[RDOWS]

Camanche drops pit pull ordinance discussion
By Danica BakerHerald Staff Writer

CAMANCHE — In a 3 to 2 vote on Tuesday night, the Camanche City Council decided to stop trying to potentially enact an ordinance regulating the existence of pit bulls within city limits.

The issue was first discussed at the Nov. 20 council meeting, where several Camanche residents expressed their opposition to the proposed ordinance that would have regulated ownership of the dog breed and banned any new pit bulls in the city. At that meeting, the three members of the council present decided to table the issue until the full five-member council could be present for the discussion.

On Tuesday, Councilman Steve Cundiff asked if the current vicious dog ordinance covers pit bulls. Camanche Police Chief Bob Houzenga replied that the ordinance covers all dogs. City Attorney Tom Lonergan noted that the concern is the breed's bite capacity and capability for severe injury. He said the question is whether the city wants to do something before or after a pit bull dog attack, because the danger is there.

Houzenga explained that no one is trying to pick on anyone’s pet, but some traits unique to pit bulls make them more dangerous, including disproportionate strength to size and temperament. He said he is bothered by the breed’s unpredictability of aggression, saying the dogs generally show no negative signs before attacking. He added that once an attack begins, there is little to no chance of retreating from the attack without injury. Houzenga said the breed has a higher likelihood of severe injury and death because pit bulls target deep muscle tissue, and once a dog bites down it will shake and rip the tissue, causing severe injury and can be especially harmful to children. He stated that passing the ordinance in advance of a possible attack shows the city’s foresight.

City Administrator Tom Roth said people at the last meeting had asked why pit bulls. He read from two articles to explain the support for breed specific legislation, citing one from the Illinois Municipal League stating that while pit bulls are less than one percent of the total dog population, they are responsible for more than 70 percent of all fatal dog attacks. Roth said there is rationale and logic to the concept of breed targeting and he thinks it is backed up with data.

Cundiff said if the city experiences one child attacked by a pit bull, he could guarantee there would be a lot of citizens at the council meeting wondering why the council did not pass the ordinance. Councilman Ken Fahlbeck said his biggest concern is where the council draws the line, saying he thinks rottweilers can be just as dangerous and have a higher bite capacity. He stated he thinks it is all about how a dog is trained.

Roth said many cities have added pit bull ordinances, but noted the city of Des Moines lost a court case because the ordinance included any dog that looks like pit bull. Councilman Trevor Willis asked who would be the city’s expert on determining the breed of the dog involved in an attack. Lonergan suggested the Humane Society and Public Works Director Dave Rickertsen said he would call the local veterinarian.

Mayor Jim Robertson asked if the ordinance would cover a dog considered a mixed or half-breed. Roth named the breeds listed in the ordinance and noted the terminology includes any dog that displays the traits of one of the named breeds. Lonergan said he called a veterinarian and was told there is a test that can be done to determine the breed of the dog. Roth added the ordinance outlines a procedure in which if a dog is impounded, the owner can ask for a hearing before the city council to prove the dog is not a pit bull, but said the burden of proof is on the owner. Houzenga added that when residents register their dog, the vaccination information from the veterinarian lists the dog’s breed.

Wehde offered a motion to drop considering the pit bull ordinance, and Fahlbeck seconded the motion. Wehde, Fahlbeck and Willis voted to drop the ordinance, while Cundiff and Councilwoman Linda Kramer voted against the measure.

http://www.clintonherald.com/local/local_story_339112554.html