Dogs as Public Nuisance, questions re hearing, abatement

[Thora]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? California

Last year, during September, I was walking my dog to the store. My dog was on a leash. An un leashed dog came running and barking at us from behind. My dog ran toward the approaching dog and tripped me when he changed directions, dragging me. My dog killed the dog.

The dog was often out of the yard, roaming and chasing people. Just the morning before the incident, I saw the dog was out, put my dog in a sit, stay. My dog watched the small dog run about while I got a neighbor to put the dog back into its yard.

I was told the incident was partially my fault, as I did not control my dog.

This year, in July, a friend of mine was walking two of my dogs at the same time, they were leashed to each other. My dogs were sitting on the grass about 2 houses down from my house. A man was walking his dog on a leash when my female and his dog, also female, began running toward each other. Both of my dogs participated in mortally injuring the other dog.

I have done a ton of research, (have learned about pack structure, I do not walk the dogs more then one at a time now, I use a training collar, vs. a harness, taken my dogs to a professional private very reputable trainer and now have 100% control of my female, she no longer even pays attention to barking dogs, or any distractions.

Since my dogs have not bitten a person, they are not considered "dangerous" or "vicious". But because they have damaged personal property they want to declare them a public nuisance, which is just like a "dangerous dog"

My questions are:

• do people ever win a public nuisance hearing?
• I was given 2 notices of intent and had to respond with 2 requests to appeal, now they are "hearing" them both at the same time and want to abate my premises, questions about insurance, why they are doing it?
• suggestions on areas I should focus my defense, I do not feel I was negligent, my dogs do not fit the definition of public nuisance, dogs never been impounded,..I was un educated and have corrected mistakes

Thanks in advance for any comments.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

[ecmst12]

You wait until your dogs kill TWO other dogs before you educate yourself on proper training? Sounds to me like YOU are the public nuisance.

[Thora]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

You wait until your dogs kill TWO other dogs before you educate yourself on proper training? Sounds to me like YOU are the public nuisance.

well no, if you pay attention, my male is trained, he sat and stayed put prior when that little dog was running amuck and barking. How close into one's personal space is something or someone allowed to go before you feel the need to protect yourself?

And yes, my female should have been better trained, his dog was out of control also, running at my dogs. My mistake was in letting both dogs be leashed to each other, where one went the other had to go, and they had on harnesses rather then training collars.

I understand I made mistakes, I have corrected them. The other dog owners made mistakes as well. Tragic situations, not completely my fault.

But thank you for your pointless response. Have a wonderful day.

[ecmst12]

What kind of dogs do you have?

[Stevef]

Originally Posted by Thora

• do people ever win a public nuisance hearing?
• I was given 2 notices of intent and had to respond with 2 requests to appeal, now they are "hearing" them both at the same time and want to abate my premises, questions about insurance, why they are doing it?
• suggestions on areas I should focus my defense, I do not feel I was negligent, my dogs do not fit the definition of public nuisance, dogs never been impounded,..I was un educated and have corrected mistakes

This really depends on who is holding the hearing. I've seen town councils hell bent on destroying an animal, no matter what the owner does.

You may want to talk to an attorney who specializes in animal law before the hearing. After the hearing may be too late.

ETA: I found this link: [url]http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stuscacalfoodagcode30501_31683.htm[/url]

It looks like your dogs could be classified as potentially dangerous. Your argument would be that the attack was not unprovoked.

§ 31602. Potentially dangerous dog defined

"Potentially dangerous dog" means any of the following:

(a) Any dog which, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within the prior 36-month period, engages in any behavior that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury when the person and the dog are off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog.

(b) Any dog which, when unprovoked, bites a person causing a less severe injury than as defined in Section 31604.

(c) Any dog which, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within the prior 36-month period, has killed, seriously bitten, inflicted injury, or otherwise caused injury attacking a domestic animal off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog.

[Thora]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

What kind of dogs do you have?

What does that matter?

They are Rhodesian Ridgeback.

[Thora]

They are not going after the dangerous dog as my dogs have not on 2 occasions attacked or bitten a person. They have never bitten a person. Never been aggressive toward people at all.

The first situation, was provoked by the other dog, as the other dog was not lawfully using the public property, he was violating the leash law, his actions caused me to loose control of my dog.

The hearing is an administrative hearing, by a hearing officer at the animal control. An employee of the County Animal Control assigned at random who has nothing to do with the case.

Does such a person have the authority to abate my dogs or my property? Doesn't a judge have to do that?

This is for public nuisance, not dangerous dog, although the end results lead to the same restrictions or potential outcome. Its for damaging property, not "dog bite" (every thing in the local ordinances say bite or injury to human, to person, there is no specific local ordinance about dogs injuring another dog specifically) Thank you for your response.

Originally Posted by Stevef

This really depends on who is holding the hearing. I've seen town councils hell bent on destroying an animal, no matter what the owner does.

You may want to talk to an attorney who specializes in animal law before the hearing. After the hearing may be too late.

ETA: I found this link: [url]http://www.animallaw.info/statutes/stuscacalfoodagcode30501_31683.htm[/url]

It looks like your dogs could be classified as potentially dangerous. Your argument would be that the attack was not unprovoked.

§ 31602. Potentially dangerous dog defined

"Potentially dangerous dog" means any of the following:

(a) Any dog which, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within the prior 36-month period, engages in any behavior that requires a defensive action by any person to prevent bodily injury when the person and the dog are off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog.

(b) Any dog which, when unprovoked, bites a person causing a less severe injury than as defined in Section 31604.

(c) Any dog which, when unprovoked, on two separate occasions within the prior 36-month period, has killed, seriously bitten, inflicted injury, or otherwise caused injury attacking a domestic animal off the property of the owner or keeper of the dog.

[Zigner]

Ok - your dog, while on a leash, was attacked by another dog that was not on a leash. Your dog killed that dog.

In an of itself, that does not make your dog "dangerous". HOWEVER, the second incident is very troubling. I am actually appalled that you are defending your actions with regard to allowing your dog(s) to kill another dog when all the dogs were on a leash!

[ecmst12]

I ask what kind of dog because if your dogs are known to be an aggressive breed, and you did not FULLY educate yourself on how to train and control them before adopting them in the first place, then you are basically completely negligent and shouldn't be allowed to own dogs.

[Stevef]

Originally Posted by Thora

They are not going after the dangerous dog as my dogs have not on 2 occasions attacked or bitten a person. They have never bitten a person. Never been aggressive toward people at all.

The first situation, was provoked by the other dog, as the other dog was not lawfully using the public property, he was violating the leash law, his actions caused me to loose control of my dog.

The hearing is an administrative hearing, by a hearing officer at the animal control. An employee of the County Animal Control assigned at random who has nothing to do with the case.

Does such a person have the authority to abate my dogs or my property? Doesn't a judge have to do that?

This is for public nuisance, not dangerous dog, although the end results lead to the same restrictions or potential outcome. Its for damaging property, not "dog bite" (every thing in the local ordinances say bite or injury to human, to person, there is no specific local ordinance about dogs injuring another dog specifically) Thank you for your response.

My suggestion is you look at the website I pointed you to containing the state laws regarding "potentially dangerous" dogs.

Those laws define a "potentially dangerous" dog. That definition includes an unprovoked attack on another dog, injuring or killing that dog, twice within 36 months. That pretty much defines your dog. As I wrote, you can argue the point about the attack being provoked or unprovoked.

Even if your dog is found to be "potentially dangerous", the remedies are also defined by statute (Keep the dogs inside or on a leash). The "potentially dangerous" designation expires after 36 months.

These laws are clear cut and well defined. A 'public nuisance' designation is not. You probably want to argue that they should not impose a stricter penalty on you for their general classification of nuisance than the state imposed for a clearly defined potentially dangerous dog.

[Adalaide78]

I have a pet who goes outside on a leash. Because I can't be sure that everyone is a responsible pet owner, I am forced to keep her only in the back yard to prevent problems. I'll agree that all dogs should be on leashes and not just running around or onto other people's property but ultimately it is a pet owners responsibility to make sure their pet does not endanger someone else's. If your dog fits the description of a public nuisance, accept it, know that you have since become a responsible pet owner and make sure you remain one. It certainly sounds like you didn't start out as one. I can say for sure that if someone's dog ate my rabbit I'd sue their ass off.

[Thora]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

I ask what kind of dog because if your dogs are known to be an aggressive breed, and you did not FULLY educate yourself on how to train and control them before adopting them in the first place, then you are basically completely negligent and shouldn't be allowed to own dogs.

The Rhodesian Ridgeback is not known to be an aggressive breed from what I understand. They are in the hound class, scent and sight hounds.

I have owned my male for 9 years, he is very well behaved, I have taken him every place dogs can go and never had any problems with him.

My female was not as well behaved, she had no manners on a leash and I hated to walk her. (Which is why a friend was walking my dogs when the second incident happened)

Does my lack of time to train my female make me negligent? Irresponsible?

I have made many changes, I dont think my mistakes were negligent.

[Thora]

Originally Posted by Stevef

My suggestion is you look at the website I pointed you to containing the state laws regarding "potentially dangerous" dogs.

Those laws define a "potentially dangerous" dog. That definition includes an unprovoked attack on another dog, injuring or killing that dog, twice within 36 months. That pretty much defines your dog. As I wrote, you can argue the point about the attack being provoked or unprovoked.

Even if your dog is found to be "potentially dangerous", the remedies are also defined by statute (Keep the dogs inside or on a leash). The "potentially dangerous" designation expires after 36 months.

These laws are clear cut and well defined. A 'public nuisance' designation is not. You probably want to argue that they should not impose a stricter penalty on you for their general classification of nuisance than the state imposed for a clearly defined potentially dangerous dog.

When the county ordinances are not the same as the state laws, which do they enforce? Don't I have to base my defense on the specific things they are citing me for? If they are citing me for a violation of the state dangerous dog law, (which is only different from the county in that it includes "property" the county I am in specifically says "dogs must bite, attack a human" and that they are to remain a dangerous dog for the rest of its life) they wouldn't have to put public nuisance abatement restrictions on me, they could just declare my male a dangerous dog.
So, I am unclear exactly what I need to prepare for.

[Thora]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Ok - your dog, while on a leash, was attacked by another dog that was not on a leash. Your dog killed that dog.

In an of itself, that does not make your dog "dangerous". HOWEVER, the second incident is very troubling. I am actually appalled that you are defending your actions with regard to allowing your dog(s) to kill another dog when all the dogs were on a leash!

I did not allow my dogs to kill another dog. I was not out there with the dogs. I would have not allowed my dogs to sit with nothing to do but focus on another dog. I would have walked them the other way, distracted them.. I would not have just stood there, which is what my friend did, and watch the dog come closer. Why? Because I know my female will bark at other dogs and because I never know how the other dog behaves, how it is trained, if it barks, what sex it is..

My friend did not consider all these things. The other dog was a barker, it began barking at my dogs and my female took off toward it.

Yes, this is absolutely my responsibility in not training my female. I am not talking about back yard training, professional training where both the dog and the owner are taught. It makes 100% difference. Even no training at all, the correct type of collar would have given my friend enough control to hold my dogs.

I dont think that I am defending my actions, or rather my lack of actions prior to the incident in that I got professional training for the dogs leash manners and my ability to control the animals right after it happened.

I thought my friend could control my dogs. I would never want such a situation to happen. I hope this further detail makes the incident clearer.

[Thora]

Originally Posted by Adalaide78

I have a pet who goes outside on a leash. Because I can't be sure that everyone is a responsible pet owner, I am forced to keep her only in the back yard to prevent problems. I'll agree that all dogs should be on leashes and not just running around or onto other people's property but ultimately it is a pet owners responsibility to make sure their pet does not endanger someone else's. If your dog fits the description of a public nuisance, accept it, know that you have since become a responsible pet owner and make sure you remain one. It certainly sounds like you didn't start out as one. I can say for sure that if someone's dog ate my rabbit I'd sue their ass off.

Thanks for your response. This is a difficult situation and each opinion helps me to see more views.