October 22nd, 2004, 07:17 AM
This morning Oakley on 640am was quoted as saying that Pitbulls in the U.S. have caused more deaths to humans than any other breed . I understood that stat belonged to another breed . Can someone find these stats today . I have to go offline until about 6pm ,Sorry .
October 22nd, 2004, 09:08 AM
According to the published stats that I have, pit bulls are indeed #1. Rottweilers are second and German Shepherds are third.
Here are the Canadian dog fatality stats that I have. I have just started researching this, so I reserve the right to edit as I find more online.
Breed #of fatalities
Pit bull types 76
German Shepherd 27
Husky type 21
Wolf Hybrid 14
Mixed Breed (NOS) 12
St. Bernard 8
Great Dane 7
Sled type 3
Bull dog 3
Bull Mastiff 2
Hound type (NOS) 2
Retriever type (NOS) 2
Chesapeake Bay Retriever 1
West Highland (NOS) 1
Terrier type (NOS) 1
Japanese Hunting Dog (NOS) 1
Sheepdog (NOS) 1
Rodesian Ridgeback 1
****er Spaniel 1
Please bear in mind that I have just given totals and not broken it down between purebreds and cross breeds as the original chart I saw. NOS means None Other Specified.
October 22nd, 2004, 09:15 AM
Breed #of fatalities
Pit bull types 76
** Please remember that a "pit bull type" encompasses at a MINIMUM three different breeds! The American Stafforshire Terrier, Staffordshire Terrier and American Pit Bull Terrier. Therefore those results are VERY skewed!
MANY people still are unable to determine a breed during an attack and even if they could, some are very wrong. I posted in another thread at a 13 year breed ban was overturned in Cincinnati because a vet was brought into a court of law and identified six American Bulldogs as Am Staffs!!
October 22nd, 2004, 10:48 AM
We don't have our own statistics? How can a law against a breed of dog be just when we have no information to go on?
Canadian Data Lacking
Canada has no national data on canine population, dog-related deaths and injuries, or which breeds cause the most harm. In Canada, much of the insurance-related liability is borne by our health care system. Dog bites are a common reason for emergency room visits. Yet there is no mandatory reporting of these bites - not to mention the dogs' ownership, breed, spay/neuter status or history of aggression.
The coroner's report on a six-year old girl killed by dogs in 1999 found that 117,000 Quebeckers claimed to have been bitten by a dog between 1997 and 1998. Of these, 75 per cent were under the age of 10 and half were bitten by their own dogs. Extrapolating these numbers, the Canada Safety Council estimates that dogs bite 460,000 Canadians annually. Our problem is likely almost as serious as that of our southern neighbor.
All too often, the news carries reports of unprovoked attacks by dogs. Some kill smaller pets. Others attack people. Injuries can be severe, sometimes requiring extensive surgery. Consider a few incidents this year:
If you read further into the link the CANADIAN SAFETY COUNCIL believes:
Breed bans should not be used as a quick fix. The solution lies in a combination of effective animal control measures, reputable breeders, responsible owners, public education, backed up with enforcement and based on reliable data.
What's wrong with this picture!!??!
October 22nd, 2004, 11:18 AM
* bump, bump *
October 22nd, 2004, 02:27 PM
There is no such bird as a 'Seagull', it's just a catch-all for those birds of many species that hang out at the beach, or dump. World wide there must be over a 100 different kinds of 'Seagull'. But gulls can't cross breed.
I think I found over 9 different breeds of dog across Canada under BSL laws. And dogs can crossbreed. So you've got 9 BSL breeds X 9 X all other breeds, X the number of other mixes possible. Sounds Perfectly Clear to me.-
LOL! :crazy: (50 million dogs? LOL!!)
October 22nd, 2004, 03:19 PM
Can I email this or cross post? Did they happen to break it down to provinces?
October 22nd, 2004, 03:25 PM
If you meant my stats, feel free. I got them from someone else's research though, so I am not sure how good they are. Not to say that I am not confident in the source.
The problem is, again, Canada doesn't keep track of dog bites or dog bite fatalities. Neither does the U.S. for that matter. It would seem like that little tidbit of information alone would make a ban based on statistics near impossible to pass.
October 22nd, 2004, 03:49 PM
Also not taken into account is numbers. If a city has 4,000 pit bulls (or what can be ID'd as pit bulls) and 5 Akitas, you would expect more bites from pit bulls.
I haven't read each of the threads here, so if someone already posted this, sorry.
Article in the Toronto Star, one of the few unbiased, sensible and levelheaded ones:
TO Star (http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1098094028731&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907626796%20%20http://www.rabble.ca)
October 22nd, 2004, 05:02 PM
I did post it yesterday I was so pleasantly surprised to read something positive and well written. Bryant lies are catching up to him. I actually emailed the Prime Minister and told him how appalled I was by the blatant lies and misinformation being told to the public, by our AG.