Page 1 of 330 The Monthly National Legislation Report 7/5/2010 ...

The Monthly National Legislation Reporthttp://mnlreport.typepad.com/Page 137 of 3307/5/2010Daviess County – (8/28/09) - The fight against puppy mills in Daviess County is starting to heat up as the Daviess County Humane Society has placed billboards this week on the awareness of puppy mills.The boards, seen on SR 57 north of Washington and U.S. 50 east of Washington ask people to visit their Web site and sign a petition. The county has been called by other media outlets the “Puppy Mill Capitalof Indiana” for its numerous dog breeders, particularly in Amish areas. A puppy mill is defined as a dog breeder that uses methods of breeding andkeeping dogs that are considered inhumane by animal rights advocates and state legislators. The petition the society is wanting people to sign is for aproposed ordinance the society is slated to present to the Daviess County Commissioners in September asking the county to limit the number ofunaltered adult female dogs a breeder can have. As of Thursday evening, there were 13 signatures on the Web-based petition. Earlier this year, thestate legislature passed HB 1468, which went into law on July 1. The law requires breeders to register with the state Board of Animal Health and complywith state and USDA regulations.For the Humane Society, the state law does not go far enough.“What the state did is open Pandora’s Box because they can have 500 dogs at one location and only pay $500,” Mattes said. “Most states are looking toshut down puppy mills and there’s too much overpopulation (of animals).” Mattes felt the state law is so lax, puppy millers from other states may come to Indiana because their home states have stricterregulations of breeders. “They can still have 500 dogs at one location without any problems,” Mattes said. The billboards were paid for by society members and donations given during adoption drives. AnneSterling, Indiana director of the Humane Society of the United States, said Daviess County has one of the largest breeders in the state. Sterling also said other counties in the state are looking towards stiffeningthe state law with local ordinances.Elkhart – (8/17/09) - Should the city of Elkhart ban pit bulls? That's a question the City Council started to answer on Monday night. The council took a look at the first draft of a new ordinance that wouldmake it illegal to own pit bulls within city limits. As written, the law would grandfather in current pit bull owners provided they meet certain guidelines like muzzling their dogs and carrying $300,000 worth ofinsurance coverage. Current owners would have to meet those requirements within 180 days after the ordinance takes effect. After those 180 days, it would be illegal for anyone else to own a pitbull. City Council president Rod Roberson said the time has come to do something about the breed. "It does happen in certain neighborhoods where these dogs actually hold the wholeneighborhood hostage," said Roberson. "I think it's important to be aware that a dog shouldn't determine when you walk down a street or when you visit a park or when you mow your lawn."The council did not hear public comment on the issue on Monday, but will in future meetings. No word on when the council will vote.IOWAAtlantic – (8/14/09) - The Atlantic City Council has asked City Attorney Dave Wiederstein to begin researching language for a possible aggressive dog ordinance following a request from acitizen Wednesday night.Mason City – Cerro Gordo – (8/25/09) - Cerro Gordo County supervisors will try to put a muzzle on barking dogs, at least figuratively, with an ordinance they will take up next month. The proposedordinance, which will have its first reading on Sept. 1, would make it illegal for anyone to have an animal that “howls, barks, whines, bays or makes sounds of any kind that disturbs the peace and quiet for morethan 15 minutes.” The ordinance also would prohibit owners from having animals running at large; harassing, biting or scratching; and leaving wastes that become a health hazard. In addition, the new lawwould ban dogs from any public parks during events sponsored by board of supervisors or county conservation board unless sanctioned by either board. Violations would be misdemeanors carrying a $25 finefor the first offense, up to $100 for a second offense and up to $200 for a third offense. County Administrative Officer Tom Drzycimski told supervisors at today’s meeting the county ordinance would bepatterned after Mason City’s.KANSASJohnson County – (8/20/09) - Animal rights activists begged the Johnson County park board Wednesday to spare the lives of deer in Shawnee Mission Park. About 40 people protestedoutside park district offices holding signs that read “Stop the Killing” and “Save Our Shawnee Mission Deer.” The demonstration was organized by the Bite Club of KC, an animal rightsorganization founded by Jason Miller of Lenexa. “I don’t want them to kill the deer,” said Kathy Martin of Shawnee as she held a sign. “It’s so inhumane.” Responding to severeoverpopulation of deer in the park, the board decided earlier this summer to recruit police officers to shoot the deer this fall. The goal is to reduce the herd from about 200 deer per squaremile to 50. Many of the demonstrators spoke at a meeting of the park board, urging officials to find nonlethal methods of thinning the herd. “We want to get the word out that this impendingherd cull is unnecessary, barbaric and ineffective,” Miller said. Judy Carman, co-founder of Animal Outreach of Kansas, said a 2003 study found that a deer population could be reduced by 30to 60 percent in four to 10 years by sterilizing 25 to 50 percent of the females.KENTUCKYWilliamsburg – (8/20/09) - During the regularly scheduled meeting of the Williamsburg City Council which took place on Aug. 10, council members accepted the first reading of two controversial ordinances.The first, Ordinance No. 09-004, seeks to reign in on garage and yard sales, and the second, Ordinance No. 09-005, hopes to tighten the leash on dog-related activities in Williamsburg. The new zoningordinance, which is being referred to as “the new dog ordinance” by community members, enumerates new violations and clarifies existing ones.First, the ordinance states it is illegal for “any person…to keep, harbor, or own any animal and/or pet…without a current vaccination tag for rabies.” It then declares that any animal/pet owner is responsible forensuring a rabies vaccination is regularly administered. The next section of the ordinance pertains to the “public nuisance” aspect of animals/pets. It reads, “No person shall keep, harbor, or own any dog whichshall do any one or more of the following…actions.” Those actions include “incessantly” barking, howling, yelping, or whining “loud enough to be heard beyond the premises where it is kept or harbored.”Other objectionable actions include “habitually” going upon any property not belonging to the dog owner; turning over or invading any garbage cans not belonging to the dog owner; damaging any property notbelonging to the dog owner; “habitually” running at, jumping at, chasing, barking at, or biting at any person other than the dog owner; and chasing, attacking, or killing “any other animal/livestock” notbelonging to the dog owner. Section three of the proposed ordinance makes it illegal to “keep, harbor, or own any dog…which is not restrained at all times.” Being restrained requires the dog to be “confined…within an enclosure,” “firmly secured by means of collar and chain” or leash, or, lastly, “being in the immediate control of its owner.” Though not explicitly defined, the latter seemingly refers to a dog beingphysically restrained by its owner, perhaps while being held.The two following sections of the ordinance pertain to impounding animals deemed to be in violation of the ordinance and procedures for reclaiming an animal which has been impounded. Another sectionprovides guidelines for maintaining an appropriate level of sanitation within an animal’s “pen, yard, lot, or other enclosure.” It also seeks to combat the growing problem of animal waste being left on publicproperty, which has been a problem at Williamsburg’s recreational sites, such as Bill Woods Park in downtown. Relating to such, the ordinance reads: “The owner or custodian of every animal…shall containand remove any excrement deposited by their animal(s) on public walks, streets, recreation areas, or private property belonging to another.” Failure to remove animal waste is “declared a public nuisance,” andviolators will be fined “$25 for each offense, with each day’s violation being considered a separate offense.” Animal waste, especially, has been a problem for residents of Williamsburg. Despite multiple signsat Bill Woods Park, residents have realized the hard way that others simply aren’t obeying dog waste rules. Bill Woods Park is the site of Williamsburg’s Old Fashioned Block Parties.This ordinance must be read again during September’s meeting of the Williamsburg City Council prior to taking effect.MAINEAugusta – (8/12/09) - Governor John E. Baldacci today ceremonially signed LD 454, An Act To Expand Representation on the Animal Welfare Advisory Council. Bill sponsor Sen. RichardNass (R-York) was at the ceremonial signing, as were the First Lady and the First Family’s dogs, Sam and Mia. In addition, members of the Federation of Maine Dog Clubs and ResponsibleDog Owners, supporters of the bill, were represented at the event.The legislation expands the composition of the Animal Welfare Advisory Council to include a kennel license holder. Itrequires the Governor, in making this nomination, to consider a list made by State-based dog clubs. The bill also ensures that a pet owner sits on the board, as well as a person representinglicensed breeding kennels.“This is one of many pieces of legislation passed this session to address animal welfare issues, something that is important to all Mainers,” said the Governor. “As adog owner, I am pleased to sign this bill into law.” The bill goes into effect 90 days after the close of the Legislative session, which is Sept. 12.Kittery – (8/26/09) - Proposed changes to an ordinance dealing with dog and horse waste led to a spirited discussion for the Town Council. Councilor Ann Grinnell presented the changes, which would includehorses in an ordinance that currently requires dog owners to pick up and dispose of their canines' waste, and would provide for a container for dog waste at Seapoint Beach paid for partly by fines under theordinance. The purpose of Monday night's meeting was to nail down the language to be used in the ordinance and the inclusion of the container before a September public hearing, according to Grinnell. Whenfellow councilors asked whether bags or even shovels would be provided for horse owners, she countered the ordinance would specify it was the owner's responsibility to figure out how to remove the manure."I feel that if you're going to ride a horse on public ways, you're going to have to figure out how to pick up that poop," Grinnell said. Councilor Frank Dennett questioned how many horses were present in thetown. Councilor Gary Beers, who favored expanding the definition beyond public ways and sidewalks, said horse manure is a potent fertilizer and questioned whether it could be used in the new co-generationenergy system for the Town Hall. He said putting up the container and paying to have the dog waste collected at the beach, however, was enabling those not taking proper care of the waste and was extendingan opportunity not afforded to horse owners in Rogers Park. Police Chief Ed Strong said police could enforce the ordinance but would need to be present to see which horse was responsibile for the manure.Both he and Parks Commission Co-Chairman Page Mead said people bag up dog waste at Seapoint Beach now, but tend to leave the bags sitting on the beach, defeating the purpose.A public hearing on the proposed ordinance changes will take place Sept. 28, and Council Chairman Jeff Thomson said he hoped to get more input from residents then.MARYLAND