ResearchSpanish dangerous animals act: Effect on the epidemiology of dog bites
Introduction
Dogs are considered one of the favorite pets in modern industrialized societies. Despite the important psychologic, physical, and social benefits derived from living with a dog (McNicholas and Collis, 2000, Wells, 2007), the ability to occasionally bite people has made these animals become the focus of a public health and security challenge (Overall and Love, 2001, Palacio et al., 2005, Morgan and Palmer, 2007). In addition, a great number of dogs that show aggressive behavior are abandoned or euthanized, which poses problems in the field of animal welfare (Hunthausen, 1997, Mikkelsen and Lund, 2000).
Canine aggression directed toward people has given rise to an enormous interest both in the media and in the scientific literature during the last 2 decades. Moreover, the problem has pervaded political spheres and several countries in Europe, North America, and Australia have regulated dog ownership with the aim of reducing the number of people injured by dog bites and prevent new episodes (Butcher et al., 2002, Ledger et al., 2005, Collier, 2006).
Two kinds of legislation have been developed in this regard. The first type of legislation is Breed Specific Legislation (BSL), which is based on a series of regulations, including banning measures, applied to the so-called “dangerous breeds” (DB). It is thought that the elaboration of DB lists has been influenced to a large extent by biases in the media and the subsequent social alarm in response to fatal dog attacks. The second type of legislation, non-Breed Specific Legislation (nBSL), includes different regulation measures to promote responsible dog ownership regardless of the animal breed.
Most countries apply BSL as a first response, and complement it with characteristic nBSL measures (De Meester, 2004). According to the literature, BSL has not been proven effective in decreasing the number of people injured by dog bites (Ledger et al., 2005, Collier, 2006, Kuhne and Struwe, 2006) nor in preventing fatal dog attacks (Sacks et al., 2000). However, it is difficult to assess the effect of a particular type of legislation reliably due to the scarce scientific studies and data in this field. With this purpose, studies over long periods of time both before and after the introduction of the legislation should be carried out (De Meester, 2004). To our knowledge, only the study by Klaassen et al. (1996) has been carried out in this way, but it is important to note that a relatively brief period of time (3 months) was assessed. This study showed that the implementation of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 in the UK had limited effect on the rate of patients treated for dog bites in 1 urban Accident and Emergency department.
According to several studies based on data from both hospitals and public health departments, the so-called DB contribute to only a few of the dog bite-related incidents (Kahn et al., 2003, León, 2006). This finding contradicts the belief that these breeds are more dangerous and discredits DB lists. There are, however, no published data that show the effectiveness of nBSL over BSL (De Meester, 2004). This shows the necessity of carrying out more comparative scientific studies in this field.
The problems posed by dog attacks toward people in Spain (Knobel et al., 1997, Méndez et al., 2002; León-Artozqui et al., 2004) gave rise to specific legislation in 1999 (Spanish Dangerous Animals Act: Ley 50/1999). At first, the act opted for the principles of nBSL, but in 2002 (RD 287/2002), this regulation was ammended with the inclusion of a DB list.
The aim of this study was to assess, in an objective way, the effect of the Spanish Dangerous Animals Act on the epidemiology of dog bites and to discuss the effectiveness and suitability of legislation regarding the issue of dangerous dogs. The study analyzed epidemiologic data of medically-attended dog bites, comparing those belonging to the periods before (1995 to 1999) and after (2000 to 2004) the introduction of legislation. Furthermore, the effect of both the nBSL and the BSL was assessed. To this end, 2 main parameters were used: first, the incidence of dog bite-related incidents in 2 different areas, namely areas of low and high population density; second, the relative proportion of involved breeds. In addition, a breed-related risk factor analysis was carried out.
Section snippets
Materials
Dog bite-related incidents reported between 1995 and 2004 to the Public Health Department of Aragón (Spain) were collected using the Rabies Control and Prevention Programme. According to this program, the health staff from the Public Health centre where the victim is attended (i.e., primary care center, emergency department, etc.) fills out a record with information related to the incident and then reports it to the Public Health department. Subsequently, the dog is subjected to an observation
Results
A total of 4,186 dog bite-related incidents were registered during the course of the period of study, 1,877 during the first 5-year period (1995 to 1999) and 2,309 during the second one (2000 to 2004). Breed information was available in 48.7% (n = 915) of collected cases during the first period and in 52.1% (n = 1203) during the second one.
Annual incidences from 1995 to 2004 together with the evolution of canine population during this period are represented in Figure 1. The following incidence
Discussion
In the present study, the impact of the Spanish Dangerous Animals Act (50/1999, R.D. 287/2002) on the epidemiology of dog bite-related incidents was assessed. It is important to note that this study deals only with medically-attended dog bites.
According to the results, the implementation of nBSL measures and the subsequent DB list did not exert a significant effect on the incidence of dog bites during the non-legislated period. Because this finding was observed both in the region's capital area
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the DGA (Diputación General de Aragón) and especially, Dr. Luis Colón and Fernando Carrera, for the inestimable help in providing material for the present study. We also thank Dr. Ignacio de Blas for his valued advice on statistical analysis and María Yetano for the enriching proof-reading support.
References (55)
Breed-Specific legislation and the pit bull terrier: are the laws justified?
J. Vet. Behav
(2006)- et al.
Effect of selection for behavior on pituitary-adrenal axis and proopiomelanocortin gene expression in silver foxes (Vulpes vulpes)
Physiol. Behav
(2004) - et al.
Does the Dangerous Dogs Act protect against animal attacks: a prospective study of mammalian bites in the Accident and Emergency department
Injury
(1996) - et al.
The need for a co-ordinated scientific approach to the investigation of dog bite injuries
Vet. J
(2006) - et al.
Aspectos epidemiológicos de las mordeduras caninas
Gac. Sanit
(2005) Breed-typical behavior in dogs—Historical remnants or recent constructs?
Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci
(2006)Canine aggression toward people. Bite scenarios and prevention
Vet. Clin. North Am. Small Anim. Pract
(1991)Task force on canine aggression and human-canine interactions. A community approach to dog bite prevention
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc
(2001)- et al.
Dog bites in urban children
Pediatrics
(1991) Will breed-specific legislation reduce dog bites?
Can. Vet. J
(1996)
Unreported dog bites in children
Public Health Rep
Animal bites in a large city—A report on Baltimore, Maryland
Am. J. Public Health
El informe suizo sobre perros peligrosos 2a parte
Animalia
Dog bites in New York City
Plast. Reconstr. Surg
Determination of behavioral traits of pure-bred dogs using factor analysis and cluster analysis; a comparison of studies in the USA and UK
Res. Vet. Sci
A survey of the behavioral characteristics of pure-bred dogs in the United Kingdom
Vet. Rec
Dangerous dogs—Are we getting it right?
Eur. J. Comp. Anim. Pract
Epidemiology of dog bites: a Belgium experience of canine behavior and public health concerns
Vet. J
Problemas de agresividad del perro: aspectos epidemiológicos y etiológicos (Dissertation)
Which dogs bite? A case-control study of risk factors
Pediatrics
Mordeduras de perro en la infancia. Estudio epidemiológico y clínico de 144 casos
An. Esp. Pediatr
Dog bites-an unrecognized epidemic
Bill. N.Y. Acad. Med
Selecting pet dogs on the basis of cluster analysis of breed behavior profiles and gender
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc
Behavioral profiles of dog breeds
J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc
Why do dogs bite?
Eur. J. Comp. Anim. Pract
Accidents par morsure de chien suivis d'une intervention médicale, Suisse: victimes-chiens-situation au moment de l'accident (Dissertation)
Cited by (33)
Opinions of veterinarians in Turkey on aggression levels of various dog breeds and breed-specific legislation
2023, Journal of Veterinary BehaviorCharacteristics and outcomes of dog attacks to dogs and cats in Melbourne, Australia: A retrospective study of 459 cases (2018)
2022, Preventive Veterinary MedicineCitation Excerpt :Previous attempts have largely focused on the attacker, with the introduction of mandatory muzzling and breed-specific legislation. Whilst there is no way to track their success at reducing the number of veterinary victims, data from the human medical field shows these traditional, attacker-centred approaches have been largely unsuccessful (Rosado et al., 2007; Victorian State Government, 2016; Nilson et al., 2018). More recently, the focus has shifted to attack victims (children), including the development of education campaigns to help them understand and avoid dog attacks (National Canine Research Council, 2016; Victorian State Government, 2016; D'Onise et al., 2017; Caffrey et al., 2019).
Descriptive study of dog bites in France—Severity factors, factors of onset of sequelae, and circumstances. Results of a survey conducted by InVS and Zoopsy in 2009-2010
2017, Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and ResearchCitation Excerpt :Rottweilers are also overrepresented in Switzerland among biting dogs (Horisberger, 2002). In contrast, breeds designated by breed-specific legislation are involved in only 4% of bites in Spain and 6% in the United Kingdom (Klaassen et al., 1996; Rosado et al., 2007). Studies that consider breed as a risk factor suffer from different biases:
Behavioural testing based breeding policy reduces the prevalence of fear and aggression related behaviour in Rottweilers
2017, Applied Animal Behaviour ScienceCitation Excerpt :An American study of 238 fatal dog attacks on humans between 1979 and 1998 found the Rottweiler to be overrepresented (Sacks et al., 2000), though a follow-up study between 2000 and 2009 on 256 human fatalities failed to find specific high risk breeds (Patronek et al., 2013). In European countries like Germany and Spain the Rottweiler is considered a dangerous breed that is subject to national or local breed specific legislation (Kuhne and Struwe, 2006; Rosado et al., 2007; Schalke et al., 2008). The Dutch government abolished dog breed specific legislation in January 2009, switching to a policy of individual dog risk-assessment in the cases of serious biting incidences.
Inconsistent identification of pit bull-type dogs by shelter staff
2015, Veterinary JournalCitation Excerpt :Mixing breeds is not like mixing paint. The regulation of certain dog breeds is controversial, with little evidence that breed bans have resulted in decreased serious or fatal dog bite-related injuries (Klaassen et al., 1996; Rosado et al., 2007; Overall, 2010; Patronek et al., 2010). Regulation of particular breeds has been challenged in court, as has the breed identification of individual dogs4 (Patronek and Slavinski, 2009).
Breeding dogs for beauty and behaviour: Why scientists need to do more to develop valid and reliable behaviour assessments for dogs kept as companions
2012, Applied Animal Behaviour ScienceCitation Excerpt :Indeed, such stereotyping has resulted in breed specific legislation being enacted in some countries, where certain breeds are either banned or where their owners are forced to adhere to dangerous dog laws (Schalke et al., 2008) even if their individual dog is an affectionate, friendly animal who behaves in a socially acceptable manner. Although government officials implement these rulings, there is little evidence to support the notion that some breeds are inherently more dangerous than others (Rosado et al., 2007; Kaspersson, 2008; Schalke et al., 2008) or that dog bite injuries to humans have been significantly reduced by breed specific legislation (Klaassen et al., 1996; Collier, 2006; Cornelissen and Hopster, 2010). Restricting dog breeds per se is perhaps unlikely to reduce incidents involving dangerous dogs, unless extensive regulations which include muzzling of dogs and fining irresponsible owners are properly enforced (Villalbi et al., 2010).