Will Subsidized Spay/Neuter for Pit Bulls Decrease Surrenders?
We ran across an article in the Denver paper we think is worth commenting on. A Colorado shelter is one of apparently a number of shelters across the country that received grants from an animal related charity to offer subsidized spay/neuter services for pit-bull owners. The grant is described as being part of a nationwide effort to stop the “over-breeding of pit bulls and prevent them from being abandoned by their owners.”
While we’re all for programs that reduce pets being surrendered to shelters, this particular effort doesn’t appear to be well thought out. First we have to ask, how do we know pit bulls are being “over bred”? Does that mean ownership of pit bulls has increased in recent years? We can’t imagine that registration statistics documenting this conclusion exist. “Pit bull” is a breed type, not a breed. American Pit Bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, and even Staffordshire Bull Terriers and American Bulldogs are considered to be “pit bulls” in some communities. So while more pit bulls are ending up in some shelters, that doesn’t necessarily mean that ownership of pit bulls has increased.
Unfortunately, “pit bulls” are a popular type of dog among irresponsible people who want such a dog for all the wrong reasons. And they are very unlikely to register their dogs with their local animal control agency. So obtaining ownership statistics is virtually impossible. And even as the director of this Colorado shelter admits, these folks are not likely to be interested in neutering their dogs, even if it costs them nothing.
That leads to the second problem with this effort. The unstated assumption is that pit bull owners are not neutering their dogs because they can’t afford it. How do we know this? It’s more likely irresponsible pit bull owners aren’t neutering their dogs simply because they don’t want to. It goes against the reasons they likely acquired the dog in the first place.
The third poorly conceived aspect of this effort is that over-breeding of pit bulls and owners not being able to neuter them is what’s causing more of them to show up in shelters. Really? Breed bans are a significant reason why pit bulls are surrendered to shelters. One only needs to look at the surrender numbers in Denver from a few years ago when that city’s breed ban was reinstated.
Many shelters collect data on reason for surrender when dogs come in. What are the reasons people are giving for surrendering their pit bulls? That would seem to be a crucial piece of information to know in order to target the cause of the problem with relevant programs. Our suspicion is that breed bans aside, pit bulls are surrendered for the same reason most dogs are – unrealistic expectations about dog/breed ownership, “moving”, and behavior problems.
Pit bulls are not a breed for the novice dog owner or someone who thinks they want a "macho" dog. If the pit bull has become the "flavor of the month" breed to have in certain circles, like Dalmatians and other breeds have been in the past, then efforts to educate people about the personality and behavioral tendencies of pit bulls would be relevant.
We know there are responsible pit bull owners. Those folks aren’t contributing to the pit bulls that end up in shelters. Responsible owners are spaying and neutering their dogs, licensing them, and training them to be friendly, not dangerous. We suspect it’s a relatively small number of responsible owners who might need financial help with spaying and neutering. And spay/neuter assistance is already available through other programs.
And while shelters need all the help they can get, the $20,000 grant to this one shelter to spay and neuter pit bulls in our opinion could be better spent on other programs. What about training classes just for pit bull breeds? Structure them as teaching fun tricks to pit bulls rather than "basic obedience" which many owners view as boring. That would also allow competent trainers to get a look at these dogs and identify those with worrisome behavior patterns that could be "red flags" for later dangerous behavior or other behavior problems that could ultimately result in surrender. Intuitively at least, seems more likely to get at actual surrender prevention than spay/neuter.
Other ideas include mandatory bite prevention education programs for any owner whose dog is cited for aggression or biting, free behavior evaluations of pit bulls and other dogs perceived as potentially dangerous in the community, free training classes and behavior consultations for owners of pit bulls with problems, tracking of any dangerous dog, regardless of breed, and research to get at the real reasons why pit bulls are over-represented in certain shelters.
Dear Hereos – you have it wrong about Colorado training pit bulls for the disabled. Part of the federal statute about service dogs now says if a pit bull is a service dog it cannot be denied public access even if there is a breed ban in place. It remains to be seen what will happen with this, as to my knowledge we do not have any service dogs in Colorado that are pit bulls – or at least none that have hit anyone’s/the media’s radar.
Suzanne
I like dogs, never have I been near a bull type and due to the bad press over the years, I believe I would be anxious near one, he’d smell my anxiety and bite me. This is my fear talking. Many people I’ve talked to about thier family bull, or personally an owner, All seem to be in agreement, they are loving, great with kids and the other dog. I am not a scientist , so when I was reading a Dog breeding written in the 1960′s I recall what was needed to achieve the dog with best temperment, physical standard, and health. The breeder has not wanted a dog who has been used fighting for over 2000 years. That gene, or instinct must be still more than a notion, than an instinct? I heard Colorado has considered training bulls for the disabled. I wish them well.
Hi Shirley – thanks for your thoughtful comment. We don’t know if mandatory spay/neuter laws exist in this particular county or not. If they don’t and the pitbulls aren’t being targeted under those laws as you mention, then the program seems even less relevant. We agree that there can’t be much not to like about programs that support pet owners, but it’s a leap of faith to assume that they all lead to more responsible pet ownership and fewer surrenders.
In fact, in a study we did of a pet education program we developed about 10 years ago, the data showed the program was most effective with first time offenders with animal control violoations but had little effect on recidivism with repeat offenders. So first-time intervention according to our results is much better.
You’re right, if the funds are earmarked for specific things then that’s one thing. I guess one of our points was earmarking those funds for spay/neuter of pit bulls may not be a well conceived idea and the best use of money, if the goal is to decrease the number of pit bulls in shelters. Especially if the reasons why pit bulls are being seen in increasing numbers in shelters aren’t clear. And there may not be a one size fits all answer to this -it may vary geographically as well.
Suzanne
Well there are two relevant and interesting perspectives – first one has to do with what spay/neuter grants achieve in regards to shelter surrenders based on mandatory spay/neuter laws and the second has to do with what any pet ownership support program tends to achieve.
So for the first – studies that show that mandatory spay/neuter laws increase shelter surrenders, so any program that helps support spay/neuter would necessarily decrease surrenders based on any citations based on mandatory spay/neuter laws. so while pitbulls in particular may not be surrendered/abandoned or over-bred to a higher degree than any other dogs, programs to support spay/neuter will probably lower pitbull surrenders, especially if these animals are being targeted under these mandatory spay laws.
As for the second point – regardless of any spay/neuter laws and their effects on surrenders, any program that supports pet owners often leads to more responsible pet ownership which in turn will reduce surrenders.
i think the real problem, as this article states, is that the claims being made (that spay neuter is the way to reduce pitbull surrenders because of over-breeding, etc.) are most likely misstated…but any program that supports owners is likely to benefit both owners and pets and that is a great thing.
So could the funds be better spent? maybe…but then again often funds that are earmarked for a particular activity aren’t otherwise up for grabs. so the best outcome would be that the funds used for this specific project are used as efficiently as possible – that pet owners who take advantage of this grant are well-educated and are in the end better supported and because of that their pets are less likely to be surrendered/abandoned.