[911_993_911]

I live in Iowa and 5 1/2 months ago, my American Bully got out of my yard and traveled into the city limits where the local animal control picked him up. I live outside the city limits and am not required to have a dog license. They claim that once he crossed over into the city limits, that they now have jurisdiction over the dog and due to their Breed Specific Laws are not allowing me to have him back. I hired an attorney and have exhausted all legal avenues to getting the dog back.

My dog, 'Sin', has the best temperment ever. He has never bitten or even growled at anyone. He is a family pet for me and the neighborhood kids played with him in the back yard. He has never ever had any problems with or even showed any signs of aggression. So I was/am in total disbelief when they told me he was so vicious they couldn't even take him out of his cage to do an aggression test on him. They said he lunged at the cage fence and tried to bite any one who even walked by him - so they were going to euthanize him. I asked if I could witness the behavior personally because I just couldn't believe what they were saying but my request was denied.
Someone told me back when this whole thing started, that it was because 'someone wants that dog'. I said they were crazy. Sin is very well behaved and his Razors Edge bloodline has given him champion grade stunning looks, so....well, maybe.

The whole thing seemed a little hokey though when two months later they still had not killed this animal they said was 'so vicious'. So that's when I got an attorney to try and stop them from killing him. They agreed to let a behavior specialist outside their group assess him for aggressiveness. Well, guess what - their behavior specialist said he was not aggressive and could be placed out for adoption. Now, I'm told the shelter who had signed their affidavit, as previously requested, taking responsibility for the dog if he was deemed adoptable, is not an acceptable shelter to them. Now, he has to be placed outside the state of Iowa, which my lawyer says is 'because they don't want you to get him back' and they are suggesting a shelter in Colorado.

I love that dog to death. He is a part of my family and of my heart. If I have no legal rights to get him back here in Iowa so now my only option is to have someone in Colorado adopt him from the shelter there and give him back to me. I would pay to the person that adopts him, any fees or cost associated with adopting him from the shelter. So that person would not be out any money what so ever for helping me out.

They are probably going to send him out there this week so I don't have much time at all to get things lined up.

Sin didn't harm anyone or anything and yet I've seen dogs that actually bite people go back to their owners here. The only reason I can't have him back is because of his breed. And if I don't get him back, how do I know that who ever wanted him in the first place isn't ending up with him? I am so grateful that he is not being put down because he does not deserve that at all. He is the best dog ever and the only wrong done was by me in not being a responsible pet owner.

If you live in Colorado and would be willing to adopt my dog from the Humane Society in Longmont, then give him back to me, please respond quickly so we can get it set up and be the first in line to adopt him.

If you don't live in Colorado but know someone who does, could you please ask them if they would be willing to help us?

Thank you so much for any help you can give me.

[XU8i6ysK]

Methinks you are leaving something out of the story.

[teewHettive]

I'm confused. They won't let you have your legal property back because of his breed? Do you live in an area with a ban or something? Do they claim you lack proof of ownership?

[911_993_911]

In an effort to shorten the story in hopes that more people would take the time to read it, I did leave parts out. It doesn't change the story though. They took my dog, had him assessed for aggression by Dr. Emily Weiss, and she confirmed exactly what I've said all along - he is NOT vicious - and they still will not let me have him back.

The law here says that if a 'vicious dog' is picked up two times without a license, the owner can not have the dog back. If they do have a license, that pick up time increases to three. All and only the pit bulls breeds are listed and deemed 'vicious' simply because of their breed.

This is the 2nd time they have picked up my dog with out a license. Did I mention that I do not live inside their city limits and not one of their other city oridinances apply to me.

The first time they picked up my dog, a year ago, they told me what a great dog he was and said they didn't have any problems with him at all. But before they would release him to me, I had to sign a piece of paper that deemed him as vicious because he is one of the pit bull breeds - as determined by the 'breed test' they do on all dogs they pick up (which consist of a man looking at him and saying, yep, he's a pit).

I do realize that the problem here is me not being a responsible pet owner. There should have never been a way out or even an opportunity for Sin to leave the yard. I have learned so much in the last 6 months and so much more to learn also.

The laws do not prohibit me from getting another dog. In fact, animal control said I can get another pit bull if I want to. Seems like they should let me have the one back that has been assessed and is not vicious or aggressive rather than taking a chance that the next one I get actually could be.

So he's picked up the first time, then the dog they didn't have any problems with is declared to be a vicious dog (paper I had to sign) before being released, then he is picked up a second time. Now I can't have him back because the ordinance says that if an unlicensed vicious dog is picked up two times, the owner can't have him back. My opinion is that this is only the first time he has been picked up as a 'vicious dog'.

[teewHettive]

Wow, ok. Good luck.

[Madjostok]

I really hope some one can help you.

[BronUVT]

You're asking someone to break the terms of what will likely be a legally binding adoption agreement to re-home a dog to someone with a track record of not being able to contain him or even properly license him? You realize that anyone who would do that would also be legally liable if that dog then escaped again and attacked someone?

I know you love your dog but I think it's best to let this one go.

[Lypepuddyu]

when two months later they still had not killed this animal they said was 'so vicious'. .

Have you actually SEEN the dog recently? Will you be able to SEE that the dog is on the truck to Longmont?

I don't trust "shelters" one bit.

Carla

[furillo]

I agree with Carla and the few posters who said let this one go. I understand that the city ordinance laws do not apply to you, but did you explain that to them? Also, your dog has gotten out before...that would have made me think to myself "hmm...well...if this ever happens again, I should have him licensed JUST in case...better safe than sorry"
Maybe you think the rules don't apply to you, but clearly they do...or else you wouldn't be in this predicament in the first place.
Sorry you lost your dog due to your own negligence =/ I hope someone adopts him and gives him a loving home.

[Pheboasmabs]

WOW again. You can't contain your dog, even after being warned and signing paperwork making sure that you must have been well aware of the consequences of not licensing your dog, and not containing your dog. Some people never learn and others just feel they are above the law. You admit you have not been a responsible dog owner and now you are asking someone to adopt a dog and hand it over to a person who admits being irresponsible.

It is folks like you that are the real reason there is BSL gaining ground all over the country. Let me guess, your dog in not fixed?

[IRYzouNv]

i dont feel bad 4 u

[Madjostok]

It's the 2nd time the dog has escaped, a year apart, accidents happen. Christ.

[BronUVT]

One time is an accident. Two times is negligence. If you know your dog can escape, you keep him contained. Period.

You don't have to like the laws where you live but you do have to obey them. There are consequences. And asking other people to violate a legally binding agreement also doesn't sit well with me. She's damn lucky the dog wasn't put down.

[Madjostok]

Personally, I don't see an issue with her/him asking for help, even if what she/he isn't exactly legal, I'd like to see the dog go home.

It was a year apart, if it was a few days apart, maybe I'd think differently but you also don't know the story behind the dog escaping.

When my two dogs escaped three times in two weeks (months ago now) that was a accident but you'd call it something else. I don't mind calling me neglectful for when they got out but for a dog that has escaped a year apart, that's ridiculous to claim that the owner is irresponsible.

[Madjostok]

To me, saying it wasn't a accident, a whole year apart doesn't make sense. When my two escaped 3 (I think it was 3 times, could have been 2) in two weeks, it was a accident because of the reasons behind them escaping, that is fine it some one wants to say they weren't a accident because that's a lot of escaping in two weeks but this dog escaped a year apart from the last escape.

[BronUVT]

Personally, I don't see an issue with her/him asking for help, even if what she/he isn't exactly legal, I'd like to see the dog go home.

It was a year apart, if it was a few days apart, maybe I'd think differently but you also don't know the story behind the dog escaping.

When my two dogs escaped three times in two weeks (months ago now) that was a accident but you'd call it something else. I don't mind calling me neglectful for when they got out but for a dog that has escaped a year apart, that's ridiculous to claim that the owner is irresponsible.

To me, saying it wasn't a accident, a whole year apart doesn't make sense. When my two escaped 3 (I think it was 3 times, could have been 2) in two weeks, it was a accident because of the reasons behind them escaping, that is fine it some one wants to say they weren't a accident because that's a lot of escaping in two weeks but this dog escaped a year apart from the last escape.

It IS irresponsible. Responsible dog owners don't let their dogs escape. And pit bull owners are held to a higher standard for this exact reason. If you value your dog, keep it contained. And yeah, 3 escapes in two weeks is also not an accident - it's negligence. Your top responsibility as a dog owner is to protect your dog, and letting it escape to be hit by a car, attacked by people or put down by pit-bull hating animal shelters means you FAILED at your job.

I'd like to see the dog go to A home.

[IRYzouNv]

It IS irresponsible. Responsible dog owners don't let their dogs escape. And pit bull owners are held to a higher standard for this exact reason. If you value your dog, keep it contained. And yeah, 3 escapes in two weeks is also not an accident - it's negligence. Your top responsibility as a dog owner is to protect your dog, and letting it escape to be hit by a car, attacked by people or put down by pit-bull hating animal shelters means you FAILED at your job.

I'd like to see the dog go to A home.

yup exactly right

[Madjostok]

Responsible owners make mistakes at times as well, no one is perfect and while Pitbull owners are held to a higher standard, that doesn't mean they don't make mistakes. I have seen a few very responsible owners make a mistake here and there.

I guess we'll never agree but in my eyes, he is a responsible owner and he had a accident.

[XU8i6ysK]

Just as I thought......

[furillo]

It's the 2nd time the dog has escaped, a year apart, accidents happen. Christ.

It's not even the second time escaping that is the issue...the problem is that after escaping the first time, she gets the dog back...she still didn't license him which would have meant she could have had one more chance to get her dog back