Exeter, CA: Exeter council delays vote on dog ordinance

Previous alert for Exeter: http://stopbsl.com/2010/02/08/exeter-ca-city-council-to-consider-bsl-that-violates-state-law-feb-9/

Exeter council delays vote on dog ordinance

Staff reports • February 9, 2010

By a 5-0 vote Tuesday night, the Exeter City Counci voted to delay a vote on a controversial dog ordinance that would have targeted certain breeds for especially stiff licensing requirements and harsh confinement.

[…] No date was set to revisit the ordinance.[…]

Full article retrieved 2/10/10 from http://www.visaliatimesdelta.com/article/20100209/NEWS01/100209017/Exeter+council+delays+vote+on+dog+ordinance

2 responses to “Exeter, CA: Exeter council delays vote on dog ordinance

  1. I am frankly quite upset with the city for taking this issue to the extreme and seeking to implement BSL. I was disappointed with the councilmen/women at their lack of creativity in solving the dilemna of owner accountability. At one point during the testimony of a FBR volunteer, Jack A. Asked her to provide him with statistical data regarding the issue! I’m sorry, but if the City feels this strongly against pitbulls,they should have been providing US with the data, not the other way around.

    If they had, they would have found that the majority of reputable organizations are adamantly against BSL. According to the CDC, only .0000222 of all dog bites result in fatalities, and of all reported dog bites, it’s impossible to say exactly which breed is most responsible for the attacks.

    Also, I was disappointed with the City’s failure to include in the ordinance how Exeter would be financially supporting the local animal shelters and rescues that will undoubtedly be drastically affected by the new legislation, should it be passed.

    Lastly, the city failed to address if any additional training the local police force would receive to properly identify the breeds affected by the ordinance to protect owners with dogs, such as boxers and American Bulldogs, who closely resemble and are often mistaken for pitbulls.As the majority of pets are not papered and registered, who is going to be the expert in saying wether or not those dogs have the met the necessary breed standards to be included as part of the affected group of dogs? My white boxer is always being mistaken as a pit, and is often met by strangers with a wary glance and wide berth. But a boxer owner knows better and could differentiate in a heartbeat. Do you think police officers are going to consider that a priority? Probabaly not.

  2. If they are going to try and subject a particualar breed… than it would be the same as the 1980 when african americans had no rights and hispanica didnt either… statistics show that smaller dogs are more prone to bit that larger breed… yes larger breeds cause more damage… but if your going to ban a breed because its owner is ignorant and allows them to be aggresive animals becuase its the owner not the breed. than that is retarted… its horrible that that ladys dog was killed but maybe if she kept her dog on a lesh than that would be a differnt story. if your going to change the rules for large breed animals than you have to change the rule for all dogs not just pitbulls boxers, dobbies, rotties etc… as far as it goes i feel that unless your a breeder and have a kennel than you should only be allowed one large dog per house hold there has beed studys showing that black labs are more prone to bit that pitbulls, so this whole issue is rediculous to me…