June 16, 2008
Compiled By:
Ken Sondej
4winds@viawest.net
&
Linda D. Witouski
dropfred13@aol.com
Please email one of the above authors to contribute information, update information, send corrections or ask questions.
Copyright © 2008, The Monthly National Legislation Report
(Copyright © violations include deleting, changing, or altering of information)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Federal
The above Farm Bill is 673 pages.
http://agriculture.house.gov/inside/Legislation/110/FB/Conf/CRlang.pdf
Included in it are the following sections of importance to the dog community - Section 14207: Prohibitions on Dog Fighting Ventures which can be found on pages 582 & 583. The other is Section 14210 regarding Importation of Live Dogs and can be found on page 585. UPDATE - (5/21/08) - Mix-up puts House farm bill veto override in doubt.The House overwhelmingly rejected George W. Bush's veto Wednesday of a $290 billion farm bill, but what should have been a stinging defeat for the president became an embarrassment for Democrats. Only hours before the House's 316-108 vote, Bush had vetoed the five-year measure, saying it was too expensive and gave too much money to wealthy farmers when farm incomes are high. The Senate then was expected to follow suit quickly. Action stalled, however, after the discovery that Congress had omitted a 34-page section of the bill when lawmakers sent the massive measure to the White House. That means Bush vetoed a different bill from the one Congress passed, leaving leaders scrambling to figure out whether it could become law. Democrats hoped to pass the entire bill, again, on Thursday under expedited rules usually reserved for unopposed legislation. Lawmakers also probably will have to pass an extension of current farm law, which expires Friday. "We will have to repass the whole thing, as will the Senate," said Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y. "We can't let the farm bill just die."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_on_go_co/bush_farm_bill&printer=1;_ylt=AkicG9AWS27WUKZYLRvCpIiMwfIE
UPDATE: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 Congress Overrides Farm Bill VetoWASHINGTON, DC - This afternoon, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to override President Bush's second veto of the Food, Conservation and Energy Act with a bipartisan vote of 317-109."Today's vote will ensure that all parts of the Food, Conservation and Energy Act are enacted into law," Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson said. "Particularly considering the serious concerns about rising food prices and severe flooding affecting crops in the Midwest, this Farm Bill provides a critical safety net for families and farmers." Last month, Congress approved the conference report for the Food, Conservation and Energy Act (H.R. 2419). When that bill was sent to the White House, one of the bill's 15 titles was inadvertently left out of the official copy of the bill vetoed by the President. Congress overrode the veto of H.R. 2419, which enacted 14 of the bill's 15 titles into law. To ensure that all 15 titles are properly enacted, the House passed the Food, Conservation and Energy Act a second time with a new bill number (H.R. 6124). That bill was sent to the White House, and following President Bush's veto, the House voted today to override the veto.
S2831 - Senator Seeks New Regulations for Charities
A key senator wants to give the Federal Trade Commission the power to regulate nonprofit organizations including penalizing charities that say in their fund-raising appeals they are raising money for a particular cause but devote very little of it to that purpose. The effort by Sen. Byron L. Dorgan, a North Dakota Democrat, is the first stab at putting the brakes on nonprofit organizations that spend a very low percentage of the money they raise on their charitable missions. A provision on the regulation of nonprofit groups was included in legislation to extend the Federal Trade Commission bill, S. 2831, that is being considered by the Interstate Commerce, Trade and Tourism Subcommittee, which Senator Dorgan chairs.
http://philanthropy.com/news/government/4492/senator-seeks-new-regulators-for-charities
UPDATE: Sen Dorgan, Byron L. [ND] (introduced 4/8/2008) Cosponsors (2) Latest Major Action: 4/8/2008 Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
STATES - IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER
ALABAMA
No reports for Alaska
ARIZONA Home Page: http://www.azleg.gov/
No reports for Arizona
ARKANSAS
Greenwood - city council placed a 90-day moratorium on the sale of animals on its streets and parking lots, pending passing ordinances to regulate it and to encourage responsible pet ownership. A suggestion to have the police department’s code enforcement officer take on animal control duties rather than hiring an animal control officer immediately, buying time to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a city-run program. Measures suggested then included required registration of pets and banning vicious breeds such as pitbulls. http://www.swtimes.com/articles/2008/06/11/week_in_review/news/wednesday/news10.txt
Mayflower - Conway - (6/4/08) - The Mayflower Police department, Animal Control section, will have a public meeting at 6 p.m. Thursday (6/5/08) at the Mayflower City Hall to explain and define the Mayflower Pit Bull Ordinance for all residents in the Mayflower city limits. There will be a question and answer time allowed for all owners of any AKC registered Pit Bills or any animal who may have been bred with a pit bull breed or any lineage from a pit bull. All these animals must be registered with the city by Aug. 1. Any citizens of Mayflower interested in this discussion, or the ramifications of the ordinance, are invited to attend. For any questions about this meeting or the ordinance, call the Mayflower Animal Control office at 470-1000. Hours are 9 a.m. until 1 p.m.
http://www.thecabin.net/stories/060308/sty_0603080029.shtml
http://www.thecabin.net/stories/060708/loc_0607080004.shtml
CALIFORNIA
AB1760 - would amend the Veterinary Practice Act to facilitate licensing of out of state veterinarians to address the California shortage, specifically food animal practice being critical to food safety has moved along without opposition. Status: Senate Committee on B.P. & E.D. to be heard on May 12. Re-refered. Status: http://www.legislature.ca.gov/cgi-bin/port-postquery?bill_number=ab_1760&sess=CUR&house=B&author=galgiani Status: SEN APPROPRIATIONS Hearing Date: 06/23/2008
AB1938 - would authorize a credit against that tax for each taxable year beginning on or after January 1, 2008, in an amount equal to 25% of the aggregate amount paid or incurred by a taxpayer for qualified costs, as defined, to spay or neuter a cat or dog and would take effect immediately as a tax levy. Status: Suspense File Assembly Committee on Revenue & Taxation for which the release hearing is May 12. Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1901-1950/ab_1938_bill_20080513_status.html No further action to date 6/19/08
AB2131 - to add Section 54.25 to the Civil Code to permit a peace officer assigned to a canine unit, who is on official assignment for travel away from his or her home jurisdiction, to be accompanied in those places by his or her peace officer dog without paying an extra charge and amend Penal Code Section 365.5 to create a crime of interfering with or preventing such officer from these rights. Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2101-2150/ab_2131_bill_20080501_status.html Status: SEN APPROPRIATIONS Hearing Date: 06/30/2008
AB2132 - would amend and add to the Fish and Game Code to require signs forbidding trespass to be at least 8-1/2 by 11 inches in size, make it unlawful for a person to remove any collar from a hunting dog with the intent to prevent or hinder the owner from locating the dog and require the Fish and Game Commission to consider adopting regulations that permit, during archery season, the use of one dog per hunter to aid in the recovery of deer. Passed Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2101-2150/ab_2132_bill_20080515_status.html Status: SEN APPROPRIATIONS Hearing Date: 06/30/2008
AB2233 - to add Section 23118 to the Vehicle Code, "A person shall not drive a motor vehicle while holding a live animal in his or her arm or arms, or upon his or her lap" creates only an infraction offense with minor costs. Passed 6/17/08 Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2201-2250/ab_2233_bill_20080515_status.html
AB2291 - approved by the Committee on Revenue and Taxation (04/14/08) sponsored by Concerned Dog Owners of California, introduced by Assembly Member Tony Mendoza, supported by dog clubs, individuals and humane organizations. The bill adds a check off box to the California Income Tax Form so each year we can all contribute $1 for a voluntary spay and neuter fund. HSUS opposes this bill. Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2251-2300/ab_2291_bill_20080221_introduced.html Status: SEN REVENUE AND TAXATION COMM. ACTION DATE : 06/18/2008 HEARING DATE : 06/25/2008
AB2296 - was amended to a criminal bill based on an expansive definition of "animal enterprise" and offenses of disclosing information to harass those involved such as posting on the internet personal information about animal researchers. Bill was greatly scaled back to narrow the definition of animal enterprise as "an entity that lawfully uses animals or animal products for education or research in any exercise of a constitutional right that relates to academic freedom" and provide only civil remedies for employees of the animal enterprise. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2251-2300/ab_2296_bill_20080515_status.html Status: SEN JUDICIARY Hearing Date: 06/24/2008
AB2427 - prohibiting licensed veterinarians or anyone else from declawing cats and restricts local governments from prohibiting groups of persons authorized by one of the agencies in the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) by a license, certificate, or other such means to engage in a particular business, from engaging in their business, occupation, profession, or from engaging in any act or series of acts that fall within the statutory or regulatory definition of that business, occupation, or profession, as defined by state law. Status: Senate Committee on Local Government. Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2401-2450/ab_2427_bill_20080502_status.html Status: 06/10/2008 : In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
AB2949 - An act to amend Sections 1815, 1816, and 1981 of the Civil Code, relating to involuntary deposits. This bill would provide that an involuntary deposit is made by the abandonment or leaving of a live animal in or about any premises or real property that has been vacated upon, or immediately preceding, the termination of a lease or other rental agreement or foreclosure of the property. The bill would authorize any person or private entity with whom a live animal is involuntarily deposited to immediately transfer the animal to any animal control agency or shelter for proper care and attention, or to notify animal control officials for the purpose of retrieving the animal Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_2901-2950/ab_2949_bill_20080515_status.html Status: SEN JUDICIARY Hearing Date: 6/24/08
SB1527 - to require sale of the Cow Palace in Daly City for development was amended to allow sale to Daly City of only a 13 acre parcel, thus saving the facility, for now, although the two AKC Obedience clubs holding trials there have decided to leave. Status: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_1501-1550/sb_1527_bill_20080515_status.html
Status: SEN APPROPRIATIONS Hearing Date: 06/30/2008
Seven animal initiatives fail to qualify for ballot. We the People Pets reported that they would re-file.
http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v%7Cjq2q43wvsl855o%7Cx4m72ycnj7kpsa&issueId=x48gnuowgqsg6o&xid=x4dqn3so3o0lp5
Bakersfield - Kern County - (5/21/08) - The controversial idea of a mandatory spay and neuter law will be discussed again at the County's Animal Control Commission meeting. In March, people packed another meeting to tell the commission what they thought of the proposed law. Supervisors have asked the commission to draft an ordinance, that would require pets to be spayed or neutered. The ordinance is intended to cut down on the number of animals in county shelters, and decrease euthanasia rates. Opponents say the ordinance is unfair to those who want to make their own choice. The commission must come up with the ordinance by June. http://www.kget.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=2b5e2273-7287-45f7-955e-54549196510a UPDATE: 6/7/08 - Bakersfield - Pet over population is bringing a mandatory spay and neuter ordinance before the County Supervisors on Tuesday for a final decision. The Kern County Animal control commission drafted an ordinance and conducted ten workshops getting feedback from the public. The final decision falls in the hands of County Supervisors June 10th. http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/19620384.html UPDATE: Board of Supervisors was a unanimous “no” to a mandatory spay/neuter requirement 06/10/08
Butte County - Oroville - new proposal states if a dog barks for an hour straight, the owner could face a first-offense civil fine of $100 that can grow to $500 for the third and future offenses. The proposal first allowed a limit of eight cats over the age of three months on less than an acre of property and 12 cats over three months on more than an acre. The board reduced the cat limit to six and eight, before approving the ordinance. The ordinance will have to come to the board one more time for final approval. If approved, it would become effective 30 days after that vote
Manteca - city officials are looking into ways to crack down on people who own allegedly vicious dogs. Council will consider relatively minor tweaks to the city's existing laws regarding all breeds of vicious dogs. Presently, Bricker explained, the City of Manteca considers a dog vicious after it attacks a person or animal two times. That means a dog that charges someone but does not actually bite him or her, or one that acts aggressively toward people walking past its property, would likely not qualify. The council could take a more extreme approach, Bricker said, even passing an ordinance that would forbid people from owning pit bulls within city limits. Other possibilities could include requiring owners of certain breeds to purchase insurance - although enforcing such a law would be virtually impossible - or refusing to adopt out lost or stray pit bulls recovered at the city pound. http://sunpost.net/content/view/1980/190/
Oceanside - (5/19/08) - Oceanside Mayor Jim Wood said he sees no reason why the city could not at least study the idea of a dog beach at the river mouth, especially since the new bridge will largely separate vehicle traffic from the beach."I wouldn't mind having something like that in Oceanside. I know it's wildly popular in Del Mar," Wood said. "Of course cleanup (of animal waste) would be key, and parking would be an issue as well." Wood said he would be willing to ask city staffers to study the idea if the public showed enough interest. His willingness, however, does not mean that a dog beach would be an easy sell, particularly among residents who live closest to the river mouth and have complained in the past that a dog beach could bring more traffic and mess to their neighborhood. In 1998, Councilwoman Carol McCauley proposed a dog beach on the same stretch of shoreline near the San Luis Rey. The council discussed the issue, but voted 4-1 to keep dogs off the sand after many residents in the nearby North Coast Village condominium complex opposed the idea. The homeowners said they worried that dogs would poop on private property en route to and from the city parking lot closest to the site. Gordon Witz, a Realtor and full-time resident of the 550-unit seaside condo complex, said he believes any new attempt to create a dog beach would draw the same kind of opposition. If the City Council considers such a proposal "I know for sure they could expect a fight," Witz said. "A majority of the owners would definitely be against a dog beach there." http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/05/19/news/coastal/oceanside/zb236662b5847f9b38825744a005569c0.txt
Paradise - 6/7/08 - In Paradise, the Town Council may approve the new chapter of the Paradise Municipal Code pertaining to potentially dangerous, dangerous and vicious animals at Tuesday (6/10/08) night's meeting. If the animal is established to be potentially dangerous or dangerous the owner has to comply with a list of requirements as follows: The animal would have to be immediately confined to an enclosed run or other area as determined by the animal control officer. If the animal isn't properly restrained it will be impounded at the owner's expense until proper restraint is attained. The owner would need to have $250,000 in liability insurance covering the animal's activities. The animal would have to have an identity mico-chip under its skin. The owner would have to provide the animal's color photograph to the animal control department. The owner would need to post signs with a symbol warning the public that a potentially dangerous or dangerous animal is near. The animal would have to be muzzled and restrained by a proper chain or leash no longer than 6 feet long while off the owner's property. The animal would need to be licensed and vaccinated. The owner would also be required to pay to register the animal with the town. The registered permit would have to be submitted within 10 days of determination. If the animal is a dog it would have to be spayed or neutered within 30 days of being classified as potentially dangerous or dangerous. Finally, the animal control officer would be authorized to hold inspections of the animal whenever necessary. Ordinance violators would receive an infraction with a fine no more than $1,000.
http://www.paradisepost.com/ci_9505143
Pasadena - City Council Public Safety committee will not take up the dog breed specific ordinance during the June 10, 2008 meeting. The ordinance will not be on the agenda.
.
HB1308 - will permit an owner of a companion or assistance animal to recover damages for loss of companionship if a veterinarian's negligence causes injury or death to the animal. Such damages are usually available only to people in close relationships, not animals. Bill was gutted of all animal rights language in the House Judiciary Committee on 3/12/08. The bill has passed the House and is currently in the Senate. Third reading passed Senate 4/29/08 http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2008a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont/19EBA9AA60F9CCDD872573680055F1C4?Open&target=/clics/clics2008a/csl.nsf/billsummary/0BFD76A510AD769F8725736700617DBE?opendocument Status: 05/13/2008 Signed by the Speaker of the House 05/14/2008 Signed by the President of the Senate 05/14/2008 Sent to the Governor 05/29/2008 Governor Action - Signed
Aurora - 5/29/08 - The city of Aurora's pit bull ban will now be challenged in federal court. A district court judge cleared the way for the courtroom drama, which is scheduled for Aug. 25. The lawsuit, filed by the American Canine Foundation, alleges there is no statistical proof that the ban enhances public safety. "There's no evidence at all that any breed of dog is more vicious than any other breed of dog," said Sonya Dias, who filed a similar suit against the city of Denver. Her suit was later dismissed. Aurora city attorney Charlie Richardson said the city is not taking this lightly. He said Aurora looks forward to proving, through proper evidence and testimony, that pit bulls represent an enhanced threat. In a partial summary judgment order dated May 29, Colorado District Judge Wiley Daniel responded to five separate claims filed against the city of Aurora by Florence Vianzon and the American Canine Foundation. In the order, Daniel found reason to hear arguments for two of the plaintiffs' five claims against the city, specifically that the current bandoes not have a legitimate purpose and that it fails to properly compensate an owner for "property seized."
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/7newsteam/5347714/detail.html
Boulder - 6/4/08 - Dog owners in Boulder might soon be able to register their pets and renew dog licenses online instead of only by mail, if the City Council this summer approves a proposed change to city code. Now, an owner must fill out a hard-copy application for a license and mail it to the city, along with a veterinarian's letter verifying the dog has been vaccinated. The proposal before the City Council suggests making pet owners solely responsible for vaccinating their dogs, thus eliminating the need for veterinarians' letters and simplifying the application to make it available online. In the past, veterinarian-certified proof that a dog was vaccinated was required in case the animal bit someone, authorities determined it had rabies and the case went to court.
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2008/jun/03/proposal-shifts-dog-licenses-online/
Englewood - 6/7/08 - Englewood took a step toward completion of a project June 2 that began in November 2005, as the city council passed the rewritten dangerous animal ordinance on first reading. The ordinance establishes the definitions to be used with the new law, deals with animals at large, establishes rules prohibiting animal abuse or neglect and sets up steps to place animals that misbehave repeatedly in one of two categories - at-risk or dangerous. The law also provides methods to have the animal removed from either of the categories. There is also a provision allowing the city to euthanize a dangerous animal but requires a court hearing, which allows the owner to testify and have witnesses testify about why the animal should not be put to sleep. The ordinance passed 6-1 on first reading. Councilman John Moore voted against the ordinance, citing his objection to one section that prohibits an owner from being in the front yard and allowing the animal off leash but still maintaining voice control. The regulation must be approved on second and final reading before it can officially revise the existing city ordinance dealing with dangerous animals. The council is tentatively scheduled to vote on second reading as part of the June 16 meeting. The document about to be approved could be used a model for other communities looking to establish similar laws. http://www.englewood-herald.com/site/tab6.cfm?newsid=19752656&BRD=2713&PAG=461&dept_id=559191&rfi=6
CONNECTICUT
DELAWARE
Information from Florida Lupine Association (FLA)
HB0101 - An ACT relating to dangerous dogs; amending 767.14, F.S.; eliminating the prohibition of breed-specific local government regulation of dangerous dogs
http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_h0101__.doc&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0101&Session=2008
Status: Died in Committee on Agribusiness on Friday, May 02, 2008 6:02 PM
HB0219 - An act relating to the Gertrude Maxwell Save a Pet Act; providing a short title; creating s. 570.236, F.S.; creating a direct-support organization for the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services; providing for the organization and operation of the direct-support organization; providing for a contract; providing for a board of directors; providing for the use of property, facilities, and personal services of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services by the direct-support organization; providing restrictions; providing for the deposit of moneys; providing for an annual audit; providing limits on the direct-support organization; specifying inapplicability of potentially conflicting provision of law; providing an effective date. http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_h0219er.xml&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0219&Session=2008
Status: 05/28/08 Approved by Governor; Chapter No. 2008-72 on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 2:57 PM
SB444 - Sale of Dogs and Cats/DOACS [RPCC]: Redefines the term "pet dealer" for purposes of provisions authorizing a purchaser to return an animal to the pet dealer and receive a refund, exchange the animal, or receive a reimbursement of expenses. Authorizes the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to enforce statutory provisions related to the sale of dogs and cats, etc. http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=_s0444c1.DOC&DocumentType=Bill&BillNumber=0444&Session=2008
Status: Died in Committee on General Government Appropriations Monday, May 05, 2008 7:11 AM
Collier County - (5/20/08) - Animal Services has failed to conduct an educational outreach program, and perhaps the Collier County sheriff should get involved. One can’t educate the dogs, but professionals can educate the owners, advocates said. At the May 27 commission meeting, Collier leaders will see a slate of proposed changes to the ordinance on animal control. Tentatively proposed in an April 17 memo between Townsend and Assistant County Attorney Colleen Greene, the following are among the revisions to the county’s Dangerous Dog Ordinance under consideration:
• Provide that any person who violates any provision of the Dangerous Dog Ordinance is guilty of a fine not to exceed $500. The violation will be issued by DAS officers and may be appealed to the county’s special magistrate in the same manner as a code enforcement violation.
• Add a strong definition of proper enclosure. The current ordinance provides that DAS will conduct a site visit prior to releasing a dangerous dog and issuing certification of registration, which allows DAS to confirm enclosure and that all other registration requirements are met.
• Provide that DAS may impound any dog under investigation if DAS has reason to believe that the owner is unable or unwilling to securely confine the animal during the investigation. The owner must allow DAS access to the dog to impound the dog during the investigation. The dog’s owner would be held responsible for all costs during impoundment unless the dog isn’t ultimately declared dangerous.
• Specifically provide for payment of all costs incurred to care for dangerous dogs, including those costs incurred when dog must be destroyed.
• Additional licensing fees, not exceeding $125, for an animal declared dangerous that is neither spayed or neutered.
• Require that dangerous dogs wear a muzzle when taken off its owner’s property. The muzzle must allow the animal to pant and drink.
• Require obedience training for dangerous dogs and their owners. The owner will be required to provide proof of training within 30 days from the date the animal is registered. Failure to provide proof of training will result in a fine.
• Failure to comply with all provisions of the ordinance could result in forfeiture of the ownership of the dog.
• Owners of dangerous dogs will not be allowed to adopt dogs in the future from DAS.
County government spokeswoman Camden Smith noted that these proposed changes were reviewed by the DAS Advisory Board, and a final document will be part of a future County Commission agenda. http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/may/17/collier-looks-revamp-its-dangerous-dog-ordinance/ UPDATE: Passed 06/11/08
Lee County - Fort Myers - commissioners want to reclassify ANY dog that has ANY wolf content as wildlife and want to leave it up to local AC to determine whether a dog has "wolf" in it. It requires special permits and containment and acreage requirements that may be fine for a wild wolf, but for a wolf dog of low content.
FYI - Wolf "hybrids" which wolf dogs are NOT, because hybrid is a term used for the crossing of two different species. DNA studies show dogs and wolves to be the same.
Naples - Collier County commissioners are considering a new law, owners to keep their dangerous dogs under better control - or they lose the dogs. The proposed ordinance goes on for nearly 20 pages. It covers acceptable dog houses and other enclosures for dangerous dogs, training for cited dogs and owners, and additional annual tag fees for dogs that are not neutered. It also mentions muzzles. http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2008/may/21/editorial-muzzle-proposed-pet-law
Pasco County - (5/19/08) Animal Liberation and Rights Movement (ALARM) is under way in Pasco County with 25 members already. The members are in the process of drafting a mandatory spay and neuter bill for Florida to be known as Sam's Bill. We are currently collecting arguments for or against mandatory spaying and neutering. A mandatory spay and neuter bill would require all pets to be spayed or neutered prior to 6 months of age. All pets spayed or neutered could be tracked via pet microchipping. Sam's Bill in no way meant to police households or breeders, but to end the practice of euthanasia for pet population control purposes. If households with unaltered pets or breeders are caught, then hefty fines should be imposed. The bill would save Animal Services thousands of dollars each year as individual costs for euthanizing animals is more than $100 per pet, according to Pasco County Animal Services. The costs include the lethal dose of medicine, one syringe, one needle, prep material, waste fees, veterinary costs and body disposal fees via cremation or burial services. Animal Services also has food and shelter costs for the pet until it is euthanized. We are counting on the support of people who care about the welfare of animals. Arguments for or against Sam's Bill should be mailed to ALARM at P.O. Box 2103, Elfers, FL 34680. E-mail us at alarmsamsbill@yahoo.com
Volusia - (6/4/08) - Some Volusia County Council members believe mandatory spaying or neutering of pets in unincorporated areas will cut down on the deaths. Other council members are less certain, as they prepare to consider the plan Thursday. Public opinion is also split. Supporters and opponents have lobbied council members. "I've gotten more e-mails, both pro and con, on this than any item recently," said Councilwoman Pat Northey, who supports the plan. Kathy Lucas of Longwood in Seminole County picketed with 15 members of Pet Liberty Volusia outside the county administration building in DeLand on Tuesday to oppose the plan. The group formed in May after the council first discussed mandatory spaying and neutering. If the council approves mandatory spaying and neutering for unincorporated areas, some council members want to encourage cities to enact the same requirement. As an inducement to the cities, Volusia would buy and equip another bus to offer low-cost spaying and neutering. Total costs, including operating the bus for a year, would be about $500,000. Cities would split the $92,000 in operating expenses. Show or competition cats and dogs, animals unfit to undergo the procedure, law enforcement dogs, service animals, cats or dogs used for breeding and hunting or herding dogs can be exempt from the ordinance. County Council meets Thursday, (6/5/08) 9 a.m.; public participation starts at 8:30 a.m. at the Thomas C. Kelly Administration Center, DeLand. http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Local/newWEST03060408.htm UPDATE: (6/5/08) - County leaders voted in favor of mandatory spay and neutering for all pets Thursday. It goes into effect September 1. There were dozens who packed Volusia County council chambers Thursday to fight a proposed law that would require all pet owners to have their cats and dogs spayed or neutered or face serious fines. "We're killing more and more animals every day and it's costing this county a lot of money and it's costing a lot of animal lives and that's not right," said Volusia County Chairman Frank Bruno. After hours of debate, the new ordinance passed by a 5 to 2 vote. http://www.wftv.com/news/16514498/detail.html?rss=orlc&psp=news
Decatur County - Board of Commissioners may be closer to getting a leash law to protect citizens and property from dogs that present a nuisance or danger. More strictly enforce a Georgia law dealing with dangerous dogs by allocating more people and resources to enforce the state law could make a difference.
Burley - 6/5/08 - Pit bulls are one step closer to being outlawed in the City of Burley. The South Idaho Press reports the Burley City Council voted five to one Tuesday to pass a draft ordinance. If it becomes law, it would ban the dogs within city limits. The council has expressed concerns that pit bulls are violent by nature, and therefore pose a threat to people, as well as other dogs and pets. The plan is come under fire from some animal owners, but has so far passed legal muster. Burley city attorney Randy Stone says passing the ordinance is the easy part - enforcing it will be much harder. http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-jun0508-burley_pit_bulls.12267ef.html UPDATE: City Council members decided to forget about the idea of banning the ill-reputed dogs. Burley already has an aggressive-dog law, which holds the owner of a vicious animal, regardless of breed, responsible for the dog´s behavior. Council members voted unanimously to table the idea of banning pit bulls. Tabled 06/19/08. http://www.southidahopress.com/articles/2008/06/19/news/local/9339pitbulls.txt
Boise - Idaho is one of only six states where being cruel to animals carries just a misdemeanor charge. Local radio DJ Dan Tooker from Magic 93.1's morning show, wants to change that. "Dogfighting now is a felony, and we've made great strides with dogfighting, but animal cruelty is a misdemeanor." Tooker and Magic 93 hosted a pet rally at Boise's Military Reserve Dog Park Saturday and encouraged people to sign a petition that could help change animal cruelty legislation. "Today we have started a petition as well as an online petition at dantooker.com. We've had over 3,000 people sign up and people are just here, showing their support," said Tooker. http://www.ktrv.com/Global/story.asp?S=8341846
HJR0117 - Urges the Governor and Department of Natural Resources to continue and maintain the Controlled Pheasant Hunting Program. http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=51&GA=95&DocTypeId=HJR&DocNum=117&GAID=9&LegID=38415&SpecSess=&Session= Status: 5/14/08 - House Resolution adopted 5/15/08 - Senate - referred to Rules No further action to date 6/19/08
Belvidere - Boone County - (6/6/08) - A new law could limit the number of dogs that county residents are allowed. As it stands now, rural Boone County residents can own as many dogs as they like. But a county committee decided tonight that a maximum of 10 dogs is a proper limit. The vote will go before the full County Board Wednesday before it is official. “For responsible dog owners, this shouldn’t be an issue,” said Shanna Hanssen, office manager and rescue coordinator for Boone County Animal Control. “I think it is absolutely needed.” Karl Johnson, the committee chairman, was the sole committee member to vote down the would-be law. “I think when we cut it too tight, then we start to infringe on people’s individual liberties, and that concerns me,” Johnson said. Many municipalities have limits on household pets. Also tonight, Roscoe established a four-pet limit for each house. A grandfather clause in the new law would allow owners who already harbor more than 10 registered dogs to remain exempt. The exemption expires once the existing dogs die or are relinquished by the owner. Breaking the law would lead to a $75 fine, which could be even stiffer. The committee tonight favored a $75 fine for each dog over the limit. http://www.rrstar.com/belvidere/x1857751491/Boone-County-Board-committee-proposes-10-dog-limit
Park City - 6/7/08 - An alderman's close encounter with two barking pit bulls tied to a tree in his neighborhood has raised a question of public safety in the minds of some on the City Council. Ald. Jack Palmieri reported the incident to the council Thursday night and suggested the city tighten control on all dogs within Park City. Aldermen agreed by requesting Police Chief Walter Holderbaum and City Attorney Peter Karlovics to review the current dog licensing ordinance for effectiveness and public safety since it has not been reviewed for several years. Holderbaum said the city's current dog control ordinance does not specifically deal with the pit bull terrier breed, just dogs in general. He said bite reports from pit bulls are common on local police blotters. "Pit bulls in general are not inherently dangerous. They just require attentive and considerate care by their owners in keeping the public's safety in mind," he said. He distributed a North Chicago dog ordinance adopted in 2006 that specifically covers the licensing or revocation of a pit bull or a kennel license, their confinement, selling, giving away, or the destruction of any pit bull which bites or attacks a person. Most notably, a pit bull owner "who owns, keeps or harbors a pit bull must produce either a renter's or homeowner's insurance policy to the city ... showing that there is coverage to the owner for any damages caused by the pit bull in the minimum amount of $100,000 per person." Holderbaum said the North Chicago ordinance also calls for prominent warning signs to be posted by pet owners at all entrances and exits of a property where a pit bull is confined. http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/newssun/news/992657,5_1_WA07_PARKCITY_S1.article
Sioux City - member of the city council wants restrictions on the owners of a certain breed of dog. Council member Aaron Rochester now suggests placing restrictions on pit bull owners and putting microchips in the dogs, requiring a special licensing for them, and treating them as high risk animals.
http://www.ktiv.com/News/index.php?ID=25516
Spirit Lake - Council members discussed whether they would like to see control of the animals, which includes having the animal leashed, muzzled, confined and insured, rather than having the animals banned. A motion was made for City Attorney Earl Maahs to draft an ordinance for animal control, rather than a ban. The motion was carried unanimously. http://www.esthervilledailynews.com/page/content.detail/id/500991.html
Waterloo - (6/22/08) - Other scheduled council business includes:An adjustment to a dangerous dog ordinance adding more penalties for pet owners violating the two strikes rule. A person who has twice been convicted of dangerous dog violations is barred from owning dogs. The change spells out a $500 fine and allows for the confiscation of future dogs the individual harbors. The meeting is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. Monday (6/23/08) in the council chambers on the second floor of City Hall.
http://www.wcfcourier.com/articles/2008/06/22/news/metro/doc485e49dc3b6c1201004716.txt
http://www.emporiagazette.com/news/2008/jun/02/time_city_act/
Pottawatomie County - County Commissioners last Thursday (05/29/08) indicated a desire to put some legal teeth into preventing attacks by vicious dogs. Commissioners asked county counselor Gary Conklin to obtain sample ordinances from other municipalities that prohibit harboring breeds with a history or propensity for viciousness - specifically pit bulls, Dobermans and Rottweilers. http://www.themercury.com/News/article.aspx?articleId=a4611cdf96154cbe80c3cdb171617c5f and http://www.pottcounty.org/Administration/AdminServ.html
Boone - (6/4/08) - Pit bulls are receiving some attention in Boone County. A Hebron resident's bichon frise was attacked by a neighbor's pit bull in April. The dog later died from the incident and the pit bull was euthanized. Boone County Commissioner Cathy Flaig asked Boone County Administrator Jeff Earlywine to look into the pit bull issue. Beckey Reiter, director of Boone County Animal Care & Control, said she is doing some research on the issue. She said she'll advise the administration on what she found and what studies are showing. http://news.communitypress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080603/NEWS/806030304
Maysville - currently in the process of passing an ordinance prohibiting ownership of pit bulls within the city. The ordinance would require any pit bull found within the city after Sept. 1, 2008 to be seized and impounded. A pit bull seized will only be released to an owner producing evidence that the pit bull dog is to be permanently taken out of the city. If such proof is not provided, the pit bull dog would be destroyed.
Worthington - ordinance prohibits city residents from owning any dog defined as "vicious" according to Kentucky law, and requires owners of "potentially vicious dogs," including specific canine breeds, to be registered with the city. Vicious dogs include any dog in the city "that has attacked or attempted to attack a human being or other domestic animal without provocation" and "any dog with a known propensity or tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked" a human being or domestic animal, or cause injury to property. Potentially vicious dogs are defined as the bull terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier, American Staffordshire, Rottweiler, chow chow, mixed-breed dogs known as pit bulls and "any dog which has the appearance and/or characteristics of being predominantly of any of the breeds of dogs listed above or a combination of any of those." People who register potentially vicious dogs with the city must provide two color photos of the animal and comply with fencing and leash requirements. UPDATE: Passed 06/10/08 http://www.dailyindependent.com/local/local_story_162191243.html
http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=8420912 UPDATE: Status: 6/19/08 - Sent to Governor for executive approval
No Reports for Maryland
MASSACHUSETTS
http://www.eagletribune.com/punewshh/local_story_155235951.html?keyword=topstory
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2007-2008/billintroduced/House/htm/2008-HIB-5738.htm
*HB5738 was introduced 2/28/08 and reported in The Monthly National Legislative Report - 03/19/08
Howell - Livingston County - (5/20/08) - The Livingston County Board of Commissioners approved a resolution (5/19/08) Monday night giving the county's animal control department the authority to euthanize so-called "bully breeds" or "aggressive dogs," under certain conditions. Under the new rule, any stray, unlicensed dog considered dangerous or a bully breed that is picked up or surrendered to animal control faces possible euthanization. If it does not have a "collar, license, MDA tattoo or other evidence of ownership," the dog will be held for the state-mandated period of four days, "or seven days, with evidence of ownership," the resolution states. If not claimed by the owner, who must show proof of ownership and pay the required fees, the dog will then be euthanized. Breeds affected by the new rule include pit bull terriers, American pit bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American bulldogs, mixes, or any aggressive dogs. The resolution defines an aggressive dog as one which has an "observed or historical behavior that makes the animal a danger to the health and safety of people or other animal(s)." Effective immediately across the county
http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2008/05/livingston_county_board_oks_ne.html
Tecumseh - 6/7/08 - Tecumseh City Council members held a Study Session prior to Monday night’s regular meeting in order to discuss the possibilities of adding a dog leashing requirement to its present ordinance. City officials decided to address the matter, however, in the interest of health and public safety, and brought information to the Study Session to begin that process. Welch said that he and Tecumseh City Clerk Laura Caterina had made inquiries, did some research, and learned that 242 Michigan communities have leash ordinances. An ordinance being used in Plymouth is pretty clear and might be a starting point for Tecumseh to fashion one. It lists the purpose of the article as to “promote the public health, safety, comfort and general welfare of the community through the proper control of dogs by their owners and others,” and addresses dangerous dogs as well as running at large, along with exceptions. “We are really addressing two issues, looking at dangerous animals as well as a leash law. I don’t think we’ve really had problems with breeds like pit bulls like some have, but now is the time to address it, not after something happens.” the next step would be for City Attorney Laura Schaedler to review some proposed language, along with Tecumseh Police Chief Mack Haun, since the city’s police officers would be the ones having to enforce the ordinance, and then the item would be brought back to the council at a future meeting for a first reading. http://www.tecumsehherald.com/node/687
Article at: http://news.postbulletin.com/newsmanager/templates/localnews_story.asp?a=338636&z=2
Minneapolis - (6/23/08) On “Take Your Dog to Work Day” June 20, the City Council decided it was a good idea to allow licensed and leashed dogs to accompany their owners to sidewalk cafes. “It’s a very tail-wagging, feel-good kind-of-thing,” Council Member Lisa Goodman (7th Ward) said of her hard-fought ordinance change. Goodman dismissed arguments against the change, saying it allows Minneapolis to sit alongside other progressive, metropolitan cities such as New York that allow dogs at sidewalk cafes.“This is not a solution in search of a problem,” Goodman said. Dogs will not be allowed to sit on tables or chairs, nor will they be able to eat of off plates or drink out of bowls. “All over the world, dogs are companions of many people and come to public places,” the proud golden doodle owner said. Goodman went on to say that local bars and restaurant would benefit from the change. It will be official once Mayor R.T. Rybak signs off on the amendment, which could be as early as today, Goodman said. Each restaurant — or food and beverage outdoor establishment — will have the option of purchasing a dog permit to allow diners to bring along their four-legged companions. http://www.downtownjournal.com/index.php?&story=11795&page=65&category=54
St. Cloud - Stearns County - 6/4/08 - Owners of dogs deemed to be dangerous in Stearns County will have to restrain, register and insure them for up to $300,000, under a new ordinance. The county board Tuesday (6/3/08) passed the rules that mirror a state law the Legislature revised last session. Under the state law and the interim county ordinance, a dangerous dog must be confined or muzzled and restrained. A warning sign needs to be posted. If the owner moves, he or she must notify authorities of the dog’s new location. Legislators changed the law this year to require that dangerous dogs be sterilized and to increase the insurance requirement from at least $50,000 to at least $300,000. People convicted of breaking dangerous animal laws are not permitted to own dangerous dogs. A dangerous dog is defined as one that inflicts substantial bodily harm without provocation, kills another pet without provocation or attacks after being found potentially dangerous. Authorities must notify the owner that he or she can request a hearing before an impartial officer http://www.sctimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080604/NEWS01/106030051
Waite Park - 5/25/08 - Last Monday (5/19/08), the city council reviewed its dog and cat ordinance which currently states a residence is allowed to have three animals and no more than two dogs and cats. Council member Frank Theisen said the only way it would be fair to allow three dogs and make an exception, is if they changed the ordinance for everyone. The staff decided to research the surrounding cities' dog ordinances and bring their results to the council. Staff research found the norm to be no more than two dogs allowed per residence. “It seems like what we have been doing is in line with [other cities],” said Shaunna Johnson, Waite Park city administrator. Other city ordinances listed were:
Sartell - allows two dogs per residence, but will issue excessive kennel licenses to residents who ask. Most excessive kennel licenses go to people who are just moving in, divorced people getting remarried and combining their animals, or people who are purchasing new puppies knowing their old ones are about to pass on.
MISSISSIPPI
Moss Point - residents push to ban pit bulls from city after two attacks http://www.wlox.com/Global/story.asp?S=8446922&nav=6DJ
Winston County - 6/7/08 - The Winston County Board of Supervisors heard from almost a dozen citizens with about 50 in attendance at a public hearing on the need for a dog ordinance in the county. "We are here to find out what kind of ordinance if any best fits the needs of the citizens," said Winston County Board Attorney Hugh Hathorn. Hathorn reviewed for the crowd many of the state statues dealing with nuisance and vicious dogs denoting in many cases the property owner did have a right to kill any dog chasing or harming livestock. Most of the attendees voiced a common theme that vicious and stray dogs should be addressed in the county. One citizen noted that dogs had killed his cow and calf and while state statues allowed him to shoot the dog if caught in such an act that he was concerned that shooting the dogs may further strain his tenuous relationship with his neighbor who owned the dogs. Winston County Supervisor for District 1 and Board president Jerry Estes noted to the crowd that they were seeking information and the will of the people on ways to address the problem. http://www.winstoncountyjournal.com/articles/2008/06/04/news/news04.txt
http://suburbanjournals.stltoday.com/articles/2008/06/01/business/sj2tn20080531-0601cla-city.ii1.txtMi
The Montana Legislature meets biennially in odd-numbered years. The next session convenes Jan. 5, 2009.
NEBRASKA
NEW JERSEY
http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/A1500/1418_T1.HTM
STATUS: 2/7/08 - Passed by Assembly 2/14/08 - Senate Commerce Committee No further action to date 6/19/08
A1583/A1584 - COHEN/BURZICHELLI/FISHER BILLS TO OUTLAW SURGICAL MODIFICATION OF DOGS FOR SMUGGLING DRUGS ADVANCES - The Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee today released two bills Assemblymen Neil M. Cohen, John J. Burzichelli and Douglas H. Fisher sponsored to make surgical modification of dogs and other animals to serve as drug mules a specific animal cruelty crime. The two-bill package was introduced in response to a report issued last year by the Drug Enforcement Administration's (DEA) that live puppies were being used to smuggle bags of liquid heroin into the United States during a January 2005 raid on a clandestine veterinary clinic in Colombia, South America. http://politickernj.com/gitabajaj/19605/cohenburzichellifisher-bills-outlaw-surgical-modification-dogs-smuggling-drugs-advan Status: 5/12/08 - Reported & referred to Assembly Judiciary Committee
A2362/S1516 - An Act concerning animal cruelty and amending, supplementing, and repealing various sections of law. This act shall be known and may be cited as the “Animal Cruelty Recodification and Modernization Act.”
Status: Referred to Assembly Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee 02/28/08 No further action to date 6/19/08 http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/A2500/2362_I1.HTM
S1516/A2362 - An Act concerning animal cruelty and amending, supplementing, and repealing various sections of law. This act shall be known and may be cited as the “Animal Cruelty Recodification and Modernization Act.”
Status: Referred to Senate Economic Growth Committee 03/10/08 No further action to date 6/19/08 http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2008/Bills/S2000/1516_I1.HTM
S6427/A9345 - AN ACT to amend the agriculture and markets law, in relation to companion animal hoarding
Status: REFERRED TO AGRICULTURE 01/09/2008 No further action to date 6/19/08
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S06427&sh=t
S8546 - a companion to A11509, (which was removed from consideration after the strong expression of opposition from concerned dog breeders and owners). S8546, would change the state's "pet dealer" laws by:
* Adjusting the pet dealing license fee costs to a graduated systembased on previous year's sales. Status: 6/16/08 - referred to Rules
http://assembly.state.ny.us/leg/?bn=S08546
Naples - The Town Board will seek more input before adopting an amendment to a municipal law that would make it easier to cite owners of barking dogs. For months, residents have asked the town to do something about the noise from barking dogs on two properties in Italy Valley and Lanning roads. Because the town doesn’t have its own police force, Supervisor Frank Duserick asked the Ontario County Sheriff’s Office for assistance in enforcing an existing local law that prohibits continuous barking and howling. The sheriff’s office checked with the county attorney, who responded that the Naples law is unenforceable as currently written. To address this problem, Town Attorney Ed Brockman presented the board with several proposed amendments. The revisions would allow any officer with jurisdiction in Naples to enforce the law. Action could be taken in the case of any dogs that are howling or barking in such a manner to disturb the peace. The language in the proposed amendment is modeled after a disorderly-conduct law in state penal code, intended to apply to humans, which has previously been upheld by the Court of Appeals. The board had planned to adopt the amended law at its June 9 meeting. However, the town had also asked the county attorney to review the revisions. So far, it has not heard back. The board will next meet on Monday, July 14.
http://www.mpnnow.com/news/x2113783243/Another-month-to-wait-on-Naples-dog-law
NORTH CAROLINA
North Carolina residents: Visit North Carolina Responsible Animal Owners Alliance (NCRAOA) http://www.ncraoa.com/ or email cubhill@earthlink.net
Status: Ref to Com on Appropriations 5/28/08
Brevard - 6/4/08 - Transylvania County residents made some noise of their own as they protested a new proposed noise ordinance during this week's public hearing on the issue. The ordinance prohibits residents from creating "unreasonably loud" or "disturbing" noises that are detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of any reasonable person. In determining whether a noise is unreasonably loud and disturbing, factors considered include: • Time of day • Proximity to residences • Whether the noise is recurrent, intermittent or constant • Volume and intensity • Whether the noise has been enhanced in volume or range by mechanical means • The nature and zoning of the area • Whether the noise is related to the normal operation of a business, for example, a machine shop, manufacturing company. • Whether the noise is subject to being controlled without unreasonable effort or expense to the creator. The way the ordinance is currently written, a sheriff's deputy is responsible for responding to the complaint and has the discretion to issue a warning or a ticket which carries with it a $50 fine, said Transylvania County Manager Artie Wilson. The current ordinance makes violations a criminal offense, he said, and the revisions that have been proposed would also make violations a civil offense with the possibility of a fine up to $500. Transylvania County residents worried about property right infringement voiced their feelings loud and clear as more than 25 people spoke at the public hearing. Several people raised concerns regarding the possibility of someone calling the sheriff if their dogs barked. Under the proposed ordinance, a dog barking for more than 10 minutes at a time is a violation. http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/20080602/NEWS/658546772/0/SPORTS
Cary - councilors are taking a look at curtailing dogs and cats' reproductive rights in order to curb what some describe as an out-of-control stray pet population. Town officials are studying the idea of requiring all pet owners to have their dogs and cats spayed or neutered http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/2960351/local/story/2960351/
Orange County - Hillsborough - (5/20/08) Public hearing on tethering - May 20 at 7:30 PM @ Southern Human Services Center, 2501 Homestead Rd, Chapel Hill NC. Orange County proposes to limit the time a dog can be tethered to 3 hours out of a 24-hour period. In addition, the county is regulating kennel sizes; 1-35 pound dog must have 80 sq.ft. PER DOG; 36-75 pounds must have 100 sq.ft. PER DOG; 76 pounds and up 120 sq.ft. PER DOG. In order to keep a second dog in the kennel, an additional 50 percent of space must be added.
UPDATE: (6/4/08): Orange County commissioners heard long and loud Tuesday (6/3/08) night from advocates pushing for a new ordinance to limit dog tethering and from opponents, and the controversy delayed any decisions. The board finally ended the public hearing without a vote, likely deferring action until fall. The hearing went late into the night as the two sides sparred over the issue. The anti chaining coalition wants Orange County to severely restrict the dog-tethering portion of its animal control ordinance to allow no more than three hours in a 24-hour period. The amendment would specify types of collars and equipment that could be used, minimum kennel sizes, certain exemptions and an 18-month educational period after enactment. As presented Tuesday night, the ordinance would take effect in June 2009 and would have violators issued only warnings for one year as an educational effort. Penalties would not start until 2010. http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/2986674/
Kenmare - City Council members originally proposed banning some dog breeds they considered potentially dangerous, but decided this week to regulate them instead. The revised ordinance allows people in the town of about 1,000 who have pit bulls, Rottweilers and Doberman pinchers to keep them if the dogs are registered and licensed before June 1. Owners must provide proof of liability insurance in the amount of at least $300,000 and must secure the dogs. http://www.in-forum.com/News/articles/203279
HB 446 - For Bill Anaylsis: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/analysis.cfm?ID=127_HB_446&ACT=As%20Introduced&hf=analyses127/h0446-i-127.htm UPDATE: HB446 hearing scheduled for 4/17/2008 was dropped from the hearing agenda. UPDATE: Amendments were introduced on May 8 to return to the 3-month age for licensing puppies, but the 30-day grace period was dropped. Thus it will become illegal to own a puppy that is one day over three months of age unless it is licensed. Changes in the requirements for finders of stray dogs make it more difficult for a dog owner to reclaim his pet. There were no changes in the requirements to individually license each dog in a licensed kennel or to mandate that rabies vaccinations be given by a veterinarian. The next hearing will be May 15. UPDATE: Passed House (10-4). 3rd reading 5/28/08 - Introduced in Senate 5/28/08 Assigned to State & Local Government & Veterans Affairs
HB 568 - (5/20/08) - Sec. 955.111. (A) Beginning ninety days after the effective date of this section, no person shall own, keep, or harbor a dog that belongs to a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog. (B) Not later than ninety days after the effective date of this section, a person who owns, keeps, or harbors a pit bull dog on the effective date of this section shall surrender the dog to the dog warden. Not later than ten days after receiving the dog, the dog warden shall euthanize the dog. (C)(1) Beginning ninety days after the effective date of this section, if an officer has probable cause to believe that a dog is a pit bull dog, the officer may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for a search warrant. The court shall issue a search warrant for the purposes requested if there is probable cause to believe that a dog is a pit bull dog. (2) After obtaining a search warrant, an officer shall seize the pit bull dog and surrender the dog to the dog warden. Not later than ten days after receiving the dog, the dog warden shall euthanize the dog. (D) As used in this section, "officer" has the same meaning as in section 959.132 of the Revised Code. http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=127_HB_568 Introduced in House 5/19/08 UPDATE: (6/2/08) - A proposal to capture and put down all pit bulls in Ohio is being changed. State Representative Tyrone Yates of Cincinnati announced his plan following recent attacks on children by vicious dogs. Yates announced he is working with Representative Shawn Webster to change the plan. Webster is also a practicing veterinarian. They are looking for ways to stop the violent training of pit bulls while respecting the rights of dog owners.
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080622/NEWS24/806220304/-1/NEWS
SB 173: This kennel licensing bill affects breeders with more than eight intact dogs in their kennels. It sets up a state bureaucracy to inspect kennels, requires insurance in case dogs have to be impounded, and mandates bonds for animal care if the kennel owner wants to appeal a seizure. It also requires criminal background checks for license applicants, specifies housing and care requirements that deny breeders the opportunity to make decisions about bedding, water dishes, and veterinary care. A substitute bill is expected at a hearing on May 13. http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=127_SB_173 Introduced in Senate 5/17/08 - State & Local Government & Veterans Affairs
Cincinnati - City Council may be about to put "Pit Bull Police" on the streets, but not everyone is sure it's such a good idea. Unless you owned it before 2003, it's illegal to own a pit bull in the City of Cincinnati. But the head of the city's Law and Public Safety Committee admits, it's virtually un-enforceable. That could be about to change. City Council is expected to pass an ordinance that will add some real "teeth". The new ordinance city council's voting on will make the existing ban more enforceable by putting two trained police officers on the street in each police district. If the new ordinance passes, it will give city council more information on the pit bull situation in the city. If the dog is found to be vicious, the owner can simply turn the dog over to the city and it will be destroyed or the case would go through the legal system. http://www.local12.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=6bfa4573-40d9-4521-a843-8def799ef966
UPDATE: On May 29, two motions that could overturn the city's ban on pit bulls were introduced to the Cincinnati City Council. These motions follow a decision by the full council to authorize police officers to identify dogs of the pit bull type in order to enforce the city's ban on AmStaffs, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, and their mixes. Council members are split on whether the pit bull ban is working or should be lifted. The motions were referred to the Law & Safety Committee. Motions were as follows:
MOTION, dated 5/20/2008, submitted by Council members Qualls, Berding, Bortz, Cole and Vice Mayor Crowley, that the following proposed changes to the Vicious Dog Law be submitted to the Vicious Dog Legislative Task Force for review: 1. Allow for responsible pit bull owners in Cincinnati to register their pit bulls and own them legally, but only if they can prove their compliance with all State and City laws at the time of registration. Owners will receive a special tag for their dog to wear, so if stopped by CPD there will be proof of valid registration on the dog. Owners must present at the time of registration (and re-registration, as this will be required annually): a. Proof of a valid Ohio dog license b. Proof of current rabies vaccination c. Proof the dog has been spayed or neutered d. Proof of a registered microchip e. Signed statement that owner is aware of Ohio and City laws regarding owning and harboring a vicious dog. f. Registration fee 2. Ease burden on Cincinnati Police Department by providing changes to the administrative hearing process as follows: a. Add an opportunity for a person in violation of the registration requirement to remedy their situation by coming into full compliance with registration requirements.
MOTION, dated 5/21/2008 submitted by Council members Qualls, Bortz, Berding, Cole, Cranley and Vice Mayor Crowley, that Council re-establish the Vicious Dog Legislative Task Force to draft new legislation that encourages and/or mandates responsible dog ownerships and increases penalties for irresponsible dog ownership. We further move that members of the task force include a representative of SPCA Cincinnati a representative of the Cincinnati Police Department, a representative of the Solicitor's Office, a veterinarian familiar with all breeds of dogs, and citizen representatives Rich Harwood, Nick Lloyd, Jim McNulty, Virginia Thomas, Jim Tomaszewski, and Dorothy Wilson. The task force will elect a chairperson from among its members. We further move that the task force make its recommendations to Council August 1, 2008.
Lakewood - (5/20/08) - Lakewood City Council will consider an ordinance concerning dangerous dogs at its meeting Monday evening. City council will specifically consider prohibiting owning pit bulls or canary dogs. Councilman Brian Powers plans to propose the amendment. Last year, residents filed 44 complaints about pit bulls. http://www.newsnet5.com/news/16328582/detail.html UPDATE: A proposed law introduced by Councilman Brian Powers Monday night would ban pit bulls and related mixed breeds. Residents who own a pit bull would have to get rid of the animal within 40 days. A first-time violation would be a third-degree misdemeanor. Subsequent violations would carry heftier penalties. http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/121127238596541.xml&coll=2
Racine - After a pit bull allegedly attacked dogs on Vine Street, then went after Racine Police Marshal Curtis Jones and had to be shot recently, the village may now consider banning vicious dogs completely. Currently, vicious and dangerous dogs are allowed in the village but they must be confined in a locked kennel which is six-feet high and has a top, or inside a locked fence or locked enclosure with a top.
The Ohio Revised Code defines a “dangerous dog” as a dog that without provocation...has chased or approached in either a menacing fashion or an apparent attitude of attack, or has attempted to bite or otherwise endanger any person, while that dog is off the premises of its owner, keeper, or harborer and not under their reasonable control of its owner, keeper, harborer, or some other responsible person, or not physically restrained or confined in a locked pen which has a top, locked fenced or other locked enclosure which has a top. The Ohio Revised Code defines a “vicious dog” as a dog that without provocation...has killed or caused serious injury to any person; has caused injury, other than killing or serious injury, to any person, or has killed another dog; belongs to a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog. The ownership, keeping, or harboring of such a breed of dog shall be prima-facie evidence of the ownership, keeping, or harboring of a vicious dog. http://www.mydailysentinel.com/articles/2008/05/21/news/news03.txt
Whitehall - (6/4/08) - Jacquelyn Thompson, a Whitehall City Council member since January, hasn't given up trying to ban pit bulls from the city, saying she's lost only Round One. Her crusade to ban pit bulls from Whitehall had just ended in one quick vote. All but one of her colleagues on the City Council voted it down last night after four months of heated public meetings punctuated with personal attacks. So just before last night's council meeting ended, Thompson tried to explain why she's so passionate about a ban. She waxed philosophical, talking about pit bulls as the "new order" of evil in society. Thompson is one of Whitehall's newest council members and easily the most controversial. Just after joining the City Council in January, Thompson began pushing for the ban, the city's most divisive proposal in recent years, referring to pit bulls as "tools of terror." Whitehall council members now are considering an alternative proposal that would not ban pit bulls, but instead impose stiffer penalties on owners of any breed of dog who don't properly confine or care for the animals. Although Thompson's plan didn't pass, she said, she'll continue to push for a ban. "I just consider this Round One," she said. City Council voted down any ban on pit bulls
http://www.columbusdispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2008/06/04/Pit_bull_fighter.ART_ART_06-04-08_B1_N5AD6OO.html?sid=101 UPDATE: City Council members are considering a new proposed ordinance that establishes an appeals board to determine whether a dog in question is indeed a pit bull, and therefore vicious, as well as an appeal process to determine if dogs other than a pit bull are deemed vicious. Any dog declared vicious must be harbored as such according to state law, which includes a myriad of requirements such as mandatory liability insurance and adhering to one or more other regulations including muzzling, micro-chipping and maintaining a locked, 6-foot fence. http://www.snponline.com/articles/2008/06/12/multiple_papers/news/allwhpitbu_20080611_0355pm_3.txt
Status: signed by governor (06/03/08)
Tulsa - (5/21/08) - Councilor Jack Henderson said Tulsa's animal problems are greater than other cities' because pet ordinances are tougher elsewhere. Letcher agreed, adding that there also is a lack of community education on the role of spaying and neutering in reducing pet populations and animal destruction.
OREGON
The Oregon State Legislative Assembly Special Sessionadjourned Sine Die at 9:39pm, Friday February 22, 2008.
The State of Oregon has a Citizen Legislature consisting of the Senate, whose 30 members are elected to serve four-year terms, and the House of Representatives, which has 60 members elected for two-year terms. The assembly convenes every two years in regular session on the second Monday in January during odd-numbered years, a date set by statute. Oregon Constitution does not specify a limitation on session length, however most sessions last approximately six months. During the interim, legislators serve on interim committees and task forces that study issues likely to be faced during the next legislative session.
HB2553 - (5/20/08) - The General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania hereby enacts as follows:Section 1. Section 507-A of the act of December 7, 1982 (P.L.784, No.225), known as the Dog Law, added May 31, 1990 (P.L.213, No.46), is amended to read: Section 507-A. Construction of article. (a) Enforcement.--This article shall be enforced by all municipalities except counties unless otherwise provided by ordinance in accordance with subsection (c). (b) Abusive or unlawful conduct of victim.--This articleshall not apply if the threat, injury or damage was sustained by a person who, at the time, was committing a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the owner of the dog, or was tormenting, abusing or assaulting the dog or has, in the past, been observed or reported to have tormented, abused or assaulted the dog, or was committing or attempting to commit a crime. (c) Local ordinances.-- [Those provisions of local ordinances relating to dangerous dogs are hereby abrogated. A local ordinance otherwise dealing with dogs may not prohibit or otherwise limit a specific breed of dog.] This act shall notsupersede or preclude the adoption of any municipal ordinance applicable to dangerous dogs. http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2007&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=2553&pn=3802
H7212 - AN ACT RELATING TO ANIMALS AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY - CRUELTY TO ANIMALS - This act would provide for judicial direction regarding incarceration related to animal fighting. http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext08/housetext08/h7212.pdf Bill Status: 4/23/08 Committee transferred to House Finance 6/19/08 - No further action to date
H7284 - AN ACT RELATING TO ANIMALS ANIMAL HUSBANDRY - DOGS - This act would prohibit any person from keeping a dog tethered, penned, caged, fenced or other wise confined outside for more than thirty (30) minutes when temperature is beyond the weather safety scale as set forth in the most recent adopted version of the Tufts Animal Care Condition Scale. "Guardian" is also defined as the owner/possessor of the dog http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext08/housetext08/h7284.pdf Bill Status: 2/27/2008 Committee recommended measure be held for further study - 6/19/08 - No further action to date
S2006 - AN ACT RELATING TO ANIMALS -DOGS - This act would permit the animal control officer in the town of Warren to issue citations to animal owners who are in violation of any animal control ordinance which may be paid by mail and also to prescribe pecuniary penalties. http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext08/senatetext08/s2006.pdf Bill Status: 04/30/2008 Senate read and passed 05/21/2008 - House passed in concurrence
S2008 - AN ACT RELATING TO ANIMALS AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY - CRUELTY TO ANIMALS - This act would increase the various penalties related to animal cruelty. http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext08/senatetext08/s2008.pdf Bill Status: 1/02/2008 Introduced, referred to Senate Constitutional and Regulatory Issues 6/19/08 - No further action to date
S2030 - AN ACT RELATING TO ANIMALS AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY - CRUELTY TO ANIMALS - This act would provide for mandatory imprisionment for convictions related to animal fighting http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext08/senatetext08/s2030.pdf Bill Status: 1/02/2008 Introduced, referred to Senate Judiciary 6/19/08 - No further action to date
S2043 - AN ACT RELATING TO ANIMALS AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY - REGULATION OF VICIOUS DOGS - This act would add the director of the defenders of animals or his or her designee to the hearing panel which decides whether as dog should be declared vicious. http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext08/senatetext08/s2043.pdf Bill Status: 1/10/2008 Introduced, referred to Senate Constitutional and Regulatory Issues 06/12/2008 - Senate read and passed 06/12/2008 Referred to House H.E.W.
S2096 - AN ACT RELATING TO ANIMALS AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY - DOGS - This act would provide guidlelines and penalties for any person that keeps a dog outside tethered, penned, caged, fenced or otherwise contained without adequate shelter from the elements.. "Guardian" is also defined as the owner/possessor of the dog (guardian would be interchangeable with owner/possessor). http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/billtext08/senatetext08/s2096.pdf Bill Status: 5/14/2008 Committee recommends passage of Sub A 05/27/2008 Senate passed Sub A 05/28/2008 Referred to House H.E.W.
The 2nd Regular Session of the 117th South Carolina General Assembly
January 8, 2008 - June 5, 2008
SOUTH DAKOTA
TENNESSEE
Frankfort - The Legislator closed for the year last week. Out of the 33 bills or resolutions proposed during 2007 and 2008, only 4 were passed and made into law during this session.
SB0870/HB1168 - Chemical capture of companion animals. Animals control officers can become certified to use chemical items to capture an animal without a Veterinarian present.
http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB0870.pdf
Status: Passed
SB2399/HB2808 - Hazardous Materials - Requires all antifreeze containing at least 10 percent ethylene glycol to contain, and be labeled with, a bittering agent; penalty is a Class C misdemeanor punishable only by a $50.00 fine. - Amends TCA Title 68, Chapter 131, Part 1
http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB2399.pdf
Status: Passed
SB2697/HB2804 - Criminal Offenses - Changes offense of killing animal of another to require only that the defendant knowingly and unlawfully kills animal of another without the owner's effective consent. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 14, Part 2. http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB2697.pdf
Status: Passed
SB3149/HB2912 - Animal Control - Requires non-livestock animals be held three business days before euthanasia except in emergency situations; applies non-livestock animal humane death act to all persons euthanizing non-livestock animals as agent of animal shelters; and clarifies that animal must be heavily sedated if intracardial injection method of euthanasia is used. - Amends TCA Title 44, Chapter 17. http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/BILL/SB3149.pdf
Status: Passed
Paris - summary of last night's city council meeting (06/05/08) indicates that the Paris city council is studying Puryear's ordinance. It appears that Puryear has regulations regarding the ownership of pit bulls. http://www.parispi.net/articles/2008/06/06/news/local_news/doc4849759636345%20471544768.txt
TEXAS
Home Page: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/
Dallas - (6/2/08) - The Dallas City Council plans to vote in late June on measures to strengthen its animal control ordinances. The proposed changes will include mandatory spaying or neutering of most pets. There's also a proposal to stop owners from leaving their dogs tethered outside. Tethering is widely believed to make dogs more prone to attack. But the proposed measures still don't go far enough to hold irresponsible dog owners to a higher legal standard. Of particular concern are measures aimed at dangerous dogs. Neither existing law nor the proposed changes do anything to ensure that the owner won't simply purchase a new dog and continue the same irresponsible behavior that led to the original attack. Key changes in the law :
•Mandatory spay/neuter for household pets •Limit on the number of dogs and cats per household •Ban on tethering unattended dogs •Streamlined process to go after vicious dogs What's still needed - •Sanctions that apply specifically to irresponsible owners •Vigorous criminal prosecution •Budget and staffing to ensure better enforcement http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-dogs_02edi.ART.State.Edition1.460260e.html UPDATE: 6/4/08 - Look for several notable changes to a sweeping Dallas animal ordinance proposal that's scheduled to be briefed Wednesday, June 18, before the Dallas City Council -- and formally voted on a week later. The ordinance's chief advocate, Mayor Pro Tem Elba Garcia, says she's willing to soften a few of the proposal's provisions. Faced with some pushback from at least a couple of her council colleagues, Dr. Garcia says, for example, that she's open to allowing owners of non-purebred dogs to obtain city permits to breed them. (The ordinance as proposed calls for the mandatory spaying and neutering of dogs, unless owners are city-permitted breeders.) Among other prospective compromises: Softening regulations on implanting tracking microchips underneath dogs' skin, and reworking some of the fee structures for obtaining breeding permits. "We're definitely working with some of the council members who've had some issues. We're definitely working with everyone to make sure their concerns are addressed," Dr. Garcia said. But she quickly noted that "the main issues are still on the table as they've been." Those main issues, in addition to the spay/neuter provision, include restricting the practice of tethering pets in a yard, and limiting the number of dogs and cats to six per Dallas household. http://cityhallblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/06/some-compromises-on-the-horizo.html UPDATE: The Dallas City Council will vote on the proposed changes to Dallas' animal control ordinance on Wednesday, June 25TH, 9:00 A.M., at Dallas City Hall, 1500 Marilla Street, Dallas. These changes include mandatory spay/neuter, breeder permitting, and limits on the number of pets that can be owned. It is vitally important that Dallas-area responsible dog breeders and owners express their opposition via calls, mailed letters, and faxes, and attend the hearing to show opposition to this unreasonable ordinance proposal.
Duncanville - City Council took a step toward a breed-specific dog ban with a unanimous vote June 3. The council approved a resolution supporting the introduction and passage of breed-specific legislation for local municipalities concerning dangerous dogs. Now the city must determine which breeds to ban, and how such a ban will impact residents moving into the city with those breeds versus those already in the city. “We will be sending a letter to the area cities requesting them to adopt a similar resolution and ask them to send it to their representatives requesting their support,” City Secretary Dara Crabtree said. “And we will be working with the Texas Municipal League on this matter.” http://www.todaynewspapers.net/articles/2008/06/12/duncanville/news/dvnews1.txt/
UTAH
Home Page: http://www.le.state.ut.us/
Provo - City Council is contemplating stricter regulations on vicious dogs regardless of breed and their owners rather than turn to pit bull-specific restrictions. Proposed ordinance would establish a two-step ranking system for "dangerous dogs" and "at-risk dogs." A canine would merit the dangerous-dog classification if it has attacked a person, menaced or killed any domestic animal or if it was used in the commission of a crime, such as dog fighting or guarding illegal property. http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700234957,00.html
VERMONT
Home Page: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/
H769 - AN ACT RELATING TO REGULATION OF COMMERCIAL DOG BREEDERS IN VERMONT. This bill proposes to regulate commercial dog breeders in Vermont. http://www.leg.state.vt.us/database/status/summary.cfm?Bill=H.0769&Session=2008 Status: In Government Operations 2/8/08 - 6/22/08 - No action to date
S0341 - AN ACT RELATING TO THE REGISTRATION OF PET MERCHANTS - This bill clarifies that a pet dealer is anyone who sells an animal and sets out compliance criteria for dog breeders. http://www.leg.state.vt.us./docs/legdoc.cfm?URL=/docs/2008/bills/intro/S-341.HTM Bill Status: Senate Committee – Finance 4/3/08 - 6/22/08 - No action to date
VIRGINIA
Home page: http://www.virginia.gov/cmsportal2/index.html
VIRGINIA HUNTING & HUNTING DOG ENTHUSIASTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO VISIT http://vhdoa.uplandbirddog.com/staterk.html
for bills affecting your sport !!
Virginians should also visit http://vhdoa.uplandbirddog.com/stater.html for further information and updates on house & senate bills
Ablemarle - 6/5/08 - The Albemarle Board of Supervisors will meet next week to discuss a proposed ordinance allowing frustrated neighbors to request a summons for the owner of a barking dog. After 30 consecutive minutes of barking, a dog could be setting his owner up for conviction of a Class Three misdemeanor punishable by a fine of up to $500. One provision in the proposed law gives Animal Control the right to seize a dog after three infractions in 12 months. If passed, the new ordinance will not apply to commercial dog kennels, livestock noises, or rurally zoned tracts of five acres or more. It will also be much simpler than other Virginia counties' laws. Barking ordinances in Spotsylvania, Stafford, and Prince William Counties require time-consuming investigations, according to the "executive summary" accompanying the draft ordinance. Those counties require complaints from two separate households plus a investigative visit from an animal control officer-- and a warning to the owner.
http://www.readthehook.com/stories/2008/06/05/NEWS-dogbarking-F.aspx and
http://www.dailyprogress.com/cdp/news/local/article/3_barks_and_theyre_out/23185/ UPDATE: Albemarle County passed 6/11/08
Gloucester County - considering raising its animal licensing fees, but it would sell three-year licenses, rather than the traditional one-year. A one-year dog license now costs $6. Under the proposed changes, a three-year license would cost $25.
Loudoun County - The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors has approved fee increases for pet licenses, pet adoptions and other services provided by the county's Department of Animal Care and Control. Effective July 1, a dog license will cost $10 a year regardless of the spay or neuter status of the animal. The adoption fee will be $50 for dogs younger than 7 and $25 for dogs older than 7, with an additional neuter fee of $65 or spay fee of $75 for dogs who require that surgery. For cats, the adoption fee will be $20 for those younger than 7 and $10 if older than 7, plus a neuter fee of $50 or a spay fee of $60 for cats requiring the surgery. Officials said the increases will help offset the cost of two new staff positions in the department. For a full list of all the department's fees, go to http://www.loudoun.gov/animals and click on the "News" link in the left-hand column.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/20/AR2008062003452.html
Richmond - Virginia is taking the lead in cracking down on animal fighting. As home to one of the most notorious dogfighting cases, the Commonwealth now it has some of the strictest laws banning the so-called "sport." Governor Tim Kaine signed off Wednesday on sweeping reforms to what is and is not illegal in Virginia as well as the punishment for breaking the law. The General Assembly did more, passing sweeping reform to dog fighting laws with some stricter punishments and easier prosecution. There were also changes to Virginia's cockfighting laws, which were growing in popularity in Virginia. Another bill signed Wednesday better regulates the dog breeding industry in hopes of preventing puppy mills.
http://www.nbc29.com/global/story.asp?s=8432436
WASHINGTON
Home page: http://www.leg.wa.gov/legislature
Pierce County - (5/25/08) - Pierce County’s proposed dangerous dog ordinance should be a dream come true. Instead of pointing a bull’s-eye on pit bulls, the law would target dog owners who can’t control their pets. All dogs would be treated the same regardless of their breed. Dog owners would have to fork over a $500 fee each year they own a dangerous dog, one that has severely injured a person or another animal. Those owners of dangerous dogs would also have to carry $500,000 in liability insurance. Owners who have had multiple complaints filed against their pet would be prohibited from owning a pet for 10 years. Violation of the regulations could result in a year in jail. Sumner is looking into a similar stance, though not quite as strict. In the next few weeks, city council will discuss putting a dangerous dog ordinance on the books for the first time, mirroring Pierce County and Puyallup’s current regulations. Puyallup, Edgewood and Bonney Lake all contract with Sumner animal services so it’s important for the four cities to see eye-to-eye on regulations. Making it mandatory to have a dangerous dog tattooed or chipped so that animal control in a new location could be alerted to the dog’s history would assist in the public’s protection.
http://www.puyallup-herald.com/105/story/2242.html
Wapato - (6/4/08) - A proposed ordinance banning ownership of pit bulls, Rottweilers and American bulldogs and any mixes of such breeds in Wapato may be going nowhere. Monday (6/2/08) night, a motion to adopt the ordinance died after if failed to garner a second. Other council members said they want to take more time to review such a measure. The ordinance needs to look more at taking action against vicious dogs rather than banning certain breeds, one council member said. The ordinance also needs to better define what is a savage dog.
http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/4631 UPDATE: city has banned several specific breeds of dog, attaching a fine of up to $500 for violation of the new ordinance. City Council members unanimously passed Monday(06/16/08) an ordinance outlawing ownership of pit bull terriers or a mixture of those breeds. That includes Mastiffs, Rottweilers or American bulldogs. Under the ordinance, a person caught with such a dog would face a $250 fine for the first offense, and $500 fines for each subsequent offense. The only exceptions are for trained service dogs and for dogs certified as Canine Good Citizens by the American Kennel Association. http://www.yakima-herald.com/stories/4989
WASHINGTON D.C. Home Page: http://www.dccouncil.washington.dc.us/
No reports for Washington D.C.
WEST VIRGINIA
Home Page: http://www.legis.state.wv.us/index.cfm
Beckley - 5/21/08) - Beckley officials faced more than 50 residents Tuesday (5/20/08) afternoon - most ready to unleash their fury about a proposed ordinance limiting the number of pets they could own. The Beckley Planning Commission voted 4-0 to postpone any action on the amended ordinance until they have more time to complete further research, possibly on an ordinance that will address various pet owners’ concerns.The city is considering amending its current pet ownership ordinance, under which residents are allowed to have no more than three dogs and no more than three cats, total, outside their homes or inside accessory buildings. A loophole, though, has allowed residents to keep as many domestic pets inside their homes as they want, just as long as only three of each go outside. The amendment would allow residents to keep three dogs and three cats — period. If it passes, violators could face a maximum $1,000 fine per day. http://www.register-herald.com/local/local_story_141222043.html
Petersburg - public outcry over the recent misbehavior of several dogs around town has resulted in a proposed change in Petersburg's "leash law" ordinance. The change gives the city the right to seek maximum penalties against owners of certain breeds for first offense violations. The proposal includes a list of specific breeds considered by many municipalities and insurance companies to be vicious and dangerous animals. Breeds on the list are rottweiler, Doberman, Stafford bull terrier, pit bull, German shepherd, chow (chow chow), Akita and Presa Canarious (Canary Dog). The revised ordinance states: "Persons owning, possessing, harboring or having the care, charge or custody of these identified breeds or any mix thereof and that dog having been satisfactorily proved before the city judge to be vicious, dangerous or in the habit of biting or attacking other persons or pets/animals whether or not such dog wears a tag or muzzle, the city judge shall exercise the maximum punishment and fines allowed in this code. The city judge may authorize the humane officer to cause such dog to be killed." http://www.grantcountypress.com/6-10/commission.htm
Winfield - Putnam County - 6/7/08 - A Hurricane resident addressed the Putnam County Commission on Tuesday urging tougher noise and leash ordinances for dogs. Farmer explained that she has assembled a plan using procedures/laws she has found others institute in their communities. These ideas include an increase in the dog licensing fee, new ordinances in regards to noise and the free running of dogs as well as a fine schedule for those who are not responsible in complying with ordinances. She hopes to present the item to the commission for their review and consideration within the week. http://www.herald-dispatch.com/homepage/x1607432955/Putnam-commission-to-address-noise-problem
WISCONSIN
Home Page: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/
Brown County - Board is expected (06/15/08) to decide whether to approve an ordinance intended to keep dogs safe, healthy and friendly. The issue is centered on the housing of outdoor dogs. The proposed ordinance would set guidelines for tethering dogs outdoors as well as providing them adequate shelter and sufficient space if confined to a pen. The ordinance would limit the chaining or tethering of dogs to a stationary object to one hour. A running line or trolley must be at least 10 feet long and no dog may be tied or fastened with anything attached directly to the dog's neck. Untethered dogs must be housed in an enclosure that's at least 100 square feet and must have access to shelter and fresh water. http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080618/GPG0101/806180687/1978/GPGbusiness
UPDATE: Board of Supervisors decided to send this item, the Tethering Ordinance, back to committee to have more public input on this important matter. 06/18/08 RESPONSIBLE DOG OWNERS OF THE WESTERN STATES (RDOWS) is sending input and opinions to the Board for consideration.
Cudahy - A draft pit bull/vicious dog ordinance, which could potentially ban any pit bull terrier, will be refined and brought back to the Rules, Laws and Ordinance Committee at a later date. The committee reviewed the draft, written more than three years ago and defeated at that time, at a meeting May 14. Cudahy already has a vicious dog ordinance on the books, but it does not reference a particular breed. http://www.cudahynow.com/story/index.aspx?id=751668 UPDATE: Still considering ban/restrictions on "pit bulls" http://www.ci.cudahy.wi.us/PDFs/RulesLawsOrdinance20080709Agenda.pdf
Mosinee - (5/20/08) - Mosinee officials on Monday (5/19/08) tabled a proposed ordinance that was aimed primarily at banning pit bull dogs within the city limits, or at least making it so difficult to keep them that no one would. It's a good thing they didn't vote on the rules that were proposed, because the ordinance would have been so broad, so vague and so poorly written that it would have been all but impossible to enforce. City Administrator Jeff Gates said he will re-evaluate the ordinance and bring a better version back to City Council members when wrinkles have been ironed out. As he's ironing, he should pay particular attention to the concerns raised by residents and experts on dangerous dogs. The ordinance went on to define "pit bulls" as any dog with a drop of pit bull, American Staffordshire terrier, or Staffordshire bull terrier blood in its veins as a pit bull.
http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080518/WDH06/805180373/1636 UPDATE: approves revised dog ordinance; pit bulls are welcome just as long as they aren't considered dangerous under a revised animal ordinance the city approved Monday night. The ordinance groups problem dogs into two groups, menacing and dangerous. A menacing dog, defined as a dog that poses a threat to any animal or person, must have a muzzle and be restrained at all times in public. If it escapes, the owner must report it to the police immediately. A dangerous dog, defined as a dog that routinely chases or threatens a person, must be kept indoors or in a locked pen when on the owner's property. When outside on the owner's property, a dangerous dog also must have a muzzle and a leash no longer than 3 feet. http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080609/WDH0101/80609170/1981
Portage - 6/7/08 - City officials said Wednesday that their recently passed vicious and dangerous animal ordinance might need some tweaking. "When we drafted this, we thought we had it all covered and we did a good job. However, we need to go back and look at it again," said Common Council member Carol Heisz. Heisz, the chairwoman of the Legislative and Regulatory Committee, the quasi-judicial body tasked with hearing appeals on the specified ordinance, said that one exception might need to be made to the rules imposed on the owners of animals that are deemed dangerous by Portage police officers. The exception would grant the owner the ability to chain up their animal on private property as long as it is supervised. The city's ordinance has two designations for problem animals - "dangerous" and "vicious." Vicious animals can be banned from the city under the ordinance. http://www.wiscnews.com/pdr/news/289894
*NOTE - CORRECTION FROM 5/21/08 REPORT*
The 5-21-08 Report listed Piece County under Florida. It was also listed under the state of Washington under Tacoma - Pierce County. The Florida listing was incorrect.Thanks to Elisa Law of the Central Florida Great Dane Rescue, Inc. for bringing this to our attention.
COUNTRIES - OF OTHER INTEREST
AUSTRALIA
Darwin - 6/6/08 - City Council has today launched tough new laws governing pet ownership. Under the plan all pet dogs and cats must be microchipped and registered. Owners of vicious dogs will be fined up to $11,000 if their dog attacks another animal or a person. Lord Mayor Graeme Sawyer says having cats microchipped will make it easier to return lost pets. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/06/2267267.htm
CANADA
Nova Scotia - (5/21/08) - BILL 138 - Nova Scotia politicians are about to pass a law that has dog owners howling mad. The Dog Legislation Council of Canada says the proposed changes to the Municipal Government Act will allow Nova Scotia municipalities to ban breeds. But a government spokeswoman says they let municipalities put some restrictions in place without banning breeds. "They’re putting in some measures (so) that they can control a restricted dog without an outright ban," said Donna Chislett, a spokeswoman for Service Nova Scotia. Under the Municipal Government Act, municipalities regulate the keeping of fierce or dangerous animals. They are left to define fierce or dangerous dogs, "including defining them by breed, crossbreed, partial breed or type." The proposed changes will allow municipalities to define dogs as fierce, dangerous or restricted, also by using "behaviour or type." Municipalities will also be able to regulate "the keeping of fierce, dangerous or restricted dogs, including requiring spaying or neutering, liability insurance, warning signs, physical controls on or off the owner’s property or training requirements," the amendments state. Halifax regional councillor Andrew Younger called the proposed changes "ridiculous." "I haven’t seen any packs of Rottweilers running loose in the streets that we have to control. I’m not hearing stories from any municipality where these dogs are out of control. And where does it stop? Poodles bark a lot, so do you ban poodles because you don’t like the barking?" http://www.thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1057070.html and
Text at: http://gov.ns.ca/LEGISLATURE/LEGC/bills/60th_2nd/1st_read/b138.htm
Ontario - New Tecumseth - new proposed bylaw will limit dog ownership to three in town and five out of town. The new proposed bylaw states anyone wanting to start a pet-related business will be required to own five acres. http://www.allistonherald.com/allistonherald/article/105278
Saskatchewan - Delisle - community has adopted a new animal control bylaw in the wake of a dog mauling that seriously injured a five-year-old girl last January. The bylaw aims to strike a balance between the rights of dog owners and protection of the public. Under the bylaw, dog owners can be compelled to put up signs warning of an aggressive dog, and can also be forced to put up a dog run on private property to house an aggressive dog. Owners can also be compelled to repair fences, gates or faulty locks or latches. The community refused to consider a ban on certain breeds of dogs. http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hgLel8gfwuj_vhgPhcdW6CjmmzAQ
CZECH REPUBLIC
Prague - Dog owners are likely to be unhappy about a draft bill soon to be discussed in Parliament. Already approved by the government May 21, the regulation would require all dogs to be walked on leashes, or else owners could be fined 50,000 K ($3,175). It is part of an animal-protection bill intended to minimize cruelty to animals, and it has divided mayors as well as veterinarians and the public. http://www.praguepost.com/articles/2008/06/18/bill-calls-for-all-dogs-to-be-leashed.php
Ireland
Dublin - City Council is to allow some of its tenants to keep so-called "dangerous" breeds of dogs, provided they are spayed and micro-chipped. The city council banned them from all council-owned property including public parks. The country will focus on enforcing local leashing laws and owner education programmes. In future, dogs that display aggression will be tested by an expert. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/council-to-lift-ban-on-pitbulls-for--tenants-1403846.html
JAMAICA
6/7/08 - THE JAMAICA Veterinary Medical Association is now helping to draft legislation to deal with the problem of dangerous dogs, particularly the vicious American Pit Bull Terrier, that have been smuggled into the country over many years. The Veterinary Services Division in the Ministry of Agriculture wants the owners of dogs in Jamaica to be required to register their animals. Dr St Aubyn Bartlett, a veterinarian and government backbencher, on Wednesday called for urgent laws to deal with the illegal importation of the American Pit Bull Terrier. "The situation is now totally out of control as these dangerous dogs are now seen in every community," Bartlett commented, during his contribution to the 2008/2009 Sectoral Debate in the House of Representatives. Director of the Veterinary Services Division, Dr Osbil Watson, told The Gleaner yesterday that these animals were being brought into the country illegally, noting that the division had never given a permit to import the Pit Bull. He said Jamaica would have only permitted imports from the United Kingdom, but that country has now banned the Pit Bull. The animal has also been banned in Canada and a number of states in America. The director of veterinary services said the division would recommend that the registration begin with the more cultured breeds such as the Rottweiler and Doberman. Trinidad and Tobago has introduced legislation banning the importation and breeding of 'dangerous' dogs. Contravention of this law attracts a fine of TT$70,000. http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20080606/lead/lead6.html see also:
Member of Parliament called for the introduction of legislation to govern the importation, breeding, rearing and the registration and licensing of 'dangerous dogs'. http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/html/20080604T230000-0500_136394_OBS__CONTROL_THOSE_DANGEROUS_DOGS_.asp
Netherlands
Amsterdam - Dutch government says it will lift a long-standing ban on pit bulls because it did not lead to any decrease in bite incidents. The country will focus on enforcing local leashing laws and owner education programs. A new policy will hopefully be in place by year-end, in which dogs that have displayed aggression will be tested by an expert. http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/06/09/20080609netherlands-pitbulls0609-ON.html?source=nletter-news
NEW ZEALAND
The Dog Protection Society wants a complete ban on all varieties of pit bull terriers, after the latest attack on a child. A two-year-old boy was bitten by the family's pet red-nosed pit bull in his home in Te Atatu South, west Auckland. The boy is in hospital being treated for facial injuries and a broken jaw. Society spokesman Graham Fitzpatrick says over hundreds of year, pit bulls have been trained specifically for fighting and it is now entrenched in their nature. He says they have a short fuse and if they become upset or confused they will attack. Mr Fitzpatrick says dog breeds that have an unpredictable and dangerous nature should not be kept as pets, be bred or imported. He believes the current ban on American pit bulls, dogo Argentino, Brazilian fila, and Japanese tosa do not go far enough. http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/newsdetail1.asp?storyID=138627 Breeders question the proposed breed selective legislation, Dog Control Amendment Bill (No 2) because of the failed experiment in the Netherlands last week since it did not lead to any decrease in bite incidents.
Scotland
Lothians - A SOARING number of pet owners in the Lothians are being charged with failing to keep dangerous dogs under control. Police officers charged a total of 75 people with letting their pets run loose last year – treble the number caught four years ago. The Scottish SPCA said the steep rise in charges may be due to a growing lack of care and supervision given to pets, as well as the "macho culture" of buying dogs such as Staffordshire Bull Terriers. Jo Wilson, spokeswoman for the Scottish SPCA, said: "If an animal is on a leash, or off its leash but the owner is present and supervising, then that does not break the law. "If a dog ends up wandering the streets alone, it's classed as a stray. If a person or another animal is attacked, or the dog causes a road hazard, charges can be brought. "There is a macho culture of wanting certain breeds of dogs as a status symbol. Some of these owners then fail to exercise the responsibility of ownership. Tracy Warren, secretary of the Scottish Staffordshire Bull Terrier Rescue charity in Baberton Mains, agreed a lack of responsibility among some owners was behind the swelling number of charges. "Unfortunately, some people don't want the level of responsibility they take on when they get a Staffie or any other dog." http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Rise-in-pet-owners-collared.4148924.jp
Switzerland
Zurich - recently passed a law with the intention of clarifying acceptable treatment of "social animals" that goes into effect September first establishes desirable treatment of animals such as dogs, fish, horses, and even rhinoceroses. An array of animals has been included under the bracket of "social animals" - and a part of this new law states that any of these animals will be considered abused if they are not able to cohabit with another of their species. Swiss fisherman will now be required to participate in a course that teaches them how to catch fish humanely. Catch and Release fishing has been banned; instead fishers must now kill the fish immediately after being caught with "a sharp blow to the head with a blunt instrument." This law affects farmers as well, who are barred from restraining horses, sheep, and goats. Pigs and cows must not be forced to reside in areas with hard flooring. http://www.ussportsmen.org/NETCOMMUNITY/Page.aspx?pid=929&srcid=55&srctid=1&erid=11816
United Kingdom
London - (5/20/08) - Lawmakers approve new embryo research. British lawmakers voted Monday to approve plans to allow the use of animal-human embryos for research. The proposed laws have provoked stormy debate - pitting Prime Minister Gordon Brown and scientists against religious leaders, anti-abortion campaigners and a large number of lawmakers. Brown has said he believes scientists seeking to use mixed animal-human embryos for stem cell research into diseases such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's are on a moral mission to improve - and save - millions of lives. Debate on other aspects of the bill are to be debated today. A final vote is expected in the coming weeks. http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/121127242096540.xml&coll=2
London - (6/4/08) - The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) wants all British dogs to be fitted with microchips, to enable the organisation to create a comprehensive database of dogs and owners in the UK. 88 per cent of attendees at the charity's annual conference voted in favour of micro-chipping dogs, which would allow the creation of the dog and owner info database. The RSPCA also, unsurprisingly, voted against the Dangerous Dogs Act and against any addition of new breeds to the act, originally introduced by John Major in 1991 outlawing four breeds - American pit bulls, Dogo Argentino, Japanese Tosa and Fila Brazileros. Irresponsible owners are to blame, not the dogs, according to the RSPCA – and a database of owners would help to police this, without recourse to animal cruelty, claims the organisation. The RSPCA received 358 calls about dog fights in 2007, double that of the previous year and the number of people treated for dog bites in England rose 40 per cent over the period 2003 through to 2007."Why do we still have a stray animal problem? Why do we have an increasing dangerous dog problem? The answer has to come down to education, enforcement of legislation and, in certain cases, microchipping and dog licensing," said David Bowles, the RSPCA's head of external affairs. http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/future-tech/rspca-wants-all-dogs-micro-chipped-381450
London - (6/4/08) - Commenting on today's publication of a Defra leaflet which provides information regarding the law on dangerous dogs, Liberal Democrat Shadow Health Secretary, Norman Lamb said: "The Dangerous Dogs Act has been consistently criticised as a piece of flawed legislation, which was rushed in by the previous Tory government. Yet ministers are responding to the massive rise in attacks with just a leaflet. "This is a pathetic response to a dramatically increasing problem in this country. Current legislation doesn't even deal adequately with the problem of dangerous dogs in private homes."Irresponsible owners are more likely to make a dog 'dangerous' than it being born a particular breed. There is a worrying trend in some areas of using dangerous dogs as fashion accessories or, worse still, as weapons. "The current law simply isn't working, and the Government needs to do far more than produce a leaflet to deal with it."
http://www.libdems.org.uk/news/dangerous-dogs-law-simply-isnt-working-lamb.14397.html ALSO SEE:
Lord Rooker spells out laws on dangerous dogs at:
http://www.24dash.com/news/Housing/2008-06-03-Lord-Rooker-spells-out-law-on-dangerous-dogs-at-RSPCA-conference
North Wales - (6/4/08) - North Wales chief constable Richard Brunstrom last night called for dangerous dogs to be targeted like sex offenders. He urged officers to treat a past incident where a dog had bitten a human “like a previous conviction”. Mr Brunstrom told an RSPCA conference Britain had suffered an “exponential growth in dog fighting” and its towns and cities were “swamped with irresponsible owners”. Mr Brunstrom said police needed to target “canine offenders” and learn more about who they bite and how often.He said: “We really need to think about targeting offenders, both the human and the canine. We do not pay enough attention to the dogs that bite within our communities. If a dog has bitten before that should be regarded as previous conviction in human terms. “We have not been seeking out the problem dogs and doing something about them. Mr Brunstrom criticised the Dangerous Dogs Act for banning specific breeds rather than focusing on an animal’s behaviour. He said: “In my opinion the breed type legislation is stupid, it is intellectually ridiculous and bankrupt but we are stuck with it.” Mr Brunstrom added Britain could learn from Portland, Oregon, in America, where dogs which have a history of biting are monitored. In Virginia, a register of biting dogs has been set up for residents to view in a system similar Megan’s Law, which listed paedophiles. He added that the surge in dog fighting was due to “out of control breeding” and changes in “human population. http://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/2008/06/04/richard-brunstrom-treat-devil-dogs-like-sex-beasts-55578-21019247/
Pembrokeshire County - Haverfordwest - County Council brought a test case to clarify the law banning the docking of puppy tails in the UK.
Rutland - (5/20/08) - Dog owners could soon be forced to keep their pets on leads in a town park. Oakham mum Jenny Arthey has called for dogs to be kept under stricter control after her young daughter was scared by an unsupervised animal in Cutts Close. She wanted Oakham Town Council to fence off a section of the park for pet owners to let their dogs loose, leaving the rest of the area dog-free for children to enjoy. The idea was branded as "ludicrous" by several councillors at a meeting last week but they are now considering introducing a rule for all dogs to be kept on leads in the park. At the moment pets are allowed to run free. http://www.rutland-times.co.uk/news/Call-for-action-on-danger.4088962.jp
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Around the World Notes !!
There are some pretty bizarre laws on the books in a variety of places. We thought we'd share some of them - and a story - with you ! Who says working legislation is no fun? !!
Here's one for you "dangerous dog" owners:
'Dangerous Dog' Found Not Guilty
Aberporth, Wales, UK
Defense attorney Colin Taylor said, "This must be the most ridiculous case ever brought before this court." The prosecution was going for the death penalty. Allegedly, Beth the 13-year-old dog growled at two elderly women, and "they were left distressed." Under the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991 (c.65), the court "may order the destruction of any dog in respect of which the offence was committed." But then the defense called Beth, their star witness, to the stand. She was asked to open her mouth, and when she did, she revealed nothing but gums.
(Editor's note: Supposing she was asked to "show the tooth, the whole tooth and nothing but the tooth." ...Sorry, couldn't resist ! )
Said Mr. Taylor, "The dog has no teeth. How on earth could it be classed as dangerous?" Owner Maxine Turner of Aberporth told Cardigan magistrates that all Beth's teeth had dropped out two years before. "She can't even chew her dog food because she hasn't got a tooth in her head. What is she going to do - lick people to death?" added Ms. Turner.
Beth was found overwhelmingly not guilty.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OTHER TRIVIA
Some laws go back prior to the horse & buggy era and have never been removed from the books. Some definitely defy any explanation.....
There's no court in the land that would prosecute you for "failing to have your dog's hind legs tied during the month of April" (Massachusetts), but you never know when it might behoove you to brush up on some local ordinances. So, here we go .......
PALDING, OH
A police officer may bite a dog to quiet him. (That'll definitely quiet any dog down.....!)
ZION, IL
It is illegal for anyone to give lighted cigars to dogs, cats, and other domesticated animals kept as pets. (Ken & I assumed that you could go ahead and give them to wild animals !)
VENTURA COUNTY, CA
Cats and dogs are not allowed to have sex without a permit. (We couldn't figure out if this was for sex with the same species or sex with a member of the opposite species....)
HARTFORD, CT
It is illegal to educate dogs. (All you obedience people in Connecticut - cut that out !!)
OKLAHOMA
People who make "ugly faces" at dogs may be fined and/or jailed. (Ho Boy ! Best watch yourself while standing ringside at the dog show.....!)
NEVADA
It is "legal" to hang a person for shooting your dog on your property but it's not legal to drive a camel on the highway. (We still haven't figured out what one had to do with the other......)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The information in this report has been compiled by:
Ken Sondej - 4winds@viawest.net
AKC Legislation Liaison - Silver State Kennel Club
Legislation Liaison - National Pet Press
Owner: NVPetLaw@yahoogroups.com
Owner: Nevada Animal Owners & Sportsmen Voting Alliance http://www.naosva.com/
&
Linda D. Witouski - dropfred13@aol.com
AKC Judge/Delegate/Legislation Liaison
AKC Legislation Representative - SC/PA & I.L.L. at Large
Camo Coalition Steering Committee - SC
SC National Assembly of Sportsmen's Caucuses
Legislation Editor-Liaison/Staff Investigative Writer - National Pet Press
Legislation Chair/BOD/Delegate - Myrtle Beach Kennel Club, Inc.
Legislation Chair - Miniature Pinscher Club of America, Inc.
Legislation Chair - Yankee Miniature Pinscher Club, Inc.
Owner - DogLegislation@yahoogroups.com
Owner - MinPinInReview@yahoogroups.com 
