Brian Rudman: Quick snip around suburban streets will reduce dog bites

Having got myself offside with the dog-owning half of the population with my quick solution to the dog-bite problem, I'm a bit nervous about upsetting cat lovers as well. But I guess it's in for a penny, in for a pound and all that.

In my thoughtful little piece last week that suggested the elimination of all "suspect" dog breeds would halve the problem overnight, I took time out to describe a ramble through the Tahuna Torea nature reserve at Glendowie.

I might well have left the impression that unleashed dogs were not just a menace to humans, but could be blamed for the lack of birds in the park as well.

Owen Munro, a local resident for more than 70 years, was quick to suggest the more likely culprits were rats and the household moggie.

When he moved to the area in the 1930s "the dawn chorus was truly magnificent" with tens of thousands of birds in Tahuna Torea, Dingle Dell and the other pockets of bush in the area.

"In those places today you will hear very little, few insects, few birds."

He puts it down to four things. "Auckland has become a concrete jungle, wholesale use of pesticides, domestic cats and vermin."

He's seen cats and rats up trees after birds, "but never seen a dog clever enough to do this".

He says the main killers are easy to control - poison for rats and compulsory registration and neutering for cats. Cage-type traps in bird sanctuaries would catch marauding cats every night. Unregistered cats would be destroyed. Registered cats caught more than once would get a heavy fine.

"I'm not a cat hater. I believe cats and dogs should be subjected to the same controls."

Having seen the number of sparrow legs left on my front path by the neighbourhood cats over the years, even an animal lover like myself has to agree he has a point.

But moving quickly back to the vexed question of dog attacks, you may have guessed I came in for something of a monstering from the owners of the "suspect" breeds.

Their own particular breeds are all angels, I was told in no uncertain terms. It's the mongrels that pass themselves off as pit bulls and staffies and the like that are the problem. Along with the council officers who go along with the passing off.

Rather than re-enter the fray, I'm hoping the heat will now go on Minister of Internal Affairs Chris Carter. His department has just released a preliminary report on dog control issues which I am sure will raise dog fanciers' wrath by including a top ten list of naughty dog breeds.

For the six months to the end of 2002, staffordshire bull terriers take the gold medal with 22 per cent of recorded attacks on people, followed by pit bull terriers (16 per cent) and german shepherds (13 per cent). I'll say nothing, except to note the report does admit breed reporting by councils is "patchy".

Over the past few days I've also been referred to interesting reports from New South Wales and the US, and a British medical journal. All play down the importance of breeds. A survey of "mammalian" bite victims admitted to the accident and emergency clinic, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, noted 17.9 per cent of bite victims were suffering from human bites - as many as the worst dog breed of the survey - the german shepherd.

The human bites required more active treatment and were more likely to require specialist referral than dog bites. Sadly I couldn't track down the full report so as to provide the where and how and why answers you, of course, don't want to know.

On a more useful note was the revelation, in a comprehensive report by the American Veterinary Association Task Force on Canine Aggression, that 80 per cent of dogs reported to vets for aggression were unneutered males and that unneutered males were involved in 70 to 76 per cent of reported dog-bite incidents.

Could this suggest that with a quick snip, snip around our suburban streets, the problem would be over - in part at least?

The other emphasis, in both the main reports, is on the need for education, both of dog owners and potential victims. In particular, of young children.

In Australia, half of all bites are inflicted by the family dog. There are no New Zealand statistics to compare, but I'm guessing it isn't much different here. Certainly New Zealand Health Information Service records show that in the five years to 2000, of the 1722 people taken to public hospital with dog bites 39 per cent were children ten and under and 45 per cent 15 or under.

Teaching from kindergarten onwards that dogs can be dangerous would be a good move. But it does presume a degree of maturity on the part of the potential victims that many have not yet reached. We teach youngsters, for instance, the danger of going near a swimming pool without an adult present. But we know that's not sufficient protection and insist on backyard fencing as well. It's time we treated dogs in the same light.