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

The Monthly National Legislation Reporthttp://mnlreport.typepad.com/Page 39 of 3307/5/2010STATES - in ALPHABETICAL ORDERALASKAHB6 - An Act relating to cruelty to animals; and relating to aggravating factors at sentencing involving assaultive behavior and cruelty to animals.ARIZONAPima County – (4/12/10) – New dog barking ordinance promotes hate, animal cruelty. Dog owners beware: your barking pooch could land you in court – or worse – thanks to a newPima County barking ordinance that goes into effect May 5. Under the new ordinance just passed by the Pima County Board of Supervisors, dog barking complaints will bring stricterpenalties. The same fines of $50 to $500 per day still stand, but the complaint process is sped up and, if found guilty of two violations, owners could find themselves in justice court wherejudges are free to dispense punishment as they see fit. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Such harsh penalties for a barking dog ranks right up there with the $250,000 fine and five yearsin prison promised by the federal government for the heinous crime of using a rented or personal DVD for profit.ARKANSASHamburg – (4/29/10) - The Hamburg City Council, during its regular meeting on Monday night, April 26, approved a new ordinance to provide citizens a means to deal with barking orhowling dogs. The new barking or howling dog ordinance provides that citizens can file affidavits against any person keeping dogs "which by loud and frequent barking or howling shalldisturb the peace and quiet of any person who may reside within reasonable proximity of the place where such a dog is kept." After an affidavit is filed, the case will be heard in the HamburgDistrict Court. Penalties for conviction are fines of $10 to $100 for the first offense with a recommended fine of not less than $50 for the second offense and a recommended fine of $100 ormore for a third or subsequent offense. While the ordinance is effective immediately, the penalties will not go into effect until June 1.Salem – (4/30/10) – Dog owners ask council to revise ordinance. The Salem City Council met in regular session on Thursday, April 22 at City Hall. Many dog owners who live within theSalem city limits addressed the council with concerns over the liability insurance requirements in the new city dog ordinance. "Me and mom tried to get liability insurance and severalcompanies said they wouldn't do that," said Daniel Keller. "I talked to Albert and he said he even had trouble trying to do the same thing for his dogs. It's just impossible to get the insuranceon your dogs like you're asking for." Police Chief Al Roork related to the council that he had found 24 pit bulls and eight rottweilers within the city limits since the ordinance went into effect."Most all of those dogs I petted while I was visiting with the owners," said Roork. "I didn't have problems from anyone; most everyone was pretty receptive. I think that we unknowingly andunintentionally passed a law that our citizens cannot comply with." Mayor Gary Clayton agreed that the ordinance was in need of a revision. "Dewayne (Plumlee) put that provision in theordinance, and since we've found out that folks can't comply with it, well, I think we need to do something to alleviate this by amending the existing ordinance," said Clayton. "Chipping isgood for us and for the owner too, because if that dog gets lost or gets away it makes it easier to find it." The council agreed to have city attorney Dewayne Plumlee amend the ordinance andreplace the insurance requirements with a chipping requirement for all dogs listed as dangerous dogs. "We will have to pass an amendment to that ordinance, which takes out the insurancerequirement and replaces it with the chipping," said Clayton. "We'll do that at the next meeting. In the meantime, we won't do any enforcement on the insurance requirement." Chief Roorkthen brought up a few dogs he would like the council to show leniency on. "We have one guy up here with a rottweiler who has never been out," said Roork. "The dog's in the last year or soof his life. He doesn't see very well and he doesn't hear very good. There's another dog here that's a pit bull and he can't hear or see. He's very friendly, and he's in the last months of his lifetoo. I don't want to have those two dogs neutered because it would kill them. We have to exercise some common sense too along with this ordinance. A young dog needs to be neutered, Ithink, if they're that type of dog. It will make them more docile and save them from some health problems in later years, especially if they're a male dog."CALIFORNIAAB2223 - nontoxic shot. The Ridley-Tree Condor Preservation Act requires the use of nonlead centerfire rifle and pistol ammunition when taking big game and coyote within specified areas.Existing law generally provides that a violation of the fish and game laws is a crime. This bill would require the use of nontoxic shot, as defined, when shooting or hunting in state wildlifemanagement areas. Under the bill, a person who violates that requirement would be guilty of an infraction punishable by a $500 fine for the first offense. Because the act would create a newcrime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by thestate. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.SB1179 - An act to add Section 3040 to the Fish and Game Code, relating to hunting. Free hunting days. Existing law generally requires a license to take a bird or mammal. Existing lawrequires the Department of Fish and Game to issue hunting licenses, upon payment of a fee, to eligible California residents and nonresidents, as specified. Existing law authorizes the Directorof Fish and Game to designatenot more than 2 days a year as free sportfishing days during which residents and nonresidents may, without having a sportfishing license and without thepayment of any fee, exercise the privileges of a holder of a sportfishing license, subject to all of the limitations, restrictions, conditions, laws, rules, and regulations applicable to the holder of asportfishing license. This bill would require the department to establish 2 free hunting days per year. The bill would permit a California resident who does not possess a hunting license tohunt if accompanied by a person who holds a valid hunting license and if the unlicensed hunter remains in the field of vision of the licensed hunter at all times. The bill would authorize thedepartment to require to demonstrate the safe operation of the firearm he or she intends to use prior to being authorized to participate in a free hunting day. The bill would authorize thedepartment to prohibit unlicensed hunters hunting pursuant to these provisions from taking certain species.City of Watsonville – (4/13/10) - In October, the City of Watsonville tightened the leash on owners of dangerous dogs, adding penalties, fines and restrictions to ownership. But that actiondidn’t prevent an incident on Jan. 1, when a 64-year-old Watsonville woman was hospitalized. Now the city is looking to put more bite in the city code in hopes of preventing a similar attackin the future. The proposed amendments to the ordinance will be discussed at tonight’s City Council meeting on the fourth floor of the Civic Plaza. In October, the city toughened its existingordinance so that a dog can be declared “vicious” or “potentially dangerous” if, when unprovoked, it inflicts severe injury on a human being or if, on two separate occasions within a 36-monthperiod, the dog engages in any behavior that requires a defensive action by another person when the dog is off the owner’s property. A dog can also be declared vicious if it attacks otherdomestic animals twice in a period of 36 months. Any dog previously deemed dangerous that is not cared for as prescribed by the court can also be declared dangerous.Exeter - officials have taken the bite out of a proposed vicious-dog ordinance by making it nonbreed-specific. Under the ordinance, dogs that exhibit hostility that leads to injury to otheranimals or people would be classified on two levels: Level 1: Any dog engaging in unprovoked attacks on humans that require a defensive action to prevent bodily injury, or that cause minorinjury to other dogs. Level 2: Any dog engaging in unprovoked attacks on humans that result in minor to moderate injury, or that cause moderate to serious injury to other dogs. UPDATE(4/27/10) Exeter City Council approves non-breed-specific ordinance protecting the public against 'dangerous' dogs.Long Beach – (3/25/10) - Long Beach City College officials are hopping into action against a bunny infestation that's overtaking their campus. School staff have started postingsigns warning of possible $500 fines and jail time for abandoning animals on the grassy campus that's become a dumping ground for unwanted pet rabbits. Veterinarians are also on campusworking to spay and neuter the rabbits, with help from volunteers who collect the animals and take care of them after surgery.Local animal rights activists, meanwhile, are aiding the collegeby seeking adoptive homes for the creatures. The efforts come several months after officials counted more than 300 of the flower-chomping furballs on their campus. They fear there could bemany more now, since they multiply like ... well, you get the picture.Long Beach – (3/11/10) - Animal Control plans aggressive campaign to curb cat population in Long Beach. In an effort to reduce unwanted litters of cats, Animal Control Officersare stepping-up enforcement of the City’s mandatory spay and neuter laws for the felines. In 2009 alone, over 4,400 cats were impounded and unclaimed at the City’s Shelter. Through anaggressive campaign to increase enforcement and promote spay and neuter, ACS hopes to reverse this trend. “Many don’t realize that it is illegal to possess an unaltered cat in the City ofLong Beach”, says Operations Chief, Michelle Quigley, “in Long Beach, you must have your cat spayed or neutered or face a $100 citation from Animal Care Services (LBMC 6.16.085).”Santa Ana – (3/31/10) – City offers amnesty for delinquent dog licenses. Santa Ana Animal Services will waive late fees for dog licenses during a temporary amnesty program throughMay 15. The city charges $24 annually to license a spayed or neutered dog, $100 for an unfixed dog; late fees are $41. Dog owners who have never purchased a license or who have lettheir licenses lapse can get a new one without paying the late fee during the amnesty. Licenses are available at City Hall, 20 Civic Center Plaza. Click here for more information.Santa Barbara – (3/2/10) - Santa Barbara to Consider Spay-and-Neuter Ordinance. The city of Santa Barbara will consider a spay-and-neuter ordinance in future Ordinance Committeediscussions amid an increasing problem of unwanted pets in the county. The spay-and-neuter ordinance most likely won’t be on the calendar for a few months. Last November, the SantaBarbara County Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance making it mandatory for pet owners to spay or neuter their cats and dogs, unless they’re exempted by their veterinarians. Theordinance became effective in January for those who live in unincorporated areas, and those who buy unaltered animal licenses — who are exempted from spaying or neutering their pets —are faced with a $10 fee. There is a $250 fine for unlicensed, unaltered pets after a six-month grace period. The council unanimously passed a motion to have a discussion addressing many