Who Cares about Dog Laws?
The City of St. Paul has OK'd a new ordinence stating that anyone cited for animal abuse or neglect more than twice in five years will not be permitted to register another animal.
This ruling was covered by the St. Paul Pioneer Press in a one sentence article online, stating the barebones information, but no information on when or why the oridence had been introduced, what the repercussions of the ordinence could be, or what the history of animal abuse in St. Paul was in order to need such an ordinence.
The Star Tribune article in contrast hashed out the story with interesting details on why the law was instituted, as well as detailed accounts of the incidents which lead the law to be impossed. According to the Strib, "The ordinance is aimed at people who train dogs to fight, puppy mill operators and negligent pet owners."
The deeper coverage of this story seems to make sense in light of the coverage violent dog attacks have had in last few weeks in both print and television.
After reading the fully developed story by the Star Tribune, the Pioneer Press article which reads for its entirety: Headline: "Tougher Dog Law"
"Under the new St. Paul ordinance, anyone cited for animal neglect or abuse two or more times in five years is barred from registering another pet. Owners may appeal a license denial."
It is somewhat appaling to see coverage like this, because it looks primarily like a last ditch effort to cover an issue which could impact locals significantly.
Neither article however talked about what the law had been prior to this ruling about animal abuse.
The Animal Legal and Historical Center website provides a chart with links to specific minnesota statutes dealing dog law, and according to the Minnesota Statute 347.21 the state laws on dog control are supplemental to the local provisons that are enacted by ordinences.