|
|
|
County supports bill that would mandate altering
certain dog breeds
By REBECCA WOLF-DN Staff Writer
RED BLUFF In a county where one child has been
killed and another severely injured by dog maulings, the Tehama County Board
of Supervisors decided to send written support for a state bill that would
allow counties and cities to mandate the spaying or neutering of certain
breeds of dogs.
Tehama County Animal Services Director K. Beau
Beauregard told the board Tuesday that if the bill passed, the county would
be able to put some type of restrictions on certain breeds of dogs.
The bill specifically refers to "potentially
dangerous or vicious dogs." It would also require that jurisdictions
choosing to enact ordinances compile statistical information on dog bites
that identify the breed of dog involved, the severity of the bite and
whether the dog was altered.
Beauregard said that most dog bites occur with
dogs that have not been spayed or neutered.
He suggested that the county may later consider
an ordinance that would require all pit bulls and pit bull crosses be spayed
or neutered. The director said that most pit bulls or crosses are euthanized
when they are brought to the county's animal care center because they are
not adopted.
In the letter unanimously approved by the board,
the county states that breed-specific ordinances provide "the most humane
way to reduce shelter overpopulation by dogs that would have little, if any,
chance of adoption or would pose a possible liability if adopted by members
of the general public."
Beauregard referred to the past maulings in the
county in his comments to the board. In 2002, 6-year-old Genoe Novach was
killed by his neighbor's dogs, two Rottweiler-pug crosses. A third dog, a
Rottweiler, was never proved to be involved in the attack but was also
euthanized. In 1998, 11-year-old Cody Fox lost an arm when he was mauled by
a pack of dogs. The pack was believed to be made up of mostly pit bulls or
crosses, a Rottweiler and a coydog (coyote-dog cross).
Supervisor Ross Turner wanted to clarify at the
meeting that the letter of support did not mean the county was adopting any
breed-specific ordinance at this time.
"For the love of dog and man,we stand as one.We
are the DLCC."
|
|
|