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 He does feel that this is as close as they've ever been in his three years at the shelter to getting the law repealed.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

[Sean Toohey]

I work for a county agency in Ohio the city I'm in has a city code that restricts the ownership of Pitts. I'm not allowed to enforce city codes only state codes and as of May 28 2012 Ohio has labeled pittbulls the same as any other breed. The city is wrong the dogs should be returned.

[Brent]

Ryan -- I believe the other 30 animals are in safe rescue groups. Unfortunately, even if they are safe, they are taking up kennels that would no doubt be needed for other dogs in those communities.

Joel -- I never imagined that this story would attract so much national attention.

Adrienne -- I think it's important for people to recognize that had people NOT spoken out about this, and spoken out loudly, that the "audits" would still likely be occurring.

Randy -- From my recollection, there wasn't a significant incident that led to the law being put into place -- and that many people came out to oppose the law, but it was passed anyway. Regardless of the reason, passing punitive, archaic legislation that has never proven itself to be an effective solution and is not supported by any expert organization in animal behavior should never have been an option.

[Randy]

Brent-I don't disagree that it maybe "bad" law but the point is for what ever reason it did pass through a vote of elected officials. I can think of several "bad" laws I don't like at the national level but won't go there, lol. I just get concerned when the focus of the aggravation (dare I say anger at some point) tends to focus on those that are required to implement the law when the focus should be on the law makers and a change in the law if needed.

[Brent]

Agree Randy -- that in some cases people in positions to enforce laws sometimes must do so only because it's their job, and not their choosing. However, the idea that they were going door-to-door checking on compliance leads me to believe that they are actively in support of this law -- as that type of enforcement is virtually unheard of in any other type of law enforcement.

[Randy]

It really puts the enforcers in a tough position. If they don't actively enforce the law then they get criticised by those that think they are not doing thier job and maybe complaining about the situation and pointing out the law to them. If they do enforce the law they get criticised by those that don't think the law is right (us for instance). Kind of a no win for them. Just hope the law can be changed to avoid the ambiguity and I hope the energy goes to that end.

[Donna Groves]

This is utterly ridiculous and needs to be STOPPED immediately!

[scott leger]

i have a hard time being polite or courteous to people who think pit bulls should be banned or killed, glad to hear this news.Chihuahuas are more vicious than pits. just saying

[jennifer]

The article said to protect families from aggressive dogs. Once again if your a pit bull you must be aggressive! Thats a joke, blame the owners not the dogs they arent naturally aggressive thats a learned behavior from stupid people.. rarely do pit bulls in shelters get adopted back out its sad!

[CATHY PRECKWINKLE]

So, when do they do an "audit" on German Shepherds, poodles, pugs, beagles, etc??

[Keira Fritzen]

Thank You so much for this update! I was soooo sad last night. I'm glad the shelter seems to be fighting for the dogs.

[thisisaweful]

I'm glad there was a public outcry and this nonsense didn't get out if hand! I hope people will support a change in sikeston!

[Susie Burton]

I am grateful that the public attention has caused this situation to change. I am not against animal control, I am against BSL. Let's discuss the DOG'S ACTIONS, not the dog's breed. Let's discuss the OWNER control. Don't remove family dogs who have no issues with the community.

AND, by the way, thank you Trace. Again.

[Ladee Diane Campbell]

I think this is the most ignorant barbaric cruel thing to do. These dogs are family pets when owned by the right people as I own. I warn people far and wide. My pitbull is like my child and if anyone tries to touch, take, confiscate, round up, harm. abuse, steal, my bully I promise I will defend him like I would my child. I will hurt anyone who messes with my kid.

[Ladee Diane Campbell]

I LAUGH AT HOW THEY TRY TO SPEAK TO PEOPLE AS IF THEY WERE STUPID! I FIGHT BSL, I FIGHT FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS! AND YOU HAVE BEEN CAUGHT! CAUGHT WITH YOUR HANDS IN THE COOKIE JAR! BAD MISSOURI. BAD BAD BAD!

[SocialMange]

Did Sikeston audit ALL dog owners to ensure compliance with licensing, vaccination, s/n, etc?
If not, this is discrimination, pure and simple

[SocialMange]

Randy, I suggest you educate yourself on "breed" specific legislation. How it makes law-abiding dog owners into second-class citizens and kills innocent dogs. How it is a knee-jerk, unfounded, unjust, vague, shoddy, ineffective and fiscally irresponsible reaction to the issue of dangerous dogs in a community.

[EmilyS]

Here's the city trying to cover its butt:
http://www.standard-democrat.com/story/1920992.html

not a round up? Hmm..... then why did the shelter make the (very laudable) effort to empty 30 kennels in anticipation of seized pit bulls?

It was just "luck" that the reporter was interested in this story.. that's what stopped the "audit". For now. They'll just continue at a later date. Only a lawsuit on the "no option other than seizure for noncompliance" issue will stop them.

And it's sad to me that so many of the commentators here seem unaware that FAR WORSE happens in locations like Commerce City, Colorado.... EVERY DAY. Have people already forgotten poor Chloe, the "not even an APBT" dog tased multiple times and then shot to death? Just last week.

[Therese]

I have to take you to task on the first blog post you wrote on the same topic. Inaccurate account, not researched to the point of being factual, and as it turns out missing some key information. Don't get me wrong, this event is unfair and horrendous and three dogs collected is three dogs too many. I completely oppose breed descrimination. However, when blog posts like your original one are written in an inflaming and inaccurate way, it hurts everyone in the animal welfare industry by making us look unprofessional. Please, in the future, lots and lots of research before publishing as fact.

[Christie Keith]

I love you because you shared good news, but I love you MORE for doing fact-checking. You rock.

[Beth Mersten Cruz]

Thank you for posting the update ... very informative

[Randy]

Social-I don't suppport breed specific legislation. Looks like to me as others have pointed out that the individual animals/owners behavior should be the focus not the breed. That said I have a hard time blaming the people charged with enforcing such legislation if their elected officials passed it.

[Siobhra DeWar]

I hope all the people who see this understand why us gun owners fight against registration. When we say that it could lead to the government rounding up the guns we are laughed at. Yet if the dog owners had been paying attention and fought back to prevent the law this could never have happened.

[Catherine]

This doesn't make it better ! Animal control auditing, human society round up. NAZI'S!!!!! Murdering SS also did auditing and round ups !!!!

[Brent]

Theresa --

I'll note that I had 3 separate sources (all fairly reliable)for the first piece (one of my sources was the news report, which also had multiple sources that were different than mine). While the information may not have ended up as exactly what happened, there is little reason to believe, based on the actions of the shelter and the interviews, that this isn't what started out, and ended up as something else following the public outcry. And the city is claiming it was a "simple drive by" and yet by their own numbers about 12% of the pit bulls in the city were confiscated that day, and at least one other person had to talk her way into keeping her dog.

As with most things, there are probably 3 sides to every story, but I'm not believing the city's version of this either at this point, as they're the only ones telling that story.

[Brent]

Siobra, from my understanding, more than a few folks have been standing up against this law for awhile...but it's why all of us need to stand up for everyone's rights, even if we're directly unaffected; or the will of the majority will always take away rights of the minority - -whether they're dog owners, gun owners, minorities, gays or whatever. Society has shown this over and over.