When politicians propose breed bans, they rarely cite peer-reviewed research. They point to headlines. They invoke emotional reactions to tragic incidents. They promise to protect public safety.
The actual science tells a different story. For thirty years, researchers have studied breed-specific legislation from every angle. The findings are consistent and unambiguous: targeting breeds does not reduce dog bites. Not anywhere. Not ever.
This is not my opinion. This is the consensus of veterinary medicine, animal behavior science, and public health research. Let me walk you through what the evidence actually shows.
Major Organizations Opposing BSL
Before examining specific studies, consider the breadth of professional opposition to breed-based approaches. These are not advocacy groups or breed clubs. These are the leading scientific and professional organizations in animal health and public safety.
- American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) - Representing over 100,000 veterinarians
- American Kennel Club (AKC)
- American Bar Association (ABA)
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
- National Canine Research Council
- American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)
- Humane Society of the United States
- International Association of Canine Professionals
- Association of Professional Dog Trainers
- National Animal Control Association
When veterinarians, lawyers, public health officials, animal control officers, and dog trainers all agree that a policy does not work, perhaps we should listen.
The CDC Study: Why They Stopped Tracking Breed
The Centers for Disease Control conducted extensive research on dog bite fatalities through the 1990s, initially attempting to identify which breeds posed the greatest risk. Their conclusion surprised many: breed data was too unreliable to be useful.
In their landmark 2000 paper published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, CDC researchers explained why they would no longer track fatal dog bites by breed. The problems they identified remain unresolved today.
First, visual breed identification proved unreliable. Without DNA testing, which was not routinely available, breed designations came from witnesses, media reports, or animal control officers. Different observers regularly identified the same dog as different breeds.
Second, mixed-breed dogs, which constitute the majority of the dog population, could not be accurately categorized. A dog that was half Labrador and half Rottweiler might be listed as either or neither depending on who made the identification.
Third, population data was unavailable. Even if certain breeds appeared more frequently in bite statistics, without knowing total breed populations, no risk assessment was possible. If pit bulls constituted 30% of fatal bites but also 30% of the dog population, they would be exactly average in risk, not elevated.
CDC Position Statement
The CDC concluded that breed-specific approaches to dog bite prevention are not recommended because there is no evidence that they work, breed identification is unreliable, and they shift focus away from effective behavioral interventions.
The Bite Statistics: What They Actually Show
Proponents of BSL often cite statistics showing certain breeds involved in more bite incidents. These numbers require context that is rarely provided.
The identification problem corrupts all breed-specific bite data. Research published in the Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science found that even professionals correctly identified pit bull type dogs from photographs only 36% of the time when compared to DNA results. Shelter staff, veterinarians, and animal control officers all performed similarly poorly.
This means a dog labeled as a pit bull in bite reports has a nearly two-thirds chance of being something else entirely. The breeds showing high bite numbers may simply be the breeds most often misidentified, not the breeds most likely to bite.
Population denominators matter. Raw bite numbers mean nothing without knowing how many dogs of each breed exist. A 2013 study in the Journal of Veterinary Behavior noted that pit bull type dogs may constitute 20% or more of the U.S. dog population when genetic testing is used rather than visual identification. If true, their representation in bite statistics would be proportional or below average.
Severity does not equal frequency. Large dogs cause more severe injuries when they bite, regardless of breed. This is physics, not genetics. A German Shepherd or Labrador bite sends more people to the hospital than a Chihuahua bite. Media coverage tracks severity, creating an illusion that certain breeds bite more often rather than simply causing more damage when bites occur. This has led to increasing restrictions on herding and working breeds despite their excellent temperament records.
The Aggression Research
If BSL logic were correct, certain breeds would show inherently higher aggression. Researchers have tested this hypothesis extensively. The results do not support breed-based predictions of individual dog behavior.
A landmark 2008 study in Applied Animal Behaviour Science surveyed owners of over 15,000 dogs about aggressive behaviors. Pit bulls showed no elevated aggression toward people compared to other breeds. Some traditionally restricted breeds scored below average on aggression measures.
The breeds showing highest stranger-directed aggression? Dachshunds, Chihuahuas, and Jack Russell Terriers. These dogs are never targeted by BSL because their bites rarely require medical attention, not because they are actually less aggressive.
A 2014 study in the Journal of Veterinary Behavior evaluated dogs entering shelters using standardized behavior assessments. The researchers found no significant differences in aggression between pit bull type dogs and other breeds. Dogs of all types showed similar distributions of friendly, neutral, and concerning behaviors.
Behavior is individual, not breed-determined. While breeds may have tendencies, enormous variation exists within breeds. A well-socialized pit bull from responsible owners presents far less risk than an unsocialized Labrador from neglectful owners. Judging individual dogs by breed averages makes as much sense as judging individual people by demographic averages.
The Effectiveness Studies
Perhaps most damning for BSL are the studies examining whether breed bans actually reduce dog bites. Across multiple countries and decades of data, the answer is consistently no.
Spain implemented breed restrictions in 1999. A 2017 study published in the Journal of Veterinary Behavior examined 12 years of hospital admission data for dog bites. The researchers found no reduction in bite-related injuries following BSL implementation.
Italy passed breed-specific laws in 2003, then repealed them in 2009 after government analysis showed they had not reduced dog bites. Italy now uses behavior-based approaches.
Calgary, Canada rejected BSL and instead implemented strict licensing, owner education, and behavior-based dangerous dog laws. The result was a 56% reduction in dog bites over twenty years. No breed bans necessary.
Winnipeg, Canada banned pit bulls in 1990. A 2012 study compared Winnipeg's bite statistics to Calgary's. Despite Winnipeg's 22-year breed ban, Calgary's breed-neutral approach produced significantly better results.
The Genetics of Aggression
Modern genetic research has revolutionized our understanding of dog behavior, and the findings further undermine BSL assumptions.
A 2022 study published in Science, one of the world's most prestigious journals, analyzed genetic data from over 18,000 dogs alongside detailed behavioral surveys. The researchers found that breed explained only about 9% of behavioral variation in individual dogs. For specific traits like aggression, breed predictive power was even lower.
This means knowing a dog's breed tells you remarkably little about how that specific dog will behave. Two dogs of the same breed can show completely different temperaments because individual genetic variation, early experiences, training, and environment matter far more than breed category.
The study also found that traits sometimes associated with specific breeds actually occurred across many breeds at similar rates. Dogs labeled as pit bulls showed no elevated rates of aggression compared to dogs labeled as other breeds when individual assessment replaced breed categorization.
The AVMA's Comprehensive Review
In 2014, the American Veterinary Medical Association published an extensive literature review on dog bite risk and prevention. Their conclusions, based on analysis of all available peer-reviewed research, deserve extensive quotation.
On breed as a risk factor: The AVMA found that controlled studies have not identified any single breed as disproportionately dangerous. While certain breeds may be overrepresented in bite statistics, the data is compromised by breed identification errors, population uncertainty, and reporting biases that make conclusions unreliable.
On BSL effectiveness: The AVMA stated that breed-specific bans are largely ineffective and difficult to enforce. They noted that such laws may actually impair effective enforcement by diverting limited animal control resources toward breed identification rather than addressing actual dangerous dogs regardless of breed.
On recommended approaches: The AVMA endorsed comprehensive programs including improved dog owner education, enhanced enforcement of existing animal control laws, and regulations targeting specific dangerous dogs based on their behavior rather than their appearance.
What The Science Demands
The evidence against BSL is not ambiguous. It is not a close call. Every major scientific and professional organization that has examined the issue has reached the same conclusion: breed bans do not work.
Effective dog bite prevention requires addressing the factors that actually predict dangerous behavior: owner responsibility, socialization, training, and individual dog assessment. Communities that have embraced these approaches have achieved the results that BSL promised but never delivered.
When politicians propose breed bans, they are not following science. They are following fear, media narratives, and political convenience. The science demands better. Our dogs deserve better. And we can do better when we insist that policy be based on evidence rather than prejudice.
For further reading on dog genetics and behavior, visit The Herding Gene, which covers genetic factors in herding breed behavior and health.
The Scientific Consensus is Clear
Breed-specific legislation lacks scientific support. The organizations representing veterinarians, animal behaviorists, public health officials, and animal control professionals all oppose breed-based approaches. Evidence-based policy requires behavior-focused alternatives.