The Big Controversy: No Pets...?
(But This Is America!)

Prepare for an unpleasant surprise. The "animal rights" movement is not  
what it claims to be.  Animal rights activism is not ultimately about the
rights of animals at all,  not in the sense that most pet lovers would
think.  The title, "Animal Rights Movement" is much like the title "Moral
Majority"; most civilized people certainly would want to be thought of as
part of a "moral"  group, if in name only.  Similarly, an encyclopedia
salesman shrewdly asks "don't you want your children to have a good
education?" knowing the reply of good parents everywhere will  
automatically be "yes".   The name "Animal Rights" deceptively causes
many who anguish over animal mistreatment to join ranks without
examining the "fine print" of this movement.  What animal lover would
say they don't want a better life for pets and livestock? The name creates
instant agreement and support, and gradually, patiently,  "sells" the
public on a set of almost secret beliefs, slowly unveiling them through
new laws, ads, and the media, over a period of years.  But this goes
much deeper than just the issue of domestic animals.  It is a radical
vision of the future, of a new society, completely remade by different
values and ideals. The movement is based to a great extent on the
writings of the professor and author, Peter Singer, considered to be one
of the foremost respected and controversial philosophers of this era...
and interestingly, a grandson of concentration camp survivors.  
He advocates granting certain species of animals more rights, more
personhood" than certain developmentally disabled humans, such as
those with Downs syndrome, and that  such "defective" humans should
be euthanized at birth, (even legally by their own parents).
One fundamental aspect of this view of the world is that animals belong
only in nature and not in human society, where they are simply exploited
and enslaved. This includes all animals, even our often overly-pampered
pets.  Pets are seen as neurotic, distorted, and deformed by human
greed and whim.  All animal breeding is seen as an abomination. The
creatures we have created, such as purebred dogs, cats, cattle, horses,
etc. are freaks, and best allowed to die out completely or even be killed
by turning them loose in the wild.. knowing they will die.
It is a grave mistake to take this lightly as too extreme to ever gain
foothold.  It  is already a  powerful and insidious movement the world
Unbelievable as it may seem, due to the incremental success toward  
accomplishing their goals over the last 10-15 years, we may someday be
unable to have any sort of pets at all. Whether or not it ever reaches that
point, we will, without question, lose many things we now take for
granted. We already have, but it's our nature to not really notice it, to
perhaps grumble a bit, but we go along with wherever the herd is being
herded (by media, politics, social pressure or expectations of rewards).  
We eventually adapt to change, however unpleasant, and usually realize
there is little else we can do.
But what if the future brings us forced vegetarianism, if it even becomes
illegal to produce or eat meat, fish, eggs, milk, cheese? Or to raise or
keep any animal, even a bird or a fish? This is the future the Animal
Rights movement has in store for us if they reach their stated goals.  
Even if companion animals aren't eliminated, our ability to raise animals
will be either highly regulated to the point of being a major deterrent to
breeding them, or it may be so difficult to be able to legally have a pet,
that few will have that privilege.
The AR movement cannot be dismissed as just a bunch of kooks and
crazies. It is a highly organized movement driven by  deep, well-
developed, philosophical convictions based on the view that Western
Christian-based societies are barbaric and doomed to self destruct,
taking the rest of the world with them. The foot soldiers of the movement
are usually unaware of the bottom-line agenda, or if they are, turn a blind
eye to it. They see how animals are actually being helped in some ways,
and so support the movement even if not in agreement with the final
ultimate agenda: the end of all domestic animals.
Behind the scenes, groups like PETA, and the Animal Liberation Front,
are contradicting the well-crafted, pro-animal, public image. There are
even incidents where members have adopted healthy puppies and
adults only to immediately euthanize them, (occurred recently in this
author's hometown). "Rogue" members supposedly, claims PETA's
(People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) president, Ingrid Newkirk.
But this isn't the first time. Killing animals "saves" them from this
distorted, unnatural life. Center for Consumer Freedom says "
PETA, the
best known A.R. group, is not an animal welfare organization.
PETA spends less than one percent of its multi-million dollar budget actually
helping animals. The group euthanized (killed) more than 1,900 animals in
2003 alone -- that's over 85 percent of the animals it received. In fact, from
July 1998 through the end of 2003, PETA killed over 10,000 dogs, cats, and
other "companion animals" at its Norfolk, Virginia headquarters. That's
more than five animals every day. On its 2002 federal income-tax return,
PETA claimed a $9,370 expense for a giant walk-in freezer, the kind most
people use as a meat locker or for ice-cream storage. But animal-rights
activists don't eat meat or dairy foods. So far, the group hasn't confirmed
the obvious -- that it's using the appliance to store the bodies of its victims."

reprinted from
There is a brave new world gestating in the minds of AR adherents. They
see themselves as progressive visionaries, bringing light to a primitive
world in darkness. They are convinced these ideas must be translated
into world-wide laws,  if the planet is to be saved from human greed,
destructiveness, and cruelty. Mankind is even considered by many, to be
a planetary infestation of the most destructive parasite on earth.  The   
A.R.  movement has been developing over more than 30 years, as a
reaction to very real problems our society is faced with and has
unfortunately had little success in solving.  
Much-needed animal welfare reforms over the years have resulted from
this activism, which unfortunately lends credibility to the movement,
enabling them to make headway in areas most who care about animals
consider harmful, when they see where it is leading. These efforts have
created strong supporters among Hollywood stars such as Doris Day,
Susan Sarandon, and other highly influential people, including the head
of the Humane Society of the U.S. itself, Wayne Pacell.
Whether or not aspects of their ideology have any merit, the threat of
losing a substantial amount of our freedom in the name of their cause is
real.  Once lost, freedoms are almost never reinstated.  Headway toward  
legislating their convictions is moving forward, calculated to sneak up
on us under its many guises.  It is perhaps only "helping" pets in our
terms, in order to get agreement and support, since the ultimate "help"
by their standards is to eliminate them.  Their propaganda is a "Trojan
Horse" hiding their true agenda, thus minimizing resistance, and both
enlisting and deceiving the very people who will ultimately be hurt by
this, people who truly love animals.
Animal Rights in Europe.
In some areas of Europe, brachycephalic breeds (short noses) may soon
be eliminated, at least as we know them. Breeds with dwarfism,
hairlessness, wrinkled skin, etc. are  included in this decision.  A
European treaty that is, in effect, a major multi-species, multi-breed ban,
has been signed recently. It identifies numerous domestic animals, dogs,
cats, livestock etc (such as Bostons, English Bulldogs, Persians,
Munchkins and Sphynx cats to name a few) which are deemed by
veterinary decree, to be unnatural to the point of affecting animal health.
Many countries have ear cropping and tail docking bans, (which often
have a counter effect causing more people to import docked and
cropped dogs from overseas and not buy locally). Recently  in Spain a
mandatory spay/neuter law passed without opposition.  Electronic
training devices are outlawed in some countries, even electronic
fences, and furniture mats. You may think, "well these are good laws, we
need them too!". Or,if you are on the other side of the fence "This is
America, it can't possibly happen here!".  But it will happen, it already is.
By the time we wake up to it, we will have lost many small battles but
maybe not the war..and war it them

In the USA
In the USA, various states have passed poorly written, ill-conceived laws,
in efforts to address problems that usually are actually enforcement
issues, and will not be solved by passing new laws with more
enforcement issues. Most of the current laws are adequate, but
inadequately implemented. Instead of finding ways to better enforce, it is
easier to just pass more laws, which gives the public image that there is
action taken to correct problems .
In some areas, pets are being seized from private property and
euthanized without even having displayed aggression, simply due to
their breed. This is  a result of Breed-Specific Bans, enacted by people
who usually neither fully understand the issues, nor have all the facts.
The long-term consequences of such legislation are rarely studied.
There is a precedent-setting law that passed last year in Kentucky.  
Animal Control Officers now have the right to come onto your property
and seize your dogs for any reason they think is justified, without a
warrant or due process, simply on their own judgement and
discretion...Then there is the mandatory spay/neuter (possibly mandatory
microchipping) bill in Huntington Beach, Los Angeles, the Breed Specific
Bans in cities in Colorado, Missouri, Kansas and Arkansas which have
resulted in banned-breed non-offending, innocent dogs being seized
and euthanized in spite of owners desperate pleas. Many people are  
fleeing those areas, leaving their homes, in order to save their dogs.  .
San Antonio is trying to get a law similar to the (temporarily withdrawn)
California statewide mandatory spay/neuter bill.  Word is that a town in
Oklahoma has passed such a law, more information on this to come. Ohio
is toying with a law to require background checks and social security
numbers on breeders of certain numbers of dogs. (If any of this is
inaccurate, please contact me and correct it).  

We need to face that this noose is tightening, literally
daily.  The word
must get out so people see what is happening. There is a famous saying
referring to the holocaust which is appropriate here. Its message is
basically, if you don't stop the Gestapo from taking your neighbors away
(even if you are delighted to see them go) the Gestapo will eventually
come for
Keep track of legislation in both your hometown and federally, and learn
what can be done to protect your rights. Visit this outstanding web site:
join the forum! get informed!

Humane Society of the
United States Misled
Americans With
Fundraising Pitch,
Says Center for
Consumer Freedom

Animal rights group
falsely claimed it would
"care for" Michael Vick's

/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Today the
Center for Consumer Freedom
(CCF) called on the Humane
Society of the
United States (HSUS) to return
all the money it has raised in
the wake of
the Michael Vick dogfighting
scandal. CCF revealed today
that beginning on
July 18 -- the day after Vick's
criminal indictment -- HSUS
promised on its
website that financial
contributions would be
earmarked for helping it
"care for the dogs seized in the
Michael Vick case." But
yesterday The New
York Times reported that HSUS
is not, in fact, caring for the
animals. And
HSUS president Wayne
Pacelle told the Times that his
group is recommending
that government officials "put
down" (that is, kill) the dogs
rather than
adopt them out to suitable
"Like most Americans, we can't
stand dogfighting," said Center
Consumer Freedom Director of
Research David Martosko. "But
we also can't
stand animal-rights fundraising
that smells this fishy."
The Humane Society of the
United States is not affiliated
with any
local "humane societies."
Although the organization runs
no hands-on dog or
cat shelters anywhere, some of
its fundraising materials hint at
a direct
connection with pet rescue
HSUS's online fundraising
pitch related to Michael Vick
has now been
quietly altered to remove the
claim that the group is caring
for his pit
bulls. But there's no reliable
way to know how much money
the group raised
on the basis of its earlier
"As usual, HSUS is exploiting
Americans' emotions about
dogs to build
its war chest for anti-meat,
anti-dairy, and
campaigns," Martosko added.
"These predatory activists
should return every
cent and apologize for
misleading the public."
In a similar episode, HSUS
raised a reported $32 million in
the wake of
the Hurricane Katrina disaster,
promising to use the funds to
rescue and
reunite lost pets with their
owners. But since March 2006,
Attorney General Charles Foti's
office has been investigating
what happened
to the majority of those funds,
which HSUS does not appear
to have used for
Katrina- related rescues.
-- The New York Times article
is online at
-- HSUS's false fundraising
claim is preserved online at
For more information about the
Humane Society of the United
for more articles
by this author
stafford  07
Scroll to bottom for
newest legislation

t's now official. the
Louisiana Attorney
General is investigating  
complaints and reports
which have indicated
that supplies (beds,
blankets, toys, crates,
etc.) and food were never
allowed to be used to help
the animals
housed in the rescue
centers. Although
thousands of pounds of
food were donated, many
volunteers have
complained that they
were only allowed to feed
the rescued animals the
cheapest, poorest
quality foods they

Allegations have been
made that purebred
rescue groups
were turned away by the
HSUS and not allowed to
pull their own
breeds from the rescue
centers, unless they were
willing to take "X"
number of "others" as
well. Additional reports
indicate that at
least 700 "bully" breed
dogs mysteriously
disappeared from the
HSUS rescue centers,
never to be seen again. It
has also been
widely reported that some
pets were sent to
far-away locations,
quickly adopted out, and
that no real efforts were
made to reunite
these lost pets with their
original owners.

If you personally
volunteered in the
rescue effort (or if you
know someone who did)
and may have firsthand
knowledge of the pet
rescue situation in the
aftermath of the
hurricanes, please
contact Attorney General
Foti and provide him with
all pertinent information to
assist him in his effort to
ensure that
funds and/or supplies
donated by the
compassionate pet
owners of
the U.S. were and **will
be** used for the
purposes for which they
donated. Press release
and contact information

HR2491 - Law on Trusts for Pets in the House Ways and Means Committee text available upon request

SA 3723 - NEW PAWS: Exception is similar to SB 1139 - anyone who sells not more than 25 dogs/cats from not
more than 6 litters per calendar year (whichever is greater). If the kittens/puppies are all sold at retail, and not for
resale, the breeder would NOT have to be federally regulated as long as the dogs/cats are bred or raised on the
premises of the "seller". In addition a total of 25 other dogs and cats not bred or raised on the premises can be
sold (allows for rescue or former show/breeding pets). New PAWS has some additions - most notable is the
concept of the "certified third-party inspector". This can be a nonprofit organization certified by the Secretary of
Agriculture to inspect breeding facilities. Instead of having inspections by USDA inspectors one could choose to
comply with standards established by a certified third-party inspector. Breeders could have the HSUS, or perhaps
AKC inspectors, coming into their homes - probably with a hefty fee. But the standards and inspection protocols
must be "at least as protective of animal welfare as those promulgated by the Secretary" according to the Animal
Welfare Act. The USDA standards don't work well for a home-based cat fancier with female breeding cats and
kittens wandering in the house among their altered pet cats. USDA standards are designed for commercial facilities
with animals in separate primary enclosures impervious to moisture. There are also provisions for the importation
of dogs and cats into the United States from foreign countries. Regulations would be promulgated within 24
months, so we don't know what to expect here. The ability of the USDA to apply to court for a temporary restraining
order or injunction increases the ability to protect animals covered in the existing Animal Welfare Act. A attempt by
Sen Richard Durbin (D-IL) to attach a amended-partial PAWS (2005) to the Farm Bill (HR2419) amendment failed
and was "ordered to lie on the table".

Senator Durbin has revised SA 3723, removing all references to expanded breeder regulation and third-party
inspection. The new amendment contains restrictions on puppy imports which, should they become law, would not
only be unenforceable, they wouldn't adequately protect U.S. dogs' health or wellbeing. It is obvious that the PAWS
supporters have not abandoned, only postponed their efforts to license and regulate the private sector.



Anniston - Passed an ordinance defining a "vicious dog" as: any pit bull terrier, which shall be defined as an
American Pit Bull Terrier or Staffordshire Bull Terrier or any American Staffordshire Terrier breed of dog, or any
mixed breed of dog which contains as an element American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier or
Staffordshire Bull Terrier as to be identified predominantly as American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire
Terrier or Staffordshire Bull Terrier. text available upon request

Dothan - officials are considering a tougher law that would prohibit any dogs - or cats - from being loose outside,
even on private property and requiring a $5 per animal licensing fee could help fund an affordable spay/neuter
program. The committee suggested a higher fee, like $50, if the animal has not been altered.


Kenai - proposed change to the Animal Control ordinance regarding kennel permits, renewals, application,
location, property values and noise nuisances. There is no distinction between hobby or commercial breeders in
the ordinance. There is no grandfather clause and each application must be renewed each year subject to
approval or disapproval. partial information is available upon request.


Little Rock - Board of Directors to regulate pit bulls and classify them as a dangerous breed, but they stop short of
banning the dogs in an ordinance. Under the proposed ordinance, Little Rock residents still will be allowed to have
pit bulls, and new residents can move with their dogs into the city after the ordinance passes. But they will have to
register them with Animal Services, pose for a photograph with the dog, sterilize the animal and pay an additional
fee to have a dangerous breed permit. The dog would have to be kept indoors or in an outside enclosure. If
outside the enclosure, the animal would have to wear a muzzle. If a registered dog were to bite someone, the
owner's dangerous breed license could be revoked. The ordinance, which limits owners to two dogs per
household, would apply to American pit bull terriers, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers and any
mix of those breeds.


Sacramento - Ballot Initiative to prohibit mandatory sterilization of puppies and kittens

Sacramento - Ballot Initiative to prohibit mandatory chipping of animals and humans.

Sacramento - Ballot Initiative to lift restrictions on the number of pets a person can own

Sacramento - Ballot Initiative to forbid the killing of animals unless seven conditions were met, such as lack of
empty cages or kennels and the determination that the animal is not a feral cat that could be sterilized and

Sacramento - Ballot Initiative to cap license fees

Modesto - City Council committee will be discussing changes in the animal control ordinance that would put more
teeth into penalties that police can levy against animal owners whose pets run loose, show vicious behavior or
don't have licenses. One change would declare some animal code violations a misdemeanor instead of an
infraction, enabling officers to arrest reckless pet owners for repeated offenses. It also would give officers more
authority to seize dangerous dogs. The other change would restore a former police practice the city attorney
scuttled this year. It would allow officers to bundle fines for multiple animal code infractions on a single ticket.

Riverside - proposal of a new series of flat fees, replacing a matrix of fees for a la carte services that its chief
veterinarian described as confusing and complicated. Owners would be asked to pay $25 for spaying or neutering
cats and $50 for dogs, regardless of size. Owners now are charged according to the animals' weights. County
would begin vaccinating all cats for rabies and ensuring that all dogs and cats are free of intestinal worms before
turning over the animals to the new owners, an important measure to ensure public health. County shelters also
would begin to implant scannable microchips in all dogs and cats before turning them over to new owners and
collect a fee for that service. County also would raise boarding fees to $12 per day for stray or impounded animals.


Boca Raton - Palm Beach County - County commissioners have approved a new and revised schedule of fees for
Palm Beach County Animal Care and Control, including: � Increased fees for licensing non-sterilized dogs and
cats -- up from $38 to $75. - Requiring pet owners whose un-neutered animal is picked up by animal control to pay
$300 to have the animal returned. Commissioners have also endorsed a mandatory spay and neutering program
for all dogs and cats. Boca Raton hasn’t made it mandatory, the idea of responsible pet ownership is contained in
city code.

Miami-Dade County - new proposed local law banning tying dogs to any stationary object, such as a house, fence
or post. If this law passes you are still allowed to tie your dog up, as long as you stay near them and keep a very
close eye. What you can't do is tie your dog up and leave them all alone.

Palm Beach County - proposed Animal Care and Control fee increases for Rabies License Tags Fees; Service
Fees and Citation Fees; provide direction regarding mandatory spay/neuter of dogs and cats; and provide
direction regarding backyard breeding of dogs and cats. Mandatory spay/neuter of all dogs and cats in PBC, intact
license fee of $75 per dog or cat per year and breeder permits - you will be able to apply for a breeding permit by
paying a $100 fee, filling out an application from Palm Beach County Animal Care & Control, allowing AC&C to
come and "inspect" your home, and AC&C will do a "background check" to insure you aren't a criminal. Passed -
Effective 01/01/08.

Volusia - officials expect to take another look at laws meant to reduce the number of dogs and cats euthanized
every year in the county. County attorneys have started reviewing mandatory spay and neuter laws from other


DuBois County - Jasper - County Commissioners are considering a proposal that calls for all dogs and cats to be
licensed annually. If an animal is spayed and neutered, the price could range from $1 to $5 a year. If an animal is
not spayed or neutered, the fee could range from $150 to $200 per animal. The figures are examples, not
recommendations. A key is that any license fee for intact animals be higher than a veterinarian's charge for
spay/neuter surgeries. The proposal included dog and cat census forms to be mailed with property tax forms.
License fees would be used to pay for an animal control officer and associated costs.

Ft Wayne - City Council unanimously supported stricter rules for owners of pets that bite, for tethering animals and
for owners of animals that repeatedly break the law. Under the law, pets who bite while on the loose or who are
tethered must be spayed or neutered. The law also created a "potentially dangerous" label for dogs, that allows for
other restrictions for the animals based on the severity of the bite, but all animals labeled potentially dangerous
must be spayed or neutered. For harsher bites, the owner could be forced to attend educational classes, muzzle
the animal while off a leash and confine the dog in a kennel while alone. The bill also restricts how dogs can be
tethered. It prohibits dogs from being tethered overnight, tethering a dog younger than 6 months old or for
tethered dogs to be within 3 feet of the property line or right of way, including sidewalks. Approved 12/04/07 and
must formally approve the law during its regular meeting next week.


Camanche - City Council decided to table approving the first consideration of an ordinance regulating the
existence of pit bulls within city limits until a full council could be present for the discuss. The city never noticed a
problem with pit bulls within the city, the question is whether the city wants to be proactive or reactive to a dog
attack. The issue will be placed on the next council agenda for further discussion.

UPDATE: City Council decided to stop trying to potentially enact an ordinance regulating the existence of pit bulls
within city limits. Dead 12/03/07

South Sioux City - city council voted to approve breed specific regulations for dogs. The new legislation targets pit
bulls and other breeds considered aggressive and risky to the public, though the council will have to approve the
measure two more times. The proposed law says owners must register and micro-chip dangerous dogs, pay an
annual fee of $65, take out a liability insurance policy of at least $250,000, secure the dog in a pen meeting
specific requirements, post warning signs on their property and leash and muzzle the animal in public. First


McPherson - City Commission will discuss pit bull regulations


Frankfort - Pam Rogers of the Kentucky Humane Society commented that come the first of the year they will in fact
be pushing for forfeiture bonds on any animals taken. It is also written in a way that you are guilty no matter what.

Louisville - A bipartisan group of Louisville Metro Council members unanimously approved modifications to the
city's dangerous-dog ordinance yesterday, including one that would drop unaltered dogs from the definition of
those that could be considered dangerous. The subcommittee also modified how Metro Animal Services would deal
with unlicensed animals. The law says a dog is "at risk" of being dangerous if it menaces, chases, displays
threatening or aggressive behavior to people; causes physical injury to domestic pets or livestock; is found
unrestrained; or is unaltered. The subcommittee's revision strikes unaltered from that definition. Another major
change comes in the way Animal Services officers would deal with unlicensed pets. Under current law, officers can
issue citations or impound unlicensed animals. The subcommittee discussed that subject for about 45 minutes
yesterday before deciding that officers should first warn owners of unlicensed pets, allowing 15 days to get the
animal licensed. If they don't comply, the owners can then be cited and will have to pay a $30 fine plus the cost of a
license, which is $9 for an altered animal and $35 for an unaltered animal. Animal Services would be allowed to
impound the animal if the owner fails to license it 30 days after receiving the citation.


Maine has quietly passed extremely restrictive laws, in the last 2 years, and continues with more bills up for review
in Jan. There are so few dog breeders in the state, that Maine was literally blindsided, and was not aware of these
bills. The few breeders in Maine are now trying to prevent more legislation, and the mood of the legislators is not
favorable to dog breeders, so the existing laws are now on the books.

1) 5 or more intact dogs/cats require a state license and inspection.

2) contract requirements for our animals, above and beyond our own contracts

3) rabies licenses now going to the state, so they can track down people with 5 or more intact animals.

4) advertising law - if people sell more than one dog/cat in a calendar year, they must have a state license # or a
vendor's #, obtained from the Department of Agriculture.

5) sales tax

6) inspection of records

7) inspection of homes, if dogs kept in the house

There is a bill that just passed at the emergency session, to create a breeder's certificate. The intent of this bill is
not currently known.


Baltimore - County Council members rejected last night a measure that would have placed the region's toughest
restrictions on pit bull owners, siding with dog owners who argued that singling out the breed would be unfair and
likely ineffective. By a 6-1 vote, the council killed a proposal that would have required pit bull owners to keep their
dogs in concrete-based kennels and post warning signs on their lawns. The author of the proposal, Councilman
Vincent J. Gardina, was the only member to vote in favor of it. Defeated 11/15/07


Apple Valley - city council approved stricter rules for aggressive dogs which could mean forcing some of them out
of neighborhoods. As of December 1st, 2007, any dog labeled dangerous will no longer be able to live in a
residential area but instead must live in an industrial area. Dangerous dogs are not determined by breed but are
dogs that when unprovoked, cause serious bodily harm to humans.


Independence (Jackson County) - city council has decided to amend their current animal ordinance to one of
breed specific restrictions of 'pit bulls' by: 1. Spaying/neutering. 2. Microchipping. 3. Muzzling whenever outside of
home or kennel and on a 3 foot leash. 4. Obtaining $100,000 insurance. 5. Registering each year with at least 2
photos on file. 6. Outside enclosure specifically defined. 7. Signage visible from nearby road. 'Pit bulls' are defined
as "Any dog that exhibits those distinguishing characteristics which substantially conform to the standards
established by the American Kennel Club for American Staffordshire Terrier, or Staffordshire Bull Terriers, or
substantially conform to the standards established by the United States Kennel Club for American Pit Bull Terriers,
including any mixed breed of dog which contains as an element of its breeding as the breed of Staffordshire Bull
Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, or American Pit Bull Terrier."

Independence - (Jackson County) UPDATE - dog owners are advised to maintain close supervision of their pets
following city council's first reading on a vicious dog ordinance. Ordinance, which will go into effect following a
second reading during the Dec. 3 meeting, owners will be fined $500 if a dog bite is reported. The animal must also
be registered with the city as a vicious animal. Council elected to remove specific dog breeds from the ordinance in
hopes of avoiding court challenges. Ordinance lists four criteria in defining a vicious dog, including: Any dog that
has caused death or serious injury to a person engaged in lawful activity. Any dog that has attacked or bitten,
without provocation, a person engaged in lawful activity. Any dog that has killed or injured another animal after the
owner has been given written or verbal notice to keep the animal confined or muzzled. Any dog that has been
declared to be vicious by a physician attending to a person who has been bitten or attacked by said dog. Passed

Joplin - City Council discussing proposed ordinance changes aimed at cutting down on animal nuisances in the
city, recommending restriction on people from keeping litters of puppies and kittens for up to six months of age -
health department recommends that be lowered to 10 weeks of age. Another change would prohibit feeding feral


Concord - HB 1301 - AN ACT relative to the definition of service dogs. This bill expands the definition and use of
service dogs to apply to persons with recognized seizure disorders. text available upon request

Concord - HB1293 - AN ACT relative to eligibility requirements for the state animal population control program. text
available upon request

Concord - HB 1298-FN - AN ACT making changes to the veterinary/medical/optometric education program. text
available upon request

Concord - HB1143 - AN ACT relative to penalties for failure to provide outdoor dogs with necessary shelter. text
available upon request

Concord - HB 1314 - AN ACT relative to animal cruelty. This bill removes “worrying” from the list of legal reasons
allowing the killing of a dog. This bill also makes it illegal to take the life of an animal without lawful authority text
available upon request

Concord - HB 1430 - AN ACT relative to the application of animal cruelty laws to horse and dog race tracks text
available upon request


Trenton - A-909 - to forbid traditional animal-testing methods if there is a federally recommended alternative
(passed Assembly)

A-4026 - Require courts to issue protective orders against animal abusers

A-2645 - Permit tenants to keep pets provided they are spayed or neutered and properly cared for and controlled

A-2649 - Revamp the animal cruelty laws, upgrading offenses, hiking minimum fines and adding new offenses for
hoarding, euthanizing improperly, failing to provide minimum care, committing animal cruelty in the presence of a
child and "cruel commercial exploitation"

A-3192 - Create a civil action against the owner of a pet that hurts or kills another's pet (passed Assembly)

A-4171 - Provide pet food safety standards

A-4217 - Allow a civil action for injury or death due to tainted pet food, with up to $15,000 in loss of companionship

S-161 - a new offense for injuring an animal while committing or fleeing a crime (passed Senate)

Trenton (additional)- a bill introduced yesterday (11/20/07) that would revise state law regarding dangerous dogs,
allowing the court to send a dog home under certain conditions even after the canine has been declared "vicious"
by a judge. The proposed law is retroactive to Jan. 1, 2007. New law would insert language usually found in human
criminal cases, requiring the prosecutor to prove the dog was not provoked "beyond a reasonable doubt,"
according to a copy of the bill The proposed bill also removes a requirement that the dogs re leased under the
aforementioned conditions be tattooed with a registration number. Under the current law that deals with canine
violence, a dog can be labeled "vicious" if the state or municipality proves the animal attacked without provocation


Albuquerque - "Importation Rule" for non-native species coming into New Mexico. This rule concerns "non-
domestic" animals of all kinds (birds, reptiles, amphibians, arachnids, etc.). The basic idea is that anyone bringing
any such animal into NM must obtain a vet inspection, obtain a permit 2 weeks in advance, and pay a fee of $25
per animal.

Bernalillo County - County Commissioners have drafted extensive amendments to the current animal ordinance.
Proposed changes include but are not limited to:

- Hobby breeder site means a non-commercial animal facility or premises operated by a person involved in
controlled breeding of dogs or cats which are registered with a recognized registry organization, or which are a
member of a breed which is not eligible to be registered, if that breed has been approved by the county manager
or his designee.

- Multiple animal site means a non-commercial premises where more than six dogs, or cats, or any combination
thereof, over three months of age must be spayed or neutered, if they're not bred or sold for resale, testing,
research, or laboratory experimentation.

- Hobby breeders are required to have a permit and their premises may be inspected. Unsterilized adult dogs have
be separated by sex when not being bred or otherwise approved.

- No person or household shall own, harbor or keep more than four dogs, cats in any combination thereof over the
age of three months without a valid professional animal permit, hobby breeder site permit, multiple animal site
permit, or shelter permit.

- A hobby breeder or multiple animal 'kennel' must include 75 square feet per dog weighing less than 30 pounds;
100 square feet per dog between 30 and 59 pounds, and 125 square feet per dog over 60 pounds.

- Puppies can only be bartered for, sold, given away or other transfer or conveyance from the residential location
listed on the litter permit or hobby breeder permit.

- All dogs must be licensed and micro chipped. - All tail docking and ear cropping must be done by a licensed

Bernalillo County (con't) - proposed mandatory S/N changes to the ordinance. It appears the exemption for "show
dogs" has been removed and a "special permit" is required. To obtain a "special permit" you must have records for
a microchip. (The county has no way to store information regarding microchips and/or tattoos.) Ordinance limits six
dogs or cats or combination per household. Leashes may not exceed 6 foot.

Bernalillo County - UPDATE 11/26 meeting - Commissioners considered new proposals include higher license fees
and mandatory micro-chipping. Cruelty laws would be expanded to include negligence, failure to provide basic
veterinary care, and the amateur practices of ear-cropping, tail docking, and removing the dog's ability to bark.
higher permit fees for people who breed and sell animals, along with stricter record keeping requirements and


Denver - Lincoln County Commissioners are now looking into adopting an ordinance that would limit the number of
animals allowed for each acre of land.

Orange County -. is about to implement a 3 hour limit on tethered dogs, except for training and events, but then it
would be a max. of 7 days (???). Additional language not currently available.


Crawford County - Dog Warden wants to inform all owners, keepers and harborers of dogs belonging to the breed
commonly known as pit bulls, that due to a recent Ohio Supreme Court decision, these dogs shall be covered by
liability insurance coverage in the amount of $100,000. These dogs must be properly confined in a locked kennel
with a top, a locked fence or other locked enclosure that has a top. While these dogs are off the premises of the
owner, keeper or harbored, they must be walked on a chain-linked leash or tether that is not more than 6 feet in
length and under control of a person of suitable age to adequately restrain such a dog.

St. Paris - Village Council passes dog control legislation. The ordinance specifies that owners of dogs commonly
known as "pit bulls" must file ownership acknowledgement with the county dog warden, and that pit bull puppies are
only legal to own up to three months of age. Vicious dogs, under the ordinance, must be kept in a confined kennel
with secure roof and sides, and when not on the owner's property must be kept leashed and muzzled, in
accordance with the Ohio Revised Code. The owners must have "beware of dog" signage as well and will be liable
for all damage caused to parks or public property by their dogs. Passed 12/03/07


Oklahoma City - State Representative Lee Denney has introduced his Oklahoma Pet Quality Assurance and
Protection Act. The draft of the bill states that people who sell more than 25 dogs a year must get a Quality
Assurance License. To quality for a Quality Assurance License breeders must be at least 21-years-old and pass a
written exam. They must also meet some basic requirements including breeding standards, housing and sanitation,
veterinary care, exercise and socialization and lineage certification. The requirements will be enforced by inspectors

Oklahoma City – City of Oklahoma City's policy of not allowing pit bull terriers to be adopted from its animal shelter
violates state law, an appeals court has ruled. The Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals found Oklahoma City's policy
breached state law that bans "breed specific" regulation of dangerous dogs by a municipality. As a result,
Oklahoma City's rule was unenforceable, the appellate found. "The plain meaning of the statute forbids (the) City
from regulating potentially dangerous or dangerous dogs by breed," the ruling states. "The Policy adopted by
City's Animal Welfare Superintendent does just that. Therefore, the Policy is in conflict with the statute and must


Salem - SB0570 - Requires Office of Emergency Management to prepare written animal emergency operations
plan to provide for animals during major disaster or emergency. text available upon request

Salem - SB1017 - Requires that certain public or private officials report suspected animal abuse. Requires that
veterinarians and certain public or private officials report suspected animal neglect in first degree. text available
upon request


Charleston - County Council already has laws in place that say stray animals must be sterilized before they are
returned to their owners, but County Council would modify those laws under two amendments expected to pass
council this week. If the modifications are approved, pet owners could have their dogs neutered by the veterinarian
of their choice and no animal would be neutered or spayed sooner than five days from the date it is picked up.
County law exempts pets if a veterinarian advises against sterilization, if the owner can prove the pet participated in
a nationally recognized conformation or obedience show within the past year, or if the pet assists a disabled


Webster - City officials are leaning toward approval of an ordinance that will ban many exotic and not-so-exotic
pets. The measure is designed to deal with vicious animals. Among those that would generally be outlawed would
be pit bulls, Rottweilers, Doberman pinschers, porcupines, ostriches, wart hogs and boa constrictors. The
proposed new ordinance would exempt animals from being classified as vicious if their actions are consistent with
protecting property and owners of dangerous dogs and other vicious critters would be grandfathered in.


Brownsville - city officials are looking at two tough new ordinances. Under scrutiny are any breed of so-called
vicious dogs ­ especially pit bulldogs, and they are about to be illegal in Brownsville. City leaders have also taken
steps to restrict the number of pets residents of Brownsville may own. Under the new vicious dog ordinance it will
be illegal to own a pit bulldog. The ordinance states, “It shall be unlawful to keep, harbor, own, or in any way
possess a pit bull dog” in Brownsville. The ordinance allows current pits to stay with their owners but only under
strict guidelines that include registering the animals with the city, paying an annual permit fee, housing them
appropriately and buying liability insurance covering each animal

Dyersburg - city is currently reviewing the MTAS (Municipal Technical Advisory Service - Knoxville, TN) pit bull
ordinance banning all pit bulls. The proposed ordinance, if passed, mandates registration of the animals and
outlaws ownership of new pit bulls, mandates the dogs must be muzzled while being walked, with leashes no longer
than four feet and walked by person with the physical ability to restrict the dog's movement, existing vicious dog
ordinance requires animals deemed dangerous to the community to be housed in a fenced cage with a concrete
base and padlocks. Resident who do not comply with the registry can have their dogs seized and impounded. This
ordinance is in place in several cities in Tennessee, some dating back for several years. In addition, its important
to note that Dyersburg sits in the same general area where three pit bull bans recently passed.

Knoxville and Knox County - board members agreed to ask the county to change its policy regarding "Level 1
Dangerous Dogs" to require that these animals be spayed or neutered at owners' expense. Currently, only dogs
classified as "Level 2 Dangerous Dogs" are required to be altered. A "Level 1 Dangerous Dog" is defined as an
animal that has met one of the following criteria:

-When unprovoked and while on the property of its owner, attacked a person on two or more occasions within the
prior 24-month period.

-Has within the prior 24-month period, while off the property of its owner, engaged in any behavior when
unprovoked that reasonably would have required a person to take defensive action to prevent bodily injury.

-Has, when unprovoked while off the property of its owner, bitten a person or domestic animal, causing a minor

Board also decided to ask that additional language be added to the city ordinance and new language added to the
county ordinance dealing with owner responsibility. The new language would stipulate that if a dog owner shows
continuous disregard for animal laws, the right to petition for the dog to be destroyed takes effect. The Board's
recommendations will now go before the County Commission for consideration.

Rockwood (Wate) - Mayor Mike Miller is drafting an ordinance to ban pit bulls banned within city limits. The
ordinance will go before the Rockwood City Council at its meeting on January 21


Irving - City Council unanimously approved an ordinance that bans tethering unattended dogs any time, any place.
Passed 11/01/07


Spokane - City's "dangerous dog" ordinance is unconstitutional because it denies pet owners the right of due
process, a Superior Court judge ruled Friday (11/30/07) in a case that may have far-reaching effects.


Washington, D.C.- Public Safety Committee sent a new policy, which allows adoption of pit bulls but attaches breed-
specific guidelines, forward to the full board with no recommendation. Before May 2007 all pitbulls not claimed by
owner were euthanized. May 2007 the Virginia attorney general's opinion that breed-specific euthanasia violates
state law, so the shelter has set up procedures to transfer pit bulls to approved breed rescue groups, and has
euthanized based on the animal's score on a temperament test. A majority of the "supervisor-appointed" Animal
Advisory Committee members wants the policy to have no mention of any breed. The policy recommended by
Animal Care and Control Director Tom Koenig and his staff lists breeds "known to be used to illegal activities" and
puts tight controls on who can adopt them.


Madison - AB 567 Amendments:

1. The '8 breeding females' benchmark in the definition of a 'commercial breeder' has been removed and the
number of dogs sold in a year has been changed to 50. Thus, now only those who sell 50 or more dogs in a
calendar year are covered by the licensure portion of the bill.

2. The 'puppy lemon law' portion of the legislation has been modified. Specifically, the substitute amendment now
allows for the seller of the puppy to provide a list of potential breed specific or individual puppy specific health
issues/problems associated with that dog or breed. If a purchaser receives this list provided by the seller, they
would then NOT be eligible for a right to remedy for these issues laid out before the sale by the seller.

3. Under the substitute amendment draft, the seller would have the right to a second opinion from a veterinarian of
their own choosing prior to providing a remedy.

4. The draft clarifies that no communicable disease the puppy gets after leaving the care of the seller is not eligible
for a right to remedy. Likewise, any action or inaction by the purchaser causing damage or harm to the health of
the animal is specifically exempt from the right to remedy. text available upon request

Madison - SB308 Amendments:

1. The '8 breeding females' benchmark in the definition of a 'commercial breeder' has been removed and the
number of dogs sold in a year has been changed to 50. Thus, now only those who sell 50 or more dogs in a
calendar year are covered by the licensure portion of the bill.

2. The 'puppy lemon law' portion of the legislation has been modified. Specifically, the substitute amendment now
allows for the seller of the puppy to provide a list of potential breed specific or individual puppy specific health
issues/problems associated with that dog or breed. If a purchaser receives this list provided by the seller, they
would then NOT be eligible for a right to remedy for these issues laid out before the sale by the seller.

3. Under the substitute amendment draft, the seller would have the right to a second opinion from a veterinarian of
their own choosing prior to providing a remedy.

4. The draft clarifies that no communicable disease the puppy gets after leaving the care of the seller is not eligible
for a right to remedy. Likewise, any action or inaction by the purchaser causing damage or harm to the health of
the animal is specifically exempt from the right to remedy. text available upon request

Menomonee Falls - village board seems to be focused on a limit law for no apparent reason. So far the village
attorney seems to be taking the easy route by merely adopting the ordinance from an adjoining village. There is a
question regarding grand father clauses, and/or fancier licenses



British Columbia - Port Edward - district discussing what to do about an ongoing issue of feral cats now spreading
through that community

British Columbia - Prince Rupert - proposed animal-control bylaw could limit the number of cats and dogs people
can own, require signs for dangerous dogs and increase license fees. The bylaw limits to three the number of cats
and dogs a person can own, and under the new bylaw both dogs and cats would be licensed. Annual license fees
would increase by as much as 50 per cent, with a lesser fee for spayed or neutered animals. If a person currently
has more than three animals, their animals will be grandfathered in as exceptions. The bylaw also includes a
section of prevention of cruelty that allows the bylaw officer to take action against people mistreating animals.
Under the bylaw, all animals shall be kept with suitable water and food, in a clean environment with the opportunity
for daily exercise. Choke chains will not be allowed and people will not be able to keep an animal enclosed without
adequate ventilation - for example, in a car in the summer with the windows rolled up. The bylaw includes
regulations for both vicious dogs and some specific breeds. Anyone who owns either a vicious or restricted dog will
have to meet guidelines for containing the animal as well as posting signage to inform the public. The bylaw also
bans exotic animals, effectively outlawing circuses.

British Columbia - Victoria - The Spay/Neuter Action Bylaw Committee (public group not part of the government) is
proposing a mandatory spay/neuter bylaw for domestic cats and dogs across the Capital Region. No resident shall
own or harbor a dog over the age of five (5) months which has not been spayed or neutered by a licensed
veterinary surgeon unless the owner is in possession of a breeding permit.

Labrador - government to give its animal protection laws more teeth, bigger fines for people convicted of animal
cruelty, as well as regulations on the length of time dogs can be left tied up.

Newfoundland - government to give its animal protection laws more teeth, bigger fines for people convicted of
animal cruelty, as well as regulations on the length of time dogs can be left tied up.

Ontario - New Tecumseth (includes the amalgamated towns of Alliston, Beeton and Tottenham) - proposal to
regulate, impound dogs at large and establish penalties. text available upon request

Northern Ireland

Belfast - Assembly to debate dangerous dogs legislation. A motion, aimed at strengthening dangerous dog
legislation of dog attacks on livestock were treated as criminal offences, attacks on other pets were not. Alliance
MLA Naomi Long said more attention should be given to the behavior of dogs and their owners rather than banned
breeds. Also the issue of people cross-breeding illegal breeds and importing dangerous dogs also needed to be


Stockholm - adopted a new law aimed at tackling the problem of aggressive dogs by allowing police to seize
dangerous canines and even ban some people from owning or handling them. The aim is to reduce the problems
that are linked to lacking care for dogs and cats. People who have seriously failed in their care of a dog or cat will
be subject to fines or up to one year in prison. The Swedish Kennel Club, only one death has been attributed to a
dog attack since the 1960s. Effective January 2008.

U.A.E. - Dubai - Dubai Municipality will confiscate 16 breeds of dogs from January 1, 2008. The list includes the
American Pit Bull Terrier and other dogs historically used for fighting, but also the Shar Pei, Husky and Doberman
while omitting the German Shepherd.