Toledo, Ohio - Another example of why BSL does not work

Everyone's favorite dog warden, Tom Skeldon, in Lucas County (Toledo) is in the news again. This guy gets almost as much press coverage as Britney Spears and always for the wrong reasons. The article's headline is "Pit bull seizures decrease slightly from year before" (link above to the full article). This article raises a number of issues, all related to Skeldon's claim that his tactics, and Toledo's vicious dog laws, have made the community safer.

1. "Seizures of pit bulls are down." First of all, the entire issue of breed determination is inherently flawed unless you have papers showing the breed registry from a group such those as the AKC. Obviously, the kinds of dogs that Skeldon calls "pit bulls" have no such papers so the breed determination is based upon what he thinks they are. As we highlighted previously in this blog post, breed determination is MUCH more involved than that. DNA testing has shown many instances of dogs that "look like" pit bulls actually have no ancestry (or a very small amount) of the breeds commonly defined as a pit bull. Also, there is a group of concerned dog owners up in Lucas County that have gathered information proving that many dogs euthanized (murdered) by Skeldon because they classified by him as a pit bull, actually were not pit bulls at all! Yes, this is truly outrageous!
2. "33.9% of the dogs seized last year were pit bulls." Following from #1, how in the WORLD is this determination made? Were all of the dogs DNA tested before they were euthanized (murdered)? Also, given Skeldon's widely publicized feelings to eradicate bully breeds from the face of the earth, there is a pretty good incentive to question a possible inflation of this number.
   
3. "Dogs bites in Lucas county have actually gone UP in the past year." If the goal of the Toledo vicious dog legislation was to make the community safer, these bit statistics show that those efforts were a complete and utter failure. "...the number of dog bites and attacks investigated by the warden's office increased from 329 in 2007 to 403 last year." That was the last line of the Toledo Blade article. This fact alone makes all the rest of the article irrelevant. Despite slaughtering thousands of dogs over the years, simply because of the way they look, without true behavior testing or TRUE breed determination, the city of Toledo is less safe than it was before and more dogs are biting people.
   

Pro-Breed Specific Legislation leaning groups (including Skeldon and Lucas County) typically focus only on one group/breed of dogs. They believe the problem is the dogs. The problem is NOT the dogs, the problem is owners and until the focus is rightfully placed on the owners and cracking down on bad owners, the failures of BSL all over the country will continue.

Aurora, Colorado "pit bull" ban goes to court

As detailed in this article from the Denver Post, the court case for Aurora Colorado's ban on "pit bulls" started on Monday in U.S. District Court. This is a landmark case for breed specific legislation and could have huge ramifications across the country. Our friends over at KC Dog Blog have an excellent post about this trial.

When It Comes to Dog Laws....Everyone is the Expert

For those of you who think 'beyond' the hype of the six o'clock news....our friend Brent Toellner over at KC Dog Blog has a very elegantly written piece about the pitfalls and pratfalls of legislators and legislation. In light of the recent events in Whitehall it holds particular merit with those of us here at HELP FIDO. Check it out here and if you don't have his blog bookmarked - you should!!

Genetics and Dogs or…HELP FIDO’s DNA Study

This week there has been quite a buzz in the news about a recent study from the University of Pennsylvania on canine aggression. Brent Toellner over at KCDogBlog did a great write up on it that, if you haven’t read, you should do so now! A major problem that I have with the whole story, as covered by the media, is that the study has yet to be published. As far back as May of this year you can find references to it being published “this week” in the Applied Animal Behavioral Science journal. However, I have access to journals and I can tell that even in the upcoming August edition it does not appear. I am a HUGE believer in reading the actual science article in a peer reviewed journal before I form an opinion. Unlike many of our elected officials…I believe in getting my facts from the source and not from a media account.

But I digress.

From what I can discern from the limited information available so far about this study, it shores up what many anti-BSL advocates have been saying for a long time…you cannot create policy based solely upon the breed of a dog because breed means little. You MUST evaluate each and every dog on its individual behaviors. Genetics has always fascinated me. In my former “day job” position at a Columbus healthcare system I managed the Cancer Genetic Counseling program. Being a young cancer survivor, I was tested early on for a genetic mutation associated with breast cancer. I tested negative, however because I had great counseling I understand that this does not mean I don’t have some sort of familial condition that might have put me at risk. In other words, as much as has been learned about genetics…the unknown is far greater. That is how I came to be interested in canine genetics and the various breed tests and mixed breed “panel” tests that are currently being marketed.

Then a story aired on “60 Minutes” about human genetics and ancestor discovery. A key point made in this story is that you don’t have to go back very far in your own pedigree to see that one individual can have multiple influences such that it is nearly impossible to nail down where you “came from.” For every generation your DNA sources double: 4 grandparents, 8 great-grandparents, 16 great great-grandparents, 32 great great-grandparents…you get the picture. In case you don't - if you go back just 20 generations you have more than one million grandparents!!

Along those lines, HELP FIDO has embarked on a research study looking at breed identification subjectively and with DNA. The hypothesis is that, absent a pedigree, one cannot determine with any consistent accuracy the predominant breed of any one dog. Therefore, it is unconscionable to set policy based on a breed rather than behavior, because the penalty of being wrong is a death sentence for the dog in question.

We are doing this by collecting DNA results, photos, and narratives from owners of dogs of any breeds (with a focus on those dogs determined to be bully breeds). One outcome of this project will be to analyze how DNA results correlate with previously put-upon breed determinations. A perfect example of this comes from Jennifer Thomas over at happypitbull.com. She posted a story about her DNA test results for Dozer and I commented back about our study, shamelessly soliciting for her results, which she has generously supplied. Reprinted here with her permission is some fascinating information about what Dozer has been labeled:

"Dozer is usually somewhere between 80 and 87 pounds (he should be 80 lbs at healthy weight) and stands about 26 inches at the shoulder. Though it’s hard to tell in the photos, Dozer’s body is really not very wide or muscular; it reminds me more of a Lab’s body than a pit bull’s body.When we adopted him (as a little puppy), the shelter said he was a purebred pit bull, and told us he wouldn’t get larger than about 50 lbs. We went for a second opinion when he was about 8 months old, and a pit bull rescue group worker said he was not a pit bull at all—he was a Dogo Argentino. Though everyone at our vet office has generally acknowledged he’s a pit bull mix… Another vet .. said he was obviously a 'Lab mix of some sort.' And one time, a really clueless stranger at Petsmart marveled at our 'white Rottweiler.' "

And Dozer’s DNA results? According to his Mars Mixed Breed Panel test “Dozer ancestry contains distant traces of American Staffordshire Terrier, Bull Terrier, Bulldog, and Dalmatian. There are also faint signals from other breeds which are not strong enough to identify.” And yet in some cities in our country Dozer would be banned because he might possibly have some physical characteristics matching those of a pit bull.

Another outcome will be to develop a test using photos and DNA results. This test will then be taken by animal control officers, dog wardens, veterinarians and techs, animal rescue workers, and lay people. The test will be on one’s ability to determine the predominant breed of a dog based on the physical characteristics (photos) alone. Unlike the “Find the Pit Bull” tests which give you a 50% chance of guessing correctly, this test will ask the subject to determine the dogs’ predominant breed. We will then analyze the results looking at consistency associated with training, background, education level, etc. versus the DNA results.

If you would like to participate or have further questions about the study, please contact us at helpfido@gmail.com.

Fascinating stuff!

Shame, Shame, Shame

A local apartment complex will be added to the Wall of Shame.

Two days ago I received an urgent call for help. A man disabled by mental illness is facing immediate eviction. Is he being evicted because he is a disruptive tenant? No. Is it because he doesn't pay his rent on time? No. The reason for his eviction - his 9 1/2 year old prescribed, emotional service dog looks too much like a pit bull according to the complex manager. This dog wasn't identified or evaluated by any animal professional in order to make this determination. In fact, the dog's Vet states the dog is nothing more than a mutt. The complex manager has made this determination which will greatly impact the life of this man and his dog. (Perhaps I should ask her to do the locking jaw test)

The details of this situation makes it that more shameful. This man has lived in this apartment for NINETEEN years. The dog, who is recovering from mammary cancer and spends her days laying on the couch watching tv, has been living in this apartment for nine years. In nine years there has never been any type of aggression issues with humans or animals.

When this gentleman renewed his lease in November 2007, he thought he was renewing the same lease that he had signed for the past 18 years. The manager pointed out the changes in monthly rental fees but never mentioned the newly added breed restrictions or that his dog would be considered one of the disallowed breeds. Instead, seven months later, he is slapped with an eviction notice.

What is even more shameful - the Department of Fair Housing allows this type of treatment of disabled tenants.

Shame on you CSC Apartments and shame on you Department of Fair Housing.

Cleaning up after the Councilwoman

I am sure many of you are familiar with the lunacy we have been dealing with in Whitehall in the form of Jackie Thompson. Apparently Jackie has found a new website to cozy up with on those long, lonely nights and it is inspiring her to send out more letters to the editor filled with twisted statistics and false information. The following letter is to once again correct her inaccuracies and mistruths that were published in the July 3rd issue of The Other Paper.

Response to Councilwoman Thompson

It is always interesting to read the opinions of those who rely on news snippets and inaccurate data to drive their fear. I would like to correct some of the inaccuracies and add a bit of clarification.

The pit bull is not a breed of dog, but instead the term has come to be widely used to describe a dog that has an appearance similar to an American Pit Bull terrier or American Staffordshire terrier. Since other breeds of dog physically resemble these breeds, mistaken identity is frequently made and consequently numbers are inflated for the number of attacks involving so-called "pit bulls". Further, correct breed identification becomes more problematic when the dog involved in an attack is a mixed-breed. Hence, ambiguity exists when using the term "pit bull". Note that other data collection techniques (animal control reports, police reports, witness observation) used for breed identification purposes in dog attacks may also be flawed for these reasons. Recently genetic DNA testing has become available to help with breed determination. Preliminary DNA studies have found that approximately 1 out of every 10 dogs identified as “pit bull” actually has any bully breed DNA at all. This potentially means that 90% of these dogs are misidentified.

Ms. Thompson states that "The American Temperament Test Society argument does not stand up to close scrutiny. The ATTS was not set up to score house pets. It was devised to test dogs for police and guarding type work." Actually, according to Thomas Szebenyi, the Chief Tester of the ATTS, “The test was created to help breeders remove dogs from their breeding stock that have bad temperament. The test is open to all purebred dogs and spayed/neutered mixed breed dogs.” The ATTS tests dogs on a number of behaviors to determine the temperament and stability of a dog, not specific to suitability for police or guarding dogs. A dog that is fearful or overly timid when facing specific stimuli is not a sound, stable dog. Aggressiveness when facing stimuli would be another indicator temperament issues. This test is to determine if the dog has the correct, healthy response to the stimuli.

Ms. Thompson also states that the UK Dangerous Dog Act names the pit bull terrier but not the Staffordshire Terrier or the American Staffordshire Terrier in the Act, thus giving dog owners a loophole. While she is correct in that the Act only specifically lists the pit bull terrier, the UK Dangerous Dog Act classifies dangerous dogs by "type" not by breed label. This means that whether a dog is prohibited under the Act will depend on a judgment about its physical characteristics. To highlight this fact the UK even distributes brochures with pictures and descriptions of the prohibited breed "types."

Ms. Thompson further states that she would like to see bite incidents reported by severity. On this we can agree. I would like to take it a step further and have the dog owners’ responsibility placed in the report, as in the recent incident in New York when the angry boyfriend kicked out a window air conditioner and tossed a frightened dog into a room of children. I would also like to know how many prior incidents the owners have had regarding animal control violations.

To correct Ms. Thompson's belief that there has not been a pit bull related death in Ohio since BSL was enacted. There was a pit bull related death in 1992. Additionally, since BSL was enacted in Ohio, a Husky and a Chow killed a 7 year old, an American Bulldog killed a 5 year old, a Wolf-Dog killed a 5 year old, a German Shepherd and a mixed breed killed an infant, a Rottweiler killed a 54 year old woman and a Rottweiler killed a 40 year old man.

Ms. Thompson also brings up fatalities in the state of Texas. Texas which is the 2nd most populous state had the highest rate of fatal dog attacks in 2007, which were not limited to pit bull type dogs. There were some commonalities. All of the dogs were intact and most were chained, outside dogs, not "family dogs" as it was claimed. Ms. Thompson attributes the higher rate of fatalities in Texas to their lack of BSL. However in 2007 there were 44 states with no pit bull fatalities that did not have BSL enacted.

She also brings up Council Bluffs, Iowa as a success story. Of course pit bull bites are going to decrease if you decrease the population. What she fails to mention is that while there were fewer bites by pit bulls due to the decreased population, attacks by other breeds increased. The question shouldn't be "did pit bull bites go down", but "did public safety improve?" The answer would be a resounding, no.

It also needs to be pointed out that there is no difference between the injuries inflicted by a pit bull versus any other breed of similar size. For nearly two decades the National Canine Research Council has investigated and analyzed fatal dog attack injuries. It is important to note that NCRC has researched EVERY fatal and/or severe attack for which data is available. No other individual or group has even approached the volume of information that NCRC has collected and analyzed. The NCRC states that it is impossible to determine the breed of dog by reviewing an autopsy report or photo, as no breed of dog has a particular method of attack or inflicts an exclusive type of injury. It is virtually impossible for anyone to match the breed of dog with the fatal injuries - as such - claims that one breed of dog inflicts injuries unlike other breeds have no merit.

Any time anyone is hurt by a dog it is an unfortunate situation that should have never occurred. I do know that the “pit bull lobby”, as Jacquelyn Thompson likes to call those of us who are pushing for stronger laws requiring responsible ownership of all breeds, reached out to a recent victim of a local dog attack to be certain that the victim had the appropriate care and assistance while recovering from injuries. I personally have been pushing for much harsher penalties for owners of animals which have attacked as well as pushing for stronger regulation of dogs which have shown threatening tendencies. I have no tolerance for irresponsible people that allow their animals to hurt others and I believe Ms. Thompson would be quite surprised at some of the measures I would like to see taken. In fact, I invite Ms. Thompson to meet with me to discuss these ideas.

New Legislation Passes In Whitehall

Hello all. Dr. Mandi here to fill everyone in on what happened at the July 1st meeting of the Whitehall City Council. So, first things first...VICTORY. Amendments to Chapter 505 of the Codified Ordinances of the City of Whitehall entitled "Animals" were finally adopted. There was only ONE vote against the ordinance and it came from our old friend, you guessed it, Jackie Thompson. Councilwoman Leslie Lacorte surprisingly voted "yes" and added something to the effect that she hopes this doesn't come back against "us".

What does this mean for HELP FIDO and our supporters you might ask? Well it's really just the tip of the iceberg. Now our real work will begin! Getting the legislation passed was only round one. Enforcement is going to be the hard part. Mayor Wolfe will need to get to work on appointing an appeals board, enforcement decisions will need to be made, and word needs to get out to the Whitehall community that there are programs to help them comply with the new laws and to help them to be responsible pet owners. At HELP FIDO we will make ourselves available to help with all steps of the process.

The passing of the revised ordinance wasn't the only notable occurrence at the meeting. As usual, Ms. Thompson was very vocal concerning her opinions on BSL as well as her opinions on HELP FIDO's involvement in Whitehall. She quoted a letter written to a Pit Bull website concerning the drafting of the new legislation which mentioned that a majority of HELP FIDO members were active in helping to re-write existing Whitehall animal laws and that we did not reside in Whitehall. She said that she was "outraged" and "never thought she would see the day when outsiders would come in and dictate how we should live here in Whitehall." What Ms. Thompson doesn't understand is that what happens in Whitehall doesn't stay in Whitehall. The legislation that is passed in that community has the potential to affect all of the surrounding communities. So if BSL is passed in Whitehall, many surrounding communities may consider following the same path. In fact, Ms. Thompson was trying to follow the path of Bexley and Reynoldsburg, and in doing so would not have been a doing a thing to help citizens and instead punishing good responsible members of the community.

It seems funny how Ms. Thompson uses examples and "facts" from communities and municipalities outside of Whitehall when it suits and supports her arguments, however, she is reluctant to let "outsiders" voice their opinion. Isn't that being a bit hypocritical? Hmmmmm Ms. Thompson?

Ms. Thompson also mentioned an "altercation" that occurred at a Whitehall music in the park event a couple of weeks ago. Again she failed to get her facts straight before preaching to the council. She made it sound like there was an incident between several "pit bulls", when in fact the altercation mentioned was between the dog owners and the dogs NEVER got involved. In fact, they never misbehaved or showed aggression in any way. IT WAS THE OWNERS. As usual owner irresponsibility caused the problem and the reputation of the breed suffers as a result.

She also explained that Whitehall is in their "current mess" because previous leaders made poor decisions and the passing of the new animal legislation is, in her opinion, another one. Now here's a question...if Ms. Thompson is so concerned about making poor decisions and is worried about the safety of "her" community wouldn't she have voted yes to the new ordinance hoping that it would at least provide for some increase in safety and quality of life of the residents of Whitehall? Hmmmm.........

There was also some concern by several council members regarding a letter in the Whitehall News that many thought was slanderous towards Ms. Thompson. Here's the link http://tinyurl.com/3z6mhx . Read the letter and decide for yourself but I think it wasn't slanderous at all. Calling for the removal of Ms. Thompson from the city council is simply one person's opinion, nothing slanderous about that.....we live in a democracy where free speech is a right....GOD BLESS AMERICA. Ms. Thompson takes advantage of expressing her opinion about lots of things every chance she gets.....she gives opinions about BSL, about "outsiders", about other city council members, "pit bull" owners (or should we say evil doers)..... Slanderous Ms. Thompson? You know what the say, "people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones", I hope you have a lot of Windex Ms. Thompson to clean all of that glass.

Well, that's all for now folks. Onward and upward to continue helping HELP FIDO to fight the good fight in ALL communities.

"Well, we wouldn't want to discriminate."

That was a quote from one of the council members at the Whitehall (OH) City Council meeting last night. Any statement against discrimination would obviously come from someone opposed to BSL, right?? Of course, you say, that makes sense, that's logical. Well, while logical, that would be incorrect. The above quote was from everybody's favorite council person - Jacquelyn Thompson in reference to an off-topic discussion about banning all dogs in a park during an outdoor concert. And that's a big part of the problem right now - most of the pro-BSL and bully ban proponents are woefully short on common sense and logic. Whether it's Lakewood (OH), Kansas City, Cincinnati, or one of the other communities currently debating these issues, the root of the problem is publicity hungry local politicians with way too much time on their hands and the ability to ignore all evidence and logic contrary to their uninformed positions.

Thankfully, there are many council members and others in Whitehall government that are logical people, that truly want what's best for their community and realize passing a ban or restrictions on dogs simply based on what they look like will accomplish nothing. Wait.... wouldn't that be discrimination? Ms. Thompson? "Well, wouldn't want to discriminate." Hmm.

Next week in Whitehall is the 3rd and final reading of Councilman Robert Bailey's comprehensive, breed neutral legislation that truly will benefit the community. Unless there is a big surprise, that legislation will go to a vote next Tuesday and will likely pass.

How about something on the lighter side? This video has made it's way around so probably not new and I have no idea if the story is true or not, but still cracks me up. The story: "These people were always finding water all over their pool deck and furniture, every time they came home, after being away for a few hours. They thought the neighborhood kids were watching for them to leave, and using the pool. However, they could never catch them doing it. So they set up their video cam and left. This is what they found......." Dog home alone. It is summer after all :)

HELP FIDO's Response to article in The Other Paper

I'm writing in response to the 6/19/2008 article titled "Pit Stop." I want to applaud The Other Paper for delving into such a controversial issue, but I feel compelled to add some points that are critical in understanding and preventing canine aggression.

Karen Delise and her group, The National Canine Research Council, have done amazing work studying dog bites. Delise has authored two books and the work of her not-for-profit, has confirmed what so many of us already knew. There are real factors of canine aggression and those factors are not skin deep nor breed specific.

In the past 150 years, there have been countless interactions between humans and canines. In her second book, The Pit Bull Placebo, Delise breaks down the relatively low, though very important, incidents of fatal and severe dog attacks during this period. What one comes to learn is that there are three categories that are present in an overwhelming percentage of these tragic incidents:

-reckless ownership practices (such as chaining and allowing dog(s) to run at large),
-reproductive status of dog(s) (not spayed or neutered; intact), and
-the function of dog (obtained for a status symbol, breeding, fighting, protection; not a companion animal).

It's when we as a community start to address these issues that we begin to make progress. And this progress is hard work, indeed.

We must love, respect, raise responsibly and control man's best friend in order to protect the rights of all dog owners and keep our communities safe. Please, your community needs your help. Get involved! Such groups as the Capital Area Humane Society, Citizens for Humane Action, the Franklin County Dog Shelter, HELP FIDO, the American Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, just to name a few, are wonderful organizations to support. Through their work, the intricate connection that is the human-canine bond can be understood, respected, and preserved.

Amanda Spires
HELP FIDO, Board Member

Keep It Up Columbus!!

We here at HELP FIDO have spent the better part of the past 4 months being present at Whitehall City Council discussions about a proposed pit bull ban by Councilwoman Jacquelyn Thompson. In fact, this civil action of ours was what brought about HELP FIDO as an organized effort to increase the quality of life for dogs in central Ohio.

These long, arduous, stressful Tuesday nights were not only spent listening to myths, lies and unsupported “facts,” but also were often felt like a personal attack. Indeed, we have been called evil-doers and owners of “tools of terror.” This all happened before PETA’s announcement that pit bull owners are thugs.

*sigh*

After a few months, we decided, as we were beginning to organize and talk amongst ourselves that we would continue to attend the Whitehall meetings. However, since there had been comments made about our “outside” presence being unwelcome, as well as some rude accusations lodged against us, we also decided we would refrain from further comment until the status of the proposed ban was decided. Luckily other citizens of Whitehall chose to act and spoke numerous times at the meetings and to media. They didn’t need us to point out the problems with a ban…they had found their voice. On the night it failed we decided to speak out only after the vote though afterwards we retreated again behind our “above the fray” shield.

Since then, even though Thompson’s crazy ranting speech from the night of the failed ban made it into the Saturday Dispatch editorial section, we have not felt the need to speak out. The reason we have not been voraciously responding to this? We haven’t needed to. Many others came forward to point out the incredibly unsupported stance of BSL. Online letters to editors against BSL have far outweighed any support of Thompson (here) and (here) and (here). These are but a few of the letters that appeared. And then there is the glorious statement in Saturday’s Dispatch by Amanda Gleason, a woman who states she is not only not a part of the “pit bull lobby,” she doesn’t even own a pit bull! Furthermore, a rather, um, interesting article appeared in The Other Paper and featured one of our members rescue operations, and we will be addressing some concerns with that article.

Meanwhile we wanted to take a moment to applaud the efforts of these folks who have taken the extra time to write a letter, make a phone call, or send an email. We welcome their support and encourage them to continue to use their voice!!

Well done!!

Whitehall council meeting 6/17

Members of HELP FIDO were in attendance at Whitehall’s city council meeting last night. All members of council were present with the exception of Councilwoman Thompson, who's previously proposed breed ban failed two weeks earlier. This is one of two monthly meetings where the public is given a chance to speak publicly.

Two pieces of animal legislation received their second of three readings during the meeting. The first piece of legislation was regarding noisy animals. And second, the comprehensive ‘breed neutral’ piece of legislation proposed by Councilman Bailey regarding dangerous and vicious dogs, as well as humane confinement and dog fighting. Prior to receiving its second reading, an amendment was passed changing the required height of a fence containing a deemed ‘vicious’ dog from 48” to 72”.

There are many summer activities the city has planned such as farmers markets, live music and movies. You can find a listing of events in Whitehall HERE.

The next meeting in Whitehall is next Tuesday June 24th. The meeting is a committee meeting and is open to the public, although here are no opportunities for public speaking.

Diplomacy, Breed Bans, and Letters to the Editor

Ok I’m a little late to the party, and thank you Brent for a great entry on the KCDogBlog about Jacquelyn Thompson’s letter to the editor in the Columbus Dispatch On 6/14/08 regarding her failed Pit Bull Ban. After hearing “We’ve had enough outside influence” I politely obliged and stopped my contact with the Whitehall council. I have to bite on this one though…

Pit Bull lobby??? Perhaps she is talking about the concerned dog owners of Whitehall and the handful of central Ohioans who have been out to voice their opposition to the ban. This coming from the woman who, after receiving extremely limited local community support for her “legislation,” used this very same newspaper to drum up allies as she pled for help weeks ago.

Here’s my take… Laws should be designed to protect ALL members of a population, not discriminate against a few. By aiming legislation at dogs (in the instance of a ban), you are inadvertently discriminating against law-abiding members of the population merely because they have chosen a certain type of pet. To be effective, legislation should be aimed at people. It is the person who allows their dog to run loose, untrained, and out of control who should be held responsible. This is an 'ownership' issue not a 'dog' issue.

With all of that being said, there are solutions that have been proven effective, and are completely 'breed neutral.' Despite receiving several examples of these 'breed neutral' solutions, it appears that Thompson can’t be bothered, and seems merely concerned with ridding the streets of these "Pit Bull type” dogs all the while hiding this agenda behind the cloak of ‘safety.’ I fail to see how eliminating 'Pit Bulls' will ever address, improper confinement, neglect, abuse, or incidences with other breeds.

In this letter to the editor the “Pit Bull Lobby” has been accused of "threatening, and bulling communities"… interestingly enough, the author of the letter, is the one who has publicly singled out members of the community she is serving, harassing citizens by drudging up decades old criminal reports. She is also the one pointing fingers around the council chambers accusing other councilmember’s of everything from not having concern for public safety to “reading plays.”

I personally have had my own testimony twisted and thrown back in my face by her. Somehow after politely thanking the officials for allowing me to speak, giving a testimony as to how a breed ban could negatively affect a city with, costs, enforcement, the fact that they don’t address ‘vicious’ dogs of other breeds, and the fact that many citizens do lawfully and responsibly own Pit Bulls as family pets; I was asked by Thompson in an email, “Why I was advocating for vicious animals in Whitehall?” My reply was simply, “I am NOT advocating for vicious animals, I’m advocating for the responsible owners in your community.”

I mean talk about bullying… I’m not surprised many citizens weren’t coming out and speaking up. It was obvious if you spoke out against the ban, you were making yourself a target. Despite my polite correspondence I was talked down to. Unfortunately for Thompson, all that did was cement my position, and cleared my calendar’s Tuesday nights so I could make sure my face was in the crowd at each meeting.

“Abused, a twisted status symbol, killer, maimer. That, too often, is the reality of the pit-bull breeds. They are to be pitied, but we are left with no alternative but to remove them from society.”

Interesting… wouldn’t a better, more admirable (let alone effective), ‘alternative’ be to target the people who neglect, abuse, and use these dogs to engage in criminal activity instead of banning these dogs into extinction. It is after all it is human error at the root of the problem.

“It's just too bad that the majority of members do not see the danger coming and chose to come down on the side of darkness when they voted no on the ban.”

The “side of darkness”… What!? It’s called Democracy… Thompson stated her intentions, the council voted, her ban failed. I wonder if in her eye’s, the council members who voted “no” are also now considered “evildoers,” (as Thompson once described Pit Bull owners)?

“The United States led the way to the formation of the United Nations as a means to settle differences diplomatically…”

Did she really mention the United Nations!? Huh? What? Yes, the UN was formed partly to help come about ‘diplomatic’ solutions, so I wonder how Thompson would explain how her Pit Bull ban and recent actions have even resembled ‘diplomacy.’ She has had her heels dug in, and mind made up from the get go.

Whitehall, OH – debate continues

Members of HELP FIDO attended the Whitehall City Council meeting again last night – it’s almost a tradition at this point, at least I know where I’ll be every Tuesday evening. Last night’s meeting was a committee meeting which is open to the public, but the public is only allowed to speak at the full Council meetings. As outlined below and here, Council Member Jackie Thompson’s much publicized pit bull ban was defeated last week, 5-2. But Ms. Thompson’s antics continued this week with her attacks on Council Member Bob Bailey’s comprehensive, breed neutral legislation that is based on action or behavior (not breed). It will be up for 2nd Reading next Tuesday, June 17th (most ordinances go to a 3rd reading) so I encourage everyone to attend - especially if you're a Whitehall resident. If you’d like an entire copy of this ordinance, send me an email (briancluxton@yahoo.com). Ms. Thompson continues to argue the same uninformed, ignorant positions at each meeting about pit bulls and breed specific legislation; there simply is no reasoning with her. I got the distinct impression last evening that many elected officials in Whitehall are tired of her act. I know I tired of it a long time ago.

After the back and forth about Mr. Bailey’s legislation, discussion moved on to other matters, including the standing committees. During the Safety committee discussion, talk among the members turned to general safety in Whitehall – nothing to do with dogs or dog legislation. Pretty much out of nowhere, Ms. Thompson stated that “All of the men on council don’t care that Whitehall citizens feel threatened.” This was at least the second time she has claimed no one supports or agrees with her based on gender. Needless to say, that remark set off a firestorm of discussion and many of the other Council members were furious. Personally, I was dumbfounded – Ms. Thompson has said a lot of stupid things over the past 5 or so months, but that took it to a whole other level. As usual, reporters from both the Suburban News Publications and Eastside Messenger were in attendance. I hope they are accurate in their newspaper accounts of Ms. Thompson’s behavior last evening.

On to a much more pleasant topic – Anna and I were in Iowa City 2 weekends ago for the 4th Annual Bully Workshop. One of the highlights was seeing Wallace the Pit Bull, the 2007 Purina Incredible Dog Challenge Freestyle Flying Disc National Champion. Wallace and Roo (his handler/owner) are amazing!! Wallace is also one of the sweetest dogs you’ll ever meet. And to think, people like Jackie Thompson believe dogs like Wallace should be killed simply because of the way they look. Much more about Wallace’s story can be found here.