|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Administrators
Last Login: 8/14/2007 2:51:08 PM
Posts: 2,
Post ID: 96572
|
|
11/4/2009 12:00:00 AM
Let's discuss 'Now Elkhart County looks at animal laws, too'.
You'd be able to keep your dog if it bit or attacked someone under a draft animal ordinance Elkhart County officials are considering. It wouldn't be easy, though. You'd have to pay a $500 "dangerous animal" registration fee, get $300,000 in liability insurance in the event the dog attacks again and confine the canine to your home or a secure kennel, among other things.
-from
the Truth
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 8:05:05 AM
Posts: 37,
Post ID: 96576
|
|
| Dear Mr Vandenack Thank You for the informative article on the work of the citizens group authorized by the County Commissioners under the leadership of Tom Byers. A number of good people spent a great deal of serious time trying to build an ordinance that protected people, was enforceable, animal friendly and had a fair chance at approval. We never in our deliberations studied "Critters". In common speech, critter denotes a large domestic animal. For example a "a cow," "a horse," or "a mule". or in the comic sense Racoons, Possums and things that go bump in the night. I only bring this to your attention because in the first public hearing on the ordinance proposed following the attack on my Wheaten's a great deal of time was wasted explaining that we were not out chasing / regulating Racoons and Mules. Respectfully Jim Piechorowski
|
|
|
|
|
Master Contributor
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 6/27/2008 9:49:35 PM
Posts: 602,
Post ID: 96581
|
|
| I would like to see some laws about not only dogs but cats running loose. People dump both dogs and cats off my property because I have a farm. I don't see why they feel I can take care of them when they can't.
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 7:11:34 AM
Posts: 53,
Post ID: 96611
|
|
| I have spoken with 7 of the 9 members of the committee who are building the ordinance for the city and had been lead to believe that they were working on an ordinance involving the chaining of a dog. I was also lead to believe that the county was going to follow suit. I just read through this entire pdf and the only mention of chaining are the laws that already exist. Let me mention AGAIN, how cruel it is to own a dog simply to tie it up behind your house to live its life out alone and unsocialized. We have made all these provisions for the dangerous dogs requiring them to be contained in a kennel that can be locked and has a cement floor. Call me crazy, but this would be a luxury compared to the way that some dogs live. These dogs requiring a kennel can move about their kennel freely, without the weight of a chain constantly pulling at their necks. What kind of life can a pet who spends 90% of his day tangled around a nearby tree possibly lead? While I am happy to see there will be no ban on any specific breed, the issue of 24/7 tethering needs some serious consideration before the ordinance is passed. After reading the ordinance I feel like it doesn't do much to better the quality of life for the pets in our county. Pet ownership is a huge responsibility and if you aren't up for the challenge, don't get a pet!
|
|
|
|
|
Master Contributor
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 1/9/2008 12:46:49 PM
Posts: 595,
Post ID: 96640
|
|
| This is the Elkhart County version of the healthcare bill. They say it's about controlling dangerous animals but it's about control of people.
|
|
|
|
|
Guru-in-Training
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/28/2007 11:53:11 AM
Posts: 1,278,
Post ID: 96662
|
|
| Control people and generate some revenue. Not that some people don't need controlling but there are already laws on the books that do that. They just aren't enforced just as these will not be except arbitrarily. Just what we need, another arbitrary law! We have too many laws now that are a rehash of other laws. I thought that yesterday's election spoke out against big government? Perhaps our local politicians weren't paying enough attention. They will soon enough!
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 11/4/2009 8:59:06 PM
Posts: 1,
Post ID: 96686
|
|
| I have been a dog owner for most of my adult life (30 yrs). I share in alot of the concerns I have read from other readers. But recently I have seen another point of view that I would like to share. My parents were given a small dog as a gift a few years back, by a son, who wants or never has, anything to do with the dogs behavior or current situatuion. Yes they love him dearly, as I myself have tried to explain, WE all love our dogs. But as owners of animals WE have a responsibility to ourselves and others, especially little children. My parents dog has started to attack with no warning. It has bit my parents on numerous occasions, with excuses made every time. They are not the only ones he has bitten. The dog will even "hold them hostage" (growling, snipping, and yes even biting) not letting them out of chairs or the car. Recently, family members, including their own children, grandchildren and great grandchildren along with their own friends, have been told "if you dont like the dog, you dont like me and dont come on our property anymore. When told we would defend ourselves, our children and our grandchildren from the dog, we are threatened that the police will be called and charges would be filed (yes, unfortionatly I come from a family who think they are a bunch of Perry Masons). I cannot remember one case out of many this summer that the dog was said to be at fault. This summer on a DIALY basis the dog would run after, barking and growling, people that are on their own or community property, (kids riding minibikes, and driving golf carts, walking, or sitting in their own yards) without notice, and then again excuces are made. When one of their friends ( who got told not to come around anymore) got bit, they replied , "it didn't even brake your skin!", and she was just sitting in a chair when the dog went after her! But the lowest point came when the dog went after a great grandchild and her grandmother stomped her foot (not touching the dog) on the ground to stop the dog. She has been constantly accused by them to everyone that she kicked the dog, and the dog is the victim here, and they will not let the event go. I was even told by my father that the dog told him that his ribs hurt and they now had to take him to the vet (2 weeks after the incident). It has broken up a family. I also know that they have created this little monster. I have been in the horrible situation of having to make the decision of putting a family dog down, but with a broken heart and tears, the decision was made. With the excuse "I don't want to get involved", we cannot rely on other family membes or friends to help this type of person/persons. WE have to be responsible for our pets, and if WE dont, WE should have to face the penalty to protect our fellow human beings. Laws need to be made to protect people, especially children, from irresponsible people like this, and there are many, who cherish their replaceable pets, more than people, unfortunatly sometimes even their own grandchildren. God created man to rule over the earth. WE need to rule and control our pets or face the penalty. I know my parents are not the only ones like this. My parents have CHOSEN to lose over half their family, most of their friends, start family World War 3.... because of a dog...............I love dogs, but......IT'S JUST A DOG.
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Newbie
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/2/2007 7:22:12 AM
Posts: 39,
Post ID: 96798
|
|
| Don I am trying to get the committee to include wording that would make it possible for you to get this dog declared dangerous. I too know of owners that are so blinded with love for their animals that they make excuses for bad behavior. I love my animals and I would not say "It's just a dog" but human safety has to come first! Always. It would hurt very bad but if they ever get aggressive I would have them put down. I have had to do this in the past with a dog we rescued from fighting. She had 2 good years with us but when she started getting aggressive without provocation I made the call. It is the only right thing to do as a good owner. This is a rough copy of some of the wording I would like to see in Elkhart city's ordnance: Dangerous dog: a dog that has (a) engaged in or has been trained to engage in exhibitions of fighting; (b) attacked a person or domestic animal without justification causing bodily injury ; (c) behaved, on two or more occasions, in a manner that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury. (d) committed a nuisance three or more times; (e) was declared to be a dangerous or vicious dog by the animal control authority or court of another jurisdiction. i. If a dog is a dangerous dog as defined in section 1 hereof, and has not been impounded, any person, the district attorney, city attorney or the animal control authority may petition any court having jurisdiction in the county where the owner resides, or where the dog is owned or kept, for a hearing for the purpose of determining whether or not the dog in question should be declared vicious. Then because of the dogs actions and the owners not taking care of the problem, there would be requirements to keep the dog and those are strict. There could be fines and possible jail time if the dog injures someone. I am also trying to get them to put in that a dog that has successfully completed training or goes for 2 years without problems will come off the dangerous list. It is nowhere near perfect but it will be a start and will address all animals that become a problem, not just one breed.
|
|
|
|