# Dog Attack Statistics



## Quinzell (Mar 14, 2011)

I'm trying to find if there is a website that holds the statistics of dog attacks. Does anyone know if one exists?


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

The last I know on general release was BBC 2008, consistant rises for a few years, the rises are accounted for because the commercial sector of the behaviourist & dog training industry dont do (most don't know) obedience training with dogs which would benefit at the critical phase.

Its a good commercial idea, the dogs have problems that gives commercial trainers & behaviourists long term paying clients 'cause those dogs always have problems, which are then sold under the label 'behavioural problem'. I am backed by robust science.

BBC 2008.
BBC NEWS | Health | Hospitals see rise in dog bites


----------



## Quinzell (Mar 14, 2011)

I was more interested in if there were any statistics on attacks by breed. 

Although its interesting that this article indicates the rises vary quite dramatically depending on region.

Prior to 2008, did they teach obedience then? I have only been to dog training classes from 2008 onwards.


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> Prior to 2008, did they teach obedience then?


Long before then, then and now some independant commercial trainers teach it, critical phase starts v early puberty, if dogs which have been complient to know commands prior to that start increasingly ignoring owners & a pattern of breaking known commands starts to evolve the dog needs OB training.

OB courses only last around 4-6 sessions at most, theres nothing left to teach a pet owner, they just reinforce what they should have been taught to recalling from chases etc.

The most common training technique attempted in commercial dog training is negative punishment, that just supresses behaviours in circumstances the dog perceives as similar. The commercial exclusive claimed negative punishment base attempt technique alone have been around more or less common by 2000-1. Negative punishment has around forever but is mixed with other things.



> I was more interested in if there were any statistics on attacks by breed.


I think they did give the breed statistics amongst other variables, I'll pass a link to the study tommorow, off the top of my head one of the spaniels, I think the springer was high on the list.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Indigo Rescue - Adopt a Rescued Animal is one based in 2008.
http://dogbitelaw.com/images/pdf/Dog_Attacks_1982-2006_Clifton.pdf is another. Interesting to see Beagle fatality was a strangulation caused by tugging on a leash which was around a child's neck. 

However dog attack statistics can be difficult. First what is classified as an attack? In many instances simply being bowled over and hurting yourself as you fall can be classified as a dog attack.

Then you have to look at the titles of the statistics... Many are "Death and Maiming" rather than simple bites. There is no doubt that some breeds cause more damage than others and these are naturally misrepresented when it comes to these figures if you are after just bites.

You then have to consider breed recognition which can frequently be wrong unless people know the dog. I'm also not sure how often the popularity of the dog is brought into play.

Final thought is again based on "damage". How many small bites are not tracked as it is just a "minor" injury not requiring hospitalization?

All in all asking for dog bite statistics is a difficult subject.


----------



## emsky (Jul 26, 2011)

Found this from 1982-2006
Dog Bite Statistics by Breed, Types of Pit Bulls, Are Pit Bulls Dangerous


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

This 2009 study is the largest study ever carried out on random selection of normal population of dogs, they strengthened the _normal random_ variable by a built in in bias of 50%M & 50%F, there was another bias to do with FCI catagories but I don't understand FCI catagories.

Full Study Veterinary Journal Publication
Factors Linked to Territorial Aggression in Dogs

Good Simplified Version
Trained for life Cordoba Territorial Aggression Study
Trained For Life | Article on Dog Aggression

.


----------



## Manoy Moneelil (Sep 1, 2011)

I've seen sets of data like this before - what is not shown is the incidents per number of dogs of that particular breed. 

So although Lab-crosses look like the worst dog there are so very many of them. 

But Golden Retrievers & Rottweilers being very popular seem to have low scores. 

The link above is an American data set?


----------



## SleepyBones (Apr 17, 2011)

> what is not shown is the incidents per number of dogs of that particular breed


That could never reliably be done if the random samples are from the normal population of dogs as in this case.

Such things are totaly dependant on the owners memory over the dogs lifetime, my own dog here now, I can say there were no significant biteing events of any kind with me or people who were in contact with her & thats a resonably reliable memory. I dont know if there was the 'odd nip' here or there or not, the 'odd nip' might be significant to the dog but overlooked by owner and person involved & if so how many nips pre 6 months old, cannot reliably be done from everyday memory of a randomly selected owners group of 711 owners & family members.



> So although Lab-crosses look like the worst dog there are so very many of them


It was done in 5 cities in Spain (Cordoba Uni) I dont know how popular labs are there but I doubt their most statisticaly popular dogs are the same as here.


----------



## Quinzell (Mar 14, 2011)

I'm almost certain that the stats used in the first link could have been those that were given to me. 

I was intrigued when someone told me that pitt bull/staffy crosses are responsible for 65% of dog attacks in the UK and thus the DDA is justified. I think that they must have been looking at stats for America (or another country) and mixing them with stat's in the UK. That would make sense.

From previous research that I have done, there are many pitt bull breeds in the UK that are now unregistered because of the DDA. And the other point is, as you have already said, its not always possible to determine a breed by looks alone.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

You'll never find an accurate or reliable set of statistics for bites by breed. The Clifton Report, which has been posted above twice is a good example as it is completely flawed. The statistics are gathered solely from media reports, which is completely unreliable as the media have a preference for demonising certain breeds, plus there is also the issue of accurate identification of the breed itself, especially pitbulls.

I'm also put off by the fact the author can't spell some of the breeds correctly


----------



## Wayward (Jan 27, 2011)

I have found this thread looking for simular stats as the OP..... due to the comments on a rescue post quoting UK stats.
There is an interesting post on one of the groups I am a member of. It is a closed group so I cannot post the link but she is a nurse and said that vast majority of bites she treats the dogs involved are staffs....... she blames the type of people which have them not the dogs themselves. Personally I would question whether they are KC registered responsibly bred staffies as the counterparts I see out of control in the park with gangs of feral youths (and it is a real problem for some of us) bear little resemblance to these.

There is a proven strong hereditary component to aggression though so it stands to reason that some breeds/lines are indeed more predisposed. 
I just wonder with the stafford whether we are judging one breed on the effects adding other guarding breeds or fighting breeds (imported from countries where dog fighting is still legal) into the genepool.


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

An article on Inherited Aggression

http://www.pitbullguru.com/InheritedDogAggression.pdf


----------



## Wayward (Jan 27, 2011)

Was basing my statement that canine aggression has a strong proven genetic component on independent unbiased research..... I don't tend to give anecdotal studies a huge amount of weight but interesting reading thanks for the link.

Canid genomics: Mapping genes for behavior in the silver fox

I find it strange how people are perfectly happy to acknowledge the genetic component in benign or desirable temperament traits but want to bury those less favourable to todays society under the carpet. Would love to claim 100% credit for my BC's predatory aggression she is an awesome herding dog but is definitely a bonafide breed trait.
Is a huge disservice to dogs too. Responsible breeders do not tout the breeding for temperament card as fluff, they understand the responsibility and importance of good temperament in their lines. To ignore that aggression has a genetic component is at best nieve and at worse ignorant plus it gives those irresponsible breeders coveting/excusing it in their lines a get out of jail free card. JMHO


----------



## Wayward (Jan 27, 2011)

....... and some independent original research into canine aggression

Canid genomics: Mapping genes for behavior in the silver fox


----------



## Rottiefan (Jun 20, 2010)

Wayward said:


> I have found this thread looking for simular stats as the OP..... due to the comments on a rescue post quoting UK stats.
> There is an interesting post on one of the groups I am a member of. I*t is a closed group so I cannot post the link but she is a nurse and said that vast majority of bites she treats the dogs involved are staffs.*...... she blames the type of people which have them not the dogs themselves. Personally I would question whether they are KC registered responsibly bred staffies as the counterparts I see out of control in the park with gangs of feral youths (and it is a real problem for some of us) bear little resemblance to these.
> 
> *There is a proven strong hereditary component to aggression though so it stands to reason that some breeds/lines are indeed more predisposed. *
> I just wonder with the stafford whether we are judging one breed on the effects adding other guarding breeds or fighting breeds (imported from countries where dog fighting is still legal) into the genepool.





Wayward said:


> ....... and some independent original research into canine aggression
> 
> Canid genomics: Mapping genes for behavior in the silver fox


Perhaps the reason your friend is bitten more is purely statistical, i.e. there are more Staffies around than not?

Also, all dogs are predisposed to 'aggression'. It is a hazard avoidance behaviour, an innate & genetic motor pattern, which all organisms have. However, the behaviours used for active defense will differ between individuals, species and whole orders and kingdoms.

It has been observed that different dog breeds have different onset times of their fear periods, or hazard avoidance behaviours. For example, a German Shepherd's is somewhere around 35 days, whereas a Cavalier King Spaniel's is more like 55 days. This makes sense, as a GSD has been selected for 'guarding' traits (more likely guarding themselves than anything else!) and thus the diminishment of their critical period for development.

I would be wary of the article you posted too. Not only are genetic traits often very broad and hugely susceptible to change during ontology, because they have to be to be of most use (even innate, so-called hardwired traits can be modified by changing the developmental environment- check out Dr Ray Coppinger's work in the 70s on guarding and herding breeds), but there are a number of mistakes in the article, e.g. dogs are not descendants of _Canis lupus_, both domestic dogs and the grey wolf are descendants from an earlier ancestor and Belyaev was not really selecting for reduced aggression but a reduced flight distance from humans. It may sound pedantic but this is a major issue I think!

Staffies may have a slightly reduced socialisation period window relatively speaking, particularly for socialising with dogs (after all, domestic dogs bond much easier and stronger with humans by nature), which may mean there is a greater chance they will have a lower threshold for aggression. However, another hypothesis is that Staffies are often termed bully-breeds because of their play styles (lots of body contact, pinning etc) which may mean other dogs have adverse reactions to them, affecting in turn the Staffies' socialisation and perception to other dogs, i.e. if other dogs regularly aggress towards Staffies, even during play, then the Staffy will learn that other dogs are unpredictable and unsafe.

We have to be careful about saying there is a genetic trait for X behaviour, as all behaviour is epigenetic, that is, the result of genes and their interaction with the environment.

This is why it is so important to educate people about responsible ownership!


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

emsky said:


> Found this from 1982-2006
> Dog Bite Statistics by Breed, Types of Pit Bulls, Are Pit Bulls Dangerous


If this is an American link, which by the PB's seems to be, the Malamute looks pretty good as there are lots of them in the States. Two attacks and both on children - ah well at least I don't have any for them to maul! :blush:

ETA - my daughter is a nurse in our local A&E and in the past three years has treated only one dog bite - a Malamute!


----------

