Rough count / overview:

• BSL Repealed = 6
• BSL Rejected = 34
• BSL Proposals that Died Quietly = 17
• Repeal Proposals that Did Not Pass = 8
• New BSL Passed = 12
• BSL Revised Slightly = 15

BSL Repealed

1. Bay County, MI
2. Overland, MO
3. Cleveland, OH (although breed-specific state law still applies)
4. Moses Lake, WA
5. Vienna, WV
6. Canada, BC, Cumberland

BSL Proposals Rejected

1. Montgomery, AL – this news media-driven push for BSL ended with breed-neutral revisions to the dog ordinance
2. Jasper, AL – the mayor requested a breed ban and a committee recommended BSL, but city council rejected the proposal and asked for a breed-neutral ordinance instead
3. Haskell, AR – council proposed a breed ban, but a public hearing generated too much opposition for council to ignore
4. Santa Clara County, CA – considered breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter. The proposal was officially rejected in May 2011 after the Animal Advisory Committee recommended against it.
5. Cypress, CA – considered breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter. The council rejected the idea in January 2011.
6. Petaluma, CA – a committee considered and voted against breed-specific MSN
7. Sonoma, CA – a councilmember wanted BSL, but the council decided against it
8. Hayden, CO – a resident requested BSL, but council dropped the idea, probably due to state law prohibiting BSL
9. Bristol, CT – confusing media coverage and unclear statements from a councilmember led to a massive public outcry against a possible breed ban. Council quickly backed off the idea.
10. Lisbon, IA – council proposed a breed ban, then tabled it after public opposition
11. Illinois HB 1080 – this statewide bill would have repealed the state law that prohibits municipalities from passing BSL. It died in committee.
12. Morton, IL – a resident requested BSL for “dangerous breeds,” but the council introduced a breed-neutral ordinance in January 2011
13. Gardner, KS – a councilmember asked for a breed ban, but the council voted against it
14. Terrebonne Parish, LA – a councilmember suggested BSL, but the final revisions to their dog ordinance were breed-neutral
15. Dartmouth, MA – the select board decided against BSL
16. Charles County, MD – BSL was proposed, but after a work session and some heavy public outcry, the revised proposal was breed-neutral
17. Michigan HB 4714 – the committee chair declined to hear a proposed statewide ban on “pit bulls,” so the proposal is basically dead
18. Buchanan, MI – a resident requested BSL, but the council decided against passing any new laws
19. Egelston Township, MI – the board proposed and ultimately rejected BSL
20. Wyoming, MI – after a resident requested BSL, the police chief and city manager publicly stated that the city would not pursue BSL
21. Fulton, MO – although a resident suggested BSL, the resulting proposed ordinance was breed-neutral
22. Butte-Silver Bow, MT – a councilmember’s repeated submitted proposals for BSL were voted down by the rest of council
23. Waxhaw, NC – the media reported a public call for a breed ban, but the ordinance introduced by council was breed-neutral
24. Smithville, OH – the council dropped a breed ban after public outcry
25. Oklahoma SB 362 – this statewide bill would have repealed the state law that prohibits municipalities from passing BSL. It died in committee.
26. Aberdeen, SD – after starting out with a proposal to regulate “pit bulls,” council eventually passed a breed-neutral ordinance, and rejected two breed-specific amendments to that ordinance
27. Madison, SD – although council initially considered BSL, the revised proposal was breed-neutral
28. Taylorsville, UT – a very “pit bull”-focused council meeting and work session ended with the city stating publicly that they would not pursue a breed ban
29. Friday Harbor, WA – after a resident requested BSL, council voted against the proposal in a narrow vote of 3-2
30. Vancouver, WA – what started as a “pit bull” ban eventually become breed-neutral
31. West Virginia HB 3080 – this statewide bill was poorly written and would have both prohibited BSL and declared all “pit bulls” to be dangerous dogs. It died in committee.
32. Marinette, WI – the council proposed a breed ban, did more research, discussed, and ultimately decided against a ban
33. Canada, BC, Port Moody – the council declined to propose BSL despite resident’s request
34. Canada, MB, Springfield – ban discussed by residents, but rejected by council

BSL Proposals that Fizzled Out

These proposals for BSL lost steam after a while. In most cases, officials just stopped talking about it. We don’t believe any of these proposals passed.

1. Ventura County, CA – the animal shelter director’s proposal for breed-specific MSN never gained traction with county commissioners
2. Hamden, CT – after some residents asked for a breed ban, city officials said they would look into it, but the city never discussed it again
3. Savannah, GA – a resident started a petition for BSL and the news media went crazy, but city council never took up the issue
4. Elkader, IA – BSL was briefly considered, but the city eventually stopped talking about animal ordinance revisions altogether
5. Glidden, IA – a resident asked the city to consider BSL
6. Hopkinton, IA – after a fatal attack by a Rottweiler, the mayor suggested banning Rottweilers (“pit bulls” are already banned, for all the good it did), but in the end, the council decided against it
7. Marshalltown, IA – a resident asked the city to reinstate a breed ban, but so far it appears the city isn’t interested
8. Mission Hills, KS – already had BSL for “pit bulls” and intended to add Rottweilers, but later decided against the idea
9. New Bedford, MA – although a councilmember continues to push for BSL, the proposal seems to be going nowhere
10. Ecorse, MI – although the city reported having trouble enforcing their “pit bull” ban, and said it was thinking about loosening the ban, nothing seems to have come of the idea
11. Ellenville, NY – although the council wanted to pass BSL, the city attorney advised that BSL was not allowed in New York
12. Shelby, NC – a councilmember suggested BSL, but the city did not discuss the issue again
13. Union County, NC – a county commissioner called for BSL, but no further action seems to have been taken
14. Bristol Borough, PA – although a councilmember pushed for BSL and council was considering it, the proposal quietly died
15. Springfield, TN – council intended to add to their current BSL, but later tabled the idea
16. Cornell, WI – dog ordinance discussions included debate for and against BSL, but in the end, no ordinance was drawn up
17. Waukesha, WI – an alderman suggested BSL, but the city never moved forward with the idea

BSL Repeals that Failed to Pass

Sadly, these proposals to repeal BSL did not survive.

1. Idaho S1143 – bill would have made it illegal for municipalities to pass BSL. Made it through the state Senate but missed a deadline in the House and died.
2. Preston, ID – city council voted against repeal of BSL
3. Nevada AB324 – this bill would have prohibited muncipalities from passing BSL, but the bill died
4. Kearney, MO – despite a resident’s request to repeal the city’s breed ban, the city council voted against repeal
5. Springfield, MO – the city considered a repeal of BSL, but the idea did not gain traction
6. Ohio HB 25 – an early draft repealed statewide BSL, but a later draft did not (but that’s okay, because HB 14 is still in action)
7. Oacoma, SD – declined to repeal breed ban
8. Canada, BC, Castlegar – city briefly considered repeal of BSL

New BSL Passed

1. Air Force base housing – breed ban passed
2. Barstow, CA – breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter passed
3. Fontana, CA – breed-specific mandatory spay/neuter passed
4. Franklin, KY – breed-specific restrictions passed
5. Patterson, LA – breed-specific restrictions passed
6. Lowell, MA – breed-specific restrictions passed
7. Saginaw, MI – breed-specific restrictions passed
8. Webb City, MO – breed ban passed
9. Union, MS – breed ban passed
10. Kenton, TN – breed-specific restrictions passed
11. China, Shanghai – long list of breeds banned
12. Malaysia, Subang Jaya – breed ban passed

BSL Revised (Still BSL)

1. Lake City, AR – breeds added to breed ban
2. Trumann, AR – moved from BSL to breed ban
3. Aurora, CO – repealed BSL for all restricted breeds except “pit bulls”
4. College Park, GA – revised breed-specific restrictions
5. Seward County, KS – repealed a breed ban, then passed breed restrictions
6. Hazel Park, MI – added breed ban on new “pit bulls” to current BSL
7. Camdenton, MO – city removed the grandfather clause from breed ban
8. Greenville, MS – passed stricter BSL
9. New Albany, MS – added breed ban on new “pit bulls” to current BSL
10. Oakwood, OH – created a new vicious dog ordinance that uses state law to define “vicious dog”
11. Xenia, OH – breeds added to BSL. Language also appears to create a breed ban.
12. Australia - several states in Australia have instituted stricter BSL that amounts to a breed ban
13. Canada, BC, Ladysmith – city added Canine Good Citizen exemption to BSL
14. Denmark – 12 breeds added to “watchlist” to be potentially added to breed ban
15. New Zealand – Presa Canario added to import ban list of breeds

Still on the Watchlist

These are some of the issues we will be monitoring into 2012.

1. Trussville, AL – breed ban proposed
2. Florida HB 997 / SB 1322 – would repeal BSL in Miami-Dade County (and anywhere else it has been grandfathered in)
3. Fairburn, GA – council discussion about possible breed ban
4. Hinesville, GA – council to “look into” BSL after resident request
5. Donnellson, IA – council considering breed ban
6. Mason City, IA – suggested breed ban
7. Hobart, IN – councilwoman suggested fee to own “dangerous breeds”
8. Waterville, ME – police chief says he will draft BSL (would violate state law)
9. Lake Saint Louis, MO – ordinance rewording would allow ACO to consider breed when determining dangerous dog
10. Slater, MO – council considering BSL
11. Wentzville, MO – resident group requesting repeal of BSL
12. Tupelo, MS – may add breeds to current “pit bull” BSL
13. Ohio HB 14 – would repeal state-level BSL
14. Parma, OH – citizens request repeal of breed ban (but it doesn’t seem to have gained traction in council)
15. Chippewa Falls, WI – some talk about BSL (though it doesn’t appear to be going anywhere)
16. Canada, Ontario – bill would repeal breed ban
17. U.K. – bill would repeal nationwide BSL

Unknown Outcomes

These are open cities, states, or countries that we are unable to monitor or determine what came of the proposal. If you have any updates for these, please send us an email at stopbsl.com@gmail.com.

1. Porterdale, GA – news reported that council would discuss BSL or a breed ban during a work session
2. Merrillville, IN – the city was considering adding “Staffordshire Terrier” to definition of “pit bull”
3. Junction City, KY – the police chief reported that residents were asking for a breed ban
4. Ridgely, MD – the city was considering adding breeds and restrictions to its current BSL Outcome established (see city link)
5. Burton, MI – the city was going to consider Saginaw’s BSL as a possible model for their own dog ordinance
6. Manton, MI – news reported breed ban in the works
7. Canada, AB, Grande Prairie – news reported possible repeal of BSL
8. Canada, AB, Wetaskiwin – news reported resident requesting BSL
9. Canada, MB, Winnipeg – citizen group was working to repeal BSL
10. Canada, NS, Halifax – councillor called for BSL or breed ban
11. Canada, NS, Yarmouth – BSL proposed
12. Canada, QC, Montreal, Hochelaga-Maisonneuve borough – Mayor suggests BSL or breed ban
13. Canada, QC, Montreal, Rivière-des-Prairies – Pointe-aux-Trembles borough – Borough plans to muzzle “pit bulls”
14. Lithuania – government drafting breed ban
15. Norway – Govt officials discuss possible repeal of BSL
16. Trinidad and Tobago – BSL already in place; govt intends to revise

The committee also stated an interest in enforcing or strengthening the breed-neutral dog ordinances they already have in place.

Thanks to the many people who took the time to update StopBSL on Marinette, including Cindi and the Lakeshore Bully Club.

All alerts for Marinette: http://stopbsl.com/?s=marinette

In July, the Marinette, WI, Public Safety and Code Enforcement Committee wrote up a proposal to ban ”pit bulls.” Their decision to advance the ordinance to council was delayed by public protest.

The Committee will again discuss and possibly recommend a breed ban or breed-specific restrictions on Wednesday, August 10, at 4:45 PM, in Council Chambers, Marinette City Hall, 1905 Hall Avenue, Marinette, WI.

In addition to sending correspondence to council to oppose breed-discriminatory laws, residents and locals are urged to attend the Public Safety and Code Enforcement Committee meeting on August 10 to reiterate public opposition to the proposed ban.

Marinette City Hall, 1905 Hall Avenue, Marinette, WI 54143-1716
Mayor Robert M. Harbick, mayor@marinette.wi.us
Elected officials’ contact information may be viewed here (emails not available): http://www.marinette.wi.us/government/elected_officials.php

The Public Safety and Code Enforcement Committee meets on the second Wednesday of  each month at 4:45 PM. City Council meets on the first Tuesday of each month at 7:00 PM. Call 715.732.5120 for more information.

Marinette, WI, Public Safety and Code Enforcement Committee has written up a proposed ordinance to ban ”pit bulls”; the committee considered the proposal during a meeting today. The committee has decided to perform additional research on the issue before advancing the proposed ordinance to city council.

Residents and locals, please send polite, respectful, informative correspondence to the city council as they prepare to look into the issue further. You may wish to demonstrate the ethical, financial, and public safety failures of BSL and breed bans; you may also wish to provide reasonable, effective, and fair breed-neutral ordinances for their consideration.

Marinette City Hall, 1905 Hall Avenue, Marinette, WI 54143-1716 
Mayor Robert M. Harbick, mayor@marinette.wi.us
Elected officials’ contact information may be viewed here (emails not available): http://www.marinette.wi.us/government/elected_officials.php

The Public Safety and Code Enforcement Committee meets on the second Wednesday of  each month at 4:45 PM. City Council meets on the first Tuesday of each month at 7:00 PM. Call 715.732.5120 for more information.

Pit bull ban?

Marinette is considering banning pit bulls

Published : Wednesday, 13 Jul 2011, 9:42 PM CDT
Reporter: Becky DeVries

MARINETTE – Should people be allowed to own pit bulls? Marinette is considering an ordinance that would keep all pit bulls out of the city. [...]

According to the Marinette public safety and code enforcement committee chair, Marinette’s mayor asked the city attorney to draft an ordinance banning residents from owning pit bulls. [...]

Ten people spoke up at the committee meeting, all against an ordinance banning pit bulls. [...]

The committee unanimously voted to put the idea on hold and look into more research, before making a recommendation to the full city council.[...]

Full article retrieved 7/13/11 from http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/local/north_counties/marinette-considers-pit-bull-ordinance

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

Implementation procedures for banned dog breeds released for Pendleton residents

Written by Lance Cpl. Daniel Boothe, Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
Tuesday, 22 December 2009

Camp Pendleton announced implementation procedures for banned dog breeds today, after receiving approval of a request to extend the waiver period originally mandated by Headquarters Marine Corps.

Marine Corps Order P11000.22 Ch 6, released in August, mandated all installations ban any breed of pit bull, rottweiler or wolf hybrid dog from residing on base. It also prevented visitors from bringing banned breeds on base.

[...] “The Marine Corps Order’s original deadline gave residents only 60 days to complete breed testing and approval,” said Grabman. “But Camp Pendleton went through a pretty extensive review and waiver process to get that date pushed out until April of 2010 to ensure residents have adequate time to meet all the requirements.”

[...] Pendleton’s Domestic Animal Control will require majority breed determinations for animals in question at the owner’s expense.[...]

Full article retrieved 12/29/10 from http://scoutnewspaper.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1129&Itemid=411

Ironically, only 2% of the banned dogs on the base proved, through temperament testing, to actually pose a danger. The other 98% of “aggressive”-type dogs were shown to be safe family pets.

The testing was not performed on non-banned types of dogs. If the goal of the policy is to protect base residents from aggressive dogs, why weren’t the temperament tests done on all residents’ dogs? Why weren’t all aggressive dogs removed from base, and the non-aggressive ones left alone, regardless of their physical appearance?

Contact info for Marine Corps spokesperson
Headquarters Marine Corps 1st Lt. Brian Block
The Pentagon, Arlington, Va.
(703) 614-4309
brian.block@usmc.mil

Two of 85 dogs ousted from South Carolina Marine bases for aggressiveness

October 9, 2009 | 11:26 am

Most of the pit bulls, Rottweilers and canine-wolf mixes assessed at Marine bases in South Carolina this week get to keep their Marine dog tags.

Of 85 dogs from the three breeds checked by experts from the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, only two were found to be so aggressive as to pose a danger to Marines and their families. Those two will have to leave base housing. [...]

Full article retrieved 10/10/09 from http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2009/10/two-of-85-dogs-ousted-by-aspca-from-south-carolina-marine-bases.html

This base in S.C. will provide waivers to residents whose dogs pass the SAFER behavior test administered by the ASPCA. The residents will be allowed to keep their pets on the base until 2012.

Marines Enlist Help of ASPCA Animal Behavior Experts

Team of Experts to Assess Behavior of Dogs in Danger of Breed Ban

NEW YORK, Sept. 28 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Several Animal Behavior Experts from the ASPCA(R)( )(The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals(R)) will be in Parris Island, S.C. from October 6-8 to conduct behavior assessments of over 100 dogs living with their pet parents who could potentially be subject to a breed ban in the Tri-Command housing units of the Marines Corp Recruit Depot.

[...] “We’re very excited about the ASPCA coming to Parris Island,” said Army Capt. Jenifer Gustafson, the Officer in Charge of the veterinary clinic on Parris Island. “There was a chance that some pet parents would be forced to give up their dogs or leave housing on the base, so this is a great alternative solution.”

Full article retrieved 9/29/09 from http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/marines-enlist-help-of-aspca-animal-behavior-experts-62343397.html

Marine Corps puts certain dog breeds on a short leash when living on base

By PATRICK DONOHUE
pdonohue@beaufortgazette.com
Published Friday, September 11, 2009

Beaufort Marines have until the end of the month to get the Corps’ permission to keep their Rottweilers and pit bulls on base — and then only for another year.

Without the waiver, they have to give up their dogs or move off base, according to a Marine Corps order last month.[...]

Full article retrieved 9/14/09 from http://www.islandpacket.com/news/local/story/963856.html

Proposal would ban some dogs from base housing

By Trista Talton – Staff writer
Posted : Monday Aug 3, 2009 8:02:49 EDT

A new Corpswide proposal calls for banning specific dogs and mixes of those breeds from all Marine bases as soon as September.

The draft order, which would be included in the Marine Corps Housing Management Manual, prohibits pit bulls, Rottweilers, canid/wolf hybrids and mixes of those dogs from being on “any Marine Corps installation, at any time.” The only exception would be trips directly to and from a base veterinary office, “with no other stops aboard the installation authorized.”[...]

Full article retrieved 8/3/09 from http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/2009/08/marine_dogs_080209w/