"Global warming is the battle cry of environmentalists designating the atmospheric atrocities that have led to what they view as a climatic crisis. But another type of admonition of a global nature should alert dog enthusiasts to another form of crisis. Across the globe, countries are enacting bans on specific breeds of dogs. Breed-specific restrictions and prohibitions have long been part of the American legal scene, much to the chagrin of owners who view these laws to be repressive and repugnant. (See "Breed-Specific Laws Rear Their Ugly Heads," DOG WORLD, June 1998 issue.) BAD BANS Restrictions or outright bans directed toward specific breeds are considered bad for several reasons. They often are prompted by a particularly horrific incident, usually involving an attack on a child. Sometimes these attacks are exaggerated by hyperbole and hysteria. The resulting legal measures tend to be arbitrary because they are not based on well-grounded, empirical data that proves particular breeds of dogs are inherently more dangerous than others. By selectively singling out specific types of dogs for punitive treatment, these measures tend to punish responsible dog owners while often overlooking irresponsible owners of different breeds. Breed-specific bans and similar measures also bring with them other odious features. They often are accompanied by provisions allowing warrantless entry and searches of private homes and the seizure of dogs without giving their owners an opportunity for a judicial hearing, and they can lead to loss of insurance coverage and inability to obtain substitute insurance for owners of affected breeds. All these shortcomings should point toward the constriction of breed-specific bans. Instead the converse is true: The bans seem to be growing by leaps and bounds. The laws' resilience is reflected in measures that occasionally pop up to enact breed-specific laws in communities in the dozen or so states in which there are specific statewide laws prohibiting such enactments. Politicians hungry for votes and fueled by a voracious media often lead the charge. But well-meaning citizens also get caught up in the frenzy, often prompted by inaccurate or misleading information. The surge is now reaching epidemic proportions around the globe. The implementation of breed bans began in the early 1990s in Britain and Denmark and has spread to other portions of Europe. France recently enacted a policy requiring the neutering of all "attack" dogs, making it impossible to breed them. Italy intends to begin breed bans soon. GERMAN FERMENT But the most ominous developments have occurred in Germany, where legislation has ushered in a spate of breed bans. Germany, like the United States, is a republic, meaning that every state can pass its own legislations. Many of the German states have enacted measures that differentiate between two types of breeds. One category consists of certain types of dogs, including so-called "pit bulls," and places severe restrictions on their maintenance, including strict leash and muzzle provisions and spay and neuter requirements; the other classification, which consists of Rottweilers, Dobermans and some herding breeds, is less restrictive, with general leash and muzzle provisions. A couple notable features of the measures add tot he anxiety that the laws breed. Ownership of dogs in either classification usually is restricted to people who are able to satisfy local authorities of their dog owning qualifications, including a lack of criminal record. This provision gives the gendarmes the authority to decide who may own certain breeds of dogs and who may not. The second troublesome commonality of these laws is that they require dogs of designated breeds to be identified with tags indicating that they are "dangerous," along with yellow lettering on houses where they live stating that those homes harbor "dangerous" canines, which harkens back to an even more troublesome time in Germany's history. The third common, and not surprising, characteristic of these laws is that none of them applies to one particular breed: the German Shepherd Dog, even though German studies have shown that those canines tend to have a greater statistical involvement in attacks than most other dogs. The enormity of the restrictions is reflected in the German state of Hessen, where 16 different breeds are banned. Germany authorities also reportedly are planning to ask the European Parliament to introduce a Europe-wide ban on American Staffordshire Terriers and other so-called "pit bulls." As in the United States, these measures can and most likely will be challenged in court, but the legal basis for such challenges are more slender than in America. Consequently, it is likely that these European measures will stay on the books and even may be a harbinger of other repressive regulations. The ferment caused by the German laws has sent ripples back across the Atlantic. Canada now is undertaking an exhaustive study preparatory to breed-specific legislation. The Canadian plan will take a more scientific approach, which would encompass licensing all dogs, gathering information on all bites, and reviewing the statistics and taking action based on the empirical data. Ironically, German shepherd Dogs likely will be one of the targeted canines, because many feral dog mixes are classified, often inaccurately, as German Shepherd Dog mixes. The instigation of these breed-specific laws is troublesome to most dog owners. There are, to be sure, dangerous dogs that should be subject to regulation. But it is dubious whether this should be done on a breed-specific basis. Attention should be directed to the misdeeds of dogs, and their owners, not classifications of canines by breed. Dog owners all over the world now have a cause around which to rally: "Ban the deed, not the breed." However translated, this slogan should be the banner under which owners worldwide march in an effort to ban the breed bans. Marshall H. Tanick is an attorney with the law firm Mansfield, Tanick & Cohen, P.A., in Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minn. He is national counsel to the American Dog Owners Association and represents a variety of individuals and organizations in connection with matters of concern to owners of dogs and other pets. Copyright © December 2000 DOGWORLD

Home