Tag: animal control
The city of Minneapolis has taken protecting its residents from “dangerous dogs” to a whole new level with the publication of an interactive map on its website that pinpoints where dogs that have had run-ins with the law live.
The website lists each dog’s name, breed and their offense — everything from “killed a cat” to “muzzle violations” and bites to humans or other dogs, KARE 11 reported.
It also lists the full names and addresses of the owners, and photos of each dog.
Seems dogs deemed dangerous have about the same rights to privacy as a sex offender — that is, virtually none.
“In order to keep our residents safe, we post pictures of these animals and their addresses,” the website states, referring to dogs, of course.
To see the map and interact with it, click here.
Connie Bourque, of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control, says it’s all about public safety.
“If you live in a neighborhood, you have a visual that lets you know where animals that have had incidents in the past, who have been aggressive in the past. You have a sense of where you would maybe be more cautious based on the fact that you can see that information right on the website.”
Given all the other restrictions those with dogs deemed dangerous face, it strikes me as a little heavy-handed, almost as if it is meant to shame the dog owners.
Under city law, residents whose dogs have been deemed “dangerous,” or “potentially dangerous,” already face a variety of measures, from having their dog exterminated to requirements like liability insurance, sterilization, eight foot tall fences, warning signs posted at the front and rear of their home; and, when their dogs go out, muzzles, three-foot leashes and collars that carry a warning tag.
The new website, as of yesterday, lists 35 dangerous dogs in Minneapolis (compared to 146 people on the map of sex offenders residing in the city).
Unlike sex offender maps, which don’t specify the offense or use photos of the offenders, canine offenders have their photos posted, as well as a brief summary of their dangerous behavior.
Sephy, for example, a beagle from Longfellow, bit a person; Briggs, a Lab mix from near Lake Nokomis, killed a cat; and Bernadette, an American Staffordshire terrier in Loring Park, bit another animal.
It is possible for a dog to be taken off the list, but first it must be proven by their owner that they have received training and have been rehabilitated. A home inspection is also required for that.
Posted by John Woestendiek April 14th, 2015 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animal control, animals, attacks, bites, bitten, cat, dangerous, dangerous dogs, dog, dogs, interactive, killed, location, map, minneapolis, pets, pinpoint, public safety, safety, sex offenders
A county animal shelter in Tennessee was shut down and an investigation is underway after a dog was found alive in a freezer used to store the carcasses of dogs the shelter puts down.
The Lauderdale County shelter is located in Ripley, about 53 miles northeast of Memphis.
A citizen found the dog, named Asher, inside the freezer and videotaped her discovery, according to Localmemphis.com
The shelter reopened today after being closed Tuesday pending an internal probe, and the sheriff’s department is also investigating.
The woman entered the freezer looking for another dog and saw Asher.
He was barely moving and his eyes were open. She videotaped the scene, then took the dog to a veterinarian, where he was administered IV fluids. His condition is improving.
Localmemphis.com said sources told them that lab tests on the dog showed no evidence of the drug the county uses to euthanize dogs in his blood, suggesting that he was put into the freezer alive and left to die.
One shelter employee has reportedly been suspended.
The county animal control office had previously been criticized for shooting dogs and illegally putting dogs in a gas chamber.
In the wake of the incident, Lauderdale County Mayor Maurice Gaines has proposed cameras be installed to monitor employees at the shelter. The proposal will be discussed at the April 13 meeting of the County Commission.
Posted by John Woestendiek April 3rd, 2015 under Muttsblog, videos.
Tags: alive, animal control, animal shelter, animals, asher, carcass, dog, dogs, euthanization, found, freezer, lauderdale county, pets, ripley, storage, tennessee
Residents of Greensboro who tie up their dogs and leave them unattended can expect to start receiving warnings this week, and $500 fines by September, as Guilford County’s anti-tethering ordinance comes closer to being fully phased in.
The ordinance, approved by the Guilford County Board of Commissioners in 2013, prohibits the tethering or chaining of a dog without the owner present, or the use of any tether or chain less than 10 feet long.
To the uninformed, it might seem odd — an agency called “Animal Control” telling people to un-tether their dogs — but it’s another example of how, amid a new sensibility about dogs, the duties of such agencies have outgrown their name, and have (rightly) become more about helping animals than controlling them, and therefore should be called something else, something less archaic, something like the office of Animal Protection.
We tried to make that case last week, arguing that a new name could also go a long way toward improving the image of those offices, and pushing those that are still living in the past into modern times.
Animal protection, we think, is a better description of their modern day duties, or at least what their modern day duties should be.
Responding to complaints about chained dogs, and helping to free them, is a perfect example of that.
Guilford County Animal Control officers will be investigating complaints about tethered dogs and issuing written warnings to the owners until Sept. 1, when fines will go into effect. Until then officials will continue to educate residents about the new ordinance.
“We’ve done good about getting the word out and handing out fliers, posters and brochures to let people know it’s coming and it’s going,” Logan Rustan, the manager of Guilford County Animal Control, told the Greensboro News & Record. “But believe it or not, a lot of people just still have no clue.”
The ordinance took effect last March but is being phased in gradually to give residents time to comply.
It was welcomed by animal activists, and particularly by Unchain Guilford, a nonprofit organization that helps dog owners construct fences as an alternative to tying up their dogs.
Tethered dogs left unattended can easily injure themselves, and often develop behavioral problems.
“If you’re chained to a small area your entire life, you’re going to have issues interacting with other people — whether you’re a dog or a human,” said Ellen Metzger, a committee member for the group.
Many dogs who spend their lives tethered outside can easily make the transition to inside dogs, with a little training.
Greensboro resident Jennifer Thompson found that out when, shortly after the county passed the ordinance, she contacted Unchain Guilford for help.
Her 10-year-old pitbull-chow mix, Spike, had spent most of his life tethered in her yard.
“He was so big and was at the point where he would jump all over,” Thompson said. “I was kind of fearful of him.”
In Thompson’s case, volunteers also taught her training techniques to help Spike behave better. Spike lives inside the house now.
“I didn’t know this dog is so lovable,” she said. “e sat outside all these years, and he just wants somebody to love him. He’s such a sweet dog. I would not keep another dog outside, knowing what I know now.”
(Photo: Jennifer Thompson and her dog Spike; by JERRY WOLFORD / Greensboro News & Record)
Posted by John Woestendiek March 3rd, 2015 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animal control, animals, chained, chains, dog, dogs, fines, greensboro, guilford county, guilford unchained, north carolin, ordinance, pets, prohibited, tether, tethered, tethering, tied, warnings
Some long called for changes may be coming at Baltimore County’s animal shelter.
After more than a year of pressure by animal advocates for improvements, Baltimore County Executive Kevin Kamenetz announced yesterday that the shelter in Baldwin, Md., will be shifting from the “narrow view” of it being a place for dangerous animals and focusing more on caring for animals and getting them adopted.
That’s exactly the sort of change we called for in yesterday’s ohmidog! post — the one suggesting local governments ditch their use of the term “animal control” and become animal protection departments.
Baltimore County hasn’t announced any formal plans to do that (maybe it’s not too late to work that in), but the county executive did outline future steps to add more employees, expand low-cost spaying and neutering services, cooperate with a program aimed at neutering feral cats and increase the shelter’s focus on getting animals adopted.
Kamenetz said he’ll hire a volunteer coordinator and a foster care coordinator at the shelter – two areas animal advocates have been critical of. He also announced that a new Facebook page will be set up devoted to promoting adoptable animals, and that the shelter will be receiving guidance from the Baltimore Animal Rescue and Care Shelter, commonly known as BARCS.
The changes will be included in his next budget for Animal Services — a division of the county health department — and would go into effect at the start of the next budget year on July 1, the Baltimore Sun reported.
“We think we’re moving in the proper direction in a deliberative manner,” Kamenetz said.
Animal advocates and the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland complained to the county last fall that shelter volunteers were banned from taking pictures, in violation of their First Amendment rights. The county has been working with the ACLU on training shelter employees on the rights of volunteers.
Earlier this month, the County Council passed a bill creating an animal services advisory commission to review the shelter’s operations. The 11-member commission has yet to be appointed.
In a statement released by the county executive’s office, Council Chairwoman Cathy Bevins praised the proposals as “bold steps to upgrade animal services in Baltimore County.”
The county already is building a new shelter on its current site, scheduled to open in August.
Our hope would be — in accordance with the proposal we put forth yesterday, and in accordance with the new focus Kamenetz spoke of — that the sign in front of it reads Animal Protection, or Animal Services … anything but Animal Control.
(Photos: Protest sign from WJZ; Kamenetz from Baltimore Sun)
Posted by John Woestendiek February 27th, 2015 under Muttsblog.
Tags: adoptions, advocates, animal control, animal control division, animal services, animal shelter, animal welfare, animals, baltimore county, budget, changes, county executive, dogs, feral cats, focus, funding, improvements, kevin kamenetz, pets, promised, reform, shelters, tnr, volunteers
I have a simple and modest proposal — one that would involve only a name change, a slightly new way of thinking, and maybe some new stationery.
It has long been in the back of my head, but was brought to the forefront by recent cellphone videos gone viral — one (it used to be above but was removed from YouTube) of a dog being dragged through the halls of an animal control department in California; one (below) of a police officer slapping and otherwise berating a homeless man in Florida.
Both are examples of what can go wrong — and often does — when you give one group power over others. Both are about control.
Seeking, seizing and holding “control,” necessary as it sometimes seem in a so-called civilized society, almost always leads to bad things, including most of the dog abuse that occurs in our country. We get a little too caught up in the whole idea of having control — over our fellow man, over other species, over other nations, over nature itself.
Those put in control, as today’s videos show, tend to lose control when they see their control being threatened.
Hence, I propose that we do away with the term “animal control” and rename all those county animal control offices “animal protection” departments — protection being what they are mostly about, or should be mostly about, in the first place.
I’m not suggesting doing away with regulating and enforcing in the dog world — only that those doing it go under a different moniker, which, just maybe, would allow them to be seen by the public, and see themselves, less as heavy-handed dictators, more as noble do-gooders.
And animal control offices do do good. They operate shelters, find dogs new homes, rescue strays from the streets and abusive situations. The new name would put an emphasis on that, and take it away from “control.”
The term “animal control” is archaic — not much better than the even more outdated “dog warden” — yet most counties continue to use it. Employees see it on the sign when they pull into the parking lot, when they walk through the front door, on their memos and their paychecks. It’s a constant reminder, even though most of their duties are aimed at helping dogs, that they are, above all, strict enforcers and inflexible bureaucrats.
A simple name change could help fix that.
I, for instance, would love working as an animal protection officer; I’m not sure I’d want to be an animal control officer — even though most of what they do is about protecting animals. The name change could attract job applicants who see the mission as helping dogs, and possibly help weed out those who see all dogs as nuisances, and control as paramount.
In addition to improving employee self-esteem, it could help change the negative public perceptions that come with being the agency that tickets dog owners for leash-less or unlicensed dogs, euthanizes dogs when their facilities get too crowded, and sends the “dog catcher” out on his daily rounds.
There’s no reason — assuming a stray dog is being captured humanely, and treated humanely in a shelter, and put up for adoption — that the “dog catcher,” traditionally portrayed as a villain, can’t become a dog savior in the public view.
Having “Animal Protection Department” written on the side of the truck, instead of “Animal Control Department,” would go a long way toward that.
A simple shift in emphasis, and in how some agencies present themselves to the public, is all I’m talking about. It wouldn’t be only a matter of spin, though. Being an animal protection department would require actually protecting animals — and seeing that as a primary mission.
It wouldn’t make the world a kinder place overnight, and it wouldn’t keep cranky police officers from slapping homeless people — like I said it’s a modest proposal — but it could be a start, at least in the dog world, to a new way of thinking both about and among the government employees we entrust those duties to (and pay the salaries of).
They would be more about helping and educating, less about controlling.
A handful of agencies have at least worked “animal protection,” or “animal care” into their names, but most can’t quite bring themselves to let go of the term “control.”
Thus you have, for instance, the Los Angeles Department of Animal Care and Control.
Maybe they think losing “control” would be a sign they are losing control.
The term “control” might be appropriate when it comes to those agencies dealing with things like disease and traffic.
But not for those dealing with our family members.
Posted by John Woestendiek February 26th, 2015 under Muttsblog, videos.
Tags: agency, animal control, animal rights, animal welfare, animals, change, control, controlling, county, department, dog catcher, dog dragged, dog warden, dogs, duties, enforcement, government, hesperia, homeless, local, los angeles, mission, name, name change, office, pets, police, proposal, purpose, regulation, rescues, shelters, slapped, videos
The North Carolina couple that was told their dog would have to be quarantined for six months because he had been sprayed by a skunk has gotten the decision reversed.
Eleven-year-old Simon is back home in Kernersville.
Forsyth County animal control officials gave no reason for reversing the decision, according to Fox News.
Michael and April McQueen’s dog was quarantined last week after being sprayed by a skunk — even though his owners insisted he had not been bitten by, or come in contact, with the animal, other than getting sprayed.
After the incident, April McQueen took Simon to a veterinarian who told her the dog was three weeks late on renewing his rabies booster vaccination.
The vet contacted animal control officials, who informed her Simon had to spent six months in quarantine or be euthanized.
That decision struck many as harsh, including the McQueens — given their dog wasn’t actually bitten.
North Carolina law requires pets exposed to animals prone to carry rabies like skunks, foxes, coyotes, bats and raccoons be either euthanized or quarantined at the owners expense if their rabies vaccination isn’t up to date.
Rabies isn’t transmitted through a skunk’s spray, and Titer tests — as several ohmidog! readers pointed out — can be used to assess a dog’s antibody levels.
Simon’s owners appealed the decision and Simon was released on Thursday with no reason given.
Posted by John Woestendiek June 14th, 2014 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animal control, animals, april mcqueen, decision, dog, dogs, forsyth county, kernersville, michael mcqueen, north carolina, pets, quarantine, rabies, reversal, reversed, simon, skunk, skunked, titer, veterinarian, veterinary, wildlife
A North Carolina couple has lost their dog for six months — apparently because he got sprayed by a skunk.
Even though he didn’t get bitten, or come in contact with the skunk, the dog has been placed in quarantine for six months by county animal control officials who say the precaution is necessary because the dog’s rabies shot had lapsed.
Something about that stinks.
Michael and April McQueen aren’t coming right out and saying that, but they are politely questioning the decision.
“He didn’t come in contact with the skunk. He never touched the skunk,” said April McQueen, of Kernersville, whose 11-year-old dog, Simon, is now being quarantined by a private veterinarian. “The skunk never touched him. He wasn’t bitten. There was no yelp, and there was no scuffle.”
Given that, the county’s reaction — scary as rabies is — seems to be an over-reaction.
Skunks can’t pass along rabies through their spray. That seems to be pretty much accepted by health and wildlife organizations. One almost always has to be bitten to get rabies.
Maybe animal control officials are trying to send a message to the public about the importance of keeping rabies vaccinations up to date. But unless they simply don’t believe the family’s claim that the dog wasn’t bitten, and have proof otherwise, Simon should be sent home, in my view.
April says she was walking Simon Thursday night when a skunk sprayed him. As a precaution she took the dog to a veterinarian and learned he was three weeks late on renewing his rabies booster.
“That’s when I was told they were going to have to contact animal control because his rabies shot had lapsed,” she told Fox 8. “The next morning I get a call from animal control, and they’re saying they want to quarantine our dog for six months or euthanize him.”
North Carolina law requires pets exposed to animals prone to carry rabies like skunks, foxes, coyotes, bats and raccoons be either euthanized or quarantined, at the owners expense, for six months if their rabies vaccination isn’t up to date.
But getting sprayed doesn’t constitute exposure — at least that’s what the Arkansas Department of Health says on its website.
Simon’s incarceration is “due to the fact that rabies can take up to six months before a pet shows signs of the virus,” said Tim Jennings with the Forsyth County Animal Control. “It’s why we stress the importance of keeping pets up to date on their vaccinations.”
“Obviously they want to protect the health of the community,” said April’s husband, Michael McQueen, who plans to appeal the decision, based on the lack of contact between skunk and dog, and based as well on the thought of his dog in solitary.
“You think about a 11-year-old dog, used to living inside with us all these years and is just tossed in a cement 4×6 cage with no contact,” he said.
If the McQueen’s appeal is denied Simon would have to remain in isolation, without any human or animal contact, until Dec. 6. That’s going to cost the McQueens about $3,000.
“We just don’t want this to happen to anyone else,” said April. “Life can be busy but make sure your animals are vaccinated and up-to-date.”
(Update: Simon has been returned to his family. Details here.)
Posted by John Woestendiek June 12th, 2014 under Muttsblog.
Tags: animal control, animals, april mcqueen, dog, dogs, exposure, forsyth county, health, kernersville, lab, michael mcqueen, mix, pets, quarantine, rabies, simon, skunk, skunked, skunked dog, spray, sprayed, vaccinations