Category Archives: BSL Proposed

Albany Georgia looking into breed discriminatory law

Posted on May 22, 2013 by | Leave a comment

The Albany City Commissioners are looking into changes to the city’s dangerous dog laws.

A citizens advisory committee has been approved to investigate the issue and make a recommendation to the Commissioners. The city Attorney has already began work on an ordinance that would single out pit bulls by requiring special registration, containment regulations, insurance and other restrictions that have yet to be named. At least one Commissioner, Tommie Postell, has spoken openly in opposition to singling out dogs based on breed.

There seems to be a lot of media bias at play here.  One Commissioner Robert Marietta said in a recent article, “That is a breed that has a proven propensity to bite.  We haven’t seen a whole lot of it around here, but there are news items from all over the country of little kids being mauled by pit bulls.”

The city’s current ordinance categorizes a “dangerous dog” as one that has bitten someone or caused an injury.  The current city ordinance (Part 2, Chapter 10) is a rather good one that offers stiff penalties and very clearly outlines the responsibilities and legal rights of those in the community.  This is probably one reason why Albany has not had an overwhelming issue in the community, though there is a very real possibility that they are not enforcing the laws. If there is any issue, it is not a failure of the law, which is quite comprehensive, but one of enforcement.

There are no dates at this time and since this is still in the discussion and drafting stage it is extremely important to reach out to city officials to politely offer evidence of the failure of breed discriminatory laws and breed neutral alternatives to help strengthen any areas officials feel are lacking in the law.

Commissioners e-mail information:

Mayor Dorothy Hubbard: dhubbard@albany.ga.us

Commissioner Jon Howard: jhoward@albany.ga.us

Commissioner Ivy Hines: ihines@albany.ga.us

Commissioner Christopher Pike: cpike@albany.ga.us

Commissioner Roger Marietta: rmarietta@albany.ga.us

Commissioner Bob Langstaff: bob@langstafflaw.com

Commissioner Tommie Postell: tpostell@albany.ga.us

→ Leave a comment

Posted in BSL Proposed

Tagged , , ,

Springville Alabama is considering a multi-breed discriminatory law

Posted on May 19, 2013 by | 10 Comments

On May 6th the Springville City Council tabled an ordinance that would redefine what a dangerous dog is.  The current suggestions include breed discriminatory language that would target “any pit bull terrier which is defined as any Cane Corso breed of dog, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier or Bull Mastiff breed of dog.” 

This is by far the strangest inclusion of breeds in a definition of a “pit bull terrier” that I have seen so far. The very fact that the American Pit Bull Terrier is not the first on the definition, but Cane Corso is, is extremely telling about how much the officials understand about the topic.

The ordinance would require owners of targeted dogs to get a special registration, confine the dog according to the law, muzzle. Initially the idea of insurance was brought up but was rejected.

The director of public works has stated that they were “mirroring” other towns ordinances and that the changes are a cross-section of the laws of neighboring towns.

Mayor William Isely is showing some hesitation. He has said that he does not want to be premature in enacting this ordinance and thought that it needs more looking into.

The next work session was supposed to be on May 22 but needed to be cancelled because one of the members could not attend.  There is currently no date for the session, though it should come up soon.

Because they are still in the work session stage, it is extremely import to reach out and offer opposition to this ordinance. Politely ask that they institute a strong breed neutral ordinance instead and reject breed discrimination.  Showing that a breed discriminatory law would open them up legally and would not help the community, and then offering alternatives will go a long way. The Mayor and Council are putting work into this, let’s help them out to avoid the trap BDL creates.

Mayor William Isely: wisley@springvillealabama.org

Councilman Hugh Marlin: hmarlin@springvillealabama.org

Councilman Wayne Tucker: wtucker@springvillealabama.org

Councilwoman Katrina Hennings: khennings@springvillealabama.org

Councilman Chip Martin: cmartin@springvillealabama.org

Councilman David Jones: djones@springvillealabama.org

Councilman Larry Jones: larryjones@springvillealabama.org

→ 10 Comments

Posted in BSL Proposed

Tagged , , , , ,

Great Bend KS to discuss ban

Posted on May 19, 2013 by | Leave a comment

The Great Bend City Council will discuss a possible breed ban during their next meeting.

The meeting will be held on Monday May 20th.

There is limited information at this time about what positions the council takes and this appears to be a residents request that is being considered. The Council will consider a ban on “pit bulls and other vicious dogs.“

The Great Bend City Council will meet at 7:30 p.m. Monday at the City Office, 1209 Williams, Great Bend, Kansas.

Residents and locals: Please attend the meeting to respectfully and factually support breed neutral laws. Alternatives to breed discrimination can be found here. Tips for contacting legislators can be found here.

If you cannot attend the meeting please write with your opposition to a ban.

The Great Bend staff directory can be found on the cities website.

There are no e-mail addresses available for the individual council members but you may write to the City Administrator City Howard Partington at
hdpart@greatbend.com with a note that the correspondence is for the council.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in BSL Proposed

Tagged , , , , , ,

Flemingsburg Kentucky City Council passes first reading of breed ban

Posted on May 16, 2013 by | Leave a comment

At Monday nights meeting, Flemingsburg Kentucky City Council voted unanimously to alter their current breed discriminatory ordinance, which regulates pit bulls, to a complete ban.

Members of the council cite complaints from their constituents about dogs at large as the reason for the change.  Once again, a municipality has instituted a breed specific ordinance that has failed to increase the overall safety of the community.  Instead of recognizing the ordinances failures and instituting strong breed neutral regulations, they choose instead to continue to waste resources on targeting dogs based on their appearance.

All dogs deemed to be a targeted dog would have to be removed 30 days after the passage of the proposal.  A fine of $250 accompanies the loss of the dog.

All members of the community should be concerned about the current state of animal control. Proper reform will finally begin with officials abandoning the breed discriminatory laws and instituting a strong owner based law that would provide hefty penalties for non-compliance and a more easily enforceable standard.  The community will find much more of the animal control resources available to address problem owners when they stop targeting dogs based on appearance.

Flemingsburg residents and locals: The second reading of the ordinance will be on June 10th.  Reach out, politely, to officials to offer breed neutral alternatives, that would increase public safety and keep animal control funds where they need to be.

Often officials do not know what they are doing in crafting these ordinances. It is up to those of us who are knowledgeable to help point them in the direction of effective laws.

Contact information for the council is spotty.  Some of the Council members have chosen to not provide contact information but others have.

City Clerk Joy Roark: joyroark@altiusbb.com

Council Member Meredith Story: MLSTORY@windstream.ne

Council Member Scott Manning: (606) 845-6301

Council Member Van Alexander: (606) 845-1531

→ Leave a comment

Posted in BSL Proposed

Tagged , , ,

Westwego Louisiana Councilman to propose breed ban

Posted on May 10, 2013 by | Leave a comment

Councilman Glen Green has been talking about a push to increase restrictions on dogs deemed to be pit bulls since a horrific attack on a constituent and friend earlier this year.  He plans to bring these regulations to the City Council on Monday.

The changes to the law, should they pass, would ban any dog deemed to be a “pit bull” that is not registered in the city. Those that are registered would be subject to a list of requirements. Owners would have to be older than 21, unless the dog is being used as a service dog, dogs must be muzzled in public, spayed or neutered and microchipped and the owner must have a homeowner’s or renter’s liability insurance of at least $100,000.  It is interesting that Councilman Green has thought about the service dog issue but not surprising that he would not understand the breadth of the hardship such regulations would impose on a person with disabilities.

Unlicensed animals would be killed if the owner fails to remove the dog from the city immediately and the owners fined $500.

The dogs would be DNA tested to determine if they fall under the restrictions but there is no clarification at this time as to what breeds are going to be included. Officials say 50% would be considered restricted. Also not specified is what kind of DNA test is acceptable, since saliva is notoriously unreliable and even blood tests do not meet the standards to be admissible in court.

Councilman Green apparently is well aware that this law would be extremely expensive but according to a recent interview he plans on paying for it out of his discretionary fund.  An important question is what happens when the Council either no longer has the funds to pay for it, or is no longer willing to take that money out of the fund?  What happens when that fund is needed for more pressing matters than targeting dogs based on appearance? No doubt they have not thought that far ahead and in the end the tax payers will bear the burden of enforcing a law that Councilman Green wants to be strictly enforced.

Councilman Green acknowledges that the dogs themselves are not the problem. He stated that “The rationale is to control the pet owners, not so much the pets … We’ve got to do something to get their attention.”

What he does not seem to realize, though, is that he is doing exactly the opposite of what he intends. The things that he plans on introducing are targeting the dog, not the owner, and will not help to increase public safety.

Westwego residents and locals: Please reach out to the members of the Westwego City Council and if at all possible attend the meetings to voice opposition to breed discrimination. It is important to remember that the attack that happened was a terrible tragedy. Emotions are bound to run high, but nothing is ever accomplished by reacting emotionally.  Be factual and respectful in all correspondence. Offer strong breed neutral alternatives that would target problem owners instead of dogs. You can find alternatives to breed discrimination here. The Council is not interested in how much people love their dogs, they are interested in real effective ways to help make the community safer. Though the methods they are choosing are not the solution, their hearts are in the right place.

Councilman Glen Green: glenngreen@netzero.com

Councilman Ted Munch: TedMunch@cityofwestwego.com

Councilman Ivy Rogers: ivyrogers@cityofwestwego.com

Councilman Melvin Guidry: melvin.guidry@nov.com

Councilman Larry Warino: LWarino4westwego@aol.com

→ Leave a comment

Posted in BSL Proposed

Tagged , , , ,

North Carolina HB956 assigned to committee

Posted on April 19, 2013 by | 6 Comments

UPDATED INFORMATION HERE

The North Carolina bill to restrict ownership of multiple breeds of dogs has been referred to the House Committee on Rules, Calendar and Operations of the House. No date has been set as of yet for the bill to be heard.

HB 956 would restrict the following breeds and their mixes:

Rottweiler
Mastiff
Chow
Presa Canario
wolf hybrid
pit bull, which are defined as Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, and American Pit Bull Terrier

The bills sponsor Rep. Moore is now saying that he derived this list based off of dogs that insurance companies restrict.  Basing legislation on restrictions from insurance companies would be absolutely detrimental to dog owners everywhere who currently have insurance, or want to obtain insurance. Considering that one of the requirements of the bill is to notify an insurance company that you have a targeted dog and are in compliance with the regulations, should this pass, we can expect people to be dropped from their insurance, even if there were previously no issues.

North Carolina residents: Members of the committee to write in opposition of the bill can be found here.

Block e-mails: (Remember that if you put all the e-mail addresses in the “to” line the e-mail may be bounced back as spam so be sure to utilize to CC address line):

Tim.Moore@ncleg.net, Justin.Burr@ncleg.net, Paul.Stam@ncleg.net, John.Blust@ncleg.net, Jamie.Boles@ncleg.net, Marcus.Brandon@ncleg.net, William.Brisson@ncleg.net, Becky.Carney@ncleg.net, Leo.Daughtry@ncleg.net, Jean.Farmer-Butterfield@ncleg.net,
Elmer.Floyd@ncleg.net, Larry.Hall@ncleg.net, Susi.Hamilton@ncleg.net,
Kelly.Hastings@ncleg.net, Bryan.Holloway@ncleg.net, Darren.Jackson@ncleg.net, Linda.Johnson2@ncleg.net, David.Lewis@ncleg.net, Tim.Moffitt@ncleg.net, Jason.Saine@ncleg.net, Ruth.Samuelson@ncleg.net, Edgar.Starnes@ncleg.net, Michael.Stone@ncleg.net, John.Torbett@ncleg.net

Please continue to reach out to the bills sponsors to urge them to withdraw the bill.

Representative Rodney Moore: Rodney.Moore@ncleg.net

Representative Larry Pittman: Larry.Pittman@ncleg.net

Previous alert for North Carolina.

→ 6 Comments

Posted in BSL Proposed, North Carolina

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

North Carolina bill filed to restrict multiple breeds

Posted on April 17, 2013 by | 31 Comments

UPDATED INFORMATION HERE

A bill has been filed in the North Carolina House of Representatives that would restrict the ownership of several breeds of dogs.

HB 956, a bill to “Regulate Ownership of Aggressive Dog Breeds,” proposes an amendment to North Carolina’s dog laws that would impose restrictions on the following breeds and “dogs that are predominantly of any of the following breeds:”

Rottweiler
Mastiff
Chow
Presa Canario
wolf hybrid
pit bull, which are defined as Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, and American Pit Bull Terrier

The following are the requirements proposed to own one of the targeted dogs:

-Submission to a criminal background check

-Enrollment in “a course of instruction of no less than four hours duration provided by the Humane Society of the United States, or any of the rescue organizations for any of the aggressive dog breeds as defined in subsection (a) of this section that is designed to educate the owners of these dogs about their temperament and about the requirements for responsible ownership of the breed”

-A person must notify their insurance carrier, if any, of compliance with the other provisions

-A person must obtain a special permit from the Department of Insurance

Once again, we have a piece of legislation that fails to outline, in the case of mixed breed dogs, what the standard is to prove a dog is one of the listed breeds or mixes.

Also notable is the lack of definition of what constitutes a “mastiff.”  There are roughly 20 separate breeds that are considered mastiffs.

The question must be raised as to who will be developing a curriculum for these classes people are supposed to take. Who determines exactly what constitutes the requirements for responsible ownership of one breed over another?  Who will pay for developing this program?

In an interview, the bills sponsor Representative Rodney Moore was quoted saying, “It’s just to let people take responsibility for owning those breeds. Because they’re good dogs, all of them. But they have the potential.”

Representative Moore is clearly concerned about both the dogs and his community but this particular piece of legislation is a misdirected attempt at forcing responsibility on some people, while allowing lax care from others. All dog owners need to be held to the same standard. By creating special standards for one breed over another, we alienate good owners and create a false sense of security when it comes to other dogs. A gross disparity in the expected care and control of dogs invariably fails the community as a whole.

The financial impact of breed discriminatory laws is something that cannot be ignored. According to Best Friends Animal Society’s fiscal calculator, the estimated cost of enforcing this type of legislation for pit bulls only would be over $14,000,000 a year.  This does not factor in the cost of enforcing this for all the other dogs listed.

North Carolina Residents: Please reach out now to your Representatives to ask them to oppose HB 956. Also, politely and professionally, reach out to Rep. Rodney Moore and the bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. Larry Pittman, to ask that this bill be withdrawn.

You can find your specific representatives on the states website.

Representative Rodney Moore: Rodney.Moore@ncleg.net

Representative Larry Pittman: Larry.Pittman@ncleg.net

→ 31 Comments

Posted in BSL Proposed, North Carolina

Tagged , , , , , , ,