GoodPooch.com has become widely respected for our extensive research into Canadian dog bite statistics. Prior to the research I did, regarding dog-related fatalities in Canada, the number of Canadians killed by dogs each year was unknown. We discovered there is, on average, one dog-related human fatality each year in Canada. This information is now widely reported.

We were also the first to point out, with our familiarity with the fatality cases that have occurred in Canada, every recent dog-related fatality in Canada has involved dogs and victims who reside within the same home. This is also the case for a large number of the serious dog attacks.

We can confirm that Canada is similar to other regions, in that most dog bites occur inside the home or on, or directly adjacent to the owner's property (where there is little expectation of leashing or muzzling), and nearly all biting incidents involve unsupervised dogs (again, a situation that brings with it little expectation of leashing or muzzling).

My own research also uncovered the fact that we have yet to confirm a single unprovoked dog-related human fatality officially attributed to a 'pit bull' in Canadian history. (F.Y.I: There is a lot of misinformation about that statistic. To date, this is what I can confirm. There was a fatality case in Kingston that may, or may not, have been attributed to the family's 'pit bull'. There is enough conflicting evidence that the child's mother was convicted and sent to prison, initially. The injuries to the child's body may or may not be dog bites, and they may or may not have been the cause of death. For this reason, I don't believe this incident has ever been officially attributed to the dog. In two other independent fatality cases, drunken men with a known history of taunting and abusing the dogs - in each case, there were two American Staffordshire Terriers involved - the circumstances were deemed to be "provoked", and no charges were laid against the dogs' owners. Other than those three incidents, we know of no fatalities attributed to 'pit bulls' in Canada.)

Our research also discovered that, of the cases we've reviewed, every dog involved in a serious biting incident in this country had a well-known history of aggression that went either unreported, or whose owners went unpunished. Even when the bite was the first against a human, there was always a demonstrated history of aggressive behaviour either towards other animals or people, or both. We also found that a large percentage of dogs involved in serious biting incidents were already under muzzle orders, but their owners acted in defiance of those orders. This is the circumstance with the Ellis case, used by Michael Bryant to highlight the "need" for a ban on 'pit bulls'. In case you're unfamiliar with it, several years ago in Toronto, Mrs. Ellis noticed a 'pit bull' and its owner in a public place. She asked the dog's owner permission for her daughter to pet the dog. When the child approached the dog, it attacked the child and didn't release until she lost consciousness. However, that dog was known to be vicious and was already under a muzzle order. That case proves little more than irresponsible/criminal dog owners won't abide by any law passed by government, Dog Owner's Liability Act, municipal by-laws or Bill 132, even when their dogs are known to be vicious.

GoodPooch.com is also the first to demonstrate a lack of ancestry between the actual dogs involved in serious biting incidents. (You can find more on that in the section of the "Canine Primer" called "The Myth of Aggression Genes".) This is a clear indication there is no genetic component responsible for serious dog attacks. The dogs actually involved in serious attacks simply aren't related in any meaningful way, which tends to refute the idea that they inherited some kind of gene or body chemistry that makes them attack. If that were the case, the dogs would have to be related. There would be a clear path of inheritance that could be easily followed through sire and dam. But no such correlation exists. The dogs involved in serious attacks are no more closely related than the dog population, in general. (A large U.S. study examined the bodies of several dogs involved in fatal attacks and found them to have no physical abnormalities, such as medical/genetic disorders, brain tumors, etc.)

Of course, we've done extensive research in other areas, as well. Our research is ongoing.

Because of this intimate understanding of the factors leading to unprovoked dog bites, we launched our "3 Simple Steps to Bite Prevention" campaign. We made it easy to remember, easy to implement, and effective. It is easy to remember because it is concise. Just "3 Simple Steps" can prevent the vast majority of situations that lead to unprovoked dog bites in Canada. It is easy to implement because it does not require special knowledge of dog behaviour, and can be universally applied by everyone. We believe it is effective because it addresses the most common factors that lead to unprovoked bites: lack of supervision, especially where children are concerned, and lack of proper socialization.

It is the lack of supervision that is the main culprit in most biting cases. Even poorly socialized dogs can be prevented from biting if they're properly managed. Better yet, properly socialized dogs simply don't feel threatened by such non-threatening situations as someone walking by the owner's property or someone merely picking up a favoured toy. And since, other than those who've had protection training, dogs simply don't bite unless they feel threatened. By properly socializing dogs, we help them learn to differentiate between non-threatening situations, and those very rare times when they should feel justified in feeling threatened. The mailman is not a threat to a dog in any way. Girl guides selling cookies door to door are not a threat to a dog in any way. The neighbour's dog walking by the yard is not a threat to a dog in any way.

Many groups have come forward to point out that as much as 85% of bites occur on the owner's property. However, this also suggests that 15% of bites occur in public. This statistic is very misleading. While a dog bite victim who had been walking through a public park or down a public sidewalk would understandably argue the bite took place "In public", the vast majority of these incidents actually take place directly adjacent to the owner's property. The typical scenario is a dog that jumps a fence or escapes through an open gate and attacks someone passing by. It is clear that inappropriate territorial-type behaviour is a factor in many biting incidents.

In fact, unprovoked dog bites are quite predictable, from a statistical standpoint. No matter what the latest dog bite story, there's a good chance the bite took place in the home or in the yard of the dog's owner, who is also likely to be the victim's parent/relative/acquaintance. The dog is most likely known to the victim. The dog was most assuredly unsupervised at the time of the bite (at least in most cases). The dog invariably had a known history of aggression, even if it was its first reported bite against a person. And even when the victim doesn't know the dog, the bite likely took place directly adjacent to the owner's home.

Mystery solved.

Once BSL came 'home to roost' on such a large scale in Ontario, GoodPooch.com has been somewhat taken over for that cause. Our goal, however, is not solely to fight BSL, but still to promote responsible dog ownership, and reasonable policies towards dogs and dog ownership.

Some of our more popular articles are "Training 101"; "The Standard of Care For Dogs"; "Dog Walking Etiquette"; "Canine Primer"; "Everything You Wanted To Know About 'Pit Bulls'; "Hotel Survey", "Travelling With Pets", and our sample hotel pet policy; and our wildly famous "Teach Your Dog To Heel In One Day".

The "My Good Pooch" section is very popular with novice dog owners, and the "Issues" section tends to be quite popular with more experienced dog owners.

Of course, in terms of BSL, most of that section is widely referenced in the media and on the Internet. Please refer back to our site map to find a complete list of articles.

You and, in fact, all our readers, are not only encouraged to link to us, but we welcome you to borrow/copy/"steal" any of the information that is available at GoodPooch.com. Naturally, we maintain our copyrights (in the unlikely event of some kind of dispute), but our goal is to have this information distributed as widely as possible. Discouraging dissemination would be counterproductive to that goal.

It's the message that's important to us, not the messenger.

We're gearing up to launch our
"Anti-tourism" campaign, once Bill 132 comes into full effect. That may be something you would like to assist with.
Aside from the two slogans we've modified for our use, I've read another one that reads, "Ontario: Don't discover it...the hard way." You may want to develop your own anti-tourism campaign, as well. The more we can hurt the Ontario government (through diminished revenue and taxes) the better.

Again, thank you for your support, and please feel free to use any of the information found at GoodPooch.com (or in this correspondence).

All the best,