Letter #6

Notes: This letter has a lot of owner-specific info. Be sure to change it to fit your specific situation!! I've highlighted areas that you need to check over.

Please reconsider your interest in breed-specific legislation, namely a ban on pit bulls, in your city. As an owner of one APBT and one “pit bull” mix, an active volunteer in animal welfare, and a member of the National Animal Control Association, I urge you to please consider the following points.

The current dangerous/vicious dog laws that are in place lack clout and are rarely enforced. Many owners fail to register or vaccinate their dogs, do not socialize or train their dogs, and do not contain their dogs as required by law. And yet, these careless owners face little, if any, consequences. The dog attacks in your area are the result of poorly enforced leash laws. The incidents in your area would not have occurred if the owners had followed the law. In fact, I read in your newspaper that these dogs had been out running around on several occasions before these attacks occurred. Yet evidently nothing was done about it by law enforcement or animal control, whether because the laws were too weak, or because they were negligent in their duties to protect the public. You are now considering making a law that would punish responsible owners like myself, who follow the letter of the law and care for our well behaved dogs like children.

Please strengthen and enforce the non-breed-specific dangerous dog laws that are currently in place, rather than create new ones that are constitutionally questionable, expensive, and burdensome for our animal control departments, local shelters, and dog owners. Effective legislation that encourages responsible ownership and creates formidable consequences for law-breakers would help solve many of the problems communities face with dog owners.

Breed-specific legislation is very difficult to enforce. One problem is the correct identification of breeds. “Pit bull” is an extremely vague term and tends to be a catchall for any dog that looks large and muscular. However, there are a wide variety of breeds that fit in that category. So BSL runs the risk of affecting multiple other breeds and mixes than the ones you are attempting to pinpoint. Many shelters and animal control facilities already struggle with this task – the dogs don’t come with pedigree papers! – and frequently mislabel dogs, particularly mixed breeds. The media and the public tend to be even less skilled at identifying a “pit bull”.

Even assuming the identification of a “pit bull” was easy (and it’s not), animal control personnel would be faced with the insurmountable task of having to identify, remove, house, re-locate, and/or euthanize the dogs within a given region. I have volunteered for years at two local shelters. Most animal shelters struggle without having the resources and staff supports to handle their daily tasks; enforcing BSL would mean additional work that is not supported by the resources available. Additionally you will find that most shelters do not agree with breed-specific legislation. They realize that BSL is not a reasonable or viable solution for the issue of dog bites and attacks.

Irresponsible owners should be targeted, not a breed. Negligent owners already violate many dog laws, so enacting BSL would likely not faze them. However, responsible owners who are diligent in their duties - and whose dogs are good canine citizens - will bear the brunt of further restrictive legislation. The goal should be to enforce laws and increase penalties for violators (something that is undeniably currently not being done, or else animal control departments would not be so overwhelmed). BSL will simply add to the burden that responsible owners, shelters, and animal control officers must bear.

Human-aggressive pit bulls are not characteristic of the breed and have been culled for decades by responsible breeders. The United Kennel Club notes in their description of the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT) breed requirements:

The essential characteristics of the American Pit Bull Terrier are strength, confidence, and zest for life. This breed is eager to please and brimming over with enthusiasm. APBTs make excellent family companions and have always been noted for their love of children.

And…

The APBT is not the best choice for a guard dog since they are extremely friendly, even with strangers. Aggressive behavior toward humans is uncharacteristic of the breed and highly undesirable. This breed does very well in performance events because of its high level of intelligence and its willingness to work.

Similar characteristics can be found in the American Kennel Club breed description of a related breed, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier:

Its character is one of indomitable courage, high intelligence and tenacity. Coupled with its affection for its friends, and children in particular, its quietness and trustworthy stability make it an all-purpose dog.

Human-aggression in the bull breeds is not permissible by any club’s breed standard. People who breed dogs for human-aggression are dangerous individuals who are creating little more than a vicious mongrel. Those beasts may look similar to “pit bull”-type dogs, but they are not truly “pit bulls”. Additionally, despicable breeders and dangerous individuals are now working with even larger breeds, such as Presa Canarios. These larger breeds are capable of doing more damage if raised improperly. Allowing BSL against “pit bulls” targets the wrong kind of dog. This is why non-breed-specific legislation is so important. It covers all vicious dogs, regardless of breed.

Please be aware that a large number of reputable animal organizations, such as the American Kennel Club (AKC), The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), the National Animal Control Association (NACA), and the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), do NOT support BSL. Each of these organizations encourages vicious dog legislation that is not breed specific. Information about writing humane law, including vicious dog laws, can be found on each of these organizations’ websites, or by contacting their national or regional headquarters. In a 2001 journal article published by AVMA, their Canine Aggression Task Force suggested that community-wide dog bite prevention programs, not Breed Specific Legislation, is a better solution to preventing dog bites:

An often-asked question is which breed or breeds of dogs are most “dangerous?” This inquiry can be prompted by a serious attack by a specific dog, or it may be the result of media driven portrayals of a specific breed as “dangerous.” Although this is a common concern, singling out 1 or 2 breeds for control can result in a false sense of accomplishment. Doing so ignores the true scope of the problem and will not result in a responsible approach to protecting a community’s citizens.

Furthermore, an increasing amount of research demonstrates that breed is not a defining characteristic in reported bites. Instead, key factors seem to be: intact males, unsupervised situations involving children, and chained dogs. The HSUS and the AVMA have put out numerous publications attempting to spread the message that any dog can bite. No one breed should be singled out. Each dog should be looked at individually and its temperament judged by a professional. Those animals with bite histories that pose a threat to the community should be euthanized to prevent further injuries and to maintain a safe community.

Additionally, in a small survey I presented to animal control agencies regarding BSL, the respondents all indicated that BSL was a failure. It had no effect on the number of dog bites/dog attacks in their area, and it prompted numerous expensive and time-consuming lawsuits against them by dog owners. The BSL in most cases was repealed, and other areas are considering doing away with their BSL. The state of Colorado has recently changed their statutes to prohibit BSL after recognizing the problems associated with such legislation. Most agencies responding declared that their strong non-breed-specific dangerous dog laws were much more successful than BSL in dealing with aggressive dogs and their irresponsible owners.

Lastly, as a responsible owner of two rescued “pit bulls”, I respectfully appeal to you on a personal level. My dogs are well trained, supervised, abide by city laws, and are ambassadors for their breeds. Both have been through quite a few obedience classes and one of them took several classes in agility. Many people (including my veterinarian and co-workers) adore them. And my pit/lab mix actually saved me from an attack by a pack of dogs that were not “pit bulls”. It’s absurd that I, and other conscientious owners, should be brutalized due to the inappropriate - and often illegal - actions of blatantly reckless idiots. Irresponsible owners should pay for their crimes!

You will hear (and have heard) objections to BSL because it punishes everyone. If you want full support from your constituents, you can achieve this easily by strengthening and enforcing the non-breed-specific dangerous/vicious dog laws already on the books! Responsible pit bull owners, shelters, rescue groups, humane societies, and animal control departments have been begging for that for years!

Sincerely,

Contact Information