KC DOG BLOG

Giving them a chance

After my post this morning about the 400+ dogs that were rescued about from various fight busts from around the country, I thought it was highly topical to relay a couple more success stories that were in the news this week.  Success stories about dogs, like the ones rescued this week, that were from Mike Vick's dog fighting business -- that were rescued, rehabilitated, and are having great lives.  And some are even giving back to their community.

Here's a great storie about Gracie -- a dog rescued from Bad Newz Kennels that is making a new life for herself in Richmond. (via Bad Rap.)

Here's a story about Halle, another one of Vick's dogs who is scheduled to help Salt Lake County Animal Services launch it's "Bully Breed" program that will help educate owners about pit bulls.

Our Pack has a great follow up story from a Cancer Survivor that found great joy from Leo (a former Mike Vick dog, turned therapy dog) when he visited her at the hospital as she was going through treatment. Here's a short clip:

As a former patient at the cancer treatment facility I can say that Leo brings so much joy during treatment. You're going through the treatments in order to survive and your just joyful and uplifted to have him visit you. He's so gentle and sweet. Just petting him takes you out of where you are. He makes me feel so good. He makes people smile and it's just a great feeling.

Read the rest here.

Not to mention the work of Hector -- who has also recently began therapy work.

This is just a small sampling of what can be accomplished with dogs that are rescued from dog fighting operations. Not only does it prove that the dogs deserve a chance -- it also shows that society, as a whole, may be much worse off if they don't.

Scumbags

On Wednesday, authorities in 8 states across the US -- seized more than 400 dogs and charged 26 people on charges of animal cruelty and dog fighting.

State and federal agents are charging individuals in Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma and Texas -- following a year-long investigation that was instigated by the Humane Society of Missouri.

The raid is said to be the largest coordinated bust in US history.  The magnitude of this is huge on so many levels.

On one, obvious level, there are the dogs. Over 400 of them. The idea that people would subject dogs to the horrific things that encompass dog fighting is sickening. It is one of the things that really makes you realize that there is evil in the world. If these people who were arrested are guilty, I hope they get the severe punishment that comes with the crime. We need to end the this brutality, and the people who participate in it.  People who participate in dogfighting are scumbags.

 Until 2 years ago, "common knowledge" would have said that all 400 of these dogs would be systematically euthanized.  At least now, it sounds like there is some hope for the dogs to get a fair evaluation.

Jordan Crump, a spokesperson for The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), said each dog will be assessed by behavioral experts in hopes of placing as many as possible in adoptive homes. This approach is in line with the treatment of the dogs that were rescued from Michael Vick's Bad Newz Kennels in the former Atlanta Falcons quarterback's dogfighting case. The majority of the Vick dogs are now living with individuals and families around the country.

While that paragraph is music to my ears -- and the fact that they will be given a chance is why all of the work that groups like Best Friends and Bad Rap and others did with the Vick dogs was worth it. Because now there is a chance, even if it is hard to hear it be attributed to someone from HSUS -- an organization that pushed for the Vick dogs to all be killed without evaluation.  HSUS -- who's leader, even now, even in spite of the organizations "changed philosphy", sounds like he is predetermining outcomes for the dogs.

"It's just unclear what will happen," said Wayne Pacelle, head of the Humane Society of the United States. "I think it's pretty certain that a lot of those dogs will not pass a behavioral test."

Yip, that's the leader of the world's wealthiest animal welfare organization predertermining a negative outcome for the dogs.  Hopefully HSUS is not put in charge of the evaluations.

I don't know how many of these dogs will pass their evaluations and be given a new chance at life. I don't know where they'll all go if they all do pass their evaluations, but I am in favor of giving as many of the victims a chance as possible at a new life.   When/if many of these dogs are deemed ok, for rehabilitiation (or to go to adopt without the need for rehabilitation), HSUS, with it's vast resources and fundraising expertise (HSUS spent $27 million in fundraising efforts last year, and has already begun using these busts for fundraising), can help fund the rescue of these dogs.  HSUS has the resources that they could easily provide the resources (financial or otherwise) to help in the adoptions of these canine victims if they choose to do so.

Let's prosecute those responsible. Let's evaluate the victims.  And let's figure out the next steps from there.  Let's not doom them to death until the appropriate evaluations are taken, Wayne.

Meanwhile, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the other side of this coin. While it is great that the busts happened and the dogs were rescued from their horrible circumstances, articles are now popping up talking about how "widespread" dog fighting is.

This will no doubt cause some cities to look at things like breed bans to "stop the dogfighters" because they are "underground" and "hard to catch".

Of course they're underground. They're breaking the law. People don't usually break the law (at least major ones) in the wide-open public. More laws will not stop them from breaking the laws they're already breaking. Those laws only end up negatively impacting the literally hundreds of thousands of pit bull owners around the country who are trying to do right by the breed. We're giving them good lives. Training them. Loving them. Treating them like family. When people look at a situation like this, and say, we need to pass a breed specific law to stop it, they are only hurting the people who are on their side...and who are also trying to make it right.  And there are hundreds of thousands more "good guys" in this than bad guys.

The way to end the dog fighting madness is to do what appears to be done in this case -- is make it a priority to stop. For decades, while people have known that it goes on, authorities haven't really prioritized stopping it because it was seen as a "victimless" crime.  But people now, finally realize there are victims. And it's time to put an end to it by making stopping the crime a priority.  It's time to crack down on the scumbags....and leave the people who are trying to do right by the dogs alone.

(Photo attributed to the AP).

Update:

 For more commentary on this, check out:

Pet Connection:  Why Fight Busts are No Longer Enough.

Winograd: HSUS: Abused Dogs Should Face "Pretty Certain" Death

CBS News: Inside America's Biggest Dog Fight Bust (has probably the best video and photos (nothing graphic) I've seen on this thus far).

Congrats to Stella

Last night, Stella successfully achieved Canine Good Citizen Status. I'm really happy for her. She's a really impressive little dog for one that was found hit by a car and left along the side of a road badly bruised, with a broken leg, and horrible mange.

Now, she's a pretty darn cute Canine Good Citizen.

Stella celebrated by sticking her tongue out at me.

No BSL for Lincoln, NE

There's a great news coming out of Lincoln, NE this week -- but not all of the news is in the headlines.

City officials in Lincoln, NE are mulling changes to their dangerous dog laws -- but breed specific ones won't be a part of it. 

"We can look at breed specific banning all we want, but the core issue is the irresponsible pet owner," said Bruce Dart of the Lincoln-Lancaster County Health Department.

Well, it looks like they're at least going to target the correct species. They have several ideas on the table (several will work quite well) that I'll talk about in a bit. But the sidebar item really caught my eye. It's the number of dog bites in Lincoln by year since 2004:

2004: 560

2005: 543

2006: 543

2007: 524

2008: 424

2009: 300 (10 months into the fiscal -- on pace for 360)

Notice a trend? Yip. Going down pretty dramatically. 2008 is a 24% drop from 2004. It will be 36% if they hit what they're on pace for this year.  It's amazing what can happen when a city focuses on ownership issues vs dog breeds what can happen with dog bite numbers.  Yeah - focusing on the irresponsible owners, works.

This decrease has come, incidentally, at a time when the population of Lincoln has been growing pretty rapidly (up 12% since 2000). Meanwhile, a nearby city like Council Bluffs, IA, which has been focusing its efforts on dog breeds, instead of owners.  Likewise, neighboring Omaha has recently seen its share of troubles following the passing of breed specific legislation late last year. But Lincoln, who insists on focusing on owners, is seeing their bites go down.

See folks, focusing on owners, who are the real problem, works.

Meanwhile, there are several ideas the city is kicking around -- so here they are, and my thoughts on each:

1) Citing owners if their dogs run loos and aggressively approach people.  While, in general, I like ordinances that can deem a dog aggressive that really is aggressive even before it is involved in a bite incident, I think this one can be very bad for dog owners if there is not a good appeals system built into the law. Most ordinary citizens are not very knowledgable about canine behavior and aren't all that good at recognizing an approach that really is "aggressive" vs just an approach.  And often, size/breed of dog can sway people's thoughts on whether they felt threatened or not. But as long as there is a good and proper evaluation and appeals system that involves real experts, this one could work well.

2) Charging repeat offenders with being "reckless owners" and impounding animals if animal ordinances are violated three times within 24 months.  Every city should have a law like this. In most cities, it is typically the same few negligent owners that cause the majority of the problems and finding a way to deal with these negligent owners should be a top priority. As long as this is reasonably written and enforced I think it's a great law. I just think it needs to be considered that there should be a difference between a Beagle that digs under the fence a couple times and having dogs that bite or if animals are cruelly or neglectfully treated.

3) Citing owners the first time their dog bites someone.  Obviously this makes a lot of sense if the bite is severe enough to warrant it...and as long as small nips and scratches and the like are excluded. No all bites are aggressive behaviors.  What dog owner hasn't been 'bitten' when playing with their dog -- either roughhousing or playing with a ball or something?

4) Increasing fines for having dogs at large, menacing and biting. I don't know what the current fines are, but yeah, fining people for problem dogs makes sense. I'm pretty tolerant of the dog-at-large thing on a first time basis....most dogs get out once in a while. The at-large fines need to be for frequent problems...

5) Giving animal control authority to seize dogs perceived as threats until the issue is resolved. There are certainly some potential Constitutionality issues here, but yeah, if a dog is majorly aggressive, I can see why they'd want this. Even Dart admits this one is going to be tricky.

6) Requiring dogs to be physically restrained while outside on the owner's property. I'm not a fan of these laws. If I'm outside on my porch, or deck ,or whatever, and my dog is outside with me and completely voice responsive, what difference does this make? In fact, I think this one is punishing the people most who have worked the hardest to train their dog to be voice responsive and not run off. Increase the fines for the "problems" so that people will know not to take chances with a dog that really isn't voice responsive...but don't punish people who are doing right by their dogs.

7) Requiring owners to have homeowners or renter's insurance as part of licensing. This seems like a good way to make what is probably already really low licensing compliance even lower. Most people who have homes already have home owners insurance (which will cover the dog in case something does happen).  Renters are not as reliable with this. I could make a case for this one -- but in the end, think that it will just discourage licensing which will be a net loss for the city.

8) Revising the definition of acceptable restraint to no longer include all doors and windows because dogs can break through screens. I get where they're going with this, but this would essentially eliminate the possibility of me leaving my windows open during the spring on my house while my dogs were inside. I just don't see any way that this is a winner.

9) Mandating spay/neuter - This is one of my most blogged about topics...it just doesn't work.

10) Requiring dogs declared dangerous or potentially dangerous to wear warnings on collars or harnesses. If I get close enough to read it, it's probably too late for me. But honestly, if the dog has done something to make it deemed aggressive, I have no problem with the dog being forced to wear an orange collar or something so people know.  You don't want the collar?  Make sure you don't let your dog earn it.  

Again, I'll note, at least they're talking about the right topics in Lincoln. There is a lot to be said for that. Hopefully they'll take a hard look at all of these items and make good choices that won't overcomplicate their system -- which already seems to be working pretty well for them in causing a decrease in dog bites.

Update on New KCMO animal shelter

The Star today has a new article with an update on the Kansas City, MO animal shelter which recently became privatized. "Half Way Home Pet Adoptions" is being run by Dr. Wayne Steckelberg, who quickly went to work cleaning up the shelter, and creating new spaces for animals.

"The old facility was in terrible shape," said Steckelberg, who estimated it took a month to get the building clean. 

One of the great things that they are doing is creating more space for animals.

The cats have been moved from a cramped hallway with poor ventilation that was leading to resperatory problems for the cats into a large caged area in the once-dusty basement that is now the home for about 75 cats - - complete with old furniture to climb on.  Executive offices have been turned into exam rooms. The men's locker room has been converted into a haven for the smallest puppies and kittens.

The shelter is being very aggressive about adopting out animals. While under city control, the shelter adopted out about 75-100 animals a month. In only 4 months of operation, Half Way Home is now adopting out around 300. 

While under city control, the shelter averaged killing around 565 animals per month. They are now making serious dents in that number.  Winograd has been talking a lot about the importance of good leadership in saving the lives of animals -- and the change in leadership at the Kansas City, Mo shelter has worked wonders.

We're not to where the end goal should be -- but in a few short months, certainly making huge strides in the right direction.

The Yin and Yang of No Kill over the 4th of July Weekend

The three day holiday weekend gave me a chance to spend some time with family and friends and it's always interesting talking to my "non-rescue" friends and getting their thoughts on animal welfare issues.  The view of the animal welfare world is often very different with those who are looking in on us from the outside.

Between the conversations with friends, and upon catching up on my reading last night, I couldn't help but notice the significant ying and yang of what is going on in "no kill" right now.

First, the good.

As Winograd posted this morning, Indianapolis Animal Care and Control was open on Saturday. While the vast majority of shelters around the country were off celebrating our nation's birthday, IACC decided that with so many people spending time with family over the long weekend, that they might take that family time and use it as an opportunity to gain some adoptions.  The thinking woudl be, with people actually having time during the holiday to come visit the shelter, they just might.  The net result was the adoption of 150 dogs and cats from the shelter on Saturday -- with several other people who didn't find their family's match at the shelter -- but vowed to return when the shelter got more animals.  As Winograd quotes someone from an area group:

There was not only a sense of excitement with the IACC staff today, but also a sense of hope… that the agency is beginning to turn the corner for better helping the animals get out alive. The long, winding drive from Harding St to the IACC parking lot was cars parked bumper-to-bumper on both sides of the drive. People were at the facility who had never been there before, and if they didn’t find who they were looking for, they were planning on returning in the future.  There were more people than animals available.

One of the major tennents of the no-kill model is that shelters actually need to be open when people can come vist them. Being open from 10-5 on weekdays doesn't exactly make a shelter easily accessible to the majority of potential adopters. This is an extreme example of how making the time when potential adopters have the time can reap huge rewards for animals needing to find home.

Now the bad.

Over the weekend, we spent some quality time with my wife's family and friends. During the course of conversations, it came to light that no fewer than three  of her immediate family and friends (in a group of no more than 30 people) had recently been declined by a local shelter when they tried to adopt a dog.

Her uncle was declined because he had an unaltered dog at home. He actually has a great line of working Beagles that he occassionally breeds for working hunting dogs. He was looking to adopt a dog (and he wanted one that was altered) to be a pet dog. But because he was "a breeder" he was declined from adopting a pet.

Another relative was declined because the shelter didn't want to adopt to him because he wanted the dog as an "outside" dog. He has two dogs already, both "outside" dogs, that live a pretty nice life. They each have dog houses in a well insulated horse barn that is filled with straw and other warm bedding. They have heated water dishes.  When the temperatures get too extreme (either cold or hot), they get to stay in the basement of the family home.  They live on 50 acres and have free rein to roam on the farm (but really, never get to far away).  They spend almost all of their time outdoors caring for their horses and playing with the dogs -- however the rescue told him that they would not adopt an "outside dog" to him.

A third person, a family friend, contacted a shelter about adopting a dog and filled out their online application. For the past couple of months he's been thinking about getting a new dog. His dog Sophie, died a few months ago at the age of 17. Even months later, his eyes welled up talking about Sophie, and how much he loved their dog.  This person was declined because he admitted on his application that he didn't consistently keep Sophie on heartworm medication.*  The rescue ruled that because of this, in spite of Sophie living a long, healthy life, he was not "good enough" to adopt one of their animals.

* I know some people may be appalled by the not consistently using heartworm medication. However, in this area of the country, we have very cold winters, and there are a least 4-6 months out of the year in which fleas, knats, mosquitos and other pesky bugs don't survive. My own veterinarian even advises us not to use heartworm medication during the winter because with indoor dogs, the damage done by the heartworm medication (which is, after all, a poison) is far worse than the scant likelihood of the dog actually getting heartworms during the winter months. This is actually a common recommendation from many vets in the area that improves the dog's overall health.

So on the one hand, we have a shelter in Indianapolis that stayed open for the holiday and adopted out 150 pets.

On another, I have 3 families (out of no more than 15 total families) at a family and friends gathering that had been denied from adopting a dog even though they either currently owned healthy dogs or had recently owned a healthy dog until it died of very old age -- all for very trivial reasons. What may even be more disturbing here is that all three were denied by different shelters -- so we have multiple shelters in our area denying people for trivial reasons. One of the shelters even calls themselves a 'no-kill' shelter -- even though they are not open admission and apparently aren't adopting many dogs out to free up space for more dogs to come in.

If we are going to ever reduce the number of homeless pets in our community, we must follow Indianapolis' example and find ways and reasons to adopt pets INTO loving homes, and not continually look for reason why NOT to adopt home animals. Many of these same shelters that are denying adopters are then complaining that "overpopulation" is the problem-- when it's not. It's their own lack of willingness to adopt animals into homes for trivial reasons that is causing a large part of the problem.

If we are going solve the problem, we must adopt pets into homes...we cannot continue to find reasons to deny them and push them to other places (puppy mills, breeders, etc) when their first choice is to go get a rescued dog. We need to encourage people to adopt...not continually make the process harder (or impossible). And we cannot continue to push people away from our animals if our larger goal is to save them.  It's time to make placing animals a priority for our local animal shelters.

Weekly Roundup - Week Ending July 5, 2009

The holiday weekend means that a lot of media outlets aren't really spending much time covering news -- so there have been fewer news stories than normal this week. It's interesting to me that a huge percentage of the bites that were in the news this week were from cities that had breed bans in place...yeah, still not working.  I have a pretty crazy travel schedule ahead of me for the next couple of weeks, so I'm going to appologize in advance if I'm slow in posting.  Onto the roundup:

Cities and Laws

Hays, KS is once again looking at potential breed restrictions.  This had reportedly gone away about 2 months ago but has now come back.  I'm going to have more on this (I think) later in the week.  The city is looking at a lot of different options from bans, to non-breed specific restrictions, to something in between. The city councilors got copies of some "model ordinances" -- which were not very "model".

Themayor of Wilkes Barre, PA has mentioned a desire to change the state law regarding breed restrictions. The state of Pennsylvania has a law that prohibits breed specific legislation. I think many times when city officials are in states without BSL, they are completely unaware of how ineffective the legislation really is at dealing with the problems of dog bites - and that appears to be the case here.

Dog Bites and Attacks

A three year old Vancouver area boy needed 96 stitches after being bitten by a Neopolitan Mastiff.

A six year old Fort Lauderdale girl was bitten while riding her bike by a 'pit bull' that broke lose from its chain.

A Sioux Falls, SD man was bitten this week by a white Husky mix.

A 'pit bull' in Cincinnati got in the middle of a youth tennis camp and began biting at the ankles of a couple of the youth. Also in Cincinnati, a man is accused of  ordering his mixed breed dog to attack someone who eneded up requiring medical treatment. Cincinnati has quite a history of failure with their 5 year old breed ban -- because they have been dealing with dogs instead of with owners that either let their dogs roam free, or that owners want to be aggressive and will order to attack someone. And the city will continue to have failure until they focus on the owners and not the dogs.

A guilty pleas was given by an owner of five dogs, four boxers and a dachshund, that got out of their yard and attacked a man while he was out jogging.

A 13 year old Athens, GA boy has admitted that he provoked three dogs that attacked him last week by repeatedly bouncing a basketball off the door of the home where the dogs were staying and eventually ended up breaking the door which led to the dogs (1 pit bull and 2 Fox Terriers) escaping and attacking him.

A 9 year old Austrailian girl was biten at a family barbeque by the family's Shar Pei.

In Omaha, two pit bulls allegedly attacked and killed a small dog. The dogs were running off-leash. "It's just another example of an irreponsible dog owner not having control over his dogs," said Mark Langan of the Humane Society's Field Operations. "We see it way too much." Last fall, Omaha passed an ordinance that required responsible pit bull owners to jump through a series of hoops in order to prevent them from having to adhere to muzzling restrictions and a variety of other restrictions. Instead of creating a series of hoops for responsible owners to get through, they should have focused the legislation on the irresponsible owners that Langan talks about...

UK Dangerous Dogs Act

The UK has one of the worlds oldest and most popular breed bans -- and yet, consistently story after story comes out about the failures of the ordinance -- now on 18 years after it's passing. The stories continue to serve as a reminder that even if you ban several breeds of dogs, there will always be other breeds of dogs that irresponsible owners will flock to because you never addressed the heart of the problem.

A woman in the UK is recovering after a major attack by a Japanese Akita.

A four year old boy received minor injuries after being "attacked" by a Rottweiler.

A UK has now attacked a dog for the 3rd time already this year -- but because its breed wasn't included under the Dangerous Dogs Act, there is little that authorities say they can do. 

Media Irresponsibility

As the UK media how focuses on other breeds of dogs other than 'pit bulls', they are now running a few more stories like this one, where a Rottweiler "Attacked" a 2 year old toddler, leaving only 3 teeth marks and never breakin the skin. Not breaking the skin isn't an attack, and certainly not when a large dog is involved with a toddler.

And this folks, is how a breed gets demonized. Two dogs in Mansfield, OH apparently attacked a man. It's the breed idendification that is pretty amazing "They were borderline of a pit and not a pit," said Richland County Dog Warden Dave Jordan. " They had more of a distinct bulldog look, certainly a mix".  So in other words, they were unidentifiable mixed breed dogs (like most dogs).  There is no such thing as "borderline a pit bull" -- either a dog is or it isn't. And yet, the story runs with the header "Pit bull attack". Nice.  

Abuse Cases

Four dogs in one area of the UK have been killed by heat exhaustion after being left alone in vehicles for too long in the hot summer. Folks, be very careful with your dogs in the hot summer because they can overheat in cars very quickly.

Four pit bulls were found dead in Manorville, NJ. Officials say the dogs were pretty badly mutilated and were dumped in the woods.

Three people have been indicted and 49 animals seized on suspicion of dog fighting in the Detroit area.

Animal Shelters

Concerns from the ASPCA in New York about the shelter filling up with dogs after the NYC Housing Authority placed severe restrictions on what dogs are allowed in public housing. ASPCA lawyer Deborah Bresch says there has been a lot of innaccurate and confusing information out there which has led to some confusion about what dogs are or are not allowed.

Miscellanious

A great article worth reading on Saving Bruce -- a dog that may be killed under the UK Dangerous Dogs Act for being a 'pit bull type" dog, even though at least two experts have declared the dog as not a pit bull. By all reports, the dog is not aggressive in any way and poses no danger to the public. The ridiculousness of these laws that are causing court hearings and such for breed idenitifcation for dogs that are friendly is just crazy...and the reason so many of these laws are majorly flawed. This time would much better be spent dealing with actually aggressive dogs.

Have a great week everyone.

Another potential fatal dog attack

96 year old Israel Pope, Jr. was found dead in Pickensville, AL. How he came to be that way is a bit unclear -- but a pack of wild dogs seem like the most likely culprit.

There was a pack of seven wild dogs that lived under an abandoned, ramshackle trailer that was only about 1/2 mile from Pope's home. The dogs were described as complete feral (neighbors reported that no one was able to pet the dogs), were underfed, and got most of their water from a stagnant ditch nearby.

Pope's remains were found near and under that trailer where the dogs lived. It is unclear whether Pope had died before the dogs found him, or the dogs caused his death -- and authorities think it is unlikely that they will ever be able to officially determine.  Authorities described several of the dogs as "big dogs" that easily could have overpowered the man.

Either way, this is a tragic end to a very long life for Mr. Pope.

Pickensville is a very small town in rural Alabama.  It has a population of just over 600 people -- has a declining population, and 34% of the community lives below the poverty level.

The fact that there was a pack of large dogs living under an abandoned trailer in a poor, rural community is probably not all that surprising.  The fact that the dogs had become feral and aggressive, probably isn't that surprising either. But the fact that no one called the authorities about the dogs, or if they did, nothing was done to the dogs to remove the potential threat, is pretty inexcusable.

And it's because of incidences like this that it makes me so angry when people talk about idiocy like breed bans -- because it only serves as a distraction from real issues that cause major dog attacks...including packs of dogs allowed to run at large and allowed to live in situations without owners. 

For this, I'm not sure how this one will be officially classified at the end of the year. I do find it unlikely that these dogs which were fearful of people would have attacked the man -- so it seems more likely (to me) that the man died prior to the dogs getting to him. We may never know.

This story was covered by about 20 media outlets, all directly in the Alabama/Mississippi area.

RIP. Israel Pope.

"Pit bull" headlines must gain eyeballs

I almost hate linking to this story, because, well, that's exactly what they wanted. But the ridiculousness of this is too much to pass up.

Because when people say the media shows bias against pit bulls....this is what they mean.

In West Palm Beach, Florida, a SWAT team descended on a home to serve a search warrant (reasons for the warrant were undisclosed).  The team went to the home were several people including children were on the front porch. They were allegedly attacked by a vicious 'pit bull' (according to reports, the dog weighed over 90 lbs, which is much bigger than any of the 'pit bull' breeds usually get). Police tried to subdue the dog with a fire extinguisher, but when that failed, they opened fire on the dog, killing it.

The dog was apparently chained at the time.

During the firing of bullets, a stray bullet hit one of the people sitting on the front porch.

So here we have a story where police shot a chained dog that they apparently could have avoided, while serving a search warrant for some undisclosed crime -- but felt they needed a SWAT team to perform. And shot a dog that was 25 lbs heavier than the high end weight of one of the 'pit bull' breeds of dogs. And a stray bullet when four different police officers opened fire on the dog ended up hitting a civilian.

The headline from WPBF TV?  "Police Shoot, Kill Pit Bull While Serving Search Warrant".

Seems like "Errant police bullet shoots man" could have been the headline. All of the other news networks thought the bystander was worth mentioning.

Here's from the Florida Sun Sentinel. And from the CBS Affiliate.

The people who were at the home seem like real gems....and a couple of them were hauled off in handcuffs for some crime that they likely committed.  And I realize, that in the heat of a raid that not all of the decisions are for the safety of a dog....I'm just baffled at how the dog became a part of the headline here.... 

Irony in Sioux City

Sioux City, IA is starting to become quite the little case study on BSL.

Shortly after the city passed a ban on 'pit bulls', city officials targeted those who used their democratic right to speak out against the law in front of  the council by knocking on their doors and checking out their animals.

They then had to change how they collected licenses because the veterinary community didn't want to cooperate with the city because they opposed the breed specific law. 

The city then had some "paperwork issues" that people were critical of that potentially violated people's 5th amendment rights that was later changed.

Now, it appears that the city councilman who was most responsible for pushing for the ban on pit bulls, Aaron Rochester, is awaiting his appeal to keep his Labrador Retriever because it has been declared vicious after biting his neighbor -- causing the neighbor to have stitches.

Isn't it interesting that the man who most strongly opposed recommendations from the ASPCA and local veterinarians for a breed neutral dangerous dog ordinance in favor of his own "pit bull" ban -- that has now caused hundreds of dogs that have never been a problem to be treated as dangerous animals -- now awaits a court decision on whether or not his dog -- a Labrador - is dangerous based on its actual behavior. 

These people who want breed bans are model folks, eh?

More thoughts on this at Reason Hit & Run.