|
Pet profiling: law under attack
Monica Collins
Sunday, March 20, 2005
On an otherwise tranquil summer morning, an American
Staffordshire terrier, baring its incisors, bounded up and tried to
pounce on my smaller terrier as we walked on Boston Common. A slight
woman, screaming ''come" and ''stop" while waving a leash, chased
after the Staffordshire. In the blur of the moment, I hollered, too,
but I don't remember what. My dog darted away from me, bobbing and
weaving to elude the bigger dog. In a few seconds, the frenzy ended
as quickly as it began. Inexplicably, both animals suddenly froze in
place. The woman seized the Staffordshire by its collar, snapped on
a leash, and walked away without a word.
The attack was sudden, surprising, and caused me to suspect all
foreign bull terriers with lantern jaw lines of warmongering.
The city of Boston's Responsible Pit Bull Ownership law
(Ordinance 16-1.9E), which singles out American Pit Bull Terriers,
American Staffordshires, and Staffordshires, which are all closely
related, basically does the same. A pit bull's potentially lethal
lock-on jaw sets it apart in the attack pack. These dogs were bred
to be warriors. However, some pit bulls are well trained, docile,
and make happy house pets.
The profiling of pits is more emotional than rational, as anyone
who has tangled with an aggressive dog knows. The wolf can sneak up
in sheep's clothing, disguised as a handsome golden retriever, a
comic Cairn terrier, a pedigreed poodle, or any mutt mix in between.
Pit bulls are not the only offenders.
''Breed-specific legislation does not solve the problem," says
Maura Hennigan, a mayoral candidate and a Boston city councilor who
voted against the pit bull ordinance when it came before the City
Council last June and was passed by a vote of 7 to 4, with two
abstentions. She calls it ''feel-good legislation that's really
useless," useless because irresponsible people allow their animals
to go out of control. Ultimately, any animal law comes down to human
compliance.
April 1 marks the beginning of the legal dog year, when state law
requires licensing and the new Boston pit bull rules take effect.
Starting Saturday and continuing until June 11, the city and the
Animal Rescue League of Boston will sponsor licensing and rabies
vaccination clinics in most neighborhoods. (Call 617-426-9170 or
617-635-5348 to find out when and where.) A spokeswoman in the City
Hall press office estimates there are 40,000 dogs in Boston; 10,000
of them are licensed, which means that a whole bunch of dogs need to
be brought up to code. There are no statistics yet on pit bulls.
License applications recently went out to those who had
previously registered their animals. Included in the mailings was a
separate ''application for a pit bull license." Pit bull owners must
pay $50 and provide pictures of them and their dogs. Those who do
not own a pit bull need not send mugshots. They pay $6 if their
animal is spayed or neutered; $17 if not. Pit bull keepers are
limited to two sterilized dogs. They are required to post a
''beware" sign on their property. The new law also orders the
muzzling of all pit bulls.
Hennigan believes the muzzles will give innocent dogs a
frightening demeanor and ''will make people afraid."
Councilor Rob Consalvo, who sponsored the bill, calls the
mandatory muzzle the ''most controversial piece," but he points out
that ''you don't need to put this Hannibal Lecter thing on your
dog." Boston Animal Control recommends a ''basket muzzle," which
allows the dog to pant. A picture posted on the city's website
(www.cityofboston.gov/animalcontrol/petpeeves.asp) shows a
weimaraner wearing the mask as if in a macabre William Wegman
portrait.
We could see a few of these Hannibal hounds. The ordinance
applies not only to pit bull and Staffordshire terriers, but extends
to any mixed-breed dog having any genetic pattern of pit bull.
Chihuapit? It's up to the owner to decide what DNA stew prevails in
a pet.
''You must muzzle any dog that has a portion of pit bull in it,"
said Hennigan, who adds with a wry twist: ''I don't know whether we
can expect Animal Control officers to do DNA testing out on the
streets."
Nicholas Gilman, chief executive of the Animal Rescue League,
lays out the canine conundrum: ''Who's to say it's a pit bull? Who's
to say it's not a boxer?"
Consalvo concedes that he's unclear how this provision will be
enforced. ''I will admit I'm not an animal control expert," he said.
''We would leave it up to Animal Control to determine whether a dog
is a pit bull or really isn't a pit bull." He adds that an owner
''certainly can appeal the determination of Animal Control" or pay a
$100 fine.
Consalvo represents Hyde Park, Roslindale, and Mattapan. He says
he was prompted to file the pit bull bill after a series of
high-profile attacks in the city, with six skirmishes in his own
district.
''We took a common-sense approach," he says. ''We didn't ban the
dog outright, because we respect the right of people to own dogs in
the city." He says the legislation was ''modeled on bits and pieces
of certain ordinances" from other cities. He and his staff spent
more than eight months researching and crafting the bill.
But the law seems toothless by targeting a single breed, instead
of meting out penalties for all canine misbehavior.
''I don't think the Animal Rescue League accepts that there is
any such thing as an unacceptable breed," says Gilman. ''However, we
agree that there is unacceptable behavior from dogs.
''What the citizens of Boston want is something effective instead
of something that legislates against a breed," says Gilman.
He suggests a better route: Behavior training and testing for
belligerent dogs, as well as a strict spay-and-neuter program. ''We
have seen studies indicating dogs that bite are dogs that are
fertile," says Gilman. ''We should require sterilization of any dogs
displaying significant aggressive behavior."
Hennigan wants a spay-and-neuter policy.
''How many people living in the city really breed their dogs?"
she asks. She also calls for enforcement of the leash law.
Consalvo concedes that his Responsible Pit Bull Ownership law
might not stop the problem of dog violence.
''I don't claim to have all the answers," he says. ''If it's not
working, I'm a big man. I'm willing to admit it's not the answer."
The ordinance has a sunset clause, which opens it up for review in
five years. ''Hopefully, I'll still be a city councilor by then,"
says Consalvo.
In the meantime, his office is putting together a task force of
animal activists and other interested parties to review the pit bull
ordinance during this initial year and to ''raise awareness of all
dog laws," which could be an important marketing campaign to reach
out to neglectful dog owners.
Acknowledging that Boston has a ''loud and vibrant dog
constituency," Consalvo sticks to his guns about pit bulls. ''I do
believe breed-specific legislation is important and can work," he
said.
Click here for more News Stories
|