Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
09/17/2013 00 Misc Distributed at the Meeting - Pit Bulls
r t , ;ay,:..; ,. Distribute at TJ� ��' :. F 'k .. , ° r�} , at eva ;�',,, r 7 ' "' sS` i .. a, �` -- Rediscover the pit bull. . � , � . ',,, _ i, ,i . ,„ , , 1 ,, ., f j Checklist for a Dangerous Dog eleinec.a.,tha By Jessica Dolce W Are you a politician or resident in an area where a dog - related injury) or fatality has recently occurred? If so, you're probably working to determine the best way to prevent this sort of tragedy from happening again Right now it may feel like dogs are posing a large threat to your community, but what you're experiencing is actually quite rare pog bites are at historic lows in our country and, as a whole, we've never been safer But there are certain criteria that are consistently resent in regards to dog - related injuries, so as you look at the details of the tragic events in your community, here's a reference checklist for the ingredients that, when mixed together, have the potential to create dangerous dogs. First, take a look at the function of the dog. Is the dog a member of the family? Keep in mind that just because a dog lives with a family doesn't mean it's a family dog. Determine why the family owns this d What purpose did they intend for the dog to serve? - Was the dog used for: _Fighting and gambling? _Protection of property or other people? Intimidation or status? _Backyard breeding? If you've checked any of the above, you've determined that the dog is not a family member Now it's time to look at the conditions the dog was living in. Family dogs are provided with basic care such as food l and water, regular vet visits, and time inside a home where they can socialize with their human family members. Take a look at the dog's daily life Was the dog: _Starving? Isolated? _Chained? Suffering from untreated medical problems or injuries? _Intact (and not being shown or bred responsibly)? _Not vaccinated? _Living outside or in a garage full time? _Abused or neglected? What did you discover? If you checked any of the above, then you know that the dog was not provided basic care and may, in some cases, have been physically abused. These are further indications that the dog was not a family dog and was the victim of mistreatment. 1 Next, examine the people involved. The actions of a dog are always directly related to how they are managed by humans Did the dog owner act in a reckless manner by creating scenarios where a dog, confronted with situations without proper management by humans, is likely fail? m �M x ` 1 : W`�1 ,,p' :. ri s o w s ",b +W y yy�r4a' M !� � m �� ,, ,, ,: t , b t YdOg.:2rg ,..SP, C k ,?,RA ubb y dogs � �4 � � , N ", a y^^ v S ' ;, e: t': t'es""C'rr�"S"„t, s �CY.:" ra •� y a s: �� ; fit; , h b ,' ' ' , , a Y ' 5 •,'i� �' ti t k 1 • S o q Redis!2LII.;. wu. -, ,:P � ,�:•, 4� , . <, ,4 „ :x �; ,r .r �, . ..., Did the owner: _Allow the dog to roam freely? '.' _Fail to supervise the dog around children? _Fail to socialize the dog with people? -” . r !;<, .' r , ' it X _Have multiple unsocialized dogs? �� - ,� .iW '' , • If you've checked any of the above items, then you've determined that the , � . °� ,.. dog was not properly managed by its owner The human set the dog up to fail. .. i x ,„ ` i Lastly, look at the history of the dog owner When tragedy strikes, most people i 2't- ° ,t � r , ;t are slow to take responsibility for how their actions contributed to the problem. ,, i. a They they've deeply ,.;' Y ma Y say the Y ve done nothing 9 wron 9. but since you've looked dee P Y into �• } �. ., a their daily life with the dog(s) involved in the incident, now you can trace their , ^. •° :, ? +t history. Its likely that this isn't the first time the owner or their dogs have , encountered trouble. ` "; �`�,: t r i ' $ f , t� li Does the owner _Have a history of criminal behavior? „ l ', F _Have past citations with animal control? •, Not have a current license for their dog? ', N , • ' \ t k k w , ` Have a history of training their dog to be aggressive? Photo by Melissa Lipani If you checked any of the above, then you've determined there was a history of reckless behavior on the part of the owner and a failure of law enforcement and /or animal control to follow up on a known problem. Every one of the items in this article is a warning sign that went unchecked for some time until a serious incident occurred Luckily, the overwhelming majority of dogs that are victims of one or more of the criteria listed here still do not cause harm. We are safer now than ever before So, what's missing from the list? The breed of the dog is not a checklist item. That's because any dog, of any breed or breed mix, can become dangerous in the hands of a reckless, irresponsible owner Sadly, in the last few decades, abusive and neglectful humans have gravitated towards pit bull type dogs because false information and sensationalized myths, from various sources, have glamorized pit bull type dogs as status symbols for criminals. Just like any other dog, if pit bulls are not treated as family dogs, then they become canine victims, set up to fail by humans that care little about their health, training, or for that matter, the law If you choose to ban pit bull type dogs in an attempt to make your community safer, these reckless humans will move on to another breed (like they did earlier this century when they chose to own German Shepherds or Dobermans) or it will simply push their pit bulls further underground, hiding from the law, where they will go without medical care and proper socialization Now that you've looked at the checklist, it's plain to see how those circumstances, exacerbated by a breed ban, could create a dangerous dog. It is time to move away from fixating on the breed if you want to create safe, humane communities. Instead, focus attention on the elements present in this checklist, since it's the cocktail of human - related criteria listed here that is to blame. By addressing these items through the creation and enforcement of breed - neutral dangerous dog laws which address irresponsible owners, you'll be creating truly safe communities, without punishing the hundreds of thousands of families with pit bull type dog that are loving, law abiding guardians of family dogs. V aiibbydog org iil ebook com/stubby ii.sT j A .7 ; ,, tk. I Think Bannins Breed `' Unionygle,MS A CDC S , the Mer Cl T he Meg.__ c.lifton , Trenton, MS Romeo, Ml Summary; "Insurance Company I ;, " ` Summary . of,Dog is.NOT the `;,� State of Oklaho a i L aliewood,-CD Discrimination and Actuarial Data Are ' . , � ! ' Ariswer. Agree: , Ba tt leeCre ek,MI Old Bridge, An Analysis of Merritt Clifton's a E NJ ! Used as the Cornerstones „,of the Breed , I' y ' Jacksonville, AR ! • , Do Attac De and I Maimings, U S & Canada - _ ' York, Ne Ban Argument Bamberg, SC ' Lew New York, York Kansas li Youngstown, OH September 1982 to November S to pow -1 B 13 2006 from the Killeen, TX • Sandusky, OH I Deioto, T% }' St. Tammany Parish, LA State of Maryland Comanche, IA �"”„ , ,u_... « "�- - w.. " ««'�� __,« .._�.._. _.__.. _- - - ., Sandusky, OH I Washington E Bellevue, NE " I National Canine Research Richland; WA • qustlntown, OH C OUnOd North Muskegon Federal Way, WA The CDG, Study lion Grand Rapids, Ml Wheeling, J Y i Carpus Christi, TX g• WV 1 , St. Mary's County, MD '+ ' d m " ' Coeur D'Alene, ID , Horlcon, WI Denmark, WI ~,•'' +' t Jackson County, MO } Eau Claire, WI ; Broomfield, CO One'ofthe rima,ry sources of information quot to M Clifton's "study" can be found Rodgers City, AR + Brandon, MI P ' J,: `t 1 Roseville Cassapolis, MI ; Adrian,.Ml on a prominent dog =bite attorney • P t lie WI 1 Ann Arbor, ,jus b r e e d ' ba nn i ng i s a r _ titled •B reeds : of Ward, ARA , I Oxford, MI I website and is'being used as . lacItson, L '1 North ' Ridgeville, Ohio e " dogs.involved in:fatal,human the " United ' States Milford, M Bluefield, WV ! Romeo, Ml I between 19.79 and published in in 2000 ' statistical evidence" of breed Oak Grove, MO }, , MI f Lee Summit, MO I } Belton, MO s ; r,, �, ,1 ' behaviors by those who seem Baton Rouge, LA E Bellfontaine Neighbors, a 'Oklahoma Stata '' Sumter Coun SC I' MO '• .N t `` , unable or unwilling to recognize i ' Unionville, I Illinois The CDC report illustrates morethan anything that:. g Montere TN ' :the critical errors, ' I Little Rock, AR Jennings, MO og.trends in data "Pealed I dangerous d change- (breed °is incidental and' Anderson, IL J Raytown, MO 14 ,p ' y' • r r (;'collection and the' damaging, and Manhattan, KS Sedalia :MO ! 'I subject toopularity' nd fadythrough.tEme, ,,, E ' 11 Phillipsburg, iI UnlversltyCity,MO € Almena,MI r , ' , " „ r I erroneous` conclusions drawn. 3 t Arcadia Parish, LA ^• Indianapolis. IN ! 1 I r ' Cedar CRY, UT 1 BSI stopped „ Belton, KS T he- CDC.report why breed s pec i fic'legislation E. from.a biased and flawed Portage, Wl due,LD Cducd(io,, IE Belton, MS I is NOT the Proper av for addressing dog attacks. . ' s ample. ' f Belton, MO • Peculiar, MO ineffectiveness, Cleveland, OH ' I The authors'of the re Port have ersonall g o ne on record i Leavenworth, KS o utcry d public De troit. MI to that the re P P Y g ' Me rritt Clifton's scrapbook of outc Detroit, Ml o state is INACCURATE'and shouldO 'NT I P i Batesville, AR P 1 P > I newspaper articles is presented, � Detroit, } I Deridder,LA 'll Dickenson, ND ! be used to'justify BSL. -' , Cedar Rapids, IA r - , � 1 r ' - and often acce ted, as an E Alabama i Levvnworth, KS 1 Eastpolnt, MI 3 P ! Montgomery, AL Northleke,IL Ellis, KS e - unbiased and accurate j Bald Knob, AR I Hudsonville, MI Federalsburg, MD "It is frustrating for me personally Golab says, ' because Shannon Hills, AR ,I Bald Knob, AR Golden, CO , representation of dog attacks in ({ Searcy, } Lee'aa "mmlt,MO People who want to enact specifictegislation keep E '.the U:S: and Canada. The title i Mulberry, Golden, CO ,AR Longmont, CO .using try and make'a- caseagainst pit bulls. Mulberry, AR 1 1 Northglenn, CO and number$.presented as Merrlem, KS 1 FC Colorado art Sm tt AK ith, AR I i Layfaette,CO ' statistics ' suggest that an ;l Milford, OH • ' B ut all w e did breeds with fatalities over a 20- i Rocky Ford, CO year, period. P eriod. And the numbers show that the breed that (, Federal Heights, CO unbiased,: scientific methodology 1 P , CO I! Westminster, CO , Osage County, Pontiac, Ml ounty, KS ! goes•to the top overtime; which suggests ' t ' I Estes Park, CO € Raytown, MS wa used. to achieve the re Nort hglenn, CO Normal, IL 1 'La y f eyette, CO 'Paxton, IL Redford, MI something' other than breed is responsible for the:, ; r. Longmont, CO Forest, IL Revere, MA f atalities J 1 v r' , Richland, WA However, Mr. Clifton' arbitrarily Rocky Ford, CO Bloomington, IL r , �, 1 �. t Scott City, KS Federal Heights, CO Will County, IL e dog attacks in which '1 Shawnee, KS I eo the last.few years in ta ,, g just ' weatminster, co Chicago, IL B P , P le,t rY to use New Castle County, DE I North Chicago, IL [ Shelbyville TN °the' breed of dog was not /.Coral Springs, FL LlncoloshlrE, IL 1 Sherwood Park, Alberta which shows pit bulls'and "Rettweilers dr'top'. The whole Hodgkins, IL' i Topeka, KS ''identifiable," that is, where no ! Rockmart, {' Rockmart, art, GA Middlesboro, KY 1 Tue ma, ll ha TN , point f, out ; .sumM ary'waS'to explain '.why "you can't do ..y - • 'one at ` t scene, or later, Floyd County. -GA Lake Charles, LA 1 ; ` ,.that.,Buf the media and the people want to'support F= < Kewanee, IL Bolifontelne I Neighbors, State R Lo Prohibiting 1 I theircase just don't look at that.' " • I ., t claimed to know what kind of i Waukegan, IL , I ' ` 7 '• '''t. ", ` ", I dogs were involved. Also I, McHenry County, IL Jennings, MS I E „ .y , . ° e" .,e ' Noral,IL ' Lancaster, OH California ',i .,, ; Occluded. were dogs'deemed to .I I m Paxton, IL Wilkes Barre, PA ', Colorado , : The CDC'sGilcfirist argues "the':breeds involved are Forest, IL Woodbury, TN ;; Florida ' vary :The.mo encompassing, ' is`.to'deal ° . i , be used for'g police,work { Bloomington, IL j Eau Claire, WI I; Illinois 3 o r as dogs. The !!!I I WIIICounty,IL I Detroit, MI Maine ' with dangerous d :so every o e very "o wner. 9 Chicago, ,Salem; MA i that d Minnesota un of any alleged breed I Parker, CO Neu/Jersey is covered�all-thetime , ', ', 1 ' Lincolnahl re, IL I • •• , 1 identification aside, the exclusion Hodgkins, IL I Lake St. Louis, MO New York •` i " '�: ' I 1 Northlake,IL Lowell, MI I Oklahoma : t of all attacks by'dogs where no I Mlnooka,IL I; Russellville, AR 1 Texas ` The,CDC recommends that i mprovements in surveillance I j Anderson, IN I Bourbonnais, IL Vir for,fatarand nonfatal dog bites are necessary to,targef Virginia , ; b i de n t i f i cat i on was asserted, Indianapolis, IN 11 Flatwoods, KY I Washington ,' i i' combined with the exclusion of I South Bend, IN , Annapolis, MD ' and, - evaluate p revention efforts. ., 1St. Joseph County, IN t, I Cripple Creek, CO i I . - I dogs used for a specific function, - Mason City, IA 1 Hazel Park, Ml j1 I ( y I leaves us a list that is utterly Waterloo, IA Crawford County, MI' 1 s - i Baltimore, MD .........,_..,....... E .. " - ^ ^'- ^ -^ ^ • • ^• - -- unre resentative of "do attacks Washington, IA � ' '•' I Hu Leavenworth, KA Stafford, KS mbolt, IA 11 State of Delaware .1 _. -�, - , -;--- . . .. ". .,, .. - , .. «. - ... » — ... _.. i. p g 1 r--- ""-- " " ^' ` ' and maiming " ° the,U S and I Wltahlta,KA } Wilmington, NC , , // 'a f Canada. - j Emporia, KA ,E Loveland, CO I According,to the Nation s largest Insurer 1 . Merrlum, KA , Arlington, NM I I Olathe, KA ,, Wichita, Kansas i State .Farm Insurance — no breed restrictions. Some companies don't Mr.:Clifton's "study" further I Frankfort, KY ' Auburn, WA E , ' L,etchfleld, KY Roseville, Ml ' discriminate by breed. - , (•suffers from the use of a biased I Milton, KY Bellingham, MA Lincoln County, KY • MARLBOROUGH, MA 'sample. There'is no national I Spencer County, KY fI Kansas City, MO I "We believe that there are good dogs and bad dogs within every breed, just 'organization in.the U S or ;Middlesboro, KY Black lack, MO I as we believe that there are res onsible and irres onsible owners." says Oldham County, KY Wyndotte, Ml P P y Canada that collects data on a I Palntsville,KY SL Charles, MO !' Phil 'Supple of State Farm. systematic basis on the • 'Park Hills, KY New Mexico -S188 Corinth, KY I Withdrawn E 1 circumstances or specifics'of dog 1 Taylor Mill, KY 1 Hohenwalt,TN I / Dan Hattaway, consultantfor State Farm,.sa s the ' i Lake a, 1 Indianapolis, IN Yr an underwriting Y bite- related injuries. In the Sul er, L LA Sacramento, CA co mm an doesn't even track how many of its home insuran olic holders . - y I phq LA l 1 ' p , y Y, ce P Y #absence of a� p rofessionall Gonzalez, LA I Taylor Mills, KY f I Methuen, MA I Shannon Hills, AR town dogs. Policyholders'do, have to answer questions about dogs on the reliable,data source, news„ Gloucester, MA ,I Mulberry, AR I application, however $ ecificall wants to know if a dog ' { pP Specifically, the'com an P Y 9 has reports are often substituted in I Waltham, MA ', Estes Park, CO • 1 New Jersey ' La;uanta CO + i everbitten anyone or if it has been for attack purposes. an attemptto identify North Carolina �i Longmont, CO t I circumstances surrounding dog 1 Watuga County, NC II New New Castle County, DE 7 I 1 Lancaster, OH I1 Rockmart, GA if the dog has ,bitten someone, State F arm will wantto know the I attacks. However, newspapers I W11 Palestine, Barre, PA i1 McHenry IN County, 11 1 1' circumstances•surroundin the "We'll wantto ascertain if it's'ever likely l 9 Y I ,do not have theinterest,'desire, E Hazelton,PA 1 Humbolt, IA I to happen again-- _ifprecautions have been taken to.prevent it;" says ',E resources orability-to provide an Erie, PA 11 Leavenworth, KS - Woodbury, TN II Witchlte.KS I Hattaway Other factorsthe`company look "s. at are the seriousness of the , ' complete' profile of I Tullahoma, TN 1` Frankfort, KY I injury whether..the attack,was r'ovoked'or, unprovoked'. I 1 SRelbyville,TN 1 Lietchfield,KY ( P - , P , t .; :dog,attaeksoceurring in.the U S 1 Putnam County, TN E Milton, KY I6; and'Canada'.' 1 East Palestine, OH E Lincoln County. KY ' '" d• 1 Bedford County, TN l Spencer County, KY Si I , ' , 111 , " • Kill TX ) S Ipher, LA E , i 'I §. ., .............«,. _.,_ _ .._ ( Oak Grove, MS .. ,.., w. ,,,..,_.........,., ,_ ..._._ ...._. .,... .. _.. ... ,.. -., «_ ,".... ,.... ..>, ... «.. ,.. , ._...,..._... .. _ i ..a.... .. «_. -..,. ..,,....,.�......._..- ...,.__. 1 t ' .Y :t r, � '° #* 1�5 '.°,';Y t ;? r ' �. :., A:::,;:-. q.,�Tt: y _ ,r _ I .. �� _ � ___ _. ~- � ~�_ -- ��_ Insurance Federation of Minnesota � � _ � _, _�. � - f ;.Actuarial data is trade secret because each company uses a different formula and the formulas used are considered trade secret and thus are not ever divulged: , The problem with this question is that there is, no one central repository for data about dog bite injuries-and claims. Insurers are not required to break down their claims payments' based on dog bite or even by breed ' That being said, we did query the top. 10 insurers in the state last.summer asking if they did underwriting based ; on specific dog breed and if so which breeds were subject to adverse underwriting (higher premiums or , ({ exclusions) We received 7 responses. 1 We compiled the list in aggregate and submitted it to Rep. John Lesch (DFL -St. Paul) who is considering a bill to ` ban /regulate certain breeds of dogs. ' f Akita, Alaskan Malamute, American Staffordshire Terrier, Boxer, Bullmastiff, Chow Chow, Doberman Pinscher, German Shepard, Great Dane, Pit Bull, Presa Canario, Rottweiler, Siberian Husky, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, Weimaraner, Any Wolf Hybrid, Any mix of these breeds, Any Exotic Guard Dog breed, Risks that involve vicious i or exotic animals or pets,Horses or other livestock. , This is the l supplied to Representative Lesch. As you see the list is in alphabetical order and contains no ' statistical analysis. , ` What.do th Scholars say? „ I An initial first step would be to improve surveillance and reporting of dog bites. Until accurate numbers for the , numerator and denominator in the relative, dangerousness ratio can be ascertained, insurers and governments I will be without realistic data on which to make meaningful decisions. The need for more accurate data collection 1 has been championed by the very scientists who have tried to calculate the scope of the dog- biting problem. — I See generally Jeffrey J' Sacks et al., Fatal Dog Attacks,' 1989 -1994, '97 Pediatrics 891 (June 1996) The principal problem in determining the total number of bites by a particular breed is that there is no national ` reporting system for dog bites. — Weiss HB, Friedman Dl, Coben JH Incidence of dog bite injuries treated in emergency departments. JAMA i 1998; 2711(1) 51 -53. t l There is good reason to believe that the raw data being used to calculate. relative dangerousness ratios is € incomplete and inaccurate. If the data being inputted the calculation is flawed, the results (claiming to show I some breeds are.more- dangerous than others) are equally,flawed. - K athar i ne Dokken,,.Dog Bite- Statistics: Bad Logic,. athttp:// www. thedogplace .com/library/articles156.htm C incinnati Law Review Findings- ' , .r - ' ., J ,. A five -year study published'in'the'Cincinnati.Law Review concluded that statistics did not support the assertion " , I' that any one. breed was dangerous, and found that when legislation is focused on the type of dog. it fails because I it is unenforceable, confusing: and costly Focusing legislation on breeds that are labeled •as.vicious only distracts attention from the real problem - irresponsible dog owners. ,Locating, identifying, confiscating, housing, destroying and disposing of banned dogs are expensive. Cincinnati was spending $200,000 a year to confiscate'and destroy less than 20 percent of the city's pit,bulls before the city repealed its long- standing pit bull ban last year , I The (American Veterinary Medical,Association) Task Foree on Canine Aggression and Human - Canine Interactions wrote in "A community approach t� dog bite prevention" (see JAVMA, June 2001, page 1732). that breed - specific legislation is an- inappropriate:and ineffective approach to protecting public:safety H Additional information and full texts available at www.arottalove.org or e-mail randerson@arottalove.org StubbyDog =u Rediscover the Pit Bull. Pit Bulls by the Numbers A look at the facts surrounding faulty pit bull "statistics" By Micaela Myers What do you do when you read a news story that claims pit bulls make up only 5 percent of the dog population but account for a third or even half of the dog bite related fatalities? Where did these numbers come from, and are they accurate? Here, we examine the truth behind these commonly quoted studies and what the other side is leaving out. Some of the most frequently cited statistics come from the Center for Disease Control's Special Report on fatal human dog attacks between 1979 and 1998. eft. The report attributes a third of the fatalities between 1981 — 1992 to "pit -bull OIL type dogs," but what the other side fails to include is that the report comes with many warnings about its "statistics ": s {' • First, let's look at where the CDC and other studies get their information w�''� • You guessed it — largely from media accounts. Of course, the media � M ' reports on pit bull - related incidents far more than those involving other . ,, types of dogs, a fact clearly detailed in the Canine Research Council's publication, "The Pit Bull Placebo," and the ASPCA's "Pit Bull Bias in the Media." Another commonly cited source, the anti -pit bull website Dogsbite.org, also sites studies that use press accounts to compile their numbers. • Aside from the fact the collection methods were faulty, the CDC study notes that guessing a dog's breed is just that, a guess. And what's more, people are influenced by a dog's reputation and may attribute breed to a dog involved in an incident based on that rather than any real knowledge. To quote the report: "... to the extent that attacks by 1 breed are more newsworthy than those by other breeds, our methods may have resulted in differential ascertainment of fatalities by breed. ... [B]ecause identification of a dog's breed may be subjective (even experts may disagree on a breed of a particular dog), DBRF [dog bite related fatalities] may be differentially ascribed to breeds with a reputation for aggression." It gets muddier from there, considering that "pit -bull type dogs" are not a breed at all but a type encompassing several breeds and mixes that resemble those breeds. This means you have a very loose category of dogs that it's easy for people to miss - identify. • Sites like Dogsbite.org like to claim that pit bulls only make up 5 percent of the total dog population in the United States and are therefore "attacking" at a much higher rate than other dogs, but the truth is that there are no accurate statistics kept on the total number of dogs in this country, let alone dogs by type. The CDC clearly states this on its website: "There is currently no accurate way to identify the number of dogs of a particular breed, and consequently no measure to determine which breeds are more likely to bite or kill." And while it's anyone's guess exactly how many pit bull type dogs there are in this country, it's clear from looking around most cities, neighborhoods and shelters that dogs labeled as pit bulls are far more common than 5 percent. • 04 course, there are even more factors to consider. The CDC study begins at the same time pit bulls' "Evolution of a Bad Rap" started. Prior to that, according to "The Pit Bull Placebo," pit bulls were nowhere to be found on bite lists. "In a 10 -year span, from 1966 — 1975, there is only one documented case of a fatal dog attack in the United States by a dog which could even remotely be identified as a `Pit bull,' " writes the book's author, Karen Delise. (And there are no incidents to date of a spayed /neutered indoor family pit bull ever having killed anyone.) • It's also important to note which types of dogs are listed as responsible for or fatalities changes over time, depending on which types of dogs are for negative functions, such as guarding, at that time The CDC E > . report also discusses this "[B]reeds responsible for DBRF have varied over time.... As ascertained from our data, between 1979 and 1980, Great Danes caused the most reported human DBRF.... [S]ince 1975, dogs belonging to more than 30 breeds have been responsible for fatal attacks T ' . ' on people, including Dachshunds, a Yorkshire Terrier, and a Labrador Retriever." (It's also key to point out that you are more likely to be killed �" ✓�" by lightening than a dog, and dog bites are at historic lows.) w - e • The CDC report concludes that many factors contribute to whether a dog A" � - `` "g 4 bites or not and recommends breed - neutral laws that focus on owner responsibility and individual dog behavior rather than breed - discriminatory legislation. What's the take home message of all this? It's important to question statistics related to how many pit bulls there are in the United States and how often they bite for all the reasons listed above. And, if you're in need of some positive statistics, consider this: Temperament evaluations by the American Temperament Test Society give American Pit Bull Terriers an extremely high passing rate of 82.6 percent. The average passing rate for the other 121 breeds of dogs tested was 77 percent. Pit bulls share their homes with all types of people — from celebrities to senators to everyday families like you and me. They work as search and rescue dogs, therapy dogs and service dogs, and they are our faithful companions and best friends. Related reading: StubbyDog - Resources BADRAP Monster - Myths Pit Bull Rescue Central - FAQ ASPCA - Pit Bull Bias in the Media National Canine Research Council — the problems with dog bite studies ^ 4 y `: �" `� + s�'. ` . ^ -, $, . .< c fi e: % t + , 'c a G i " , ,° : 'k 1' a *. '' 6 , ''°'x'i r' ca - ° ," ? a a s ., s . a , ,. Rediscover the pit bull. a When Dogs Bite Author and researcher Karen Delise shares her thoughts on dog bites and the media By Micaela Myers For more than two decades, Karen Delise has been researching dog bites and how the media reports them She is the founder and director of research for the National Canine Research Council, and her background includes 29 years of service with the Suffolk County, N Y's sheriff's office and a degree in veterinary science technology She is the author of "Fatal Dog Attacks The Stories Behind Statistics" and "The Pit Bull Placebo The Media, Myths and Politics of Canine Aggression " Here, Karen speaks with StubbyDog readers about dog bites and how the media reports them Q: In your book "The Pit Bull Placebo," you talk about how the media tends to focus on breed rather than circumstances when a dog bite occurs. Historically, was this always the case? A. No Absolutely not. Historically, news accounts were keen on trying to understand cause and effect when it came to dog bites. Clearly there were instances where no one could understand why a dog attacked, and oftentimes these dogs were simply referred to as "vicious" or "savage " However, many more stories not only attempted to explain the behavior of the dog, but also intentionally or unintentionally provided the reader with dog bite prevention tips An example of this is a 1960s news article that told of a dog that became frightened and confused when children threw a blanket over his head, and bit the first child he saw when the blanket was removed In this instance, the readers were given enough information to understand how this human - canine interaction ended with an injury Q: Nowadays the focus seems to be on breed. When other breeds bite or kill, do those incidents tend to get as much press coverage as inci- dents where pit bulls are said to be involved? A. With the exception of the Diane Whipple case in r ,. ,x , " San Francisco in '01 [which involved Presa y :344. �� Canarios], I have not seen a single dog bite related b fatality attributed to another breed of dog that has .. Y generated the amount of news attention given to '' . incidents that are reported to involve "pit bulls " Al � . w % There simply is no debate over this, the evidence is " s ,, . K, , 4 clear and overwhelming` � `' ' A related and disturbing phenomenon is the report- : < ing of "pit bull attacks" in which no injury resulted I`�, , , � �� have in my files over 100 cases where the media , .1 " ,� ;. ,t� , , ,., ';),* : :: (, ; ...i '... , : chose to report an encounter with a "pit bull" that tr 9 x 4,,,;. had not resulted in any injury, while incidents " k �° x , ► * 1" involving other kinds of dogs that did result in serious injury received no coverage at all. Photos courtesy of Melody McFarland arm r a � a w # &' 7� . 4 .s.�. � � ; r subbydog org w�facebook com/s 4 . . . ' , s • '` r rti h ro� t t � H� � q t � a �z.. Rediscover the pit bull. 44.41.4. • a ,:�. [Here's one example of seriously neglected and abandoned dogs erroneously referred to as "family dogs" in the media.] In 2005, the media, particularly the Detroit Free Press, repeatedly referred to two dogs involved in a fatal attack as "family pets ", the implication being that the dogs turned on a family member, betraying the bond of trust that had supposedly developed between them Not only did this imply that dogs of their reported "breed" are untrustworthy, but that on some level all dogs are unpredictable Not a single news story, in the Free Press or elsewhere, reported that the two dogs, which had only been owned by the family for a short time, had been abandoned in the basement of a row house when the family moved to another house two blocks away The people had left the dogs to die in that basement. No food and no water The dogs attempted to survive by eating the garbage in the basement, including rubber gaskets, plant material, plastic and a cardboard box of rodenticide (rat poison) When the owner's unsupervised 6- year -old daughter returned to the property to play on her old swing set, the dogs, now dying from malnutri- tion and the effects of rat poison, attacked her The police, after examining the dogs, ordered a necropsy It revealed the terrible abuse these dogs were subjected to prior to the incident. Q: In "The Pit Bull Placebo," you also talk about some of the things that dogs who bite tend to have in common, regardless of breed, if we could discuss those factors. A: This is where we find the important distinction between "family vs resident" dog The overwhelming majority of serious and fatal incidents involve resident dogs that, at the time, were not being supervised by their owners In addition to being unsupervised at the time of the incident, resident dogs rarely interact with their owners, and more often than not, have not been afforded the opportunity to enjoy positive interactions with people and to learn appropriate behaviors Q: In addition to being outdoor, resident dogs, I remember reading that most = : , dogs involved in fatalities or severe bite °f incidents are unaltered — i.e. not spayed - or neutered. Is this true in your 740T:: research? A: While the vast majority of dogs involved in fatalities are unaltered, I do not believe this to be a causation, but instead " v ° a correlation to how a dog is kept and cared What I have found to be significant is that owners not involved in respon- sible breeding programs, who have failed to spay or neuter c" ✓ their dogs, have often failed to meet many of their dogs' n 1441 aft p needs, such as appropriate socialization, shelter, nutrition ; e y 'NO and veterinary care Sexual status may become a contribut- -. ing factor when owners allow intact males to be aroused by e'er ,yy sM being near females in estrus. e V.4` r I �? �; � � org : facebook com /stubbydogS :7"4 ), 4. ;Za Rediscover the pit b ull . ,, r . � a °�. Or, nursing females, whose owners fail to provide an adequate whelping environment, may feel the need to protect litters from other animals or people For example, an intact male or female dog may not feel particu- larly threatened by an unfamiliar child coming over to pet them, but when the intact male is near a female in estrus, or the female is now nursing a litter of puppies, or when dogs are mating, the dog may perceive an unfamiliar, advancing child very differently than it would otherwise Q: Aside from chained dogs, most severe bites or fatalities are by loose dogs, correct? A. Dogs that are not under the supervision or control of their owners inflict most severe bites and fatalities. Whether the dogs are chained, loose in a yard or loose off their property seems to be less important than the fact that the dogs have been left to their own devices. a • ', ,, .: Q: If the media were to focus less on E 4 fi y • breed and more on circumstances in * , � ., reporting bite incidents, how could this i ; 1 � " help address the problems that factor ' i � . , , , into most bites. .. :, A: From strictly a human or victim based perspective (ignoring for the moment the untold dogs that have been ,fix ) 's'�" •,t � killed due to breed generated media hysteria) the greatest 4 0 �� ' — , disservice the media, and others, have created by focusing g "` _ on breed is that it completely ignores the real factors that ti 1 ' ,4 ,, �? 4 directly contributed to the bite Take, for example, the above , xt .„.4 A� case about the children throwing a blanket over a dog's ,-;,,. :�` ' :3 ;' head Time and time again I have seen the media report an P.m' -°�' .f ' incident like this as "breed x" attacks child, with no mention � : A � E of the circumstances of the bite, but, rather, with links to other attacks by "breed x" and a discussion on the history < , � ` r ,. and genetics of "breed x" – none of which provided a single : ' -- r ounce of useful information on how this very preventable Karen Delise with her dog bite could have been avoided And for the record, this is not about blaming victims; this is about reporting information that will help understand the human - canine interactions that may lead to a dog responding with a bite. Were the children to blame for teasing the dog? Was the dog to blame for biting the child? No, and no; children are allowed to play with dogs, and dogs are allowed to be frightened The key to avoiding most dog -bite related incidents is for responsible adults to realize that children will be children, and dogs will be dogs, and to supervise these interactions in order to keep both children and dogs safe , � � ;VI': ', 7 t org face ook3c m /,stubbydogs' i " _ « � '` 1 1+ ' . ...' - ..'.' ' t iM1 ., t• r' """^ ,t 3,y3,"�.: „'. �':`v° ';� ���'�' Y.?" " w+: '�' � } , a tt ,a. �,�'" �A'. ..G �, .tf " ..L�. ��qt *, "" �.ryr, p��t> ( `5 �Y .!' � a• � . • •��r' °', dace^ .. , �:.�. ".: r ", � @' ". • ",e. .� �.; ; Rediscover the pit bull. Q: I know you investigate bite- related fatalities thoroughly. Do you find that other types of dogs are often mistakenly called pit bulls by the media (or by initial witnesses to the incident)? A. I think most people would be shocked to learn where "breed identifications" of dogs involved in dog bite - related fatalities originate When I started my research into these incidents more than 20 years ago, I expected that breed identifications reported in the media would be somewhat reliable and that identifications from authorities would be even more reliable What I have learned is the media may list a dog as a certain breed without any supporting data whatsoever, oftentimes merely on the claims of a third party (neighbor) who had no knowledge of the dog or its origins. Furthermore, I learned law enforcement authorities might also list breed without any supporting data, or merely on the belief of the owner. One of the fascinating reasons for this is that many law enforcement personnel are quick to admit they cannot identify breeds of dogs and that the primary focus of their investi- gation is to determine if there is any human culpability on the part of the owners and /or parents (and the breed of dog involved has no bearing on determining that culpability) Further proof that detectives are correct in being least concerned with the breed of dog than any other aspect of the investigation is found in the studies of Dr Victoria Voith , whose work has shown us that even animal care professionals cannot visually identify mixed breeds dogs with a reliable degree of accuracy Q: Could you explain the difference between a resident dog and a family dog since this comes into play as a factor in many dog bites? A. Family dogs are dogs whose owners afford them opportunities to learn appropriate behavior and to interact with humans on a regular basis in positive and humane ways, and who give them the tools neces- sary to live harmoniously in our world. Resident dogs are dogs whose owners maintain them exclusively on chains, in kennels, or in yards, and /or obtain them for negative functions (such as guarding, fighting, protection and irresponsible breeding) Because resident dogs are maintained in ways that isolate them from regular, positive human interactions, they cannot be expected to exhibit the same behavior as family dogs. Q: It seems to me that the media often mistakenly calls dogs involved in bites "family dogs" when they are in fact resident dogs. Do you find this to be the case? A. Yes, unfortunately this misrepresentation of the dogs involved in serious incidents as "family dogs" either misrepresents or ignores altogether the circumstances that contributed to what happened This kind of news coverage contributes to the myth that dogs are "unpredictable" — when exactly the opposite is true I can confidently predict that the overwhelming majority of dogs will never seriously injury anyone, and I can confidently predict that the more than 75 million dogs living in the U S today will never be involved in a dog bite - related fatality And I want point out for your readers that only a tiny percentage of the dogs that are abused and treated badly will ever be involved in encounters with humans that result in a serious or fatal injury ��5tuE1U C�o oYsrra µ,.° t.. t1 , ' , • ••'; :; ' • Dog:Bite Prevention Programs . • ,.. , • : • r ■ , - — • .Education t siMply.cannpt'Say it or stress it enough! Parents need to be educated bout canine safety their pint'? family pets and not leaving children alone with pets. Children needIOIDe taught not tOteasel'aniMalSc:Or apProach animals without permission, stay away from `fenced l or .chained animals c)Wrie'rs need tOte"taughtto socialize and train their dogs, that dogs SnpUldneVer 5 A 'AA5 A. -We:heed v■iorktogeth0 tfr,,edUcate:the on canine safety along with writing tougher laws that " responSible. animals' actions. 4, , • 'S pi-agi-ams;fpr.your-a90'nunity,talefprei from that will help create a safer community. PBRC's Poppy's Place - Guide to canine safety ??!„ 4 t • , , , This guide is a great way to learn canine safety with child If you retOn PdPPy'S, Place,-there. are some interactive games for the kids that are —WebSites "DPdSaf,te0eiti.litn— » s, ' :American Veterinary Medical Association, A Community approach to dog bite prevention : This 18 page report js the-result the.AVM/Vs task force on canine aggression and human-canine interac- 'tiOns . ssWebsite::::::http:././WwW.aiima.Org/pUbhlth/dogbite/dogbite.pdf s 4s s . - , The American "SOCietyfor the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA): Have a community out- ':pi'' dog bite preyentibn. Create a Bite Community Without Banning Dogs Redue dogAbites in your community using a multi-pronged approach which includes bite TPreventiOri: programs for both,011C)ren2anCi:,horne service providers, puppy socialization programs ' :1Pf &Dangerous Dog Task Force made up of key players in community govern- ment a nd , anyriaNielfare':, WebSite: http:/fivvVvV,aspCa.org/site/PageServer? 15aciename=WorkshopS COMMUNITY9/6200UTREACH American Kennel Club :(Ake): Safety:,arOlind Dogs program. Website: http://www.akc.org/ publiceCiiicaiipn740'fetpildeo.cfin ,biziggOnesafe.,,art,brgahiatibrycieCiic'ated to-006 bite prevention: Website:http://www.doggonesafe.com/ For inorinf.drrnkion on pit'bull these sites :wwW.understand-a-bull.corn and www.pbrc.net ', 4;;1.4 . $ r µ ' e Fes' y ..._ ..,....«.w ... —. CLINICAL ETHICS Profiling: Two sides of the Issue Editor's Note: The fear of certain allegedly vicious canine breeds has spread like a prairie fire across North America, with many jurisdictions passing strict bans. Even it there are no local laws restricting ownership of these breeds, homeowners may find it impossible or prohibitively expensive to purchase homeowner's insurance if they own certain breeds. The current scare breed is the pit bull, which is often vaguely defined as any dog that, to relevant authorities, looks like their conception of a pit bull (An attorney friend once showed 24 photos of purebred dogs to students in my animal ethics seminar and challenged them to identify the "pit bulls" — no one could do so with any accuracy.) Rottweilers elicit a similar reaction. A generation ago, the targeted breeds were German shepherds and Doberman pinschers. Experts are divided on the rationality of these approaches. The late Dr Frank Loew, dean at Tufts and Cornell Universities veterinary schools, dismissed such reactions as "canine racism," since canine breeds are essentially races and individuals are targeted because of group membership. Other experts strongly defend such bans as being empirically based and essential to protecting public health and safety. In this pair of columns, we present the strongest arguments we could find that are put forth by experts from both sides of the issue in the hope that veterinarians will be better informed in the event they are approached to help advance or prevent such breed - specific bans in their communities.— Bernard E. Rollin, PhD, Column Editor t i ' ",: Ctrl r ;'," a3 + ' '..:Er 't °,» ., r .�''r e 'S e, ' ; FI� ' `z� By Ledy 'VanKa'v Esc` i ;. + By Alan M. Beck, Sc.D. Mark Twain said, "What gets us into trouble is not what we Subpopulations of plants and animals that become distinct don't know, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so " as a result of isolation from the large population are known as If you've read the papers lately, you would think that , races. Subgroups of domestic animals whose differences de- every dog that bit must be a "pit." Based on the myriad ; velop because of human selection are known as breeds. Hu- of news accounts, city councils have rushed to pass laws man races are a special case in that, although they developed banning any mixed -breed dog that merely resembles an naturally, they no longer have any biological significance In- American pit bull terrier Animal control and police officers deed, human races are more defined by those who make the routinely overrule veterinarians regarding the heritage of a 1 categories than by any inherent characteristic. They are social mutt. The outcome Friendly shorthaired dogs are being statements, not natural ones. When a group of humans uses seized by authorities and killed because of their alleged race as a category to deny another group social equality, we "breed." call it "racism " Is this a rational response to dog bites, or is it a witch hunt j The pit bull – supporting community has not suggested fueled by modern media bias? any serious breeding program but has reacted by denying the validity of the data and using the rhetorical argument of A study in media bias I calling the bans "racist." The analogy to real racism is cruel According to Janis Bradley, author of Dogs Bile. But Balloons . and inaccurate At the very least, it demeans the terrible im- and Slippers Are. More Dangerous, more people are killed by pact human racism has had on our culture It also implies lightning each year than by dogs. The canine population has that canine breeds are some kind of "protected" category, blossomed to 73 million in the United States.' Despite this ; which they are not. We change canine breeds all the time by increase, a relatively consistent 12 to 24 humans die from dog changing breed standards and crossing breeds to create bites each year' ; new ones (continues on column I of the next page) (continues on column 2 of the next page) 64 Veterinary Forum I January 2007 „” -20ENT • • So why the visceral reaction to dog bites when swimming The AVMA Professional Liability Trust published a book for pools, for example, are much more dangerous? Perhaps the I veterinarians who are AVMA members that gives information answer is that dogs are predators, and humans naturally re- 1 on how to recognize pit bull–type dogs and has references to coil from being considered prey Our innate fear of carnivores ) other books with useful photographs. After listing all the results in bad public policy breeds usually associated with pit bulls, the authors note, That fear is further fueled by inflammatory news reports One should remember that crossbred dogs with pit bull in designed to sell papers. Karen Delise, LVT, the author of Fa 11 their bloodlines are equally dangerous and unpre- tal Dog Attacks. The Stories Behind the dictable." Does this mean that the trolp Aie1 Statistics, has examined media bias ' AVMA is practicing canine racism? in dog-bite reporting. She sur veyed news stories about dog at ' is there .eanige racisrn ? tacks that occurred on a random Dogs whose breeding has been day June 9, 2006 (Delise K: Per ? managed by humans are a wonderful 4 •‘.*:* sonal communication, National Ca- example of breed development. nine Research Council, Slanesville, , Dogs were originally bred for specific WV, 2006) 2 functions but are more recently be On that day, a 3-year-old Virginia , ing bred for morphologic (appear- s , boy was admitted to the hospital ' , " ance) preferences Is this canine * e° with extensive injuries. The child , , racism? Just look at breed clubs and required 300 stitches and eventu- ' dog shows — judgments of inclusion t - 44 ' 0 P2' • ^ ally needed additional surgeries to 41'.1:4ki or exclusion based on breed and functionally re muscles and 17!4'4'';'0- breed alone. That is a form of canine nerves as well as scar tissue The ',1;; 4 1 racism, although with less sinister in child had been attacked by a 4`1vk tentions than human racism. Never- N -" t‘'' golden retriever mixed-breed dog. 9 theless, there is a clear recognition This horrific attack was reported in ". t;;; that specific breeds have recogniz- only two local Virginia newspapers A I able morphologic and behavioral An 1 I-year-old girl was bitten in ; differences. The general categories the leg and hospitalized when she "; S,,„4 (breeds) recognized by observation was attacked by two pit bulls in match fairly closely what has been California. She had serious but not life-threatening injuries I found using genetic mapping. This incident, however, was reported by more than 91 na- ; It has long been recognized that breed traits include both tional newspapers and media outlets, including Fox News, ; morphology and behavior. No one is surprised when the Bor- Forbes, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, and the Chicago der collie herds or the pointer points. The behaviors emerge Tribune without specific training, which is noticeably more effective in Two other incidents were reported that day In Denver, a 3- breeds selected for a breed-specific behavioral pattern year-old girl was admitted to The Children's Hospital with se- Breed-specific behaviors are often released spontaneously In rious lacerations to her face and head She had been attacked most cases, these behaviors are, at worst, annoying. But when by her Labrador retriever The attack was covered by four Col- 1 , the behavior is an inclination to attack, there is a social prob- orado media sources only In another dog-bite incident, one lem that requires attention Indiana newspaper picked up the story of a woman who had i been attacked by a German shepherd while she was walking ) Bre,?..d-:cpeci ;t: p.-)blerm, her Shetland sheepdog mix. Neighbors were able to restrain Responsible breed organizations often address issues the German shepherd but not before the woman had been '1 when a breed-specific problem emerges, whether it is a phys- bitten twice in the face, and her dog was so severely injured 1 ical deformity or undesirable behavior We have seen this that it eventually had to be euthanized. when addressing springer spaniel rage and Doberman pin- So, on June 9, 2006, four dog attacks made the news — but scher aggression. For some reason, the people dedicated to only the incident involving the pit bulls garnered extensive pit bull–type dogs have not addressed the issue of aggres- national attention. 1 siveness to people or even other dogs. (continues on column I of the next page) (continues on column 2 of the next page) January 2007 I Veterinary Forum 65 z- ^" ', r'^y, r ,. yJ .. _... _ _,,. ; --- __,.,^'_...- _ . ........ ........._ __.... ...., ... __.__ - ___.._...,.. ....... .. _».... ., ............ _._.,..._ w._............._...... Beyond breed banning J Researchers' studying the 1979 to 1998 records of dog Legislators, of course, respond to sensationalized media ac i bite — related fatalities recognized that not having concise es- counts Given the over - reporting of pit bull attacks, bans tar- I timates of the population of each canine breed placed some geting that breed might appear rational, but in the past, such 1 limitations on the certainty of the data regarding pit bulls breeds as German shepherds, Doberman pinschers, and rott= i weilers have all been similarly villified Italy, in fact, now re- "Despite these limitations and concerns, the data stricts over 90 breeds of dogs, including Welsh corgis.' I indicate that rottweilers and pit bull —type dogs ac- Despite the supposed quick fix offered by such bans, the € counted for 67% of human dog bite — related fatalities only published study conducted on breed bans" indicated p in the United States between 1979 and 1998 It is ex- that they don't work. The study involved the United King - I tremely unlikely that they accounted for anywhere dom's Dangerous Dog Act, which banned "pit bulls" in 1991 1 near 60% of dogs in the United States during that The study concluded that the ban had no effect on stopping 1 same period, thus, there appears to be a breed -spe- dog attacks. Indeed, data in a report published in the Sep - c cific problem with fatalities." tember 15, 2000, issue of /AVMA indicate that breed - specific I legislation is not the solution to dog -bite prevention It has been suggested that, because the Centers for Dis- So, if canine profiling isn't the answer, what will work? ease Control and Prevention (CDC) data rely, in part, on i s ,I. ' N „ k TO to 14, 4. £ IA. �n r. ,..�i Y.: „A LiA� et-' "fAliY ; � g . , y " 4 i � plementatlons of i. aiot'on ,.. ti . egip t C? „ 1 , , a , y , ' sogify B breed- specific legislation I ho -st1�� a=ces'~ x pr,inin - '/ "t� °.t rP, ,( can sever the > w,h,sd ,4ct.,- .JCAIL.e;d . , . r 'o r Duman-- artim��l band. i th .,arors ° ' ;' ", a Delise examined all fatal dog attacks that occurred in the ! newspaper articles, there may be bias because pit bull at- United States in 2005 and found some striking commonalities. ; tacks may be reported more often than attacks by other I breeds It may be true that nonfatal attacks have been dis- h 90% of the dogs were not neutered or spayed (interest - 4 proportionately reported when pit bulls are involved, but fa- ingly, according to Delise, there is no documented case of tal attacks are reported, at least once, for all breeds a neutered companion pit bull causing a human fatality) Fatalities caused by pit bulls may be reported more exten 81% were not maintained as a pet (i e , they were used as sively, but all the CDC studies were careful to "count" each guard dogs or for fighting) !. event only once, regardless of how often it was reported in 'i 61% involved abuse and neglect cases or were not hu- 1 the media, accurately demonstrating the disproportionate manely controlled or contained (i e , they were chained or , contribution of pit bull —type dogs to human fatalities (Lock - allowed to roam) 2 1 wood R. Personal communication, The Humane Society of In lieu of profiling, politicians should focus on remedying the United States, Washington, DC, 2006) these factors. I The pit bull community takes pride in noting a single study' , that purportedly proves that pit bull bans do not work. In re- An owner's outcry i ality, the study proves absolutely nothing! It is a descriptive Tragically, breed - specific legislation severs the human— 4 study of one small emergency room in Scotland, noting emer- animal bond. Most Americans now view their pets as family ' gency room admissions for all bites, including humans, and no members.' The anguish experienced by thousands of responsi- € fatalities during a 3 -month period before and after the British ble guardians who have had their pets seized simply because of ; law of 1991 was passed. The number of pit bull bites went their perceived breed is eloquently expressed in a recent mes- 4 from six to 12, although other breeds did experience a slight sage board posting on the Internet (originally posted in its en- ; decrease The single observation of a difference of six bites in tirety at tech.groups.yahoo com /group /SecondChanceFostering 9 a small hospital that received no fatalities proves nothing, and forDogs/message/56). i it is sad that it is the best source the pit bull "lobby" can cite (continues on column I of the next page) (continues on column 2 of the next page) 66 Veterinary Forum I January 2007 "My name is Andrea Miller, and I own an 8- year -old, 4 The need for le isLrtion black- and - white, neutered pit bull named Ali. I just About 20 years ago, western countries recognized the prob- found out today during a visit from the health depart- i lems associated with pit bulls and did what governments do ment that pit bulls were outlawed in my city I've I when there is no self- correction —they developed legislative had Ali since the day he was born, the runt of a litter ' approaches to protect the majority Since the end of the of 10, he had to be bottle fed, and I became attached. I 1980s, many European countries and many cities in North He's been my best friend all his life and my only 1 America enacted breed - specific legislation in varying forms friend at times. Eight months ago, I had a baby, and 1 from outright bans of ownership to restrictive management Ali had no problem adjusting to the new situation. Af- when the pit bull –type breeds were in public. ter all that All has become to me and my family, I can't t I suspect if a breed disproportionately caused the death bear to give him up and let city hall put him to sleep i of humans and other dogs because of disease there would But no one at city hall or the health department 1 be symposia, breed club meetings, and changes in breed seems to care how heart - wrenching this is, and I just i standards to address the problem It would not be canine can't understand how they can be so coldhearted ` racism but good and responsible husbandry It is time to "He gets along with cats, too He and Kiki take " stop calling names to evoke emotion and begin an honest turns cleaning each other I'm afraid she will be dev- ? recognition of a problem already recognized around the astated as well once she realizes he is no longer 3 world As an empirical generalization, pit bull –type dogs are around 1 an added burden for society, impacting the health of peo- "I've wondered sometimes what life would be i ple, other dogs, and even themselves I do not believe it is like when Ali passed on from old age, but I always ' appropriate to take pit bull dogs away from their owners assumed I didn't need to worry about that for many I and believe such laws are unconscionable. However, I do years I never would have imagined something like a find enough evidence to support restrictions, such as leash - this could be possible He's been my one reliable, 1 ing and muzzling when in public, and not adding to their stable friend for so long that I don't know how I will numbers in society manage without him But I can guarantee it will be , There should be less talk of racism and more talk of re- easier if I know he is alive, happy, and cared for. i sponsible animal management so that all dogs would be I've lived in and supported this city almost my j more welcomed in society vF whole life, but 1 can't help but feel betrayed and very bitter" References 1 I Clifford DH, Green KA, Scott JK. Dos and Don'ts Conrerniug Vinous Dogs. Chicago, AVMA Professional Liability Trust, 1993, p 4 Across the United States, dogs such as Ali — many of them f 2. Sacks J1, Sinclair L, Gilchrist I, et al: Breeds of dogs involved in fatal mutts.— are being seized and killed simply because of their f human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. JAVMA appearance It's not only unconscionable and unconstitu 217:836 -840, 2000 tional — it's un - American vF 1 3 Klaassen B, Buckley IR, Esmail A. Does the Dangerous Dogs Act pro- tect against animal attacks. A prospective study of mammalian bites References ' in the accident and emergency department. Injury 27(21 :89 -91, 1996. I American Pet Products Manufacturers Association: National pet own- j Al M. Beck, Sc.D., is affiliated with the Center for the Hu - ers survey APPMA Advisor May 2005 Accessed September 2006 at ,4, man – Animal Bond, Purdue University School of Veterinary Medi- http://www.appma org /newsletter /may2005 /npos.html i tine, West Lafayette, Indiana. 2. National Canine Research Council: Statistics on fatal dog attacks. Ac- ,° cessed September 2006 at http:// www .nationalcanineresearchcouncil. , . corn. About the "Cotuznn'Editor . . 3 Collier P Italy classifies corgis, collies, St. Bernards, as dangerous dogs. 41, , y Accessed September 2006, www buzzle.com /editorials /9 -25- 2003 - i i" Dr. Rollin is well. respected' in the field -1 45847.asp 1 of ethics. 'He is 'a -University Distin- , ,,, x 4 Klaassen B, Buckley JR, Esmail A. Does the Dangerous Dogs Act g wished Professor, Professor of f Philoso 1' t "s protect against animal attacks. A prospective study of mammalian phy, Professor of Biomedical Sciences, bM a'f+ s . ' + "! bites in the accident and emergency department. Injury 27(2).89– i Professor of Animal Sciences, and Uni ' :. 91, 1996 j versity Bioethicist. at Colorado State ;. 5 Kindness Index. Angel Canyon, UT, Best Friends Animal Society, 2006. University'in'Fort Collins. In.additibn to �, , serving.as column editor of Clinical Ethics, Dr. Rollin is a mem- Ledy VanKavage, Esq, is senior director of legal training and legisla- a ber o f th V ETERINARY FORUM Editorial Board. tion, National Outreach, ASPCA, Maryville, Illinois. January 2007 I Veterinary Forum 67 „,, ' ,•,,:i''' ,,. „ , ' ; , .1 ' {. .; e ' • , I,; . Y , i,/ ', : • , ' ' .' / • ' ' ' - ' '''' ' ''''''' ' ' ' '4... ...1717.7 — 1,,,,', – ,aS Ir,..5:':.'„,...:2.. '',...7 4, ....1.X.;i. . .ig21,.. '.., ...',. , ,','„:0',' '..”`” :47' ' ' F...7.: ' '',,..,, if! ".171. .r..= 7...,-,.::..:..... W...,:., -- ... ,, Zi" - ' 'r,,,,,,,:‘,..,.7,Z,;,72. , "`,142.... if , h i , 7 , Punish The.,Deed I-Not The Breed „,i7 ,;,,,,,,- %0,,,,, "e . . . + 1. 1 4 .„ ,. .. . . 0 , .., ,... „ 4 ?m ''' ''',''' , ' ',; '',1'.',,,,; `` k„•, , , , • ,, . ., 1 ,, ,,,,',,,,,, , '4,.• ' . - , ;,,2 ., ;•,;•,, r '• ; ' r =, ' • 1 , , • „.• , , , 1 . ' , = „ 2.7. •,, t = .., , , 4 - » „ . P'-' ' ' . ,,i . • ,,,; ".1 , k",„„ '” I , ' ' 0 1 '''' .;;;.' ki ' ' / ,,, ' t."N.:., 3' '':■:,,:.",, .,, ;;;'4 ( '..' .0.i ' ..,, : .... / . ■‘7, r , , q ,• ' :,, -,:41.0006wiwit . „ , •.. ,, ,=. , , •! • wi4=ti :,. i• •. t . 4 , . , 1: • ' '. - • 4 ••;• .‘ rr . c.V .. :q r ' - 4, ,,,,,,, - , . ..: , .. ?4, p it . Attlt ',,,',4 *: i .i. ‘.? , „ ''..* ,,„ : ., ;, • , , , .-4, , ;., .. "";. ' '''' i c 41 „.,;--,', ""fl.i ' , , 4, ' ' ' ,?'''''''..i ,. 'T • . ..,:.,..1.. , ''..". • f ''' . . , , , • O .' – ■ ,,,, .. .; . ' :...,t ,,, T.4. " , - Table of Contents - - r .._„.......=..... 7. la-„ ":777,: „. ;11,2',7, , 7C.: 77771 '7,7,7=,7' „„,„;,-„,,i,,,: , ;=,....„=21',1,,,„-''' 77 1 L , . , 5 :,„ ,i(,, . ,,, , .5„. 7,..,, -,,::„.,, ,:.,., „,:::,, :..;:',.. ,-.1....., ..„-, ,...4.,0, :.,...., ti,c.,,:::‘:-.,: .. .' Breed Information' :',..,... a: L :':•..,. ,., ‘'..‘ ' .., 2:: , , , . r .. * , ,1,. ' A ' : ,,,,-.• ' ,,,I, A/ A 'A", ' , „'`. r I -1 5 1 . . - r " :.'.'Breed.,Specific ' Legislation (BSL) ... , -:• • • - - ...., . -,,*'' I - --- k 4 , ./ ,, A A ' I 1 , A . . ! '14 I2-22:::'...,. — ." and Scientifit.Data. ,-.: - „.o.* S . oo / 23-24 '''''':',' Preventing Dog:Bites' ..: .„ .., ,o, ,,,,, . ,,:. :, . , i . ,,,,,, . ..--,o - ', .-:' o, ,...' :',--,. = .; -t-... ,,,--.4-.. . / ' — , ZK: '.. , ' IA/ , s tl p . ‚‚ '' /,,A.: ,,A''V ( ' 25-34 , "- , 4 ... .,.BSLitelated Articles' - o :' . : :':-- ,. „ • •:.•,.-; '.., .. ..,,, .,.. 35-36:.,.4."4— .4.HerOic Pit:Bulli'.: ''' - ` : 1 .. i ' ' .31-43 . . ., .. .4 . Biographies of Pit Bull Owners ,, .. 1 " -'''''?": ''' , ' , i • , ''," 44-66 ..'!....'......, Index of NON,Breed Sec pific LaWs` o, . ---,..,, Loo ., , ,, 4 .... ,, .. , . 1 1 , 67 ,,„ ' to,a, . , . Credits - ,o. - ,, , . o . ..., J. : . , ,... .,.. - ., .1.,...- -„ ,„,4,2,j,:: L il i ,., i ' , 1 r I/ i.i il — ---- - - 1 i 1 1 , PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I Pit Bull Breed Information What is a Pit Bull? been selectively bred for companionship and It's important to understand "pit bull" conformation dog shows. This number does is not a breed of dog but; rather a term ' not include the unregistered APBT's, which typically used to group 3 breeds of dog, would add significantly to the 4.8 million. the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT), It has been said that a Pit Bull never ' American Staffordshire Terrier (AST) and meta stranger. They love and adore humans. the Staffordshire Bull Terrier (SBT). This They want so much to be apart of your family 1, understanding becomes very important and spend time with you watching TV, walk - when talking about BSL and bite statistics! ing, driving, etc. I have seen severely abused For example, the statistics may indicate and neglected pit bulls who see you coming Labradors have 3 reported bites and pit ? and they can't wait to be petted and loved. bulls have 4 reported bites. The reality, Even after the abuse, they want nothing labradors have 3 reported bites, where as more than to be with a family of their own! " "pit 4 reported it bull bites could be any p p� ) As with any breed there are exceptions to the combination of the 3 breeds, or any 1 of 25+ normal temperament and behavior. breeds commonly mistaken to be a pit bull. Pit Bull is probably the most mis- "...most of understood dog in the United States. i these dogs 2 People see them and cross the street out of were also fear and try to ban them from their cities. pets so no human , , Why? Simply stated, lack of education on "aggression" was the breeds. The public only sees negative ' ever tolerated. " . stories in the news. Pit Bulls are wonderful dogs in the hands of responsible owners so Who Would Own a Pit Bull? just like any other breed. As with any dog, there will always be irresponsible owners •Anthony Robbins and poorly bred dogs. That does NOT mean •Molly Price, Actress from Third Watch that all of these dogs are evil! •General George Patton • Fred Astaire A Little Bit of History • Stephany Kramer For hundreds of years traits such as high prey •President Woodrow Wilson • Jan Michael Vincent drive and a high pain threshold were bred •Steve Irwin, The Crocodile Hunter into the bloodlines of pit bulls because they were originally bred to fight. However, a qual- • Alicia Silverstone • Humphrey Bogart ity that was never bred into the bloodlines •John Steinbeck was human aggression. Human "aggres- • Fatty Arbuckle sive" dogs were undesirable as these dogs • Malcolm -Jamal Warner required extensive handling prior to and • Mo Vaughn (NY Mets) during their fights AND most of these dogs • James Ellroy (Author) were also family pets so no human "aggres- ) • Amy Jo Johnson (Actress) sion" was ever tolerated. Dogs that exhibited • Barbra Eden human "aggression" were typically killed, • Rosie Perez meaning that only human friendly lines were • Kelli Williams, (The Practice) perpetuated and desired. • James Caan There is an estimated 4.8 million regis- • Shaq O'Neal tered American Pit Bull Terriers that have •Judd Nelson PITBULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 1 Pit Bull Breed Information • Michael J. Fox His statement was in a letter addressed • President Theodore Roosevelt to me on March 26. 2002. His quote ' • Sir Walter Scott, Author was: "1 have spoken with (Dr.] Sandy : , • Ken Howard, who's life was saved delahunta (the foremost dog neurologist E ; by his pit bull. in the country) and [DR.] Katherine Houpt • Usher and his family own (a leading dog behaviorist) about a jaw l 2 beautiful pit bulls. s locking mechanism in pit bulls or any other • Thomas Edison dog and they both say, as do I, that THERE ' • Mel Brooks and Anne Bancroft IS NO SUCH THING AS JAW LOCKING IN P • Julian Schnabel, Artist ANY BREED. • Stephan Jenkins, Singer 1 • Linda Blair .. We all agree that the • Jack Dempsey "...the American , ' power of the bite is pro- ` r `` •Helen Keller Pit Bull Terrier is a ',s , portional to the size of . , l; • Bernadette Peters "terrie "All terriers s � ' r the jaws and the jaw • Jon Stewart have animal prey muscles. There is no • .xl • Stephan Jenkins drive, but this does not make anatomical structure that could be a locking • Tamika Dixon (Athlete) ' them dangerous or vicious. ", mechanism in any dog." • Earl Holliman • David Spade r As a Professor • Robert Ferguson, Green Bay Packer Emeritus from the College of Veterinary Medicine at Michigan State University, Some Common Myths.Explained agree completely with their conclusion 1. Pit Bulls have locking jaws. NO! The 2. Pit Bulls are born to be mean. NOTTRUE! pit bull's jaws are the same as any other Pit Bulls like all other breeds, are not born breed of dog! Any Veterinarian can verify ' inherently mean or bad! They can, like any q this is simply a myth. Actually, pit bulls do other breed, become mean through lack of ! less damage because they bite and hold, I training, abuse, neglect and irresponsible 1 where other dogs bite /release /bite that ownership and breeding. i causes more bleeding and damage. There is no scientific proof that pit bulls __ H Prepared by: Al W. Stinson, D.V.M. or any other breed of dog is dangerous. r F The ACF's collective experience and 3, Director of Legislative Affairs, Michigan research has found the American Pit Bull Association for Pure Bred Dogs, and the Terrier is a "terrier." All terriers have animal Michigan Hunting Dog Federation, and a prey drive, but this does not make them Member of the Board of Directors of the dangerous or vicious. American Dog Owners Association 3. Pit Bulls have a 1600 PSI Jaw Pressure. i' The following quote was sent to me from i WRONG AGAIN! There is currently no Dr. Howard Evans, Professor Emeritus, device available for measuring dog bites College of Veterinary Medicine at Cornell for pressure for pit bulls or any other '3 University, Ithaca New York. We were col - animal. The ACF states: "According to leagues in the veterinary college for four the current scientific research there is years. He is the author of the textbook, no proof that the Pit Bull can bite harder ANATOMY OF THE DOG, (the world's than any other breed. There is no proof definitive work on the anatomy of the that the Pit Bull is genetically vicious and dog). statistics have been greatly manipulated. a PITBULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Pit Bull Breed Information . ' , 1 Environment, training and socialization , ' , play a much greater part in the tempera- 1. r "Every 10 ment of an individual dog than genetic years or so a traits." (ACF2003) new breed of dog \\;; .-:,.. is victimized. by 4. Will a pit bull that shows aggression irresponsible owners, towards a dog, go after people next? NO! ' Animal aggression and human aggression breeders, bad mediA ; are 2 completely different things! There coverage, and now it s are many types of aggression in the canine the pit bun turd." world and they are all very different. f Question: Are pit bulls inherently danger- , , 5. Pit Bulls attack more than any other ous to people? i; breed. NO. The statistical data on dog Answer: No! Pit bulls are no more inher- e/ bites and attacks are inaccurate. Many f ' ently dangerous to people than other dog bites are never reported. There is dog breeds. People often assume that pit nothing in place to track dog bites in the bulls are human aggressive because they US accurately. were bred to fight animals. This is simply There are 25+ breeds that are commonly ' not true! If that were the case then Irish ii wrongly identified as pit bulls, Those of us i Wolfhounds, Anatolian Shepherds, Great who have been involved with the breed , Pyrenees, etc. should be considered danger- , for years have trouble identifying them , ous to humans as well. 100% of the time, so, we certainly can't There is a common misconception expect inexperienced people to be able regarding dog aggression! In the canine k to properly ID a dog. That said, it leads us world there are many types of aggression to believe that many of the bites that claim including dog, displaced, food, fear, etc. to be from pit bulls are in fact, inflicted by r Because a dog is aggressive with other other breeds. dogs does not make them aggres- sive towards humans! A love and Here are a couple of websites with tests, respect for Humans was specifically you try �to pick the pit bull! bred into the pit bull lines, due to the nature r: www. understand -a- bull.com /Findthebulll of dog fighting when it was considered a findpitbull v3.html , sport hundreds of years ago. www .pitbullsontheweb.com /petbull /find- Dogs of any breed that show a tendency pit.html i towards Human Aggression should be imme- i diately seen by a qualified behaviorist for Common Questions and Answers temperament testing and Vet to ensure there ' Question: Are pit bulls good with children? isn't a medical problem. Often this can be Answer: Properly raised and socialized a result of fear, which can be greatly reduced these dogs are great with children. They by taking the time to properly socialize your are able to stand the rough and tumble play puppy to lots of different people, places of a toddler. As with other big dogs, pit and things! Socialization does not always bulls can accidentally knock kids over during prevent a fearful dog, but it's a huge step play, etc so they should always be super- in that direction. Human Aggression should vised. Dogs of any breed should never be NOT be tolerated in any breed of dog, small left alone with children. or large! I PITBULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 3 - Pit Bull Breed Information I Question: Why do we hear so many in the 82 percentile, meaning 80 +% of the _ - - , } negative pit bull stories in the Media and ' dogs tested passed the temperament test. are they true? t' That is a very high percentage, especially A nswer: T here are a few things that con- when comparing to breeds which are corn- . ._ , f" tribute to the negative stories on the news. mon family dogs, such as, Golden Retrievers ' As often the case, negative stories always and Bichon Frise tested at 77 %, Chihuahua seem to get National coverage, where the ,' at 71%, Greyhound at 81% and Lhasa Apso j positive stories only make the local news. z at 71 %. These test results are available at -" The Media is not always very responsible I www.atts.orq with their stories! I have seen news reports ;; ' of a dog attack by another breed and, yet a Pit Bulls bond very fast and very strongly ;'' the media had a picture of a pit bull on the I to their humans and need to spend a lot of i TV while reporting this story. time with you. If you are not home a lot or '` plan on keeping the dog in the yard, etc, Every 10 years or so a new breed of dog I then a Pit Bull isn't for you! Pit Bulls are a f is victimized by irresponsible owners, breed- -_ ers, bad media coverage, and now it's the I dominant breed and require a strong pack 1 , pit bull's turn. In the 70's it was the German leader who is always in control. Obedience ' i Shepherd, the 80's was the Doberman's turn, I and socialization is mandatory with this .. the 90's Rottweilers and pit bulls had all the breed and should be with any breed. ' bad press, and now it's the pit bull's time I Additionalinformation "" to suffer again. And, unfortunately, in a few ; q Please take some time and visit these sites years it will be another breed that will be in , for additional information about pit bulls. the spotlight. www.forpitssake.org Question: Do Pit Bulls make good pets? . www.pbrc.net Answer: Yes, but Pit Bulls are not for ;,, everyone, just like any other breed of dog. E www.understand- a- bull.com Research should be done on any breed prior www.badrap.orq -" - " to making a decision. The best place for I www.pitbullsontheweb.com responsible pit bull information is Pit Bull www.workingpitbull.com - Rescue Central www.pbrc.net. www.itsapitty.com /info.html The American Pit Bull Terrier was the #1 ' . family dog in the U.S. during the first part www.realpitbull.com of the 20th century. They are loyal, loving, www.outofthepits.org devoted, funny, and almost human like in I www.furryfriendsfoundation.com / their emotions and expressions! Truth03 /Truth03.htm The American Temperament Testing r http: / /acf2004.tripod.com i - ' i. Society does temperament testing through- r-. ,. . ,. - M out the year at breed clubs and compiles the statistics. Their overall pass rate for . -" breeds is 80 %, and in the 2002 statis- ' tics, APBTs, ASTs, and Rottweilers were all d: ' I 1 if PITBULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) What it,Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)? were no more inherently dangerous It's any ordinance or law that bans or places than any other breed in WAF /Sheila ii restrictions on dog ownership based on a Tack v. Huntsville Alabama. This case P. dog's breed instead of a dog's actions. was very costly to the city of Huntsville. • Spring of 2003, a Westbury NY court Why is 851 wrong? ruled that the city's BSL was unconsti- There are many reasons why BSL is wrong tutional and repealed the law. and should not be allowed. BSL laws get passed when City • and State officials do not �, • In 2004 the Toledo Municipal Court I; ruled American Pit Bull Terriers are not take the time to educate themselves on the issues. With a little education, you will find dangerous and granted dog owner's that BSL is definitely not the answer nor will due process rights. Tellings v. City of it make a community safer. Toledo CRB -02 -15267 (ACF 2005) 1. BSL is ineffective; in 1988 Miami Dade In 2004 The Ohio Supreme Court County Florida passed a ban on pit bulls. In in State v. Cowan 103 Ohio St. 3d 2002 it was estimated that 50,000 pit bulls 144, 2004-Ohio-4777 struck down reside in Miami -Dade County. Many cities ORC955:11 which declared the "Pit Bull" across the U.S. have repealed breed based vicious because it violates our rights to laws due to ineffectiveness and cost. be heard (Due Process). 2. BSL doesn't target the problems, only „there are 25+ '.,,v , ' ' ii increases illegal activity in the area. The ` • criminals and irresponsible owners will breeds that look ,, not be affected because they are not law- like a "pit bull "and , i abiding citizens. The responsible owners are commonly iden- i will either be forced into becoming crimi- tified incorrectly. " rA nals to keep their dogs, or they will be forced to kill their dogs. I think that history 4. Breed Identification or the inability to proves when things are made illegal, big- properly identify a breed. ger problems arise. Alcohol was outlawed in the early 1900's, causing a tremendous • The only way to identify a dog's breed increase in illegal activity until the ban is by their appearance. There is no way was repealed. genetically to test for a dog's breed. 3. BSL is unconstitutional and is being (For additional details, please see the Breed Identification of the Statistical challenged in several court cases through- and Scientific data section.) out the U.S. based on the 4th, 5th, 8th and 14th amendments. To name a few: • There are 25+ breeds of dogs that have the same appearance as a pit bull and • The United States Supreme Court in are commonly mistaken for a pit bull. It is Nicchia v. People of the State of New almost impossible for an average person York 254 U.S. 228 (1920) gave police the to accurately identify a pit bull. power to regulate and control danger- ous dogs with drastic measures as long • Pit bull is in fact not a breed of dog, as it does not infringe on dog owners but a term used to typically group three the right to Liberty with Due Process. breeds; the American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier and • August 2002, the Alabama Supreme the Staffordshire Bull Terrier. Court upheld a decision that pit bulls 3 , o I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 5 Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) m . r ' Does BSL cost taxpayers more? 1 ' $35,000.00 over the 2 year period. - -"- ¢ 1 1. Cost of additional animal control staff i However, the cost to the Animal to enforce the ban. Remember most Management Division for maintenance cities don't have sufficient animal control of pit bulls over the same period was departments to enforce leash laws. Which, $560,000.00. These figures would be W " . ' if enforced would reduce many of the higher if other variables were consid- problems that lead to bite incidents. ered and qualified such as utilities, manpower and overtime. 2. Kenneling i - E d. It should be noted that, these aver- 3. Veterinary care of the animals age costs to the County do NOT include 4. Many dog owners are opting to fight the expenditures of the County or these types of ineffective and unconsti Municipal Police Departments. These 1" cross- agency costs, while significant tutional laws and are winning the court 1 cases. Whether the owners win or lose, could not be fully captured or ade- the cities have paid a lot of money for quately estimated. Source: Prince .. - 11 legal fees, court costs, etc. Geroges County Task force Report 5. Baltimore, MD estimated in 2001 that ' Aren't there some "breeds that are more it was costing over $750,000.00 a year dangerous than others? ' for their BSL and they were still unable to 1. Many communities and cities believe enforce the law effectively. They chose to - that the solution to prevent severe and repeal the law as did Saginaw, Michigan fatal dog attacks is to label, restrict or ban and other locations based on ineffective- certain breeds of dogs as potentially dan- ness and cost. gerous. If the breed of dog was the pri- 6. Prince Geroges County, MD formed a mary or sole determining factor in a fatal 1 dog attack, it would necessarily stand to ' task force to review their existing danger- ous dog laws, including a ban on pit bulls. reason that since there are literally mil - The task force recommended repealing lions of Rottweiler, Pit Bulls and German the law and sited these cost factors: Shepherd Dogs in the United States, there ;: would have to be countless more than an a. Loss of revenue, since the ban has approximate 20 human fatalities per year. been in effect there has been a dra- matic reduction in dog show /exhibits Since only an infinitesimal number of any being held in the County. With this a breed is implicated in a human fatality, it is I comes some indirect loss of revenue not only unreasonable to characterize this for the community in areas like, hotels/ as a specific breed behavior by which judge I' an entire population of dogs, it also does motels, fuel stations, veterinarians, pet little to prevent fatal or severe dog attacks supply stores, restaurants, grocery and k as the real causes and events that contrib- drug stores. r ute to a fatal attack are masked by the issue ■ b. Director of Animal Management of breed and not seriously addressed. Division estimated the County's cost for Pit Bulls in particular have been in a fire maintaining a single pit bull through- out the entire process for 1 year was storm of bad publicity, and throughout $68,000.00. the country, Pit Bulls often bear the brunt 4 of breed specific legislation. One severe or c. Fees from pit bull registration in fatal attack can result in either restrictions 2001 -2002 generated approximately or outright banning of this breed (and 6 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) other breeds) in a community. While any i. The reports will inevitably show pop- severe or fatal attack on a person is tragic, r ular large breed dogs as the prob- there is often a tragic loss of perspective , lem. This is to be expected since large as to degree of dangerousness associated breeds can do more damage if they with this breed in reaction to a fatality. bite and due to popularity of certain ' Virtually any breed of dog can be impli- breeds they have more individuals that cated in a human fatality. could bite. Some Fatal Dog Attack Statistics i ii. No report that I have seen does any analysis by breed of population verses • Overwhelmingly, the dogs involved i bites. To have an accurate statistical in fatal dog attacks were unaltered representation this has to be part of I; males. (Karen Delise, author Fatal Dog a the analysis. . Attacks) G 10 attacks by a Doberman relative to • From 2000 -2001 there were 41 fatal a total population of 10 dogs implies 1 dog attacks. Of these, 28 were attacks a different risk than 10 attacks by a by a single dog and 13 fatalities were Labrador relative to a population of caused by multiple dogs. 1000 dogs. (A community approach to Of the 28 single dogs responsible for dog bite prevention, AVMA task force fj a fatal attack between 2000 -2001; report) 1 26 were males and 2 were females. iii. Breed identification is often inaccu- Of the 26 males, 21 were found to be rate, mixed breeds being identified as intact (the reproductive status of the purebred. In many instances the iden- F remaining 5 males dogs could not be tification is made by the victim or wit - determined). nesses who are not trained in canine • Of the 448 cases of fatal dog attacks breeds or identification. from 1965 - 2002, there is NO docu- Another consideration, people mented case where a single, neutered, involved in a crime, can not give accu- American Pit Bull terrier was the cause rate description due to the high stress of a human fatality. E level at the time of the incident. There , 2. Every 10 years or so, a new breed of was once a segment on a news show q dog is victimized by irresponsible own- where in a Law School class during a ers, breeders, bad media coverage, and lecture, the instructor had someone run into the class, steal something at now it's the pit bull's turn. In the 70's it the front of the class and run back out. was the German Shepherd, the 80's was They then took statements from every the Doberman's turn, the 90's Rottweilers student. The descriptions varied drasti- and pit bulls had all the bad press, and cally, from Asian, Black, Caucasian, etc. now it's the pit bull's time to suffer again. The heights, weight all different. The And, unfortunately, in a few years it will be same would be true of dog attacks. another breed that will be in the spotlight. Pit Bull identification is even less accu- 3. It must be understood that dog bite sta- rate than other breeds like, Dalmatians, tistics are nothing more than an estimate Husky's, etc. For starters Pit Bull is not of incidents within a community. These a breed, it's a term used to group at a reports in no way represent statistical minimum of three different breeds of data of bites for several reasons: dog. There is also the fact that there are 25+ breeds that look like a "pit I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 7 - , Breed Specific Legislation (651) :. . - .. - - bull" and are commonly identified the backyard. If we don't teach dogs . incorrectly. Visit http: / /www.under- how to play or meet new people, we stand- a- bull.com /Findthebull /find- I can't hold them accountable for their pitbull v3.html to test your ability to ; actions. identify a pit bull. I, ', i. From 1965 -2001 25% of all fatal iv. The true number of bites isn't known attacks were inflicted by chained ;i as many dog bites are not reported. dogs. (Karen Delise, author Fatal Dog f; Y " 3 v. The number of dogs by breed in any Attacks) .. given area is unknown, rarely are all , dogs in an area properly licensed with c. Obedience training, all dogs need to the city. So there is no accurate way to be trained in basic obedience. ;' determine statistics when all the fac- d. Children should NEVER be left unat- tors are unknown or inaccurate. e tended with dogs, no matter what kind vi. These reports don't often consider of dog. Never leave your child unat- multiple incidents by the same dog. tended with any pets. 79% of fatal dog , attacks are children under 12. Why do dogs. bite? There are different reasons a dog may bite. A The age group with the highest number bite is the only way for a dog to protect itself. of fatalities was children under the age of 1 year old; accounting for 19% of the 1. Canine behavior is completely different ti deaths due to dog attack. Over 95% of than that of humans, and miscommunica- these fatalities occurred when an infant tion between dogs and humans causes was left unsupervised with a dog(s). i many problems. This is the most common reason for children getting bitten. The age group with the second - highest a. Walking straight towards a dog is con- number of fatalities were 2- year -olds; -- sidered rude or threatening to a canine. accounting for 11% of the fatalities due t, to dog attack. Over 87% of these fatali- b. Making eye contact, staring is a chal- ties occurred when the 2- year -old child lenge and a threat to a dog. was left unsupervised with a dog(s) or w c. Reaching over a dog's head to pet the child wandered off to the location them is a show of dominance. This can of the dog(s). (Karen Delise, author be a threat to many dogs. Fatal Dog Attacks) 2. Irresponsible owners are a large fac - 3. Mental or physical abuse, this is another '; tor in dog bites. Owners need to be held reason children shouldn't be left alone accountable when they are irresponsible! with dogs. Children can be relentless in i a. Socializing dogs is critical to their tormenting dogs; poking at them through j; development and reducing problems, the fence, throwing things at them, etc. 1 ! including biting. Fearful and shy dogs ,,W. .. can bite suddenly due to a loud noise. k Some locations that have repealed'or ,, opted against BSI: E ' b. Chained dogs or dogs left alone to live in the back yard become very ter- Federalsburg, MD Lawrence, Kansas ritorial, protective, fearful and out of Ellis, KS New York, New York - I' control. These dogs are then blamed when they bite a child playing in - Cleveland, OH Youngstown, OH 1, 8 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACI<ET 2005 I • Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) ? w All Dogs Bite: Pontiac, MI St. Tammany Parish; LA Here are just a few news stories to show Detroit, Mi State of Maryland 1 all dogs are capable of and due great harm Belton, MO Bellevue, NE - to humans. These incidents involved various Annapolis, MD Austintown, OH breeds and range from toy to large dogs. Cripple Creek, CO Grand Rapids, MI For a more complete list by month visit Hazel Park, MI St. Mary's County, www.understand- a- bull.com and click on MD "All Dogs Bite ". Crawford County, Denmark, WI MI 1. Golden Retriever attacks mother and Baltimore, MD Broomfield, CO child walking (East Idaho, 05/17/05) State of Delaware Adrian, MI 2. Alaskan Malamute kills young girl (The Denver Post, 05/08/05) Stafford, KS Ann Arbor, MI 3. Two Siberian Huskies kill 2 yr old (WXYZ Wilmington, NC North Ridgeville, Ohio Local News, Waterford, MI 05/06/05) 9 4. Bull Mastiff attacks 6 yr old boy Loveland, CO Benton Harbor, MI (South Wales Echo, 05/12/05) - Fall 2004 5. Lab /Chow mix attacks animal control Arlington, NM Roseville, MI Fall officer (Cherokee County, 05/11/05) 2004 6. Police K9 dog attacks officer /handler Wichita, Kansas Belton, MO (Charlotte Observer, 5/11/05) Auburn, WA Oklahoma State - 7. Boy attacked by 2 Labradors, Doberman S247, HB1282 Voted and a Bulldog mix (WALB TV 5/09/05) down / Withdrawn 8. Golden Retriever attacks 2 yr. old Roseville, MI May Illinois - SB1790 - (Leavenworth Times, 05/10/05) 2004 WITHDRAWN! 9. Family Pets, Labrador Retriever and Bellingham, MA Illinois - HB1128 - a Dachshund attack elderly woman Voted down! (Indianapolis Star, 05/06/05) MARLBOROUGH, Shawnee, KS 10. Toddler attacked by Husky /Shepherd MA mix (The Winnipeg Sun, 03/14/05) Kansas City, MO Osage County, KS 11. Australian Cattle Dog attacks 3 chil- Black Jack, MO Revere, MA dren and 1 adult (Midway Driller, Wyandotte, MI Topeka, KS 1 05/02/05) New Mexico - S188 Eastpointe, MI 12. Rhodesian Ridgebacks attack woman Withdrawn house sitting (Valencia County, NM 02/26/05), States with State laws p rohibiting -BSL: ! 13. Max the Golden Retriever attacks another child and is euthanized this California Colorado Florida '' time. (Watertown, CT 03/11/05) Illinois ' Maine Minnesota i 14. St. Bernard attacks Neighbor , New Jersey New York Oklahoma (The Daily Record, Thorntonall near Pennsylvania - Texas Virginia Glasgow, 11/29/04) 15. Mutt kills 5 week old infant (Jacksonville, FL 10/06/04) I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 9 - Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) 16. Dalmatian bites'h of toddler's nose off Conclusion of the BSL Topic: ,1 (KTRK TV, Houston, 10/12/04) There is no scientific proof that genetics 17. Family Pomeranian kills infant cause a breed of dog to be aggressive, (Los Angeles, AP 09/21/03) vicious or dangerous. Irresponsible owners r 18. Maryland infant critical after mauling ' are to blame for the behavior of dogs that by family Dachshund (Washington are aggressive, vicious or dangerous. Breed Post, 12/17/02) specific legislation is an injustice, as is geno- i cide of a specific breed of dog. 19. Golden Retriever attacks toddler .. (NZ City, 12/04/03) It's been well established that dogs are 20. Cocker Spaniel attacks guide dog personal property Brown v. Muhlenberg (St. Petersburg Times, 10/21/03) Township, 269 F. 3d 205, 209 -10(3d Cir.2001), Fuller v. Vines, 36 F. 3d 65, 68 (9th Cir.1994), Organizations against Breed Specific Lesher v. Reed, 12 F. 3d 148, 150 -51 (8th Cir. Legislation: , 1994) and in a recent case Altamn v. High ! ! Point No. 02 -1178 4d ( 4th Cir. 2003). The • American Veterinary Medical Federal 4th Circuit Court ruled "we con- - ,i Association (AVMA) clude that the dogs in this case do quai- 1,: • The American Kennel Club (AKC) j ify as property protected by the Fourth Amendment ". Therefore they should be pro- .. ._ . •The United Kennel Club (UKC) tected property under the 4th, 5th, 8th and • American Society for the Prevention of 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. S. Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) Zendorf (Attorney at Law) (For additional details and costs, please see the BSL Cost • Dog Legislation Council of Canada section of the Statistical and Scientific (DLCC) data section.) • American Temperament Testing Society_ w :....... s : ".._, - , >:• .;' (ATTS) • National Animal Control Association j (NACA) ' • Maryland Veterinary Medicine ' Association • Humane Society of the United States i (HSUS) '' • Pit Bull Rescue Central (PBRC) g . • American Canine Foundation (ACF) Samples of a few effective NON -Breed , Specific Dangerous Dog Laws can be locat- .- ed at the back.of the packet.They include: ' 1. State of California "' 2. State of Illinois — The Ryan Armstrong Law s 3. Prince William County, VA 1 ID PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 `' "' Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) nd the P All [ o ft h esedogsarepurebred d o gs : Ca t e , Bull? Now imagine adding mixed breeds into:the identification process. ' � Taw „„ > w ? . : � i , ' ' . • . a + ,4 a ' � t :1 a , ° ), g * ., ' .bii W ei �' x r Jr ....a' ^ � �'" . , ,,, ` ' • y ,, ,, .H , . z , ,” .. 'fit , , *' , . '� f i . 5 ', f r:ip d '.' : . .'' q+ . , 0-4' l ' ' 1 s '1 ! V l ' , ..' � • " � . , d� " .�$ . c fi 1 2 3 4 5 ,, �!(4.t. 7,7= 4 t 4 ' , s qn ` XAT fl r 't m ;, e a , ')' ""` « „ • x _ it f • 1 { °L " "fi t lft t k R°u + E * .art x ' , °, <•. '4 I. ` p• r ` 0 t � V� T V' � �r`. 3 ; \ y a Nt ktk. li r ; ' L +z' ° k .w.,. "Mw..: 6 7 8 9 10 i V4 1 :r�a r ^ t A '� ; e., a �, a s c x = %hr , 'k '' 4 �' s y� } 4 sa . 4 'FS ptec i ° r, y. .. � :« ''''::::.114:4''''''''7''''L f � '11 t RY �x a yr g Y P • t « s' tr � F t. r w. � ' $ '�' *r -'- o- , .f...tl'' � �y7 , z r t t ` +� 1 +i f k o i l! i .J,. / ""� ,'� b i . 4 r t J � � + k L 7 y r :k C Ail y vt....., ,4„„ F, 11 12 13 14 15 ' t s . To find out what all the other " „. ` �z , ' ,, ' , �� breeds are: te P ,1 .u. : click here to view the answers z ,„ � � i , , � ,,q,..1„,,,-,At, �� , , ,, f , ., The number of the Pit bull is �, ,,' z, +" located on the Credits page } , „� °a "rc.. ti i,..&` :v :.,.:, ' 0 " 4 - f.i- � r � 4 ., at the back of this packet. 16 17 18 1 For mor information o n pit . bulls, vi s i t these sites: wwwunderst and- a- bull.coin 'and " . w ww.pbrc : net s I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 11 Statistical and Scientific Data ' ' '-" ■ American Canine Foundation - we know them today. Selection resulted on The ACF formerly Washington Animal half natural basis. Only those dogs were used Foundation is a non-profit organization that for reproduction that were suited the best advocates responsible dog ownership. ACF ' for a certain purpose. Because only large, ' assists with legislation and education. In 2001 . powerful, and courageous dogs showed the - ACF /WAF assisted the state of Louisiana in ' best skills in the aforementioned utilization revising their dangerous dog law in place of there were no significant differences in refer - I ; breed specific legislation. ACF /WAF assisted ence to their exterior or their character." ,, 1 seven cities in passing "dangerous dog laws" t "In the course of time nothing substantial including Algona, Walla Walla and Tukwila changed in the main utilization of dogs. i I Washington. g Specialized direction in breeds was estab- ACF /WAF has worked with State lished in the area of hunting dogs as well as ' Senators and Representatives in California, in special leisure activities that were estab- Florida, Washington, Washington DC, New lished in England toward the end of the 16th x + Hampshire, Oregon, Maryland, New Jersey century. Greyhound races and dogs fighting and Europe in stopping breed specific leg- bulls lead to the breeding of dogs that were ' islation and drafting dangerous dog laws. In especially suited for this "sport ". Through the 2002, we drafted a dangerous dog law for the use of the fighting dog those qualities were U.S. Government for use on military installa- used that were also evident in the original I E tions in place of breed specific legislation usage of the dogs for hunting and guarding. at Ft. Lewis Wa... ACF /WAF won a decision Originally only reserved for royalty, especial by the Alabama Supreme Court in August ly the bullfighting soon became a national ,. 2002 affirming a trial court decision proving pastime. Later dogs fought against dogs American Pit Bull Terriers are not geneti- m (because buying bulls was too expensive) 1 and after dog fighting was forbidden by the l' tally dangerous. ACF /WAF endorsed 586635 parliament in 1835, they were used against t:i in Washington, which prohibits declaring r rats (Semencic, 1984)." -- - ,1 a dog dangerous by using its breed. ACF drafted several state level and local laws "Breeding of pedigree dogs in the modern dog laws in 2003. ACF teaches responsible h sense only existed since the middle of the dog ownership and dog bite prevention 1 19th century. In 1859 the first dog show was '' for the Department of Education in state of held in England. With the establishment of Washington. ,i the British Kennel Club in 1873 the frame- . ' I work for affiliation in breed, breeding and ' Origins of Dog Breeds , exhibition was laid (Zimen, 1992). In the mid i 11 "The first dog breeds originated as the result r " 1800's the American Kennel Club was estab- g ' of selection for certain uses (Zimen1992). r lished." (Stur 2001) - 1! People first used the instinct of fighting and ', _ - protection in dogs. Then came herding dogs ' Identification of Breeds that protected the herds against attacks ' "Identification of individual dogs is possi- from wolves and coyotes (Finger1988), the ble on the basis of inherent and acquired ' first hunting dogs, that were used among ; markings; the possibility of error can never other things for the hunt of valiant game, the be excluded. Unmistakable identification is first farm dogs for protection of human set- possible on the basis of definition of blood ! tlements and later war dogs, that were taken groups respectively polymorphous protein - - into war as living weapons (Zimen1992) In the ' and enzyme systems (Schieger and Stur beginning, there were no breed standards as 1986), on the basis of DNA- fingerprints s' 12 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Statistical and Scientific Data 1 (Jeffreys and Morton1987 Georges et al., As for statistics used to support the idea 1988) as well as with microchip identification that some breeds are more dangerous, (N.N.,1993) the numbers are misleading, said Anthony Pobderscek of the University of Cambridge Based on blood groups, polymorphous Veterinary School. "There's a problem get - protein- and enzyme systems as well as DNA ting records," he said. "Golden Retrievers - fingerprints respectively canine micro satel- bite, Labrador Retrievers bite, but don't get liter, the verification of an indicated lineage reported.' Dr Wagner presented the results of two specific parent dogs is possible in an of a study on the "dangerous dog" laws of G individual dog (Morton et al., 1987; Binns et Germany earlier this week at the meeting of al., 1995; Fredholm and Wintero, 1996; ZAJC the International Society for Anthrozoology and Sampson, 1996). in Davis, Calif. Although they look different, Identification of a particular breed affilia- dog "breeds" have no more scientific basis tion is nevertheless only possible based on than do "races" among humans, said canine yP exterior markings which are defined in the researcher James Serpell of the University of breed standards; however in an individual Pennsylvania. case the undoubted affiliation of a dog to a According to RIECK (1977), the biting dog breed is only partially possible. is typically male, younger than two years, Of course, based on canine DNA markers and belongs to a working dog breed (e.g. one can execute genealogical studies about Shepherd or Rottweiler), or is for instance the genetic distance between breeds or a Cocker Spaniel, or a Chow Chow, and populations (Fredholm and Wintero, 1995; originates in mass breeding in which tem- perament or other desired qualities of a dog Okumara et al., 1996; Pihkanen et al., 1996; are not considered in breeding. The author ZAJC et al., 1997) but affiliation of a single quotes a statistic about deaths through dog dog to a certain breed or the determination bites. In 34 death cases in 1989 to 1990, 10 of lineage of a mixed breed dog of certain cases were caused by Nordic breeds like the breeds based on canine markers is not pos Husky, Samoyed or Malamute, 10 further Bible according to current scientific stand- cases were caused by Pit Bull type (mix) dogs ings (Templeton, 1990)." (Stur 2001) uncertain of positive identification. Seven :. _...__. deaths were caused by German Shepherds, Fatalities by Breeds of bog 3 by Dobermans, 1 by a Rottweiler, and 4 by study at the University of Washington A Y Y 9 other breeds. (Bandow, 1966) shows a comparison between the shares of breeds in bite incidents in corn- To claim one breed is more responsible for human fatalities is impossible. Some would parison with the recorded numbers. In this chose to single out the Pit Bull , due to the study, no statistical insurance regarding the fact there are estimated statistics and the i deviation of breed dispersion resulted. The type of dogs that resemble the Pit Bull are breed statistic, moreover, is according to the such a wide variety that we find American testimony of the author, to be viewed with Bulldogs, Boxers, and Mastiff's labeled as Pit association is based on Bulls. It is impossible to compare reservation. Breed assoc are different p P testimony of the victim who can not always breeds of dogs versus human fatalities. r in an accident situation correctly identify The Washington Animal Foundation did a the breed of attacking dog, or based on the survey on human fatalities by dogs in 2001 l i testimony of the owner who does not always and came up with these figures, Rottweiler state the correct breed. 1 (6); Labrador (2); Pomeranian (1); German I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 13 1 , Statistical and Scientific Data ' Shepherd (2); Chow (1); Wolf- Hybrid (1); Akita of the media attention focused on specific _. x (1); Doberman (1); Beagle (1); Presa Canario . breeds such as the Pit Bull, that the real sta- (2); Pit Bull (1); mixed breeds (6). When com- i tistics are never brought to the attention of paring these figures with the human fatali- the general public or the politicians, which ties from 1975 -80 by Pickney & Kennedy, : in turn does nothing to protect the safety of Traumatic Deaths from Dog Attacks in the ; the public. This misinformation affects the :" United States, the report identified the fol- political pressure concerning the passing of lowing as responsible for human fatalities ; breed bans instead of focusing on passing ;, during the study period from May, 1975 to strong dangerous dog laws that target the April, 1980: German Shepherd (16); Husky irresponsible owners of all breeds of dog. (9); St. Bernard (8); Bull Terrier (6); Great � (ACF2003) Dane (6); Malamute(5); Golden Retriever - (3); Boxer (2); Dachshund (2); Doberman Cost of Breed' Legislation Pinscher (2); Collie (2); Rottweiler(1); Basenji In England, legislation was passed I (1); Chow -Chow (1); Labrador Retriever (1); , banning specific breeds of dogs in 1991. . Yorkshire Terrier (1); mixed and unknown The legislation has not worked and cost breeds (15). One would question the accu- , millions of dollars to impound and remove racy of human fatalities by dogs from current only a small number of dogs banned: . reports and especially the statistics on the a Costs to police forces in England and Wales Pit Bull. When looked at from a more realistic , of operating the 1991 Act (first three years f point of view one would find Shepherds and ` following introduction); other working dogs rate higher in fatalities. 1992 -93 — £1,605,137 , However, given the increasing population of 1993 -94 = £1,195,421 dog breeds at any given time, it is impossible 1994 -95— £825,257 to compare one breed to another. r' 'The costs incurred by the MPS in admin- 20% of deaths involve unrestrained dogs istering the Act in respect of kenneling, off the owner's property, 70% involve unre- transport and veterinary fees have been -I strained dogs on the owner's property, and considered and are as follows:' 10% involve restrained dogs on the owner's property. Unrestrained dogs are responsible 1) Kenneling; '' for a high number of dog bite reports and I 1992 -93 - £1,263,763 attacks to other animals. Over 30 breeds 1993 -94 - £773,469 of dogs have been involved in 400 human 1994 -95 £443,646 deaths in a 30 year period. 1995-96 - £368,000 . In researching dog 2) Vet /Transport; bite incident reports r. 1 for the year 2000 in Pontiac Michigan, our 1992 -93 - £66,075 ._ - .`. ' Foundation found a high number of mixed 1993-94 - £77,418 breeds biting but no human fatalities. Chow 1994-95 - £57,829 t Chows were the dogs biting unprovoked 1995 96 - £47,000 more than other breeds. We found a high Totals: percentage of teasing or tormenting of dogs ' 1992 -93 - £1329,838 which in turn caused them to bite. We found ': 1993 -94 - 0.85 million ;°' Sight Hounds responsible for deaths to other 1 1994 -95 - 0.5 million animals, yet the breeds you hear about in the ; 1995 -96 - £415,000 projected ' media did not rate high. We find, because (actual £0.7 million) , 1 q PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Statistical and Scientific Data P 3) Baroness Blatch 1994 ,, In Pontiac, Michigan, WAF had filed a law- In response to a question in the House, 1 suit against the city on December 13, 2001 admitted that in the Met. Police area for passing breed specific legislation without alone costs had reached f2.8 Million. giving public notice, it was repealed. In all reality, breed specific legislation cannot be 1992 -1993 - 1.3 million enforced; and where it has been enacted, it • 1993 -1994 - 0.85 million has been proven it could not be enforced. 1994 -1995 - 0.7 million In 2002 Huntsville Alabama spent over 4) Mr. Nicholas Baker 70,000 dollars declaring American Pit Bull In response to Mr. Gale MP, March 1995, Terriers dangerous and appealed a case confirmed there were 133 dogs held in > (Shelia Tack v Huntsville) to the Supreme police custody in England & Wales. I Court. A decision came back ruling in favor 4 31 - held for more than 3 months of the trial court upholding American Pit 73 - held for more than 6 months Bull Terriers as not genetically dangerous. (ACF2003) 4 The daily cost of keeping dogs in _ _ _ _ custody ranged between f1.76 to £9 t Is Breed Specific Legislation' per day Hansard 2/3/95 Co1.657.658 _ Constitutional? Banning a specific breed of dog could (Pout Poulsen ACF2O03) only be declared constitutional if there were In the United States, cities have spent mil- scientific genetic proof that a specific breed • lions of dollars attempting to enforce breed i of dog is dangerous. The breed bans placed bans and all efforts have failed. In Dade 1 on the Pit Bulls and other breeds are clearly County Florida, a breed ban was passed on 2$ unconstitutional, which is why we find 11 Pit Bull type dogs in 1988, yet as of 2002 an 1 states in the United States that have passed it estimated fifty thousand Pit Bull type dogs 1 laws making it illegal to declare a dog dan- populate Dade County. In Saginaw Michigan, 1 gerous by breed. The Pit Bull is not clan- .. [ a breed ban was repealed several years ago gerous, it is a "Terrier" and all terriers have because of the cost of impounding dogs animal prey drive, this does not make them and the legal cost to the city for its defense s dangerous or vicious. The human fatalities against dog owners who filed civil action. by dogs from our research show that one h breed of dog cannot be singled out. "The Pit In Saginaw, City Attorney Catherine R. Bull has to be trained to fight." (HSUS 2002). Ginster stated "aside how the ordinance was adopted and its enforcement, a major prob- To be declared a danger to the public to ' lem exists as to the adequacy in terms of the the extent of taking away the constitutional number of available pens within the Animal rights of dog owners, the breed of dog in i Shelter to hold animals for protracted peri question would need to be proven danger - - ods. The county does not have the capacity ous with scientific evidence. This is some - 1 to hold "vicious dogs" for periods beyond thing WAF has found to never have been 1 which the State law specifies." addressed to the extent it should be. In 2001, Baltimore, Maryland projected 1. There is no scientific proof that any one . it would cost over 750,000 dollars a year to breed of dog is more or less dangerous than another. a attempt to enforce legislation directed at 3 1 , specific breeds and voted against breed spe- 1 2. There is no positive way to identify a • cific legislation. dog breed with genetics. 11 i I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 15 - Statistical and Scientific Data 3. There are no accurate dog bite b If the breed bans are being passed to I statistics. target breeds that kill humans, then why are ;,; ' not all the breeds listed banned? 4. The dog breeds listed as the cause of human fatalities are estimated and German Shepherd not accurate. i Husky Doberman 5. According to the most recent survey 1 1 I . taken, the breeds mentioned in vari- Chow Great Dane u ous reports and so often broadcast by Saint Bernard I the media are in fact not where the Golden Retriever problem exists. Malamute ; ' 6. The so called fighting breeds, which Bull Terrier some would classify as "Terriers" have to Pit Bull i;I be trained to fight, therefore it is only Collie constitutional to prohibit illegal dog Labrador Retriever 7 , ire Terrier •- fighting and training dogs to fight. Basenji 7. All breeds of dogs have animal prey drive Dachshund I ` and are able to fight with other dogs 1 Boxer i , or animals. Bull Mastiff Neo Mastiff Breed specific legislation is not constitu- Old English Mastiff I,. tional and when realistically looked upon, Beagle -- :.i it does nothing but enhance illegal activity Wolf Hybrid to the point of taking the responsible own- Pomeranian ers away from owning dogs and leaving the Akita criminals to illegally obtain dogs banned. It Presa turns responsible dog owners into criminals. Rottweiler I: Breed specific legislation endangers the `: Cocker Spaniels general public by banning specific breeds 1 1 Springer Spaniels ' . of dogs, when scientific proof states that the Irish Wolfhound environment and training of a dog is the out- Irish Setter s come of its temperament and not genetics, Poodle if one breed is taken from an irresponsible The intent of the animal rights movement owner, then all that will happen is that indi- a , that supports breed bans is to take away pet vidual will obtain another breed to train and ownership. This information can be found i abuse in the same manner as the previous $ on websites of the well known animal rights breed. (ACF2003) i organizations. They are targeting two breeds I1 If the legislation's intent is to ban breeds at this time, Pit Bulls and Rottweilers. because of dog fighting, then why is there (ACF2003) no legislation in place to ban Shar - Pei's, ' Mastiff's of all varieties including English, Is There Scientific Genetic Proof Dogs - . . Neapolitan, Pyrenean, Spanish, Tibetan and are Dangerous? . . Bull Mastiff's, Akita's, Tosa's, Presa's, Boston . There is no scientific proof that Pit Bulls, -" _ ' Terriers, and other breeds that were suppos- ; or any other breed of dog is dangerous. ;;;° edly bred for fighting? r The Foundation's collective experience and lb PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Statistical and Scientific Data research has found the American Pit Bull other dog breed in existence. (WAFAmicus Terrier is a "terrier." All terriers have animal " Alabama 2002) prey drive, but this does not make them dangerous or vicious. The Pit Bull type dog From American Canine Foundation: has to be trained to fight. Although in some s There is an estimated 4.8 million registered cases the Pit Bull is known to be a fighting American Pit Bull Terriers that have been dog, it was not bred for fighting, but for selective bred for companionship and con - bull baiting. The Pit Bull type dog comes formation dog shows. These dogs are not from Europe and evolved from some Mastiff bred for dog fighting and HSUS estimates based breed such as with some Bulldog 200,000 thousands Pit Bulls are used for blood either in a pure form or to a variation illegal activity. There is no proof that the 4.8 of any of the many terrier and hound groups million APBT's are included in this figure, beginning with the now extinct Black and because the registries AKC /UKC /ADBA that Tans Terriers and Olde English White Terriers. register these dogs prohibit illegal dog fight - English and Irish immigrants imported the ing. If it could be proved that any of the reg- istered APBT's were involved in illegal activ- dogs. Unfortunately, it was discovered in the late 1800's that if trained, the dogs could be ity, it would be less than 4 percent out of 4.8 used in the inhumane sport of dog fight- million. There is an estimated 52 million dogs ing. Due to federal laws passed in the 1970's in the United States and the American Pit ; Bull Terrier takes up 9.6 percent of the dog prohibiting dog fighting fewer dogs are now trained for the illegal sport. population and that does not count unregis- tered ones. There is no such dog called a Pit The American Pit Bull Terrier is shown Bull Type Dog, it would be a mix breed. in the American Kennel Club (AmStaff), United Kennel Club, American Dog Breeders (ACF2003) Association, Canadian Kennel Club, and Dr. Cornelia Wagner DVM, an expert the American Rare Breed Association . The on canine behavior from the University of American Pit Bull Terrier is shown in the Wisconsin, states: conformation and obedience ring. This BLAMING THE GENETIC MAKEUP OF breed competes in weight pull events in the THE DOG IS WRONG. (Fedderson- Peterson, ADBA, UKC and International Weight Pulling D.U.(2001) Zur Biologie des aggression des Association. The American Temperament Hundes, Disch Tierarzil, Wschr 108 (3),94 - Test Society (POBox 4093, St Louis, and MO 101, environmental and learning effects 63136 Phone 314- 869 -6103, in the 24 years of are always stronger than genetic influence. testing over 185 breeds of dog, rates the Pit Although certain dog breeds such as the Bull at 83.1%. This is higher than the national Rottweiler and American Pit Bull Terrier have average for all other breeds of dog. This the reputation of having stronger jaws than means the Pit Bull has the best overall tern- perament. The American Pit Bull Terrier also a otherbreeds,valuablescientificstudiesshow- rates high in the Canine Good Citizens Test. ing significant differences in jaw strength The Pit Bull is used for Search and Rescue J among breeds does not exist. In summary, and as a Therapy dog. Our Foundation uses the classification of dog breeds with respect them along with other breeds for bite pre- to their relative danger to humans makes no vention and responsible ownership classes sense, as both the complex antecedent con - in the Washington School Districts. Two US ditions in which aggressive behavior occurs, Presidents owned Pit Bulls and countless and its ramifying consequences in the indi- famous people own them. In our country vidual dog's ecological and social environ- more families own the Pit Bull than any ment are not considered." PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 17 Statistical and Scientific Data ,, The American Canine Foundation states: In 2002 two very important cases regarding _. _ "According to the current scientific breed specific legislation prevailed. August research there is no proof that the Pit Bull can 2002 (WAF /Shelia Tack v Huntsville Alabama) bite harder than any other breed. There is no the Alabama Supreme Court affirmed a trial J proof that the Pit Bull is genetically vicious court decision that American Pit Bull Terriers and statistics have been greatly manipulated. are not genetically dangerous. Environment, training and socialization play In November 2002 in Acadia Parish, La. '; a much greater part in the temperament of (EBA v Acadia Parish) The 6th District Court 1 ? an individual dog than genet._. ic traits." ruled American Pit Bull Terriers are not dan- (ACF2003) gerous and BSL unconstitutional. ' Cities and States Concerning BSL Conclusion . genetics There is no scientific proof that In the year 2001 and 2002 the Washington p g Animal Foundation has stopped and repealed cause a breed of dog to be aggressive, ' , BSL or worked with other organizations and vicious or dangerous. Irresponsible owners responsible dog owners to reach that goal. are to blame for the behavior of dogs that Below is a list: i are aggressive, vicious or dangerous. Breed specific legislation is an injustice, as is geno- i ; STATES: tide of a specific breed of dog. - State of Louisiana ' State of New Hampshire ;. It's been well established dogs are person- ' State of Florida u a l property Brown v. Muhlenberg Township, State of Maryland ° 269 F. 3d 205, 209 -10(3d Cir.2001) , Fuller v. $ Vines, 36 F. 3d 65, 68 (9th Cir.1994) , Lesher v. State of Delaware Reed, 12 F . 3d 148, 150 -51 (8th Cir. 1994) and State of California in a recent a recent case Altamn v. High Point State of Washington No. 02 -1178 4d ( 4th Cir. 2003). The Federal c l Washington DC 4th Circuit Court ruled " we conclude that the CITIES: dogs in this case do qualify as property pro- ' . Pontiac, Michigan i tected by the Fourth Amendment". Therefore 1 Walla Walla, Washington . they should be protected property under Tukwila, Washington ' the 4th, 5th, 8th and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Acadia Parish, Louisiana ._ _, v Canton, Ohio Breed specific laws criminalize United 1 Lorain, Ohio States citizens. Responsible dog owners fall Broward County, Florida , victim to these types of laws, responsible LI 1 Saginaw, Michigan dog owners greatly outweigh irresponsible Ft. Lewis, Washington ' dog owners. Dog owners who violate are Cheney, Kansas subject to criminal charges which include I; a criminal record. In People v Al Munin A. Los Angeles, California Santa Cruz, California Jabaar, 163 Misc. 2d 1045; 623 N.Y.S. 2d500; 1994 N.Y.Misc. LEXIS 643, November 1, 1994 Huntsville, Alabama the case addressed selective laws, the court i Sacramento, California found selective laws violate equal protec- To view legislative information go to tion. German Shepherds are responsible for http: / /acf2004.tripod.com/ - more reported dog bites and fatal attacks 18 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Statistical and Scientific Data yet there are no laws restricting or pro - + bloodline temperament can be changed. hibiting ownership. The American Canine American Canine Foundation whose mem- Foundation has researched fatal dog attacks bers have testified in Supreme Court cases since 1970, in some journals published the on canine genetics agree with this evidence. claim is Pit Bulls are responsible for the The American Staffordshire Terrier and the majority of fatal attacks. Accurate statistics American Pit Bull Terrier have been selective it show mixed breeds are responsible for the bred for companionship and conformation majority of fatal attacks, some journals list dog shows since 1936 and if a dog owner is Pit Bull type dogs for fatal attacks, there is charged with illegal dog fighting they will be no scientific evidence to verify a dog's con- barred from the American Kennel Club and tent therefore the foundation classifies those the United Kennel Club which register the dogs as (mixed breed) because it looks like American Pit Bull and Staffordshire Terrier. a Pit Bull does not mean it has Pit Bull in its ; The AKC registers the Amstaff and the breed breeding, there are over 25 dog breeds that is no longer bred for animal prey drive and resemble the American Pit Bull Terrier. When 's never has the dog been bred for human reviewing fatal dog attacks since 1970 the g g aggression. foundation finds over 280 mixed breed dogs responsible for fatal attacks. The majority of 1 There have been statements that laws these fatal attacks were to children left unat i have become common in the United States tended with dogs by irresponsible parents. constraining Pit Bulls, this is not accurate. n Based on fatal dog attacks alone there is no In the years 2001 -2003 attempted specific rational basis to ban any specific breed of breed legislation has been stopped at the dog when research reveals it's the irrespon- ; state level in, Louisiana, New Hampshire, sible owners and negligent parents. Florida, Maryland, Delaware, California, Washington and Washington DC, all the leg- In Sentel v. New Orleans & Carrallton islators in these states found this type of A Railroad (1896) 166 US 698 nothing was legislation to be ineffective and refused to stated to allow selective laws against specific pass it. Cities in the past 3 years have also breeds of dog, it was stated that it is "practi- repealed or refused this type of legislation, cally impossible by statute to distinguish Pontiac Mi., Walla Walla, Wa. Tukwila, Wa., between the different dog breeds ". Id. at " Acadia Parish La., Canton Oh., Lorain Oh., 701.49 states afford U.S. citizens due process Broward County Fl., Saginaw Mi., Ft. Lewis rights for dog ownership under state danger - Wa., Cheney Ks., Los Angeles Ca., Santa Cruz., ous dog statutes, ten states prohibit selec- Huntsville Al., Sacramento Ca., and Algona tive dog laws at the state and local level. Wa. This year in New Jersey which has a state In Akron v. Tipton (1989) 53 Ohio Misc. law prohibiting selective breed legislation, 2d18. It was claimed that Pit Bulls have Assemblyman Burzichelli attempted to pass extreme aggression towards other animals A2906 to repeal the existing state law to be and humans and can attack without warn- able to restrict Pit Bulls and Rottweilers, in ing. It was also stated that Pit Bulls have ' the end the Assemblyman withdrew from extremely strong jaw pressure. Current sci- A2906 and the bill did not pass. entific evidence proves none of these find- Evidence used in previous cases where ing to be accurate. breed specific laws were upheld under con- Dr. lreneSturfromtheGeneticsDepartment stitutional challenges was not accurate, sci- of the University of Veterinarian Medicene, entific evidence was not present in the find - Vienna provides research that proves within r ings. Statistics had been manipulated and r; 3 generations of selective breeding a dog's only partial facts were presented. There is I ?4 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 1 9 1 - - " -- -- il -"- --= Statistical and Scientific Data r. no rational basis to pass selective laws that pies were not trained to fight and were not — __- -*. discriminate and criminalize responsible dog vicious. In addition, it held that three women r owners and there is no compensation for the who wanted to adopt them had a right to taking of property of US citizens. intervene. The City of Huntsville claimed __. _ —1 There are over 30 breeds of dogs listed the Pit Bull puppies were genetically dan responsible for human fatalities. Banning gerous, used expert witness testimony, and one or two breeds, declaring them to be appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court after the lower court rejected its arguments dangerous, or placing restrictions on them and evidence. _ "- ..." -- --" does nothing to insure the safety of the public. Breeds from the Pomeranian to the The Alabama Supreme Court granted the Bull Mastiff have killed humans, and in most Washington Animal Foundation's petition cases they were provoked. To understand 1 to participate in the proceedings as Amicus " °' "- " "a °; the support of breed bans, one would have " Curiae because the Foundation is an expert I ' to view the movement directed at exter- on canine genetics. The Foundation pro- '-1 mination of specific breeds by certain ani- vided expert testimony to prove that Pit mal rights groups. It is their intent to stop , Bulls and other breeds are not inherently domestic pet ownership. It is a known fact genetically dangerous and must be trained there is an ongoing federal investigation tak- to fight ". ing place into the animal rights movement. S. Zendorf (Attorney at Law) -- _ -.- • - There has been evidence released show - ing minimal funding has gone to Humane"w Legislation.- , Shelters or Animal Control for enforcing - .w- ._ -., - -__....a.. i : existing dangerous dog laws by this move- One of the most serious problems with ment. However, there is heavy support by some of the existing "dangerous dog laws" is certain animal rights groups directed at the that the dog may face destruction or lengthy extermination of specific breeds, and this impoundment, while the owner receives lit - can be found on their websites. It is uncon- tie or no punishment. Irresponsible owners I stitutional to victimize responsible owners are chronic repeat offenders of animal con - and turn them into criminals and cruel to o i trol laws. Thus, the dog suffers the conse- I punish specific breeds of dogs. (ACF2003) quences of its owner's irresponsibility. On August 30, 2002 the Alabama Supreme 1. Do the current laws address each of Court affirmed a Trial Court decision that the problem areas with dogs? American Pit Bull Terriers are not vicious. The 2. Are they being enforced? American Pit Bull Terriers were born at the Huntsville Animal Shelter, after more than 3. Is there a problem with repeat offenders? i two years the Alabama Supreme court gave Problems stem from inadequate budget € . them their freedom. ).< or manpower to enforce the laws, inad- Reported by AttorneyS.Zendorf equate training to effectively deal with the "On August 30, 2002 the Alabama Supreme problem dogs in a humane way and low , Court affirmed a Circuit Court Decision that priority of animal control issues. Poor com- four American Pit Bull Terriers born at the munity education of existing animal control 1 Huntsville Animal Control Shelter "did not laws and lack of judicial support in uphold - 1 lack any useful purpose" as required by the ing effective penalties also create serious 1 [ local ordinance. Huntsville v. Four Pit Bull problems. Strong laws that penalize the Puppies (Ala. 08- 30 -02), No. 1010459, unre- owners, regardless of the breed, are what ported. The court determined that the pup- are needed. These types of laws are valid, k i: 20 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Statistical and Scientific Data have merit, and are not vague or capricious. We all agree that the power of the bite is Non- breed specific laws are valid under i ` proportional to the size of the jaws and the the Constitution, and are for the protection jaw muscles. There is no anatomical struc- of the public welfare and safety with the . ture that could be a locking mechanism in degree of precision that characterizes effec- ,„ any dog.' As a Professor Emeritus from the tive legislation. 1 College of Veterinary Medicine at Michigan State University, I agree completely with The only justice for the irresponsible their conclusion. owner are strong penalties such as the state of Washington RCW16.08.100 penalties for r You might want to circulate this statement owners of dogs allowed to cause damage, to all your pit bull members as a definitive bite, or perpetrate unprovoked attacks on 4, statement from three of the world's lead - other animals and humans. ing authorities on the anatomy of the dog. R Maybe this will help to dispel this myth that The American Canine Foundation does i not support breed specific legislation and seem to be so frequently quoted as a reason has drafts of laws available for control of for banning these animals. dangerous dogs. I will also try to talk with Sen. Thomas and AMERICAN CANINE FOUNDATION present his office with the information that 360 277 DOGS a ban on pit bulls is not the solution to the Legislation2003 @hotmail.com dangerous dog problem. http: / /acf2004.tripod.com/ " Pit bull owners can do a number of things Research included: to convince the legislators that this is not Dr Stur good public policy. I would like to encourage Dr. Wagner all individuals who oppose the introduction Pickney and Kennedy I, of this legislation to read and promote the ACF 1 conclusions in a report by the Task Force on } WAF !` Canine Aggression and Human Canine Poul Poulsen Interactions. This task force was appoint - Additional Scientific ;:; d ''' ', i ed by the American Veterinary Medical Jaw Locking and 'Bite :Pressure::, - i Association and their conclusions were pub - ".. i lished in 2001 under the title of "A Community The following quote was sent to me from Dr. Howard Evans, Professor Emeritus, College Approach to Dog Bite Prevention." The entire article can be downloaded from the AVMA of Veterinary Medicine at Cornell University, 1 web page, <www.avma.org >. On the home Ithaca New York. We were colleagues in the veterinary college for four years. He is the a page, scroll down on the menu on the left author of the textbook, ANATOMY OF THE side of the screen to "Features" and click on "A community approach to dog bite preven- DOG, (the world's definitive work on the > tion." In this article, pay attention to the qual- anatomy of the dog). His statement was in a 1 ifications of the members of the task force. letter addressed to me on March 26. 2002. His quote was: "I have spoken with [Dr.] Sandy Included in this list are representatives of deLahunta (the foremost dog neurologist ; the following groups: American Veterinary in the country) and [DR.] Katherine Houpt (a Medical Association; American Academy of leading dog behaviorist) about a jaw locking _ Pediatrics; American College of Emergency mechanism in pit bulls or any other dog and , Physicians; The Professional Liability Insurance they both say, as do I, that there is NO SUCH Trust; American College of Veterinary Behav- THING AS "JAW LOCKING IN ANY BREED. : iorist; A representative of the Insurance I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 21 ._._ "... -µ Statistical and Scientific Data ° E 1 , M"'" a ..:�.,.._ .._.. . , , 7ZLE"' ...a..., ":MT,' . . .r. ,-... .K ,„ r ,. _ MIT" — 7: ;. ' lraC , : .....:;, ,....,. 7.r...�.: ":....r ": { i Industry;American Medical Association;AVMA .._ .._......._.. Animal Welfare Committee; Humane Society a of the United States; National Animal Control Association; Center for Disease Control; and the AVMA Council on Public Relations. I ; In the body of the report, especially note the statement under "Breed or type Bans" on I page 1736 of the report. The first paragraph i--- ----- ---- - under this heading reads: "Concerns about ' 'dangerous' dogs have caused many local gov- ernments to consider supplementing existing animal control laws with ordinances directed ` �` " . _E toward control of specific breeds or types of dogs. Member of the Task Force believe such ordinances are inappropriate and ineffective. i 'l Subsequent paragraphs support the reasons for this conclusion. This whole statement would be useful to present to any local group proposing a ban on pit bulls. Prepared by: Al W. Stinson, D.V.M. Director of Legislative Affairs, Michigan # Association for Pure Bred Dogs, and the i Michigan Hunting Dog Federation, and a . Member of the Board of Directors of the ,o American Dog Owners Association 1915 Epley Rd., Williamston, MI 48895, Telephone: 517 -655 -5363, Fax: 517 - 655 -3724, i � E -mail: LSFC2 @aol.com I E P i a — ...,,..._ .__.. —. 22 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I i Preventing Dog Bites L.... ':j2,1! . w ,. , ..._...._ ,._. In1. L. ,L7,= =n," 2;17:::' ,..2,1"1, ', 'Z ,=,. •:- L: _.:.~:z Ideas t& Reduce Dog Bites ,, . ,, side, and pet under the chin. Placing 1. The dog most likely to bite, an intact your hand over their head is a move of male, the second an intact female. i Dominance in canine language. a. Public Spay and Neuter campaign, e. Give kids the statistics on Animals I the majority of dog bites are by unal- 1 who never find homes, promote tered dogs. i , responsible ownership, etc. b. Low cost or no cost spay and neuter 4 3. Dog Chaining laws, limit the time a r dog can be chained. programs for lower income people. There are some cities that organize a 1 4. Enforce Leash Laws! free spay day once a year. 5. Promote and educate people on 2. School programs to educate kids about 4 responsible pet ownership dogs. The local shelters or humane Society could visit the schools once a year for a 3 a. Training, why it's important dog education program. Hold one at the b. Socialization, why it's important! local library. Visit www.pbrc.net /poppys- place to review a canine safety program. i c. NEVER EVER leave your child alone with a dog. a. Never stare at a dog, this is consid- ered a challenge, threat, and rude in d. Proper Pet care a canine language. e. Why you shouldn't chain your dog c b. Never approach an unknown dog, f, f. Why you shouldn't leave your dog i without asking permission from the I outside all the time alone owner. g. NEVER run from a dog!! That is the c. Always allow the dog to approach i worst thing you can do! you first. h. NEVER tease or taunt dogs, it's not d. Always approach a new dog from the i nice and can provoke a dog bite. 7;, s.+, :,. . Use Links, for Bite: Prev _, . Zy ;:('. ',4 The Safe Kids /Safe Dogs Project - A site by Karen Peak of West Wind Dog Training www.SafeKidsSafeDogs.com/ Why Dogs Bite: A Guideline For Children - Humane Society of Denver www.ddfl.org /behavior /dogbites.htm ' Children and Dogs: Important Information for Parents - Humane Society of Denver www.ddfLorg /behavior /child - dog.pdf Why Dogs Bite - by Jacque Lynn Schultz, Director, ASPCA Special Projects ' ' www.petfinder .cam /journalindex.cgi ?path= public /animalbehavior /dogs /1.2.7.txt I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 23 -- -- --- i Preventing Dog Bites I r. - — - - 7," -..7 . .. "":1n 77" .17..:. 7 ... "......a 7V w. mo ........a.77 „..Ma ..h. .,:::..,.. .,.,, .:""=„ „. Zr..1.,,J 1 a Useful for Community Bite Prevention Programs: 0,- American Veterinary Medical Association, A Community.approach to dog bite prevention: This 18 page report is the result of the AVMA's task force on canine aggression and human - canine interactions. 1 Website: www. avma. org /pubhith /dogbite /dogbite.pdf ___ .' ...____... .. "! The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA): s Has a community outreach pro gram including dog bite prevention. Create a Bite -Free Community Without Banning Dogs: Reduce dog bites in your community using a multi- pronged approach which includes bite prevention programs for both children and home ' service providers, puppy socialization programs and the formation of a Dangerous Dog 3 Task Force made up of key players in community government and animal welfare. ( G I Website: www.aspca.org/ site /PageServer ?pagename = workshops COMMUNITY %20O UTREACH 3 American Kennel Club (AKC): _ -^ ' Safety around Dogs program. I Website: w w ' w.akc.org /public education /safetyvideo.cfm Doagonesafe: r an organization dedicated to dog bite prevention: if Id Website: www.doggonesafe.com / -7,-- i 777- - :°° ;7 ". ' 44:. -77-7 w -`. " : .. 7i7.77:71. '_ r,.«: «, ;, :, t o I I I E r 1 f 2 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I BSL Related Articles ' .. You Can't Ban Sifoopy .. , ,,:. r "" : , 1 She was wild and bit him a lot. What if I told Karen Peak, West Wind Dog Training you the pup was a Rottweiler? I was working with two families in semi- Right now you are probably thinking, private sessions. The mothers were friends Get rid of the dog! Rotties are a dangerous as breed and should not be kept pets. No and got puppies at the same time from the p p same breeder. They wanted to work togeth- matter how good a family is; the dogs are er with their pups and children in semi -pri- too risky! They should be banned!" vate sessions, I accommodated them. One The puppy was very active and the breed - mother had many complaints about her er bred for strong traits. Working dogs. The puppy - twelve weeks old at the start of our ! pup was self - willed, driven and high energy. lessons. This is the pup I will concentrate I Mom knew the importance of teaching the on. The puppy would bite and grab, snarl puppy it was not good to use her mouth on and lunge at the children - especially her humans. Mom was very worried about the u younger boys ages four and twelve. The b pup's increasing "aggression" to the younger is puppy had singled out the youngest on boys. Well, when mom left the room to II several occasions and even drew blood. answer the phone (remember semi - private The pup was a real terror. When I was not ; sessions at her home with another pup) the at the house, I could expect at least one call younger boys immediately started playing each week regarding the puppy's behavior. I, with the pup in ways that taught the puppy r What if I told you the puppy was a pit bull? is was good to bite people! I stopped the f boys and the middle son said this was how Right now you are probably thinking: they played with her all the time - especially "Get rid of the dog! This breed is dangerous „ when mom was not there! The pup was and should never be owned. They need to playing as roughly with the boys as she did be banned for public safety. This is what the the other puppy. However, if she got too owners get for buying this breed!" rough with the other puppy, the other pup Here is a little more about the home ' would yelp and let her know that play need- ed to tone down - and it would. Cannot play the puppy was living in. Two P Y parent household, pretty affluent region. ( nice, play will stop. But the boys did not do Mom is at home primarily. She supposedly i= this. Puppy learned that tackling and biting had time to devote to a pup and she taught hard was a good game with people! When I II parenting evenings. in the evenin s • Dad was pointed this out to mom, she just comment - locally respected. They have three boys ed that boys would be boys. I explained that ages four, twelve and seventeen. The breed this is why the pup was a biter - her boys' of dog that best fit their home was well actions. Stop the boys and have them play researched: books were read, people talked different, safer games, do some retraining of r to, a good breeder found. Mom read eight manners and the pup would turn around. books on dog training and care alone before I reminded mom that the pup needed getting the pup. It was impressive the time about three to five short practice sessions 4 and effort they put into the choice of a dog a day plus integrating lessons into daily life. I for the family. They knew the importance 1 Mom could not squeeze out the time to of early training and socializing so as soon work with the pup - or the boys. Remember, as the pup was fully inoculated, they con- she is mainly an at -home Mom. I asked about tacted me. Mom focused intently during our the exercise the pup was getting. She was a sessions and took notes! The middle child h high- energy girl with a lot of drive that need - took part in lessons. The pup was a demon. vi ed to be directed to good activities. Mom I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 25 f ....� ....... ......I BSL Related Articles ! : rs._. .. .: :77,7.a :. . ,z.:. " .» :s: - 74r ---, 2, , z7 - " " 7'a.' ..._,.,.. r ......`Fwaa. 7 „« .` .....77« . ».. »:::3:.': _ ..:.""�' . °:";.: r; i a o said the pup spent much of the day in the owners. They wanted the perfect "Norman I _. ...._ __ kitchen because she was such a terror. The Rockwell” image and a dog would complete pup needed a good combination of exercise that. However, they were not willing to do and quiet time - but all she was getting was the work it takes to make any breed or cross confinement to a small area in the kitchen! 1 a good and well- mannered companion. _ - `v° ._-.g Then mom told me about all the differ - , However, we will never hear people crying i ent techniques they were using through- to ban Snoopy. You can't ban Snoopy! So out the days to teach the puppy. The pup why do we call for banning of other breeds had no consistency. The pup was confused as opposed to looking at the dog's environ- as she never knew what to expect, what ment as the root cause of most problems? cues would be used or anything. This was ( contrary to what I explained our first meet- And during that last call from Mom, I was ing. I had explained that if they did not see told they had given up another dog not that I`° " ._e._ "" " " "" I long before they got the Beagle. The reason: i 1 improvement in a week of one technique, S "The dog kept biting the boys." I would trouble shoot and teach another P, the following week. Expecting something to © 2002, Karen Peak, - ----- --- -° -' work the first time is unreasonable. So, pup West Wind Dog Training. being taught biting humans is good, pup not getting enough balance of exercise and 'Out of the'Mouthiof Babes , , , ,,-,J 4 ' quiet time, pup confused. Bad combination. Karen Peak, The Safe Kids /Safe Dogs Project Mom called to say the pup was a real men- In the Bible it states "And a child shall lead ace but they had to stop sessions because them." How true this is. Honestly, I do not ' they did not have the time to devote to for feel we give many children enough credit. .__ '.._...k mal classes any more as their schedules got more hectic with activities every day during We tend to lump them into one big group and after school. She did not have the time and fail to see that they are individuals. As ! to supervise the boys and the puppy's play- with anything, we base our opinions of the j _ ing. The pup would stay in the kitchen and whole upon the actions of a few. Sadly, the maybe they would re -home her if her biting few we base the actions of the whole on and rough play got worse. Dad already was are almost always the troublemakers. This 1, _ _ . set to send the pup out. Now, what if I tell is wrong, so very wrong. But humans tend " you the puppy was a Beagle? You know: to do the same with any age group, any # Snoopy? race, any religion and many species of other You are probably thinking, "Oh that poor 1 animals. When I began The Safe Kids /Safe Dos Project over a ago, I knew I would pup! It is going to suffer because of own- g i y ear g ers who did not care enough to give the learn quite a bit from the people I presented 1 - pup what it needed and teach it manners. to - especially the children. Children learn -- - . "•-- .- .. - -) ° Owners like this should not have dogs!" from us. Their fears, hopes, dreams, percep- Why is there the difference in opinion? tions come one way or another from the Is it because Beagles are cute and cuddly? adults influencing them. The children either If I continued to say the pup was a pit or i want to be like us or are so disgusted that $ . Rottie would your attitude have stayed the they do all they can to be different. Some same or would you pity the dog? Rarely is > children follow the wrong paths while others 1 i ,, it the dog that is the problem. No matter become children to look up to and admire. L---- ----µ- - - what breed this puppy was, her behavior w Children are also far more perceptive than was caused due to lack of action from her we give them credit for. 26 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 BSL Related Articles When I begin a Safe Kids /Safe Dogs pre- 1 In November of 2002, I was invited to sentation, one of the first questions I ask present to an after school program for at -risk is: "What dog is the most dangerous ?" or city kids. They were elementary school age. "What dog are you most likely to be bitten , I entered with my two presentation dogs: by ?" Statistically, a child is more likely to be i a Shetland Sheepdog and a Great Pyrenees. bitten by a dog they, a friend or relative own. We introduced ourselves and I began asking 75 -85% of all reported bites occur from a my opening questions. When I asked what dog known to the child. This number could dogs are the most dangerous, I was shocked! be higher as many dog bites go unreported. The answers were: Chihuahuas, Poodles (all The media wants us to think our children are sizes), and various "fuzzy lap dogs." One at risk from Pit Bulls, Rottweilers, German child did say Pit Bulls. No sooner did he Shepherds, etc. Parents also teach their kids get that out and the others jumped on him p verbally! I asked why the kids answered small- that certain breeds are perfectly safe and er dogs. One boy piped up with "Because others would kill them if given the chance. little old ladies own them. All the ones in Often through a total lack of understand- I my apartment building are nasty and bite!" ing of dogs and dog safety, parents teach When I asked why most of them got angry their children this erroneous idea. In reality, when they heard a friend say "Pit Bulls," most the most dangerous dog is the one that is of the kids said bad people owned the only poorly trained and socialized — regardless bad dogs of these breeds. Many of these of the breed or cross. It is incorrect concepts children came from families with or had rela- that lead to restrictions and even bans being tives with these dogs often labeled danger - placed on certain breeds. ous. These children were able to make the 1 connection that in the good homes the dogs Most often, my presentations are given I (the pits) were fine. When in the bad homes, to middle and upper - middle class suburban the dogs could be dangerous. When I sug- children. When I ask the question what dogs ' g gested that maybe the owners of the little is the most dangerous I will almost always 1 dogs were not good owners because they get the standard answers of "Pit bulls and did not teach their dogs manners, these chit Rottweilers.' Sometimes there will be an dren better understood this concept. Dogs Akita, Doberman, or "Police dog" (German are a reflection of the owners — regardless of Shepherd) tossed in. When I ask what are the what breed. Dogs in good homes are better safest I almost always get "Golden Retrievers, behaved and safer than dogs in bad home. Cocker Spaniels, Collies and Labrador Out of the mouths of babes. If only more i Retrievers." When I ask why they think this adults could have the insight these city way, the answers range from "My (fill in rela- ' children did. Maybe then there would be less tive) said so," "Because the only dog on my call for breed specific laws and more call for street that is bad is a Pit Bull so they are a targeting the owners. bad dog," to "It is what I see on TV." I pretty much expect these answers now. Ironically, This article may be reprinted with permis when I ask what children a dog has ever Sion from the author. Credit must be given back bitten and what type of dog was it, an to author with a link to The Safe Kids /Safe Dogs assumed clan Brous breed as of the time this Project or the URL listed. Contact the author g through www.WestWindDogTraining.com is being written had bitten only one child of the hundreds I presented to that first year or www.SafeKidsSafeDogs.com alone. Dogs assumed to be safe breeds by © 2003, Karen Peak, the undereducated general public had bit- West Wind Dog Training & the ten more children. i Safe Kids /Safe Dogs Project I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 27 µ-- --- BSL Related Articles { :mow 7421.7.7 - :. — m _.. s. :. - -.-., .. A ` ' Ther Fa ilure " Banning 'Breeds ,"'x' " ` '1 , - just those bites caused by loose animals. L-- -- w - Karen Peak, West Wind Dog Training Honestly, the 75-80% is conservative. How many family pets nip a person and the bite All over the world, communities and even i never gets reported and medical treatment countries are calling for the banning of mul- never sought? Yes, loose dogs are a risk, - _ _ tiple breeds of dog. Is this the best way to but a person is far more likely to be bitten reduce dog bites? Will this really solve the by his own pet or the pet of someone he roblems many communities are facing? Or, p Y 9• knows. Banning a breed will not reduce this are legislators trying to take a fast way out number at all. Take away the dog, they will and not address the real problem? get another breed and may just as well get l, = bitten from that one. Most dogs that bite are If a breed is banned, ultimately only those who are responsible owners of the breed often poorly trained, poorly socialized and "-'" — will be affected. Are these the people taus- are often left in positions where they may ing the problems? No. Those who are using feel the need to bite. Dogs left outside all day and night with no one to watch them are fr dogs for fighting, protecting drugs or as more likely to develop bad behaviors as well weapons and status symbols will continue to own the dogs and ignore the laws. This type as become targets themselves. In a different of owner tends not to register dogs, often home, the dog would probably be a great keeps the dogs in horrid conditions, trains companion. But in the one the dog is in, the - -" -- -- them to be dangerous and feel that laws do dog is now a risk. Would banning the breed not apply to them. These are the people who work? No. Another dog will be brought in are causing problems and will continue to and the scenario play out again - regardless ' do so. If you ban a dog, it will become even of the breed or cross. ".._ , more of a status symbol to own. Breaking What about animal control? According the law and thumbing noses at society drive to the Animal Planet Network show Animal many people's actions. Banning a breed will Precinct, New York City has about ten animal _. __ M._." _, [ make it more desirable to the wrong people! control officers to police about 5,000,000 I Suppose a community is able to round up pets. How can the officers keep up with this and exterminate all dogs of a particular number? I lived in a community just north ' ` breed, well, new ones will be smuggled in or of Boston, MA that was one of the fastest ---- -- ---- - } another breed will become a status symbol. growing communities in the region. They 1 , We need to open our eyes and realize that had ONE part time animal control officer. breed bans will not stop these punks and Her vehicle was constantly breaking down. gangs from doing what they want. Look at f Several times I was called to make a run for __ ._.__f all the shootings going on? Obviously gun her while her police -issue junker was being I , restrictions are working... Not! And new fixed. How could she police all the animals restrictions fail as well. in her community? A community that size What about dog bites? Anywhere from needs several full -time officers. But no one 75 -80% (depending on what statistics you wanted to increase funding to do so let c look at, I have seen other variations) of all alone make the existing positing full time and provide the officer with reliable trans - dog bites occur from the family pet regard- _, less of breed or cross. This means 20 -25% portation! P I , of all bites are from other dogs - like ones What about laws? Laws need to cover any roaming loose. So, you round up all the breed or cross of dog. Laws need to realize • ... - - -- "--- -' dogs running loose, it will not have much 3 that even a small dog can cause a fatality k' i ' 1 of an impact in reducing dog bites overall in a small human. According to the 28 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 BSL Related Articles , .gar. :M - ,..Zg :'77 ..g, - ... - 127,,M777.7' F_... r^.7.7,7„ a, :,M_ ~~.:.7 — A 77—M— ry I: :21 P. Washington Animal Foundation (now . time for those found using dogs for illegal called the ACF) in Seattle, WA, of the 24 dog t activities. Hit owners in the wallet and force bite fatalities in 2001, one was from a t them to change. Habitual offenders need to Pomeranian, one from a Beagle and one r lose the PRIVILEGE to own another life. Most I from a Labrador retriever; only one was from 1 punishments for irresponsible pet owners a confirmed American Pit Bull Terrier. Maybe I are presently a joke. we should look at banning Pomeranians? They killed as many people than the APBT And of course, let's not forget education that year! In other years, Dalmations were of dog, child, dog owners, and the public. It reasonable for more dog bites than any other is through education and responsible dog breed. Why? Well it was in the years follow- ownership that dog - related incidents will be ing the release of the live 101 Dalmations. reduced. Not through the banning of only a Irresponsible breeding, owners giving into select few breeds. children's wails or falling for the hype of N No part of this article may be reproduced %' Hollywood and having to get that new fad. i, without written permission from Karen Peak A breed that needs experienced owners and P that have high energy drives were brought ©2002, revised 2003, Karen Peak, into homes far from prepared or able to West Wind Dog Training properly own one of these lovely dogs. The _ - . - xi ., -- _ . results were tragic: sharp rise in bites, Unwrppng Pit.Bulis , ,,< thou- ', ai .:, ._.: �. _ sands of dogs being dumped when they Karen Peak, West Wind Dog Training hit a year to eighteen months and became P unruly adolescents, etc. Laws to ban a spe- Never in recent history has there been cific breed will not work. Laws need to cover a breed so maligned as the grouping of all breeds as any dog can bite and any dog dogs called pit bull. Lower case pit bull is a can cause a f atality. generic term for any of several breeds and any mix of dog that is medium to larger The fault lies with the owners first and in size, short haired, stocky and squarely k foremost. Communities need to increase built. The breeds most often lumped into fines for dogs roaming loose. Yes, accidents s this generic term are: American Staffordshire happen to even the best dog owner and a Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire dog can escape. But those who habitually s' Bull Terrier, Bull Terrier and its smaller P allow dogs to roam or be in a position to "sibling" the Miniature Bull Terrier. The Am i escape by not having proper fencing are a Staff and APBT are basically the same breed. fl major problem. Owner who leave dogs unat- They came from the same stock - descending tended outside when no one is home are i= from dogs found in Great Britain and import - creating a greater risk. In many areas I have P ed to the United States. When the American lived, there always seemed to be a core of Kennel Club recognized the breed, the name a: dogs (of multiple types, breeds, sizes) that i was changed to Staffordshire Terrier and k were always loose or escaping. The owners later to American Staffordshire Terrier to h could care less. They never felt their dogs ` reduce confusion with the Staffordshire Bull were a risk. Yet these dogs had been threat- 1 Terrier (a smaller breed) and to try and sepa- ening people in the community and causing rate it from the APBT. The American Pit Bull damage to property. The fines for roaming Terrier is the United Kennel Club recognized dogs are often so minimal that the owners version of the Am Staff. do not care: easier to pay the fine than to ' ii fix the problem. Animal cruelty cases need i The breeds that have become the modern to be made felonies with mandatory jail i APBT and Am Staff were originally what are I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 29 C _. _ BSL Related Articles • called a "Catch dog.' Catch dogs were used I n the past d eca de two or , the breeds .._... ..___..___{ l by farmers, butchers and hunters to grab 5 . grouped into the heading pit have surged and hold cattle, hogs or larger game like wild in popularity worldwide. The Bull Terrier and boar and bear. Eventually, people began to Mini Bull have not been as heavily coveted brag about the way their dogs could work by the general public but are still feeling the € - and started holding events such as bull and backlash from the popularity of their cous- I bear baiting. The dogs were judged on how ins. The strong build and impressive looks 1 `.I fast they could grab and hang, the tenacity 1 of these dogs have made them popular ! ; in which they worked, etc. Dogs that were i status symbols with the wrong type of own- 1 strong, tenacious, had a desire to work, cou- ers. These wrong owners may become bad H rageous as well a good with humans were breeders. bred. The dogs were never developed to be human aggressive. It would be danger- Human males (predominantly), to show ( ~ - their machismo, use cars, clothing, guns and i ous for a farmer, butcher or hunter to have 4 now powerful looking dogs as both sta- a catch dog that was human aggressive. The owner has to be able to step in and h tus symbols and weapons. A minority of ir . °° remove the dog without worrying about undereducated people began breeding the 9 Y g risk to self. Eventually the dogs were pit dogs they felt were the most courageous ted against each other. When the "sport" of and tough. However, these humans failed dog fighting became popular, temperament to understand courage (sometimes referred _ --- S '`. was still key. A dog that could not be safely to as "gameness ") is NOT how fast a dog ('! managed by the handler was risky and will fight or attack or how human aggres I eliminated from the breeding program. sive they can make it but how confident the dog is while working in any activity. A So, where did things start to go wrong? !J few bad people started breeding dogs that As with just about everything, popularity were overly dog aggressive and encourag- 3 was the beginning of the problem. During " ing human aggressive. (Please note: human the early part of the 1900's, the American aggression and dog aggression are two 1 1 Pit Bull Terrier and Am Staff became very separate traits in dogs). Sadly, these people E popular in the United States as companions. are a very visible minority in the world of the vi " Petey" from "Our Gang" was an APBT dual "bull" breeds. It is this visible minority that is s_.._._. _......_. p' registered with the United Kennel Club and the reason lawmakers call for breed bans. k American Kennel Club as Lucenay's Peter. , John Steinbeck owned a Bull Terrier. The 4 What is the best environment for one of original Nipper ( "His Master's Voice ") was a pit 9 these dogs? First, the owner must NOT be - - --_._ l bull -fox terrier cross. Helen Keller owned an • looking for a dog as a status symbol. These r APBT. President Woodrow Wilson had a dog : people have no business owning any liv- i A that won many awards for him. Who can for- m ing creature. These are the people that are I1 i get "Spuds MacKenzie," a Bull Terrier? Most intentionally breeding poor temperaments U recently a Bull Terrier is the mascot for the , in these dogs. Second, the home must NOT Target store chain. Stubby, an American Pit be looking for something to keep outside all Bull Terrier from World War I is thought to be z day like a sentry. These people should get an the most decorated war dog from that time. I alarm system installed. A well -bred pit bull Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall owned ' can make a terrible sentry. It is more likely to a pit bull -type dog: "Harvey." Unfortunately, s beat someone to death with a wagging tail popularity brings about bad breeders and _ or drown him in kisses! However, the own- °— _ bad owners. Just look at what has happened n ers looking for a live alarm system are often [ 11 to the Dalmatian thanks to Walt Disney. the ones doing things that create dangerous p 30 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 1 BSL Related Articles a.% ::..7...z.--.12.- _ -Au& ., _;�: ....., ::s "" .:. ,,L,- . mim —C,„°. ..„.z,4,4 ..,... rs.m.. ,.6,47:1. "..„•r - z..A.,. ... ..«"... =re' _". dogs. The various breeds lumped into pit 1 Training or the URL listed. Contact the author thrive on human companionship. The best r through www.WestWindDogTraining.com. il home for one of these dogs is with someone , who has more than an hour or two a day to ©2002, revised 2003, Karen Peak, devote to a dog. A home where the dog will r West Wind Dog Training li be properly chosen from a good breeder, r Clear and Piesent Danger: ..r :v trained and socialized. The best home is `Assessing the a breed 9 one where the dogs will be given a job i-'G-.-'` ~"-"' °' = ~"--�~ -"= - ~'-- A°• ~-•-° I to utilize their desire to work. These dogs Karen Peak, West Wind Dog Training can excel in Agility, Flyball, Weight pulling, All over the world, pit bulls and other and Obedience competitions. Some of these dogs are even being used as drug detecting breeds are being rounded up and ', summarily executed. Governments claim dogs and search and rescue dogs. , these dogs are a danger to society and The breeds of dog lumped into the must be eradicated. Sadly, many of these generic pit bull heading are a wonderful, :' movements are lead by people with little to , ar hardworking, affectionate, devoted and ii no understanding of dog behavior. (Please even silly group of dogs. They are not the '! note, just because someone is a veterinarian best dogs to take to your local dog park. or animal control officer, does NOT mean They may not start a fight but neither will i; they understand dog behavior.) Rarely if they back down from a perceived challenge. 0 ever are dog professionals such as trainers, If a group of dogs is chasing a ball and the F other behaviorists or myself consulted when pit wants it, the pit will get it. If another dog it comes to making rulings about what dog is approaches a pit in a menacing way, the pit i dangerous and what is not. Concerns about will often rise to the challenge. Owners have ! a breed are often based on a broad gener- to realize this and understand that these I alization made through the observation of dogs are great with humans but may not I very few specimens of the breed. What do be so with other dogs. However, this trait ; I mean? Well, using a non -pit bull example: is found in many dogs, not just these few .; A woman I met insisted Border Collies are breeds. Understanding the background and laid back and low key dogs suited for sub - temperament of any breed of dog is vital to urban life. Now, anyone who works with being able to properly manage the dog. 0 dogs knows that a Border Collie is one of = the worst breeds for a typical suburban life. These dogs are not the vicious killers This is probably the highest energy breed the media and many lawmakers want known to man. Their work drives and needs us to believe. make them horrible pets for the average i The problem is strong dogs that have dog owner. Yet this woman owned a couple 3 strong work drives are falling into the wrong ;, Border Collies who were abnormal for the hands. A very visible minority of people who breed. Her perception of the breed based on have no business at all owning another life a very small sampling and poor research was is destroying the public perception of these a leading her to give erroneous and potential- ; breeds. This is where we end up with prob- " ly dangerous advice. How many people got lem dogs: when any breed or cross of dog 1 Border Collies based on this woman's advice falls into the hands of the wrong owners. f° and later ended up with a problem dog? i This article may be reprinted with permis- Are the dogs lumped into the general sion from the author. Credit must be given heading of pit bull really a danger? Let's back to author with a link to West Wind Dog first look at the group of dogs called Terriers I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 31 I - _.__ --- I BSL Related Articles 6 ... .7z7 T' . .:�P.'0w, ".. 7,-=, `;�.' �. a Z:" "- �a:e"L"'D�a.;a`.�.�7r wm_..._ Z. - �„'"7=d 73.1.'... .a."% _�` 7 "'""7,SI t I as a whole. Most terrier breeds devel and homes were clearly risks to society .._. ._..__. — ..J oped in Great Britain and Ireland. These and had exhibited this risk over and over. were dogs of varying sizes from the tiny However, due to the types of dogs they Yorkshire (originally a mouser but catego- were, the community and owners ignored rued as a toy breed in the USA) and Norfolk, )1 the risk the dogs posed. The only pit bull I to the medium Lakeland, Staffordshire I have had in class that posed a risk was from Terrier (close relative to the American Pit a bad source (rescued from a gang) and in Bull Terrier), to the giant Airedale. Falling a home not prepared for a stubborn and between these size extremes are breeds 0 active breed let alone a dog that came from such as the Fox Terriers, Norfolk Terriers, E a very bad source. However, I have had many Scotties, Westies, Bull Terriers, Staffordshire pits from good sources and with the right ft Bull Terriers, Manchester terriers and many owners that were just the nicest companions others. Terriers as a whole were bred to hunt anyone could ask for. Again, where does the i i> vermin. They were bred to be tenacious and danger lie? I i though may not start a fight, they often will ! not back down from a challenge. The antes- Any breed or cross from a bad source °...-- ° °°- -- -° tors of the dog called commonly a Pit Bull (one that does not take into consideration were bred to be an all -round farm dog first temperament, proper form and health/ and foremost. Terriers as a whole are often soundness when breeding) and then placed stubborn, self - willed, tenacious and active. in a home not suited for the dog poses the These are traits that in any breed require a potential for a clear and present danger to i [,. knowledgeable and experienced owner. For society. Most of the breeds being rounded i I up and banned are not threats as whole. I I example, Australian Cattle Dogs (heelers) _ ___ j , have traits very similar to Terriers that make would trust an American Pit Bull Terrier from then unsuited for novice dog owners. Yet we a good source and a proper home more do not see them as a dangerous breed over than a Labrador Retriever from a poor source and a poor home. When evaluating the all. Why do we assume other breeds with s similar traits are risks? Is it the breed? Do threat posed by a dog — not a breed, but the )Ri i dog - individual do we need to look at the r pits pose a clear and present danger? environment from which the dog came. The Simply put, no. The danger a dog poses a dog poses begins with the person ..-_ .__. _,._._ comes from the human who owns it. In managing the dog. the past twenty years, I have worked with The rounding up of dogs based solely on dogs in many capacities: showing, fostering, shelter work, as therapy animals, compet breed is giving the public a false sense of _,,.,.__-. i ing in performance events and as a profes security. Any dog can pose a threat. A good sional trainer /behavioral consultant. I have owner will maintain a dog in a safe and yet to meet an American Pit Bull Terrier or humane manner. A good owner will begin generic pit bull from a good source and in training and socializing as soon as the dog enters the house and not wait until a prob- a good home that posed any more dan- lem arises. A good owner works to prevent ger than any other Terrier. When I think of a problem and does not ignore things until the dangerous dogs I have known over the an injury occurs. Again, a pit bull in a good __. ... _ i. years, the first ones that come to mind now home is a safer dog than a Lab in a bad ' $ are a Chihuahua, an Australian Shepherd/ home. I am seeing an increase in tempera- , Dalmatian cross, and a Golden Retriever. ment issues in Labs due to their popularity, . ^ -- All these dogs were from poor sources (bad g an increase in bad breeders and an increase breeders or pet shops) and in negligent t in bad homes. Is the breed bad? No, just a homes. All of these dogs due to the source 1 few individuals within the breed. 32 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 BSL Related Articles Rarely is a dog "born bad." Occasionally mentioned in a ban does not mean it never i there will be a hereditary or medical issue will be. like a form of seizure disorder called Rage t h Syndrome (and it must be diagnosed as Even the seemingly innocuous laws Rage and not a dog who is poorly trained j, requiring special licensing or accommoda- and socialized), or a chemical imbalance tions for a specific breed is a gateway to a that may cause a dog to be an inherited risk. tighter legislation and even a ban. Once a breed is labeled as inherently dangerous There are a few individuals who intention- ally breed for heightened aggression and and needing certain provisions in order to unpredictability in dogs. But again, this is a be kept, it is just a short step to a total few individuals out of many a breeder. Risk ban. Once one breed is restricted in some assessment first begins with observing the way, the door is opened for other breeds. human. We determine how safe or unsafe Look at what happened in many regions dogs will be, regardless of breed or cross. of Germany. When I first became aware of BSLs in Germany, only a few breeds were Singling out just a few breeds does not mentioned. As time went on, more and address the real issue at hand: the owner. more breeds were added. Then there were j Remove any dog from a bad owner, leave categories created: Category I are breeds any dog with a good owner and the dan- 1 to be banned; Category II are breeds to be ger to society will be lessened. Again, it is not the breed or cross, it is the owner who monitored and banned if needed; Category determines the risk a dog poses. III, dogs over a certain height or weight (over 40Ibs or over 15.75 inches) that are Is there a Clear and Present Danger with risky because they are not small. Once the pit bulls or any breed? Honestly, no. door was opened with the call to ban a 1 j few breeds, the only dogs NOT ending up This article may be reprinted with permis- sion from the author. Credit must be given restricted were the smallest ones. Scary back to author with a link to West Wind Dog to think how out of hand the legislations Training or the URL listed. Contact the author became in such a short period of time. through www.WestWindDogTraining.com. a 'When I look at my own four dogs, three �° are restricted according to German law: ©2002, revised 2003, Karen Peak, one due to her breed (Great Pyrenees), two West Wind Dog Training due to their sizes (an Australian Shepherd/ Newfoundland cross and an oversized _ Why.All Breed's'Need #o Fight Shetland Sheepdog). Who says only certain Karen Peak, West Wind Dog Training dogs are ever banned and others will not Breed Specific Legislations, BSLs for short, be affected? When was the last time any- are becoming a reality in many communities one heard of Great Pyrenees being restrict - and even entire countries. BSLs encompass r ed? In Germany, they are Category II dogs. 4 a wide range of legislations from requiring Any Category II dog is restricted for three special licensing or accommodations for cer- u years from breeding, etc., and the breed can tain breeds of dogs to the outright banning become a Category I (basically banned) at and elimination of them. This article is not ; any time. Who ever heard of a Sheltie being going to discuss the reason why BSLs are restricted? But based on the Category III wrong or ineffective: what it is going to do section, an oversized Sheltie and many other r it look at why all breeds need to get active breeds are to be closely monitored due to and fight. Just because your breed is not their size only. I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 33 - BSL Related Articles ' When we look at the breeds most corn- 'A S pecial Note from Karen Peak monly named in BSLs, it is not hard to see Karen Peak, the Safe Kids /Safe Dogs Project where these breeds can lead to other similar dogs being banned. Take for example Bull I am a firm believer that there is a correla- Mastiffs. I have seen this breed listed in some tion between dog bites and Breed Specific .. BSLs. Who is to say the Mastiff will not be ' Legislation. Much of it has to do with the next? It is an ancestor of the Bull Mastiff and media's portrayal of dog bites. Rarely if ever r I therefore must pose some risk. At least some do we hear of a small dog biting a child. I risk in the eyes of the undereducated person s can think of just a handful of cases where often responsible for drafting these laws. a small dog injuring a child ever made the Hmmm... What other breeds went into Bull news.Yet I can think of many more incidents Mastiffs? Maybe they need to be mentioned where a large dog made the news. Do larger ' as well. Boxers, yes, they have Mastiff in their dogs really bite more? Are they really more heritage, maybe they need to be named dangerous? This is a qualified no. Big dogs as well! This is how legislators or other r have bigger mouths, are closer to face level undereducated people think: if one breed in regards to children and are stronger. A big is dangerous, any breeds related to it must dog biting can do more damage than a small be as well. It is not a big step from an APBT dog. But, there have been cases of children being seriously injured and even killed by to a Bull Terrier or from a Mastiff to a Great small dogs. When the media focuses on one Dane. What about the breed descriptions? thing so does the public. When the media Herding breeds are known to chase and nip- gets the public going, lawmakers jump on i , ' ping can be part of herding. Does this mean the bandwagon and come up with "feel- ; E herding breeds pose more of a biting risk? In . good" laws that are effectively useless. S the eyes of the undereducated, yes, herding breeds may pose a greater risk. I have seen If we want to really increase safety, we will Australian Cattle Dogs listed in BSLs because do so through education and not banning it is thought, according to some accounts, of breeds. the breed history that Dingo and Bull Terrier We should all encourage communities to blood went into them somewhere along the i adopt fair dog laws, change existing laws to line. Does this seem fair? non -breed specific and develop dog safety , ,i This is why whenever we see Breed Specific programs. 5 Legislations in the works, regardless of I am willing to help provide any commu- where or what breeds are mentioned, dog a I, nity with information to help develop dog enthusiasts all over the world need to take safety education programs and do all I can ' action and educate. Just because your breed to help get them implemented. I 1 is not mentioned, does not mean it never k ' ' will be. Our children and our dogs are worth it! This article may be reprinted with permis ' i p sion from the author. Credit must be given ,, back to author with a link to West Wind Dog Training or the URL listed. Contact the author ' through www.WestWindDogTraining.com. ! 1 © 2003, Karen Peak, West Wind Dog Training `, 34 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Heroic Pit Bulls ryry m A t a � .. _ . �y}w,��q } ':P�f�y* •%r �wv v+ • . -,. - t • -. 4 . , A M `� V # {,,' " � ! dF1 A ? R F_ ' . ! Y Ir �7w . - �'VV Lill �^ i .t g � tS m M r } . � „ ,� � {.. i d le i + xra � ' 11 2 - '1r k �F 5 ' .4. l sr t h gift in tk�a Fiat 'AlU► x ''it "#"" ' a .. a. a t nc, t o rret " . q 4 1 ?bI i . e reapi per P KW said w � E 4 " 1� 1 i ; k "' r • ' ..s ,Oiir5 —i 417"°I dunrxt�m,' s; on'[ramtnr " r. si ,�.. ..L. - �' � jen.enf °; ,iCIna'�p �i tc' =h' "ti mr'F ern email ''; M n.- ': 6a�1'id H i:n a c a w wamt�$i'n'yi 3 " u 1 . w m e t li a n�� : mil ..km, es a ! ,,,, , 3t n c `" . , � n n fis to ' ._ . - __ -,: .� : i l °t"di3n` ik h�td baa ter tt. t�'tP Pil e$ One of the top -rated search and Rescue, ;a'� ..... _ °.-�, .° . ' dogs is Dakota,'an American Pit Bull Ter rier! , 4 ` � ' s ' , , `, . s , ' gig , ' _w._.. .`._._ . �. M - ro , .' ` � , , � u '"� , `� c, One of the top -rated Search & Rescue ,te a . , (SAR) dogs in the U.S. is Kristine Crawford's �� �' . American Pit Bull Terrier, Dakota. Kris also .. „. „ T ? . '`' has two other SAR pit bulls! Kris and Dakota ' z.., * ,',` were hand - picked by NASA to aid in they *� : , t� recovery of the astronauts from the S , - o 1 They ., e . Shuttle Columbia disaster. The were also �' ' � �` � . �� r = � , � involved in the Laci Peterson search and t � just recently saved a woman's life. These - € } ± fi t ; ' �° ' � .`, i. v x � �; .3. , :. , :r te dogs bring happy reunions and sometimes T closure to many families. They are also t ; .t . certified Hospital Therapy dogs! You can i ' i b° i ,1 j - I..., v i = learn more about Kris and her team at: a. , 4 ; � ' � , . www.forp�tssake.org #_ , «+ 1 ` " For the detailed stories of these dogs : t _ ; , . 4.; . 1 h visit PBRC's Positive Pit Bull Press site at: : a ' }� www.pitbullsontheweb.com petbull/ 't it ° '" � ` "- *' _ +t t e. .. pospress.html . The Number 1 United States Customs Dog is F , x an American Pit Bull Terrier named Popsicle. I „ ' - How did he get that name? He was found * m .,,,_ . ,. _ -— �� �. during a drug bust in a freezer where he had been left to die after being used as a bait ' ° w_ -___ _ -_ __ . _ dog for dog fighters. RCA, a white APBT, is certified as a hearing dog in Alaska. Norton, was rescued from a fight ring. One day he saved his human mom's life Buddy the APBT (referred to by owners as after she had gone into anaphylactic shock their 56 lb. Chihuahua) saved 2 retired sisters from a spider bite by awakening his dad and from a house fire. taking him to his unconscious wife. He went to the master bedroom and kept pushing Private First Class Duke is a U.S. Marine her husband until he awoke and followed stationed in Japan 9 Norton to his wife. ' " """" " --- — ,WW _ PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 35 [-- -,. - -----? Heroic Pit Bulls M, :., :::_ >a ::=7" - ~4 .L.°<..w ° ,1'27 ' M: .': . :7'1- .., w ,,. ::: . ,, : '''',==",....7.1. .. : i Petunia the Pit Bull visits schools and the animals, Weela prevented a group of 30 L..._... ...._.._.1 1; assists in teaching kids about responsible :, people from crossing the river at a danger - i pet ownership. ously fast flowing section. She ran back and forth by the shoreline barking and refusing I, Spike is a service dog for a quadriplegic who to let them pass. Then she led them to a shal- - -. .. —, couldn't function without Spike's help! low spot, and helped them to safety. ' On another rescue mission, Weela led the Taylor is a 4 yr. old APBT, San Diego Narcotics i Officer. He is also a rescued pit bull! team to 13 horses stranded on a island of manure, all 13 horses were saved thanks Dixie is a 50 pound APBT who never hesi- to her efforts. Weela is a pit bull that was dumped by the original owners in an alley tated in the face of danger. She protected 3 at 4 wks. of age. Her family found her and her family's children by pushing them out of ._. 1 ! her siblings and rescued them. Once the i the way and putting herself between them and a deadly Cottonmouth about to strike. puppies were healthy they found homes for i i them and decided to keep Weela as they felt She took two bites to the face. Those bites .- . ~` would have killed the kids. ! she was special! In 1993 Weela was named s Ken -L Ration's Dog Hero of the Year! Blueberry, a young APBT, saved her owner's life by pouncing on two armed Missy saved a young boy from 2 dogs that _.._ were mauling him. g attackers as they were shooting. 3 i i * Gabby brought much needed help to a i Cloe aided a woman who had fallen down 1 ,_,-+ neighbor who had fallen off a 12 ft. ladder. outside and was unable to move. Once she was able to wake him up by licking his face and barking, she went for help. Foxy saved her 82 yr. old owner from _ .—.,, ..., „ freezing and barked until help arrived. W who was outside watchin one € Coco saved a 10 yr. old from an intruder. i of the kids in her family, suddenly body- „* k slammed 11 yr. old Gary and sent him flying. k Chevy, a Toronto Pit Bull, saved a mom who Lori (mom) saw the whole thing and was fallen and smashed her head. surprised since Weela had always played so ( .� well with the kids. Surprised that was, until ' For the detailed stories of these dogs she saw the big rattlesnake sink its fangs visit PBRC's Positive Pit Bull Press site at: into Weela's face! Then she understood www.pitbullsontheweb.com /petbull/ ; Weela had been saving Gary's life! pospress.html I ° A few years later, Weela saved the lives of i ! a 30 people, 29 Dogs, 13 horses and 1 cat. . r; :` , ow ,:.-miats 4i • - - mistam Heavy rains caused a dam to break on the Tijuana River. Weela would pull 30 to 50 lbs. of food across the river to feed stranded animals when it was needed during their month of being stranded on the island. She i always took the lead on the rescue missions c ! detecting quicksand, steep drop offs and - -- -. s mud bogs saving the rescue teams from j injury. On a trip back from delivering food to a 36 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I Biographies of Pit Bull Owners _ - -r- -- ;: . 1 _ _ ,7„' WIT :777," '...r..7 , w a, . t .. w. o Mary Bea -., c - h- Virginia ',',`,` " ' 4 I have lived in Gloucester, VA now for 5 ' � ° "Zero " and "Bluff" '' ° " ' y ears and plan to be here till the day I die. The community is very pro pit bull. We have � � " ` female APBT has even been to my daughter's ,,, i at least one IWPA weight pull a year. My 1,t i .G' `" , w IT . ,, _ preschool for show and tell. The kids adored z her and none of the parents were worried at a !, ''' "" ' ' ". / all about her She was only about 7 months ° old but was great, even with 15 kids running n,, - ; . ; around and falling on her ' 4 Vie:, . , ' , APBTs are the most loyal breed I have .eQ �1;, ,.. < >, i,,2 , 1 found. I have had other breeds and we even ` ��, Y have a mutt now, but none come close to my 6 ' ` 1 'x APBT. They would give anything to please ' ' j 'E Z Y • ' x, _ s „v2 , .. 7:,,- their owners, which sadly gets them into a a t,, ^, 4 4, lot of trouble because it's not always the best " . a ; ; � rw ' < * A; r " s people that are training them. We need bet- • , . " i , . ,, , 't 4a : „ ter owners and NOT to ban the breed. 4 s I also baby-sit on a regular basis and none s a ' ''' '';', `�V of the parents mind my dogs. The kids love � 4444. 4 � r 4' .e„.. f ' rv , .. ,. them to death and the dogs are very patient I ,- ' ` � with the kids. They even let the kids dress _ , Ili ` it : , t hem up like dolls! I cannot imagine life with �: °,� � � ��� out an APBT in it. If BSL ever gets passed in `w i 0e x ' , � ' my state, I would move before giving up my " � �' 4: A . 4 0 dogs. They are a huge part of our family and 4.,, -� , ` } t v, we all love them with all our hearts!" s 'v j , , 8 „ -.. "`k�I 4: V � l'''- v Mary Beach - . IT3i2 t 4 -A 'u - Amy Sc Michigan' • , i tro ,t� 4 name is Mary B each and I am a huge t { "My Y 9 � t � � � : � "M ;� animal lover, but have a special place in * # „” This is Nitro, taking my heart for the APBT. Growing up we ha part in a 4th of July friends of the family that had them and they ,\ . , `, parade . We greeted were just the best dogs. Those h dog s could �„ ti ` t� " everyone along the 1 , � � 1M: Y one 9 ' do anything from fetch to play dead. APBTs % •' �: `", , , parade route!" k are such comical dogs, they will do anything � ' , '�!, • - , Amy Scharmen `r to make their owners happy I got my first $ "''6 . �r APBT when I was 17 and have been hooked r ,3 ever since. She was a beautiful brindle dog 10 .:. - �� x that was the best mannered thing. I used to , . rr ` ,, " " take her regularly to VA Beach'and never had F� '' - ..r a single problem with her. Not even during � .:; 1 1 major events like the 4th of July. , t' I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 37 Biographies of Pit Bull Owners -r . ...... e -^--- .�,,.. • ' 'Y4 , x..._..- :' -",.„ .R., —17. - .w. .+ 1 . .�AJ - i and�Daniell - e Morg" a - ;Florida 'a= ,7 ". wonderful rescue people worked hard to get I_ -_, _, ...._ ; "Ti the. Protector" , � him out They deemed him aggressive at the 4 w shelter because he growled at a couple other Here is . :, what Ti dogs, and scheduled his euthanasia date for ' " A K '' looked like when we i 3 days later. We worked diligently to get him ` "sprung" him from — — , , out. Eventually, Ti became a Save The Pets the shelter as he was I [ .,,i' ' � rescue dog, and we began the journey of # ',' scheduled to be PTS being his foster parents. Ti is a wonderful '' w the next day." ' dog, with no aggression issues. He sleeps in !......._ . _,.._.. I ,_ „ Z. - the house with us, is crated from the other I ° dogs when we are not home. His first love - , "- is our other pit bull Roxie and his second is '� 5 obviously US. He is up for adoption thru Save ! i 1 i y k The Pets, and we will make sure that he goes ° , . q ; , to a person who is worthy of his devotion." • ' ...., ' ,, q X 5 9 ,' r 9) i j . '1 , I f' :1 * , "Friday, August 29, TJ saved my husband's „ , ,,,e, , f ,'. life by alerting him to a rattlesnake. My husband, Ai Morgan, was inside the 'l � , ,'�� . t a fir . � € � barking outside. So AJ h ouse and Ti TJ was barkin figured it was time to take the kids down the 3 �` , '. ' ,, -: driveway to get the mail. He stepped out on '','," A the walk (we live on 8 acres and our driveway � '67'.4+L4' "' is made of dirt) and Ti kept barking at him, i .. . 1 fi ' spinning in circles and sitting on my hus- The Story of TJ... band's feet, would NOT let AJ pass. Ai tried 1 i "Memorial Day 2003, we were sitting " to shoo TJ out of the way, but he was having ._. ...._. out on the porch with my Friend TJ from 11 none of that, every turn my husband took, l' Virginia.. and she looked up and asked i TJ just sat in front of him. Finally, AJ reached } ;. , "who's dog is that? " and there crawled Ti, on f down to pat Ti and ask him what was wrong three legs up the driveway. We ushered our and he looked down the driveway. About 1 ---- -- '- --- '1 dogs in the house and grabbed a blanket e 5 feet from him was a 4 ft. diamond back and some water for this poor bloody dog. rattlesnake coiled up in the driveway. TJ was We fed him, contacted the ER clinic, and bouncing up and down to make sure that AJ j then got him ready to take him up to Kevin didn't go anywhere near that snake... ._ _ �.. Bracket (who is a friend of my husband's). AJ escorted the snake, with the hel p of # ■ They tended to him. several long sticks off the property and TJ got i, No one is quite sure where he came from quite a feast of steak and pizza that night! or how he came to be in the condition that Just goes to show that Pit bulls are not I he was in. But from checking out his injuries, the man - eating, child attacking machines '1 1 it seems that he may have been tossed into that people make them out to be. I know a pig ring and couldn't hunt, so whoever had my husband and I are pretty much sure that him just tossed him out the door. And then Ti saved him from either a serious injury, or 1. 1 he came to us. death, because my husband doesn't wear shoes out on the driveway." He did end up with animal control as he 1 was a stray, so my husband, myself and some Danielle Morgan 38 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Biographies of Pit Bull Owners :1c . "" „, . „r, . ,'Z, 7 "„_ . ,, r .... 7 :, , , y am. , a I Jaime Finley - Ohio ry • - > ! :s. , x ) < Nafalie' Kemen Ontario � � � � : "' "Novim and Friends" '< € Rocco:, # ' ' 4 3 4 ' .,. t, t x � . ii -,:,„,.„,,..:„. v.. --. '„ , ,,, i , "Here is a picture of three of my dogs- u one is a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, one is an i ;t , i American Pit Bull Terrier mix and the other is a an American Staffordshire Terrier. As you can i i see, they are obviously not dog a "Hello my name is Natalie Kemeny, and since they are all in the same pic and one is r have a white, deaf Pit Bull. He is an amazing trying to give the other one a kiss. They are ; dog, yes, a Pit Bull who is amazing! also very loving towards people. The Am I Staff has passed the ATTS Temperament test 1, My dog has been through obedience and the AKC Canine Good Citizen (CGC) test. school and has constant training. Rocco is so affectionate, he loves to cuddle and play The Pit Bull mix has also passed the ATTS il with my American Bulldog, they are great i Test and CGC and also the Therapy Dog ° together. My neighbors love Rocco, as soon International (TDI) test. ` as I brought him home I introduced him to everyone in the area. He plays with my i The Staffy Bull has been a show dog and � mom's cat, he is just so lovable. My Pit just recently retired from the show ring and l' Bull is much friendlier with people than my is working toward some titles. They are very American Bulldog. even tempered dogs and when people meet I love all breeds of dogs, but pits are them, the fears they might have about "pit a definitely my favorite. I was never interested i bulls" go away because they see how great '1 in the breed or really knew anything about these dogs really are. All three go to the r them, until I saved Rocco at five weeks. l was dog park where there are many people trying to find him a home but then he grew 1 and dogs off leash playing in a fenced in on me and I found out he was deaf and could designated area. They also go to work with not give him up. Thank God I kept him, he is ;I me at a doggy day care and have never been ° the joy of my life. aggressive with any of the dogs or people I have several neighbors with Pit Bulls and a there. Well socialized "pit bulls" are good i they are all the same temperament as mine, family companions." + loving and caring." Jaime Finley Natalie Kemeny I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 39 __ - € .-- -.- - Biographies of Pit Bull OwnersM _N _.a 7 .77 ' Sha ` - Mi c h ig a n ' s ' ; .. ` V al er i e - Wa ._ .. _ _ . _! "Mika" :: a , "N ' f � •, 5 +a� y A i, ..............._.. .,.......,.. r xn y,{y^ 1 ✓, i.'L , ' ' . , fi x ` * , .M gaga qi�, Y en „ , „ 1 „,,,,, „ ,, :, i: „t2 j . tt.,,, .„ t ii , R _ '.. M+,,.,,iti,Witk:,4**4.11, . ' , - i "1 ' ' ! i titt 146 4r i g e i l itVik k . =k ' ,„1",„!: ' , 1 .1 1 1' '' § ? , } " } z 4,M^ isit] o. V " �t �' k 5. r M! " _. _».,....._..... ,.,.E .z l , a q j ti flr ..3 1 p i ,3 z .$. F' ° r y4 • . 4. E Zan x x 4 g at _ 4 . .. , I . ° s L + � ty w.nr�s"��•5"',°�n 4 f w � ', r'� +t. y�Qs q . ...,.,. _ ». _ .....,., ,J A .. e 3 " s. 4" y �.w.ye h � "t -t' t ; ,, 4. .a c . s�v r �� '_ "., -, ; , "When Nanna was about 7 weeks old, she ' t. was dumped off in the cold and lef to fend i a , � c for herself. My step -dad's sister found her in �,� � her garage whining and hungry, so she put the u in her sweater and carried her like ,-,... .,'iliv# - -;,;;„ ,,,,--,.- .; 4--,,, ../r v -,,\ i — - - - -- i .e „,, " that most of the day. His sister called us to , i come look at the pup. Next thing we knew, � we were taking the puppy home, and she ",., q , 3. '. has been with us ever since. _ T' viiii "" Nanna's personality is so hilarious. She LOVES people. All she wants to do is lick o .. ure because she h x - people. She adores kids. Nanna has changed t f ball team. She is around everyone's life around here. My mom wasn't "My pit is ly seard all the 'bad stuff' kids and other dogs all the time. She has her own cat and is the neighborhood favorite about them, but Nanna changed her life and outlook on Pit Bulls. Nanna is almost a year with the kids. old now. Nanna also loves to play in water. her i We have SO many people come up to us Everyone t ha t hole meets Nanna thinks th at she's ° at disbelief that a pit jus a s becau when she wags bull flyball could tournaments 'actually do thatin ':' tai h er w b ody wa " ..._ _ Sharon Va lerie L 4}Q PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 L- Biographies of Pit Bull Owners Deb and.Steve- Illinois' ` , • , Jennifer' and John :R. - Ohio ` ` . „ Loo" _ ; ' .:Car -ter '' ' f'' 1 li ti‘ 1 : !,:"*":'.‘7 ,,, " , , " e t .„6 :* ' :+14::2,:k4,. . , , t • '" r d k t I ' 1. r of a .? a " .« q x, o a Its been about a year and a half, and I � , i . ' don't know where to start, other than say - ' ' , Y r4.:44,1 la! a ing Thank you! Thank you for rescuing this ' dog, and allowing us the terrific opportunity ' "r ',WI ; ,+ ° .'t I* • ill : * ; «l'iCi to enrich our lives with such a wonderful ! P , - ` ' companion. Loo immediately settled in with wa V ''' : - Ali C our family, and has been a perfect example ', i of the classic pit bull, since we've had her. I ' can't say enough good things about her. In I fact, she has changed the minds of most of i "Dear Furry Friends, when I saw Carter's my family members about bully type dogs. picture on your website, I knew he was the In fact, when we travel to our families' homes a puppy for me. during the holidays, the first question they '6 Even though we were in Ohio, you were ask is if we're bringing Loo. I think they'd willing to let us adopt him. I can't thank you rather see her, than us! enough! I can't imagine life without our little Again, our family can't thank you enough. cuddly pit puppy. I sing your praises as often as I can because I , know the hard work that you and the foster 4: He has really blossomed here. He even families do is extremely valuable. Loo is one , graduated at the top of his obedience class. example of proof! Y He loves everyone and everything, and has really changed a lot of people's attitudes Here is a picture of Loo with our new edi- about pit bulls. Thanks again!" tion of our family, Emily. Funny enough, we i no longer need a mechanical baby monitor ' Jennifer &John R. I Updated 11/7/2002 in the house. When Emily cries, Loo comes to Courtesy of: furryfriendsfoundation.com get us! Thank you, again!" I Deb and Steve 'Updated 10/25/2003 Courtesy of: furryfriendsfoundation.com F 4 3 I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2.005 ifs a._ Biographies of Pit Bull Owners . __ , " Kelly Mack" ' Keane - Illinois - . ` , i I Mack has been with me over a year now, -.-_. _.... -__ _ _M- .....,....._.... __.._ __. _....... ,., C and I can't begin to express how much this amazing boy has enriched my life, as well as the lives of my family and neighbors. He touches everyone he meets, and has suc- - ° -- , �� ; - ceeded in changing many people's minds �s" about his breed. People are always corn- �t menting that he is one of the nicest, most well behaved dogs they've ever seen. He , "` loves other dogs, and even watches over his 11 year old brother, Clancy (my family's „ ,- 4. Shepherd /Collie mix) when he's not feeling ,, ' well. He's always very generous with kisses _- — , -even with strangers, children, and yes, even ' the vet! I couldn't ask for a more charm - ``ro x ing, wonderful dog. Thank you so much for ,. bringing us together!" Kelly Keane I Updated 11/19/2002 Mack was found tied up in an aban Courtesy of furryfriendsfoundation .com doned railroad car about two hours south __ -- h of Chicago. Despite scarring indicative of T e.Setter Family - Michigan being fought, he has never shown an ''Dakota Blue'', "Destiny" and "Taboo" dog or people aggression. He was adopt ed by a wonderful Furry Friends Foundation �� -- • -- volunteer a few years ago. , -. '" r .,,,6/'4 ,.. "I first met Mack, an American Pit Bull � '. i � .. ,' < :y Terrier, while volunteering with Furry Friends. v, 1 " �. e r ° The second I first saw him slowly saunter "� 4 , .;k. out of his cage, swinging his big head side;:riwk,e'' '`' 4K to side, I fell head over heels in love. At the 1. y f L . . . . . , _ ._ � ` t ime, I was living in a building with a no-pets policy, but as soon as I realized that Mack s 0 , ,� ., ,•. and I were meant to be together (or rather :1 , 4 � ,, � ";: Catherine helped me realize that we were , qa �,,-, "". meant to be together), I decided it was time " 13 ,E " � ----- w `, G� ," a for us both to find a new home. ' � ;,, , � ' A . " 4 CAF' 5 It's obvious by looking at him that he had a rough life before he was rescued. ,, While his body may be covered with scars, "My family's girls: Dakota Blue, I'm a feisty he has the trusting, loving heart of a dog little 1 year old puppy. I was spayed at six - who has only known kindness. He loves months and boy was it hard for mom to everyone he meets, and anyone willing to keep me quiet! I graduated from three F __:" ___. . _ look past his breed loves him as well. He Obedience classes and earned my CGC title is the best therapist I could ask for. If I'm i before I was a year old. I love to play with having a bad day, I can always count on I him to curl up in my lap (his favorite spot!) other dogs, and swim. All my neighbors i_.__... _._ and shower me with kisses (his favorite adore me, they come in my yard and play activity) and my mood instantly lifts. with me. 42 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 ' Biographies of Pit Bull Owners r . .a.. _. '17: ,---- "'., , .. gym .,A....-.»." _ _. '" . : ' „i i :, ::x"W :..^:1: ?'..,».': " " = ", , :; ...2.,'::,2_...,a A The neighborhood grandma is always ,x f �. ti asking mom to bring me over to visit * , . " a 4 Is and the people behind me are always 1, s �� , 4" ' x feeding me treats through the fence (shhh, 1 .' .4 ; '; ' -- - -' 1',` ; mom doesn't know). Destiny, white with•s, f� , brown spots. I'm 4 yrs old, spayed, and = -( - -1, _ • ' � a " still act like a puppy! I'm non -stop energy R . and love absolutely everyone and every- i . 1 • 4 1 1.• thing. My best friend is my sister, Midnight, a & 4 • 1 ' • ,',- -,, f • e 3 yr. old cat. Taboo, fawn colored. I'm a 3 yr. 1 °:' �, a; _ l ; :, ' • ' old spayed female. I act like a senior dog t because when I was a year old, we found Above: Lugh ,deaf Pit Bull -CGC that my knee socket wasn't deep enough for "I don't own pit bulls. But I own two my knee. I had to have orthopedic surgery, i dogs that are often mistaken for pit bulls - and have developed arthritis, but I still love i a Dogo Argentino and an American Bulldog. to play with sticks and swim. I just poop out 1 In fact, every time I have them out in public I i faster that the other two" 1 hear "look at that pit bull!" over and over and Marcy Setter and Family e over. The proposed legislation will affect me every bit as much as it will affect pit owners Nancy - ;M ichigan • . m „ ' "4 - who's going to decide what dog is a pit "Blizzard ", "Lumi Spot "and'. "Lugh " ; 'i ' ,,.,, „,,„ - • _ u, ... _,_ .,,... - a bull and what dog i sn ' t? Both of my dogs are 4 rescues (both are deaf) and though "I" know en" -. ,, ' , what breeds they are I have no paperwork , \ '''.'"r 121 ' 1 "" ,s' to prove it i . i M 1 " ' ' '' Both of my dogs have their CGC cer- r _. • tificates. My Dogo has passed the American r t - c, ..--, - - " r. i Temperament Testing Society temperament • S " a ` t " test (my AB was just a couple of months too to K r 1 ^.;p, ( young to take the test this summer, we'll do ,�Q- ' • ,,; ; :~ ..;4 it next year.) Both dogs visit local nursing -,•...,,,, _ - "•, :.1 homes doing pet therapy visits. '': 1 I've attached two pics of my Dogo at a ■ •• - ,,. i Halloween party last year, and one pic of my , w AB boy that I had taken recently. Above: Also, earlier this year I fostered the most �r , n Blizzard , deaf adorable deaf pit bull puppy. He was SO C t '' x Dogo Argentino - ; smart and learned so easily - he earned his s \ 1 ' ` t lik 4 CGC,TT, therapy dog 1 CGC certificate a week before he turned 5 " ; i months old. I've attached a pic of Lugh with y ° Left: the little boy he owns now." 1.: r i" , � ,„ . "Lumi Spot ",deaf ; /1 '' :,•,-i American Bulldog - ? Nancy r u ' 0 . m CGC, therapy dog, .� ' 4 � 4, local TV star I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 43 r ...__ Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws ' ' "'State ofCalifornia . '" °' .r "" � =' ■ ...._ ..._._._ :._.. z. .... : THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 31601) is added to Division 14 of the Food and I L I Agricultural Code, to read: ' .. _._._ I CHAPTER 9. POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND VICIOUS DOGS Article 1. Findings, Definitions, and 1 " General Provisions 31601. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following: i (a) Potentially dangerous and vicious dogs have become a serious and widespread threat to the safety and welfare of citizens of this state. In recent years, they have assaulted without provoca- tion and seriously injured numerous individuals, particularly children, and have killed numerous 'I dogs. Many of these attacks have occurred in public places. -- '°°~-~ I. (b) The number and - severity of these attacks are attributable to the failure of owners to regis- I ter, confine, and properly control vicious and potentially dangerous dogs. (c) The necessity for the regulation and control of vicious and potentially dangerous dogs is a --- .p.._ ".. _x statewide problem, requiring statewide regulation, and existing laws are inadequate to deal with y the threat to public health and safety posed by vicious and potentially dangerous dogs. 31602. 'Potentially dangerous dog' means any of the following: F - "�" "" " 1 (a) Any dog which, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within the prior 36 -month i period, engages in any behavior that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily I r3 injury when the person and the dog are off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog. I . _, (b) Any dog which, when unprovoked, bites a person causing a less severe injury than as defined in Section 31604. Any dog which, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within the prior 36 -month period, has killed, seriously bitten, inflicted injury, or otherwise caused injury attacking a domestic I animal off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog. i ? 31603. 'Vicious dog, means any of the following: "" (a) Any dog seized under Section 599aa of the Penal Code and upon the sustaining of a convic- tion of the owner or keeper under subdivision (a) of Section 597.5 of the Penal Code. (b) Any dog which, when unprovoked, in an aggressive manner, inflicts severe injury on or kills ,,w... ,.. -- i ` a human being. I i (c) Any dog previously determined to be and currently listed as a potentially dangerous dog { which, after its owner or keeper has been notified of this determination, continues the behavior 1 .._ __ ._ described in Section 31602 or is maintained in violation of Section 31641, 31642, or 31643. 31604. 'Severe injury' means any physical injury to a human being that results in muscle tears or disfiguring lacerations or requires multiple sutures or corrective or cosmetic surgery. 31605. 'Enclosure' means a fence or structure suitable to prevent the entry of young children, I i and which is suitable to confine a vicious dog in conjunction with other measures which may be taken by the owner or keeper of the dog. The enclosure shall be designed in order to prevent the i _ J animal from escaping. The animal shall be housed pursuant to Section 597t of the Penal Code. 31606. 'Animal control department' means the county or city animal control department. If the if it PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET C005 I Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws city or county does not have an animal control department, it means whatever entity performs animal control functions. 31607. 'Impounded' means taken into the custody of the public pound or animal control department or provider of animal control services to the city or county where the potentially dangerous or vicious dog is found. 31608. 'County' includes any city and county. 31609. (a) This chapter does not apply to licensed kennels, humane society shelters, animal control facilities, or veterinarians. i (b) This chapter does not apply to dogs while utilized by any police department or any law enforcement officer in the performance of police work. F Article 2. Judicial Process 31621. If an animal control officer or a law enforcement officer has investigated and determined that there exists probable cause to believe that a dog is potentially dangerous or vicious, the chief officer of the public pound or animal control department or his or her immediate supervisor or the head of the local law enforcement agency, or his or her designee, shall petition the municipal court within the judicial district wherein the dog is owned or kept, for a hearing for the purpose + of determining whether or not the dog in question should be declared potentially dangerous or vicious. A city or county may establish an administrative hearing procedure to hear and dispose of petitions filed pursuant to this chapter. Whenever possible, any complaint received from a member of the public which serves as the evidentiary basis for the animal control officer or law enforcement officer to find probable cause shall be sworn to and verified by the complainant and shall be attached to the petition. The chief officer of the public pound or animal control depart- ment or head of the local law enforcement agency shall notify the owner or keeper of the dog that a hearing will be held by the municipal court or the hearing entity, as the case may be, at which time he or she may present evidence as to why the dog should not be declared potentially I dangerous or vicious. The owner or keeper of the dog shall be served with notice of the hearing and a copy of the petition, either personally or by first -class mail with return receipt requested. The hearing shall be held promptly within no less than five working days nor more than 10 work- ; ing days after service of notice upon the owner or keeper of the dog. The hearing shall be open to the public. The court may admit into evidence all relevant evidence, including incident reports and the affidavits of witnesses, limit the scope of discovery, and may shorten the time to produce records or witnesses. A jury shall not be available. The court may find, upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the dog is potentially dangerous or vicious and make other orders authorized by this chapter. 31622. (a) After the hearing conducted pursuant to Section 31621, the owner or keeper of the dog shall be notified in writing of the determination and orders issued, either personally or by first -class mail postage prepaid by the court or hearing entity. If a determination is made that the dog is potentially dangerous or vicious, the owne'r or keeper shall comply with Article 3 (commencing with Section 31641) in accordance with a time schedule established by the chief officer of the public pound or animal control department or the head of the local law enforcement agency, but I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 45 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws ? ' in no case more than 30 days after the date of the determination or 35 days if notice of the deter - mination is mailed to the owner or keeper of the dog. If the petitioner or the owner or keeper of the dog contests the determination, he or she may, within five days of the receipt of the notice of determination, appeal the decision of the court or hearing entity of original jurisdiction to a court authorized to hear the appeal. The fee for filing an appeal shall be twenty dollars ($20.00), payable to the county clerk. If the original hearing held pursuant to Section 31621 was before a hearing entity other than the municipal court of the jurisdiction, appeal shall be to the municipal court. If '; the original hearing was held in the municipal court, appeal shall be to the superior court within the judicial district wherein the dog is owned or kept. The petitioner or the owner or keeper of the dog shall serve personally or by first -class mail, postage prepaid, notice of the appeal upon the other party. i r (b) The court hearing the appeal shall conduct a hearing de novo, without a jury, and make its own determination as to potential danger and viciousness and make other orders authorized by this chapter, based upon the evidence presented. The hearing shall be conducted in the same manner and within the time periods set forth in Section 31621 and subdivision (a). The court may admit all relevant evidence, including incident reports and the affidavits of witnesses, limit the scope of discovery, and may shorten the time to produce records or witnesses. The issue shall be decided upon the preponderance of the evidence. If the court rules the dog to be potentially dan- gerous or vicious, the court may establish a time schedule to ensure compliance with this chapter, but in no case more than 30 days subsequent to the date of the court's determination or 35 days } if the service of the judgment is by first -class mail. 31623. The court or hearing entity of original jurisdiction or the court hearing the appeal may decide all issues for or against the owner or keeper of the dog even if the owner or keeper fails to appear at the hearing. 31624. The determination of the court hearing the appeal shall be final and conclusive upon all parties. 31625. (a) If upon investigation it is determined by the animal control officer or law enforcement offi- cer that probable cause exists to believe the dog in question poses an immediate threat to public safety, then the animal control officer or law enforcement officer may seize and impound the dog pending the hearings to be held pursuant to this article. The owner or keeper of the dog shall be liable to the city or county where the dog is impounded for the costs and expenses of keeping the , dog, if the dog is later adjudicated potentially dangerous or vicious. J (b) When a dog has been impounded pursuant to subdivision (a) and it is not contrary to pub - lic safety, the chief animal control officer shall permit the animal to be confined at the owner's expen,se in a department approved kennel ,or veterinary facility. 31626. (a) No dog may be declared potentially dangerous or vicious if any injury or damage is sus- ; tained by a person who, at the time the injury or damage was sustained, was committing a willful trespass or other tort upon, premises occupied by the owner or keeper of the dog, or was teasing, tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog, or was committing or attempting to commit a crime. No dog may be declared potentially dangerous or vicious if the dog was protecting or defending a person within the immediate vicinity of the dog from an unjustified attack or assault. No dog may 46 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws be declared potentially dangerous or vicious if an injury or damage was sustained by a domestic animal which at the time the injury or damage was sustained was teasing, tormenting, abusing, or assaulting the dog. (b) No dog may be declared potentially dangerous or vicious if the injury or damage to a domestic animal was sustained while the dog was working as a hunting dog, herding dog, or predator control dog on the property of, or under the control of, its owner or keeper, and the dam- age or injury was to a species or type of domestic animal appropriate to the work of the dog. rv' Article 3. Disposition of Potentially Dangerous or Vicious Dogs 31641. All potentially dangerous dogs shall be properly licensed and vaccinated. The licens- ing authority shall include the potentially dangerous designation in the registration records of the dog, either after the owner or keeper of the dog has agreed to the designation or the court or hearing entity has determined the designation applies to the dog. The city or county may charge a potentially dangerous dog fee in addition to the regular licensing fee to provide for the ;; increased costs of maintaining the records of the dog. 31642. A potentially dangerous dog, while on the owner's property, shall, at all times, be kept indoors, or in a securely fenced yard from which the dog cannot escape, and into which children cannot trespass. A potentially dangerous animal may be off the owner's premises only if it is restrained by a substantial leash, of appropriate length, and if it is under the control of a respon- sible adult. 31643. If the dog in question dies, or is sold, transferred, or permanently removed from the city or county where the owner or keeper resides, the owner of a potentially dangerous dog shall notify the animal control department of the changed condition and new location of the dog in writing within two working days. 31644. If there are no additional instances of the behavior described in Section 31602 within a 36 -month period from the date of designation as a potentially dangerous dog, the dog shall be removed from the list of potentially dangerous dogs. The dog may, but is not required to be, removed from the list of potentially dangerous dogs prior to the expiration of the 36 -month period if the owner or keeper of the dog demonstrates to the animal control department that changes in circumstances or measures taken by the owner or keeper, such as training of the dog, have mitigated the risk to the public safety. 31645. (a) A dog determined to be a vicious dog may be destroyed by the animal control department when it is found, after proceedings conducted under Article 2 (commencing with Section 31621), that the release of the dog would create a significant threat to the public health, safety, and wel- fare. (b) If it is determined that a dog found to be vicious shall not be destroyed, the judicial author- ity shall impose conditions upon the ownership of the dog that prot ect the public health, safety, and welfare. (c) Any enclosure that is required pursuant to subdivision (b) shall meet the requirements of Section 31605. 31646. The owner of a dog determined to be a vicious dog may be prohibited by the city or county from owning, possessing, controlling, or having custody of any dog for a period of up to three years, when it is found, after proceedings conducted under Article 2 (commencing I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 47 --- -- -- Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws 1 with Section 31621), that ownership or possession of a dog by that person would create a signifi- _-. --- [ cant threat to the public health, safety, and welfare. Article 4. Penalties 31662. Any violation of this chapter involving a potentially dangerous dog shall be punished — , __ - -- i by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500.00). Any violation of this chapter involving a i vicious dog shall be punished by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). ' 31663.- All fines paid pursuant to this article shall be paid to the city or county in which the --- - -- ---- --- - violation occurred for the purpose of defraying the cost of the implementation of this chapter. Article 5. Miscellaneous 31681. If any provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstance - .._.. i 1!. .I is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect othe -r provisions or applications of the chapter which ! 1 I can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of e this chapter are severable. F I •-°-°-- _ 31682. The Judicial Council shall prepare all forms necessary to give effect to this chapter, including a summons or citation to be used by law enforcement agencies in the enforcement of this chapter. This chapter does not affect or change the existing civil liability or criminal laws regarding dogs. 31683. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent a city or county from adopting or enforcing its own program for the control of potentially dangerous or vicious dogs that may incorporate all, part, or none of this chapter, or that may punish a violation of this chapter as a misdemeanor or may impose a more restrictive program to control potentially dangerous or vicious dogs, provided that no program shall regulate these dogs in a manner that is specific as to breed. SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the ' i California Constitution for those costs which may be incurred by a local agency or school district because this act creates a new crime or infraction, changes the definition of a crime or infrac- tion, changes the penalty for a crime or infraction, or eliminates a crime or infraction. Moreover, no reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act. Notwithstanding Section 17580 of the Government Code, unless otherwise specified in this act, I = the provisions of this act shall become operative on the same date that the act takes effect pursu- 1 ant to the California Constitution. if t i E ,5- 3 f i a I 4+8 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 I Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws :,ate° :„Si x:..7,73= ..-.71.3'w .:: .,^._- ,3,7"1" .a -.:;t ..s;'' ....:.' ° M r : „a:::?:.!2E. ' .a. ..- ,33;3 State of Illinois = } Public Act 93 -0548 HB0184 Enrolled LRB093 04436 LCB 04488 b AN ACT in relation to animals. is Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois, represented in the General Assembly: Section 5.The Animal Control Act is amended by changing Sections 2.01, 2.02, 2.03, 2.05, 2.07, 1. 2.16,2.17,2.18,3,5,7 .1,8,9,10,11,12,13,15,17,18,19, 22, 24, and 26, and by adding Sections 2.03a, 2.04a, 2.05a, 2.11 a, 2.11 b, 2.12a, 2.17a, 2.17b, 2.18a, 2.19a, 2.19b, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, and 16.5 as follows: (510 ILCS 5/2.01) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.01) it Sec. 2.01. "Administrator" means a veterinarian licensed by the State of Illinois and appointed pursuant to this Act, or in the event a veterinarian cannot be found and appointed pursuant to this Act, a non - veterinarian may serve as Administrator under this Act. In the event the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Administrator shall defer to the veterinarian regarding all medical decisions. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/2.02) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.02) Sec. 2.02. "Animal" means every living creature, other than man, which may be affected by rabies. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/2.03) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.03) Sec. 2.03. "Animal Control Warden" means any person appointed by the Administrator to perform the duties set forth in this Act. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/2.03a new) Sec. 2.03a. "Business day" means any day including holidays that the animal control facility is I, open to the public for animal reclaims. (510 ILCS 5/2.04a new) Sec. 2.04a. "Cat" means all members of the family Felidae. ii (510 ILCS 5/2.05) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.05) Sec. 2.05. "Confined" means restriction of an animal at all times by the owner, or his agent, to an escape -proof building, house, or other enclosure away from other animals and the public. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/2.05a new) Sec. 2.05a. "Dangerous dog" means any individual dog when unmuzzled, unleashed, or 7 unattended by its owner or custodian that behaves in a manner that a reasonable person would I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 49 - ------ # Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws believe poses a serious and unjustified imminent threat of serious physical injury or death to a _j 1 person or a companion animal in a public place. (510 ILCS 5/2.07) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.07) Sec. 2.07. "Deputy Administrator" means a veterinarian licensed by the State of Illinois, I appointed by the Administrator. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) i -I i (510 ILCS 5/2.11a new) Sec. 2.11 a. "Enclosure" means a fence or structure of at least 6 feet in height, forming or causing an enclosure suitable to prevent the entry of young children, and suitable to confine a vicious dog in conjunction with other measures that may be taken by the owner or keeper, such - ..---- w. -..- -- as tethering of the vicious dog within the enclosure.The enclosure shall be securely enclosed I i and locked and designed with secure sides, top, and bottom and shall be designed to prevent I `' I the animal from escaping from the enclosure. If the enclosure is a room within a residence, the door must be locked. A vicious dog may be allowed to move about freely within the entire (° �° -' residence if it is muzzled at all times. (510 ILCS 5/2.11b new) Sec. 2.11 b. "Feral cat" means a cat that (i) is born in the wild or is the offspring of an owned or I I feral cat and is not socialized, or (ii) is a formerly owned cat that has been abandoned and is no : 1 longer socialized or lives on a farm. .1 1 (510 ILCS 5/2.12a new) Sec. 2.12a. "Impounded" means taken into the custody of the public animal control facility in the city, town, or county where the animal is found. (510 ILCS 5/2.16) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.16) Sec. 2.16. "Owner" means any person having a right of property in an animal, or who keeps or harbors an animal, or who has it in his care, or acts as its custodian. 1 (Source: P.A. 78-795.) 4 (510 ILCS 5/2.17) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.17) " Sec. 2.17. "Person" means any individual, firm, corporation, partnership, society, association or I i other legal entity, any public or private institution, the State of Illinois, municipal corporation or t political subdivision of the State, or any other business unit. I ?I (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) I ,I (510 ILCS 5/2.17a new) Sec. 2.17a. "Peace officer" has the meaning ascribed to it in Section 2 -13 of the Criminal Code I of 1961. 3 ( ILCS 5/2.17b new) f Sec. 2.17b. "Police animal" means an animal owned or used by a law enforcement department or agency in the course of the department or agency's work. i____ 1.1 (510 ILCS 5/2.18) (from Ch. 8, par. 352.18) fl Sec. 2.18. "Pound "or "animal control facility" may be used interchangeably and mean any i 50 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws »,.. ., vq . -.... +«. . ... ,.�.ri .. ....... .. if .�.�{. •5 . w.«� "bra ...... .....:. v. .� facility approved by the Administrator for the purpose of enforcing this Act and used as a shelter for seized, stray, homeless, abandoned, or unwanted dogs or other animals. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/2.18a new) Sec. 2.18a."Physical injury" means the impairment of physical condition. (510 ILCS 5/2.19a new) 1 Sec. 2.19a. "Serious physical injury" means a physical injury that creates a substantial risk of death or that causes death, serious or protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health, impairment of the function of any bodily organ, or plastic surgery. 1 (510 ILCS 5/2.19b new) Sec. 2.19b."Vicious dog" means a dog that, without justification, attacks a person and causes serious physical injury or death or any individual dog that has been found to be a "dangerous dog" upon 3 separate occasions. (510 ILCS 5/3) (from Ch. 8, par. 353) Sec. 3.The County Board Chairman with the consent of the County Board shall appoint an Administrator. Appointments shall be made as necessary to keep this position filled at all times. 1 The Administrator may appoint as many Deputy Administrators and Animal Control Wardens to aid him or her as authorized by the Board.The compensation for the Administrator, Deputy Administrators, and Animal Control Wardens shall be fixed by the Board.The Administrator may be removed from office by the County Board Chairman, with the consent of the County Board. The Board shall provide necessary personnel, training, equipment, supplies, and facilities, and shall operate pounds or contract for their operation as necessary to effectuate the program. The Board may enter into contracts or agreements with persons to assist in the operation of the 1 program. The Board shall be empowered to utilize monies from their General Corporate Fund to 1 effectuate the intent of this Act. The Board is authorized by ordinance to require the registration and microchipping of dogs and cats and shall impose an individual animal and litter registration fee. All persons selling 1 dogs or cats or keeping registries of dogs or cats shall cooperate and provide information to the t Administrator as required by Board ordinance, including sales, number of litters, and ownership g' of dogs and cats. If microchips are required, the microchip number shall serve as the county t animal control registration number. All microchips shall have an operating frequency of 125 kilohertz. In obtaining information required to implement this Act, the Department shall have power to subpoena and bring before it any person in this State and to take testimony either orally or by deposition, or both, with the same fees and mileage and in the same manner as prescribed by law for civil cases in courts of this State. The Director shall have power to administer oaths to witnesses at any hearing which the 1 Department is authorized by law to conduct, and any other oaths required or authorized in any Act administered by the Department. I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 51 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws This Section does not apply to feral cats. (Source: P.A. 87 -157.) (510 ILCS 5/5) (from Ch. 8, par. 355) Sec. 5. Duties and powers. (a) It shall be the duty of the Administrator or the Deputy Administrator, through sterilization, humane education, rabies inoculation, stray control, impoundment, quarantine, and any other means deemed necessary, to control and prevent the spread of rabies and to exercise dog and cat overpopulation control. It shall also be the duty of the Administrator to investigate and substantiate all claims made under Section 19 of this Act. (b) Counties may by ordinance determine the extent of the police powers that may be exercised by the Administrator, Deputy Administrators, and Animal Control Wardens, which powers shall pertain only to this Act.The Administrator, Deputy Administrators, and Animal '' Control Wardens may issue and serve citations and orders for violations of this Act.The Administrator, Deputy Administrators, and Animal Control Wardens may not carry weapons unless they have been specifically authorized to carry weapons by county ordinance. Animal Control Wardens, however, may use tranquilizer guns and other nonlethal weapons and equipment without specific weapons authorization. A person authorized to carry firearms by county ordinance under this subsection must have E completed the training course for peace officers prescribed in the Peace Officer Firearm Training Act.The cost of this training shall be paid by the county. (c) The sheriff and all sheriff's deputies and municipal police officers shall cooperate with the Administrator and his or her representatives in carrying out the provisions of this Act. (Source: P.A. 90 -385, eff. 8- 15 -97.) (510 ILCS 5/7.1) (from Ch.8, par. 357.1) Sec. 7.1. In addition to any other fees provided for under this Act, any county may charge a reasonable fee for the pickup and disposal of dead animals from private for - profit animal hospitals.This fee shall be sufficient to cover the costs of pickup and delivery and shall be deposited in the county's animal control fund. (Source: P.A. 80 -972.) (510 ILCS 5/8) (from Ch. 8, par. 358) s, Sec. 8. Every owner of a dog 4 months or more of age shall have each dog inoculated against rabies by a licensed veterinarian. Every dog shall have a second rabies vaccination within one year of the first.Terms of subsequent vaccine administration and duration of immunity must be in compliance with USDA licenses of vaccines used. Evidence of such rabies inoculation shall be entered on a certificate the form of which shall be approved by the Board and which shall be signed by the licensed veterinarian administering the vaccine.Veterinarians who inoculate a dog shall procure from the County Animal Control serially numbered tags, one to be issued with each inoculation certificate. Only one dog shall be included on each certificate.The veterinarian immunizing or microchipping an animal shall provide the Administrator with a certificate of immunization and microchip number.The Board shall cause a rabies inoculation tag to be issued, at a fee established by the Board for each dog inoculated against rabies. 52 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws Rabies vaccine for use on animals shall be sold or distributed only to licensed veterinarians. Such rabies vaccine shall be licensed by the United States Department of Agriculture. (Source: P.A. 78- 1166.) (510 ILCS 5/9) (from Ch. 8, par. 359) Sec. 9. Any dog found running at large contrary to provisions of this Act may be apprehended and impounded. For this purpose, the Administrator shall utilize any existing or 4 available animal control facility. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) I E (510 ILCS 5/10) (from Ch. 8, par.360) Sec. 10.When dogs or cats are apprehended and impounded by the Administrator, they must be scanned for the presence of a microchip.The Administrator shall make every reasonable } attempt to contact the owner as soon as possible.The Administrator shall give notice of not less than 7 business days to the owner prior to disposal of the animal. Such notice shall be mailed to the last known address of the owner. Testimony of the Administrator, or his or her authorized agent, who mails such notice shall be evidence of the receipt of such notice by the owner of the animal. In case the owner of any impounded dog or cat desires to make redemption thereof, he or she may do so on the following conditions: a. present proof of current rabies inoculation, and registration, if applicable, or b. pay for the rabies inoculation of the dog or cat, and registration, if applicable, and c. pay the pound for the board of the dog or cat for the period it was impounded, d. pay into the Animal Control Fund an additional impoundment fee as prescribed by the Board as a penalty for the first offense and for each subsequent offense; and e. pay for microchipping and registration if not already done. Animal control facilities that are open to the public 7 days per week for animal reclamation are exempt from the business day requirement. This shall be in addition to any other penalties invoked under this Act. (Source: P.A. 83 -711.) (510 ILCS 5/11) (from Ch. 8, par. 361) Sec. 11.When not redeemed by the owner, a dog or cat that has been impounded shall be humanely dispatched pursuant to the Humane Euthanasia in Animal Shelters Act or offered for adoption. An animal pound or animal shelter shall not release any dog or cat when not redeemed by the owner unless the animal has been surgically rendered incapable of reproduction by spaying or neutering and microchipped, or the person wishing to adopt an animal prior to the surgical procedures having been performed shall have executed a written agreement promising to have such service performed, including microchippinq, within a specified period of time not to exceed 30 days. Failure to fulfill the terms of the agreement shall result in seizure and impoundment of the animal by the animal pound or shelter, and any monies which have been deposited shall be forfeited.This Act shall not prevent humane societies from engaging in activities set forth by their charters; provided, they are not inconsistent with provisions of this Act and other existing laws. No animal shelter or animal control facility shall release dogs or cats to an individual representing a rescue group unless the group has been licensed by the Illinois Department of Agriculture or incorporated as a not -for- .rofit or. anization.The Department ma sus send or revoke the license of an animal shelter or animal control facility that fails to comply with the requirements set forth in this Section. I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 53 ---- - - -- Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws I (Source: P.A. 92 -449, eff. 1- 1 -02.) (510 ILLS 5/12) (from Ch.8, par. 362) Sec. 12. The owner of any animal which exhibits clinical signs of rabies, whether or not the animal has been inoculated against rabies, shall immediately notify the Administrator or, if r . W - I the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator, and shall promptly confine i the animal, or have it confined, under suitable observation, for a period of at least 10 days, unless officially authorized by the Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, _ . ' the Deputy Administrator, in writing, to release it sooner. Any animal that has had direct contact with the animal and that has not been inoculated against rabies, shall be confined as } recommended by the Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator. I .. • ... - 1 (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/13) (from Ch. 8, par. 363) I Sec.13. Dog or other animal bites; observation of animal. ` " ' (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) of this Section, when the Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator receives information that any person has been bitten by an animal, the Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator, or his or her authorized representative, shall have such dog or other animal confined under the observation of a licensed veterinarian for a period s of 10 days.The Department may permit such confinement to be reduced to a period of less I than 10 days. A veterinarian shall report the clinical condition of the animal immediately, with -- confirmation in writing to the Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the li Deputy Administrator within 24 hours after the animal is presented for examination, giving • the owner's name, address, the date of confinement, the breed, description, age, and sex of the animal, and whether the animal has been spayed or neutered, on appropriate forms approved t by the Department.The Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy i Administrator shall notify the attending physician or responsible health agency. At the end of the confinement period, the veterinarian shall submit a written report to the Administrator or, if > the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator advising him or her of the final I , 1 disposition of the animal on appropriate forms approved by the Department. When evidence 'r is presented that the animal was inoculated against rabies within the time prescribed by law, '+ it shall be confined in a house, or in a manner which will prohibit it from biting any person -- -- .. " i for a period of 10 days, if a licensed veterinarian adjudges such confinement satisfactory.The I Department may permit such confinement to be reduced to a period of less than 10 days. At the A end of the confinement period, the animal shall be examined by a licensed veterinarian. Any person having knowledge that any person has been bitten by an animal shall notify the Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator promptly. It is unlawful for the owner of the animal to euthanize, sell, give away, or otherwise _,_ dispose of any animal known to have bitten a person, until it is released by the Administrator or, if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator, or his or her authorized t ° representative. It is unlawful for the owner of the animal to refuse or fail to comply with the reasonable written or printed instructions made by the Administrator or, if the Administrator ---- - --- --- is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator, or his authorized representative. If such ` i r instructions cannot be delivered in person, they shall be mailed to the owner of the animal by 5L1 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws regular mail. Any expense incurred in the handling of an animal under this Section and Section 12 shall be borne by the owner. (b) When a person has been bitten by a police dog, the police dog may continue to perform its duties for the peace officer or law enforcement agency and any period of observation of the police dog may be under the supervision of a peace officer.The supervision shall consist of the dog being locked in a kennel, performing its official duties in a police vehicle, or remaining under the constant supervision of its police handler. (Source: P.A. 89 -576, eff. 1- 1 -97.) (510 ILCS 5/15) (from Ch. 8, par. 365) Sec. 15. (a) In order to have a dog deemed "vicious", the Administrator, Deputy Administrator, animal control warden, or law enforcement officer must give notice of the infraction that is the basis of the investigation to the owner, conduct a thorough investigation, interview any witnesses, including the owner, gather any existing medical records, veterinary medical records or behavioral evidence, and make a detailed report recommending a finding that the dog is a vicious dog and give the report to the States Attorney's Office and the owner.The Administrator, State's Attorney, Director or any citizen of the county in which the dog exists may file a complaint in the circuit court in the name of the People of the State of Illinois to deem a dog to be a vicious dog.Testimony of a certified applied behaviorist, a board certified veterinary behaviorist, or another recognized expert may be relevant to the court's determination of whether the dog's behavior was justified.The petitioner must prove the dog is a vicious dog by clear and convincing evidence.The Administrator shall determine where the animal shall be confined during the pendency of the case. A dog shall not be declared vicious if the court determines the conduct of the dog was justified because: (1) the threat, injury, or death was sustained by a person who at the time was committing a crime or offense upon the owner or custodian of the dog, or upon the property of the owner or custodian of the dog; (2) the injured, threatened, or killed person was tormenting, abusing, assaulting, or physically threatening the dog or its offspring, or has in the past tormented, abused, assaulted, or f physically threatened the dog or its offspring; or (3) the dog was responding to pain or injury, or was protecting itself, its owner, custodian, or member of its household, kennel, or offspring, No dog shall be deemed "vicious" if it is a professionally trained dog for law enforcement or , 9 P Y 9 guard duties.Vicious dogs shall not be classified in a manner that is specific as to breed. If the burden of proof has been met, the court shall deem the dog to be a vicious dog. If a dog is found to be a vicious dog, the dog shall be spayed or neutered within 10 days of the finding at the expense of its owner and microchipped, if not already, and is subject to enclosure. A dog found to be a vicious dog shall not be released to the owner until the Administrator, an Animal Control Warden, or the Director approves the enclosure. No owner or keeper of a vicious dog shall sell or give away the dog without court approval. Whenever an 1 I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 55 __ M.__µ._._ Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws 7: ...s,::; ".- : ._"`" 1.177 .. ."�" . ,.._....744..... .. Z17. »: ,.w: :... FM::: ' •."'"77:- a„.. - `"1:r.11 ` ..:s,. ,:Z7 •a1r« - ,M1'.4= r _ owner of a vicious dog relocates, he or she shall notify both the Administrator of County Animal _... Control where he or she has relocated and the Administrator of County Animal Control where I he or she formerly resided. 1 1 (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or maintain any dog which has been found .._1 1 to be a vicious dog unless the dog is kept in an enclosure.The only times that a vicious dog 1 TM i may be allowed out of the enclosure are (1) if it is necessary for the owner or keeper to obtain 8 ,-: veterinary care for the dog, (2) in the case of an emergency or natural disaster where the dog's { ! life is threatened, or (3) to comply with the order of a court of competent jurisdiction, provided that the dog is securely muzzled and restrained with a leash not exceeding 6 3 feet in length, i and shall be under the direct control and supervision of the owner or keeper of the dog or ii muzzled in its residence. i i, Any dog which has been found to be a vicious dog and which is not confined to an enclosure shall be impounded by the Administrator, an Animal Control Warden, or the law enforcement ( . i authority having jurisdiction in such area ! If the owner of the dog has not appealed the impoundment order to the circuit court in the county in which the animal was impounded within 15 working days, the dog may be i l ', euthanized. j Upon filing a notice of appeal, the order of euthanasia shall be automatically stayed pending a F the outcome of the appeal.The owner shall bear the burden of timely notification to animal .,, .... . R I control in writing. ) r i Guide dogs for the blind or hearing impaired, support dogs for the physically handicapped, I and sentry, guard, or police -owned dogs are exempt from this Section; provided, an attack 3 .._.--- 1 [,' or injury to a person occurs while the dog is performing duties as expected.To qualify for exemption under this Section, each such dog shall be currently inoculated against rabies in ' I accordance with Section 8 of this Act. It shall be the duty of the owner of such exempted dog [_ � i Si to notify the Administrator of changes of address. In the case of a sentry or guard dog, the ' i owner shall keep the Administrator advised of the location where such dog will be stationed. i The Administrator shall provide police and fire departments with a categorized list of such exempted dogs, and shall promptly notify such departments of any address changes reported to him. I I (Source: P.A. 86 -1460; 87 -456.) 1 (510 ILCS 5/15.1 new) Sec. 15.1. Dangerous dog determination. (a) After a thorough investigation including: sending, within 3 days of the Administrator or : Director becoming aware of the alleged infraction, notifications to the owner of the alleged. infractions, the fact of the initiation of an investigation, and affording the owner an opportunity to meet with the Administrator or Director prior to the making of a determination; gathering_ ', of any medical or veterinary evidence; interviewing witnesses; and making a detailed written report, an animal control warden, deputy administrator, or law enforcement agent may ask the t - ,• ----, - I Administrator, or his or her designee, or the Director, to deem a dog to be "dangerous" No dog . i shall be deemed a "dangerous dog "without clear and convincing evidence.The owner shall be 56 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws sent immediate notification of the determination by registered or certified mail that includes a complete description of the appeal process. (b) A dog shall not be declared dangerous if the Administrator, or his or her designee, or the Director determines the conduct of the dog was justified because: (1) the threat was sustained by a person who at the time was committing a crime or offense upon the owner or custodian of the dog.; (2) the threatened person was tormenting, abusing, assaulting, or physically threatening the dog or its offspring; (3) the injured, threatened, or killed companion animal was attacking or threatening to attack the dog or its offspring; or (4) the dog was responding to pain or injury or was protecting itself, its owner, custodian, or a member of its household, kennel, or offspring, (c) Testimony of a certified applied behaviorist, a board certified veterinary behaviorist, or another recognized expert may be relevant to the determination of whether the dog's behavior was justified pursuant to the provisions of this Section. (d) If deemed dangerous, the Administrator, or his or her designee, or the Director shall order " the dog to be spayed or neutered within 14 days at the owner's expense and microchipped, if not already, and one or more of the following as deemed appropriate under the circumstances and necessary for the protection of the public: (1) evaluation of the dog by a certified applied behaviorist, a board certified veterinary behaviorist, or another recognized expert in the field and completion of training or other treatment as deemed appropriate by the expert.The owner of the dog shall be responsible for all costs associated with evaluations and training ordered under this subsection; or (2) direct supervision by an adult 18 years of age or older whenever the animal is on public premises. (e) The Administrator may order a dangerous dog to be muzzled whenever it is on public premises in a manner that will prevent it from biting any person or animal, but that shall not injure the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration. (f) Guide dogs for the blind or hearing impaired, support dogs for the physically handicapped, and sentry, guard, or police -owned dogs are exempt from this Section; provided, an attack or injury to a person occurs while the dog is performing_duties as expected. To qualify for exemption under this Section, each such dog shall be currently inoculated against rabies in accordance with Section 8 of this Act and performing duties as expected. It shall be the duty of the owner of the exempted dog to notify the Administrator of changes of address. In the case of a sentry or guard dog, the owner shall keep the Administrator advised of the location where such dog will be stationed. The Administrator shall provide police and fire departments with a categorized list of the exempted dogs, and shall promptly notify the departments of any address changes reported to him or her. (510 ILCS 5/15.2 new) Sec.15.2. Dangerous dogs; leash. It is unlawful for any person toknowingly or recklessly I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 57 1 ---- -- -! Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws i L--=- -�°°~:~ �_ ::� - :�- ._.� �:-� . :a te w� . �a:�:.. :°�.,x� ,-- - -_ �� ,.,�. ~� ...�;:.�;: permit anv dangerous dog to leave the premises of its owner when not under control by leash ,_. _. __.. or other recognized control methods. (510 ILCS 5/15.3 new) Sec. 15.3. Dangerous dog; appeal. (a) The owner of a dog found to be a dangerous dog pursuant to this Act by an Administrator may file a complaint against the Administrator in the circuit court within 35 days of receipt of I 3 notification of the determination, for a de novo hearing on the determination.The proceeding I I shall be conducted as a civil hearing pursuant to the Illinois Rules of Evidence and the Code of Civil Procedure, including the discovery provisions. After hearing both parties' evidence, the court may make a determination of dangerous dog if the Administrator meets his or her burden of proof of clear and convincing evidence.The final order of the circuit court may be appealed ... -. pursuant to the civil appeals provisions of the Illinois Supreme Court Rules. II (b) The owner of a dog found to be a dangerous dog pursuant to this Act by the Director may, within 14 days of receipt of notification of the determination, request an administrative hearing to appeal the determination.The administrative hearing shall be conducted pursuant to the Department of Agriculture's rules applicable to formal administrative proceedings, 8 III. r Adm. Code Part 1, SubParts A and B. An owner desiring a hearing shall make his or her request for a hearing to the Illinois Department of Agriculture.The final administrative decision of the Department may be reviewed judicially by the circuit court of the county wherein the person resides or, in the case of a corporation, the county where its registered office is located. If the h plaintiff in a review proceeding is not a resident of Illinois, the venue shall be in Sangamon -- - - ----- j County.The Administrative Review Law and all amendments and modifications thereof, and the rules adopted thereto, apply to and govern all proceedings for the judicial review of final administrative decisions of the Department hereunder. I_"_ _._"---- ` (c) Until the order has been reviewed and at all times during the appeal process, the owner - shall comply with the requirements set forth by the Administrator, the court, or the Director. i I (d) At any time after a final order has been entered, the owner may petition the circuit court to reverse the designation of dangerous dog, (510 ILCS 5/16.5 new) Sec. 16.5. Expenses of microchipping. A clinic for microchipping companion animals of county I residents should be conducted at least once a year under the direction of the Administrator or, it if the Administrator is not a veterinarian, the Deputy Administrator at the animal control facility, ( ; animal shelter, or other central location within the county.The maximum amount that can be . _._ charged for microchipping an animal at this clinic shall be $15. Funds generated from this clinic shall be deposited in the county's animal control fund. i (510 ILCS 5/17) (from Ch. 8, par. 367) I Sec.17. For the purpose of making inspections hereunder, the Administrator, or his or her I € authorized representative, or any law enforcement officer may enter upon private premises, provided that the entry shall not be made into any building that is a person's residence, to -- ----- - -• - I I apprehend a straying dog or other animal, a dangerous or vicious dog or other animal, or an animal thought to be infected with rabies. If, after request therefor, the owner of the dog or 58 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws other animal shall refuse to deliver the dog or other animal to the officer, the owner shall be in violation of this Act. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/18) (from Ch. 8, par. 368) Sec. 18. Any owner seeing his or her livestock, poultry, or equidae being injured, wounded, or killed by a dog, not accompanied by or not under the supervision of its owner, may kill such dog. (Source: RA. 88-600, eff. 9- 1 -94.) (510 ILCS 5/19) (from Ch. 8, par. 369) Sec. 19. Any owner having livestock, poultry, or equidae killed or injured by a dog shall, according to the provisions of this Act and upon filing claim and making proper proof, be ' entitled to receive reimbursement for such losses from the Animal Control Fund; provided, he or she is a resident of this State and such injury or killing is reported to the Administrator within 24 hours after such injury or killing occurs, and makes affidavit stating the number of such animals or poultry killed or injured, the amount of damages and the owner of the dog causing such a killing or injury, if known. The damages referred to in this Section shall be substantiated by the Administrator through prompt investigation and by not less than 2 witnesses.The Administrator shall determine whether the provisions of this Section have been met and shall keep a record in each case of the names of the owners of the animals or poultry, the amount of damages proven, and the number of animals or poultry killed or injured. The Administrator shall file a written report with the County Treasurer as to the right of an owner of livestock, poultry, or equidae to be paid out of the Animal Control Fund, and the 11 amount of such damages claimed. The County Treasurer shall, on the first Monday in March of each calendar year, pay to the owner of the animals or poultry the amount of damages to which he or she is entitled.The county board, by ordinance, shall establish a schedule for damages reflecting the current market value. If there are funds in excess of amounts paid for such claims for damage in that portion of the Animal Control Fund set aside for this purpose, this excess shall be used for other costs of the program as set forth in this Act. (Source: P.A.84 -551.) (510 ILCS 5/22) (from Ch. 8, par. 372) 6 Sec. 22.The Department shall have general supervision of the administration of this Act and may make reasonable rules and regulations, not inconsistent with this Act, for the enforcement of this Act and for the guidance of Administrators, including revoking a license issued under the I Animal Welfare Act for noncompliance with any provision of this Act. (Source: P.A. 78 -795.) (510 ILCS 5/24) (from Ch. 8, par. 374) Sec. 24. Nothing in this Act shall be held to limit in any manner the power of any municipality or other political subdivision to prohibit animals from running at large, nor shall anything in this Act be construed to, in any manner, limit the power of any municipality or other political PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 59 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws - ri subdivision to further control and regulate dogs, cats or other animals in such municipality or other political subdivision provided that no regulation or ordinance is specific to breed. (Source: P.A. 82 -783.) (510 ILCS 5/26) (from Ch. 8, par. 376) Sec. 26. (a) Any person violating or aiding in or abetting the violation of any provision of this Act, or counterfeiting or forging any certificate, permit, or tag, or making any misrepresentation in regard to any matter prescribed by this Act, or resisting, obstructing, or impeding the ` ' Administrator or any authorized officer in enforcing this Act, or refusing to produce for i inoculation any dog in his possession, or who removes a tag from a dog for purposes of destroying or concealing its identity, is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor for a first offense and for a subsequent offense, is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor. Each day a person fails to comply constitutes a separate offense. Each State's Attorney to whom the Administrator reports any violation of this Act shall cause appropriate proceedings to be instituted in the proper courts without delay and to be prosecuted in the manner provided ' by law. (b) If the owner of a vicious dog subject to enclosure: (1) fails to maintain or keep the dog in an enclosure or fails to spay or neuter the dog; and (2) the dog inflicts serious physical injury upon any other person or causes the death of another person; and mi (3) the attack is unprovoked in a place where such person is peaceably conducting himself or herself and where such person may lawfully be; the owner shall be guilty of a Class 4 felony, unless the owner knowingly allowed the dog to run at large or failed to take steps to keep the dog in an enclosure then the owner shall be guilty of a Class 3 felony.The penalty provided in this paragraph shall be in addition to any other criminal or civil sanction provided by law. (c) If the owner of a dangerous dog knowingly fails to comply with any order of the court regarding the dog and the dog inflicts serious physical injury on a person or a companion animal, the owner shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. If the owner of a dangerous dog knowingly fails to comply with any order regarding the dog and the dog kills a person the . owner shall be guilty of a Class 4 felony. (Source: P.A. 87 -456.) Section 99. Effective date.This Act takes effect upon becoming law. fi Effective Date: 08 /19/03 60 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws Prince, William- County, Virginia, USA ARTICLE II. VICIOUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS Sec. 4-12. Definitions. For the purposes of this article and unless otherwise required by the context, the following words and terms shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section: I Dangerous dog. Any canine or canine crossbreed which: (1) Has, without provocation, attacked, bitten or inflicted injury upon a person or companion animal; or (2) Has killed a companion animal. However, when a dog attacks or bites another dog, the attacking or biting dog shall not be deemed dangerous (i) if no serious physical injury as determined by a licensed veterinarian has occurred to the other dog as a result of the attack or bite or (ii) both dogs are owned by the same person. No dog shall be found to be a dangerous dog as a result of biting, attacking or inflicting injury on another dog while engaged with an owner or custodian as part of lawful hunting or participating in an organized, lawful dog handling event. No animal shall be found to be a dangerous dog if the threat, injury or damage was sustained by a person who was (i) committing, at the time, a crime upon the premises occupied by the animal's owner or custodian, (ii) committing, at the time, a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the animal's owner or other custodian or (iii) provoking, tormenting, or physically abusing the animal, or can be shown to have repeatedly provoked, tormented, abused or assaulted the animal at other times. No animal which, at the time of the acts complained of was responding to pain or injury, or was protesting itself, its kennel, its offspring, or its owner's property shall be found to be a dangerous dog. No police dog which is engaged in the performance of its duties as such at the time of the acts complained of shall be found to be a dangerous dog. Own; owner. The words "own" and "owner" shall include any person having a right of property in a dog, any person who keeps or harbors a dog, any person who has a dog in his care, or any person who acts as its custodian. Serious bodily injury. Serious bodily injury includes multiple bites, serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health, or serious impairment of a bodily function. 1 Vicious dog. Any dog which, on or after the effective date of this ordinance: (1) Has killed a person; or f' (2) Has inflicted serious injury to a person; or (3) Has continued to exhibit the behavior which resulted in a previous finding by a court or an animal control officer as authorized by a local ordinance pursuant to the provisions of §3.1- 796.93:1(E) of the Code of Virginia that it is a dangerous dog, provided that its owner has been given notice of that finding. I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 61 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws No animal shall be found to be a vicious dog if the threat, injury or damage was sustained 1; by a person who was (i) committing, at the time, a crime upon the premises occupied by the 1 animal's owner or custodian, (ii) committing, at the time, a willful trespass or other tort upon the premises occupied by the animal's owner or other custodian or (iii) provoking, tormenting, or physically abusing the animal, or can be shown to have repeatedly provoked, tormented, abused 11 or assaulted the animal at other times. No animal which, at the time of the acts complained of' was responding to pain or injury, or was protecting itself, its kennel, its offspring, or its owner's property shall be found to be a ' vicious dog. No police dog which is engaged in the performance of its duties as such at the time of the acts complained of shall be found to be a dangerous dog. (No. 92 -56, 6 -2 -92 ; No. 95 -26, 3 -14 -95 ; ! ; No. 03 -47, 6- 24 -03, effective 7 -1 -03) ,, State law reference -- Similar provisions, Code of Virginia, § 3.1- 796.93:1. Sec. 4 - 13. Dangerous dogs. It shall be unlawful for any person to keep within the county any dangerous dog, except 1 in compliance with the list of restrictions issued by the animal warden under the provisions of section 4 -18. Each day during which a person keeps a dangerous dog in the county either without a dangerous dog certificate issued by the animal warden under section 4 -18 or in - - violation of one or more of the conditions imposed by such list of restrictions shall constitute a separate offense. A violation of this section shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor and shall be punished accordingly. Further, the general district court, upon finding that this section has been violated, may order the animal warden to impound and destroy a dangerous dog which has - ~ been kept in violation of this section. (No. 92 -56, 6 -2 -92; No. 95 -26, 3- 14 -95; No. 97 -60, 6- 24 -97, effective 7 -1 -97) State law reference -- Similar provisions, Code of Virginia, § 3.1- 796.93:1. Sec. 4 -14. Vicious dogs. _I (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to own a vicious dog. (b) If the general district court finds that an animal is a vicious dog as defined in this article, the court shall order the animal euthanized in accordance with the provisions of § 3.1- 796.119 of the Code of Virginia. (No. 92 -56, 6 -2 -92; No. 95 -26, 3- 14 -95) Sec. 4 Custody of dangerous and vicious dogs pending trial. (a) When a person has been charged with possession of a vicious dog after the animal warden has investigated and made his determination under section 4 -17, or possession of a dangerous dog in violation of a list of restrictions, or violation of any provision of Article V of this chapter relating to rabies quarantine, the animal warden shall take possession of the animal and confine it until such time as evidence shall be heard or a verdict rendered. If the animal warden determines that the owner or custodian can confine the animal in a manner that protects the public safety, he may permit the owner or custodian to confine the animal until such time as evidence shall be heard and a verdict rendered. Upon taking possession of the animal, the ' animal warden shall be under a duty to feed, care for and safeguard the animal properly until the date of trial and also until any possible appeals are complete.The animal shall not be released to the owner until the owner pays the reasonable cost of the care and keeping of the dog in accordance with the provisions of section 4 -24, and any court order for release of a dog shall so provide. 62 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws (b) Failure of the owner to comply with any order of the general district court to produce a dog or pay the animal warden the costs of the dog's maintenance at the animal shelter shall be punishable as civil contempt, and it shall be unlawful for any person to assist such owner in concealing the whereabouts of the dog from the court. (c) If the dog is ultimately held by the court not to be vicious or dangerous, or if the owner is held by the court to have complied with the list of restrictions issued by the animal warden for a dangerous dog, the animal warden shall forthwith return the dog to the owner without charge. (d) If, after hearing the evidence, the court finds that the animal is a vicious dog, the court shall order the animal euthanized in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Virginia. (No. 92 -56, 6 -2 -92; No. 95 -26, 3- 14 -95; No. 97 -60, 6- 24 -97, effective 7 -1 -97; No. 00 -42, 6- 27 -00, effective i; 7 -1 -00) State law reference -- Similar provisions, Code of Virginia, §3.1- 796.93:1; requirements for euthanizing animals, Code of Virginia, §3.1- 796.119. Sec. 4-16. Immediate destruction of a vicious dog. When a dog has killed or seriously injured a person, the animal warden shall cause the dog to be immediately seized and impounded or immediately destroyed if the seizure and impoundment are not possible without risk of serious physical harm or death to any person. If the vicious dog is impounded or destroyed, the animal warden and the director of the Prince William Health District shall provide for rabies quarantine and /or testing of the dog in ' conformance with all applicable provisions of this code and the Code of Virginia. (No. 92 -56, 6 -2- 92; No. 95 -26, 3- 14 -95) State law reference -- Authority to protect the public health, safety, and welfare and to control the , running at large of vicious dogs, Code of Virginia, § 15.1 -510. Sec. 4-17. Complaints of dangerous or vicious dogs; processing of complaints. (a) Any person may make a verbal or written complaint to the animal warden of a dog or canine crossbreed which the complainant believes to be currently dangerous or vicious.The complaint shall include sufficient information to enable the animal warden to ascertain the location and owner of the dog or canine crossbreed and shall also include the reasons why the complainant believes the animal to be dangerous or vicious. If the complaint includes descriptions of past incidents or examples of behavior which occurred before the effective date of this ordinance [No. 95 -26], the complaint must contain sufficient descriptions of incidents or examples of behavior which occurred after the effective date of this ordinance [No.95 -26] to support the allegation that the animal is dangerous or vicious. In the case of a verbal complaint, ' the complaint shall be put in writing by the animal warden. Notice that a complaint has been made and the substance of the complaint shall be mailed by the animal warden by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the owner of the animal at the owner's last address. (b) Within ten (10) days of the making of the complaint, the animal warden shall undertake an investigation to determine whether the animal identified in the complaint is dangerous or vicious. Such investigation shall include an opportunity for the owner of the animal to present evidence to the animal warden pertinent to the dangerousness or viciousness of the animal, and may include interviews of the complainant and other persons having personal knowledge regarding the animal, and observations of the animal in its normal habitat. (c) Upon completion of the investigation, the animal warden shall determine whether the animal identified in the complaint is currently dangerous or vicious. I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 63 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws (1) If the animal warden determines that the animal is neither dangerous nor vicious, he shall inform the complainant and the owner of the determination, and no further action shall be taken on the complaint. (2) If the animal warden determines that the animal is dangerous, he shall issue a list of restrictions containing such conditions, as authorized by section 4 -18 of this chapter and §3.1- 796.93:1 of the Code of Virginia as he feels necessary and appropriate to ensure that the 1 c! continued keeping of the dog in the county will not pose a substantial danger to the safety of humans or other animals. (3) If the animal warden determines that the animal is vicious, he shall put the determination in writing, as well' as the reasons supporting it.The animal warden shall then take custody of the dog, forward the written determination to the complainant and the owner and, in addition, shall notify the owner that the dog must be destroyed.This notice shall set forth a description of the animal in question and the basis for the determination that it is vicious. If the owner fails to arrange to have the dog destroyed within such period, the warden shall commence an action in the general district court pursuant to section 4 -14 to seek an order requiring that the dog be destroyed. (No. 92 -56, 6 -2 -92; No. 95 -26, 3- 14 -95; No. 97 -60, 6- 24 -97, effective 7 -1 -97) Sec. 4 -18. List of restrictions for a dangerous dog. (a) Immediately upon determining that a dog is dangerous, the animal warden shall issue to the owner of such dog, who must be a person eighteen (18) years of age or older, a list of j restrictions. This list of restrictions shall authorize the continued keeping of the dog within the county only so long as the owner complied with the requirements set forth in the list of restrictions. Such requirements shall include those that the animal warden determines 1-g necessary to ensure that no person or animal is injured by the dog. A list of restrictions may include but is not limited to the following: (1) That the dog wear a special and conspicuous form of identification collar to be issued by ' the animal warden; (2) That the owner have the dog tattooed with an identification number to be provided by the animal warden; (3) That the owner immediately notify the animal warden in the event the dog is loose and unconfined, has attacked or injured a human being or another animal, has been sold or given to another person, or has died; (4) That the owner immediately make all reasonable efforts to recapture a dangerous dog which has escaped from his property; (5) That the owner display one or more signs on his property which provide a clear warning to children and adults that a dangerous dog is present on the property; (6) That, while off the owner's property, the dog be muzzled and restrained in a particular manner and be kept on a leash; • (7) That the owner present satisfactory evidence to the animal warden that the owner has ' liability insurance, to the value of at least one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), that covers ,, ` animal bites; (8) That the owner attend one or more educational or training classes on the responsible 64 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws = "1117 ,. keeping and handling of dangerous dogs; and (9) That, upon the request of the animal warden, the owner make the dog available for inspection at such times and under such conditions as the list of restrictions shall prescribe. (b)(1) Within ten (10) days of receipt of a list of restrictions issued under subsection (a) of this section, the owner of the dog may request in writing to the chief of police that he review the animal warden's determination that the dog is dangerous and /or some or all of the requirements set forth in the list of restrictions. Upon receipt of such a request, the chief ( of police shall offer the owner an opportunity to present evidence at an information hearing pertinent to the dangerousness of the dog and to the requirements of the list of restrictions identified in the request for review. Written notice of the date, time, and place of such hearing, as well as of the person designated by the chief of police to serve as the hearing officer, shall be sent to the owner and the complainant at least seven (7) days prior to the hearing. At the hearing, in addition to receiving evidence from the animal warden, a veterinarian, a licensed animal training, a humane society agent, or any person having personal knowledge of the dog's condition. (2) Within ten (10) days of the hearing, the hearing officer shall notify the owner and the complainant in writing of his decision whether to confirm the determination that the dog is dangerous and the requirements set out in the list of restrictions. If the hearing officer determines the dog not to be dangerous, the list of restrictions issued under subsection (1) shall be canceled and no further action shall be taken on the complaint. If the officer confirms that the dog is dangerous but decides that certain requirements set out in the list of restrictions issued under subsection (1) are not necessary for the protection of the public and other animals, he shall delete or modify those requirements, but otherwise confirm the list of restrictions, as modified, and the owner's obligation to comply with it. If the officer confirms the list of F restrictions and the requirements set out in it, he shall also confirm the owner's obligation to comply with it. If the owner disagrees with the decision of the hearing officer, he or she may appeal it to the general district court for a trial on the merits, or may challenge the hearing officer's decision in his or her defense in any criminal proceeding brought against the owner for keeping a dangerous dog. (c) In the event that an owner of a dangerous dog fails to comply with any of the } requirements imposed by a list of restrictions issued under this section, the animal warden shall notify the owner of his failure, and the owner shall have twenty -four (24) hours following receipt of the notice to come into compliance with the list of restrictions. If the owner fails to do so, the animal warden is authorized to take custody of the dog to seek a court requiring that the dog be destroyed by the animal warden. (d) An owner of a dog which has been found to be dangerous in accordance with this section, and who believes that the dog is no longer dangerous or that certain requirements set out in the list of restrictions are no longer necessary for the protection of the public and other animals may request the animal warden to rescind the determination that the dog is a dangerous dog or to delete or modify those requirements of the list of restrictions; provided that no such request may be made within the first twelve (12) months following the initial determination that the dog is dangerous. Such a request must be accompanied by the fee required in subsection (e). In reviewing such a request, the animal warden may require the owner to produce the dog for the animal warden's inspection, to allow the animal warden to observe the dog in its normal habitat and to submit information pertinent to the dangerousness of the dog. In the event that the animal warden determines that the dog is no longer dangerous, the list of restrictions issued under this section shall be canceled. In the event that the animal warden determines that the I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 65 Index of NON -Breed Specific Laws :3 dog is still dangerous but that certain requirements are no longer necessary, he may delete • 1 those conditions from the list of restrictions or modify them. (e) The owner of any dog subject to a list of restrictions issued under this section shall pay to ; i ' the animal warden, within ten (10) days of the issuance of the list of restrictions, if applicable, a hearing officer's confirmation or modification of the list of restrictions under subsection (b)(2), a fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00). Any owner requesting the rescission or modification of I' a list of restrictions under subsection (d) shall pay a fee of ten dollars ($10.00) at the time he makes the request. (f) All certificates or renewals thereof, or lists of restrictions required to be obtained under this section shall only be issued to persons eighteen (18) years of age or older who present satisfactory evidence (i) of the animal's current rabies vaccination, if applicable, (ii) that the animal is and will be confined in a proper enclosure or is and will be confined inside the owner's residence or is and will be muzzled and confined in the owner's fenced -in yard until the proper enclosure is constructed, and (iii) that the animal has been spayed or neutered. In addition, owners who apply for certificates or renewals thereof under this section shall not be issued a certificate or renewal thereof unless they present satisfactory evidence that (i) their residence is and will continue to be posted with clearly visible signs warning both minors and adults of the presence of a dangerous dog on the property and (ii) the animal has been permanently identified by means of a tattoo on the inside thigh or by electronic implantation. ° i (g) While on the property of its owner, an animal determined to be a dangerous dog shall be confined indoors or in a securely locked structure of sufficient height and design to prevent its escape or direct contact with or entry by minors, adults, or other animals.The structure shall be designed to provide the animal with shelter from the elements of nature. When off its owner's property, an animal found by a court to be a dangerous dog shall be kept on a leash and muzzled in such a manner as not to cause injury to animal or interfere with the animal's vision or respiration, but so as to prevent it from biting a person or another animal. (h) If the owner of an animal determined to be a dangerous dog is a minor, the custodial parent or legal guardian of the minor shall be responsible for complying with the requirements of this section. (i) After an animal has been determined to be a dangerous dog, the animal's owner shall ' immediately, upon learning of same, notify the animal warden if the animal (i) is loose or unconfined; (ii) bites a person or attacks another animal; (iii) is sold, given away, or dies; or (iv) has been moved to a different address. (j) All fees collected pursuant to this article, less the costs incurred by the animal warden in producing and distributing the certificates and tags required by this article and in caring for animals pending the hearing described in this article, shall be paid into a special dedicated fund for the purpose of paying the expenses of any training course required under § 3.1- 796.105 of the Code of Virginia. (No. 92 -56, 6 -2 -92 ; No. 95 -26, 3 -14 -95 ; No. 97 -60, 6- 24 -97, effective 7 -1 -97; No. 03 -47, 6- 24 -03, effective 7 -1 -03) Secs. 4- 19- -4 -20. Reserved. 66 PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 Credits Pit Bull Educational Packet {, Special thanks to: by Marcy Setter Pit Bull Rescue Central www.pbrc.net /home.html © Copyright 2005 Understand -A- Bull.com For their dedication to helping homeless All rights reserved worldwide. pit bulls in need, and for their tireless Printed in the United States of America efforts in educating the public about www.understand- a- bull.com/ i these wonderful, often misrepresented d breeds. Requests of additional printed copies for educational purposes may be sent to: Our inspirations: fightbsl @understand- a- bull.cam Dakota Blue, American Pit Bull Terrier M Destiny, American Pit Bull Terrier An online version of this book is also a Boo, American Pit Bull Terrier available at: Nitro, rescued American Pit Bull Terrier www.understand- a- bull.com/ L Taura, rescued American Pit Bull Terrier Sadie, rescued Pit Bull mix Author: Marcy Setter Maddie and Alfred, rescued American Editor. Amy Scharmen Pit Bull Terriers "brother and sister" Designer: Diana McKay a Sydney, rescued American Pit Bull Terrier Bradley, rescued American Staffordshire N Special thanks to: Terrier Kris Crawford and the SAR Pits for their story, photos, and commitment. Packet and front cover designed by: www.forpitssake.org/ I WonderBull Design www.cafepress.com /wonderbull Special thanks to: the American Canine Foundation (ACF), The correct answer for the "Find the Pit for use of their scientific research data. Bull" exercise in the BSL section is #9. http: / /acf2004.tripod.com/ Special thanks to: Karen Peak of West Wind Dog Training www.westwinddogtraining.com/ and the Safe Kids /Safe Dogs Project www.SafeKidsSafeDogs.com/ Special thanks to: < Dr. Al W. Stinson D.V.M. Special thanks to: The Furry Friends Foundation www.furryfriendsfoundation.com/ For contributing many wonderful stories and photos of rescued pit bulls and their adoptive families. I PIT BULL EDUCATIONAL PACKET 2005 67 Distribute at the Meeting �1 PIT BULL — FACTS • The City's pit bull ban was upheld as constitutional by the Washington Supreme Court on August 24, 1989 (see attached) • List of 13 Washington cities that ban pit bulls and 10 that declare them dangerous • Based on (31) 2011 US fatal dog attacks — pit bulls accounted for 22 or 71% - yet make up only 5% of the total US dog population American Dog Owners Ass'n v. City of Yakima, 777 P. 2d 1046 - Wash: Supreme Court ... Page 1 of 3 113 Wn.2d 213 (1989) 777 P.2d 1046 AMERICAN DOG OWNERS ASSOCIATION, ET AL, Appellants, v. THE CITY OF YAKIMA, Respondent. No. 56122 -2. The Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc. August 24, 1989 214 *214 Leggett & Kram, by Peter Kram, for appellants. Don W Schussler (of Halverson & Applegate), for respondent. DOLLIVER, J In January 1987, there were three attacks by pit bull dogs on unsuspecting citizens in Yakima On July 28, 1987, the City of Yakima adopted ordinance 3034 which bans dogs known by the owners to be pit bulls, specifically the breeds Bull Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and American Staffordshire Terrier, as well as dogs "identifiable" as having any pit bull variety as an element of their breeding The ordinance allows owners of pit bulls licensed prior to the enactment to keep their pets subject to certain rules The ordinance also allows a judge to release an apprehended dog on a showing that the dog will not return to the city or that the dog was misidentified Plaintiffs David Carvo and Mark and Bonnie Johnson own dogs that may come under the ordinance Plaintiff American Dog Owners Association has members in Yakima owning dogs that may come under the ordinance In August 1987, Yakima notified the Johnsons that they may be subject to the ordinance All plaintiffs sued Yakima, seeking injunctive and declaratory relief as well as damages A temporary restraining order was issued Both parties moved for summary judgment prior to trial In support of their motion, the plaintiffs offered affidavits stating that an ordinary person would misidentify mixed breeds and that no scientific method can determine breed Defendant 215 City of Yakima offered affidavits showing the *215 identifiability and vicious propensity of pit bulls and outlining the procedures required of the City to prove an animal comes under the ordinance. The trial judge granted defendant's motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs assign error The matter was certified to the Supreme Court. We accept certification and affirm Plaintiffs argue first that Yakima City Ordinance 3034, codified in Yakima City Code 6 18 010 et seq , is unconstitutionally vague, claiming that a person of ordinary intelligence cannot reasonably tell what is prohibited [1] In Seattle v. Huff, 111 Wn.2d 923, 767 P.2d 572 (1989) we reaffirmed that "[a]n ordinance is presumed constitutional and the party challenging the constitutionality of the law has the burden of proving it is unconstitutionally vague beyond a reasonable doubt." Huff, at 928 (citing State v. Maciolek, 101 Wn.2d 259, 263, 676 P.2d 996 (1984)) For the ordinance to be vague beyond a reasonable doubt, the plaintiff must show at least one of two procedural elements is missing. "adequate notice to citizens and adequate standards to prevent arbitrary enforcement." Seattle v. Huff, supra at 929 http: / /scholar.google.com /scholar case? case = 4741494193260953656 &q = American +Dog +... 9/17/2013 American Dog Owners Assn v. City of Yakima, 777 P. 2d 1046 - Wash: Supreme Court ... Page 2 of 3 Adequate notice requires the law to be sufficiently definite so that a person of ordinary intelligence can reasonably tell what is prohibited However, "[i]mpossible standards of specificity are not required " Blondheim v. State, 84 Wn.2d 874, 878, 529 P.2d 1096 (1975) Neither is absolute agreement. "' [I]f [persons] of ordinary intelligence can understand a penal statute, notwithstanding some possible areas of disagreement, it is not wanting in certainty "' Seattle v. Eze, [111 Wn.2d 22, 27, 759 P.2d 366 (1988)1 (quoting State v. Maciolek, supra at 265) Huff, at 929 [2] We find Yakima City Ordinance 3034 gives sufficient notice The four breeds outlined in the ordinance are understood to refer to dogs satisfying detailed professional standards. Yakima animal control officers presently use 216 *216 these standards along with illustrations to identify dogs This standard is stricter than a lay person would have to apply Moreover, the ordinance has provisions to protect those who already own pit bulls and those who happen to travel through town with a pit bull. Other courts have held pit bull ordinances may give notice without painstaking definitions State v. Peters, 534 So.2d 760, 766 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988), where the ordinance was explicit, held that alternative definitions of pit bull did not violate notice requirements State v. Robinson, 44 Ohio App.3d 128, 541 N.E.2d 1092 (1989), where the ordinance was not explicit, determined that "[a]lthough the statute lacks a specific definition of pit bull dog, mathematical certainty is not always essential ". Likewise an unpublished Ohio Court of Appeals case, Lima v McFadden, cause 1- 85 -22, June 30, 1986, cited in State v. Peters, supra at 768, upheld an ordinance without a definition of pit bull because the phrase "pit bull" has a discernible meaning Although American Dog Owners Ass'n, Inc. v. Lynn, Mass. , 533 N.E.2d 642 (1989) found that statute "not sufficiently definite ", Lynn, 533 N.E.2d at 646, the definition there was "devoid of any reference to a particular breed" Lynn, 533 N.E.2d at 646 The Yakima ordinance here names four particular breeds. We decline to follow Lynn A statute must have adequate standards to prevent arbitrary enforcement. This forbids "criminal statutes that contain no standards and allow police officers, judge, and jury to subjectively decide what conduct the statute proscribes in any given case " State v. Worrell, 111 Wn.2d 537, 544, 761 P.2d 56 (1988) (quoting Maciolek, at 267) But a statute is not necessarily unconstitutional because it requires subjective evaluations by an officer State v. Worrell, supra (quoting Maciolek, at 267) The real question is whether it "invites an inordinate amount of police discretion" Worrell, at 547 (Utter, J , concurring) 217 "217 [3] We find adequate standards for identification in the professional standards and illustrations used by the City and in the burden of proof which rests on the City to show that a particular dog meets the professional standard and that no reason exists to impede the dog's destruction Furthermore, as outlined by the assistant city attorney in her affidavit, the City is required to prove that the dog at the time of pickup was over 6 months old, known by the owner to be either a purebred or mixed breed of the four listed breeds and identifiable as one of those breeds. See Yakima City Ordinance 3035, codified in Yakima City Code 6.20 110E. [4, 5] The Yakima ordinance is constitutional even though some inoffensive pit bulls might be banned. Overbreadth is only a problem when it "' reaches a substantial amount of constitutionally protected conduct. "' Huff, at 925 (quoting Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 458, 96 L.Ed.2d 398, 107 S.Ct. 2502 (1987)). Dogs are subject to police power and may be destroyed or regulated to protect citizens. See Sentell v. New Orleans & C.R.R., 166 U.S. 698, 704, 41 L.Ed. 1169, 17 S.Ct. 693 (1897) Thus, "property in dogs is of an imperfect or qualified nature ", Sentell, at 701, and "a harmless or inoffensive American Pit Bull Terrier may be banned in order to abate the threat presented by other American Pit Bull Terriers ". Garcia v. Tiferas, N.M. , 767 P.2d 355, 363 (1988) The Yakima ordinance is also constitutional although it will not stop all dog bites nor remove unidentifiable pit bull mixes A municipality may "address threats in a piecemeal fashion," Garcia. 767 P.2d at 361, as long as there is a httn: / /scholar.eooele.com /scholar case? case = 4741494193260953656 &Q = American +Doe +... 9/17/2013 American Dog Owners Ass'n v. City of Yakima, 777 P. 2d 1046 - Wash: Supreme Court ... Page 3 of 3 rational basis for the decision. The Yakima ordinance was enacted as a public safety measure after three unprovoked attacks by pit bulls Finally, the plaintiffs fail to show vagueness "beyond a reasonable doubt." Huff, at 928 In fact, the plaintiffs admit acquiring their pets believing them to be pit bulls, although they now aver they cannot identify the breed 218 *218 II The plaintiffs argue that the trial judge erred in granting summary judgment to the defendant and in denying summary judgment to the plaintiffs [6] For summary judgment, the "moving party bears the initial burden of showing the absence of an issue of material fact ", Young v. Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. 112 Wn.2d 216, 225, 770 P.2d 182 (1989), and reasonable inferences are evaluated "in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party" Reichelt v. Johns - Manville Corp., 42 Wn. App. 620, 624, 712 P.2d 881 (1986), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 107 Wn.2d 761, 733 P.2d 530 (1987) If a defendant successfully bears the initial burden, the inquiry shifts to the plaintiff "to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case" Young, at 225 Yakima met its initial burden by showing sufficient specificity to avoid vagueness and sufficient rationale for the use of police power The burden shifted to the plaintiffs to establish a viable question of vagueness However, as discussed above, the ordinance cannot be found vague Likewise, the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment fails the initial burden of proof because there was no competent question of vagueness We hold that Yakima City Ordinance 3034 is not unconstitutionally vague We also hold that summary judgment was not given in error The trial court is affirmed CALLOW, C.J , and UTTER, BRACHTENBACH, DORE, PEARSON, ANDERSEN, DURHAM, and SMITH, JJ , concur Reconsideration denied October 11, 1989 Save trees - read court opinions online on Google Scholar htto: / /scholar.aooale.com /scholar case? case = 4741494193260953656 &a = American +Doa +... 9/17/2013 • Washington - Breed - Specific Laws (BSL) - Legislating Dangerous Dogs - DogsBite.org Page 1 of 2 Does bite. Some dogs don't let go. I DogsBite.org DogsBite org is a public education website home dogsbite dog bite dangerous legislating dog bite staying blog statistics dogs dogs victims safe About Us Donate ite.org In the 8 -year period from 2005 to 2012, pit bulls killed ogs' 151 Americans and accounted for 60% of the total recorded deaths (251). Combined, pit bulls and Some dogs don't let go rottweilers accounted for 73% of these deaths I More » Home a legislating dogs » state -by -state » bsl FAQ state -by -state military regulation constitutionality appellate decisions Washington breed - specific laws :: If you know of a pit bull ordinance that is not listed here, please send us a link to the ordinance or published news article so that we can update this web page. ordinanceOdogsbite.orq. Dangerous dog ordinances Pit Bull Ordinances in Washington City Website View Ordinance Type of Ordinance Fighting breeds declared "potentially dangerous" including: Akita. American Pit Bull Terrier American Staffordshire Terrier Bull Terrier Cane Corso, Dogo Argentine. Auburn Section' 6 35 Dogue de Bordeaux, Kuvasz. Pit Bull Terrier Presa Caner*. Staffordshire Bull Terrier Tose Mu Brewster Section. 6 10.20 Bans. pit bulls Bridgeport Section. 6.10.020 Bans: pit bulls B ucket Section: 9.30.090 Bans' pit bulls Cathlamet Section. 6.10 -020 Bans. pit bulls Connell Section: 8.08.010 Pit bulls and rottweilers declared "potentially dangerous" Enumclaw Section. 7.08 Bans: pit bulls Everett Section 6 08.010 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" 1 1987 legal notesf- ' Everson Section: 6.08 020 Restricts: pit bulls Grandview Section: 6 06.010 Pit bulls declared "dangerous" Kennewick Section: 8'02.320 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Mattawa Section. 6.04.010 Pit bulls declared "dangerous" Pasco Section' 8 02.320 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Prosser Section: 6.40 010 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Ouincy Section' 8 06.010 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Othello Section: 6 06.010 Bans: pit bulls Raineer Section' 6.04.020 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Rosalia Animal control:. Bans pit bulls Royal Cite Section: 6.04.020 Bans pit bulls and rottweilers Seatac Section. 6 05.120 Pit bulls declared "dangerous" Selah Section: 5.07.080 Bans. pit bulls Sumas Section: 6.02 045 Bans: pit bulls Toppenish Section: 6.06 Pit bulls declared "dangerous" Wapato News article Bans, pit bulls. rottweilers, mastiffs. and American bulldogs. Yakima Section: 6 -18 , Bans' pit bulls http: / /www.doasbite.era /leaislatina- dangerous- dons- washinaton.phn 9/17/2013 Washington - Breed - Specific Laws (BSL) - Legislating Dangerous Dogs - DogsBite.org Page 2 of 2 Related materials. American Dog Owners v. Yakima home I dogsbite blog I dog bite statistics I dangerous dogs I legislating dogs I dog bite victims I staying safe I donate About I Contact I Site Terms I Privacy Policy I Dog Bite Attorney Directory I Webmaster Tools I Tee Shop I Links Copyright © 2007 -2013 DogsBite.org i Published by Lynn Media Group I DogsBite.org for Android DogsBite org is a national dog bite victims' group dedicated to reducing serious dog attacks Through our work, we hope to protect both people and pets from future attacks Page last modified: 09/17/2013 14'25:52 I Sitemap httn:// www. doasbite. ora/ leaislatina- dangerous- dons- washinaton.nhn 9/17/2013 Washington - Breed - Specific Laws (BSL) - Legislating Dangerous Dogs - DogsBite.org Page 1 of 2 Dogs bite, Some dogs don't let go. I DogsBite.org DogsBite.org is a public education website home dogsbite dog bite dangerous legislating dog bite staying blog statistics dogs dogs victims safe About Us Donate o In the 8 -year period from 2005 to 2012, pit bulls killed Dogs 151 Americans and accounted for 60% of the total �� 9 1 / S or g recorded deaths (251). Combined, pit bulls and 2 / CN #4 6! 7 Some dogs don't let go rottweilers accounted for 73% of these deaths. More » % a 3A - d� /l) Home » legislating dogs » state -by -state » V, bsl FAQ state -by -state military regulation constitutionality appellate decisions Washington breed - specific laws :: If you know of a pit bull ordinance that is not listed here, please send us a link to the ordinance or published news article so that we can update this web page: ordinanceAdogsbite.org. Dangerous dog ordinances Pit But Ordinances in Washington City Website View Ordinance Type of Ordinance Fighting breeds declared "potentially dangerous" including: Akita, American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, Bull Terrier, Cane Corso, Dogo Argentino, Auburn Section: 6 -35 Dogue de Bordeaux, Kuvasz, Pd Bull Terrier Presa Canario, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, Tosa !nu Brewster Section: 6.10.20 , Batis:.pit Bridgeport Section: 6.10.020 Bens:.pitbulls Buckely Section: 9.30.090 Barts:.pit $uils Cathlamet Section: 6.10.020 Bans pit bulls Connell Section: 8.08.010 Pit bulls and rottweilers declared ,'potentially dangerous" Enumclaw Section: 7.08 t :Bans: Pit _ buts r Everett Section: 6.08.010 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" 1 1987 legal note Everson Section. 6.08.020 Restncts:.pit bulls Grandview Section: 6.06.010 Pit bulls declared "dangerous" Kennewick Section: 8:02.320 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Mattawa Section: 6.04.010 } Pit buts declared "dangerous" Pasco Section: 8.02.320 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Prosser Section 6.40.010 Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Ouincy Section: 8.06 -010 j Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Othello Section: 6.06.010 Bans: piit'bups+ E Raineer Section: 6.04.020 , Pit bulls declared "potentially dangerous" Rosalie Animal control Bans: pit taillsl Royal City Section: 6.04.020 Bans:.pit'bulla and rottweters' 10? Seatac Section: 6.05.120 Pit bulls declared "dangerous" Seiah Section 5.07.080 .t B&nsi.p4u0s .''s' Sumas Section: 6.02_045 q „salts :'pit bops, Toppenish Section' 6.06 Pit taills'declared "dangerous" Wapato News article Bans pit bulls , and American tnilldr s. Yakima Section: 6-18 Barts::pirtis.:a' httn • / /www_clogshite_org /leuisla tins - dangerous - dogs- washinQtonmhn 9/17/2013 . 2011 U.S. Dog Bite Fatalities - Dog Bite Statistics - DogsBite.org Page 1 of 11 Dogs bite. Some dogs don't let go I DogsBite org DogsBite.org is a public education website home dogsbite dog bite dangerous legislating dog bite staying blog statistics dogs dogs victims safe About Us Donate o A In the 8 -year period from 2005 to 2012, pit bulls killed { '!' 151 Americans and accounted for 60% of the total ' recorded deaths (251). Combined, pit bulls and Some dogs don't let go rottweilers accounted for 73% of these deaths. I More » Home » dog bite statistics » dog bite fatalities a dog bite studies dog bite fatalities fatality citations quick statistics studies index 2011 dog bite fatalities :: Information gathered by DogsBite.org is verifiable' through Internet archive services. Our Fatality Citations section documents each source used in our dog bite - related fatality research. 2011 statistics° 31 U S. fatal dog attacks occurred in 201. Despite being regulated in Military Housing areas and over 600 U.S. cities, pit bulls led these attacks accounting fo 71 o (22). Pit bulls make up less tha ep•f the total U S. dog population.' Notably in 2011, adult victims of fatal pit ull attacks more than doubled the number of child victims. Of the 22 total pit bull victims, 68% (15) fell between the ages of 32 to 76, and 32% (7) were ages 5 years and younger The year 2011 also marks an increase in pet pit bulls killing their owners. Of the 8 total instances this year in which a family dog inflicted fatal injury to its primary caretaker, the dog's owner 88% (7) involved pet pit bulls. Together, pit bulls (22) and rottweilers (4), the number two lethal dog breed, accounted for 84% of all fatal attacks in 2011 In the 7 -year period from 2005 to 2011 this same combination accounted for 74% (157) of the total recorded deaths (213). The breakdown between pit bulls and rottweilers is substantial over this 7 -year period. From 2005 to 2011, pit bulls killed 128 Americans, about one citizen every 20 days, versus rottweilers, which killed 29; about one citizen every 88 days. Annual data from 2011 shows that 58% (18) of the attacks occurred to adults (21 years and older) and 42% (13) occurred to children (11 years and younger). Of the children, 62% (8) occurred to ages 1 and younger 2011 data also shows that 39% (12) of the fatal incidents involved more than one dog: 26% (8) involved breeding on the dog owner's property either actively or in the recent past, and 6% (2) involved tethered dogs, down from 9% in 2010 and 19% in 2009 Dog ownership information for 2011 shows that family dogs comprised 65% (20) of the attacks that resulted in death; 74% (23) of all incidents occurred on the dog owner's property and 29% (9) resulted in criminal charges, up from 15% in 2010. The states of California and Texas led fatalities in 2011, each with 4 deaths; pit bulls and their mixes contributed to 88% (7) of the 8 deaths. North Carolina, New Mexico, South Carolina and Virginia each incurred 2 deaths. See' 7 -Year U.S. Dog Bite Fatality Chart (2005 to 2011)-' See: Full news release 2011 U.S. dog bite fatalities 2011 fatal dog attacks by breed 15'`'e+A",µ' r: ° E "' Air: `, : ^ "•=` . y ,. ' e :20^Alii 11% Pit bun (22) :V ; .24 ;:1 13% Rottweiter (4) 3% (1 per 7 different breeds) ' I I t I I 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% In 2011 one fatality involved dogs from up to four different dog breeds, thus producing a "death credit" total of 33 rather than 31 Up to seven dog breeds contributed to one death: Alaskan malamute. American bulldog. "bulldog" (American or English not specified), cane corso, doberman pinscher, German shepherd and Japanese akita. 2011 victims Linda Leal 51 -years old I Colusa, CA s r 4 4 s , ;r httn: / /www.dogsbite.org /dog- bite - statistics - fatalities- 2011.ohn 9/17/2011 • 2011 U.S. Dog Bite Fatalities - Dog Bite Statistics - DogsBite.org Page 2 of 11 Linda Leal, 51 -years old, was mauled to death by her pit bull -mix Her husband, Enrique Leal, discovered her shortly after 7 am in the couple's backyard. One pit bull, with a history of violent behavior, was penned up in the Y ' P Y p rY P P yard. The couple's other dog, a pit bull -mix, was loose and found with blood on it Arriving firefighters found extensive head and neck injuries "consistent with a dog attack." An autopsy later determined that Leal was alive during the mauling. As of January 7, officials did not know the time of death and are awaiting a toxicology report. Sheriffs Lt. Shane Maxey said the tests were needed to ensure that she "didn't have something in her system that put her in that position." Yet, police also said that there was no indication of foul play or a sign of struggle at the scene. Leal had been battling liver cancer at the time of her death. [source citations Date of death: January 4 2011 Chained: No Breed of dog: Pit bull -mix Relationship to dog: Family Sex of dog: Unknown Owner of dog: Victim Spay /Neuter Unknown Multiple dogs: No On /Off property' On Criminal charges. No Makayla Woodard 5 -years old I Waxhaw, NC Makayla Woodard, 5 -years old, was killed by two pit bulls while in her front yard. Her grandmother, Nancy Presson, was severely injured trying to protect her Michael Gordon, a convicted felon, owned both pit bulls ' Neighbors said they had complained many times about Gordon's dogs running loose. Police said they warned Gordon at Christmas -- just a few weeks earlier -- to keep his dogs contained. At the time Gordon admitted that k j his dogs, Rebel and Daisy, often managed to "hop the fence " Residents of Waxhaw were devastated by the incident. Hundreds attended Makayla's funeral, which began with the little girl's body carried in a horse drawn cart. After the funeral, town commissioners set up a panel to study the existing dog control law and to determine how to better handle potentially dangerous dogs. On January 26, Gordon turned himself into police after being charged with involuntary manslaughter [source citations] Date of death: January 12. 2011 Chained: No Breed of dog: Pit bull (2) Relationship to dog: Non - family Sex of dog: Mixed Owner of dog: Neighbor Spay /Neuter No Multiple dogs: Yes On /Off property' Off Criminal charges: Yes Kristen Dutton 9 -years old I Modoc, SC 4. Kristen Dutton, 9 -years old, was bitten in the neck and killed by a 98 -pound Japanese akita. Her grandfather, j Mickey Abercrombie, had purchased the dog three weeks earlier for his grandchildren who lived at his Modoc .. home. The seller of the dog was not named, nor did any discussion arise in the media concerning why Abercrombie purchased an akita as for his grandchildren; a breed with a well known heritage of dogfighting and , guarding. Prior to the fatal incident, Kristen had taken the dog for a walk by herself. While playing with the dog ; f near its kennel afterward, the animal attacked. Unfortunately, Kristen's brother discovered her motionless body first. Kristen Dutton was a fourth grader at Merriwether Elementary school and adored animals. She hoped to one day become a veterinarian, according to her grandmother Janice Abercrombie. The new akita was the first and last pet Kristen ever had. [source citations] Date of death: January 22 2011 Chained: No Breed of dog: Japanese akita Relationship to dog: Family Sex of dog: Unknown Owner of dog: Grandfather Spay /Neuter Unknown Multiple dogs. No On /Off property' On Criminal charges: No Ronnie Waldo 51 -years old I Randolph, MS Ronnie Waldo, 51 -years old, was killed by three pit bulls owned by his neighbor, James Swanson. Waldo had been renting a nearby property from Swanson and was discovered by a friend in Swanson's front yard. Police shot and killed two of the pit bulls on the scene. Just before the attack, Waldo and his friend Raymond Blansett had been trying to fix a hot water heater in Waldo's trailer; they needed a relay switch to complete the task. Waldo walked over to Swanson's house to see if he had one in his garage. When he did not return, Blansett went to find him. He found his friend on the ground with two pit bulls tearing at him. The third dog went after Blansett, who had httn: / /www.doEsbite.ore /dog- bite - statistics - fatalities- 2011.bho 9/17/2013 2011 U.S. Dog Bite Fatalities - Dog Bite Statistics - DogsBite.org Page 3 of 11 to run up the road to escape. Pontotoc County has neither a leash law nor a vicious dog ordinance and the attack occurred on the dog owner's property Despite these issues, a special grand jury charged him with manslaughter [source citations] Date of death: January 26. 2011 Chained: No Breed of dog: Pit bull (3) Relationship to dog: Non - family Sex of dog: Mixed Owner of dog: Neighbor Spay /Neuter• No Multiple dogs: Yes On /Off property On Criminal charges. Yes Sirlinda Hayes 66 -years old I Dillon County, SC Sirlinda Hayes, 66 -years old, was gardening just outside her one -story home when two loose rottweilers viciously attacked. The dogs, owned by her cousin and neighbor Shawn Samuel, had roamed loose many times before, but had not been a problem, according to family members. Yet on February 17, the two dogs launched a brutal attack upon Sirlinda killing her When the dogs' owner learned what happened, he rushed out to help Sirlinda. His own two dogs then turned on him, launching a second attack. When emergency responders arrived, the dogs would not them near the victims. Deputies shot and killed both animals. Animal control later removed three additional rottweilers from Samuel's home. Badly injured, Samuel was rushed to McLeod Medical Center in Dillon In addition to suffering many bite wounds, doctors were forced to amputate one of his legs Billy Odom, Sirlinda's nephew, said he believed "seeing the garden hoe" held by his aunt may have caused the dogs to attack [source citations] Date of death: February 17, 2011 Chained: No Breed of dog: Rottweiler (2) Relationship to dog: Non - family Sex of dog: Unknown Owner of dog: Cousin Spay/Neuter' Unknown Multiple dogs: Yes On /Off property Off Criminal charges: Pending Darius Tillman 15 -days old I Kalamazoo, MI Darius Tillman. 15 -days old. was mauled to death by the family pit bull as he lay sleeping. At the time of the incident, the victim's mother, his 2 -year old sibling and two pet pit bulls were at the home. Police reported that the mother laid her infant down for a nap in a bassinette and fell asleep in another room. One of the pit bulls pushed open the bedroom door and mauled the baby to death. Animal control euthanized the young male dog after the incident. It's unknown what became of the second household pit bull. Jeff Hadley, Kalamazoo Public Safety Chief, called the incident a "tragic accident." echoing the same distortion voiced by pro -pit bull groups About four months later and after the Kalamazoo Gazette gained the final incident report under the state Freedom of Information Act, it was learned that detectives sought charges of involuntary manslaughter against the child's mother, Mallory Wildig, but the Kalamazoo County Prosecutor's Office declined to pursue [source citations[ Date of death: February 19. 2011 Chained: No Breed of dog: Pit but Relationship to dog: Family Sex of dog: Male Owner of dog: Mother Spay/Neuter Unknown Multiple dogs: No On /Off property' On Criminal charges: No Vanessa Husmann 3 -years old I Hopkinton, IA Vanessa Husmann, 3 -years old, was mauled to death by her grandfather's two rottweilers that were being kept at : k 4 T her home. Just before the attack, she had gone into the backyard to play where the dogs were kept separated in a z secure kennel. Her 18 -year old half brother was babysitting her at the time but it was Blake Muller, who was visiting his mother's home across the street, who witnessed the attack and ran to help. The victim's mother, .r _;=. Rhonda Marty, later told reporters that she did not know how the dogs escaped their kennel (she issued a - - a statement on TV that the gate was "still locked" after the incident too). But on Sunday, a day after the little girl's death, family members used a large tractor to destroy and remove the kennel, leaving no future way to make this determination. Police said the dogs were usually kept in Monticello at the grandfather's home where he breeds "family oriented" AKC registered champion rottweilers, according to his website [source citations] Date of death: March 6, 2011 Chained: No Breed of dog: Rottweiler (2) Relationship to dog: Family http / /www.doasbite.ore /doe- bite - statistics - fatalities- 2011.php 9/17/2013