New post on Stop BSL |  |
|
Tuesday, 18 November 2014
Hallsville, MO, repeals breed ban by krisdiaz9
Wednesday, 12 November 2014
In a quiet trend, pit bull bans are disappearing
.In a quiet trend, pit bull bans are disappearing
11/09/2014 8:04 PM
11/09/2014 8:04 PM
That fatal dog attack in 2006 led to calls for tougher enforcement of the now-24-year-old pit bull ban in Kansas City, Kan., while prompting other area cities to tighten their restrictions on a breed known for its muscular build and savage bite.
Yet thanks to research that shows little correlation between fatal dog bites and the breeds of the dogs inflicting those wounds, the Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, Kan., is now considering what would have been unthinkable a few years ago.
Unified Government commissioners this month will take up a comprehensive animal-control ordinance that repeals the ban on pit bulls.
Instead, the proposed policy would impose new rules and restrictions aimed at preventing dog attacks without regard to breed by focusing on the behavior of animal owners and their pets.
Owners who mistreat or neglect dogs in ways that could make them mean, such as leaving them chained outside all day, would be subject to higher fines and possible jail time. Dogs that threaten or bite people, whether a German shepherd, pit bull or Chihuahua, would be subject to a zero-tolerance policy.
Reversing Kansas City, Kan.’s ban on pit bulls, however, is far from a sure thing, says Commissioner Hal Walker, who sat on the committee that has been studying the proposed changes since last spring.
“I do believe our ordinance should deal with all vicious dogs,” he said, but he also was friends with someone who needed 200 stitches after being attacked by a pit bull.
“Therefore, I’m not committed to exempting pit bulls yet.”
Roeland Park is also rethinking its pit bull ban. A proposal much like the one under consideration by its neighbor to the north will be discussed at a forum set for 7 p.m. Monday at the Roeland Park Community Center.
This breed-neutral approach has had fits and starts nationally. Nineteen states have enacted laws prohibiting local governments from banning specific dog breeds.
A similar bill passed through committee in the last session of the Missouri General Assembly, but it never became law.
On Tuesday in Aurora, Colo., voters defeated a measure that would have erased that city’s ban. Opponents feared that the Denver suburb would become a magnet for pit bull owners when bans remained in place throughout much of the rest of that metro area.
But the trend is starting to take hold in the Kansas City region. Topeka got rid of its pit bull ban in 2010. Closer to home, Bonner Springs did so last January and Riverside the year before.
Kansas City, Kan., is the most populous city in the metro area to seriously consider dropping its ban. If it is repealed, animal welfare advocates hope it will cause other area municipalities to reconsider their prohibitions.
“It’s not good public policy anymore, it’s just silly,” said Katie Barnett, a Lawrence attorney who leads a coalition of animal welfare groups campaigning to update local animal control laws.
Professionals for a Humane & Safe KC wants changes or tweaks in everything from pet adoptions to managing the surplus of feral cats.
But reversing pit bull bans, and the thinking behind them, is the biggest challenge given what the breed’s advocates say are unfair characterizations of the dogs as vicious killers.
While Kansas City has never prohibited the breed (but does require the dogs be sterilized), bans remain in some of the larger suburbs, including Overland Park, Independence, Shawnee, Liberty, Grandview, Prairie Village and Leawood.
Most were put in place in the 1980s and 1990s after a string of highly publicized pit bull attacks. Some blamed that on the breed, while others put the blame on irresponsible owners who purposely (in the case of drug dealers) or through neglect allowed their dogs to become mean.
“They’ve gotten a bad rap,” said Roeland Park resident and former pit bull owner Geoff Geist. Because of the dogs’ strength and forceful bite, he agrees, pit bulls can be very dangerous “if they go bad.”
But when well-treated by responsible owners, they make great pets, says Geist, who recently sent Roeland Park City Council members a video of his toddler being licked by a pit bull mix that his family once owned named Lady.
“She was one of the most loving pets I’ve ever had,” he said.
That’s also the image portrayed on “Pit Bulls and Parolees,” a popular show on Animal Planet the last several years. Host Tia Torres was recently a guest on “The Daily Show With Jon Stewart,” another pit bull lover.
“They’re incredibly affectionate dogs,” Stewart said on the show. “Super sweet.”
Although the breed is still demonized by some, the latest research shows pit bull bans are not only unfair to pet owners because they don’t distinguish between well-behaved and vicious dogs, but they are also a waste of limited resources.
The American Veterinary Medicine Association, the American Bar Association and other groups say that animal control departments are better off addressing the public safety risks of problem animals than on impounding every dog that happens to look like a pit bull.
Indeed, that’s how many local ordinances are written because, technically speaking, there is no breed known simply as a pit bull.
Liberty’s ordinance is typical. It defines a pit bull as any of several types of bull terriers, or “any dog which has the appearance and characteristics” of those breeds: square head and bulky body.
That vagueness has led to court challenges, but a Kansas Supreme Courtruling set a precedent when it upheld Overland Park’s ordinance.
Brent Toellner is one who hopes local policymakers rethink the pit pull bans now on the books. He’s co-founder of KC Pet Project, which runs the Kansas City animal shelter, and says 25 percent of the dogs the shelter impounds are some form of pit bull. Yet they make up about half of the shelter population on any given day.
Toellner blames that on scattershot local policies where, for instance, it’s legal to keep a pit bull in Lenexa, but one block away in Shawnee or Overland Park, it isn’t.
“So many people come in and fall in love with them and want to adopt them,” he said, “but find out they can’t keep them in their community.”
In a region where space in today’s no-kill animal shelters is always at a premium, that’s a huge impediment.
But ultimately, the issue is not about fairness to dog owners, crowded animal shelters or even the statistics that dog attacks are more the fault of pet owners than the dogs themselves.
It’s about public safety.
“I’m told by experts that what we need is a vicious dog ordinance as opposed to singling out a breed,” Walker said, but he remains uncertain about relaxing the ban.
“What we need is a good discussion,” he said.
To reach Mike Hendricks, call 816-234-4738, or send email to mhendricks@kcstar.com.
Friday, 3 October 2014
Is it worth it?
Is it worth it?
Looks like the city of Denver is facing yet another lawsuit on their pit bull ordinance. Three women in the area are suing them for damages that ensued by forcing them to either give up their homes and lives and move from the city or have their dogs killed.
Caveat has done a nice job of tracking the story, including having the entire complaint documentfor your viewing pleasure.
I would also like to point out the wonderful poll question by the Denver Post yesterday -- that pretty much assumes pit bulls are a problem in every response.
The Denver government is standing behind their ordinance of course. But it makes me wonder why no one is complaining about the large amount of money that is getting tied up in BSL disputes. Ontario has been dealing with a lawsuit to overturn their BSL, Toledo vs. Tellings is awaiting decision in the Ohio Supreme Court after its second appeal. There is also a court case going on in Columbus, OH, and several in San Francisco over their MSN/BSL. There is a LOT of money getting tied up in our legal system by cities trying to defend laws that have been proven NOT TO WORK.
The government finds a lot of ways to waste taxpayer dollars, and this is another perfect example. When the government looks for ways to interfere with people's lives, they are asking for problems. I can't think of a single other type of ordinance (outside of maybe no-smoking laws in restaurants and bars) that causes the same types of problems as BSL from a legal front.
At some point they're going to get it. Unfortunately, it's going to take a lot of waste of taxpayers dollars and civil employee's time before they do.
Laws Against Pit Bulls Soften As Attitudes Change
Laws Against Pit Bulls Soften As Attitudes Change
| By BILL DRAPER
Posted: Updated:
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — For much of the past three decades, pit bulls have been widely regarded as America's most dangerous dog — the favorite breed of thugs, drug dealers and dog-fighting rings, with a fearsome reputation for unprovoked, sometimes deadly attacks.
Hostility toward "pits" grew so intense that some cities began treating them as the canine equivalent of assault rifles and prohibited residents from owning them.
But attitudes have softened considerably since then as animal activists and even television shows cast the dogs in a more positive light. The image makeover has prompted many states to pass new laws that forbid communities from banning specific breeds. And it illustrates the power and persistence of dog-advocacy groups that have worked to fend off pit bull restrictions with much the same zeal as gun-rights groups have defeated gun-control measures.
"Lawmakers are realizing that targeting dogs based on their breed or what they look like is not a solution to dealing with dangerous dogs," said Lisa Peters, a spokeswoman for the American Kennel Club.
Eighteen states now have laws that prohibit communities from adopting breed-specific bans. Lawmakers in six more states are considering similar measures, and some cities are reviewing local policies that classify pit bulls as dangerous animals.
Pit bull advocates hail the changes as recognition that breed-specific laws discriminate against dogs that are not inherently aggressive or dangerous unless they are made to be that way by irresponsible owners.
The dogs' foes complain that their message is being drowned out by a well-funded, well-organized lobbying effort in state capitols. The debate puts millions of pit bull owners up against a relatively small number of people who have been victimized by the dogs.
Ron Hicks, who sponsored a bill in the Missouri House to forbid breed-specific legislation, said he was surprised when nobody spoke against his proposal last month at a committee hearing.
"I figured a few parents would be there who would bring tears to my eyes," the Republican said. "Would it have changed my opinion or what I believe in? No."
A version of Hicks' legislation was endorsed by a House committee last month and needs to clear another committee before a full House vote. The state Senate is considering a comparable bill, as are lawmakers in Utah, South Dakota, Washington, Vermont and Maryland.
In Kansas, the communities of Bonner Springs and Garden City repealed their pit-bull bans earlier this year.
Summer Freeman did not know there was a ban when she moved to Bonner Springs last year after a divorce. She panicked when an animal-control officer discovered her pet and told her she had 15 days to get rid of the dog named Titan or move out of town.
"I think of him like my son," she said. "He's my dog-son, I guess you could say. He's at my hip all the time. He's just a big baby that wouldn't hurt a fly."
Freeman was forced to leave Titan at a shelter in Lawrence for nine months until she successfully fought to overturn the law in January.
For dog owners and pit bull opponents alike, the battle is as deeply personal as any gun-control or religious issue. Each side accuses the other of lying, exploiting emotions and using bullying tactics.
Pit bull owners insist their dogs are harmless, loving family members that shouldn't be blamed for something they didn't do. To opponents, they are a volatile breed whose genetics drive them to kill more than two dozen people in the U.S. each year, many of them young children.
Popular television shows such as "Pit Boss" and "Pit Bulls and Parolees" on Animal Planet glorify the animals and minimize the tragedies that occur when pit bulls turn on humans, pit bull opponents say.
"Everything is telling us these animals are safe if you raise them right," said Jeff Borchardt, a Stevens Point, Wis., man whose 14-month-old son was mauled to death a year ago by two pit bulls that tore the child from the arms of their owner, who was baby-sitting. "My son's dead because of a lie, because of a myth. My life will never be the same."
The two dogs that killed Borchardt's son had lived with their owner since soon after they were born, were well-cared for and had no history of aggressive behavior, he said. Both had been spayed or neutered.
That contradicts the contention that only mistreated, neglected or abused pit bulls attack people.
Colleen Lynn, founder of DogsBite.org, pointed to a friend-of-the-court brief her organization submitted in a 2012 case in which the Maryland Court of Appeals declared pit bulls "inherently dangerous."
"Appellate courts agree with us. Doctors and surgeons agree with us. That is credibility right there," Lynn said. "We also have the support of three divisions of the U.S. military, huge, massive bodies in the U.S. government."
The Marines, Army and Air Force all have banned dangerous dogs — including pit bulls and rottweilers — from their bases because of the "unreasonable risk" they pose to safety, Lynn said.
On the other side stand the American Bar Association and National Animal Control Association, which oppose breed-specific laws because they are discriminatory against a type of dog that isn't really a single breed.
Three main breeds — Staffordshire bull terrier, American pit bull terrier and American Staffordshire terrier — along with mixes of those breeds are generally considered pit bulls. But many muscular, square-jawed, boxer-type dogs often are misidentified as pit bulls, making breed-specific bans hard to enforce.
And because fatal pit bull attacks are a rarity compared with other causes of death such as auto accidents, dog advocates argue that breed-specific bans amount to legislative overkill.
"All communities deserve comprehensive dog laws that demand responsible dog ownership and that hold reckless owners accountable when their poor decisions wind up getting other dogs or other people hurt," said Ledy Vankavage, a top lobbyist for the Best Friends Animal Society.
Don Burmeister, assistant city attorney for Council Bluffs, Iowa, led the effort to pass a local pit bull ban that took effect in 2005. He recalled first reading about the issue in the July 27, 1987, issue of Sports Illustrated, which carried a full-cover shot of an angry pit bull baring its teeth. Across the top, it said "BEWARE OF THIS DOG."
After the Council Bluffs ban went into place, the number of pit bull attacks that resulted in hospitalization plummeted from 29 in 2004 to zero the past few years — proof, Burmeister said, that breed-specific bans work.
The opposition to pit bull bans, he added, is a sign that many American pet owners have lost touch with reality.
"Fifty years ago, you could take a sick animal behind a barn and put it out of its misery," he said. "That's just the way it was done. Now they would investigate you for doing that. The emotional irrationality of Americans and their dogs has never been worse than it is today."
| By BILL DRAPER
Posted: Updated:
KANSAS CITY, Mo. (AP) — For much of the past three decades, pit bulls have been widely regarded as America's most dangerous dog — the favorite breed of thugs, drug dealers and dog-fighting rings, with a fearsome reputation for unprovoked, sometimes deadly attacks.
Hostility toward "pits" grew so intense that some cities began treating them as the canine equivalent of assault rifles and prohibited residents from owning them.
But attitudes have softened considerably since then as animal activists and even television shows cast the dogs in a more positive light. The image makeover has prompted many states to pass new laws that forbid communities from banning specific breeds. And it illustrates the power and persistence of dog-advocacy groups that have worked to fend off pit bull restrictions with much the same zeal as gun-rights groups have defeated gun-control measures.
"Lawmakers are realizing that targeting dogs based on their breed or what they look like is not a solution to dealing with dangerous dogs," said Lisa Peters, a spokeswoman for the American Kennel Club.
Eighteen states now have laws that prohibit communities from adopting breed-specific bans. Lawmakers in six more states are considering similar measures, and some cities are reviewing local policies that classify pit bulls as dangerous animals.
Pit bull advocates hail the changes as recognition that breed-specific laws discriminate against dogs that are not inherently aggressive or dangerous unless they are made to be that way by irresponsible owners.
The dogs' foes complain that their message is being drowned out by a well-funded, well-organized lobbying effort in state capitols. The debate puts millions of pit bull owners up against a relatively small number of people who have been victimized by the dogs.
Ron Hicks, who sponsored a bill in the Missouri House to forbid breed-specific legislation, said he was surprised when nobody spoke against his proposal last month at a committee hearing.
"I figured a few parents would be there who would bring tears to my eyes," the Republican said. "Would it have changed my opinion or what I believe in? No."
A version of Hicks' legislation was endorsed by a House committee last month and needs to clear another committee before a full House vote. The state Senate is considering a comparable bill, as are lawmakers in Utah, South Dakota, Washington, Vermont and Maryland.
In Kansas, the communities of Bonner Springs and Garden City repealed their pit-bull bans earlier this year.
Summer Freeman did not know there was a ban when she moved to Bonner Springs last year after a divorce. She panicked when an animal-control officer discovered her pet and told her she had 15 days to get rid of the dog named Titan or move out of town.
"I think of him like my son," she said. "He's my dog-son, I guess you could say. He's at my hip all the time. He's just a big baby that wouldn't hurt a fly."
Freeman was forced to leave Titan at a shelter in Lawrence for nine months until she successfully fought to overturn the law in January.
For dog owners and pit bull opponents alike, the battle is as deeply personal as any gun-control or religious issue. Each side accuses the other of lying, exploiting emotions and using bullying tactics.
Pit bull owners insist their dogs are harmless, loving family members that shouldn't be blamed for something they didn't do. To opponents, they are a volatile breed whose genetics drive them to kill more than two dozen people in the U.S. each year, many of them young children.
Popular television shows such as "Pit Boss" and "Pit Bulls and Parolees" on Animal Planet glorify the animals and minimize the tragedies that occur when pit bulls turn on humans, pit bull opponents say.
"Everything is telling us these animals are safe if you raise them right," said Jeff Borchardt, a Stevens Point, Wis., man whose 14-month-old son was mauled to death a year ago by two pit bulls that tore the child from the arms of their owner, who was baby-sitting. "My son's dead because of a lie, because of a myth. My life will never be the same."
The two dogs that killed Borchardt's son had lived with their owner since soon after they were born, were well-cared for and had no history of aggressive behavior, he said. Both had been spayed or neutered.
That contradicts the contention that only mistreated, neglected or abused pit bulls attack people.
Colleen Lynn, founder of DogsBite.org, pointed to a friend-of-the-court brief her organization submitted in a 2012 case in which the Maryland Court of Appeals declared pit bulls "inherently dangerous."
"Appellate courts agree with us. Doctors and surgeons agree with us. That is credibility right there," Lynn said. "We also have the support of three divisions of the U.S. military, huge, massive bodies in the U.S. government."
The Marines, Army and Air Force all have banned dangerous dogs — including pit bulls and rottweilers — from their bases because of the "unreasonable risk" they pose to safety, Lynn said.
On the other side stand the American Bar Association and National Animal Control Association, which oppose breed-specific laws because they are discriminatory against a type of dog that isn't really a single breed.
Three main breeds — Staffordshire bull terrier, American pit bull terrier and American Staffordshire terrier — along with mixes of those breeds are generally considered pit bulls. But many muscular, square-jawed, boxer-type dogs often are misidentified as pit bulls, making breed-specific bans hard to enforce.
And because fatal pit bull attacks are a rarity compared with other causes of death such as auto accidents, dog advocates argue that breed-specific bans amount to legislative overkill.
"All communities deserve comprehensive dog laws that demand responsible dog ownership and that hold reckless owners accountable when their poor decisions wind up getting other dogs or other people hurt," said Ledy Vankavage, a top lobbyist for the Best Friends Animal Society.
Don Burmeister, assistant city attorney for Council Bluffs, Iowa, led the effort to pass a local pit bull ban that took effect in 2005. He recalled first reading about the issue in the July 27, 1987, issue of Sports Illustrated, which carried a full-cover shot of an angry pit bull baring its teeth. Across the top, it said "BEWARE OF THIS DOG."
After the Council Bluffs ban went into place, the number of pit bull attacks that resulted in hospitalization plummeted from 29 in 2004 to zero the past few years — proof, Burmeister said, that breed-specific bans work.
The opposition to pit bull bans, he added, is a sign that many American pet owners have lost touch with reality.
"Fifty years ago, you could take a sick animal behind a barn and put it out of its misery," he said. "That's just the way it was done. Now they would investigate you for doing that. The emotional irrationality of Americans and their dogs has never been worse than it is today."
Suggest a correction
BSL and those against it
Not a single dog or human safety expert organization has come out saying that breed-specific legislation is effective. All mainstream and professional animal welfare groups are totally against breed-specific legislation, here’s a partial list…
American Animal Hospital Association
American Bar Association
American Canine Foundation
American Dog Breeders Association
American Dog Owners Association
American Humane Association
American Kennel Club (AKC)
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)
American Temperament Test Society
American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA)
American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior
American Working Dog Federation
Animal Farm Foundation
Animal Legal Defense Fund
Association of Pet Dog Trainers
Best Friends Animal Society
British Veterinary Association
California Veterinary Medical Association
Canadian Kennel Club
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Coalition for Living Safely with Dogs
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants
International Association of Canine Professionals
In Defense of Animals
Lawyers In Defense of Animals
MSPCA-Angell
National Animal Control Association
National Animal Interest Alliance
National Association of Dog Obedience Instructors
National Canine Research Council
No Kill Advocacy Center
United Kennel Club (UKC)
American Bar Association
American Canine Foundation
American Dog Breeders Association
American Dog Owners Association
American Humane Association
American Kennel Club (AKC)
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA)
American Temperament Test Society
American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA)
American Veterinary Society of Animal Behavior
American Working Dog Federation
Animal Farm Foundation
Animal Legal Defense Fund
Association of Pet Dog Trainers
Best Friends Animal Society
British Veterinary Association
California Veterinary Medical Association
Canadian Kennel Club
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Coalition for Living Safely with Dogs
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
International Association of Animal Behavior Consultants
International Association of Canine Professionals
In Defense of Animals
Lawyers In Defense of Animals
MSPCA-Angell
National Animal Control Association
National Animal Interest Alliance
National Association of Dog Obedience Instructors
National Canine Research Council
No Kill Advocacy Center
United Kennel Club (UKC)
Even the United States government has weighed in on the issue:
United States Department of Justice
- See more at: http://www.swaylove.org/bslbdl/organization-opposition#sthash.fB3Dti3V.dpuf
United States Department of Justice
The Truth Behind The Media's Mythical Monster
The Pit Bull Hoax DVD
The Truth Behind The Media's Mythical Monster
The Truth Behind The Media's Mythical Monster
The Pit Bull Hoax is an educational DVD. Its intended purpose is to remove existing Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) from the law books and prevent any cities, counties and states from enacting BSL.As of 2009, 41 states have BSL or are considering it in its legislature. Additionally, various insurance companies, housing authorities and other groups have a list of "dangerous dogs" that totals 75 breeds.
Featuring interviews with: Dr. Nicholas Dodman, Jean Donaldson, Dr Ian Dunbar, Diane Jessup and Jane Berkey.
Copies of The Pit Bull Hoax DVD are offered free of charge to legislators, media and anyone who is attempting to educate people as to why BSL is not effective in reducing dog bites or human fatalities related to dog bites.
The shipping and handling fee is $6.95. When you click on the "Add to Cart" button, you will be redirected to a secure server (PayPal) to order the DVD and pay the shipping and handling fee by credit card (VISA, MC, AMEX, Discover).
To order your FREE copy of The Pit Bull Hoax DVD, email this request form and pay shipping and handling costs below. Please contact us for bulk shipping and handling rates if you need more than one copy for a special event. Use the ADD TO CART button below if you are requesting ONE copy. Thanks.
Pit Bull Hoax DVD is FREE ($6.95 Shipping and Handling)
Here's what people are saying about The Pit Bull Hoax:
"The Pit Bull Hoax is an outstanding tool for educating both legislators and the general public. It hits the major points that need to be discussed in debates over Breed Specific Legislation and public safety. I believe it is a great conversation starter and reminds all of us that dogs are unbelieveably safe and every dog attack can be traced right back to an irresponsible owner."
- Jean Keating Co-Founder Ohio Coalition of Dog Advocates
"Real passion cannot be bought, it cannot be learned and it cannot be faked. Passion can only be as powerful and unique as the individual whom it consumes. Drayton Michaels possesses an unrivaled drive to do right by the dogs he studies, trains and represents, and it is terrifically contagious. His efforts not only help our best friends, they inspire others to follow their inner voice and make a difference -- and that is exciting."
- Jon Bozak, author Demo: The Story of a Junkyard Dog
"I just received a copy of your "The Pit Bull Hoax". It is outstanding. You did a great job with it and it is very professional. God bless you for your promotion of the Pit Bull Breed and your battle against BSL. It is obvious that you are not in this for monetary reasons since you only charged shipping. Quite frankly I personally would have paid $25 or $30 site unseen (because of the subject matter) but after viewing it, in my opinion it is worth much more then that. I am big time Pit Bull Enthusiast and have attended two of BADRAP's annual Pit Bull Conferences out in Oakland. I volunteer at Liberty Humane Society in Jersey City. I live in Edison which has a large Pit Bull population. I'll definitly be spreading the word about this DVD!"
- Tony Gencarelli, Pit Bull Owner and Advocate
"Congrats on the whole thing. Very worthwhile effort, Drayton."
- Michael Mountain, Co-Founder of Best Friends Animal Sanctuary
"I am just baffled by the mysticism surrounding BSL. I think the most impressive thing in the Hoax DVD is the quiet, measured conviction of those professionals as they spoke on behalf of these dogs. No screaming, no diatribes, no fanatical or fancy speech...just plain and simple logic. As I watched the video, all I could think was that if the Pro BSL crowd can't comprehend what these folks are saying, well, then, what is it going to take?"
- Joann Prince, All Star Pet Rescue, Inc.
"Great Job! One of the most important aspects of The Pit Bull Hoax is how it illustrates that Breed Bans force local government resources and tax-payers' monies to be spent on non effective means. While many other dog abuse cases go unheard or ignored because the local governments don't have the resources for abuse task forces."
- Edel Miedes, Co-Founder and Co-Director Miami Coalition Against BSL
“The Pit Bull Hoax DVD is a most valuable tool being used to pave the way to repeal the Breed Ban or Breed Specific Legislation, in Miami ~Dade County. It clearly gets the visual point across! Thanks for your help!"
- Dahlia, Director Miami Coalition Against Breed Specific Legislation
"The Pit Bull Hoax DVD is a good example of this man's single minded determination to help lift the American pit bull from the sad state in which it finds itself. If the breed had but a few more fanciers of his calibre, dedication and spirit, Pit Bull dogs should soon see better days. Two thumbs up for The Pit Bull Hoax!"
- Diane Jessup, Pit Bull breed steward and author of The Dog Who Spoke With Gods
"The Pit Bull Hoax' is a wonderful DVD for fans of bully breeds and for those who are not yet converted to adoring Bully Breeds.This DVD pulls resources from various well-respected Industry experts and delivers compelling and intelligent arguments. I am so grateful to have this DVD as an education tool for our events, it's completes the circle necessary to dispel breed-specific mandates, poor media reporting, and proves why bully breeds get such a bad rap."
- Deirdre Franklin aka Little Darling, President & Founder www.pinupsforpitbulls.com
"The 'Pit Bull Hoax' is a must see and should be part of the resource library of every person or organization that is serious about working to protect the wonderful breed of dog commonly referred to as the 'pit bull'. This is a rare opportunity to hear from well-respected professionals who actually work with canines, more specifically with aggression cases. The truth about pit bulls is something needs more exposure and this short presentation will have you on the right path."
- Faith Hynoski, Co-Founder of Families Against Breed Bans
"At long last — some rational information about pitbulls."
- Dr. Ian Dunbar
- Jean Keating Co-Founder Ohio Coalition of Dog Advocates
"Real passion cannot be bought, it cannot be learned and it cannot be faked. Passion can only be as powerful and unique as the individual whom it consumes. Drayton Michaels possesses an unrivaled drive to do right by the dogs he studies, trains and represents, and it is terrifically contagious. His efforts not only help our best friends, they inspire others to follow their inner voice and make a difference -- and that is exciting."
- Jon Bozak, author Demo: The Story of a Junkyard Dog
"I just received a copy of your "The Pit Bull Hoax". It is outstanding. You did a great job with it and it is very professional. God bless you for your promotion of the Pit Bull Breed and your battle against BSL. It is obvious that you are not in this for monetary reasons since you only charged shipping. Quite frankly I personally would have paid $25 or $30 site unseen (because of the subject matter) but after viewing it, in my opinion it is worth much more then that. I am big time Pit Bull Enthusiast and have attended two of BADRAP's annual Pit Bull Conferences out in Oakland. I volunteer at Liberty Humane Society in Jersey City. I live in Edison which has a large Pit Bull population. I'll definitly be spreading the word about this DVD!"
- Tony Gencarelli, Pit Bull Owner and Advocate
"Congrats on the whole thing. Very worthwhile effort, Drayton."
- Michael Mountain, Co-Founder of Best Friends Animal Sanctuary
"I am just baffled by the mysticism surrounding BSL. I think the most impressive thing in the Hoax DVD is the quiet, measured conviction of those professionals as they spoke on behalf of these dogs. No screaming, no diatribes, no fanatical or fancy speech...just plain and simple logic. As I watched the video, all I could think was that if the Pro BSL crowd can't comprehend what these folks are saying, well, then, what is it going to take?"
- Joann Prince, All Star Pet Rescue, Inc.
"Great Job! One of the most important aspects of The Pit Bull Hoax is how it illustrates that Breed Bans force local government resources and tax-payers' monies to be spent on non effective means. While many other dog abuse cases go unheard or ignored because the local governments don't have the resources for abuse task forces."
- Edel Miedes, Co-Founder and Co-Director Miami Coalition Against BSL
“The Pit Bull Hoax DVD is a most valuable tool being used to pave the way to repeal the Breed Ban or Breed Specific Legislation, in Miami ~Dade County. It clearly gets the visual point across! Thanks for your help!"
- Dahlia, Director Miami Coalition Against Breed Specific Legislation
"The Pit Bull Hoax DVD is a good example of this man's single minded determination to help lift the American pit bull from the sad state in which it finds itself. If the breed had but a few more fanciers of his calibre, dedication and spirit, Pit Bull dogs should soon see better days. Two thumbs up for The Pit Bull Hoax!"
- Diane Jessup, Pit Bull breed steward and author of The Dog Who Spoke With Gods
"The Pit Bull Hoax' is a wonderful DVD for fans of bully breeds and for those who are not yet converted to adoring Bully Breeds.This DVD pulls resources from various well-respected Industry experts and delivers compelling and intelligent arguments. I am so grateful to have this DVD as an education tool for our events, it's completes the circle necessary to dispel breed-specific mandates, poor media reporting, and proves why bully breeds get such a bad rap."
- Deirdre Franklin aka Little Darling, President & Founder www.pinupsforpitbulls.com
"The 'Pit Bull Hoax' is a must see and should be part of the resource library of every person or organization that is serious about working to protect the wonderful breed of dog commonly referred to as the 'pit bull'. This is a rare opportunity to hear from well-respected professionals who actually work with canines, more specifically with aggression cases. The truth about pit bulls is something needs more exposure and this short presentation will have you on the right path."
- Faith Hynoski, Co-Founder of Families Against Breed Bans
"At long last — some rational information about pitbulls."
- Dr. Ian Dunbar
Pit Bull Hoax DVD is FREE ($6.95 Shipping and Handling)
Wednesday, 1 October 2014
ANIMAL AIDS POSITION STATEMENT ON BSL
Draft Policy on Dangerous Dog Strategies and Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)
Animal Aid supports the creation of evidence based regulatory policy.
While enforcing the enacted legislation, Animal Aid would seek to replace Breed related legislation aimed at reducing dog bite statistics on the grounds that:
• BSL does not reduce the number of dog bites.
• BSL does not address the number of bites that arise from other breeds and cross-breeds.
• BSL ignores the fact that there may be highly sociable and well adjusted individuals in any breed.
• The identification of Pitbull Terriers (the breed under scrutiny at present) and other banned breeds from visual standards cannot be determined with complete relaibility.
The Facts
• Studies have shown that BSL has not reduced bites in the UK (Klaassen, Buckley, & Esmail, 1996), Germany (Schalke, Ott, & von Gaertner, 2008; Ott, Schalke, von Gaertner, & Hackbarth, 2008) or the Netherlands (Cornelissen & Hopster, 2010) and BSL has been repealed in Germany and the Netherlands. Only one study supports the effectiveness of BSL and that incorporated many other strong initiatives to promote responsible ownership (Villalbi et al., 2010).
• Incontestably identifying a ‘restricted breed’ dog is currently impossible. Visual determinations of breed made by a Victorian government appointed ‘breed panel’ of experts was overturned by legal challenge.
• There are no definitive objective criteria, such as a DNA test, to identify a Pitbull Terrier.
• The Division of Local Government in NSW reports that in 2005 only 1-2% of attacking dogs were identified as restricted breeds i.e. 98% were not. The percentage of bites attributable to restricted breed dogs has been steadily decreasing (0.06% in 2008 and 0.2% in 2009). Therefore, BSL could only ever be expected to reduce the number dog bites by a very small amount.
• Any breed of dog breed can bite regardless of breed. The challenge is identifying which one is likely to do so before they actually do it. Recommendations
• Identifying strategies that work elsewhere and implementing them. For example, Calgary, Canada has reduced dog bites and shelter euthanasia; increased desexing and regulatory compliance without BSL or mandating desexing. Incidentally, Calgary has a very high population of Pitbull Terriers
(see http://www.petsmartcharities.org/resources/the-calgary-model-for-success.html).
• Develop the ability to identify individual dogs that have a propensity to bite, regardless of species by establishing if there are genetic markers of canine aggression.
• Provision of widespread, low-cost dog training targeting problematic and anti-social behaviour to proactively prevent issues developing.
• Development of validated assessments for good temperament and only breeding with dogs that have passed such tests to reduce aggression. While all dogs have the ability to bite, the risk is mediated by the size and sociability of the dog, genetic factors, specific breed characteristics (which are the focus of current attention) and owner responsibility. The Calgary experience indicates that owner responsibility is the key variable. Animal Aid believes that society’s interests are best served by moving away from BSL and using a combination of strategies to reduce dog bites including rewarding responsible owners who register, socialise and train their dogs while rigorously enforcing registration requirements and owner liability for the offences that their dog’s commit. Reference List
Cornelissen, J. M. & Hopster, H. (2010). Dog bites in The Netherlands: a study of victims, injuries, circumstances and aggressors to support evaluation of breed specific legislation. Veterinary Journal, 186, 292-298.
Klaassen, B., Buckley, J. R., & Esmail, A. (1996). Does the dangerous dogs act protect against animal attacks: a prospective study of mammalian bites in the accident and emergency department. Injury, 27, 89-91.
Ott, S. A., Schalke, E., von Gaertner, A. M., & Hackbarth, H. (2008). Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed-specific legislation regarding aggressive behavior. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 3, 134-140. Schalke, E., Ott, S. A., & von Gaertner, A. M. (2008). Is breed-specific legislation justified? Study of the results of the temperament test of Lower Saxony . Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 3, 97-103.
Villalbi, J. R., Cleries, M., Bouis, S., Peracho, V., Duran, J., & Casas, C. (2010). Decline in hospitalisations due to dog bite injuries in Catalonia, 1997-2008. An effect of government regulation? Inj.Prev., 16, 408-410.
Animal Aid supports the creation of evidence based regulatory policy.
While enforcing the enacted legislation, Animal Aid would seek to replace Breed related legislation aimed at reducing dog bite statistics on the grounds that:
• BSL does not reduce the number of dog bites.
• BSL does not address the number of bites that arise from other breeds and cross-breeds.
• BSL ignores the fact that there may be highly sociable and well adjusted individuals in any breed.
• The identification of Pitbull Terriers (the breed under scrutiny at present) and other banned breeds from visual standards cannot be determined with complete relaibility.
The Facts
• Studies have shown that BSL has not reduced bites in the UK (Klaassen, Buckley, & Esmail, 1996), Germany (Schalke, Ott, & von Gaertner, 2008; Ott, Schalke, von Gaertner, & Hackbarth, 2008) or the Netherlands (Cornelissen & Hopster, 2010) and BSL has been repealed in Germany and the Netherlands. Only one study supports the effectiveness of BSL and that incorporated many other strong initiatives to promote responsible ownership (Villalbi et al., 2010).
• Incontestably identifying a ‘restricted breed’ dog is currently impossible. Visual determinations of breed made by a Victorian government appointed ‘breed panel’ of experts was overturned by legal challenge.
• There are no definitive objective criteria, such as a DNA test, to identify a Pitbull Terrier.
• The Division of Local Government in NSW reports that in 2005 only 1-2% of attacking dogs were identified as restricted breeds i.e. 98% were not. The percentage of bites attributable to restricted breed dogs has been steadily decreasing (0.06% in 2008 and 0.2% in 2009). Therefore, BSL could only ever be expected to reduce the number dog bites by a very small amount.
• Any breed of dog breed can bite regardless of breed. The challenge is identifying which one is likely to do so before they actually do it. Recommendations
• Identifying strategies that work elsewhere and implementing them. For example, Calgary, Canada has reduced dog bites and shelter euthanasia; increased desexing and regulatory compliance without BSL or mandating desexing. Incidentally, Calgary has a very high population of Pitbull Terriers
(see http://www.petsmartcharities.org/resources/the-calgary-model-for-success.html).
• Develop the ability to identify individual dogs that have a propensity to bite, regardless of species by establishing if there are genetic markers of canine aggression.
• Provision of widespread, low-cost dog training targeting problematic and anti-social behaviour to proactively prevent issues developing.
• Development of validated assessments for good temperament and only breeding with dogs that have passed such tests to reduce aggression. While all dogs have the ability to bite, the risk is mediated by the size and sociability of the dog, genetic factors, specific breed characteristics (which are the focus of current attention) and owner responsibility. The Calgary experience indicates that owner responsibility is the key variable. Animal Aid believes that society’s interests are best served by moving away from BSL and using a combination of strategies to reduce dog bites including rewarding responsible owners who register, socialise and train their dogs while rigorously enforcing registration requirements and owner liability for the offences that their dog’s commit. Reference List
Cornelissen, J. M. & Hopster, H. (2010). Dog bites in The Netherlands: a study of victims, injuries, circumstances and aggressors to support evaluation of breed specific legislation. Veterinary Journal, 186, 292-298.
Klaassen, B., Buckley, J. R., & Esmail, A. (1996). Does the dangerous dogs act protect against animal attacks: a prospective study of mammalian bites in the accident and emergency department. Injury, 27, 89-91.
Ott, S. A., Schalke, E., von Gaertner, A. M., & Hackbarth, H. (2008). Is there a difference? Comparison of golden retrievers and dogs affected by breed-specific legislation regarding aggressive behavior. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 3, 134-140. Schalke, E., Ott, S. A., & von Gaertner, A. M. (2008). Is breed-specific legislation justified? Study of the results of the temperament test of Lower Saxony . Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 3, 97-103.
Villalbi, J. R., Cleries, M., Bouis, S., Peracho, V., Duran, J., & Casas, C. (2010). Decline in hospitalisations due to dog bite injuries in Catalonia, 1997-2008. An effect of government regulation? Inj.Prev., 16, 408-410.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)