Legislation around the nation

Legislative Alerts

This is information from Endangered Breeds Association, American Dog Breeders Association, and American Kennel Club. You should check with your local or state representatives on any proposed legislation that may affect you. Many states' legislative sessions are over for the year, but city and county ordinances are proposed and heard throughout the year.

CALIFORNIA
San Bernadino County has enacted breed specific legislation and mandatory spay/neuter for the unincorporated areas. The City of Yucaipa also has the same proposal for Riverside County.
Contra Costa officials are working on an ordinance that would require pit bulls to be spayed or neutered.

IOWA
Des Moines City Council has approved a change to the city's vicious dog ordinance. Under the original ordinance, a vicious dog found running loose or unlicensed more than one time would be euthanized. The change spares unleashed or unlicensed dogs deemed vicious based strictly on their breed. These dogs now can be adopted. Vicious breeds defined by city code are American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and Staffordshire Bull Terriers.

MASSACHUSETTS
Lynn is considering pit bull restrictions (muzzling). Lynn has a population of 89,000 per the 2000 census.  There were a couple of incidents in Lynn on Memorial Day weekend that precipitated this action, both of which are either leash law violations or failure to control problems and belong in civil court.  Lynn has no dangerous dog ordinance that EBA President Kim Krohn could find. 

MISSOURI
A statutory initiative relating to dog breeding may be placed on the November 2010 mid-term election ballot. Supporters of the initiative, which duplicates previous unsuccessful legislative efforts, claim to have collected the required number of signatures to put the initiative on the November ballot. The initiative contains a 50-dog ownership limit. A lawsuit has been filed by the Missouri Federation.

NEW YORK
Assembly Bill 5507, known as “Charlemagne’s Law”, would amend the state’s existing definition of “pet dealer” to include those who sell or offer to sell more than five (reduced from nine) dogs or cats per year at wholesale or retail. It also would reduce the current breeder-retailer exception from fewer than 25 dogs or cats per year to 10 dogs or cats per year and impose new restrictions on “pet dealers”. In addition, the bill creates a definition of “commercial kennel”, defines extensive care and conditions requirements for these kennels, and requires annual inspections. The bill has been held in the Assembly Agriculture Committee.

NORTH CAROLINA
Senate Bill 460, carried over from 2009, sought to regulate "commercial breeders", which are defined as anyone who owns 15 or more intact female dogs "of breeding age" and 30 or more puppies. It was unclear if this was the number on the property at one time, or if it was a cumulative number over a lifetime. The North Carolina Federation of Dog Clubs and a number of other coalition partners opposed the bill which died in the House of Representatives.

OHIO
The Ohio General Assembly has recessed for the summer and will likely reconvene in September to consider the following legislation.
House Bill 55 - Revises penalties and clarifies Ohio’s animal cruelty provisions; it was amended on the House floor to remove breed-specific language (specifically, the term “pit bull”) from the state’s vicious dog definition. The amendment was added after House Bill 79, which sought to remove the breed-specific language, was stalled in a House committee. The bill now goes to the State Senate.
Senate Bill 95 - Seeks to regulate “high volume” dog breeding in Ohio, and was passed by the Senate State & Local Government & Veterans Affairs Committee. It defines “high volume dog breeder” as one who produces at least 9 litters and sells at least 60 puppies and/or adult dogs per year.

PENNSYLVANIA
Senate Bill 1417 transfers all duties prescribed in the state’s “Dog Law” (including individual dog and kennel licensing, penalties, etc.) from the state Department of Agriculture to the Department of Health. The bill has been assigned to the Senate Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee.

RHODE ISLAND
Senate Bill 2022 sought to outlaw keeping any dog outside, tethered, penned, caged, fenced or otherwise confined for more than one hour without access to an “outdoor housing facility” unless the person in charge of the dog was also outside with it. The measure also used “guardianship” language, which could undermine owners’ legal rights to their animals, and authorizes local humane society personnel to act as enforcement officers without requiring standard legal and procedural training. The bill passed the Senate, but was held in the House Judiciary Committee. The legislature has concluded its business for the year.

TENNESSEE
Memphis City Council Services & Neighborhood Committee will consider four ordinances amending the city’s animal control laws. The proposal will require mandatory spay/neuter of all dogs larger than 29 pounds; define any dog that has "bitten once and been at-large twice" as a dangerous dog; increase fees for owners of intact dogs; and limit tethering.

TEXAS
El Paso City Council will consider changes to the animal control code including differential license fees, breeder licensing and inspections, and a ban on sales of cats and dogs in pet stores. The changes proposed include: higher fees for intact dogs; spay/neuter of a dog on its second impoundment; and provisions for "competition" (show) dogs.

El Paso City Council Public Hearing
Tuesday, August 10th
8:30 am
Council Chambers, City Hall
2 Civic Center Plaza
El Paso, TX 79901

Key Provisions of the Ordinance (Click here for full text)
• Establishes a differential license fee so owners of intact dogs will pay a higher fee
Allows fees to be set as part of the budget process instead of codified in law
• This allows city officials to avoid taking a vote on the amount of the fees when they vote on the ordinance, and instead allows them to vote on all city fees at once. This makes elected officials less accountable and diminishes the input of constituents.
• Requires a dog be spayed/neutered on the second impoundment
These violations may occur years apart and not be indicative of an irresponsible dog owner.
• Defines "competition dog" as "a dog that has been registered with a local, state or international club or organization that has been recognized by the director as a club or organization that maintains standards for breeds and/or health of dogs…or registered with a club or organization that holds or sponsors…competition dog shows, field trials or agility trials involving 50 or more animals at least once a year."
•Allows the director of the department of public health to decide whether competition dogs or cats will pay the discounted registration fee
• It is critical that fanciers and purebred dog owners understand that according to the ordinance the director MAY charge competition dogs the discounted fee – but it does not require it. If the intention is for all purebred dogs to be charged the discounted fee, then the ordinance needs to read "SHALL" instead of "MAY."

• Adds Additional Requirements for Litter Permits
•Requires that a breeder only breed "competition dogs or cats" and register the litter with the club or organization prior to offering the animals for sale
•The city adopted a requirement for litter permits in 2006 (AKC was not aware of this change at that time) and the fee was set at $75. These amendments will remove the fee and it will instead be set annually as part of the budget process.

• Requires Breeder’s Permit and/or Breeder’s License
However, there is no definition for either of these terms and it is unclear what the requirements would be to obtain this permit
• Authorizes the director to make all inspections necessary for the issuance of permits, but does not specify standards for inspections or inspectors
• Prohibits pet stores from selling dogs or cats after September 1, 2010 except for those already in the store’s possession on that date
• Creates a new section of law (Section 6) entitled "Animal Shows, Sales and Breeding" – however there is no language in this section so it is unclear what purpose it serves.
It should be noted that there are a variety of omissions and errors throughout this draft – from missing definitions to inconsistent terminology. Although these may seem like small problems, if this ordinance is enacted as drafted it could be detrimental for responsible owners and breeders when the ambiguities are used against them.