Shon
06-24-2004, 10:35 AM
Council Approves Pit Bull Restrictions
The Boston City Council passed some of the most comprehensive restrictions on pit bull ownership in the state yesterday, requiring owners to spay or neuter their dogs, muzzle them in public, and post signs outside their homes warning that there are pit bulls inside.
The council voted 7-4 to approve the measure just four hours after a pit bull running loose in South Boston mauled a small dog, gripping the 22-pound Shiba Inu in its jaws until a neighbor clubbed the pitbull over the head with a baseball bat. The small dog was in stable condition yesterday afternoon. The owner of the pit bull, whose name wasn't released, decided to put euthanize his dog, according to officials at Angell Memorial Animal Hospital.
No people were hurt in the incident. On Friday, an exterminator and an animal control officer were attacked by a pit bull at a Hyde Park apartment complex.
"How many attacks have to continually happen over and over again in the city before we take action," Councilor Rob Consalvo said at an emotionally charged meeting. . "We need to make sure we're protecting our children and our citizens from dog bites."
Animal rights advocates, who have staunchly opposed legislation that would single out any breed for restrictions, immediately denounced the measure and said a law would be unenforceable.
"It's just so flawed," said Kara Holmquist, director of advocacy for the MSPCA. "The city is just going to be embroiled in a legal battle. It could be challenged on its face as unconstitutional."
Mayor Thomas M. Menino pledged to sign the measure when it reaches his desk.
"Mayor Menino believes the legislation represents another tool in the arsenal to protect Boston's residents and to ensure safety with regard to animals," said Menino's spokesman, Seth Gitell.
Pit bull restrictions have been extremely controversial in Massachusetts and across the nation, with pet owners and animal rights advocates arguing that attacks are most often a problem of bad owners, not a specific breed, while many public safety and elected officials point to statistics showing large numbers of injuries from pit bulls.
Bans and other restrictions have been passed in cities across the country, often following attacks. Ohio imposed statewide restrictions.
But many attempts have been turned back. Lynn and Winthrop enacted bans in the 1980s, but both were struck down. The Supreme Judicial Court ruled Lynn's law was unconstitutionally vague. The law did not clearly define pit bulls, the court said, leaving too much discretion to law enforcement officers in determining which dogs would be subject to the restrictions.
Twelve states have passed laws prohibiting breed-specific legislation. Massachusetts does not have such a restriction, and Boston councilors who sponsored yesterday's measure said the legislation includes language defining pit bulls in order to help it stand up to challenges in court.
The measure specifies dogs registered as pit bulls and those identified by licensed veterinarians or "displaying the majority of physical traits" of the three breeds often known as pit bulls, American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, and American Pit Bull Terriers. Owners may appeal with proof that their dogs are not descended form those lines.
"I think ours gives more leeway to the experts to make the determinations about which dogs are pit bulls or not," Consalvo said.
He also said he hoped that by mandating restrictions instead of a ban, the legislation would not invite legal challenges in the first place.
Other cities in Massachusetts have successfully enacted restrictions on pit bulls without instituting bans. Pit bulls must be muzzled on public property in Medway, where laws also prohibit selling or breeding the dogs. Fall River requires pit bull owners to have insurance, and New Bedford and Holyoke require permits to own the dogs, according to the Pit Bull Rescue League Central, an advocacy group that tracks breed-specific legislation across the nation.
Boston's goes further by requiring neutering and signs posted on owners' property. Owners caught violating the restrictions would have to pay $100, and their dogs could be impounded. Police and animal control officers will be responsible for enforcement.
"What Boston has done goes far beyond what any other city or town in Massachusetts has done," said Virginia Rowland, of the Massachusetts Federation of Dog Clubs. "That's really bad news."
Animal rights advocates such as Holmquist say those laws still would not stand up in court because the discriminate against a particular breed.
In yesterday's attack, Donna Fitzgerald was walking with her dog, Rocky, near her South Boston home on K Street about 8 a.m. A pitbull lunged at him, sinking its teeth into Rocky's neck and swinging him around like a rag doll until a neighbor clubbed the pit bull with a bat.
When the dog released his grip on Rocky, Fitzgerald scooped up her 6-year-old pet and cradled him in her arms, talking to him to try to calm him while she waited for police to arrive. Officers took both dogs to Angell Memorial, where Rocky underwent surgery, and the pit bull was put down.
A stunned Fitzgerald returned to the scene of the attack a few hours later, thanking neighbors who had come to her aid and recounting the morning's events.
"That pit bull was a killer," she said, motioning toward the corner of East 6th Street where it happened. "It was not a pretty sight. Everybody around here has children and animals."
She said she was in favor of pitbull restrictions. "Hopefully something good will come out of something bad," she said.
The Boston City Council passed some of the most comprehensive restrictions on pit bull ownership in the state yesterday, requiring owners to spay or neuter their dogs, muzzle them in public, and post signs outside their homes warning that there are pit bulls inside.
The council voted 7-4 to approve the measure just four hours after a pit bull running loose in South Boston mauled a small dog, gripping the 22-pound Shiba Inu in its jaws until a neighbor clubbed the pitbull over the head with a baseball bat. The small dog was in stable condition yesterday afternoon. The owner of the pit bull, whose name wasn't released, decided to put euthanize his dog, according to officials at Angell Memorial Animal Hospital.
No people were hurt in the incident. On Friday, an exterminator and an animal control officer were attacked by a pit bull at a Hyde Park apartment complex.
"How many attacks have to continually happen over and over again in the city before we take action," Councilor Rob Consalvo said at an emotionally charged meeting. . "We need to make sure we're protecting our children and our citizens from dog bites."
Animal rights advocates, who have staunchly opposed legislation that would single out any breed for restrictions, immediately denounced the measure and said a law would be unenforceable.
"It's just so flawed," said Kara Holmquist, director of advocacy for the MSPCA. "The city is just going to be embroiled in a legal battle. It could be challenged on its face as unconstitutional."
Mayor Thomas M. Menino pledged to sign the measure when it reaches his desk.
"Mayor Menino believes the legislation represents another tool in the arsenal to protect Boston's residents and to ensure safety with regard to animals," said Menino's spokesman, Seth Gitell.
Pit bull restrictions have been extremely controversial in Massachusetts and across the nation, with pet owners and animal rights advocates arguing that attacks are most often a problem of bad owners, not a specific breed, while many public safety and elected officials point to statistics showing large numbers of injuries from pit bulls.
Bans and other restrictions have been passed in cities across the country, often following attacks. Ohio imposed statewide restrictions.
But many attempts have been turned back. Lynn and Winthrop enacted bans in the 1980s, but both were struck down. The Supreme Judicial Court ruled Lynn's law was unconstitutionally vague. The law did not clearly define pit bulls, the court said, leaving too much discretion to law enforcement officers in determining which dogs would be subject to the restrictions.
Twelve states have passed laws prohibiting breed-specific legislation. Massachusetts does not have such a restriction, and Boston councilors who sponsored yesterday's measure said the legislation includes language defining pit bulls in order to help it stand up to challenges in court.
The measure specifies dogs registered as pit bulls and those identified by licensed veterinarians or "displaying the majority of physical traits" of the three breeds often known as pit bulls, American Staffordshire Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers, and American Pit Bull Terriers. Owners may appeal with proof that their dogs are not descended form those lines.
"I think ours gives more leeway to the experts to make the determinations about which dogs are pit bulls or not," Consalvo said.
He also said he hoped that by mandating restrictions instead of a ban, the legislation would not invite legal challenges in the first place.
Other cities in Massachusetts have successfully enacted restrictions on pit bulls without instituting bans. Pit bulls must be muzzled on public property in Medway, where laws also prohibit selling or breeding the dogs. Fall River requires pit bull owners to have insurance, and New Bedford and Holyoke require permits to own the dogs, according to the Pit Bull Rescue League Central, an advocacy group that tracks breed-specific legislation across the nation.
Boston's goes further by requiring neutering and signs posted on owners' property. Owners caught violating the restrictions would have to pay $100, and their dogs could be impounded. Police and animal control officers will be responsible for enforcement.
"What Boston has done goes far beyond what any other city or town in Massachusetts has done," said Virginia Rowland, of the Massachusetts Federation of Dog Clubs. "That's really bad news."
Animal rights advocates such as Holmquist say those laws still would not stand up in court because the discriminate against a particular breed.
In yesterday's attack, Donna Fitzgerald was walking with her dog, Rocky, near her South Boston home on K Street about 8 a.m. A pitbull lunged at him, sinking its teeth into Rocky's neck and swinging him around like a rag doll until a neighbor clubbed the pit bull with a bat.
When the dog released his grip on Rocky, Fitzgerald scooped up her 6-year-old pet and cradled him in her arms, talking to him to try to calm him while she waited for police to arrive. Officers took both dogs to Angell Memorial, where Rocky underwent surgery, and the pit bull was put down.
A stunned Fitzgerald returned to the scene of the attack a few hours later, thanking neighbors who had come to her aid and recounting the morning's events.
"That pit bull was a killer," she said, motioning toward the corner of East 6th Street where it happened. "It was not a pretty sight. Everybody around here has children and animals."
She said she was in favor of pitbull restrictions. "Hopefully something good will come out of something bad," she said.