We want to let you know about a proposed ordinance in Worcester that would impose specific restrictions on pit bull type dogs.  The ordinance was given initial approval by the city council on July 20th.  It goes before city council again on August 10th in a public hearing. Read an article about this ordinance and the Worcester Animal Rescue League. 

 

Because many of you are involved in rescue groups and shelters, we think this proposed ordinance may be of interest to you.  MAC's own PILOT program sees daily the crisis facing pit bull type dogs in our state.  Shelters and rescues are often full with these types of dogs and, as a result, there are currently very few options for pit bull dogs to be transferred from animal control facilities to other shelters via PILOT.  This means that the dogs aren't placed because so many are homeless.  MAC is also involved through our Pit Bull Spay/Neuter task force, which is working increase the number of pit bull type dogs spayed or neutered in Massachusetts through low cost/no cost spay/neuter events.  Unfortunately, when municipalities enact breed-specific ordinances, it hurts these efforts.

  

Having this issue come up in Worcester is particularly important because it would be another large city in Massachusetts to enact such an ordinance.  Unfortunately, several municipalities have copied Boston's ordinance; an ordinance for which there is no proof that it has reduced dog bites.

 

As people who care about animals, we obviously are concerned about the dogs who will lose their lives for no reason except to have been born a certain breed with a certain look.  There is no evidence that breed-specific legislation prevents dog bites, while there is evidence that comprehensive (and enforced) dangerous dog ordinances do. The public should also be concerned about these ordinances as a flawed attempt to prevent a goal we all certainly desire - reduced dog bites and safe communities.

 

The reasons that this type of legislation is misguided -- and information you can use to help make the case against this -- includes:  that these policies do not impact dogs of other breeds who may be dangerous; they unfairly brand all dogs of a particular breed, regardless of their behavioral history, as dangerous; and when communities concentrate their public protection efforts on specific breeds, they only address the dogs, rather than dealing with the true cause of these threats to public safety: pet owner irresponsibility.  No dog breed is inherently vicious and experts agree that singling out breeds oversimplifies the problem and overlooks the dangerous and irresponsible behaviors of specific dog owners at the root of these problems.  Communities should enforce ordinances that define "dangerous" dogs, include provisions such as spaying/neutering, microchipping, and training of dogs who exhibit dangerous behaviors plus substantial and graduated fines for violations.  These interventions require responsible behavior from dog owners and reduce dog bites. 

 

MAC has a page on devoted to resources on pit bulls.  The ASPCA has a comprehensive position statement on this issue.  The AVMA has a highly praised article from the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, called "A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention", that offers alternatives and explains that "... singling out 1 or 2 breeds for control can result in a false sense of accomplishment.  Doing so ignores the true scope of the problem and will not result in a responsible approach to protecting a community's citizens."  The MSPCA also has an alert on this issue specific to Worcester with more information on how you can speak up and stop this ordinance.

 

If Worcester adopts such a bylaw, it is likely that there will be even more momentum with other cities and towns.  Worcester could be a tipping point on this issue, so we feel it is important for people to get involved.  Ways to do so include: 

And, by joining MAC and its task forces that work on these issues.