Set up - operational
California - California Voters Alliance
Arizona - Filahound@aol.com
Kentucky - fuzzypaws1234@yahoo.com
Massachusetts - jeanog@juno.com
Texas - noah007@satx.rr.com
Open Season: Firing back at the critics
June 21, 2009 6:00 AM
I get hate mail on the average of once a week, and I don't know why. My column shouldn't be controversial. Hunting has been around since the caveman, and guns have been around shortly after the Chinese invented gunpowder - and our Constitution clearly states that U.S. citizens have the right to keep and bear arms if they so choose. So, hunting and owning guns are two of America's oldest and most time-honored traditions.
Why make them - and my column - a controversy?
After 21 years of dealing with cry-baby anti-hunters and runny-nosed gun-grabbers that whine incessantly about my column, the outdoors lifestyle and the shooting sports, I've become thick-skinned. Their barbs don't penetrate. Some hate mail I answer, some I don't. Some I answer here.
The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), based in Washington, threw another of its hissy-fits recently because I wrote about how the wealthy animal rights group has been investigated after soliciting donations to reunite pets with their owners during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. They took in $34 million for that purpose but only spent $7 million on it. So, a whopping $27 million of solicited funds were used for something else.
In his letter to the editor, HSUS's Michael Markarian skirts that issue and also avoids the notion that the group is pushing to get 41 dog bills enacted in 26 states that are cloaked as eliminating puppy mills, but go to the extreme, as usual. Language in such bills has included mandatory spaying/neutering (or pay $500 per dog per year that is not spayed or neutered), reporting all puppy sales to local authorities and eliminating the practice of humane tethering.
Markarian uses diversion, and says that the group campaigns vigorously against abusive hunting practices. They also (falsely) claim that I defend inhumane practices. Inhumane? By whose standards? Those of animal rights extremists? By their standards, all hunting is inhumane and the group's
underlying agenda is to eliminate all hunting.
HSUS President and CEO Wayne Pacelle has been quoted as saying, "If we could shut down all sport hunting in a moment, we would," as quoted by the Associated Press in Impassioned Agitator, Dec. 30, 1991. "Our goal is to get sport hunting in the same category as cock fighting and dog fighting," as
quoted in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, Oct. 8, 1991. And, "Sport hunting - the killing of wild animals as recreation - is fundamentally at odds with the values of a humane, just and caring society," HSUS Website 2003.
And according to a report from the U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance (USSA), Pacelle recently criticized in his blog, those who disagree with the group's agenda, practically accusing them of not being in step with American culture, the report says.
Pacelle suggests that HSUS opponents should, "start adjusting to the evolving ethos in American culture. You'll get ahead through innovation and adaptation, not stubborn adherence to custom or current business operations." He also stated that other animal rights groups, "miss the bigger picture, and our interest in reaching mainstream Americans."
"Mr. Pacelle's own words pull the curtain back and unveil the real intent of the HSUS," stated USSA President and CEO Bud Pidgeon. "He admits to attempting to 'mainstream' the group - at the same time he criticizes 'custom.' There's only one reason to do this and that is to fundamentally
change America to correspond to the HSUS agenda."
The HSUS is also involved in a lawsuit to stop the delisting of the gray wolf as an endangered species in the Great Lakes states, where the wolf has rebounded to thriving and healthy populations, far exceeding the goals that were established in order to remove it from the list. The U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service - under the both the Bush and Obama Administrations - has determined that the wolf numbers are more than sufficient for it to be delisted. But that's not good enough for the HSUS and other animal rights groups that are spending money on the lawsuit.
Could it be that the money being donated by people who are duped into believing they are helping doggies and kitties, is being used by these groups to fund those expensive anti-hunting lawsuits which tie up the courts with nonsense? We already know that a lot of the money feathers the nests of
high-paid executives at the top of these groups. Without an animal rights agenda, they're out of their quarter-million-
with that?
Just this week, PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is in an uproar because President Obama swatted a fly. So, is swatting a fly (or a mosquito) now considered inhumane and abusive by animal rights' standards? Are we now to adhere to the animal rights doctrine that mainstream America
does not swat dirty, disease-carrying insects?
I see the animal rights brigade as nothing more than a noisy band of half-baked control freaks, led like sheep by cunning executives interested only in job security, who want to dictate how we spend our leisure time, what we eat and how we raise our own private pets. If you don't like hunting, don't hunt.
If you don't like meat, eat weeds. Don't want puppies, get your dog spayed. But why are they trying to shove their ridiculous agendas down our throats and make controversy out of "truly mainstream" activities that have been "custom" for centuries? It's a free country, and if I want to hunt, eat meat, raise a litter of puppies and stomp on a bug, I should be able to without worrying about those whiny breast-beaters trying to outlaw it all.
Another recent hate letter was from Floyd, who thought my story about feeling the effects of approaching 50 just plain stunk and he wrote, "Write a book and do an autograph session with your raccoon hat and western jacket. Your description of stink is nothing compared to your articles."
Well written, Floyd, but I beat you to it. Already working on my book - a collection of short stories, my favorite stinky articles. Hey, I might even name it that. "My Favorite Stinky Articles, by Marc Folco." It's got a nice ring to it. And thanks for the idea of wearing a coonskin hat for the book signing. Don't have a coonskin one though, so I'll have to wear my full-length coyote hat, made from a coyote that I shot (I'll let you pet it if you buy a book). I don't have a western jacket either, so I hope my buckskins will do (I'll let you play with the fringe if you buy a book).
And if my articles stink so badly, why read them? If I think a writer stinks, I'm not wasting my valuable time reading his/her putrid rubbish from start to finish. I already know that fresh pile of doggie poo the puppy left on the carpet is going to stink, so I'm not going to sniff it.
Another reader was irate because I won a couple of humor awards from the New England Outdoor Writers' Assoc. for 2008. "Only you would make a joke out of killing a small defenseless deer - and
your ilk rewarded that story on top of it. You and your kind are callous and disgusting," M.S. said in reference to my story about shooting "teacup whitetails," one of the award-winners. M.S. went on to say, "You are the most politically incorrect writer I have ever read!"
Well, my stories have won more than a dozen New England and national writing awards (many of them first place), so maybe you're the one who is lacking a sense of humor. Laughter is the best medicine. Have a dose. Aint we got fun! I do have to agree with one thing. You hit the nail on the head - I am
politically incorrect. And proud of it.
I am a man who tells it like it is, whether readers like it or not. I don't write by anybody's standards except my own, and those of the newspaper of course, where I can't slander or use profanity. I wear my heart on my sleeve and say what I feel and think. Anybody who cowers to political correctness
is a rump-smoocher in my book.
The end of "My Way," as sung by Frank Sinatra, says it nicely:
"For what is a man?
What has he got?
If not himself
Then he has not
To say the things he truly feels
And not the words of one who kneels
The record shows
I took the blows
And did it my way."
*ED Note * - Marc Folco is the outdoor writer for The Standard Times. If you'd like to send him a "Thank You", (or hate mail), Contact him right here !
Either way, we're thinking that if you send a thank you, he'll let you pet his coyote hat - on the other hand, if it's hate mail, bet you end up playing with the fringe on the buckskins !!!
FOR ALL THE HORSE ENTHUSIASTS ! THE LATEST NEWS IN EQUINE LEGISLATION AFFECTING YOU !
|
EquuiVox: the voice of horseowners
Issue No. 3 ~ June, 2009 |
| News In This Issue:
(click here to go to the website and read the full articles)
United Organizations of the Horse has new web look to support H.O.R.S.E. Act Actual bill language for the Humane and Optimal Restoration and Sustainability of Equines (H.O.R.S.E.) Act is being drafted by the US House of Representatives-Agricultural Committee Staff with the blessing of Chairman Colin Peterson, and
should be available by the 4th of July. Nonetheless, the United Organizations
of the Horse is using the Internet to spread its direct message about the
issues, and the real solutions that are so necessary to ensure that Americans
can continue to enjoy horses for generations to come.
We Need You! We need as many supporters as possible who are willing to lobby on our behalf, write letters, make calls, and be heard-we need quick and decisive financial
support from individuals and organizations like yourselves. HSUS/PETA is
planning a massive "Horses on the Hill" onslaught of Congress on July 14th
with their anti-slaughter message. We must have our information in the
hands of every single Congressional office before that happens to provide
Congress with accurate facts to counter attempts to emotionally manipulate our leaders...and, most importantly of all, we need dollars, fast.
If you have not already done so, please click here and join! Contribute a little extra to give us the quick and substantial
support we need to make this effort successful! PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL LIKE-MINDED HORSE OWNERS AND EQUINE PROFESSIONALS THAT YOU KNOW. THANKS!
National Congress of American Indians Passes Resolution Katherine Minthorn Good Luck, representative of the National Tribal Horse Coalition on the United Organizations of the Horse's Founding Leadership Team,
reports that the National Congress of American Indians has passed a resolution
expressing the tribes' views in regards to federal interference with their ability to sustainably manage horses on tribal lands, and supporting the reopening of US
processing facilities. Tribes in at least four states-Oregon, Montana, North and
South Dakota-are working to establish humane processing facilities on tribal
lands to provide an economic boost, jobs, and a much-needed valuable use for
excess horses on tribal lands, and as a service to all horse owners.
This resolution was passed at their Mid Year Conference in Niagara Falls, NY,
June 14-17 and should be posted on their website shortly.
Government Accounting Office (GAO) Takes Hard Look at Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) Need for Options for Unadoptable Feral Horses
The BLM believes they have about 33,000 horses running on public land, along with another 30,000 in feedlots, and holding facilities that cannot be adopted.
Google Earth photo counts, and horrific incidents like the Trail Springs disaster,
and the continued destruction of the range conditions, all indicate that there
may be more than three times that many. In this report from the GAO, government researchers point out the inaccuracy of the population estimates.
"The extent to which BLM has actually met Appropriate Management Level (AML) depends on the accuracy of BLM's population counts. Nineteen of the 26 field
officials GAO surveyed used a counting method which, researchers say, consistently undercounts animals and does not provide a statistical range of population estimates. Undercounting can put animals at risk and lead to increased program costs."
Guest Editorials: Wise Words of Support From the Senior Senator from Wyoming Michael B. Enzi, United States Senator Magnificent Beast or Backyard Pet? Jeri Dobrowski
SHARING INFORMATION - STARTING TO USE OTHER IDEAS - WORKING
TOGETHER TO FORM A UNITED FRONT - THAT'S WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT !!!
AND WITH THAT: Special Bulletin: downloadable materials for the H.O.R.S.E. Act
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
FOR ALL YOU NRA, HUNTING, SPORTING, GUN TOTING READERS OUT THERE - HERE IS THE LATEST NRA LISTING OF LEGISLATION ! CLICK RIGHT HERE TO VISIT THEIR WEBSITE !
STATE ROUNDUP (Please note the only items listed below are those that have had recent action. For other updates on state legislation, please go to the state legislation section at www.NRAILA.org, and check each week's issue of the Grassroots Alert.")
ARIZONA: Urgent! The Arizona Senate & House Needs To Hear From You Today! There are only a few days left before the 2009 Arizona legislative session is over, so keep the calls and emails going! Please contact your State Senator by phone and email to respectfully urge them to support HB2474 with only the Gould drafted and NRA supported amendments.
It is urgent that you also contact your State Representatives by phone and email to urge them to vote to support SB1113, SB1168 and SB1243 on the floor in their current forms. Respectfully, let your Representatives know that a vote for a hostile amendment on ANY NRA-supported bill is a vote against the Second Amendment! Contact information for your State Representative can be found by clicking here. The word is the Senate will be working on Saturday, June 27. This could be an opportunity to personally tell your Senator how important these bills are to you. In order to confirm the Senate is working Saturday, please call the main number at (602) 926-3559 or Toll Free at 1-800-352-8404. The address to the capitol is 1700 W. Washington St. and there is free parking adjacent to it. For more detailed information about the bills listed above, please click here.
CALIFORNIA: Two Anti-Gun Bills Scheduled to be Considered Next Week! Assembly Bill 962 and Senate Bill 585 are scheduled to be considered on Tuesday, June 30. AB962 will be heard in the Senate Public Safety Committee and SB585 will be considered by the Assembly Public Safety Committee. Click here to learn more about these bills. Please contact the members of the Senate Public Safety Committee and urge them to oppose AB962. Also, please contact the members of the Assembly Committee on Public Safety and insist that they defeat SB585. Contact information can be found here.
NRA Comments To California Fish and Game Commission Regarding Extended Lead Ammo Ban: As a result of action taken by the California legislature, a ban was imposed on the use of lead ammunition for hunting large game in areas inhabited by the California condor. This week the California Fish and Game Commission accepted public comment on a proposal to extend the ban to all hunting in condor habitat areas. Final action will occur at the Commission's August meeting. Please click here to see the comments that NRA submitted in strong opposition to the latest effort to extend a lead ammunition ban statewide.
DELAWARE: Gun Records Protection Bill Heads to the Governor's Desk On Wednesday, June 24, the Delaware State House unanimously passed Senate Bill 139, with two members absent. SB 139 would provide legal purchasers of firearms a source of redress in the Delaware court system if their firearms purchase records are improperly handled or stored by the Delaware State Police. It would also allow the successful party seeking an injunction to recover his or her attorney's fees and court costs. The bill now moves to Governor's desk for his consideration. Please contact Governor Jack Markell (D) TODAY and urge him to support this crucial piece of legislation. Contact information can be found here.
ILLINOIS: Anti-Gun Groups Launch Campaign Against Important Gun Reform Anti-gun groups are mounting a campaign urging the Governor to veto HB182. This important pro-gun reform bill, would simply change the "Unlawful Use of Weapons (UUW)" law, adding "dwelling" and "dwelling of another" where a person has been invited with permission to possess a firearm, to the list of exemptions in which a law-abiding citizen is currently restricted from carrying a firearm. Please contact Governor Quinn TODAY and respectfully urge him to sign this critical reform. To contact the Governor, please call 312-814-2121 or click here to send email.
LOUISIANA: Bill Aiding Visually Impaired Hunters Heads to Governor's Desk! House Bill 39 is en route to the desk of Governor Bobby Jindal (R) for his consideration. HB39 would authorize the use of laser scopes by visually impaired hunters. Please contact the Governor TODAY and respectfully urge him to sign HB39 into law. Please click here to email Governor Jindal.
NEBRASKA: Proposal Requiring Fingerprinting for Firearm Sales Put on Hold for Three Weeks At Tuesday afternoon's Omaha City Council hearing, the proposed ordinance to require fingerprinting for all gun sales to "secondhand stores" was tabled for three weeks to allow for further review. This ordinance, if passed, would require gun stores to fingerprint anyone who sells a firearm to the store. It is important that you use this time to contact the City Council and urge them to oppose this proposal. Please contact the members of the City Council and respectfully voice your opposition to this measure. Contact information can be found here.
NEVADA: Nevada Will No Longer Recognize Utah and Florida Right-to-Carry Permits Effective, July 1, Nevada will no longer recognize Right-to-Carry permits from Utah or Florida. They have, however, added Ohio and West Virginia as recognized states. Each May, the Nevada Department of Public Safety conducts an audit of states and their Right-to-Carry laws for the purpose of determining which states it will recognize. The Nevada DPS dropped Utah because it does not have a live fire requirement, which is a part of Nevada's training requirements. Florida will no longer be recognized because its permits are now valid for seven years instead of five. The Nevada DPS and the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs will be hosting their annual Right-to-Carry forum in Carson City in August with a teleconference feed to Las Vegas. We encourage all members to attend this informational meeting. Details will be forthcoming. Please continue checking your email and www.NRAILA.org for updates.
NEW YORK: Another Micro-Stamping Bill Introduced in New York State Senate As reported last week, State Senator Eric Schneiderman (D-31) has introduced a new micro-stamping bill, Senate Bill 6005. This new bill contains language that would remove the requirement that in-state manufacturers may only produce micro-stamp equipped semi-automatic handguns. Though this narrow amendment may address one problem for New York manufacturers, there are still numerous reasons for gun makers and gun owners to strongly oppose this bill. We will keep you updated as to any movement in the Senate. Please continue checking your email and www.NRAILA.org for updates.
New York State Senate May Consider Numerous Anti-Gun Bills! While last day of session was set for Monday, June 22, the Senate returned to Albany to act on unfinished business. Law-abiding gun owners, hunters and sportsmen should stay tuned, as numerous anti-gun measures were pending action when the Senate leadership battle commenced and they could be taken up at any time. To learn more about these bills, please click here.
NORTH CAROLINA: Three Pro-Gun Bills Awaiting Action As we reported last week, Senate Bill 928, North Carolina's "Castle Doctrine" bill, is currently stalled in the House Judiciary I Committee. House Bill 473, which would allow magistrates with a Right-to-Carry permit to carry concealed firearms into courthouses while on official business, is awaiting consideration in the House. Finally, House Bill 1132, legislation dealing with Right-to-Carry permit renewals, passed the Senate on Wednesday and the bill now returns to the House for concurrence. To learn more about these bills and how to take action in support of them, please click here.
Bill to Regulate Dog Owners and Breeders Scheduled to be Heard by Senate Finance Committee! The Senate Finance Committee will hear Senate Bill 460 on Tuesday, June 30 at 1:00 P.M. in room 544 of the Legislative Office Building. This is yet another bill actively supported by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), and intended to put dog breeders and kennel owners out of business. Please take a moment and contact the members of the Senate Finance Committee TODAY, to voice your opposition to S 460. Contact information for the committee members can be found here. A strong showing by NRA members and concerned dog owners is important for this hearing, so if you can, please plan to go to Raleigh to attend the meeting of the Senate Finance Committee. If you are unsure about how to get to Room 544, please inquire at the Welcome Desk in the main building at 16 West Jones Street.
TENNESSEE: Localities Already Opting-Out of Park Carry Law! As anticipated, Tennessee counties and municipalities have started to opt-out of the park carry law passed by the Tennessee General Assembly during the 2009 session. Please contact your local officials and respectfully ask them not to create a confusing patchwork of laws that will close off local parks to law-abiding permit holders, who simply wish to be able to protect themselves and their families. If you have any information on Tennessee counties and municipalities taking steps to opt-out of this important self-defense law, please contact the NRA-ILA's State and Local Affairs Division. Contact information can be found here.
WISCONSIN: Youth Hunting Bill Heading to Governor's Desk for Consideration! On Thursday, June 18, the General Assembly passed Senate Bill 167 by a voice vote. SB167 now heads to the desk of Governor Jim Doyle (D) for his consideration. SB167 would establish a mentored hunting program in the Badger State. Please contact Governor Doyle at 608-266-1212 and urge him to sign this important piece of legislation. Also, please contact your State Legislators and thank them for passing SB167. You can find your legislators contact information by clicking here.
TO VISIT THE AKC'S LEGISLATIVE TRACKING SITE FOR ALL FEDERAL & STATE BILLS, CLICK HERE ! We're told that it is updated automatically daily.
If you have anything that you would like to expand on, regarding any state or federal bills, send it to us and we'll make sure it is reported !
FEDERAL
Internet providers who charge customers by how much they use would have to justify their prices to federal regulators under a bill introduced last week.
Do you think federal regulators should review Internet pricing plans?
What do you think? Tell President Obama where you stand on the issue. Click HERE.
"When freedom is a memory And justice is outlawed,
the Just then must become outlaws"
ALABAMA
Autauga County - (6/18/09) - An Autauga County man whose miniature horse was mauled by three pit bulls in February is applauding the Autauga County Commission's move to strengthen its vicious animal ordinance. But, according to James Wilson, the new law doesn't go far enough. "We're in a lot better shape than where we were," he said. "But we wanted any dog that attacks an animal to have to be quarantined, just like when they attack a person. I think that needs to be done in the long run." The County Commission unanimously passed the ordinance during its Tuesday night meeting. The new ordinance gives the county's animal control officer more leeway in investigating vicious or nuisance animals. It's valid only in the unincorporated portions of the county.
Bay Minette - (6/15/09) - A $20,000 grant from Maddie's Fund Pet Rescue Foundation will allow the Bay Minette Police Department to implement a new spay and neuter program for lost, stray, homeless or abandoned dogs and cats in the city. Police Chief Michael Rowland said the money will also be used to buy equipment and provide training for the department's animal control officer, Gina Ramer. Rowland said instituting a spay-neuter program "dovetails" with the department's need to revamp the city's animal ordinance. "We will use part of the money to do some research and other things that need to be done on that, but also to bring our animal control ordinance in line with what other cities of our size are doing," Rowland said. In updating the ordinances, Rowland said, the city will strengthen its stance on animals raised for fighting — such as chickens and dogs — and will clarify what types of farm animals, if any, will be allowed inside the city limits. "We have got to start moving away from trying to preserve a rural environment inside the city limits," Rowland said, adding that there are many horses, goats, cows and other farm animals that reside in residential neighborhoods. "Most every city that has animal control ordinances pretty much excludes those type animals from being inside the city for the hazards they present." Mayor Jamie Tillery said the review of the animal control ordinances will be done as part of an overall update of city ordinances. "All ordinances need to be reviewed regularly and updated to meet the needs of our citizens and our future growth," Tillery said in an e-mail last week. "Our animal ordinances directly involve our land-use and zoning guidelines. To make valid and reliable judgments concerning all these ordinances, it is imperative to address the city as a whole entity. We are confident that this study will yield results that will have a positive effect on public safety, future growth, citizen needs and our pets."
Fayette - (6/22/09) - The city of Fayette will ban ownership of pit bull breed dogs in the city limits, as of July 3, 2009. If you own a pit bull currently and reside in the city don’t panic. You only have to register your dog at one of two locations in the city. Registrations will be available at the Fayette City Hall, and police department until July 3rd. If caught with possession of a pit bull breed dog after the 3rd without registration you could face up to $500 in fines and six months in jail. For more information regarding the dog ban you can call the Fayette City Hall at 205-932-5367.
Heflin - (6/18/09) - Heflin councilmen got a draft copy last week of the city's proposed dog ordinance last week to review. Heflin Mayor Anna Berry said ferrets would not be included in the regulations and "pet fanciers" will probably be issued a special permit. She said all dogs will probably be required to have collars and be vaccinated. She also said she preferred the idea of dog owners being able to obtain their license through city hall rather than through a vet. "I am more in favor of a database we have control of,' she said. Councilman Curtis Turner said he would be opposed to allowing licensing through a vet because they charge such high fees. No decision was made.
Jacksonville - (6/24/09) - Residents of Jacksonville had filled the seats and were standing along the walls on Monday as the Jacksonville City Council opened the floor for discussion about a proposed draft ordinance that would limit the number of pets per household. “We’re not trying to reinvent the wheel here,” Mayor Johnny Smith said during the work session prior to the council meeting. “We did look at ordinances in other cities, which is why I’m surprised that this has caused such a commotion.” Smith said the draft ordinance was just a starting point, which he hoped would be something for the council to discuss. “The problem here is the number of dogs being kept at residences which is causing problems,” Smith said. “It’s nowhere near a done deal. The council as a whole has not even addressed this.” Councilman Mark Jones said the city should focus on the current laws rather than make new ones. “I think we do have ordinances now that we need to look at better ways of enforcing,” Jones said. “ I would hate to punish those people that are able to take care of their dogs just to get at a small few.” However, Councilman Truman Norred said the city should take some action. “We have to have something that makes our citizens take responsibility,” Norred said. During the city council meeting, the floor was opened to those who wished to make comments to the council. After the council meeting, Mayor Smith said he was pleased with the way the meeting went. “I thought it was very good,” Smith said “It was nice to see this many people come to a city council meeting and be able to share their opinions. I think the council will take those to heart and blend that in with their own ideas and try to come up with something that works for everybody.” The city council didn’t take any action on the draft ordinance. Smith said it would be discussed again at the council work session on July 6.
ARIZONA
Bisbee - (6/26/09) - A new section may be added to the county’s animal control ordinance that deals with cats at large after revisions of the county animal control ordinance were reviewed during a recent Board of Supervisors work session. Tuesday, Deputy Chief Rod Rothrock of the Sheriff’s Office discussed some of the main highlights: “align the policy to current practices, allow the animal control officers to enter property to seize an animal in distress and to provide a dog license that runs concurrent with the duration of the rabies vaccination of three years.” There also is a a new comprehensive definitions section that specifies what and who an owner is. He also emphasized that animal control is “primarily reactive and complaint driven.” The new Section 6 specifies how animal control officers will manage cats-at-large. If someone complains about a cat that crosses property lines, the owner “will be counseled and/or cited for failing to control his or her pet.” Another article under the proposed cat code states, “Injury to any person or damage to any property by an animal at large shall be the full responsibility of the animal owner or persons responsible for the animal when such damages were inflicted.” The proposed three-year county dog license will make it more convenient for dog owners to comply with the regulation since it can run in the same time frame as the rabies shots. And though the county could bring in $8,000 to $9,000 a year, revenue is not the reason for the license. It’s just to be vigilant about pets getting their rabies shots, explained Rothrock. The fees proposed are:
• Neutered dog license — $5 for one year, $7.50 for two years and $10 for three years.
• Non-neutered dogs — $10 for one year, $15 for two years and $20 for three years.
There was some discussion about veterinarians taking care of licenses when the animals come in for rabies shots. The license fee could be tagged on with the rabies and a small portion of the license fees could be shared with the vets who sell the licenses. Under definitions, the county took a state statute to define a kennel as “an enclosed, controlled area, inaccessible to other animals in which a person keeps, harbors or maintains five or more dogs under controlled conditions.” But, if the owner has all the dogs licensed, the kennel definition would not apply, according to Rothrock. “There is no desire, or ability to conduct an animal count or animal census. The ordinance provides the tools for the animal control officers to resolve problems,” said Rothrock. The ordinance will come before the supervisors for a vote at an upcoming meeting.
Holbrook - proposing a limit law of three dogs per household. There was also serious discussion about eliminating the word "dog" and setting a total limit of animals per household.
Prescott Valley - (6/21/09) - The Prescott Valley Police Department will revise a proposal to raise dog license fees in response to criticisms that came up Thursday at a work/study meeting of the Town Council. They are going to refine it," Town Manager Larry Tarkowski said after the discussion. "I don't know how long it is going to take." Tarkowski and the seven council members reviewed the request by the Police Department, which oversees animal control, to increase license fees for both altered an unaltered dogs. The existing fee schedule went into effect in 2004. While the proposed fee hikes generated debate, the council quickly dispensed with a proposal, also from the Police Department, to contract with the Yavapai Humane Society for housing lost and missing pets beginning in the 2009-10 fiscal year, which starts July 1. The Police Department brought the proposal before the council because the City of Prescott beginning July 1 will no longer provide animal shelter services to surrounding communities. The Police Department has participated in an intergovernmental agreement with the City of Prescott for an animal shelter for the past eight years.
ARKANSAS
Little Rock - (6/15/09) - Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel has joined attorneys general from 24 other states in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reinstate a federal animal cruelty law recently struck down by a federal appeals court. A friend of the court brief, filed Monday by Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum and the Humane Society of the United States, asks the nation’s highest court to overturn a 2008 ruling by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia that depictions of animal cruelty were “protected free speech” and that preventing animal cruelty was “not a compelling state interest.” That ruling struck down the 1999 federal Depiction of Animal Cruelty Act which banned the commercial sale of videos depicting extreme and illegal acts of animal cruelty. The attorneys general argue that animal cruelty is often closely associated with other serious crimes such as gang activity, drug dealing and violent felonies.
Little Rock - (6/15/09) - Free-roaming cats would have to be sterilized and microchipped to continue their wandering, under an ordinance Little Rock directors are scheduled to vote on Tuesday. The capital city wants to update various animal laws, increasing the fee for keeping a "dangerous" dog from $100 to $150 and adding a section on how to deal with dangerous cats. The idea of an attack cat has city directors laughing, but they realize that Little Rock's animalcontrol officers have no authority to rein in angry felines that bite or attack at random. Under the proposed ordinance, the city would have the authority to declare a cat "dangerous" if it attacks a person unprovoked. An owner of such a cat would have to pay $25 for a permit, and the cat would be required to stay indoors. The same ordinance sets minimum standards of care for a cat, such as providing clean water and enough food to keep it healthy. Owners could be ticketed for not providing cats access to "a structurally sound, moisture-proof and windproof shelter." But what has the attention of most cat owners is the city's desire to microchip and sterilize roaming cats. Initially the requirement would have applied to feral cats that live in the wild and aren't owned by anyone. After listening to speakers at public hearings, city officials decided it would be impossible to hold anyone accountable for the wild cats. The proposed law that city directors are to vote on Tuesday would apply only to pet cats that are let outside. Cats that stay indoors and never go outside aren't covered. Cities across the country have passed or considered similar laws to help reduce cat populations. A handful of cities require all cats and dogs to be sterilized or microchipped. Last year, Crossett in Ashley County passed its law requiring all cats and dogs to be microchipped. "Everything will be complaintbased."
CALIFORNIA
AB1437 - AB1437 hearing postponed to July 8th. AB 1437 will prohibit the sale of eggs in California for human consumption that do not meet the animal welfare standards of Proposition 2 by January 1, 2015.
LosAngeles - (6/2/09)- A day after it nearly went down in flames, Senate Bill 250 (also known as the Pet Responsibility Act) has been approved by the California state Senate on a 21-16 vote. The bill, introduced by state Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez(D-Shafter), would require adult dogs in California to be spayed or neutered. Free-roaming cats would also be required to be spayed or neutered, although the bill doesn't apply to cats kept strictly indoors. Owners who wished to keep an unaltered dog would have to obtain a permit to do so. (In a last-minute alteration to the bill, Florez amended its language to exempt working dogs and hunting dogs.) The bill first went to the state Senate for a vote yesterday, where it failed 16-15. Judie Mancuso, an animal activist who supports the bill, told the Bakersfield Californianthat it failed to pass yesterday's vote because many state senators were absent. Florez then issued a request for reconsideration, paving the way for the bill's passage today. It must also pass in the Assembly before it can be enacted. UPDATE: (6/23/09) - AKC ALERT ! - Senate Bill 250 has been referred to the Assembly Business and Professions Committee and will be heard next Tuesday, June 30th. It is vital that concerned fanciers, dog owners, breeders, and clubs immediately notify the committee members of their ongoing opposition to the measure. We are still awaiting the amendments that Senator Florez promised as the bill left the Senate. The amendments are expected to address exemptions for working dogs or those involved in hunting activities. A second amendment will require sterilization the 2nd time a dog is at-large, rather than the first. Until we see the text of these amendments, we cannot know their impact. Click here for additional article.
Sacramento - (6/2/09)- The puppy mill bill (otherwise known as Assembly Bill 241, The Responsible Breeder Act of 2009, by Assemblyman Pedro Nava) requires a definition: ”Puppy mills are large-scale breeding facilities that mass-produce puppies for sale. Puppy mills commonly house animals in overcrowded, filthy, and inhumane conditions with inadequate shelter and care,” the bill’s web site says. This bill would limit the number of “intact” cats or dogs a seller can maintain to 50. (Supporters say it won’t impact animal shelters, research facilities, pet stores, veterinarians, groomers or boarding facilities.) - similar legislation limiting the number of dogs in puppy mills was passed last year in Louisiana and Virginia.
Sacramento - (6/24/09) - California dairy and ranch operators would be prohibited from "tail docking" cattle, except in emergencies, if a bill that passed its first Assembly review Tuesday becomes law. The solid parts of cows' tails are sometimes cut off, especially at dairies, with the intention of reducing disease and increasing milk quality. But advocates, led by the Humane Society argued Tuesday that there is no scientific justification for this practice, and veterinarians' representatives agreed. Senate Bill 135, however, was approved only after Sen. Dean Florez, D-Shafter, the author, agreed to an amendment that partially addressed the concern of farm groups about emergencies. Initially at the committee, the bill would have allowed a veterinarian to dock a cow's tail to save the animal's life or relieve pain. But Conover and representatives of the Farm Bureau and other groups argued that sometimes it takes hours or days for a veterinarian to reach a farm, causing extended pain or risk for a cow. Instead, the farm groups pushed to give dairy and ranch operators the authority to dock the tail in such emergencies, and Florez agreed. "You can do the procedure," Florez said, but he called for notice to state agricultural officials. "Just let us know 30 days hence that you did it." Farm lobbyists balked at the notice requirement, saying that it could lead to fees to cover any related costs, but the bill was approved with that provision. SB 135 passed the Assembly Committee on Public Safety and next goes to the Assembly Agriculture Committee.
Solvang - (6/15/09)- The Solvang City Council voted unanimously to hold off signing a letter from the Santa Barbara County mayors opposing a proposed mandatory spay and neutering ordinance. Before taking a stand, council members decided they want to see the draft ordinance that is presented to the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. The letter outlines concerns about additional costs to contracted cities within the county to hire four to seven staff members for a “Calgary Model” type program. City officials say the program would implement ineffective and unpopular financial burdens on taxpayers.
COLORADO
Fort Collins - (6/23/09) - A publishing error forced the Larimer County commissioners on Monday to postpone taking action on proposed revisions to the county's animal-control ordinance. The changes, including a new section that prohibits chaining a dog for an unreasonable length of time, were not correctly shown in a legal noticed as printed in the Coloradoan. Changes are marked with lines through deleted wording and underlining of new wording. Without correct public notice, the county attorney's office recommended reading the changes into the record, republishing the notice and scheduling another hearing. The tethering regulations are not intended to be a ban on chaining a dog, said Capt. Bill Porter, director of animal control with the Larimer Humane Society. Porter said the main reason for wanting the regulation is to encourage pet owners to be responsible in how they treat their animals. The tethering regulations include a requirement that a chain be a least 10 feet long and that the dog have access to food, water and shelter. The ordinance leaves deciding the amount of time a dog may be chained to the discretion of an animal-control officer based on conditions. County Commissioner Steve Johnson said he was concerned about producing a law that many people would have difficulty living with but added the county has a responsibility for "protecting our citizens from dogs that are made into dangerous animals by the way they are treated and confined." The Larimer County commissioners are scheduled to have a second reading of amendments to the county's animal-control ordinance at its July 20 meeting. For information on the ordinance, visit www.larimer.org.
SnowMass Village - (6/17/09) - Following passionate arguments from supporters of the Krabloonik sled dog operation and detractors who think the dogs are living inhumanely, Snowmass Village Town Council on Monday declined to take action on a pair of ordinances a dog advocacy group brought forward addressing the tethering and spaying and neutering of the dogs.
CONNECTICUT
Darien - (6/22/09) - The dog leash ordinance proposal may have been pulled from the Representative Town Meeting’s agenda in this spring, but the debate on the merits of a leash law continues. The RTM recently held a meeting to discuss the future of a potential ordinance. Chip Stahl, the town’s animal control officer, spoke to attendees about the need for some kind of leash law in town. The Parks & Recreation Commission created a subcommittee to study if and when dogs should have some kind of off-leash time in parks. The RTM plans to revisit the issue in September.
Rocky Hill - (6/2/09)- Dog licenses are now available from the town clerk's office. The fee is $8 for spayed or neutered dogs and $19 for dogs that have not been spayed or neutered.
All dogs six months or older must be licensed and wear a collar and tag at all times. All dogs must also be vaccinated against rabies. When a spayed or neutered dog is licensed for the first time, a certificate from a veterinarian must be presented. Dogs without tags will be presumed unlicensed and are not protected by law. The deadline is June 30; late fees will be applied after that date. Licenses can be picked up in the town clerk's office or by mailing a check and self-addressed, stamped envelope to Town Clerk, 761 Old Main St., Rocky Hill, CT 06067. For information, call 860-258-7709
Sheldon - (6/24/09) - The proposed dog ordinance before the Board of Aldermen is needed and should go even further than it does, two residents told the aldermen Tuesday at a public hearing. The board's Public Health and Safety Committee for months worked on creating an ordinance to address vicious dogs, especially those who attack and kill other animals. The ordinance was prompted in part by the death of a city resident's pug last September at the hands of two pit bulls. The committee presented to the board an ordinance that calls for the creation of a panel of three, including the chief of police, a veterinarian and an animal behaviorist, who would be charged with reviewing any dog the city's animal control officer deems vicious. That way any owner of a pet determined to be vicious would have an outlet for an appeal. The ordinance includes fines of $250 for the owners of vicious dogs and gives the animal control officer the power to order a vicious dog euthanized. The aldermen could vote to approve the ordinance at its July 9 meeting.
D.C.
Washington - (6/25/09) - Today, the House Agriculture Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities and Risk Management held its second hearing in as many days to review implementation of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (FCEA), commonly known as the Farm Bill. Congressman Leonard Boswell of Iowa is Chairman of the Subcommittee. "We had good discussion today on the status of many vital programs to our farmers and ranchers safety net," said Chairman Boswell.
"USDA is working hard to ensure our county Farm Service Agency offices are up to speed on programs such as Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE). Written testimony provided by witnesses for both hearings are available on the Committee website: http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/index.html A full transcript of the hearing will be posted on the Committee website at a later date.
FLORIDA
Dundee - (6/25/09) - Pet owners may want to think twice about letting their dogs loose in Dundee's Lake Marie Park as town officials are taking steps to make residents aware of local leash laws. Resident Ron Hall brought the matter to the town council's attention during Tuesday's meeting. Hall is concerned about the number of dog fights he's witnessed at the park and is unhappy about the "dog poop issue." "We have a dog leash law but we are not to the point of enforcing it," Hall said, suggesting the town put up a sign reminding residents of the ordinance. Councilman Bob Kampsen said stray cats are also a nuisance and not only "spray" houses and cars with urine but also make excessive noise. "If we are going to pick on dogs, we need to pick on cats," Kampsen said.
Hallendale Beach - (6/21/09) - a law passed Wednesday targets puppy stores, requiring cages to be clean with enough space to allow the animal to turn around. It also prohibits animals in pet stores from being left unattended for more than 12 hours; prohibits sick, injured or unweaned animals from being sold or exhibited; and requires exercise for confined animals.
Palm Beach County - (6/1/09) - Palm Beach County next month plans to tighten the leash on "dangerous dogs." The County Commission Tuesday agreed to hold a public hearing July 21 to consider a proposed rule change making it easier for the county to label an animal a "dangerous dog," which prompts tougher safety requirements for owners. Current rules allow a dog to be labeled dangerous after it attacks a person or kills or seriously injures more than one domestic animal. The new rule would label a dog "dangerous" after one attack on another dog or other domestic animal. UPDATE: (6/17/09) - Florida HB 189 / SB 922, which would have eliminated the statewide prohibition on breed-specific legislation, has been ``indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration'' according to the Florida House website. That means Boca Raton and Palm Beach County, at this point, aren't yet able to pass local laws prohibiting and/or otherwise regulating dogs by a specific breed. Translated: Pitbulls and Rotweillers are still permitted in Boca Raton and Palm Beach County. However, the county is proceeding with a July 21 hearing that will discuss to an amenment to the Animal Care and Control Ordinance ``to strengthen provisions pertaining to dangerous and vicious dogs.'' The county just can't, at this point, do so by virtue of a dog's beed.
Sebring - (6/15/09) - Highlands County Animal Control is now caring for an unusually high number of livestock and household pets other than dogs and cats. By coincidence, the Highlands County commissioners will vote Tuesday on proposed new rules for the sale or donation of livestock and other animals, not including dogs and cats, that are picked up by Animal Control and not claimed by the owner. The proposed ordinance clearly spells out the rules for selling livestock picked up by Animal Control officers and, if the unclaimed animal can't be sold, how it can be donated to a non-profit organization. Daryl Scott, director of Animal Control said Friday that the number of livestock and pets other than dogs and cats picked up by his officers varies widely, from zero in certain weeks to dozens in other weeks. Right now, Animal Control is holding enough livestock to start a small farm, and have a fairly well stock live-animal show to boot. "We went for a while and didn't have any large livestock, and then all of a sudden, out of the blue, we got a cow," Scott said. "Then, we got horses, and then we picked up two goats from one place and three goats from another place. "Then," Scott continued, we had a grow-house bust just the other day, and we got four more horses from that place, plus 35 pigeons, some chickens and four Muscovy ducks. "We also picked up a goose from another situation, a rabbit from another call, and we've picked up a bird cage with a parakeet in it." Also within the past week, Scott said, "we had to pick up an aquarium, which has some fish in it." "Some (animals picked up) were seizures for neglect, some were from grow-house raids, and some were from evictions," Scott added. "And in some cases, the animals came here just because they were abandoned." Several years ago, the commissioners passed an ordinance, recommended by then-county administrator Carl Cool, which allowed Animal Control to "dispose of these (unclaimed) animals by any means necessary, be it auction, donation or adoption." The proposed ordinance would require three things. First, Animal Control would have to make efforts, including newspaper advertisements, to find the owner and notify him or her that their animal is being held by the county. Second, if no owner comes forward, Animal Control would have to advertise sale of the animal by auction and then conduct the sale. Third, if no bids were received at the sale, Animal Control could then donate the unclaimed animal to a non-profit group. All money raised from the sale of unclaimed animals would have to be reported to the Highlands County Clerk of Court's office and be used to pay off the expenses, including feed, which Animal Control spent for taking care of the animal before the sale. If the sale brings in more money than Animal Control's cost for caring for the animal, the proposed ordinance orders that the extra money goes back into the fund for Animal Control operations. Scott said he supports the proposed ordinance. "The bottom line with this ordinance," he said, "is that it's going to lay out, once and for all and in a clear and forthright manner, the proper way of getting rid of these (non dog or cat) animals."
Southwest Ranches - (6/21/09) - on Thursday made it a crime to tether a dog for more than 16 hours or in extreme weather. Nikki's Law, named for a Doberman chained to a tree as a puppy, makes it illegal to tether dogs that are sick, injured or younger than six months. Nikki's Law says: Dogs can't be tethered in bad weather or longer than 16 hours a day. They must have access to food, water, shelter and dry ground. They can't be tethered if they are sick, injured or younger than six months. The tether must be five times the length of the dog's body; connected to a buckle-type collar or harness not less than 1 inch wide; and attached in a way that avoids injury or strangulation. It cannot be excessively heavy. Violators can face up to 60 days in jail and fines up to $5,000 per violation.
Wakulla - (6/23/09) - Are you interested in serving as a member on the Dangerous Dog Appeals Board? The Wakulla County Board of County Commissioners is soliciting nominees to serve on the Dangerous Dog Appeals Board. An Appeals Board consisting of five (5) members and five (5) alternate members shall be appointed by the Board of County Commissioners to review the initial classification of a dog as “dangerous” by Animal Control. The Appeals Board will hear appeals filed pursuant to section 6.010(c) of the Wakulla County Code. The Board will consist of citizens knowledgeable in the areas of animal behavior, law enforcement, and/or public health. Nominations are now being accepted. If you are a citizen with knowledge in animal behavior, law enforcement, and/or public health, and wish to serve on this Board, please e-mail your contact information to jwelch@mywakulla.com This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it by close of business on Thursday, July 2, 2009. Nominations will be gathered and forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners to appoint five (5) members and five (5) alternate members at the July 21, 2009 Board Meeting.
GEORGIA
Forsyth County - (6/2/09)- The Forsyth County commission’s decision Monday to delay proposed changes to the local animal control ordinance upset those on both sides of the divisive issue.
Supporters and opponents packed Monday night’s public hearing on whether to forbid tethering, or chaining, of dogs for more than three hours. Following the public hearing, the commission voted to postpone the matter until its first meeting in July. The motion passed 4-1 with Chairman Charles Laughinghouse opposed.
IDAHO
Fremont County - County Attorney Joette Lookabaugh presented commissioners with a draft ordinance that would ban dogs from running at large and ban pit bulls and other dogs known to be "extraordinarily dangerous" week's regular county commission meeting. The draft ordinance defines "confined' as keeping an animal in an enclosure that cannot be easily opened by any person other than the owner, or with the owner's permission, and from which the animal cannot escape. The draft also addresses "public nuisance dogs," which are defined as persistently barking, whining, howling, pooping on other people's property, running at large, and chasing people, bicycles, and vehicles. Next commission meeting: June 8, 9 AM to 5 PM at the county courthouse in St. Anthony. UPDATE (6/10) In this week's regular county commission meeting, County Attorney Joette Lookabaugh told commissioners she's rethinking her proposal to ban pit bulls. She said she has received e-mails from pit bull advocates who cite statistics showing that pit bulls are not as dangerous as other breeds.
ILLINOIS
(6/22/09) - This report is from Lisa Hill, Illinois Capital K.C., forwarded with her permission. (Thanks to Lisa for the report !) Notes on Today's Task Force Meeting
Date: Monday, June 22, 2009, 9:03 PM
First of all.....a big thank you to everyone who turned out for today's Task Force meeting and especially to Jo and Thelma Barrington for the I Breed, I Rescue tags. There were about 35 people in the audience. 'll try to give you a brief summary of the proceedings:
Following introductions of the Task Force members, Senator Kotowski briefly addressed the audience stating it was his intent and hope that we could come to some mutually agreeable changes to the Current Illinois Animal Welfare Act/Humane Care for Animals Act that would give the Department of Ag more resources to end "puppy mills" (his words not mine) in Illinois.
The Task Force began by going through the definitions outlined on section(225 ILCS 605/2)
The Pet Shop representative was unable to attend so the definition of a Pet shop operator was skipped. When the definition of Kennel Operator was read, there was much discussion. Jordan Matyas (HSUS) stated that they would like to see a cap of 30 animals. This led to a lengthy discussion in which the opponents emphatically stated it was care and welfare not numbers that the Task Force should be focusing on. Mary Jo Trimble (Sporting Dogs) spoke about how sporting dogs would run packs of 20+ animals and apply various criteria in order to select a few animals that would be used for breeding. Michele Kasten read from the ASPCA's position statement emphasizing care not numbers. Much discussion took place and Senator Kotowski said that we were not going to discuss numbers any further and to move on.
Cori Menkin (ASPCA) stated that they would like to see a definition of a commercial dog breeder.
Erika Walsh (rescue) stated that she would define a commercial breeder as anyone that sold 1 puppy to a broker or a pet store.
Senator Kotowski asked the opponents if they would define a commercial breeder. All said they had looked at other states for a definition, but at this point had found nothing that adequately defined a commercial breeder. The Department of Ag Chairman asked that everyone think about a definition for a "commercial breeder" and to be prepared to discuss at the next meeting.
There was no discussion regarding "Cattery operator" as they are not included in the scope of the Task Force.
Discussion on the "Information of dogs and Cats for sale was tabled as the Pet Store Representative was not present.
In regards to the definition of "Foster Home" Michele Kasten (small breeder) stated she would like to see the number of foster dogs allowed per household raised from 4, because often they get a critically ill or very elderly dogs ("lifer") in that is unadoptable and those dogs permanently take a spot that is needed for incoming foster dogs.
Jordan Matyas (HSUS) stated that he would like to see distinct and separate licenses for each type of endeavor at a location. For instance a location operating a boarding kennel and rescue, would need to be licensed separately. This was met with opposition and discussion from Dr. Dullard (veterinarian) , and small breeder representatives. Cori Menkin (ASPCA) stated that it was necessary from a public information purpose for consumers to know whether they are getting a dog from a commercial breeder or a rescue organization. She stated that they have instances where commercial breeders have misrepresented themselves as rescue organizations.
Dr. Dullard (vets) stated that this was overregulation on the part of the state and that it could be taken care of under a primary and secondary disclosure scheme. Senator Althoff asked Dr. O'Keefe (DOA) if she was prepared to report on the resources or lack there of at the Dept. of Agriculture. Senator Althoff stated that we could craft the perfect law, but if the DOA didn't have the resources to enforce it, then it was a moot point.
Regarding Section 5 Application for licensure, Dr. O'Keefe passed out the current application for licensure. Members of the Task Force were asked to review the application and be ready with comments for the next meeting.
Also Senator Kotowski asked Dr. O'Keefe whether the Department of Agriculture had any written recommendations of changes they would like to see made to the Illinois Animal Welfare Act and Illinois Humane Care for Animals Act. Dr. O'Keefe said they did and she would have them for the next meeting.
Due to the early dismissal time, the Department of Ag Chair of the Task Force allowed the public to make comments. Four opponents spoke on various aspects of current and proposed law.
Meeting adjourned at 11:45 AM
Earlville - (6/24/09) - In response to recent complaints about dogs running at large, La Salle County Animal Control officer Gary Wind addressed the city council this month about the legal steps required when declaring a dog dangerous or vicious. Last month the council urged residents to formally complain about the dogs so the legal process of investigation could take place. Alderman Larry Burd, chairman of the public health and safety committee, said they would look at the ordinance and consider it at their next meeting. The ordinance places stiff restrictions on pit bull and similar breeds.
Elgin - City Councilman Robert Gilliam has pledged to "re-examine" a pit bull ban this summer. He apparently proposed a ban several years ago and was unsuccessful. Nothing has been formally proposed at this time. UPDATE: (6/26/09) - In Elgin, residents this month asked the City Council for laws banning pit bulls or at least compelling dog owners to be more responsible. "The City of Elgin is reviewing its current animal ordinances to determine if there should be stronger penalties for owners of animals involved in biting incidents or deemed a public danger or nuisance," said Sue Olafson, city spokeswoman. The City Council directed staff to review Elgin's ordinance, which requires that pets be leashed at all times when that pet is not on the owner's property. If a pet is not leashed, the owner could be fined $50, city officials said. There are provisions in Elgin's codes that would require an owner to surrender a pet if it is deemed a public danger or is suspected to have been involved in a biting incident.
Hampshire - (6/24/09) - Since at least the days of the 1950s TV series "Leave it to Beaver," the white picket fence has been a heart-warming symbol of the quiet, peaceful suburb and small town. But if that fence is found on the street side of a home, it soon may become illegal in Hampshire. The village's long debate over where "invisible" buried dog-control fences can be placed was settled when the village board met on Thursday. But that same night, this village's government began what could be an equally long debate about whether regular above-ground visible fences should be allowed in front yards. a yearlong debate about new rules for underground electronic pet fences apparently ended last week. The board voted unanimously to reaffirm its September 2008 decision that new underground fences be at least 5 feet away from the nearest sidewalk, street or alley. The old minimum was 4 feet. The underground fences, many of them sold under the brand name "Invisible Fence," work by activating an electric collar on the dog's neck when the dog gets too close to the fence line. Some board members proposed beefing up the electronic fence rules after one dog that supposedly was being controlled by an underground fence extended his head beyond the fence line and bit someone walking on the adjoining sidewalk. After that September decision, an Invisible Fence dealer and some dog owners complained that the fences' electronic field actually extends several feet farther into the yard than the fence line and that the 5-foot limit was unnecessary. The ordinance passed last week also requires a resident to obtain a building permit, with a fee of $40, before installing an underground fence so village authorities can verify it is being installed at the right place.
Highland Park - (6/26/09) - Two suburbs are considering restrictions on pit bulls. (see Elgin above) Highland Park has all but abandoned a controversial plan to ban pit bulls, but owners of the dogs may soon be on a much shorter leash. Facing the threat of costly legal challenges, officials are opting instead to strengthen existing laws for all dog breeds deemed to be vicious. The revised proposal was introduced at a packed meeting Monday with calls for fences, warning signs, mandatory liability insurance for vicious dogs, euthanasia for repeat offenders and jail time for their owners. "If an owner violates a restriction that has been imposed on him, we'd be able to prosecute the owner as a misdemeanor offense, which could mean up to 6 months in jail," City Atty. Steven Elrod said. "That would be a significant forceful action -- significant teeth to put into our ordinance." Highland Park Mayor Michael Belsky suggested a ban on pit bulls last month. Though the council expressed unanimous support for strengthening its existing regulations, at least one longtime resident was disappointed to see the city backing away from a pit bull ban. The proposed ordinance is expected to come back to the City Council for two public hearings in August before a final vote.
Springfield - (6/23/09) - During today's Illinois Agricultural Legislative Roundtable session, representatives from the state's major animal ag groups gave a fairly glum status report. In a nutshell: 1. Pork producers are entering 20 months of losses. 2. Milk producers are getting half the price for milk they were a year ago. 3. Beef producers saw prices tank with the economy. 4. Lastly, each of the groups are concerned about attacks from animal welfare groups. Mark Gebhards, Illinois Farm Bureau executive director, says the Illinois ag community was lucky to have recently faced down so many animal welfare bills, namely the banning of tail docking and gestation crates. "I think we've been extremely lucky that things turned out as well as they did," he adds. However, Gebhards says we haven't heard the last from the animal activists. In his opinion, ag has been "playing not to lose." This type of strategy almost always leads to a loss, he notes. "If we're not being proactive, we're not going to win the game," Gebhards concludes. I agree with Gebhards. We need to get out there and champion animal ag. Because one thing was clear at today's roundtable, this issue affects all of us in ag.
INDIANA
Indianapolis - (6/20/09) - The Indiana Farm Bureau, a steadfast and influential partner in agriculture, already is establishing its own public relations advisory committee and is in talks with an advertising and public relations firm to diffuse what IFB president Don Villwock called one of the biggest issues of his career. Our world really turned upside down a few months ago, and the Humane Society of the United States became a top priority for all of us,” he said. “The good news is it’s a wake-up call for agriculture. Through this threat to our industry, we’ve learned we all have to step it up a notch.” Many Indiana farmers — not to mention the entire U.S. agricultural community — already are riled up about Proposition 2, a provision passed in California banning confinement of certain farm animals in manners that don’t allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up and fully extend their limbs, a measure that is taking hold in Ohio and several other states. TV personalities including Regis Philbin, who said he would never look at food the same way again after seeing the new documentary, Food, Inc., and Ellen DeGeneres, who encourages her viewers to sell items on eBay to raise funds for the HSUS, have been marked as further hindrances to agriculture.
Muncie - Delaware County - (6/23/09) - - Dog tax: The Muncie Delaware County Humane Society is hoping to convince the county council to take action on an ordinance that would tax dog owners $5 per dog annually. The council tabled the dog tax ordinance in an April 28 meeting. Despite efforts by the Humane Society, council members said it is unlikely that the dog tax will be taken off the table for a vote Tuesday. Under Indiana law, enacting the dog tax would allow local governments to begin licensing both cats and dogs, which the Humane Society supports. The tax is also a key component in plan to combine city and county animal control, contracting the service through the Muncie Delaware County Humane Society. - Attention dog and cat owners of Delaware County. Can you afford an additional $55 to $60 per year to pay for taxes and licensing for each of your pets? The Delaware County Council will meet at 9 a.m. today in the Delaware County Building and could vote to approve a county option dog tax. This is a $5 maximum tax on dogs only. But, if the tax is re-instated, the Muncie Delaware County Humane Society could then be allowed to collect a yearly license fee for both dogs and cats. The maximum proposed charge is $25 per unspayed animal. A yearly rabies vaccination will be required to obtain the license. That will add an additional fee for veterinary care and the cost of a rabies vaccine. The state of Indiana does not require yearly vaccinations. Additionally, as outlined in their proposed ordinance, the Humane Society can collect fees of up to $1,000 for interference with the duties of an animal shelter worker. Even more upsetting, is the right to enter your property without a search warrant. Please learn more about the proposed ordinance that may be before the commissioners soon. In the meantime, attend the meeting on the third floor of the Delaware County Building and voice your disapproval of the dog tax. If you cannot attend, call or e-mail council members. Editor's note: Indiana law as to rabies vaccines for dogs and cats can be found at www.in.gov. under 345 IAC 1-5-2. All dogs and cats three months of age and older must be vaccinated against rabies with revaccination required depending on whether a one-year or three year vaccine is used. A 1-year vaccine requires yearly boosters.
New Albany - (6/2/09)- Dogs saved from an Indiana puppy mill are now on their way to better lives thanks to the diligent efforts of local authorities, area humane organizations and The Humane Society of the United States, which is the lead animal welfare organization in this rescue mission. According to a statement from the Attorney General’s office, the operation enforces Indiana’s sales-tax-evasion laws. The case began when the Attorney General’s office received complaints that the property owners bred dogs and sold the puppies for hundreds of dollars each, but failed to collect or remit sales taxes to the State of Indiana as required by law. State investigators today served a search warrant on the Harrison County property. The puppies of these neglected, sick dogs were sold to unsuspecting consumers through newspaper ads. Puppy mills have thrived in Indiana in part due to historically lax animal cruelty laws. Recent passage of HEA 1486 will allow for increased action against inhumane puppy mills, forcing them to improve conditions and provide decent care for the animals. Today’s sales-tax-enforcement action took place under pre-existing law. A new law passed by the Legislature that takes effect July 1, House Enrolled Act. 1468, will give the state of Indiana additional enforcement authority against commercial dog-breeding operations. It requires that caged dogs be allowed out for exercise and increases the penalties for animal cruelty. Puppy producers and brokers will be required to register with the State of Indiana; and that in turn could more readily trigger sales-tax investigations.
IOWA
Des Moines - (6/26/09) - A Des Moines City Council member has come out in favor of a pit bull ban while local leaders weigh tougher regulations on breeds of dogs deemed vicious in the city code. Councilwoman Christine Hensley said the volume of complaints and concerns she's fielded about pit bulls over the years has moved her to back a ban. "They're not an appropriate breed to have in the city because there are all kinds of issues that could potentially develop," she said. If a ban is implemented, dog owners who already have pit bulls in the city should be able to keep them if they follow necessary requirements, Hensley said. Mayor Frank Cownie said recent problems with vicious dogs could necessitate additional restrictions. He's not convinced, however, that a ban is needed. "We have to look at all aspects before we flat decide what we're going to do with a specific breed," Cownie said. It's fairly common for vicious-dog owners to violate requirements for licensing, containment and liability insurance, Sgt. Scott Raudabaugh, the city's chief humane officer, said in a recent interview. Vicious-dog ordinances are in force in Polk County and a few dozen Iowa cities. Council Bluffs in 2004 put several restrictions on pit bull owners and banned any more of the breed in the city. Pit Bull Rescue Central, an organization that promotes education about pit bull-type dogs, calls breed-specific laws "ineffective, costly to residents and unfair to responsible dog owners."
Send your POLITE AND RESPECTFUL opposition to breed specific legislation to the Des Moines officials listed below. Please also include your suggestions and viable alternatives for their consideration
The next city council meeting is June 30, 2009.
Des Moines, Iowa Officials
• Mayor - T. M. Franklin Cownie
675 Harwood Drive
Des Moines, IA 50312
Home Phone: (515) 255-3644
City Hall Phone: (515) 283-4944
• Ward II - Robert L. (Bob) Mahaffey
2220 E. 32nd Street
Des Moines, IA 50317
Home Phone: (515) 266-6825
City Hall Phone: (515) 237-1624
• Ward I - Thomas D. Vlassis
5001 Lyndale Drive
Des Moines, IA 50310
Home Phone: (515) 277-7809
City Hall Phone: (515) 237-1623
• Ward IV - Brian Meyer
5417 SE 29th Street
Des Moines, IA 50320
Home Phone: (515) 255-3994
City Hall Phone: (515) 237-1626
• Ward III - Christine Hensley
753 55th Street
Des Moines, IA 50312
Home Phone: (515) 255-4716
City Hall Phone: (515) 237-1625
• At Large - Michael Kiernan
750 16th Street
Des Moines, IA 50314
City Hall Phone: (515) 237-1621
E-mail addresses for Mayor and City Council members:
mahafb@aedairy.
ColemanSeven@
dirauh@dmgov.
mjkiernan@dmgov.
City council agendas and meeting dates:
http://www.ci.
Sioux City - (6/23/09) - Today Sioux City council voted unanimously to approve an ordinance that will not allow anyone to own a pet after they've been convicted, or plead guilty to animal cruelty charges. Animal lovers say they're hoping the revamped ordinance will help cut down on animal abuse in Sioux City. Tonight's vote was the first reading of the ordinance. City council will meet again on July 6th for a second reading.
KANSAS
Tonganoxie - (6/17/09) - When Casey Allen and his family decided to move back to the town where he grew up, he didn’t think he would soon have to give up a member of his family. But after a few months in his new home in Tonganoxie, Allen was told that Princess, the 1-year-old Rottweiler he bought for his children on Thanksgiving Day, would have to leave. Since the early 1990s, the City of Tonganoxie has had a law banning Rottweilers and pit bulls because the city council found that “certain specific breeds of dog are by their nature of breeding prone to exhibit unpredictable and dangerous behavior.” But Allen and others are now asking the city council to update the ordinance. While city leaders continue to debate adopting new regulation, City Administrator Mike Yanez said there might be some practical problems with adopting an ordinance like Olathe’s. He said the city does not currently have the resources to handle a behavioral ordinance, especially during a time when the city is trying to cut back on expenses. The city council will be taking up the issue again at its next regular meeting on Monday.
KENTUCKY
Lexington - (6/2/09)- Lexington city leaders are considering a proposal that could make chaining your dog outside a crime. The Services Committee heard arguments for and against the idea Tuesday. Members of "Speak Out and Rescue" or SOAR are trying to limit the amount of time a dog spends chained in a yard to one hour a day between 3-7p.m. “When you pass strong laws you protect the dogs and you protect the public," said Pam Rogers, with the Humane Society. "It is the number one cause of dangerous dogs many of the cities in the state and they are looking at dangerous dogs issues. Louisville passed the ordinance several years ago." In spite of support from the committee members, it did not make it out of committee meeting.
LOUISIANA
HB 155 - (6/17/09) - Owners of dogs that attack people could be subject to negligent homicide charges under legislation that passed the full Senate Tuesday. House Bill 155 would allow prosecutors to pursue the charge, which means dog owners could be sentenced to up to five years in prison and fined up to $5,000. State Sen. Elbert Guillory, D-Opelousas, said the bill sends a message to dangerous dog owners across Louisiana. “We will not tolerate attacks,” he said. Senators amended HB155 to prohibit insurance companies from denying homeowner policy claims if the homeowner is found guilty of the new crime. Some policies specifically deny coverage for acts committed due to criminal conduct. State Sen. Danny Martiny, R-Kenner, said recent tragic deaths due to dog attacks have highlighted some inadequacies in the state’s criminal system.
MARYLAND
Annapolis - (6/19/09) - Gov. Martin O'Malley is asking the state's attorney general to review Maryland's animal cruelty laws. The Governor's office has received a flood of e-mails after news reports about a dog set on fire in Baltimore City.
Baltimore - (6/2/09) - American Bird Conservancy has produced a new, short film “Trap, Neuter, and Release: Bad for Cats, Disaster for Birds” that claims that a feral cat management program called trap, neuter, and release is failing to substantially reduce cat numbers and is contributing to the deaths of millions of birds each year, including endangered species. Trap, neuter, and release (TNR) programs catch feral cats, neuter them, and then release them back to colonies. In theory, these cat colonies will diminish over time through attrition, and eventually disappear. “The truth is that TNR fails to eliminate cat colonies, and instead perpetuates many of the problems these colonies create, including the predation of birds and other wildlife, risks to human and wildlife health, and public nuisance,” Steve Holmer, American Bird Conservancy’s spokesman said in a statement. “Feral and free-roaming cats kill hundreds of millions of our nation’s birds each year, putting additional pressure on the populations of many species that are in decline.” The film highlights two cases where trap and release has been used. One, at Ocean Reef, a gated, private residential community in the Florida Keys; and one at a public park in Miami. The film finds that 500 cats continue to roam the community 15 years after the program began. In Miami, the cat population grew, too. “A better solution is to trap, neuter, and remove feral cats, and then relocate them to enclosed cat sanctuaries or shelters, or, where possible, to adopt them out to safe and comfortable homes,” Holmer said.
MASSACHUSETTS
(6/16/09) - On July 14 there is a scheduled hearing on an act to prohibit the devocalization of cats and dogs in the Joint Committee on Judiciary. That hearing will decide whether the bill will live, dies, or is possibly added to the state’s animal protection laws. State Reps. Mike Rush and Jeffrey Sanchez are co-sponsors of the bill, which has more than 40 co-sponsors. Click here for Full text of HB344.
Scituate - (6/25/09) - According to state law and the bylaws of the Town of Scituate, all dogs must be licensed annually. Dog licenses for 2009 are now available in the town clerk’s office. The 2008 licenses are valid only until June 30. Fees are $15 for a male or female and $10 for a spayed or neutered dog. Proof of spaying and neutering is required at the time of licensing. State law also requires proof of a current rabies vaccination. Office hours are 9:30 a.m. to 4:45 p.m. Monday, Wednesday and Thursday; 8:30 a.m. to 7:30 pm. Tuesdays; and 8:30 to 11:45 a.m., Fridays. Notify the clerk’s office if a dog has a new owner or is deceased by calling 781-545-8743.
MICHIGAN
Saugatuck - (6/21/09) - (*Ed.note - THIS is a classic!) - City Council members want canines off Oval Beach and the surrounding city land, but will let them stay in vehicles in the parking lot. “This is not anti-dog, it’s pro-people and dogs,” said Councilman Bill Hess about rules council discussed Thursday, June 18. City Manager Kirk Harrier will draw up a proposed ordinance for council action in July. The new rules will ban dogs from the park but allow them to stay in vehicles. People who pay the entrance fee can get into the park with their dogs, but cannot let them out of the vehicle. Currently, dogs are banned from the beach, but people continue to bring their animals to the park, Harrier said, causing health and safety concerns. Beach visitors have said that the concession stand and restrooms are not technically beach area, so they have brought their dogs to eating areas and into the bathrooms. “Only an idiot takes a dog to the concession stand and restroom,” said Councilman Mark Bekken.
Warren - (6/24/09) - Thanks to Diana for the update and report ! About 7 pit bull advocates showed up at the meeting last night, Shayne brought her pit bull who is a certified therapy dog (Akiva). When the council saw all those pit bull advocates there, they took the BSL ordinance OFF the agenda right away! Pit Bull people at the meeting got together outside and exchanged contact info. They are going to make sure they go to each subsequent meeting until this issue is off the table or resolved
without BSL. Advocates talked with council members before and after the meeting, some council members even pet Akiva and loved on her. At least two council members said they were totally against BSL, but we'll have to wait and see.
Anyone interested in joining those who will continue to show a presence at
future council meetings should contact Tanya - teenie2us@yahoo.
- parrothead1624@
Here is the draft of the proposed ordinance in its entirety:
An ordinance amending chapter 7 of the code of ordinances for the city of
Warren relating to pit bulls.
Sec. 7-133. Purpose
It is the purpose and intent of the City of Warren through the adoption of this ordinance to regulate ownership of pit bulls.
Sec. 7-134. Definition of Pit Bull
For the purpose of this ordinance, a "pit bull" is defined as and includes American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, or any dog displaying the majority of physical traits of any
one or more of the above breeds, or any dog exhibiting those distinguishing characteristics which substantially conform to the standards established by the American Kennel Club or the United Kennel Club for any of the above breeds.
Sec. 7-135. Other Ordinances
An owner of a pit bull shall comply with all other ordinances in Ch. 7 of the Code of Ordinances in addition to the requirements set forth in this Article VI.
Sec. 7-136. Spay/Neuter
All owners of pit bulls in the City of Warren shall have the pit bull either spayed or neutered.
Sec. 7-137. License and vaccination
All pit bulls shall be properly licensed and vaccinated.
Sec. 7-138. On property other than owner's property
A pit bull while on any property other than the owner's property, including public property and sidewalks, shall be muzzled and attached to a leash sufficiently strong enough so that the pit bull cannot break free of the leash.
Sec. 7-139. On owner's residential property
A pit bull on an owner's residential property shall not be left alone or otherwise unattended outside of the owner's house or home if there is not a person of at least 18 years of age at the house or home to supervise the pit bull. If there is no one of at least 18 years of age to supervise the pit bull, the pit bull cannot be left outside the home, in a garage, in a dog house or other structure, but rather must be left inside the owner's
residential house or home.
Sec. 7-140. On business property
Pit bulls are prohibited on any business and/or commercial property in the City of Warren, excluding veterinary clinics and veterinary hospitals.
Sec. 7-141. Public parks
Pit bulls are prohibited in all City parks, including any City park designated as a "dog park" by the Director of Parks and Recreation.
Sec. 7-142. Confiscation
A violation of Article VI shall be grounds for the immediate confiscation and possible destruction of the pit bull. After confiscation, the procedure set forth in Section 7-143 shall apply.
Sec. 7-143. Judicial Process - Pit bull
(1) If an animal control officer or a law enforcement officer has investigated and determined that there exists probable cause to believe that there is a violation of this Article, the animal control officers, his or her immediate supervisor, the head of the local law enforcement agency, or his or her designee, shall confiscate the pit bull and then petition the 37th District Court for a hearing for the purpose of determining whether or
not the pit bull should be destroyed, the owner fined and/or restrictions be placed on continued ownership of the pit bull. "Petition" includes issuance of a citation. Whenever possible, any complaint received from a member of the public which serves as the evidentiary basis for the animal control officer or law enforcement officer to find probable cause shall be sworn to and verified by the complainant and shall be attached to the petition. The animal control officer or head of the local law enforcement agency shall notify the owner or keeper of the pit bull that a hearing will be held by the 37th District Court at which time the owner or keeper of the pit bull may present evidence as to why the pit bull should not be destroyed. The owner or keeper of the pit bull shall be served with notice of the hearing and a copy of the petition, either personally or by first-class mail with return receipt requested. The hearing shall be held promptly within no less than five (5) working days nor more than ten (10) working days after service of notice upon owner or keeper of the pit bull. The hearing shall be open to the public. The court may admit into evidence all relevant evidence, including incident reports and the affidavits of witnesses, limit the scope of discovery, and may shorten the time to produce records or witnesses. A jury shall not be available. The court may find, upon a preponderance of the
evidence, that the owner or keeper of the pit bull violated this Article and make orders authorized by Ordinance Nos. 7-145 and/or 7-146.
(2) After the hearing conducted pursuant to subsection (1) above, the owner or keeper of the pit bull shall be notified in writing of the determination and orders issued, either personally or by first-class mail postage prepaid by the Court. If the petitioner or the owner or keeper of the pit bull contests the determination, he or she may appeal the decision of the Court. If the District Court orders the destruction of the pit bull, the owner
should request a stay pending appeal otherwise the pit bull will be destroyed.
Sec. 7-144. Immediate Seizure of Vicious or Potentially Dangerous Animals
(1) If upon investigation, it is determined by the animal control officer or law enforcement officer that probable cause exists to believe the pit bull in question poses an immediate threat to public safety, then the animal
control officer or law enforcement officer may seize and impound the pit bull pending the hearings to be held pursuant to this Article. The owner or keeper of the pit bull shall be liable to the City for the costs and
expenses of keeping and impounding the pit bull, if it is later adjudicated that the pit bull was kept in violation of this Article
(2) When a pit bull has been impounded pursuant to subsection (1) above and it is not contrary to public safety, the animal control officer shall permit the pit bull to be confined at the owner's expense in a department approved kennel, or veterinary facility.
Sec. 7-145. Disposition of a pit bull
The Court may enter any of the following orders:
(1) The Court may order the pit bull be destroyed.
(2) The Court may impose conditions in addition to those in this Article, for the continued ownership of the pit bull to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.
(3) The Court may order that individual owner be prohibited from owning, possessing, controlling, or having custody of a pit bull within the city for a period of up to three years, when it is found, after proceedings conducted under Section 7-143, that ownership or possession of a pit bull by that person would create a significant threat to the public health, safety, and welfare.
Sec. 7-146. Penalties
(1) Any violation of this Article involving pit bulls shall be punished by fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00), and the Court may impose costs.
(2) The Court may also order the costs associated with impounding and caring for the pit bull to be imposed upon the owner or keeper of the animal.
(3) The Court may also order the costs associated with destroying the pit bull to be imposed upon the owner or keeper of the pit bull.
(4) All fines pursuant to this Article shall be paid to the city for the purpose of defraying the cost of the implementation of this Article.
(5) The Court may enter other orders necessary to effectuate the purpose of this Ordinance.
Sec. 7-147. Voluntary Destruction
At any point before the order of the Court, the owner or keeper of the pit bull may voluntary request that the pit bull be destroyed. The request may be made in open court or by letter that is properly notarized.
Sec. 7-148. No Conflict with Article V or Section 7-7
The provisions of this Article VI addressing pit bulls are not intended to conflict with the prohibitions against possessing vicious or potentially vicious animals, as set forth in Article V, or possessing dangerous animals,
as set forth and defined in section 7.7.
Sec. 7-149. Savings Clause
If any provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the chapter which can be given effect without
the invalid provision or application, and to this and the provisions of this chapter are severable.
MINNESOTA
Alexandria - (6/23/09) - If you have a potentially dangerous dog – or are worried about being attacked by one – perk up your ears. The city of Alexandria is biting back. At its meeting Monday night, the city council approved a second and final reading of an amended “dangerous dog” ordinance. The council took the action at the advice of the city attorney’s office and the city's legislative committee. Alexandria’s existing ordinance requires all dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs to be implanted with a microchip for identification purposes. If the dog owner doesn’t have the chip implanted, the ordinance empowers the city to have it done. The ordinance is being amended to make sure that the dog’s owner, not the city, covers the cost of the procedure. Another change would require owners of dangerous dogs to pay an annual fee of $500 to register the animal. The city approved a preliminary reading of the fee.
Eden Prairie - (6/17/09) - At its regular meeting Tuesday, the Eden Prairie City Council OK’d an update to the city’s ordinance regarding dangerous dogs to bring it in line with changes to state statute. Police Chief Rob Reynolds said those changes relate to the appeal process for the owner of a dog deemed dangerous. The changes also bring penalties in line with state statute.
MISSISSIPPI
Jackson - (6/19/09) - Animal welfare advocates protested Wednesday at the Mississippi Farm Bureau Federation headquarters over what they charge is the Farm Bureau's attempt to block legislation that would offer prosecutors a felony option for animal abuse cases. "We're not asking for the Farm Bureau to support our goals. We just want them to stop opposing them," said Tiffany Frautschi, spokeswoman for Mississippi-Fighting Animal Cruelty Together.
MISSOURI
Troy - (6/22/09) - In an unanimous vote Monday evening, the Troy Board of Aldermen passed an ordinance prohibiting the ownership of pit bulls within the City of Troy. In the ordinance, the board of aldermen 'finds that pit bull dogs are dangerous and potentially hazardous to the community because the breed possesses characteristics of aggression, strength, gameness, viciousness, predaceousness, unpredictability and savageness not possessed by other breeds of dog.' The ordinance further defines the "pit bull dog" the Staffordshire bull terrier, American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier breed and any mixed breed of do which contains an element of these breeds. Current owners of these breeds residing in Troy may be kept but must registered with the city within 60 days and outline specific measures of how the dogs must be leashed, housed and muzzled when they are outside the animal's enclosure or pen. All structures erected to house pit bull dogs must comply with Section 205.060 of the city code. Within 60 days, owners must display in a prominent place on their premises a sign using the words "Beware of Dog-Pit Bull" and a similar sign on their pen of the animal. Proof of public liability insurance in the amount of $100,000 for bodily injury or death also must be presented to the city. Owners must also provide city with photos of the dog and must microchip the animal prior to registration. Any offspring of registered dogs must be removed from the city within eight weeks of the birth of such animal.
Penalties for violation would be not less than $200 and no more than $1,000 and/or 30-day jail sentence.
MONTANA
(6/24/09) - Montana trappers are gearing up for a fight in the wake of efforts by an anti-trapping group to eliminate trapping on public land in the state. A group called Footloose Montana is working to place an issue on the ballot in 2010 that will outlaw all trapping on public land.
NEW JERSEY
Holland Township - (6/15/09) - A public curfew, false alarms and problems related to dog ownership are subjects to be discussed at Tuesday's Township Committee meeting. The municipality is updating its ordinances, said Mayor Ed Burdzy. Some, he noted, have not been reviewed in 20 years. The impacts of fees and fines associated with some ordinances have lessened considerably with the passage of time. The committee will meet on Tuesday at 7:30 p.m.(6/16/09) at the Municipal Building and conduct public hearings on the measures. A recently updated ordinance specifies that a dog must be on a leash and under the control of the owner or keeper when in public. The previous version permitted a dog to be simply under the control of the keeper. The result was that some dogs were running at large, said Mr. Burdzy, particularly in the Riegel Ridge area. They included a couple of pit bulls. The ordinance was "fine until the dog bolts from you." The Board of Health has been working on proposals targeting fecal runoff, odors, noise, breeding, the number of dogs that may be kept within a home and outdoors, and the enforcement of the regulations. The township also wants to start enforcing a requirement that people clean up after their dogs when walking them on municipal propertyThe township is attempting to find a solution to an ongoing controversy among some residents over the presence of hybrid wolf-dogs here, owned by one man.
The Board of Health is to develop recommendations for dog ordinances at its meeting tonight at 7:30 in the Municipal Building, to be forwarded to the Township Committee for its meeting on Tuesday.
Princeton Township - (6/13/09) - The owner of a dog that bites here can now expect a bigger bite out of his or her wallet as a result of such canine behavior. The township committee Monday night unanimously voted to adopt a revised dog ordinance that sets a fine of $250 for the owner of a dog that bites another dog or a human, up from $75, and $500 for subsequent offenses. Dogs that commit canine misdemeanors like running off a leash or eating a neighbor's flowers will still face a nuisance fine of $75, just as they did in the old township dog ordinance. The higher fine for biting was created as an incentive for dog owners to control their dogs better, officials said. Despite language being eliminated from the ordinance that would have allowed fines of $250 when a dog "molests or threatens" another dog, some dog lovers still objected, saying the dog ordinance overall needs to be reviewed and that many items in it are subjective, such as what constitutes a nuisance. Officials said a small-animal committee will meet in the fall to review all the township's rules and regulations regarding dogs, but that didn't satisfy everyone.
NEW MEXICO Albuquerque - (6/16/09) - The City of Albuquerque is providing a Website where residents can find out which homes have dangerous dogs. Rick DeReyes of the city's Animal Welfare Department said they wanted to give residents a heads up about dangerous animals. To make it on the list, a dog must be deemed dangerous. It must have caused serious injury to a person or animal, was caught chasing or menacing a person or animal, or has been impounded. You can find the dangerous dog list on the city's website here. NEBRASKA Grand Island - (6/25/09) - A number of recently overturned dangerous animal declarations prompted Grand Island’s Animal Advisory Board to direct a change in policy on Wednesday. It authorized animal control officers to use discretion in what bite cases result in a dog or other animal being deemed potentially dangerous. Up to now, any bite to a human or another animal that resulted in medical treatment led to a potentially dangerous dog declaration. The declaration has applied equally to pit bulls aggressively attacking neighborhood dogs, a taunted dog biting a child in the buttocks and a small dog cowering in a corner that snapped at its owner. “Discretion is needed,” advisory board member Doug Jensen said. “If it’s not a hazard to society,” it shouldn’t be declared potentially dangerous. The board used a recent appeal hearing involving a miniature pinscher as an example. Larry and Cindy Addison, 221 Arapahoe St., adopted a miniature pinscher that then cowered behind the toilet in their bathroom. As Larry Addison leaned over to pick up the dog and place it in a kennel, the startled dog bit him on the index finger. When he went to get a tetanus shot, medical officials reported the bite, and animal control officers felt compelled under city code to declare the dog potentially dangerous because medical treatment was sought. Sidney - (6/25/09) - Sidney City Council listened to a presentation by City Attorney Jordan Ball on various cat control ordinances in other Nebraska towns. The cat control issue became a focal point near the end of the North Side town hall meeting, and residents seemed unanimous in asking that the city become more restrictive on cats. According to Ball, Sidney does not require a leash on cats, does not require vaccination or licensing, does not require impoundment fees or excreta removal. In comparison to other Nebraska cities, Sidney’s cat control laws seem quite lax considering the only law for cats is on their numbers per property. Hastings is stringent with cat laws, outlawing at large animals, requiring leashes, limiting numbers, requiring vaccination and licensing, impoundment fees and excreta clean up. Of the six other communities whose laws were reviewed, there is a mash up of varying ordinances between them for the same categories. No action was taken, but Person said the issue will probably return to council, similar to the recent kenneling ordinance issue.
(6/13/09) - New York has one of the worst animal fighting laws, ranking 48th in the country. While dogfighting and cockfighting are felonies in New York, possessing animals for the purpose of fighting is only a misdemeanor, and attending an animal fight is a misdemeanor punishable by little more than a slap on the wrist. New York's lenient laws also attract spectators from other states that have more severe punishments, such as New Jersey, which has the stiffest animal cruelty laws in the country. But that may be about to change. Last week, the state Senate's Agriculture Committee unanimously passed a bill that would toughen the animal fighting laws by making it a felony to possess animals for the purpose of fighting and attend an animal fight. Still, if passed, the law will not come early enough for some offenders to do time.
NEW YORK
Hornell - (6/23/09) - Hornell officials think they might need to look at its dangerous dog laws again following an attack on two children Friday. Hornell Mayor Shawn Hogan said at Monday night’s Common Council meeting the city’s dangerous dog laws need to be enforced. “There is a tendency for a knee-jerk reaction,” Hogan said, referring to many municipalities across the country banning some breeds of dogs after attacks. “They (police) showed restraint,” Hogan said, referring to a report in the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle about police officers shooting dogs. “They have shot 87 dogs in the City of Rochester.” This is not the first time the Common Council has had to deal with dangerous dogs, Hogan said. “In 2003, the city tried to deal with the problem,” he said, adding the law passed then requires the owners of dangerous dogs to have a $100,000 liability insurance policy in place. The bill was met by stiff opposition and is not generally enforced. “They (attorneys) suggested we enforce this from now on and have it tested in the courts,” Hogan said. The city also could have a new dog census done, which will update the city’s dangerous dog roster and force many dog owners to license their animals. The last dog census was 7 years ago, the mayor added. Hogan added landowners are technically liable for a dog attack by their tenants’ dogs on their property, and suggested landlords check to see if their tenants have dangerous dogs.
NORTH CAROLINA
NC ALERT: COMMERCIAL BREEDER BILL HEARING JUNE 30th
Visit the SAOVA website - CLICK HERE - for additional talking points and to email committee members with one click.
Senator Don Davis has placed SB 460 Commercial Dog Breeders on the Finance Committee Calendar for Tuesday, June 30, 2009 at 1 PM room 544 LOB.
PLEASE ATTEND THE HEARING IF AT ALL POSSIBLE. IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND CALL THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND ASK THEM TO VOTE NO.
HSUS would have our legislators believe that ALL breeders in North Carolina need state supervision and that substandard breeding kennels are rampant throughout our state. This is NOT TRUE. Supporters claim the only reason to have 15 females is for mass producing puppies, i.e. continually breeding each female. NOT TRUE. SB460 is not based on facts or need; it is based on emotion and is part of a nationwide campaign by HSUS to pass restrictive legislation on dog breeders. This legislative campaign is about CONTROL, not about animal welfare. HSUS has a well documented history of opposing all purposeful breeding of dogs.
S695 - tethering bill was withdrawn by sponsor Sen. Linda Garrou (D, Forsyth)
Badin - (06/03) council chose to table the ordinance concerning about dangerous dogs after the last meeting to allow for clarification and to address a concern of the ordinance being vague. The next regular council meeting will be June 9 at 7 p.m.
Alamance County - (6/14/09) - Alamance County planners are considering changes to ordinances covering animals and noises that could lead to tighter restrictions and tougher fines if approved by the county commissioners. County Planning Director Jason Martin said he made draft amendments to both ordinances after asking County Manager Craig Honeycutt to consider adding stronger penalties. His proposed changes would call for a written warning for a first violation of both ordinances, and to fines ranging from $50 to $500 for subsequent violations. The current ordinances allow no more than a $50 fine or 30-day jail sentence, and are relatively toothless.
Gaston County - (6/2/09) - Gaston County is holding off on a plan to reward people for spaying and neutering their pets and penalize those who don't. The county was urged in April to adopt a differential licensing program to help reduce the overpopulation of stray dogs and cats here. The proposal came from the county's Animal Control Task Force Advisory Board and animal control administrator Reggie Horton. The plan would entice residents to sterilize their pets using the county's low-cost spay and neuter program. In return, participants would get a discount on the county fee for registering and licensing their pets, which is required by law though ignored by many residents. A pet owner with a spayed or neutered dog or cat would be charged only a licensing fee of $10 per year, or they could purchase a three-year license for $20. But a person would have to pay $35 per year for a dog or cat that was not spayed or neutered. Exemptions and other license options would exist for breeders, hunters and other special situations. The licensing fee would also increase for residents with dogs classified as "dangerous" by the county, such as those that had attacked someone. Commissioners seemed to agree with the spirit of the plan last week but were hesitant to raise any fees in light of the current economy. They passed an amendment to the animal control ordinance that keeps all animal control fees flat, at their existing levels. Assistant county attorney Sam Shames, who helped craft the differential licensing plan, expects it will be approved later this year.
Raleigh - (6/27/09) - A new dog tethering ordinance will take effect in Raleigh on Wednesday, July 1. The ordinance regulates the unattended restraint or tethering of dogs. Under the measure, a dog may not be tethered for more than three hours total in any 24-hour period. The ordinance defines tethering as a means of tying out or fastening a dog outdoors on a rope, chain or other line for restraining a dog. The term does not mean the restraint of a dog on an attended leash. Any device used to tether a dog must be at least 10-feet long and attached in a manner that prevents strangulation or other injury to the dog, or entanglement with objects, under the ordinance. A cable trolley system may be used to tether a dog for the allowed period as long as the stationary cable is at least 10-feet long and the dog can move perpendicularly at least 10-feet away from the stationary line. The line should be attached to the dog with a buckle-type collar or a body harness. The device used to tether can weigh no more than 10 percent of the animal's body weight and must allow the dog access to food and water. In addition to being a misdemeanor, a violation of the dog tethering ordinance would be subject to a civil penalty of $100 per day for each day of violation.
Zebulon - (6/23/09) - Your barking dog could get you a ticket if town commissioners approve a proposed new ordinance. The new law would allow police to write citations for civil infractions. Police Chief Tim Hayworth presented the ordinance to commissioners last week. Police currently have the authority under state law to enforce local civil ordinances, but the process is a cumbersome one that lands the accused in criminal court where their cases are often dismissed. Hayworth said adopting a local law to give police civil authority would prevent clogging the court system and it would also result in meaningful penalties for people who violate town ordinances. Among the most common civil violations Hayworth said his officers see are cars parked in fire lanes, dogs barking uncontrollably in residential neighborhoods and commercial vehicles parked in residential neighborhoods. The fines for civil penalties would range from $15 to $100 depending on the seriousness of the violation and the number of times a person has been cited for the same violation. If commissioners approve the proposal at their meeting in July, the ordinance would go into effect Aug. 1. Hayworth said his department would begin a 60-day education effort by issuing warning citations.
NORTH DAKOTA
Fargo - (6/18/09) - A nonprofit advocacy group has sued a Fargo property management business, saying the company illegally charged tenants extra fees for keeping dogs they needed for their health or therapy. The lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court by the Bismarck-based Fair Housing of the Dakotas accuses Goldmark Property Management of a "pattern of discrimination" in charging the tenants higher rents and assessing fees. The lawsuit seeks class action status on behalf of tenants dating back to June 16, 2007, and unspecified damages for what it says are a loss of housing opportunities, emotional distress and mental anguish. The lawsuit cites two cases in which it says the company charged extra fees and higher monthly rents to tenants with dogs in violation of state and federal housing laws. It says one Fargo woman, whose small dog helps alleviate her anxiety and loneliness, was charged a nonrefundable fee of $200 as well as $20 in extra monthly rent. Another woman who sought a companion dog to walk so she could relieve pain and stiffness in her joints was told she would have to pay a nonrefundable deposit of $200 as well $20 more in monthly rent and a $35 verification fee, the lawsuit said.
OHIO
Cleveland - (6/25/09) - (Avon Lake) - The loose ends were about tied up on the proposed vicious dog ordinance at the beginning of the month (See the June 4 article), but within three days of its first reading at City Council, about 350 dog owners and influential residents signed petitions prompting council to revisit the issue. Moved by testimony against breed specific legislation, council considered revising the ordinance once again, but instead decided to table the issue. City Council members are expected to make a decision after they come back from summer break on Aug. 16. Although Law Director Bill Kerner said he would consider breed neutral legislation as and review the South Euclid dog ordinance over council's break, going against state law is not something he's thrilled about. "My opinion has been that for the city to delete the pit bull from the vicious definition would be a conflict of state law," Kerner said. " I have opined that the city should not do that." Ward 3 Councilman Larry Meiners said despite the fact he's owned pets his entire life, he's never felt the need to challenge the law director's opinion.
Columbus - (6/11/09) - Activists who want to ban dog auctions in Ohio plan to take their case to the voters in 2010. Members of BanOhioDogAuctions.com plan to turn in a petition Monday to start the process of placing the state-law change on the November 2010 ballot, said organizer Mary O'Connor- Shaver. "It's definitely something the voters want to see on the ballot," O'Connor-Shaver said. "We're getting hundreds of e-mails." In the first of a two-step petition process, O'Connor-Shaver will submit more than 1,000 signatures to the Ohio attorney general's office for review. If the signatures and wording are approved, the group will have until the end of the year to gather 127,000 more signatures. "We feel very confident it can be done," O'Connor-Shaver said. The proposed law would make the auctioning or raffling of dogs a minor misdemeanor for the first offense and a fourth-degree misdemeanor for additional offenses.
Fairborn - (6/24/09) - Owning a pit bull is against the law in the city of Fairborn, and there is a zoning ordinance prohibiting the dogs and the city plans to enforce it. The ordinance was passed by city council in May 2008. However, the city manager said the city is now beginning to enforce it after it has seen an increase in the presence of pit bulls. If you live in Fairborn, it doesn’t matter what kind of pit bull a person owns, the city wants to get rid of them. City Manager Deborah McDonnell said, “The law no longer allows pit bulls in Fairborn at all. McDonnell said, pit pull owners will receive a letter from the city. It will let them know about a zoning ordinance that was passed by city council last year. The city manager said, “We are asking residents to move the dogs to other locations and find other homes for them.”
Lakewood - (6/19/09) - Councilman Tom Bullock (Ward II) then discussed with council the possibility of allowing leashed dogs in Lakewood’s parks. As it stands right now, no dogs, or any other pets or animals for that matter, are allowed in any of Lakewood’s parks. However in recent months a group of citizens have been looking into the possibility of changing this fact and allowing residence with leashed dogs to walk them in the parks. Councilman Bullock’s statement was received and referred to the Public Works committee for further discussion.
Salem - (6/22/09) - Lawmakers are considering an amendment to Ohio’s constitution that will create and enforce guidelines for proper care of livestock and poultry. A joint resolution between the Ohio Senate and House of Representatives which has the support of most major agricultural organizations in Ohio would authorize language on the ballot this November and, if passed, would create the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board, a 13-member board responsible for implementing proper guidelines. Votes could come as early as this week. Despite the overwhelming support from the agricultural industry, one group opposes the amendment — the Humane Society of the United States. “This is very much a ‘fox guarding the hen house’ situation,” said Paul Shapiro, senior director of the Humane Society of the United States’ factory farming campaign. “Because of the proposed industry-dominated board, it is poor public policy, and we believe voters should not support the amendment.” Shapiro said other states have dealt with similar matters through statues, and he regards Ohio’s attempt to amend the state constitution as unnecessary and said it contains hidden motives. “It’s essentially a hand-out to big agribusinesses,” he said. Earlier this year, representatives from the Humane Society of the United States, including CEO Wayne Pacelle, met with Ohio’s agricultural industry leaders. The HSUS representatives explained they wanted to eliminate poultry cages, veal crates and gestation stalls and that they were willing to take the issue to the ballot. Upon hearing Gov. Strickland’s support of the legislation, Pacelle issued a statement, explaining his disapproval of the legislation. Pacelle said Ohio Farm Bureau had refused to respond to the society’s initial proposal and are now implementing a “favored oversight system” into the state constitution.
Wellsville - (6/14/09) - Village residents who own or harbor pit bulls or any vicious dog will now be required to register their dogs at Village Hall. Mayor Joe Surace announced Friday those with such pets will be required to show proof of the required liability insurance of not less than $100,000 per dog. "If they don't sign up and are found with such an animal, they will be cited into Magistrate Court," Surace emphasized. By law, any dog commonly known as a pit bull is automatically defined as "vicious," and the law defines "pit bull" as any of the following: - An American pit bull terrier - A Staffordshire bull terrier - An American Staffordshire terrier - An American bulldog -Any other pure-bred or mixed-breed dog whose appearance and physical characteristics is predominately those of any of the dogs listed above or which is a combination of any of the dogs listed above. Pit bulls also fall under different rules for confinement by state law and must be confined on the owner's property by means of a locked fenced yard, a locked dog pen that has a top, or some other locked enclosure that has a top (such as a house). This law applies not only to pure-bred American Pit Bull dogs, but also to other pure bred and mixed breed dogs that have similar physical and/or behavioral characteristics, with the animal control officer responsible for making the determination whether a dog is a pit bull.
Whitehall - Councilwoman Jacquelyn Thompson presented a proposal to ban pitbull dogs in the suburb, almost exactly a year after a similar law was rejected. "I see no other alternative," Thompson said. "It's been almost a year and we're still having attacks. I just feel this city isn't safe." The councilwoman said the compromise devised last July has not worked. It requires the owners of vicious dogs, which legally includes all pitbulls, to put up a 6-foot fence, neuter or spay the animal, implant an ID microchip and buy liability insurance. UPDATE: (6/17/09) - The ordinance banning pit bulls is scheduled for introduced as draft legislation at the next meeting of council committees, set for 6:30 p.m. Tuesday, June 23, at Whitehall City Hall, 360 S. Yearling Road.
Whitehall - (6/24/09) - It appears Whitehall will have its own animal control officer in the near future, filling a position that had been vacant for three years. Whitehall Mayor John Wolfe introduced an ordinance at the Tuesday, June 23, meeting of council committees to create a new position in the service department: a hybrid code enforcement and animal control officer. Naming an animal control officer appears to be another step in the city's continuing effort to use existing laws to stem dog attacks in the city in lieu of any ban.
OREGON
(6/2/09) - Legislation that establishes tough restrictions on Oregon dog breeders cleared the Legislature on Tuesday. The bill prohibits breeders from owning more than 50 sexually intact dogs at a time, if the dogs are 2 years or older and used for breeding. Gov. Ted Kulongoski plans to sign the bill over the objections of Republicans and breeders. The bill passed the state Senate 18-10 with most Republicans opposing it. Gov. Ted Kulongoski, said he supports it.
Albany - (6/22/09) - A proposal to stick with Albany’s limit of two dogs per household has drawn only minimal public comment. The proposed ordinance allows for exemptions of up to four dogs per household.No comments concerning the proposed dog limit ordinance were posted online after a story appeared in the Democrat-Herald on June 9. Mayor Sharon Konopa said she received only one e-mail on the subject since the story ran. That person did not want to see any limits set on the number of dogs people could own.The council will take up the issue again when it meets in regular session at 7:15 p.m. Wednesday at City Hall. Konopa said she will discourage testimony from anyone living outside of Albany. In earlier regular and work sessions, a number of people from out of town voiced their opinions on what limit to set.People will be allowed to comment on Wednesday before the council votes on the ordinance.As proposed, in addition to the current two-dog limit, an exemption would be available for up to four dogs. The pet owner could not have been convicted of a dog offense and would have to pay $50, which would cover all dogs.The outlines of the proposed ordinance were suggested by a city task force.The task force also recommended that dogs in the city be required to be licensed. Dog licenses, issued by the counties, cost $15 a year for an altered animal and $25 for one that is not. UPDATE: (6/25/09) - The Albany City Council’s attempt to put a revised dog ordinance in place met a roadblock at Wednesday’s council meeting. Councilor Dick Olsen voted against holding a second reading on the proposed ordinance, which forced postponement of a final vote to the council’s next regular meeting on July 8. For a second reading at the same meeting as the first, the city charter requires that a vote be unanimous. Olsen’s was the only dissenting vote. "A variety of things haven’t been considered as far as the keeping of dogs is concerned, and I have received many letters opposed to the two-dog limit,” he said. The proposed ordinance allows two dogs per household with exemptions for up to four. Olsen said there were no provisions for families raising guide dogs, families fostering animals for humane societies, or people who pick up stray dogs and keep them while attempting to find their owners. He also wants provisions for people who have guests bringing dogs when visiting and for people who raise multiple dogs for competition. Olsen objected to a proposed $100 fee to be charged on top of any fine for a violation to go to the police department. He said any fees collected should be placed in the general fund. “We are not ready for this ordinance,” Olsen said. He urged the council to reconvene a task force charged with recommending changes to the current ordinance. Olsen also wanted to know why he was not appointed to the earlier task force convened by staff and wondered why more members of the public were not invited to sit on the panel. He also asked why the council never held a public hearing on the dog ordinance. *Ed Note: Bravo Coucilor Olsen !! *
PENNSYLVANIA
Harrisburg - (6/20/09) - A House lawmaker's anger over the Senate's failure to pass an animal-cruelty bill is threatening to hold up all law-and-order bills in the lower chamber. Rep. Thomas Caltagirone (D., Berks), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said he would not move Senate bills that cross his transom until the Senate acts on bills referred by his committee. Caltagirone blames the Senate Republican leadership for the turtle's pace of an animal-cruelty bill that he sponsored and that passed the House unanimously in March. "They are playing games with me. They're impounding my dog bill," Caltagirone said. The bill, which would bar anyone except veterinarians from performing certain surgical procedures on dogs, should have been on Gov. Rendell's desk by now, he said. The bill (H.B. 39) lingered in the Senate Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee for three months before being approved June 10. It was then referred to the Judiciary Committee, which Caltagirone contended was a further stalling tactic. Caltagirone said that for now, Senate bills referred to his committee will sit until his dog bill is unleashed from committee. "There's no reason why this shouldn't pass quickly," he said. "I want to see it on the calendar, ready for a vote."
Hereford Township - (6/2/09) - Hereford Township has passed a new zoning ordinance that limits to 50 dogs the number you may have at one time. It requires anyone with more than 4 dogs, even those who are kennels licensed by the state, to get a kennel license and submit to an annual inspection by the Zoning Officer. It further limits kennels to industrial, airport and agricultural preservation districts, prohibiting them in over half the residential area of the township. The Board of Supervisors has expressed a willingness to amend this law to make it more reasonable. A schedule of their meetings can be located at the township web site - click here to go there ! *Ed. note - Submitted by Julian Prager, Pennsylvania Federation of Dog Clubs, Inc. THANK YOU, JULIAN !! *
Pleasant Hills - (6/16/09) - Council approved an update to a 1948 dog-licensing ordinance to remove a three-month inconsistency with county regulations and to bring it into conformity with the annual licensing period that runs from Jan. 1 through Dec. 31.The borough's annual licensing period expired March 31.
RHODE ISLAND
Woonsocket - (6/15/09) - The Woonsocket Police Department has launched a campaign to persuade the City Council to impose a pit bull ordinance. Captain Kenneth Paulhus has compiled more than three years worth of reports which show pit bull terriers are responsible for more dog bites in the city than any other breed. Many of those incidents involved serious injuries that required medical or veterinary treetment. Both Pawtucket and Central Falls already have already set strict regulations for people who own pit bulls. Woonsocket officials listed below.
Leo T. Fontaine
President
l.fontaine@cox.
56 Tara Lane
(401) 769-7289
William D. Schneck, Jr.
Vice President
schneckfam@aol.
211 Cherry Hill Ave
(401) 766-8621
Suzanne J. Vadenais
svadenais@yahoo.
68 Miles Avenue
(401) 769-1214
John F. Ward, CPA
ward02985@cox.
166 Getchell Avenue
(401) 766-8743
Stella Brien
stella@brienlaw.
521 South Main Street
(401) 766-9887
Christopher Beauchamp
chrisbeauchamp@
37 Meadow Road
(401) 356-4940
Roger Jalette
E-mail not available
178 Greene Street
(401) 597-5790
City council meeting minutes and agendas can be found at:
http://www.ci.
SOUTH DAKOTA
(6/22/09) - The horse slaughter debate is about to get downright contentious, now that South Dakota radio talk show host Chase Adams has joined the fray. The farm and ranch director and host of the “Five State Live!” agriculture show on radio station KBHB has just registered a nonprofit organization, the American Horse League Inc., to do battle with animal rights activist groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Humane Society of the United Sates. “Somebody out there somewhere has got to be willing to step up to the plate and take on PETA and the HSUS and every single other group in the nation that threatens animal agriculture on a day-to-day basis,” he says. “It’s a $400 million industry, just to threaten animal agriculture.” - Current status - The efforts of the American Horse League will be focused entirely on the horse slaughter issue, which has been a hotly debated issue since the closing of the only three U.S. plants in 2007. Legislative wrangling in Washington continues while the various aspects of equine death are brought into the debate. A bill, the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2009, now is making its way through the U.S. House of Representatives. Most recently, it was referred to in the House Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security. According to the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan arm of the Library of Congress, the bill would amend the federal criminal code to impose a fine or prison term of up to three years (or both) for possessing, shipping, transporting, purchasing, selling, delivering or receiving any horse with the intent that it be slaughtered for human consumption. Adams thinks Americans are being mislead on the important points relative to horse slaughter and intends to make public information a part of the league’s mission. “Education is a huge part of it,” he says. “PETA and the HSUS basically thrive off of ignorance.” - Hitting back - But the league’s main goal is more direct in nature. He wants to “hit those groups like PETA and the Humane Society the same way they hit us. They hit us through lawsuits time and time and time again,” he says. “Somebody needs to sue them back.” He intends to build the American Horse League into an organization that can challenge PETA and the Humane Society in open court and elsewhere. “We’ll take them on in the media and the court of public opinion, in the federal district court, state court — wherever,” he says. He’s just returned from Washington and says he made some good progress on Capitol Hill. He spoke with members lawmakers from around the country to gather support for horse slaughter. “I feel that we’ve got good, strong support in Congress and pretty good in the Senate,” he says. “We’re going to work on the legislative side. Our main focus, though, will be working through the courts.” That done, he now is setting out to build grass-roots support. The American Horse League will hold its first fundraiser June 14 at the St. Onge (S.D.) Livestock Co. and then will have another June 16 at the Philip (S.D.) Livestock.
Mobridge - (6/1/09) - The Police Advisory Board will come up with a recommendation for the city council. BSL is under consideration. Please send polite, informative, and respectful correspondence to:
Chief Mike Nehls
110 1st Avenue E., Mobridge, SD 57601-2692
mike.nehls@mobridgepolice.org
The editor of the local paper seems to be shifting her position a little, too !
TENNESSEE
Clarksville - (6/24/09) - The City Council may have unleashed the hounds when it approved an ordinance allowing the Clarksville Parks and Recreation Department to ban dogs from parks of its choosing. Critics have come out in force to oppose the plan to their representatives. Something stinks, they say, and it's not the doggie "deposits." In response, the Parks and Recreation Committee will meet Thursday to discuss a possible compromise. The council approved first reading of the ordinance earlier this month, with second and final reading still to come. If approved, it would allow the Parks and Recreation Department to set rules and regulations "pertaining to animals in city public parks and other recreation areas in order to further public health, welfare and safety, and for aesthetic purposes." The Parks and Recreation Committee is scheduled to revisit the ordinance at its next meeting, 3 p.m. Thursday at City Hall, One Public Square. The ordinance did not go through the committee before being approved on first reading by the council, nor did it appear at the council's preceding non-voting session. The ordinance could again be on the agenda in some form for the City Council's next non-voting session, scheduled for 4:30 p.m. Thursday. UPDATE: (6/26/09) - Clarksville Mayor Johnny Piper today proposed delaying final reading of an ordinance that would allow the Parks and Recreation Department to ban dogs from certain parks. At today's Parks and Recreation Committee meting, Piper said the city would delay seconding reading of the ordinance for at least 60 days. In return, he asked dog advocates who attended the meeting to encourage fellow owners to do the right thing and pick up dog waste while they enjoy local parks. Progress will be reviewed after 60 days, Piper said.
Nashville - (6/16/09) - Large-scale breeders of dogs and cats would be subject to state licensing and inspection requirements for the first time under legislation approved by the House 93-3 Wednesday. Known as the "puppy mill" bill, HB386 would apply to persons keeping more than 20 unsterilized female dogs or cats. Those held by veterinarians or for hunting are exempted. The bill still awaits approval in the Senate. Supporters say they may wait until next year to push for final approval in that chamber.
TEXAS
(6/1/09) - The Texas legislative session was loaded with pet-related bills, but only a fraction made it through the process.
Gone to the Gov - HB 3004: Gives counties the authority to enforce animal shelter standards. SB 554: Enhances the crime of dogfighting. HB 205: Exempts working livestock dogs from city leash laws when property is annexed. SB 408: Allows for appeals in animal cruelty seizure cases. Suddenly died at the last minute: HB 853: Allowing judges in domestic violence cases to include pets and other companion animals in protective orders. This bill passed, seemed to be widely supported, and somehow did not make it out of conference committee before the deadline (read more about this bill). HB 1320: Expanding penalties for cockfighting. Got through the conference committee and then died (read more about how it died). HB 3180: Regulating commercial dog and cat breeders, dubbed the "puppy mill bill", died in committee. However, some of the text was added to HB 2310 as an amendment which was then removed by the conference committee in the session's final days. All of the bills below died earlier in the session: HB 435: Raising the penalty for theft of a pet made little progress, to the disappointment of those who own pets that have little monetary value. However, a bill raising penalties for stealing livestock (SB 1163) passed. From the "Do It For The Children" Department: HB 1982: An extreme and unreasonable 'vicious' dog bill. HB 925: Prohibiting minors from 'caring for' pit bull dogs. Rep. Harold Dutton (D-Houston) attempted to amend the dogfighting bill to define all 'pit bulls' as dangerous dogs but this amendment was rejected by the bill's author. HB 634: Prohibiting tethering and requiring minimum kennel sizes even for short periods of time (read more). From the Why God Created Homeowners' Associations (Even in the Sticks) Department: HB 458: Allowing dog limits in unincorporated areas. HB 2732 and HB 3380, defining barking dogs in unincorporated areas as nuisances. ... And from the Land of Unintended Consequences we give you: HB 1472, which would have given people who shoot dogs and cats who chase their livestock a defense from prosecution (read more about this bill). SB 691, which may have unintentionally classified dogs and cats as invasive species (read more about this bill). SB 1845/HB 4277, which mandated the spaying and neutering of dogs and cats, both by owners and by all releasing shelters including releases to rescue groups (read more about this bill). Austin County - Sealy - (6/25/09) - Austin County voters could have a say in whether or not the county adopts leash and registration laws when it comes to animals in unincorporated areas. Bilski said she would not be opposed to bringing the issue up to commissioners and holding an election in November, when a state constitutional amendment election is already set, that would allow voters to say whether or not they want leash and registration laws in the county when it comes to animals, like dogs.
There are no current regulations on the county books when it comes to requiring leashes or registration. For some, that’s a perk to living in the county. While the county does not have a leash law, there are some protections offered to residents living in unincorporated communities. The Local Government Code does regulate dangerous dogs, and it’s up to the sheriff’s office to enforce those codes. “I would think that those codes were being enforced,” Bilski said. “Residents have a right to protect their property and themselves. There are consequences to having leash and regulation laws. We would have to have someone designated to pick up the animal, and a place to hold the animals. I just don’t know if that’s where our commissioners and our taxpayers want us to spend our money.” Bilski said she is open to discussing the issue with commissioners.
Bryan - changes are being proposed in the City of Bryan's animal control ordinance. One of the items under the ordinance would dispose animals that have been impounded for 72 hours and limit the number of animals living at a residence to no more than any combination of four dogs and cats, that are three months of age or older.
Killeen - (6/19/09) - Residents in Killeen feel that the city should be doing more to protect its residents against dangerous dogs. Wednesday, the city met to discuss whether more regulations were needed. "The consensus was that current ordinances are sufficient," Cole said. But Cole also said the city will work to improve collaboration between Animal Control and Code Enforcement. "So when Animal Control finds a dangerous animal and sees that there is a problem with containing the animal on the property, on the owner's property, and the fence is part of the problem, they call Code Enforcement," Cole said. "Code Enforcement goes out and looks at the fence that's not in repair, that's a violation of the ordinance. Now they can either warn you, or site you."
Marlin - (6/12/09) - The issue of cats and dogs, specifically too many cats and dogs, was a major topic of discussion at Monday’s meeting of the Rosebud City Council. Based on the city council’s recommendations made last month, Rosebud City Administrator Eric Kuykendall made changes to the proposed ‘Animal Control Ordinance’ and the city council studied it again. The major changes to the ordinance were 1) the removal of the grandfather clause because of the difficulty in identifying the grandfathered animals, 2) changed the 4-animal limit to encompass any combination of cats and dogs, 3) changed the kennel fee to $100 per year, and 4) changed the annual registration fee to $6 per animal. Councilmember Isabel McBee voiced her strong opposition to the ordinance. Her primary concern was too much animal registration paperwork would be required for the city staff. And she said that the only people who would register their pets would be the responsible pet owners, who are not the stimulus for the ordinance. McBee finally stated her sentiment about the new animal ordinance: “I would like to see it just go away.” Her motion to table the new animal ordinance was approved by a unanimous vote.
Texarkana - (6/22/09) - Texarkana, Texas will consider making changes to its animal care and control ordinances, including placing a ban on chaining animals. The ordinance would outlaw residents tying dogs up for permanent confinement. City Council members will also consider tightening up laws on vaccinations, neutering, spaying and leash requirements. The council is scheduled to vote on the proposed ordinance tonight. If the ordinance passes, fines would not be levied until the fall. What we will do is have a time period where we will educate the community on all the components of the ordinance. Then there will be warnings which will be given," city spokeswoman Vicki Meldel said. UPDATE - (6/24/09) - officials announced Monday the City Council would not vote on a proposed animal control ordinance, even before an hour of public questions and criticism. “We are going to table that ordinance until next month, but we want to still discuss it because we have some issues we want to shore up, too,” Mayor Steve Mayo told citizens. The proposed ordinance places a ban on chaining dogs as a means of long-term confinement. Exceptions allow short times of constraint when the animal is supervised, such as during veterinary treatment, walking, grooming and training.
UTAH
Ogden - (6/19/09) - A pack of pit bull owners attacked proposed amendments to a city ordinance Thursday night because they claim it discriminates against their pets. More than 30 people attended a city council work session held to discuss changes to the municipality's animal control ordinance that would impose tougher requirements for pit bull owners. The council took no action on the amendments and instructed the city's legal staff to make revisions to help ensure that responsible pit bull owners with docile dogs aren't penalized. The council may vote on the ordinance July 14. Please continue sending your POLITE AND RESPECTFUL opposition to the Ogden City council at: citycouncil@
found here. UPDATE: (6/26/09) - Bob Geier is the manager of the Ogden City Animal Shelter. His comments: Ogden is not seeking to ban Pit Bulls. Rather, the city is proposing a 4-R approach:
1) Registration 2) Recognition 3) Restraint 4) Responsibility
Registration requires the full legal name of the owner matched to acceptable identification and the address and phone number of the owner and the description. A photograph of the dog is also a requirement. The dog would need current rabies vaccination, micro-chip identification, health record from a veterinarian, and written permission of the landowner to house the dog and make the needed improvements on rented property.
Recognition will require signs placed on the property where the dog is housed, indicating the presence of a Pit Bull. The dog must wear a tag identifying the dog as a Pit Bull and the dog must be implanted with a micro-chip for positive identification of the owners.
Restraint means that the dog must be kept inside the home or in an appropriate fenced area or kennel provided to restrain the dog from escaping. The dog must be on a leash when outside and the person in control of the leashed dog must be physically capable of controlling the dog.
Responsibility for the dog rests solely with the owner. They must understand the potential liability of owning a Pit Bull. The owner must immediately notify the shelter if the dog gets loose of if the dog's ownership changes. The owner would be required to have liability insurance in the amount of $50,000. The ordinance reinforces that it is illegal for minors to own Pit Bulls or to be listed as the responsible party.
Ogden is not alone in its concern over Pit Bulls. North Salt Lake City, Springville, South Jordan and Hill Air Force Base housing have legislation regarding Pit Bulls. Pit Bulls are banned in South Jordan and in on-base housing at Hill Air Force Base. Many communities across the country have taken steps to pass laws pertaining to Pit Bulls. We believe this is the proper thing to do. Ogden city is not banning Pit Bulls.
There is enough evidence that these dogs, as a breed, pose a significant risk to people of Ogden and should be regulated. Not all Pit Bulls are bad dogs. Not all Pit Bull owners are irresponsible; the disproportionate number of strays and attacks on humans and pets clearly indicates a need for rules of conduct specific to Pit Bulls.
VIRGINIA
Danville - (6/15/09) - The Danville Area Humane Society is circulating a petition calling for a city ordinance that would restrict chaining dogs outdoors.
WASHINGTON
Anacortes - (6/15/09) - A pit bull attack on a favorite town pet - a gray donkey - has the shoreside community of Anacortes fired up. And some are now calling for a ban on that dog breed in the Skagit County town after reports of more pit bull attacks on other animals and humans there.
Auburn - (6/19/09) - From now on, owners of dangerous dogs who move into the city of Auburn with the animals will have more than a day to register them. But thanks to an amendment the City Council passed Monday to the Dangerous Dog Ordinance, those owners will pay $500 a year to register their dog, a $400 increase. The amendment also lays out in detail what constitutes a proper dangerous dog enclosure. "We have eliminated the particular statement that the dangerous dogs had to be reported on the first day that people brought them to the community," said Councilmember Gene Cerino, chairman of the Municipal Services Committee, adding that the revision allows owners up to 10 days to register the dog. Owners who fail to comply with the 10-day rule could face confiscation of their dogs. Failure to secure liability insurance and failure to keep the dog in a proper enclosure or muzzled and restrained when outside of one also could result in confiscation.
Covington - (6/19/09) - The Covington City Council is considering beefing up its city laws regarding dangerous and vicious dogs. Currently the city contracts with King County Animal Control for response services when a call comes in regarding a dog attack and Covington follows the county’s rules for penalties and so on. This issue arose, explained City Manager Derek Matheson, when a resident spoke during the public comment period at the council’s April 14 meeting.
WEST VIRGINIA
Huntington - (6/23/09)- While Huntington City Council voted Monday night to provide greater enforcement to police regarding nuisance properties, it continued to waver on a dog tethering ordinance.
Morgan County - (6/25/09) - The county’s Animal Control officer and Sheriff Vince Shambaugh urged the Morgan County Commissioners to consider making an anti-tethering law, restricting residents from chaining dogs for extended periods in a fixed location and neglecting to care for the animals. Laura Klein, the county’s animal control officer, said an anti-tethering law would help reduce aggression and bites from chained animals. An ordinance against cruel chaining wouldn’t eliminate people’s ability to chain up their dogs under reasonable circumstance, said Commissioner Brenda Hutchinson, who supports an anti-tethering law. Commissioner Stacy Dugan had concerns about such a law. The commissioners agreed to support an educational campaign about cruel chaining in the community and revisit the idea of an anti-tethering law in six months after they had reviewed laws in other counties.
LEGISLATION IN
OTHER COUNTRIES OF INTEREST
AUSTRALIA
Brisbane - (6/23/09) - Some cat owners will be afforded a one-year reprieve from compulsory pet registration, after Gold Coast City Council last night became the second local authority to thumb its nose at new state laws, due to take effect in Brisbane on July 1. From next Wednesday, Brisbane cat owners will need to dish out $39 a year to register desexed cats or $78 for three years to register their feline friends. However, Gold Coast and Moreton Bay councils have chosen to waive the fees for at least 12 months, amid criticism the registration program is "impractical" and costly. Logan and Brisbane City Councils have offered a 12-month amnesty for owners of desexed cats. However owners of cats, at least three-months-old and not desexed, will face a fine of $200. Gold Coast City councillor Bob La Castra said the registration plan had been sprung on the council, which would be left with a $55,000 advertising bill to inform residents of their new responsibilities. "This was basically dumped in our laps. We don't have the IT programs in place to handle the registration," he said.
Mitcham - (6/2/09) - MITCHAM council has indefinitely delayed the introduction of strict new cat control laws amid claims from its own members it "rushed" into the decision last week. At a special meeting tonight, councillors unanimously called for a report into the impact and costs of a new regime that would ban residents from owning more than two cats and force them to microchip and register the animals. The council last week voted 7-6 in favour of introducing some of the toughest cat laws in the state, but failed to achieve the "absolute majority" of eight votes required to make them legally binding.
WA - City of Joondalup - (6/20/09) - Cat ownership in WA is under siege by local cat laws newly introduced by the Shire of Swan and soon to be implemented by the City of Joondalup. Cat owners will be penalized by fines if their cat unwittingly trespasses onto a neighbours property without their permission. The ultimate penalty is the trapping of your beloved moggy by a neighbour in a trap supplied by the shire and the impoundment and possible euthanization of your cat if you can’t locate it within 7 days. The legal trapping of cats opened up by these new local cat laws will only encourage vigilantes who hate cats to have an ‘open season’ on cats in their neighborhood. The Cat Haven, a well known Perth based cat rescue group have already reported incidences of cats caught in traps being drowned in lakes. A horrible death for any animal with no chance of escape – and astonishingly still a set of laws introduced in such poor format by local councils that policing these laws is almost impossible.
Yarra Ranges - (6/16/09) - YARRA Ranges councillors waded into the contentious issue of mandatory desexing of cats last week … but they kept to the shallows. They unanimously supported a motion that cats not previously registered would not be accepted for registration after 10 April next year unless they were desexed or exempted. Compulsory desexing was proposed as part of the shire’s Domestic Animal Management Plan adopted in October last year. Councillors Samantha Dunn and Tim Heenan launched a strong case in favour of compulsory desexing including statistics from animal protection organisations that reported 53,000 cats lodged with animal welfare centres across Australia and 35,000 being euthanased. “That’s a lot of unwanted cats and kittens out there preying on wildlife and I can see no reason why any responsible owner of a domestic moggie would not support desexing,” Cr Dunn said. Cr Heenan said there had been substantial loss of wildlife in the Dandenongs over the years. “I have no time for people who allow them to roam and if this is the way for those numbers to be controlled, I am for it,” he said. The report from the shire’s planning, building and health department said that while most of the animal welfare organisations consulted, including the Victorian Animal Aid Trust at Coldstream, supported compulsory desexing of cats, the Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) was against it. Cats will be exempted based on veterinary advice, if they belong to a registered breeder, or pet shop, or if they are registered with an approved association. The exemptions provided a balance between the opposing arguments, the report said.
CHINA
(6/19/09) - Animal abuse or harm such as the controversial dog culling in Hanzhong, Shaanxi province would be illegal under a new draft law. If passed through the country's legislative organs, it would be the first time that the concept of "animal welfare" is added to law. Experts have completed drafting the country's first animal protection law and are now in the process of revising it before its submission to government and congress authorities, said Chang Jiwen, a law professor with Chinese Academy of Social Sciences who led the drafting team. UPDATE: A draft of the country's first law on animal protection has proposed a fine of up to 6,000 yuan ($877) and two weeks detention for those found guilty of animal cruelty. "The proposal will be submitted to the State Council by the end of the year," Chang Jiwen, director of the social law research department of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, who authored the draft, told China Daily Thursday. As part of strict measures to manage and control the animal population in the country, the draft also proposes a prohibition on pet owners from breeding their animals, said Chang. The draft law further makes it compulsory for data chips to be implanted in pets to track down their owners in case the animals are found abandoned. "These rules will ensure that people who abandon their pets will be prevented from raising more animals," he said. The proposal will be posted on www.china.com.cn, a major information portal, to solicit public opinion in August, Chang said.
Guangzhou - (6/18/09) - Mrs. Chen can't imagine abandoning one of her two best friends: her scruffy terrier mutt and a white fluffy Pekingese mix with buggy eyes. But that's what the government in this southern Chinese city wants the middle-aged housewife to do when a one-dog policy takes effect in Guangzhou. Beginning July 1, each household can raise only one pooch. The regulation won't be grandfathered in, so families with two or more dogs will apparently have to decide which one gets to stay. "It's a cruel regulation. These dogs are like family. How can you keep one and get rid of the others?" said Chen, who declined to give her full name because she feared the police would track her down and seize the dogs. Such dog controls have touched off resentment among urban — mostly new middle class — Chinese in other cities. The Guangzhou measure comes as many are worrying about the economy, and there's potential for the regulation to trigger a public backlash. Police and city government officials appear to be aware of the issue's sensitivity. The Associated Press spent three weeks making calls and sending faxes to officials requesting an interview about the policy. But after the requests were passed back and forth between the police and city government, neither agreed to discuss it. The regulation appears to be part of an effort to control stray dogs in Guangzhou, once known as Canton. An hour north of Hong Kong by train, it is one of the richest cities in China and has a rapidly growing middle class that can afford to own dogs.
Shanghai - (6/21/09) - The Chinese have a supremely ambivalent relationship with dogs. They still like to eat them in winter because it is good for the blood. They also consider them to be pests and cull them on a semi-regular basis. And, recently, a growing number of newly affluent urbanites like to keep cute little puppies as pets. It means that when you see a dog, even in sophisticated Shanghai, it’s not always clear whether you’re looking at dinner, a rabid cur or man’s best friend. Although dog culls were an almost annual event in China from 1949 to 1976, and there were several reports of dog roundups in Beijing prior to last year’s Olympic Games, there hasn’t been news of a slaughter on the scale of the Shaanxi cull in nearly three years — and the flak has been heavy, by Chinese standards. The central government responded by promising to publish a draft law by the end of the summer outlining its plans to protect animals, including measures prohibiting abusing and abandoning pets. It didn’t mention whether killing dogs for food will be affected, but it is unlikely.
IRELAND
Northern Ireland - (6/22/09) - Northern Ireland council, Derry City Council have released an annual service plan for the next 12 months, which includes the recommendation of more breeds being added to their version of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 (DDA), the Dangerous Dogs (NI) Order 1991. The Dangerous Dogs (NI) Order 1991 (DDO) is very similar to the DDA in England, Wales and Scotland however has no provision for a dog that may fit “type” to be exempted, meaning any dog deemed type is automatically destroyed. The new plan claims that other breeds such as the German Shepherd, Rottweiler and Doberman Pinscher should be restricted and forced to be leashed and muzzled in public under provisions within the Order to add breeds or types not currently covered. The same provision to add new breeds or types is also included in the DDA and although Defra claim to have no plans to add breeds or types they do state it is always under review. Should the recommendation be acted on, the restrictions would bring Northern Ireland more in line with Southern Ireland which already requires the leashing and muzzling of American Pit Bull Terrier, Bull Mastiff, Doberman pinscher, English Bull Terrier, German Shepard (Alsation), Japanese Akita, Japanese Tosa, Rhodesian Ridgeback, Rottweiler, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and to every dog of the type commonly known as the Ban Dog (or Bandog) and to every other strain or cross of every breed or type of dog described. It will however retain the ban and mandatory destruction in relation to the American Pit bull Terrier, Japanese Tosa, Dogo Argentino and the Fila Brasiliero. The plan also suggests fines for straying; licensing and identification offences should be significantly increased with the income from such fines being reinvested back into dog control activities by the council.
UK
(6/16/09) - The annual British Veterinary Association, (BVA), Scottish dinner, held at the Scottish Parliament last Thursday, heard BVA President, Nicky Paull praise the introduction of the Control of Dogs (Scotland) Bill. Mrs Paull welcomed a Bill that, she said: "focuses on the animal's behaviour rather than its breed," and hoped that other UK countries would follow Scotland's lead in tackling the "spiralling problem of status dogs – or weapon dogs." Mrs Paull went on to describe the new Bill as a huge leap forward in dealing with the inadequacies of the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act. The Bill to modernise the law on out of control and dangerous dogs was lodged with the Scottish Parliament in March by Scottish National Party, (SNP) MSP Christine Grahame who heads the Cross-Party Group on Animal Welfare. Ms. Grahame took over and reintroduced the Bill after Alex Neil MSP, the member who first proposed the Bill, became Minister for Communities.
London - (6/1/09) - A report to the Metropolitan Police Authority said the Notting Hill carnival, Peckham Rye and Brockwell Park fairs could trigger more seizures. The summer events could also lead to dog violence, the report warned. The Met has now set up a unit to tackle "weapon" dogs. Last year 719 dangerous dogs were seized in London. The rise in dog seizures meant £1.3m of taxpayers' money was spent on housing 302 dogs in kennels. Analysts from the Met found a strong link between knife crime and dog fighting. Police have focused on 10 boroughs including Croydon, Newham, Hackney, Southwark, Haringey, Lambeth and Lewisham. The Met has now joined forces with the Greater London Authority and local councils to form The London Dangerous Dog Forum (LDDF) to tackle the issue.
Londonderry - (6/17/09) - The isolation of the pit-bull breed is failing to protect the public from serious attacks according to a new report by Derry City Council. A newly drafted Annual Service Plan 2009-2010 by the Council's Department of Environmental Health states current legislation fails to recognise breeds such as the Doberman Pinscher, Rottweiler, German Shepherd are equally capable of posing a risk to the public. The report says the Dangerous Dogs (NI) Order 1991 is time-consuming in its stipulation local authorities identify the pit-bull breed. It also ignores the fact that other breeds can be "very dangerous" to the public. Media interest in dog attacks was blamed for shifting public focus disproportionately onto the pit-bull with other dangerous dogs seldom getting mentioned. It said dangerous dogs legislation reflected this.