Lawsuit Filed Against Louisville, KY, Dog Ordinance

[ChRotties]

For those of you that aren't familiar with the 91 page draconian dog "law"*cough*, you may read it in it's entirety here:
www.louisville-pets.com You will need Adobe Acrobat to open the file.

From today's Courier-Journal:
http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/...WS01/703281218

************************************************** ********
Lawsuit challenges dog curbs
Clubs, sportsmen, vets seeking relief

By Dan Klepal
[email protected]
The Courier-Journal



Kennel clubs, cat clubs, sportsmen and veterinarians joined yesterday to file a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Louisville's controversial new dog ordinance.

The ordinance, signed into law in Jan. 4, significantly increases license fees for animals deemed to be dangerous or potentially dangerous and restricts how dogs that have not been spayed or neutered can be kept.



Jon Fleischaker, attorney for the 12 organizations and individuals suing the city, said his clients believe the ordinance violates the federal and state constitutions. The suit, filed in Jefferson Circuit Court, claims that the ordinance isn't even a "dog law."

"It is a law that restricts the freedoms of people," the suit says.

"The law allows unfettered discretion by city officials in dealing with the property of people, without standards and without guidelines," Fleischaker said. "This is an effort by city officials to dictate how people deal with their pets, when their pets aren't bothering anyone."

The suit asks the court to strike down the ordinance but does not seek a restraining order against its enforcement.

Norman Auspitz, the owner of the Kentucky Colonels Cat Club, said he joined as a plaintiff because the ordinance is "anti-pet."

"It's a bizarre thing," Auspitz said. "The law talks about unaltered animals, be they dogs, be they cats, be they rabbits."

The ordinance was debated for more than a year after two fatal attacks -- one on a 2-year-old girl, the other on an elderly man. It originally was to be a ban on pit bulls and Rottweilers, two breeds that some people say are inherently aggressive.

Eventually, the council dropped the idea of bans on specific breeds, opting instead for higher license fees for dogs that have not been spayed or neutered, and dictating that any sexually unaltered dog must be kept on a 4-foot leash whenever off the owner's property.

The ordinance also says that animal control will spay or neuter any unaltered dog it picks up -- a provision that the council may change next week.

The council approved the ordinance 16-8 after a nine-hour meeting Dec. 20, during which numerous last-minute amendments were passed.

Metro Council President Rick Blackwell said the ordinance is necessary for public safety. He said Animal Services Director Gilles Meloche is confident of his department's ability to enforce the ordinance, and the Jefferson County attorney's office is confident that it is constitutional.

"I feel like we put together a pretty comprehensive ordinance," Blackwell said. "There was a ton of discussion on it, a lot of different viewpoints. At some point, we felt like we had to move forward with something that we had the votes for. If there were any changes (later), then so be it. We'd look at them."

The suit says the law does not protect the public.

"Science does not support the ordinance's false presumption that unaltered dogs are more aggressive than altered dogs," the suit says. "Further, the ordinance's definitions of 'potentially dangerous' and 'dangerous' dogs are so vague and overbroad that they effectively include every dog in Louisville."

Council member Kelly Downard, R-16th District, is in a delicate position of being on council and yet supporting many aspects of the lawsuit. Downard voted against the ordinance.

"Half the council never read the ordinance before voting on it because they didn't get it until that night," Downard said. "It's awkward. A large group of us is against it. The law was put together so quickly, it conflicts with itself in many cases."

THE PLAINTIFFS

The Louisville Kennel Club

The League of Kentucky Sportsmen

Kentucky Houndsmen's Association

Greater Louisville Training Club

Felines Cat Club

Dimes and Dollars Cat Club

Kentucky Colonels Cat Club

Waggin' Tail Kennels

Royalton Kennels

Paul Lee of Louisville

H. Patrick King Jr., veterinarian

Kurt Oliver, veterinarian

 

[Buckshot]

Other than the fact that laws dont work, if they take more than a paragraph the people who wrote it need to be hung.

 

[casablanca1]

We're been so enthusiastic about fighting bsl that we keep forgetting that the easy answer to not going anti-breed is to go anti-dog. Presto - no bias. From the tone of that article, public sympathy is not behind the dog owners - everything the reporter mentions seems totally reasonable - confine dangerous dogs, leash intact dogs. You'd have to read the very long ordinance to know that it is a problematic thing for a lot of reasonable dog owners. This sort of thing is going to get more common as bsl is fought down, and I hope the anti-bsl people realize that it's their responsibility. Most dog people supported them; they need to repay that support by not letting proposed bsl morph into anti-dog legislation.

 

[Renee750il]

I'd like to read Fleischaker's brief.

 

[Miakoda]

Most dog people supported them

Sadly, most dog people did not & do not support those of us with breeds affected by BSL.

And your statements of we need to "repay" these helpful owners of other breeds, well by fighting BSL we are doing just that. BSL won't just stop with certain breeds it will continue on & on & on. And no offense, but other dog owners need to be fighting BSL for themselves as well. It's a self serving battle, not one done just to help us vicious pit bull owners.

 

[Renee750il]

Absolutely, Mia . . . after all, "if we do not hang together, we shall all surely hang separately." (Thomas Paine)

 

[ChRotties]

I so agree with you all! BSL and other types of anti-dog legislation should be the concern of ALL RESPONSIBLE DOG OWNERS!
I get so p**** off when I hear, "well, I don't have a pit or a rottie, so it doesn't matter to me!"

First it's BSL, then when that doesn't work(and it DOES NOT WORK) the mandatory speuter laws come creeping in...and then there is this garbage that got signed by the Mayor in L'ville...
And for those that don't believe the ARs are behind most of this, I have a copy of a letter from HSus to the powers that be in L'ville stating their reasoning behind "banning pit bulls and their breeding"

I'll try to post it here..

 

[ChRotties]

Copy of HSUS letter to L'ville

The only way I could get this on here was to copy and paste from my file on my puter..
**********************************************************

July 5, 2006


Dear Louisville Metro Council and Animal Ordinance Advisory Group Members:


After a number of high profile dog attacks late last year, proposed changes in the city’s animal ordinance have been discussed at great length over the last few months. Experts in various animal professions have all contributed to the effort. As the time approaches to decide on an ordinance, I hope that you will consider the following points from The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS):

Dangerous dogs – The most effective way to control dangerous dogs within a community is to give local animal control the authority and financing to easily identify and regulate both dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs. Dogs that repeatedly run loose, attack other animals, and menace or attack people should all be considered a threat to the community. Good dangerous dog legislation is strictly enforced and punishes irresponsible dog owners. I have attached The HSUS Model Dangerous Dog Legislation for your review.

Pit bulls – There is no doubt that pit bulls are in bad shape in America right now. They are likely the most popular dog in the country, but unfortunately, they are also the dogs of choice for drug dealers, gang members, and anyone else who is looking for a dog to be a status symbol. Legislation banning pit bulls or requiring strict regulation will not solve the problems created by dangerous dogs. However, because pit bulls currently flood animal shelters in Louisville and across the country, legislation requiring their mandatory sterilization could be a benefit to the breed and to all dogs in the community. Additionally, the mandatory sterilization of pit bulls would negatively impact those individuals who use pit bulls for fighting, guarding locations used for illegal activities, and the backyard breeders who so recklessly add to the dog overpopulation. Requiring the sterilization of pit bulls does not have the same problems as traditional breed-specific legislation. This does not punish responsible pet owners, as truly responsible owners already have their animals sterilized.

Dog chaining and tethering – The long term chaining or tethering of dogs is a two-pronged issue: the practice is inhumane to the animals and creates a safety risk to the community. Dogs are social animals and the isolation created by long-term tethering goes against their nature. Without social contact, life on a chain leads dogs to become, lonely, bored, territorial, and aggressive. In fact, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), chained dogs are 2.8 times more likely to attack than unchained dogs and chained dogs are 5.4 times more likely to attack children than unchained dogs. By restricting the hours that dogs can be tethered and regulating the set up (chain vs. cable trolley), such legislation could protect letter carriers, meter readers, and other professionals who work door-to-door, while also negatively impacting dog fighters who keep dozens of dogs chained in their yards.

Outdoor dog shelters – While The HSUS always encourages pet owners to keep their dogs indoors with the family, dogs that live or spend much time outdoors must have adequate shelter. Certain structures like rabbit hutches or plastic barrels are not acceptable. Regulations should be enacted that outline the specific requirements for outdoor dog shelters. Such structures must have a roof, a floor, and four side walls, with one wall having a doorway; the size of the structure and doorway must allow the dog to easily enter and exit, lay down, stand up, and turn around; the structure must provide shade and protect the interior from wind, rain, snow, other forms of precipitation, and extreme weather. Regulations like these will ensure the safety of dogs outdoors.

Pet auctions & flea market sales - Animal auctions place pets without regard for their future or the pressures that a new pet puts on a family. Whether such auctions are done for profit or for charity fundraisers, they are irresponsible and unethical.*Pet auctions fly in the face of the efforts of animal shelters and rescue groups, not only philosophically, but also in very real terms as animals obtained from auctions may easily be surrendered to such groups. Flea markets provide nothing but an unregulated venue for impulse animal purchases.*This lack of regulation*allows disreputable animal sellers to add animals of questionable health and temperament to a pet*overpopulation that is already*overextending both animal services offices and the taxpayers who fund them.*Companion animal and human relationships are more successful when they’re carefully considered along with the understanding of commitment and responsibility that a pet brings.*

Spay/Neuter and adoption groups – Pet overpopulation is a problem everywhere. There are millions of animals euthanized every year in the United States simply because they lack a home. It is imperative that animal shelters and adoption groups are required to have all animals sterilized before adoption. Dogs can begin reproducing as early as six months of age, and cats as early as four months of age. Giving out vouchers and having adopters sign contracts promising to have their new pets altered by a certain age is not effective. Too often new adopters forget, don’t care, or even want their animal intact. While some people may have concerns about juvenile (or pediatric) spay/neuter, the surgeries are perfectly safe when performed by experienced veterinarians.

Breeders & differential licensing – Differential licensing is a system where owners of intact animals pay a much higher licensing fee than owners of altered animals. The extra funds can be used to provide subsidized spay/neuter services to low income pet owners. Not only does this system encourage pet sterilization, it also helps facilitate it. While this system costs breeders more money, this is fair because they make money adding to the pet population. An additional measure requiring breeders to list their license number in newspaper ads would be beneficial to the community. It would make sure that only licensed (legal) breeders advertise and would make them easier to identify for consumers and animal control officers, in case of problems.

The attempted re-draft of the Louisville metro animal ordinance has taken many forms. Despite some minor problems, most versions contain a number of excellent, progressive provisions that will benefit the community. Many groups have suggested weakening these provisions, but to do so would only hurt the animals and the community as a whole. It is not clear whether these people are motivated by financial gain or simply set in their ways. They may benefit from nixing certain points, but the rest of the community would not.

As a complement to a new ordinance, The HSUS would be pleased to send specialists to Louisville to train law enforcement officials in investigating and prosecuting dog fighters. Increased enforcement of the state’s felony prohibition on dog fighting would advance any effort to reign in problematic individuals who use dogs in illegal and harmful ways.

As always, The HSUS is available to answer questions or help in any way that we can.

Sincerely,

Kentucky Legislative Coordinator
The Humane Society of the United States
291 N. Hubbbards Lane, #280
Louisville, KY 40207
502-893-9796
[email protected]

 

[Laurelin]

I've said before, and I'll say it again. Stupid stupid stupid law.

And I can't help but thinking that a 4 foot lead wouldn't work for my intact dogs- they're short! What do you want me to do? Hang them?

 

[casablanca1]

Sadly, most dog people did not & do not support those of us with breeds affected by BSL. And your statements of we need to "repay" these helpful owners of other breeds, well by fighting BSL we are doing just that. BSL won't just stop with certain breeds it will continue on & on & on. And no offense, but other dog owners need to be fighting BSL for themselves as well. It's a self serving battle, not one done just to help us vicious pit bull owners.

This is nonesense. Most people with dogs do support people with pit bulls, but it doesn't cut both ways. The pit bull owners who fight bsl aren't doing the rest of us any favors; in most cases, they're undercutting us by casting an ugly shadow over all dogs. The only thing that's going to end in dogs being hurt as a race is the BSL fight itself. The battle to rehab the pit bull is all about image - the anti-bsl movement seems to focus exclusively on doing a deadly PR job on dogs as a race. I've seen more anti-dog rhetoric coming from pit bull fans - all dogs bite, no dog can be trusted, never leave a child alone with a dog - and more damaging stories about dogs being tossed around. Standard operation procedure for anyone protesting bsl is to start talking about how dangerous dogs are, bringing up the last time a Golden Retriever killed someone, and in general re-defining man's best friend as a potential killer who only crates, extensive socialization and puppy kindergarten classes can tame. It's an anti-dog campaign to save one breed.

 

[ChRotties]

um, excuse me, but BSL is not about ONE BREED. Yes, the focus of late has been on pit bull type dogs. BSL should be a concern of ALL dog owners. It must be fought tooth and nail and IS FOUGHT every day by responsible dog owners and those of us involved in the fancy, many with breeds not yet affected by bsl nonsense.
Should children be left alone with dogs? no, dogs are not babysitters. All dogs have the ability to bite.


BSL , in and of itself, is constructed in the belief that there are inherently vicious breeds of dogs. Which is total bull. Any breed, at any time, at the whim of some uneducated lawmaker, is subject to be classified as "dangerous". The focus needs to be on stronger punishments for irresponsible dog owners, no matter the breed.

It's very easy for those of us directly under fire by bsl to become defensive. For 15 years, I've educated to the best of my ability , promoting responsible Rottweiler ownership and responsible ownership in general. The American Rottweiler Club has done a wonderful job of educating and promoting this for the breed as a whole. I sometimes wish there was a more "unified" fight, if you will, among the bully type breed owners....Regardless, all dog owners, must stand together and work to educate lawmakers, and the public on responsible dog ownership. That's the only way to eventually do away with BSL.

 

[Kayla]

This is nonesense. Most people with dogs do support people with pit bulls, but it doesn't cut both ways. The pit bull owners who fight bsl aren't doing the rest of us any favors; in most cases, they're undercutting us by casting an ugly shadow over all dogs. The only thing that's going to end in dogs being hurt as a race is the BSL fight itself. The battle to rehab the pit bull is all about image - the anti-bsl movement seems to focus exclusively on doing a deadly PR job on dogs as a race. I've seen more anti-dog rhetoric coming from pit bull fans - all dogs bite, no dog can be trusted, never leave a child alone with a dog - and more damaging stories about dogs being tossed around. Standard operation procedure for anyone protesting bsl is to start talking about how dangerous dogs are, bringing up the last time a Golden Retriever killed someone, and in general re-defining man's best friend as a potential killer who only crates, extensive socialization and puppy kindergarten classes can tame. It's an anti-dog campaign to save one breed.

I completely disagree with you, it's not an anti-dog campiegn it's a reality check. ALL DOGS CAN KILL PEOPLE, yes I said it, from poms to goldens, to labs to cockers and yes pittbulls, rotti's, dobs and Shepherds unless care and effort is made from an early age to properly socailize and train your pup to model it in to a good canine citizen regardless of breed. If you think bsl is not something that needs to be fought look what happened in some european countries, in some cases over 70 breeds are banned all which started out with your typical 3 or 4 easy scape goats.

Don't come crying to us when your breed is on the line as bsl affects ALL responsible owners of ALL breeds period.

 

[ChRotties]

Very well stated, Kayla.