Breed Specific Legislation: How policy may not lead to the prevention of dog bites

To reduce the over four million Americans bitten by dogs annually, policy-makers enacted “Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)” which bans, restricts and regulates ownership of specific dog breeds.    Examples of BSL include mandatory muzzling in public, mandatory spay/neuter, special liability insurance, to name a few.  Petronek, et al., (2013) suggests fatal dog bites are less related to dog breed and more related to the victim’s interaction with the dog, being a stranger,  and/or a history of owner mismanagement.  This study examined 673 participants’ experiences with dogs, history with dog bites and perceptions regarding the BSL regulations.    Of the participants, 41% (n=275) reported having been personally bitten by a dog.  Of those reporting the breed of dog that bit them, only 35% were by dogs listed on the ‘dangerous breed list’.  No difference was found when comparing those bitten vs. those not with attitudes towards restricting owners’ rights and banning certain breeds (ChiSq=.22;NS).  There were significant gender differences in history of dog bites, with 49% of males vs. 39% of females reporting yes (ChiSq= 3.4;p<.05).  The majority of participants (95%) reported no specific breeds should be banned to prevent dog bites.  Yet, more males (9%), compared to females (3%) agreed certain dog breeds should be banned (ChiSq= 6.8;p<.02).  Most participants reported the most effective way to prevent dog bites was to improve owners’ daily management (91%), and educating children on proper interactions with dogs (83%).  The study findings will be discussed in relationship to the needed change in Breed Specific Legislation.