Sentences with phrase «dog law instead»

Since she was the only vet in the community, this strategy worked like a charm and the city council passed a comprehensive breed - neutral dangerous - dog law instead.

Not exact matches

So instead of leaving the dogs to suffer for another six months, law enforcement can file criminal charges on the spot.

Several members agreed that Deltona should tweak its own ordinance, instead of following a state law that allows a dog to attack two pets before removing it from the city.

Modern dog training acknowledges this new research and focuses instead on changing our dog's behavior according to the laws of behavioral science.

Dangerous dog laws should never target specific breed type, size, or assumed disposition instead, they should be crafted so they can be fairly enacted across the gamut of dog ownership, and with a reasonable understanding of typical dog behavior.

Even more horrible is the fact these laws do not even take into consideration the individual dog's history but instead lumps them all together under one classification.

In other areas, neighbors complained about nuisances, and lawmakers responded with limits on the number of dogs an owner could have instead of enforcing anti-barking laws and leash laws already on the books.

Proponents have tended to ignore evidence like this, and instead point to the fact that dogs, who have been subject to licensing laws for years, enjoy higher redemption rates than cats.

Paid $ 5,000 a month by an industry association of CBEs, his goal in making the claim was to get the court to overturn a law that makes it illegal for pet stores in Grove City, OH, to sell puppy mill dogs; the law requires pet stores to work with rescues and shelters to adopt out rescued animals instead.

Chief among them are the use of genetic testing to identify individual dogs; establishment of the State Canine Awareness Network to keep tabs on anti-dog legislation and promote reasonable dog control laws; a code of ethics for breeders; and emphasis on owner participation instead of professional handling for dogs in conformation shows.

Instead of enhancing public safety, breed - discriminatory laws actually compromise public safety by requiring law enforcement officers to seize or restrict friendly pets instead of focusing on dogs whose behavior is truly danInstead of enhancing public safety, breed - discriminatory laws actually compromise public safety by requiring law enforcement officers to seize or restrict friendly pets instead of focusing on dogs whose behavior is truly daninstead of focusing on dogs whose behavior is truly dangerous.

Most mixed breed and crossbred puppies are produced by dogs who haven't read the law; instead of staying home where they belong, they wander the streets.

The laws require pet stores that offer dogs for sale to source them from shelters and rescue organizations instead of breeders.

He has successfully worked with local government attorneys and animal control to avoid breed discrminatory law and instead implement laws that will protect communities from negligent dog owners.

Laws that ban particular breeds of dogs do not achieve these aims and instead create the illusion, but not the reality, of enhanced public safety.

And hey, maybe if the HSUS spread some of their giant, vast loads of dough to local rescues to help them in these projects (instead of using it to lobby for laws that harm reputable dog breeding and ownership) maybe they'd actually be doing some good here in the real world.

Cities and states spend money enforcing restrictions and bans instead of putting that money to better use by establishing and strictly enforcing licensing and leash laws, and responding proactively to target owners of any dog that poses a risk to the community.»

Therefore, instead of passing unfair, ineffective laws, NAIA advocates developing animal control programs that encourage dog owners to properly socialize, train, and care for their dogs, so that they can become good canine citizens and remain prominent members of the cultural landscape.

Instead of targeting certain breeds, the panel suggested a law that would set conditions to owning dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs.

People realize that broadly generalized laws that target types of dogs instead of based on individual dog behavior do not work.

Instead, dangerous dog laws from now on must focus on what's said to be the more effective approach: regulating behavior, of the dogs themselves and of their owners.

Fred Kray, an attorney specializing in dog law, says that even in cases where owners provide for their pets» care, instead of their killing, those wishes may be overlooked.

The bill should instead preserve local control, eliminate the necessity of a central bureaucracy and allow local law enforcement including dog wardens, humane agents, health officials as well as existing state agencies to conduct inspections, issue cease and desist orders and refer violations for imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

We should focus more on working to prevent problems with our dogs instead of concentrating on treating problems after they have developed, and that includes how we craft and implement veterinary practices, dog training methods, dog ownership practices, and dog laws.

Instead it negatively affects many law abiding dog owners and dogs within the targeted breeds.

Additionally, a number of Canadian municipalities have introduced by - laws that restrict the retail sale of cats and dogs in pet stores and instead promote the in - store adoption of homeless pets.

So instead of their animal control or police department focusing their resources on non-aggressive dogs because may or may not be pit bulls, they can spend those resources on enforcing the city's vicious dog law.

It would be get rid of the law targeting certain breeds of dogs — which inevitably leads to dogs dying in shelters unnecessarily and no increase in public safety — and instead, focus the laws on responsible pet ownership, and targeting aggressive dogs based on their BEHAVIOR, not breeds.

The state instead adopted laws recognizing that it is the criminal or negligent acts of the owner / caretaker that are responsible for a dog's behavior.

Instead, they support laws that go after the real problem: the behavior of the individual dog and the behavior of the reckless or negligent owner.

The law does not say this but instead it says that the dog may be confiscated on site.

Instead, state law requires some proof that the dog owner was somehow negligent.