![[Spencer Daily Reporter nameplate]](http://www.spencerdailyreporter.com/images/nameplate.png)
RSS
Print
Email link
Respond to editor
Read comments (5)
Share link
Facebook
Twitter
del.icio.us
Digg
StumbleUpon
Technorati
Newsvine
Reddit
GoogleFirst filing on changes to the "Vicious Animals Ordinance" was unanimously approved at Monday night's Spencer City Council meeting, but not before an extended discussion clarifying just how the changes would be enforced and what animals would be directly impacted.
Concerns were raised by Amy Clark, a veterinary assistant at Homestead Small Animal Practice as well as a dog trainer, regarding the specific breed targeting as suggested in the ordinance language, identifying breed specific dogs that would meet the definition of a vicious animal: A Staffordshire Terrier breed, American Pit-bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, or any dog which has the appearance and characteristics of being predominantly of the breeds of Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit-bull Terrier, or American Staffordshire.
"Who determines dangerous dogs?" Clark questioned.
"The problem is with responsible ownership…not the breed," Clark insisted.
Clark owns a pit bull, that has received "Canine Good Citizen" distinction. She and her husband have a young child in the home, and claims that by treating the animal correctly and "keeping it socialized" the animal is just fine.
"They really do make good pets," said Clark. "It's been a loved member of our family for seven years."
Ward Five Councilman Ron Hanson said he was surprised to see the breeds mentioned in the ordinance.
Steve Bomgaars, Ward Three councilman, pointed to his own research on the matter which indicated that between 500,000 and 800,000 dog attacks annually require medical attention, and that five percent of hospital visits are a result of dog attacks.
Bomgaars noted that 67 percent of dog attack fatalities involve the vicious dogs outlined in the ordinance.
"There have been more and more incidents this summer than I can recall," Bomgaars said, saying that police have identified many of the dogs as having "pit bull characteristics."
Bomgaars also cited Veterinary Association information that indicated certain breeds are hereditarily vicious.
According to Bomgaars, the city's responsibility is to protect the children, elderly, and having a little fun with Councilman Hanson, postal carriers as well.
Clark noted that the Veterinary Association is also 100 percent against "animal bans."
City Attorney Don Hemphill said, "This is not a ban. This applies specifically to dogs at large."
According to Hemphill, if these dog breeds are found at large, they may be treated as vicious animals under the ordinance.
The council voted 7-0 on the first filing and are expected to revisit the matter two more times.
The ordinance also clarifies when an animal may be destroyed.
In other business
Matt Barstad, of Cannon Moss Brygger and Associates met with the council during a Committee of the Whole session prior to the regularly scheduled meeting Monday night to present the proposed plans and specs for the Golf Course Clubhouse.
The facility itself is an approximate 4,800 square foot facility. There is also a sunroom that is part of the project as well.
"It's a very simple, straight-forward project," Barstad told the council. "Your high end home builder here is very capable of bidding…Everything is available here locally."
Barstad indicated that as part of the agreement, a portion of the work would be done through volunteer labor. He expected the contractor cost to be somewhere in the low $300,000 range, indicating that there's a good balance between volunteer work, and enough contractor work to make it a biddable project.
The new facility will have seating capacity for about 224 people, but there are no plans to expand food offerings or open a formal dining kitchen.
"Our plan is to have the same set up we have right now," course director Brian Mohr told the council.
Hanson asked about any increased staffing needs as a result of the expansion and remodel.
"The layout of the floor plan was based on the current staffing in the clubhouse. It won't require anymore," Mohr said.
During the budget process it was discussed that the project would be financed by the City and repaid through Golf Course Revenues as well as Hotel/Motel
Taxes. It was also stated that the Golf Course would need to have set aside $50,000 in cash or savings through the volunteers.
A hearing on the plans and specs was set for Aug. 4. The bids would be received at 5 p.m. by the Golf Course Board on Aug. 14, and then be awarded at the Aug. 18 council meeting
Wastewater Service Charge approved
The final filing of an ordinance amending a Spencer City Code to create a Combined Sewer Initiative Surcharge to Wastewater Service Charges in the City of Spencer was approved which will result in a $5 surcharge designated strictly for the cost associated with making the necessary improvements to sanitary/storm sewer that are being mandated by the EPA.
The improvements could also include improvements to the wastewater plant as well. It is important to note that this surcharge is to pay for the city's portion of future projects only. As with similar projects of this kind, special assessments will still be used for individuals that receive a direct benefit from the project.
The estimated cost at this time for the improvements needed to meet the EPA mandate are approximately $30,000,000 and will take 20 to 30 years to complete. Representatives from McClure Engineering were present at the Committee of the Whole meeting and went over the results of the CSI survey that were mailed out to sanitary sewer customers in the community. Results from the survey will appear in Wednesday's Daily Reporter.
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. If you feel that a comment is offensive, please
bully bans are the stupidest things since wars. I raise dogs's and train dogs and puppies are born loving everything. some dogs are more timid than others and if they are treated badly they are scared of the people. I have a dog that was tortured as a puppy by twelve year olds. To this day she is terrified by kids. If they come running at her she will growl at them. I tell them to stay away from her and I explain why--that don't seem to do any good as kids don't seem to think that they need to listen. Parents should teach their kids to not run at a pet that they don't know. They should teach them to respect pets. Actually I think a lot of KIDS need to go through obedience classes with their dogs-then they would learn to appreciate animals. A friend has a pit and it has completed all of the obedience classes and therapy classes and is a registered therapy dog. a beautiful dog!!
First of all, there is at least one discrepancy in the article. Ron Hansen did not vote in favor of the filing on changes to the "Vicious Animals Ordinance."
This ordnance will not ban the dogs, but rather place more penalties on Pit Bull type dogs and their owners if they are found "at large." If you are a responsible pet owner, this will not affect you, as long as the wording stays the same.
On the subject of full breed bans, one thing that is constantly overlooked in these statistics is that Pit Bulls are grossly overrepresented in the criminal and irresponsible community. Go to any crime infested neighborhood in any major city, and tell me what kind of dog you see the most. In a place where violence amongst people is the norm, what do you expect of their animals that are typically severely unsocialized and untrained? Visit http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil... for REAL statistics and explanations on the factors surrounding dog related injuries.
Another factor is the inefficacy of breed bans. When Pit Bulls are banned, the irresponsible owners that had them do not get Poodles and become responsible pet owners. They get other breeds such as German Shepherds, Rottweilers, etc, and the cycle starts again. Breed bans are a band-aid, and a simple solution that gives a false sense of security to residents and lawmakers. A good example of this is The Netherlands, who recently lifted their Pit Bull ban due to it being ineffective. http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/ss/related/...
And as I said at the meeting, Pit Bull type dogs DO make wonderful pets and working dogs! The Washington State Border Patrol has many Pit Bulls on the force as detection dogs. See http://www.lawdogsusa.org for information on an organization that has supplied them with many of their dogs. LawDogsUSA offers their detection dogs to law enforcement agencies for FREE, which saves a jurisdiction the $6-10K plus that it costs to purchase a German Shepherd or Belgian Malinois with the same training.
Our own American Staffordshire Terrier not only has the CGC listed in the article, but also certified as a therapy dog through a national organization. He was nationally ranked in AKC obedience in 2005, and is one of very few AmStafs to have passed Herding Instinct Testing. He is a very gentle dog, calm and well trained. We couldn't ask for a better companion.
Yes, Pit Bull attacks are all over the news. But, how many people actually read between the lines? Type "Pit Bull Attack" into Google News, and you get some surprising results.
The title says it all: Pit bull attack leads to drugs, weapons seizure http://www.thebarrieexaminer.com/Article...
How about the recent headline grabbing Staten Island attack? Early reports admitted that the owner was charged with having unleashed dogs and failure to have collars or tags on the dogs. In a later article it reveals that the owner is "a convicted rapist who was arrested a day after the pit bull mauling, was indicted on charges of second- and third-degree assault, unlawfully dealing with fireworks, and failure to restrain the dogs.
Police also rearrested McNair in jail yesterday and charged the registered sex offender with failure to notify the state's Division of Criminal Justice Services of his change of address." link: http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/200...
Read between the lines and you will find similarities in most of these cases that have nothing to do with breed. The most common attacks are on children by dogs that aren't spayed or neutered. The dogs are often on chains, and very rarely are they "family" dogs, as in dogs that are members of the family. They are typically "resident dogs," as in dogs that are kept outdoors away from the family, typically on a chain or in a kennel. These dogs are usually kept as yard dogs, guard dogs, or just status symbols. They are typically much less socialized, trained, and familiar with humans, making them more likely to show aggression towards humans.
It all goes back to owner responsibility. If a pet owner is responsible, and has a well trained, socialized, protected and confined pet, there is no issue at all. Criminalizing the dog simply for being born what it was does not address the actual problem. These laws tend to affect the responsible owners anyway, as people who allow their dogs to run at large and wreck havoc are at minimum breaking the leash laws, and perhaps even more if the situation is scrutinized. A dog can only hurt people and be a nuisance if you allow it to be.
Also, in addition to the results of the vote being incorrect, why was quoted in calling my dog "it?" Pet owners don't call their dogs "it." I may be picking apart the article, but when I hear somebody refer to their dog as "it," it is clear that the dog is not even valued enough to be male or female, much less for their personality and individuality. The dog is also technically an American Staffordshire Terrier, not a pit bull, which was mentioned at the meeting.
In the past I stereotyped all Pit Bulls as being bad until I met my granddaughter's Pit Bull. He weighs 85#, is 2yrs old and his only fault is, he loves people. He & I rode 1300 miles in a truck together & he thinks he is my lap dog. There is a 2yr old in the same house and they are great buddies. However, they are never left unattended as like any dog they can bite when they are tired of being poked & prodded. He has wonderful manners and minds commands when given by his owner. Responsible owners take care of their dogs, teach them manners with loving kindness much like raising a child. If they are treated badly they behave badly. My family had a Cocker Spaniel and it was the nastiest dog I have ever encountered. My parents got it as a giveaway and I could understand why.
I know not all Pit Bulls or any other breed can be kind & loving but please do not catagorize all as being vicious because they are not.
Would it not be better for the council to just use the term vivious without singling out certain breeds of dogs?
I hate to play "devil's advocate", but something needs to be said about the capacity for a dog to inflict severe injury or death. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the issue here is how a dog is treated and trained. In other words, it's a people issue versus an animal issue. Unfortunately, there will always be morons in the world who will treat animals poorly and will train them to be viscous. I wish there was more stringent enforcement for these folks. One point that I think needs to be made, is that you can mistreat or improperly train a poodle all you want, and they simply don't have the capacity to inflict a mortal wound. Pit bulls are different in that sense. They are very strong animals with a unique capacity to do great harm. So, as long as there are people who don't share our love of animals and who mistreat and improperly train their dogs, the city is tasked with making sure that their citizens (especially children) are protected. Not really fair to the pit bulls in the world, but I certainly understand the predicament this poses to the city council.