Update on the situation in Sikeston

As everyone in the world seems to know, on Wednesday night news started coming out a roundup of pit bull type dogs in Sikeston, MO. As time grows, and the story gets passed along, things become a little, eh, exaggerated. So I want to provide the most accurate information I can on the situation there.

Earlier this morning, Trace White of the Sikeston Humane Society posted an update on their facebook page. And here are a few more details of the situation in Sikeston:

-- First off, the Sikeston Humane Society holds the animal control contract for the community of 16,000 people. They are NOT animal control -- which is separate. Nor does SHS support the city's pit bull restrictions

-- Earlier this week, SHS shipped around 30 dogs to other shelters in the region in order to make room for the dogs expected to come in.  These are the dogs talked about in the news report -- as many were shipped to the St. Louis region.

-- From animal control's perspective, the "roundup" was part of an "audit" of the people who had licensed dogs under the city's pit bull restrictions. The restrictions require registration, Beware of Dog signs, insurance, top and bottom gate locks and requiring a muzzle if the dog is off your property. Animal Control was "auditing' these owners to be sure they were complying. If they weren't in compliance, their dogs were seized.

-- Earlier, Animal Control had estimated that SHS would receive about 20 dogs through this "audit" -- which is why the dogs at the shelter were shipped out. However, due to the push back, animal control never finished their audit -- and Mr. White isn't sure they ever will. Because they didn't finish, the final number of dogs received at the shelter was only 3 (which is still 3 too many). The dogs are going to be held to give the owners enough time to comply with the regulations and hopefully get their dogs back. Mr. White is working with these owners to get their dogs back, and if they cannot, they will be adopted out or sent to rescue.

 -- Mr. White agrees that the BSL in Sikeston needs to be changed - and he, himself, moved from Sikeston so he could walk his dogs without muzzles. He does feel that this is as close as they've ever been in his three years at the shelter to getting the law repealed.

-- If people want to help, they can send letters to the city staff and council stating they think the law should change. LETTERS MUST BE PROFESSIONAL AND COURTEOUS in order to be well-received. We should be sure they are focusing on the real goal, which is to protect families from aggressive dogs, and also from having their family pets removed from their home. If you aren't capable of doing this professionally and politely, please don't write to them.   

-----

I want to quickly note that I'm very grateful for Mr. White's presence at SHS -- if city shelter workers were of the same mindset as the city, and animal control, many animals likely would have died during this process. Even so, the animals that were sent out to other rescues are still displacing animals in those communities that badly need the shelter space also.

I'm also very grateful that due to the public outcry and support for the dogs and the families, the 'audit' has ceased. This is very good news and thanks to everyone for their support of the dogs and families.

I have a few other thoughts on this as well -- but I'm going to hold them for now until the urgency of the matter blows over.

Comments

[Krista]

That's a much more hopeful situation than has been promoted around, so thanks for sharing that info!

[Colleen]

Thanks for the update and am glad the SHS is involved.

[Christine Guttilla]

Thank you for the update. And thank you for your well-stated blog. We'll keep fighting the good fight with you.

[Selma]

Great update. The attention, including from Fox who did some excellent reports, likely helped in stopping this "audit".

Yelling your head off is always better than hiding under the covers.

[Marianne]

Thank you for the update

[jodi declue]

that sad it not the pitbulls fault it there owner that why sometime pitbulls atak people

[EmilyS]

have you found a link to the actual law that gives authority for seizing dogs whose owners are found not to be in compliance with an "audit"?

p.s. "audit" my a**

[Robbie Halbert]

This is so unreal, this is a country founded on freedom. This story felt as if we lived in Russia and the KGB were knocking at our doors. This story really unset me for several reasons. Being a profound animal lover since the day I was born. Respect for my country that was fought by men who died for our country and our freedom. I can not believe this is happening in the United States of American. I am not a pit bull owner or do I know alot about this breed except for all the negitives I have heard thru the media and horror stories of them attacking. Being a animal supporter, I know that there are reasons for a animal to attack. Sometimes it does happen for no reason and it isn't just pit bulls. But most of the time, it is mans fault when a animal attacks. Weather it is the lack of responsibillity of the owners or it is caused by abuse of man. This really did upset me and it felt like we went back in time over two hundred years. This is totally unbelievable that this could be happening in this great country of ours. The land of the free.

[PAMM - People Against Mad Murders]

Grandview does this every year.

[Brent]

Emily, here's a link to the law:

http://www.sikeston.org/departments/public_works/docs/ORD5527.pdf

It's down at 6.40.05 to start

6.40.090 has the punishment for non-compliance as immediate confiscation and a minimum $500 fine. Ouch. This is not a rich community...

[EmilyS]

the local ordinances are online. Here's the stunningly "due process? who ever heard of due process" section that I assume they were using:

"It shall be unlawful for the owner, keeper or harborer of a pit bull dog or dangerous dog as defined in Sections 205.450 and 205.460 to fail to register that dog with the City of Sikeston as required by this Article or for such an owner, keeper or harborer of such a dog to fail to comply with the requirements and conditions set forth in this Article. Any dog found to be the subject of a violation of this Article shall be subject to immediate seizure and impoundment. "

http://www.sikeston.org/departments/public_works/docs/ORD5527.pdf

[john a reimer]

we living in worthington mn will tell you beware of or american bull dog she will leave welts on your legs through sheer joy from her part by her wagging tail!!!!!jail the owner for abusing the pet during training

[Raytha Hand Poland]

WTF? --
From animal control's perspective, the "roundup" was part of an "audit" of the people who had licensed dogs under the city's pit bull restrictions. The restrictions require registration, Beware of Dog signs, insurance, top and bottom gate locks and requiring a muzzle if the dog is off your property. Animal Control was "auditing' these owners to be sure they were complying. If they weren't in compliance, their dogs were seized."
Why treat an animal as if they are criminals when they have done nothing because humans are too ignorant to educate themselves. I am so tired of animals being the scapegoats and particularly certain breeds. Wake up people!!!

[Brent]

There are laws like this everywhere -- unfortunately, there aren't a lot of people with enough money to challenge them in court that actually end up impacted by the laws...because the people with money are in charge.

[Kim Krohn, EBA President, Missouri Federation of Animal Owners]

Per Missouri state law $500 per offense is the maximum fine municipalities can charge for violations of city ordinances. Thank goodness, or we would be seeing $10,000 parking tickets - mark my words.

I believe it's $1000 in Kansas.

Thanks for the update, Brent.

[Kim Krohn, EBA President, Missouri Federation of Animal Owners]

Just so everyone knows, the Missouri Federation of Animal Owners is concerned about Sikeston taking people's pets.

[KLP]

Because the government perceives animals as property, the rights associated with Fourth Amendment searches and seizures apply. In Fuller v. Vines (36 F.3d 68 (9th Cir. 1994)), the Fuller family of Richmond, California, alleged that police officers’ wrongful shooting of their dog constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, ruling that a dog is an “effect” or “property” and that the destruction of property is a “meaningful interference” constituting a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. There are now analogous cases in almost every circuit in the country.

With something else I found pets are personal property, under the Constitution. Due process, search and seizure, i.e. all protections provided by Constitution apply to pets. The ruling reaffirms you are the OWNER of your pets, not a "guardian” as in the state having the right to take you pet away as can be done with your child! Seizure bond is illegal and unconstitutional because it constitutes unlawful taking of personal property. If, after a search warrant is obtained, a person is arrested and their dogs are seized, their dogs must be held AS IS (cannot be sterilized while held, cannot be sold, transferred to anyone or euthanized) unless the owner is found guilty after trial. If they arrest you for commission of a crime involving your automobile, they can impound your car but if you are found innocent, it must be returned to you in the same condition in which it was seized. You are not charged storage fees. The same applies to your dogs. You do NOT pay for their care, until/unless found guilty of the charges.

[Ryan]

Is anyone tracking the 30 dogs shipped to nearby shelters? What will happen to them?

[Joel]

Thanks for the update Brent, and congratulations on the previous entry becoming what has to be your most-commented-upon thread ever.

[shannon]

I just want to say, that still this is so beyond sickening to me. my dog plays with a Pit bull every weekend. He loves the play dates we have they both do. how can someone come in and just up and take a family pet? PIT BULLS ARE NOT BAD, ITS THE OWNERS AND IGNORANCE FROM PEOPLE ABOUT THE BREED! IT IS HOW YOU RAISE THEM, I KNOW MANY PIT BULLS AND NONE OF THEM HAVE EVER HURT A SINGLE SOLE BECAUSE THEIR OWNERS RAISED THEM THE WAY THEY SHOULD BE. its ignorance of people like in this town that are ruining the place we live in.

[Kim Krohn, EBA President, Missouri Federation of Animal Owners]

Most of these types of ordinances allow for immediate confiscation of the animal if there is non-compliance. That doesn't mean I think it's acceptable. It's a bit ridiculous - if you take your car in for inspection and the turn signals don't work the state doesn't confiscate your vehicle. you have X number of days to get it repaired and then get your car reinspected.

I would also be curious to read what people sign when the apply for a license for their dogs. Sometimes, either with or without realizing it, they sign a statement saying the city can confiscate their pet if they are found to be in violation of any of the compliance requirements.

[Kristie McDaniel]

Thank you so much for posting this update and clearing up some facts. I am glad they haven't gone so far as Denver did, however, I am still appalled at the level of restrictions they have put on these pets. Special insurance, muzzled for walk, etc. It just goes to show you how ignorant people are of this amazing breed. My pibble came from a Kansas City shelter, I am so glad he came into my life. I would move before ever giving him up. But, I have the means to do this. Poorer people don't have the means to challenge legally or move. I hope the city leaders learn a thing or two about the breed and stop enforcing ridiculous restrictions.

[Adrienne]

I'm sorry but we who fight BSL knows that when your hand is caught in the cookie jar you automatically back peddle. I say keep up the fight..KMOV in St.Louis reported this, http://fox2now.com/2012/12/05/dozens-of-dogs-shipped-up-to-st-louis-to-avoid-mass-euthanasia/ and here is where some of those dogs went..This is where a lot of those dogs went http://www.facebook.com/pages/Five-Acres-Animal-Shelter/214975568526615 Keep the pressure up and sign the petition!!http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.change.org%2Fpetitions%2Fsikeston-missouri-against-pit-bull-round-up-overturn-this-law-ban-on-pit-bull-and-pit-bull-type-dogs%3Futm_campaign%3Dshare_button_array-upsell_share_buttons_experiment%26utm_medium%3Dfacebook%26utm_source%3Dshare_petition%26utm_term%3D16045355&h=TAQHHdTky

[Marianne]

Thank you for the update ..the whole country was in an uproar about this

[Randy]

It would be interesting to know the reason for that law in the first place. While it is easy for all of us to sit back in our arm chairs snd crticize there maybe more to the story. Remember we are not there. Remeber too that law was passed at some point by a City Council which was elected by the people, and I assume there was also public input. So they may have been working an issue we are totally unaware of. Also, if the law needs to be changed then the correct way is to influence the Council and not blame Animal Control for enforcing a City regualtion. That is what they are hired to do and they don't get a lot of choice in it. To suggest other wise is to suggest you want your local Animal Control or police for that matter to just enforce what ever they think is right and ignore the regulations passed by elected (by you in your City) representatives of the City. As always thanks for the good information!