The Fargo City Commission unanimously voted to update our city’s dog and cat ordinance to put stricter punishments and responsibilities on the owners of ”dangerous” dogs or “potentially dangerous” dogs.
Thankfully, this ordinance will not include breed specific regulations or bans on certain breeds of dogs. Instead, it will hold all dog owners to the same standards.
Banning or regulating a certain dog breed would mean judging a dog on her looks rather than her behavior. Aggression is a state of mind, and any animal is capable of acting aggressively under the right circumstances. There is no such thing as a “vicious dog breed.”
We all know that “pitbulls” are usually the target for dangerous dog ordinances. It doesn’t help that some “pitbull” owners are too quick to defend their dogs. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard dog owners say something like, “She’s a pitbull, but she’s friendly.”
‘Pitbulls”
Dangerous dog statistics that blame “pitbulls” for the majority of dog bites are way off because pretty much any mutt can be identified as a “pitbull.” A ”pitbull” is not a breed of dog, and therefore it is up to interpretation what a “pitbull” actually looks like. The name “pitbull” generally groups together the American pit bull terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier and American bulldog.
The American pit bull terrier gets a bad rap because it takes the blame for aggressive behavior from boxers, black lab mixes, Boston terrier mixes and anything else misidentified as a “pitbull.” Since so many dogs can be considered “pitbulls,” of course there will be a higher number of “pitbull” bites.
People can’t identify purebred dogs, and they certainly can’t identify mixed breeds. Heck, I can’t even identify the breeds in my own mutt, and I work with dogs every day!
‘Vicious’ dog laws
Some examples of breed specific regulations that target American pit bull terriers inlude the Wichita, Kan., dog ordinance that requires all “pitbulls” to be microchipped and sterilized unless the owner has a breeders license.
The “vicious dog” ordinance in Des Moines, Iowa, defines a vicious dog as any dog with the appearance and characteristics of being predominately of the breeds Staffordshire terrier, American pit bull terrier or American Staffordshire terrier.
The dog ordinance in Omaha, Neb., requires all “pitbulls” to be leashed and muzzled whenever they are out of a “fenced enclosure.”
A good resource to check out for news on breed specific regulation is the KC Dog Blog. I was also shocked by a story from Vet Wisdom Cafe about a woman driving through Denver over the holidays who had her pitbull puppy violently taken from her car by an arrogant cop. “Pitbulls” are banned from the city of Denver.
Are ‘dangerous dog’ laws necessary?
Fargo’s dangerous dog ordinance will put the responsibility on dog owners as a whole, with strict regulations for those who own dogs legally considered “dangerous” or “potentially dangerous.”
The real issue is keeping all children, adults and domestic animals safe, but I’m leery of dangerous dog ordinances whether they are breed specific or not. Like dog breeder regulations or mandatory spay/neuter laws, dangerous dog ordinances may be well intended but may lack the desired results and are difficult to enforce.
What will happen to dogs labeled “dangerous” when their owners are unable to or refuse to follow the regulations required in order to keep the dog?
Some of the requirements to keep a “dangerous dog” in Fargo include paying a $500 per year license, sterilizing and microchipping the dog and carrying $300,000 in liability insurance, according to The Forum.
Some will say if you can’t afford to pay the price, then you shouldn’t have a dog. That may be true, but with this dangerous dog ordinance in place we are going to see an increase in the amount of dogs euthanized in Fargo-area pounds in 2010.
What are your thoughts on dangerous dog ordinances? Does your city have one, and is it effective?
The ”pitbulls” above (L to R: Buddy, Delton and Vixen) are all up for adoption with 4 Luv of Dog Rescue in Fargo.
5/4/10 update: Delton was adopted!
No related posts.
January 17th, 2010 at 10:38 pm
I am glad that Fargo did not target specific breeds in the ordinance, but I completely agree with what you said, what happens to these dogs when the owners can’t afford the fees or don’t follow the regulations to keep the dogs? But on the other hand, I am a firm believer that it’s not the breed or the dog, it’s the human that is training/caring for it. If you have an aggressive dog to the point where if you lose control of it it will attack people or other animals, then I don’t consider you a responsible dog owner and think that you shouldn’t have any dog. But of course, issues like this are not black and white, and a dog that may be labeled “dangerous” maybe wound up in the wrong circumstances and is really not overall and aggressive dog. I think it’s sad that people are so irresponsible that cities feel the need to have extreme breed ordinances like the ones you mentioned. Do you know if there is information in the Fargo ordinance about what happens to a dangerous dog if it ends up in the pound and the owner does not claim it?
January 18th, 2010 at 1:20 am
Thanks for the write up, Lindsay. I strongly agree with you on this subject.
January 18th, 2010 at 7:18 am
Thanks Christina! Amanda, I am not sure what happens to a “dangerous dog” that is impounded and not claimed by its owner. I will find out for you.
January 18th, 2010 at 9:36 am
I agree as well.
All dogs present a level of “risk.” It would be nice to identify dogs that pose a greater threat of harming someone (or property) & making sure there is insurance to cover it and safeguards to prevent it. This can not be achieved by regulating dog breed, as you’ve noted so well.
I recently read “Dogtown: A Sanctuary for Rescued Dogs” (the National Geographic show is about the same place), and it was talking about what happened to some of the pits who were rescued from the Michael Vick compound and were deemed by a court as “too dangerous to ever be released” and other dogs deemed as dangerous. When you learn about the fabulous work that can be done with dogs who have every reason and right to be dangerous, the concept of a “dangerous breed” seems even more ridiculous.
January 18th, 2010 at 9:54 am
I will check out that book. I love the show Dogtown.
January 18th, 2010 at 10:50 am
I too am glad to see that the ordnance does not target a specific breed, but rather places the responsibility on the human factor. I have two sweet dogs, and one can be horribly dangerous in the right circumstances (one with anyone who does not look like everyone else, read minorities or uniforms) . I take steps to ensure that they are not placed in these situations and they are ALWAYS on leash, in a fenced yard or in the house.
On the flip side, I had a friend whose dog bit a child. When we came to visit with another child, guess what? It got bit. Friend was surprised because she thought it was a one-time deal (??) and didn’t think it worth mentioning.
January 18th, 2010 at 11:04 am
I’m curious, what they deem “dangerous”? I’m glad it’s not breed specific, but I just don’t quite understand the ordinance I guess. I am all for owners taking responsibility for their pets, but I have to agree, that legislating that is nearly impossible.
January 18th, 2010 at 11:20 am
I just want to share something that happened yesterday:
We met up with our area’s friendly dog club for a 2-hour off-leash hike. Attending the hike were four German Shepherds, one pug, and one American Mastiff. All dogs got along great, taking turn being the chaser or the chased. Near the end of our hike we ran in to a man with a Springer Spaniel. We assured him that all the dogs were friendly, and he responded “mine isn’t!” And sure enough, this little dog attacked the Mastiff! The Mastiff retaliated and it took a few frantic seconds later we all had our dogs leashed and the culprits were separated. Fortunately the only damage was a scratched nose on the Mastiff, there was no mark on the Spaniel.
January 18th, 2010 at 11:28 am
If only all owners with potentially dangerous dogs could just be responsible like you Jill and know how to keep the dog and others safe.
Marie, Fargo’s ordinance considers dogs “potentially dangerous” under a number of circumstances such as if it attacks another domestic animal unprovoked or if it bites someone. But I agree it is nearly impossible to enforce. And how do you decide what is provoked and what isn’t? And what is considered a bite? Etc.
January 18th, 2010 at 11:31 am
Sylvie,
That is so frustrating. What kind of idiot lets his aggressive dog off leash? All we can really do is make sure to keep our own dogs under control, always practice the recall and always teach dogs to be calm and ignore these approaching problem dogs.
January 18th, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Marie, according to an article in our local newspaper, The Forum, a dog can be considered potentially dangerous in Fargo if it:
- bites a human or animal while unprovoked
- chases or approaches someone off the owner’s property unprovoked as though it will attack
- has a known disposition to attack unprovoked
A dog can be designated dangerous in Fargo if it:
- Causes substantial bodily injury to a person or animal
- Kills a domestic animal while off its owner’s property
- Is considered potentially dangerous and bites, attacks or endangers a human or animal
January 18th, 2010 at 4:46 pm
Sylvie,
Was the area a place where dogs were permitted off-leash? If so, that man had no place being there with his dog. If not, then I think it was a mistake for your group to choose to do an off-leash hike there. Very often, people think that leash laws shouldn’t apply to their own dogs, because the dog can be well-behaved. That’s great, but it doesn’t account for other dogs, that may not be as good with other dogs.
January 18th, 2010 at 6:45 pm
The mastiff shouldn’t have been off leash. If the mastiff had had a better recall, it would’ve gone back to its owner when called rather than fight off the springer. But this was not the case. Most dogs are not as well trained as their owners think and will match the energy of an approaching dog. That’s why we need to teach our dogs to remain calm and ignore excited dogs.
January 18th, 2010 at 10:31 pm
Some of those descriptions of a potentially dangerous dog sound reasonable, but I really don’t know how they will be able to enforce it.
Our animal control officers don’t even have the time or staff to enforce licensing laws.
I do have to say that one of the points that you posted from the newspaper sounds like something that a lot of herding dogs just do naturally.
“chases or approaches someone off the owner’s property unprovoked as though it will attack” I guess it would depend on the perspective of the person whether it was deemed a dangerous threat, or just a dog acting on instinct for chasing/herding moving objects. Not that the dog should be able to get off it’s property unattended by it’s owner anyway…but still difficult to distinguish and enforce.
Too bad we just don’t live in a world of responsible pet owners where this stuff isn’t even a consideration. That’s my dream.
January 19th, 2010 at 6:53 am
Right. What one person sees as aggressive could be just a curious dog. If someone is afraid of dogs or doesn’t understand dogs, than anything could seem like it’s going to attack. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been approached by loose dogs while out on walks. Although sometimes they bark at me, they are never threatening. Usually they’re pretty insecure because they are not on their own property.
January 19th, 2010 at 7:48 am
Shay, it was an off leash area of a conservation area. All dogs, including the Springer Spanier were off leash.
January 19th, 2010 at 9:28 am
Sylvie,
Thanks for the clarification. I never cease to be amazed by people who bring dogs to off-leash areas (dog parks, natural parks, etc.) when they know that their own dog is aggressive with other dogs!
January 25th, 2010 at 9:24 am
Lindsay I really like what you said about some Black Lab mixes being considered Pit mixes. You have ran with Duke before so I know you have had an upclose and personal view of him, felt his coat, etc. My own fiance called Duke a Lab/Pitbull mix just yesterday and he has lived with Duke since the day we adopted him a year and a half ago! I laughed and laughed when I heard him say this. It is my own best guess, and the vets, and the members of the FMKC that he is probably mixed with ACD. I also have two friends who got a puppy a couple years ago and the owner said he was Lab/Boston Terrier. I was with them and helped them pick out the puppy and we saw BOTH parents, the mom was a B. Lab and the dad was a Boston, completely intact and a BIG boy, and they just in the last year have started calling him a Pit/Lab because he is about 60 lbs (really overweight)and has a white patch on the chest. It really irritates me and even though it’s rude whenever I hear her say “my Pit/Lab” I always correct her. An interesting thing about Buddy…. I heard his previous foster mom say at an adoption days event that the vet thought he was part English Mastiff! I thought that made sense.
January 25th, 2010 at 9:42 am
Ha! Duke looks nothing like a pitbull! I have no idea what he is mixed with, but I can see that he could have some kind of cattle dog in him like everyone says. Who knows!
Buddy is an interesting one, too. He might not even have pitbull in him. How can we really know? Maybe he is part mastiff …
I guess this proves why it’s dumb to judge a dog by its breed! Even dog people can’t identify mixed breeds.
January 28th, 2010 at 5:10 pm
Lindsay, this may seem a little random, but do you know of any trainers in the F-M area that work/specialize with aggressive dogs? Most of the ones I have heard of are obedience type trainers who generally think you can teach anything to a dog with treats. It’s not for my dog, but I’ve noticed that any dog that is stated “aggressive” is euthanized in the pound, shelter or by it’s owner. I’m guessing it’s because there is not a good resource in this area for rehabilitating dogs with “aggressive” type issues. Or if there is people just don’t know about it.
January 28th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Red River North Dog Obedience Club is a good place to start. Although the club focuses on general obedience classes and therefore group classes, many of the trainers have plenty of experience working with aggressive dogs and would be able to help an individual out with his or her dog.
I agree, using strictly positive reinforcement training is usually not the best approach.
February 2nd, 2010 at 8:55 am
I’m all for being tough on people who have dangerous dogs. The majority of people who have dogs that bite don’t do anything about it and their dogs continue to be a menace wherever they live.
February 2nd, 2010 at 9:00 am
Unfortunately, you are right.
February 6th, 2010 at 12:39 pm
I wanted to say that while I agree with this law, I feel it makes it difficult for owners who are trying to rehabilitate their animals. If you have a dog with issues, you need to confront those issues and not ignore them. For example, my dog has ‘greeting’ issues. He will get over-excited and approach another dog rudely. This can sometimes result in a fight. In order for me to correct his behavior, I bring him to dog parks with a muzzle and long leash. I force him to interact with other dogs politly, by approaching from the sides or remaining calm around other dogs. The muzzle is simple a precaution until his training progresses to a more acceptable level.
This new law makes it hard for me to continue training my animal. When I bring him to dog parks, owners are already terrified. With this new law, they can legally call animal control and take my dog away. He never does any harm and I am doing the responsible thing by training him/socializing him. All I am saying is that I believe irresponsible owners (those that dont walk their animals or recognize dangerous signs) should be held accountable but responsible owners (those that are training their animals) should be able to continue training without the threat that your dog could be taken away from you.
February 6th, 2010 at 2:30 pm
Yeah I completely agree with you. There is nothing wrong with using a muzzle and then bringing the dog around other dogs to socialize as long as you know what you are doing. I would still avoid dog parks just because there are always so many people there who don’t understand dog behavior. They will freak out and make situations worse if your dog even growls. Plus, their own dogs probably aren’t very socialized or exercised.
February 6th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
That is my problem exactly. I have such a hard time finding safe places to socialize my dog. I’m not inexperienced and I have quite a bit of knowledge on dog behavior but I cannot seem to find people who share the same knowledge. I figured that as long as I know how to read my dog and can keep him under control, I should be okay. To be honost, one of the main reasons why I bring my dog to the park is because the other dogs are not always balanced. It allows my dog to get used to ill-behaved dogs as well and well-behaved dogs. He is doing better, just two weeks ago I was babysitting the neighbors dog for the weekend. They did great together! She made a bigger a deal out of the meeting (stressed out, panting, pacing, whining) than my dog who just laid around and tried to play every once in awhile. I very proud of his behavior.
I hope to someday find a place that I can safely work on his interactions.
February 6th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
Ha! “To be honest, one of the main reasons why I bring my dog to the park is because the other dogs are not always balanced.” I see your point. Since my dog has no aggression issues, but could use more work on staying calm, I should keep that in mind for him – using the park for training and work rather than always play.
Have you taken your dog to any group obedience classes?
February 6th, 2010 at 7:32 pm
As a puppy we went to one but we did not follow through. I keep thinking about signing up but I make excuses. I am making a promise to myself right now to find a dog obedience class this summer. No more excuses. I am job shadowing at the Molen Pet Center, have you been there? It is very interesting. Not the techniques I use when I train dogs but it is a great learning experience.
Yes, I always veiw the dog park as a place to train and work. This way, my dog goes to the park with the mind frame that he is going there to learn not to play. He does get to interact but I always incorperate some sort of lesson like recall or polite behavior. Usually I just use the park to work on his aggression. It is going well so far but I sure do scare the crap out of the other people at the park.
I love my dog, flaws and all. I did not pick the easiest dog to work with but everyday is a beautiful learning experience. I cannot even begin to express how much he has helped me get over my own flaws. Flaws such as denial, lying, distrust, anger, lazyness… just to name a few.
Ahh, the amazing way dogs can heal their owners.
February 6th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
I actually have not been to the Molen Pet Center. I will have to go see it one of these days. I take and help with classes at Red River North Dog Obedience Club. What kind of dog do you have?
February 6th, 2010 at 9:37 pm
A Siberian Husky, he just turned 3 a week ago. When I got him, I was expecting a dog simular to my first but something I had to learn is that every dog is different. Not to mention, I picked the most dominant puppy of the litter, completely due to my ignorance at the time. I actually just tried sending you some ‘outdoor photos’ but my email was acting up.
February 7th, 2010 at 9:26 am
I’m sure he’s a cute dog
February 11th, 2010 at 1:53 pm
As an answer to Amanda’s question (very first comment):
I contacted the Fargo dog pound and asked what happens to a dog that has been declared dangerous by the city if its owner does not claim it. The man who answered the phone told me that the dog would have to be euthanized. Rescue groups and individuals would not be allowed to rescue the dog.