"elegy" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:33:04 -0400, "Paul E. Schoen"
wrote:

There seems to have been some previous history of aggression with this
dog.
Perhaps there can be some sort of aggression screening as part of dog
license renewal, to alert owners of possible problems. Maybe offer
discounts if the dog passes the tests, and require an additional fee or
bond if dangerous traits are detected. The test could be performed by a
licensed vet, trainer, kennel operator or shelter. That would be more
fair
than BSL.

what tests? and who is going to do all of this? who is going to
enforce it? where's the money to do all of this going to come from?
will this encompass all dogs, or just certain breeds? if somebody's
fear-aggressive little dog tries to bite, will they be considered as
dangerous as somebody's dominant-aggressive large breed dog?


There must be some way to make this fair and effective. Here in Baltimore
County, a dog license is merely $5(neutered)/$10(intact). I would suggest
this as a minimum, and then adding about $0.25/lb. Then add a $10
temperamant fee, which could be waived if one can present an affidavit from
a vet, rescue, kennel, etc. Of course it could be forged, but it's at least
some precaution. If a dog has had a recorded incident of aggression, an
appropriate surcharge could be added to the license fee. Maybe this could
be reduced or eliminated if the dog has gone through training or behavior
modification.

Something needs to be done, or public outcries will make BSL a reality, and
many dogs and responsible owners will suffer. I'd rather pay more $$ now,
rather than pay later, perhaps by being told I must have one of my dogs
PTS.

Here's the fee schedule for Baltimore County:
http://resources.co.ba.md.us/Documents/Permits/Miscellaneous%20Permits/misc_fee_schedules.pdf

Paul, Muttley and Lucky

On Aug 23, 3:41 pm, sighthounds & siberians
wrote:
Boy, no kidding. Cross vet off that list - - there are vets who think
greyhounds are 'aggressive' when they come in to have minor skin
wounds stitched up that are the result of the type of play (even
rougher play) that would not leave marks on thicker skinned, heavier
coated dogs. And we know that vets are not behaviorists, so not all
vets will distinguish between dog-aggressive and human-aggressive. As
for kennel owners and shelter staff making those judgments - - forget
it. And all of this assumes that the owners of potentially dangerous
dogs are going to license said dogs and/or have their dogs evaluated
for "dangerous traits".

Mustang Sally

Well, we all know from the "think of the children" card that gets
dropped in about one third of dog attack news stories that dog
aggression is the same as human aggression. I know it was just a
chihuahua/cat, but what if it had been a child... laugh.

Nick

In article ,
Paul E. Schoen wrote:
There must be some way to make this fair and effective. Here in Baltimore
County, a dog license is merely $5(neutered)/$10(intact). I would suggest
this as a minimum, and then adding about $0.25/lb. Then add a $10
temperamant fee, which could be waived if one can present an affidavit from
a vet, rescue, kennel, etc. Of course it could be forged, but it's at least
some precaution.

Maybe if you thought about it in terms of incentives you
might come up with something. 'Cause right now everything
you're proposing is likely to reduce compliance rather than
improve it.

Something needs to be done, or public outcries will make BSL a reality, and
many dogs and responsible owners will suffer.

BSL proposals are being defeated pretty consistently. I'm
afraid you'll have to come up with some other excuse for
instituting complicated, expensive, unenforceable
legislation.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

wrote in message
oups.com...

The problem with increasing licensing requirements is it will probably
just result in an even lower percentage of people in compliance with
local licensing laws. I have heard of some local governments that
believe they only have about 20% compliance with their existing
licensing laws. The fewer people in compliance, the more difficult it
will be to properly enforce existing laws as well as any more laws
they feel like creating. Although it would be more fair than BSL, I
don't really see either as a satisfactory solution to the problem.


Compliance is a separate problem that needs to be dealt with in this case,
as well as many others. People ignore laws all the time, and then complain
when they are caught. How many people drive 10-20 MPH or more over speed
limits? How many drive aggressively or impaired? How many parolees violate
parole? Underage drinking and smoking? Illegal guns? There are all sorts of
violations of law that are done regularly with little or no consequence,
even when caught.

Dog training would not be effective if the dog got away with bad behavior.
People are not much different. Consequences for scofflaws should be swift
and firm, and there should be rewards for good behavior as well. NILIF
should be the norm in schools, at work, everywhere.

I don't think my proposed increase in license fees would seriously lower
compliance, at least not here, where they are so low already. I would
gladly pay ten times what I do now, if I knew that rules were better
enforced, and AC were better funded and staffed to care for more dogs, and
protect people from irresponsible pet owners.

Paul, Muttley and Lucky

"Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in
:

NILIF
should be the norm in schools, at work, everywhere.



i'm surprised you said this. i recall a time when you seemed to think NILIF
was abuse.

In article ,
(Melinda Shore) wrote:


BSL proposals are being defeated pretty consistently. I'm
afraid you'll have to come up with some other excuse for
instituting complicated, expensive, unenforceable
legislation.

Yep. There was a pretty big force when Baltimore City tried to
introduce BSL. Actual facts won out and I don't think that the
situation will change.

--
Janet Boss
www.bestfriendsdogobedience.com

In article ,
Janet Boss wrote:
Yep. There was a pretty big force when Baltimore City tried to
introduce BSL. Actual facts won out and I don't think that the
situation will change.

The movement hasn't died out by any means and it's necessary
to stay on top of it, but the trend is clear. My
understanding is that NY State now has a law prohibiting
local governments from passing BSL. The current trend seem
to be proposing laws against racing dogs and laws against
tethering.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
...
In article ,
elegy wrote:
i still think it's an oversimplification to look specifically at
whether the dog is intact.

To a point. "Is this owner responsible?" is a question with
an analog answer and "Is this dog neutered?" is a question
with a binary, digital answer.

ok, you are a total computer geek, but this is an awesome, simple analogy.
I like it.

"diddy" none wrote in message
. ..
"Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in
:

NILIF
should be the norm in schools, at work, everywhere.



i'm surprised you said this. i recall a time when you seemed to think
NILIF
was abuse.

I can't recall ever saying that. I have always felt that one should deserve
whatever is given to them, by doing something to earn it. Muttley now sits
automagically if I have a treat for him, and usually Lucky will sit with
some coaxing. It's more difficult if they are together.

Maybe you are thinking of the time when I was trying the JH method, and
praising Muttley even when he was ignoring me.

Paul

I have yet to check out the poll on CNN and I really should. I am very
annoyed by the extremely flawed chart they posted. They posted 3
breeds, and the number of fatalaties they were responsible for. Next to
the chart of fatalaties, they posted the same 3 breeds and the number of
maulings they were responsible for. As I previously posted the chart
went back to 1982. I have no idea where they got the chart info from.

I was an owner of Dobes in the late 70's and early 80's and somewhere
during that time period GSD's and Chows topped the list of dogs that had
attacked humans, of course that was partially in fact due to the
popularity of those breeds at the time.

Something else that disturbs me is that for some reason a dog that has
an ounce of Pit Bull in it, though it may be mixed with heaven knows
what is called a Pit Bull which flaws the stats even more.


Be Free.....Judy