Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee changes ‘dangerous dog’ language to exempt dogs defending owners or other animals
Summary
The North Adams code-review committee revised the dangerous-dog definition to clarify that dogs should not be declared dangerous when the victim was committing a crime or when the dog was provoked by abuse of the dog, its owner, or another animal; the amendment passed 3–0.
The North Adams code-review committee on Thursday approved revised wording for the city’s dangerous-dog ordinance to make clear that dogs acting in defense of their owner or another animal should not be declared dangerous.
Chair (the presiding committee member) read the proposed language into the record: “No dog shall be declared dangerous or potentially dangerous if the threat, injury, or damage was sustained by a person committing a crime, or if the dog was provoked by a person abusing the dog, its owner, or another bridal.” After brief discussion about the purpose of the change and prior input from a member who had advocated including protection for other animals, the committee moved and seconded the amendment. The motion carried with three ayes.
Committee members said the revision is intended to reduce ambiguity when officers or adjudicators determine whether an animal should be classified as dangerous. The change will be incorporated into the draft code language the clerk will forward to general code and the Animal Control Board as appropriate.
