This Bullytin Board should be used to discuss health, diet, and new owner issues. Participants are encouraged to discuss personal experiences, however we will ask that you refrain from using names of other individuals unless you have prior permission. Additionally, The Bullytin strictly prohibits the sale of dogs.

Webmaster@bullytin.com

[IMG][/IMG]

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 6:21 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Page 2

by

[IMG][/IMG]

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 6:25 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Page 3

by

[IMG][/IMG]

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 6:27 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Page 3 by

I love reading her writings.
She is so right.. HOWEVER.. she came from an era where wide and wry was not uncommon. She would be horrified at the number of narrow, spooned, untypical jaws that are more common now. Not wry, but what good are they?

e

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 7:32 PM
from IP address 72.214.101.1

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

that was me by

.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 7:32 PM
from IP address 72.214.101.1

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Judging

by Bufords Bulldogs Kim

In a class lets say of 20 dogs what percentage would you say have correct jaws ?

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 8:02 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

GREAT NEWS!! Colorado Puppy Mill Bill DEAD and BURIED!!!

by

Yes, we DID defeat the so-called 'Puppy Mill bill' which was actually an HSUS 'let's get rid of dog breeders' bill! The bill went to its first hearing before the House Agriculture Committee on Wednesday afternoon. After a grueling 4+ hours of testimony, the committee voted to kill the bill. It was far from an easy defeat...we had to work for it since we went into the hearing with only 4 of the 12 votes solid against it. I have to say I have never been prouder of the dog community than during this time. Hobby breeders, the dog show community, small licensed breeders, as well as large scale licensed breeders came together to fight this bill being pushed by a common enemy HSUS. I couldn't have planned the whole thing better if I'd tried. We went into the hearing room about 2 PM and we had a great turn out of people from all facets of the dog community. Our speakers were prepared and did a great job of speaking to the issues. Each planned speaker took a different point or view of the bill to speak about so we covered all bases. The Committee had already been educated about why we opposed the bill through letters and phone calls, and that wonderful NAIA tool - CapWiz! AKC also wrote us a letter of opposition and helped with gathering information and handouts. PIJAC from the pet industry alerted their members, and the licensed commercial breeders had several meetings with the Colorado Federation of Dog Clubs to coordinate efforts and information exchange. We knew that HSUS would be watching our website so we didn't put up a full alert there, but did play it pretty quiet until after the bill was actually introduced and we were ready for action from the Federation members and the dog show community. The Federation and our lobbyists had meetings with the sponsor of the bill on several occasions and stood firm in our position that this bill was not needed, their limit of 25 intact dogs was absolutely unacceptable, and improved nothing for breeding facility care of dogs over the existing PACFA (Pet Animal Care & Facilities Act) law that had been in place for over 14 years. There were some violations of this law over the past year that hit the media (and justly so) that had given HSUS the opportunity to attempt such a bill. The Agriculture Department which oversees the PACFA program was aware of the Federation's concerns about the problems and they were reviewing changes in their procedures. As with many government agencies, they were under staffed because of funding limits under state laws. The Federation and the licensed dog breeders promised to help them in that area if they would improve their enforcement. This is a good program with people trying to do a job on a shoestring.



As usual, opposition gave testimony first so we made sure we gave good arguments against this bill. Everyone was respectful of the committee and the commercial breeders spoke of the pride they take in their facilities and care of their dogs, and how hard they work to do it right. They were as upset as anyone about bad breeders since it reflects on them negatively. In the case of one of the worse cases to hit the news, it was actually a commercial breeder who called in the situation to the PACFA department and asked that they investigate. All agreed that if raising fees was what was needed to get another inspector and get the program back on track, then that is what should happen. That had an effect on the thinking of the Committee about this bill. The PACFA vets spoke well on their problems with enforcement and what they were doing to clean the problems up. The program had just gone through what Colorado calls a sunset review of how the program was working, which had been presented to the legislature a couple of weeks before, and problems as well as solutions were being addressed in that sunset bill. This gave us added ammunition to oppose HB1172 since increased enforcement and funding were being addressed already.



The opposition testimony took about 3 hours with 20 speakers. The supporters of the bill had 10 speakers who didn't get their chance to speak until almost 6PM. Everyone was tired, but the committee had been listening. When the supporters started in with their horror stories, the committee members commented that it appeared to be an enforcement issue, not a need for this bill or limits on numbers of intact dogs. We had done our homework, we were polite but firm in our opposition, and it was successful. In the end the author of the bill tried several amendments, including changing their 'magic number' to 50, but the committee wasn't buying it. They voted to not pass the bill out of committee 7-5. Dead and buried!



Again, the secret to our success was everyone putting aside our differences and pulling together, sharing information, being aware of what was happening in our state to set up the situation, and a tip from a fellow dog person early on for a draft of the bill. Also, an educated legislature and a great team of lobbyists. When it hit the legislature we were ready and waiting! We do know this will probably be back in a ballot initiative or referendum this summer, since the public is easier to deceive with emotional issues than a well prepared legislature, but we will also be ready for that battle. We will also be monitoring the PACFA program to make sure it gets the funding it needs and support to do the job it was created for. It is an excellent program and we did something right in creating it 14 years ago!



Linda Hart, Secretary

Colorado Federation of Dog Clubs





Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 10:48 AM
from IP address 12.74.216.62

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Question on this????? by

<<<PIJAC from the pet industry alerted their members, and the licensed commercial breeders >>>>

I understand fighting laws that limit reasonable breeding by hobby/show breeders, but are we fighting ANY law, that also allows the pet industry and commercial USDA breeders to still do "their" thing? I have a hard time on that.

We have all discussed many times many "USDA" licensed breeders, how terrible the dog's conditions are (such as when there are auctions) or their breeding practices, and how outdated and lax the USDA regulations are. We have all voiced our opinion about AKC when they want some business deal with Petland or offers they do for the USDA breeders.

Yet, we are also working hand in hand with USDA breeders to block ALL legislation??

I do not know the details of the Colorado bill. However, the statement at the top concerns me. There are too many states where dog breeding is dealt like livestock, which allows these USDA breeders with 500 plus dogs, and some of the terrible auctions we have had posted. To me, responsible breeders need to work on protecting reasonable laws, but to tighten others that allow the abuse.




Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 2:42 PM
from IP address 56.0.84.24

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I wondered that same Patti

by

What is considered reasonable breeding by a hobby/show breeder. What is that number.

I know we want to fight legislation but isn't there some legislation that should be passed. Isn't there some kind of control or limits that should be placed.

We have show breeders with kennels of 150 dogs...why are they not puppy mills? Because they are breeding for their next champion? Where is the market for their puppies that don't "cut the mustard".

What about Bulldog breeders breeding 3 - 5 litters a year. Is that just a hobby/breeder. Where is the line between reputable hobby/show breeder to BYB or puppy mill.

Is that a number of litters a year?
The number of dogs in your kennel?
If you have a kennel?
The number of champions you produce a year?





Posted on Feb 6, 2009, 6:48 AM
from IP address 98.247.255.68

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I think this needs to be discussed more by

Of course, some don't want it to affect their operation. But let's be realistic. You have a kennel of 100 dogs, really even 50 dogs, how much attention, socialization, etc is being done with the adults, let alone the pups?

But, when on one hand we are against so much of the USDA issues, then go hand in hand with them in fighting ANY limitations, to me is sending the wrong message.

Posted on Feb 6, 2009, 10:38 AM
from IP address 56.0.84.23

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Rib by

Improper shape in rib spring seems to be admired quite a bit. Can anyone explain what proper ribspring should look like...where it should start on the body, uniformity,etc

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 10:28 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Improper shape in rib spring ?? by

How about "lack of rib", also???

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 11:15 AM
from IP address 56.0.84.24

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

from the front it should be like looking at a Keg

by

round and full, It should start from Just behind the shoulder or at the shoulder. If to far back IMO you dont have the pear shape.

Bella IMO has great rib and has passed it down several generations.


Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 11:36 AM
from IP address 204.58.223.235

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Should you see the rib from the front???? by

I don't believe so. If so, then you don't have proper tacked on shoulders. That is what should be evident from the "front"...IMO

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 2:43 PM
from IP address 56.0.84.24

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

NO, by

the ribs should be up right behind the shoulders, if not you have a hollow spot behind the shoulders. if they are not round then the shoulders are not tacked on correct and the dog doesnt move right.

Body- The brisket and body should be very capacious, with full sides, well-rounded ribs and very deep from the shoulders down to its lowest part, where it joins the chest. It should be well let down between the shoulders and forelegs, giving the dog a broad, low, short-legged appearance.

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://langagerbulldogs.tripod.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.


Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 5:23 PM
from IP address 72.86.23.85

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Disagree

by

the ribs should be up right behind the shoulders, if not you have a hollow spot behind the shoulders. if they are not round then the shoulders are not tacked on correct and the dog doesnt move right.
>>>> You can still have proper "well sprung rib" AND the shoulders are tacked on. If the shoulders come as one with the rib, then it is not tacked on.

Body- The brisket and body should be very capacious, with full sides, well-rounded ribs and very deep from the shoulders down to its lowest part, where it joins the chest. It should be well let down between the shoulders and forelegs, giving the dog a broad, low, short-legged appearance.
>>>>> I agree from the front you should see that it is well let down between hte shoulders and forelegs. But that is not the same thing as looking for the proper "well sprung rib". That you will see looking over them.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 5:33 PM
from IP address 207.200.116.74

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

i may not be saying it correct by

what im trying to say is the rib should be well rounded and be close to the shoulders or at the shoulders (rounded) If they are flat or slab the shoulders from what i have seen are not tacked on but under the dog vs on the sides. They do not move correct IMO if the shoulders are tucked under vs being tacked to the sides

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://langagerbulldogs.tripod.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.


Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 7:27 PM
from IP address 72.86.23.85

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: McRib

by

Jessica wrote:
"Improper shape in rib spring seems to be admired quite a bit. Can anyone explain what proper ribspring should look like...where it should start on the body, uniformity,etc"

It starts at the sternum point. A lot of dogs today have recessed and concave fore chests/brisket. Unlike humans, the clavicle or collar bone is frequently absent in dogs so the shape of the ribcage is pretty significant, especially in Bulldogs.

"Body -- The brisket and body should be very capacious, with full sides, well rounded ribs and very deep from the shoulders down to its lowest part, where it joins the chest."

Note, the standard states that the "brisket and body should be very capacious" so that's why I said it starts at the sternum point. The lower and more prominent the sternum point (to a degree), the wider and fuller you are up front, the better. Hopefully the gaps will be filled in with well developed muscles. i.e. chest, shoulder, arm, and trap muscles. In theory, your movement should be better and even your turn of shoulder. I think a full chest would probably give you better angles on your scapula because they basically lie atop of the ribcage. This in turn, would give you better angles on your upper arm.

I'm gonna try to break it down for those who might need a visual. I know you already know the answer to your question Jess but you suckered me in so here we go. Just keep in mind some of the examples aren't the best but it's the best I can come up with. Improvising here a bit if you will.

See how recessed this sternum point on this skeletal model. I touched up one photo of the same dog/bitch for comparison.


Compare to the lower skeletal model with lowered sternum point and wider rib spring up front.



For whatever reason, I find that a lot of people I talk to believe brisket is the belly area or mid section and mostly judge rib at it's widest point (last rib). Not all of my dogs have brisket and tremendous rib. Some have very good rib and brisket and some don't but I recognize this. Some people don't. That's where the problem lies.

"Chest -- The chest should be very broad, deep and full."

I think the chest on this dog is nice, based on pictures. Lots of fill, it's very full and capacious. Does the dog tuck up? I don't know, I've never had my hands on the dog but I used it as an example of fullness compared to I guess, some of the dogs being admired today.



I was looking at Frenchies and couldn't help but notice the underline on this Frenchie is probably better than I've seen on a lot of Bulldogs. They use the same description in their standard. French Bulldog standard: "The chest is broad, deep, and full; well ribbed with the belly tucked up.". Notice the deepest part of the chest is between the forelegs and shoulders?



Posted on Feb 7, 2009, 3:27 AM
from IP address 66.74.132.170

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Sucker! by

If the shoe fits...then well lol It's interesting you bring up Frenchies. Cristal has crazy rib! She went through her first heat cycle and it was almost overnight this little beef cake showed up.

Posted on Feb 7, 2009, 11:03 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Well

by

That's good. A French Bulldog without substance is just a large barking rat. Maybe you will let me buy one from you one of these days

Scott

Posted on Feb 8, 2009, 1:24 PM
from IP address 66.74.132.170

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Next generation by

The first generation of our pups will be on lockdown per our contract. Anything not exclusively owned by us has to be spayed/neutered...so we can't have any expansive direction until we gets puppies out of the litter coming.

Posted on Feb 9, 2009, 8:21 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Next generation

by

Thanks for the consideration! I'm not really ready for one right now right now but if anything ever comes up down the line. I have a few Bulldog priorities that are a must so if I can jump a few hurdles ahead of me hopefully we can revisit this. If I remember correctly, Ed says brindle Frenchies are your least favorite color? Brindle is my favorite color in a Frenchie. I'll be happy to take a brindle female off your hands if the opportunity ever presents itself.

Until then

Scott

Posted on Feb 9, 2009, 12:25 PM
from IP address 66.74.132.170

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Brindles by

I love some brindles...Ryan and Allora's Renault fits the bill as well as THE bitch special Lola. Not surprising since they share some awesome dogs in their pedigrees. I think just after Jordan that I'm brindled out for a bit lol (Jordan will always be my favorite, it just really disappointed me that such quality was lost in color) We bred Cristal to a pied male, so it will be interesting to see what comes out. Obviously it would take a while to get anything out of Cristal's pups so we will have time to negotiate.
I hear you about your priorities...we're making some transitions here too
That's pretty ambitious to ask for a bitch tho...I'll have to send you Cristal's pedigree sometime. Along the same caliber as Ozzie...there are some serious high dollar imports in her pedigree! That could be fun...with your potential for research I could probably have a pic for every dog in her lines in a few days...lol

Posted on Feb 9, 2009, 4:52 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Brindles

by

I'm sure Jordan would have been more of a standout if he was a little flashier. Structure and type should be pretty clear regardless of color though. That being said, I'm really not into pied Frenchies. My least favorite color. I was not aware of the magnitude of your bitch's line. It can't hurt to ask because you never know until you do. I will have to check out her pedigree. No pedigree has gotten the best of me yet so I'll take that as a challenge.

Scott

Posted on Feb 10, 2009, 1:21 AM
from IP address 66.74.132.170

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

YGM by

Emailing you her pedigree

Posted on Feb 10, 2009, 12:47 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

NID

by

"No I don't"

Nothing in my email box from you.

Scott

Posted on Feb 10, 2009, 1:06 PM
from IP address 66.74.132.170

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

lol by

Check again...it's an email from Edgar.

Posted on Feb 10, 2009, 7:08 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

YGM

by

Still working on it. Check back for updates. Of course, it didn't help that the quality of the pedigree you sent me sucked! Geez that was hard to read.

Scott

Posted on Feb 11, 2009, 1:25 AM
from IP address 66.74.132.170

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Sorry by

I can only work with what I was given...

Posted on Feb 11, 2009, 10:07 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

How Many "Lines" make us pause?

by Jaime Gerdes

I was thinking today about kennel names that are known in a pedigree. There are some that are sought after, for sure. There are also some that I have heard "labeled" as having this or that prevalent in it. Just curious what kennel names/lines make you visualize a certain type of dog. What/who is it? Please share!!!

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 6:40 PM
from IP address 76.194.25.209

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Re: How Many "Lines" make us pause? by

Not so many anymore. Pure "lines" are rare now.
Merriveen will always make me stop and look twice.
e

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 4:44 AM
from IP address 72.214.101.1

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

agree

by Rhiann

Merriveen and i will add in Britishpride to that as well...

I wish i were around to have ever seen "Del Boy". I have several magazines with him on the cover and anything i can find of him I keep. I know pics are and can be decieiving but i love what i see. Would have loved to have had my hands on him before he died.


Posted on Feb 6, 2009, 11:17 AM
from IP address 99.130.7.222

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Well by

I guess I pay more attention and make more notes on the lines I DON'T admire for one reason or another. Like bad temperaments, etc to keep them out of my lines. There really isn't anything you can call a line anymore though. It's all a jumble of outcrosses.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 10:23 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I know a few local breeders who have been breeding

by

for years who have some very nice lines, they have tried bringing outside dogs and are now going back and using their old stuff to bring it back to what it was.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 11:43 AM
from IP address 204.58.223.235

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

How many generations of breeding would constitute a "line"..?

by

When line breeding, one must / should go out now and then. Breeding out to another dog would be best if that dog himself were line breed and background more researchable.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 5:28 PM
from IP address 75.220.125.98

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I was wondering this too

by Jaime Gerdes

At what point do you have "a line"?

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 5:43 PM
from IP address 76.194.24.95

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I think their are very few breeders who have "LINES" by

i consider a line someone who breeds dogs who are out of their own dogs for generations.

I guess you have to have quite a few dogs that you can line breed and outcross in your own kennel with generations of your own dogs.

I dont think my breedings are my lines, since i have only breed 1 litter of puppies where the bitch and sire are both out of my breeding.

I think most like me are camping off other lines, and do not have a house/kennel of dogs where we can breed just our dogs to our dogs for generations.

We do have some breeders, you can look at the dogs and know who the breeder is or the dog comes down from by looking at the dog.

Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://langagerbulldogs.tripod.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.


Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 7:32 PM
from IP address 72.86.23.85

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Vicky by

I think you're correct in your description. I feel I have "my line" on my bitch side but I'm 4 generations out from my original purchased bitch. I don't think if you buy a bitch and have a litter you can call that your line. I like your camping description...lol

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 9:05 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I have dogs at my home that are 8th generation........

by

My ten and a half year old is a Cool Dude daughter, making her a 3rd generation dog of mine.
Living with her are dogs that are 4 & 5 generations down the road from her and one is with pups herself....
I've been out a few times, mostly with certain English dogs and then went back to breeding within my line for a few generations to see what changed from those out cross breedings. It's one way I've been able to keep a hand on health issues and other things as well.

Ugly babies?? We all get them but those aren't the ones I later bred. Limited Registration is something I've been using since I started breeding and in the early days, took lots of heat for doing so. Now we all understand that selling Full Registration pups to pet buyers is not a wise thing to do. If I sell a breedable bitch, I stay on as co-owner and most of the time, do the litter raising myself, avoiding lots of tragedy and suffering at the hands of novices who don't listen very well.. Those that do listen and take the time to learn are few but the ones that have are today pretty good breeders theselves .

One thing I have experienced is, if some people just don't like you because you're forward, confident, opinionated, sometimes right or just not part of the "in-crowd", your dogs are not to be bred to...
In my case, the segregation has been bliss.....LOL

With the times I judged so far, I don't care who's showing a dog or where I think he's from, I'm in the "now" state of mind and doing my job of measuring on who lives up best to the standard. I'm also new and still learning but know I can do it.
I feel most bulldogger judges do the same and respected all-breed judges do it very well. They're not tainted with the love / hate possibilities that exist ringside but judge from how they interpret the AKC standard, just as a judge in a US court does with the law. You have liberal judges and then you have hanging judges, many times with varied results.


Posted on Feb 6, 2009, 6:27 AM
from IP address 75.220.125.98

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Good read.....

by Shelly

http://www.thedogplace.org/Articles/Breeder/0901-Preferred-Type_Gammill.htm

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 3:51 PM
from IP address 98.207.11.178

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

This is an EXCELLENT article!!

by

Everyone should read this, from the seasoned Vet to the Newbie!
Ward

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 8:36 AM
from IP address 12.74.216.62

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: This is an EXCELLENT article!!

by

It is a EXCELLENT article to read.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 9:31 AM
from IP address 72.197.171.172

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: This is an EXCELLENT article!!

by

It is a EXCELLENT article to read.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 9:32 AM
from IP address 72.197.171.172

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

lol by

I think I've been there a few times. Good article...thanks Shelly.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 10:24 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Expression by

What feature about the head do you feel plays the most important role in expression?

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 10:13 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

I would say by

The nose...If its not placed well or pigmented properly it throws the whole look of the expression off..

Kelly
Whitehills Bulldogs
http://www.geocities.com/kellywhitehills

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 10:37 AM
from IP address 71.108.166.60

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

The eyes by

I think a lot of things contribute to expression as a whole (length of skull, ear set and carriage) but for me it's the eyes. I think you get the most "sourness" out of the eyes. The eyes can tell you to go f off...better than anything imo. We picked up a new dog this weekend that has the biggest, roundest eyes I've ever seen but they also have a very soft look to them...it's interesting.

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 11:20 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Expression

by Elizabeth

I don't think it can be summed up in just one feature. Our breeds' head is way too complex.

Without a long, flat skull, you don't get the correct sour expression.
If your skull isn't correctly furrowed, you loose expression.
If the eyes are not properly placed you loose good expression (I am way fussier about placement than shape. I am not as offended by the common "cornered" eye as some people are.
Nose placement is important.
Eye color is critical.
Jaw width, sweep, depth, squareness and length. Without any of these things present, there goes good expression.
Full, deep chops. Need them for your good foreface, which in turn you need for good expression.
Ears. Big ears, long ears, heavy ears, drooping ears, flat ears, flying ears all ruin expression.

e

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 11:56 AM
from IP address 65.77.65.11

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

President's family dog search....

by

If President Obama wanted to buy a bulldog as the family pet and White House dog, would you go along with it and sell him a dog while knowing he and his party support legislation in many states that are anti-dog / anti-breeding?

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 5:32 AM
from IP address 99.188.210.175

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Nope

by

I do not think the White House is a good environment for a dog..To much going on for a dog to get the proper attention..

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 7:02 AM
from IP address 98.119.189.200

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Depends by

Depends on where it would go after the family left office. Most pets are given away after the term...not fair to the animal.

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 7:58 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I bet...

by

I bet some breeders of considered breeds may be hesitant, due to his pro-animal legislature stand when he was running for office.

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 4:40 PM
from IP address 75.220.125.98

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

New dog laws are being proposed everywhere..........

by

I'm curious as to why all this is happening. I checked the AKC website and many states at any given time are working on laws that do nothing but restrict dog ownership, breeding or using them as working dogs.

Massachussetts is about to vote on spay / neuter requirements, vaccination schedules mandated by law, not common sense. Heck, I bet there are still children in many of those states that don't have all the necessary vaccinations.

Are the politicians behind these proposed laws lost for things to rally for during this tough economy?
I'd like to see a list of who these politicians are by state and what their party affilliations are. So far from what I see, most of the state senators and representatives behind these anti-dog laws are from the Democratic party.

Shooting down anti-dog legislation is a reality for us as breeders / dog owners and knowing who is behind it and revealing them to the fancy is a way to get to them. Their names need to be on an Anti-Dog legislator list and then confront them on their own turf. I suspect they'll back off because they'll appear as if their business has nothing to do with helping us all work out of our current economic mess, the real problem that needs attention.

Again, who are these legislators? Which party do they belong to?



Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 4:54 AM
from IP address 99.188.210.175

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Check this out........

by

I lifted this of a website while checking out legislators in MA that are behind anti-dog ownership laws.

"Legislation is being promoted vigorously by the radical Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) in states that the polls indicate are likely to be won by Barrack Obama in the November presidential election. The list includes Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and now Massachusetts.

Regardless of the outcome nationally, an Obama victory in those states would carry many liberal Democratic state senators and legislators into office on his coattails. Liberal Democrats tend to be the major supporters of animal rights legislation. The likely goal of HSUS is to help liberal Democrats capture or hold onto control of state legislatures in Obama-leaning states.

We can speculate that HSUS might be offering political support in return for yes votes on animal rights legislation, or commitments by candidates to support similar legislation next year.

Obama supported animal rights legislation during the primary campaign, but has been silent on this issue in recent months.

HSUS is a radical animal rights group that is working to reduce and ultimately eliminate the private ownership of animals in America. HSUS does not operate animal shelters and has no relationship with local humane societies that actually help animals. HSUS is a political organization in the animal rights movement. "

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 5:27 AM
from IP address 99.188.210.175

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

It is amazing...

by Anonymous

how the HSUS can fly under the radar when they are as radical in there beliefs as PETA. Matter of fact Wayne Pacelle HSUS Head Honcho prior to starting HSUS was a big wig at PETA...I know of Bulldoggers who have actually monetarily supported this radical group! We have to get the word out!! The General Public, as well as people that should know better, are misled by the name HUMANE SOCIETY of the United States believing they are a government supported agency! This is our ARCH ENEMY!! They have more money in there coffers than PETA! They made enough money on the Katrina Disaster that all the dogs they supposedly helped could have stayed in 5 Star Hotels and eaten Steak every day out of Platium food bowls! Where did all this money go...the dogs never saw it! This eventually resulted in a Federal Investigation that has not surprisingly been swept under the rug... The NRA fights this group on a regular basis!
If you dont believe me do a little research. It will scare the ---- out of you!
Ward

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 10:22 AM
from IP address 12.74.204.2

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Sorry that was me!

by

nm

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 10:24 AM
from IP address 12.74.204.2

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Barkley April 9, 1998 - February 3, 2009 RIP

by

I groomed and bathed him last night and when I looked into his eyes, I knew what had to be done. But I still wasn't sure. I went to bed hoping that he would just go to sleep and not wake up, but he was there this morning. When he didn't eat and drank his water lying down, I was sure.

Barkley was my first show dog and he showed for me even though he didn't really want to, for a whole year. He got one Reserve at the small Lynden, WA show under Ed Sledzik. I'll never forget that. I wanted so bad for him to win something, so bad. He never did but he taught me many things that year and those experiences taught me so very much about this.

He was a great dog.

Registered Name: Mytemugshot Sir Charles Barkley
Sire: MBIS, MBISS Ch. Prestwick Gawain
Dam: Ch. TLC's Rushelle
DOB: April 9, 1998
Breeders: Bridgett Higginbotham, Lynn Lageson & Sherian Evans
Owners: Christine & Jay Serion





Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 1:32 PM
from IP address 24.19.225.6

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Rest in Peace, sweet Barkley

by

Jay, I know today and the ones to come will be hard. But soon his memory will only bring smiles to you, smiles of wonderful memories and feelings the two of you had.

There is always a "special" one, and doesn't have to be a champion, that takes a piece of your heart and gives you so much.

Sounds like Barkley was a cool boy, that brought you to our world of Bulldogs and many friends. Hugs to you Jay.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 1:48 PM
from IP address 56.0.84.23

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Rest in Peace, sweet Barkley

by

Jay, I know today and the ones to come will be hard. But soon his memory will only bring smiles to you, smiles of wonderful memories and feelings the two of you had.

There is always a "special" one, and doesn't have to be a champion, that takes a piece of your heart and gives you so much.

Sounds like Barkley was a cool boy, that brought you to our world of Bulldogs and many friends. Hugs to you Jay.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 1:48 PM
from IP address 56.0.84.23

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Jay and Christine by

So sorry about Barkley. We know exactly how you feel. You did the right thing by helping him along. Although we wish our pets would make it easy on us and just go on their own, it's a truly selfless thing to help them out. Rest in peace big guy...you were always one of my favorites.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 2:16 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

So sorry Jay and Christine...

by

RIP Barkley, so sorry for you loss....

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 3:18 PM
from IP address 65.127.36.7

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Jay and Christine

by Kelly

I am so sorry..I know it was a hard thing to do..

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 4:27 PM
from IP address 71.108.166.60

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

To SAD

by

I know one day it will come this way. I look at thr little man and saw so much. LOL Jay. Thomas Elsa and Bullies

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 4:35 PM
from IP address 72.197.171.172

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

This is a sad day

by Jaime Gerdes

I hope that the two of you find some peace at the end of it!

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 6:31 PM
from IP address 76.212.3.106

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Sorry for your loss.......

by

This dog will always be your favorite memory, no matter how many dogs you show, breed or finish...

God put these guys in our hands to teach us humility, love and pride.

Now don't let him down..... God Bless you in your moment of sorrow..

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 7:52 PM
from IP address 99.188.210.175

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Well said...Jay sorry for your loss...May he rest in Peace

by Daryn

Jay ...I haven't had the chance to meet you in person but my wife did in Long Beach and needless to say your reputation not only as a breeder/handler but as a lover of this wonderful breed proceed you.

We are truly sorry for your loss.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 10:13 PM
from IP address 68.111.130.198

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

So sorry....

by Ryan & Allora

Allora and I are saddened by the news of Barkley's passing. We are thinking of you guys and we are happy to have met Barkley in person. He was a really sweet boy and he will be missed.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 11:21 PM
from IP address 98.234.13.221

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

very sorry for your loss

by Rhiann

RIP Barkley

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 4:48 PM
from IP address 99.130.7.222

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Barkley April 9, 1998 - February 3, 2009 RIP by

Jay & Christine, i am so sorry for your loss. RIP Barkley, & may all those wonderful memories bring joy & comfort to your heart.

Marcela

Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 10:01 PM
from IP address 76.220.64.130

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Strong foreface by

What does this mean? Any examples?

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 12:15 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Correct me if I am wrong..

by Kelly

I would say that Amos had a strong foreface..Good upsweep and length of jaw and a chin..



Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 4:25 PM
from IP address 71.108.166.60

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Kim

by

It would be great to see picture I can not remember. Kim

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 5:36 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Strong foreface

by

[IMG][/IMG]
I was given this picture by Flo I did not understand when she said foreface she said this was a good example this is a dog of long ago but if you see where nose ends to jaw this is what I understood It is just my opinon but I think Tate is a good example & his daughter Shelly Jo has inherited it from him. May be Jay could post a head shot of him. I never could find this term in the old books. Its a great discussion. Good Question


Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 5:26 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Englands Maserpiece

by

[IMG][/IMG]

Another Good Example

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 5:57 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

1926 The Bulldog Analyzed Page 1

by

[IMG][/IMG]

This is very old but the only time I have seen the term foreface used hope you enjoy Kim

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 7:41 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

The Bulldog Analyzed Page 2

by

[IMG][/IMG]

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 7:57 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

After thoughts of this article

by

Foreface is nothing more than the bone substance of upper Jaw & Face

A good foreface is determined my a strong upper jaw.

There is always talk of the bottom jaw but have never heard a bulldoggers talk about a strong upper jaw as you cannot have a good foreface without a strong upper jaw. What are your thoughts?
Kim

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 6:59 AM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Strong foreface by

Look at it in terms of strong vs weak.. as in quality.
First, recognize what is a quality foreface by the component parts, ie; jaw, flews, nose placement.
A "strong" foreface by description means the dog excels in this area.
A description of "weak" tells me he falls short.
I have never heard it used in the context of "strength" as in physical strength, rather "strength" as in strength of conformation.
The tetherington dog Kim sent a picture of looks terrific.
e

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 4:57 AM
from IP address 72.214.101.1

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Let's discuss by

There doesn't seem to be really any meaningful threads lately...recently there was discussion of free whelping litters and many breeders now seem to be in favor of such a process with stipulations. A few years ago, if you had mentioned any such thing you would have been labeled as irresponsible...why the shift? Are you for or against free whelping. What limitations would you suggest for attempting free whelping a litter? If more litters were freewhelped, do you think there would be a greater shift in the public viewing our breed as healthier?

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 10:53 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

I have only ever free whelped 1 litter of puppies by

and that was Chihuahua's im not sure i would risk that with a bulldog. She bit me, thank god she has a small mouth, i would hate to get bit by one of my girls.


Peanut had 5 puppies, the first was stuck and we had to help it out (when i got bit)the 3rd was stuck too. 3 out of 5 were born with the sack off. It was a very long evening she was very tired.

I know how tired my chihuahua; i also have talked to many who have free whelped if a pup gets stuck in the birth canal you have very little time to get to the vet and have the section, the one stuck dies and sometimes the ones behind it also die and also the bitch. I know one who said if one is stuck they put their hand in the bitch and crush it and pull it out. I DONT WANT TO EVER HAVE TO DO THAT.

Some bitches also do not go in labor.

Believe me, i have one big ass girl who could deliver a semi if needed.



Vicky,
Bosco, Bella, Breve' & Holly

http://langagerbulldogs.tripod.com

PHOTOS ARE PROPERTY OF LANGAGER BULLDOGS, YOU MUST HAVE WRITTEN PERMISSION FOR ANY USE OF THESE PHOTOS FROM LANGAGERBULLDOG.


Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 11:34 AM
from IP address 204.58.223.235

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I'm in the middle of reading a Bulldog Book

by Tammy

That was published in 1985.

I'm reading the breeding part of it right now, and it's funny how in there, the c-section was written as the absolute last resort. And, how if a bitch couldn't naturally free whelp she shouldn't be bred.

It also talks about AI too, and how it was a bad idea because of infection resulting from human hands and inserting the tube. That year was just the beginning of AI starting.It talked about the endless possibilities if AI and frozen collections would expand a breeding program for years.

It's interesting to read different perspectives from different time periods.

I finished reading another book from 1934 a few weeks ago. Do you know in 1934 a well bred bitch cost $500?

Something else we should think of too (not to get too far off topic)is this book was written during the depression. It discusses how breeders should not alter their prices during economic times.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 12:13 PM
from IP address 207.216.238.202

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

I've had two and with zero problems......

by

My two were born from bitches that were both in the 42-44lb category. Delivery was uneventful and with a little help from us, they both settled down after having the pups and also took care of them from that moment on.

Year later, we tried letting one of these girls do it again but we became squeemish when she went 61 days. At the c-section, one was just starting to head down the canal, so it was clear that we jumped the gun. Had we waited, she would have had done it again. I also wish we had as the c-section was extra rough on her. The anesthesia interruption and the nature of the surgery took its toll.

When free whelping, they go from birthing mommy to nursing mommy just like that.

Another thing to mention is that it was buzzed around the show the next weekend that I was too cheap to get the c-section. I laughed as one started having her pups while I drove to the vet for the c-section. #1 was born in the van and the rest started moments after I arrived back home.
So yes, I dodged a c-section fee and ended up with a healthy, normal mom along with an educational experience that I could share.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 12:14 PM
from IP address 99.188.210.175

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Thanks

by

We are do on the 7 0f Feb. I would love to free it. But Dr B has the call. Good info to share. She is a 46lb.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 4:42 PM
from IP address 72.197.171.172

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Not Worth the Risk...

by

I understand that a C-Section is major surgery. As long as there are "Water Puppys" I will continue to do C-Sections. I have had Bitches that could and have free whelped. I just do not feel that it is worth the loss of puppies and possibly my bitch to prove a point.
Ward

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 4:42 PM
from IP address 173.96.224.252

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Ward by

Thank you for answering...you have much to offer but most people see you as the "legislation guy"...lol

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 5:34 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Shelly... by

Didn't you have a bitch that free whelped...including a water pup? Not trying to put you on the spot or saying I agree...just that it happened.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 5:33 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Jessica...

by Shelly

Yes...I did. I was going to post, just been very busy today.
This girl was back in 1983, she was built must like my girl CJ.
She free whelped 4 litters. Her first litter was 7 and she did have a good size water pup, which was born dead but she had no problem whelping that pup.
Her last litter was the only one had problems with, and I lost 3 as she was in labor for a long time. We had just moved to Santa Rosa and she went into labor in the middle of the night, I had NO idea of where to take her, so the last 3 (out of 7) were born dead.
She never had any problems delivering any of the litters and she was "allowed" to have her pups with her 24/7. Never lost a pup from injury and never had an issue with not enough milk, if anything she had too much.
It was just something that was done back then as was natural breeding and we never did progesterone test!! Went by "days" of the heat cycle and I never missed a girl.
Would I do it again today?....I dont think so, its very stressful (for the human!) and it can take hours. I free whelped the Chihuahua and that with only 3 pups took hours!

Wild West Bulldogs

Pictures property of Wild West Bulldogs.



Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 7:27 PM
from IP address 98.207.11.178

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

thank you

by Rhiann

for sharing this. Very interesting.

Posted on Feb 6, 2009, 11:26 AM
from IP address 99.130.7.222

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Let's discuss

by Jaime Gerdes

I know of a dog that free-whelped. She happened to be alone (for a VERY brief period) when she did it and the puppies wound up dead because she didn't know what she was doing.
Why take chances when there are SO MANY variables with this breed?



Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 6:33 PM
from IP address 76.212.3.106

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

It's funny Jaime by

My first litter was born in a dirt hole my bitch dug in a brief amount of time, while I was at dinner. This was a litter of 6, and this is the great grandmother of your Sara. So free whelping is in your girl's genes.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 7:16 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Haven't had a water pup since 1998........

by

No kidding and diet has lots to do with it.

I'd post why I've had this experience but would rather share it with someone who'd be interested while we have a cup of coffee or lunch.
I posted my findings on BDW once and one poster actually attacked and said I was full of it. May be so but still not a water pups since 1998.

I've shared this with those who have bought bitches from me and they have had the same results...

When I fisrt made the discovery, I tested it all on three bitches who were bigtime water puppy girls. They had their first normal litters, all born c-section... One girl was having her fourth litter at 4 1/2 years of age.
It ended up being her healthiest and easiest of her.
Excess amniotic fluid was no longer a concern of mine since this discovery.

Free whelping is not for all but if you get caught with a newborn in the crate, don't freak out, be calm and let her do her thing... If she goes more than two hours with passing one, head on over for the c-section.

I can say I've never lost a bitch while free whelping those two litters that happened but I have lost one while having a c-section...That was a bummer of a day...

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 7:50 PM
from IP address 99.188.210.175

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Well...

by Jaime Gerdes

I think Sara, who lays down in the neighbor's grass ever time I walk her, would have NOT been successful in free whelping her puppies. I don't believe she had the stamina. My old granny Lucy, the queen of the singleton, would have held on to the puppy until it weighed 4 pounds, free whelped it, and then left it in a dumpster somewhere (she was the poster of a dead-beat Bully Mom).

The one I am referring to was actually related to Sara's great grandmother too, and she had no trouble whelping the puppies. She just could not take care of them properly once she had them. If someone had been there, I guess it would have been a success.

If I had it to say, I am to nervous to try and let it be. My opinion is that this is a man-made breed, and "man" should plan on a c section vs. waiting it out to see if mom could do it on her own.

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 6:45 PM
from IP address 76.194.25.209

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Oh, that poor momma, being talked about

by

on a public forum, so much slander.

ahhahahaha


My Bella would have been the same way. She loves then when they are MUCH older, and i think it is just so she can clean them and wisper in their ears that she will kick butt if they step out of line.



Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 8:05 AM
from IP address 204.58.223.235

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

My Norbert

by

was from a free whelped litter of 8. The owner of the bitch is a vet and owns his own clinic so they could do a C-Section in a hurry if needed. The bitches next litter was a C-Section and they didn't have another litter out of her.

I personally have helped whelp lots of litters of puppies (other breeds) and in just the time, mess, clean-up, concern for health, etc, etc, etc it seems like C-Sections are SO much easier.

For me the Pros for C-Sections far outweight the Cons.

I feel the same about AI...why risk the bitch and stud dog when modern methods allow us to do it so much easier without the risk and time involved.


Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 7:29 AM
from IP address 98.247.255.68

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

C-Sections are not without considerable Risk.

by

There have been many Bitches and litters lost as a result of a C-Section gone bad. I am never comfortable going into the operating theatre with my pregnant Bitch, though I am very confident in my Vets abilities. I am not trying to contradict myself from my previous post, but you have to be aware of the dangers associated with C-Sections, Major Surgery, Anesthesia, Infections, Blown Sutures, Bleed Outs etc. I just want everyone to consider all of the risks prior to breeding your girl. This all being said, to me the risks of attempting a Natural Whelp out weigh the risks of a C- Sect.!
Ward
Marcel, I would greatly appreciate it if you would email me your Water Puppy diet.
W

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 10:36 AM
from IP address 12.74.204.2

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Oh Don't get em wrong

by

I totally understand the risks of C-Sections. Especially with our breed. I have only been in attendance of 2 C-Sections (not my bitches) and I was totally concerned for the bitch on the table and couldn't wait to see them awake. When it's mine I'm not sure I could even be there helping. I guess I'll see when the time comes.

My vet video's his surgeries and I had a young bitch that had a CCL surgery...I was fine reviewing the video with him until I saw her white leg and knew it was my girl. I didn't faint but I did get a little queezy.

Posted on Feb 4, 2009, 6:47 PM
from IP address 98.247.255.68

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Well I would worry

by

That if breeders started leaning more towards attempting free whelps it would give a GREEN light to every inexperienced yahoo out there to do the same. I think that a lot people don't touch breeding Bulldogs because they are aware of the C-section delivery. I am not sure I would ever attempt it myself..and I am not a stranger to assiting animals through the birthing process. It is very intense when foaling out a mare..knowing that if the presentation is wrong you are going to have to get her up until the vet arrives. Can't really throw in the car and race to the vet. Anyways back to dogs..It's the water puppy that scares me..it would definitely have to be done at the vets office. Both deliveries have substantial risk..it is just what one feels more comfortable with I guess. I would not knock someone who wanted to do it under the right conditions and knowledge.



Posted on Feb 5, 2009, 9:44 AM
from IP address 207.200.116.74

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

one would think

by Rhiann

that the word C-section would stop every other yahoo. But is doesnt.
I can only speak for my area. In the kings county we have about 5 free whelping Bulldog breeders who will only utilze the local vet in the event of an emergency.

In Kern county we probably have the higher rate with about 50% of the breeders there free whelping litters. (this area is full of BYB nowadays with ads running in the newspapers from LA times to SF Chronicle) And even more interesting is that a small network of people are your local PD and Sheriffs in the area! One made a joke to me how soon he was going to be able to retire from the PD because of how succesful his Bulldog Business has become.

In my county, Tulare county we dont see as many free whelpers but the amount does seem to be increasing. Why? Because so many of our local vets keep pushing them to free whelp. A vet i no longer see used to annoy the hell out of me when i would go there. He is an 87 year old semi retired man who claims he has watched Bulldog breeders create nothing but a man made disaster. He loved seeing Mia and claimed she was one the best examples of the breed he had seen in many years. Although i prided in his words, i refused to keep going there because he would not respect my decsions towards C-sections. I got tired of the free whelping battle with him among a few other issues.



Posted on Feb 6, 2009, 11:43 AM
from IP address 99.130.7.222

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

MLBC Sweeps Day 1 by

by Tracy (Login tstorck74)
Judge: Mr. Lucky Watson

6-9 Month Dogs
1-- Islandrock's BMW's Head Honcho OWNER-- Edgar and Jessica Pangilinan
2-- Silverspoon's Custom Built OWNER-- Marci Burton
3-- Undeniabulls Why So Serious OWNER-- Angela and Troy Drenth
4-- Walkin' Blues Fat Boy Slim OWNER-- Suzy and Chris Holleran

9-12 Month Dogs
1-- Graybulls Hair Of The Dog OWNER-- Bill, Kay, and Aimee Gray
2-- Bullwrinkle Rudy Valentino OWNER-- Derek and Debbie Burns
3-- Bullwrinkle Cassanova Bentley OWNER-- George and Lindsay Bolton and Edie Gaertner

12-18 Month Dogs
1-- Note A Bull's Philly Joe Jones OWNER-- Debbi and Lance Golding
2-- Sir Touch-Down Q-Tip OWNER-- Thomas and Elsa White and Nolita Wiley
3-- PJ's Handsome Bean Being Bean OWNER-- Mark and Susan Phelps

6-9 Month Bitches
1-- Seabee's In The Eye Of The Storm OWNER-- DeWayne and Cathey Martin
2-- Walkin' Blues Celestial Shining Star OWNER-- Brian and Bonnie Roberts
3-- Wild Wests Guns N Roses OWNER-- Shelly Fernandez
4-- Kingsbrae Celtic Princess OWNER-- Marcela Montoya

9-12 Month Bitches
1-- Bullwrinkle's Sparkle OWNER-- Victoria Cameron and Edie Gaertner
2-- Coastbulls Red Hot Reba OWNER-- Link Newcomb and Micah Leslie
3-- Brizzibull Beautiful Tribute OWNER-- Catherine and Kenneth Brizzi and Doris Boyd
4-- Bullwrinkle Francesca OWNER-- Edie Gaertner

12-18 Month Bitches
1-- Bodhi's Light Life And Love OWNER-- Mary Aiken, Sandra Martinez and Patti Rungo
2-- Royal Lee's Flying Eagle II OWNER-- Alexander Lee
3-- Benchmarks Devine-A-Bull Stella OWNER-- Kim Lucier and David Long
4-- Black Islands Hugs N Kisses OWNER-- Gloria Labrecque

BEST IN SWEEPS-- Bodhi's Light Life And Love
BEST OPPOSITE-- Graybulls Hair Of The Dog


Thanks for the results Tracy! I'll cross post when they are available, we didn't get a chance to mark our catalogue.

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 8:39 AM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Pictures from Motherlode Bulldog Club Specialty 2009 (Sacramento, CA)

by

Congratulations to all the winners this weekend! Great weather, great dogs, great peeps... good times!!

Here is a link to pictures. They are divided by day, and each day is divided into class dogs, class bitches, and best of breed:

http://flickr.com/photos/ryansphotomadness/collections/72157613178669077/

Here are a few...




































Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 12:11 PM
from IP address 64.84.58.84

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Thanks Ryan and Allora! by

Great pics as usual! Thanks for sharing Bitches are going to be tough this year...lots of nice girls out there!

Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 1:28 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

thank you!

by

great photos as always!!! see you guys soon.

Marcela

Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 2:39 PM
from IP address 76.203.52.139

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Thanks so much Ryan and Allora

by

For the great pics

Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 3:23 PM
from IP address 65.127.36.7

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Re: Pictures from Motherlode Bulldog Club Specialty 2009 (Sacramento, CA)

by

Thanks we had a GREAT time. Nice show and GOOD LOOKING BULLDOGS. Thomas and Bullies

Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 3:45 PM
from IP address 72.197.171.172

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Thanks Guys!!...

by Shelly

Great pics as always!

Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 4:17 PM
from IP address 207.200.116.135

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

*** ThE PuLL-iT SuRpRiZe!!! (Part 2) ***

by

When we last left our Intrepid HeRo he was hangin' on to his eGo for dear life...but the BaTTLe wasn't over yet!


Ughh...these wOMaNFoLk are a tenacious bunch!






I THiNk maybe I'm wearin' her down. (Hmmm, or is it ME that's wearin' OuT?!!)







I'll just put my REaR iN GeAr and...







wHoOpS!!!...oH NOOoo!!!...It's the dreaded "PuLL-iT SiR-PRiZE"!!!







Ta-DA!!! The ViCToRiOUs ViXeN reigns!







Here ya go Mr. Wonder-Waffle. You can have it now...






Don't think I'll play with da Ladies anymore...they're ToO STuBBoRN!







Here, Gabie...need a KLeENeX?






Meanwhile, you folks can go give Gabie a BoOSt by givin' him the oL' VoTE-N-ViEW at his AMeRiCa'S FuNNiESt page:

http://abc.go.com/primetime/afv/index?pn=player&itemId=6325790


NOTE: Photos property of SittingBullies.com All rights reserved.










Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 7:34 AM
from IP address 76.28.213.49

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Pretty excited.... by

taking my girl to the BCT B match saturday. She isnt old enough yet to show, but we have been practicing and she is doing great with the stack and pretty good on the lead.

Any advice on puppy training for the ramp and lead???






If youu pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man.
-Mark Twain


The average dog is a nicer person than the average person.
-Andy Rooney






Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 4:41 AM
from IP address 67.76.192.86

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

*** ThE PuLL-iT SuRpRiZe!!! (Part 1) ***

by

One of Gabe's favorite pastimes is to play TuG with any guests who come by. He's proud of the fact that he can take on ANyBuLLy & come out on ToP. Ummm...that is uNTiL he met The TeNaCiOUs TuGGeR, BeTsY ThE BoLd!



OK, I'vE got a GRiP...Have YoU?



...Ready?...PuLL!!!




What's YOuRs is MiNE, MiChiLiN MaN, so you may as well GiVE up NOW!






Well, YoU haven't reckoned with my "TWiRL-A-GiRL", then, have you?!!






I'm still with ya, TuBBo!







(Hmmm...I see what they mean about these "DiZZyiN' DaMeS"! This one is TeNaCiOuS!!!...FeELiN' DiZZzzeEE...gotta hold onnNNn...ughhHH!)






She...juSt...WoN't...GiVe...uPPpp!!!






...To bE CoNTiNUed! Tune in next time to see whether Gabe remains ToP-TuGGer-oF-aLL-TiMe...or, MEeTs hiS MaTcH!?!!


Until then, you can keep pluggin' away at his VoTeS-N-ViEWs in The AMeRiCa'S FuNNiEsT BaTTLe! Over 90,000 views & still holdin' his own as ToP DaWG!

http://abc.go.com/primetime/afv/index?pn=player&itemId=6325790


NOTE: Photos property of SittingBullies.com All rights reserved.













Posted on Jan 31, 2009, 10:24 AM
from IP address 76.28.213.49

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

OK... by

#5 cracked me up!!! These are too sweet.






If youu pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man.
-Mark Twain


The average dog is a nicer person than the average person.
-Andy Rooney






Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 4:51 AM
from IP address 67.76.192.86

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Prayers are Needed

by

Mike Shea, So.Cal. AKC Rep. is in need of your prayers. He is hospitalized with terminal leukemia. He is in critical condition and is comatose. Please remember him in your prayers. Kim


Posted on Jan 30, 2009, 2:16 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

Done... by

Sorry to hear this

Posted on Jan 30, 2009, 4:02 PM
from IP address 76.126.125.41

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

very sad.. by

prayers being said.






If youu pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man.
-Mark Twain


The average dog is a nicer person than the average person.
-Andy Rooney






Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 4:52 AM
from IP address 67.76.192.86

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

GOD BLESS

by

May the Lord be with Mike.He is a very nice man.Thomas

Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 7:21 AM
from IP address 72.197.171.172

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Update on Mike

by

UPDATE

Joan Frailey was at the hospital today (4:15 pm) and Mike was a little better. Wendy Bettis is visiting each evening and Joe Waterman will go with her tomight or tomorrow and let us know how he is doing. Keep up the prayers.\

Donna

Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 4:46 PM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Kim by

I just got this..


I am very sad to report that a dear and wonderful person has passed away.
Mike Shea passed away peacefully today (Monday) at 3pm PST. He was surrounded by
friends and love ones.
As many of you may know Mike was a very successful handler for many years. He
retired from handling to become the AKC Field Rep on the West Coast. Mike
retired from the AKC a few years ago and became a very popular judge. He always
had a great sense of humor and was always there to help anyone at any time. I
first met Mike when he was working as an assistant to Frank Sabella years ago.
Mike remained the nicest and sweetest person thru out the years.
He will be missed by his many friends and love ones.

A Memorial Service is being planned.

Cards of condolence may be sent to his dear friends who were always there for
him:

Jimmy and Wendy Bettis
PMB 381
231 E Alessandro Blvd. #A
Riverside, Ca. 92508




Kelly
Whitehills Bulldogs
http://www.geocities.com/kellywhitehills

Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 10:26 AM
from IP address 71.108.166.60

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

Thank You

by

Along with his family the dog show family was there for him till the very end. Thanks to my bulldog family for all your prayers.

Kim & Burt


Posted on Feb 3, 2009, 11:04 AM
from IP address 76.170.137.239

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

*** PoTTy BeLLeS-N-WHiStLeS! ***

by

At 7.5 weeks old The Holly Berries litter is sailing through "Puppy 101", working to perfect the most crucial of lessons, "PRoPeR PoTTy PRoToCoL"...


They've been making routine trips outside to the infamous PoTTy BoX with da BiG DaWGs & immediately caught on to the purpose of the journey. This week they discovered the MaGiC PoTTy BeLL that suddenly transports them outside to enjoy the wonders of the SaWDuSt TRaiL to TReAtDoM!




"On my honor, I promise to doO my DoOty to da BRoAd and My COuNtRy.
To put my BoOtY, where you SHOULD doO yer DOoTy
and oBeY da LaW of Da PaCk!...Ay-MeN."




One RiNgY-DiNGy!...






I DiD it!!!






Now, I'll give it the Ol' "THuNdeR-UnDeR DiNg-A-LiNG" just fer good measure!






TwO RiNgY-DiNGiEs!






Hey! I'm RiNGiN' dA THiNgY...






It must be BRoKe...da MaGiC DoOR hasn't opened yet. Hmmm.






MaYBe if I SiT just right...







HeY YoU!!!...We'RE WAiTiNGGG!!!...Crossed all da LeGs we can CRoSS...and wE'Re gettin' CRoSS!!!






*** MiSSiON ACCoMpLiSHeD!!! ***



Ok...we got THaT lesson down. What's NeXt?!!






MaKE SuRe YOU go ring Gabie's bell at the link below for his AMeRiCa'S FuNNiESt ViDeO today & keep it climbin' da charts to STaRDoM!

http://abc.go.com/primetime/afv/index?pn=player&itemId=6325790


NOTE: Photos property of SittingBullies.com All rights reserved.







Posted on Jan 30, 2009, 10:18 AM
from IP address 76.28.213.49

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

LOLOL by

to cute. I have only had one faithful ringer of the bell so I just put it away. I may have to drag it back out with my newbies.






If youu pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous, he will not bite you; that is the principal difference between a dog and a man.
-Mark Twain


The average dog is a nicer person than the average person.
-Andy Rooney






Posted on Feb 2, 2009, 4:50 AM
from IP address 67.76.192.86

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

State by State Legislative News (Long)

by

*** ALERT *** New York City, NY - Legislation against Bird owners

This received from the New York Bird Club regarding legislation against bird owners they are trying to pass.

< > < > < > < < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < >

Ban the Sale of Birds as Pets (petstore legislation)

You are receiving this email since you have expressed an interest in either banning the sale of birds as pets and/or improving conditions for captive petstore birds that are for sale to anyone who has possession of the correct amount of US currency.

Take a look at what I wrote for Change.org so we can work within these guidelines. Please write your own draft, and when we have finalized a draft, we will present it to a NY council member or assembly member with the goal of establishing some kind of petstore law. At the present time, there are no laws for captive birds in petstores.

If you are in the New York City area and want to work on a committee, please let me know.

Ban the Sale of Birds as Pets



The New York Bird Club rallies for a law to be passed that would ban the sale of birds being kept as pets in the USA, as birds are being kept in cages too small to fly in for the majority of their lives, which in some cases is close to 100 years. It also contributes to the import of illegal bird types. Keeping birds is unnecessary and cruel. At the very least that regulations be placed on cage sizes, number of birds per cage, or even licences to keep birds as pets. It seems to me to be far too easy for any one to buy a bird from a pet shop with no knowledge of bird welfare and no questions asked of that person about where the bird will be kept, etc. If we can at least get our government to debate this subject, I do hope that some positive actions may be brought forward.
I appreciate your comments and feedback.
Anna Dove New York Bird Club




Ken & L
Owners - Monthly National Legislation Report





Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 26, 2009
ALERT California - Santa Barbara County - February 4, 2009 - Meeting


*****Please cross post to your dog and cat friends who are against Mandatory
Sterilization of dogs and cats who live in Santa Barbara County. Please
leave this post intact *****


As we ramp up for the next SNAP (Spay /Neuter) Task force meetings we really
need all Santa Barbara County community members to be active and involved.

We need to be coordinated and cohesive just like we try to be for shows,
performance events and matches. If we don't step it up now
will our clubs exist if our County changes? We are outnumbered on the task
force and public comment, letters to the task force and the Board of
Supervisors are very important.

John Hamil DVM and his wife Susan LaCroix Hamil are traveling from Laguna
area (February 18th) as experts before this task force about Mandatory
Sterilization and the health of animals, will you be there? Will you help
us prepare for this continued fight at Task Force Meetings? John Hamil past
President CVMA will help us educate this task force and Dr. Ron Faoro also
past President CVMA (who brought us California AB 1634). Dr. Hamil
delivered a fabulous speech at the Capitol against AB 1634 and we are
fortunate he is willing and able to come to Santa Barbara for this.

Members of your community who are task force members have tirelessly
attended seven Task Force meetings to date, shelter visits, and outreach to
the spanish speaking community. Please if not for your right to have
medical decisions for your animals made between your and your vet, come
support your community members serving on the task force with moral support.

Contact Susan Klein-Rothschild task force facilitator at (805) 681-5435 for
more information about the task force. To see Task Force Minutes and
Agendas: http://www.sbcphd.org/snap/default.html>
http://www.sbcphd.org/snap/default.html



We have a online group to aid in organization and communication. Please
email CCKCDCC@gmail.com and after a few questions are answered we'll invite
you to the list.

Send your letters to the task force members:
Santa Barbara SNAP Task Force Members
c/o Susan Klein-Rothschild, MSW
Asst Deputy Director, Public Health Dept
300 N. San Antonio Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93110
Fax - 805-681-5200
Email: susan.klein-rothschild@sbcphd.org

Clearly state in your letter to distribute to the task force members.

Please also bcc that letter to CCKCDCC@gmail.com so we can make sure it is
distributed.
Thank you,
Diane Jones
Member Channel City Kennel Club, Dachshund Club of America, Dachshund Club
of California


Future meetings:
February 4
February 18
March 4
March 18


Locations and times to be announced. They are trying to change them back to
all be in SB where they have better public attendance.

Location will be one of the following with the other having video
teleconferencing.

Board of Supervisors Hearing Room, 105 E. Anapamu St. (4th floor) Santa
Barbara,CA 93101 or
Board of Supervisors Conference Room, 511 E. Lakeside Parkway, Santa Maria,
CA 93455 .


Write your supervisor:

1st District: Salud Carbajal, Phone:(805) 568-2186 Fax: (805) 568-2534
Email: SupervisorCarbajal@sbcbos1.org


2nd District: Janet Wolf Vice Chair, Phone: (805) 568-2191 Fax: (805)
568-2283
Email: jwolf@sbcbos2.org

3rd District: Doreen Farr Phone: (805) 568-2192 Fax:(805) 568-2883 Solvang:
(805) 686-5095
Fax: (805) 686-8133 E-mail: dfarr@countyofsb.org

4th District: Joni Gray Lompoc: (805) 737-7700 Santa Maria: (805) 346-8407
Email: jgray@co.santa-barbara.ca.us

5th District: Joseph Centeno, Chair Santa Maria: (805) 346-8400 Fax: (805)
346-8404
Email: jcenteno@co.santa-barbara.ca.us
Documents from last task force meeting.



Ken & L
Owners - Monthly National Legislation Report



Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 23, 2009
ALERT -- VA SB 1151 -- Virginia could use some national help -- PLEASE


ALERT -- VA SB 1151 -- Virginia could use some national help -- PLEASE


SB 1151 would require VA animal shelters to require owners to
sterilize their dogs and cats if they get picked up twice by A/C. In
other words, the second time you go there to get Fluffy, you have to
sign a contract that you'll have her spayed, same as you would if
you were adopting her. There are no exceptions.

This email asks for your help to educate the sponsor and the first
committee. Everything you need is here.

Those who want to research the bill for themselves can go to:



http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?091+sum+SB1151

To read the actual text, click the blue line under 'Full text:' As
usual, plain type is existing law and italics are language added by
the bill.

The claimed reason for this bill is 'overpopulation' as shown by
shelter euthanasia. However (except for the notorious PETA operation)
Virginia's shelter euthanasia rates are good and have been improving
for decades. This is actually hard core AR legislation: HSUS is
frantic to get some sort of MSN passed in some state as a springboard
to getting a federal bill in the next four years. At the shelter
level, the goal is simply to have another way to punish animal owners.

The majority of shelter euthanasia now is feral cats and unwanted
ADULT dogs, many of them unsuited to be pets. We have far more reason
to be concerned about a dog shortage in the next few years, than 'pet
overpopulation.' The few Virginia shelters with unwanted puppies
available can (and increasingly do) send them to other shelters where
they're snapped up as they come in.


DISCUSSION

Requiring S/N of shelter animals when adopted DOES reduce birthrates.
No other kind of MSN works, in fact the other schemes actually cause
MORE euthanasia.

Here are the reasons SB 1151 can't work:

About 75% of pet dogs and 85-90% of pet cats are already sterilized.
Those that aren't, either:

1. Are no-owner (usually feral) cats, or,

2. Belong to an owner who feels she can't afford the S/N operation --
typically $150-up -- or,

3. Have owners who are keeping them intact for breeding or performance
reasons.

Unowned cats are the biggest problem -- typically 50-65% of total
shelter intakes and a higher fraction of euthanasias -- but no law can
help.

Most owners of 'just a pet' dogs and cats who don't have them
sterilized, confine them in order to prevent pregnancy. And most of
the accidental puppies find homes without ever seeing the shelter.

Dogs and cats kept for breeding must be intact; hunters often feel
that intact animals perform better and may in any case want to breed a
good dog at a later time. While breeders are fanatics about
confinement (especially when a bitch is in season), escapes DO happen
sometimes. Hunters routinely have their dogs out. The contribution to
the birthrate of unwanted animals from breeders and hunters combined,
is zilch.


If SB 1151 is passed, it will:

1. Have no impact on birthrates, and,

2. Increase abandonment of a greater fraction of dogs picked up for a
second time by a shelter, due to owner inability to pay for the
operation. With unemployment increasing, this problem will get worse.


(Shelters that actually care about the animals usually figure out that
MSN laws cause more abandonment and stop enforcement after a few
months. Do we want another law like that?)

3. Cause pointless sterilization of breeding and hunting dogs that are
intentionally kept intact. For a small breeder the loss of the
breeding potential of even one bitch would be a major setback. And
hunters' dogs are so frequently out (although not lost or abandoned)
that many of them are picked up twice within the same year.

If we won't allow large scale breeding and we go after small scale
breeders with ideas like SB 1151 (and since the importation of young
puppies for resale is now banned by federal law), where do we want the
dogs to come from?


ACTION:

1. SB 1151's sponsor is Sen. Ryan McDougle. He's a Republican, has
generally been one of the 'good guys,' and needs polite education.

His capital phone number is (804) 698-7504. Ask for his legislative
aide, tell the aide who you are and where you're from. If you're a
Virginian and from his (4th) district, be sure to say so. His email
address is: district04@senate.virginia.gov His fax phone number is
(804) 698-7943. You can say as little as "I'm calling to ask that
Senator McDougle withdraw SB 1151." Or you can go into reasons that
the bill is a bad idea.

By email use a subject line like "Please withdraw SB 1151." Get the
same message at the end of your text. Keep it short!

2. The bill is likely to be heard in the Senate Agriculture Committee
as early as next Monday AM. Below is the list of members and their
contact information. Please make as many contacts as your time
allows.


The message for Senate Ag is "Please VOTE NO on SB 1151." You can do
it by phone (same as above) or by fax or email. Emails should be short
and clear -- try to get it all on one screen. As with all writing to
lawmakers, include your full contact info. BE POLITE.

IF YOUR SENATOR IS ON THE LIST BELOW PLEASE, PLEASE CALL HIM OR HER
AND BE SURE TO SAY "I AM A CONSTITUENT OF SENATOR XXX"!


CONTACT INFORMATION FOR VA SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE

Chairwoman
Patricia S. Ticer
district30@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7530
Fax: (804) 698-7651

John Watkins
district10@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7510
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Mary Margaret Whipple,
district31@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7531
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Emmett W. Hanger, Jr.
district24@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7524
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Wm. Roscoe Reynolds,
district20@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7520
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Frank M. Ruff, Jr.
district15@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7515
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Phillip P. Puckett
district38@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7538
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Harry B. Blevins
district14@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7514
Fax: (804) 698-7651

R. Creigh Deeds
district25@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7525
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Mark D. Obenshain
district26@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7526
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Ryan T. McDougle
district04@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7504
Fax: (804) 698-7943


A. Donald McEachin
district09@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7509
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Chap Petersen
district34@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7534
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Ralph S. Northam
district06@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7506
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Richard H. Stuart
district28@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7528
Fax: (804) 698-7651



THANKS, everyone. Just 3-4 years ago we killed a breeder licensing bill
with hundreds of your calls and emails over about three days. The
sponsor of that bill learned a lot from that experience and is now on
our side. I hope you'll help us again.


Walt Hutchens
Timbreblue Whippets
Virginia




Ken & L
Owners - Monthly National Legislation Report




Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 20, 2009
Animal Laws & Legislation - January 20, 2009









STATES - IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER











ALABAMA - 2009 Regular Legislative Session begins Feb. 3, 2009

Gadsden - Humane Society of Etowah County has asked the Gadsden City Council to consider passing a law requiring mandatory spaying and neutering of dogs and cats. The proposed law as drafted would require all dogs or cats 4 months old or older to be spayed or neutered. The ordinance exempts kennels licensed by the city's Revenue Department. People temporarily harboring an animal for 14 days or less would not be required to have the animal spayed or neutered.

Lawrence County - (1/14/09) - Angry citizens, hoping for immediate action from the Lawrence County Commission concerning dangerous and roaming dogs, left Mondays meeting disappointed. Rather than passing a resolution to adopt a state animal confinement law, commissioners opted not to act on the matter before gathering further information. The commission instead formed a committee to research the animal control issue further before taking any kind of action. The committee will be comprised of Commissioners Alma Whitlow, Bradley Cross and Mose Jones, as well as County Attorney Cecil Caine.




ALASKA - 2009 Legislative Session began Jan 20, 2009 to Apr 19, 2009

Anchorage - (1/15/09) - At a Public Safety Committee meeting Wednesday, the Anchorage Animal Control Advisory Board said the municipality's animal control laws need to be changed. The advisory board said that under current law, an aggressive animal can get away with repeated attacks on humans, as long as they don't cause significant physical injury. According to Anchorage municipal code, physical injury can mean anything -- scrapes, cuts or other similar injuries. But a serious physical injury is something that would be life threatening, a serious disfigurement, or something that impairs the victim's health or internal organs. The board recommended a stricter policy for animals that continually injure people, regardless if the injury is classified as serious or not. The stricter policy could include euthanasia after repeated offenses. The Anchorage Assembly would have to approve any official changes in animal control law.





ARIZONA

UPDATE: Cottonwood - MSN proposal was voted down

Pima County - (1/4/09) - The yipping, the yapping, the bowwowing and the woof-woofing can start to wear on a person after a while. It wore on Catherine Sienko until she just couldn't take it anymore. But when she called to file a complaint against her neighbor and his barking dogs, she didn't feel like she got much help from Pima County. After a yearlong battle, in which she was forced to spend many hours unsuccessfully negotiating for her peace and quiet, the neighbor was fined $200. The barking continues. So she has started Quiet Pima County, an organization whose aim is to change the way the county deals with barking-dog complaints. So far, the group has just a dozen members, but she's hoping its ranks will swell to hundreds of had-it-up-to-here activists who can get the county to change its ways. "We're being assaulted," she said. "We're being assaulted by noise. We're getting sick. We're getting high blood pressure. We're getting tinnitus. We can't sleep at night. We can't enjoy our patios in the evening." There were 615 complaints related to barking dogs in the last year.

Phoenix - (1/11/09) - Legislative Ag Fest will be held January 21at the State Capitol. The goal is to reach as many state legislators as possible and show them how diverse agriculture is in Arizona and help them see we need their support. The event will begin at 5:30 p.m. For more information, contact Paul Brierley at 480.635.3612 or _paulbrierley@azfb.org_

Phoenix - (1/16/09) - A measure before the Arizona Legislature would extend current state bans on dog fighting and cockfighting to other animals. Senate Bill 1115 would make it a felony to train or be involved with animal fighting. It expands upon existing state law against dog fighting.

Show Low - (1/18/09) - The Planning and Zoning Commission accepted a number of proposed revisions to Section 15 of the city code, the zoning ordinance, during its regular meeting Tuesday. One such group of revisions belonged to requirements of home occupations. The revisions also includes a list of permitted and non-permitted businesses for home occupation, with other examples being decided on a case-by-case basis. The code allowed non-household animals in residential zones when the lot had a minimum size of 20,000 square feet. The code would allow one large animal (horses, cows), one small animal (sheep, goats) or 10 chickens, turkeys, rabbits and other animals of that sort for every 20,000 square feet on the lot. So, for example, a person could have one horse and 10 rabbits on a 40,000-square-foot lot. the household pets provision was already in Chapter 6 of the city code and therefore was separated from the non-household animals portion of the zoning ordinance. "You can have three dogs and four horses on a two-acre (87,120 square feet) piece of property," he said.
Since the household pets portion was removed from the zoning ordinance, the changes dealing with animals was mainly numbering of the sub-sections. Everything would remain in the ordinance as it was before.





ARKANSAS - The 87th General Assembly began Jan 12, 2009

SB77 - AN ACT CONCERNING AGGRAVATED CRUELTY TO DOGS, CATS, AND HORSES AND RELATED OFFENSES AND CONCERNING ANIMAL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Senate Committee on Judiciary

Helena-West Helena - (1/8/09) - Patrick Allen, Helena-West Helena code enforcement officer, addressed the city council Tuesday night about animal control ordinances for the city. Helena-West Helena is still without an animal shelter and has issues with enforcing leash laws and animal registration fees.


Little Rock- (1/10/09) - Attorney General Dustin McDaniel is paring down his wish list for the legislative session that starts next week. He says he will focus on a handful of issues rather than several. In particular, McDaniel will focus on tougher penalities for animal cruelty and on an ethics bill. His bill that would make aggravated animal cruelty a felony on the first offense has already won over the Arkansas Farm Bureau -- a group that opposed similar efforts in the past. McDaniel says the proposal also has the support of a majority of both the House and Senate judiciary committees, which would likely be first to consider the measure. He's predicting easy passage of the animal cruelty bill. Additional article re: SB77 - click here.

Maumelle - (1/7/09) - Almost half of the hour-long meeting was spent debating a subject that wasnt even on the agenda cats and dogs. During the initial public comment period, Maumelle resident Brandon Tolbert asked the council to change the animal nuisance ordinance to require animal control officers to remove dogs that were a nuisance rather than keeping the current law which he said gives animal control officers discretionary judgment. After a lengthy discussion on the wording Tolbert offered that lasted almost 30 minutes, Ladner asked if this wasnt something that could be worked out at a more appropriate time, saying that public comments were supposed to be limited to three minutes. The council agreed, but not before city attorney JaNan Davis warned them that dogs were considered a persons property and the courts required due process before personal property can be taken.






CALIFORNIA - 2009 Legislature began Jan. 5, 2009

Alameda County - (1/9/09) - A new law took effect Jan. 1 which states that landlords and mortgage lenders must take charge of abandoned animals left behind on properties that have been vacated following the termination of a rental agreement or property foreclosure. It requires them to notify an animal control office immediately, who will then retrieve and take possession of the animal until it is deemed to be in a suitable condition to be returned to the owner. The bill also authorizes animal control officials to secure a lien upon the animal for the purpose of recovering the costs of its rescue.

Hollister - (1/6/09) - The city recently updated several laws to coincide with state legislation such as code sections dealing with the vaccination period for dogs. The change deals with the vaccination period allowed for dogs over four months old. The prior ordinance required vaccinations to occur "not less than one year and not more than two years" after birth. The new wording changes it from two years to three.


Lancaster - (1/15/09) - The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday (1/13/09) to grant the first of two required approvals for a new ordinance that will define potentially dangerous and vicious canines and establish new rules for their owners to follow. (Note: CA state law prohibits designation of specific breeds as dangerous. However, it does allow breed-specific spay/neuter). If enacted, the ordinance would require spaying or neutering for pit bulls and Rottweilers, including mixed-breed animals that exhibit the predominant physical characteristics of those breeds. Exceptions could be made for dogs that are considered at risk of not surviving a spaying or neutering procedure, as well as for dogs registered with breed registries such as the American Kennel Club. UPDATE: (1/16/09) - Next city council meeting: Jan. 27, 5 PM Lancaster City Hall Council Chambers, 44933 N. Fern Ave., Lancaster, California 93534 661-723-6000 To contact a member of the City Council:
Phone: 661-723-6019

Laguna Hills - since last year, the city has been looking into spay and neuter programs and is now recommending that a public education campaign and a license canvassing program be created in the upcoming biennial budget to make it easier for pet owners in the city to license and alter their dogs. A canvassing program report recommends pet license outreach spay/neuter program not needed for now. The twelve-month canvassing program would run from January 2010 to December 2010

Manteca - (1/14/09) - Those slamming two of the current council members Mayor Willie Weatherford and John Harris for the lack of a dog park in Manteca are barking up the wrong tree. They are conveniently leaving out one big detail: The entire council back then went along with the idea of the dog park and put it ahead of others only after the Manteca Dog Owners Group (DOGS) made the commitment to raise $60,000 toward its construction. The deal was simple. When the group raised the money, the city would build the park.


Riverside County - (12/15/08) - Riverside County supervisors plan to introduce an ordinance today (12/16/08) to sterilize dogs whose owners let them run amok, roam unlicensed, bite people or otherwise violate state or local laws. The ordinance would also require all adult dogs and cats in the unincorporated county to be implanted with identifying microchips. County animal-control officials say they hope the ordinance, if passed, will satisfy the opponents of a 2006 proposal to spay and neuter almost all dogs and cats in the unincorporated county. Under the new proposal, spay and neuter requirements would apply only when pet owners show themselves to be irresponsible, officials said. The cities of San Bernardino and Los Angeles as well as Los Angeles County have adopted stricter rules that require sterilization of adult pets generally with the exception of guide dogs, purebred show animals and a few others. Supervisors are expected to introduce the ordinance today. If it is approved, it would go to a public hearing and final vote probably in a month, Miller said. UPDATE -Ordinance approved 5-0, HEARING to be held TUESDAY - 1/13/09 - 9:30 a.m. UPDATE - (1/14/09) - Dogs and cats whose owners let them run astray, go unlicensed, bite people or otherwise violate laws could face mandatory sterilization, Riverside County supervisors voted Tuesday. Also, pet owners must have their dogs and cats implanted with identifying microchips, supervisors decided. The unanimous decision just before 7 p.m. followed more than five hours of comment from a packed and boisterous audience of opponents and supporters. Supervisors softened the new rules, adding an exemption from spay/neuter provisions for "recognized breeders" and creating a committee to define that. The new rules apply to all of unincorporated Riverside County and take effect in 30 days. UPDATE: (1/15/09) - The Riverside County Board of Supervisors is asking for people to consider joining a committee that will review an ordinance adopted Tuesday night (Jan. 13). The REVERSAL Ordinance Task Force will include a group of people that favored the ordinance as it was written, plus a group of individuals that opposed the microchipping/spay & neuter ordinance. The ordinance, dubbed REVERSAL by Supervisor Jeff Stone, drew praise and criticism during a seven-hour public hearing on Tuesday. Supervisors Stone acronym stands for: Reducing Euthanasia Vowing Everyones Responsibility to Save Animal Lives. Supervisor Roy Wilson said he supported the ordinance, but requested a committee be formed so people can help amend whatever changes might be necessary to the law. Those interested in participating on the REVERSAL Ordinance task force are asked to contact their respective Supervisor via e-mail. UPDATE: (1/19/09) - A new ordinance requiring identifying microchips on almost all dogs and cats in unincorporated Riverside County takes effect March 1, but animal control officers will not cite or fine anyone until June, said Robert Miller, county director of Animal Services.

Riverside - (1/7/09) - Some Riverside County residents are pretty steamed about a new anti-nuisance ordinance, approved by the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, that will fine owners of barking dogs up to $500. The new ordinance also affects the way dog-related complaints are handled by officials. Under current county law, when a resident in an unincorporated community complains about a barking, howling or otherwise noisy dog, an Animal Services officer investigates the matter, generally by visiting the location where the disturbance has been reported. When the new rules take effect -- in 30 days -- noisy dogs' owners will receive a warning for a first complaint. If another complaint is made within a year of the first one, the matter goes to a hearing, during which an officer decides whether or not the dog is actually a nuisance. If so, an order is issued to the dog's owner and must be followed within 10 days.

Remedies might include obedience training, containing the animal within an enclosed space, such as a garage, restricting the amount of time the animal is allowed outside -- or debarking the dog so it doesn't vocalize beyond a whisper.

If the order is not followed within the 10 days allotted, a fine is incurred, beginning at $100 for the first violation. A second violation within a year racks up a $200 fine, and a $500 fine is imposed for each additional violation. For more information, check out the Riverside County Department of Animal Services.

Ukiah - new ordinance regarding the status of the city's dogs would either lead to greater compassion for the animals or a "legal quagmire," depending on which side people get their information from. By a 4-1 vote at its regular board meeting Dec. 17, the Ukiah City Council directed staff to draft an ordinance to be brought back for final approval at a later date mandating the change of the word "owner" to "guardian" in city code regarding canines. Councilmember Doug Crane said he could not stand behind the intentions of the actions because it would lead to more problems down the road.





COLORADO

Aspen/Snowmass - (1/17/09) - As the end of dog-sledding season grows nearer, advocates for the dogs at Krabloonik Restaurant and Kennel in Snowmass Village are weighing their options on how to most effectively improve what they say are inhumane off-season conditions at the 280-some animal facility. The kennel has long been a source of consternation for some in this animal-friendly community who claim the dogs there are mistreated. Under mounting public pressure MacEachen stopped shooting old and weak dogs in 2005, though the practice remains legal for working animals like sled dogs. And Krabloonik was cited in May for violating 10 state dog-sled kennel regulations. However, an inspection of the kennels dogs last fall by seven veterinarians concluded they were in good health. If working with MacEachen does not net substantial improvements by this off-season, the advocates intend to put an ordinance to Snowmass Village voters that would create a legal mandate raising the standard of care for working animals like the Krabloonik dogs. The advisory board includes freshly elected Snowmass Mayor Bill Boineau. They are already stumping for state legislation that would cap the number of adult breeding dogs that a kennel can house at 25. Voices for Krabloonik co-founder Bill Fabrocini has been lobbying state Sen. Gail Schwartz (D-Snowmass Village) to sponsor the so-called Puppy Mill Bill.


Boulder - Humane Society of Boulder Valley says law enforcement has decided to write fewer tickets for such violations as having an off-leash dog in a prohibited area. Instead, officers are trying to talk to pet owners about municipal rules.

Calhan - (1/5/09) - A new law in Colorado may end up costing you a little more to adopt your next cat or dog. The new law, which went into effect January 1st, requires all cats or dogs to be spayed or neutered before they are adopted. At the Pikes Peak Humane Society in Colorado Springs, adopting a cat or dog that is unaltered will cost an additional $50. You get the $50 returned to you once the dog or cat you've adopted is neutered or spayed.

Denver - (1/4/09) - When Colorado Lawmakers go back to work on Wednesday, one of the bills they will consider would require cat owners to have tags or microchips for their animals. Westminster Rep. Cherylin Peniston and Denver Sen. Joyce Foster will introduce a bill requiring all cats in urban areas to have identification. If passed, the new legislation will only apply to cities with populations over 100,000. It excludes rural communities that may not have formal animal control programs and also have barn cat populations for which identification is not practical. Cities like Fort Collins that have already instituted identification requirements for cats. To help cat owners, the Metro Denver Shelter Alliance and the Denver Area Veterinary Medical Society are offering more than 150,000 microchips to metro area cats free of charge through September. The program is called "Chip Your Cat."


Denver- (1/16/09) - The city of Denver unveiled more than 100 proposals Thursday to save $20 million in the 2009 budget, but what many residents are more likely to notice are a couple of initiatives aimed at their wallets. Do you violate city laws by letting your dog roam around Cheesman Park without a leash? Are you picking up his poop? Consider yourself warned. Between April and September, two animal control officers will be on stealth patrol riding bicycles looking for people just like you. Their mission: Issue more tickets. The city expects to generate an additional $96,000 this year by putting two animal control officers on bike patrol. Scholz said the city has had animal control officers on bikes before but that it suspended the practice last year because of staffing shortages. Those vacancies have since been filled.

Denver Court Case News Update - From Sonya Diaz - We had our oral arguments in front of the three-judge federal court of appeals yesterday (01/12/09). Honestly, it was a mixed bag of good and not so good, but the best thing about it all was that we drew a good panel of sharp judges. From the things they said and asked, at least two of the three judges seemed to get it and I think that is the most favorable part of the whole. One of the judges said to the city attorney, Mike Joyce, who did the oral arguments for Denver, that he didn't know if his own dog would fall under the ordinance. The sharpness of the judges, I think, seemed to overcome even our sometimes spotty arguments. The outcome possibilities are that the appeals court 1) keeps our case out of court 2) allows us to go to trial, but throws out our vagueness claim or our substantive due process claim, or even a piece of one of the claims. Our witnesses are mostly for the substantive due process side of our arguments. I'll let you know when the ruling comes out. I don't know when that will be.

Greeley - (1/9/09) - Its no secret that Greeley is the most anti-dog city in northern Colorado, maybe in the nation. A group of Greeley citizens initiated an ordinance, which would open parks to dogs, gathered signatures and placed it on the ballot. Voting will be done by mail in late January and early February. The city staff and city council fear that the citizens cant be trusted with this decision, so they devised a procedural trick that will sabotage the initiative process. The citizens proposal would open all 41 parks to dogs on leashes. The city council developed another proposal that would open only 19 parks, leaving 22 closed even to dogs on leashes. They have placed this competing proposal on the same ballot as the citizens proposal. Some on the council would have you believe that they are giving you a choice, open 19 parks or open all 41. Some who favor dogs will vote yes for both, but many will vote yes for one alternative and no for the other. So, the pro-dog vote will be split between two alternatives, which all but assures that both will fail, which is exactly what some on the council want. Dogs would be prohibited from parks and Greeleys anti-dog reputation would be upheld. The citizens proposal includes the baggie law that requires anyone walking a dog in any park or on any street or sidewalk to have in their possession a plastic bag suitable for picking up dog poop. Failure to carry a baggie would result in a $25 fine. The city is using misinformation and political trickery to deny citizens rights to use the initiative process. Please dont let them succeed. Vote yes on the citizens proposal, Item 200, which will appear first on the ballot. Vote no on the citys proposal, Item 2A, which will appear second on the ballot.







CONNECTICUT - 2009 Regular Legislative Session Convened Jan 7, 2009 - Adjourns: June 3, 2009

Greenwich Point - (1/4/09) - Greenwich Point caretaker Ed Fesco said he has received complaints recently about dog owners who do not abide by the law to keep their dogs on a leash and pick up after them since the town-owned property opened to the animals Dec. 1 through March 31. "It's the dog owners faults, but Animal Control has to do a better job," he said. On the weekends, the beach trails are packed with dogs of all sizes, from cocker spaniels to St. Bernards-many of which run freely through the woods and on the beach without proper supervision . "People think that I don't see them put the leashes on as I drive by, but I do," Fesco said. Old Greenwich resident, Susan Ryan has a friend who refuses to jog at the Point anymore out of fear of the dogs, she said.

Wilton - (1/15/09) - A change to the dog leash ordinance has some dog owners barking foul this week, as some contend the changes are an unnecessary intrusion on responsible dog owners. The original law, passed in June 2006, requires dogs to be leashed in the Wilton Center area, Schencks Island, all public sidewalks and roadways, the town hall complex, the Gilbert and Bennett School properties, all properties owned or operated by the Board of Education, all playing fields operated and/or maintained by the Parks and Recreation Department, and at any public event in town. Proposed changes would further prohibit dogs from being unleashed in Merwin Meadows and all walking trails on property owned by the town. A public hearing to discuss the changes is scheduled for this coming Tuesday, Jan. 20, at 7 p.m. at town hall.



D.C.

No Report for Washington, DC



DELAWARE - The 145th General Assembly opened Jan 13, 2009

No Report for Delaware





FLORIDA

FL SB 288

Session: 2009 (3/3/09 thru 5/1/09 Prefiled)
Sponsor: Bullard
Summary:
Sale of Dogs and Cats [EPSC]; Requires that additional information relating to the genetic disorders to which dogs and cats are susceptible be included in the written notice that pet dealers provide to a consumer at the time of sale. Redefines the term "pet dealer" for purposes of provisions authorizing a purchaser to return an animal to the pet dealer and receive a refund, exchange the animal, or receive a reimbursement of expenses, etc. APPROPRIATION: $82,669. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2009.
History:
12/17/08 SENATE Referred to Agriculture; Judiciary; General Government Appropriations 12/03/08 SENATE Filed


SB 372 - Damage by Dogs; Expresses the legislative intent to revise laws relating to damage by dogs. EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon becoming law. 12/15/08 SENATE File

Go to the NAIA Trust CapWiz tool and send an email to your Senators expressing opposition to removing the restrictions provided in F.S. 767.14. The only changes that need to be made in
Chapter 767 Damage by Dogs is the menacing language by which many innocent dogs are being destroyed. Click here for the NAIA CapWiz link.

Alachua County - (1/19/09) - Alachua County pet owners whose cats, dogs and ferrets are not sterilized will not have to pay more for a pet license following action last week by the Alachua County Commission. Meanwhile, a new nonprofit veterinary clinic that will spay and neuter pets at low cost is progressing and slated to open in May. The higher license fee for fertile pets and the clinic are linked: The County Commission provided $250,000 to help establish the clinic. Alachua County Animal Services raised the license fee on non-sterilized pets to recoup some of that money. However, Animal Services Director David Flagler said the differing fees created problems for veterinarians who sell county licenses at their practice. The licensing fees for dogs had been $15 for a sterile one and $25 for a fertile one. Cat and ferret licenses were $8 for a sterile one and $12 for a fertile one. At Flagler's recommendation, the commission last week voted to charge the lower fees regardless of the animal's fertility status. Flagler said he may introduce a new plan for higher fees in the future.

Panama City - (1/8/09) - A new pet friendly dining ordinance could be in place well before the dog days of summer. The Panama City Beach city council will have its first reading of a doggie dining ordinance. The ordinance would allow pet owners to bring their dog with them to restaurants with outside eating areas.

Tarpon Springs - (1/17/08) - It is unfair for veterinarians to be able to board dogs overnight, while kennels are not afforded the same right. That sentiment was voiced last year when three people who wanted to open a kennel in the downtown business district found they could only board dogs during the day because they were not associated with a veterinarian. At that time the trio told city commissioners the municipal zoning code placed unfair restricts on would-be kennel owners not affiliated with a veterinarian. In response, the City Commission took a tentative step Tuesday night toward leveling the animal boarding playing field. Commissioner voted unanimously to approve on first reading an ordinance that would allow domestic pets to be kept overnight in kennels in a business district. The ordinance does not allow farm or wild animals to be kept at the kennels and would mandate a number of other restrictions intended to keep kennels from bothering neighbors. The commission will consider passing the ordinance on its second and final reading Jan. 27.





GEORGIA

Albany - (1/14/09) - State law in Georgia defines a vicious dog as any dog that inflicts severe injury on a human without provocation, but to be declared vicious, the dog must have bitten people on at least two occasions. Some cities don't think the state laws go far enough. They've enacted stronger local laws to deal with dangerous dogs.

Decatur County - (1/9/09) - As of Thursday, January 15, 2009, any person who owns, keeps, maintains or harbors any dog, cat, or ferret three months of age or older must have the animal vaccinated against rabies from a licensed veterinarian. In addition, the animal must have a collar around its neck with a vaccination tag and license number of the animal. See Registration/Vaccination requirements Download the Animal Registration Form that is needed to register your animal at the Decatur County Planning Department on Airport Road. The law also states; It shall be unlawful for any dog to be on the streets, lanes, roads, rights of way or squares of any subdivision in the County, or loose on vacant lots or unenclosed lots, unless such dog is held firmly on a leash held by a person.

Thomasville - (1/15/09) - A south Georgia sheriff has asked county officials to consider a proposal that would ban pit bulls in his county. Thomas County Sheriff Carlton Powell considers the breed to be a danger to the public. He made the comments at Tuesday's meeting of the Thomas County Commission.





HAWAII - 2009 Legislative session began Jan 21, 2009

Kai - (12/30/08) - A new nonprofit is taking over the city's spaying and neutering program for the first time in more than two decades, which could mean big changes, said the Hawaiian Humane Society, the current service provider. Animal Care Foundation says it will start running the city's Neuter Now program in February out of its Hawaii Kai office and in a mobile clinic around the island. The Humane Society will stop running the program tomorrow, meaning the Neuter Now program will not be available next month. Residents can still purchase discount certificates for pet sterilization through the Hawaiian Humane Society or satellite city halls until tomorrow. Those certificates will be honored until March 31.





IDAHO - 2009 Legislative Session began Jan 12, 2009

Pocatello - Mayor Roger Chase wants the state to create a vicious dog registry that tracks animals when their owners move from one jurisdiction to another after a southeastern Idaho animal control officer was attacked and injured by a pitbull with a long history of problems this month





ILLINOIS


The death of a 4-year-old mauled by at least one Rottweiler owned by his foster family could lead to a crackdown on how the state regulates the care of foster children in homes with animals. Rep. Rosemary Mulligan (R-Des Plaines) said the Illinois House committee that oversees the Department of Children and Family Services might consider tough legislation outlawing dangerous dogs in foster homes. If you want to be a foster parent, forgoing a dog could be it, Mulligan said.

Chicago - (1/9/09) - Chicagos proposed mandatory spay-neuter ordinance has been amended to exempt veterinarians from needing to report when they see animals that have not been altered, according to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which is pushing the initiative. The new amendment was crafted and submitted to the committees a few weeks ago. The amendment had not been publicly announced until now. The ordinance has not come up in public since it was given a hearing by the Chicago City Council in September. The September hearing on the proposed ordinance was attended by so many people who wanted to give statements that officials adjourned the discussions after three hours and scheduled it to be brought up again, although a date has not been set. The proposed ordinance requires owners to neuter their cat or dog before the animal is six months of age, unless they have an exemption, such as being registered with an approved registry or association like a breeders group or having a note from a licensed veterinarian. An owner without a waiver who was found to have an unneutered cat or dog would be issued a citation. Failure to have the animal neutered within 60 days would result in a $100 fine. Failure to act within another 60 days would result in a $500 fine and confiscation of the animal for forced sterilization. The fact that veterinarians are not required to report their clients with unaltered animals hasnt been the issue for our group, Greeley said. The issue has been the government determining the need for the medical services in the first place. There also has been some question of whether or not the city would even be able to enforce such a law, and whether it is truly needed.

Crystal Lake- (1/9/09) - Dont mess with McHenry Countys pet lovers. Almost 150 of them crammed into a small meeting room Wednesday evening to tell the McHenry County Animal Control Advisory Committee that the idea of limiting the number of animals that residents can own was a bad one. A member of the McHenry County Board had brought up the idea last year based on constituents concerns. It took almost two hours to get through the people who packed the countys Animal Control and Adoption Center to speak, and not one supported the idea. The committee planned to mull over whether such a need exists in the county, but it has no authority to implement the ordinance, Committee Chairman Ed Varga told the audience. But that did not ease the concerns of the sea of opponents, who disliked the concept on grounds ranging from animal rights to intrusive government.

Danville - (1/18/09) - Owners of dangerous or vicious dogs in the city could be required to obtain at least $100,000 liability insurance coverage under proposed city ordinance changes.
Revisions to a city ordinance to address dangerous dogs are now on their way to the city councils public services committee on Jan. 27 for approval. The citys dangerous dog subcommittee finished this week going through the proposed ordinance changes.

Lincoln Park - Springfield - (1/18/09) - Animal welfare activists and State Rep. John Fritchey (D-Chicago) met this morning at an animal shelter in Lincoln Park to announce a proposed law aimed at cracking down on abusive puppy mills. "This isn't something that should be considered radical," Fritchey said. "It's decent." Fritchey said opposition to the bill may be inevitable, but that he'd have concerns about any dog breeder who opposed the law. The bill, sponsored by Fritchey and State Sen. Dan Kotowski (D-Mount Prospect) and backed by the Humane Society of the United States and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, is called Chloe's Bill The legislation, if passed in its proposed form, would:

Create a "Dog Breeder License Act," which would prevent breeders from having more than 20 unaltered dogs, that is, dogs not neutered or spayed. Prohibit people from obtaining a dog-breeding license if they have been convicted of a felony animal-cruelty crime, including dogfighting. Require dog breeders to keep dogs in buildings without wire flooring and with sufficient heating, cooling and ventilation. Humane Society officials said Sunday that many puppy mills they've uncovered have dogs in crates stacked high on top of each other, with the wire flooring of the crates destroying the animals' paws over time. Require pet stores and breeders to provide potential pet buyers with the dog's full medical history, information of spaying and neutering, and information about any prior medical care. Officials said many dogs from puppy mills end up having substantial medical problems because of interbreeding and exposure to disease in cramped environments. Establish penalties starting with fines and escalating to having animals seized and breeding operations shut down.



Rantoul - After a proposal to ban dogs by breed drew criticism from animal activists, service dog owners, pet owners and breed enthusiasts, the Rantoul village staff is proposing a compromise animal control ordinance. The proposal would limit the number of dogs and cats based on the size of a dwelling and would prohibit more than four dogs and/or cats at a home. Proposal was dropped. Under the new proposal, the number of dogs or cats allowed on a property would be determined by the size of the dwelling, lot or parcel.





INDIANA - 116th General Assembly began Jan 7, 2009

Portage - BSL - City Councilman Brendan Clancy said he just wanted to put some additional teeth into the city's animal control ordinance and make dog owners more responsible. He didn't anticipate the growling after he introduced the proposed amendments to the ordinance last month. Clancy got e-mails and phone calls from people as far away as California complaining about his proposal and has withdrawn that language from the proposal. The discussion has opened up more debate that many sections of the city's code regarding animal control are outdated. Clancy said once the present ordinance is reviewed and draft changes are made, he will have a public input meeting to gather opinions on various sides of the issue. He was not sure when the meeting would take place. Next meeting January 6, 2009

Richmond - (1/19/09) - The city of Richmond's animal control ordinance won't go away. In fact, a new draft of the ordinance will be presented Tuesday night to Richmond Common Council. The ordinance, which was first proposed in 2007, has been rewritten and will be again presented to council with new changes. Council, in turn, is expected to set a special meeting to focus exclusively on the ordinance. The council meeting has been moved to Tuesday because of the observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The animal ordinance will thus be presented Tuesday night with a short explanation and then a special meeting will be set. There will be no public comment. The ordinance contains new language regarding hoarding animals -- keeping more than four dogs or four cats in a home -- fines for owners whose animal runs loose and bites a resident, registration of animals reclaimed from a shelter, registration of those surrendering litters of pets to an animal shelter and restrictions on animals tethered for lengthy periods of time.





IOWA - 83rd General Assembly began Jan 12, 2009

Castalia - (1/9/09) - An ordinance banning pit bulls, except for those currently in town, is being considered by the Castalia City Council. Monday night, the Council scheduled a public hearing on the ordinance that prohibits the dogs, or regulates the ownership of those dogs located within Castalia before the adoption of the ordinance. The hearing is at 7:30 p.m. during the Council's Monday, Feb. 2, meeting at City Hall. The proposed ordinance states: "No person shall permit a pit bull dog to go outside its kennel or pen unless such dog is securely leashed with a leash no longer than four feet. No person shall permit a pit bull dog to be kept on a chain, rope or other type of leash outside its kennel or pen unless a person is in physical control of the leash. In addition, all pit bull dogs on a leash outside the animal's kennel must be muzzled by a muzzling device sufficient to prevent such dog from biting persons or other animals." The kennel must have secure sides and a secure top attached to the sides and must be locked when the animals are within the structure. It It must comply with all zoning and building regulations of the city. Pit bull owners also would be required to place an easily readable sign on their property using the words "Beware of dog," with another similar sign posted on the kennel of the animal. Pit bull owners also would be required under the ordinance to provide the city clerk's office with proof of public liability insurance in a single incident amount of $500,000 for bodily injury to or death of any person or persons or for damages to property. The policy can't be cancelled unless 10 days written notice is given to the clerk's office. The ordinance specifies reporting requirements for pit bull owners
Violating the ordinance is punishable by up to a $500 fine and 30 days in jail. In addition, the city will order the pit bull to be removed.

Des Moines - (1/16/09) - Animal rights advocates are hoping Iowa lawmakers will give state inspectors the authority to respond to complaints against dog breeders who run so-called "puppy mills" that are home to squalid conditions for animals. Most of those breeders hold federal licenses with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, but critics say federal officials are too slow to respond to problems.
Tom Colvin, executive director of the Animal Rescue League of Iowa, and a former director of Waterloo's Cedar Bend Humane Society, said he doesn't have confidence that the USDA has enough inspectors to do a thorough job of ensuring that the facilities it licenses are meeting animal welfare standards. Rep. Jim Lykam, D-Davenport, is crafting the bill that would have state inspectors look into complaints and expects an initial draft to be released soon. He said many good breeders in Iowa exist, but the bad ones are giving everybody a black eye. "We just want to protect defenseless animals," Lykam said.

Logan- City Council came to no conclusions at the Dec. 8 meeting regarding making any changes to the animal control ordinance. Banning specific breeds was discussed. The council agreed to purchase catch poles and collapsible cages for dogs that are caught.

Sioux City - changes to the pit bull ban will have to wait another week. The city council was set to discuss amending that ordinance at tomorrow's council meeting, but councilman, Aaron Rochester asked for a delay. In September, city leaders approved an ordinance to ban new pit bulls from the city and put additional requirements on current pit bull owners. The topic will be back on the agenda January 12th. UPDATE: Council members and the public debated restrictions on the breed including keeping pit bulls on a six foot or shorter leash, only being walked by adults age 18 and older, micro-chipping of the breed, and keeping the dogs in enclosed kennels or fences that are at least six feet tall. One restriction that was erased from the amendment after some debate tonight was the requirement to muzzle the dogs while out in public. The council voted tonight (01/12/09) not to have a second and third hearing on this amendment. The new amendments to the ordinance will take effect on Saturday, January 17, when they're published.





KANSAS - 2009 Legislative Session began Jan 12, 2009

Arkansas City- (1/5/09) - The City may require local veterinarians to produce rabies vaccination records when requested by law enforcement authorities. A new proposed ordinance that will be discussed today at a City Commission work session would provide a way to enforce an existing requirement that residents have their pets vaccinated annually, a city commissioner said. The work session will be at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall. The proposed ordinance also is on the agenda for the commission's regular meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at City Hall. The proposed ordinance would not require licenses for dogs and cats, Commissioner Dotty Smith said today. Nor would it require that veterinarians do anything that they are not already doing. But it would require them to provide police rabies vaccinations records when requested. "We're not talking at about licensing," Smith said. "We're talking about finding a way to enforce rabies vaccination." Pet owners are required by law to have their dogs and cats vaccinated every year. "All this would be is a rabies tag that they already have if they are vaccinated," she added.

Overland Park - (1/14/09) - After drafting a proposed ordinance that allowed property owners or homes associations to hire a licensed trapper to remove threatening coyotes, city officials on Wednesday offered a revised version that leaves the trapping up to the city. The City Councils public safety committee approved the measure Wednesday. The full council could take it up Feb. 2. Under the latest proposal, residents would ask the city to remove a coyote. If the police chief finds that the animal is a danger to private property or livestock, the chief could order the animal to be trapped. The trapped coyote would be euthanized, Police Chief John Douglass said. Residents would be required to pay $250 to help defray the trapping costs.

Wilson - Ordinance 782 prohibits both pure and mixed breed pit bulls, unless they are already licensed as of the date of the ordinance





KENTUCKY

Louisville - (1/4/09) - Unlicensed pet breeders, take note -- your next customer could be an undercover animal-control officer. Determined to crack down on unlicensed breeding and selling, Metro Animal Services officers are poring over newspaper and online pet ads, then calling unlicensed breeders to set up sales. The more aggressive enforcement tactics, put in place after the city passed a stricter animal ordinance more than a year ago, have resulted in Animal Services officers busting about a dozen illegal pet sellers -- confiscating 123 animals and spaying or neutering those that haven't been altered.Those tactics are being criticized by local dog club members, dog owners and lawyers, who argue that what Animal Services is doing is improper, deceitful and wrong. They contend that the animal-control officers posing as buyers are not immediately identifying themselves, entering homes without warrants and altering the animals they seize, without any recourse for the owners.





LOUISIANA - 2009 Legislative Session begins Apr 27, 2009; adjourns Jun 25, 2009

No Report for Louisiana





MAINE - The 124st Legislature opened Dec. 3, 2008

Augusta- (1/19/09) - The 20-page report on changes to the states regulations for breeding dogs and cats is ready for review by the Legislatures Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee, and the states animal welfare director is calling it a great beginning. Some of the details of the report are: a recommendation to hire more investigators under the Animal Welfare Program; a new definition of breeding kennel to include small breeder (five to 10 intact females); medium breeder (11-20 intact females); and large breeder (21 dogs or more), along with new licensing fees; and a restriction on the number of dogs any kennel may keep. The task force began its work last summer after the committee determined that LD 2010, introduced by Rep. Benjamin Pratt, needed more research. No date has been set for discussion of the report by the Agriculture, Forestry and Conservation Committee.

Ogunquit- (1/8/09) - Things got a little testy Tuesday as selectmen considered resident John Mixon's request to expedite the processing of his citizen's petition concerning changes to town ordinances governing dogs. Mixon filed a petition that would liberalize dog owners' ability to demonstrate an animal is under voice control, so that approved dogs may be walked without a leash around town. Selectmen accepted the petition and agreed to consider it at the June Town Meeting. Mixon wants the changes put to a vote sooner. Mixon and Tramuto had a lengthy engagement over the current requirement that owners present a certificate of insurance as part of the process to demonstrate voice control over an animal. "The voters never voted anything regarding a certificate of insurance," Mixon said. Tramuto defended the requirement, citing the selectmen's responsibility to ensure the public safety.

South Portland - (1/14/09) - Two South Portland residents are collecting signatures for a referendum petition that would ban dogs from Willard Beach during the summer and require that they be leashed the rest of the year. The petition leaders, Gary Crosby and Dan LaBrie, must collect at least 930 signatures -- 5 percent of the city's active voters. They plan to put the question on the November ballot. City officials have reviewed the petition wording and concluded it is legal, according to City Clerk Susan Mooney. The petition would establish the following city ordinance: "No person owning or in custody of or control of any dog shall permit such dog to enter upon Willard Beach between April 15 and Oct. 15. Dogs are allowed on Willard Beach between Oct. 16 and April 14 during park hours, if on leash and under owner's control." The City Council is currently working on making some changes to the existing ordinance, which allows dogs on the beach year-round.



MARYLAND - The 426th Session began Jan 14, 2009 and adjourns Apr 13, 2009

No Report for Maryland





MASSACHUSETTS

Click here for article regarding the below bills.


MA HB 1339 - Animal Cruelty
This bill adds to the definition of animal cruelty, knowingly, intentionally or recklessly, and unjustifiably, failing to provide veterinary care that a reasonably prudent person should know is necessary to prevent an animal from suffering. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 77 - Animal Cruelty Penalties
This bill adds torture to the definition of animal cruelty and creates monetary fines in addition to imprisonment as a penalty. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 4360; & HB 1546 - Protective Orders
This bill allows a person suffering from abuse by an adult or minor family or household member to request protection for any companion animal or companion livestock owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household.

MA HB 1546 allows a person suffering from abuse by an adult or minor family or household member to request protection for any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held as a pet by either party or a minor child residing in the household. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 1940, 1948, 1993, 2000, 2004 - Dangerous Dog
H.B. 1940: Establishes an 11-day period for the relocation of a dangerous dog.

H.B. 1948: A dog may not be declared potentially dangerous or vicious if the person who sustained the injury or damage was committing trespass or other torts, or was teasing, tormenting, abusing or assaulting the dog, or was attempting to commit a crime.

H.B. 1993: The owner of a dog that is determined vicious shall reimburse the city or town for all costs that the dog incurs for housing and care during its impoundment and appeals process.

H.B. 2000: A dog deemed vicious must have done damage to either the body or property of any person.

MA HB 751 & SB 1167 - Spay and Neuter of Cats
This bill requires that all cats over the age of six months be spayed or neutered, unless the owner of such cat(s) possesses a permit for such exemption. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 1583 - Pet Trusts
This bill allows for the creation of pet trusts. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 147 - Basic Pet Care
This bill requires that all pet shops provide free basic pet care information on all mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and amphibians sold on the premises. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 224 - Warranty for Dogs and Cats
This bill requires pet shops to cover veterinarian costs of up to $2,000 to treat a dog or cat, or provide a substitution, or provide a full refund (of the purchase price) to any purchaser who within 14 days has the animal examined by a veterinarian, where the exam denotes that the animal has a congenital disorder. The purchaser must present the animal and veterinarian's statement within two business days of the examination. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 1197 - Regulation of Animal Shelters
This bill requires shelters and rescue organizations to register with the state of Massachusetts, keep records, and isolate animals coming from outside the state. It also allows shelters and rescues to partner with pet shops and pet supply stores to adopt out animals. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 1787 - Spay/Neuter Fund
This bill creates a (voluntary tax check off) fund, from which will assist residents with affordable spays/neuters for their dogs and cats. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 2450 - Animal Control
This bill requires all dogs or cats brought into or sold in the Commonwealth to be accompanied by an official health certificate issued by an accredited veterinarian; increases fines; improves mandatory spay/neuter laws. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 957 - Prevents Breed-Specific Insurance Discrimination
This bill prevents breed-specific insurance discrimination. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 1941 - Pet Shops and Puppy Mills
This bill requires pet shops to list on the cage of each dog, the state of origin of the dog offered for sale, establishes a toll free number for the reporting of sick animals, to be prominently displayed in all licensed pet shops. Failure to obtain a license will result in a fine of $5,000. Breeder will be issued an immediate cease and desist order until such time as the proper license has been obtained, which may require an inspection of said breeder's premises.

MA SB 2002 - Treatment of Elephants
This bill prohibits any person who houses, possesses or travels with elephants in Massachusetts, to use any implement that would result in physical harm or keep the elephants constantly restrained by chain or similar device. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 2273 - Internet Hunting
This bill prohibits Internet hunting. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.




S2624 - was S2450 - 2008, which would, among other things, prohibit cities and towns from declaring a dog dangerous based solely on its breed. S 2624 was engrossed (passed the Senate) and was sent to the House Ways and Means committee on 12/22/08.

Boston - (1/11/09) - Massachusetts' animal anti-cruelty laws are being updated for the Internet age. Under a bill signed by Gov. Deval Patrick, anyone who creates images or movies of animal fights and posts them on the web now faces a fine of up to $500 or a year in prison. The penalties extend to anyone who buys or rents the images. Anyone found selling the images faces a $1,000 fine or two years in prison. The law also toughens the state's existing penalties for those who sponsor or attend animal fights. Those penalties jump from $250 and a month in prison to a $1,000 fine and up to five years in prison.

Groton - (1/9/09) - To make it easy for dog owners, the town clerk's office will be including a dog registration form in the same mailing as town census forms to be sent out in the coming week. "We keep the information in a database," said Bouchard. All dogs are required by state law to be registered with the town in which they reside. Dog owners must have proof of a current rabies vaccination for their dog(s), or have unexpired rabies information on file with the town. "State law and the Groton town ordinances give the authority to register a dog with a normal fee of $10 for a neutered or spayed dog and $15 for an unaltered dog," said Bouchard. "Groton's bylaws authorize a late fee of $15 to dog owners with pets that are not registered by March 1. That's in addition to the regular registration fee. Residents over 70 can register their dogs for free. So we certainly encourage people to recognize the need for public safety and to register their dogs before March 1."

Lowell - (1/14/09) - An hour of passionate lobbying from animal advocates convinced the City Council to delay a vote on a proposed pit-bull ordinance last night. The ordinance, patterned after similar laws adopted by the Boston City Council in 2004, restricts dog owners to a maximum of two pit bulls per residence, with the exception of puppies less than 9 weeks old; pit bulls must be properly registered and licensed, spayed or neutered, and muzzled when off the owner's private property; they will also be prohibited from the city dog park. Pit-bull owners would be required to post a "Beware of pit bull" sign on their residence that is visible from the roadway and would not be allowed to keep the windows of their homes open, for fear that the dog may jump through the screen. Those who violate the ordinance will be fined $200 for the first offense and $300 for each subsequent offense. The Council voted unanimously to delay the vote in order to take representatives from the MSPCA, Humane Society, Lowell Unleashed and others up on their offer to work with the city to formulate an ordinance that will work best for all residents.



Newton- (1/15/09) - The Board of Aldermen next week will take up a proposal to set the fine at a flat $50 for violating city leash laws. The fine used to be graduated per offense, starting at $25 and moving up to $35, but the advent of dog parks means residents have less of an excuse to break the law, according to Alderman Marcia Johnson. Police previously told aldermen that current fines were not enough to deter unleashed dogs.



MICHIGAN - 2009 Legislature opened Jan 14, 2009

Jackson County - (1/17/09) - Commissioners Tuesday will review a committee's report that recommends the sheriff continue to supervise Animal Control's enforcement operations, but suggests that management of the animal shelter be transferred to county administration. "The sheriff's responsibility will end at the front door of the shelter," said county Commissioner Earl Poleski, chairman of the committee. County Administrator Randy Treacher said he will suggest shelter operations be turned over to the county Health Department if commissioners decide to follow the committee recommendation.





MINNESOTA - 2009 Legislature Session opened Jan 6, 2009

SF0007 - A bill for an act relating to animals; providing standards of care for dog and cat breeders; authorizing rulemaking; providing criminal penalties; appropriating money; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 347.
Referred to Agriculture and Veterans Committee

Burnsville - (1/15/09) - City Hall was peppered with e-mail from all over the country from people rooting for the boy after he and his family learned Burnsville did not allow the birds. A neighbor had complained about the boy's seven chickens, prompting an animal control officer to visit the Remund home in September. At a council meeting in October, Stefan pleaded with the council and soon became a chicken-owning celebrity. He gave interviews to newspapers and a radio station. And he gave three of his chickens to an Arden Hills girl whose chickens had been killed by a dog or other animal. Tuesday night, the boy perched nervously on the edge of his chair as city leaders discussed changing the city ordinance to allow chickens.

St. Paul - (1/5/09) - Pet breeding: Several Minnesota groups hope to convince the Legislature to ban puppy mills. The proposed legislation would give the state the authority to license, inspect and regulate the dog- and cat-breeding industry in Minnesota or delegate that authority to a city or county. At least two groups AnimalFolksMN and Animal Ark, a no-kill animal welfare organization are publicly supporting the proposal.

Tower - (1/15/09) - Keeping five cats puts Edwards in conflict with the citys animal control ordinance, which limits the number of cats at a Tower house to three. She came to the Tower City Council in December, bringing along one of her disabled cats, asking for an exemption to the city ordinance, but the council was unwilling to grant that request. The council directed the Breitung Police to allow the cats to remain while the issue was being settled. At Januarys meeting, the council looked over a sample ordinance that would provide a new type of animal license, called a multi-pet residence license. The council took no action on the ordinance, but will look at ways to adapt the ordinance for Tower.

Twin Cities- (1/13/09) - Despite putting the puppy mill issue on the cover of its winter promotional magazine and encouraging supporters to endorse its Puppy and Kitten Mill Bill, the Animal Humane Society refused to discuss the details of its proposed legislation. Spokeswoman Laurie Brickley said in early December that the organization is still working with its partners to finalize the language. In promotional materials, AHS indicates that they are reintroducing a bill they worked on last year that would set care standards at commercial breeding facilities, increase inspections, and require state licensing. For months, staff at Animal Ark has worked with the Minnesota Purebred Association and state veterinary groups to tackle the program strategically. "If you take the idea that all breeding is bad, then you have cut out a very critical and important stakeholder with a large voice at the Legislature," says Fry. "The small breeders are very responsible and most have the same desires and goals that we do. The failure to include them in the planning for previous bills has really been bad. It's caused massive opposition, yet that's what they keep doing over and over again, and that's why they keep failing and failing." Instead of defining commercial breeding facilities with a number, Animal Ark's bill would work to finance and enforce current state cruelty laws.



MISSISSIPPI

No Report for Mississippi



MISSOURI - State Legislature began January 7. 2009

State Rep. Jim Viebrock (12/27/08) - plans to resurrect a controversial bill requiring a veterinarian to inspect farm animals suspected of being abused before authorities can impound the animal. This will be the fourth straight year Viebrock has pursued reforms to the way state and local government authorities can seize animals from an owner when there are allegations of abuse. Viebrock, R-Republic, said he intends to file the bill for the 2009 legislation session, which begins Jan. 7. By bringing in an impartial state veterinarian from the Department of Agriculture to inspect an animal, Viebrock's bill aims to curtail abuse of the system by some animal rescue groups that reportedly inject themselves into alleged abuse cases for the chance to sell and profit from the animals. "People believe that the animal rights activists are all good-natured, big-hearted people," he said. In some cases in Missouri and across the country, Viebrock said, owners have been acquitted of animal abuse charges, but their herds have already been sold off by the government or given away to animal sanctuaries.

Fayette - Proposed BSL to be voted on, Jan. 6, 7 PM. Fayette city clerk, the Board of Aldermen will vote on a proposed pit bull ban during the Jan. 6 council meeting. UPDATE: city council unanimously passed an ordinance banning "pit bulls" at the city council meeting on Tuesday, January 6, 2009. The ordinance has a grandfather clause, and those who already own pit bulls will be allowed to keep their dogs as long as they are registered with the city and "properly controlled."

Pilot Grove - At the December meeting, the city council had instructed Mayor Dennis Knipp to have city counselor Mike Conway draft an ordinance banning five different breeds of potentially vicious. New ordinance would ban five of those. They include: Pit bull; Chinesischer Kampfhund (Chinese fighting dog), otherwise known as a Shar Pei; Chow; Doberman; and Rottweiler



MONTANA - 2009 Legislature Session opened Jan 5, 2009

HB 191 - A BILL FOR AN ACT ENTITLED: "AN ACT REGULATING PIT BULLS; PROHIBITING OWNERSHIP OF PIT BULLS AFTER A CERTAIN DATE; ALLOWING EXCEPTIONS; AND PROVIDING AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE." Referred to Committee on Local Government - 01/07/2009 UPDATE: (1/17/09) - The Local Government Committee has scheduled the hearing for Montana HB 191, which will ban pit bulls statewide. When: Thursday, Jan. 22, 3 PM Where: Room 172

Billings - (1/3/09) -

Some cases similar to the confiscation of the around 200 dogs in Ballantine have led to action in the state legislature. A Missoula representative is now calling for inspections of commercial dog breeding facilities, saying it would stop puppy mills in Montana. Dave Pauli of the Humane Society of the United States helped out last week and also aided in confiscating nearly 100 dogs from Linda Kapsa's property in 1992. Pauli and Representative Dave McAlpine of Missoula wrote a bill that would require annual inspections of commercial dog breeding facilities. A similar bill failed in 2007, so McAlpin made a slight change to the 2009 bill. The plan is to have breeders buy a license that would pay for inspections. "It's not a big brother bill, it's just saying when you when reach those numbers, it's a fine line to impacting public health and safety" said McAlpin. Pauli says that legislators have introduced six additional "animal bills" for the 2009 session. UPDATE: (1/18/09) - We are targeting people who breed large numbers of dogs without respect to genetics, without regard to the age of the female dog; who breed dogs on their first heat and every heat, until the dog is no longer producing and is then discarded, Prato said. Responsible breeders are the ones who breed to improve the breed, not to propagate the breed.








Billings - (12/27/08) - With close to 10 million horses in the nation, Montana horse owners and enthusiasts are concerned about the welfare of the equine industry if legislation is passed banning the transport of horses to slaughter facilities. H.R. 6598, the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008, would ban the transportation of horses to slaughter, making it a federal crime, explained Nancy Schlepp of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation during its equine seminar on Nov. 9 in Billings, Mont. It would also affect the transportation of horses in general, such as to rodeos, ranches or for hunting. Horses have been transported to slaughter facilities in Canada and Mexico since the Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruling shut down the Texas horse slaughter plants, and the Seventh Circuit Federal Court of Appeals shut down the plant in Illinois. Now, animal rights activists, such as the Humane Society of the United States, have been pushing for the passage of this bill, H.R. 6598, to further prevent horse slaughter, which they claim is an act of cruelty.































NEBRASKA - - The 101st Legislature opened Jan 7, 2009

No Report for Nebraska




NEVADA - The 75th Legislature opens Feb. 2, 2009

NV BDR 778
Session: 2009 (2/2/09 thru 6/1/09 Prefiled)
Sponsor: Breeden
Summary:
Requires licensing of dog breeders.
History:
12/12/2008 Bill Draft requested

*** No action taken to move this BDR to the Legislative floor at this time. It can be called to the floor anytime during the legislative session



NEW HAMPSHIRE - The 161st Session opened Jan 7, 2009

HB0059 - AN ACT requiring employers of employees with service dogs to place signs prohibiting animals other than service dogs. HOUSE COMMERCE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS

HB0148 - AN ACT relative to the sale and vaccination of animals. ANALYSIS This bill requires that applicants for a license to transfer household pets provide proof of conformity with municipal zoning regulations before issuance of a license. HOUSE ENVIRONMENT AND AGRICULTURE

HB0220 - AN ACT relative to civil proceedings for forfeiture of animals. ANALYSIS This bill requires that animals be taken into custody when a person is charged with cruelty to animals. HOUSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

HB0247 - AN ACT relative to the assistance of the state veterinarian with the investigation and enforcement of animal abuse laws. HOUSE COMMITTEE ENVIRONMENT AND AGRICULTURE

HB0278 - AN ACT relative to the penalty for mistreating service animals. HOUSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY

HB0337 - AN ACT permitting the issue of temporary licenses for certain sellers of animals. COMMITTEE: Executive Departments and Administration

SB0019 - AN ACT relative to government immunity from lawsuits for municipal dog
parks.
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE


Ogunquit - (1/8/09) - Things got a little testy Tuesday as selectmen considered resident John Mixon's request to expedite the processing of his citizen's petition concerning changes to town ordinances governing dogs. Mixon filed a petition that would liberalize dog owners' ability to demonstrate an animal is under voice control, so that approved dogs may be walked without a leash around town. Selectmen accepted the petition and agreed to consider it at the June Town Meeting. Mixon wants the changes put to a vote sooner.


Rye - (1/7/09) - Voters at the town's deliberative session will be asked to consider changes to the ordinance governing dogs on the beaches. The changes would add one hour in the morning for dogs to run off-leash and require leashes during two hours in the evening. The changes would affect summer months only, from the first Saturday before Memorial Day to Oct. 1. Currently, unleashed dogs are not allowed on the beach in the summer from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. The proposed changes would allow unleashed dogs until 9 each morning, but also require dogs to be leashed from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. The changes must be approved by voters on March 10 to take effect. As an SB2 town, voters could change the wording of the proposed ordinance at the Jan. 31 deliberative session.



NEW JERSEY

AB3335 - An Act establishing animal cruelty assistant county prosecutors, supplementing Title 2C of the New Jersey Statutes and chapter 22 of Title 4 of the Revised Statutes, and amending P.L.1966, c.37. SYNOPSIS Requires animal cruelty training for selected assistant county prosecutors and tracking of animal cruelty cases in State uniform crime reporting system; directs AG to issue prosecutor guidelines for animal cruelty cases. STATEMENT This bill requires each county prosecutor to have one or more assistant county prosecutors specially trained in matters of animal cruelty, the State animal cruelty laws, and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. The bill provides that this training would be prescribed by the Attorney General, in consultation with the Humane Society University of the Humane Society of the United States. The Humane Society University has a prosecutor training program. The bill also requires the Attorney General to issue a checklist for animal cruelty cases for, and distribute them to, county and municipal prosecutors. The bill further requires that the uniform crime reporting system established by P.L.1966, c.37 (C.52:17B-5.1 et seq.) include tracking of animal cruelty offenses and violations. Finally, the bill authorizes the Attorney General to issue guidelines and adopt regulations that may be necessary for implementing the act.

A3539- An Act concerning animal cruelty, supplementing Title 4 of the Revised Statutes and amending R.S.4:22-26. 1. (New section) a. No person shall cruelly restrain a dog. A person cruelly restrains a dog if the person:
(1) chains, ties, fastens or otherwise tethers a dog to a dog house, tree, stake, pole, fence, wall or any other stationary object for more than three hours in a 24-hour period;
(2) regardless of how long a period of time, chains, ties, fastens or otherwise tethers a dog with any collar or similar device other than a properly fitted harness or buckle-type collar for the dog; or
(3) regardless of how long a period of time, uses a choke or prong collar on the dog when chaining, tying, fastening or otherwise tethering the dog.
b. It is an affirmative defense to prosecution for cruel restraint of a dog that the actor:
(1) had a reasonable basis for the restraining of the dog;
(2) restrained the dog with a properly fitted harness or buckle-type collar; and
(3) did not use a choke or prong collar to restrain the dog.
c. Nothing in this act shall be construed to prohibit a person from chaining, tying, fastening or otherwise tethering a dog to a running line, pulley, or trolley system, provided the dog is not attached to the running line, pulley or trolley system with a choke or prong collar.





NEW MEXICO - 2009 Legislative session opened Jan 20 - adjourns Mar 21. 2009

Silver City - (1/15/09) - Town councilors got an earful Tuesday night at their first regular meeting of the new year. Residents had complaints about cruelty to animals and barking dogs. There was a plea to the council for help in getting a "starving and abused" dog rescued. Attempts to get help for the dog were mde by calling everyone from animal control to the police. "I will see to the dog immediately," Councilor Thomas Nupp said. "Our animal control ordinance is lacking." Several others at the meeting complained to the council about barking dogs. The chairman of the noise ordinance committee commented that the town can expect to see a drafted ordinance this year.





NEW YORK

S00093 - AN ACT to amend the insurance law, in relation to prohibiting insurers from canceling, refusing to issue or renew, or charging higher premiums for homeowners` insurance based on the breed of dog owned if the dog completes an approved obedience course.

Fenner - Discussion of the possibility of enacting a noise ordinance in Fenner died in November when Councilman Hank Stoker suggested the Fenner Town Council should stop talking around the issue and cut to the chase: The town has a dog problem, and the council should propose an appropriate ordinance to combat it. The matter was tabled to the December meeting to allow Supervisor Russell Hammond to consult with representatives from the Madison County Board of Elections to determine how it is done. Cary (article does not say who Cary is) returned to the board Dec. 10 with the news that they should have an attorney draft the wording for the ballot so it doesn't sound slanted. "It should be written in neutral language."



NORTH CAROLINA

Chapel Hill - (1/9/09) - A town memo written by Police Chief Brian Curran and legal advisor Terri Gale recommend that Town Council members take no action on a citizen petition asking that felines be treated the same as dogs under the town leash ordinance. The town ordinance that covers restraint of animals that are not in custody of an owner refers to dogs but not cats.

Durham - (1/6/09) - Many pet owners in Durham County are in for a surprise this week as they receive forms to declare their taxable property for 2009. A previously little-known ordinance that charges pet owners $10 per spayed and neutered cat and dog and $75 per unaltered animal is being collected by the Durham County Tax Administration Office this year, meaning higher penalties for those who get caught not paying the bill. Residents must list cats and dogs four months and older. The listing is required of both individuals and kennels. The Durham County Animal Ordinance, unknown to many, if not most pet owners in the county, has been on the books since 1990 and was previously managed and enforced by Durham County Animal Control. The ordinance requires the owner of every dog or cat that is kept within the territorial boundaries of the county for more than 30 days to list the animal with the Durham County Tax Administrator, within 30 days of bringing the animal into the county. The Tax Administration will have more muscles to flex when it comes to enforcement of the ordinance. The county could collect more than $1 million in revenue from the ordinance, all of which will go into the general fund. "If they're delinquent, they'll get a delinquent bill asking them to pay before we start enforcement actions," Simpson said. "If you owe taxes, then your income tax refund from the state can be attached and we can garnish wages." Residents have until Feb. 2 to list their individual and business property for tax.

Gaston County - (1/9/09) - Gaston County Commissioners are considering a mandatory spay-neuter program. The suggestion came after a heated and emotional debate between animal advocates and the county animal control Thursday night. "All the passion thats involved, its bringing animal related issues to the forefront to the commissioners, as well as ours, it can only mean good things for the animal community," said Reggie Horton of Gaston County Animal Control. Over the next month, commissioners will consider that mandatory spay-neuter program. Both sides also agree a new shelter is badly needed.

Nashville- (1/15/09) - The North Carolina Court of Appeals on Thursday heard a case involving a pet ordinance that a Nashville dog owner says is unconstitutional. Adele Maynard was charged and convicted in 2006 of violating the town's rule, which allows three pets per household. Maynard has six collies and lives in a home her family has owned for generations. Her attorney, Daniel Reade, says that just limiting the number of pets doesn't really address the issue which he says is whether the dogs are noisy or dangerous. "(The ordinance) doesn't say anything about the size of the dogs, the propensity of the dogs, the way the dogs are kept," Reade said. But an attorney representing the town argued in court Thursday that it limits the number of dogs to protect all of its citizens. Town leaders believe they acted responsibly and within their rights. State law allows municipalities to limit the number of pets, regardless of whether the animals prove to be a public nuisance. If the Court of Appeals agrees that limiting the number of dogs is unconstitutional, the ruling could overturn all similar pet ordinances throughout North Carolina.

Pasquotank County - (1/9/09) - Landowner Ike Jackson stood up to make a final argument before a Pasquotank County committee that has debated for a year over what to do about hunting deer with dogs. After describing damage caused by dogs chasing deer through his cattle farm over more than 40 years, he called for a ban on the practice in Pasquotank County. Hunter Bobby Harris, president of the Albemarle Houndsmen Association, responded. Over the next 90 minutes, three county commissioners; Jackson and a small group of landowners; hunters who use dogs; and two wildlife enforcement officers discussed the issue. In the end, three commissioners voted Tuesday to send six options to the full board in February, ranging from a total ban to taking no action. In between were four choices that compromised with both sides. A public hearing will be held soon.



NORTH DAKOTA - The 61st Legislative Assembly opened Jan 6, 2009

No Report for North Dakota



OHIO - 2009 Legislative session began Jan 5, 2009


Montgomery County - (1/14/09) - Montgomery County Auditor Karl L. Keith is reminding Montgomery County dog owners that it is time to renew your dogs license. Each year, between December 1 through January 31, dog owners register their dogs with local authorities to ensure a safe trip if their dog is lost, stolen or missing. State law requires every dog older than three months to have a license.





OKLAHOMA - The 161st Legislature opened Jan. 7, 2009

HB 1045 - An Act relating to animals; amending 4 O.S. 2001, Section 43, which relates to regulation and control of dogs running at large; eliminating certain population restriction; and providing an effective date

McAlester - (1/9/09) - When Jared Holbirds pit bull got loose a year and a half ago and was picked up by the city dog catcher, the pet owner was happy to get her back. He paid his fine, picked her up from the animal shelter, and made sure everyone in his household knew to let the dog out through the back door, and not the front door. So he was surprised last week when an animal control officer threatened to cite him for keeping his dog in the yard. City ordinances require animal owners to keep their unspayed female pets indoors while they are in heat. Chapter 10 of the McAlester City Code deals with animals, and a female dog in heat is defined as a nuisance. Section 10-4 of the code states It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or harbor an animal which is determined to be a nuisance. Section 10-75 of the code deals with female dogs and cats and states: Every female dog or cat in season shall be kept confined in a building or secure enclosure, or in a veterinary hospital or boarding kennel, in such a manner that such female dog or cat cannot come in contact with another animal except for controlled breeding purposes. The way I read it, if your dog comes in heat, you might ought to take it to a vet or put it inside, said the police chief, whose department includes two animal control officers. Technically, (if an owner) lets the dog out into his yard to go to the bathroom, and its fenced, hes in violation.




Norman - (1/13/09) - After reviewing and suggesting changes to the city's animal welfare ordinance, the Animal Welfare Division is hosting public meetings to seek feedback and comments concerning the proposed changes. A proposed language change would change the division's name from Animal Control to Animal Welfare. Businesses and residences that have kennel licenses -- 34 in all -- are only required one inspection during the application process, with no follow-up checks. The proposed change would require a "random inspection at least once a year. Discussion also included establishing a limit to the number of dogs and cats residents may own. Also under the proposal, anyone owning more than five cats would be required to obtain a kennel license. Proposed changes would be for the city to establish a limit of two dogs and three cats owned by each residence, if the animals were unaltered. Having the pets neutered or spayed would allow residents to own four dogs and five cats -- possibly six cats. Pet cats roaming free would be required to be altered and wear collars and licenses -- possibly microchips. The proposed changes also would alter the duties of Animal Welfare officers, to allow inspection of licensed kennel locations. Currently there are only four Animal Control officers in Norman.
Discussion also included animal cruelty issues, and an ordinance to prohibit pet confinement in unventilated vehicles.
· Confinement of dogs and cats, to restrict unaltered cats from being allowed to run at large.
· Disposition of animals, allowing a feral dog or cat to be euthanized without observing the full five day waiting period.
· Deposit of waste material, which requires a person in charge of a dog to clean up and properly dispose of waste the dog deposits on public or unauthorized private property.
Any input will be reviewed with feedback from other meetings before the final draft ordinance changes are proposed to the City Council.






OREGON - The 75th Legislature convened Jan. 12, 2009


(1/10/09) - As the 2009 Oregon Legislature convenes - lawmakers will be asked for sweeping increases in every hunting and angling license and tag the state sells -- and a few new ones as well. Included in the request from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is a doubling of fishing and hunting surcharges already assessed on license sales. These surcharges are used to enhance and restore fisheries and habitat and to buy access for public hunting. The department wants to extend the programs (due to sunset in 2010) through 2019 and increase benefits to hunters, anglers and wildlife. Agency officials propose an increase in their current $270 million biennium budget to $300 million for 2009-11. More than one-third of it ($104 million) will depend on license and tag fees. Fees now make up $81 million of the department's budget income. The balance of revenue comes primarily from federal excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment and from the state's general fund. Curt Melcher, the department's deputy director, said most of the increase is necessary to maintain existing programs.


Molalla - In response to a Christmas day "pit bull" attack, Molalla Mayor John Atkins is considering whether the city should adopt a pit bull ordinance or, in the alternative, adopt a generic ordinance related to dangerous animals. UPDATE: (1/19/09) - Concerned local citizens as well as several out-of-towners showed up at the Molalla City Council's meeting Wednesday night to voice their opinions about adopting a breed-specific dog ban in the city. A memo to the council prepared by city manager John Atkins listed several options for updating the city's laws against aggressive dogs. Although the memo included information on banning certain breeds of dogs from the city, Atkins did not recommend that course of action. The council voted to update its aggressive dog ordinance -- adopted in 1974 -- to bring it in line with current Oregon laws regarding aggressive dogs. The council also adopted a resolution officially naming Clackamas County as the city's dog control agency. The county served that role on an unofficial basis previously.



PENNSYLVANIA

Lancaster - (1/11/09) - In the past 30 days, more than 100 dogs have been brought to the Humane League of Lancaster County. Most of the dogs are from area kennels, struggling to comply with the state's new dog law. It's put the shelter in an unusual position: loving the new law, but needing to make extraordinary provisions. The Humane League is asking kennel owners and others to wait until next month to "surrender" their animals.



RHODE ISLAND - 2009 Legislative session began Jan. 6, 2009

No Report for Rhode Island



SOUTH CAROLINA - The 118th General Assembly convened Jan 13, 2009

Columbia - HSUS has set Feb 4, 2009 as Lobby Day. DO NOT let them be the only voice
heard by your legislators. Call your state representative and make an appointment. http://www.scstatehouse.gov/

04 February 2009 10:00am - South Carolina Humane Lobby Day- Blatt Building, Room #101
Capitol Complex, Columbia, SC HOSTED BY: Jessica Feingold Lieberson, Grassroots Coordinator



H 3004 - TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 7 TO CHAPTER 6, TITLE 23 SO AS TO CREATE THE NATURAL RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT
DIVISION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND TO TRANSFER TO THE
DIVISION CERTAIN POWERS AND ASSETS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,
AMONG OTHER THINGS;
12/09/08 House Prefiled
12/09/08 House Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural
Resources and Environmental Affairs
01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-17
01/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural
Resources and Environmental Affairs HJ-19

Section 23-6-370. (A)An enforcement officer, deputy enforcement officer, or officer deputized by the department pursuant to Section 27-16-70(C)(2): (1)shall enforce the laws of the State related to natural resources as provided in Title 50 and prosecute a person who violates these laws; (2) has statewide jurisdiction;(3) has the same power and authority held and exercised by: (a) a constable at common law and under the laws of this State; and (b) an inspector as provided by Chapter 5, Title 50; and (4) may use an official summons for violations of a law or regulation of the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, the State Forestry Commission, or the Department of Health and Environmental Control pertaining to shellfish, trespass, and: (c) malicious injury to animalsor personal property, Section 16-11-510; (q) inhumane treatment to animals, Section 47-1-40.



H 3013 - TO AMEND SECTION 16-11-650, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE OFFENSE OF REMOVING OR DESTROYING FENCES, GATES, OR OTHER BARRIERS ENCLOSING ANIMALS, CROPS, OR UNCULTIVATED LANDS, SO AS TO REVISE THE ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE AND INCREASE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS AND TO VEST JURISDICTION TO HEAR AND DISPOSE OF THIS OFFENSE IN MAGISTRATES COURT.
12/09/08 House Prefiled
12/09/08 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary
01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-21
01/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary HJ-22



H 3117 - To amend section 20-4-60, as amended, code of laws of South Carolina, 1976, relating to an order for protection from domestic abuse, to provide the temporary possession of personal property, the court may order the temporary possession of pet animals.
12/09/08 House prefiled
H 3154 - TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, SO AS TO ENACT "THESOUTH CAROLINA AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT REFORM ACT OF 2009"; TO AMEND SECTION12-43-217, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO REASSESSMENT OF REAL PROPERTY EVERY FIVEYEARS, SO AS TO LIMIT A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE IN THE YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION OFREVISED AGRICULTURAL USE STANDARDS 12/16/08 House Prefiled 12/16/08 House Referred to Committee on Ways and Means 01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-68 01/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Ways and Means HJ-69H 3197 - TO AMEND SECTION 44-1-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976,RELATING TO THE SUPERVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTALCONTROL BY THE BOARD OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, SO AS TO DELETEREFERENCES TO THE BOARD AND INSTEAD PROVIDE THE DEPARTMENT MUST BE MANAGED ANDOPERATED BY A DIRECTOR APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR UPON THE ADVICE AND CONSENTOF THE SENATE AND SUBJECT TO REMOVAL BY THE GOVERNOR; 12/16/08 House Prefiled12/16/08 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-8601/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary HJ-86 H 3227 - TO AMEND SECTION 16-17-650,CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO COCKFIGHTING, SO AS TO INCREASE THE PENALTIES FOR THE OFFENSE.







H 3265 - A bill to amend section 47-1-40, as amended, code of laws of South Carolina, 1976, relating to the ill-treatment of animals, to clarify that the provisions of the section do not apply to the practice of veterinary medicine in accordance with accepted veterinary standards.01/14/09 House Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs 01/14/09 House Introduced and read first time S 102 - A bill to amend section 47-1-40, as amended, code of laws of South Carolina, 1976, relating to the ill-treatment of animals, to clarify that the provisions of the section do not apply to the practice of veterinary medicine in accordance with accepted veterinary standards.01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time 12/10/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 12/10/08 Senate Prefiled S 104 - TO AMEND TITLE 46 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO AGRICULTURE, BY ADDINGCHAPTER 53, TO LIMIT THE LIABILITY THAT AN AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL MAY INCURDUE TO AN INJURY OR DEATH SUFFERED BY A PARTICIPANT IN AN AGRITOURISMACTIVITY, TO PROVIDE THAT AN AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL MUST POST A WARNINGNOTICE AT THE AGRITOURISM FACILITY, TO PROVIDE THAT WARNING NOTICES MUST BEINCLUDED IN CONTRACTS THE AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL ENTERS INTO WITHPARTICIPANTS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL'S LIABILITY ISNOT LIMITED IF THE PROPER WARNING NOTICES ARE NOT PROVIDED TO PARTICIPANTS. 12/10/08 Senate Prefiled 12/10/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time SJ-119 01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources SJ-119 S 177 - To amend section 50-11-310 of the 1976 code, relating to open season for antlered deer, to delete the prohibition of baiting for deer in games zones 1 and 2.01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time 12/10/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry 12/10/08 Senate Prefiled S 223 - TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION47-1-145, TO ENACT THE "PROVISIONS FOR COST OF ANIMAL CARE ACT OF 2009", TOPROVIDE THAT THE CUSTODIAN OF AN ANIMAL TAKEN INTO CUSTODY DUE TO CIVIL ORCRIMINAL VIOLATIONS BY ITS OWNER MAY PETITION THE COURT FOR EXPENSES RELATEDTO PROVIDING CARE TO THE ANIMAL, TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR HEARING SUCHPETITIONS AND FOR THE COLLECTION AND USE OF FUNDS ORDERED TO BE PAID, TOPROVIDE THAT A PERSON WHO FAILS TO PAY SUCH FUNDS FORFEITS RIGHTS OF OWNERSHIPTO THE ANIMAL, TO PROVIDE FOR THE DISPOSITION OF SUCH AN ANIMAL, AND TOPROVIDE FOR THE RETURN OF FUNDS WHEN A PERSON IS NOT FOUND TO BE IN VIOLATION;TO AMEND SECTION 47-1-130, RELATING TO CRUELTY TO ANIMALS, TO PROVIDE THATAGENTS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS,OR ANY OTHER SOCIETY DULY INCORPORATED FOR THAT PURPOSE, MAY ASSIST WITH ALAWFUL INVESTIGATION OF THIS CHAPTER, BUT MAY ONLY EFFECTUATE AN ARREST OF APERSON IF THEY HAVE BEEN VESTED WITH THE POWER TO ARREST BY A SHERIFF OR THEGOVERNING BODY OF A COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY; AND TO AMEND SECTION 47-1-140,RELATING TO NOTICE PROVIDED TO THE OWNER OF ANIMALS WHICH HAVE BEEN SEIZEDFROM OTHERS UPON ARREST, TO REMOVE SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR AGENTS OF THE SOUTHCAROLINA SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS, OR ANY OTHERSOCIETY DULY INCORPORATED FOR THAT PURPOSE. 12/17/08 Senate Prefiled 12/17/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time SJ-185 01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources SJ-185 Greer - (1/6/09) - The new year brings major changes to Greer residents who keep pets or live near them. Mayor Rick Danner said that not all City Council members oppose tethering dogs. The resulting compromise didn't spell out a time limit and simply banned "permanent" tethering, he said, adding that it may be difficult to enforce. Under changes to the ordinance, people who complain of nuisance barking will need to fill out a form including the dates and duration of the violation.Danner said the ordinance asks complainants to be more responsive. He said in the past,neighbors have freely offered information about barking dogs, but haven't necessarily been open to helping the city make a case, which has resulted in a judge throwing it out of court. A festival-goer bitten by a dog at last year's Oktoberfest was the impetus for changing the animal ordinance, the mayor said. "The original intent . . . was to add that section prohibiting animals in a public setting, realizing that we'd be having more and more events downtown particularly as the (downtown city) park opened and to look at protecting the citizens," he said. Leashed dogs still will be allowed in parks but not during events, including sports, he said. The council has adopted, and the mayor and city attorney have signed the revised animal ordinance, according to City Attorney John Duggan."Technically, it's in effect," he said. He expected the Police Department could start enforcing it as soon as copies were disseminated.

SOUTH DAKOTA
Tea - (1/11/09) - UPDATE - Tea might rescind its ban on pit bulls in favor of rules requiring dog owners to spay or neuter their animals and purchase liability insurance. The City Council voted 4-2 earlier this week in favor of writing a new ordinance to deal with pit bulls and possibly place restrictions on other breeds of large dog. Council member Herman Otten said he's convinced that spaying or neutering animals decreases their aggression, and he says requiring the procedure would be preferable to an outright ban. Otten also would expect the owners of pit bulls and breeds crossed with wolves to carry liability insurance of more than $100,000, initially suggesting that owners have $500,000 of coverage. Fowlds, Otten and Joe Weis will form a committee to draft an ordinance. Otten brought a list of restrictions culled from various municipalities to the meeting Monday and said that many of them could end up in a new ordinance. In addition to pit bull regulations, the rules could place restrictions on chows, Dobermans, German shepherds and Rottweilers. Otten's list of proposals included one to forbid felons from owning those breeds.



TENNESSEE - 2009 Legislature session opened Jan. 12, 2009

Henry - (1/14/09) - Henrys Mayor and Board of Aldermen learned Tuesday night that the city plans to start enforcing an existing stray dog ordinance by citing dog owners into city court. The announcement was made during a staff report by Edward Bush, the citys public works director.
Were not going to chase dogs this year, Bush said. Weve been really nice to the public, weve warned them when new people have come into town, weve warned them. Were not doing that this year. Bush said from now on he would be citing dog owners, unless he was told otherwise by Henry Mayor Joe Qualls. Henry Police Chief Mark Herndon said the stray dogs were a safety hazard, particularly on Highway 79 where motorists are often traveling at 70-80 mph. A drivers first impulse when an animal crosses his or her path is to swerve, which at those speeds could result in a fatal accident, Herndon said. The dog is not worth a human life, he said.

Nashville - (1/4/09) - When state lawmakers return to Capitol Hill next week they will file several new bills aimed at improving life in Tennessee. Two pieces of new legislation involves the sale of puppies and the other addresses animal cruelty. State lawmakers want to join 37 other states and make cockfighting a felony. A cockfighting ring was recently dismantled in Nashville. Making it a felony instead of a misdemeanor seems to make sense. But there's a chance money will override commonsense this year on Capitol Hill. The state is facing $1 billion shortfall. The same lawmaker that is trying to pass cockfighting legislation may have more luck with a bill that regulates puppy mills in Tennessee. "I am told that we are losing up to $3 million a year by not having them regulated at all," Sontany said. By regulating them, her legislation could bring millions of sales tax revenue back to Tennessee in these tough times. The Humane Society said the selling of puppies is big business in Tennessee. If anyone looks online every day prospective owners can find more than 10,000 ads for pups for sale in Tennessee. Many of the commercial breeders also are not regulated by the state. Lawmakers will go back into session next Tuesday. They will file new bills and most likely will nominate Republican Jason Mumpower as the new Speaker of the House.



TEXAS - Texas 81st Legislature opened Jan. 13, 2009

HB 435 - (12/19/08) - would amend the penal code to make theft of a pet a separately
codified offense, and allow a penalty of up to two years in prison to be
assessed to individuals who steal domesticated household pets including cats,
dogs, rodents, fish, reptiles or birds. Livestock and wildlife animals would not
be covered by the bill; theft of livestock and wild animals are covered in
other sections of Texas law. Under current Texas law, when people were prosecuted for stealing a family pet, they were typically prosecuted based on the value of the pet, since pets
are essentially considered chattle under Texas law. Consequently, theft of a prized , pedigreed, Golden Retriever with a significant retail could essentially mean that someone who was prosecuted for stealing that type of pet would be prosecuted differently than someone who stole a mixed-breed dog a family adopted from a local animal shelter. Thus, there was a significant disparity
that often made prosecution for theft of a pet fairly meaningless if the pet wasnt a pedigreed animal with a significant retail value. The legislation is likely crafted in response to a bizarre incident that
occurred in the Rio Grande Valley city of Alice earlier this year when the mayor of that city was prosecuted for allegedly stealing a neighbors dog. The bill would continue a trend by the Legislature to create additional offenses and penalties to those who harm domesticated animals.

Austin - (12/15/08) - Pit bulls and Rottweilers could become a hot topic down in Austin next year as lawmakers consider the pros and cons of allowing cities and counties to adopt ordinances restricting or banning certain breeds of dogs. Dallas state Rep. Tony Goolsby has put a spotlight on the issue by asking Attorney General Greg Abbott for an official opinion on whether cities and counties have the power to impose the restrictions. Goolsby argues in his request to Abbott that the law is unclear as to whether local governments can write ordinances addressing certain breeds; many local city officials have long assumed they lacked authority. Yet local governments havent ruled out targeting breeds and most will be paying attention if the issue is addressed in Austin next year. The Fort Worth City Council approved a legislative agenda for the upcoming session earlier this month that included monitoring dog breed specific legislation. Reid Rector, Fort Worths governmental relations director, said the city does not currently have a position on the issue.

Carthage - (1/14/09) - Commissioners approved an ordinance Monday that requires owners to keep their dogs within a fence. "We have seen over the past couple of years the number of complaints about roaming dogs increase," said City Manager Brenda Samford. "This ordinance will hopefully address the issue." Samford said the city still is examining how it will enforce the new ordinance. She said fines for violators have not been established.

Fort Worth - (1/19/09) - Should dangerous dogs be banned from North Texas? That's a question that lawmakers could soon be debating. The topic has some dog owners unleashing their thoughts.

Grayson County - (1/9/09) - No North Texas city has publicly advocated for outright bans of pit bulls or other breeds such as Rottweilers, chow chows and German shepherds. But leaders have pondered stricter regulations for those animals, such as mandatory microchipping, liability insurance requirements and taller fence standards.

Harker Heights - (1/18/09) - A dog-on-dog ordinance, which would allow dogs who attack other dogs to be declared dangerous, will be proposed to the Animal Advisory Committee in February, said Lt. Loretta Fox of the Harker Heights Police Department, which oversees the city's animal control. Fox said she plans to propose to the Animal Advisory Committee in February an ordinance to declare animals that attack other animals as dangerous. From there, it would be reviewed by Police Chief Mike Gentry and then go to the City Council. Dangerous dogs require warning signs, fences, proper securing, insurance and many other stipulations, Fox said.


HB 458 - AN ACT relating to limitations on the number of dogs at a residence in certain counties

San Marcos - is poised to join San Antonio as one of the few cities in the nation to require mandatory microchipping, tethering restrictions, pet limits (four dogs or a total of seven dogs and cats without a special city permit). New rabies vaccination rules. A microchip pet ID system. A ban on parking lot pet sales. UPDATE: (1/8/09) - The updated Animal Control Ordinance adopted in December will take effect on April 1. The citys Animal Services Department staff will hold a series of public meetings in January and February before the new ordinance takes effect to help residents understand the new rules. The other public meetings on the ordinance will be held Monday, Jan. 26 from 7 to 8:30 p.m. at the city council chambers, 630 E. Hopkins and Saturday, Feb. 7, from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. in the city council chambers. The city says the new rules are aimed at conforming with state law and promoting responsible pet ownership. The ordinance changes a variety of local rules:
Requires rabies vaccinations once every three years instead of annually
Sets up a microchip program to provide one-time registration of pets
Bans selling or giving away animals on public property, private parking lots and flea markets
Restricts but does not outlaw tethering of animals
Sets up rules for managed feral cat colonies based on trap, vaccinate, alter, return and manage
Changes dog regulations to conform with state law, including increasing penalties for dog attacks
For information about the new rules, call the San Marcos Animal Shelter at 805-2650 or visit the Animal Services page on the Web at www.ci.san-marcos.tx.us UPDATE: (1/19/09) - The city strengthened its animal protection laws recently, becoming one of a few cities in the country to require microchips for pets, but it stopped short of banning the chaining of dogs because officials said they didn't want to burden residents financially.



UTAH - 2009 General Session opens Jan. 26, 2009

No Report for Utah



VERMONT

No report for Vermont



VIRGINIA - 2009 Regular Session convened Jan 14, 2009


There is a registry in the U.S. for sex offenders. One can search a database to see if there is an offender in your area. The registry has met with a great deal of controversy. In Virginia, there is an additional controversial registry: A dangerous dog database and you can search to see if a dangerous dog lives near you. To search a city or county in Virginia visit the Dangerous Dog Registry with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Are you on it?


HB1951 - Dangerous Dog Registry; authorizes use of copies of all
records, etc., associated therewith.

HB2321 - Dangerous dog; court may order owner to pay to any injured
person costs of medical care.

HB2097 - Animal shelters and pounds; administration of certain medications.

HB2263 - Oversight of animal control officers.

HB2364 - Dangerous or vicious dog; court may order owner to pay
restitution for damages to injured person.

HB2377 - Animals as prizes and gifts.

HB2381 - Protective orders; companion animals and livestock.

HB2393 - Animal control officers deemed law-enforcement officers.

HJ 661 - Feral cats; Dept. of Agriculture & Consumer Services to convene
workgroup to address issues.

SB897 - A BILL to amend and reenact § 3.2-6546 of the Code of Virginia, relating to companion animals
Referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources

SB931 - A BILL to amend and reenact § 3.2-6566 of the Code of Virginia, relating to animal cruelty Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources, (dubbed VA's ACO's "get out of jail free" card) - Each animal control officer, humane investigator or State Veterinarian's representative shall interfere to prevent the perpetration of any act of cruelty upon any animal in his presence and shall enjoy the protection of the Commonwealth's sovereign immunity for those actions taken in good faith and with reasonable cause. Any person who shall interfere with or obstruct or resist any animal control officer, humane investigator or State Veterinarian's representative in the discharge of his rights, powers, and duties as authorized and prescribed by law is guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.

SB950 - A BILL to amend and reenact § 3.2-6540 of the Code of Virginia, relating to dangerous and vicious dogs.
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources

SB1151 - Companion animals; releasing agencies.

Martinsville - (12/17/08) - Henry County officials will extensively revise the countys noise
control ordinance, in part to control barking dogs. Two proposed ordinances prepared by County Attorney George Lyle were rejected by the Henry County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday. One could
have resulted in dogs that bark excessively being euthanized. Instead, the supervisors unanimously voted to have Lyle revise the existing ordinance so it will pertain to many types of extremely loud
noises.

Rocky Mount - (1/5/09) - Rocky Mount Town Councilman John Lester has proposed that the town look into the possibility of adopting a dog leash law. Lester told town council recently that the town may need a leash law. Rocky Mount does not have a leash law for dogs.


Virginia Beach - (1/6/09) - The new year brought newer and tougher laws to protect animals. Breeders and sellers are accountable for the animals in their care. The law is designed to crack down on puppy mills. The law took effect January 1. It limits the number of animals a person can have and breed to 30 females. It limits the ages for breeding between 18 months and eight years. It also requires animals be kept in floored cages, mandates an exercise regimen and veterinary care. Large commercial dog breeding operations must get a business license and submit to inspections by local animal control officers. Those operations now must meet strict record-keeping requirements.





WASHINGTON - 2009 Legislature Session convened Jan 12, 2009

Bellingham- (1/12/09) - A public hearing to discuss a proposed animal control ordinance and the restructuring of animal license fees, originally scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 13, has been postponed. The new date for the public hearing has not been set. The proposed ordinance would restructure license fees and create new permit fees for kennel owners and "animal enthusiasts," or those who own more than four dogs or cats, said Penny Cistaro, executive director of the Whatcom Humane Society. Kennel owners currently pay a flat fee of $65 for a kennel license. If the ordinance passes, kennel owners, or those who own more than 10 dogs or cats, would pay $125 to $200 for a permit fee and an $11 or $21 license fee per animal depending on whether the animal is spayed or neutered, Cistaro said. Under the ordinance, those with between five and 10 cats and/or dogs would pay a $65 permit fee plus the $11 or $21 license fee per animal. The ordinance also would allow animal control to inspect facilities prior to issuing a permit to make sure they are structurally sound, provide sanitary conditions and are compatible with the number of animals living there, Cistaro said.

Moses Lake - City Council took no action when asked to reconsider the hazardous dog ordinance. The city council recently adopted an ordinance declaring pit bulls, rottweilers and presa canarios as hazardous dogs. To own a hazardous dog, pet owners must obtain a $250,000 insurance policy for the animal in case it harms someone, it must be spayed or neutered, have a microchip installed, be confined to an enclosed structure and costs $150 to register with the city. A hazardous dog can also include any individual dog of any breed that habitually bites, attacks and threatens another human or animal on public property.

Vancouver - Town Hall meeting (Saturday, January 10) with State Representatives for the 49th Legislative District to ask that they pass a law to outlaw dog chaining and tethering. This propoasal backed by HSUS.



WEST VIRGINIA - 2009 Legislative Session begins Feb. 11, 2009

No Report for West Virginia



WISCONSIN

Barron County - (1/9/09) - The full Barron County Board of Supervisors will decide later this month whether to approve a newly crafted contract with the local Humane Society chapter for animal control services. The new proposal cuts plans for a county-funded addition to the animal shelter and instead asks for an annual contribution from the county for the cause.
At Tuesday's executive committee meeting, Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald said that the county's legal counsel had reviewed, modified and given their approval toward the potential contract. The Humane Society of Barron County's governing board has not considered the amended document yet officially, but talks between the county and Humane Society members have indicated that the changes would be found acceptable.The executive committee approved the tentative contract Tuesday and will recommend its adoption by the full county board at the regular January meeting. The law enforcement committee had given its approval of the proposal last week. The latest proposal version also includes added protection for the Humane Society's interests, Fitzgerald said. Added was a stipulation exempting the shelter from bearing full responsibility for housing animals if more than 15 are surrendered at one time. In this rare case, the county would be required to help care for and place the animals. When a mass seizure takes place, any animals deemed adoptable and in need of care will incur a $7 per day fee (with a 1 week maximum) that the county must pay the Humane Society for. Unsociable or ill animals taken in such a seizure would be euthanized at a charge of $15 per animal to the county. Fitzgerald added that the mass surrender scenario might happen once a year and would likely involve criminal charges being filed. The county may then be able to recoup costs through restitution. UPDATE: (1/19/09) - At Monday evening's Barron County Board of Supervisors meeting, the long-anticipated animal control contract between the county and the local Humane Society office passed. For several years, Barron County officials and others have been trying to devise a way to address stray animal problems in a uniform and efficient way. The board's approval of a 1-year contract with the Humane Society of Barron County is the culmination of these efforts.




Green Bay - (1/15/09) - Green Bay ordinance forbids dogs from all city parks, but Alderman Dan Piton wants to allow leashed dogs in a few parts of some parks. The City Council will consider the issue when it meets at 7 p.m. today in the council chambers of City Hall, 100 N. Jefferson St., Green Bay.

New Berlin - Alderman Moore says the Safety Commission chose not to have BSL Wednesday evening (12/17/08)

Oshkosh - (12/15/08) - Discussions are in the works over the possibility of requiring owners of pit bulls, and other breeds, to meet specific guidelines. Paul Spiegel, the city of Oshkoshs Health Department Director, has been working with other city staff members on the wording of a draft ordinance for the breed-specific legislation, which would require owners of the restricted breeds to obtain a special license or provide proof that their dog passed the American Kennel Clubs Good Citizen Program, according to a memo from city manager Mark Rohloff. The specified breeds could also be required to be spayed and neutered before being allowed to live in the city, according to the memo. The draft ordinance has been revised and reviewed several times and sent to various veterinarians, animal behaviorists and owners of pet stores, grooming shops and kennels in the city for feedback, according to the memo. Once feedback is provided, a work group consisting of city staff members will reconvene to review and make any necessary revisions to the draft ordinance. Spiegel is expected to present workshop to the Oshkosh Common Council at some point on the breed-specific legislation, said Mayor Frank Tower. UPDATE: (12/21/08) - The Oshkosh Kennel Club last week came out in opposition to proposed city rules regulating pit bull terriers and related breeds. Steve Eichman, president of the Oshkosh Kennel Club said he is not comfortable with the city's idea of using the club's Good Citizen class as a measure of whether pit bulls and other breeds could be exempt from the requirement for a special $100 license. And club members are unhappy that city officials chose the class, which only lasts for 15 or 20 minutes, as a test for the exemption without first consulting with the club. Eichman said the level of a dog's aggression cannot be determined in the 15 to 20 minute Good Citizen class, which consists of approximately 15 short tests for the dog. UPDATE: (1/4/09) - Proposed changes to the city's animal ordinances, in addition to controversial new rules on pit bulls and related breeds, could mean owners would be required to spay or neuter their pets, would not be allowed to bring animals into taverns and could mean more stringent requirements on pets considered to be dangerous. One change could require owners to spay or neuter their pets as a way to reduce the amount of stray pets and unwanted animals, cats in particular, in the city, Spiegel said. "That is a proposal and I'm not sure if that will go completely as proposed," Spiegel said. "The humane society suggested the change.

West Allis - is considering a plan to ban vicious dogs. Mayor Dan Devine says the new ordinance would eliminate the problem, but not discriminate against a particular type of dog. The proposal has a long list of behaviors that would make a dog considered 'vicious' including growling. The plan will be discussed at a meeting next Tuesday (12/30/08).



WYOMING - 2009 General Session Convened January 13, 2009 at Noon


HB0011
Dogs chasing wildlife.
Sponsored by: Joint Travel, Recreation, Wildlife and
Cultural Resources Interim Committee
A BILL for AN ACT relating to game and fish; modifying penalties for
owners of dogs injuring or threatening big game animals; modifying elements of the offense; and providing for an effective date. Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming: Section 1. W.S. 23-3-109(c) is amended to read: 23-3-109. Use of dogs; dogs injuring big or trophy game animals may be killed; citation of owners of dogs harassing game animals; penalties.


Posted on Jan 29, 2009, 9:33 AM
from IP address 12.74.216.100

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

OFF Topic - Ward WSOP 2009?

by

Ward,

The 2009 tournament schedule is out. Are you planning to go this year?

Jay

Posted on Jan 29, 2009, 11:31 AM
from IP address 24.19.225.6

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home

---

State by State Legislative News (Long)

by

*** ALERT *** New York City, NY - Legislation against Bird owners

This received from the New York Bird Club regarding legislation against bird owners they are trying to pass.

< > < > < > < < > < > < > < > < > < > < > < >

Ban the Sale of Birds as Pets (petstore legislation)

You are receiving this email since you have expressed an interest in either banning the sale of birds as pets and/or improving conditions for captive petstore birds that are for sale to anyone who has possession of the correct amount of US currency.

Take a look at what I wrote for Change.org so we can work within these guidelines. Please write your own draft, and when we have finalized a draft, we will present it to a NY council member or assembly member with the goal of establishing some kind of petstore law. At the present time, there are no laws for captive birds in petstores.

If you are in the New York City area and want to work on a committee, please let me know.

Ban the Sale of Birds as Pets



The New York Bird Club rallies for a law to be passed that would ban the sale of birds being kept as pets in the USA, as birds are being kept in cages too small to fly in for the majority of their lives, which in some cases is close to 100 years. It also contributes to the import of illegal bird types. Keeping birds is unnecessary and cruel. At the very least that regulations be placed on cage sizes, number of birds per cage, or even licences to keep birds as pets. It seems to me to be far too easy for any one to buy a bird from a pet shop with no knowledge of bird welfare and no questions asked of that person about where the bird will be kept, etc. If we can at least get our government to debate this subject, I do hope that some positive actions may be brought forward.
I appreciate your comments and feedback.
Anna Dove New York Bird Club




Ken & L
Owners - Monthly National Legislation Report





Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 26, 2009
ALERT California - Santa Barbara County - February 4, 2009 - Meeting


*****Please cross post to your dog and cat friends who are against Mandatory
Sterilization of dogs and cats who live in Santa Barbara County. Please
leave this post intact *****


As we ramp up for the next SNAP (Spay /Neuter) Task force meetings we really
need all Santa Barbara County community members to be active and involved.

We need to be coordinated and cohesive just like we try to be for shows,
performance events and matches. If we don't step it up now
will our clubs exist if our County changes? We are outnumbered on the task
force and public comment, letters to the task force and the Board of
Supervisors are very important.

John Hamil DVM and his wife Susan LaCroix Hamil are traveling from Laguna
area (February 18th) as experts before this task force about Mandatory
Sterilization and the health of animals, will you be there? Will you help
us prepare for this continued fight at Task Force Meetings? John Hamil past
President CVMA will help us educate this task force and Dr. Ron Faoro also
past President CVMA (who brought us California AB 1634). Dr. Hamil
delivered a fabulous speech at the Capitol against AB 1634 and we are
fortunate he is willing and able to come to Santa Barbara for this.

Members of your community who are task force members have tirelessly
attended seven Task Force meetings to date, shelter visits, and outreach to
the spanish speaking community. Please if not for your right to have
medical decisions for your animals made between your and your vet, come
support your community members serving on the task force with moral support.

Contact Susan Klein-Rothschild task force facilitator at (805) 681-5435 for
more information about the task force. To see Task Force Minutes and
Agendas: http://www.sbcphd.org/snap/default.html>
http://www.sbcphd.org/snap/default.html



We have a online group to aid in organization and communication. Please
email CCKCDCC@gmail.com and after a few questions are answered we'll invite
you to the list.

Send your letters to the task force members:
Santa Barbara SNAP Task Force Members
c/o Susan Klein-Rothschild, MSW
Asst Deputy Director, Public Health Dept
300 N. San Antonio Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93110
Fax - 805-681-5200
Email: susan.klein-rothschild@sbcphd.org

Clearly state in your letter to distribute to the task force members.

Please also bcc that letter to CCKCDCC@gmail.com so we can make sure it is
distributed.
Thank you,
Diane Jones
Member Channel City Kennel Club, Dachshund Club of America, Dachshund Club
of California


Future meetings:
February 4
February 18
March 4
March 18


Locations and times to be announced. They are trying to change them back to
all be in SB where they have better public attendance.

Location will be one of the following with the other having video
teleconferencing.

Board of Supervisors Hearing Room, 105 E. Anapamu St. (4th floor) Santa
Barbara,CA 93101 or
Board of Supervisors Conference Room, 511 E. Lakeside Parkway, Santa Maria,
CA 93455 .


Write your supervisor:

1st District: Salud Carbajal, Phone:(805) 568-2186 Fax: (805) 568-2534
Email: SupervisorCarbajal@sbcbos1.org


2nd District: Janet Wolf Vice Chair, Phone: (805) 568-2191 Fax: (805)
568-2283
Email: jwolf@sbcbos2.org

3rd District: Doreen Farr Phone: (805) 568-2192 Fax:(805) 568-2883 Solvang:
(805) 686-5095
Fax: (805) 686-8133 E-mail: dfarr@countyofsb.org

4th District: Joni Gray Lompoc: (805) 737-7700 Santa Maria: (805) 346-8407
Email: jgray@co.santa-barbara.ca.us

5th District: Joseph Centeno, Chair Santa Maria: (805) 346-8400 Fax: (805)
346-8404
Email: jcenteno@co.santa-barbara.ca.us
Documents from last task force meeting.



Ken & L
Owners - Monthly National Legislation Report



Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 23, 2009
ALERT -- VA SB 1151 -- Virginia could use some national help -- PLEASE


ALERT -- VA SB 1151 -- Virginia could use some national help -- PLEASE


SB 1151 would require VA animal shelters to require owners to
sterilize their dogs and cats if they get picked up twice by A/C. In
other words, the second time you go there to get Fluffy, you have to
sign a contract that you'll have her spayed, same as you would if
you were adopting her. There are no exceptions.

This email asks for your help to educate the sponsor and the first
committee. Everything you need is here.

Those who want to research the bill for themselves can go to:



http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?091+sum+SB1151

To read the actual text, click the blue line under 'Full text:' As
usual, plain type is existing law and italics are language added by
the bill.

The claimed reason for this bill is 'overpopulation' as shown by
shelter euthanasia. However (except for the notorious PETA operation)
Virginia's shelter euthanasia rates are good and have been improving
for decades. This is actually hard core AR legislation: HSUS is
frantic to get some sort of MSN passed in some state as a springboard
to getting a federal bill in the next four years. At the shelter
level, the goal is simply to have another way to punish animal owners.

The majority of shelter euthanasia now is feral cats and unwanted
ADULT dogs, many of them unsuited to be pets. We have far more reason
to be concerned about a dog shortage in the next few years, than 'pet
overpopulation.' The few Virginia shelters with unwanted puppies
available can (and increasingly do) send them to other shelters where
they're snapped up as they come in.


DISCUSSION

Requiring S/N of shelter animals when adopted DOES reduce birthrates.
No other kind of MSN works, in fact the other schemes actually cause
MORE euthanasia.

Here are the reasons SB 1151 can't work:

About 75% of pet dogs and 85-90% of pet cats are already sterilized.
Those that aren't, either:

1. Are no-owner (usually feral) cats, or,

2. Belong to an owner who feels she can't afford the S/N operation --
typically $150-up -- or,

3. Have owners who are keeping them intact for breeding or performance
reasons.

Unowned cats are the biggest problem -- typically 50-65% of total
shelter intakes and a higher fraction of euthanasias -- but no law can
help.

Most owners of 'just a pet' dogs and cats who don't have them
sterilized, confine them in order to prevent pregnancy. And most of
the accidental puppies find homes without ever seeing the shelter.

Dogs and cats kept for breeding must be intact; hunters often feel
that intact animals perform better and may in any case want to breed a
good dog at a later time. While breeders are fanatics about
confinement (especially when a bitch is in season), escapes DO happen
sometimes. Hunters routinely have their dogs out. The contribution to
the birthrate of unwanted animals from breeders and hunters combined,
is zilch.


If SB 1151 is passed, it will:

1. Have no impact on birthrates, and,

2. Increase abandonment of a greater fraction of dogs picked up for a
second time by a shelter, due to owner inability to pay for the
operation. With unemployment increasing, this problem will get worse.


(Shelters that actually care about the animals usually figure out that
MSN laws cause more abandonment and stop enforcement after a few
months. Do we want another law like that?)

3. Cause pointless sterilization of breeding and hunting dogs that are
intentionally kept intact. For a small breeder the loss of the
breeding potential of even one bitch would be a major setback. And
hunters' dogs are so frequently out (although not lost or abandoned)
that many of them are picked up twice within the same year.

If we won't allow large scale breeding and we go after small scale
breeders with ideas like SB 1151 (and since the importation of young
puppies for resale is now banned by federal law), where do we want the
dogs to come from?


ACTION:

1. SB 1151's sponsor is Sen. Ryan McDougle. He's a Republican, has
generally been one of the 'good guys,' and needs polite education.

His capital phone number is (804) 698-7504. Ask for his legislative
aide, tell the aide who you are and where you're from. If you're a
Virginian and from his (4th) district, be sure to say so. His email
address is: district04@senate.virginia.gov His fax phone number is
(804) 698-7943. You can say as little as "I'm calling to ask that
Senator McDougle withdraw SB 1151." Or you can go into reasons that
the bill is a bad idea.

By email use a subject line like "Please withdraw SB 1151." Get the
same message at the end of your text. Keep it short!

2. The bill is likely to be heard in the Senate Agriculture Committee
as early as next Monday AM. Below is the list of members and their
contact information. Please make as many contacts as your time
allows.


The message for Senate Ag is "Please VOTE NO on SB 1151." You can do
it by phone (same as above) or by fax or email. Emails should be short
and clear -- try to get it all on one screen. As with all writing to
lawmakers, include your full contact info. BE POLITE.

IF YOUR SENATOR IS ON THE LIST BELOW PLEASE, PLEASE CALL HIM OR HER
AND BE SURE TO SAY "I AM A CONSTITUENT OF SENATOR XXX"!


CONTACT INFORMATION FOR VA SENATE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE

Chairwoman
Patricia S. Ticer
district30@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7530
Fax: (804) 698-7651

John Watkins
district10@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7510
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Mary Margaret Whipple,
district31@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7531
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Emmett W. Hanger, Jr.
district24@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7524
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Wm. Roscoe Reynolds,
district20@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7520
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Frank M. Ruff, Jr.
district15@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7515
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Phillip P. Puckett
district38@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7538
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Harry B. Blevins
district14@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7514
Fax: (804) 698-7651

R. Creigh Deeds
district25@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7525
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Mark D. Obenshain
district26@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7526
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Ryan T. McDougle
district04@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7504
Fax: (804) 698-7943


A. Donald McEachin
district09@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7509
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Chap Petersen
district34@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7534
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Ralph S. Northam
district06@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7506
Fax: (804) 698-7651

Richard H. Stuart
district28@sov.state.va.us
Phone: (804) 698-7528
Fax: (804) 698-7651



THANKS, everyone. Just 3-4 years ago we killed a breeder licensing bill
with hundreds of your calls and emails over about three days. The
sponsor of that bill learned a lot from that experience and is now on
our side. I hope you'll help us again.


Walt Hutchens
Timbreblue Whippets
Virginia




Ken & L
Owners - Monthly National Legislation Report




Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

January 20, 2009
Animal Laws & Legislation - January 20, 2009









STATES - IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER











ALABAMA - 2009 Regular Legislative Session begins Feb. 3, 2009

Gadsden - Humane Society of Etowah County has asked the Gadsden City Council to consider passing a law requiring mandatory spaying and neutering of dogs and cats. The proposed law as drafted would require all dogs or cats 4 months old or older to be spayed or neutered. The ordinance exempts kennels licensed by the city's Revenue Department. People temporarily harboring an animal for 14 days or less would not be required to have the animal spayed or neutered.

Lawrence County - (1/14/09) - Angry citizens, hoping for immediate action from the Lawrence County Commission concerning dangerous and roaming dogs, left Mondays meeting disappointed. Rather than passing a resolution to adopt a state animal confinement law, commissioners opted not to act on the matter before gathering further information. The commission instead formed a committee to research the animal control issue further before taking any kind of action. The committee will be comprised of Commissioners Alma Whitlow, Bradley Cross and Mose Jones, as well as County Attorney Cecil Caine.




ALASKA - 2009 Legislative Session began Jan 20, 2009 to Apr 19, 2009

Anchorage - (1/15/09) - At a Public Safety Committee meeting Wednesday, the Anchorage Animal Control Advisory Board said the municipality's animal control laws need to be changed. The advisory board said that under current law, an aggressive animal can get away with repeated attacks on humans, as long as they don't cause significant physical injury. According to Anchorage municipal code, physical injury can mean anything -- scrapes, cuts or other similar injuries. But a serious physical injury is something that would be life threatening, a serious disfigurement, or something that impairs the victim's health or internal organs. The board recommended a stricter policy for animals that continually injure people, regardless if the injury is classified as serious or not. The stricter policy could include euthanasia after repeated offenses. The Anchorage Assembly would have to approve any official changes in animal control law.





ARIZONA

UPDATE: Cottonwood - MSN proposal was voted down

Pima County - (1/4/09) - The yipping, the yapping, the bowwowing and the woof-woofing can start to wear on a person after a while. It wore on Catherine Sienko until she just couldn't take it anymore. But when she called to file a complaint against her neighbor and his barking dogs, she didn't feel like she got much help from Pima County. After a yearlong battle, in which she was forced to spend many hours unsuccessfully negotiating for her peace and quiet, the neighbor was fined $200. The barking continues. So she has started Quiet Pima County, an organization whose aim is to change the way the county deals with barking-dog complaints. So far, the group has just a dozen members, but she's hoping its ranks will swell to hundreds of had-it-up-to-here activists who can get the county to change its ways. "We're being assaulted," she said. "We're being assaulted by noise. We're getting sick. We're getting high blood pressure. We're getting tinnitus. We can't sleep at night. We can't enjoy our patios in the evening." There were 615 complaints related to barking dogs in the last year.

Phoenix - (1/11/09) - Legislative Ag Fest will be held January 21at the State Capitol. The goal is to reach as many state legislators as possible and show them how diverse agriculture is in Arizona and help them see we need their support. The event will begin at 5:30 p.m. For more information, contact Paul Brierley at 480.635.3612 or _paulbrierley@azfb.org_

Phoenix - (1/16/09) - A measure before the Arizona Legislature would extend current state bans on dog fighting and cockfighting to other animals. Senate Bill 1115 would make it a felony to train or be involved with animal fighting. It expands upon existing state law against dog fighting.

Show Low - (1/18/09) - The Planning and Zoning Commission accepted a number of proposed revisions to Section 15 of the city code, the zoning ordinance, during its regular meeting Tuesday. One such group of revisions belonged to requirements of home occupations. The revisions also includes a list of permitted and non-permitted businesses for home occupation, with other examples being decided on a case-by-case basis. The code allowed non-household animals in residential zones when the lot had a minimum size of 20,000 square feet. The code would allow one large animal (horses, cows), one small animal (sheep, goats) or 10 chickens, turkeys, rabbits and other animals of that sort for every 20,000 square feet on the lot. So, for example, a person could have one horse and 10 rabbits on a 40,000-square-foot lot. the household pets provision was already in Chapter 6 of the city code and therefore was separated from the non-household animals portion of the zoning ordinance. "You can have three dogs and four horses on a two-acre (87,120 square feet) piece of property," he said.
Since the household pets portion was removed from the zoning ordinance, the changes dealing with animals was mainly numbering of the sub-sections. Everything would remain in the ordinance as it was before.





ARKANSAS - The 87th General Assembly began Jan 12, 2009

SB77 - AN ACT CONCERNING AGGRAVATED CRUELTY TO DOGS, CATS, AND HORSES AND RELATED OFFENSES AND CONCERNING ANIMAL MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Senate Committee on Judiciary

Helena-West Helena - (1/8/09) - Patrick Allen, Helena-West Helena code enforcement officer, addressed the city council Tuesday night about animal control ordinances for the city. Helena-West Helena is still without an animal shelter and has issues with enforcing leash laws and animal registration fees.


Little Rock- (1/10/09) - Attorney General Dustin McDaniel is paring down his wish list for the legislative session that starts next week. He says he will focus on a handful of issues rather than several. In particular, McDaniel will focus on tougher penalities for animal cruelty and on an ethics bill. His bill that would make aggravated animal cruelty a felony on the first offense has already won over the Arkansas Farm Bureau -- a group that opposed similar efforts in the past. McDaniel says the proposal also has the support of a majority of both the House and Senate judiciary committees, which would likely be first to consider the measure. He's predicting easy passage of the animal cruelty bill. Additional article re: SB77 - click here.

Maumelle - (1/7/09) - Almost half of the hour-long meeting was spent debating a subject that wasnt even on the agenda cats and dogs. During the initial public comment period, Maumelle resident Brandon Tolbert asked the council to change the animal nuisance ordinance to require animal control officers to remove dogs that were a nuisance rather than keeping the current law which he said gives animal control officers discretionary judgment. After a lengthy discussion on the wording Tolbert offered that lasted almost 30 minutes, Ladner asked if this wasnt something that could be worked out at a more appropriate time, saying that public comments were supposed to be limited to three minutes. The council agreed, but not before city attorney JaNan Davis warned them that dogs were considered a persons property and the courts required due process before personal property can be taken.






CALIFORNIA - 2009 Legislature began Jan. 5, 2009

Alameda County - (1/9/09) - A new law took effect Jan. 1 which states that landlords and mortgage lenders must take charge of abandoned animals left behind on properties that have been vacated following the termination of a rental agreement or property foreclosure. It requires them to notify an animal control office immediately, who will then retrieve and take possession of the animal until it is deemed to be in a suitable condition to be returned to the owner. The bill also authorizes animal control officials to secure a lien upon the animal for the purpose of recovering the costs of its rescue.

Hollister - (1/6/09) - The city recently updated several laws to coincide with state legislation such as code sections dealing with the vaccination period for dogs. The change deals with the vaccination period allowed for dogs over four months old. The prior ordinance required vaccinations to occur "not less than one year and not more than two years" after birth. The new wording changes it from two years to three.


Lancaster - (1/15/09) - The City Council voted unanimously Tuesday (1/13/09) to grant the first of two required approvals for a new ordinance that will define potentially dangerous and vicious canines and establish new rules for their owners to follow. (Note: CA state law prohibits designation of specific breeds as dangerous. However, it does allow breed-specific spay/neuter). If enacted, the ordinance would require spaying or neutering for pit bulls and Rottweilers, including mixed-breed animals that exhibit the predominant physical characteristics of those breeds. Exceptions could be made for dogs that are considered at risk of not surviving a spaying or neutering procedure, as well as for dogs registered with breed registries such as the American Kennel Club. UPDATE: (1/16/09) - Next city council meeting: Jan. 27, 5 PM Lancaster City Hall Council Chambers, 44933 N. Fern Ave., Lancaster, California 93534 661-723-6000 To contact a member of the City Council:
Phone: 661-723-6019

Laguna Hills - since last year, the city has been looking into spay and neuter programs and is now recommending that a public education campaign and a license canvassing program be created in the upcoming biennial budget to make it easier for pet owners in the city to license and alter their dogs. A canvassing program report recommends pet license outreach spay/neuter program not needed for now. The twelve-month canvassing program would run from January 2010 to December 2010

Manteca - (1/14/09) - Those slamming two of the current council members Mayor Willie Weatherford and John Harris for the lack of a dog park in Manteca are barking up the wrong tree. They are conveniently leaving out one big detail: The entire council back then went along with the idea of the dog park and put it ahead of others only after the Manteca Dog Owners Group (DOGS) made the commitment to raise $60,000 toward its construction. The deal was simple. When the group raised the money, the city would build the park.


Riverside County - (12/15/08) - Riverside County supervisors plan to introduce an ordinance today (12/16/08) to sterilize dogs whose owners let them run amok, roam unlicensed, bite people or otherwise violate state or local laws. The ordinance would also require all adult dogs and cats in the unincorporated county to be implanted with identifying microchips. County animal-control officials say they hope the ordinance, if passed, will satisfy the opponents of a 2006 proposal to spay and neuter almost all dogs and cats in the unincorporated county. Under the new proposal, spay and neuter requirements would apply only when pet owners show themselves to be irresponsible, officials said. The cities of San Bernardino and Los Angeles as well as Los Angeles County have adopted stricter rules that require sterilization of adult pets generally with the exception of guide dogs, purebred show animals and a few others. Supervisors are expected to introduce the ordinance today. If it is approved, it would go to a public hearing and final vote probably in a month, Miller said. UPDATE -Ordinance approved 5-0, HEARING to be held TUESDAY - 1/13/09 - 9:30 a.m. UPDATE - (1/14/09) - Dogs and cats whose owners let them run astray, go unlicensed, bite people or otherwise violate laws could face mandatory sterilization, Riverside County supervisors voted Tuesday. Also, pet owners must have their dogs and cats implanted with identifying microchips, supervisors decided. The unanimous decision just before 7 p.m. followed more than five hours of comment from a packed and boisterous audience of opponents and supporters. Supervisors softened the new rules, adding an exemption from spay/neuter provisions for "recognized breeders" and creating a committee to define that. The new rules apply to all of unincorporated Riverside County and take effect in 30 days. UPDATE: (1/15/09) - The Riverside County Board of Supervisors is asking for people to consider joining a committee that will review an ordinance adopted Tuesday night (Jan. 13). The REVERSAL Ordinance Task Force will include a group of people that favored the ordinance as it was written, plus a group of individuals that opposed the microchipping/spay & neuter ordinance. The ordinance, dubbed REVERSAL by Supervisor Jeff Stone, drew praise and criticism during a seven-hour public hearing on Tuesday. Supervisors Stone acronym stands for: Reducing Euthanasia Vowing Everyones Responsibility to Save Animal Lives. Supervisor Roy Wilson said he supported the ordinance, but requested a committee be formed so people can help amend whatever changes might be necessary to the law. Those interested in participating on the REVERSAL Ordinance task force are asked to contact their respective Supervisor via e-mail. UPDATE: (1/19/09) - A new ordinance requiring identifying microchips on almost all dogs and cats in unincorporated Riverside County takes effect March 1, but animal control officers will not cite or fine anyone until June, said Robert Miller, county director of Animal Services.

Riverside - (1/7/09) - Some Riverside County residents are pretty steamed about a new anti-nuisance ordinance, approved by the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, that will fine owners of barking dogs up to $500. The new ordinance also affects the way dog-related complaints are handled by officials. Under current county law, when a resident in an unincorporated community complains about a barking, howling or otherwise noisy dog, an Animal Services officer investigates the matter, generally by visiting the location where the disturbance has been reported. When the new rules take effect -- in 30 days -- noisy dogs' owners will receive a warning for a first complaint. If another complaint is made within a year of the first one, the matter goes to a hearing, during which an officer decides whether or not the dog is actually a nuisance. If so, an order is issued to the dog's owner and must be followed within 10 days.

Remedies might include obedience training, containing the animal within an enclosed space, such as a garage, restricting the amount of time the animal is allowed outside -- or debarking the dog so it doesn't vocalize beyond a whisper.

If the order is not followed within the 10 days allotted, a fine is incurred, beginning at $100 for the first violation. A second violation within a year racks up a $200 fine, and a $500 fine is imposed for each additional violation. For more information, check out the Riverside County Department of Animal Services.

Ukiah - new ordinance regarding the status of the city's dogs would either lead to greater compassion for the animals or a "legal quagmire," depending on which side people get their information from. By a 4-1 vote at its regular board meeting Dec. 17, the Ukiah City Council directed staff to draft an ordinance to be brought back for final approval at a later date mandating the change of the word "owner" to "guardian" in city code regarding canines. Councilmember Doug Crane said he could not stand behind the intentions of the actions because it would lead to more problems down the road.





COLORADO

Aspen/Snowmass - (1/17/09) - As the end of dog-sledding season grows nearer, advocates for the dogs at Krabloonik Restaurant and Kennel in Snowmass Village are weighing their options on how to most effectively improve what they say are inhumane off-season conditions at the 280-some animal facility. The kennel has long been a source of consternation for some in this animal-friendly community who claim the dogs there are mistreated. Under mounting public pressure MacEachen stopped shooting old and weak dogs in 2005, though the practice remains legal for working animals like sled dogs. And Krabloonik was cited in May for violating 10 state dog-sled kennel regulations. However, an inspection of the kennels dogs last fall by seven veterinarians concluded they were in good health. If working with MacEachen does not net substantial improvements by this off-season, the advocates intend to put an ordinance to Snowmass Village voters that would create a legal mandate raising the standard of care for working animals like the Krabloonik dogs. The advisory board includes freshly elected Snowmass Mayor Bill Boineau. They are already stumping for state legislation that would cap the number of adult breeding dogs that a kennel can house at 25. Voices for Krabloonik co-founder Bill Fabrocini has been lobbying state Sen. Gail Schwartz (D-Snowmass Village) to sponsor the so-called Puppy Mill Bill.


Boulder - Humane Society of Boulder Valley says law enforcement has decided to write fewer tickets for such violations as having an off-leash dog in a prohibited area. Instead, officers are trying to talk to pet owners about municipal rules.

Calhan - (1/5/09) - A new law in Colorado may end up costing you a little more to adopt your next cat or dog. The new law, which went into effect January 1st, requires all cats or dogs to be spayed or neutered before they are adopted. At the Pikes Peak Humane Society in Colorado Springs, adopting a cat or dog that is unaltered will cost an additional $50. You get the $50 returned to you once the dog or cat you've adopted is neutered or spayed.

Denver - (1/4/09) - When Colorado Lawmakers go back to work on Wednesday, one of the bills they will consider would require cat owners to have tags or microchips for their animals. Westminster Rep. Cherylin Peniston and Denver Sen. Joyce Foster will introduce a bill requiring all cats in urban areas to have identification. If passed, the new legislation will only apply to cities with populations over 100,000. It excludes rural communities that may not have formal animal control programs and also have barn cat populations for which identification is not practical. Cities like Fort Collins that have already instituted identification requirements for cats. To help cat owners, the Metro Denver Shelter Alliance and the Denver Area Veterinary Medical Society are offering more than 150,000 microchips to metro area cats free of charge through September. The program is called "Chip Your Cat."


Denver- (1/16/09) - The city of Denver unveiled more than 100 proposals Thursday to save $20 million in the 2009 budget, but what many residents are more likely to notice are a couple of initiatives aimed at their wallets. Do you violate city laws by letting your dog roam around Cheesman Park without a leash? Are you picking up his poop? Consider yourself warned. Between April and September, two animal control officers will be on stealth patrol riding bicycles looking for people just like you. Their mission: Issue more tickets. The city expects to generate an additional $96,000 this year by putting two animal control officers on bike patrol. Scholz said the city has had animal control officers on bikes before but that it suspended the practice last year because of staffing shortages. Those vacancies have since been filled.

Denver Court Case News Update - From Sonya Diaz - We had our oral arguments in front of the three-judge federal court of appeals yesterday (01/12/09). Honestly, it was a mixed bag of good and not so good, but the best thing about it all was that we drew a good panel of sharp judges. From the things they said and asked, at least two of the three judges seemed to get it and I think that is the most favorable part of the whole. One of the judges said to the city attorney, Mike Joyce, who did the oral arguments for Denver, that he didn't know if his own dog would fall under the ordinance. The sharpness of the judges, I think, seemed to overcome even our sometimes spotty arguments. The outcome possibilities are that the appeals court 1) keeps our case out of court 2) allows us to go to trial, but throws out our vagueness claim or our substantive due process claim, or even a piece of one of the claims. Our witnesses are mostly for the substantive due process side of our arguments. I'll let you know when the ruling comes out. I don't know when that will be.

Greeley - (1/9/09) - Its no secret that Greeley is the most anti-dog city in northern Colorado, maybe in the nation. A group of Greeley citizens initiated an ordinance, which would open parks to dogs, gathered signatures and placed it on the ballot. Voting will be done by mail in late January and early February. The city staff and city council fear that the citizens cant be trusted with this decision, so they devised a procedural trick that will sabotage the initiative process. The citizens proposal would open all 41 parks to dogs on leashes. The city council developed another proposal that would open only 19 parks, leaving 22 closed even to dogs on leashes. They have placed this competing proposal on the same ballot as the citizens proposal. Some on the council would have you believe that they are giving you a choice, open 19 parks or open all 41. Some who favor dogs will vote yes for both, but many will vote yes for one alternative and no for the other. So, the pro-dog vote will be split between two alternatives, which all but assures that both will fail, which is exactly what some on the council want. Dogs would be prohibited from parks and Greeleys anti-dog reputation would be upheld. The citizens proposal includes the baggie law that requires anyone walking a dog in any park or on any street or sidewalk to have in their possession a plastic bag suitable for picking up dog poop. Failure to carry a baggie would result in a $25 fine. The city is using misinformation and political trickery to deny citizens rights to use the initiative process. Please dont let them succeed. Vote yes on the citizens proposal, Item 200, which will appear first on the ballot. Vote no on the citys proposal, Item 2A, which will appear second on the ballot.







CONNECTICUT - 2009 Regular Legislative Session Convened Jan 7, 2009 - Adjourns: June 3, 2009

Greenwich Point - (1/4/09) - Greenwich Point caretaker Ed Fesco said he has received complaints recently about dog owners who do not abide by the law to keep their dogs on a leash and pick up after them since the town-owned property opened to the animals Dec. 1 through March 31. "It's the dog owners faults, but Animal Control has to do a better job," he said. On the weekends, the beach trails are packed with dogs of all sizes, from cocker spaniels to St. Bernards-many of which run freely through the woods and on the beach without proper supervision . "People think that I don't see them put the leashes on as I drive by, but I do," Fesco said. Old Greenwich resident, Susan Ryan has a friend who refuses to jog at the Point anymore out of fear of the dogs, she said.

Wilton - (1/15/09) - A change to the dog leash ordinance has some dog owners barking foul this week, as some contend the changes are an unnecessary intrusion on responsible dog owners. The original law, passed in June 2006, requires dogs to be leashed in the Wilton Center area, Schencks Island, all public sidewalks and roadways, the town hall complex, the Gilbert and Bennett School properties, all properties owned or operated by the Board of Education, all playing fields operated and/or maintained by the Parks and Recreation Department, and at any public event in town. Proposed changes would further prohibit dogs from being unleashed in Merwin Meadows and all walking trails on property owned by the town. A public hearing to discuss the changes is scheduled for this coming Tuesday, Jan. 20, at 7 p.m. at town hall.



D.C.

No Report for Washington, DC



DELAWARE - The 145th General Assembly opened Jan 13, 2009

No Report for Delaware





FLORIDA

FL SB 288

Session: 2009 (3/3/09 thru 5/1/09 Prefiled)
Sponsor: Bullard
Summary:
Sale of Dogs and Cats [EPSC]; Requires that additional information relating to the genetic disorders to which dogs and cats are susceptible be included in the written notice that pet dealers provide to a consumer at the time of sale. Redefines the term "pet dealer" for purposes of provisions authorizing a purchaser to return an animal to the pet dealer and receive a refund, exchange the animal, or receive a reimbursement of expenses, etc. APPROPRIATION: $82,669. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2009.
History:
12/17/08 SENATE Referred to Agriculture; Judiciary; General Government Appropriations 12/03/08 SENATE Filed


SB 372 - Damage by Dogs; Expresses the legislative intent to revise laws relating to damage by dogs. EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon becoming law. 12/15/08 SENATE File

Go to the NAIA Trust CapWiz tool and send an email to your Senators expressing opposition to removing the restrictions provided in F.S. 767.14. The only changes that need to be made in
Chapter 767 Damage by Dogs is the menacing language by which many innocent dogs are being destroyed. Click here for the NAIA CapWiz link.

Alachua County - (1/19/09) - Alachua County pet owners whose cats, dogs and ferrets are not sterilized will not have to pay more for a pet license following action last week by the Alachua County Commission. Meanwhile, a new nonprofit veterinary clinic that will spay and neuter pets at low cost is progressing and slated to open in May. The higher license fee for fertile pets and the clinic are linked: The County Commission provided $250,000 to help establish the clinic. Alachua County Animal Services raised the license fee on non-sterilized pets to recoup some of that money. However, Animal Services Director David Flagler said the differing fees created problems for veterinarians who sell county licenses at their practice. The licensing fees for dogs had been $15 for a sterile one and $25 for a fertile one. Cat and ferret licenses were $8 for a sterile one and $12 for a fertile one. At Flagler's recommendation, the commission last week voted to charge the lower fees regardless of the animal's fertility status. Flagler said he may introduce a new plan for higher fees in the future.

Panama City - (1/8/09) - A new pet friendly dining ordinance could be in place well before the dog days of summer. The Panama City Beach city council will have its first reading of a doggie dining ordinance. The ordinance would allow pet owners to bring their dog with them to restaurants with outside eating areas.

Tarpon Springs - (1/17/08) - It is unfair for veterinarians to be able to board dogs overnight, while kennels are not afforded the same right. That sentiment was voiced last year when three people who wanted to open a kennel in the downtown business district found they could only board dogs during the day because they were not associated with a veterinarian. At that time the trio told city commissioners the municipal zoning code placed unfair restricts on would-be kennel owners not affiliated with a veterinarian. In response, the City Commission took a tentative step Tuesday night toward leveling the animal boarding playing field. Commissioner voted unanimously to approve on first reading an ordinance that would allow domestic pets to be kept overnight in kennels in a business district. The ordinance does not allow farm or wild animals to be kept at the kennels and would mandate a number of other restrictions intended to keep kennels from bothering neighbors. The commission will consider passing the ordinance on its second and final reading Jan. 27.





GEORGIA

Albany - (1/14/09) - State law in Georgia defines a vicious dog as any dog that inflicts severe injury on a human without provocation, but to be declared vicious, the dog must have bitten people on at least two occasions. Some cities don't think the state laws go far enough. They've enacted stronger local laws to deal with dangerous dogs.

Decatur County - (1/9/09) - As of Thursday, January 15, 2009, any person who owns, keeps, maintains or harbors any dog, cat, or ferret three months of age or older must have the animal vaccinated against rabies from a licensed veterinarian. In addition, the animal must have a collar around its neck with a vaccination tag and license number of the animal. See Registration/Vaccination requirements Download the Animal Registration Form that is needed to register your animal at the Decatur County Planning Department on Airport Road. The law also states; It shall be unlawful for any dog to be on the streets, lanes, roads, rights of way or squares of any subdivision in the County, or loose on vacant lots or unenclosed lots, unless such dog is held firmly on a leash held by a person.

Thomasville - (1/15/09) - A south Georgia sheriff has asked county officials to consider a proposal that would ban pit bulls in his county. Thomas County Sheriff Carlton Powell considers the breed to be a danger to the public. He made the comments at Tuesday's meeting of the Thomas County Commission.





HAWAII - 2009 Legislative session began Jan 21, 2009

Kai - (12/30/08) - A new nonprofit is taking over the city's spaying and neutering program for the first time in more than two decades, which could mean big changes, said the Hawaiian Humane Society, the current service provider. Animal Care Foundation says it will start running the city's Neuter Now program in February out of its Hawaii Kai office and in a mobile clinic around the island. The Humane Society will stop running the program tomorrow, meaning the Neuter Now program will not be available next month. Residents can still purchase discount certificates for pet sterilization through the Hawaiian Humane Society or satellite city halls until tomorrow. Those certificates will be honored until March 31.





IDAHO - 2009 Legislative Session began Jan 12, 2009

Pocatello - Mayor Roger Chase wants the state to create a vicious dog registry that tracks animals when their owners move from one jurisdiction to another after a southeastern Idaho animal control officer was attacked and injured by a pitbull with a long history of problems this month





ILLINOIS


The death of a 4-year-old mauled by at least one Rottweiler owned by his foster family could lead to a crackdown on how the state regulates the care of foster children in homes with animals. Rep. Rosemary Mulligan (R-Des Plaines) said the Illinois House committee that oversees the Department of Children and Family Services might consider tough legislation outlawing dangerous dogs in foster homes. If you want to be a foster parent, forgoing a dog could be it, Mulligan said.

Chicago - (1/9/09) - Chicagos proposed mandatory spay-neuter ordinance has been amended to exempt veterinarians from needing to report when they see animals that have not been altered, according to the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), which is pushing the initiative. The new amendment was crafted and submitted to the committees a few weeks ago. The amendment had not been publicly announced until now. The ordinance has not come up in public since it was given a hearing by the Chicago City Council in September. The September hearing on the proposed ordinance was attended by so many people who wanted to give statements that officials adjourned the discussions after three hours and scheduled it to be brought up again, although a date has not been set. The proposed ordinance requires owners to neuter their cat or dog before the animal is six months of age, unless they have an exemption, such as being registered with an approved registry or association like a breeders group or having a note from a licensed veterinarian. An owner without a waiver who was found to have an unneutered cat or dog would be issued a citation. Failure to have the animal neutered within 60 days would result in a $100 fine. Failure to act within another 60 days would result in a $500 fine and confiscation of the animal for forced sterilization. The fact that veterinarians are not required to report their clients with unaltered animals hasnt been the issue for our group, Greeley said. The issue has been the government determining the need for the medical services in the first place. There also has been some question of whether or not the city would even be able to enforce such a law, and whether it is truly needed.

Crystal Lake- (1/9/09) - Dont mess with McHenry Countys pet lovers. Almost 150 of them crammed into a small meeting room Wednesday evening to tell the McHenry County Animal Control Advisory Committee that the idea of limiting the number of animals that residents can own was a bad one. A member of the McHenry County Board had brought up the idea last year based on constituents concerns. It took almost two hours to get through the people who packed the countys Animal Control and Adoption Center to speak, and not one supported the idea. The committee planned to mull over whether such a need exists in the county, but it has no authority to implement the ordinance, Committee Chairman Ed Varga told the audience. But that did not ease the concerns of the sea of opponents, who disliked the concept on grounds ranging from animal rights to intrusive government.

Danville - (1/18/09) - Owners of dangerous or vicious dogs in the city could be required to obtain at least $100,000 liability insurance coverage under proposed city ordinance changes.
Revisions to a city ordinance to address dangerous dogs are now on their way to the city councils public services committee on Jan. 27 for approval. The citys dangerous dog subcommittee finished this week going through the proposed ordinance changes.

Lincoln Park - Springfield - (1/18/09) - Animal welfare activists and State Rep. John Fritchey (D-Chicago) met this morning at an animal shelter in Lincoln Park to announce a proposed law aimed at cracking down on abusive puppy mills. "This isn't something that should be considered radical," Fritchey said. "It's decent." Fritchey said opposition to the bill may be inevitable, but that he'd have concerns about any dog breeder who opposed the law. The bill, sponsored by Fritchey and State Sen. Dan Kotowski (D-Mount Prospect) and backed by the Humane Society of the United States and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, is called Chloe's Bill The legislation, if passed in its proposed form, would:

Create a "Dog Breeder License Act," which would prevent breeders from having more than 20 unaltered dogs, that is, dogs not neutered or spayed. Prohibit people from obtaining a dog-breeding license if they have been convicted of a felony animal-cruelty crime, including dogfighting. Require dog breeders to keep dogs in buildings without wire flooring and with sufficient heating, cooling and ventilation. Humane Society officials said Sunday that many puppy mills they've uncovered have dogs in crates stacked high on top of each other, with the wire flooring of the crates destroying the animals' paws over time. Require pet stores and breeders to provide potential pet buyers with the dog's full medical history, information of spaying and neutering, and information about any prior medical care. Officials said many dogs from puppy mills end up having substantial medical problems because of interbreeding and exposure to disease in cramped environments. Establish penalties starting with fines and escalating to having animals seized and breeding operations shut down.



Rantoul - After a proposal to ban dogs by breed drew criticism from animal activists, service dog owners, pet owners and breed enthusiasts, the Rantoul village staff is proposing a compromise animal control ordinance. The proposal would limit the number of dogs and cats based on the size of a dwelling and would prohibit more than four dogs and/or cats at a home. Proposal was dropped. Under the new proposal, the number of dogs or cats allowed on a property would be determined by the size of the dwelling, lot or parcel.





INDIANA - 116th General Assembly began Jan 7, 2009

Portage - BSL - City Councilman Brendan Clancy said he just wanted to put some additional teeth into the city's animal control ordinance and make dog owners more responsible. He didn't anticipate the growling after he introduced the proposed amendments to the ordinance last month. Clancy got e-mails and phone calls from people as far away as California complaining about his proposal and has withdrawn that language from the proposal. The discussion has opened up more debate that many sections of the city's code regarding animal control are outdated. Clancy said once the present ordinance is reviewed and draft changes are made, he will have a public input meeting to gather opinions on various sides of the issue. He was not sure when the meeting would take place. Next meeting January 6, 2009

Richmond - (1/19/09) - The city of Richmond's animal control ordinance won't go away. In fact, a new draft of the ordinance will be presented Tuesday night to Richmond Common Council. The ordinance, which was first proposed in 2007, has been rewritten and will be again presented to council with new changes. Council, in turn, is expected to set a special meeting to focus exclusively on the ordinance. The council meeting has been moved to Tuesday because of the observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The animal ordinance will thus be presented Tuesday night with a short explanation and then a special meeting will be set. There will be no public comment. The ordinance contains new language regarding hoarding animals -- keeping more than four dogs or four cats in a home -- fines for owners whose animal runs loose and bites a resident, registration of animals reclaimed from a shelter, registration of those surrendering litters of pets to an animal shelter and restrictions on animals tethered for lengthy periods of time.





IOWA - 83rd General Assembly began Jan 12, 2009

Castalia - (1/9/09) - An ordinance banning pit bulls, except for those currently in town, is being considered by the Castalia City Council. Monday night, the Council scheduled a public hearing on the ordinance that prohibits the dogs, or regulates the ownership of those dogs located within Castalia before the adoption of the ordinance. The hearing is at 7:30 p.m. during the Council's Monday, Feb. 2, meeting at City Hall. The proposed ordinance states: "No person shall permit a pit bull dog to go outside its kennel or pen unless such dog is securely leashed with a leash no longer than four feet. No person shall permit a pit bull dog to be kept on a chain, rope or other type of leash outside its kennel or pen unless a person is in physical control of the leash. In addition, all pit bull dogs on a leash outside the animal's kennel must be muzzled by a muzzling device sufficient to prevent such dog from biting persons or other animals." The kennel must have secure sides and a secure top attached to the sides and must be locked when the animals are within the structure. It It must comply with all zoning and building regulations of the city. Pit bull owners also would be required to place an easily readable sign on their property using the words "Beware of dog," with another similar sign posted on the kennel of the animal. Pit bull owners also would be required under the ordinance to provide the city clerk's office with proof of public liability insurance in a single incident amount of $500,000 for bodily injury to or death of any person or persons or for damages to property. The policy can't be cancelled unless 10 days written notice is given to the clerk's office. The ordinance specifies reporting requirements for pit bull owners
Violating the ordinance is punishable by up to a $500 fine and 30 days in jail. In addition, the city will order the pit bull to be removed.

Des Moines - (1/16/09) - Animal rights advocates are hoping Iowa lawmakers will give state inspectors the authority to respond to complaints against dog breeders who run so-called "puppy mills" that are home to squalid conditions for animals. Most of those breeders hold federal licenses with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, but critics say federal officials are too slow to respond to problems.
Tom Colvin, executive director of the Animal Rescue League of Iowa, and a former director of Waterloo's Cedar Bend Humane Society, said he doesn't have confidence that the USDA has enough inspectors to do a thorough job of ensuring that the facilities it licenses are meeting animal welfare standards. Rep. Jim Lykam, D-Davenport, is crafting the bill that would have state inspectors look into complaints and expects an initial draft to be released soon. He said many good breeders in Iowa exist, but the bad ones are giving everybody a black eye. "We just want to protect defenseless animals," Lykam said.

Logan- City Council came to no conclusions at the Dec. 8 meeting regarding making any changes to the animal control ordinance. Banning specific breeds was discussed. The council agreed to purchase catch poles and collapsible cages for dogs that are caught.

Sioux City - changes to the pit bull ban will have to wait another week. The city council was set to discuss amending that ordinance at tomorrow's council meeting, but councilman, Aaron Rochester asked for a delay. In September, city leaders approved an ordinance to ban new pit bulls from the city and put additional requirements on current pit bull owners. The topic will be back on the agenda January 12th. UPDATE: Council members and the public debated restrictions on the breed including keeping pit bulls on a six foot or shorter leash, only being walked by adults age 18 and older, micro-chipping of the breed, and keeping the dogs in enclosed kennels or fences that are at least six feet tall. One restriction that was erased from the amendment after some debate tonight was the requirement to muzzle the dogs while out in public. The council voted tonight (01/12/09) not to have a second and third hearing on this amendment. The new amendments to the ordinance will take effect on Saturday, January 17, when they're published.





KANSAS - 2009 Legislative Session began Jan 12, 2009

Arkansas City- (1/5/09) - The City may require local veterinarians to produce rabies vaccination records when requested by law enforcement authorities. A new proposed ordinance that will be discussed today at a City Commission work session would provide a way to enforce an existing requirement that residents have their pets vaccinated annually, a city commissioner said. The work session will be at 5:30 p.m. at City Hall. The proposed ordinance also is on the agenda for the commission's regular meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at City Hall. The proposed ordinance would not require licenses for dogs and cats, Commissioner Dotty Smith said today. Nor would it require that veterinarians do anything that they are not already doing. But it would require them to provide police rabies vaccinations records when requested. "We're not talking at about licensing," Smith said. "We're talking about finding a way to enforce rabies vaccination." Pet owners are required by law to have their dogs and cats vaccinated every year. "All this would be is a rabies tag that they already have if they are vaccinated," she added.

Overland Park - (1/14/09) - After drafting a proposed ordinance that allowed property owners or homes associations to hire a licensed trapper to remove threatening coyotes, city officials on Wednesday offered a revised version that leaves the trapping up to the city. The City Councils public safety committee approved the measure Wednesday. The full council could take it up Feb. 2. Under the latest proposal, residents would ask the city to remove a coyote. If the police chief finds that the animal is a danger to private property or livestock, the chief could order the animal to be trapped. The trapped coyote would be euthanized, Police Chief John Douglass said. Residents would be required to pay $250 to help defray the trapping costs.

Wilson - Ordinance 782 prohibits both pure and mixed breed pit bulls, unless they are already licensed as of the date of the ordinance





KENTUCKY

Louisville - (1/4/09) - Unlicensed pet breeders, take note -- your next customer could be an undercover animal-control officer. Determined to crack down on unlicensed breeding and selling, Metro Animal Services officers are poring over newspaper and online pet ads, then calling unlicensed breeders to set up sales. The more aggressive enforcement tactics, put in place after the city passed a stricter animal ordinance more than a year ago, have resulted in Animal Services officers busting about a dozen illegal pet sellers -- confiscating 123 animals and spaying or neutering those that haven't been altered.Those tactics are being criticized by local dog club members, dog owners and lawyers, who argue that what Animal Services is doing is improper, deceitful and wrong. They contend that the animal-control officers posing as buyers are not immediately identifying themselves, entering homes without warrants and altering the animals they seize, without any recourse for the owners.





LOUISIANA - 2009 Legislative Session begins Apr 27, 2009; adjourns Jun 25, 2009

No Report for Louisiana





MAINE - The 124st Legislature opened Dec. 3, 2008

Augusta- (1/19/09) - The 20-page report on changes to the states regulations for breeding dogs and cats is ready for review by the Legislatures Agriculture, Conservation and Forestry Committee, and the states animal welfare director is calling it a great beginning. Some of the details of the report are: a recommendation to hire more investigators under the Animal Welfare Program; a new definition of breeding kennel to include small breeder (five to 10 intact females); medium breeder (11-20 intact females); and large breeder (21 dogs or more), along with new licensing fees; and a restriction on the number of dogs any kennel may keep. The task force began its work last summer after the committee determined that LD 2010, introduced by Rep. Benjamin Pratt, needed more research. No date has been set for discussion of the report by the Agriculture, Forestry and Conservation Committee.

Ogunquit- (1/8/09) - Things got a little testy Tuesday as selectmen considered resident John Mixon's request to expedite the processing of his citizen's petition concerning changes to town ordinances governing dogs. Mixon filed a petition that would liberalize dog owners' ability to demonstrate an animal is under voice control, so that approved dogs may be walked without a leash around town. Selectmen accepted the petition and agreed to consider it at the June Town Meeting. Mixon wants the changes put to a vote sooner. Mixon and Tramuto had a lengthy engagement over the current requirement that owners present a certificate of insurance as part of the process to demonstrate voice control over an animal. "The voters never voted anything regarding a certificate of insurance," Mixon said. Tramuto defended the requirement, citing the selectmen's responsibility to ensure the public safety.

South Portland - (1/14/09) - Two South Portland residents are collecting signatures for a referendum petition that would ban dogs from Willard Beach during the summer and require that they be leashed the rest of the year. The petition leaders, Gary Crosby and Dan LaBrie, must collect at least 930 signatures -- 5 percent of the city's active voters. They plan to put the question on the November ballot. City officials have reviewed the petition wording and concluded it is legal, according to City Clerk Susan Mooney. The petition would establish the following city ordinance: "No person owning or in custody of or control of any dog shall permit such dog to enter upon Willard Beach between April 15 and Oct. 15. Dogs are allowed on Willard Beach between Oct. 16 and April 14 during park hours, if on leash and under owner's control." The City Council is currently working on making some changes to the existing ordinance, which allows dogs on the beach year-round.



MARYLAND - The 426th Session began Jan 14, 2009 and adjourns Apr 13, 2009

No Report for Maryland





MASSACHUSETTS

Click here for article regarding the below bills.


MA HB 1339 - Animal Cruelty
This bill adds to the definition of animal cruelty, knowingly, intentionally or recklessly, and unjustifiably, failing to provide veterinary care that a reasonably prudent person should know is necessary to prevent an animal from suffering. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 77 - Animal Cruelty Penalties
This bill adds torture to the definition of animal cruelty and creates monetary fines in addition to imprisonment as a penalty. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 4360; & HB 1546 - Protective Orders
This bill allows a person suffering from abuse by an adult or minor family or household member to request protection for any companion animal or companion livestock owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held by either party or a minor child residing in the household.

MA HB 1546 allows a person suffering from abuse by an adult or minor family or household member to request protection for any animal owned, possessed, leased, kept, or held as a pet by either party or a minor child residing in the household. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 1940, 1948, 1993, 2000, 2004 - Dangerous Dog
H.B. 1940: Establishes an 11-day period for the relocation of a dangerous dog.

H.B. 1948: A dog may not be declared potentially dangerous or vicious if the person who sustained the injury or damage was committing trespass or other torts, or was teasing, tormenting, abusing or assaulting the dog, or was attempting to commit a crime.

H.B. 1993: The owner of a dog that is determined vicious shall reimburse the city or town for all costs that the dog incurs for housing and care during its impoundment and appeals process.

H.B. 2000: A dog deemed vicious must have done damage to either the body or property of any person.

MA HB 751 & SB 1167 - Spay and Neuter of Cats
This bill requires that all cats over the age of six months be spayed or neutered, unless the owner of such cat(s) possesses a permit for such exemption. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 1583 - Pet Trusts
This bill allows for the creation of pet trusts. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 147 - Basic Pet Care
This bill requires that all pet shops provide free basic pet care information on all mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and amphibians sold on the premises. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 224 - Warranty for Dogs and Cats
This bill requires pet shops to cover veterinarian costs of up to $2,000 to treat a dog or cat, or provide a substitution, or provide a full refund (of the purchase price) to any purchaser who within 14 days has the animal examined by a veterinarian, where the exam denotes that the animal has a congenital disorder. The purchaser must present the animal and veterinarian's statement within two business days of the examination. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 1197 - Regulation of Animal Shelters
This bill requires shelters and rescue organizations to register with the state of Massachusetts, keep records, and isolate animals coming from outside the state. It also allows shelters and rescues to partner with pet shops and pet supply stores to adopt out animals. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 1787 - Spay/Neuter Fund
This bill creates a (voluntary tax check off) fund, from which will assist residents with affordable spays/neuters for their dogs and cats. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 2450 - Animal Control
This bill requires all dogs or cats brought into or sold in the Commonwealth to be accompanied by an official health certificate issued by an accredited veterinarian; increases fines; improves mandatory spay/neuter laws. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 957 - Prevents Breed-Specific Insurance Discrimination
This bill prevents breed-specific insurance discrimination. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA HB 1941 - Pet Shops and Puppy Mills
This bill requires pet shops to list on the cage of each dog, the state of origin of the dog offered for sale, establishes a toll free number for the reporting of sick animals, to be prominently displayed in all licensed pet shops. Failure to obtain a license will result in a fine of $5,000. Breeder will be issued an immediate cease and desist order until such time as the proper license has been obtained, which may require an inspection of said breeder's premises.

MA SB 2002 - Treatment of Elephants
This bill prohibits any person who houses, possesses or travels with elephants in Massachusetts, to use any implement that would result in physical harm or keep the elephants constantly restrained by chain or similar device. The bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.

MA SB 2273 - Internet Hunting
This bill prohibits Internet hunting. This bill is pending, scheduled for a 2009 session.




S2624 - was S2450 - 2008, which would, among other things, prohibit cities and towns from declaring a dog dangerous based solely on its breed. S 2624 was engrossed (passed the Senate) and was sent to the House Ways and Means committee on 12/22/08.

Boston - (1/11/09) - Massachusetts' animal anti-cruelty laws are being updated for the Internet age. Under a bill signed by Gov. Deval Patrick, anyone who creates images or movies of animal fights and posts them on the web now faces a fine of up to $500 or a year in prison. The penalties extend to anyone who buys or rents the images. Anyone found selling the images faces a $1,000 fine or two years in prison. The law also toughens the state's existing penalties for those who sponsor or attend animal fights. Those penalties jump from $250 and a month in prison to a $1,000 fine and up to five years in prison.

Groton - (1/9/09) - To make it easy for dog owners, the town clerk's office will be including a dog registration form in the same mailing as town census forms to be sent out in the coming week. "We keep the information in a database," said Bouchard. All dogs are required by state law to be registered with the town in which they reside. Dog owners must have proof of a current rabies vaccination for their dog(s), or have unexpired rabies information on file with the town. "State law and the Groton town ordinances give the authority to register a dog with a normal fee of $10 for a neutered or spayed dog and $15 for an unaltered dog," said Bouchard. "Groton's bylaws authorize a late fee of $15 to dog owners with pets that are not registered by March 1. That's in addition to the regular registration fee. Residents over 70 can register their dogs for free. So we certainly encourage people to recognize the need for public safety and to register their dogs before March 1."

Lowell - (1/14/09) - An hour of passionate lobbying from animal advocates convinced the City Council to delay a vote on a proposed pit-bull ordinance last night. The ordinance, patterned after similar laws adopted by the Boston City Council in 2004, restricts dog owners to a maximum of two pit bulls per residence, with the exception of puppies less than 9 weeks old; pit bulls must be properly registered and licensed, spayed or neutered, and muzzled when off the owner's private property; they will also be prohibited from the city dog park. Pit-bull owners would be required to post a "Beware of pit bull" sign on their residence that is visible from the roadway and would not be allowed to keep the windows of their homes open, for fear that the dog may jump through the screen. Those who violate the ordinance will be fined $200 for the first offense and $300 for each subsequent offense. The Council voted unanimously to delay the vote in order to take representatives from the MSPCA, Humane Society, Lowell Unleashed and others up on their offer to work with the city to formulate an ordinance that will work best for all residents.



Newton- (1/15/09) - The Board of Aldermen next week will take up a proposal to set the fine at a flat $50 for violating city leash laws. The fine used to be graduated per offense, starting at $25 and moving up to $35, but the advent of dog parks means residents have less of an excuse to break the law, according to Alderman Marcia Johnson. Police previously told aldermen that current fines were not enough to deter unleashed dogs.



MICHIGAN - 2009 Legislature opened Jan 14, 2009

Jackson County - (1/17/09) - Commissioners Tuesday will review a committee's report that recommends the sheriff continue to supervise Animal Control's enforcement operations, but suggests that management of the animal shelter be transferred to county administration. "The sheriff's responsibility will end at the front door of the shelter," said county Commissioner Earl Poleski, chairman of the committee. County Administrator Randy Treacher said he will suggest shelter operations be turned over to the county Health Department if commissioners decide to follow the committee recommendation.





MINNESOTA - 2009 Legislature Session opened Jan 6, 2009

SF0007 - A bill for an act relating to animals; providing standards of care for dog and cat breeders; authorizing rulemaking; providing criminal penalties; appropriating money; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 347.
Referred to Agriculture and Veterans Committee

Burnsville - (1/15/09) - City Hall was peppered with e-mail from all over the country from people rooting for the boy after he and his family learned Burnsville did not allow the birds. A neighbor had complained about the boy's seven chickens, prompting an animal control officer to visit the Remund home in September. At a council meeting in October, Stefan pleaded with the council and soon became a chicken-owning celebrity. He gave interviews to newspapers and a radio station. And he gave three of his chickens to an Arden Hills girl whose chickens had been killed by a dog or other animal. Tuesday night, the boy perched nervously on the edge of his chair as city leaders discussed changing the city ordinance to allow chickens.

St. Paul - (1/5/09) - Pet breeding: Several Minnesota groups hope to convince the Legislature to ban puppy mills. The proposed legislation would give the state the authority to license, inspect and regulate the dog- and cat-breeding industry in Minnesota or delegate that authority to a city or county. At least two groups AnimalFolksMN and Animal Ark, a no-kill animal welfare organization are publicly supporting the proposal.

Tower - (1/15/09) - Keeping five cats puts Edwards in conflict with the citys animal control ordinance, which limits the number of cats at a Tower house to three. She came to the Tower City Council in December, bringing along one of her disabled cats, asking for an exemption to the city ordinance, but the council was unwilling to grant that request. The council directed the Breitung Police to allow the cats to remain while the issue was being settled. At Januarys meeting, the council looked over a sample ordinance that would provide a new type of animal license, called a multi-pet residence license. The council took no action on the ordinance, but will look at ways to adapt the ordinance for Tower.

Twin Cities- (1/13/09) - Despite putting the puppy mill issue on the cover of its winter promotional magazine and encouraging supporters to endorse its Puppy and Kitten Mill Bill, the Animal Humane Society refused to discuss the details of its proposed legislation. Spokeswoman Laurie Brickley said in early December that the organization is still working with its partners to finalize the language. In promotional materials, AHS indicates that they are reintroducing a bill they worked on last year that would set care standards at commercial breeding facilities, increase inspections, and require state licensing. For months, staff at Animal Ark has worked with the Minnesota Purebred Association and state veterinary groups to tackle the program strategically. "If you take the idea that all breeding is bad, then you have cut out a very critical and important stakeholder with a large voice at the Legislature," says Fry. "The small breeders are very responsible and most have the same desires and goals that we do. The failure to include them in the planning for previous bills has really been bad. It's caused massive opposition, yet that's what they keep doing over and over again, and that's why they keep failing and failing." Instead of defining commercial breeding facilities with a number, Animal Ark's bill would work to finance and enforce current state cruelty laws.



MISSISSIPPI

No Report for Mississippi



MISSOURI - State Legislature began January 7. 2009

State Rep. Jim Viebrock (12/27/08) - plans to resurrect a controversial bill requiring a veterinarian to inspect farm animals suspected of being abused before authorities can impound the animal. This will be the fourth straight year Viebrock has pursued reforms to the way state and local government authorities can seize animals from an owner when there are allegations of abuse. Viebrock, R-Republic, said he intends to file the bill for the 2009 legislation session, which begins Jan. 7. By bringing in an impartial state veterinarian from the Department of Agriculture to inspect an animal, Viebrock's bill aims to curtail abuse of the system by some animal rescue groups that reportedly inject themselves into alleged abuse cases for the chance to sell and profit from the animals. "People believe that the animal rights activists are all good-natured, big-hearted people," he said. In some cases in Missouri and across the country, Viebrock said, owners have been acquitted of animal abuse charges, but their herds have already been sold off by the government or given away to animal sanctuaries.

Fayette - Proposed BSL to be voted on, Jan. 6, 7 PM. Fayette city clerk, the Board of Aldermen will vote on a proposed pit bull ban during the Jan. 6 council meeting. UPDATE: city council unanimously passed an ordinance banning "pit bulls" at the city council meeting on Tuesday, January 6, 2009. The ordinance has a grandfather clause, and those who already own pit bulls will be allowed to keep their dogs as long as they are registered with the city and "properly controlled."

Pilot Grove - At the December meeting, the city council had instructed Mayor Dennis Knipp to have city counselor Mike Conway draft an ordinance banning five different breeds of potentially vicious. New ordinance would ban five of those. They include: Pit bull; Chinesischer Kampfhund (Chinese fighting dog), otherwise known as a Shar Pei; Chow; Doberman; and Rottweiler



MONTANA - 2009 Legislature Session opened Jan 5, 2009

HB 191 - A BILL FOR AN ACT ENTITLED: "AN ACT REGULATING PIT BULLS; PROHIBITING OWNERSHIP OF PIT BULLS AFTER A CERTAIN DATE; ALLOWING EXCEPTIONS; AND PROVIDING AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE." Referred to Committee on Local Government - 01/07/2009 UPDATE: (1/17/09) - The Local Government Committee has scheduled the hearing for Montana HB 191, which will ban pit bulls statewide. When: Thursday, Jan. 22, 3 PM Where: Room 172

Billings - (1/3/09) -

Some cases similar to the confiscation of the around 200 dogs in Ballantine have led to action in the state legislature. A Missoula representative is now calling for inspections of commercial dog breeding facilities, saying it would stop puppy mills in Montana. Dave Pauli of the Humane Society of the United States helped out last week and also aided in confiscating nearly 100 dogs from Linda Kapsa's property in 1992. Pauli and Representative Dave McAlpine of Missoula wrote a bill that would require annual inspections of commercial dog breeding facilities. A similar bill failed in 2007, so McAlpin made a slight change to the 2009 bill. The plan is to have breeders buy a license that would pay for inspections. "It's not a big brother bill, it's just saying when you when reach those numbers, it's a fine line to impacting public health and safety" said McAlpin. Pauli says that legislators have introduced six additional "animal bills" for the 2009 session. UPDATE: (1/18/09) - We are targeting people who breed large numbers of dogs without respect to genetics, without regard to the age of the female dog; who breed dogs on their first heat and every heat, until the dog is no longer producing and is then discarded, Prato said. Responsible breeders are the ones who breed to improve the breed, not to propagate the breed.








Billings - (12/27/08) - With close to 10 million horses in the nation, Montana horse owners and enthusiasts are concerned about the welfare of the equine industry if legislation is passed banning the transport of horses to slaughter facilities. H.R. 6598, the Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008, would ban the transportation of horses to slaughter, making it a federal crime, explained Nancy Schlepp of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation during its equine seminar on Nov. 9 in Billings, Mont. It would also affect the transportation of horses in general, such as to rodeos, ranches or for hunting. Horses have been transported to slaughter facilities in Canada and Mexico since the Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruling shut down the Texas horse slaughter plants, and the Seventh Circuit Federal Court of Appeals shut down the plant in Illinois. Now, animal rights activists, such as the Humane Society of the United States, have been pushing for the passage of this bill, H.R. 6598, to further prevent horse slaughter, which they claim is an act of cruelty.































NEBRASKA - - The 101st Legislature opened Jan 7, 2009

No Report for Nebraska




NEVADA - The 75th Legislature opens Feb. 2, 2009

NV BDR 778
Session: 2009 (2/2/09 thru 6/1/09 Prefiled)
Sponsor: Breeden
Summary:
Requires licensing of dog breeders.
History:
12/12/2008 Bill Draft requested

*** No action taken to move this BDR to the Legislative floor at this time. It can be called to the floor anytime during the legislative session



NEW HAMPSHIRE - The 161st Session opened Jan 7, 2009

HB0059 - AN ACT requiring employers of employees with service dogs to place signs prohibiting animals other than service dogs. HOUSE COMMERCE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS

HB0148 - AN ACT relative to the sale and vaccination of animals. ANALYSIS This bill requires that applicants for a license to transfer household pets provide proof of conformity with municipal zoning regulations before issuance of a license. HOUSE ENVIRONMENT AND AGRICULTURE

HB0220 - AN ACT relative to civil proceedings for forfeiture of animals. ANALYSIS This bill requires that animals be taken into custody when a person is charged with cruelty to animals. HOUSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE

HB0247 - AN ACT relative to the assistance of the state veterinarian with the investigation and enforcement of animal abuse laws. HOUSE COMMITTEE ENVIRONMENT AND AGRICULTURE

HB0278 - AN ACT relative to the penalty for mistreating service animals. HOUSE CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY

HB0337 - AN ACT permitting the issue of temporary licenses for certain sellers of animals. COMMITTEE: Executive Departments and Administration

SB0019 - AN ACT relative to government immunity from lawsuits for municipal dog
parks.
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE


Ogunquit - (1/8/09) - Things got a little testy Tuesday as selectmen considered resident John Mixon's request to expedite the processing of his citizen's petition concerning changes to town ordinances governing dogs. Mixon filed a petition that would liberalize dog owners' ability to demonstrate an animal is under voice control, so that approved dogs may be walked without a leash around town. Selectmen accepted the petition and agreed to consider it at the June Town Meeting. Mixon wants the changes put to a vote sooner.


Rye - (1/7/09) - Voters at the town's deliberative session will be asked to consider changes to the ordinance governing dogs on the beaches. The changes would add one hour in the morning for dogs to run off-leash and require leashes during two hours in the evening. The changes would affect summer months only, from the first Saturday before Memorial Day to Oct. 1. Currently, unleashed dogs are not allowed on the beach in the summer from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. The proposed changes would allow unleashed dogs until 9 each morning, but also require dogs to be leashed from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. The changes must be approved by voters on March 10 to take effect. As an SB2 town, voters could change the wording of the proposed ordinance at the Jan. 31 deliberative session.



NEW JERSEY

AB3335 - An Act establishing animal cruelty assistant county prosecutors, supplementing Title 2C of the New Jersey Statutes and chapter 22 of Title 4 of the Revised Statutes, and amending P.L.1966, c.37. SYNOPSIS Requires animal cruelty training for selected assistant county prosecutors and tracking of animal cruelty cases in State uniform crime reporting system; directs AG to issue prosecutor guidelines for animal cruelty cases. STATEMENT This bill requires each county prosecutor to have one or more assistant county prosecutors specially trained in matters of animal cruelty, the State animal cruelty laws, and the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. The bill provides that this training would be prescribed by the Attorney General, in consultation with the Humane Society University of the Humane Society of the United States. The Humane Society University has a prosecutor training program. The bill also requires the Attorney General to issue a checklist for animal cruelty cases for, and distribute them to, county and municipal prosecutors. The bill further requires that the uniform crime reporting system established by P.L.1966, c.37 (C.52:17B-5.1 et seq.) include tracking of animal cruelty offenses and violations. Finally, the bill authorizes the Attorney General to issue guidelines and adopt regulations that may be necessary for implementing the act.

A3539- An Act concerning animal cruelty, supplementing Title 4 of the Revised Statutes and amending R.S.4:22-26. 1. (New section) a. No person shall cruelly restrain a dog. A person cruelly restrains a dog if the person:
(1) chains, ties, fastens or otherwise tethers a dog to a dog house, tree, stake, pole, fence, wall or any other stationary object for more than three hours in a 24-hour period;
(2) regardless of how long a period of time, chains, ties, fastens or otherwise tethers a dog with any collar or similar device other than a properly fitted harness or buckle-type collar for the dog; or
(3) regardless of how long a period of time, uses a choke or prong collar on the dog when chaining, tying, fastening or otherwise tethering the dog.
b. It is an affirmative defense to prosecution for cruel restraint of a dog that the actor:
(1) had a reasonable basis for the restraining of the dog;
(2) restrained the dog with a properly fitted harness or buckle-type collar; and
(3) did not use a choke or prong collar to restrain the dog.
c. Nothing in this act shall be construed to prohibit a person from chaining, tying, fastening or otherwise tethering a dog to a running line, pulley, or trolley system, provided the dog is not attached to the running line, pulley or trolley system with a choke or prong collar.





NEW MEXICO - 2009 Legislative session opened Jan 20 - adjourns Mar 21. 2009

Silver City - (1/15/09) - Town councilors got an earful Tuesday night at their first regular meeting of the new year. Residents had complaints about cruelty to animals and barking dogs. There was a plea to the council for help in getting a "starving and abused" dog rescued. Attempts to get help for the dog were mde by calling everyone from animal control to the police. "I will see to the dog immediately," Councilor Thomas Nupp said. "Our animal control ordinance is lacking." Several others at the meeting complained to the council about barking dogs. The chairman of the noise ordinance committee commented that the town can expect to see a drafted ordinance this year.





NEW YORK

S00093 - AN ACT to amend the insurance law, in relation to prohibiting insurers from canceling, refusing to issue or renew, or charging higher premiums for homeowners` insurance based on the breed of dog owned if the dog completes an approved obedience course.

Fenner - Discussion of the possibility of enacting a noise ordinance in Fenner died in November when Councilman Hank Stoker suggested the Fenner Town Council should stop talking around the issue and cut to the chase: The town has a dog problem, and the council should propose an appropriate ordinance to combat it. The matter was tabled to the December meeting to allow Supervisor Russell Hammond to consult with representatives from the Madison County Board of Elections to determine how it is done. Cary (article does not say who Cary is) returned to the board Dec. 10 with the news that they should have an attorney draft the wording for the ballot so it doesn't sound slanted. "It should be written in neutral language."



NORTH CAROLINA

Chapel Hill - (1/9/09) - A town memo written by Police Chief Brian Curran and legal advisor Terri Gale recommend that Town Council members take no action on a citizen petition asking that felines be treated the same as dogs under the town leash ordinance. The town ordinance that covers restraint of animals that are not in custody of an owner refers to dogs but not cats.

Durham - (1/6/09) - Many pet owners in Durham County are in for a surprise this week as they receive forms to declare their taxable property for 2009. A previously little-known ordinance that charges pet owners $10 per spayed and neutered cat and dog and $75 per unaltered animal is being collected by the Durham County Tax Administration Office this year, meaning higher penalties for those who get caught not paying the bill. Residents must list cats and dogs four months and older. The listing is required of both individuals and kennels. The Durham County Animal Ordinance, unknown to many, if not most pet owners in the county, has been on the books since 1990 and was previously managed and enforced by Durham County Animal Control. The ordinance requires the owner of every dog or cat that is kept within the territorial boundaries of the county for more than 30 days to list the animal with the Durham County Tax Administrator, within 30 days of bringing the animal into the county. The Tax Administration will have more muscles to flex when it comes to enforcement of the ordinance. The county could collect more than $1 million in revenue from the ordinance, all of which will go into the general fund. "If they're delinquent, they'll get a delinquent bill asking them to pay before we start enforcement actions," Simpson said. "If you owe taxes, then your income tax refund from the state can be attached and we can garnish wages." Residents have until Feb. 2 to list their individual and business property for tax.

Gaston County - (1/9/09) - Gaston County Commissioners are considering a mandatory spay-neuter program. The suggestion came after a heated and emotional debate between animal advocates and the county animal control Thursday night. "All the passion thats involved, its bringing animal related issues to the forefront to the commissioners, as well as ours, it can only mean good things for the animal community," said Reggie Horton of Gaston County Animal Control. Over the next month, commissioners will consider that mandatory spay-neuter program. Both sides also agree a new shelter is badly needed.

Nashville- (1/15/09) - The North Carolina Court of Appeals on Thursday heard a case involving a pet ordinance that a Nashville dog owner says is unconstitutional. Adele Maynard was charged and convicted in 2006 of violating the town's rule, which allows three pets per household. Maynard has six collies and lives in a home her family has owned for generations. Her attorney, Daniel Reade, says that just limiting the number of pets doesn't really address the issue which he says is whether the dogs are noisy or dangerous. "(The ordinance) doesn't say anything about the size of the dogs, the propensity of the dogs, the way the dogs are kept," Reade said. But an attorney representing the town argued in court Thursday that it limits the number of dogs to protect all of its citizens. Town leaders believe they acted responsibly and within their rights. State law allows municipalities to limit the number of pets, regardless of whether the animals prove to be a public nuisance. If the Court of Appeals agrees that limiting the number of dogs is unconstitutional, the ruling could overturn all similar pet ordinances throughout North Carolina.

Pasquotank County - (1/9/09) - Landowner Ike Jackson stood up to make a final argument before a Pasquotank County committee that has debated for a year over what to do about hunting deer with dogs. After describing damage caused by dogs chasing deer through his cattle farm over more than 40 years, he called for a ban on the practice in Pasquotank County. Hunter Bobby Harris, president of the Albemarle Houndsmen Association, responded. Over the next 90 minutes, three county commissioners; Jackson and a small group of landowners; hunters who use dogs; and two wildlife enforcement officers discussed the issue. In the end, three commissioners voted Tuesday to send six options to the full board in February, ranging from a total ban to taking no action. In between were four choices that compromised with both sides. A public hearing will be held soon.



NORTH DAKOTA - The 61st Legislative Assembly opened Jan 6, 2009

No Report for North Dakota



OHIO - 2009 Legislative session began Jan 5, 2009


Montgomery County - (1/14/09) - Montgomery County Auditor Karl L. Keith is reminding Montgomery County dog owners that it is time to renew your dogs license. Each year, between December 1 through January 31, dog owners register their dogs with local authorities to ensure a safe trip if their dog is lost, stolen or missing. State law requires every dog older than three months to have a license.





OKLAHOMA - The 161st Legislature opened Jan. 7, 2009

HB 1045 - An Act relating to animals; amending 4 O.S. 2001, Section 43, which relates to regulation and control of dogs running at large; eliminating certain population restriction; and providing an effective date

McAlester - (1/9/09) - When Jared Holbirds pit bull got loose a year and a half ago and was picked up by the city dog catcher, the pet owner was happy to get her back. He paid his fine, picked her up from the animal shelter, and made sure everyone in his household knew to let the dog out through the back door, and not the front door. So he was surprised last week when an animal control officer threatened to cite him for keeping his dog in the yard. City ordinances require animal owners to keep their unspayed female pets indoors while they are in heat. Chapter 10 of the McAlester City Code deals with animals, and a female dog in heat is defined as a nuisance. Section 10-4 of the code states It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or harbor an animal which is determined to be a nuisance. Section 10-75 of the code deals with female dogs and cats and states: Every female dog or cat in season shall be kept confined in a building or secure enclosure, or in a veterinary hospital or boarding kennel, in such a manner that such female dog or cat cannot come in contact with another animal except for controlled breeding purposes. The way I read it, if your dog comes in heat, you might ought to take it to a vet or put it inside, said the police chief, whose department includes two animal control officers. Technically, (if an owner) lets the dog out into his yard to go to the bathroom, and its fenced, hes in violation.




Norman - (1/13/09) - After reviewing and suggesting changes to the city's animal welfare ordinance, the Animal Welfare Division is hosting public meetings to seek feedback and comments concerning the proposed changes. A proposed language change would change the division's name from Animal Control to Animal Welfare. Businesses and residences that have kennel licenses -- 34 in all -- are only required one inspection during the application process, with no follow-up checks. The proposed change would require a "random inspection at least once a year. Discussion also included establishing a limit to the number of dogs and cats residents may own. Also under the proposal, anyone owning more than five cats would be required to obtain a kennel license. Proposed changes would be for the city to establish a limit of two dogs and three cats owned by each residence, if the animals were unaltered. Having the pets neutered or spayed would allow residents to own four dogs and five cats -- possibly six cats. Pet cats roaming free would be required to be altered and wear collars and licenses -- possibly microchips. The proposed changes also would alter the duties of Animal Welfare officers, to allow inspection of licensed kennel locations. Currently there are only four Animal Control officers in Norman.
Discussion also included animal cruelty issues, and an ordinance to prohibit pet confinement in unventilated vehicles.
· Confinement of dogs and cats, to restrict unaltered cats from being allowed to run at large.
· Disposition of animals, allowing a feral dog or cat to be euthanized without observing the full five day waiting period.
· Deposit of waste material, which requires a person in charge of a dog to clean up and properly dispose of waste the dog deposits on public or unauthorized private property.
Any input will be reviewed with feedback from other meetings before the final draft ordinance changes are proposed to the City Council.






OREGON - The 75th Legislature convened Jan. 12, 2009


(1/10/09) - As the 2009 Oregon Legislature convenes - lawmakers will be asked for sweeping increases in every hunting and angling license and tag the state sells -- and a few new ones as well. Included in the request from the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is a doubling of fishing and hunting surcharges already assessed on license sales. These surcharges are used to enhance and restore fisheries and habitat and to buy access for public hunting. The department wants to extend the programs (due to sunset in 2010) through 2019 and increase benefits to hunters, anglers and wildlife. Agency officials propose an increase in their current $270 million biennium budget to $300 million for 2009-11. More than one-third of it ($104 million) will depend on license and tag fees. Fees now make up $81 million of the department's budget income. The balance of revenue comes primarily from federal excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment and from the state's general fund. Curt Melcher, the department's deputy director, said most of the increase is necessary to maintain existing programs.


Molalla - In response to a Christmas day "pit bull" attack, Molalla Mayor John Atkins is considering whether the city should adopt a pit bull ordinance or, in the alternative, adopt a generic ordinance related to dangerous animals. UPDATE: (1/19/09) - Concerned local citizens as well as several out-of-towners showed up at the Molalla City Council's meeting Wednesday night to voice their opinions about adopting a breed-specific dog ban in the city. A memo to the council prepared by city manager John Atkins listed several options for updating the city's laws against aggressive dogs. Although the memo included information on banning certain breeds of dogs from the city, Atkins did not recommend that course of action. The council voted to update its aggressive dog ordinance -- adopted in 1974 -- to bring it in line with current Oregon laws regarding aggressive dogs. The council also adopted a resolution officially naming Clackamas County as the city's dog control agency. The county served that role on an unofficial basis previously.



PENNSYLVANIA

Lancaster - (1/11/09) - In the past 30 days, more than 100 dogs have been brought to the Humane League of Lancaster County. Most of the dogs are from area kennels, struggling to comply with the state's new dog law. It's put the shelter in an unusual position: loving the new law, but needing to make extraordinary provisions. The Humane League is asking kennel owners and others to wait until next month to "surrender" their animals.



RHODE ISLAND - 2009 Legislative session began Jan. 6, 2009

No Report for Rhode Island



SOUTH CAROLINA - The 118th General Assembly convened Jan 13, 2009

Columbia - HSUS has set Feb 4, 2009 as Lobby Day. DO NOT let them be the only voice
heard by your legislators. Call your state representative and make an appointment. http://www.scstatehouse.gov/

04 February 2009 10:00am - South Carolina Humane Lobby Day- Blatt Building, Room #101
Capitol Complex, Columbia, SC HOSTED BY: Jessica Feingold Lieberson, Grassroots Coordinator



H 3004 - TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 7 TO CHAPTER 6, TITLE 23 SO AS TO CREATE THE NATURAL RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT
DIVISION WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND TO TRANSFER TO THE
DIVISION CERTAIN POWERS AND ASSETS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,
AMONG OTHER THINGS;
12/09/08 House Prefiled
12/09/08 House Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural
Resources and Environmental Affairs
01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-17
01/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural
Resources and Environmental Affairs HJ-19

Section 23-6-370. (A)An enforcement officer, deputy enforcement officer, or officer deputized by the department pursuant to Section 27-16-70(C)(2): (1)shall enforce the laws of the State related to natural resources as provided in Title 50 and prosecute a person who violates these laws; (2) has statewide jurisdiction;(3) has the same power and authority held and exercised by: (a) a constable at common law and under the laws of this State; and (b) an inspector as provided by Chapter 5, Title 50; and (4) may use an official summons for violations of a law or regulation of the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, the State Forestry Commission, or the Department of Health and Environmental Control pertaining to shellfish, trespass, and: (c) malicious injury to animalsor personal property, Section 16-11-510; (q) inhumane treatment to animals, Section 47-1-40.



H 3013 - TO AMEND SECTION 16-11-650, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE OFFENSE OF REMOVING OR DESTROYING FENCES, GATES, OR OTHER BARRIERS ENCLOSING ANIMALS, CROPS, OR UNCULTIVATED LANDS, SO AS TO REVISE THE ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE AND INCREASE PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS AND TO VEST JURISDICTION TO HEAR AND DISPOSE OF THIS OFFENSE IN MAGISTRATES COURT.
12/09/08 House Prefiled
12/09/08 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary
01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-21
01/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary HJ-22



H 3117 - To amend section 20-4-60, as amended, code of laws of South Carolina, 1976, relating to an order for protection from domestic abuse, to provide the temporary possession of personal property, the court may order the temporary possession of pet animals.
12/09/08 House prefiled
H 3154 - TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, SO AS TO ENACT "THESOUTH CAROLINA AGRICULTURAL ASSESSMENT REFORM ACT OF 2009"; TO AMEND SECTION12-43-217, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO REASSESSMENT OF REAL PROPERTY EVERY FIVEYEARS, SO AS TO LIMIT A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE IN THE YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION OFREVISED AGRICULTURAL USE STANDARDS 12/16/08 House Prefiled 12/16/08 House Referred to Committee on Ways and Means 01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-68 01/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Ways and Means HJ-69H 3197 - TO AMEND SECTION 44-1-20, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976,RELATING TO THE SUPERVISION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTALCONTROL BY THE BOARD OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, SO AS TO DELETEREFERENCES TO THE BOARD AND INSTEAD PROVIDE THE DEPARTMENT MUST BE MANAGED ANDOPERATED BY A DIRECTOR APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR UPON THE ADVICE AND CONSENTOF THE SENATE AND SUBJECT TO REMOVAL BY THE GOVERNOR; 12/16/08 House Prefiled12/16/08 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary01/13/09 House Introduced and read first time HJ-8601/13/09 House Referred to Committee on Judiciary HJ-86 H 3227 - TO AMEND SECTION 16-17-650,CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO COCKFIGHTING, SO AS TO INCREASE THE PENALTIES FOR THE OFFENSE.







H 3265 - A bill to amend section 47-1-40, as amended, code of laws of South Carolina, 1976, relating to the ill-treatment of animals, to clarify that the provisions of the section do not apply to the practice of veterinary medicine in accordance with accepted veterinary standards.01/14/09 House Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environmental Affairs 01/14/09 House Introduced and read first time S 102 - A bill to amend section 47-1-40, as amended, code of laws of South Carolina, 1976, relating to the ill-treatment of animals, to clarify that the provisions of the section do not apply to the practice of veterinary medicine in accordance with accepted veterinary standards.01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time 12/10/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 12/10/08 Senate Prefiled S 104 - TO AMEND TITLE 46 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO AGRICULTURE, BY ADDINGCHAPTER 53, TO LIMIT THE LIABILITY THAT AN AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL MAY INCURDUE TO AN INJURY OR DEATH SUFFERED BY A PARTICIPANT IN AN AGRITOURISMACTIVITY, TO PROVIDE THAT AN AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL MUST POST A WARNINGNOTICE AT THE AGRITOURISM FACILITY, TO PROVIDE THAT WARNING NOTICES MUST BEINCLUDED IN CONTRACTS THE AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL ENTERS INTO WITHPARTICIPANTS, AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE AGRITOURISM PROFESSIONAL'S LIABILITY ISNOT LIMITED IF THE PROPER WARNING NOTICES ARE NOT PROVIDED TO PARTICIPANTS. 12/10/08 Senate Prefiled 12/10/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time SJ-119 01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources SJ-119 S 177 - To amend section 50-11-310 of the 1976 code, relating to open season for antlered deer, to delete the prohibition of baiting for deer in games zones 1 and 2.01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time 12/10/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Fish, Game and Forestry 12/10/08 Senate Prefiled S 223 - TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING SECTION47-1-145, TO ENACT THE "PROVISIONS FOR COST OF ANIMAL CARE ACT OF 2009", TOPROVIDE THAT THE CUSTODIAN OF AN ANIMAL TAKEN INTO CUSTODY DUE TO CIVIL ORCRIMINAL VIOLATIONS BY ITS OWNER MAY PETITION THE COURT FOR EXPENSES RELATEDTO PROVIDING CARE TO THE ANIMAL, TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR HEARING SUCHPETITIONS AND FOR THE COLLECTION AND USE OF FUNDS ORDERED TO BE PAID, TOPROVIDE THAT A PERSON WHO FAILS TO PAY SUCH FUNDS FORFEITS RIGHTS OF OWNERSHIPTO THE ANIMAL, TO PROVIDE FOR THE DISPOSITION OF SUCH AN ANIMAL, AND TOPROVIDE FOR THE RETURN OF FUNDS WHEN A PERSON IS NOT FOUND TO BE IN VIOLATION;TO AMEND SECTION 47-1-130, RELATING TO CRUELTY TO ANIMALS, TO PROVIDE THATAGENTS OF THE SOUTH CAROLINA SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS,OR ANY OTHER SOCIETY DULY INCORPORATED FOR THAT PURPOSE, MAY ASSIST WITH ALAWFUL INVESTIGATION OF THIS CHAPTER, BUT MAY ONLY EFFECTUATE AN ARREST OF APERSON IF THEY HAVE BEEN VESTED WITH THE POWER TO ARREST BY A SHERIFF OR THEGOVERNING BODY OF A COUNTY OR MUNICIPALITY; AND TO AMEND SECTION 47-1-140,RELATING TO NOTICE PROVIDED TO THE OWNER OF ANIMALS WHICH HAVE BEEN SEIZEDFROM OTHERS UPON ARREST, TO REMOVE SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR AGENTS OF THE SOUTHCAROLINA SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS, OR ANY OTHERSOCIETY DULY INCORPORATED FOR THAT PURPOSE. 12/17/08 Senate Prefiled 12/17/08 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources 01/13/09 Senate Introduced and read first time SJ-185 01/13/09 Senate Referred to Committee on Agriculture and Natural Resources SJ-185 Greer - (1/6/09) - The new year brings major changes to Greer residents who keep pets or live near them. Mayor Rick Danner said that not all City Council members oppose tethering dogs. The resulting compromise didn't spell out a time limit and simply banned "permanent" tethering, he said, adding that it may be difficult to enforce. Under changes to the ordinance, people who complain of nuisance barking will need to fill out a form including the dates and duration of the violation.Danner said the ordinance asks complainants to be more responsive. He said in the past,neighbors have freely offered information about barking dogs, but haven't necessarily been open to helping the city make a case, which has resulted in a judge throwing it out of court. A festival-goer bitten by a dog at last year's Oktoberfest was the impetus for changing the animal ordinance, the mayor said. "The original intent . . . was to add that section prohibiting animals in a public setting, realizing that we'd be having more and more events downtown particularly as the (downtown city) park opened and to look at protecting the citizens," he said. Leashed dogs still will be allowed in parks but not during events, including sports, he said. The council has adopted, and the mayor and city attorney have signed the revised animal ordinance, according to City Attorney John Duggan."Technically, it's in effect," he said. He expected the Police Department could start enforcing it as soon as copies were disseminated.

SOUTH DAKOTA
Tea - (1/11/09) - UPDATE - Tea might rescind its ban on pit bulls in favor of rules requiring dog owners to spay or neuter their animals and purchase liability insurance. The City Council voted 4-2 earlier this week in favor of writing a new ordinance to deal with pit bulls and possibly place restrictions on other breeds of large dog. Council member Herman Otten said he's convinced that spaying or neutering animals decreases their aggression, and he says requiring the procedure would be preferable to an outright ban. Otten also would expect the owners of pit bulls and breeds crossed with wolves to carry liability insurance of more than $100,000, initially suggesting that owners have $500,000 of coverage. Fowlds, Otten and Joe Weis will form a committee to draft an ordinance. Otten brought a list of restrictions culled from various municipalities to the meeting Monday and said that many of them could end up in a new ordinance. In addition to pit bull regulations, the rules could place restrictions on chows, Dobermans, German shepherds and Rottweilers. Otten's list of proposals included one to forbid felons from owning those breeds.



TENNESSEE - 2009 Legislature session opened Jan. 12, 2009

Henry - (1/14/09) - Henrys Mayor and Board of Aldermen learned Tuesday night that the city plans to start enforcing an existing stray dog ordinance by citing dog owners into city court. The announcement was made during a staff report by Edward Bush, the citys public works director.
Were not going to chase dogs this year, Bush said. Weve been really nice to the public, weve warned them when new people have come into town, weve warned them. Were not doing that this year. Bush said from now on he would be citing dog owners, unless he was told otherwise by Henry Mayor Joe Qualls. Henry Police Chief Mark Herndon said the stray dogs were a safety hazard, particularly on Highway 79 where motorists are often traveling at 70-80 mph. A drivers first impulse when an animal crosses his or her path is to swerve, which at those speeds could result in a fatal accident, Herndon said. The dog is not worth a human life, he said.

Nashville - (1/4/09) - When state lawmakers return to Capitol Hill next week they will file several new bills aimed at improving life in Tennessee. Two pieces of new legislation involves the sale of puppies and the other addresses animal cruelty. State lawmakers want to join 37 other states and make cockfighting a felony. A cockfighting ring was recently dismantled in Nashville. Making it a felony instead of a misdemeanor seems to make sense. But there's a chance money will override commonsense this year on Capitol Hill. The state is facing $1 billion shortfall. The same lawmaker that is trying to pass cockfighting legislation may have more luck with a bill that regulates puppy mills in Tennessee. "I am told that we are losing up to $3 million a year by not having them regulated at all," Sontany said. By regulating them, her legislation could bring millions of sales tax revenue back to Tennessee in these tough times. The Humane Society said the selling of puppies is big business in Tennessee. If anyone looks online every day prospective owners can find more than 10,000 ads for pups for sale in Tennessee. Many of the commercial breeders also are not regulated by the state. Lawmakers will go back into session next Tuesday. They will file new bills and most likely will nominate Republican Jason Mumpower as the new Speaker of the House.



TEXAS - Texas 81st Legislature opened Jan. 13, 2009

HB 435 - (12/19/08) - would amend the penal code to make theft of a pet a separately
codified offense, and allow a penalty of up to two years in prison to be
assessed to individuals who steal domesticated household pets including cats,
dogs, rodents, fish, reptiles or birds. Livestock and wildlife animals would not
be covered by the bill; theft of livestock and wild animals are covered in
other sections of Texas law. Under current Texas law, when people were prosecuted for stealing a family pet, they were typically prosecuted based on the value of the pet, since pets
are essentially considered chattle under Texas law. Consequently, theft of a prized , pedigreed, Golden Retriever with a significant retail could essentially mean that someone who was prosecuted for stealing that type of pet would be prosecuted differently than someone who stole a mixed-breed dog a family adopted from a local animal shelter. Thus, there was a significant disparity
that often made prosecution for theft of a pet fairly meaningless if the pet wasnt a pedigreed animal with a significant retail value. The legislation is likely crafted in response to a bizarre incident that
occurred in the Rio Grande Valley city of Alice earlier this year when the mayor of that city was prosecuted for allegedly stealing a neighbors dog. The bill would continue a trend by the Legislature to create additional offenses and penalties to those who harm domesticated animals.

Austin - (12/15/08) - Pit bulls and Rottweilers could become a hot topic down in Austin next year as lawmakers consider the pros and cons of allowing cities and counties to adopt ordinances restricting or banning certain breeds of dogs. Dallas state Rep. Tony Goolsby has put a spotlight on the issue by asking Attorney General Greg Abbott for an official opinion on whether cities and counties have the power to impose the restrictions. Goolsby argues in his request to Abbott that the law is unclear as to whether local governments can write ordinances addressing certain breeds; many local city officials have long assumed they lacked authority. Yet local governments havent ruled out targeting breeds and most will be paying attention if the issue is addressed in Austin next year. The Fort Worth City Council approved a legislative agenda for the upcoming session earlier this month that included monitoring dog breed specific legislation. Reid Rector, Fort Worths governmental relations director, said the city does not currently have a position on the issue.

Carthage - (1/14/09) - Commissioners approved an ordinance Monday that requires owners to keep their dogs within a fence. "We have seen over the past couple of years the number of complaints about roaming dogs increase," said City Manager Brenda Samford. "This ordinance will hopefully address the issue." Samford said the city still is examining how it will enforce the new ordinance. She said fines for violators have not been established.

Fort Worth - (1/19/09) - Should dangerous dogs be banned from North Texas? That's a question that lawmakers could soon be debating. The topic has some dog owners unleashing their thoughts.

Grayson County - (1/9/09) - No North Texas city has publicly advocated for outright bans of pit bulls or other breeds such as Rottweilers, chow chows and German shepherds. But leaders have pondered stricter regulations for those animals, such as mandatory microchipping, liability insurance requirements and taller fence standards.

Harker Heights - (1/18/09) - A dog-on-dog ordinance, which would allow dogs who attack other dogs to be declared dangerous, will be proposed to the Animal Advisory Committee in February, said Lt. Loretta Fox of the Harker Heights Police Department, which oversees the city's animal control. Fox said she plans to propose to the Animal Advisory Committee in February an ordinance to declare animals that attack other animals as dangerous. From there, it would be reviewed by Police Chief Mike Gentry and then go to the City Council. Dangerous dogs require warning signs, fences, proper securing, insurance and many other stipulations, Fox said.


HB 458 - AN ACT relating to limitations on the number of dogs at a residence in certain counties

San Marcos - is poised to join San Antonio as one of the few cities in the nation to require mandatory microchipping, tethering restrictions, pet limits (four dogs or a total of seven dogs and cats without a special city permit). New rabies vaccination rules. A microchip pet ID system. A ban on parking lot pet sales. UPDATE: (1/8/09) - The updated Animal Control Ordinance adopted in December will take effect on April 1. The citys Animal Services Department staff will hold a series of public meetings in January and February before the new ordinance takes effect to help residents understand the new rules. The other public meetings on the ordinance will be held Monday, Jan. 26 from 7 to 8:30 p.m. at the city council chambers, 630 E. Hopkins and Saturday, Feb. 7, from 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. in the city council chambers. The city says the new rules are aimed at conforming with state law and promoting responsible pet ownership. The ordinance changes a variety of local rules:
Requires rabies vaccinations once every three years instead of annually
Sets up a microchip program to provide one-time registration of pets
Bans selling or giving away animals on public property, private parking lots and flea markets
Restricts but does not outlaw tethering of animals
Sets up rules for managed feral cat colonies based on trap, vaccinate, alter, return and manage
Changes dog regulations to conform with state law, including increasing penalties for dog attacks
For information about the new rules, call the San Marcos Animal Shelter at 805-2650 or visit the Animal Services page on the Web at www.ci.san-marcos.tx.us UPDATE: (1/19/09) - The city strengthened its animal protection laws recently, becoming one of a few cities in the country to require microchips for pets, but it stopped short of banning the chaining of dogs because officials said they didn't want to burden residents financially.



UTAH - 2009 General Session opens Jan. 26, 2009

No Report for Utah



VERMONT

No report for Vermont



VIRGINIA - 2009 Regular Session convened Jan 14, 2009


There is a registry in the U.S. for sex offenders. One can search a database to see if there is an offender in your area. The registry has met with a great deal of controversy. In Virginia, there is an additional controversial registry: A dangerous dog database and you can search to see if a dangerous dog lives near you. To search a city or county in Virginia visit the Dangerous Dog Registry with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Are you on it?


HB1951 - Dangerous Dog Registry; authorizes use of copies of all
records, etc., associated therewith.

HB2321 - Dangerous dog; court may order owner to pay to any injured
person costs of medical care.

HB2097 - Animal shelters and pounds; administration of certain medications.

HB2263 - Oversight of animal control officers.

HB2364 - Dangerous or vicious dog; court may order owner to pay
restitution for damages to injured person.

HB2377 - Animals as prizes and gifts.

HB2381 - Protective orders; companion animals and livestock.

HB2393 - Animal control officers deemed law-enforcement officers.

HJ 661 - Feral cats; Dept. of Agriculture & Consumer Services to convene
workgroup to address issues.

SB897 - A BILL to amend and reenact § 3.2-6546 of the Code of Virginia, relating to companion animals
Referred to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources

SB931 - A BILL to amend and reenact § 3.2-6566 of the Code of Virginia, relating to animal cruelty Referred to Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources, (dubbed VA's ACO's "get out of jail free" card) - Each animal control officer, humane investigator or State Veterinarian's representative shall interfere to prevent the perpetration of any act of cruelty upon any animal in his presence and shall enjoy the protection of the Commonwealth's sovereign immunity for those actions taken in good faith and with reasonable cause. Any person who shall interfere with or obstruct or resist any animal control officer, humane investigator or State Veterinarian's representative in the discharge of his rights, powers, and duties as authorized and prescribed by law is guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor.

SB950 - A BILL to amend and reenact § 3.2-6540 of the Code of Virginia, relating to dangerous and vicious dogs.
Senate Committee on Agriculture, Conservation and Natural Resources

SB1151 - Companion animals; releasing agencies.

Martinsville - (12/17/08) - Henry County officials will extensively revise the countys noise
control ordinance, in part to control barking dogs. Two proposed ordinances prepared by County Attorney George Lyle were rejected by the Henry County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday. One could
have resulted in dogs that bark excessively being euthanized. Instead, the supervisors unanimously voted to have Lyle revise the existing ordinance so it will pertain to many types of extremely loud
noises.

Rocky Mount - (1/5/09) - Rocky Mount Town Councilman John Lester has proposed that the town look into the possibility of adopting a dog leash law. Lester told town council recently that the town may need a leash law. Rocky Mount does not have a leash law for dogs.


Virginia Beach - (1/6/09) - The new year brought newer and tougher laws to protect animals. Breeders and sellers are accountable for the animals in their care. The law is designed to crack down on puppy mills. The law took effect January 1. It limits the number of animals a person can have and breed to 30 females. It limits the ages for breeding between 18 months and eight years. It also requires animals be kept in floored cages, mandates an exercise regimen and veterinary care. Large commercial dog breeding operations must get a business license and submit to inspections by local animal control officers. Those operations now must meet strict record-keeping requirements.





WASHINGTON - 2009 Legislature Session convened Jan 12, 2009

Bellingham- (1/12/09) - A public hearing to discuss a proposed animal control ordinance and the restructuring of animal license fees, originally scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 13, has been postponed. The new date for the public hearing has not been set. The proposed ordinance would restructure license fees and create new permit fees for kennel owners and "animal enthusiasts," or those who own more than four dogs or cats, said Penny Cistaro, executive director of the Whatcom Humane Society. Kennel owners currently pay a flat fee of $65 for a kennel license. If the ordinance passes, kennel owners, or those who own more than 10 dogs or cats, would pay $125 to $200 for a permit fee and an $11 or $21 license fee per animal depending on whether the animal is spayed or neutered, Cistaro said. Under the ordinance, those with between five and 10 cats and/or dogs would pay a $65 permit fee plus the $11 or $21 license fee per animal. The ordinance also would allow animal control to inspect facilities prior to issuing a permit to make sure they are structurally sound, provide sanitary conditions and are compatible with the number of animals living there, Cistaro said.

Moses Lake - City Council took no action when asked to reconsider the hazardous dog ordinance. The city council recently adopted an ordinance declaring pit bulls, rottweilers and presa canarios as hazardous dogs. To own a hazardous dog, pet owners must obtain a $250,000 insurance policy for the animal in case it harms someone, it must be spayed or neutered, have a microchip installed, be confined to an enclosed structure and costs $150 to register with the city. A hazardous dog can also include any individual dog of any breed that habitually bites, attacks and threatens another human or animal on public property.

Vancouver - Town Hall meeting (Saturday, January 10) with State Representatives for the 49th Legislative District to ask that they pass a law to outlaw dog chaining and tethering. This propoasal backed by HSUS.



WEST VIRGINIA - 2009 Legislative Session begins Feb. 11, 2009

No Report for West Virginia



WISCONSIN

Barron County - (1/9/09) - The full Barron County Board of Supervisors will decide later this month whether to approve a newly crafted contract with the local Humane Society chapter for animal control services. The new proposal cuts plans for a county-funded addition to the animal shelter and instead asks for an annual contribution from the county for the cause.
At Tuesday's executive committee meeting, Sheriff Chris Fitzgerald said that the county's legal counsel had reviewed, modified and given their approval toward the potential contract. The Humane Society of Barron County's governing board has not considered the amended document yet officially, but talks between the county and Humane Society members have indicated that the changes would be found acceptable.The executive committee approved the tentative contract Tuesday and will recommend its adoption by the full county board at the regular January meeting. The law enforcement committee had given its approval of the proposal last week. The latest proposal version also includes added protection for the Humane Society's interests, Fitzgerald said. Added was a stipulation exempting the shelter from bearing full responsibility for housing animals if more than 15 are surrendered at one time. In this rare case, the county would be required to help care for and place the animals. When a mass seizure takes place, any animals deemed adoptable and in need of care will incur a $7 per day fee (with a 1 week maximum) that the county must pay the Humane Society for. Unsociable or ill animals taken in such a seizure would be euthanized at a charge of $15 per animal to the county. Fitzgerald added that the mass surrender scenario might happen once a year and would likely involve criminal charges being filed. The county may then be able to recoup costs through restitution. UPDATE: (1/19/09) - At Monday evening's Barron County Board of Supervisors meeting, the long-anticipated animal control contract between the county and the local Humane Society office passed. For several years, Barron County officials and others have been trying to devise a way to address stray animal problems in a uniform and efficient way. The board's approval of a 1-year contract with the Humane Society of Barron County is the culmination of these efforts.




Green Bay - (1/15/09) - Green Bay ordinance forbids dogs from all city parks, but Alderman Dan Piton wants to allow leashed dogs in a few parts of some parks. The City Council will consider the issue when it meets at 7 p.m. today in the council chambers of City Hall, 100 N. Jefferson St., Green Bay.

New Berlin - Alderman Moore says the Safety Commission chose not to have BSL Wednesday evening (12/17/08)

Oshkosh - (12/15/08) - Discussions are in the works over the possibility of requiring owners of pit bulls, and other breeds, to meet specific guidelines. Paul Spiegel, the city of Oshkoshs Health Department Director, has been working with other city staff members on the wording of a draft ordinance for the breed-specific legislation, which would require owners of the restricted breeds to obtain a special license or provide proof that their dog passed the American Kennel Clubs Good Citizen Program, according to a memo from city manager Mark Rohloff. The specified breeds could also be required to be spayed and neutered before being allowed to live in the city, according to the memo. The draft ordinance has been revised and reviewed several times and sent to various veterinarians, animal behaviorists and owners of pet stores, grooming shops and kennels in the city for feedback, according to the memo. Once feedback is provided, a work group consisting of city staff members will reconvene to review and make any necessary revisions to the draft ordinance. Spiegel is expected to present workshop to the Oshkosh Common Council at some point on the breed-specific legislation, said Mayor Frank Tower. UPDATE: (12/21/08) - The Oshkosh Kennel Club last week came out in opposition to proposed city rules regulating pit bull terriers and related breeds. Steve Eichman, president of the Oshkosh Kennel Club said he is not comfortable with the city's idea of using the club's Good Citizen class as a measure of whether pit bulls and other breeds could be exempt from the requirement for a special $100 license. And club members are unhappy that city officials chose the class, which only lasts for 15 or 20 minutes, as a test for the exemption without first consulting with the club. Eichman said the level of a dog's aggression cannot be determined in the 15 to 20 minute Good Citizen class, which consists of approximately 15 short tests for the dog. UPDATE: (1/4/09) - Proposed changes to the city's animal ordinances, in addition to controversial new rules on pit bulls and related breeds, could mean owners would be required to spay or neuter their pets, would not be allowed to bring animals into taverns and could mean more stringent requirements on pets considered to be dangerous. One change could require owners to spay or neuter their pets as a way to reduce the amount of stray pets and unwanted animals, cats in particular, in the city, Spiegel said. "That is a proposal and I'm not sure if that will go completely as proposed," Spiegel said. "The humane society suggested the change.

West Allis - is considering a plan to ban vicious dogs. Mayor Dan Devine says the new ordinance would eliminate the problem, but not discriminate against a particular type of dog. The proposal has a long list of behaviors that would make a dog considered 'vicious' including growling. The plan will be discussed at a meeting next Tuesday (12/30/08).



WYOMING - 2009 General Session Convened January 13, 2009 at Noon


HB0011
Dogs chasing wildlife.
Sponsored by: Joint Travel, Recreation, Wildlife and
Cultural Resources Interim Committee
A BILL for AN ACT relating to game and fish; modifying penalties for
owners of dogs injuring or threatening big game animals; modifying elements of the offense; and providing for an effective date. Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Wyoming: Section 1. W.S. 23-3-109(c) is amended to read: 23-3-109. Use of dogs; dogs injuring big or trophy game animals may be killed; citation of owners of dogs harassing game animals; penalties.


Posted on Jan 29, 2009, 9:32 AM
from IP address 12.74.216.100

Respond to this message

Goto Forum Home