BSL Debate In Local Newspaper (Long But Interesting)

Here are the letters that have been sent to our local newspaper lately about BSL. Thought you guys might want to read them. It is just one guy in town here lying to stir up trouble.

This is his first letter to the editor about wanting controls.

Large Breed Controls Needed

Editor:

In the Regina Leader-Post of Dec 27, 2006 there is a report from Hamilton Ont, where two Rottweiler dogs viciously attacked a two-year-old boy on Christmas Day. It is reported the boy's ears were ripped off and his cheek was gaping open. What a sad story, especially on Christmas Day.

In February of 2006, a German Shepherd dog mauled a five-year-old in Calgary. The boy needed 196 stitches to his head, face and neck in order to repair the damage and save his life. Another tragedy.

There are a number of these kind of attacks reported each year in the papers, radio and T.V., where children are mauled by large dogs of different breeds. Those attacks are devastating and in a few cases, resulted in death.

Every time I read about these kinds of tragic incidents. I wonder when governments, federal, provincial, civic and local authorities are going to take measure to bring forth some form of legislation to ban those types of large vicious dogs in our towns and cities.

I know there are arguments on both sides of the issue, and some will say it's not the fault of the dog, and then maybe the owners are responsible. When I read these kinds of reports, I don't think there needs much debate as to what needs to be done.

For those that may have strong arguments against banning large vicious dogs, just think what you would do if it happens to your son or daughter who experienced such a trauma with all the pain and suffering. What would your answer be then?

There are already a number of governments, cities and towns in Canada and the U.S.A that have some form of legislation banning most large vicious dogs regardless of the breed.

Let our city Fathers act now, before such a tragedy hits our community.

Gerry Gauvin

These next three letters were in response to what he had to say.

Every Dog Has Potential To Be Vicious

Editor:

In response to the letter "Large Breed Controls are needed" which appeared in the Jan. 11 Southwest Booster, I have my side to the so-called "issue".

Large dogs such as Rottweilers, German Shepherds, Pitbulls, Boxers, and Mastiffs all get vicious reports mainly because of their size. There is history imbedded deep in the bloodlines of each of these breeds. Rottweilers in 1901 until 1907 were used as police dogs. German Shepherds have been a police force favourite since anyone can remember. Mastiffs have been prized as admirable watch dogs and their history dates back as far as 550 BC. Pitbulls and boxers were the original pit fighting dogs, but breeders of these two have been trying valiantly to tone down the breed's instincts to fight.

When I was 12, I was in Ponteix visiting my grandparents with my family and I decided to go for a walk. I saw a dog coming toward me, and in typical fashion bend down to call it to me. Its ears were down and its eyes scared, clear signs to me to leave the dog alone, but I didn't. When I stood up my reward was a nasty bite to my stomach. I went back to my grandparents and after tending to my wound, I found out from my grandma that the dog I described as being a Shetland Sheepdog mix had been harassed by neighbourhood kids throwing rocks at it, kicking it, and hitting it. I instantly felt sorry for the dog and knew the bite was my fault alone.

Every dog has the potential to be "vicious". It's all in how you train a dog right from puppy hood. When they are canine infants you should be strict yet loving and with more dominant minded breeds, you have to rule with an iron fist, not letting them step out of line. Consult your vet for proper training techniques, as they can be the key to a happy home with any breed of dog.

Also, teach children to be respectful towards animals, adults do the same and breed bans will not be needed.

Chelsea Thomas

Breed Bans Not The Answer To Dog Problems

Editor:

I am writing this in response to the letter printed in last week's Southwest Booster regarding breed banning.

First I would like to define the meaning of "vicious dog." To me and most people, it means any dog that lunges, bites or attacks a human. If this is the case, how is it that only large breeds, in some peoples eyes are deemed vicious. Is it because smaller breed usually do less damage? What does that really matter though? A bite is a bite.

Breed banning is, by no means, a reasonable solution to preventing dog attacks. The majority of dogs that bite are owned by irresponsible owners. It is extremely easy for that owner to get a different breed and own it irresponsibly, also.

Any dog, not properly trained and sociallized can bite a human. I once read an article of a child being attacked by a Border Collie. Should we ban all medium sized dogs? I don't think so. I also read an article of an infant being killed by a Pomeranian, a toy breed. Should we ban all small and toy breed dogs? Of course not. It would not be reaonable. So why is it that banning large breeds is? The people it would directly affect are the majority of us that are utterly innocent, responsible dog owners. Breed banning will only shoot another breed to the top of the so called "aggressive dogs list."

Statistically speaking, there are approximately 50 million dogs in Canada. About 50 dogs are involved in serious incidents. That is only 0.001 per cent of all dogs, leaving 99.999 per cent of dogs that are not involved in biting incidents. Within the those 50 incidents, it has been found that the dogs that bit, were a wide range of shapes, sizes and breeds. In fact, no breed of dog has more than 0.1 per cent of its members involved. On average, there is one dog-related fatality per year. Each year, in the United States, nearly 100 times more people die from falling in the bathtub than from dog bites. I'm sure everyone can agree that you wouldn't ban bathtubs. There is also no scientific connection between a dogs breed and its propensity to bite.

To date, there has been no accurate non-fatal dog bite statistics kept in Canada, but there are studies that show that breed bans do not reduce the number of dog bite incidents. Serious dog bites continue to occur in cities that have breed specific legislation in place. The dogs involved are usually just not a breed that has been banned.

According to the American Temperment Test Society, American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers and German Shepherds scored the same in their temperment tests as the Golden Retriever, with the Rottweiler scoring only 0.5 per cent under the Golden. Those breeds also scored higher than the Border Collie, Samoyed and Miniature Schnauzer.

How would the government obtain the expertise to correctly identify dogs, (purebred or mixed breed) of these breeds? It is difficult to correctly identify a mixed breed dog. Even for people very experienced. Would you ban only purebred, large breed dogs. If so, that would also be nearly impossible, because the majority of these dogs are not registered as purebred and therefore legally are not purebred. The remaining purebreds are usually owned by breeders or responsible owners. Many that show their dogs at competitions or work their dogs. Dogs placed in show rings and agility competitions have training and have been socialized. But any responsible pet owner will train and socialize the dog so the dog behaves as it should. It is not the dog or the breed that is the problem. It is the owners.

Many of the breeds on banning lists are used in certain lines of work. They help people. German Shepherds and Rottweilers are used as police dogs. American Pit Bull Terriers and American Staffordshire Terriers are used as drug detection and therapy dogs. Why is it, these so called, vicious dogs can work with humans all day long and not cause any problems? Because they were properly trained and socialized.

There are many alternatives to breed banning. Make it manditory for people with these breeds to have their pet spayed or neutered. An altered dog is far less likely to become aggresive than an intact one. Have people that own these dogs take a course on properly caring for, raising, sociallizing and training their dog.

I would do these things if it meant being able to have the breed I love in my home.

I, myself own an American Staffordshire Terrier. A breed that has been banned in many other places. Not once would I think twice about letting him near a child. He was trained as a therapy dog and has been taken to the park many times. Not once has he even looked at another child, adult or dog wrong. How fair is it for me to have the right to own this dog taken away. He has never caused any harm.

If you would like more information on breed banning and how it doesn't work or would like to learn more about Bully Breeds, please feel free to visit my website. http://savethebulliedbreeds.tripod.com

Jaclyn Schultz

He then reponded like this.... I would like to say that it was found that he was only telling part of the truth if any. He twisted things to make them sound like he wanted it to sound.

Warnings Not Heard

Editor:

Tragedy has struck again. In the Jan 20 Regina Leader Post, the article reads, "Boy killed by Dogs." This seems to support and reinforce my earlier Letter to the Editor about the banning of large vicious dogs.

It seems that some form of banning or some type of restrictions are required for most breeds of large dogs.

As I stated earlier, if this five-year-old boy was yours, what would the answer continue to be?

Just as sure as can be, tragedy will strike again. The question is where and when. Need I say more?

Gerry Gauvin

There was three more responses to this letter also...

Dog Bans Disgusting

Editor:
Everyone knows the phrase Mans Best Friend referring to dogs. I don't know who first said that but I know that he/she would probably be completely disgusted and the thought of his/her "best friend" being banned.

Doug Britton

Dog Breed Banning Targets Animals Instead Of Owners

Editor:

First of all I would like to say studies have shown that breed banning does not work. Breed bans seperate responsible, loving owners from their pets, while irresponsible pet owners, the ones that are causing breed bans to happen, are rarely deterred from owning these breed.

So lets say we banned certain breeds. Myself and my husband would lose our American Staffordshire Terrier and he would be euthanized. For what? Our dog has two years of training to become a therapy dog to help people, not hurt them. He is loving and loyal and a part of our family. How could anyone say that he should be euthanized because he is a certain breed.

I know of a bully breed that was rescued at six months of age from and irresponsible owner that burned her with cigarettes, beat her with a broom handle and whipped her with chains. She is now a loving, gentle pet. Now you tell me where the problem lies. How can a dog that is supposed to be a monster go through all that and forgive humans for what they have done to her.

American Pit Bull Terriers, for example were bred for centuries to fight other dogs, yet lived with their owners in their houses, with their families. Bully breeds were never bred to hate mankind. They only do what they have been taught are acceptable behaviours. If you teach a dog it is alright to bite, he will do it, regardless of size or breed. Why? Because all a dog ever wants to do is please their owners.

In the very first letter to the editor concerning breed banning, it was stated that someone had been attacked by a dog in Ontario. If breed banning works so well, why did this attack happen in a province that already has breed specific legislation in place? If breed banning actually worked the attack should have never happened.

Lets say two dogs bit different people. One was a large dog and one was a small dog. The large dog attack would more than likely be front page news while, no one would ever hear about the small dog attack. Dog attacks make headlines. There is no question about that. In my experience and research I have found that, usually the story consists of what kind of dog it was (which nine times out of 10 is wrong anyways), how many stitches the person had to get and the age of the victim. What the story usually does not tell you is what that person was doing before the attack occured. Was it a 10 year old child poking at the dog through a gate? What caused this dog to attack? After all there must be a reason because dogs do not bite for no reason.

I do feel bad for the parents of children that have been bit by a dog, but where are the parents when little children are being attacked?

Children should never be left unsupervised with any dog, family pet or not. They should also be taught at a very young age how to approach a dog. Teach them to ask the owner before trying to touch a dog. Teach them not to run up and grab a dog, reach for a dogs face, pull their hair etc. These things can be extremely frightening to a dog. Even a well trained dog.

Let me ask you this. If you were the sheriff of your town and it was found that red vehicles caused the most accidents, would you ban all red cars or would you prosecute the people responsible for the accident? If you banned all the red cars and everyone went out and bought blue cars, blue cars would start causing more accidents. Maybe we should ban all blue cars then?

I would also like to answer the question in the last article. How would you feel if it was your own child? I can tell you exactly how I would feel. If my child was attacked by my own dog, I would be devastated. But obviously I didn't do my part when it came to training and socializing my dog. It would be my fault the attack happened. Not the dogs!

Banning is not going to solve anything, but education will. Educating owners, children and the public about dogs will stop a lot of heartache for both sides of this debate. Don't preach hate. Educate.

Jaclyn Schultz

Facts About Reported Dog Attack

Editor:

I have a response to the letter written in last week's paper titled Warnings Not Heard. The letters written prior to last weeks were read and responded to; in a negative manner I might add.

People are not going to surrender their long time family members just because of their breed. Racism towards human beings is not tolerated, why is it among canines? I feel for the parents who have lost a child due to the attack of a dog, or any other animal. I myself have an eight-month-old child, and an American Staffordshire terrier. Both I love very much, but I have the responsibility to protect my child at all costs. If for any reason my dog showed an aggression toward my son, my dog would have to be destroyed. The love for the breed of dog I possess is a passion. I take the time out of each and everyday to properly train my dog, and my child to ensure an attack will never happen.

I have been doing some research on the articles spoke of in the past Letters To The Editor. I have found that all of them have happened on a First Nations Reserve where there was no animal control system in place. "Officials have said in the past that stray dogs are a chronic problem on some reserves". The stray dogs would travel in packs for several days. There were numerous sightings of this wild pack of dogs but nothing was done about it obviously. We on the other hand have an animal control here in Swift Current. Were at anytime if a stray dog was sighted a simple phone call would solve the problem.

I encourage the public to research the topic discussed here. Educate yourself on the breeds that have been discriminated upon. There are many websites devoting all their time and effort to this specific issue. "Men have killed children too, now we wouldn't ban all men now would we?"


Jamie McCrum

Im glad to see there is a lot more people in our community that are against BSL than I thought. Its nice to see the support.

This spring Jamie McCrum and I are going to be hosting a picnic in the park type of thing with agility contests and dog show for little kids with hot dogs and that sort of thing to raise money for Banned Aid. Wish us luck.

[DryCreek]

Very interesting read, thanks for posting.....

I just want to point out that the APBT is NOT a large breed of dog, it is considered a medium sized breed. Average size is between 30-50 pounds.

Now the altered breed of dogs called American Bullies, which are commonly called "Pit Bulls", are a large breed of dog.....anywhere from 65 to 120 pounds.

Hey you are completely right. I never actually thought about it. Thanks for bringing that up.