37 Rescue/Shelter Dogs Kill-Harmed People?

“At least 37 dogs in custody of shelters or rescues, or rehomed by shelters or rescues, killed or disfigured someone in 2014.”

The above statement, made by Clifton, http://www.animals24-7.org/2015/01/03/773-rise-in-fatal-disfiguring-pit-bull-attacks-from-2007-to-2014/, is one of the things he has been doing by using in most cases, news stories. Seriously, we are sure that number is LOW—because most bites to owners are never even reported…….

We do not vouch for the accuracy in his reporting, we are just pointing out that when people who do not know dogs, and who have little experience with canines, decide to subject their KIDS to dogs that are unknown (background,temperament)–beware.

The  deal with Clifton’s reporting is that the actual dog itself may  have “looked” like a bully but not been an actually bully dog. In any event, because many rescuers don’t truly understand bully dogs and believe it’s all in how you treat them, let us remind people: genetics are involved and general beliefs regarding the background of the APBT (American Pitbull Terrier) are often distorted by those who know little about pitbull dogs. While we understand there is no such breed as “pitbull” there are certainly different breeds related to the APBT.

It is very unfortunate that the public has a very wide divide on bully type dogs but the fact is that the APBT dogs when they started out, were not large dogs. Maybe 30-35lb. They were slowly bred for not being friendly to other dogs, so the true genetics of such dogs, means that being dog-dog or even animal aggressive was not a fault. But since such dogs (which would/could have been dog aggressive) were later mixed down with other breeds, mostly not by planned breeding– the results are that who knows what genetics the bully mix might have?

Because the “mixed” bully has unknown genetics and likely unknown temperament, it makes sense that even though APBT are highly popular, in fact– the breed was purposely designed to be dog aggressive (yes, fighting dogs were bred for fighting..) Understanding that fact, the person who decides to PICK a dog from:

(1)  Owner who doesn’t want the dog  (2) Shelter who has the dog  (3)Rescuer who has the dog  (4) Breeder who raised, shows and tests the dogs

It is obvious that #4–the actual breeder–would be a better choice. Very few if any breeders will pretend their dogs are “not” animal aggressive if in fact, they are. It is possible with some bully dogs, like the Am Staff, that the genetics have been toned down and channeled such that only dog friendly breeder dogs were used over many years. That means a lot of culling if necessary. The Am Staff is shown and recognized by the AKC, the APBT is not. If you have ever been to a large dog show, you would know that having a dog which may get out of control with other dogs would wreak havoc both to the show, the patrons, and to the business of owning and showing dogs.

If you have ever been to an APBT show, you will notice that nearly all of the owners know what the stakes are, and assuming that at least half of the dogs may be dog aggressive (since they were originally bred specifically for that trait)– everyone is very careful not to let their dogs just mosey around. Understanding the fundamental fact that if a breed is kept true to its intended purpose, and the breeder does the job correctly, the dog should be close to the standard for which it was designed.

This means that generally,  herding dogs herd, go to ground dogs go to ground, and guardians guard. But rescuers and those who want to save every dog alive are not experts, not breeders, know little to nothing about animal genetics, and are normally AR enthusiasts that “feel” too much emotion over animals and thus try and salvage every dog in America. Salvaging every dog in the USA is not a good goal, simply because it causes injury to the common community.

How? The public in general is not very smart, they watch TV and follow Animal Planet. They buy dogs from shelters, rescues and owners for which they have absolutely no clue how to handle such animals, much less train them.

They watch Caesar on dog TV and think “oh i can do that!!”  They know nothing about genetics or training and listen to AR rubbish on how to let the dog control the owner, not vice versa. In poorer communities, many of the mixed breed dogs were/are not planned breeding, and no one knows anything about the background of the dogs. When those dogs produce puppies, as it happens, for example, in Los Angeles which passed mandatory spay-neuter—do we think that this law helped? NOPE, it did nothing.

Why? Because the poor area that produces most of the throw away dogs does not have the spay neuter at their level; the mobile units that were originally designed to visit the neighborhoods got scuttled. The bilingual efforts at education disappeared. And although  LA county claimed they would be “no kill” within 5 years [they probably said this almost 10 years ago..]—of course it never happened–not even close.

With 50% of the (1) intake and (2) killed dogs coming from the same area year after year, it only made sense to target the problem area, NOT target breeders that were not causing issues by breeding small, expensive toy sized dogs. But that’s what the ARs did, they piled on about “pet stores” and in-home breeders. It is a fact that most shelter animals were not the result of planned litters, with possible exception in some counties, for pitbulls and chihuahua dogs.

Quite seriously, in ANY county in California that is NOT poor–there is no excessive population of shelter dogs. There is usually never a puppy available for buying.

For more than the past 10 years, we have indicated what will never change: the AR mantras about buying and adoption are nonsense. You could adopt for the rest of your life but there will always be unwanted animals if no one wants them. If all dog would- be-owners would ignore the AR mantras, and just buy a damn dog from people who knew what they were doing when they bred the dog in the first place, we would be eliminating the AR plan that we must all be “guardians with rescued animals.”

For those that didn’t know, ARs plan for animals is to have them obtain human status legally–which would eliminate all commercial use of any and all animal products.

They started by using the child welfare statutes and then made animal laws based off children’s law. Then they focused on animal housing, animal selling, animal killing, animal buying, etc. The focus being–don’t sell or buy animals–don’t eat meat or fish–teach kids to be AR leaning. And HSUS has done this for decades in schools, if not half a century.

In the end, when minimum wages forces businesses to eliminate jobs, and there are no full time jobs (only part time), we will start to see a lot of people who never own a vehicle, never own a house, and never get waited on by people in a restaurant because they will all be using the computer for the menu selections. When enough businesses go belly up, and everyone is tired of California, the last thing on earth they will want is an adopted “rescue” dog that might kill them. Remember, we said it first.