Immediate Threat To All Dogs And Owners

[apocalypsepwnie]

Is there anywhere we can get stats that we can show a clear correlation to the introduction of bsl laws and the bite incidents?

Possibly even show the rise and fall of specific breed attacks against registered ownership.

I'd bet the amount of attacks don't change or go up and the registration of said breeds either dramatically increases showing more of a saturation of that dog in the community which would automatically jump the bites for that breed OR they significantly drop showing that these dogs are owned by numpties/people being forced into hiding.

What about stats of how many complaints of dangerous dogs were actually investigated and found to be correct. Compare those to attacks and I also bet it hasn't changed anything. Along with how many complaints are allocated per person or how many staff they would need to complete all work compared to how many they have. Showing that adding more work that won't be completed is a way to show public safety is at risk.

We all know the dogs that are focused in these laws are owned by more people depending on stigma attached to them and it changes as we do. More people own bull breeds now than rotties and gsd.

But if we can show stats that can't back up this then it has to go back to dog specific to protect public safety.

[kelpiecuddles]

Not to mention that reporting levels have increased dramatically, in the past if you got a mild bite by a dog you'd likely be told to leave the dog alone and that it served you right for annoying it somehow, now if you turn up at the hospital for even a tiny little wound from a dog bite it's reportable, no mandatory reporting for cat bites! I've been bitten by 4 dogs over time and never reported any of them, they were all bites for a reason when I was trying to assist the dog somehow and it was fearful or similar so I don't blame the dog.

[sandgrubber]

given the elevated level of discussion in politics, it is probably more effective to point out that BSL is not cost effective, and the augmented legislation will make it even less so

[Erny]

given the elevated level of discussion in politics, it is probably more effective to point out that BSL is not cost effective, and the augmented legislation will make it even less so

I like this, along with the persistent assertion that BSL and any derivative continues to be a failure in terms of Community Safety and Welfare.

[juice]

Perhaps something along the line of:

Insert country, how many breeds of dogs on list..........FAILED ......BSL dropped.

" '' " " " " " " " " " ".

etc etc.

Then something like ,so why is Australia wasting taxpayers money doing it?

[Salukifan]

Is there anywhere we can get stats that we can show a clear correlation to the introduction of bsl laws and the bite incidents?

Possibly even show the rise and fall of specific breed attacks against registered ownership.

I'd bet the amount of attacks don't change or go up and the registration of said breeds either dramatically increases showing more of a saturation of that dog in the community which would automatically jump the bites for that breed OR they significantly drop showing that these dogs are owned by numpties/people being forced into hiding.

There's that word again. Use of anything relating to breed in an attempt to disprove the need for BSL won't work.

There's only one thing you need to know about breed based bite statistics.... people who research dog attacks for a living won't touch them with a barge pole. They discredit ANY attempt to assign bites to breed for a range of reasons including misidentification of dogs and the fact that they don't account for crossbreeds.

You can't win the BSL debate with any argument that involves breed because breed is irrelevant, inaccurate and unscientific when it comes to dog bite data. That's what's wrong with BSL in the first place.

Edited February 6, 2014 by Haredown Whippets

[Erny]

Is there anywhere we can get stats that we can show a clear correlation to the introduction of bsl laws and the bite incidents?

Possibly even show the rise and fall of specific breed attacks against registered ownership.

I'd bet the amount of attacks don't change or go up and the registration of said breeds either dramatically increases showing more of a saturation of that dog in the community which would automatically jump the bites for that breed OR they significantly drop showing that these dogs are owned by numpties/people being forced into hiding.

There's that word again. Use of anything relating to breed in an attempt to disprove the need for BSL won't work.

There's only one thing you need to know about breed based bite statistics.... people who research dog attacks for a living won't touch them with a barge pole. They discredit ANY attempt to assign bites to breed for a range of reasons including misidentification of dogs and the fact that they don't account for crossbreeds.

You can't win the BSL debate with any argument that involves breed because breed is irrelevant, inaccurate and unscientific when it comes to dog bite data. That's what's wrong with BSL in the first place.

My highlights.

Strongly agree again.

If you want to get rid of BREED Specific Legislation, WE need to STOP talking "BREED" ourselves and discuss/debate with an overall objective to improvement for Community Safety.

Edited February 6, 2014 by Erny

[Tempus Fugit]

The creator of The Calgary Model, Bill Bruce, came to Australia and had extensive meetings with politicians statewide. It doesn't seem to have had an impact yet though. Very disappointing.

Politicians will only care when they feel that votes depend on it.

Yes - it is a real shame that they all seem to be turning their backs on this to the point as though it doesn't exist.

Is it helpful if we write to our MP's with a two-liner asking why the Government won't acknowledge Calgary Model and don't look at adopting it when current laws and laws they've implemented to follow have only proven failure and increased bite stats?

I do find that the longer the letter, the more detail ….. the more the Government have to work with. If the Government's letter is relevant in response at all (usually a standard print off letter), keeping a letter succinct where there is no denying or escaping the question less possible to squirm away from (and makes that "squirming" more evident).

The government is probably more attracted to the Irish model than the Calgary model.

[sandgrubber]

I'm not convinced that BREED is irrelevant. I disagree with Haredown Whippets that scientific studies discredit use of the breed concept. There are many, well constructed studies that show strong differences in dog behavior for different breeds. A couple of these are cited in Studies About Dogs in the pinned part of General. Differences in temperament will lead to differences in propensity to bite. I don't think anyone who has been around dogs a lot doesn't have an a priori sense of what to expect of a dog just by looking at it. No one is real surprised to hear an ACD bailed someone up, but you wouldn't expect it of, say, a greyhound or poodle. Many will regard a calm, laid back young Jack Russell as having exceptional temperament.

The problem is that breed only tells you the statistical tendency for the category. It doesn't say anything about the individual. Worse still, it ignores the owner; and the owner, both by selection of what pup or dog to buy, and by the way they raise the dog, will have a huge effect on where the dog ends out on the bell curve of aggression. A drongo who likes images of blood and terror will seek a pup whose sire and dam have a reputation for being mean and muscular, and raise the pup to bring out that potential. If you ban a breed and effectively make it unavailable, the drongo will find another breed to work with. You can find fearsome individuals in a lot of breeds.

BSL is analagous to trying to get rid of crime by taking the area code of a high crime district and throwing everyone in jail...because there is a higher-than-normal probability they will commit crime. Or assuming that because someone is over 65, they are in failing health.

By ignoring the owner, BSL especially hurts people who favor bull breeds because they are generally waggy, funny, hardy creatures ... including the people who will take a dog with potential for meanness and bring out its gentle side. Over time, such people, by selectively breeding from the dogs with better temperament, will move the breed tendency away from the 'mean' type.