Some breeds carry genes to kill, fight

I have been following the articles relative to Monroe’s “canine plan” of one-strike dog breeds, along with the Friday editorial, “Breed-specific laws bark up the wrong tree.”

I have often been in the presence of and owned several breeds of dogs, including Akitas, collies, terriers, beagles, pit bulls and German shepherds, for over 50 years. I truly love most dogs and have been involved with “Guide Dogs for the Blind” for eight years. According to KC Dog Blog, there were 33 dog attack fatalities in 2007. I would venture to bet that the attacks were not caused by beagles, collies, shepherds, golden retrievers, black labs or silky terriers, and I’m sure some of these dogs also have irresponsible owners.

Why is it most articles I read in the newspaper relative to dog attacks have to do with pit bulls, Rottweilers or bull terriers? I think it’s because they have much more of a potential to attack due to lack of socialization, natural guarding instincts along with attack tendencies, and abuse from owners.

Those specific dog breeds that were pictured in the article, “Should one bite be limit?” are generally “hardwired” to guard and attack. It is an intrinsic behavior in many of these breeds to fight and kill. My experience with the Akita is that it is ferociously loyal and protective of its human caregivers and will attack that which it perceives a threat to its “family.” It was bred for hunting, guarding and fighting.

I am not convinced by the editorial, irrespective of the stats in the article. I’d rather have an unsupervised collie in my backyard in the presence of my young grandchild than an American pit bull terrier, and I’m sure The Herald editors would feel the same. I think Monroe is on the right track.

John Mack

Snohomish