<strong>The</strong> <strong>Monthly</strong> <strong>National</strong> <strong>Legislation</strong> <strong>Report</strong>http://mnlreport.typepad.com/<strong>Page</strong> 262 <strong>of</strong> <strong>330</strong>7/5/<strong>2010</strong>PENNSYLVANIAHB671 - AN ACT relating to dogs, regulating the keeping <strong>of</strong> dogs; providing for the licensing <strong>of</strong> dogs and kennels; providing for the protection <strong>of</strong> dogs and the detention anddestruction <strong>of</strong> dogs in certain cases; regulating the sale and transportation <strong>of</strong> dogs; declaring dogs to be personal property and the subject <strong>of</strong> theft; providing for theabandonment <strong>of</strong> animals; providing for the assessment <strong>of</strong> damages done to animals; providing for payment <strong>of</strong> damages by the Commonwealth in certain cases and theliability <strong>of</strong> the owner or keeper <strong>of</strong> dogs for such damages; imposing powers and duties on certain State and local <strong>of</strong>ficers and employees; providing penalties; and creating aDog Law Restricted Account," further providing for construction <strong>of</strong> article relating to dangerous dogs.SOUTH CAROLINAHB3319 - RELATING TO CERTAIN DEFINITIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE A DANGEROUS ANIMAL MEANS, AMONG OTHER THINGS, AN ANIMAL THAT MAKES AN UNPROVOKED ATTACKON A DOMESTIC ANIMAL OR AN ANIMAL WHOSE CERTAIN ACTIONS WOULD CAUSE A PERSON REASONABLY TO BELIEVE THE ANIMAL WILL ATTACK AND CAUSE BODILY INJURYTO A DOMESTIC ANIMAL.TENNESSEEGreene County - (2/19/09) - A subcommittee <strong>of</strong> the Greene County Commission's Animal Control Committee voted Tuesday afternoon to give greater authority to CountyAnimal Control Director Eddie Key to enforce the county's leash law. <strong>The</strong> vote by the subcommittee, which includes commissioners on the committee plus pet-rescueactivists and others in favor <strong>of</strong> a spay-and-neuter ordinance, followed another contentious meeting pitting hunters opposed to a new spay-and-neuter law against those infavor <strong>of</strong> such a law. <strong>The</strong> Animal Control Committee and subcommittee, meeting jointly, also voted to direct the Greene County Commission's Insurance Committee toinvestigate the possibility <strong>of</strong> having volunteers assist Key in his duties as the county's main animal control <strong>of</strong>ficer. Dr. Douglas Essinger, also a subcommittee member,argued in favor <strong>of</strong> hunters' and others' microchipping or tattooing their pets for identification purposes.He also suggested that hunters then make a list <strong>of</strong> theirmicrochipped dogs and turn it in to the county for reference. "Why can't the hunters get an Internet site" that would attract hunters from outside the area to visit GreeneCounty and spend tourism dollars here? Essinger said. "No restrictions are being put on hunters," Essinger argued. His voice rising, he added, "What reason do they have tocomplain?" He said the concern <strong>of</strong> hunters who worry about restrictions being put on them by county <strong>of</strong>ficials in the future could be resolved by putting a provision in anynew spay-and-neuter ordinance stating that the exemption for hunters could not be changed unless county voters approved it by a two-thirds majority. Under Kiker'sproposal, all dogs and cats over the age <strong>of</strong> six months in Greene County would have to be spayed or neutered -- but, she emphasized that the requirement would only applyif another Animal Control ordinance was also violated. If an owner strongly objected to a dog or cat being spayed or neutered, the owner could purchase a $50 unalteredanimalpermit for that animal.Kiker emphasized at Tuesday's meeting that hers was "a proposal" and simply a starting point for discussion. County Commissioner RennieHopson, a member <strong>of</strong> the committee, said, "I think we've got a one-sided (sub)committee" in favor <strong>of</strong> animal-rights activists.Hopson suggested that issuing citations andtaking repeat violators <strong>of</strong> the leash law to court could be the best solution. Mike Hayes, who described himself as a hunter in the beef cattle business, said he keeps his dogin a kennel. But, Hayes added, "I don't love my dog like I love my granddaughters. I think there's a difference in philosophy" among those gathered for the meeting, he said.He said, "We're not all a bunch <strong>of</strong> ignorant rednecks, and resent being thrown into one group" by some animal-rights activists. "I believe it comes down to individualfreedoms in this county," Hayes said. "We just don't want to give up any more. It's more about freedom than anything, in my view," Hayes said. County Commissioner TimWhite echoed Hayes' comments when he said, "<strong>The</strong> citizens <strong>of</strong> Greene County don't want county government to tell them how to take care <strong>of</strong> their animals. How muchgovernment involvement do we want in our lives?" <strong>The</strong> next meeting <strong>of</strong> the Animal Control Subcommittee is set for Thursday, March 12, at 3:30 p.m., in the same conferenceroom in the courthouse annex.TEXAS<strong>The</strong> Blue Lacy is a breed <strong>of</strong> working dog that originated in Texas in the mid 1800s, the only dog breed to have originated in that state. <strong>The</strong>Lacy was first recognized in 2001 by the Texas Senate. In Senate Resolution No. 436, the 77th Legislature honored the Lacy as "a trueTexas breed"; In June 2005, Governor Rick Perry signed the legislation adopting the Blue Lacy as "the <strong>of</strong>ficial State Dog Breed <strong>of</strong> Texas."HB205 - AN ACT relating to the applicability <strong>of</strong> certain city requirements affecting the restraint <strong>of</strong> certain dogs on annexed or otherwise acquiredproperty used for agricultural operationsHB853 - AN ACT relating to inclusion <strong>of</strong> pets and other companion animals in protective orders; providing a penalty.HB1147 - AN ACT relating to conduct constituting the <strong>of</strong>fense <strong>of</strong> dog fighting and to the criminal and civil consequences <strong>of</strong> committing that <strong>of</strong>fense.HB1615 - AN ACT relating to the practice <strong>of</strong> veterinarians in certain mercantile establishmentsHB1701 - AN ACT relating to the regulation <strong>of</strong> certain activities on a public highway or road, the right-<strong>of</strong>-way <strong>of</strong> a public highway or road, or a parking lot. (roadside vendors, includinglive animals)HB1704 - AN ACT relating to the punishment <strong>of</strong> the <strong>of</strong>fense <strong>of</strong> cruelty to animalsHB1982 - AN ACT relating to the regulation <strong>of</strong> dangerous and vicious dogs; providing penalties.HB2001 - AN ACT relating to the unlawful restraint <strong>of</strong> a dog.HB2042 - AN ACT relating to the notice requirements following impoundment <strong>of</strong> an estray.HB2528 - AN ACT relating to the requirements for obtaining a veterinarian's special licenseHB2732 - AN ACT relating to the regulation <strong>of</strong> barking dogs by certain counties as a nuisanceHB3004 - AN ACT relating to animal shelter standards; providing a civil penalty.HB3180 - AN ACT relating to the licensing and regulation <strong>of</strong> commercial dog and cat breeders and the regulation <strong>of</strong> dog and cat dealers; providing penalties.HB3713 - AN ACT relating to the possession or distribution <strong>of</strong> certain controlled substances by certain persons for purposes <strong>of</strong> a humane society or animal control agency.HB4277 - AN ACT relating to the sterilization <strong>of</strong> dogs and cats; providing a penaltySB523 - AN ACT relating to the practice <strong>of</strong> veterinarians in certain mercantile establishments.SB554 - AN ACT relating to conduct constituting the <strong>of</strong>fense <strong>of</strong> dog fighting and to the criminal and civil consequences <strong>of</strong> committing that <strong>of</strong>fense.SB682 - AN ACT relating to participation in an animal identification systemSB870 - AN ACT relating to the duties <strong>of</strong> the interagency obesity council and the Department <strong>of</strong> Agriculture relating to health, wellness, and prevention <strong>of</strong> obesity.SB1298 - AN ACT relating to the authority <strong>of</strong> an animal control <strong>of</strong>ficer to carry a bite prevention stick in the performance <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficial duties.SB1845 - AN ACT relating to the sterilization <strong>of</strong> dogs and cats; providing a penalty
<strong>The</strong> <strong>Monthly</strong> <strong>National</strong> <strong>Legislation</strong> <strong>Report</strong>http://mnlreport.typepad.com/<strong>Page</strong> 263 <strong>of</strong> <strong>330</strong>7/5/<strong>2010</strong>SB1910 - AN ACT relating to the licensing and regulation <strong>of</strong> commercial dog and cat breeders and the regulation <strong>of</strong> dog and cat dealers; providing penalties.SB2282 - AN ACT relating to creating an <strong>of</strong>fense for engaging in certain conduct relating to cockfighting and to the criminal and civil consequences <strong>of</strong> committing that <strong>of</strong>fense.Killeen - (2/20/09) - A week after approving the framework <strong>of</strong> a revised dangerous animal ordinance, the city <strong>of</strong> Killeen is wasting no time filling in the missing holes. Now, the city istargeting the use <strong>of</strong> tethers, or ropes, as a possible prohibited practice within city limits. Municipal prosecutor Holli Clements said the outlawing <strong>of</strong> tethering was one <strong>of</strong> the maintopics <strong>of</strong> discussion during the animal advisory committee's meeting Wednesday. She said the city could adopt the addition to the ordinance as soon as next week. <strong>The</strong> addition wouldmove Killeen in line with Fort Hood, which has a similar regulation in place. "We're looking at going to a no-tie ordinance. Currently the ordinance allows for a pulley system ? so it's nottied to a single point. A lot <strong>of</strong> research shows that it tends to breed aggression in animals."It's no secret that the ordinance is intended to limit ties on dogs, particularly pit bulls, though the inclusion <strong>of</strong> such language in a law is prohibited. But the city is doing its best to getaround that, while still keeping people safe. <strong>The</strong> City Council will also decide at its meeting next Tuesday whether it will increase its breeder permit <strong>of</strong> $5 per litter to $50 perlitter.Plano - (2/19/09) - <strong>The</strong> Plano City Council met Tuesday to pass an ordinance regarding pet ownership responsibilities. <strong>The</strong> former city ordinances were said to be outdated and neededto be updated to current standards and procedures. “<strong>The</strong> ordinance that was brought to council for approval on Tuesday was the first revision in more than 10 years,” said JameyCantrell, animal services manager and primary author <strong>of</strong> the revised ordinance. “<strong>The</strong> changes were necessitated by changes in the environment, city population, animal population andstate law.” Some <strong>of</strong> the major changes in the ordinance included updates in the minimum standard <strong>of</strong> care that animals should be afforded, addressed new issues and challenges facedby the city’s animal shelter and to reflect recent changes made in the state law. <strong>The</strong> hot topic for debate was in regards to Section 4-809 <strong>of</strong> the revised ordinance with part <strong>of</strong> theclause addressing the sterilization <strong>of</strong> animals at four months <strong>of</strong> age. <strong>The</strong> ordinance reads: “No owner or person shall advertise, display, transfer ownership or <strong>of</strong>fer to transferownership <strong>of</strong> any dog, cat or ferret more than four months <strong>of</strong> age that is not sterilized, implanted with a microchip and currently vaccinated against rabies. “A releasing agency maytransfer ownership <strong>of</strong> animals provided that the following conditions are met: all displayed animals are sterilized; all displayed animals more than three months <strong>of</strong> age have beenvaccinated against rabies; all displayed animals have been implanted with a microchip; and the agency keeps a record for each animal adopted, including the contact information andpro<strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong> vaccination and sterilization for each animal adopted.” Nearly two dozen hobby breeders in Plano attended Tuesday’s council meeting to appeal for a withdrawal oramendment <strong>of</strong> the revised ordinance’s sterilization clause. After a brief discussion and hearing both sides to the argument, the city council decided to pull Section 4-809 from therevised ordinances to amend further. <strong>The</strong> rest <strong>of</strong> the ordinance passed with a unanimous vote. Mayor Pat Evans assigned a committee to consider modification and further clarificationon the language used in Section 4-809 <strong>of</strong> the ordinance. <strong>The</strong> committee included the two previously assigned council liaisons, Pat Miner and Mabrie Jackson, two members <strong>of</strong> theAnimal Shelter, two members <strong>of</strong> the Animal Shelter Advisory Board and two <strong>of</strong> the hobby breeders that attended the meeting. Cantrell said he is looking forward to working with thecommittee to find a compromise and common ground with the hobby breeders. “<strong>The</strong> council handled the situation appropriately and did the right thing in the best interests <strong>of</strong> the cityby passing only parts <strong>of</strong> the ordinance and still honoring the concerns <strong>of</strong> the hobby breeders,” Cantrell said. “I am hoping to get started working [on the amendments] within the nextfew weeks. I don’t think it will be a long, drawn-out or contentious process.” Lunenschloss also echoed Cantrell’s optimism to hammer out the details <strong>of</strong> Section 4-809, praising thehard work put into the daunting task <strong>of</strong> re-writing and updating the city’s ordinance. She said she is incredibly proud <strong>of</strong> Plano’s commitment to not have breed-specific legislation.Lunenschloss said she would rather have seen the entire ordinance tabled for further revision, noting that she did not agree with some individual things “peppered throughout theordinance,” but the individual issues were minor compared to the mandatory sterilization clause.VIRGINIADare County - (2/20/09) - Dare County has adopted a stricter ordinance that allows animal control to keep dangerous dogs away from the public. Any dog that seriously bites a person,severely injures a domestic animal that's not on its owner's property or threatens to attack a person who is not on its owner's property now can be considered a potentially dangerousanimal by the county health department or the county Dangerous Animal Appeal Board. "If I have a situation that happens, then I can seize, impound and hold an animal," DeniseLambiotte, director <strong>of</strong> the Dare County Animal Shelter, said <strong>of</strong> the ordinance the county Board <strong>of</strong> Commissioners approved Monday. Dare County Attorney Bobby Outten said a copy <strong>of</strong>the new ordinance has been sent to the county's six towns, some <strong>of</strong> which have expressed interest in passing similar regulations. Outten said he is also looking into two types <strong>of</strong>breed-specific ordinances that have passed legal muster elsewhere. One would allow people to own dog breeds such as pit bulls only under certain restrictions; the other wouldoutright ban them. <strong>The</strong> proposals will be presented to the Board <strong>of</strong> Commissioners, probably at an April meeting, Outten said, and if the board decides to move forward oneither one, a public hearing will be scheduled. "It's just that pits can do so much more damage, Pit bulls have powerful jaws that can lock when biting, and they are bred to attack.Although they can be gentle to toddlers, the high-pitched voices <strong>of</strong> children and their sudden movements can set <strong>of</strong>f pit bulls' predatory instincts". <strong>The</strong> Dare County Animal Shelter doesnot adopt out pit bullsWASHINGTONHB2202 - AN ACT relating to ensuing the minium proper veterinary care standard for young dogSB5200 - AN ACT relating to marauding dogsSB5651 - AN ACT relating to providing humanitarian requirements for certain dog breeding practices.SB5870 - AN ACT relating to the duty <strong>of</strong> the sheriff relating to a dog running at large.SB5329/HB1406 - UPDATE (<strong>Report</strong> Feb-2009) - neither bill made it out <strong>of</strong> their respective houses in time to be considered further this session. <strong>The</strong>y are both "dead".WEST VIRGINIAHB2699 - ARTICLE 20. DOGS AND CATS. §19-20-22a. Aggressive or vicious dog breeding restrictions. Notwithstanding any provision <strong>of</strong> this code to the contrary, a person may not breed anaggressive or vicious dog unless the person has an appropriate, escape-pro<strong>of</strong> fence around the area, a reasonable amount <strong>of</strong> area contained within the fenced area, and a sign postedidentifying the area as "potentially dangerous due to dog breeding".NOTE: <strong>The</strong> purpose <strong>of</strong> this bill is to establish breeding restrictions for aggressive or vicious dogs. (By DelegatesEldridge, Perry, Stowers, Klempa, Barker, Marshall, Martin, Beach, Lawrence, Argento and Hall) [Introduced February 20, 2009; referred to theCommittee on Agriculture then the Judiciary.]HB2721 - A BILL to amend the Code <strong>of</strong> West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new article, designated §19-20C-1, §19-20C-2, §19-20C-3, §19-20C-4, §19-20C-5, §19-20C-6, §19-20C-7 and§19-20C-8, all relating to providing for the Dangerous Dog Act; defining terms; providing for the determination <strong>of</strong> a potentially dangerous dog; providing for the determination <strong>of</strong> a dangerous dog;providing exceptions; providing consequences <strong>of</strong> a dangerous or potentially dangerous dog determination; providing registration and handling requirements for dangerous and potentially dangerousdogs; setting forth responsibilities <strong>of</strong> owners <strong>of</strong> dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs; and providing criminal and civil penalties. (By Delegates Campbell and Canterbury) [Introduced February 20,2009; referred to the Committee on Agriculture then the Judiciary.]SB292 - A BILL to amend the Code <strong>of</strong> West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §11-21-12i, relating to creating a personal income tax credit forpersons who may choose to spay or neuter their pets. By Senators Laird, Prezioso, Kessler and Stollings) [Introduced February 18, 2009; referred to the Committee on Finance]SB447 - A BILL to amend the Code <strong>of</strong> West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new section, designated §19-20-26, relating to commercial dog breeding operations;definitions; commercial dog breeder required to have a valid business license; requirements for maintaining a commercial dog breeding operation; cooperation with inspections byanimal control <strong>of</strong>ficers to ensure compliance with state and federal animal care laws; and criminal penalties.
Change language