Category: Dog Bites

Posted on

Police Officer Shoots Dog

I have spent a career working with Police Officers and dogs.  Police Officers tend to overreact to dogs acting aggressively.  Police Officers seem to have some notion of self-preservation.  Unlike Animal Control Officers, Police Officers don’t get a lot of practice in being attacked by dogs.  As such, they perceive a doggy threat much higher than an Animal Control Officer would.

Police Officers work with a continuum of threat assessment, but that assessment protocol doesn’t work well with animals.  In a perfect world, an officer might first consider a nonlethal means of handling dogs.  They have little or no experience in testing pepper spray or a taser on dogs, so it makes sense that their gun might be the first tool they grab.  They know, from experience, that their gun is an effective tool.

In that same perfect world, dog owners would be smart enough to reel their dog in (or even place it on a leash) when an officer approaches.  Dogs die because officers don’t want to be bitten.  Dogs die due to stupid owners.

If I were to make the world a better place, I would let the officer take a small bite and then sue the owner for a million dollars.  The dog would live, and the officer could take a nice fishing trip.  And, who knows, maybe the owner learns something in the process.  I know, that’s a long shot.

Posted on

Dog Bites on Postal Carriers

A couple of months ago, I received a postcard from the Post Office reminding residents of the need to secure their pets; dog bites rise in the summer months. Today, our local media reports that there has been a spike in the number of postal carriers being bitten by dogs. Two factors are present when dog bites occur: hot weather that makes dogs short-tempered, and irresponsible dog owners who let their dogs run loose. There isn’t much of a cure for either of these two factors…. Or is there?

I have always believed that the Postal Service holds the greatest cure to end the stupidity factor. They only need to stop mail service to the neighborhood with loose aggressive dogs, and the dog owners’ neighbors will begin the education process. In most cases, the dog owner sees his (or her) error and will comply with the neighborhood norms. If that doesn’t work, then the dog becomes a victim of the neighborhood by either someone holding the dog for Animal Control to pick up or by “accidentally” digesting food that disagrees with the dog.  Having the option of having animal control in the community is a good step in reducing incidents of extreme justice.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of pet owners who cannot overcome their stupidity and thus secures the careers of many animal control personnel. I used to meet up with postal carriers to check in with them about potential problems on their routes. No one knows the problem of loose dogs better than postal carriers: work with them to keep the mail flowing.

In communities where animal control is underfunded, I have heard about neighborhoods in which people carry weapons when going out for a neighborly walk.  Usually, the problem has to persist when neighbors resort to such activities; and yet,  the owner acts shocked when one of their dogs is the recipient of a neighbor’s bullet.   Clueless is right up there with stupidity for such people.

Posted on

Its not their fault!

I was reading comments following the recent incident of one of our police officers shooting a dog.  Many people conclude that the dog was not to blame.  On that, I agree.  Dogs become confused, especially when some stranger is yelling at them.  Time and time again we see evidence that many pet owners are not smart enough to own a dog.  Any reasonable person would realize that the best way to control your dog is with a leash.   If you can’t figure out the purpose of the leash, you should not take your dog into a crowd.

Every effort that the person attempting to control the dog made it worse.  Their excitement just further excited the dog.  During the two separate altercations that the police had with the dog, I did not hear a single person say “no” to the dog.  That is the first step in training dogs to be around people; to stop aberrant behavior.  This incident failed at all levels.

When the officer approached the dog the first time, the leash was on the dog, but no one was holding the leash.  Someone was stepping on the leash.  The officer should have seen the risk that he was entering into and demanded that someone take the leash into their hands.  It might have helped that he didn’t start with “his cop voice.”

In the second incident with the dog, the dog was off-leash.  The person near the dog could be clearly seen with the leash in her hand.  This makes no sense; the person had to be pretty stupid to take the dog off leash following the dog biting an officer just moments before.

Still using his “cop voice,” but a little more excited, the officer was yelling at the woman to hold the dog.  In addition to the woman being stupid, she was also very slow.  The dog began approaching the officer and the woman’s efforts to stop the dog only seemed to excite the dog more.

As slow as the woman was, the police officer was very quick in pumping four rounds into the dog.  Although the dog didn’t immediately die, it was in pretty bad shape.  I don’t know at what point that dog realized that he was acting badly; it is further evidence that people should be tested first before they are allowed to own a pet or have children.

Posted on

Officer Involved Shooting

Our local police responded to a parking lot full of people.  From police footage, it appears that most of the people were homeless.  One police officer approached the group and was attacked and bitten by a dog.  It appeared to me that the dog was on a leash at the time.   The officer was walking off the attack when he came back into view of the dog again, which was now off-leash.    Another officer approached the dog’s owner yelling at her to control her dog.  Her attempt was feeble, at best.  He promised her that he would shoot the dog if she didn’t gain control of it.  She didn’t and the dog attacked again and was shot four times for its efforts.

In most circumstances, I would feel sorry for the stupid dog and its owner; but, people don’t realize the impact that has on the officer.  As an animal control officer, I could have taken the dog without killing it.  That’s what we do.  But, I don’t expect a police officer to handle the situation as I would have.  Police officers are trained to think with their guns when they are in danger.  So, given the circumstances, it was a righteous shooting. Although, a Taser would have been my first choice.

Before you start thinking that I’m all full of myself, keep in mind that most animal control officers don’t carry guns.  So shooting a dog isn’t an option.  If we are experienced animal control officers, we get out of our vehicles with a ketch-pole and leash in our hands.  The prospect of getting bitten doesn’t worry us as it does police officers.  Of course, we also get more experience facing down a face full of doggie teeth.

I recall using pepper spray on a Rottweiler once.  The owners complained to the police about my use of pepper spray and when the police sergeant came out to talk to the dog’s owners, the dog attacked him.  He came just short of shooting the dog.  Once the sergeant calmed down, he told me not to worry about the complaint.  I was a little embarrassed that I stepped out of the vehicle without my ketch-pole.  After all of these years, I still feel bad about using the pepper spray.

Posted on

There are no bad dogs.

Recently, I was contacted by a blogger who wanted facetime on my website.  I am always curious about people who approach me and want to write on my website when they have a website of their own.  In checking out his website, he had a tagline that claimed, “There are no bad dogs.”

This is the greatest lie that we can tell people.  In the same vein is when we tell people that all dogs are alike.  People usually make that claim when talking about pitbulls.  That too, is another lie.

Anyone who has worked in an animal shelter knows that pets have phenotypical and behavioral differences.  We chalk that up to genetics.  It is foolish to think that genetics does not impact behavior.  Let us face it, poodles and chihuahuas are the meanest dogs.  We chalk that up to their genetically small brains.  They don’t make the newspapers because they are too small to cause any real damage to a person.  Pitbulls are the breed most likely to cause a fatality due to their size, aggression, and numbers.  There is something about a pitbull owner that seems to think that they need to breed more pitbull mixes.  I think they are having a contest to see just how many other breeds will breed with a pitbull.

For many years, dog fighters would breed their line of pitbulls to be mean.   They would come upon a specific genetic marker for aggression and milk it. Many of the offspring of those animals find their way into animal shelters.  One of the biggest problems that we face is that most pet owners do not know how to respond to the aggression they see in their pets.  Like having a misbehaving child, they blame themselves and attempt to adapt to these new behaviours.

It is tragic the number of pitbull owners who give up their pet after witnessing numerous incidents of aggression and wait for the “the big one.”  The one action that is so severe that they are forced to surrender their dog.  That action is usually a bite so severe that it cannot be overlooked.  The victim is usually a child.

Pitbulls are not alone in being potentially dangerous.  It is the responsibility of shelter staff to see aggressive behaviour before you place the dog on the adoption row.  Too often, animal shelters are trying so hard to reach a 90% save rate that they will intentionally overlook a dog’s behaviour in hope of being able to announce they’ve become no-kill.  For that reason, maybe people should avoid a no-kill shelter fearing that their no-kill rating is more important than an adopter’s safety.

Animal shelters that adopt potentially dangerous dogs and pet owners who choose to keep a potentially dangerous dog should be charged with reckless endangerment if someone is ever injured due to their complacency.  An animal shelter is negligent when keeping a dog that has shown aggression towards their own staff.  If more shelters were held responsible for their animals that they adopt, they might reconsider the importance of being called no-kill.

Don’t get me wrong, no-kill is a good thing, if it is done in a responsible way.

Posted on

Wolf-Hybrid Dogs

I have to take issue with a headline in today’s news: “Feral Wolf-Hybrid Dogs.” The article is about public health officials conducting a welfare check on an old woman who found that she was living with 40 feral wolf-hybrid dogs. The dogs were seized and euthanized. My issue is pondering whether a wild species being bred into a domestic species can legitimately be identified as feral. A feral animal starts domestic and is turned out by its owner to become wild. A wolf-hybrid is not a feral animal because it was genetically born wild.

Walk back with me a few years… say maybe 30 years when there was a fad of owning wolf-hybrid dogs. Public health officials announced that no tests can be performed to determine if the rabies vaccination administered to dogs would be effective on wolf-hybrids. Even vaccinated for rabies, wolf-hybrid dogs would have to be treated as an unvaccinated animal. The problem with unvaccinated animals biting a human is that the animal would have to be tested for rabies following the incident.

Rabies testing of animals is very hard on the tested animal. It requires that the brain is removed so that tissue can be observed to be infected. In all of the years that I have worked in animal control, I have yet to see an animal that we could put back together. Although, many of the biting animals that we tested actually became better pets after the test.

It was interesting to note that following the public health announcement, the next round of licensing applications saw much fewer dogs being identified as wolf-hybrids. Those who had dogs that were obviously wolf-hybrids were surrendered to individuals who created wolf-hybrid sanctuaries. I was never surprised by reports of these sanctuary owners being eaten by their dogs under their care. You breed in wild, you get wild.

As a species, we never grew smart enough to understand that genetics plays a major role in the behavior of the dogs that we turn into pets. It is that ignorance that becomes job security for those of us who work in Animal Control.

Posted on

Worrying

Three dogs were attacking people in a Roy Utah park.   The three dogs were a Border Collie mix, a Lab mix, and an Aussie mix.  In rural communities, dogs are not generally killed for attacking people, but most rural communities have laws that allow dogs to be killed for “worrying” livestock.

Utah Code 18.3 states, “Any person may injure or kill a dog while: 1) the dog is attacking, chasing, or worrying: a) a domestic animal having commercial value, b) a service animal, or c) any species of hoofed protective wildlife.”

So these three dogs didn’t risk being shot until the dogs moved on from attacking people to “worrying” a neighboring horse.  Don’t get excited, none of the dogs were killed, but one dog was shot with a bean bag round.  All three dogs were captured, with the help of the dog’s owner.  But the notion of shooting the dogs only rises to the occasion of the dogs chasing a horse.

I find these rural animal control codes interesting in that we overlook the actions of dogs biting people and concern ourselves with what is going on in the minds of a herd of cattle.  It isn’t as if you can get a written statement from a cow before you shoot the dog that has entered the cow’s domain.  I think the intent of this law is to catch a dog in the commission of engaging in an attack on cattle, but it goes on to include much more.

If a rancher decided to shoot a dog that was found in the pasture of his (or her) cows, no proof of an attack would be needed because worrying a cow is not a physical action.  Even a dog wanting to play with a cow would likely cause the cow to worry.

I’ve experienced plenty of dogs rushing at me in which I could not determine the dog’s body language to know the dog’s intent.  I have had more than my share of worrying.  This is one of the biggest problems with dog owners: not considering the mindset of the people around them.  They give no thought to people being worried about their dog’s unruly behavior.  It isn’t until the dog bites someone that the dog’s owner is pulled out of his or her stupidity.

 

Posted on

Dog Bite Prevention

6,000 Letter Carriers are bitten by dogs each year.  Why?  Because dogs feel like they are invincible against the Carriers.  Every day a Carrier comes to their door to deliver mail, the dog barks at the Carrier, and the Carrier leaves.  In the dog’s mind, the dog believes that his (or her) barking has frightened away an intruder.  Day after day, the dog is further convinced of being invincible and their aggression increases with each return of that intruder who is taunting the dog.  In the dog’s mind, that intruder is begging to be bitten.

Receiving mail is an important part of our everyday lives.  Dog owners who want to continue receiving their mail should take a critical look at their dog’s behavior to determine if their dog presents a risk to their Letter Carrier.

As an animal control professional, I saw that when the USPS stopped mail delivery it was the most effective way to control loose dogs in a neighborhood.  In recent years, Letter Carriers have been encouraged to sue dog owners when they are bitten.  Lawsuits are an effective way to educate people.

The best prevention is to separate the dog from the carrier.  It’s pretty darn simple.  Lawsuits are simply an effective way to end stupidity.

Posted on

Dumbing Down Dog Bite Statistics

It all started with the maligning of pit bulls. The first efforts of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) towards dogs began with coining the phrase of determining a dog’s character by the dog’s deeds and not the dog’s breed. Most of us in animal welfare accepted that as a fair assessment. However, over the years, the deeds of the breed caused greater concern towards the dog’s breed. Too many people were being killed by a single breed to not accept the fact that there is something different about that breed.

As the maligning of pit bulls got worse. To combat against people seeing the pit bull as a dangerous breed, news media began leaving out the breed of the dog engaged in acts of violence. More and more news reports of dog attacks are not reporting on the breed of the dog engaged in the attack. Some will say that the reason is that pit bull dogs are hard to identify and are often mistaken in these incidents. In some ways, they are correct. There are so many pit bulls and pit bull mixes that it is becoming more and more difficult to identify the breed amid all of the other breeds mixed into an offending dog if you don’t consider the wide forehead of the offending dog. Let’s face it, pit bulls have a single phenotypical characteristic that is too hard to disguise. That wide forehead is hard to overlook.

So, the best way to not allow pit bulls to be maligned in a dog bite incident is to not report the breed of the offending dog. In today’s society, reporting the dog as a pit bull is just racist.

Posted on

The Evolution of the Animal Shelter Profession

I was once called “old school.” I guess they meant that I am stuck to the old ways of the profession when the responsibility of being an Animal Control Officer was to serve and protect the public. Our profession has evolved, and to be honest, I am glad that I am now retired because I can’t stop being old school..

The No Kill Movement started the evolution. Our professional focus turned to the plight of the animals in our care. I have to admit, it was very fulfilling to see euthanasia rates decline. Shelters with a live release rate of 10% started seeing more animals getting adopted and eventually many shelters saw live release rates over 90%.

The problem was that many claimed that a 90% live release rate was still too low and that decisions had to be made to place animals that were not considered adoptable. Pit bulls became the poster breed for this cause. Organizations were attempting to convince the public that pit bulls were the breed to own. Even ones that had a history of aggression.

Recently, in my community, a woman was killed by a pair of pit bulls. The Newspaper, along with the local Animal Control organization wrote an article assuring the public that pit bulls are a maligned breed and that you should ignore the deaths caused by the breed. After all, “all breeds are the same.” Don’t let another pit bull related death interfere with the adoption of these animals from the animal shelter.

The problem with this evolution is that it is making people stupid. Animal Shelters are so focused on adopting every animal that they fail to warn people about the genetic characteristics that control an animal’s behavior. Let’s face it, when shelters have a population of 70% pit bulls, they have quite a sales job to make. After all, their mission is no longer to protect people, but to have the highest possible adoption rate…. no matter what the cost.

Since this evolution has sucked so many animal shelters in, it might become necessary to outlaw the adoption of potentially dangerous animals. The Commonwealth of Virginia outlaws the holding back of information about a dog’s previous behavior problems to potential adopters. I used to think that keeping adopters in the dark was a Southern thing, but it appears that it has spilled over into the rest of the Country. Maybe communities should reenact some old school philosophies.

I’m not suggesting that some breeds should be banned; I just think that animal shelters should get back to the days of full disclosure when adopting animals. An era of integrity and respecting the mission that people must come first.