Ordinance Passed in our Community

[rottnkidd]

I live in a small village in N.E. Ohio. Since 2001 there's been a
codified Ordinance titled: "Dogs and Other Animals Running at Large; Dangerous and Vicious Dogs".
As of Tues Sept 16th this Ordinance will be amended as follows:
"No more than one vicious dog will be permitted per househould.
(A portion of this Ordinance currently reads: "No person shall cause animals to be herded, kept, or detained for the purpose of grazing on premises other than those owned or occupied by the owner or keeper thereof without the consent of the owner of the premises." "A vicious dog....belongs to a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog".
There is no mention anywhere in this lengthy Ordinance of the Rottweiler, or other breeds that are sometimes targets of BSL.
An acqaintance of ours acquired a young, female Pit bull within the past year. She bred this female to her intact male, and 6 pups were born in early Aug. Recently the female got out of the yard (by leaping over the deck rail), and ran into a neighboring yard, frightening the elderly resident. This event snowballed to the point the Village is changing their dog-related Ordinance, as posted above.
The male is incredibly friendly and obedient, although he's had no formal training. The female however, is young (too young to have been bred!), and although I've never met her, she's supposedly friendly but on the wild side.
This is another case of owner irresponsibility. Now this owner is in a panic about the legislation. She's calling me on the phone as if I can change what happened. It only takes 1 squeak to get the oil. And the neighbor that was intimidated has squeaked all the way to the Prosecutor's office.
Tues night is the Council meeting and I plan on attending. I won't know if the public will be included in any discussion, however, if the Ordinance is going to be passed tomorrow night, is there anything that can make a difference at this point? This is why it's so important that those of us with breeds that can be
targeted, to be so vigilant. There's just no place for being lax.
kathy

[Troy]

Hang in there Kathy. Be firm and bring information that can hopefully enlighten this group!

Best of luck.

[Judi W]

Go to the AKC legislatitive site. They have material.

Actually (if it didn't include a breed, but rather actions) I think one vicious dog per household is quite generous.

[guitronics]

The master organization of governments is the United Nations. They want absolute power over the people of the world,and they're getting it,slowly.
Breed Specific Legislation is a "Divide and Conquer "Tool. People defend their property (and lives) with animals,usually Dogs.So there will be a move around the globe to push for BSL,as well as "Gun Control",and sweeping "Investigative Powers".

[Grendl]

Rottnkidd - What was the outcome of the meeting last Tuesday night? Did anything change?

[rottnkidd]

I'm sorry I haven't followed up on this until now! The Council voted to eliminate the word "Dangerous" from the existing Ordinance of "Dangerous and Vicious dogs..." The term "vicious" will apply to "a Pit Bull or Pit Bull-type dog", and only 1 dog of this type will be permitted per household within the community. The owner must also provide containment, to include overhead fencing to prevent escape; and the dog must be leashed at all times, even on owner's property, when out of the boundaries of the fence.
This Ordinance will be passed at the next meeting, and I'll post any pertinent info.
kathy

[guitronics]

"A Pit Bull or Pit Bull-Type Dog"? How would a person define "A Pit Bull-Type Dog"? A person with the resources might get this language declared unconstitutional.

A court could say "a dog with a Bobbed tail constitutes a Pit Bull-type dog". Or they could say "Any dog that shows it's teeth or growls when confronted by a stranger is a Pit Bull-Type dog".

That's the trouble with Governments....the more powerful they are, the more intrusive they are to Citizens,and the more they want to dictate.