News -- Updates -- Articles -- Reference -- Resources

DBRF in Canada

Summaries:

# of Attacks

24

# of Victims

25

# of Dogs

61

# of Attacks > 1 dog

13

# of Attacks > 2 dogs

9

# of "attacks" accidental

2

Victim's Age:

0 - 2

5

3 - 5

10

6 - 12

8

13 - 16

0

17+

2

Dog Location:

Home

10

Relative

4

Neighbour

4

Loose

6

Breed of Dog in the 24 attacks:

In cases where there was more than one dog involved and the breeds were different, each

breed was given the percentage of dogs of that breed involved.  For example, in the case

of the 3 Rottweilers and 1 Border Collie, the Rottweilers comprised 0.75 of the attack and

the Border Collie 0.25.

It is important to keep in mind the following points when considering breed:

1. Breed has not been proven to be a determining factor in dog attacks.  It is clear from this analysis that owner control and parent responsibility are the two factors that would have prevented all except one of these deaths.
    
2. The breeds of the dogs in these attacks have NOT been independently verified and cannot be.  Visual identification of breed is at best subjective and is extremely unreliable.

German Shepherd

4

Husky

4

(3 x 1,  2 x 0.5)

Unknown

4

(Northern dogs, perhaps Husky mixes)

Rottweiler

3.25

(2 x 1,  1 x 0.5,  1 x 0.75)

Sled Dog

3

(Northern dogs, perhaps Husky mixes)

AmStaff ("pit bull")

1

Bullmastiff

1

Chow Chow

1

Labrador

1

(2 x 0.5)

Maremma Sheepdog

1

Wolf

0.5

(1 x 0.5)

Border Collie

0.25

(1 x 0.25)

Solutions:

"Pit Bull" Ban

0 - 1

(dogs would probably have been grandfathered)

Muzzle "Pit bulls" in public

0

(dogs were not in public)

Secure enclosure for "Pit Bulls"

0

(victim and dogs were inside an apartment)

Muzzle ALL dogs in public

0

(dogs would only be muzzled if on leash)

Leash ALL dogs in public

6

Secure enclosure for ALL dogs

18

(high fences and high latched gates)

Supervise child (no dog expected)

8

Supervise child/dog interaction

9

None of the above

1

Comments:

A strictly enforced leash and loose dog law may have helped in some of the off-leash cases where dogs were deliberately allowed to roam loose or where packs of strays were running loose.

Secure enclosures that prevent children from entering yards would have had significant impact.  These same secure enclosures would have prevented dogs from breaking loose.  Another solution would be if the dogs were not left unattended in the yards.

In all cases where supervising children (with no dog expected) is suggested, the children were 6 years old or younger and had been left unsupervised.  We assume that the parent did NOT know there would be child/dog interaction.  So simply knowing where the child was and what he/she was doing would have prevented these attacks.  The assumption is that a parent or guardian should always know where a child 6 years old or younger is.

Supervising child/dog interaction in the cases where the parent or guardian (e.g., neighbour) knew that the child was interacting with the dog would have had significant impact.

In how many of these cases were owners criminally charged or significantly fined?