East Coast Quality Breeders Association

Hamilton - City Council will vote tonight, July 9, on an expanded vicious dog ordinance intended to help the police department control the pet population. The ordinance comes a few weeks after City Council voted to cut funding for animal control as it cuts its budget because of a projected financial crisis. The city was paying about $85,000 per year to the county for a dog warden to patrol the city and to the county's shelter. Council opted to discontinue payment because the city is in financial straits and the county is required by state law to serve all areas within its borders. Rather than allowing police to cite residents under the new ordinance, a more effective solution would be to mandate dog breeds classified as vicious to be spayed or neutered.

Draconian Ohio Breed-Specific Bill Introduced [Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Ohio House Bill 568, introduced by Representative Tyrone Yates of Cincinnati, seeks to prohibit the ownership, keeping, or harboring of a dog that "belongs to a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog." Furthermore, if this bill is passed and adopted into law, all such dogs will be seized and euthanized. It is imperative that all concerned dog owners in Ohio contact their elected representatives and express their vehement opposition to this draconian legislation.

The American Kennel Club supports reasonable, enforceable, non-discriminatory laws to govern the ownership of dogs. The AKC believes that dog owners should be responsible for their dogs. We support laws that: establish a fair process by which specific dogs are identified as "dangerous" based on stated, measurable actions; impose appropriate penalties on irresponsible owners; and establish a well-defined method for dealing with dogs proven to be dangerous. The American Kennel Club strongly opposes any legislation that determines a dog to be "dangerous" based on specific breeds or phenotypic classes of dogs.

HB 568 unacceptably provides that:

• No person shall own, keep, or harbor a dog that belongs to a breed that is commonly known as a pit bull dog.
  
• No later than 90 days after the effective date of this bill, a person who owns, keeps, or harbor a pit bull dog will be forced to surrender the dog to a dog warden.
  
• Within ten days of surrender, the dog warden shall euthanize the dog.
  
• If an officer has probable cause to believe that a dog is a pit bull, the officer may apply for a search warrant. After obtaining a search warrant, an officer shall seize the dog and transfer the dog to the dog warden, who shall euthanize the dog within 10 days.

WHAT YOU CAN DO:

All concerned Ohio dog owners should contact their elected representatives and express their strong opposition to HB 568. To find your elected representatives, click here.

HB446 - A bill To amend sections 951.01, 951.10, 951.11, 951.12, 951.13, 951.99, 955.01, 955.011, 955.02, 955.04, 955.05, 955.06, 955.08, 955.10, 955.11, 955.12, 955.14, 955.15, 955.16, 955.17, 955.18, 955.19, 955.20, 955.201, 955.21, 955.22, 955.23, 955.26, 955.261, 955.27, 955.28, 955.29, 955.32, 955.34, 955.35, 955.37, 955.38, 955.42, 955.44, 955.50, 955.51, 955.52, 955.53, 955.99, 957.16, 959.131, 959.99, 1717.02, 1717.05, 1717.06, 1717.08, 1717.09, 1717.14, 3719.01, 4501.21, 4729.01, and 4736.01; to amend, for the purpose of adopting new section numbers as indicated in parentheses, sections 955.26 (955.40), 955.261 (955.41), 955.34 (955.351), 955.41 (955.43), 955.43 (955.45), 955.44 (955.46), and 957.16 (901.36); to enact new section 955.39 and sections 109.804, 951.20, 951.21, 951.22, 955.014, 955.13, 955.161, 957.01, 957.02, 957.03, 957.04, 957.05, 957.06, and 957.99; and to repeal sections 951.02, 955.202, 955.31, 955.33, 955.39, 955.40, 1717.03, and 1717.04 of the Revised Code to revise the statutes governing animal control.
UPDATE: HB446 will have a 5th hearing on Thursday, April 17, in Room 018 of the Capitol building in Columbus. The hearing starts at 8:30 a.m., and HB 446 is 6th (last) on the agenda. Anyone available is encouraged to attend the hearing.

Sylvania - city council will consider a vicious dog ordinance modeled after Toledo's one-dog limit, which was upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court. UPDATE: City Council has decided to spend more time to research a proposed ordinance that would place restrictions on vicious dogs. Two versions of a vicious-dog ordinance have been written. Both proposed ordinances place limitations on ownership and would require that pit bulls be muzzled and kept on a leash when outside of the owner's home. One of the proposed ordinances, however, would require that all dogs commonly known as pit bulls or pit bull mixed breed dogs be spayed and neutered when they are six months or older, and the same ordinance would make it illegal for a convicted felon to own a pit bull or pit bull mixed-breed dog. The less-restrictive ordinance is the one originally introduced, said Councilman Doug Haynam, noting that provisions in that ordinance have been litigated and have been upheld as a responsible use of police powers which is based on state law and language in the Ohio Revised Code. UPDATE: heated debate in Sylvania at a public meeting (04/06/08) over additional restrictions on "pit bulls" and vicious dog legislation. Under the proposed ordinance, vicious dog won't be able to be in the front yard without a muzzle. Council members like to see alternatives that have worked, including, among other things, anti chaining/tethering laws, enforcement of leash laws and registration laws, harsher penalties.

Toledo - City Councilwoman Wilma Brown wants to make it legal to spay and neuter all pit bulls the warden picks up in Toledo, which would cost the dog's owner an extra $75 to $125. Right now, pit bulls must be muzzled when walked off the property, and owners cannot have more than one

Clark County - Springfield - County commissioners would like the city to adopt Toledo's vicious dog ordinance to regulate ownership of vicious dogs.

Columbus - Central Ohio inspectors cracking down on illegally operated kennels out of residential areas. The city code regarding nuisances was never strictly enforced until a resident was convicted in February. After two years of complaining, the neighborhood was relieved to see him found guilty of zoning code violations. The Franklin County auditor, which issues kennel licenses with a warning to first check local zoning laws, approved 79 licenses in 2007 and 63 in 2008 so far.

Sylvania - city council will consider a vicious dog ordinance modeled after Toledo's one-dog limit, which was upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court.

Whitehall - City Council proposing a pit bull ban. Council members would like to see alternatives that have worked, including, among other things, anti chaining/tethering laws, enforcement of leash laws and registration laws, harsher penalties.

by JOHN YATES
American Sporting Dog Alliance

COLUMBUS, OH – Legislation revising Ohio’s animal control laws is designed to penalize law-abiding dog owners and burden kennel owners by making them pay for the cost of enforcing the law against people who don’t comply with it. Law-abiding dog and kennel owners would face a fivefold increase in the cost of licensure, plus greatly increased burdens of paperwork.

Other changes in the law will greatly increase the number of dogs killed in shelters, give county auditors unrestrained power to revoke kennel licenses in violation of constitutional guarantees of due process, promote medically dangerous sterilization and vaccination practices, mandates breed-specific euthanization, and make it harder for good Samaritans to help stray pets.

For dog owners, the legislation boils down to this: Responsible dog owners and innocent dogs would have to pay for the sins of people who don’t obey the law.

Rep. Shawn Webster (R-Columbus) is the prime sponsor of House Bill 446. We urge Ohio dog owners to contact Rep. Webster before Tuesday, March 11, when he is scheduled to meet with representatives of the Ohio Valley Dog Owners (OVDO) to discuss problems with this legislation. Rep. Webster’s email address is district53@ohr.state.oh.us. The American Sporting Dog Alliance strongly supports OVDO’s vital work to improve this poorly conceived legislation, and we urge all Ohio dog owners to do the same by emailing Rep. Webster today about your concerns.

The American Sporting Dog Alliance is the unified voice of sporting dog owners and professionals in America. We work at the grassroots level to defeat unfair legislation and policies that are harmful to dogs and the people who own and work with them. Our work to protect your rights is supported solely by the donations of our members. Please visit us on the web at http://www.americansportingdogalliance.org.

In Ohio, ASDA also is currently working to defeat proposed kennel legislation that would severely burden if not destroy responsible hobby breeding, and to defend the rights of people who hunt with dogs or compete with them in field trials.

House Bill 446 would require county registration (licensure) of all dogs, and puppies that are eight weeks of age or older, and also criminalize the sale or transfer of any puppy or dog that is not licensed. Current law requires registration at the age of three months.

Registration fees for each dog and puppy would be increased from $2 to $10. In addition to these individual fees, owners of kennels would see an increase in their county license costs from $10 to $50. Anyone who raises dogs for hunting, or offers dogs for sale, is considered to be a kennel owner. Raising dogs for hunting is specifically singled out.

The purpose of these greatly increased fees is to pay for the cost of animal control in Ohio. The unfairness and irrationality of this approach is that responsible dog owners and breeders, who are perhaps the least likely cause of the problem, are the people who are being forced to pay for it.

Breeders and owners of purebred dogs rarely burden animal control agencies and animal shelters. Moreover, purebred puppies almost never are found in municipal animal shelters. This legislation makes responsible dog owners and breeders the “cash cow” that will be milked to pay for animal control efforts directed at irresponsible people who ignore the law. ASDA regards this as the unethical exploitation of law-abiding citizens.

People who actually violate the law should pay for the cost of enforcing it, through fines and other penalties. This cost should not be borne by law-abiding dog owners. We should not be held responsible for the actions of others, over which we have no control.

A particularly onerous part of the legislation gives county auditors the unrestricted power to revoke kennel licenses (this includes anyone who raises a single litter of hunting dogs) for unproven allegations of animal cruelty. County auditors do not have the qualifications to make judgments about animal cruelty, and the guilt or innocence of a dog owner facing such accusations should be determined only in a court of law.

This power is given to auditors “if the auditor determines” that a violation of animal cruelty statutes has occurred. No limits are placed on this power, and the legislation does not define any criteria for an auditor to use. In fact, the law gives an auditor the power to revoke a license if he/she simply feels that a kennel owner may have violated cruelty statutes, or even extra-legal personal opinions about what constitutes cruelty.

This is a clear violation of constitutional protections of due process of the law.

The legislation allows animal control officers to confiscate any dog or puppy over eight weeks old that is not wearing a collar and license, even inside its owner’s home or kennel, or if it slips its collar or the collar is chewed off by rambunctious littermates. Officers also would be given the power to sell or kill a dog or puppy that is not wearing a collar and license, and its owner would have no recourse.

Good Samaritans would have a tough time under the legislation. Many kind-hearted people take in a stray dog, care for it and try to locate its owner. If they cannot locate the owner, they often try to find another person to take the dog, take it to no-kill shelters where the dog might be given a second chance, or keep it themselves.

The legislation would require good Samaritans to notify the county within two days of finding a stray dog, and deliver it to a municipal shelter within 10 days if the owner cannot be located. Most municipal shelters euthanize most of the unclaimed dogs that they receive.

This would eliminate the option of placing the dog with a rescue group or shelter that does not kill dogs. It also would prohibit finding a home for the dog with a neighbor, friend or family member. For many dogs that good Samaritans would help, the result would be death for an innocent dog in a municipal gas chamber.

ASDA believes that this provision serves no legitimate purpose, while hindering people who want to help stray dogs and sentencing many of those dogs to death.

County animal control officers also would be given the legal authority to kill any “nuisance” dog for which proof of rabies vaccination by a veterinarian cannot be produced, if a rabies quarantine has been declared. There is no definition of the key word “nuisance” in the legislation.

Under the existing law, it appears that a dog would not be able to play in its own yard, go hunting or compete in a field trial if a rabies quarantine is imposed in the state, as it would have to be penned, leashed or confined inside of a home or kennel. This unnecessary restriction should be removed from the law.

In 2007, the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) declared that rabies has been eliminated from domesticated dogs everywhere in America. A CDC statement said that no dogs with rabies have been found in American kennels for more than 10 years.

ASDA believes that the current rabies prevention program is working and should be continued. However, there is no rational justification for more strict rabies controls in light of the CDC findings.

The legislation also requires rabies vaccines to be administered only by a licensed veterinarian. This is an unnecessary burden on dog and kennel owners, and especially on people who own several dogs. Dog owners should be permitted to administer the vaccines themselves. Veterinary expertise is not required to successfully vaccinate a dog.

Potentially unsafe medical practices also would be encouraged under the legislation. The age for making people pay higher license fees for dogs that are not spayed or neutered was lowered from nine months to six months. Many veterinarians believe it is potentially harmful to spay or neuter an immature puppy, and an increasing body of research suggests that sterilizing dogs carries many significant health risks for the dog. Moreover, female dogs typically don’t reach reproductive maturity until they are around 11 months old.

ASDA objects to any law that would penalize serious breeders of purebred dogs, as they do not contribute significantly to the problem of unwanted pets. Most breeders take great pains to assure that the puppies they sell go to good homes where they are wanted and valued. The vast majority of unwanted puppies come from accidental matings of dogs that are owned by negligent people. Research also has shown that most dogs in shelters are there because of other reasons, such as a landlord’s objections, personal illness, or job transfers to other states.

In addition, most dogs that will compete in dog shows, field trials or performance events, or that will be used for hunting or farm herding, cannot be fully evaluated for their fitness for competition, hunting, herding or breeding until they are a year or two old.

The legislation’s definition of a dangerous dog automatically includes all “pit bulls.” It would make it illegal for anyone to transfer any “pit bull,” except for the purpose of euthanasia. ASDA strongly opposes any breed-specific legislation, which would deny due process of the law and equal treatment under the law to people who show purebred American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, Bull Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers and other breeds.

One of the major reasons why ASDA opposes breed-specific legislation is that we see a strong tendency for legislation to include hunting breeds. The proposed federal Pet Animal Welfare Act, for example, includes all hunting dogs with pit bulls for much more intensive regulation. The Ohio legislation also takes a major step in this dangerous direction by requiring anyone who raises a litter of hunting dogs to obtain a county kennel license.

Hunting dog owners also know that we are next on the list for the extremist animal rights groups, who strongly support this kind of legislation. We cannot let down our vigilance.

For these reasons and more, ASDA urges all Ohio dog and kennel owners to voice their strong opposition to this legislation by contacting Rep. Webster immediately.

HB418 - Revises the penalties for animal cruelty and allows for the pets of victims of domestic violence and stalking to be included on protection orders.

HB415 - A bill to amend section 959.99 of the Revised Code to increase the penalty for animal fighting, including cockfighting and dogfighting.

HB446 - A bill to amend sections 951.01, 951.10, 951.11, 951.12, 951.13, 951.99, 955.01, 955.011, 955.02, 955.04, 955.05, 955.06, 955.08, 955.10, 955.11, 955.12, 955.14, 955.15, 955.16, 955.17, 955.18, 955.19, 955.20, 955.201, 955.21, 955.22, 955.23, 955.26, 955.261, 955.27, 955.28, 955.29, 955.32, 955.34, 955.35, 955.37, 955.38, 955.42, 955.44, 955.50, 955.51, 955.52, 955.53, 955.99, 957.16, 959.131, 959.99, 1717.02, 1717.05, 1717.06, 1717.08, 1717.09, 1717.14, 3719.01, 4501.21, 4729.01, and 4736.01; to amend, for the purpose of adopting new section numbers as indicated in parentheses, sections 955.26 (955.40), 955.261 (955.41), 955.34 (955.351), 955.41 (955.43), 955.43 (955.45), 955.44 (955.46), and 957.16 (901.36); to enact new section 955.39 and sections 109.804, 951.20, 951.21, 951.22, 955.014, 955.13, 955.161, 957.01, 957.02, 957.03, 957.04, 957.05, 957.06, and 957.99; and to repeal sections 951.02, 955.202, 955.31, 955.33, 955.39, 955.40, 1717.03, and 1717.04 of the Revised Code to revise the statutes governing animal control. Registration of dogs & kennels, increase minimum annual dog registration, identification of cats and care of feral cats, ferrets, rabies vaccine and quarantine, transfer of dogs, dispostion of dogs in shelter.

SB173 - A BILL To amend sections 955.02, 955.10, 955.12, 955.20, 955.26, and 1901.183 and to enact sections 956.01 to 956.19, 956.98, and 956.99 of the Revised Code to establish licensing requirements and standards of care for certain dog breeding kennels and dog intermediaries.

City of Columbus - The City of Columbus prohibits businesses in residential zones and is now investigating those who breed dogs in those areas. People wanting to raise/sell dogs must then be in compliance with not only the county laws, but the city laws, as well, if they choose to undertake a "kennel type business".

Clayton - City Council approved an amendment to the ordinance, which requires the owner of a vicious dog to have a licensed veterinarian implant or inject a microchip into the dog instead of having it tattooed. Vicious dogs are described in the Clayton Codified Ordinances (505.14 subsection (a)(4) C, D & E.) as follows: "Pit bull terrier" as used herein includes, but is not limited to, any American Pit Bull Terrier, any Bull Terrier, any Staffordshire Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire Terrier breed of dog, or any mixed breed of dog which contains as an element of its breeding the breed American Pit Bull Terrier, Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier as to be identifiable as practically the breed of American Pit Bull Terrier, Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire Terrier. "American Bulldog" as used herein includes, but is not limited to, any American bulldog or old country bulldog, or any mixed breed of dog which contains, as an element of its breeding, the breed of American bulldog or old country bulldog as to be identifiable as partially of breed of American Bulldog or old country bulldog. "Canary Dog" as used herein includes, but is not limited to, any canary dog or Perro de Presa Canario, or mixed breed of dog which contains, as an element of its breeding, the breed of canary dog Perro de Presa Canario as to be identifiable as partially of the breed canary dog or Perro de Presa Canario. Passed 1/24/08.

New Richmond - anti-tethering ordinance, passed a couple of months ago, that bans owners from tethering dogs outside "as a means of confinement to property" is being sent to a committee for possible amendment and a clarification amendment permitting electronic fences.

Warren - New legislation deigned to get pit bulls off the streets of Warren may not be needed, several city officials said Wednesday (01/16). City ordinances already define pit bulls as vicious dogs and require owners to have insurance and register the animals. But not one pit bull has been registered since the law was passed in 2006.