Trooper needed constant care and medical treatment during the first few months of his life. (Beth Clifton photo)
by Beth Clifton
There is a strong argument to be made that pit bulls are the most abused and exploited dogs ever, the only breed used extensively in dogfighting and baiting bulls and wildlife, far more likely than any other breed to be neglected and––even if not used in fighting or baiting––five times more likely to suffer from violent abuse.
Certainly pit bulls are the most overbred dogs filling shelters across the country.
These sad facts should have any animal lover up in arms, fighting to end this tragic state of affairs.
Trooper with his litter. (Beth Clifton photo)
Strong s/n requirement needed
In my few years as a pit bull advocate, and now as an advocate for victims of dog attacks, it has become very clear to me that breed-specific legislation, including a mandatory spay/neuter component, is necessary not only to end the dogs’ suffering, but also to end the frequent and deadly attacks on humans that have made pit bulls notorious.
Thirty-nine humans were killed in 2017 by pit bull-type dogs within the U.S. alone, plus 32 more in 2018 and another 10 through May 2019. Just since Trooper was born in 2011, 262 family members have been stolen from their loved ones, torn apart by the jaws of the fighting dog in the U.S. alone, with many more pit bull attack deaths occurring in other nations.
Failed adoption at eight weeks left Trooper in the garage of another foster home because that foster caretaker’s pit bulls wanted to kill Trooper. (Beth Clifton photo)
The simplest way to address this crisis is to greatly reduce the births of pit bulls through strong regulation and enforcement of swift and consistent penalties for those who break the law.
To date the majority of humane organizations and pit bull advocates are strongly fighting against all regulation that singles out these dogs, even though the facts clearly point to pit bulls committing the greatest damage to humans, pets and livestock. This approach implies the view that the number of casualties and fatalities inflicted by pit bulls is to be accepted as “normal”; that pit bulls should get a free pass, no matter what they do, because pit bulls are just dogs.
Trooper in dog bed at about six months of age. (Beth Clifton photo)
My pit bull Trooper
My pit bull Trooper filled three years of my life with worry and stress over keeping him and others safe from harm. Trooper was a victim from conception of the systematic lies being told about pit bulls to promote them, and in a sense I was a victim of these lies as well, because I believed them enough to adopt Trooper and spend three years looking after him.
I no longer believe the systematic lies about pit bulls, and am saddened that the very people who most vehemently advocate for pit bulls, and most claim to love and care about pit bulls, are the people doing the most damage to these dogs by ignoring the truth and refusing to do what needs to be done to protect them and the public.
My first moments with Trooper and Sarah, removed from their litter at three weeks old to save their lives. (Beth Clifton photo)
Never should have been born
I am a veterinary technician, humane volunteer, and former animal control officer, long actively involved in animal rescue. Trooper entered my life in May 2011, when I received a call from a friend who told me that a pair of three-week-old pit bull puppies needed bottle feeding, and that it would be necessary to remove them from their mother or they would not survive the weekend. I was there in twenty minutes to pick them up and foster them to health if possible. I named them Trooper and Sarah. They weighed less than a pound.
I arrived to find a female adult pit bull surrounded by approximately twelve puppies, mostly in good weight, but Trooper and Sarah were clearly failing. I purchased the supplies I would need, brought them home and spent the next two months trying to save their lives. Ironically, while Trooper and Sarah appeared to be the pups most in danger, their mother later died from parvovirus, as did several of the other pups.
I began questioning whether saving Trooper was the right thing to do. (Beth Clifton photo)
Health issues
While Trooper and Sarah escaped parvovirus, I was obliged to euthanize Sarah at eight weeks old, as it was believed by our veterinarian that she had a congenital intestinal disorder and as a young puppy would not likely survive the grueling surgery that would be necessary if we were to attempt to correct it. Sarah had two months filled with love, attention and care before she passed in my arms at the vet clinic. Her ashes were placed in a small urn where they remained in my bedroom for two and a half years as I continued to raise Trooper.
Trooper’s health was also challenged, but I never gave up on him and he began to grow into a 90-pound adult. He came to work with me every day and became a mascot of sorts at my job. A rambunctious and unruly dog, he was loved by all and most of all cherished and loved by me.
Trooper at 6 months. (Beth Clifton photo)
Maintaining his health and well being had become my mission. He slept in my bed. I would take him to pet stores as a young puppy to choose a toy. We went through the nationally recognized Star puppy class, and he and I worked on his training together for two years. He received the best vet care, the best food, and was treated, as I called him, a “prince.”
At about eight weeks of age, after Trooper’s health improved, he was transferred back to the rescue organization for whom I had fostered him, and was neutered. He was supposed to have been adopted, but somehow never reached the adopter’s home, and ended up in the garage of yet another foster home. When this was brought to my attention, I directed the rescue organization to bring Trooper home to me.
Trooper had surgery and was a tripod.
(Beth Clifton photo)
Lost leg
At six months old Trooper broke a growth plate in his right front leg while running through the house. My veterinarian advised me to wait until Trooper reached fifteen months old, when his bones were fully grown, to make a decision about whether he could keep the leg. At fifteen months of age, when Trooper continued to require pain medication for the injury, I agreed that Trooper’s leg should be amputated.
Twelve hours after the surgery, Trooper was running through the house, apparently not even realizing that he now had only one front leg. We were invited to a meeting of a human amputee support group where Trooper was given a standing ovation as he performed our favorite trick, in which he cheerfully growled “I love you.”
Trooper digs a hole. (Beth Clifton)
Despite Trooper’s successful performance for his fellow amputees, Trooper was most of all acutely mistrusting. I attributed this to the need to treat him with all sorts of medications during his first few months of life. From the time he began to feel well enough to play and interact with humans and other animals, he clearly was not a calm or well-balanced dog.
The socialization, love, care and patience he received could not trump his genetics. Trying, I suppose, to validate my reasons for keeping such an unstable dog, I fondly called Trooper a “spaz,” meaning he was a very large, strong dog with behavior problems that were seemingly impossible to train out of him.
(Beth Clifton photo)
Escalating aggression
I spent a great deal of time attempting to correct some of these behaviors with little to no results. Eventually I found it necessary to prevent my family, including my grandchildren, from coming to my home. This was not only to protect my family, but also to protect Trooper from any problems that could arise from a negative dog/child encounter, or even a bite or attack.
For as long as I had Trooper, he coexisted with my other dogs and cats, but he always chased the cats if they ran. I knew that at some point his need to chase could result in an injured or dead cat. And Trooper proved on one occasion that he could fight with a family dog (also a pit bull) and do serious damage. The two dogs required almost $1,000 in emergency clinic veterinary bills.
Trooper as a 90-pound adult.
(Beth Clifton photo)
By two and a half years old, Trooper showed signs of escalating aggression toward my smaller dog. Twice Trooper pursued the smaller dog in an aggressive manner, placing his mouth over my smaller dog’s back, but fortunately leaving no injuries.
We had gopher tortoises on our property, federally protected as a threatened species. Trooper demonstrated that if he had been able to get to one of those tortoises, he would have done the tortoise grave injury. I never gave him the chance.
That Trooper would even try to attack a tortoise, along with all of the other aspects necessary to managing Trooper safely, prompted me to begin considering euthanasia, though the thought of it broke my heart. I had always said that my home was Trooper’s first and last stop, and that if it was necessary, I would take him myself to the vet’s office to end his life, rather than pass along a potentially deadly problem for a human, another animal, or Trooper himself.
Gopher tortoise. (Dave Pauli photo)
Both grief & relief
In January 2014, at age three, about twice the age of the average pit bull killed for dangerous behavior at animal shelters, Trooper was euthanized in our home in my loving arms. Sarah’s ashes were placed with Trooper.
It is possible to experience both grief and a sense of relief simultaneously. That is how I felt when I said goodbye to Trooper. I miss him, but I don’t miss what my life had become to keep such a dangerous dog.
Trooper & Sarah. (Beth Clifton)
In retrospect, I too once believed that pit bulls were no different from any other type of dog. I too believed that if you raise any dog correctly, the dog will be well-behaved, stable and safe. I no longer believe these myths.
Merritt & Beth Clifton
I have many friends who have lost children, loved ones, and pets to pit bulls. I would like to take this opportunity to thank them for their dedication to raising awareness about the dangers of pit bulls.
I was paying attention, as a pit bull caretaker and advocate, to their messages. I saw first-hand the dangers that pit bulls present. I took responsible action in order to keep my family, my pets, my neighbors, my community, and all other animals safe.
[See also Pit bulls, Trooper, and the personal is political, by Barbara Kay, and Editorial: Obsessed about pit bulls.]
Please donate to support our work:http://www.animals24-7.org/donate/
Related Posts
Pit bulls, Trooper & “The personal is political”
Inexpensive & simple vegan ricotta, by Beth Clifton
The Rottweilers in my life: that could have been me
Cockfights: Laurel County, KY Sheriff John Root avows he won’t do his job
How zombies from hell ate animal protection, by Steve Hindi
16 real-life tips for surviving a dog attack (2021 edition)
We grieve with you on the loss and applaud you for doing the right thing. Maybe Trooper’s next life will be different and you have given him the opportunity to seek it.
Good story. I , too, understand the love one can have for a dog, but have never had to deal with an aggressive dog. Don’t think I would handle it as well as you. I would be constantly worried the dog would hurt someone. Seems Pits are quite able to get over and under fences, break chains, or get loose in so many different ways. I see them as nothing but problems
There’s so many valuable things to be realized by your life with Trooper, that I don’t know where to begin. First, I’m sorry for your loss of a loved pet, but glad that it was only after every possible thing that could be done was done. There are two troopers in your tale (you being the other of course) but there are seemingly two Troopers and two Beths taking two paths, one to destruction and one to enlightenment. It took you, with the right qualifications, training, experience, perspective, vision, objectivity, scientific curiosity and willingness to learn that which would in the end require you to accept the bitter truth about this dog and do a complete 180 degree change in what you thought you knew, and what your heart felt. You had to do the right thing, not just for yourself and your dog, but for everyone in your type of situation. It takes courage to change one’s mind and on’e’s belief. The telling here is something everyone can relate to. I’ve been an animal lover all my life; I think (hope) most people are, but this one type of animal is the exception to the rules. It’s destined to break all the rules. We can only prevent that by preventing them. Spay, neuter, stop breeding them and stop accepting them as pets. Good job Beth. I left a lot out but that says it all.
Sorry for your loss. There is not happy ending, except that you tried and you loved and your dog knew that.
If Animals 24-7 advocates for breed specific legislation what comes next after Pit Bulls – German Shepherds, Rottweilers, Dobermans, Huskies and many others – or mixes of the same for that matter. Things are never black and white. Surely you must be able to find one positive story. If not, I have one. Her name is Annie and she is an absolute gem.
None of the other breeds that Anne Streeter listed were developed expressly for dogfighting and baiting. While German shepherds, Dobermans, huskies, and several other common breeds are about four times more likely to kill or disfigure people than the average dog, pit bulls and Rottweilers are 11 times more likely to kill or disfigure people than the average dog, based on the death and disfigurement data from the past 32 years and affirmed by the death data since 1844: for 170 consecutive years, pit bulls have accounted for half or more of all dog fatalities in any given 10-year time frame. Neither have any other breeds ever been as over-represented among animal shelter admissions, about two-thirds of which occur through owner surrenders while one third result from impoundments. German shepherds and German shepherd mixes, at the peak of their popularity in the early 1980s, together accounted for 16% of shelter admissions, comparable to their representation among the dog population at large. Pit bulls, by contrast, have never been more than 5% of the U.S. dog population, yet were 23% of the dogs admitted to U.S. shelters by 2003, and have been well over a third of the dogs admitted to U.S. shelters during the present decade.
It’s unbelievable to me that anti BSL activists can ignore the statistics you so finely presented here.
If a pit bull or any dog gets loose and attacks a child, that dog needs to be put to death, no ifs ands and buts! There were two children walking to kindergarten here in the Atlanta area Tuesday, a 6-year-old boy and a 5-yr-old girl. The 6-year-old boy was killed and the 5-year-old girl is in the hospital. One dog was shot and wounded and the other was captured without a scratch! COPS are so eager to shoot people but not dogs!! If it was my child they wouldn’t need to call animal control!! These dogs would have been history! THE OWNER WAS ARRESTED AND I HOPE HE STAYS IN JAIL FOR A LONG TIME!!! He is under a $ 70,000 bond.
We have closely followed developments in the Atlanta case, and have shared information with concerned Atlanta citizens about legislation that might prevent fatal and disfiguring attacks, both by pit bulls and by other dogs. The most effective responses will be breed-specific, but much else can and should be done. Meanwhile, Carter Buckner may be unaware that his comment is appended to a memoir, Why pit bulls will break your heart, by a former police officer, my wife Beth, who never even once drew her gun on a suspect in six years of often highly dangerous service. Police officers are, however, increasingly often obliged to shoot dogs, most often pit bulls, both to protect attack victims and to protect themselves. Our recent article Pit bull crime doubled in 2016 looks at this trend in depth. As of the close of 2016, police in verifiable cases since 2005 had shot 904 dogs, 750 of them pit bulls (83%). About a third of the shootings were to protect civilians from attack; about two-thirds were to protect police officers themselves.
Annie Streeter: Nobody advocating for BSL has adopted that position because they were unable to find “one positive story.” Nor did they become BSL advocates because of “one negative story.” One comes to a policy position through exposure to epidemiological trends, not personal anecdotes. Moreover, just about every case in which a family’s pet dog mauled or killed a family member was a “positive story” until the tragedy happened – randomly and suddenly. Public policy is not about “you” or “me” or anyone in particular. It is about risk assessment. There are many people who smoke all their lives and never get lung cancer. That does not mean that smoking is safe. Pit bulls present an elevated risk to other animals and to humans. That is settled fact. What to do about it is the question you should be considering instead of limiting your focus to your particular pet.
Good for you for doing the right thing. It’s being a responsible citizen.
Thank you for this powerful story, and I’m sorry for the difficult decision that you were forced to make. I am someone who was involved in a serious, and completely unprovoked, pit bull attack by two dogs that broke free from their dog walker. By all accounts, the attacking dogs, which had attacked previously only months prior to my attack, were raised in a loving home from puppyhood. The idea that it’s all about how they’re raised is harmful to the breed, to the people who adopt, love, but cannot control their dogs, and to the community. While heartbreaking, I completely applaud your decision to euthanize Trooper. You likely prevented severe heartache and injury to others. A million thank yous for being such a responsible owner.
Thank you for the tremendously informational posts about animal issues that are so widely misunderstood by most. I’m grateful for the attention you bring to the problems of pit bull ownership.
I live in a state, Virginia, that does not employ BSL. And I am surrounded by innumerable rescue agencies that practice hard core No Kill principles and pit bull advocacy. Any commentary that raises a question to the limits or unwanted side-effects of No Kill practices or to any sort of breed restrictions on pit bulls is typically met with comments of unbridled hatred/intolerance. In our shelters that are so overrun with pit bulls these policies frequently result in the long-term housing/storage of pit bulls and in the adoption of these dogs to just about anyone who will adopt them.
I’m distressed at the unabated proliferation of pit bulls and the rising tensions that result in horrific retaliations against these dogs (i.e. http://www.examiner.com/article/dog-stabbed-to-death-at-georgia-adoption-event). And I’m especially distressed at the pet rescue community’s denial of these problems and unwillingness to engage in meaningful, constructive dialog on the issues.
While I would never advocate for the euthanasia of pit bulls that are responsibly owned and maintained, I can well see the benefit of a policy that would mandate the sterilization of all pit bulls and its strict enforcement. Sadly, this idea cannot even be discussed with civility in my community.
If BSL is the problem for mandating sterilization, then why not enforce mandated sterilization for all dogs with the exception of licensed and regulated breeders? All dogs have the potential to cause physical harm and certainly all dogs can cause financial harm to residents of any community that must fund a shelter and animal control service. I don’t understand why the rescue community remains unwilling to seriously address the issue of truly restricted breeding and I would welcome comments on this.
FYI- the stabbing in Georgia was NOT retaliation, it was defense of the man’s dog. The pit, who was already known to be an animal killer, broke loose and ran across the store to attack a small leashed dog, standing with her owner. When the man could not get the oit off his dog, he stabbed the pit, instead of waiting until his dog was dead.
When people use words like retaliate, it makes it sound as if this guy was just mad at pits and was wanting to kill one, instead of the truth of self defense. People also call events like this fights, when they are one-sided attacks! (You didn’t, just making a point.)
Anyone who has the ability to save their pet, or a person, from a pit attack will do it if possible. Anyone with a clue realizes an increasing amount of stabbings and shootings of attacking pits is due to widespread knowledge of the deaths they cause.
Someone has to defend the defenseless!!!
I don’t question that this occurrence was an unprovoked attack by a pit bull that should never have been at such an event – nor that any owner of an attacked dog would/should respond with force to halt the attack. That’s not my point. But from all accounts I’ve read, the owner’s response was excessive with the knifing continuing after the attack had ceased (“He knifed her over and over and over and she just lay there. She did not fight back.”) . This, and the passion behind this, is the retaliation I speak of. Such retaliation is also seen in the reports I read about people burning alive pit bulls in the streets and numerous other violent acts against these dogs. These are the result of our society failing to address the serious problems we have with pit bulls. And such acts will only increase as we continue to deny these problems. The victim of our folly, as always, is the dog (and in far too many cases the humans and other animals). The role of AC is supposed to be to protect the community. How can they simply turn a blind eye to what’s going on? There are solutions. We can prohibit the breeding of these dogs. Why don’t we?
The statement “retaliation is also seen in the reports I read about people burning alive pit bulls in the streets and numerous other violent acts against these dogs” appears to have been made oblivious to the reality that burning pit bulls alive is among the traditional fates of pit bulls who lose fights or refuse to fight. Others include shooting, hanging, drowning, and dragging behind cars. Beyond that, pit bulls are frequently kept by other categories of violent people––drug dealers, for example––among whom it is not unusual for animals who make a mistake to be punished with the same cruelty that is commonly meted out to human rivals and informants. Pit bulls were already five times more likely to be violently abused than other dogs in 1993, when I first assembled and published the relevant data, long before the present explosion of attacks on people and animals other than members of their own households. This trend has continued, and so has the trend that the people most likely to torture and otherwise abuse pit bulls are the people who keep them. Cases of anyone else “retaliating” against a pit bull are surpassingly rare.
This does not change my question. Why do we not ban the unrestricted breeding of these dogs (and all dogs in my opinion)?
Yes, I had a similar experience with a pittie I raised on a bottle since birth. He slept with us & was a very sweet, well mannered & well trained dog. At about a year old, he went “game”. I could not walk him because we would inevitably run across another dog & he would break his leash, even a ski rope to attack the other dog. At about 2-3 years old, he met his demise when he crashed through a window to run across the street to attack a dog he saw & got hit by a car. I was saddened, also, but as time went by, I realized the relief that had set in knowing I would never have to remove another dog from his jaws. RIP Belvedere….
Wow,….You are no vet tech… SHAME ON YOU! Calling this American Bulldog a Pit Bull. Do your research!!!!!!!!!! NO PIT BULL IS OVER 90lbs!!!!!!! LOOK IT UP!
The American Pit Bull Terrier, the ONLY Pit Bull will never get over 70lbs MAX! SHAME ON YOU!
dog killer.
The “Declaration of Facts” posted by “American bulldog” developer John D. Johnson at http://www.arfusa.com/declaration_scott_and_johnson.htm makes very clear, despite Johnson’s pretenses to the contrary, that the “American bulldog” is most definitely a pit bull. Some of the relevant points: “Originally, my dogs were registered with the National Kennel Club [NKC], as “American [Pit] Bulldogs”…The American Bulldog is the same dog that was developed in England in the 12th century, by the meat packers, to catch large bulls, to kill for meat, as they did not have the facilities to handle them. They were called ‘Packers’ Dogs’ for a couple of hundred of years; then they started bull baiting with them, and they then were called ‘Bull Baiting Dogs’. Later, they were registered as ‘English Bulldogs’ [“The AKC Dog Book” refers to the breed as “Bulldogs”.]. They also were ‘pit’ fought over there [ England ], against each other, badgers, lions, and anything that would fight.”
And breeders advertising “XL,” “XXL,” and “Monster” Pits are easily found, as well.
Don’t confuse the nutters with the truth. They suffer from a form of cognitive dissonance.
http://fox2now.com/2013/02/06/poll-can-you-spot-the-pitbull/
All 10 of the dogs displayed in this “can you spot the pit bull?” quiz are in fact pit bulls: representatives of breeds developed or descended from breeds produced to be “pitted” against other pit bulls, other animals, and sometimes humans. The predilection of pit bull advocates for renaming their dogs and then pretending they are not pit bulls is analogous to someone insisting that Pere Noel, Kris Kringle, St. Nicholas, and Father Christmas are other than alternate names for Santa Claus.
Merritt that analogy is brilliant! Best one I’ve heard yet.
What has happened over the past two decades is a dovetailing of the “No Kill” movement and “pit bull advocacy”, whose goals are essentially the same; ensuring that every physically healthy dog, regardless of temperament or potential dangerousness, is not euthanized. The demonization of open admission shelters and the ability of “no kill” organizations to raise millions by promising to “save every dog” has drained financial and public support from many worthy shelters and rescue organizations. Now these limited admission “no kill” shelters are accountable to their donors for perpetuating the fantasy that all dogs can be rehabilitated with love and training and that there is a “loving, forever home” for every homeless dog in America. When faced with a flood of unwanted, unadoptable pit bulls, they are unable to alienate donors by admitting that some dogs are just too dangerous to be placed in a pet home, and should be euthanized humanely.
These shelters and humane organizations that advocate against the regulation of fighting breeds are no longer a credible voice for the humane treatment of animals.. Their polices are shaped not by a desire to prevent animal suffering, but by lobbyists who threaten to influence their donor base. The benefits of mandatory s/n for pit bull type dogs, especially in high crime urban areas, are self evident….fewer dogs euthanized, a reduction in dog fighting, a reduction in attacks against both humans and other family pets, more resources available to help other shelter animals., to name a few. There is no logical argument against BSL, and to hear supposed humane advocates parrot the ridiculous, whiney, petulant refrain “But is just not FAIR to single out pit bulls!” makes sane adults embarrassed to be associated with these organizations.
The game being played now, by every major humane organization, and the “no kill” shelter advocates, is to redefine what is normal behavior for a pet dog. Shelters and rescues have decided, since they are wedded to their “no kill” philosophy, that they must present aggressive, non-social dogs as normal, and tell adopters that growling, attacking other dogs, biting their owners, resource guarding, etc., is all normal dog behavior, and that it’s up to the adopter to learn to manage it. They make emotional appeals to adopters, label biters as “mouthy”,resource guarders as “scared”, and non-social, reactive dogs as “probably abused”. They use corporate marketing techniques to sell their merchandize, and treat potential adopters like dupes; they try to manipulate your emotions and make you feel guilty that “Buddy, the pit bull” has been in the shelter for almost a year, and just can’t find someone to love him!
We are headed to a place where an animal shelter or rescue will become the worst place to find a stable, safe pet dog. The fact that animal welfare advocates would enable animal abuse by supporting the continued breeding of fighting dogs is a tragedy for everyone…the victims of dog attacks, owners like Beth Clifton, and the dogs themselves.
Well stated. I just wish the rescue community could even hear your words. Those I’ve encountered remain so fully closed and vitriolic should their stance on “no kill” be questioned. It’s very sad.
In the Netherlands, within only four years of the pit bull ban being lifted (in 2008), we were (and still are) at the place where a shelter is the worst place to find a stable pet dog. The public knows this and has begun massively avoiding Dutch shelters. The small volunteer networks that had always imported dogs from shelters in Greece, Turkey and Russia, have grown explosively. They are no longer specialist rescue organizations comparable to (for example) greyhound rescue, but are serving the general public in a way that the Dutch shelters no longer can or do. This has been worsened by the common practice shelters have adopted of hiding the fact that a dog is a pit bull mix, calling it a ‘Lab mix’ or a ‘pointer’. People who would love to get a Dutch shelter dog but don’t want a pit bull type dog have become fearful of what the shelters will send them home with.
And it’s not only the general public. The Chief Coordinator of the Hague chapter of our Society for Protection of Animals, which fired me for refusing to adapt my scientific work to their pro- pit bull standpoints, is still shaming others for getting foreign shelter dogs instead of a dog from a Dutch shelter — but in the meantime, she herself has chosen to own a dog imported from a non-Dutch shelter for exactly the same reasons others do: she doesn’t want to own a pit bull type dog.
And so pit bull advocacy has sabotaged a nation-wide low-kill system that worked so well that we didn’t even need a ‘No Kill’ movement over here. For an explanation of this, please see what I wrote elsewhere:
http://17barks.blogspot.nl/2012/06/pit-bulls-and-shelter-bankruptcy.html
In The Hague, the shelter was euthanizing 1% of all dogs that came in (1 dog for every 33,300 residents). Shelters are now secretive about their euthanasia rates, so I don’t know the exact present figures. I do know that the Dutch Society for Protection of Animals has, since I wrote the above article, several times sent emails to all shelters begging the ones that have fewer pit bull type dogs to take some from shelters that have many — and got no response. There is apparently no shelter that is willing to take in yet more pit bulls from another shelter. Not only has pit bull advocacy pushed many shelters to near bankruptcy, it has bankrupted a system that was producing a kill rate that ‘No Kill’ in the US can only dream of.
This has been a tragedy for the pit bulls themselves as well. In 2008, when the ban was lifted, there were 180 pit bulls nationwide awaiting euthanasia in shelters. This was the number of pit bulls confiscated in the course of about five years, the time it takes for the entire appeals process to be exhausted, and amounted to putting down about 30 pit bulls yearly nationwide. Now thousands are being euthanized nationwide every year. I don’t understand why pit bull advocacy claims this as a victory.
Aside from all the other parties who BSL is good for, BSL is also good for pit bulls. It’s too bad — including for pit bulls — that the ‘humane’ community is still refusing to acknowledge this.
I’m very interested in the information shared in these posts. I wonder if there is a data-based report or documentation of the transition that took place in the Netherlands or any similar sort of transition elsewhere. If so, this would be such valuable information. Having asked the president of Virginia’s animal control association who also happens to be the new VP of the National Animal Control Association (NACA) to give me his thoughts on this discussion, he has affirmed his belief that BSL would be harmful. As well he states that NACA would be highly unlikely to ever embrace BSL adding that they would be more likely to embrace a policy to enforce sterilization of all dogs not licensed for breeding. While I don’t know the answers, I see the dynamics and issues addressed here as central to the future of companion animal welfare.in this country.
For further particulars of the situation in the Netherlands, please see “The 2011 Dutch animal cops plan, viewed in 2014,” by Alexandra Semyonova, http://wp.me/p4pKmM-7Y
Concerning NACA positions, NACA has also at various times opposed abolition of the decompression chamber and the gas chamber for killing homeless animals, and opposed the introduction of neuter/return feral cat control, among other collective stances later reversed as the value of change became evident.
Thank you and kudos to you, Beth Clifton and ANIMALS 24/7 for stating the truth in a manner that hopefully will get through to at least a few of the people who seem to be suffering from politically correct failure to hear/comprehend it. If it saves even one life of an innocent living being of any species, it has helped immeasurably.
You are a horrible dog hater, agressive dog? What a crock of shit, more like you were a irresponsible dog owner, shame on you for generalising dogs of a certain breed into the same category, as soon as I read the first paragraph I could tell you were a passive agressive pitbull hater trying to sell your dirty wares.
The vitriol spewed here by the advocates are PROOF that only certain types of people refuse to listen to the facts and maintains that pitbulls are safe.
They dont even realize they are proving our point. Ladies and gentlemen these are your pitbull owners. Nutty as fruitcakes and mean as snakes. Cruel and uncaring about other animals and human beings.
A total disregard for human life. What a selfish, narcissistic bunch of creeps.
Beth you did the right thing and thank you for the guts to tell the story. Ignore the Nutters.
Just because a shelter is a no-kill doesn’t mean that dangerous dogs are warehoused or given out for adoption. Responsible shelters euthanize dangerous dogs and very sick animals. Responsible shelters never release unsterilized animals – dogs or cats. No-kills are not pounds which automatically euthanize most animals as a means of population control – freeing up cages for new arrivals. Pounds are profit motivated. Good no-kill shelters should be a temporary safe haven for animals and an educating body.
As I said earlier on, things are never black and white. I am frustrated by people who take total unbending stands on certain issues. No situation is the same.
Far from being “profit-motivated,” all but a handful of the 20,000-odd animal control service providers in North America are either municipal agencies, operating at an annual loss, or nonprofit humane societies, subsidizing their pound contracts with donations. Montreal, where Anne Streeter lives, is in fact the only city of significant size in either the U.S. or Canada to have had a for-profit animal control service provider in the past 30 years. As to the realities of dangerous dogs being rehomed, from the 1858 opening of the first U.S. shelter to do adoptions until 1988, there were no known human fatalities involving shelter dogs. In 1988 and 1989, two children were killed by wolf hybrids who had been rehomed by shelters. After those two incidents, there were no further fatalities involving shelter dogs until 2003. From 2003 through 2009, three shelter dogs killed people––a pit bull, a Doberman, and a Presa Canario, essentially a cross of pit bull with mastiff. From 2010 to the present, however, 35 shelter dogs have killed people, including 24 pit bulls, seven bull mastiffs, two Rottweilers, a Lab who may have been part pit bull, and a husky. For every human killed, hundreds of animals have been–about 6,800 animals killed by shelter dogs in 2013 alone. None of this is acceptable; all of it is avoidable, but the no-kill community is going to have to get off their feel-good high first, & quit pretending that consigning animals to death by pit bull mauling is in any way doing a good deed.
The problem I see with No Kill is that, while some may be responsible, the frenzied movement and donor money that comes to those who claim No Kill (having no real understanding of what it means), have resulted in so many shelters and now municipal pounds becoming irresponsible – lying about their practices, warehousing dogs for years, and adopting out dogs without proper screening at “discount” bargain rates. I find myself lumping breeders and shelters together as “pet brokers”. While some may be responsible – there is little to no regulation or accountability for private rescues and shelters where I live.
You and Merritt both touch on a problem I mentioned in my review of Cabral’s book here
http://www.animals24-7.org/2014/03/07/review-desperate-dogs-determined-measures-by-robert-cabral/
When ‘no kill’ shelters count ‘live releases’, they aren’t really counting animal lives saved. If they ‘live release’ a dog that goes on to kill one or more other animals, the net gain in animal life saved is negative and should be subtracted from their ‘live release’ claim, at least insofar as that’s supposed to indicate animal lives saved. They should also subtract ‘live release’ dogs who are later abandoned to open admission shelters to be euthanized for aggressive behavior, as well as ‘live release’ dogs whose owners end up putting them down for aggressive behavior.
For further discussion of this issue, please see: http://wp.me/p4pKmM-bS
I too have had my heart broken my pit bulls. As someone who works in the animal field, I have had plenty of experience with them. I remember when I first started in this business and I fostered a pit bull with heartworm disease while he went through treatment. While he was sick, he was the sweetest dog. He was so scared and timid, I would often have to carry him around. Once treatment was finished, he personality changed. He suddenly became very dog aggressive and started to attack my other dogs. Every time he attacked one, he was harder to pull off. I couldn’t bring him anywhere to promote him because he would try to attack every dog he saw. I finally brought him back and he had to live the shelter life until adopted. He was adopted out, but with some strict rules about him not being near other animals. Looking back, he should have been euthanized. At the time, my heart couldn’t take it. Every time I have bonded with a pit bull, I have been disappointed. A few year ago, I agreed to babysit a friend’s pit at my house. He assured me she was dog friendly. I was cautious and didn’t take his leash off. After 6 hours of hanging out with my dogs, she suddenly flew threw the air at my dog’s throat. I grabbed the leash and tackled her to the ground. After that, I said I wouldn’t even try to bond with the pits. I treat them humanely and care for them properly, but I never let my heart get attached. I just gave 2 examples of the many I have experienced. Over the course of years, there have been plenty of heartbreaks in between. My heart did catch up with my what my head already knew. Beth, ignore the negative comments. Turning a blind eye does not make you a better vet tech or person in general. You can still love animals, but live in reality.
Pit bull advocacy talking points are repeated so often that they have the superficial veneer of truth, but virtually all of the pit bull lobby’s central claims fail to check out when examined in depth. Rigorous fact-checking reveals that the pit bull advocate’s go-to arsenal is little more than an elaborately-scaffolded house of cards.
Here are just a few examples:
Numerous websites, blogs, and even news articles assert that pit bulls were once known as “nanny dogs” or were once the most popular family pet. Not one of them lists even a single primary source for this supposed “fact.”
A study published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association claims that breed is not a factor in fatal dog attacks. Yet four of the five authors of this study are staff or longtime associates of a major pit bull lobbying organization, and all five are outspoken BSL opponents. The study relied on a single vocal, on-the-record BSL opponent to look at photos of dogs to determine their breed. This study made no attempt to establish observer reliability. The authors did not disclose their obvious conflicts of interest, and thus the conflict of interest even escaped the attention of JAVMA’s peer reviewers.
Pit bull advocates insist that the public cannot identify a pit bull despite the millions of dollars poured into pit bull rebranding campaigns over the past decade. The percentage of serious and deadly attacks attributed to pit bulls has increased despite the proliferation of the pit bull rebranding movement, high-profile coverage of the Michael Vick case, and numerous books, films, feature stories, and TV shows dedicated to pit bulls. Whether or not the general public can reliably visually identify dogs has yet to be established, but the idea that people are LESS likely to recognize a pit bull today than they were ten or twenty years ago is ludicrous.
Pit bull advocates insist that “BSL doesn’t work” as though this was an inarguable and well-established fact. However few scientific studies have ever been conducted on BSL, and the only two long-term studies on BSL both concluded that restrictions on pit bulls may have resulted in a significant reduction in serious dog bite injuries.
The “National Canine Research Council” represents itself as an independent research organization, yet it was founded by a pit bull lobbyist and is owned and operated by an organization whose stated mission to ”secure equal treatment” for pit bulls.
A commonly-cited NCRC flyer argues that the media is biased against pit bulls. The flyer compares the amount of news coverage given to four dog injury incidents: a pit bull incident that was widely reported and three other incidents that received little media attention. The flyer fails to mention that the pit bull incident involved a brutal, prolonged, unprovoked, and sensational attack that eventually ended with a $2.2 million settlement for the victim, whereas the other three incidents were comparatively typical. One involved a dog that knocked over (but did not bite) the victim. The NCRC flyer refers to this dog as a Labrador mix, but the dog was registered with the city as a pit bull: http://billingsgazette.com/news/local/dog-s-attack-hard-to-believe/article_e534c598-d459-509d-bcff-500e9a46f010.html
Pit bull advocates insist that the American Temperament Test and other temperament tests prove that pit bulls are no more aggressive than other breeds. However, the ATTS test is not designed to detect aggression. At least three separate studies have proven that temperament tests routinely fail to identify dogs that behave aggressively.
On and on and on it goes. Deliberate omissions, exaggerations, and outright fabrications piled one on top of the other.
This is one of the most pressing animal issues of our time. Truly independent research coupled with aggressive fact-checking has never been more needed. Pit bull advocacy talking points might stand up to lazy journalism, but when subjected to anything other than the most superficial level of examination, these talking points fall apart like cheap toilet paper.
Promoting responsible dog ownership and putting the blame where it belongs (on the humans) will cut down on any dog bites and fatalities. People need to be responsible for their dogs actions, they need to not let their dogs run at large unattended, they need to train their dogs and not leave them to their own devices and instincts. people need to learn to speak dog, and they need to monitor their dog around children and not leave them alone.
Trooper had a high prey drive, my rottweiler Jake has the same prey drive which is why I have to watch him around my cats.He is also very dog aggressive. He is crated or separated from the cats when I am not at home. He recently attacked a baby deer that somehow got in my back yard over the fence, once he got in that zone I couldn’t stop him.. If I went by your thinking I should have him killed because he’s not the perfect dog, he’s a danger to cats and to deer. But he is the joy of my life and I am willing to work with him and enjoy his company.
Keeping a dog who is a menace to the lives of cats, other dogs, and deer is very nearly the definition of irresponsible dog ownership. The time to “work with” a dog is before the dog begins attacking other animals and humans; afterward, pretending that “work” will make the dog safe is the sort of delusional thinking that has allowed pit bulls to kill upward of 40,000 other animals per year over the past five years and an average of more than 30 humans per year.
Indeed, as Tony Solesky said: Responsible dog ownership begins with the type of dog you choose.
This ‘Deb’ is, like Cabral, under the illusion (rather: delusion) that her Rottweiler’s behavior is somehow normal domestic dog behavior. It is not. The domestic dog’s evolution took place by its wandering around human settlements unattended and not harming us or our children and livestock, and those who did being summarily killed. The domestic dog became very good at hanging around in the background, avoiding conflict, and avoiding us rather than harming us if a conflict threatened. Normal dogs also do this in their own groups — it is abnormal, pathological behavior for a domestic dog to fight another DD with the intent of killing it no matter what.
Then this other invention that is commonly cited nowadays among dog trainers: “prey drive”. There is no such thing. Wild animals go out to hunt not because of some ‘prey drive’, but because they’re hungry and have learned that certain other animals represent food. If they aren’t hungry, they’ll pass a herd of their usual prey without bothering that prey. The prey animals have learned this — they can read the carnivore and know whether it’s out hunting or just passing.
What these trainers really mean when they say ‘prey drive (though they don’t know this)’ is a number of genetically determined handicaps that humans have installed in various breeds / types of dogs by artificial selection. The main culprits are two: 1) exaggeration of genetically determined motor patterns that are normally a part of a functional hunting chain, and 2) deficient impulse control
Trooper was not a normal dog, and neither is your Jake. For those who are interested in understanding how normal dogs do things, please look at:
http://www.nonlineardogs.com/SocOrgDomDog_Jay_.art.pdf
Yup, I had to Euthanize my three year old Rottweiler Pit Bull mix. Hardest thing I ever did, but the future looked bleak..very affectionate at home, but went nuts when she saw other dogs.
Please, I urge you to find a new home for your cats. If you cannot prevent your dog from killing a deer, you will not be able to stop him when he kills one of your cats. (And this is when, not if.)
When we take domestic pets into our homes, we make a promise to them that we will protect and shelter them, and care for them as very best we can throughout their lives. Your cats should not have to feel fearful for their lives in their own home. This is profoundly unfair to them.
The real problems have been touched upon but not really fully addressed. Many, many people breed, sell and fight the pits–they get under the radar and yet so much of the pit bull problem originates with this element. Just what started Trooper’s life and story is a good example. The dog had 12 puppies, I venture to say, no one knew the history of the “mom” or “Dad”. Chances are she was a stray alllowed by her irresponsible owner to birth 12 puppies. I hate to say it but puppies such as this should be euthanized immediately leaving only one for the well being of the “mom”. Destroyed that young seems much more humane that allowing 12 more unapproved pits to make a person or shelter responsible for. their futiure which will probably be grim in one way or another. The people that are out there breeding (backyard so to speak) must be ferretted out and stopped. It will not be easy–even Michael Vick wasn’t discovered for a long time and who is more visible than he? In the 1980’s it was definitely the Sheps, Dobies and even huskies that were the breeds that killed humans and the one thing that nearly every killer dog had in common was that they lived chained almost all of their lives. If you check back, it is really shocking to see the difference.. Chained dogs begin to freak out due to neglect and begin to guard their little space and often unattended c hildren got caught in the chains–it was a horrible situation but now, as we were told, things have gone from bad to worse. All over the world, dogs are abused and euthanized for lack of having a home or space in shelters. It has become a very visable cause for concern and many wonderful people are volunteering and becoming fosters. Hopefully time will allow us to become better able to control breeding and encourage people to keep their dogs for a lifetime commitment–I only hope it will be in my lifetime, but it is unlikely.
The statement above that “In the 1980′s it was definitely the Sheps, Dobies and even huskies that were the breeds that killed humans ” is often made, but demonstrably untrue. In truth, pit bulls have accounted for half or more of all human fatalities in every 10-year time frame since 1844. The fewest fatal dog attacks occurred between 1930 and 1960: just 15 in 30 years. Nine of the killer dogs were pit bulls, two were Dobermans, and four were unidentified mutts. I began logging fatal and disfiguring dog attacks in September 1982. From then to the present, pit bulls have accounted for half or more of all fatal dog attacks in each and every year: 32 consecutive years in all.
This is not the truth about Pit Bulls, it is the truth about your dog. And if you are a journalist, please look up the statistics about dog bites and aggression.
Here are the statistics, which I began logging just about exactly 32 years ago, in September 1982: Of the 4,969 dogs involved in fatal and disfiguring attacks on humans occurring in the U.S. & Canada, 3,425 (69%) were pit bulls; 556 were Rottweilers; 4,256 (85%) were of related molosser breeds, including pit bulls, Rottweilers, mastiffs, bull mastiffs, boxers, and their mixes. Of the 567 human fatalities, 299 were killed by pit bulls; 87 were killed by Rottweilers; 430 (75%) were killed by molosser breeds. Of the 3,015 people who were disfigured, 2,102 (70%) were disfigured by pit bulls; 327 were disfigured by Rottweilers; 2,581 (84%) were disfigured by molosser breeds. Pit bulls–exclusive of their use in dogfighting–also inflict more than 70 times as many fatal and disfiguring injuries on other pets and livestock as on humans, a pattern unique to the pit bull class. Surveys of dogs offered for sale or adoption indicate that pit bulls and pit mixes are together less than 7% of the U.S. dog population, and less than 5% in the U.S. and Canada combined; molosser breeds, total, are 9%.
Beth’s heart was broken. Trooper was hand-reared from a tiny pup, and absolutely adored. Socialised, trained, exercised, stimulated, loved and loving. But still the deep and unyielding fire of his gladiatorial genes could not be quenched. Nature will out, and Trooper was a child of his nature. This was not his fault, any more than it was Beth’s ‘fault’ for stopping the hands of a deadly clock reaching midnight. She did what so few Pit Bull owners do, she SAW him as he became himself, the old Sport dog of bygone days, and dangerous because of it. She gave him the peace he needed, and she did her duty to humanity. Beth’s love for her dog shines brighter than all the vicious and ugly comments from the Nutters about her decision, and THAT love cannot be extinguished nor diminished – it exists as a rare thing in the Pit Bull arena – it both touches us, and teaches us ALL. Thank you, Beth. x
Thank you Lesley that was beautifully written and all very true! Your comment is thoughtful and empathetic and I appreciate that you took the time to write it.
Beth described most of the pit bull type dogs she handled in the clinic as nervous (or something along those lines). I find very often the opposite is true. I am in rescue, am also a former vet-tech, and I am a pet sitter. I’m around groups of dogs all day long. In my experience, a happy, wiggly pitbull is just as deadly as a tense one, and may be more so because the victim won’t see them coming, I don’t think Beth was suggesting these dogs have to be tense before they attack, but I would clear up any misleading ideas there in that article so that pitbull owners who have happy dogs who enjoy going to the vet, do not get the impression that their dogs are safe. I find pitbulls to be some of the most relaxed dogs in the clinic, almost abnormally so. Perhaps they’re more calm because they don’t fear the prick of a vaccine or a blood draw, In any case, I feel it is very important to not let pitbull owners think their dogs are incapable of harm if they are sweet and relaxed around other people/pets. Our pit was super friendly with all people and dogs until 14 months of age. He was attacked by a dog and the next day he became an “attempted dog murderer” (we interrupted his attack on a smaller dog). BTW, hitting him on the top of the muzzle with a very strong fist (300lb man) got him to let go). I am reaching out to to you to say I appreciate your work and also to ask for your help. I am scared. I own small dogs again after many years of owning only large breeds, I never used to worry about dogs killing my dogs, but now it is a concern. Since I was there for my pitbull’s attack on a smaller dog, I know how hard it can be to stop them. I really wish the general public was not allowed to own these dogs or any large dog who shows aptitude for unprovoked aggression. I find ad after ad of pitbull rescuers pushing dogs who need to be the “only dog in the house”. Do they really think these dogs will never ever escape? And if they do escape, who is responsible for the animals they kill? The rescues who find them homes should be responsible becuase they have the opportunity to end the danger and they do not. I understand it is very difficult to put down a dog you have rescued, but it is much more difficult to face a kid who just saw her best friend get mauled to death. What can we do to stop the madness? I am not necessarily for a pitbull “ban”, but I am certainly for a breeding ban and a special license for owning them. Is there any possiblity for such changes? Best Wishes, Nikki
Dear Nikki,
Thank you for responding to my story about Trooper. I really appreciate that unlike many others who have contempt for me and how I handled the situation with my Trooper, you were polite, kind and well spoken. I agree with you, though our perspectives on pit bulls’ behavior in a veterinary setting is slightly different. That is not a problem as I see it. May we post this as your comment under the Trooper article? I feel that what you have to say is very important. So does Merritt. Thank you very much Nikki, Beth
I just read your article on Animals 24-7 titled “Why Pit Bulls Will Break Your Heart” with tears in my own eyes. I wanted to post a reply, but found no way to do so.
Several years ago, we adopted what was described by the shelter as a “St. Bernard/Springer Spaniel” mix. He appeared to be around 6 months old and had eyes that would melt your heart. After adoption, we did a bit of digging and discovered that the animal control officers who took him in (he was actually caught by them roaming the streets) from an inner-city neighborhood with a very high population of pit bulls – in a city where pit bull ownership is illegal…
They had labeled the dog we named Konner (because he “conned” his way into our hearts) as the mix they had because they knew if they labeled him as a Pit mix, he would have to be put down (between the laws making it illegal to own him in that city, it would limit him to those outside the city – ).
Subsequent vets finally came to a confident determination that he was Pit + Brittany Spaniel.
We did have concerns – but he was the most loving dog, who showed absolutely ZERO aggression towards anyone or anything… other than cats if they ran. He loved attention and other than being bull-headed (he would knock you down trying to run past you to go outside) – he was a very sweet dog who never ever even caused us a moment’s concern.
But then…
We had him for 4 years and after never being concerned, something switched. We could figure out nothing from his environment, nothing health-related (vet gave him 100% clear diagnosis), he became extremely aggressive towards our lawnmower, then the ATV – literally demonstrating the stereotypical “pit bull” fighting dog attitude towards both pieces of equipment! Still showed no issues towards animals or people.
6 months later – again with no warning – he began ripping door knobs off our home (inside) and literally chewing the metal into a tangled mess! He actually broke a tooth and ripped another out in the process! Still no aggression at all towards anyone or any animals.
Then he went after a fellow who had come to do some outside maintenance work. No warning. No previous signs – just boom! Thankfully, he avoided Konner by jumping a fence. But Konner was trying everything he could to get to him and eat him…
Again – no health issues. No diagnosable pain or other issues (including hearing/eye sight, joints, etc.). Absolutely ZERO explanation. He just snapped. The vet did mention that maybe he had some kind of mini-strokes over time but they didn’t show on any tests.
Ultimately, as responsible pet owners, we had to put him down. That was one of the most heartbreaking experiences I’ve had as a father and a pet owner. That dog had literally stolen our hearts and had given us (apparently undo) confidence that the “pit bull” part was, just as you pointed out many believe naively – overcomeable.
Just wanted to share own own story of heartbreak.