westernrvparkowner wrote:
While all that is true, there is no way for any business (including yours) to pre-determine whether or not a dog arriving is a stable, well trained dog, or a poorly socialized, untrained one.
While you would rather deal with a well trained Doberman or Pit Bull, I would also like to point out you would much rather be attacked by a Lab or a Poodle than attacked by a Doberman or Pit Bull. The damage that can be inflicted by the breeds most often targeted for breed exclusions is much more serious than can be inflicted by the vast majority of dogs.
The first statement is true, the second is poppycock.
While I can't pre-determine a dog's reaction to a certain situation, I (as most vets) have developed a pretty good ability to read the situations pretty quickly. I wouldn't have lasted 37 years with my body relatively intact without that ability. While I've had more training and experience than most, there is a minimal skill level that needs to be taught early to everybody This would help avoid situations where bites happen.
A lab, golden, poodle or any breed can inflict damage as severe as any of the named breeds. Terriers tend to shake after biting which causes so much tissue trauma. While size of the dog biting CAN make a difference, it's just a fallacy that bites from dogs not on the list are less serious.
I understand that there are lots of people that aren't dog people and running a business to try to satisfy everybody is tough, but to think that dog related problems will be eliminated or even reduced by breed restrictions just doesn't seem valid. If that's what the insurance people demand, you just don't have much choice.
