Posted on

Breed Specific Legislation (BSL)

Breed specific legislation is all about treating every breed as equals.

Miami started the fad of banning pitbulls, thinking it was a public safety measure.  Many communities followed.

Does banning pitbulls make your community safer?  Yes, but so does banning Cocker Spaniels and Chihuahuas.   Most dog bites are the result of irresponsible dog owners, but poor ownership qualities become more noticeable as the size and the power of the breed increases.  A bad Chihuahua owner is hardly noticed because the bite of a Chihuahua rarely needs medical attention.  Bites caused by pitbulls are increasingly causing fatalities… thus the decision communities take to ban them.

Are Pitbulls getting a bad reputation?  Yes and no, Pitbulls are very loyal dogs, but they attract the worst pet owners; on top of that, genetics play a role that makes the dogs predisposed to aggression towards other animals.  Many humans are bitten trying to protect their pet from an attacking Pitbull.

People always find their way around the BSL laws.  When Pitbull owners discover that their breed has been unmasked, they simply respond saying that the dog is a service animal.  You already know how I feel about the abuses of the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) concerning service animals; but, now you have communities dealing with the dilemma of dealing with Pitbulls as an ADA issue.

The chant opposing BSL is, “The deed, not the breed.”  The idea is that if a dog is aggressive, it will display that aggression by biting someone.  Given that every dog has the potential to bite, you don’t arbitrarily ban a breed without proof of aggression.  In theory, this sounds fair, but the problem arises that someone now has to be bitten.  The idea of BSL is to prevent bites before they occur.

We now live in a world in which people want to champion the cause of the under dogs and as such we are seeing a movement to rescind BSL laws in many cities.  Some State have created laws prohibiting breed specific laws.  Although this movement will not sway the insurance companies that have banned these dogs from homeowner insurance polices or stop apartment managers from renting to owners of specific breeds.

The underlying problem is that in the wrong hands dogs, any dog, presents a risk to society when the owner of that dog decides that his right to own a potentially dangerous dog out weighs the rights of his neighbors to live safely.  Pitbulls can live in our community, only if their owners can recognize the potential threat that they may pose and take the necessary steps to prevent them from causing harm… this also applies to Chihuahuas as well.

Although Pitbulls are finding good pet owners, they are prominently still falling into the hands of the worst owners, as evidenced by the volume of Pitbulls that are overwhelming our shelters.  In leu of a ban on Pitbulls, I would recommend legislation that requires the sterilization of the breed; it is our only hope of getting our shelter populations under control.  As long as pitbull breeds fill over half of the kennels in our shelters that are and will remain a problem in our communities.

A few years ago, after Denver banned pitbulls, people began identifying their  pitbull as a service animal.  As you have read in other posts on this site, the laws concerning service animals had gotten way out of control and Denver was dealing with that abuse as people fought for their banned pets.  In February of 2020, the City of Denver overturned the previous ban and provided for passage of pitbulls to be treated like other pets, following a two year probationary period.

States started transitioning away from breed specific legislation and began banning laws that don’t treat all animals as equals.  In our WOKE society, the breed laws were decried as racist and “didn’t follow the science.”  Many states began passing laws directed at insurance companies who first discovered that paying out insurance claims differed from breed to breed.  Given that some breeds were responsible for the greatest number of serious bites and fatalities, they decided to not insure those breeds.

As governments start pressuring insurance companies into accepting all manner of breeds, it will be interesting to see how these companies will respond to being forced to pay out claims for animals that they see as high risk.

Anyone who has been bitten by various breeds knows that all breeds are not equal.  Smaller breeds are more likely to bite more often, but larger breeds inflict the most injuries.

Posted on

Our Largest Obstacle

The greatest obstacle that we have in performing our jobs is protecting the public.  I frequently query job openings in our profession and then seek out the back story.  I would like to find the happy story about an animal shelter director who retired after a long fulfilling career of service to his or her community, but that is rarely the case.

Many directors are fired for doing their jobs.  The problem with doing our job is that there is always some one who thinks that the job should be done differently.   It usually involves the euthanasia of an animal.

In our business, there is ALWAYS someone who will second guess our decisions.  Most of our decisions are geared toward keeping the public safe, but someone will always come along to champion the cause of an animal that you have killed.  Even if their cause is righteous, death usually rule outs other outcomes.  Many times, you don’t know that someone is interested in the animal until after the deed has been done.  In almost every case, it deals with the decision that the animal shelter personnel believes the animal to be aggressive.

When you decide to get into this profession, you need to realize that it possible that you can get fired for just doing your job.  Petition sites and social media have no obligation to tell the truth, their purpose is to get people excited; hopefully to get the people in a rage.  People used to be able to see through these scams, but not any more.  People believe what they are told and are too lazy to research the truth for themselves.

My mantra in this business is:  “If you are going to get into trouble, do it for doing something good.”  Do the right thing.  You may be with your employer only a couple of years, but you must live with yourself the rest of your life.

Posted on

Bad Fences Make for Bad Neighbors

One of the most frustrating thing that we face in our profession is determining the risk of a failing fence.  I have had countless conversations with owners of perceived aggressive dogs as to the state of their fence line.  We are not in the insurance business, but we know a accident waiting to happen.  The problem we face is that the owners of aggressive dogs are not the brightest tool in the box and as Animal Control Officers, we cannot take action until the dog actually escapes the yard.

The other day, 9-year-old Emma Hermandez was killed by three pit bull type dogs in Detroit after Emma’s father spoke to the dog’s owners about  the sad state that his fence was in.   The owner was arrested, but the article stated that the “prosecutors are determining what charges, if any, their owner may face.”  The problem with prosecutors is that they rarely deal with fatal dog cases and can’t think objectively.  Every dog has the potential to bite, but few have the ability to kill.  Dogs are like a loaded weapon, some are like BB guns and other are more like a 45 caliber.  Having been warned about the neighbor’s concern and failing to take action, the owner should be charged with reckless endangerment.  If the Animal Control had received and acted on previous complaints, the owner should be charged with murder.

As with guns, there are no laws that keep dogs out of the hands of idiots.  You can usually tell when a neighborhood has one of these dog owners, the rest of the neighborhood knows that a gun will trump a dog anytime.

I have advised neighbors to know the response time of their police and go on record filing a complaint with both the police and animal control.  A person needs to build a case for themselves as to the necessity of the actions that they have taken to protect themselves.  You may one day be in court trying to convince a judge that your actions were necessary.  A person needs to keep their wits about them, even an experienced police officer can fail to hit a vital organ.  My shelter dealt with a pit bull dog that had been shot by the local police officers 19 times and lived through the experience.  The best shot comes when the dog is running directly at you, presenting that large forehead.  If you miss, offer up your forearm and you are in perfect position to line up for a perfect shot.  If you work for the police department, volunteer to catch your canine dog on a wrap.  Plenty of “wrap time” can get you to see for yourself the opportunity that is made available to you.  If you find it necessary to shoot the dog, remember that in all of the excitement, you must always insure that you have a safe background behind the dog.

Why would you consider shooting a dog?

  1. You do not carry the necessary equipment to capture the dog alive without risk to yourself.
  2. It is a quick solution to a problem that demands an immediate response.  Let’s face it, the longer that a dog is allowed to chew on a child, the less likely the child will survive.
  3. It is a permanent solution to a problem that you cannot trust the dog’s owner to fix.

In the case with Emma, a neighbor shot one dog and the others were later captured by animal control; but, it was all too late for her.   As with any of these fatal incidents, there will be someone wanting to save the dogs.  They might even hire a “dog expert” to justify the dog’s actions, these guys are paid well to spin a yarn, they’ll even make the case that it was the victim’s fault.

Posted on

The Case for Pookie

In 1995, a 2 year old girl was playing in her yard, when she decided that she wanted to pet the neighbor’s dog, Pookie.  She began climbing the chain link fence so that she could reach over and pet the dog.  As she climbed the fence, the dog grabbed on to the toe of her shoe and began pulling her toes, then foot, then leg through the fence.  A witness at a nearby bus stop reported that the dog look like a land shark, trying to pull that child through the fence.

The dangerous dog case against this dog was thrown out because the judge ruled that when the child’s toes crossed the plane of the fence, the child was trespassing and determined that the child’s actions triggered the attack upon her.

This incident became a landmark case in Portland Oregon because it set the stage for a local attorney and his wife to turn the local animal shelter into a prison as they appealed dangerous dog cases that came their way.  Anyone who has worked with the courts know the lengthy process and the attorney used this lengthy process to punish the shelter by forcing them to hold dogs pending the appeal process.  The appeals serve to keep the animal shelter full of “dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs,” and where the dogs become the victims of being caged for a long time.  Many debate as to how humane it is for a dog to be caged for years pending a court resolution.

The war between public safety and the rights of animals has been constantly waged in Portland Oregon for years.  This attorney and his wife have repeatedly stated that there really is no reason to declare an animal as dangerous, it is a human problem.  As with any cause, there are people at the extreme left and extreme right.  The people who live their lives in the fringe of any cause do not accept those of us who try to remain balanced and stay in the middle.   Working in the animal welfare field, you are going to be constantly called on to take one side or the other.  If you are a government employee, you have to understand that even though we got into this business because of our love for animals, our primary purpose is to protect our community.  In spite of what people will tell you, there are animals that are too unsafe to live in our communities.  Sure, most of them became unsafe as a result of their owners; so, even though it isn’t their fault, they are still a public safety risk.

The purpose of people like this attorney and his wife is to intimidate us.  They believe that if they are persistent long enough, we will cave to their will.  Along the way we are going to lose a case or two, but we will carry on because we have a higher calling: to keep our children safe.

Posted on

Cracking Down on Service Animal Fraud

Alabama has just joined 25 other States who have are cracking down on people who are declaring their pets as service animals.  The problem is that the States will have no way to prove that a person is committing the fraud.  Given the way that the American Disability Act (ADA) was written to protect disabled people, those same laws protect people claiming to be disabled.

The various State laws claim that a person must be disabled and have a service animal specifically trained to assist the person with their disability.  The ADA states that a person is not required to prove that they are disabled and Service Animals are not required to be trained by certified trainers.

Nothing angers me more that people who abuse the system; but, the laws that protect disabled people also protect the abusers.  It is tragic what businesses have to deal with when dealing with this abuse, but I am afraid that the ADA is unwilling to do anything about its laws so as to keep protecting the people that the laws were intended for.

Posted on

Delaware Recognized as the first No-kill State

Best Friends just announced that Delaware has achieved a 90% live release rate average for animal shelters throughout the State; designating it as the first no-kill State.  This comes as no surprise as we (in the animal welfare profession) have recognized that people living in the New England States seem to be more sensitive to the plight of animals.

Shelters in the northeast were the first shelters to experience a shortage of animals because their owners were smart enough to spay/neuter their pets.  Fearing that breeders would fill the void, the shelters began transporting pets in from animal shelters south of them.

It is amazing to recognize this accomplishment because they reach no-kill status as a State and while they were also importing animals from other states.  Good job Delaware!

Posted on

Service Animals

Service animals are in the news again; I am not surprised. It is one of the most abused area of the Americans with Disability Act. Under the ADA, a person just needs to mention that they are disabled and the animal performs some function to assist with that disability. The person is not required to present proof of disability or evidence that their dog is specifically trained to assist the person.

If you Google “Service Dog,” you will see advertisements for service dog vests and ID that a person can purchase, in hopes of overcoming the question as to whether a person can appear to be legitimate. Thanks to the Internet, you can appear to be legitimate for thirty or forty dollars.

A major airline took the stance that certain breeds and size of dogs were not going to allowed on aircraft. The airline was experiencing an increase in dog bite incidents and wanted to improve passenger safety. The ADA stepped in and advised the airline that they could not discriminate on breed or size of a service dog.

From my experience, there is more fraud surrounding service animals; by my guess that for every legitimate service animals, there are four per owners taking advantage of the system, by claiming that their pet is a service animal. Just going online to see the numerous companies that cater to this abuse is evidence enough.

Unfortunately, although the ADA has laws that prevent abuse, there is no substance that anyone can act on. Under the ADA, a business owner must accept the word of the dog owner. The only reason that the dog owner may be asked to leave is if the owner or the animal becomes unruly. Here is a list of frequently asked questions about service animals. 

Pet owners are required to clean up after their pets, but anyone who will abuse the laws of the ADA will likely refuse to clean up after their pet.  It becomes most troublesome for passengers on a crowded aircraft to have to maneuver around a large “service animal.”

If you go on a website that is selling the supplies for fake service dog registrations, they will provide a long list of ailments that would meet the requirements for claiming a disability.  That list is so extensive that 80 percent of the population would meet the requirements of claiming use of a service animal.

What bothers me about the ADA laws is the impact that it has on people who legitimately need a service animals when they live in a world that is largely made up of fraudulent abusers.

Posted on

Dress Code

One of the greatest challenge in overseeing the professional image of your animal shelter is administering a dress code.  For many years, simply stating that the dress code is business casual seemed to be understood by everyone.  Now, you have to deal with female employees wanting to wear leggings and everyone seems to be accessorized with tattoos and piercings.

In the “old days,” the issues seemed to center around hair length, both on the head and face.  Now days, employees want the liberty to sculpt their bodies with art.  Each organization has to decide as to how these sculptures impact the image of the organization.   There seems to be a movement toward having the appearance that people have spent time in the “big house,” receiving prison tattoos.  It makes me believe that anyone can be a tattoo artist, no skill is required.

As with all things, moderations should reign in the decision as to present our public image, but we live in times in which restraint is rarely exercised.  I have witnessed some beautiful tattoos, but they have been infrequent.  I have come from a generation in which the best tattoos are the ones that are hidden from view.  If you can’t hide your tattoos, you might consider the fact that you have applied them excessively.

Posted on

Why? 2.0

Last month, I celebrated my second year in retirement.  My one-year anniversary of creating this blog.  The blog is therapy for me; yes, after two years of retirement, I am still winding down from the experiences from my adventures in animal welfare.

The early days of my profession were easy; people had better control of their emotions and had some semblance of commonsense; but best of all, they had not harnessed the destructive power of social media.  My last two gigs were a bit more complicated.  In one gig, the “powers” surrendered their efforts of evolving to a no-kill operation to appease one employee.  That employee didn’t like having volunteers around or allowing rescues from coming into the shelter.  Although I was the Executive Director, it was clear who had the power.  In the other gig, the “powers” were more concerned about positive social media than having a properly run operation.  Without someone showing some constraint many, many aggressive dogs would have been released into the community.

I bring this up because in the animal welfare profession we come with great expectations of making our organizations great, only to be undermined by the social and political currents that surround us.    While I was in the heat of the fire, I frequently asked if I had made a poor career choice.  In looking back, I remember all of the good that I participated in.  Looking in the soft eyes of an animal in pain,  I felt the strength to help that animal.  Humans are a thankless species, but the dogs and cats that we help make up for the grief that we receive from our own species.

The purpose of this blog is to help someone who might be considering animal welfare as their own profession.  I report mostly on the negative things to prepare you for what you have to face, but the rewards are great as well.  For those who are in the fire now, leave your office and walk back into the kennels and hold one of the animals in your care.  As directors, we feel alone, but what you are experiencing is happening to many, many others.  Fight the good fight, provide your community with what they need, not what they want.  Protect the innocent.

In our profession, we will get plenty of advice.  Much of it will be bad advice.  Some of the worst advice I ever received was from a County Attorney who told me not to say anything bad about an employee who petitioned the County Commission for reinstatement.  How can you make a case that you don’t want a bad employee back, if you cannot tell the truth?  My mistake was that I listened to the attorney.   The next time, I was told by a City Attorney that you cannot fire a volunteer.  This time I was smart enough not to listen.  The No Kill Movement depended on City/County Attorneys making this mistake when they encouraged volunteers to stand up for their rights.  But, just as you can fire an employee, you can fire a volunteer who is disrupting your organization.

So, you are faced with many decisions and you’ll have to make the best decisions for your community.  You will face many people telling you what to do and many of them will try to bully you into doing what they want; for that reason, your decisions must be ethical, sound, and consistent with the morays of your community.  This blog is intended to pass along my journey and it is up to you to decide if any of it pertains to you.  During my walk, I have become biased, for good cause; but, that doesn’t mean my advice is sound for your situation.  Your are being paid to make the right decisions that will impact your community and the pets within that community.  I spent a lifetime of compromise and now I can reflect back as to whether I did the right thing when I made those compromises.  The funny thing about history is that at the time it felt good, then history later shows your mistakes.  Do the best that you can with the information that you have at the time and hopefully  you can later live with the results.  And later in life, you can sit back and hopefully help someone else who has just started their journey.

Posted on

Animals in Hot Cars

A summer doesn’t go by without news of a child or dog dying in a hot car.  People do not seem to comprehend how quickly a vehicle can heat up.  It is tragic t loose an animal in this fashion.  For that reason, animal control organizations need to have policies in place to make sure that animal control officers are not guilty of committing the same acts, especially if those officers are using unairconditioned animal control boxes on their vehicles.

In creating a policy, the organization must determine the ambient temperature that will trigger the policy; eighty to ninety degrees seems to be a good temperature range to work with.  When the temperature reaches that threshold temperature, the policy is triggered that sets the maximum time that an animal may be in the vehicle; 60 minutes is a good length of time, providing that the carrier box pushes air through each kennel.

If an animal seems hot during pickup, that holding time should be reduced to 30 minutes and the animal should be given water and wetted down prior to transportation.  Animal Control Officers need to be smart enough to park in shaded area and to constantly check on the animals onboard the vehicle.  Frequent stops at gas stations might be necessary to keep the animals hosed down and kept cool.

There is no excuse for an animal control officer leaving an animal onboard his/her vehicle for extending period of time in the summer; but, every year we hear about an officer forgetting about an animal that is left on the vehicle over night.  Officers need to get into the routine of checking their vehicle at the end of their shift and cleaning the vehicle for use the next day.  One stupid mistake can bring to an end of your animal control career.

Keeping animals safe in the summer is a matter of common sense.