Ohio Valley Dog Owners, Inc.

Protecting dogs, dog owners and our neighbors
through education and community service

• New taxes for dog owners passes House May 28!
• Breeder licensing bills gain opposition in Ohio
• Two lawmakers send mixed messages about pit bulls
• Toledo's pit bull restrictions pass court muster

• HB 71 tightens penalties for dog fighting; passes Senate
• In the hopper
• Louisville plaintiffs file summary judgement petition
• Check out the National Animal Interest Alliance

On to the Senate: New taxes and demands for Ohio dog owners passes House May 28!

ALERT!! HB 446, the bill that doubles kennel license fees, bans rabies vaccination by owners, burdens military families and others who move into Ohio with a family pet, and requires all dogs to wear license tags unless in the owner's home, passed the Ohio House on May 28 and is headed for Senate hearings.

HB 446 is more than 100pages of new and amended regulations that overhauls Ohio animal control law. If approved as amended, HB 446 will

• ban the sale of unlicensed dogs,
• mandate individual licenses for dogs in kennels,
• prohibit owners from giving rabies vaccinations,
• require new owners to license dogs within one business day of acquisition,
• require new Ohio residents who own dogs to license them within one business day of moving into the state,
• make it easy for someone who finds a stray dog or takes a dog from a neighbor to keep that dog simply by buying a license, and
• mandate training for animal control officers.

The amended bill is available at http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=127_HB_446

OVDO's letter to the sponsor is here.

OVDO testimony is here and here.

Breeder licensing bills gain opposition in Ohio

SB 173 and HB 223 are almost identical bills that impose state regulation on breeding kennels with more than eight intact adult dogs. Testimony on SB 173 was heard on April 24 and April 30; testimony on HB 223 was heard on May 22.

HB 223/ SB 173 place high financial & regulatory burdens on owners with more than eight intact adult dogs regardless of kennel conditions. Does USDA do it better?

This is an anti-breeder animal rights bill. Proponents pretend that all breeders with more than eight adult dogs will mistreat their dogs or keep them in bad conditions without state oversight. These bills include

• high license application fees,
• a new state bureaucracy to hire inspectors and enforce the law,
• an oversight committee with only three of the 10 members representing those who breed or sell puppies,
• micro-management of kennel conditions and veterinary care, and
• the power to revoke or refuse a license on trivial grounds.

October 11, 2007: HB 223 opponents packed two hearing rooms in the bill's third hearing before the Ohio State Government & Elections Committee. Read the OVDO testimony.

May 22, 2008: The comittee suspended the hearing on HB 223 when time ran out. Testimony will resume at a later date. OVDO testimony was entered into the record.

Two Ohio lawmakers send mixed messages about pit bulls

Representative Shawn Webster's HB 366 would eliminate breed specific language
from state law and leave bans and restrictions to local governments. Representative Tyrone Yates' HB 568 would ban pit bulls fromOhio and kill all the pit bulls remaining in the state.

Following an uproar over Yates' bill, the two representatvies announced that they will work together to protect the public from irresponsible dog owners without targeting family pets.

The judges speak: Toledo's pit bull restrictions pass court muster

State Supreme Court decision*

Will the decision encourage lawmakers to rewrite the state's unconstitutional vicious dog law? Or will breed restrictions and bans continue to proliferate?

Breed-specific laws continue to be a hot topic throughout the state. While some cities opt for bans, others, including the Columbus suburb of Whitehall, reject prohibitions in favor of general vicious dog laws. Following a decision to train police officers to identify pit bulls, Cincinnati City Council accepted two motions that could result in the ban being lifted. One motion re-establishes the Vicious Dog Legislative Task Force to draft legislation to punish irresponsible dog owners; the other outlines a registration program that would allow responsible owners to keep their dogs. If the motions go forward, the task force report would be due on August 1.

* The plaintiff in the case petitioned the US Supreme Court for a hearing, but the petition was denied.

HB 71 tightens penalties on dog fighting, passes Senate on May 28

Substitute HB 71 began as an attempt to strengthen laws against dog and cock fighting but morphed into a drive to repeal due process for people accused of animal cruelty.

OVDO opposed this dangerous bill because it assumed that cruelty accusations equal cruelty conviction. The Senate committee amended the bill to return most of the due process provisions before sending it to the full Senate for a vote. Unfortunately, the final bill fails to return the bond money to the owner of an unlicensed dog who is acquitted of more serious charges of cruelty or dog fighting that prompted the authorities to impound the animal and the court to require a bond before disposition of the case.

In the hopper
These bills affecting animals and animal owners have also been introduced
in the 2007-2008 session of the Ohio State Legislature.

• HB 22: Increases penalties for animal cruelty and requires counseling for minors convicted of animal abuse.
• HB 45: Restricts exotic animal ownership.
• HB 281: Amends the process for determining fair market value of certain animals killed by a dog.
• HB 352: Adds alpacas to the definition of livestock.
• HB 415: Increases penalties for animal fighting, allows for sale of equipment and forfeiture of cash confiscated in raids with proceeds used for care of impounded animals and education to decrease animal fighting.
• HB 418: Increases penalties for animal cruelty, provides for probation for felony animal abusers, requires counseling for minors convicted of animal abuse, and expands protection orders in domestic abuse cases to include pets.

Louisville plaintiffs file summary judgement petition in federal court

Plaintiffs in the lawsuit against the Louisville City Council rewrite of the city's dangerous dog law have asked a federal court to decide in its favor without hearing further arguments.

Lawyers for the Louisville Kennel Club and other plaintiffs filed a summary judgement petition that argues that several provisions of the law are unconstitutional and that these provisions make the remaining language of the law impossible to enforce. The filing also takes issue with the city's hiring of veterinarian Gilles Miloche as the director of its animal control division as illegal under Kentucky law. Dr. Meloche not only is not a US citizen as required by law, but he is also ineligible to become a peace officer in Kentucky on other grounds according to the petition.

NAIA promotes responsible animal ownership and use, exposes the arrogance and danger of the animal rights movement, and encourages lawmakers and regulators to include responsible animal owners in their deliberations. Visit the NAIA website at http://www.naiaonline.org

See these NAIA articles for more information: From firearms to Fido: "Feel Good" Laws Make Things Worse, and the NAIA Guide to Pet Friendly Ordinances