Mayor: Let's Ban All Dogs from Public Events

[AbbyK9]

Here's the proposed text of the legislation. From - http://www.watertown-ny.gov/archives...l%20Agenda.pdf

It shall be unlawful for the owner of any dog to permit or allow such dog to be present at any “Special Event” in the City or to be upon City owned property and within 20 feet of any City owned swimming pool or playground equipment located within any City park or playground. For purposes of this section, a “Special Event” shall mean the following activities upon City owned property: The Farm & Craft Market; The 4th of July Concert at Thompson Park; or The Jefferson County Fair. A “Special Event” shall also include any other specifically approved event conducted, at least in part, upon City owned property and which will or may involve significant public assembly.

The posting of signage by the host of a Special Event, to the effect that dogs are not permitted at the Special Event, shall be presumptive evidence that said event will or may involve significant public assembly and will be conducted, at least in part, on City property.

The prohibition herein shall not apply to an owner whose dog is confined within an automobile, crate, cage or similar structure that prevents a dog from causing personal injury or damage to personal property.

The prohibition of this Section 81-5 (C) may be waived by special approval of the City Manager or his or her designee.

There shall be excluded from this section any owner of a dog which is defined under Section 108 of the New York Agriculture and Markets Law, as the same may be amended from time to time, as a guide dog, hearing dog, service dog, working search dog, therapy dog, detection dog, war dog, or any other dog which may be utilized by law enforcement agencies within the jurisdiction of the City, or which are professionally trained service animals utilized by persons with disabilities.

Note that this is the current draft, not the final proposed legislation. This was up for discussion at the city council on 5 December. One of the council members voiced some concerns about sports games -

Council Member Smith asked about t-ball games and if a family brings a dog but is not within 20’ of playground equipment.

Mrs. Corriveau stated that if it is an organized game and they asked to use the City field, dogs can not be brought there.

So not only would this law ban dogs from events and near playgrounds, dog owners could no longer bring their dogs to their children's organized games - T-ball, softball, soccer, etc. if they are played on city fields.

[DharmasMom]

I think they should ban all children from public events but allow the dogs.

[LaRen616]

Originally Posted by DharmasMom

I think they should ban all children from public events but allow the dogs.

[x0emiroxy0x]

I read a few articles on this that mentioned there was a GROUP of young children petting the dog when the boy and his mother approached. The mother said she pet the dog first, then it says when they boy pet the dog "from behind" the dog "turned around" and attacked.

Is it weird to anyone else that the dog was surrounded by a group of kids being pet, the mother pet it, then the dog suddenly decided to attack the little boy?

If the little boy was petting from behind, obviously the mother was to the side of the dog and it could see her.

MY mother taught me don't approach horses from behind or you will get kicked and don't pet strangers dogs unless you ask first.

This situation is an example of an idiot parent, not a mean dog.

I NEVER got bit by a dog...because I NEVER pet a dog without asking and NEVER pet a dog that had its ears pinned back, wasn't looking at me, or was tensed up.

COMMON SENSE PEOPLE!!!

WHy do you think restaurants are banning kids? It isn't that kids have gotten worse through the ages....it is because parenting skills are NONEXISTENT nowadays!!

*rant over*

[LARHAGE]

You don't approach horses from behind because they can't see directly behind them without turning their head. I'm sorry but this dog's reaction was way over the top, this was an extremely aggressive attack, not a startled little nip, this dog had no business being in public and I'm sure this was not the first time he bit. I would never bring a dog that I knew had an unstable temperament out where children would be likely to pet them, the parent did everything she could and was assured the dog was ok, this dog was not, simple as that.

[DharmasMom]

The fact is nobody knows what really happened. Like every story there is 3 sides- the mother's, the owner's and the truth, which is probably somewhere in the middle.

Was the dog feeling overwhelmed and no one noticed the signs? Did the kid run at the dog from behind? Was the dog just crazy and snapped? None of us has those answers. What we do know is that a kid is permanently disfigured, a dog will die, and I am sure the owner of the dog will get sued to the ends of the earth and back and it is the fault of the 2 adults who were responsible for each of them. And now the town council wants to go crazy and ban all dogs from everywhere.

That to me is completely nuts. If a child get seriously hurt riding a bike, do we ban all bikes? Thousands of people (including children) are killed in car crashes every year so should we ban all cars? If a kid gets hit by a car when he runs into a road chasing a ball, do we then ban cars from driving on that road forever?

What happened to this kid is horrible and tragic and it could have been prevented. But horrible, tragic preventable accidents happen to people everyday in this country and we don't go crazy and decide to start banning things. For some reason people have decided to focus on dogs and decided that they are inherently "dangerous". So now we have BSL's that are murdering good dogs all over this country every day and now there is a town that wants to ban dogs in public. I'm sure more towns will follow. When will people start taking PERSONAL responsibility for their actions and those of their pets and children? Personal responsibility means that we don't need sweeping legislation to handle isolated cases. It means that EACH person takes responsibility for their own. It means that if you have a dog that has a history you don't take it out in public and if it doesn't have a history, don't set it up for failure by letting a half dozen kids get in it's face. And as a mother don't let your 2 year old near a large dog that you don't know. I don't care if there are 15 other kids playing with that dog. If there were 15 other kids playing in the middle of the highway would you let your toddler do it? Use some common sense. You DON'T know the dog and 2 year olds DON'T know how to approach dogs or read dogs.

All of this could have been prevented if people would use a little bit of common sense but sadly we are in a critical short supply of that in this country but we have more than enough of a sense of entitlement and "It's not my fault" to make up for it.

[AbbyK9]

^ This.

None of us, including myself, know exactly how this bite happened because none of us were at this event when it occurred. I doubt even the dog owner or the mother really know what happened until the child was on the ground being bitten. If you asked them to recount what happened in the minutes before, they probably wouldn't know whether the dog was stressed, whether the dog was startled, whether the child stepped on a paw or pulled a tail.

But it's irrelevant. It sounds like everyone was being responsible and doing the right things up until the bite. The dog's owner was in a grassy area with her dog on a leash. Other children were petting the dog without any issues. The boy's mother asked if her child could pet and petted the dog first. Then, suddenly, the child winds up behind the dog and is bitten.

I don't think it's ever a good idea for a toddler to be allowed to pet a strange dog, regardless of whether the dog is big or small, friendly or not, leashed or not. Little kids shouldn't touch strange dogs. I think in hindsight, the mother is trying to make it out like she was already "uncomfortable" about this particular dog, that she "sensed" the dog was a danger ... which, I think, isn't in her favor because it's like saying, "Yeah, I thought the dog was dangerous, but I still let my toddler pet him." Makes no sense.

But I digress.

The whole point is, this is hurting everyone else who has dogs and is responsible with their dogs. MY dogs love events, love kids, love being petted, hugged, kissed. LOADS of dogs don't. And I don't think it's fair I should no longer be able to do things with my dogs that I enjoy doing because this accident happened.

[Mrs.K]

The whole point is, this is hurting everyone else who has dogs and is responsible with their dogs. MY dogs love events, love kids, love being petted, hugged, kissed. LOADS of dogs don't. And I don't think it's fair I should no longer be able to do things with my dogs that I enjoy doing because this accident happened.

Mine do too.

[Chicagocanine]

Well I'd say the same thing about breed bans... Just because some (insert breed here) was involved in an attack, should all dogs of that breed have to suffer?

A city in Iowa banned pit bulls because a meter reader was bitten by one. That seems pretty weird to me for several reasons-- meter readers are probably at risk from dog bites due to their job, and I don't see how banning a breed is going to help...

Now they have also told a man he can't have his service dog because it's a pit bull mix:
Retired Chicago cop?s service dog not welcome in Iowa town - Chicago Sun-Times

Of course that part is against the ADA but the breed ban for pet dogs I'm sure is there to stay.

[Rott-n-GSDs]

As far as the incident with the boy getting attacked by the dog, I agree with selzer. This was not a "correction" or a "warning nip," it was a drawn out attack. The dog should be put down. I can't believe the amount of people blaming the "idiot mother" for not being able to read dog language. How many dog owners cannot read dog language? How many dog "TRAINERS" cannot read dog language?

If it was as reported where the mother asked and the boy pet the dog and was then attacked (even if it happened awhile after the mother originally asked) I put the blame on the dog owner... that kind of dog should never have been out in public.

NONE of my dogs would bite if a child "pet their back," pulled their fur, poked their eyes, or even fell on them. They might, if continually provoked, give a correction/bite. BUT if suddenly a child ran up and threw themselves at my dogs and I was not quick enough to prevent contact, I am confident that my dogs would not bite. If I was not confident, I would not bring them out in public. I certainly would never allow my dogs to be tormented to the point of them feeling like they need to handle a situation. If my dogs are uncomfortable in any situation, they immediately look to me. If I cannot remove what's bothering them, I remove myself and my dogs. (example: I was once in a situation where a little boy kept running up and screaming in my dogs' faces. I couldn't locate the parents or whoever was in charge of the boy, so we left).

But, everybody wants to bring their dogs everywhere without a care of whether or not the dog is comfortable in every situation. Rather than accepting they have a "dog in need of space" (a term I've seen thrown around lately), they try to FORCE their dog to accept every situation, to "socialize" them so they will accept it. Guess what? Not every dog's going to be okay with joe blow public pawing them, with or without permission.

The more idiot owners that try to force their dogs to be social butterflies when it simply isn't their personality, the more bans and restrictions are going to be placed, and the more justified the authorities are going to be in placing those bans. I'm not sure what to do about it... other than continue to try and educate so the good owners outnumber the idiot ones.