Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutA001 - Excerpt of City Council minutes from July 24, 2007 r 7-24-2007: "REPORT ON REQUEST FOR PIT BULL REGULATION: Chief of Police Chuck Cychosz introduced Lorna Lavender, Animal Control Supervisor. Chief Cychosz reviewed a request received from Kay Johnson to develop breed-specific regulations to better protect the community from Pit Bulls. The concern was timely in that the Animal Control staff was seeing a change in their workload as it relates to these animals. He further reviewed the incident that Ms. Johnson referred to regarding the death of a Yorkshire Terrier and the attack and injury to a Poodle mix. Chief Cychosz stated that the Animal Shelter is seeing more strays of this kind coming in in greater numbers than previous records show. Since December 2006,16 dogs have come into the shelter that fit within the Pit Bull or"Bully Breed" classification, and most of these animals are not reclaimed by their owners. Since these dogs have an unknown history, they are not adoptable and are destroyed. Chief Cychosz reported that Pit Bull types are also touted as wonderful family pets by their advocates, and it appears that these types of dogs are increasingly popular in Ames. Staff has identified eight reported attacks on dogs by"Bully Breeds" over the past 10 years, and the City has seen a spike in this activity this spring. Many of the attacks are unprovoked and not easily foreseen. Chief Cychosz reported that our current ordinance was revisited along with how other cities are responding to these challenges. Four options were laid out for the Council's review as follows: Option 1: Utilize the current municipal ordinance on dangerous domestic animals (behavior- based in that it classifies dangerous domestics using injury or potential to injure as criteria). Option 2: Enhance the current municipal ordinance on dangerous domestic animals (allowing classification of an animal as a dangerous domestic based on a verified report of unprovoked aggressive behavior directed at a person or domestic animal). Any person keeping a dangerous domestic could be required to show proof of liability insurance in addition to meeting current requirements for registration and confinement. This option could also be enhanced by adding an appeal process to it. Option 3: Restrictions for Bully Breeds (insurance, sterilization, fences, muzzles, higher fines for violations, breed-specific registration, signage, etc.). Option 4: Ban Bully Breeds (with grandfathering in of currently owned animals with restrictions). Chief Cychosz stated that from an animal-control perspective, staff feels that the current ordinance should be enhanced (with Option 2) with the presented recommendations. Discussion was held regarding these various options and responsible domestic animal ownership. Council Member Goodman asked if there was a way to enforce Option 2 without it becoming a neighbor disagreement. He is concerned that the personalities of humans might affect the advocacy with which a situation might evolve. Animal Control Supervisor Lorna Lavender stated that this is the current situation and has been for a number of years. She explained that complaints are called in on a daily basis, and investigation of incidents, eye witness accounts, and veterinary testimony all come into play. Ms. Lavender stated that this could be built into an appeal process, which is a recommendation in Option 2. Aggressive dog behavior occurring on personal property was also discussed. Ms. Lavender indicated that Animal Control has never registered an animal as being dangerous under the terms of exhibiting forceful behavior on its owner's property. They currently receive a number of these types of calls from passers-by, and they do investigate situations of boundary issues. City Manager Steve Schainker stated that staff s recommendation classifies these animals based upon a verified report of unprovoked aggressive behavior. It is Council's decision whether or not the ordinance will be defined more specifically to include this type of behavior on a person's personal property. Ms. Lavender said that she can not think of one time where this has occurred on a person's own property. Most usually, the animal is running loose, there is an actual attack, etc.; these are the types of things happening when an animal is registered as a dangerous domestic. At this time, the term"aggressive" was discussed. According to Assistant City Attorney Judy Parks, there is no specific definition in our current ordinance. However, if the Council wants to make it specific, that can be included in the City's own Municipal Code definition. Council Member Goodman said"on property" aggression should not apply, as animals are trained to defend their homes. He also feels that aggression needs to encompass the idea of a high potential for harm. Ms. Lavender indicated that right now, the City's determination of dangerous is .... "any animal which has inflicted serious injury on a person without provocation; any animal which has, at the animal's own initiative, killed a domestic animal; any animal owned or harbored, primarily or in part, for the purpose of animal fighting; any animal which by breeding, training, disposition, or behavior, may pose a potential risk of attacking and inflicting injury without provocation upon people or other animals." She explained that when registration is required, the aggressive act has always included serious bites or maiming of people. Joan Doran, 828 Murray Drive, stated her credentials concerning her knowledge of dog breeds and their behaviors. She currently owns two Toy Poodles, two Pugs, a Pomeranian, an American Pit Bull Terrier, plus two cats, and they all get along well. Ms. Doran said that her pets are her family, and she does everything she can to take care of them. There are people on both sides of this issue who love animals, and they all want safe communities. However, she urged the Council not to ban or target specific breeds known as "Bully Breeds." Ms. Doran indicated that "breedism" to her is likened to racism. She asked that everyone educate themselves and learn as much about animal behavior as possible. She further asked that people "judge the deed, not the breed." Erin Magnani, 1313 Clark Avenue, said that she has a lot of experience with dogs and gave her background. She currently owns an American Stafford Terrier as well as a Doberman. Despite her Terrier's breed and background of being abused, her dog is a great representation of canines. Her dogs have been attacked numerous times by other dogs of other breeds, and she asked that the Council not put restrictions on the Pit Bull breed. Ms. Magnani stated that other dog breeds pose problems as well. She said that bad dogs are not born; they are made by their owners. She, too, urged people to educate themselves about dog behavior and to promote responsible pet ownership. She asked that the Council support Option 2. Kay Johnson, 703 Grand Avenue, Apt. 3, stated that she made the initial request for banning of Pit Bulls from Ames. She said that expanding this dangerous animal act will not prevent anything from happening. She feels that part of the problem is the dog owner, and that some owners do not know what they are getting into. Pit Bulls need a higher standard of care and should be owned by those who know how to handle them. Ms. Johnson again asked that the Council enact some specific breed laws; she was not asking for a specific ban. She reported that people and other animals need to be protected from these types of dogs. Piper Wall, 912 Clark Avenue, stated that she is a veterinarian and a member of the Cyclone Kennel Club. She is a dog owner and feels that staff is going the right direction with its recommendation in not banning breed-specific dogs. Ms. Wall said that pet owners should be held financially responsible for animals attacking others. Brenda Bell, 3703 Dawes Drive, stated her background regarding her knowledge of and experience with dogs. She currently owns two dogs. Ms. Bell stated that her definition of breed-specific legislation would be canine racism. Biting dogs are caused by irresponsible owners. Breed bans do not work, because they penalize the responsible owners. Those who are not responsible owners ignore ordinances anyway. She further stated that more dog bites are caused by Labrador Retrievers, because they are the most popular breed. Ms. Bell said that she supports Option 2 as written, but if additional requirements are imposed that deal with impoundment, an appeal process, etc., she would want to review them before she could endorse that option. Scott Zarecor, 820 Wilson Avenue, reported that he currently owns as 12-year old Pitt Bull. He said that it appears the recommendation is not for any breed-specific dog, but based more on aggressive or belligerent behavior. He hopes that when the Council votes on this ordinance, it will be clarified. Mr. Zarecor stated that when it does come time to enforce the enhanced ordinance, he further hopes that Husky or Retriever attacks will be treated the same as "Bully Breeds." Phil Propes, 1008 Burnett Avenue, stated that he does support vicious dog legislation, however, not for specific breeds. He wants to see enhancements made to the current ordinance (Option 2) that allow for appeals, for being on private property, and for natural dog behaviors. Rodney Hibbs, 3708 Jewell Drive, stated that it was his two dogs that were attacked by the Pit Bull. Not only were they attacked this time but, in all, three times. During the last attack, his Yorkie was killed. He thinks that if the attacking dog had been of another breed, he could have saved his dogs. Mr. Hibbs indicated that these dogs need to be registered, and insurance needs to be required. He feels that there would not be as many Pit Bulls in Ames if insurance was required, because many people can not afford it. Ashley Ward, 1523 Meadowlane Avenue, said that she has lived and worked with many different dog breeds throughout her life. She has been bitten by five dogs, but never by a Pit Bull. Ms. Ward stated that she supports Option 2, and that it is not the dog breed, but the owners. People need to know and understand the breeds and what each is capable of doing. Moved by Popken, seconded by Doll, to approve Option 2, enhancing the current municipal ordinance on dangerous domestic animals by specifically allowing classification of an animal as a dangerous domestic based on a verified report of unprovoked aggressive behavior directed at a person or a domestic animal; any person keeping a dangerous domestic could be required to show proof of liability insurance in addition to meeting current requirements for registration and confinement. Discussion ensued regarding registration of dogs and its effectiveness in other communities. Ms. Lavender stated that it does tighten enforcement power, and licensing/registration is most effective where there is a full-time licensing officer. With regard to identification tags, Ms. Lavender further stated that they are not frequently seen on animals that come into the Shelter. Council Member Goodman indicated that he wants to see an appeal process added and that there should be some sort of an exception allowed for"on personal property incidents." He further wanted the term "aggressive" to involve some sort of description relative to "causing harm." Further discussion was held regarding aggressive dog behavior and a dog's protective tendencies. Ms. Lavender pointed out that Animal Control staff looks at injury by a dog being much different than a dog showing aggression. Verification and/or evaluation of investigations was also discussed. Council Member Rice stated that the City Attorney's Office, Animal Control, and the Police Department staff can take the Council's discussion and bring it into a workable ordinance. Council Member Rice called the question. Vote on Motion: 5-1. Voting aye: Doll, Larson, Mahayni, Popken, Rice. Voting nay: Goodman. Motion declared carried."