Please remember that there is NO compromise when it comes to Breed Discriminatory Legislation (BDL, sometimes called BSL). You don't halfways discriminate against someone or something.  

 Some Watertown City Council members are seemingly trying to throw residents a bone with their "Grandfather Clause" or by saying that it isn't an "out and out ban". They seem to think they are appeasing the residents who already own ‘pit bull’ dogs; those who fear they will have to move or give up their dog.

Discrimination is discrimination. There are still all kinds of bogus requirements that single out "pit bull" dogs which will cause hardship to their owners. Requiring extra insurance, extra fencing, yard signs and telling you where you can and cannot live with a "pit bull" dog is discrimination. The proposed ordinance even tells you that you cannot leave your windows open. 


If the "high risk" language is removed from the ordinance, a Grandfather Clause will not be necessary. A dog will have to "earn" the designation of vicious - regardless of breed. 

Accepting a Grandfather Clause as a compromise will NOT make the community safer - it is STILL BDL and does not protect the community from reckless owners. Please do not allow yourself to be swayed by this argument. It would be like allowing Rosa Parks to sit in the middle of the bus.

Breed Discriminatory Legislation (sometimes called BSL) has been proven to be ineffective.  It is a waste of hard-earned taxpayer dollars.  The cost of enforcing BDL takes away precious resources from other matters of concern to the community, including protecting the community from truly dangerous dogs not belonging to the targeted breeds. 

Every citizen deserves to be protected from ALL reckless dog owners, not just reckless owners with the targeted breeds of dogs.  Everyone needs to be held equally accountable.

BDL can be a disincentive to dog license compliance, so communities may lose licensing revenues that could have been used to fund important animal services.

BDL can drive business away.  Dog shows, sporting events, and other pet-related events are not likely to be held in areas where certain dogs may be confiscated for attending.  Tourists with targeted dogs will also choose not to visit.  Businesses will have trouble attracting new employees who will chose not to relocate because they own one of the targeted breeds.  Business owners who own targeted breeds will choose to either leave town or not establish a new business in town. Landlords who are not permitted to rent to targeted breeds will suffer a loss of income. 

BDL makes animal control officers,  police officers and the animal shelter, the enemies of the community by forcing them to seize and destroy well-behaved family pets. 

BDL results in costly lawsuits.  Citizens who feel their constitutional rights are being violated, their dogs were wrongly identified as a "dangerous breed", or residents of towns with local BDL that contracts state law, can and have brought lawsuits against their municipalities. 

BDL is costly to individual dog owners, who must relocate or surrender their family pet.  The emotional cost to pet owners cannot be measured.  When dogs are not banned, but are subject to restrictions, pet owners must bear ordinance-imposed financial costs as a result of the requirements that they maintain higher libability insurance limits or purchase expensive containment systems.  This financially penalizes responsible families. 

Read more here.....http://animalfarmfoundation.org/pages/Breed-Specific-Legislation

Bill Bruce, Former Director of Animal and By-Law Services, Calgary: "BSL is intended to be the silver bullet that will end animal aggression, and it never has.  When we see it applied, it typically tends to see an escalation in animal aggression because it's attempting to deal with the dog, not the problem.  The problem is the owner.  The other problem with it is that when it's that broad-brushed, you catch the wrong fish in the net.  So when you propose BSL, what you do is you polarize the entire community.  Instead of drawing a community of responsible pet owners together, you polarize them by attacking people who are not part of your problem..." 

Read more here: http://animalfarmfoundation.org/files/Community-Model-for-RPO_Calgary_2013.pdf

Breed discriminatory legislation (sometimes called BSL) discriminates against certain members of the community based on the pet they own.  BDL forces families to relocate to other areas in order to keep their pets, making it difficult for families to stay connected.  BDL discriminates against families on fixed-incomes, families with children or senior citizens, and people with disabilities: relocation may not be an option for these families.

BDL breaks up families by forcing law abiding citizens to give up their family pets.  They are forced to bring well-behaved family dogs to the shelter where they may be destroyed.

Read more here...http://animalfarmfoundation.org/files/BSL-Talking-Points-ebook_2.pd

Breed Discriminatory Legislation (often called BSL) leads to increases in owner surrenders, creating more work for animal shelters, more shelter deaths, and more financial resources required to care for/euthanize surrendered dogs.  It puts all animals in the shelter at risk, because of the increased financial and staff burden.

Breed Discriminatory Legislation hinders adoptions and increases length of stay by restricting which dogs can be placed, limiting the potential pool of adopters, and generating fear of all shelter dogs.

Read more here...http://animalfarmfoundation.org/files/BSL-Talking-Points-ebook_2.

Speak up against the proposed breed-discriminatory ordinance.

As you may be aware, the City of Watertown has been discussing the implementation
of a breed-discriminatory ordinance for some time. Although progress has been
made in educating alderpersons on why an ordinance targeting a particular breed
is bad policy, we haven’t swayed them entirely. At present, the proposed
ordinance still contains language mandating that any pit bull terrier dog be
deemed a “high risk dog,” which subjects the dog’s guardian to burdensome,
costly and exceedingly discriminatory regulations.

Please speak up to protect your companion animals, your property rights and your tax
dollars. Tell Watertown alderpersons that breed discrimination is wrong and
makes the community more vulnerable to truly dangerous dogs
while, at the same time, punishing responsible dog owners and innocent dogs.
Breed-discriminatory ordinances also waste taxpayer dollars and infringe on
constitutional property rights.

Take action by contacting the mayor and the alderpersons immediately using the email
letter we’ve provided. Personalizing your email will help its effectiveness but
is not necessary. Also, to be persuasive in getting your message across, please
be sure to use a polite tone in all communications.

If you live in the Watertown area, please attend the council meeting on Tuesday,
August 20, at 7 pm. The agenda may be viewed here.
Be sure to dress nicely and avoid emotional testimony. The facts speak best:
Breed discrimination makes communities less safe, costs taxpayers greatly,
infringes on property rights, and punishes responsible citizens.

Click here to access the Action Alert provided by Best Friends Animal Society:
http://www.capwiz.com/bestfriends/issues/alert/?alertid=62844796#.UhJm4D2NcJY.facebook

Dogs do not attack for no reason. Humans often misinterpret a dog
attacking "out of the blue" and "without warning" because we missed the signs. A
dog that is prepared to bite someone has his reasons. Can we, as humans, justify
those reasons using the social norms of people? No, because dogs are not people,
and do not live their lives according to our social values. However, as their
guardians, it is our duty to understand how they communicate to avoid these
situations.  

Contrary to what certain media outlets lead the public to believe, there is
no dog bite epidemic. Reports to public health agencies of dog bites have
declined significantly since the 1970’s. And this occurred while there was a
significant increase in both human and canine populations. In other words, our
communities are safer than ever before. Dog bites are not common. Which is why
when bites happen, they are big news. While society barely notices everyday
events such as car crash fatalities (which claim 65,000 people each year), it
thrives on the obscure. 　And dog attacks are just that. Intense focus on select
and isolated incidents of serious dog bite injuries incites fear and hysteria. 
 
A study by the National Canine Research Council reveals biased reporting by
the media, and its devastating consequences for dogs, mainly dogs labeled as
"pit bulls". The media over reports anything with a "pit bull" in the headlines,
and underreports on any other breed. As Karen Delise, the founder and Director
of Research at NCRC states, "Clearly a dog bite-related fatality by an
unremarkable breed is not as newsworthy as a non-fatal incident involving a "pit
bull" dog." You can read the summary of this study here:  
http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/2007%20Media%20Bias.pdf

Dog bites are a societal problem that cannot be characterized apart from
people. They result from problematic human behaviors that place people and
animals at risk. Encouraging and enforcing responsible dog ownership is the key
to addressing public safety issues involving dogs. Dog bites are not ok. We all
want to live in safe communities. 

No dog bite study claiming to correlate dog bite related injuries by breed –
whether published recently or in earlier decades – is valid or reliable because
the reporting was based primarily on visual breed identification, a methodology
which has been discredited by modern science. The third issue of the Journal of
Veterinary Behavior in 2008 documented the research of the Institute of Animal
Welfare and Behavior of the University of Veterinary Medicine in
Hanover, Germany. Four authors scrutinized over 1000 individual dogs of various
breeds to learn if different breeds signaled their warnings differently before
triggering into aggression. They concluded that "all dogs, including dogs
commonly labeled 'pit bull,' signal their intent." The claim that "pit bulls" do
not give notice prior to attacking a person is an outdated myth and urban legend
that has been overwhelmingly refuted by science. All dogs signal intent. No dog
of any breed just ‘snaps’. Here is the link to the research:
http://www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/tinymce/Schalke.pdf

There is no scientific evidence that one breed or type of a dog is more
likely to injure a human than any other breed or type of dog. There is no
scientific evidence that "pit bull" dogs cause more damage when they bite. As
for the pit bulls have "locking jaws" myth, there is no anatomical structure
that could be a locking mechanism in any dog of any breed.

Almost every "pit bull" hater or proponent of breed-discriminatory
legislation relies on a single study from 2000 to make their case (J. Sacks, L.
Sinclair, G. Golab, et al, "Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in
the United States between 1979 and 1998," JAVMA, Vol 217, No. 6, Sept 15, 2000).
In this study, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) attempted to identify the
breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks between 1979 –1998. In reporting
their findings, the researchers made clear that the breeds of dogs said to be
involved in human fatalities had varied over time, depending on whatever breeds
were popular at that time.

The CDC has since released a statement: "[The study] does not identify
specific breeds that are most likely to bite or kill, and thus is not
appropriate for policymaking decisions related to the topic." One of the
researchers involved in the CDC project, Dr. Gail Golab of the AVMA, said: "The
whole point of our summary was to explain why you can’t do that. But the media
and the people who want to support their case just don’t look at that." (Golab
was quoted in the Sept/Oct. 2004 issue of Best Friends Magazine) 

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), also released a
statement: "In contrast to what has been reported in the news media, the data
[from the study]…CANNOT be used to infer any breed-specific risk for dog bite
fatalities…" So there ya go, the experts have spoken. There is no breed of dog
that is more likely to bite than another.

There are millions of "pit bull" dog owners across the US living quiet,
peaceful, and unremarkable lives with their family dog. These owners are not the
exception; they are the rule. "Pit bull" dogs live with and provide a service to
many of their owners and neighbors. Around the world, "pit bull" dogs are used
as therapy dogs, service dogs, police, K9s, and military dogs.

 "Pit bull" dogs are increasingly popular family pets:  Banfield Pet
Hospitals, the largest general veterinary practice in the world, reports that
the percentage of "pit bull" dogs visiting their U.S. network of clinics has
increased by 47 percent over the past ten years (2000 to 2010).  A recent survey
by Vetstreet concluded that dogs identified as "pit bulls" are one of the most
popular family dogs in this country. 

The history books now tell us there were no witches in Salem, nor was our
country infiltrated by communists, and eventually history will bear out that
"pit bulls" are just plain old dogs. No better or worse than any other breed.
But before that can happen, we must come to realize that we are in the midst of
a social hysteria about "pit bulls", and educate those who believe the hype. 

To learn more about this topic, please read The Pit Bull Placebo, published
by the National Canine Research Council:
http://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/uploaded_files/publications/230603563_Pit%20Bull%20Placebo.pdf


Kelly Herbold
Wisconsin Voters for Companion Animals Advisor
Milwaukee Animal Alliance Director