|
When Providence
police Sgt. James Breen was dispatched to South Providence to break up a domestic dispute on March 31, 1980, he encountered
more than he had bargained for. A pit bull in the back yard seized Breen by the arm and dragged him around the house,
shattering his knee in 13 places. Four years later, after a rash of pit bull incidents and a spike in the dog population,
the Providence City Council enacted an ordinance that required pit bull owners to have $25,000 in liability insurance
to cover any damage caused by the dogs.
Providence
was the first municipality in the state to enact an ordinance aimed at specific breeds. The ordinance was inspired largely
by Breen's story, said John Washburn, director of the Providence Police Animal Control Unit. "Way back in the 1980s,"
he explained, "we had a rash of pit bull attacks, and that was the main reason for the ordinance." The Providence
ordinance turned out to be the precedent for other communities in the ensuing years as complaints about aggressive pit bulls
spread. A year after Providence adopted its pit bull ordinance, the Pawtucket City Council approved a similar one.
West Warwick adopted pit bull regulations two years ago, and town officials in Bristol earlier this month discussed banning
pit bulls after an attack that left a Shih Tzu dead. Yet several other towns and cities across the state and in
nearby Massachusetts, including Woonsocket, East Providence, Warren, and North Providence, have in recent years had little success
in passing ordinances that target pit bulls. Officials in those towns decided against the measures in part because of the
strong backlash of dog advocates, who at times make even seasoned Washington lobbyists look like neophytes.
"These people, when you're putting an ordinance together like that, they do rally for the dogs," said North Providence Police
Chief William Devine, who suggested a town ordinance in April that would have required pit bull owners to have a $100,000
liability insurance policy for each dog. "I got calls from all over."
When officials in East Providence last year considered requiring pit bull owners to buy insurance, dog trainer Alexandra Morgan,
of Rehoboth, came to a council meeting with a pit bull she adopted from the local pound and told council members they
should drop the measure. They did. There was a fair amount of opposition from some of the groups that are sympathetic
with dog rights," said East Providence City Manager Paul E. Lemont.
And when the Woonsocket City Council considered insurance requirements for pit bull owners three years ago, Lionel Hetu, executive
director of the Rhode Island chapter of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, showed up at a meeting
armed with statistics showing that most vicious-dog hearings were held for rottweilers and German shepherds, not pit bulls. The
Woonsocket council also abandoned its proposal. "It's all right to punish people when they're guilty," Hetu said
in a telephone interview last week, "but a lot of people who own pit bulls are just like those who own any other kind of dog
. . . I'm afraid [the towns] are going overboard. Now they want to include rottweilers, German shepherds. Where's it
going to end?"
HETU AND OTHER dog advocates contend that pit bulls are not vicious by nature. The dogs become vicious when they are mistreated
or trained improperly, the advocates argue, and adopting ordinances that specifically target the dogs is unfair. J.
Michel Martineau, a Woonsocket City Councilman who supported the proposed pit bull insurance requirement there, disagreed. "I
think these are the type of dogs that need to be singled out," he said. "And if they're being singled out, so be it. This
is a neon sign that's going, 'If I'm loose, I'm going to bite you.' "
In North Providence, the proposed ordinance specifically targeted American Staffordshire Terriers, American Pit Bull Terriers,
and Bull Terriers, three breeds commonly recognized as pit bull-type dogs. News that the town wanted to enact
an ordinance spread as far south as Raleigh, N.C., to the headquarters of the American Kennel Club, or AKC. The AKC
serves as an official registry for purebred dogs. AKC officials posted a notice on the organization's
Web site about the proposal that listed names and contact information for North Providence officials such as Mayor A. Ralph
Mollis. The notice also said that the AKC was working with local dog owners to defeat the measure. "People
let us know when they hear of things and we try to provide them with assistance," said Stephanie Pier, program administrator
at the AKC's Canine Legislation Department. "In general, the AKC opposes breed-specific legislation, and we would state
that in any correspondence to town officials." The campaign apparently paid off. Devine said the proposed ordinance
is on hold indefinitely pending further research but that he may ask the Town Council to reconsider it if there is another
pit bull incident in town. The AKC has conducted similar campaigns across the country, organizing dog lovers in
Maryland, for example, to protest a bill that would have banned pit bulls from the state. One place where dog enthusiasts
were unable to forestall legislation: Wilmington, Del., which banned pit bull breeding last year.
SIXTEEN YEARS ago, a Rhode Island General Assembly bill introduced by then-Sen. David Sholes, of Cranston, proposed that pit
bull owners across the state keep their dogs in fenced enclosures and obtain $100,000 in liability insurance to cover
any damage caused by the animals. It also proposed allowing local dog officers to destroy pit bulls that attacked animals
or people. The "necessity for the regulation and control of pit bulls," the bill said, "is a statewide problem,
requiring statewide regulation, and [the] existing laws are inadequate to deal with the threat to public health and safety
posed by pit bulls." The bill passed in the state Senate, although it was ultimately amended and became the
Rhode Island General Law that sets guidelines for towns to declare dogs vicious. Unlike dog ordinances in cities
such as Providence and Pawtucket, the state law does not target specific breeds. Under the law, towns must hold hearings
to determine whether a dog is vicious. If a three-person panel says it is, then owners must obtain $100,000 in
liability insurance. Since few insurance companies issue insurance policies for dogs that have been declared vicious,
Hetu of the SPCA said, most of the dogs are euthanized. Washburn, of the animal control unit in Providence, said the
city has about 1,000 registered pit bulls, but that there are countless others whose owners skirt the regulations. "That's
our main dog in the City of Providence," he said. "It's always been that way, even back in the 1960s." On average,
Washburn said, animal control officers pick up two or three pit bulls a day. Because most of them are not licensed, they are
destroyed.
Before pit bull owners can license their dogs in Providence, they must be able to show proof of insurance and a certificate
that says their dogs have been vaccinated for rabies. "There's nothing wrong with the dog, basically. But once
it gets in the wrong hands, forget about it. It's a different animal," Washburn said, explaining why there are tougher requirements for
pit bull owners. "The problem is that pit bulls bite differently than other dogs. When they bite, they don't release."
|
