Advocates Beware: some tactics are counterproductive

Being a "pit bull" advocate is like tiptoeing through an active minefield - you have to watch where you step or you're going to detonate something explosive. Ultimately, I do think we need to cut each other some slack:  What we do is incredibly precise, challenging work. Even the best advocates can't be "on" all the time.

I certainly do not believe I know everything there is to know about "pit bulls" and how to best help them. I will never stop learning about this topic. The law and our culture are living entities. They evolve, so I evolve.

I do feel, however, that the following tactics are ineffective and possibly damaging to the movement. I see these crop up all over the place and, worse, I frequently see them used as weapons by anti-pit bull groups and spokespeople, in legal forums and otherwise. I urge folks to think about these points and how they can be revamped as or substituted for more effective advocacy tools.

1. The bait and switch: I've often heard folks complain about a factual inaccuracy that the opposition has made about "pit bulls," but then seen these folks substitute their own pit bull favorable, albeit also false or unsupported fact.

e.g. poodles are actually the breed of dog that bites most commonly (really? where is the information to support that allegation? And way to piss off poodle owners, owners like me) or "pit bulls are the most bred dog in the US" (I've never seen this fact and it's impossible to maintain with any level of authority since "pit bull" isn't a breed, and the word isn't uniformly defined, and there is no database containing information on "pit bulls." In AKC and UKC registrations, Am Staffs don't even come in in the top 10). Why it is acceptable to pick apart the oppositions' facts but hold scrutiny of pro-"pit bull" facts to a different standard is beyond me.

Without reliable research or authority to support a fact, don't use it. 

2. The 'raise them well': "Raise them to be aggressive and they'll be aggressive." Well, probably not. This argument is problematic for a few reasons: (1) "Aggression" is an oft-misunderstood term. "aggressive" acts can range from a subtle movement to a bark or growl to a serious bite. All dogs aggress. Serious, violent dog-directed or human-directed "aggression" is not an adaptive trait and is no dog breed has a propensity for these behaviors; (2) This argument does not help change discriminatory policies in shelters that don't allow "pit bulls" to be adopted out, and does not encourage folks to rescue "pit bulls" either. So, untold numbers of these dogs continue dying in our shelters. Since the point is to save their lives, we should probably think about what we're saying about the dogs most in need of our help - the ones not raised in loving, responsible environments since puppyhood.

A better phrase would be something to the tune of: a dog's environment and owner management impacts a dog's behavior. 

3. The elitist: Pit bulls are the best dog ever! No, they're not. Don't get me wrong, I've met some amazing "pit bulls" via my rescue and advocacy work, but I've also met some annoying or otherwise distateful (to me) ones that I'd never want in my home. Same goes for every breed (and mixes too!) out there. Dogs are individuals and the goals of fighting breed discriminatory laws are to put them on an even playing field, not a pedestal. Pointing out that they're the "best" makes it seem as though they're different. And the reason BDL exists and is upheld is because the argument that they are different has held up in court and convinced lawmakers!)

4. The mudslinger: Picking on other breeds. My question is always: Why? Most people in the US do not own "pit bulls," even if they are incredibly popular. So why are we alienating other dog owners? BDL really is a dog issue not a "pit bull" issue, and the more non-pit bull owning folks we can get on our side, the better. It makes the movement generalizable and more credible. Plus, we don't need to bring down other breeds in order to save the "pit bull." Finally, we never know what the impact of allegations on other breeds might bring: what if someone picked up on our negative statements and then tried to ban a different breed?

5. The historian: Discussing or Debating the "history" of the "pit bull" is problematic as this topic is conentious and not set in stone, even among knowledgeable advocates. Part of the problem is that we still don't know what a "pit bull" is today, needless to say how it was defined 100-200 years ago. Allegations of Nanny Dogs and fighting dogs and working dogs fly around wildly. But, quite frankly, it doesn't matter at all what the history of the breed is. Most breeds have evolved in a totally different direction than their history indicates. Plus, it's entirely possible to change the inclinations of an animal in just a few generations, as shown in the Russian fox experiments. So, for the purpose of fighting breed discriminatory laws, history is a red herring. Leave it be, or risk alienating other advocates who have a different opinion on the "pit bull's" origins and who might otherwise have been allied with you.

Kill all the Pit Bulls: How to Deal with Antagonism as a Breed Advocate

One of my wonderful new volunteers, Nicole, related the following story to me today:

It was at lunch today.  I wasn't eating (we had a meeting where they fed us a big breakfast) and I was on my phone texting you, look at my messages on FB, and thinking about the Roxie situation in general.  My close friend,who knows me well, asked me if I was doing dog stuff.  I said yes, and when she asked about it I started telling the story of Roxie and how I could possibly be transporting her this weekend.  They called me crazy, in a teasing but nice way, and then we continued talking until my coworker, Lindsey, asked me what type of dog she was.  I responded with pit mix and she replied, "Oh they can put her down.  I don't care about pit bulls."  I must of had a stunned look on my face because then she proceeded to explain that her dog was attacked by a pit bull, who was owned by someone she knew who was then in jail.  I told her I was very sorry about that, but that it was one dog and it was safe to say that the owner probably wasn't quality.  I tried to express my opinion that it is more "bad owners" than bad dogs but I was pretty much drowned out by a chorus of pit bull related horror stories and reasons why none of them would ever have a pit bull.  I tried to explain my opinions on the stereotypes and misinformation regarding the breed, but at that point I was so upset and flustered that I ended up just leaving the room.  

Obviously, for a pit bull advocate, especially a new one, such remarks can sting (I suppose they always sting) and it can be difficult to figure out how to proceed in a controlled, professional manner. I talk to a lot of people about pit bull type dogs and for the most part I've met with receptive audiences. Here are a few simple steps to help you stay on track as an advocate. 

1. Be educated. Know the key arguments against pit bull type dogs and know the facts that shut down these arguments. Make sure your facts come from reliable sources. Prepare simple, concise statements that summarize these facts. Don't spout out things you haven't fact-checked, even if it means you don't "win" on every point. Many points are red herrings anyway. Offer to provide additional information, and then hold true to your offer.

Real life example: Comment - Studies have shown that pit bulls are much more likely to attack a person than any other breed. Answer - Please get me the names of those studies. To my knowledge, no reliable dog bite statistics exist, and the studies that claim to make determinations on pit bull aggressiveness are based on media reports and are not scientific or authoritative. In fact, the authors of the most prominent dog bite study available have clearly stated that their data is incomplete and that it should not be used to extrapolate any conclusions about the temperament of any breed nor should it be used to pass any breed discriminatory legislation. Reliable research on canine temperament consistently demonstrates that pit bull type dogs score high on temperament tests and are less likely to aggress toward humans than many popular breeds. 

2. Be authoritative. If someone is wrong, then they're wrong, and you have a right to correct them unequivocally. Be firm without being a jerk. 

Real life example: Comment - well, pit bulls have locking jaws. Answer - No, they don't. Pit bulls are mammals, and no mammal has a jaw with the ability to lock. Pit bull jaw structure has been studied and was found to be exactly the same as all other dog breeds.

3. Don't diss. Positive pit bull research is abundant, so there is no reason to insult other dog breeds or other people, even if they do it first. Advocates present facts (and perhaps conclusions based on those facts); they do not attack dissenters. 

Real life example: Comment -- Pit bulls are the ugliest breed of dog and I don't know why anyone would want one. Wrong Answer -- Look at pugs with those bulging eyes, or Cocker Spaniels with those stupid ears! Right Answer -- Hey, you don't have to own a pit bull or even like pit bulls; I respect that. But physical appearance has nothing to do with a dog's temperament. 

4. Don't yell. Keep your emotions under control. Anti-pit bull people like the term "pit bull nutters" to describe advocates. Do not give any teeth to that designation. Yelling won't win you followers but it will ensure that open-minded people will take you less seriously. 

Real life example: I've been called all sorts of terrible names by people who are raving. I just present the facts, then stand back and let them discredit themselves with their ranting (it nearly always works). I look that much more credible in comparison. 

5. Walk away. You can't win every battle. And some folks are just too stubborn to change. Don't waste your time on those people. There's a reason extreme views are called "extreme"; most folks are moderate and open to good information. Spend your time discussing issues with that large group. As long as we have the majority on our side, we're winning. 

6. Have support. Pit bull advocacy can be trying, lonely work. Make sure you have a network of friends, family, and peers who you can turn to for consolation, affirmation, or vent(ilation). 

Real life example: My family and friends are always willing to lend an ear. I also have made connections across the country with fellow pit bull advocates and I discuss issues with them regularly. 

Foster Mom Christina tells Duke's Story

One Friday night, Brian was headed out to pick up some takeout. A few seconds after he walked out the door I got a phone call saying, "Honey, there's a dog outside the house." I went out front and there was Duke lapping up sprinkler water in our front yard. He was skinny, didn't have a collar, and had a patch of fur scratched off his face. We fed him and brought him into our backyard and he perked up right away. 

Duke, soon after we rescued him 

Duke is all puppy - he'll sleep for a few hours then want to play. He loves to run around with other dogs - one of his favorites is a young female across the street. They will run around together as long as you let them. He loves rawhide bones, dental bones, stuffed animals, floppy toys that he can shake around, and pretty much anything that makes noise - including empty water bottles and soda cans! He likes tug-of-war, but hasn't figured out how to fetch yet. He loves to play in the sprinklers, but is not a big fan of baths! 

Duke and Duchess with Christina

Since he has been in our house we have taught him to sit on command and how to walk on a leash. He has also gotten all his vaccinations and been neutered. He still needs help learning more doggie manners since he's just a big rambunctious pup. He's a quick learner though!Duke is a big lover. He loves to sit in laps and will climb into bed with you if you let him. He gives lots of kisses - especially on faces and toes.

Some of Duke's famous kisses!

Duke also knows how to use his doggie door to go potty and he is crate trained. We put him in his crate when we aren't home and at night. The only time that he fusses in his crate is if he hasn't gotten enough attention during the day or he has to potty.

I think Duke would do well either as the only pet or in a household with other animals. He is not dog aggressive and loves to play. Ultimately the most important thing to me is that he find a forever home with a family that will give him lots of love! I think his sweet face and disposition would be a positive addition to any home.

Duke today! Still looking for that perfect forever home!

Letter to Protest Breed Discrimination

It can be hard for breed advocates to figure out what exactly to do to encourage change -- be it within public perceptions, local or state laws, or owner behaviors. There are many avenues for advocacy. I thought I'd focus today on letter writing. Some may roll their eyes and think, "gee, what's a silly letter going to to?" But a well-written appeal carries weight; I've had a lot of positive feedback from lawmakers I've taken the time to write.


It's important to write letters that are relatively brief, dispassionate, and well-researched. You want to come off as a credible professional, not some nutcase on the loose. I've included below a copy of a letter I drafted for council members in a Washington city. I hope you find it useful. Please feel free to use this format as a template for your own letters.


Cheers!

Letter in Opposition to Chapter 6.18 of the Yakima Municipal Code

My name is Gemma Zanowski; I am an attorney in here in Washington and have been actively involved in canine rescue efforts and advocacy since 2004. I am writing to request that the Yakima Council repeal Chapter 6.18, the Pit Bull ban. The American Pit Bull Terrier, and related breeds (“pit bull type dogs”) are fully capable of living long lives as beloved family companions. Unfortunately, many are not given this opportunity because of misguided legislation that generalizes their characteristics based on unfounded stereotypes and fears. Chapter 6.18 of the Yakima Municipal Code is an example of such legislation.

There exists one principal study used to support the notion that pit bulls are dangerous: Breeds of Dogs Involved in Fatal Human Attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. The oft-debated element of the study is the percentage of total fatalities attributable to pit bull type dogs. However, as the researchers involved with the study have emphasized, it is impossible to extrapolate overall breed viciousness without knowing the base population of the breed, which the study did not know. The Center for Disease Control, the researchers themselves, and other researchers have since concluded that this study should not be used as a basis for breed discriminatory legislation (BDL). A second body of information has been used to misattribute aggressive incidents to pit bull type dogs. This study was conducted by Merritt Cliffton and is an incomplete, inaccurate, and shamefully biased compilation of media reports from a twenty-year period. Thorough investigation has revealed it to be garbage veiled in postulations of science. It must be disregarded.

Conversely, no reputable animal welfare agency or rescue supports BDL or the notion that pit bull type dogs are more likely to attack humans. In fact, pit bull type dogs routinely outperform many “family-friendly” dog breeds on temperament tests and credible research echoes this performance record. Further, no credible study on BDL has found discriminatory measures to be effective; in fact, bite incidence remains consistent with breed population.

I wholeheartedly support stringent dog that focus on owner culpability; t dangerous humans who indulge high-risk environments. If dogs are deemed dangerous this status should be considered based on individual behaviors, and not merely on their physical characteristics or reputation. The City of Yakima already has a dangerous dog law in place that describes particular behaviors that make an individual dog dangerous. An additional focus on pit bulls is extraneous and overbroad as it targets a class of animals of which most will never pose a public safety threat.

With the dire economic situation currently in Washington, non-essential spending should be clipped wherever possible. Best Friends Society fiscal impact estimator indicates that Yakima is spending around $100,000 a year to enforce Chapter 6.18 – money that would more prudently be spent to battle the chief causes of dog aggression: intact animals, chaining, and abuse.

Currently Washington is considering SB 5151, which would establish a state-wide low-cost spay and neuter program in order to curb dog bite incidences and pet overpopulation. If the bill does not pass, there is no reason the City of Yakima cannot consider a similar provision. Further, the City of Yakima does not have an anti-chaining ordinance; as 25 percent of dog bite fatalities involve chained dogs, it would be prudent for the Council to consider an ordinance that regulates chaining as well.

As dogs are considered property, accountability for their actions should fall squarely on the shoulders of dog owners. BDL provisions ultimately and strangely hold dogs accountable for their lineage, as the animal is impounded and in many cases euthanized merely for being of a particular breed. US ideologies increasingly reflect individual autonomy, and firmly established constitutional principles favor a presumption of innocence; Chapter 6.18 and similar discriminatory provisions in other localities contradict these tenets.

Change is coming. Thirteen states have already written laws that forbid discrimination based on breed alone. Ohio, the only state with state-wide BDL, has voted to overturn the legislation in the House and awaits Senate approval. I urge the City of Yakima to become a frontrunner in this change. Repealing an out-dated ordinance such as Chapter 6.18 is the first step in establishing a comprehensive, effective dangerous dog plan. I welcome emails or phone calls to further discuss my position.