When we talk about predators, or any other animal or situation in our daily lives, we evaluate the risk of danger they may represent for our physical or psychological integrity. In order to better understand this notion of "danger", which we frequently use, we'll mention its theoretical foundations, starting with its definition.

Dangerousness is the estimation of the danger, the traumatic risk (psychological or physical), for a potential victim. Above all, it is an anthropocentric notion, necessary for public and family safety. It can be assessed for every animal species, including those threatened by the latter : wild animals, pets, humans, etc. Its estimation, at the level of the average population, is also highly personal, with each person feeling it in their own way, according to their own fears, degree of knowledge, beliefs and even education.

It's important not to confuse danger with fear ! The former is based on the real dangers involved, while the latter is linked to each person's feelings, depending on their level of knowledge, beliefs, past experiences and even upbringing. A person who is afraid of spiders is convinced that they represent a real danger, which is not the case in our country. We must therefore always distinguish between the real danger posed by an animal, a situation or a thing, and that which we create and amplify through our personal fears, phobias or beliefs. 

An animal is recognized as potentially dangerous when it presents a set of characteristics which mean that the physical or psychological integrity of an individual may be endangered by its behavior (aggression, pursuit, predation, etc.).

In the case of canids, mainly domestic, the criteria for dangerousness are :

- Weight and mass of the canine
- Category of people at risk
- Type of aggression (offensive or defensive)
- Type of bite (controlled, single, multiple)

It's very important to note that the risk of dangerousness is always relative to a particular person and to specific circumstances. This is the anchor point for understanding this subject. Every living being, animal or person, is a unique individual, behaving differently depending on the situation, environment, emotional/physiological state or current, among other things. Nothing can be generalized. For example : if a wolf were to bite a person in specific circumstances (which must be evaluated as a whole, neutrally and thoroughly), and this had not happened in 10, 20 or 30 years, this case should not lead to a negative evaluation, in terms of dangerousness, of the species as a whole. This will remain an individual, a person, a situation, a context, an emotional/physiological state, specific circumstances - in other words, many factors that differ, sometimes even from one occasion to the next for the same individual.

So, depending on these same factors, any animal can be dangerous ! We need to keep in mind that human behaviour at the time of the incident (aggression/bite) plays a major role, particularly in any defensive attack. But, depending on the circumstances, this can also be the case for offensive/predatory aggression, either directly or indirectly. We'll come back to this point in later chapters.

There's also an extremely important, inescapable factor to take into account when talking about dangerousness and the risk of aggression or incident: the "PROBABILITY" factor. As far as canines in Switzerland are concerned, it's obvious that with 556,000 dogs in the country, constantly around us (at home, in public areas, in our friends/family's house, etc.), the risk of a bite/attack increases dramatically compared to the wolf, a discreet animal whose numbers are around 300 in Switzerland and which we very rarely encounter. In the same spirit, the risk of dying in a plane crash, if we only take it rarely, is quite insignificant compared to that of succumbing in a car accident, which we take every day, driving between 10,000 and 30,000 km a year. This factor is non-negotiable, and must be kept in mind, in any debate on risk and dangerousness, to avoid one-upmanship or the onset of disabling and often unjustified anxiety.

It's also fair to say that nature itself is dangerous, as the number of accidents every year clearly shows. We go there to enjoy our hobbies, forgetting or totally ignoring the many dangers that lurk there, far more dangereous and frequent than natural predators : falling rocks, branches/trees, uneven terrain (slopes, holes, leading to falls), crevasses, cliffs, changing weather conditions (heat, avalanches, flash floods, lightning, storms), etc. All these factors can lead to injury (fracture, trauma, concussion, brain injury, haemorrhage, hypovolaemic shock, burns), physical problems (heat stroke, cardio/respiratory problems, malaise, hypothermia, sunstroke, dehydration) and, sometimes, death.

And the evolution of our society, with its quest for thrills, novelty and performance, is leading to ever-increasing risks and dangers. Activities such as trail running and mountain biking highlight a little-known problem that greatly increases the risk of accident or even death : the use of headphones. Coupled with sunglasses and helmet/cap, not to mention the focus on the stopwatch and other parameters, the person quite simply loses two of their main senses: sight and hearing ! In these circumstances, we're no longer attentive to what's going on around us, to noises, to possible events, to people or animals that might be in our path; we can't see danger coming, and so can't anticipate it ! It's now clear that risks, and therefore danger, also come from overestimating our abilities, lack of anticipation & observation, and a lack of knowledge of the terrain, the way nature works and its unpredictability.

We need to be aware that, with nature and living beings, we'll never be able to predict or control everything, and that zero risk will never exist. So there will always be dangers and accidents, in every one of our activities, from the moment we open our eyes to the moment we close them. It's vital, therefore, not to overreact, nor to make, as is often the case, fanciful comparisons or predictions. These are often based not on real risks and dangers, but on fears, whether ancestral, cultural, mythological, traumatic or phobic. Our role is to deal with dangerousness in terms of probability and frequency of occurrence, by applying procedures, measures and rules that will prevent incidents as far as possible (but not "always", we must be fully aware of this). 

Dictionary

Anthropocentric              Makes human the center of the world.
Hypovolemic shock         Decrease in effective blood volume, i.e. that which is physiologically necessary to maintain normal circulatory function.
Septic shock                  Generalized infection resulting in organ failure and dangerously low blood pressure.
Anaphylactic shock         Exacerbated allergic reaction, in most cases leading to serious and potentially life-threatening consequences.
Flood                            Rising water level in a river or lake.    
Declivity                       The state of being on a slope.

NEXT CHAPTER : DIFFERENT TYPES OF AGGRESSION