‘This isn’t about Chihuahuas’: North Dakota House advances bill to clamp down on ‘nuisance dogs’

BISMARCK — North Dakota lawmakers unleashed private jabs on each other throughout a debate over whether or not to tighten rules on free-roaming neighborhood canines.

The state Home of Representatives voted 56-34 on Monday, Feb. 13, to cross

Home Invoice 1364,

which might develop when a canine might be declared a public nuisance and put to loss of life. The Senate will take up the laws subsequent month.

Supporters of the proposal sponsored by Rep. SuAnn Olson, R-Baldwin, say it could shield individuals on their very own land from menacing canines with delinquent house owners. Opponents argue roving canines are an area drawback and a sweeping state regulation would consequence within the pointless killing of pets.

Burleigh County resident Sean Johnson

instructed the Home Judiciary Committee

final week he instructed the laws to Olson after a “harmful Rottweiler” terrorized his neighbors on personal property for almost two years.

Johnson mentioned neighbors sought the assistance of police, however officers instructed them the state’s public nuisance regulation solely applies if a canine torments somebody on a public highway.

The invoice goals to shut what Johnson known as “a authorized hole” by affirming in regulation {that a} wandering canine could also be thought of a public nuisance if it harasses individuals on their very own property.

In a spirited attraction to defeat the laws, Rep. Steve Vetter instructed lawmakers Monday he believes the committee erred in giving the proposal a “do-pass” suggestion.

The Grand Forks Republican mentioned his colleagues on the panel didn’t perceive that canines declared a public nuisance by a decide obtain the loss of life sentence.

He cited

an present state regulation

that claims, “If the decide finds that the canine is a public nuisance… the decide shall order any peace officer to kill and bury the canine.”

Vetter contended that Johnson’s plight ought to have been addressed by means of an area ordinance, not a state regulation.

“One individual’s drawback that may very well be handled domestically mustn’t overrule the desire of lots of of 1000’s of North Dakotans who’re managing their animals domestically,” Vetter mentioned.

The 2-term legislator instructed the chamber it could “both bury a canine or bury this invoice.”

“All canines could go to heaven, however it’s not our job to ship them there sooner,” Vetter mentioned.

Rep. Bernie Satrom, R-Jamestown, mentioned Monday he has a private connection to the invoice that he’s co-sponsoring.

When a neighbor’s canine got here onto his property and “went for” his grandchildren, Satrom mentioned he needed to fend off the animal. He believes North Dakotans ought to have a authorized channel for coping with that type of scenario if it turns into recurrent.

“This isn’t about chihuahuas. It’s not about little issues,” Satrom mentioned. “It’s about having the chance if one thing’s in your property to have the ability to deal with it.”

Vetter talked about throughout final week’s listening to that he owns two Chihuahuas.

Olson insinuated that Vetter had exaggerated concerning the impact of her invoice, noting that house owners must show themselves unwilling to regulate their canine on a number of events earlier than it rises to the extent of a public nuisance.

“This isn’t an intent to be punitive, to be killing canines proper and left, however merely to supply an avenue for individuals to allow them to take pleasure in their very own property,” Olson mentioned Monday. “You should not must be afraid to exit in your yard.”