Hopefully the decrease in the attacks is due to tougher dog laws introduced in 2003, which included fines for owners of unregistered dogs, and prosecution if dogs inflict injuries.
Dog owners argue that the laws are already tough enough. Poodle owners for example, may feel that even stricter legislation unfairly penalises them.
The truth is that any dog can bite, but some are more likely to. Of the 17,125 dogs registered in the Bay, 26 are classified as dangerous and 123 as menacing.
Add to that figure the number of dogs crossed with a dangerous dog that are not picked up by the statistics.
Why do we have dangerous dogs?
Last week Local Government Minister Nick Smith promised an inquiry into the laws on dangerous dogs.
Part of this inquiry should be to examine further bans or restrictions of the most dangerous breeds. A softer, but more costly approach might be to introduce legislation such as compulsory dog training and checks.
Fans of these breeds will resist. A minority choose breeds purely for their viciousness. For this misguided group, dangerous dogs offer the same 'cool' status of a weapon. It is unlikely that these owners will go to puppy school.
Then there are owners who believe that their staffie-cross is a well-loved family dog. A big softie.
When big softie sinks its teeth into the neck of the 2-year-old neighbour, we are told children need to be taught about dogs.
They do. But unfortunately if you meet a dangerous dog on a bad day, no amount of patting him the right way or avoiding eye contact is going to save you from a mauling, whatever your age.
This is true for certain breeds whether the dog has been mistreated or showered with love.
It's time to stop pussy footing about dangerous dogs and seriously consider banning certain breeds.
It's not the owner. It's the dog.
