After 25 years of ineffectiveness, the State of Ohio finally eliminates statewide breed-specific law

COLUMBUS, OH — After 25 years, the State of Ohio has eliminated its statewide breed-specific law. Gov. John Kasich signed the bill Tuesday morning eliminating the law that automatically declared the “pit bull” to be an inherently vicious dog.

Ohio’s breed-specicific law was enacted in the summer of 1987, but never resulted in the improved community safety it sought. The law did result in discrimination and unjustified shelter killing.

Eleven states currently have laws in effect that specifically forbid regulation of dogs on the basis of breed.

The new law will take effect in 90 days. In addition to dropping any reference to a specific breed of dog from the law, the new law will redefine current designations of “vicious” and “dangerous” dog, create a third lesser category of “nuisance” dog, create a process for dog owners to appeal law enforcement’s labeling of their dogs, and place the burden to prove the classification by clear and convincing evidence on the dog warden.

(Prepared in part from a report in the Toledo Blade.)

Posted in News, Uncategorized

NCRC reports on an important new study from Maddie’s Fund: Dog breed identification no basis for public policy

An important new study further confirms the unreliability of visual breed identification used in dog adoption, lost and found, and regulation.

Read the NCRC commentary: Dog breed identification no basis for public policy.

Read more about Breed Identification, Breed and Behavior.

Posted in News, Uncategorized

Bill lifting “vicious” label from “pit bull” dogs goes to Ohio governor

February 8, 2012 — After 25 years, the State of Ohio may be about to do away with its breed specific law.

The Ohio House of Representatives voted 67-30 Wednesday to send House Bill 14 to Gov. John Kasich’s desk. The State Senate passed the measure last week by a vote of 27-5. The Governor is expected to sign the legislation, which sailed through both houses of the legislature with veto-proof majorities.

The law, which declared that any dog “of a breed commonly known as a pit bull” was a “vicious” dog, was enacted in the summer of 1987, but never resulted in the improved community safety outcomes it sought. The law did result in discrimination and unjustified shelter killing.

Eleven states currently have laws in effect that specifically forbid regulation of dogs on the basis of breed. Where breed-specific regulations do exist, at whatever level of government, they are inevitably enforced on the basis of subjective opinions concerning a dog’s appearance.

Section 955.11 of the Ohio Revised Code defines a “vicious dog” as one that, without provocation, has seriously injured a person, killed another dog, or “belongs to a breed of that is commonly known as a pit bull dog.” Designation of a dog as a “pit bull” dog triggers additional liability insurance, restraint, and other requirements for the dogs’ owner. It also significantly increases the chances that a dog so labeled by a dog warden will be euthanized if picked up on the street.

In addition to dropping the language that targets “pit bull” dogs from the law, House Bill 14 would redefine current designations of “vicious” and “dangerous” dogs, create a third lesser category of “nuisance” dogs, create a venue for dog owners to appeal law enforcement’s labeling of their dogs, and place the burden to prove the classification by clear and convincing evidence on the dog wardens.

The Ohio County Dog Warden’s Association remained officially neutral during the legislature’s deliberations, at the same time stating that House Bill 14 offered the best chance for much needed reform on the issues in question.

John Dinon, executive director of the Toledo Area Humane Society, applauded the vote. His is one of a number of groups that have been fighting for years to change Ohio’s vicious dog law from a breed-based law to a one based on behavior. “We feel that this is not only more fair to the dogs, but also makes our state safer since the new law gives dog wardens tools to go after dangerous dogs of all breeds,” Mr. Dinon told the Toledo Blade.

(Prepared in part from a report in the Toledo Blade by Columbus Bureau Chief Jim Provance.)

Posted in News, Uncategorized

America owes respect to dogs we have placed in harm’s way

CNN National Security Producer Jennifer Rizzo has written an enlightening story about dogs serving with American soldiers in theatres of war.  Currently the Defense Department classifies military working dogs as “equipment.” Dog advocates — and we at NCRC are happy to be included in their number — want that changed.

There are approximately 2,700 dogs serving worldwide, including 600 in designated war zones.

Rizzo raises important questions. Will retired dogs be repatriated, just as rotating service personnel are? Will the dogs have the opportunity for a life stateside?  Will our government assist adopters with a dog’s medical needs?

When is a dog not only a dog, but a comrade in arms?

The U.S. has come a long way from the disgraceful legacy of Vietnam, where, of the 4,900 dogs that the U.S. employed there, 2,700 were turned over to the South Vietnamese army, and another 1,600 were euthanized.  That’s right: 1,600 survived the enemy, but not us.

Read the entire story by following the link below:

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/06/when-a-dog-isnt-a-dog/

Posted in News, Uncategorized

BSL failure in Britain – hospital admissions rise for fifth consecutive year. Dangerous Dogs Act reform now in advanced stage.

January 20 – According to new figures from the UK National Health Service this month, more than 6000 adults and children were admitted to hospitals over the year to March 2011, after being “bitten or struck by a dog”.

While exact figures were unavailable for the previous years, The Guardian newspaper reported that this represented the fifth successive year on-on-year increase.

The evidence of the ineffectiveness of the UK’s breed specific regulation comes amid continuing demands from animal welfare charities, including the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), for changes to the discredited Dangerous Dogs Act (DDA), which was rushed through the House of Commons by former Prime Minister John Major in 1991.

“It is probably the worst bit of legislation that’s ever come onto the statute books,” Laura Vallance, of the Dogs Trust told the newspaper. A spokesman for the RSPCA dismissed the DDA as “not fit for purpose”.

A government spokesman said negotiations were “at a very advanced stage” on reforming the law, and suggested that details would be announced early in the new year, possibly within the next three months.

According to research commissioned by the RSPCA, two in three UK dog owners favor licensing because they believe animal welfare will improve. Indeed, the remarkable success of the Calgary (Alberta) Animal Services Responsible Pet Ownership Model is due, in part, to dog license compliance exceeding 90%.  Calgary dog owners see value in licensing their dogs, both for themselves and their pets. The high rate of licensing compliance appears to have led to compliance with other provisions of the animal bylaw as well. In contrast to the dismal situation in Britain, dog bites, serious or otherwise, have fallen to historic lows in Calgary.

The British government would do well to study this successful regulatory model from elsewhere in the Commonwealth.

To learn more about The Calgary Model, use the link below.

http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/calgary-alberta/

(Compiled from reports that appeared in The Guardian Newspaper and London Telegraph)

Posted in News, Uncategorized

The “Pit Bull” Placebo: Media, Myths and the Politics of Breed Specific Legislation

Title: The “Pit Bull” Placebo: Media, Myths and the Politics of Breed Specific Legislation
Location: University of Florida College of Veterinary Medicine, Gainesville, FL
Link out: Click here
Description: Presentation by Donald Cleary, Director of Communications and Publications for the National Canine Research Council. Learn the history of discrimination against different groups of dogs, and how media-reinforced attitudes created the crisis confronting “pit bulls,” including breed specific regulation. Regulating dogs on the basis of breed has justified animal cruelty, but has not resulted in safer communities. Veterinarians can help break the cycle of discrimination by showing that we can abandon discredited stereotypes, and by encouraging a higher standard of accountability and care for all dogs.
Start Time: 18:00
Date: 2012-02-20
End Time: 19:30

Posted in Events

The “Pit Bull” Placebo: Media, Myths and the Politics of Breed Specific Legislation

Title: The “Pit Bull” Placebo: Media, Myths and the Politics of Breed Specific Legislation
Location: Western University College of Health Sciences School of Veterinary Medicine, Pomona, California
Link out: Click here
Date: 2012-01-25

Posted in Events

The “Pit Bull” Placebo: Media, Myths and Politics and the Effect on Companion Dogs

Title: The “Pit Bull” Placebo: Media, Myths and Politics and the Effect on Companion Dogs
Location: Virginia Federation of Humane Societies Annual Conference, Williamsburg, Virginia
Link out: Click here
Description: Friday, March 30, 2012. Donald Cleary, Director of Communications and Publications for the National Canine Research Council will present at the Virginia Federation of Humane Societies Annual Conference, Williamsburg, Virginia: The “Pit Bull” Placebo: Media, Myths and Politics and the Effect on Companion Dogs.”
Date: 2012-03-30

Posted in Events

Rethink ‘pit bull’ and break the cycle of discrimination

Title: Rethink ‘pit bull’ and break the cycle of discrimination
Location: APDT Webinar
Link out: Click here
Description: Rethink ‘Pit bull’ and Break the Cycle of Discrimination

With Don Cleary of the National Canine Research Council
Attendees will learn the history of canine discrimination, how it led to the demonization of dogs called “pit bulls,” and how it has resulted in commercial discrimination, barriers to adoption, and breed specific legislation. We will also discuss the origin and limitations of modern dog bite studies, along with selected reports concerning the human-canine bond that have appeared in the academic literature. Regulating dogs by breed or appearance, whether in shelters or in our communities, destroys the human-canine bond. Trainers have the opportunity to teach their clients a better understanding of dogs, and, in doing so, to protect future generations of dogs from being targeted. Dog trainers can help break the cycle of discrimination by urging their clients to put aside stereotypes and hold all dog owners to the same high standards of accountability and care.
Start Time: 03:00
Date: 2012-02-02
End Time: 04:30

Posted in Events

Canine Companions in Life Honored in Death

Last October, in an essay in The New York Times, Kelly Oliver, W. Alton Jones Professor of Philosophy at Vanderbilt University, observed that, “love and emotional dependence – most especially the love of animals – are still seen as too feminine, too lightweight, to be serious philosophical issues.”

“Loving animals as friends and family is seen as quirky at best and at worst, crazy,” Professor Oliver wrote.[i]

Whatever our contemporary cultural bias, there is archeological evidence that thousands of years ago, human beings regarded some canids (dogs?) as beings possessing essential qualities similar to those they had recognized in themselves.  To these peoples, humans were not the only sentient, emotional and social creatures in creation.  Some animals were also “persons,” in the sense that we moderns might use the term, and were interacted with as such.

And it is as “persons” that these canids were buried.

A paper published late last year in the Journal of Anthropological Archeology, describes burial sites in the Lake Baikal region of central Russia that date as far back as 8000 years before the present.[ii] At a number of sites in the region, dogs, and even a wolf, were buried with “lavish care, often on a par with that given to the human dead.”  In one grave, canid remains were found with those of human beings; though it is not likely that the canids were killed to be buried with the human beings. These were separate interments at different times.  At another site, dogs were buried in their own individual sites, complete with the same kinds of materials, such as spoons and pendants, as are found in the graves of human beings.

The most interesting find is the remains of a dog buried in Shamanka, at the southwest corner of Lake Baikal.   The indications are that this dog was middle aged, and may have  been used as a beast of burden; but also that he/she ate a diet similar to that of its human companions.  The scientists believe that the dog must have lived in close contact with humans, sharing food and assisting in tasks.  In death, the humans accorded the dog the same honors that they accorded themselves.  They buried the dog in the same manner that they buried each other.

Neolithic peoples in the northern hemisphere related to some canids differently than we do today –differently than critics of pet-keeping argue that we should relate to them. This may have been a function of a belief system that ascribed consciousness to a variety of other animals and even to natural forces, such as the wind and rain.

Whatever the source of their beliefs, they reflected awareness applicable in our own time. According to Charles Siebert, “Through close and repeated observations of different species in a variety of group settings and circumstances, scientists are finding that our own behavioral traits exist in varying degrees and dimensions among creatures across all the branches of life’s tree.”[iii]

The Neolithic natives of the Baikal region of Russia did not have to wait for The New York Times to know how to respect their canine companions.  They had their own wisdom to guide them.

It is clear that humans and dogs have developed together for thousands of years.  Discoveries such as those made near Lake Baikal remind us that the human-canine bond is unique, irreplaceable, and deserving of our diligent protection.

The complete journal article can be obtained through the University of Alberta website at: http://bap.arts.ualberta.ca/UserFiles/File/Losey_JAA_2011.pdf


[i] Oliver, Kelly. “Pet Lovers, Pathologized.” The New York Times, October 30, 2011.

[ii] Losey, R.J., et al. “Canids as persons: Early Neolithic dog and wolf burials, Cis-Baikal, Siberia.” J. Anthropol. Archaeol. (2011), doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2011.01.001

[iii] Siebert, Charles. “The Animal Self.” The New York Times, January 22, 2006.

Posted in News, Uncategorized