Heads Up Connecticut!

[Rene Allegrini]

Elizabeth Benton, Register Staff
05/12/2007



Nancy Caruso has been trying since March to rid her Ansonia neighborhood of the two dogs she claims killed her 6-month old Pomeranian puppy, Sammy.


In April, the Carusos gathered signatures from neighbors at 78 of the 95 homes in their area calling for their neighbor’s bull mastiff and Labrador to be removed. Caruso brought the petition to Ansonia’s Board of Aldermen and the Police Commission. But little could be done, the Carusos were told.

Ansonia had already fined Elmer Sulkowski Jr., owner of the two dogs allegedly responsible for Sammy’s death, for allowing the dogs to roam, for harboring dogs to create a nuisance, and for failing to license his three dogs (he has a third not involved in the incident). His tickets totaled $634.

After Sammy’s death, Sulkowski said he was willing to find a new home for his Italian mastiff, Mia, but claimed his Labrador, Guinness, was not involved. Both Mia and Guinness still live with Sulkowski, next door to the Carusos.

As is the case in many Connecticut towns, Ansonia police cannot force a dog owner to euthanize or remove his pet after it has attacked another animal, only in cases where a person has been targeted.

But changes may be afoot in Ansonia and at the state level.

Both local and state politicians are considering adopting laws that give animal control officers more authority to act in cases where a dog has attacked another animal.

Members of Ansonia’s Board of Aldermen are currently reviewing "vicious dog" ordinances from other Connecticut towns, including Trumbull, where another dog-on-dog attack spurred a change in local law.

Aldermanic President Peter Danielczuk, D-1, said he would like to see an ordinance that adds "a little more teeth in the law," that applies to cases where a dog attacks another animal.

State lawmakers are also considering beefing up dog-attack laws. If passed, local animal control officers would be able to order a dog euthanized or removed in cases where a dog attacks a pet or farm animal. Dog owners would have a chance to appeal a decision, just as they do now in cases where a dog has attacked a person.

Under current state laws, if a dog breaks loose and kills another pet, animal control officers have limited options in most municipalities.

"The only action we can take is a nuisance ticket and a ticket for allowing a dog to roam," said Maureen Griffin, supervisor of State Animal Control, which works with local animal control on dog nuisance cases.

Therese Jositas of Trumbull has made it a personal mission to see to it that the situation changes.

In June 2005, Jositas and her daughter, Gretchen, then 16, were walking their two collies, Gracie and Rowdie, around the block. As they turned a corner, a pit bull several homes down leaped over its fence and circled the family, growling, Jositas recalls.

"We huddled into a little circle. … As a runner, my worst fear has always been being attacked by a dog, in particular a dog like this," she said.

A second pit bull escaped from the yard, and both dogs lunged at Gracie. Gretchen tried to kick the pit bulls off Gracie. Eventually the pit bulls’ owner ran out to help, but was thrown to the ground by her pets, Jositas said.

When Gracie’s collar slipped off her neck during the attack, the pit bulls’ owner whipped the dogs across the snout, and one of the dogs released its grip. Police arrived, and Gracie was freed and taken to a veterinary hospital, but she died eight hours later.

Jositas’s neighbor agreed to euthanize one of the pit bulls, but two years later, Jositas says she still sees the second dog walk past her home.

"I was shocked to find out [police] could do absolutely nothing. They couldn’t quarantine the dogs, they couldn’t seize the dogs. They couldn’t do a thing," Jositas said.

By July 2005, Trumbull had strengthened its leash laws in response to Gracie’s death. By October 2005, "Gracie’s Law" was unanimously voted onto the books.

Gracie’s Law strengthened the town’s codes on animals, adding specific language regarding "vicious dogs." The law is serving as an example now for Ansonia aldermen in considering their own ordinance.

A vicious dog in Trumbull includes dogs that have severely injured or killed a domestic animal or pet while off its owner’s property, a dog that has inflicted severe injury on a person, another dog, or domestic animal without provocation, or any dog used primarily for dog fighting, the ordinance states.

If a dog is declared vicious by the town’s animal control officer, the dog’s owner may be ordered to give up the dog, post warning signs, confine the dog and keep it off porches, and patios, among other possibilities. A vicious dog that has severely attacked a person can be euthanized.

"I’d be very happy with the state law," said Caruso. "But because I don’t know if the state law will go through, it would be really nice to have a Sammy’s Law in Ansonia like Gracie’s Law in Trumbull."

The state bill passed unanimously in the Senate on Wednesday, and is now waiting to be called for a vote before the House of Representatives.

State Sen. Bill Finch, D-Bridgeport, was moved to co-sponsor the bill after hearing the Jositas’ case.

"We can argue until we’re blue in the face whether the owner has some responsibility, but at that point, it’s too late. If there is a vicious dog, there needs to be some consequences to reestablish public safety," he said.

While legislators so far appear to support the bill, some animal activists have claimed the law ought to punish dog owners, rather than dogs.

"The dog doesn’t know any better," said Marlene Scrivani, a volunteer at the Milford Animal Shelter. "The owner should be punished. I don’t think there is enough punishment in the state for negligent dog owners."

Under the legislation, dog owners who fail to comply with an order by an animal control officer may be fined up to $250 or jailed for up to 30 days.

New Haven Register - Dogfight could lead to change in state laws