Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia
The problem with bite statistics is they are horribly skewed and inaccurate. The only way they will show a true indication of aggression by breed is if EVERY bite was reported. If they were, all those "Top 10 most aggressive dog breed" lists would have to be redone.
I am definitely more wary of smaller breeds then I am larger breeds. Yes, larger breeds can do more damage, but any size dog can be dangerous if they land a bite in the right place. Smaller dogs are often underestimated and babied because of their size and cuteness. As a result, they are often poorly trained and socialised and more likely to be allowed to get away with bad behaviour.
I'm currently studying in the veterinary field and you wanna know the breed that I hear the most negative feedback about from vets and vet techs? Chihuahua's.
We definitely use the smaller muzzles far more often than the larger ones.
We have a large family, lots of neices and nephews and everyone has their own dogs. Rottweilers, staffies, pit mixes, bulldogs, bullmastiffs and pomeranians. The pom's are the only two dogs out of all of them that have ever snapped and landed a bite on any of the kids - both on the face, no less.
The sad fact is that people are generally ignorant about a dog's body language and we try so hard to humanize them and treat them like our babies. They are dogs, they behave like dogs, they communicate like dogs and no amount of cutesy talk and babying will change that.
I hate it when I hear "I don't know why he/she snapped. It happened out of nowhere!"
Most likely it didn't happen out of nowhere...you just didn't pick up on what the dog was trying to say and biting was it's last effort to communicate.