Category Archives: Breed Identification

Sarnia, Ontario, Canada: Protest at city hall against “pit bull” ban

Sarnia, like Brampton, has been having difficulties with breed identification. Previous articles on Sarnia: http://stopbsl.com/?s=sarnia
Sarnia’s mayor isn’t correct when he says Sarnia must enforce Ontario’s “pit bull” ban. Ottawa, for instance, has decided not to enforce the ban.

Pitbull protest at city hall

TARA HAGAN
The Observer

A group of dog owners set up camp at Sarnia’s city hall Monday to protest Ontario’s ban on pit bulls.[...]

[Mayor] Bradley said the law has been a stress on animal control workers, noting that he preferred the city’s previous ‘dangerous dog’ bylaw, which dealt with the animals on a case-by-case basis, rather than by breed.

Article retrieved 4/23/10 from http://www.theobserver.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2540872

Brampton, Ontario, Canada: Dog seizures not isolated

Previous info on Brampton: http://stopbsl.com/?s=brampton

Dog seizures not isolated

PAM DOUGLAS
Apr 22, 2010 – 11:09 AM

Brittany and Rambo are safely home once again, but The Brampton Guardian has learned this isn’t the first time a previously legally licensed dog has been seized from a Brampton home without a warrant, and owner-offered proof that they are not “pitbulls” rejected by city animal shelter workers.

[...] Peel Health statistics show there has been no corresponding drop in reported dog bites in Brampton since the ban was put in place.

Article retrieved 4/23/10 from http://www.bramptonguardian.com/news/article/803925–dog-seizures-not-an-isolated-case

Brampton, Ontario, Canada: Dogs freed, ruled not “pit bulls”

Previous alerts about Brampton: http://stopbsl.com/?s=brampton

The sad part is that despite the ruling that these dogs are not “pit bulls,” despite no complaints from the public about the dogs, and despite the city’s own veterinarian saying the dogs are friendly, the city has still designated both dogs “potentially dangerous.” Why?

This is a city that cannot lose gracefully and admit they were wrong.

Dogs freed, ruled not pitbulls

Pam Douglas
Apr 19, 2010 – 3:26 PM

[...] An independent veterinarian has ruled Brittany and Rambo are not pitbulls, which means after 97 days in the pound, the two dogs are finally home.

[...] Despite the vet’s ruling, as part of the agreement with the city, the owners had to agree to allow the dogs to be designated “potentially dangerous” and they must wear muzzles when out in public.

Article retrieved 4/19/10 from http://www.bramptonguardian.com/news/article/802381–dogs-freed-ruled-not-pitbulls

Mitchell, SD: Whispers of BSL

The dogs in question, who were running loose in violation of code, were identified as “pit bull”/Boxer mixes. Note that two of the dogs were not aggressive toward the animal control officer, who subsequently decided that those two are “probably a little more Boxer” than the aggressive dog. (In other words, aggressive dogs are labeled pit bulls. Nonaggressive dogs are not.)

Update 4/3: In a new article, the owner of the dogs disputes that they are “pit bulls” at all: 

But Contreras insists that her dogs — which she said are full-blooded boxers and not the pit bull/boxer crosses they have been described as — are all friendly animals who were likely only interested in Odegaard’s dogs and not in hurting Odegaard herself.

“They’re not pit bulls,” Contreras said. “We hate pit bulls.”

City Hall, 612 North Main, Mitchell, SD 57301
Phone: (605) 995-8420
Fax: (605) 995-8054
Mayor Lou Sebert, lsebert@cityofmitchell.org
Mel Olson, Ward 1, mel.olson@k12.sd.us
Doug Backlund, Ward 1, doug_backlund@yahoo.com
Travis Carpenter, Ward 2, travis.carpenter@k12.sd.us
Dan Allen, Ward 2, llallen5@hotmail.com
Marty Barington (Vice-President), Ward 3, mmbarington@mit.midco.net
Scott Houwman, Ward 3, univpt@mit.midco.net
Geri Beck, Ward 4, geribeck@gmail.com
Jeff Smith (President), Ward 4, jsmith@cortrustbank.com

The Mitchell City Council meets the first and third Monday’s of each month. City Council meetings begin at 7:30 pm in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 612 N. Main.

After Thursday attack in Mitchell, pit bulls come under scrutiny

By: Austin Kaus, The Daily Republic

[... Diane] Odegaard was not physically harmed, but she is hoping that sharing her experience could lead to stricter dog laws in the city, such as a ban on pit bulls.

[...Mayor Sebert] wasn’t sure of the legality of banning certain dog breeds within city limits, but he said he would be in favor of banning pit bulls in Mitchell.[...]

Article retrieved 4/2/10 from http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/event/article/id/42060/

Denver and Aurora, CO: Disabled vets file discrimination suit due to “pit bull” bans

Update 4/4: Great article on the importance of service dogs to veterans: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/us/04dogs.html

Note that one veteran’s dog was seized after being misidentified as a “pit bull.”

Pit bull ban: Disabled Vietnam, Gulf War vets sue Denver and Aurora for discriminating against their service dogs

By J. David McSwane, Wednesday, Mar. 31 2010 @ 3:46PM

A federal class-action suit involving disabled Coloradans — two war veterans with psychological disorders — and their service animals was filed Tuesday against Aurora, the City and County of Denver and its head of Animal Control.

The two veterans, and another disabled woman from out of state, say Denver’s controversial pit-bull ban doesn’t make exceptions for service dogs and their owners and is therefore a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.[...]

Read the lawsuit here.

Article retrieved 4/1/10 from http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2010/03/pit_bull_ban_disabled_vietnam.php

Lakewood, OH: Lawsuit filed against city due to “pit bull” ban

Read a copy of the suit filed in Cuyahoga County, Ohio Common Pleas Court: http://www.lovelakewood.com/pdf/dog/100319_pitbull_court.pdf

An excerpt of the case (visit the link for the full post):

http://www.lovelakewood.com/blog/2010/03/30/citys-enforcement-of-pit-bull-ban-draws-lawsuit/

Former Lakewood resident Leonard Shelton alleges that he suffered “economic damages, psychological damages, and other compensatory damages” when the city harassed him about Rosco, his Boston Terrier mix, and forced them both to move out of the city. Shelton is seeking a minimum of $475,000 in damages.

According to Shelton’s complaint, Stewart and Lakewood police officer Kenneth Kulczycki stopped him on the street in April, 2009, and told him his pet was a pit bull and needed to be removed from the city, or else he would face criminal charges.

[...] Shelton’s complaint against the city says its inability to correctly identify the breed of his dog, the harassment, and refusal to accept DNA proof was motivated by “among other things, malice, ill will, discrimination, and bad faith and constitutes violations of [his] constitutional rights.”

Additional posts and info about Leonard Shelton:

http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2009/05/bsl-again-affecting-good-owners.html

http://www.clevescene.com/cleveland/leonard-shelton-fought-in-the-marines-for-20-years-now-he-fights-for-sleep/Content?oid=1505838

Springfield Township, OH: Township no longer enforcing BSL

Springfield Township puts hold on dog legislation

By Heidi Fallon • hfallon@communitypress.com • March 12, 2010

[...] Trustees approved putting the breed-specific regulations on hold at the March 9 meeting.

[...] Township Administrator Mike Hinnenkamp said several factors went into the decision including veterinarians being unable to determine specific breeds.

[...] Saying that any action against dog owners would be based on the dog’s behavior, not the breed, Heimpold said his department would follow state laws regarding vicious dogs.[...]

Full article retrieved 3/13/10 from http://communitypress.cincinnati.com/article/20100312/NEWS/3120309/Springfield+Township+puts+hold+on+dog+legislation