Why knowledge is power - Broward County, FL edition

Last week, Broward County Vice Mayor Barbara Sharief proposed a new bill that would make ownership of pit bulls illegal in Broward County. The law would have been opposed to the state law which prohibits breed-specific legislation so the city would have had to lobby the state to allow them to probibit pit bull ownership.

Sharief seemed very confident that the bill would be adopted, telling the Broward New Times: "It has a pretty good chance of being adopted. I'm not asking for anything unreasonable....We're absolutely going to get backlash for this, but we have more supporters than backlashers."

Well, Sharief appeared to be wrong in her assumptions.

First of all, the New Times did a nice job of posting a story with scientific data noting that "pit bulls' were actually less aggressive toward both their owners, and strangers, than many other breeds of dogs.

Then, there's the reality that her law was based on the Miami-Dade ordinance -- even though with the ban in Miami-Dade they had a significantly higher dog bite/per capita than Broward County had without a ban.

Then, in an informal poll (which isn't scientific, but is telling), 84% of a local news station's voters said they opposed a ban on specific breeds of dogs.

Then, there's the reality that there really wasn't much support for her proposal. Yesterday, with the hearing of the ordinance, there was a packed house at the Commission chambers and nearly 60 people showed up to speak at yesterday's hearing on the law, and nearly all opposed it. One councilman noted that he got more than 1000 emails opposing the law, and only 11 in favor. Opposition also included representatives from the Humane Society of Broward County.

So with the opposition, Sharief withdrew her propsal -- and noted to the New Times that she was "surprised it was met with such fierce opposition."  She now plans to assemble a group of animal experts to discuss other possibilities outside of her proposal. 

I'm not surprised at the opposition.  This same opposition is met every time something like this is brought up because the science doesn't support breed specific laws, and there is an overwelming lack of professional support for them. Again, knowledge is power. And people and legislators who support breed-specific laws tend to not have the knowledge they need to make such a decision, or have gotten information from unreliable, non expert sources. Her proposal was shown to once again ignore the science, the knowledge of professionals in her community and not have the support of the majority of people in her community.

Congrats to the folks in Broward County, and hopefull the revised proposal is something far more reliable and impactful.

Comments

[db]

Just read an article about the Grand Rapids, MI police shooting a pit bull that the teen owners sent out to attack. The comments make me wonder if we've made any progress at all. People refuse to believe the facts and hold onto these horrible myths about all pits and pit mixes. It makes me sick to my stomach!

[Joel]

The only problem is that I feel people generally vote on what they think is going to make them safe. And dogs are overwhelmingly safe. So a community without BSL is probably going to oppose BSL.

Meanwhile, a community with BSL is probably going to want to continue with it...again, because they feel safe since dogs aren't really that big of a public safety threat in the grand scheme of things no matter what sort of laws we put in.

The general population is going to want to stay with the status quo.

[Brent]

People fear change, no doubt. I also think she may have been thrown by the vote in Miami on the same topic, assuming the same situation would translate -- even though Miami is void of law-abiding pit bull owners and Broward is full of them -- this people's real pets are impacted, as well as their neighbor's pets, and people get to see the dogs in real life, not just via some news report.

And yes, in general, dogs are safe, and people don't fear dogs, so there is little reason to adjust things....

[Joel]

That's the thing; people who have dogs who would be on the BSL list are the ones who are going to get on the phones and come to the city hall meetings.

But when it comes to the vote, it's the general public (people who do not own breeds targeted by BSL) who are going to be making the difference in passing or not passing the laws. And they're not likely to change what's in place. They didn't change it in Dade County last year, and they wouldn't have changed it in Broward County even if this HAD gone to the polls.

It's good for communities without BSL. But it's troubling for communities with BSL. As stupid as most animal lovers and animal welfare people find BSL, it's not on the radar for the general public so they're not going to vote to change things without a LOT of education. Asking a community with BSL to vote it out is a big ask in my book...do we know of any communities where it's happened?

[Brent]

As far as I know Joel, Miami is the first time it's been brought to a public vote. If it's happened before it was probably more than a decade ago (before attitudes about pit bulls were changing as much). And given that BSL had existed for so long in Miami, and thus, few owners really existed there to help push for educating the public, I wasn't surprised by how the vote went -- especially when older people tend to hold on to old misconceptions more and are more likely to vote.

[Joel]

Well let's consider that the bar for what happens when it's put to a popular vote.

63% for BSL, 37% against.

[Brent]

I really doubt that's a true bar. It's also important to note that more than 1/2 of the public cast their ballots from early voting or absentee ballots -- the ones that waited until voting day (after more educational campaigns and editorials ran opposing the ban ran) voted to repeal at 41%.

Keep in mind that in Miami, pit bulls had been banned for 25 years. So not only were there almost no pit bull owners there to represent, most people there had never really even seen pit bulls out in the community -- so they had no real-life experiences to draw from. I think it's much more slanted than what the public in a non-BSL city would vote. Honestly, the fact that it was as close as it was was kind of surprising to me.

[db]

Okay, just found out that the mayor where I live is pushing for banning pits, pit mixes and "scary looking hounds" (yeah, he really said that). Where would you suggest I go for information I can get to my council members and mayor that will give him some facts (and maybe a better option)?

[Joel]

db, half of Brent's posts would probably work.

[db]

I know - but if I could get something in an easy to read, dummy proof form, that would work best. The mayor is known to grab onto something and not let go until he makes it happen.

[dodo]

How about the American Bar Association's report and resolution on breed neutral laws.

http://www.abanow.org/2012/06/2012am100/

They are less likely to brush off something like this by claiming it was written by some random biased non-expert, pro-pit bull person.

[db]

Thanks, dodo, I sent the link with a message to our mayor.

[Brent]

Yeah, I often send a variety of links to them when the topic comes up. I send them links to the followings statements on breed-specific laws:

AVMA
National Animal Control Association
American Bar Association
Association of Pet Dog Trainers
ASPCA

Sometimes I'll send others -- but generally I like them to realize that there is absolutely no professional support for breed-specific laws. None.

[Charlotte Fee]

PLEASE READ!
I spoke at the Commission hearing and was asked to participate in Sharief's 'group of animal experts' in committee to work on dog concerns. Interestingly enough, however, even though I'd emailed and phoned her chief of staff, they 'forgot' to invite some of us to the meeting. Specifically myself (30 year humane society volunteer, owner of 2 rescue dogs including a certified therapy dog), Marni Bellavia (10+ year evaluator and head of local humane society therapy dog group), Sharron Carmichle (27+ year cruelty investigator w/local humane society), Dawn Hanna (dog behaviorist), and others.

It's like pulling teeth to obtain the invitee list, attendee list, meeting minutes, or date/time/location of the next meeting.

I am told the 2nd meeting will be April 24 at 11am at Broward Commission offices. I am also told that any member of the public must be allowed to participate, because it's a public committee w/other members of the public.

So I encourage those well-spoken and concerned animal advocates to appear with any documentation to enter into the record. No posters, no picketing, just an overabundance of facts. If you can't appear, please e-mail your commissioners w/facts, expressing concern that educated citizens are being stonewalled from the meetings they were invited to (as a public show), that the vice-mayor has hand-picked people and is framing participation so that she can claim her new suggestions came out of public committee.

I am told the 1st meeting had solutions 'unanimously agreed' upon which staff (i.e., staff attorneys drafting law) are now working on. And I did see the attendee list, containing not 1 person I am aware of from the local dog community, except those against 'dangerous breeds' like pit bulls. This is very concerning, how not 1 member of the BCHS was included; conveniently 'forgotten'.

We're being stonewalled, folks. And the vice-mayor certainly intends on presenting to the commission her proposed laws against pit bulls - like those already in place in Sunrise, FL, even though the State prohibits breed discriminatory legislation -code enforcement laws apparently have a loophole, at least until they're challenged in court.

Please - spread the word. Write all the commissioners. Attend April 24. Protect our rights as responsible dog owners!