Breed Specific Legislation

Displaying 111 - 120 of 160
Titlesort descending Summary
OH - Reynoldsburg - Breed - 505.35 Control and harboring of vicious or dangerous dogs and other vicious or dangerous animals.


In Reynoldsburg, Ohio, no person shall own, keep, or harbor any vicious dog, which includes any pit bull dog. A violation is a misdemeanor of the second degree, and the vicious dog shall be seized, impounded, and humanely destroyed.

OH - Warrensville Heights - Breed - 505.20 Pit Bull Terriers.


In Warrensville Heights, Ohio, no person may own, keep or harbor a pit bull terrier, defined as a Staffordshire Bull Terrier, an American Staffordshire Terrier, or any mixture. No exceptions are made,

OH - Wooster - Breed - 505.14 Dangerous and vicious animals.


In Wooster, Ohio, no person may possess, harbor or keep a vicious animal, which includes any Pit Bull dog. A violation is a misdemeanor of the first degree. The dog or other vicious animal may be removed from the City or be humanely destroyed.

OH - Youngstown - Breed - 505.191 Prohibition of Pit Bull Terriers.


In Youngstown, Ohio, no person may own, keep, harbor or possess a Pit Bull Terrier, with an exception for dogs previously registered. However, such dogs must be kept in compliance with mandatory requirements, such as being properly confined or kept on a leash with a muzzle. The owner must also post a "Beware of Dog” sign and keep liability insurance. A violation is a misdemeanor and may result in the dog being impounded and humanely destroyed.

Overview of Breed Specific Legislation
Overview of Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) Ordinances


Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) is created when a municipality or a county believes a certain breed of dog poses a hazard to the public health, safety, and welfare. While this website does not contain every ordinance relating to BSL, it does contain many samples of how BSL can be constructed. For more information on your city's or county's ordinances, please contact the city or county of interest.

Overview of States that Prohibit BSL This document lists the states that prohibit the regulation of dogs by local governments based on breed, commonly known as breed-specific legislation. The laws are divided into two general categories: (1) states that prohibit breed-specific legislation (BSL) in all animal regulation (10 states); and (2) states that prohibit BSL in dangerous/vicious dog laws (16 states). In total, there are approximately 22 states with some sort of anti-BSL legislation (combining both (1) and (2) together, and not counting DE, IL, and VA twice because they have both such laws). The pertinent part of the legislation is included in this list as well as a link to the actual laws. A further distinction has to be made in the application of some of these laws in the dangerous dog category. Some laws state that municipalities may not regulate dangerous dogs based solely on breed while other laws simply say that breed cannot be used to prove a dangerous dog declaration.
Overview of the Laws Regulating Rescue and Foster Care Programs for Companion Animals This overview examines how states deal with foster care and other non-profit rescue organizations. It details how states define such organizations and what laws may affect their operations. The paper also discusses potential legal issues that arise with pet rescue and fostering.
PA - Dangerous - § 459-507-A. Construction of article (dangerous dogs) This Pennsylvania statute provides the construction of the dangerous dog chapter in the state. It outlines the exceptions under the dangerous dog law as well as the enforcement procedure for one who is attacked by such dog. It also specifically states that any provisions of local ordinances relating to dangerous dogs are hereby abrogated. Further, a local ordinance otherwise dealing with dogs may not prohibit or otherwise limit a specific breed of dog.
Pit Bull Bans and the Human Factors Affecting Canine Behavior


This Comment examines the reasons for breed-specific legislation and looks at some of the human factors behind the “breed” problem. It argues that instead of targeting specific breeds, municipalities should enforce existing animal control laws and punish the human behavior that leads to dog attacks. This Comment concludes that laws addressing human behavior, rather than breed bans, are a better long-term solution to further public safety and animal welfare.

Pages