Category Archives: BSL Passed

City of Ventura, CA: BSL passed

Ventura city council members voted for mandatory spay/neuter for “pit bulls” during its council meeting this week.

StopBSL takes no position on mandatory spay/neuter as long as it is not breed-specific. Unfortunately, Ventura’s breed-specific MSN brings with it all of the problems that are associated with any BSL: unnecessary discrimination against citizens based on their dog’s physical appearance; subjective, nonscientific visual guesses about a dog’s possible breed, resulting in unequal application of the law and resource-consuming lawsuits and court challenges; enforcement difficulties; and so on. (Think animal shelter workers can reliably identify “pit bulls”? Check out this study done by Maddie’s Fund.)

Some city officials have already expressed concerns that the law will be difficult to enforce. And, of course, BS-MSN has not solved any problems anywhere else it has been implemented.

City of Ventura Mayor and City Council
mike.tracy@cityofventura.net, cheitmann@ci.ventura.ca.us, nandrews@ci.ventura.ca.us, bbrennan@ci.ventura.ca.us, jmonahan@ci.ventura.ca.us, cmorehouse@ci.ventura.ca.us, cweir@ci.ventura.ca.us

All alerts for Ventura (county and cities): http://stopbsl.com/?s=ventura

Ventura council approves pit bull ordinance

By Arlene Martinez
Posted May 23, 2012 at 5:12 p.m.

Despite concerns that enforcement might be difficult, the Ventura City Council voted 6-1 on Monday to require pit bulls to be spayed or neutered by the time they are 16 weeks.

[...] Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers and American Staffordshire Terriers fall under the “pit bull” category. Dogs used in law enforcement and purebreds registered with the American Kennel Club, United Kennel Club or “other national registry” are exempt from the ordinance. [...]

Full article retrieved 5/24/12 from http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/23/ventura-council-approves-pit-bull-ordinance/

Trinidad and Tobago: BSL to go into effect, August 2012

We last reported on Trinidad and Tobago in May 2011. Trinidad and Tobago has had BSL in place since 2000 (regulating “pit bulls,” Japanese Tosa, and Fila Brasiliero), but the Act has never been enforced. T&T government has decided to enforce the BSL, effective August 2012.

Last year, the government was considering some revisions to the Dangerous Dogs Act, but as of today, they have decided not to revise it. The T&T Dangerous Dogs Act currently mirrors the Dangerous Dog Act of the UK, which has been a miserable failure.

The following news article also contains the text of the DDA for T&T. Click the article link (below) to read the entire article and to see the text of the DDA.

Man’s best friend in the doghouse

By CAROL MATROO Sunday, May 20 2012

Despite misgivings by various interest groups and dog lovers throughout Trinidad and Tobago, Government will apparently make the Dangerous Dogs Act law on August 1 without amendment.

The act, originally inspired by former attorney general Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, was passed in June 2000 but was never proclaimed. It requires owners of dangerous dogs to be at least 18 years old, carry $250,000 insurance, adhere to special containment requirements, sterilisation and registration, and to apply and obtain a $500 annual licence per dog. [...]

Full article retrieved 5/21/12 from http://www.newsday.co.tt/features/0,160437.html

All alerts for T&T: http://www.stopbsl.org/?s=trinidad

Portsmouth, OH: BSL passed

Portsmouth, OH, has passed BSL for “pit bull” owners.

From a purely technical standpoint, the law is poorly written. As in, the city did not have either a lawyer or an English major look it over.

“Pit bull” is confusingly defined as Bull Terrier and American Staffordshire Terrier, AND mixed breeds known as pit bulls, AND any dog that looks like a Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, AND any other breed that might be considered a pit bull, AND any combination of the aforementioned.

Portsmouth Passes Vicious Dogs Ordinance

PORTSMOUTH, Ohio (WSAZ) – [...] Pit bulls are no longer considered inherently vicious in the state of Ohio, but the new ordinance says all pit bulls have to be confined as though they were vicious. [...]

Full article retrieved 5/15/12 from http://www.wsaz.com/home/headlines/Portsmouth_Passes_Vicious_Dogs_Ordinance_151482235.html

Portsmouth’s vicious dog ordinance is below. I have boldfaced the sections that are relevant to “pit bull” owners. I have also left commentary regarding the poor technical quality of the ordinance. Folks, if you ever have the chance to write your own ordinance, get help from an experienced attorney and make sure you have the ordinance copyedited before it becomes a permanent embarrassment to your city.

505.14 VICIOUS DOGS.

(a) For the purpose of this ordinance, “vicious dog” is defined as:

1) Any dog [ED: "which"] when unprovoked engages in any behavior that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury when the dog is off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog.
2) Any dog which, when unprovoked, bites a person [ED: comma] causing severe injury. Severe injury shall be defined as any physical harm to a human being that results in muscle tears or disfiguring lacerations or requires multiple sutures or cosmetic surgery.
3) Any dog which, when unprovoked has killed, seriously bitten, inflicted injury, or otherwise caused injury when attacking a domestic animal off of the property of the owner or keeper of the dog.

(b) A “vicious dog” does not include either [ED: "Either" refers to TWO options. Below there are THREE options.] of the following:

1) A police dog that has killed or caused serious injury to any person while the police dog is being used to assist one or more law enforcement officers in the performance of their official duties.
2) A dog that has killed or caused serious injury to any person while the person was committing or attempting to commit a trespass or other criminal offense on the property of the owner, keeper, or harbor of the dog.
3) A dog that bites or attacks a person or animal that provokes, torments, tortures, or treats an animal cruelly.

[ED: Section (e) should go HERE, with all the other definitions, followed by Section c(4), which makes clear that the following section (c) applies to "pit bulls."]

(c) Standards for keeping vicious dogs. The keeping of vicious dogs shall be subject to the following standards.

1) CONFINEMENT. When vicious dogs are not under the physical control of their owner, all vicious dogs shall be securely confined indoors, in a securely enclosed and locked pen or kennel, or in a fenced in yard with a locked gate. Such fenced in yard must be equipped with a six (6) foot high fence, or that of adequate height determined by the Portsmouth City Animal Control Officer. The fence must be equipped with a locked gate. If said fence is not sufficient in height or strength to keep vicious dogs from running at large, the vicious dog must be kept in a pen or kennel that meets the following standards:

(a) The pen or kennel must have secure sides and a secure top attached to its sides.
(b) Such structure must have a secure bottom of floor [ED: what is a "bottom of floor"? Perhaps "of" should be "or"?] attached to the sides of the pen, or the sides of the pen must be embedded in the ground to a depth of no less than two (2) feet.
(c) The fencing for such structure must be at least 14 gauge fencing wire.
(d) All structures used to confine such animals must be locked with a key or combination lock when such animals are within the structure.
(e) No structure may violate any Codified Ordinances of the City of Portsmouth, Ohio.

2) CONFINEMENT INDOORS. No vicious dog may be kept on a porch, patio, or in any part of a house or structure that would allow the dog to exit such building on its own volition [ED: Fancy word, incorrect usage. "of its own volition"]. In addition, no such dog may be kept in a house or structure where window screens or screen doors are the only obstacles preventing the dog from exiting the structure.

3) CONTROL OF VICIOUS DOG. No person shall permit a vicious dog to go outside of its kennel, pen, or the owner’s residence unless such dog is securely leashed with a leash not longer than four (4) feet in length. No person shall permit such a dog to be kept on a chain, rope, or other type of leash outside its kennel or pen unless a person is in [ED: "unless a person is in" what?] and able to maintain physical control of the animal at all times. Such dogs may not be leashed to inanimate objects such as trees, posts, buildings, etc.

4) While not being classified as vicious, due to the disproportionate number of documented “pit bulls” running at large complaints and documented attacks on domestic animals and people, ALL dogs that meet the definition of “pit bulls”, as stated in section (e) of this ordinance, must be confined as stated in section (c) of this ordinance. [ED: Requiring readers to skip around to figure out what applies = poor form. Only NOW do we find out that "pit bull" owners are subject to Section (c). This section (4) and Section (e) should be established at the very beginning. We're not even going to go into the not-so-subtle implications being made in this paragraph.]

(d) INSURANCE IDENTIFICATION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.

1) Insurance. All owners, keepers or harborers of vicious dogs must within ten (10) days of the effective date of this ordinance, obtain liability or home owner’s insurance that provides coverage for each occurrence because of damage or bodily injury to or death of a person caused by the dog. The liability or homeowner’s insurance policy must be a minimum of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000).

(a) The owner, keeper or harborer of a “Pit Bull Dog”, as defined in section (e) of this ordinance is exempted from the insurance requirements for vicious dogs unless the “pit bull dog” has been documented to have previously bitten or attacked a person or domestic animal. [ED: This is a totally unnecessary clause. A properly written law does not need to make an exemption when a section doesn't apply in the first place.]

2) Any owner of a vicious dog if so ordered by a court, any law enforcement officer, animal control officer, or public health official must provide proof of the required liability insurance.

(e) DEFINITION. ” Pit Bull Dog” is defined for purposes of this Section to mean the Bull Terrier breed of dog, the American Staffordshire Terrier breed of dog, dogs of mixed breed or other breeds which breed or mixed breed is known as Pit Bulls, PitBull Dogs or Pit Bull Terriers, and any dog which has the appearance and characteristics of being predominantly of the breeds of Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, and other breed commonly known as Pit Bulls, Pit Bull dogs, or Pit Bull Terriers, or a combination of any of these breeds. The Portsmouth City Animal Control Officer shall make the final determination of whether the dog meets the definition of a “pit bull dog”. [ED: This  ordinance wins the award for the most convoluted and confusing definition of "pit bull" I've ever seen. Also, this is a definition and should go in the beginning with the other definitions.]

(f) ENFORCEMENT. It shall be the duty of the Portsmouth City Animal Control Officer to enforce this ordinance. The Portsmouth City Police Department also has the authority to enforce this ordinance.

1) The Portsmouth City Animal Control Officer shall investigate all vicious dog complaints. All complaints shall be put in writing and reviewed by the Portsmouth City Animal Control Officer and the officer shall determine if the dog is vicious or not.
2) The Portsmouth City Animal Control Officer shall require the owner or harborer of the vicious dog to comply with the provisions of this ordinance or safely remove such dog from the city limits of Portsmouth, Ohio.

(g) FAILURE TO COMPLY. If the owner, keeper or harborer of a vicious dog fails to comply with the requirements and conditions set forth in this Section and this entire Ordinance, the Portsmouth City Animal Control Officer may order the vicious dog to be immediately seized, impounded or destroyed.

[ED: Missing Section (h).]

(i) The first violation of this ordinance will result in the charge of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

1) A second violation of this ordinance will result in the charge of a misdemeanor of the third degree.
2) A third violation of this ordinance will result in the charge of a misdemeanor of the second degree.
3) The fourth violation of this ordinance will result in a charge of a misdemeanor of the first degree.
4) Each subsequent violation will result in the charge of a misdemeanor of the first degree.

a) Each occurrence shall constitute a separate offense.

All alerts for Portsmouth: http://stopbsl.org/?s=portsmouth

Bastrop, LA: Public meeting to discuss “pit bull” ordinance, May 14

There will be a public meeting on May 14 at 5:00 PM at City Hall so Bastrop city officials can talk to the public about enforcement of the “pit bull” ordinance. Residents and locals are encouraged to attend, speak against the ordinance, and try to convince city officials to put something breed-neutral, workable, and effective in place.

Bastrop, LA, City Hall, 202 East Jefferson Avenue, Bastrop, Louisiana 71220
City Clerk Sandra Goleman, sgoleman@cityofbastrop.com
Telephone: 318-283-0250

City responds to complaints about pit bulls

By Andrew Bell, Bastrop Daily Enterprise
Posted May 05, 2012 @ 09:30 AM

BASTROP — On May 14, there will be a public meeting at City Hall at 5 p.m. to discuss how the city is aiming to more closely follow to its authority regarding pit bulls.

“It’s going to be an informative meeting, letting residents know that we are going to start enforcing the ordinance,” explained Public Works director Willie McKee.

[...] In April 2009 the mayor and aldermen approved an amendment to the city’s animal and fowl ordinance that specifically categorizes pit bulls as a “dangerous dog.” [...]

Full article retrieved 5/7/12 from http://www.bastropenterprise.com/news/x1809303690/City-responds-to-complaints-about-pit-bulls

Bastrop, LA: City to start enforcing BSL

There will be a public meeting on May 14 at 5:00 PM at City Hall so city officials can talk to the public about enforcement of the “pit bull” ordinance.
Bastrop, LA, City Hall, 202 East Jefferson Avenue, Bastrop, Louisiana 71220
City Clerk Sandra Goleman, sgoleman@cityofbastrop.com
Telephone: 318-283-0250

City responds to complaints about pit bulls

By Andrew Bell, Bastrop Daily Enterprise
Posted May 05, 2012 @ 09:30 AM

BASTROP — On May 14, there will be a public meeting at City Hall at 5 p.m. to discuss how the city is aiming to more closely follow to its authority regarding pit bulls.

“It’s going to be an informative meeting, letting residents know that we are going to start enforcing the ordinance,” explained Public Works director Willie McKee.

[...] In April 2009 the mayor and aldermen approved an amendment to the city’s animal and fowl ordinance that specifically categorizes pit bulls as a “dangerous dog.” [...]

Full article retrieved 5/7/12 from http://www.bastropenterprise.com/news/x1809303690/City-responds-to-complaints-about-pit-bulls

Harbin, China: City bans 49 breeds

Harbin, China, has banned 49 “dangerous” breeds (and imposed a size limit on top of that). Harbin is the 10th most populated city in China, with a population of over 10 million. The new ban has the potential to make tens of thousands of beloved pet dogs homeless. Although the government says that they will relocate the banned dogs outside of the city, not kill them, it’s not exactly clear how they intend to accomplish such a goal. How are they going to find enough homes to adopt so many dogs?

The banned breeds are (sorry, rough translations): Tibetan Mastiff, Pit Bull Terrier, Argentine Dogo dogs Brazilian non-pull dogs, Japanese Tosa, Asian shepherd, the Chuandong dogs, the Soviet Union Collie, German Shepherd, Bull Terrier, English Mastiff, Cane Corso, Italy, Great Dane, the Russian Caucasus, Italian twist Bolivarian Dayton, Stavros, the Afghan hound, the Boeing dogs, Weimaraner, the Bloodhound, the Ba Xianji dog, English Bulldog, Akita, Newfoundland dogs, Kerry Blue Terrier, Chinese pastoral dogs, the Soviet Red Dog, Kunming Dog, Doberman , Belgian shepherd, Rottweiler, large wheat-cho, dog, St. Bernard dog, the Great Pyrenees Sheepdog Irish shepherd dog Shaq, Greyhound, Australian Shepherd, Flanders Collie Netherlands gross lion dog, Bird Terrier Alaska dog, Husky, Golden Retriever dogs, Chow Chow, Samoyed, Labrador, snow dogs.

Harbin ban on big dogs stirs up howls of protest

Updated: 2012-04-19 08:12
By Tian Xuefei and Zhou Huiying in Harbin (China Daily)

Under a new regulation, dogs taller than 50 cm, longer than 70 cm or on a list of 49 breeds considered “dangerous” will be banned from downtown Harbin.

[...] According to the regulation, local residents must resettle their large and dangerous dogs between April 1 and Oct 31. After that, police will remove any large dogs from the downtown area. [...]

“After Nov 1, we will establish a place where we can put the large dogs, but we will not kill any of them. We will call on organizations and people outside the city to adopt them,” said Han Zhi, vice-director of Harbin public security bureau, at a Wednesday news conference.

Though the online rumor that the dogs would be killed was denied, many said they still found it difficult to accept that many docile dogs, including Labradors, Samoyeds and golden retrievers, were on the list.

“When the one-dog policy was published, I never thought that these breeds would be included,” said Zhao Boshi, an owner of a 4-year-old golden retriever named Nike. [...]

A report by Harbin Centers for Disease Control and Prevention stated that dogs bit 1,300 people during the first two months of this year. Fear of dogs, especially large ones, makes some of the non-dog owners support the regulation. [...]

Full article retrieved 4/21/12 from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-04/19/content_15085525.htm

Bloomer, WI: City replaces breed ban with breed-specific restrictions

Bloomer will now allow some “pit bulls” if the owner can prove he/she meets several restrictive requirements on a yearly basis.

All alerts for Bloomer: http://stopbsl.com/?s=bloomer

Bloomer amends law against pit bulls

Posted: 10:12 PM Apr 11, 2012

(WEAU) – [...] Bloomer used to have an ordinance banning the dog breed, but that ban was recently amended. The new law would allow pit bulls if the owners could meet several requirements.

The change left Bloomer Police unsure how they should enforce the law, so Wednesday night the city council amended the law again to force owners to show they meet the requirements on a yearly basis. [...]

Full article retrieved 4/12/12 from http://www.weau.com/news/headlines/Bloomer_amends_law_against_pit_bulls_147095225.html