By the close of 2007, several states had passed new legislation affecting dogs in some way. Leaving aside the inconsequential, the boringly administrative and the highly specialized, here are some interesting new substantive changes in state laws relating to dogs.
•Arkansas enacted a law that created a new crime, “unlawful dog attack.” It is now a Class A misdemeanor to negligently allow a dog to attack another person. (A.C.A. 5-62-125, effective July 2007)
•Colorado expanded its animal cruelty statute, making “engaging in sex acts with a dog” Class 1 misdemeanors. (C.R.S.A. 18-9-202, effective July 2007)
•Georgia added the group “those who raise guide or service dogs” to its statutory protections for disabled persons who own or use assistance animals; it is now a misdemeanor to discriminate against such persons. (Ga. Code Ann., 30-4-4, effective July 2007)
•Hawaii removed dogs specifically from its list of animals for which it is a crime of second-degree animal cruelty to use in fighting or baiting, but left in the catchall phrase “or other animal”; dogs had been particularly named on this list for a long time and the reason for their removal is unclear. (H.R.S. 711-1109, effective July 2007)
•New Hampshire added an entire statute that allows dog handlers using leashed dogs to track wounded deer, moose or bear. (N.H. Rev. Stat. 207:12-c, effective January 2007)
•North Carolina removed the group “herding dogs engaged in the working of domesticated livestock for agricultural, entertainment or sporting purposes” from its definition of animals that can be considered the subject of felony dog fighting and baiting. (N.C.G.S.A. 14-362.2, effective January 2007)
•Tennessee added a new condition to its cruelty-to-animals statute; it is now a Class A misdemeanor for a person to “knowingly tie, tether or restrain a dog in a manner that results in the dog suffering bodily injury” (T.C.A. 39-14-202, effective January 2007), as well as a new crime to its statutory list: It’s a Class B misdemeanor to remove a microchip or electronic collar from a dog. (T.C.A. 39-14-213, effective January 2007)
•Utah expanded its definition of “service animal” by adding both “signal dogs” and “any other animal individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of a person with a disability,” a definition which itself includes “emotional support animals” and “psychiatric therapy animals.” (U.C.A. 1953 62A-5b-102, effective January 2007)
•Vermont rewrote its entire statutory section regarding the use of dogs to hunt bears (10 V.S.A. APP Reg. Ch. 1 7, effective January 2007). The state has historically allowed its hunters to use dogs “to maintain the best health, population and utilization levels” of bear populations, but without any real guidelines; the new statute delineates quite specific rules by which dogs may be used.
•Finally, West Virginia has also made it a misdemeanor to remove identifying devices, including microchips, from dogs. (W.Va. Code,19-20-12, effective June 2007)
The idealist in me dreamily sees dog-related legislation from 2007 as reflective of an increase in society’s concern for and valuing of positive and healthy dog-human interactions. The cynic in me, however, grudgingly recognizes that—as usual—the new statutes really only increase benefits to humans, since such restrictions don’t necessarily protect dogs directly as much as they protect the expanding sphere of commercial activities related to dogs.
Whether the businessperson is a trainer, sportsman, merchant or therapist, as people spend more of their disposable income on their dogs, more laws arise to protect that financial outlay involved as opposed to protecting the animals themselves.
© 2007 Geordie Duckler
Identify and contact your federal and state elected officials:
www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt
Dr. Geordie Duckler heads The Animal Law Practice, a unique private law practice in Portland, Ore. The practice's clients are primarily companion, domestic, commercial, and exotic animal owners, and its main focus is on the resolution, litigation, and trial of animal-related disputes and harms in cases at both the state and federal levels.
www.animallawpractice.com
HOME | TOP | CONTACT
US | ABOUT
THE BARK | WEBMASTER
|
