Tag Archives: bull terrier

Enumclaw, Washington, considers repeal of breed ban

A change to the Enumclaw, WA, ordinance that bans “pit bulls” is working its way through the city council.

The first vote of the repeal was passed on September 22nd, with only one dissenting vote.  The second and final reading of the repeal is set to be heard on October 13th.

The current ordinance defines “pit bull” as “any dog over the age of six months known by the owner to be a Pit Bull Terrier. Pit Bull Terrier shall mean any Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, or Staffordshire Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire Terrier breed of dog or any mixed breed of dog which contains as an element of its breeding the breed of Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire Terrier so as to be identifiable as partially of the breed Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire Terrier.

Again, we see the use of the “as an element of its breeding” in the ordinance, which has been successfully challenged in court several times.  Because the implication is that even a dog with 1% of the listed breeds is banned, there is a question as to whether, rationally, a dog with 1% of anything could contain the supposed “inherent” behaviors of that breed.

City administrator Chris Searcy stated that the city repeatedly receives requests from residents to repeal the law, showing support for the repeal, specific to residents.

Residents and locals are encouraged to attend the meeting, to show support for the repeal.  If you cannot attend this meeting, you can contact the city council to politely and factually support the repeal of the current breed ban, by finding your council members information on the cities website.

Oacoma, SD: Breed ban to remain in place

Oacoma OKs dog-breed ban

By: Anna Jauhola, The Daily Republic

OACOMA — The Oacoma town board recently upheld its vicious dog ordinance after a resident requested it be amended.

Jessica Countryman-Vennard asked the board at the Aug. 15 meeting to amend its ordinance to allow pit bull terriers already living in the city to remain with their owners. The board declined the request and left the existing ordinance in place, which bans various breeds from the city. […]

The ordinance doesn’t only pertain to pit bull terriers. It specifically refers to any dog of the bull terrier breed, including bull terriers mixed with Staffordshire terriers, German shepherds, Doberman pinschers or any other breed. […]

Full article retrieved 9/1/11 from http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/event/article/id/56424/

Singapore: Changes to breed-specific dangerous dog laws

In Singapore, Presa Canarios have been moved from the Second Schedule Part II list to Part I list, and new restrictions on Part I and Part II dogs have been added.

Second Schedule Part I dog breeds include the following: “pit bull” (American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Bulldog), Akita, Neapolitan Mastiff, Tosa, Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Presa Canario, Boerboel, and any mixes of these breeds.

Part I dog restrictions include the following (includes new changes to dog law):

  • Muzzled and leashed in public
  • Microchipped
  • Spayed/neutered
  • Liability insurance of $100,000 minimum
  • Only one Part I dog may be kept on a premises (new restriction)
  • Obedience training (new restriction)
  • A $5,000 deposit that is forfeited (and must be renewed) if the owner fails to comply with any of these restrictions
  • May not be imported

Second Schedule Part II dog breeds include the following: Mastiffs (Cane Corso, Bull Mastiff, Dogue de Bordeaux), Bull Terrier, Doberman Pinscher, German Shepherd and related breeds (Belgian Shepherd Dog, East European Shepherd Dog), Rottweiler, and mixes of these breeds.

Part II dog restrictions include the following (includes new changes to dog law):

  • Muzzled and leashed in public
  • Microchipped (new restriction)
  • Liability insurance of $100,000 minimum (new restriction)
  • Obedience training (new restriction)
  • Only one Part II dog may be kept on a premises (new restriction)
  • A $2,000 deposit that is forfeited (and must be renewed) if the dog owner fails to comply with any of these restrictions (new restriction)

Restrictions similar to those in Part II will also apply to any dog that has engaged in an unprovoked attack that causes injury to a person or animal. (New restriction)

The changes to Singapore’s dog law can be viewed here: http://www.ava.gov.sg/NR/rdonlyres/9253E7B2-E57D-4992-982C-1304E73748D6/18191/CHANGESTOTHEANIMALSANDBIRDSDOGLICENSINGANDCONTROLR.pdf

Bermuda: Proposal to move some breeds from “banned” to new “restricted” class

The following 23 breeds are currently banned in Bermuda: 

  • Akita
  • American Bulldog
  • American Pitbull terrier
  • American Staffordshire Terrier
  • Argentine mastiff (Dogo Argentino)
  • Aryan Molossus
  • Australian Dingo
  • Boerboel
  • Brazilian mastiff (Fila Brasileiro)
  • Bull Terrier & Miniature Bull Terrier
  • Bullmastiff
  • Cane Corso
  • Danish Broholmer
  • Dogue de Bordeaux
  • English Staffordshire Bull Terrier
  • Japanese Tosa (Tosa Inu)
  • Mastiff
  • Neopolitan Mastiff
  • Perro de Presa Canario
  • Perro de Presa Mallorquin
  • Rottweiler
  • Tibetan Mastiff
  • Wolf & Wolf Hybrid
  • All types of crossbreeds of the above mentioned dogs
  • This list of breeds cannot be considered as exhaustive. Any exotic or uncommon breed may also be refused entry despite its absence from the list above. The list will be amended as necessary.

The proposal would move some of these breeds into a new “restricted” category, which would allow the dogs in Bermuda, but with special requirements for owners. The article below contradicts itself; I cannot confirm at this time which breeds will remain banned and which are proposed to become restricted.

Bid to remove dogs from BDA’s banned breed list

Simon Jones
9/24/2010 10:36:00 AM

An overhaul of the way dogs are classified in Bermuda could be implemented within weeks. The move could see rottweilers, Staffordshire bull terriers and mastiffs taken off the banned breed list and put into a new “restricted” category. German shepherds, dobermans and Rhodesian ridgebacks would be placed into the same group. Dogs in the new category would be allowed into Bermuda but there will be additional conditions attached for keeping, licensing and breeding.

Read the rest of the article at:


Midwest City, OK: Court of Appeals says city can’t ban breeds

Previous alerts for Midwest City:

Although OK state law prohibits BSL, Midwest City is a home rule city. The question that will be brought to the OK Supreme Court is whether Midwest City, as a home rule city, can pass laws that conflict with state law.

MWC dog appeals

Staff Writer
4:23 PM CST, December 2, 2009

MIDWEST CITY, OK — A Midwest City couple is one step closer to keeping their dogs after a 2-Year battle with city officials. According to Jerry and Carol Stuckey, their trouble started when a city ordinance banned any breed of dog with the words “pit” or “bull” in their name. That means their bull terriers are not welcomed.[…]

Earlier this week the Oklahoma Court of Appeals agreed with Stuckeys and claim city officials can’t ban any breed of dog.[…]

Full article retrieved 12/4/09 from http://www.kfor.com/news/local/kfor-news-mwc-dog-appeals-story,0,5439940.story

Midwest City, OK: MWC, Residents Fight Over Dog Ban

Ridiculous quote of the month: Katherine Bolles, the City Attorney for Midwest City said, “Those dogs [pit bulls] will seek out small children or petite women as their prey. They don’t just bite them and release, they bite to kill.”

Please send your photos of petite women and small children hanging out with “pit bulls” to:
Katherine Bolles, City Attorney
100 N. Midwest Boulevard, Midwest City, OK 73110

Contact page for Midwest City Mayor and City Council:

The Council meets on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month, beginning at 7:15 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 100 N. Midwest Boulevard.

Next city council meeting: July 28


MWC & Residents Fight Over Dog Ban

Story Created: Jul 20, 2009 at 5:24 PM CDT

Covering the metro, a battle continues in Midwest City over which dogs can be owned by residents. Bull terrier is one of the breeds that are not allowed. But a local family won a ruling to keep their dogs and now, the city is waiting for their appeal to be heard in court.

[…] Katherine Bolles, the City Attorney for Midwest City said, “Those dogs will seek out small children or petite women as their prey. They don’t just bite them and release, they bite to kill.”

Oklahoma Statute indicates that no one can practice specific breed banning. So Midwest City says they should be able to rule over local issues since they’re a Home-Rule Charter City.[…]

Midwest City, OK: Dogfight brews in Midwest City as breed law is enforced


Dogfight brews in Midwest City as breed law is enforced

By Aaron Wright, editor
The Sun
Published: July 13, 2009 01:49 pm

[…] Enforcing Midwest City ordinance Article 4, Section 8-171, the city officials confronted Carol and Jerry Stuckey in December of 2007 about their ownership of bull terriers. According to the ordinance, bull terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, American Pit Bull Terrier and American Staffordshire Terrier breeds constitute the definition of a pit bull.

Referencing Oklahoma statute Title 4, section 46 about not being able to practice breed specific banning, the Stuckey’s took the city of Midwest City to court.

The court ruled in favor of the Stuckeys. The city appealed the decision.

“Really, probably the key thing about this case is that it’s not about dogs,” said Katherine Bolles, city attorney for Midwest City. She said the city is most interested in having the courts define the powers of a home-rule charter city, which Midwest City is.[…]

Currently, the city is working on filing briefs. Midwest City has hired an attorney in Edmond that specializes in home-rule charters and municipal law. The $200 an hour fee for the attorney comes out of a fund set aside to address lawsuits.

“It’s very significant for all municipalities in the state,” said Bolles.[…]