KC DOG BLOG

A rough night for BSL advocates at the polls

It was a tough night for local politicians who favored Breed Specific Legislation throughout the country yesterday.

In Whitehall, OH, Jaquelin Thompson was voted out of office on a recall vote with 75% of voters saying she should be removed from office. Thompson was responsible for not once, but twice, trying to ban pit bulls in the community of Whitehall. She was removed from office two years before her term was up.  Also in Whitehall, the only other council member who voted in favor of a ban on 'pit bulls' when it came up for a vote last year, Leslie LaCorte, was also voted out of office in favor of Van Gregg.  LaCorte got only 41% of the vote.

(Special thanks to my friends at Help Fido for their Twitter updates last night to keep me up to speed on the latest news in Whitehall).

Update:  Here's an article from the Whitehall News: Thompson Sent Packing; Voters overwhelmingly agree councilwoman needs to go.

Meanwhile in Sioux City, IA, incumbant Jim Rixner who supported the city's breed ban last fall was voted out of office. Even Rixner admits that the new dog ordinance most likely cost him the election:

"The vote was split because people were angry about dog ordinances and the Chamber's furious effort to make sure I didn't get re-elected," said Rixner, who was running for his second term on council.

Both he and Rappolt received endorsements from labor organizations, but Rixner said he believes a lot of people "plunked" for Rappolt "because they wanted to see the (vicious) dog ordinance changed."

Rixner supported passage of a stricter vicious dog law and endorsed the pit bull ban, defending both votes during the campaign."

These politicians have followed others around the country, in places like Kansas City, MO; Merriam, KS; Raytown, MO; Overland Park, KS; and Omaha, NE who have been voted out of office shortly after their irresponsible dog legislation was passed -- or, after they proposed a ban on particular breeds of dogs in their city and it did not pass.

People are becoming increasingly aware of the realitities of Breed Bans - -and that they are costly to cities, impossible to enforce, ineffective, and not based on rational decision-making. It ignores all science and the public positions of every single nationally-respected organization that has expertise in canine/human interactions.

And because of this, people are beginning to consistently vote politicians out of office who favor this irresponsible legislation.  And I've written about it before, but I do think that BSL can serve as a pretty solid litmus test for candidates.  

And hats off to the people in these communities who are taking a stand against irresponsible legislation and the politicians who support it. We can make a difference by being involved politically and getting politcians in office who are animal-friendly.

If you're not involved politically, you are no longer a victim of what politicians do to you, you're a participant.

Sioux City: "It's Just a Bad Law"

Last fall, Sioux City hurried through a process, and ignored their local experts, and passed a new law regarding dogs in their community.  Among the laws was a ban on "pit bulls", and a changed policy on how the city dealt with "dangerous" dogs -- that all dogs accused of biting would be euthanized -- with no options for transfering the dogs from the city.

The city has had it's share of problems with the laws, including getting people to sign paperwork that signed over their guilt (which is unconstitutional), the local vet community deciding not to help them with breed identification for enforcing their 'pit bull' ban, animal control targeting those who spoke out against the ordinance (another violation of the constitution), and having one of the first dogs that was declared dangerous by the city for biting someone after the ordinance was passed being alabrador belonging to a city council member who was responsible for passing the law in the first place -- a dog that was later stolen from the city shelter.

So why would I not be surprised that the city is facing even MORE problems with their ordinance.

Currently, there are six people who have filed civil suits against the city for what they say were arbitrary decisions about the dogs beign "dangerous".   So while these suits tie up the court system, the dogs remain in the shelter for sim months to up to two years at a time on doggie death row waiting for the hearings to take place.

"I think the city does have to be concerned about it because animal control's having to provide shelter for these dogs and it's just something that's going to continue until there's some kind of resolution to it," said Martha McMinn, the attorney for the owners of the dogs. "Everyone agrees you shouldn't have vicious dogs out there biting people but this is so arbitrary."

Dogs affected by the new ordinance, including those confiscated due to the ban on 'pit bulls' now take up about 1/3 of the 52 kennel spaces in the Sioux City Animal Control Shelter and the shelter is struggling with overcrowding. "We're running out of room" said Cindy Rarrat, owner of the Sioux City Shelter.

Also interesting is that of the 6 dogs waiting on doggie death row, only one is actually a 'pit bull' -- with the others being a German Shepherd Mix, a Shar Pei, a Siberian Husky and a Great Dane. So why were 'pit bulls' singled out again?  They make up only a small percentage of the dogs that are accused of biting. 

Meanwhile, the amount of money the taxpayers are now paying for court rulings, holding the dogs, etc is mounting up tremendously.

"It's just a bad law and people are waking up to a lot of that," said Dennis Cloud, the owner of one of the dogs on death row.

I couldn't agree more.

 

Weekly Roundup, Week Ending 8/9/09

It's been quite a week. Denver is considering a possible repeal of their long-standing ban on pit bulls because of the financial drain the repeated court cases are having on their city budget. Lakewood, OH has run yet another non-pit bull owner out of their community due to an inability to identify dog breeds, Omaha's first six months with breed specific legislation has proven to be a disaster...both in terms of reducing dog bites and its impact on the city budget, and Kansas City, MO has implemented some new 'performance standards" for animal control that will reward ACOs for bringing more animals into the shelter.   For the life of me I have no idea why a city would want to impose breed specific language when the evidence of its failures is everywhere and there are so many successful models that exist without breed specific language. I feel like the tide is turning...we'll see. 

On to the rest of the week's stories -- and there are a lot of odd ones for sure:

Cities and Laws

The saga in Sioux City, IA took yet another interesting turn this week. For the past 9 months or so, Sioux City, IA has undergone a series of embarrassments coming out of their ban on 'pit bulls' -- the latest being when councilman Aaron Rochester -- who was the leader in getting the ban passed -- let his Labrador get free and it attacked a passing jogger. The dog was declared vicious by the courts and sentenced to be killed -- but this week, Rochester's dog, Jake, was freed from the kennel when someone cut the lock off a chain link fence and rescued Jake.  Rochester's comments seem very odd, including noting that he isn't upset by his dog being stolen, he's 'surprised' but thought something like this could happen and claims to have no clue as to who could be responsible, even though some people have apparently said to him that they might do it. Nearly a year later, the fols in Sioux City are STILL discussing changes to their dog ordinance, and the saga continues to get weirder. Yes Biscuit! has a great writeup on this as well this week.

Mount Clemens, MI passed a ban on pit bulls this week, in spite of about 35 people coming out to testify against the ordinance and only a couple that spoke in favor.  Their ordinance allows people to keep their existing "pit bulls" with restrictions, but that the restrictions could be avoided if the dog is certified through the AKC's Canine Good Citizen program. This is similar to what Omaha did with their ordinance which essentially requires responsible owners -- who were never a problem in the first place -- to jump through a series of hoops in order to keep their dogs and takes the focus away from the owners that are irresponsible in the first place. Omaha's law has not been successful, but I guess Mount Clemens thought they should try it anyway.

Pine Bluff, AR officials are meeting trying to seek additional penalties for repeat offenders of their vicious dog ordinance. In 2006, Pine Bluffs enacted a breed specific ordinance that required owners of 'pit bulls' to have signs, an insurance policy, and a special registry for their dogs, however, the city continues to have problems with a small group of repeate offenders.  Most cities have a small group of dog owners that creat the majority of the dog bite problems in a their community, and yet instead of focusing on these owners, they make a more broad-sweeping law that creates hurdles for good dog owners to have to jump through....which just doesn't make sense.

Elyria, OH is considering a new dangerous dog law with breed specific language.

Denmark is now considering nationwide BSL -- hopefully they'll look at the failures of their UK neighbors (see below) and realize why this is such a bad idea.

Rock Hill, NC is putting in strong restrictions on how dog owners can keep their dogs with the hope of ending the mistreatment of dogs in their community after 13 dogs were found in the woods strapped with logging chains and without dog houses.  These types of ordinances make complete sense if public safety and improving the lives of animals is your goal.

Yorkville, IL has decided against breed specific language in their laws.

Miami Dade County lost two lawsuits this week when dogs that were confiscated from homes under the city's breed ban were determined to not be any of the banned breeds. Breed ID via site is proving to be futile....and not only making BSL unenforcable, it is showing that most dog bite studies based on breed are actually bunk because the breed ID is not reliable.

Nackawic, CA is looking at potentially eliminating their breed specific law and making a behavior-based ordinance.

Ortonville, MI is looking at potential breed specific legislation because an owner can't seem to kep her dog from getting loose -- with the owner getting three dog at large tickets in the past month.  Note to Ortonville, this owner is the problem...not an entire breed of dogs.

Dog Bites/Attacks

A Labrador Retriever that was tied to a metal fence bit a 2 year old Seattle area girl. The girl had a small puncture on her face that required a stitch. 

A 10 year old boy was bitten in the face by a dog (breed was unmentioned) in Connecticut.

An electrical repairman in DeWitt, IA was severely attacked by three dogs that circled him and attacked him. The dogs were described as an American Bulldog, Boxer and a Huskie that were all running at-large.

A four year old girl was bitten for the second time by the family's Beagle/Dachsund mix.  Apparently the dog had bitten the child before, but the child went over and laid on the dog. The incident appears to be a complete example of why educating parents how to introduce children and dogs together is increasingly important....for both the child and the dog. Now the dog will be killed because the parents failed to teach their toddler not lay on their dog.

An 82 year old Park Ridge, IL man was bitten by his neighbor's German Shepherds that were running at large.

Note that in none of the above stories was the dog breed mentioned in the headline.

In Miami-Dade County (which has had a ban on 'pit bulls' for 20 years), there is a news story about a 'pit bull' that apparently attacked a US Postal worker. Now, the term 'pit bull' is used in the headline, but if you go to the 14th paragraph of the article, you'll note that the dog, named "Blue", was registered as an Australian Shepherd (although I wonder if they mean Australian Cattle Dog/Blue Heeler given the dog's name).  In the 15th paragraph, you'll note that the writer of the story admits that the breed of dog has not been confirmed -- even though the headline appears to say otherwise. Meanwhile, regardless of the breed, the owner does need to be held accountable and it is further evidence that Miami's 2-decade-old ban is not improving public safety in their comunity.

A 13 year old girl in Sacramento was bitten by a 'pit bull' that was owned by the family. Apparently the girl was watching the family's three dogs play in the back yard when the dog ran into the girl, knocking her down, and then bit her.  The girl's injuries are described as minor, even though the word "attack" was used in both the headline and the story lead -- along with the words 'pit bull'.

A three year old Apopka, FL boy was attacked by his uncle's German Shepherd that was chained out in front of the home. The boy underwent emergency surgery following the attack.  The boy received over 100 stitches in his face and neck.  Some reports have noted that the young boy may have been throwing rocks and sticks at the dog prior to being attacked.  Apparently this is the second time the boy has been bitten by the dog.

A nine year old Corner Brook girl was bitten when a German Shepherd broke free from its chain and attacked her.

The UK Dangerous Dogs Act

Dog bites in West Yorkshire, UK have gone up more than 43% over the past 5 years in spite of the country-wide ban on  four breeds of dogs. The UK, often cited as an example of a place that passed a ban on 'pit bulls' and other breeds continues to be a complete failure at improving public safety because they still haven't figure out how to deal with the irresponsible dog owner situation.

In Lancashire, the bite increases are even more major. In the past 5 years, the number of severe attacks in that area have more than doubled.

A UK couple that was out walking their Rottweilers were attacked by two at-large Bull Mastiff-type dogs.

Miscellanious

This is a great story from the Gloucester (MA) Times about dog bites, with some refreshing outlooks on causes of dog bites and who's fault it is when one does (yip, that person who owns the dog).  It's refreshing when a newspaper does a well-informed article, that educates the public, and puts the responsibility of dog ownership on the dog owner.

A call for help from Best Friends for rescue groups and foster homes to step up to help the 400_ dogs confiscated from a major dog fighting ring bust about a month ago.

Olathe, KS has voted to keep their animal shelter open for at least one more year. Due to budget limitations, they have been considering contracting out shelter operations to nearby Animal Haven.

An interesting article about the growing veterinary field of canine forensics.

The pit bull, nanny dog, an endangered species -- a good write up from the Examiner folks on the failings of BSL -- featuring a mention of a blind pit bull that was taken from her owner in Independence following the city's breed ban.

I don't know anything about this movie --but an interesting trailer is now online for a trailer to a new documentary highlighting the plight of 'pit bulls' in the city of Denver.

Must-read Blog postings from the week:

Yes Biscuit! has a video of a man who's 'pit bull' save his son's life.

One Bark at a Time posts two photographs that tell a very sad, telling story. Fred is usually a great writer, but sometimes let's his photography skills do the talking for him. Folks, if you have older friends or family in your life, please make plans for what will happen with the companion dog when/if the dog's caretaker dies.

F8Hasit has an interesting post from an American Bulldog owner's viewpoint following two incidences where dog owners of non-targeted breeds were forced out of town by the city's pit bull ban and the city's inability to correctly identify dog breeds.

For the Love of Dog Blog has a good article on dog tethering including a day in the life video of a dog that is left chained as its primary form of containment. It's a worthy watch, regardless of where you stand on the tethering issue. And while I do support certain types of ordinances that restrict tethering, I think they should be tailored specifically toward the types of owners featured in this video who, while tethering their dogs, their complete neglect of the dog is their primary crime. Not all tethering is inhumane...but certainly the type featured here is.

Terrierman has a great post on accuracy of reporting, the accuracy of blogs, and steps people should take to insure they are developing accurate opinions on particular subjects. This is great to keep in mind for those city council members who think BSL is a great solution -- if the only source you can find to justify your position is a website created by someone who was bitten by a dog as her primary credentials, then you may need to go find a more accurate source --like any of the expert animal behavior groups out there.

A really great post fromSave a Pit Bull, Save the World about how no one should be made to feel bad about owning a particular breed of dog.

Weekly Roundup, Week Ending 8/2/09

Thanks for the reponses last week. I just wanted to be sure there was value in this weekly post and since there is, I plan to continue it for the foreseeable future.   Let's get to the news.

Cities and Laws

From Stop BSL: The mayor of the city of Laurel, MD is asking Prince George's County, MD to lift their ban on pit bulls that has been in place since 1997. It doesn't sound like the ban is having any positive impacts but a whole lot of negative ones.  This is the third time in the past decade that the county has looked at a repeal.

BSL watch for Elkhart, IN who is at least talking about the possibility. There even is a "Pit Bulls are like a loaded gun" comment in there, even though guns kill tens of thousands of people ever year in the US and pit bulls get 6-10 in a typical year. People in this country aren't really all that good at math though and like drama much better.

Hutchinson, KS may now be looking at breed specific legislation following an incident where a woman was bitten by a pit bull there.

Sioux City, IA residents are still pushing for changes to the city's dangerous dog law. Since the new law was put in place (which included a pit bull ban), three dogs in the city have been declared dangerous including a pit bull, a Great Dane, and city councilman Aaron Rochester's Labrador.  Sioux City's struggles with BSL have been pretty well documented and it looks like they're going to look at other options besides their current ban maybe this fall.

The city of Olathe, KS is now not sure they want to close down their shelter because of budget cuts and because of expansions to the fire station next door that requires the space occupied by the shelter. They're doing a pretty thorough job of looking into this. While their shelter is one of the better city run shelters in the area while their alternative, contracting with Animal Haven is also a sound choice.

Cities, Dog bites, and media reporting

The Sheriff in White County, TN is no longer recommending that the county look at a county-wide breed ban. There was talk of this last week following an attack where a woman was attacked by what the media reported as two 'pit bulls'.  However, it turns out one of the dogs was actually a Boxer (and how anyone missed that breed ID I have no idea, it couldn't look more like a Boxer -- and frankly, the 'pit bull' doesn't look very 'pit bull' either) and the sheriff is realizing that something breed neutral is more the way to go. The deputy on the case said he originally identified the animals as 'pit bulls' based on the victim's and witnesses testimony (which we know is entirely innaccurate). It's just amazing how some bad media reporting can spark a debate that shouldn't have been taking place at all.

Dog bites and attacks

There were a LOT of stories this week about young toddlers getting bitten by dogs. These types of bites are fairly common and breed is irrelevant. What would be great is that instead of talking about breeds when it comes to dog bites, we would spend that time and energy talking to parents about great ways to introduce toddlers into their family with an existing dog. If we would do that, so many of these bites would be eliminated.  Of course several of these involve 'pit bulls', because the media loves a good pit bull story, but if you look at the ones involving other breeds you'll note there is really no difference in these bites except for the way the media covers them. Parents, if you have young toddlers and dogs, it is your responsibility to socialize the two together and closely supervise all interactions.

In New Mexico, an 11 month old toddler was bitten while playing with the family's 'pit bull' without close adult supervision.  The grandmother on the scene noted that she "heard a nip" -- so obviously wasn't watching the child/dog interaction.

A 17 month old Redondo Beach, CA boy was bitten after he was bitten by the family dog. The boy was playing with the dog in the living room when he apparently pulled the dog's tale and caused the dog to lash back at the boy. Toddlers often don't have any understanding of their actions causing harm to dogs -- and dogs that are harmed will often lash back as biting is their only form of defense.  The dog is being called a 'pit bull' by the media -- but that dog looks nothing like any of the "pit bull" breeds.

A 9 month old Tuscon toddler was attacked by the family's "shepherd mix" -- both the toddler and the dog were near the child's mom while she was out planting a small garden.

A 16 month old child in Waco was bitten by the family's dog.  The child's mother left the room for "just a moment" and when she came back the child was crying and bleeding after being bitten by the dog.

A 15 month old Eden, NC child was bitten by a mixed breed dog requiring stitches. Apparently the dog was on a chain but was able to reach far enough to bite the child who received injuries on his houlder, jaw and nose.

All of these bites were EXTREMELY preventable given a proper amount of parent education.  But we MUST stop talking about "breeds" and start talking about circumstances if there is every going to be any hope of curbing these types of preventable bites.

In other stories:

A 10 year old Bloomington, IN boy was bitten in the face pretty severely by a mixed breed dog causing part of his nose and lip to be town off. There have been previous reports of an animal biting children at the same address....none of which appeared to have been covered by the local media.

A 13 year old Oshawa (Ontario) boy was taken to the hospital to receive stitches after being bitten by an American Bull Dog. Ontario has a ban on 'pit bulls' -- but because they focused on breeds and not irresponsible and neglectful dog owners, attacks like this still happen. 

Two Russian Wolfhounds that attacked a man and his dog earlier this month were returned to their owner in East Alton (IL?) .  The owner plans to return the dogs to the breeder where he got them.

A family is searching for a cat that attacked their 7 year old son. 

An 8 year old boy apparently provoked the family's "bull mastiff" (I really question this breed ID as the dog is supposedly 3 years old and weighs only 80 lbs) into attacking him...but the dog is getting kicked out of the house anyway.

An Akita in Kingston, MA is being ordered to be neutered, restrained when outside and receive professional training after it bit a 9 year old boy in the face and stomach in april.

Officials in Newmarket, DE seized a mixed breed dog (a very cool looking dog, I'm not sure I've ever seen anything like it) that bit four people.  Officials are calling it a Rottweiler mix, which I guess it could be, but I'm not so sure.

Abuse Cases

A pit bull in Sheridan, ORdied because it was chained up in the back yard to its dog house and apparently unable to get to its food or water in 103 degree weather last week.  The dog died not 30 feet away from the family's above ground pool where they were cooling off from the heat.

A Dearborn, MI man suffered from a tragic case of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder that ended up leading him to collect Chihuahuas -- and last week, 110 live dogs and 150 dead dogs that were kept in freezes were pulled from a trash and feces filled home. Even five days after the investigation began, authorities were still finding dogs in the home.

Dogs and the Police

Police in Kirkwood, GA are taking some heat for shooting and killing a family's Labrador Retriever for apparently very little reason.

An off-duty police officer in Hialeah, FL attempted to shoot a "charging pit bull' but missed the dog and the bullet riccocheted and hit a woman that was standing nearby. The woman thankfully is going to be ok, but sort of a scary situation. Meanwhile, the bullet evidently missed the charging dog, but the officer wasn't bitten by the dog....so it looks as if the free firing of the bullet was a little pre-mature.  Scary stuff...and we need to demand that police officers get better training with dogs instead of the current shoot first, ask questions later mentality that seems to exist out there right now.

Miscellanious

A great article from out of Jamaica about pit bulls and how people don't really understand them and give them a bad rap.

This is a follow up to an earlier story from this week that includes some great video footage from Fox 8 in Cleveland of a white Boxer and his owner playing with each other at the shelter. The dog got loose earlier this week and then was tasered multiple times by police and is now being detained because police officials are claiming the dog is a pit bull and should be killed. This whole story highlights the ridiculousness of BSL as now valuable animal control resources are being used to detain this dog that is obviously not aggressive -- and obviously not a pit bull. This diverts resources from dogs that are truly aggressive dogs or have truly neglegent owners. To the city of Lakewood: Accidents happen. Fine the owner for the loose dog and send him home. And quit tying up resources in the name of your own neglegence ignorant laws trying to defend your actions. Say you're sorry and be done with it. You're wasting everyone's time and wasting taxpayer dollars.  And continuing to embarrass yourselves. And this isn't the first time.

A great article about TNR programs in Chicago helping to curb the feral cat populations.

Good article from Charlotte, NC -- Despite attack, some (including true experts) point to pit bulls' bad rap

Blog Postings for the week

Some really great blog postings from the internets this week that deserve their own category:

One Bark at a Time: A Public Service Announcement for Commercial Dog Breeders.

The Pet Connection: Orwellian Language Redux: I don't think "abandon' means what you think it means.

Our Pack: Introducing Your Dog to a New Dog

Lassie Get Help:Good cop/bad cop, live dog/dead dog

Wayne Pacelle: Anti-Dogfighting Training Camp (The blog posting is in its usual self-glorifying tone, but I am a really big fan of this program and the pictures and acompanying picture gallary alone are worth the visit.

Irony in Sioux City

Sioux City, IA is starting to become quite the little case study on BSL.

Shortly after the city passed a ban on 'pit bulls', city officials targeted those who used their democratic right to speak out against the law in front of  the council by knocking on their doors and checking out their animals.

They then had to change how they collected licenses because the veterinary community didn't want to cooperate with the city because they opposed the breed specific law. 

The city then had some "paperwork issues" that people were critical of that potentially violated people's 5th amendment rights that was later changed.

Now, it appears that the city councilman who was most responsible for pushing for the ban on pit bulls, Aaron Rochester, is awaiting his appeal to keep his Labrador Retriever because it has been declared vicious after biting his neighbor -- causing the neighbor to have stitches.

Isn't it interesting that the man who most strongly opposed recommendations from the ASPCA and local veterinarians for a breed neutral dangerous dog ordinance in favor of his own "pit bull" ban -- that has now caused hundreds of dogs that have never been a problem to be treated as dangerous animals -- now awaits a court decision on whether or not his dog -- a Labrador - is dangerous based on its actual behavior. 

These people who want breed bans are model folks, eh?

More thoughts on this at Reason Hit & Run.

Around the horn on BSL Issues

I have several stories that I've been wanting to do their own posts for -- because they are pretty big deals -- but just haven't been able to find the time. But I need to get the stories out sooner rather than later and am backed up on a few other things going on.  So, with that, here are a few pretty major stories that I want to be sure are on the radar:

Springfield, MO

City Councilwoman Mary Collette is looking to make a change to how the city handles 'pit bulls'.  Back in 2006, Springfield passed a ban on all 'pit bulls' in the city. As the law is currently being practiced, if a 'pit bull' type dog comes into the shelter, unless it is quickly claimed by the owner, the dog is killed.  (It should be noted that the LAW doesn't specify that this has to happen, but as a matter of policy, the animal shelter is killing the dogs).

Collette is pushing for an ordinance that would allow rescue groups to pull dogs from the shelter and allow them to find homes for the dogs outside the city.

The city is going to discuss this issue again on Monday night at 7:00 -- after tabling the proposal last week because a few of the council members are putting even tighter restrictions on who can pull the dogs -- requiring groups to come up with $500,000 of insurance per dog and requiring the dogs to be adopted out more than 100 miles away from the city.  None of these requirements are necessary for rescue groups when pulling other types of dogs.

While I don't in any way support the city's (paranoia-driven) pit bull ban, I am at the very least supportive of letting some of the dogs be pulled from the shelter instead of forcing them to be instantly killed.

Sioux City, IA

On March 21st, Sioux City, IA began enforcing its ban on 'pit bulls', and impounded 10 dogs in the first 3 days. However, people are hopping mad about it.

Turns out one woman had her dogs taken from her and was given paperwork to sign off on "acknowledging" that the dogs had been taken. There was also, supposedly, a signature requirement for euthanasia, that the dog's owner did not sign because she planned to appeal the measure and move herself and her dogs out of town. However, the dogs were instantly put down in the shelter and the dogs' owner wants to know why.

When KMEG 14 asked animal control for a copy of the form owners had to sign, staff denied their initial request -- essentially violating state open records laws.  The news station eventually did get the form.

It is not uncommon for cities to have this type of paperwork that they force people to sign when they confiscate dogs. They will usually tell them that the paperwork is to "acknowledge" that the dog is being taken, but often has wording that incriminates them in some way by stating that they are acknowledging the dog is a "pit bull" or that the dog can be euthanized.  This paperwork, when it is self-incriminating and doesn't allow for a trial before the dogs are destroyed (which is what happened in this case), is usually seen as a violation of the 5th Amendment rights under the US Constitution. If the woman was forced to sign either of the lines in the document, I do believe this would qualify. You cannot force soemone to give up their right to a trial.

A group of residents in Sioux City are filing a petition now for a repeal on the ban.

Omaha

The Nebraska Humane Society released the first quarter stats on dog citations this week. After they passed their breed-specific restrictions, 43 citations were written for 'pit bull' owners who could not provide proof of insurance, and 32 more for not having proper restraints (most were apparently on too long of a leash.

19 tickets were issued for dogs remaining tethered outside for a long period of time.

17 dogs were declared dangerous (no breed info available on that).

It remains very disturbing to me that NHS continues to define "success" of their ordinance based on the number of tickets they write vs things like decreasing the number of dogs killed in shelters or improved public safety (which it is appearing to not be doing).. However, because they will not release their records to the public, they get to choose how they define "success".

Meanwhile,it should be noted that NHS has been caught bullying 'pit bull' owners  -- with at least one case where they arrested someone for 'not cooperating" with an investigation when the dog owner refused to show them his dog. NHS did not have a warrant for a search, but arrested the man for not giving up his Constitutional right to be unjustly searched and his dog seized. After police arrived, it was later determined that the man's dog was not responsible for a bite - -but the man was still fined.

By the way, I love that the TV station cites that "Pit bull violations lead the field" when that was the primary target of the ordinance -- so of COURSE they do. Mediots.

In other Omaha news, they have an important election coming up on Tuesday. Jim Suttle, someone who was rational during the passing of their ridiculous ordinance, is running for Mayor against city councilman Jim Vokal. Vokal was one of the ring leaders behind pushing forward on the breed specific restrictions in spite of recommendations against it from virtually everyone in the city.  So go out and vote for Jim Suttle on Tuesday, for the good of the city.

Sioux CIty, IA Struggling Early with BSL

 Sioux City, IA is struggling with the early stages of their BSL.  For years, the city has relied on veterinarians to handle dog licensing.  When people go in to get their pets vaccinated, the vets have been handling getting the dogs licensed with the city.

Now, it appears that many of the vets are no longer cooperating with the city.  Once the city passed their ban on 'pit bulls' (which several area vets spoke out against), vets no longer want to be responsible for determining the breed of dog involved and be identifying which dogs should be restricted and which ones should not be.

"Now they've added the burden on us of identifying what animals are pit bulls and veterinarians as a whole don't want to deal with that," said Dr. David Ray. Ray said that specifying breeds based on visual appearance is tricky, especially when the dog is a mix of multiple breeds.

In other words, the vets say they can't really visually identify a dog that is predominantly 'pit bull' with accuracy, and don't want that burden placed on them.

Because many of the vets won't license, the city may have to provide their own ways for people to license their animals -- meaning added administrative expense for the city.  Currently the city brings in $52,000 in revenues from licensing (which has a compliance rate of 10-15%) but has a cost of $340,000 for animal control (and that number may soon be rising).  Taxpayers are paying the difference.

There are so many things wrong with this train wreck, but here are my initial thoughts:

1) Cities should not necessarily look at animal control as something that should be completely funded by pet owners any more than schools should be completely funded only by parents. There is value to society in not having stray, loose, dangerous dogs roaming a city. 

2) If a city can completely fund animal control through licensing, all the better. Calgary is the only city I know of that has been able to do that -- and they've done this by providing a service to their constituents and by not imposing unfair and harsh legislation against their dog owners. Increasing licensing certainly can't be done if people are being targeted for punishment by the city even if they've done nothing wrong.

3) With all of that said, cities need to be responsible with the amount of money they spend on animal control.  There are many city services that people pay for, and increasing the amount of money for animal control in order to enforce ordinances that don't improve public safety or the safety of animals is taking away resources from other programs that really do improve public safety.  Omaha continues to struggle with crime even as they added $500,000 to the city budget for animal control, and Cincinnati, which has one of the highest murder rates in the country is using police to enforce their "pit bull" ban.  It just doesn't make sense.

4) It is going to be increasingly difficult to get people to license their animals in light of a) the city using people's data that is being used to target them once new laws are passed and b) when just in the past 2 weeks, cities like Arkansas City, KS and Welsh, LA are looking at adding additional breeds to their banned list because the ban on 'pit bulls' hasn't solved their dangerous dog owner problem. People become very concerned that their type of dog will be next because the irresponsible owners change breeds of dogs but that doesn't make them responsible. Cities must learn that they have to deal with the root cause of the problem -- OWNERS -- in order to solve it. It isn't, and never will be about "breed".

5) Universally, Veterinarians say they find it almost impossible to determine breeds of dogs, particularly when dogs are mixed breeds.  This is one of the major reasons the AVMA does not support breed specific laws.   And yet, cities all over think they can enforce this type of legislationg by using veterinarians, animal control officers, or judges to determine what type of dog something is.  The enforcement is arbitrary at best. This is why Kansas City, KS has lost multiple lawsuits over the past 15 months by mislabeling dogs as pit bulls, even some dogs that were originally adopted from their shelter.  Who cares what type of dog it is if the dog isn't aggressive?

Hats off to the veterinarians in Sioux City who do not want to help the city enforce their inneffective legislation...

Sioux City, IA targets those who speak up for good government

It's a story we've heard a lot -- from places across the country. And it looks like Sioux City, IA is the next city to punish people for getting involved in the democratic process. Apparently, city officials collected the names and addresses of dog owners who testified at various City Council Meetings against the ban on 'pit bulls' the city eventually passed. Now, it turns out that these people were sent notices through the mail by the city warning them to license their pets.

City Councilman Jim Rixner called the move totally unacceptable.

"People should hae the ability to come before the council and have a passionate opinion about something and be able to express that without any fear of retaliation," Rixner said. "The potential for abuse is very frightening to me....It's a chilling effect."

Agreed.

But unfortunately, this, all too often is the story we hear.