Greybull, Wyoming Turns Away From Breed-Specific Legislation; Opts for Dangerous Dog Law Instead
As I wrote in October, Greybull, Wyoming had already passed a first reading of a very drastic breed-specific law (BSL) that would have severely restricted so-called pit bulls in a feigned attempt to protect them. Yet what Animal Control Officer Doug Youngerman had proposed would actually have codified animal abuse since the proposal required constant containment for breeds Youngerman defined as pit bulls, and “any dog which as [sic] the appearance and characteristics of being predominantly in any one or more of the aforementioned breeds.”
So, like the rest of the dog lobby, it was good to hear that Greybull has scrapped its breed-specific legislation proposal in favor of a dangerous dog ordinance. The dangerous dog ordinance proposes to,
. . . require any owner of a potentially dangerous dog to register the dog with the town clerk within five days of that determination or as otherwise ordered by the municipal judge. All such dogs would be required to be licensed, vaccinated, microchipped by the animal control office and have an approved tag affixed to its collar.
The ordinance proposal would also forbid vicious dogs making it “unlawful to own, harbor or keep” a dog declared vicious.
Congratulations to the advocates who educated their own Animal Control Officer about the inefficacy of BSL and offered a better piece of legislation, a dangerous dog law, that will put the onus on irresponsible owners, not on the breeds of dog they may own.
Related Posts By Category
- Greybull, Wyoming Passes 1st Reading of Extreme Pit Bull Restrictions, Animal Control Measures
- Manderson, Wyoming Looks to Add Rottweilers, Dobermans to Existing Pit Bull Ban
- Baker City, Oregon May Consider Pit Bull Restrictions Via Dangerous Dog Law
- Appeals Court Throws Out Lima, Ohio’s Breed-Specific Dangerous Dog Law
- Bristol Borough, Pennsylvania May Consider Breed-Specific Legislation in Violation of State Law