Boston pit bull ordinance: balance between dog-ownership rights and public safety

/Home/Breed Specific Web Sites/Pit Bull

2/28/2009

In 2004 the city of Boston, following a string of incidences in 2002-2003, enacted a local pit bull ordinance that shows a level of restraint not included in many of the proposed pit bull bans. This ordinance attempts to protect the general population without excluding pit bulls from living within the city.

The first limitation is on headcount. Unlike other breeds of dog with a household limit of the dogs, pit bull owners are limited to two dogs of that breed.

There is an additional licensing fee of $50 in addition to the $6 neutered/spayed dog license fee or $17 for an intact dog. In addition to the extra fee, owners must submit a photo less than 30 days old as an aide to identification of individual dogs by the Boston Animal Control Officer.

This ordinance does include a mandatory spay/neuter provision, unless a licensed veterinarian states that there would be high risk to the life of the dog due to age or health.

Owners must also have written permission of the landlord if they are not a home owner, to specifically house a pit bull or pit bull mix.

When not in a secure temporary enclosure (dog crate) and away from the owner’s property, there is a muzzling requirement for all pit bulls regardless of temperament or training.

The dogs registered owner must be over the age of eighteen so that they understand their legal and moral obligations. There is no allowance for a transfer of ownership of a pit bull within city limits without notifying the local dog officer.

The dog owner also has a legal obligation to post “Beware of Dog” or “Pit Bull Dog” signs to notify anyone entering the property that a dog of the pit bull breed is on the premises.

There are several notifications required of Pit Bull owners, including: if a dog threatens or attack a human or animal, if the dog is at large, if the dog dies, if the dog is permanently re-homed, if a female becomes pregnant or gives birth. It is interesting that the town council included this in spite of the spay/neuter requirement of the ordinance. As with many aspects of this law, practicality seems to have actually outweighed politics and rhetoric.

An outstanding aspect of this ordinance is that it acknowledges that baiting or harassing a dog can mitigate the liability of both the dog and owner in the instance of a dog bite. Don’t poke the bear – or the pit bull, is actually incorporated in the law.

While the law is somewhat restrictive, rather than banning the breed entirely the City of Boston responded to real statistics of pit bull bites within city limits to find a way for the dogs to stay, but keep the citizens safe. While I do not personally agree with breed-based restrictions, this practical approach speaks highly of the City of Boston.