Total Pageviews

Monday, 15 September 2014

Haters gonna Hate

HATERS GONNA HATE
Anyone who loves pit bulls must rally and rally NOW!  Please read the following AND ACT ON IT!!! The future of this breed depends on your actions!



I see/hear/read it all the time (like a dull buzz after awhile), “pit bulls are killing machines, who will ‘eat your face off’, spontaneously attack with no provocation or warning; not stopping until their opponent is dead.”
While I understand that small-minded, frightened people often say things out of fear, the recent proliferation of Web pages, blogs, and clearly fake profiles – on a national level – that are calling for extreme, violent and illegal actions against ‘pit bulls’ and their owners, has me frightened.  Thanks to the advent of ‘Google Alerts’, these tirades are now being seen, locally, with the “national participants” injecting themselves into a local cultures, that they are not members of.  While not ‘a movement’, the verbage and syntax are clearly one or two people, taking on the persona/facebook identities of many!  This same ‘group’, then, whips the locals, via the comment section of their community’s papers, into a frenzy!  The same players, just a different game board, time and again, giving the appearance of a ‘movement’, so to speak, of the anti-pit sentiment, that they are spreading.  They then divert the readers to fabricated ‘facts’ via personal web pages that were created to look credible.  Community by community, this faction is creating widespread hysteria, based on lies, to unknowing people who believe everything they read that claims to be based on ‘facts’ or read on a website.  Even when the dog in question is clearly identified as another breed, this group of ‘pit-haters’ clamour that it is a ‘pit-type’, then, proceed with their anti-pit agenda.  If called to reason, they turn the tables, saying that the person opposing their views either: 1) doesn’t care about the victim, 2) is a “pit nutter” and unable to avail themselves to ‘the facts’, or 3) throws personal innuendo about the opposing side that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.  Like the high school girls’ room, they will stop at nothing in their vindictive attacks.
Not since the Doberman hysteria of the 80’s have I seen such histrionic, far-reaching ideology with no basis in fact (actually, facts are often made up along the way!), clinging to an undocumented, unwarranted philosophy.  There HAD to be more to this….here’s what I found.
It all began when a jogger, Coleen Lynn, passing a dog walker and pit, didn’t want to slow down, but decided to pass the duo from behind. She was subsequently bitten by the frightened dog, as she attempted to squeeze herself between a fence and the dog – from behind it. She received three puncture marks to the top of her arm and two on the bottom.  The arm was broken.  However, there is significant question as to whether her arm was broken by the bite (as she claims) or in the fall.  The only certainty is that her account could not be factual and it morphed with time.  However, that didn’t stop her from 1) having the poor dog euthanized and 2) collecting a HUGE insurance settlement.
Pages of Interest:
The Lynn Media Group:  http://www.lynnmediagroup.com/about.htm   Not able to keep a good woman down, Ms. Lynn marketed her infamous “attack” into the Lynn Media Group for ‘Social Awareness’.  Note the last paragraph of this page that states, “Ms. Lynn has built a reputation for her innovative approach to customer experience….”   INDEED!  I suspect that her clever and relentless attacks on a specific breed of dog (by creating a multitude of fake profiles) is what has launched The Lynn Media Group.  Without that, she would be ‘just another web designer’.  Basing a business on the fear of the multitudes would be difficult to incorporate into a business plan, but clearly, Ms. Lynn has made it work for her!
Dogsbite.org – A Registered Non-Profit as of 2011:  http://www.dogsbite.org  Ms. Lynn’s page devoted to fake ‘pit bull’ facts.  This page appears to be the premier ‘origin of hate’ against pits on the web.  Professional-looking and full of statistics (fake ones), this page can fool anyone not familiar with statistical analysis and web design.  The common person, who has no interaction with dogs, can easily be tricked into believing it is a ‘real’ web page filled with actual statistics on pit bulls.
Who REALLY is behind Dog Bites. org – CO EIN Number (scroll to the bottom):http://www.sos.state.co.us/biz/ViewImage.do?fileId=20101678308&masterFileId=20091666412
(Interestingly, the dogsbite.org domain was originally registered on GoDaddy to an individual named Gary Stevens with the address and phone number of the Seattle Police Department!!!  It was changed very quickly when that fact was brought to the attention of the SPD. Why would a individual from CA, who moved to Seattle, WA, then to Austin, TX with her windfall, incorporate in CO??)
The ‘Donate’ Button is EVERYWHERE! :  http://www.dogsbite.org/dogsbite-donate.php   Although it has NOTHING to do with pit bulls, her media group, which is a ‘for profit’, seems to be intertwined with the 501c3 revenue (which hasn’t filed 990’s yet) of dogsbite.org, time and again! 
Information referral form to the IRS.  http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3949a.pdf  This form is for reporting tax fraud or impropriety.
Here, she even ADMITS that the dogbite.org site is inaccurate: http://www.dogsbite.org/dogsbite-terms.php
One Example of Media Bias By the News Director of a Tuscon TV Station:  https://www.facebook.com/KGUN9OnYourSide/posts/259476627470347  This particular News Director, Forrest Carr, not only ‘becomes the news’ by constantly interjecting his personal bias, on the side of the dogsbite.org crew (apparently, not well enough versed in syntax to realize he’s only speaking to a couple of people with 50 different aliases), but he freely attacks those speaking out for pit bulls, personally!  So scewed are his biases, that he prepared this:http://www.kgun9.com/news/local/138511629.html.  Rarely do we see such blatant attacks lodged by an employee of the news media on such a personal level.  Professionalism to the wind, Mr. Carr shamelessly “went pit bull” (a phrase this group is attempting to make popular slang) on  anyone who dared to insinuate that he was doing this for ratings.  Apparently, it never occurred to Mr. Carr that most people will react stongly to injustice, lies and false accusations, not to mention his frequent personal attacks on individuals.  However, it is only fair to note that the ‘ratings factor’ is not helping his cause, as his station ranks LAST of the THREE Tuscon media outlets.
A Listing of More Fake Bull Sites, Each With Links To More:
A conglomeration of news features about pit bulls that are twisted to suit the author’s agenda.  The site is to “Educate The Public About Pit Bulls”.  While not much effort has gone into this one, it is heaped onto the rest of the pretend-facts blogs to add to the numbers:  http://educatingpeopleaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com/
This site makes no attempt to hide the fact that it skews facts AND people.  Unabashedly naming-names of those who dare oppose the views of ‘Dawn James’ (another fake name/person) and twisting half-truths to suit their own agenda.  Nationally- acclaimed behaviorists and pit moms alike are trashed in this hodgepodge of fuckery:    http://thetruthaboutpitbulls.blogspot.com
FAKE PROFILES THAT NEED REPORTED TO FACEBOOK:  It is against Facebook Terms of Service Policy to have a personal profile that isn’t a ‘real’ person.  As many animal advocates can attest, Facebook is making those having profiles that are suspected of not being ‘real’ people, fax them a copy of their photo identification.  Although I am certain this group of fakes will simply put up another fake profile, the following profiles need to be GONE from Facebook, as they are clearly the same individual.  To report a regular page, go to the bottom left, and click ‘Report/Block’, then check the box that says, “Not a real person”.  To report a timeline, go to the gear in the upper-right corner and hit “Report/Block”, then click “Not a real person”.
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003660134530 – This profile actually changed names in the time it took me to write this post!! It was Ginny LRidley, now it is Fiona Mastiff!!!  In reality, it’s a woman named Dawn James: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003660134530#!/profile.php?id=100002775596708&sk=wall
This woman is actually http://www.ginnyscockatiels.com/   Now Tim’s Cockatiels…no doubt due to the negative publicity she spouts!!!  If you scroll down to the first page, her Fiona, looks amazingly like a “Pit Bull Type”…classic hypocrite!!!!
FACEBOOK HATER PAGES NEEDING CONSTANT MONITORING:
Here’s What She Does When She’s NOT trashing pits and their owners:  http://www.yelp.com/user_details?userid=CzGxDp3YyspPACFHmHmgCg  (She’s not a playa, she just eats a lot.)  Colleen L’s Yelp Profile shows she does a good deal of drinking and fine dining, at the expense of our pups!
  • Review from Colleen L.
  • Photo of Colleen L.
What to Expect When Confronting This Group:
Myths of the Absolute:
1.  All pit bulls are dangerous, unpredictable beasts who will attack without warning
2.  All pit owners, fanciers are prostitutes, dog fighters and drug dealers
3.   All pit bulls possess supernatural traits, ie. ‘locking jaws’, no fence can contain them, unGodly strength
4.  All BSL proponents are experts on pit bulls, but are unable to define them
5.  All pit bulls must be eradicated
6.  Any individual that speaks out for pit bulls has questionable mental faculties
Recognize Their Tactics:
1.  Personal attacks will take the place of evidence
2. The subject will change depending on where they want to go, or when they perceive you are making ground
3. Goading us into anger
4.  Promoting breed/breeder hatred
5.  Identifying pit bulls as ‘victims’, while calling for their extinction
6.  Hiding behind anonymity
7.  Claiming to be experts, but with no credentials
8.  Bashing those WITH credentials
9  Accusing defenders of doing what they are doing, ie. changing subject, not caring about victims
10.  Isolating one defender to befriend, while trashing another
What to Do To Protect Your Animals:
1. Debate openly
2.  Stay on topic
3.  Ignore personal attacks
4.  Substitute fiction with facts – offer proof
5.  Use humor
6.  Know who you are talking to
7.  Know yourself
8.  Know the law
9.  Treat your opposers with courtesy, respect and politeness
10.  Learn from EVERY ENCOUNTER!!!!!
One Analogy:

COURTESY OF: http://impawsablerescue.wordpress.com/2012/04/17/haters-gonna-hate/
Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, 14 September 2014

MERRIT CLIFTON SPINNING A YARN ABOUT TAIL DOCKING

Dogfighters as veterinary innovators

Tail-docking was originally done to keep fighting dogs from signaling intent to prospective opponents that they meant to avoid a fight.  The first tail-dockers appear to have been dogfighters of the Elizabethan era,  who also introduced ear-cropping,  lest their dogs lose fights due to ear bleeding.   Cropping and docking spread from fighting dogs to other breeds through emulation of the “fancy,”  which today means exhibitors of show dogs,  but as recently as the early 20th century was a a word used by The New York Times and other major newspapers chiefly in reference to gambling on dogfights.
Ironically,  dogfighters largely stopped cropping ears and docking tails by the mid-20th century,  to avoid being conspicuous,  after dogfighting was banned in most of the U.S.
Dogfighters preparing cats and kittens for use as live bait in training dogs may have become the first practitioners of onychectomy,  as the standard declawing operation is formally called.  Newspaper veterinary columns began trying to popularize declawing as early as 1950,  when one Herb Jacobs recommended the procedure,  but it apparently was not formally described in veterinary literature until 1966.
Helen Keller with her Boston terrier.
Helen Keller with her Boston terrier.

Helen Keller

Helen Keller,  though deaf and blind,  spoke out against the cruelty inherent in ear-cropping and tail-docking more than 100 years ago,  and backed attempts to outlaw both procedures.  She probably would have opposed declawing too,  had she known about it.
Anti-ear-cropping and tail-docking bills were approved by the legislatures of various states as early as 1913,  but were repeatedly vetoed by governors under pressure from the “dog fancy.”  Pennsylvania finally passed an anti-ear-cropping bill that took effect in 1933.  The Western Pennsylvania Humane Society won a conviction under the new law just two months later.  Bitterly opposed by veterinarians,  the law was later repealed,  then partially reinstated in 2009 as part of a law which allows only licensed veterinarians to perform ear-cropping,  and allows dog breeders to dock the tails of puppies only within five days of birth and then only under veterinary supervision.

Veterinary views changing at glacial speed

There is evidence that veterinary attitudes are changing––but entire glaciers in the Cascades,  Andes, and Himalayas have melted in the interim.  Ear-cropping and tail-docking remain lucrative,  but the British Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons in November 1992 asked Parliament to ban tail-docking;  Parliament complied in 2007.  The American Veterinary Medical Association executive board in November 2008 resolved that the AVMA “opposes ear cropping and tail docking of dogs,”  when done for cosmetic reasons,  and asked breed fanciers “to remove mention of the procedures from their standards.”  The American Animal Hospital Association and the Canadian Veterinary Association had adopted similar resolutions earlier,  as had the AVMA House of Delegates in 1999.
Banfield statementAlso in 2009,  Banfield pet hospital vice president for medical quality advancement Karen Faunt announced that the 730 Banfield locations and 2,000 Banfield veterinarians would no longer crop ears,  dock tails, or debark dogs.  Debarking,  another common but often controversial surgical mutilation,  like tail-docking tends to inhibit the ability of dogs to signal intent,  and appears to increase the risk that dogs may bite.  “After thoughtful consideration and reviewing medical research, we have determined it is in the best interest of the pets we treat,  as well as the overall practice,  to discontinue performing these unnecessary cosmetic procedures,” Faunt told Elizabeth Weise of USA Today.  Banfield recommends against declawing,  but still does onychectomies if a cat keeper insists that it must be done.
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, 12 September 2014

Myth: The U.S. Center for Disease Control (the CDC) has determined that the Pit Bull is the most dangerous dog in the U.S.

Some myths about Pit Bulls:

Myth: The U.S. Center for Disease Control (the CDC) has determined that the Pit Bull is the most dangerous dog in the U.S.

Fact: In 1999, the CDC formally quit compiling dog fatalities by breed, because they conceded they had been compiling all their statistics from newspaper reports, which were written by newspaper reporters. If a Yellow Lab bites a mailman, it is not very likely the incident will be in the newspaper. But if a Pit Bull even chases a mailman, the police will likely be called, and the incident will very likely to be in the newspaper.

F
pit race profiling
urthermore, most newspaper reporters, and even policemen, are not experts in dog identification. Example: Just last year in my hometown, there was a front-page headline: "Officer Shoots Pit Bull." Two days later, in the back of the newspaper, was the small headline "Dog Shot Is Misidentified." In the clarifying article, the dog was identified as being a Blue Heeler/Boxer mix. But the damage was done, and such shoddy reporting and consequent damage goes on daily across the U.S.

Finally, the CDC has stated that any of its previous statistics on breed identification and dog related fatalities are so flawed that they should not be used at all.

Myth: When Pit Bulls bite, their jaws lock.
Fact: Their jaws lock no more than any other dog, which is not at all.


Myth: They have the most powerful jaws.
Fact: German Shepherds and Dobermans have stronger bite pressure according to testing done by National Geographic. And based on size alone several dogs the same size or bigger than German Shepherds probably do too. Pit Bulls just have the wider jaw/narrower nose appearance, which makes their jaws just look more formidable, and cutting their ears off just emphasizes that look.


Myth: Pits are very human aggressive.
Fact: In breeding them for dog fighting, they have been bred to be very people friendly. A Pit Bull that bit a handler was a goner. Consequently the dogs left for breeding are the least likely to bite a human. Why don't dog-fighters use other dogs, especially bigger dogs? Because they would be much more difficult to control in a dogfight.

Furthermore, according to the American Temperament Test Society, Inc., the leading institution on evaluating canine temperament, the following dogs all have worse temperament failure rates than American Pit Bull Terriers: Akita, American Eskimo, Australian Shepherd, Australian Cattle dog, Boxer, Dalmatian, Doberman, German Shepherd, Great Dane, Golden Retriever, Greyhound, Mastiff, Rottweiler, Shar-Pei. And yes, you read that right--Golden Retriever.

Fact: A big problem dog fighters have is that they sometimes have a hard time getting their “Pit Bull” to fight.

Fact: There has NEVER been a documented case of a sexually altered, single household family pet Pit Bull killing a human. By household pet, I mean not kept chained up out-side the house or kept just in a kennel or used as a guard dog. And you can bet that if this had ever happened, it would be well publicized.

Fact: The woman who received the world's first partial face transplant in November 2005, was attacked by a--Labrador.

Fact: Pit Bulls often have a prey drive that can be easily activated. So do most dogs, including the bigger ones such as German Shepherds, Dobermans, Rottweilers, Boxers, Akitas, and Labradors, as well as smaller dogs that have also been involved in human and dog fatalities.

Opinion: Anyone who leaves a child alone with more than one sexually intact dog of any comparable size or larger is committing negligence.

One book you need to read if you want to be up-to-date and well informed about the issue of aggressive dogs is:
"The Pit Bull Placebo: The Media, Myths and Politics of Canine Aggression," by Karen Delise.
Well researched with extensive footnotes and well written, it's a masterpiece about canine behavior in connection with politics and journalism. The book can also be downloaded for free athttp://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/resources/breed-and-behavior/

Another excellent book is “Dogs Bite: But Balloons and Slippers Are More Dangerous” by Janis Bradley. This book really puts the issue of dangerous dogs in perspective. Both books can be found at Amazon.com
Permission is granted to reproduce or post this writing in its entirety, but please let me know.
Posted by at No comments:

Various breeds of dogs have been demonized since newspapers became more popular


A Brief History of Dog Prejudice, by Keith L. Kendrick
Various breeds of dogs have been demonized since newspapers became more popular after the Civil War. First it was the Blood Hounds of Uncle Tom's Cabin that struck fear into the hearts of people throughout America. This dog was portrayed throughout the country as a savage, bloodthirsty, man-killing beast in vaudeville productions of Uncle Tom's Cabin towards the latter part of the 19th century. It didn't help that Bloodhounds had been used to hunt down runaway slaves and escaped criminals.

Then the public gradually realized that Blood Hounds were actually just another breed of dog with qualities similar to other dogs of about the same size.

The next demonized dogs were the Northern breeds, the Malamutes and Huskies, who were assumed by many to be the equivalent of wolves. Because of the extreme deprivation often suffered by sled dogs in the early North, and often being let to roam free in packs, there were horrible fatal human incidents that the press gleefully fed the public. Can you imagine the horror of living in Canada's Northern Territories, leaving your small child outside for just a few minutes and when you go back your child is gone. Then after a short search you find a pack of Huskies ravenously eating something. You scare the dogs off--and find nothing but a few remains of flesh on the bones of your child? It certainly made for good newspaper press and sold lots of newspapers.

As time passed, the Northern breeds lost favor as demons in the press and were replaced by the demon German Shepherd of WWI. However there was a mitigating factor that held back this breed's demonization: The advent of movies and then the TV series of RIN TIN TIN. The German Shepherd image in the public's eye was altered from a vicious, savage, man-killing beast into the amazing helper and protector of RIN TIN TIN--a "SuperDog" for humans.

Yet the German Shepherd is actually just another breed of dog with qualities similar to other dogs of around the same size.
Peaches tutu resize

In the early 1900's an interesting development occurred: One of the most popular dogs in America gained a reputation in the press as an all-purpose family dog because of it’s reputation for protecting its family’s children. These dogs were even a main character in the famous short films and TV serial "Our Gang" (or "The Little Rascals"), and as well as the mascot for Buster Brown shoes and the dog featured next to an early phonograph in ads by RCA. But these dogs, with the unfortunate name of Pit Bull, were not ready for prime-time demonization.
Next on the list of demonized dogs were Dobermans and Rottweilers, due to their use in WWII and afterwords in various militaries and their frequent use as guard dogs. The problem with using dogs as guards to protect property is that a dog simply cannot distinguish between a bad person and a good person. They only distinguish people as familiar or as strangers, and when used for guard purposes their territorial protective nature is maxed out. If somehow a stranger enters the dog's territory and acts erratic, the dog is primed to attack. This situation is made even worse if the stranger is a child or elderly person who suddenly runs and starts flailing his or her arms and squealing like a chased animal.

As the 1950's fell into the '60's and '70's, two relevant growing developments were occurring in rural areas and inner-city ghettos: organized dog fighting, and a dramatic increase in inner-city gangs accompanied by their increasing violence and use of illegal drugs. And the dog usually used in fighting was the Pit Bull, but probably not for the reason you think.

But there are two interesting things about using Pit Bulls in dog fighting: First, why were Pit Bulls weighing between 50 and 70 pounds used instead of Dobermans, Rottweilers, German Shepherds and Mastiffs?
dogfighting reward poster2

Because in the midst of a dogfight, men wouldn't be as able to control the larger and more powerful dogs! Secondly, throughout the history of breeding Pit Bulls for fighting, at any time in a dogfight if a dog ever bit a handler the dog would be put down and culled from the breeding population. Consequently Pit Bulls have been bred to actually be the least likely dog to bite humans.
However as gangs multiplied and Pit Bulls gained a reputation for fighting and also an undeserved reputation for extraordinary viciousness, they became the favorite dog for gangs to boast their intimidating image. Pit bulls were being seen on street corners wearing big spike collars with their ears cut off to make them look meaner, all to boost the “bad” image of their drug dealing masters. Such masters usually weren't too interested in having their dogs well socialized and trained. Unfortunately many such masters also severely neglected or even cruelly abused these dogs. Imagine any large breed dog, chained except for an occasional walk around the block, underfed, under socialized, and almost inevitably to be discarded like trash. Then people blame the whole breed of dog for not being friendly.dogfighthead
However in July of 1987 the public perception of Pit Bulls suddenly took a drastic turn to for the worst: SPORTS ILLUSTRATED did an extremely inflammatory cover story on Pit Bulls with a cover picture of a mean looking, snarling Pit Bull with the headline: "BEWARE OF THIS DOG." The same month, TIME magazine also did a similar story called "Time Bomb On Legs,” with this as the first paragraph: "Fire burst from its open mouth, its eyes glowed with a smoldering glare, its muzzle and hackles were outlined in flickering flame. Never in the delirious dream of a disordered brain could anything more savage, more appalling, more hellish, be conceived than that dark form and savage face."
SI cover


So despite being known as the "nanny dog" in the early 1900's, as well as in the United States as a well regarded all purpose family dog good with children, because of such highly distorted journalism Pit Bulls immediately became the top demon dog. Two things resulted from this: Even more people likely to be involved in crime wanted to have Pit (and such people were more likely to be irresponsible and uncaring dog owners), and because then more people who owned Pits were bad owners, Pits got an even worse name.

Secondly, many cities started to enact "breed specific" dog bans which outlawed any dog that resembled a Pit Bull, and irrational and inflammatory political grandstanding in banning Pit Bulls further tarnished the breed's image. It is so bad in Denver, Colorado that people had to relocate their families to protect their beloved dogs and the police were literally knocking down peoples' doors to take their dogs away to be killed just because of their breed--regardless of their behavior. And if you even pass through Denver with a dog that faintly resembles a Pit Bull you risk being stopped and having your dog taken and killed. This was all ultimately because of the so-called sport of dog fighting, sensationalistic and distorted journalism, and an irrational disregard of facts about dogs and how to deal with them.

Yet if you were to ask the hundreds of thousands of responsible owners of Pit Bulls in the U.S.A. about their dogs, you would likely get almost universal agreement that they are great household pets--just like when they were called the "nanny dog" years ago before gangs, drug dealers, sensationalizing journalism and politicians took advantage of them.

----------------------------------------------
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, 11 September 2014

Pit Bulls tend to do better than average in temperament tests.






Temperament

One very important characteristic of the Pit Bull dogs, is their amazing love of people. Human aggression, severe shyness, and instability are not traits typically found and accepted in the Pit Bull breed. Unlike the myth propagated by the media though, human aggression is not a trait associated with the Pit Bull breed. In fact, Pit Bulls tend to do better than average in temperament tests. Unlike the myth propagated by the media though, human aggression is not a problem specific to the Pit Bull breed.


Dog Aggression

Humans have created very specialized dogs through emphasizing desired traits and eliminating unwanted ones. It is no different with the Pit Bull breed - 'selectively' bred for hundreds of years to fight other dogs. Certain specific traits were selectively bred into the dogs and are now part of the breed's character. It's like the digging instinct of many Terriers, the compulsion to run in Greyhounds, etc. We don't condone or glorify it, but dog-aggression is common with Pit Bull type dogs. Owners must recognize and accept this fact or they won’t be able to provide competent ownership and have fun with their dogs.


It is not necessarily a hate of other dogs that will cause Pit Bulls to fight, but rather an "urge" to do so that has been bred into the breed for many generations. Pit Bull owners must be aware of the remarkable fighting abilities of this breed and always keep in mind that Pit Bulls have the potential to inflict serious injuries to other animals.

Pit Bulls can and do interact peacefully with other dogs and animals. Individual dog temperament, early training and socializing, all play an important role in whether or not a Pit Bull is capable of getting along with other animals. Many people successfully keep multiple Pit Bulls and other pets in the same household. Success is based on careful supervision, proper management and training, and the individual animals involved.

In closing, please remember that animal-aggression and people-aggression should NEVER be confused, as they are two different traits.
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, 10 September 2014

Canine Corner The human-animal bond by Stanley Coren, Ph.D.

Dog Bite Force: Myths, Misinterpretations and Realities

Reported dog bite strengths of 2000 pounds may be wrong

      I was working on a paper which dealt with dog bites and wanted to include some mention of the strength of dog bites for particular breeds. I have been at several conferences dealing with dog behavior and have heard a number of veterinarians quote that the bite force of a Rottweiler (and sometimes a pit bull) is approximately 2000 pounds per square inch. Since dog behavior, not dog physiology, is my expertise, I tended to accept those statements without too much analysis (except of course, to marvel at the strength of the dog's jaw). However this time I thought about these numbers more closely and began to doubt what I had heard.

 Let's put these numbers into a meaningful context. Imagine a bite force of dog bite2000 pounds. To achieve this, suppose that we had a dog's jaw and wanted to press the upper portion down with this force, it would require our putting a pressure equivalent to the weight of a subcompact automobile (like a smaller Toyota or Hyundai) on the top jaw. That simply did not make sense. For one thing I doubted that the bone structure of the dog's jaw could withstand such pressures.
 So where did this number-a bite strength of 2000 pounds for the Rottweiler-come from? It turns out that there has not been a lot of research in this area, and most of it has been done using indirect and laboratory measures. An example is the experimental work done by a team headed by Jennifer Lynn Ellis of Guelph University in Canada (published in the Journal of Anatomy in 2008). This team used two methods to measure bite strength. The first tested live dogs, which were anesthetized and had their jaw muscles electrically stimulated. The second was more theoretical and is based computations made using the architecture of the skulls and jaws of deceased dogs. One thing that comes out very strongly from their measures is that the bite force varies depending upon where in the mouth you measure it. For example in one German Shepherd the measure of bite force in the front portion of the jaw was 170 pounds while in the rear of the jaw (where the lever principle works most strongly) it was 568 pounds. This is a long way from 2000 pounds. So where did that figure come from?
      If you look at the way the data is presented, the researchers are not reporting their results in pounds of force, but rather in a force measure called Newtons. An average of the results of the inner bite strength of the 20 dogs in this study does come out to be around 2000 Newtons. Perhaps that is where the number came from. However if that is the case then reports of 2000 pounds of pressure are greatly in error. A Newton actually equals a 0.22 pounds of force or a bit more than a fifth of a pound. So a 2000 Newton force is actually approximately equal to a 450 pound force. This is a lot of force, the equivalent our putting a pressure equivalent to the weight of two football linemen on the top jaw, but a lot less than 2000 pounds of pressure. Could it be that the estimate of the bite strength of the dog has been reported so widely and so wrongly is because the people reading the reports have misread the units of measure, assuming pounds for Newtons? That would at least might explain where the frequently reported numbers come from.
      Dr. Brady Barr of National Geographic, for a TV special calledDangerous Encounters: Bite Force, measured bite forces of several different creatures using a more direct measure. Basically he placed a force measuring device on a bite protection sleeve (or on a pole for larger more dangerous beasts) and provoked the animals to bite it. Because of the way that these measures are taken, they actually reflect the bite force closer to the front of the jaw, so they might not measure the maximum force possible. The strength of the bite will also depend upon just how provoked and angry the dog was during the measurement. In any event, for the three dogs measured (an American Pit Bull, a German Shepherd and a Rottweiler) the average bite strength was 269 pounds of pressure, with the Rottweiler topping the group with 328 pounds of bite pressure. Compare these to the bite strength of lions and white sharks which are both around 600 pounds, or the bone crushing hyena at around 1000 pounds, or more shocking, the Nile alligator which comes in at just under 2500 pounds.
      In more recent research (published in 2009 in the Journal of Anatomy), Dr. Ellis and her team were able to show that the size of the animal and the shape of its jaw predicted bite strength. The larger the dog and the dog's head, and the wider the jaw, the higher the bite force turned out to be. The dog breed with the largest head and widest mouth is the Mastiff, so it is perhaps not surprising that it has been recently measured as having a bite strength of 552 pounds-just shy of the bite force that the lion has. This force exceeds that of all breeds measured to date.
   And what about humans? We come in at a measly 120 pounds of bite pressure. It is a good thing that we rely more upon our brains than our teeth to survive.
     
13 Reader comments join the discussion here!
   http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/canine-corner/201005/dog-bite-force-myths-misinterpretations-and-realities
Posted by at No comments:

Ohio Voters for Companion Animals - OVCA

Ohio Voters for Companion Animals - OVCA
OVCA "TWO PAWS UP" TO DEDICATED ADVOCATE, Mary Clark, FOR SERVING AS A STRONG VOICE AGAINST BREED DISCRIMINATION LEGISLATION IN CINCINNATI (HAMILTON COUNTY)! As shared by Mary:
Dear Council Member Wendell Young:
As a Cincinnati resident, I believe one of the goals of the city council should be to provide for public safety in the most effective and comprehensive way possible. Everyone benefits from a safe community - both people and pets. Yet, breed-discriminatory legislation (BDL) fails to make society safer because it targets dogs by appearance instead of focusing on the real cause of most dangerous dogs - the behavior of the dog and its owner.
Our communities should be protected against any dangerous dog, no matter what the breed or appearance. Rather than punishing dogs because of their appearance, our community should work to come up with better solutions that hold reckless owners of dangerous dogs accountable. The simple truth is that breed discrimination doesn't work because breed has nothing to do with dangerousness. That is why the national trend is against BDL. In fact, 19 states have outlawed breed discrimination because it infringes on property rights, fails to enhance public safety and is extremely expensive to enforce.
Now we have Councilman Smitherman trying to turn back the clock. His poorly written ordinance discriminates against dogs by breed and, if enacted and enforced, would be disastrous and expensive for Cincinnati. Our city already has experienced the gross failures of breed-discriminatory legislation, including both outright bans and registration requirements. It is unreasonable, irrational and, frankly, perplexing why we would tread down this same road again.
BDL failure is not unique to Cincinnati. It's been a global failure as well. Studies done in the United Kingdom, Spain and Germany revealed that BDL fails to reduce the number of dog bites. Communities that enacted breed discrimination actually saw their dog bite incidents increase.
Based on these studies and valid concerns about property rights and the constitutional due process deficiencies inherent in this kind of legislation, the American Bar Association, the National Animal Care and Control Association, the American Veterinary Society for Animal Behavior, and the American Veterinary Medical Association all have policies against breed discrimination. Along with numerous other credible organizations, they have long ago shifted their support to laws that deal with the real problem - the behavior of the individual dog and the behavior of the reckless owner.
Breed discrimination also severely interferes with citizens' property rights. Every American citizen who follows the safety rules as a responsible dog owner should be allowed to own whatever breed of dog he or she chooses. In a recent national survey conducted by Luntz Global, 84 percent of respondents said local government shouldn't regulate what breed of dog citizens may own.
For these reasons, I urge you to abandon consideration of enacting any ordinance, policy or regulation that is specific to breed. It's time to move forward instead of repeating the legislative mistakes of the past.
As a licensed property manager in Cincinnati, I can assure anyone involved in this terribly misguided attack on responsible pet ownership that BSL costs cities investment and homeowners. Informed people refuse to invest in areas which have elected officials who attempt to pass destructive legislation which harms the law abiding citizens and taxpayers. Any attempt to start BSL again in the city will result in residents moving out, even more than usual. BSL is an offense against taxpaying, law abiding citizens and causes financial losses for taxpayers.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to harm the city in this manner. Cincinnati just removed BSL and joined the 20th century. The effort to push dog breeding and dog fighting back into their criminal activity is the inevitable result of BSL. BSL puts everyone at risk and for no reason.
This is ridiculous.
Thank you for your consideration of this important public safety and property rights issue.
Sincerely,
MP Clark
~~~
COUNCIL MEMBER WENDELL YOUNG'S RESPONSE:
Hi there,
Thank you for contacting our office with your concern about making sure dog owners are accountable for the behavior of their dogs, regardless of breed. Councilmember Young agrees that breed specific laws are problematic and do little to address the real problem of irresponsible owners. Our office will we working hard to make sure any legislation that is passed by city council reflects this belief.
Thank you again for your concern,
Liza
--
Liza Druck
Director of Policy and Communications
Office of Councilman Wendell Young
801 Plum St., Rm. 352
Cincinnati, OH 45202
(513) 352-3466
liza.druck@cincinnati-oh.gov
~~~
Mailing Address For City Council Members:
801 Plum Street
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Vice Mayor David Mann
513-352-4610
david.mann@cincinnati-oh.gov
President Pro Tem Yvette Simpson
513-352-5260
yvette.simpson@cincinnati-oh.gov
Council Member Kevin Flynn
513-352-4550
kevin.flynn@cincinnati-oh.gov
Council Member Amy Murray
513-352-3640
amy.murray@cincinnati-oh.gov
Council Member Chris Seelbach
513-352-5210
chris.seelbach@cincinnati-oh.gov
Council Member P.G. Sittenfeld
513-352-5270
pg.sittenfeld@cincinnati-oh.gov
Council Member Christopher Smitherman
513-352-3464
christopher.smitherman@cincinnati-oh.gov
Council Member Charlie Winburn
513-352-5354
charlie.winburn@cincinnati-oh.gov
Council Member Wendell Young – AGAINST BREED DISCRIMINATION!
513-352-3466
wendell.young@cincinnati-oh.gov
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)