title: Animal control measures and their relationship to the reported incidence of dog bites in urban Canadian municipalities.
abstract: Various measures, including ticketing, licensing, and breed-specific legislation, are used by municipalities to control dog bites, but their effectiveness is largely unknown. Thirty-six urban Canadian municipalities provided information about their animal control practices, resourcing, and (for 22 municipalities) rate of reported dog bites. Municipalities differed widely in rates of licensing (4% to 75%) and ticketing (0.1 to 83 per 10,000 people), even where staffing and budgets were similar. Reported frequency of dog bites ranged from 0 to 9.0 (median 1.9) per 10,000 people. Rates were generally higher in municipalities with higher ticketing, licensing, staffing, and budget levels. However, in municipalities with very active ticketing the reported bite rate was much lower than predicted by a linear regression on ticketing rate (quadratic regression, R(2) = 0.52), likely reflecting a reduction in actual bites with very active enforcement. Municipalities with and without breed-specific legislation did not differ in reported bite rate. Ticketing appeared most effective in reducing dog bites, although it may also lead to increased reporting.
authors.affiliation: Animal Welfare Program, University of British Columbia, 2357 Main Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada. nancy.clarke@ubc.ca
authors.forename: Nancy M
authors.initials: NM
authors.lastname: Clarke
authors.forename: David
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Fraser
mesh_terms: D000823:Animal Identification Systems; D000818:Animals; D001733:Bites and Stings / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000517:prevention & control*; D002170:Canada; D002947:Cities / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D004285:Dogs; D006801:Humans; D015994:Incidence
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 1997 Oct;87(10):1703-5
references.pmid: 9357359
references.citation: Inj Prev. 1996 Mar;2(1):52-4
references.pmid: 9346056
references.citation: J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2001 Jun 1;218(11):1732-49
references.pmid: 11394820
references.citation: Vet J. 2006 Nov;172(3):482-7
references.pmid: 15996492
references.citation: Can Vet J. 2005 Aug;46(8):735-43
references.pmid: 16187720
references.citation: Inj Prev. 2008 Oct;14(5):296-301
references.pmid: 18836045
references.citation: Can Vet J. 1989 Dec;30(12):937-42
references.pmid: 17423472
references.citation: Public Health Rep. 1985 May-Jun;100(3):315-21
references.pmid: 3923540
references.citation: Injury. 1996 Mar;27(2):89-91
references.pmid: 8730379
references.citation: Can Vet J. 2008 Jun;49(6):577-81
references.pmid: 18624067
references.citation: J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2001 Jun 15;218(12):1923-34
references.pmid: 11417736