Pit bull ban advances amid protests

10:00 PM

By Lynn Zerschling Journal staff writer | Posted: Monday, July 21, 2008

SIOUX CITY -- City lawmakers took the first step to put the muzzle on pit bull ownership in Sioux City despite the pleas from a half dozen dog owners Monday night.

"It's not the dog, it's the person who raises the dog," Jeremiah Thompson told the council about Councilman Aaron Rochester's proposal. "What's next -- Rottweilers? Great Danes? ... The next thing will be you only will allow small dogs. ... The dogs who bite the most are dachshunds. Pit bulls are sixth on that list."

Rochester replied that statistics show that almost 50 percent of the dogs declared vicious or high risk since October are pit bulls or mixes, while only 3 percent of the dogs with pet licenses are pit bulls.

The council gave unanimous first-round approval to the proposal to require all pit bull owners to register their pets with the city clerk's office. No one could adopt a pit bull, or replace a pit bull pet if it dies. Owners would have six months to place pit bull puppies in homes outside the city limits. Exceptions would be made for Animal Control, Siouxland Humane Society and canines participating in dog shows.

A pit bull owner would have six months to register his or her dog with the clerk's office. Owners would have to buy a city license tag for the pet at the time it is registered. No fee would be charged to register the pit bull. A pit bull picked up by Animal Control officers would be euthanized, unless the owner could prove he already had registered that animal with the city or prove he can place the dog in a home outside the city limits.

Other pit bull owners questioned the validity of banning a certain breed, which, they said, can be a docile animal.

"My pit bull is the best darn dog we've ever had," Justine Harrington said, noting her family also has owned labs and huskies. "I just don't think it is fair we can't get another one."

"There's a lot of wonderful dogs out there," Mayor Mike Hobart told her. "Nobody is going to vote in favor of this ban if they didn't believe pit bulls have more of a propensity to bite and do damage. ... I am convinced in my heart that pit pulls are a dangerous breed."

Candice Matson urged the council to find the middle ground, which she said called for more enforcement of the owners. For example, she said the city should require breeders of any breed to register with the city.

"What has you so in love with pit bulls?" Hobart asked. Matson replied, "Because he is so in love with me."

Harrington suggested the city require all pit bull owners to take their pets to dog obedience classes.

Councilman Jim Rixner said the preponderance of evidence "still points to these as vicious dogs. I don't know where the middle ground is. ... We'd still have all the outlaws who won't register their dogs anyway."

Rixner and Councilmen Dave Ferris and Brent Hoffman reported they had received a great number of e-mails, many from animal rights organizations not located in Iowa, opposing a breed ban. Rochester said he received one from the United Kingdom.

"The vast majority from citizens opposed to this ordinance were not from Sioux City," Hoffman said, "but those in favor of it were from Sioux City."

Another reason to urge registration of the dogs is so those pit bull owners pay the annual city license fee. Hoffman noted. Those fees help finance Animal Control operations.

Rixner voiced concern about legal challenges to the ordinance in defining the breed. City Attorney Andrew Mai said he based the definition on the city of Des Moines' ordinance, which was upheld in a court test.

Pit bulls are described as dogs that are an American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier or any dog that predominantly has those characteristics.

The council is slated to consider giving second, and possibly final approval to the proposal next Monday. Rixner said he could be persuaded to chance his mind if a workable alternative were offered.

Story Comments

lish wrote on Jul 28, 2008 7:30 AM:

" To the person who made the post about the dog attacks outside her home, are the dogs in a fenced yard or on a secure chain or are these dogs allowed to roam at will? Why not make people be RESPONSIBLE for thier dogs. Get tougher on dogs left to roam the streets. I have been bitten by dogs in the past and none were pit bulls. I own dogs personally and take the time to ensure that they are well behaved and socialized. I know what sets them off and I know how to prevent this from occuring out in the public. "

Tracey Franco wrote on Jul 28, 2008 12:19 AM:

" We do need stiffer laws for people owning pit bulls so we can get them away from people that should NOT have them. I was at Animal Control the other day and someone came in to get their pit bull (lived on Court Street) and the dog had been taken as he was on the end of a chain barking. The animal was timid and had NOT been socialized at all - that was clear when I saw him bring the dog out. It's a status symbol for gangs and that is EXACTLY the people who should not have these dogs. They ruin it for those of us who are responsible with our pets. "

Steven Boggs wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:08 AM:

" My comment continued:

I would take Jade to a vet onces a month and have a report sent into the city if that is what I had to do. I love my dog to death and hate seeing breed specific laws passed. More thought should be put into this. Seems to me like were just jumping the gun to take care of what everyone thinks is the problem.

Thanks,
Steven Boggs
SIoux City "

Steven Boggs Jr. wrote on Jul 26, 2008 1:07 AM:

" I am an owner of a 2 year old American rednosed Pitbull terrier. Her name is Jade and she is the smartest and loving dog that I have ever seen. Everyone that meets her tells me how great she is and are very surprised at how nice she is because of the stereotype that the pitbull's have these days. I have never had a problem with Jade and never see a reason as to why I might. I think the ban on the whole breed just singles out the dogs and does nothing about the irresponsible owners! Picking on a certain breed I think is wrong also. How is this any different from racism? Singling out one race (or in this case breed). What if we were to decide that one race was more of a threat than another? We wouldn't just try to eliminate the whole race. We would try to eliminate the cause of the problem. In this case irresponsible owners. I think that they should create rules that are more strict for pitbull owners. A person that truly loves there pitbull will do anything to keep that pitbull. "

PitLover wrote on Jul 25, 2008 7:12 PM:

" It just amazes me that there are people out there that don't think for themselves, and who live vicariously through our over hyped media who are just tiring to sell a paper not really report the truth. These are the same people who think there is a simple solution or quick fix for everything. IF your fat take a pill...If your a bad parent and you cant control your kid, give him a pill, don't think about the consequences or the damage your causing because you are satisfied with your temporary band aid. After all we all live in a nation of "NOW". And in this same instance if there is irresponsible dog owner who needs regulation skip that step and just ban the dogs. I'm sure that's the answer! When did Americans become so lazy and self absorbed? "