Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings, U.S.

& Canada: a Critique

September 1982 to December 22, 2009
 

Dwight Tinker
2010-12-04

This critique explores Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings, U.S. & Canada as published on
December 22, 2009 against the claims of its critics. The source document is written and
published by Merritt Clifton. The analysis is based on studies of dog attacks, Mr. Clifton’s
annotated notes within the report, and a database of the 109 breed and mixed breed statistics Mr.
Clifton used as a dataset within the report.
This is meant as a comprehensive critique of the source document's dataset and how well it
supports Mr. Clifton's conclusions, rather than a review. The critique focuses almost solely on
the data found to be inaccurate or untrue and focuses on the Pit Bull breeds. This was not my
intent, however Mr. Clifton’s analysis focuses almost exclusively on bull terrier type breeds. You
are encouraged to read Mr. Clifton's report to judge his conclusions yourself with the
understanding that they are largely his own caveats and are neither based on studied data nor
endorsed by others in an objective manner.
Mr. Clifton’s report has an introduction, a tabulation of the dataset grouped by breed, and an
analysis. The dataset is comprised of statistics gathered during a 27 year survey of press releases.
The introduction explains the methodology and defends the conclusions given in the analysis.
The author’s conclusion is that specific breeds, specifically Pit Bull breeds represent an
unacceptable risk to the public and that breed specific restrictions and regulations, including
breed based bans and euthanasia, are needed for public safety.
Critics claim that the report’s methodology is flawed, thus providing biased statistics. The facets
of the report’s methodology studied for this critique were the data’s appropriateness, the
reliability of sources, the data’s accuracy, the objectivity of the author, and finally the
methodology used to analyze and formulate conclusions.

CONTENTS
1. Appropriateness pg. 3
1.1. Behavior vs. breed
1.2. The data set
1.3. Grouping of categories
1.4. Media bias
2. Reliability of sources pg. 5
2.1. Statistical relevance
2.2. Breed Identification
2.2.1. Witness identification via identification Study of dogs involved in attacks.
2.2.2. Breed vs. body type
3. Accuracy pg. 7
4. The author’s objectivity pg. 9
5. The analysis of data and conclusions
5.1. Examples of statistical correction for comparison
5.2. Breed characteristics (Pit Bull terrier)
5.3. Population estimates (Pit Bull terrier)

Methodology
As a survey of media reports, for the report to maintain its integrity the author must verify that
the data has been collated from attacks caused by household pets and that the breeds were
identified accurately. In addition, as a statistical analysis the dataset must be unbiased and
include random samples of dog attacks that involve criteria thresholds for inclusion, one of
which is the severity of attacks. While the author states that these requirements are upheld the
dataset’s sources have not been released. This critique uses several methods to determine the
extent to which the methodology has been upheld by researching dog attack fatalities, of which
all should be included in the report, and by researching several incidents that the report described
in some detail.
Appropriateness
Behavior vs. breed
Mr. Clifton assumes that breed characteristics are more important to determining the danger a
dog poses than temperament. As a result a dog’s quality of life, socialization, human interaction
and upbringing are irrelevant compared to the danger posed by the breed as a whole.
As a survey of media reports of dog attacks, similar reports were fairly popular in the 1970’s, but
have lost favor to behavioral studies. Similar surveys were discredited for several reasons,
including that the data they provide represents a small portion of the dog attacks that take place
and are statistically unreliable.
The CDC stated just that about its own study after considering its validity. The information they
gathered was incomplete and as a result their statistics were meaningless.
In a Texan study, the State Health Department of Texas concluded the same about its own
statistics. Officials have stopped tracking dog bites because the data was not statistically reliable
and refuse to publish the data they had collected stating that it was misused and misinterpreted.
Likewise, authorities in Lower Saxony, Germany concluded that the Bull Terrier-type breeds
they were seizing and testing under breed specific legislation posed the same risk as the Golden
Retrievers they tested them against as a control group.
Finally, The American Temperament Testing Society, an independent organization developed to
test and track dog temperament obtained the same results as the German Study, as of
2010-06-12. The American Staffordshire terrier scores a passing grade of 83.9%, 0.5% lower
than the Golden Retriever, the American Pit Bull Terrier scores a passing grade of 86.0% and the
Staffordshire Bull terrier scores 89.6%. In comparison the average of all other breeds’ score was
82.4%.
It is generally accepted that these studies adequately discredit the theory that breed plays a
significant role in the danger a dog poses. In the publication of the report dated 2009-12-22 the
author responded to critics’ references to these studies by stating that the reason temperament is
irrelevant is because “If a Pit Bull terrier or a Rottweiler has a bad moment, often someone is
maimed or killed—and that has now created off-the-chart actuarial risk”. This statement brings
up two questions:
1. Is this statement supported by the report’s data?
2. How accurate are the statistics Mr. Clifton uses to justify this statement?
Later we’ll discuss the accuracy of the dataset, but I will state now that Mr. Clifton’s statement is
not supported. While the dataset indicates that Pit Bull type dogs are reported in the media more
than any other breeds, according to the dataset a smaller percentage of victims are maimed and
killed than by other breeds when they attack. Specifically, Pit Bull types are 2.5% less likely to
maim and 32% less likely to cause a fatality than other breeds in the survey when they attack.
The data
Although the report is titled ‘Dog attack deaths and maimings’ you should not assume that the
incidents were attacks. The report includes dog attacks and injuries/deaths caused by
non-aggressive behavior. Additionally, while the report claims that all the dogs were identified
by individuals with ‘evident expertise’ the media articles typically didn’t include any indication
of who identified the dog’s breed so in reality there is an assumption that the breeds are
accurately identified. In fact, some incidents involved unknown dogs, several suspected dogs of
which one attacked, and dogs of unidentified breeds. Let me say that again. Most of the articles I
researched did not indicate that anyone stated that it was a pit bull. The report also included
mixed breeds whose breed related traits would often be unidentifiable by the sources, especially
in the case of behavioral characteristics, which would require the dog to be monitored to
determine which were dominant.
More troublesome, in the case of mixed breed dogs the attack can only be recorded as one of the
identified parental breeds. In the case of breeds with the bull terrier body type, whether purebred
or mixed breed, it seems they were identified as ‘Pit Bulls’ regardless of how much the Pit Bull
characteristics played a factor, with one exception in the 2,761 dog attacks recorded1. As a result
the report includes 10 Pit Bull mix categories including mixes with the Sheltie, Boxer, Chow and
a category for Unknown that between them sum a total of 88 attacks that are included in Pit Bull
statistics. However, there are no categories such as the Labrador/Pit Bull mix with the one
exception which represents a single attack. This gives credence to critics claims that the Pit Bull
breed’s publicity, characteristic strength and intimidating power, as well as the difficulty
identifying the breeds makes the term ‘Pit Bull’ a catch-all phrase for any dog resembling the
Bull Terrier body type. In fact, animal control officers routinely assign a dog the type ‘Pit Bull’
in reference to its body type rather than its breed. As only a fraction of attacks are reported and
only a small portion of media reports show photos of the actual dog involved, even when it
results in death, the breed is often indeterminable based solely on media reports.

Categorical grouping
Critics claim that grouping Pit Bull breeds together within the report inflates the attacks relative
to other breeds. The author countered critics by stating that any bias caused by grouping the
breeds together or by misidentification would be irrelevant because pit bulls would still attack
more people than other breed. While this is true, based on the dataset, I found that categorizing
Pit Bulls by breed, along with correcting the known inappropriate and erroneous data I’ll
comment on later in this report would reduce the pit bull incidents significantly.

Media bias
News editors often search for memorable stories that draw in readers with what they refer to as
an ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ mentality, so the possibility of a media bias is relatively high to some
degree when it comes to dog bites. As it pertains to pit bulls and the public’s fear of them it
seems evident. It’s common to find articles about alleged pit bull attacks and pit bulls that had
shown menacing behavior that frightened the victims but leave them unharmed while many
severe attacks from other breeds go unreported.
The data itself indicates a media bias. The average reported pit bull incident causes a death
10.5% of the time compared to 15.5% of the time for the average non-pit bull breed. Likewise,
the average Pit Bull incident also has a slightly smaller chance (2.5% less) of maiming than the
non-Pit Bull breed average. The simplest and only apparent explanation to Pit Bull breeds being
both less likely to kill and maim than other breeds is that the average pit bull attack included in
the report is less severe than attacks involving other breeds.

Reliability of sources
Mr. Clifton’s analysis focused on Pit Bull breeds, with commentary regarding the Rottweiler,
German Shepherds, and Husky. Ideally breeds that share more characteristics with Pit Bulls such
as Mastiffs, Rhodesian Ridgebacks, American Bulldogs, English Bulldogs, Curs, Boxers, the
Dogue De Burdeau, the Alpha Blue Blood Bulldog, the Vizsla, the Dogo Argentino, the Presa
Canario and the Cane Corso should be included in a study comparing breeds. In such a case most
experts presume that the sum of severe injuries would be proportional to the size and popularity
of a breed and the quality of life of its individuals. However, these breeds are absent from the
analysis because media reports identifying them in attacks are rare. In fact, the Pug has been
reported maiming at least as many people as many of the breeds and groups above, as has the
Miniature Pinscher. With 31 attacks, the Labrador Retriever accounted for more deaths and
maimings than 10 of the 12 breeds listed above that were included and several of the breeds were
omitted from the dataset.
This is an indicator that the sources used to identify breed may be inadequate. In total 4
American Bulldogs, 0 Vizsla, 45 boxers and 1,451 Pit Bulls have been mentioned in media
reports over 27 years. This reaffirmed to Mr. Clifton that Pit Bull breeds are far more dangerous
than other breeds. In my opinion it is an indicator that the data is erroneous and additional source
vetting needs to be considered.

Statistical relevance
The author states that the number of pit bull attacks in the worst 10,000 is so disproportionate to
other breeds that trying to correct any perceived bias in the report would do little to make the pit
bull seem less violent. The reference to the worst 10,000 seems to be determined by the number
of press reports he read to tally the records. However, each year there are 30,000 dog related
incidents involving severe maiming with an average of 27 involving deaths. As a result the cases
in the report involve dog related deaths and a select group of roughly 73 dog bite maimings out
of 30,000 similar attacks in any given year. For a perspective of its statistical reliability consider
that the report includes a select 0.3% of the 810,000 maimings over its 27 year period.

Sources: identification study

Investigations into the 2009 fatal attacks were undertaken to determine the reliability of media
sources. Sources claimed that 44% of the dog bite related deaths were caused by Pit Bulls, 13%
by the Rottweiler and the remaining 43% by various breeds.

Pit Bulls were reported being involved in 14 attacks. Identifiable photos of the dogs involved in
8 of the attacks were found. Of those, one clearly resembled a Pit Bull breed, 4 involved Bull
Terrier-type breeds or mixes, and the final 3 involved 4 dogs that were easily identified as
American Bulldogs, 2 being of the Johnson type. As a result, not only were the deaths caused by
Pit Bulls inflated by 64-93%, but the known American Bulldog deaths over the 27 year period
were more than doubled to 5 by re-examining a 1 year period. As a result my conclusion is that
in 2009 Pit Bull breeds caused or contributed to 3-16% of the dog related deaths.
The control group in the study includes 2 adult American Pit Bull Terriers and an American
Staffordshire Terrier. The sample group is a collection of dogs identified as Pit Bull Terriers that
killed persons in 2009. In addition, 4 additional dogs that are not related to the Pit Bull breeds
were also included for comparison purposes and can be identified by a black border. They
include several lines of American Bulldogs and a Catahoula Cur.
The UKC American Pit Bull Terrier breed standard is cited for comparison purposes.

APBT APBT Am Staff

The APBT head is unique and a key element of breed type. It is large and broad, but it is not disproportionate to the
size of the body. Viewed from the front, the head is shaped like a broad, blunt wedge.
The shoulder blades are long, wide, muscular, and well laid back. The upper arm is roughly equal in length to the
shoulder blade and joins it at an apparent right angle.
The forelegs are strong and muscular. The elbows are set close to the body. Viewed from the front, the forelegs are
set moderately wide apart and perpendicular to the ground. The pasterns are short, powerful, straight, and flexible.
When viewed in profile, the pasterns are nearly erect.
The hindquarters are strong, muscular, and moderately broad. The rump is well filled in on each side of the tail and
deep from the pelvis to the crotch. The bone, angulation, and musculature of the hindquarters are in balance with the
forequarters. The thighs are well developed with thick, easily discerned muscles. Viewed from the side, the hock
joint is well bent and the rear pasterns are well let down and perpendicular to the ground. Viewed from the rear, the
rear pasterns are straight and parallel to one another.
When viewed from the side, the skull and muzzle are parallel to one another and joined by a well defined,
moderately deep stop. Supraorbital arches over the eyes are well defined but not pronounced. The head is well
chiseled.

Johnson Am Bulldog
The skull is large, flat or slightly rounded, deep, and broad between the ears. Viewed from the top, the skull tapers
just slightly toward the stop. There is a deep median furrow that diminishes in depth from the stop to the occiput.
Cheek muscles are prominent but free of wrinkles.

American Bulldog Cur

Additional information about these attacks can be found in the source section under ‘Attack
statistics’.

Identification: type vs. breed

There is a distinction between the Bull Terrier-type which is also referred to as the Pit Bull-type,
and refers to their body type, and the Pit Bull breeds, a family of breeds that include the
Staffordshire Bull Terrier and the breeds originating from it, the American Staffordshire Terrier
and the American Pit Bull Terrier. Bull Terrier-type breeds can include the Johnson type
American Bulldogs, the modern American Bulldogs, large short-haired terriers including Border
Terriers, Bull Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and
American Pit Bull Terriers in addition to various breeds in the Molosser group.
As a result of the difficulties identifying the breed of a bull terrier type dog specific breed is
almost never reported in favor of body type. In addition, false identification is exacerbated by the
hundreds of mixes that make up the bull terrier population.

Accuracy
It’s important to understand how the reported attacks were tabulated in Mr. Clifton’s report. An
incident can involve more than one attacking dog. Victims were recorded as either a child or
adult and each victim was either maimed or killed. If three dogs were involved in an attack that
severely injured a child the report recorded it as 3 attacks and a child maiming, in the three
respective columns.
Because many incidents were incorrectly recorded statistical analysis fails throughout the report.
In fact, 6 breed categories recorded more maimings and deaths than they recorded victims. Of
the 109 breeds and mixes categorized 34% recorded the same number of victims as people
injured3. In the remaining 66 categories more victims were recorded than there were people who
died or were injured. In total, the report recorded 2,206 victims of which 1,872 were injured or
killed2, an overall disparity of 15.1%. In addition, the report cannot be independently verified or
analyzed to correct the data because no sources have been provided. In fact, Mr Clifton regularly
refuses to provide the sources.
Several of the incidents have notes with descriptions that were researchable. Of the incidents
studied many didn’t provide any new data, simply who was involved and the type of dog. The pit
bull section provided more information. In the notes section the author reported 11 victims of
attacks involving 41 pit bulls in 10 separate incidents. 6 of the 10 incidents were identifiable and
studied from their media reports. Of the 10 incidents 5 were known to involve a Pit Bull breed or
were assumed to if they couldn’t be researched. Of those five, 3 were aggressive acts with one
targeting a horse.
15 of the pit bull attacks (on 6 victims) involved dogs that were either known not to be involved
or never mentioned in the reviewed articles. Several examples are listed below.
• The report recorded a pit bull and 12 mixes, but the press articles identified 12 mixes
with no mention of a pit bull.
• 5 pit bulls were recorded, while the articles identified 4 or 5 dogs, all American Bulldogs
of the Johnson line with pedigree papers. Mr. Clifton stated that while early reports
identified them as Bulldogs they were later identified as Pit Bulls. I found no mention of
this, even in articles published several months after the attack. However, Dogsbite.org
reported that the dogs were pit bulls. Their rational being that the Johnson originated
from breeding Standard American Bulldogs with American Pit Bull Terriers, which is a
false claim. The Johnson line originated from breeding English Bulldogs with the Scott’s
line American Bulldog.
The 41 Pit Bull attacks were recorded to cause 9 deaths and 2 maimings. 39 of the attacks were
proven to be erroneous in context to the report with only 2 attacks being aggressive acts targeting
a person that was known to be a Pit Bull. Of those 2, one caused a death and included 3 dogs of
various breeds and included a bull terrier-type dog rather than a Pit Bull breed.
As a study of dog attacks the known erroneous data includes:
• A woman kicked in the head by a horse that was being attacked by a dog.
• Unsupervised children strangled when caught in a non-violent dog’s leash.
• An animal control officer who died from undisclosed causes after falling at the scene of a
loose dog complaint. Authorities stated that the dog did not harm her.
• A man bitten by an unknown number of puppies. 27 dogs were in the house and 2 of the
puppies that were in the house were identified as pit bulls, the only dogs identified by
breed. Recorded as 27 pit bull attacks and 1 death.
 • A woman hit by a train when the dog she was walking tried to follow its owner across the
tracks. The leash was knotted at her wrist.
While 0.53% of the total included Pit Bull fatalities and maimings were researched it was
determined that at least 83.3% of those were erroneously recorded in the report.

Motive and objectivity

The analysis is largely based on the author’s personal beliefs and is centered on several caveats
rather than the data the author collected. The report is structured similarly to a thesis. The data is
introduced as evidence to support the thesis. The author emphasizes several species he believes
are the most dangerous and mentions the Rottweiler and Husky breeds, but the primary focus is
on The Pit Bull breeds. Below is a quote that I believe identifies the author’s own bias that the
report is based on. The quote was published by Animal People in March of 2005. Animal People
is a newspaper the author founded and where he acts as Editor and Chief.
“If the Imperial Grand Wizards of the Ku Klux Klan had devised a plot about then to do the
maximum possible damage to Afro-Americans, he could not have concocted a more diabolical
scheme than to introduce dogfighting to black inner cities.
With the proceeds from dogfighting in decline for generations, there was no longer any reason to
keep it as an exclusive franchise, while unleashing pit bull terriers amid crowded housing
projects and multi-family small frame houses full of little kids was a surefire way to kill and
maim many more children, faster, than the Birmingham Bomber ever dreamed of.
Here was a weapon deadlier than razor blades for inner city youth to fight with, with more
backfire potential than a zip gun. Here was an animal who crime-plagued people would chain to
porches for protection, who would as often harm them instead.”

Report analysis
The report asserted that the analysis needed to evaluate the danger breeds pose in three contexts
including the dominant characteristics of the breeds, how common the breed is and the actuarial
risk that a breed poses.
However, exceptions were made when it came to temperament, socialization and quality of life
in regard to the danger breeds pose. The author stated that German Shepherd Dogs’ attacks were
higher than would be expected; “hurting someone is almost never the dogs’ intent. In the German
shepherd mauling, killing, and maiming cases I have recorded, there have almost always been
circumstances of duress: the dog was deranged from being kept alone on a chain for prolonged
periods without human contract, was starving, was otherwise severely abused, was protecting
puppies, or was part of a pack including other dangerous dogs.”
The Pit bull breeds were afforded no leniency for being kept chained or neglected before the
majority of their attacks as the 2009 attack study indicated was the case. Nor did he take into
account that 75% of all fatal attacks on adults involved roaming packs of dogs that are left
unsupervised, neglected or abandoned. The author’s conclusion was simply that Pit Bulls are
well behaved only until they turn violent, that they attack without warning and that they can turn
on a handler with fatal consequences for little or no reason.
Correcting numbers
During research no additional information was found to alter most breed statistics. In fact, only a
few incidents were actionable for research in most breed categories and the information in the
media reports was sparse, Even in cases involving a fatality there were rarely more than 1-2
news stories. When Pit Bulls were involved more information was provided, often from 4-8
articles if not dozens. This information itself indicates a media bias toward favoring publishing
articles covering Pit Bull attacks. Researching these articles identified both inappropriate data
and erroneous data that included misidentified breeds and inaccurate recording on Mr. Clifton’s
part, including the author’s manipulation of the data in the reports by recording dog breeds that
were not reported in the articles and changing the breed based on unknown sources, whether
intentional or unintentional. The combination of these factors significantly altered the Pit Bull
statistics.
First, in order to equalize a disparity in the inclusion standard, the 32.3% of Pit Bull terrier
attacks that are less serious would need to be removed in order to raise the death/attack ratio to
the non-Pit Bull terrier standard of 15.5%. From the 18 incidents researched, accounting for
0.8% of the included incidents in the Pit Bull terrier category, it was determined that if the author
categorized Pit Bulls by breed while correcting the 46 known inappropriate and erroneous
attacks the pit bull attacks would be reduced to an average of 312 attacks for each of the 3
breeds. However, this would not correct for breed misidentification and would still likely contain
virtually all the attacks perpetrated by purebred and mixed breeds with the Bull Terrier body
type.

Pit Bull characteristics

Characteristics assigned to Pit Bull breeds:
• They have fewer inhibitions that normally prevent dogs from attacking adults.
• They are notorious for attacking without warning.
• It is customary to dock their tails, to hide a coming attack.
• They are rare.

Inhibition
The author stated that Pit bulls are noteworthy for attacking adults almost as frequently as
children. He determined that Pit Bulls have fewer inhibitions to restrain them from attacking
adults. The data indicates that Pit Bulls attack adults at least 34.1% of the time compared to non-
Pit Bull breeds that attack adults at least 24.1% of the time. However, Pit Bulls attack children a
smaller percentage of the time, at least 43.3% of the time compared to at least 59.8% of the time
for non-Pit Bull breeds.
It could easily be interpreted that Pit Bull breeds are better behaved with children than the
average breed, which would increase the proportion of adults attacked. The behavior that gave
the Staffordshire Bull Terrier its nickname as “the Nanny Dog”. However, 22.6% of Pit Bull
attacks and 16.1% of non-Pit Bull attacks are neither attributed to children or adults so a realistic
comparison can’t be made. In fact, the proportion of unassigned attacks in each case is large
enough that there may not be any variance. Furthermore, any variance in attack ratios between
children and adults could be caused by environmental factors outside the scope of the report and
its data, including whether the attacks involved roaming packs of dogs, which would account for
some of the unassigned attacks. However, the Pit Bull terrier category records 1,127 attack
victims and 930 maimings and deaths and as a result there is a 17.5% disparity between the
number of attack victims and their injuries that also needs to be taken into consideration.
Child/adult attack ratio
Child Adult Unassigned

Pit Bull Terrier 43.3% 34.1% 22.6%

59.8% 24.1% 16.1%
Non-Pit Bull breeds

Warning messages before attack

Although the author claimed that pit bulls will attack without warning animal behaviorists
dispute his claim stating that all dogs show warnings before an attack unless they’ve been trained
not to. In the cases involving death that I studied the dogs often attacked after repeated attempts
to lunge had broken their collars or tethers. Many of the dogs had shown human aggression on
prior occasions either by lunging or by chasing people when loose in packs.
The research seems to disprove the author’s claim that Pit Bulls attack without warning, or at
least disproves the reputation he refers to. Behaviorists’ claim that the reputation stems from
owners overcorrecting dogs that show aggressive signs, and thereby unwittingly training dogs to
hide signs of aggression instead of dealing with the underlining fears and motivations. This
would be common with the “tough” owners who are attracted to “tough looking” dogs to help
gain a reputation and who commonly treat them forcefully.

Tail docking
The statement that it is customary to dock a Pit Bull’s tail is simply incorrect. Even if the dogs
will be used for dog fighting few owners dock a Pit Bull’s tail, with any request stemming from
the owner’s ignorance. With Pit Bull breeds the practice is reserved exclusively for amputation
after an injury.

Pit Bull population estimates

The best population estimates are no more than guesses. The population estimate of no more than
3.8 million is close to the estimate of 4 million based on AKC registrations, however, most
experts would not consider it accurate even for a low estimate. A population of 3.8 million would
require the average lifespan of a Bull Terrier-type dog to be between 2.7 and 3.8 years based on
the Mr. Clifton’seuthanasia estimates of 1-1.4 million and would make the population
unsustainable.
Since 1.2-1.7 million Pit Bull-type dogs enter shelters each year 1/3 of the breed’s population
would be in shelters in a given year, most of those would be euthanized. Another 1/6 of the
breed’s population would be too young to breed. That would leave 1.8 million Pit Bulls to
produce the 1-1.4 million new pups needed to sustain the breed’s population. A massive breeding
program including at least 10-14% of the population available for breeding would be required,
each pair producing 2 average size litters a year.
High estimates of 10 million are based on UKC registrations. Using the average of the high and
low estimates we can assume 5-6 million purebreds, which would still require massive breeding
programs to sustain the breed with 1 Pit Bull-type dog being born for every 3-4 human births.

Notes

1) The report’s record of 2,694 attacks is an inaccurate sum of its tabulated data. The correct total is 2,761.
2) The recorded total of 2,277 victims with 1,838 maimings and deaths is inaccurate. The correct sums are
2,206 victims of which 1,872 were maimed or killed. Note that the attack victims should be equal to the
number of people maimed and killed, but there is a difference of 15.1%.
3) The report identifies 111 breed categories. Of these several referenced the same breed by different names.
In these cases the categories were corrected, resulting in 109 categories.
4) Of the 109 categories, 57 referenced pure breeds and 52 referenced mixed breeds.

Tinker, Dwight (2010, What Causes Dog Attacks? A Study of Fatal Attacks)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/44678727/What‐Causes‐Dog‐Attacks‐A‐Study‐of‐Fatal‐Attacks

Clifton, M. (2009).
"Dog Attack Deaths and Maimings US and Canada, Sept 1982-Dec 2009", Animal People, Clinton, WA.

Clifton, M, (2005, 3 21).

Cultural Differences, Best Friends, Canab, UT.

Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed-specific legislation regarding
aggressive behavior
Stefanie A. Ott, Esther Schalke, Amelie M. von Gaertner, Hansjoachim Hackbarth

1 May 2008 (volume 3 issue 3 Pages 134-140 DOI: 10.1016/j.jveb.2007.09.009)

Breed statistics
American Temperment Testing Society

http://www.atts.org/statistics.html
Media sources:
Jacobson, S, A. A. (2008, 6 28).
"Titusville great-grandmother's pet dogs maul her to death, will be euthanized", Orlando Sentinel, FL.

Ferguson, N, A. A. (2007, 5 4).

"Teenager Recovering From Dog Mauling", Fox8 News, NC.

A. A. (2009, 12 31).
"2008 RDBF Michael Warner", DogBites.org.

Staff, A. A. (2009, 5 5).

"Unruly Dog Drags Owner To Tragic Train Death", Fox Reno News, NV.

Oppat, S, A. A. (2007, 11 1).

"Prosecutor says dogs involved in attack escaped before", Ann Arbor News, MI.

A. A. (2009, 7 26).
"History Channel Airs Segment of Double Fatal Attack; Images of Dogs Shown", DogBites.org.

Groves, E, A. A. (2009, 10 1).

"Plainfield animal control officer hurt by fall, not dog bite", Norwich Bulletin, CT.

A. A. (2009, 10 12).
"Funeral set for animal control officer", News 8 WTNH.

Piraneo, J, A. A. (2009, 10 12).

"Animal Control Officers Remember Colleague Who Died in Line of Duty", NBC Connecticut, CT.