To think it’s not just the owner, sometimes it’s the breed?

[StickyBlisteredAnus]

I’m a dog lover, I love all dogs especially big working breeds.

In my life I’ve had German shepherds, Rottweilers, Labrador’s and spaniels. I was always of the opinion that it’s the owner and not the breed.

But, why are there so many deaths related to pit bulls? I get the argument that pit bull type dogs tend to be owned by wrong uns so more likely to be trained to be aggressive. Ok. I also get the argument that a pit bull attack is more likely to be fatal than a spaniel attack. Fine.

But look at the statistics. Over 200 deaths related to pit bulls over a 13 year stretch in the USA alone. Most of them seemingly unprovoked. The next breed to be accountable for the most human deaths was the Rottweiler with around 40 deaths. The majority of these deaths were related to dogs which had been trained as protection dogs or were provoked.

Doberman’s had less than 15 deaths which all of them relating to unique circumstances (previously abused, trained protection dogs, one was a dog who killed its owner during an epileptic fit).

So why the huge difference with pit bulls? A lot of the pit bull deaths were caused by family dogs with no previous history of aggression.

I’m starting to change my mind. Maybe sometimes it IS the breed?

They are unpredictable, a bit like a bull is also unpredictable and can be placid for years and then attack and kill its owner most don't but you cannot tell which one might do it. As a cattle owner and bull breeder I never turn my back on a bull for this reason. Am also an owner of large breed dogs.

It’s very frightening when a large, soppy, dog suddenly flips and attacks.
A friend’s family had a beautiful rottie girl who was soft as butter. Nothing macho about the family, they all cared for her and dad was experienced with dogs. She went for him with no warning in the kitchen, he managed to get round the table and out of the door. She was put down and the family was heartbroken. They don’t talk about it as I think they felt terribly guilty and sad.
I’ve heard of a similar story with a trusted, family involving a Rottweiler, and I know it’s unscientific, but it has made me wary of that breed, despite knowing a lovely boy Rottie that never hurt a fly in the course of his life.
I’ve had a large breed, and it is very important to socialise and train them because of their size alone. I always think that’s one reason you get so many snappy little dogs, too many small dog owners think they don’t need to bother with their “fur baby” as he’s just a little ball of cute (with teeth).
I’ve certainly known a disproportionate number of feisty, snappy JRTs and as a terrier breed used for ratting etc. surely that is a breed thing?

@nrpmum That's good to know. I've known six or seven staffies in my life, some very well, and not one has shown the slightest tendency to be anything other than loving and even-tempered. I don't have a dog myself, but was raised with a lab/collie cross, followed by a whippet/collie cross followed by a german shepherd/lab cross, and I'm comfortable around most dogs. The ones I'm NOT comfortable around are the wee yappy ones. My neighbours have two westies and one is in serious danger of being kicked in the head if he attacks the postie again.

The Kennel Club UK does not recognise Pit Bull Terriers as a breed. They are not shown at Crufts

They wouldnt be would they? They are barred in the Uk under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991

Under the 1991 act, introduced by MP Ken Baker (and as amended in 1997) it is illegal to own any Specially Controlled Dogs without specific exemption from a court.[5] The dogs have to be muzzled and kept on a lead in public, they must be registered and insured, neutered, tattooed and receive microchip implants. The Act also bans the breeding, sale and exchange of these dogs, even if they are on the Index of Exempted Dogs.[6]

Four types in particular were identified by the Act:

Pit Bull Terrier
Japanese Tosa
Dogo Argentino
Fila Brasileiro

The Act also covers cross-breeds of the above four types of dog. Dangerous dogs are classified by "type", not by breed label. This means that whether a dog is prohibited under the Act will depend on a judgement about its physical characteristics, and whether they match the description of a prohibited "type". This assessment of the physical characteristics is made by a court.

The Act applies in England, Wales and Scotland,[7] with The Dangerous Dogs (Northern Ireland) Order 1991 having a similar effect in Northern Ireland.[8]

FIL's little Maltese has bitten loads of people, including children. It's only because it's tiny that it hasn't hurt anyone badly. Don't get me started on how maddening I find it that he thinks it's acceptable

Our cat was picked up and shaken by a fairly big dog of indeterminate breed a few weeks ago (it ran in our side gate past my mother who had it open to walk through and into our back garden). It was clearly only playing with her (there were no puncture marks) but it took DH and I ages to get it to open its mouth, we're both fairly strong but we just couldn't open its jaws.

I think it has a lot to do with the size and power of the dog, but I'd still blame the owner - if a dog is to big for them to manage, they shouldn't have it. And absolutely no-one should be making excuses for their dog biting.

I do agree to a certain point. It's just a fact that certain dogs are bred for particular behaviours. There's no way around it.

AhhhHereItGoes The owner of the JRT was an elderly lady who was adamant her cute little dog wouldn't harm any one (all I did was walk past the garden) when I showed her the injuries (although minor) her attitude was I must of provoked the dog. I'm a total dog lover and when out running count a good run by how many dogs I've seen so not provoked by me at all.
The collie I understand herding instincts etc but If you know they have a strong drive then keep them under control again this wasn't a bad injury but both no matter how minor are still reportable offences.
So no matter the dog breed/size or cuteness it is the owners responsibility to teach them to be respectful members of society.
Think the worst I've seen recently was a cocker spaniel with the biggest muzzle I'd seen having to be pinned to the ground by the owner as there was other dogs around. No I would never have associated spaniels with being viscous felt so sorry for the poor dog.

Yanbu. Obviously most never hurt their owners, but when they do (often out of the blue, apparently unprovoked) they are so much more likely to be deadly or cause serious injury. I'd never have one in my home.

I've also just remembered I've had a JRT smash through a old glass door as I knocked on the door. I had glass in my leg and was trying to fend off a wild JRT who was also bleeding out as he'd nicked an artery coming through the glass.
Managed to pin him down and clamp his jaw shut even though he was injured he was still so focused on attacking me. I took him to the vets myself and had him treated.

@CantBelieveImHere Exactly - it doesn't matter how much you love your dog you have to take responsibility for their bad behaviour. You need to have the physical strength to deal with them too. If 78 year old Agnes has a German Shepherd she will not be able to chase after him or restrain him.
My sister had A JRT. He was fine if he came to you first, then he'd let you stroke him. But especially as he got older, he was very temperamental.
I remember sleeping on Dsis sofa when we did wedding dress shopping the next day and I woke up to growling so I slowly got up and saw the JR was in the sofa too and I must've woke him up by moving. He was very aggressive when woken up.
I do think though as he was a rescue and likely mistreated and that he lost hearing in one ear he was very scared. But I'd always make sure the kids only stroked him when he was next to them, awake and had an adult close. They instinctively were not interested
My aunts husky mix though is so well behaved. She stands to heel and is fine with the cats around the house. It can be so variable.

I think that is also another issue owners of these small (cute) breeds don't feel the need to train their animals correctly because they are small and cute and "the fur baby didn't mean it" and I think this is the wrong attitude to take

"I think that is also another issue owners of these small (cute) breeds don't feel the need to train their animals correctly because they are small and cute and "the fur baby didn't mean it" and I think this is the wrong attitude to take"

This. I work with dogs and I've met more aggressive shih tzus, lhasas, cockerpoos, maltese etc than I have Staffies, GSDs, or Rottweilers. The owners don't feel the need to train them because they're "sooooo cute and fluffy they'd never hurt a fly!!"

Completely agree.

Also assuming little dogs don't need walks because they are small.

Of course some of it is the instinct that is bred into them.

We have a springer spaniel. If you let him off the lead when there is a bird around he will do his best to catch it. When he succeeds (pretty rare!) he will grab it by the wing and hold it firmly in his mouth, but not kill it.

The is 100% instinctive breed behaviour, and never taught at all. In fact he once had one of our chickens, and we had to prise his jaw open with a wedge to get the chicken out, and the chicken fluffed up her feathers and walked off, completely unharmed.

if a pitbull type dog had done the same, the bird would be dead.

It's not the breed, there's many more factors a golden retriever can be poorly bred and can attack. Breeding, the parents, the environment the puppies are raised in, socialisation, age which they leave their mother, the owners, training etc. All of these factors affect how a dog will turn out, I've met very aggressive breeds you'd never associate with being aggressive.

Equally I've meant the sweetest, softest staffies who have a bad reputation. If my partner wasn't adamant that a dog needs to have fur I would adopt one in a heart beat!

The statistics on this topic are not at all clear.

Firstly often there is confusion over the breed of the dog as not many people are expert enough to determine the breed correctly. Other breeds are often misclassified as Pitt Bull Terriers. Some dogs are euthanised right after the attack and beforehand the breed is determined conclusively.

Secondly, the number of bites on its own can be misleading. You also need the number of bites as a proportion of the breed population. As a general trend as a breed become popular the number of bites increases which makes sense as there are more of the breed around and are often owned by people who want a popular breed and have not put thought into their choice. You can see flunctuating statistics as GSDs, Rotties, Collies etc become more or less popular.

Thirdly, non-fatal attacks are important to record but are often under reported.

The size and power in the jaws are what makes the difference in bull-type breeds rather than their propensity to bite vs other dogs raised similarly.

My dog biting experiences are not bull-type related. I was bitten by a labrador in a park as a child. Luckily I was wearing a padded jacket as it grabbed my arm as my dad hurredly picked me up. We think it was trying to grab the bag of food I was holding to feed the ducks, but of course we'll never know!

My very traumatised rescue cocker spaniel has to be muzzled if strange men come to the house (eg builders and workmen). She freaks out and will fear-nip (like a sneak attack if they turn their back). Obviously I shut her away and try to keep her otherwise occupied, but on the off chance she gets through my legs or the workman opens a door forgetfully I don't want to risk anyone's safety.

She's a small dog (small for her breed too) which means her bites wouldn't be severe, which is the difference between her and a bull-type breed. She will try to nip in specific circumstances because of her background, not because she's naturally aggressive, and again I suspect that's true for most dogs that bite (in other cases it's a specific reaction to a threat or because they're in pain).

If course it’s the breed though any mistreated or unsocialised dog can be a threat. People yap on about poor understood pit bulls but years of breeding has creating a temperament. Just like Dalmatians are a bit dopey, springer spaniels super smart, collies good at herding, shar peis smart but stubborn.

A dog is a dog whatever the breed or owner thinks. If its having a bad day, its upset, it has a headache, its feeling unwell, its upset over something or developed a tumer or cancer ect it can and will change within a blink of an eye.

The differnece is if you own a lovely calm soft toy breed and that one day turns on someone it will do less damage being smaller than a lovely calm soft labrador that one day turns.

People who say it's the owner not the breed are dangerous in my opinion. I have dogs, I adore dogs but I would NEVER trust a dog.

springer spaniels super smart hmm, waiting ot the evidence of that in our case!

The nastiest most unpredictable breeds I've come across have been little yappy rat type dog things like chihuahas/jack russels/little terriers. I've had 2 staffies during my lifetime and known quite a few friends/family members with them and they've all been the most lovely gentle, happy and protective dogs, I have never met a nasty one. I've been snapped at/growled at/chased by JR's/westies and chihuahas! Collies can also be quite deranged, especially farm ones who love to chase cars and bite tyres.

YANBU dogs usually do what they're bred for from what I have seen.

They come genetically hard wired to do certain jobs. Some are more hard wired than others, but still it's there.

We adopted a JRT which we were told the breed didn't matter. We had guinea pigs and thought it might be a bad match. Rescue said you can't judge by breed. Took it home and found it had a hate on for the piggies and had to return it within a few weeks because clearly it had an immense hard wired prey drive and we could foresee one error in forgetting to close a door could result in dead savaged piggies.
Got a herding breed next because they get on with other small pets and found it's herding drive so strong it would chase EVERYTHING. Again, it was hard wired to herd outside the house. Was safe with the piggies though (did not show any interest in them).

Had a guard dog cross from a rescue once and unsurprisingly it was great with our kids but didn't like strangers in the house....was probably a risk there.

Current dog's breed purposely chosen because typically not hard wired with behaviours and what a relief to not deal with behaviours you cannot change. No breed history of aggression/guarding and not used for work in a long time as a breed. Relaxing dog.

They do what they are bred to do whether people will admit it or not!

Yes breeds matter. You can manage this with good training and careful handling though. But silly to say breeds don't matter.
So I would never have a patterdale terrier for example, or a siberian husky dog. Most of the dogs that are difficult to train as a pet were bred to be working dogs, they need a job.

YANBU

Most of the dogs that are difficult to train as a pet were bred to be working dogs, they need a job.

I'm not sure I follow this theory. Are you suggesting any breed whose history, traits and characteristics indicate a specific job then they are hard to train or are suggestion that a dog that was currently bred to actually be a working dog but then for example got adopted or bought as a pet would be difficult to train? If its the former, well all dogs can be traced back historically to having been bred for a purpose so that would rule out a lot of breeds as pets. If it's the latter than I can see how that could be a potential problem but any dog can be difficult to train. You just need to have someone willing to put the time in.