# County Tax $$ at Work..Against Working Dogs :o(



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

I just got this letter "certified" in the mail today. I think Riverside County is searching for revenue everywhere. There are at least 5 other kennels that were sent the same letter. When I tried to call "Tammie" who sent the letter, her voice mail says she will be out of the office for several weeks... 

I'll have to scan the 4 page "permit application" too so you can see it. It asks for names of dogs, micro-chip #s, handler's names, etc. 

It's not like I'm going to to complete it as I believe they sent it to me in error. I don't have "sentry/guard dogs" business. The wordage is very odd as the letter lumps Schutzhund and "Sentry - Guard" dogs together.

I had gotten a heads up as a training kennel had been targeted first about a month ago and the owners told me that in depositions they saw letters dated late August that were being sent out to "other" kennel businesses. Weird that they sent the letters certified as when the county asks for my annual kennel license it just comes by regular mail. Even last month when I asked our local animal control officer about "protection dog trainer" permits, he knew nothing about it. 

I think they want to run the rest of the businesses out of California.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Here is the 5 page Sentry, Guard, or attack Dog Premises Permit Application that was included in the mailing. It doesn't mention anything about Schutzhund or sport dogs. Seems like they are trying to be tricky with their cover letter.

The first training center that Animal Control approached with this was told they were looking at web sites to determine which dog businesses fell into this category. Weird because we don't offer training services (take money for training). IMO, they must have folks that know very little about training dogs and working dogs making decisions.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Here is the Code that they also included in the mailing.


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

It really shouldn't shock anyone....unfortunately. A stupid desperate State that is in BIG financial ruin. Now the counties can't rely on the good old State government for hand outs anymore.

Suprised they haven't gone after more breeders for not submitting sales tax on every puppy sale too.

At least they aren't trying to re-zone your property. Which is exactly what they did to a friend up in LA County. A licensed "a" rated boarding kennel with inspections?! ](*,)


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Candy Eggert said:


> It really shouldn't shock anyone....unfortunately. A stupid desperate State that is in BIG financial ruin. Now the counties can't rely on the good old State government for hand outs anymore.
> 
> Suprised they haven't gone after more breeders for not submitting sales tax on every puppy sale too.
> 
> At least they aren't trying to re-zone your property. Which is exactly what they did to a friend up in LA County. A licensed "a" rated boarding kennel with inspections?! ](*,)


We already have to pay CA Sales Tax on sales. Not on out of state sales of course. I'm waiting for them to start taxing services like boarding. :sad:

That sucks about the re-zoning. We were re-zoned a few years back, but to commercial which actually works in our favor...so far any way.

Pretty soon we'll all have to resort to bartering.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

what is the permit fee???

I don't like the labeling and wording of the whole thing. But unfortunately if you train sport, you are lumped in most likely..better hope you're not...

There are some VERY disturbing sentences in those forms...Very disturbing indeed...

And it sounds like carte blanche inspections, with a great range of "selective enforcement" issues. visits from the "local agency" who are probably a bunch of nutcases...the dog breathes heavily, he is overheated kinda nutcases, forget about ecollars or batons...or bitework period..no teasing puppies with a rag...because when they are teased they are suffering mental anguish..

*" E. Any permittee shall take every reasonable precaution to ensure that no animal is teased, abused, mistreated, annoyed, tormented, or in any other manner made to suffer by any person or any means."*

YOU CAN'T EVEN ANNOY THE DOG???? wtf??? I bet not one person from the local agency will be familiar with training working dogs...

Pretty freaking ridiculous...Sounds like if your dog barks, it could be offfensive to someone...and a violation..

And people wonder why I am against the government getting involved with dogs....

PLEASE KEEP US POSTED...cause your goofy state usually sets the trends on this type of BS...


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

Candy Eggert said:


> At least they aren't trying to re-zone your property. Which is exactly what they did to a friend up in LA County. A licensed "a" rated boarding kennel with inspections?! ](*,)


Oops...."tried" to do, not "did". This was an attempt to weed out "puppy mills" (maybe 5 if memory serves) by including legitimate kennels, boarding/breeding.

Glad to hear that the county did something in the owner's (your) favor ;-) When does that ever happen in California? Just wait until they figure out they made a mistake ;-)~

And you're right Debbie they are more interested in pandering to the tree huggers than keeping the economy and businesses viable. Stupid politicians!!


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> what is the permit fee???
> ...



Ron went online and looked under the code and it was about $500 annually. I think it's odd that the fee isn't on the application. The fees that can add up is when "they" walk around and decide you need to change structures, drainage, etc. Luckily we don't have any structures just "slapped up" because of Ron's job as a Heavy Construction Super and Engineer. However, I have many friends that do. In the "early years" I did have kennels that I was less than proud of, but that was back in the day of economic growth in CA and now we are turning into a fascist state. When my friends in Belgium speak of the gov't following you home from HomeDepot to see if they can tax their home improvements and raise their house taxes, I used to think never here, but now I wonder. 

Again, I'm not applying for this permit. I believe I do not meet the criteria. The letter mentions Schutzhund or any similar classification. However, in the code online if you do a search for Schutzhund there is nothing found. I think the county is trying to lump sport dogs and protection dogs in with "sentry - guard" dogs for hire in order to get $$ for their broke system. I don't know of any "sentry-guard" dog companies in Riverside County. Because of the liability laws here most have gone out of business or left the area.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Candy Eggert said:


> Oops...."tried" to do, not "did". This was an attempt to weed out "puppy mills" (maybe 5 if memory serves) by including legitimate kennels, boarding/breeding.
> 
> Glad to hear that the county did something in the owner's (your) favor ;-) When does that ever happen in California? Just wait until they figure out they made a mistake ;-)~
> 
> And you're right Debbie they are more interested in pandering to the tree huggers than keeping the economy and businesses viable. Stupid politicians!!


The county rezoned our acreage and several others along Wilson Valley as part of their "plan" that these properties become full blown businesses to serve our rural community. They want it to be similar to Mountain Center up near Lake Hemet. There is not enough population to support such a plan and 90% of the area now has been bought up by the county and zoned "Habitat". Good for me for riding the horses and hiking with the dogs, but not good for most businesses. It's good for my business to have the open spaces. But, this new twist with the gestapo animal control searching for $$ isn't good.


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

Debbie Skinner said:


> Again, I'm not applying for this permit. I believe I do not meet the criteria. The letter mentions Schutzhund or any similar classification. However, in the code online if you do a search for Schutzhund there is nothing found. I think the county is trying to lump sport dogs and protection dogs in with "sentry - guard" dogs for hire in order to get $$ for their broke system. I don't know of any "sentry-guard" dog companies in Riverside County. Because of the liability laws here most have gone out of business or left the area.


Hi Debbie,

I sent you a couple emails this morning via your email address. I truly wouldn't get too complacent because you don't train Schutzhund. As we know and have seen once the door is open these laws have a way of changing overnight. ie, limits for permits, now reduced or raised to something you can't possibly comply with. Now changed from SchH to any sport bite trained dog. You see the handwriting on wall don't you? 

Yes, counties are fishing for more money but more importantly is the_* intent*_ behind these fuel driven laws.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Candy Eggert said:


> Hi Debbie,
> 
> I sent you a couple emails this morning via your email address. I truly wouldn't get too complacent because you don't train Schutzhund. As we know and have seen once the door is open these laws have a way of changing overnight. ie, limits for permits, now reduced or raised to something you can't possibly comply with. Now changed from SchH to any sport bite trained dog. You see the handwriting on wall don't you?
> 
> Yes, counties are fishing for more money but more importantly is the_* intent*_ behind these fuel driven laws.


I'm not complacent. There is just some things I don't post on WDF. Check your email ;-) I'm posting all the pages I received to WDF in a non-complacent manner, don't you think? Why wasn't the LA thing posted on WDF. Or, did I miss that?


----------



## Jack Roberts (Sep 5, 2008)

This is why I would never live in California. The state wonders why people are leaving.


----------



## Mike Lauer (Jul 26, 2009)

seems you need to read that california code pretty closely

the additi9ons they made are pretty silly
"any instrument that could cause injury is prohibited" cant anything cause injury? is a leash banned? you could hang a dog or hit it with a leash. local government are morons

sorry you got caught in the middle of this


----------



## Christopher Smith (Jun 20, 2008)

Jack Roberts said:


> This is why I would never live in California. The state wonders why people are leaving.


California has NEVER had a year without population growth due to domestic migration. And is 13% of the US GDP. All of the welfare states in the middle of the country need to be thankful that California supports you. 

You have my full support in never moving here.


----------



## Jack Roberts (Sep 5, 2008)

No need to be sensitive Christopher. 

Your state is loosing tax paying citizens. Thee people who make money and pay taxes are leaving your state. You can look up this information from the federal reserve report. The very same thing is happening in New Jersey. They have lost 70 billion in wealth from people leaving the state. I lived in NJ but left after getting tired of paying high taxes. Your population may be growing but it is from illegal immigration. 

There is a reason why the state is going bankrupt. I am not engaging in politics but stating facts. 

You better get out and vote for the proposition to legalize Marijuana so that the State has a way to make revenue.


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

Debbie Skinner said:


> I'm not complacent. There is just some things I don't post on WDF. Check your email ;-) I'm posting all the pages I received to WDF in a non-complacent manner, don't you think? Why wasn't the LA thing posted on WDF. Or, did I miss that?


Sorry I'm more "clear" now ;-) I just got (today) the information I shared with you this morning. 

This was posted before I got your emails.  I didn't understand the degree that these counties are going to steam roll people. I guess we need to circle the wagons :-&


----------



## Bart Karmich (Jul 16, 2010)

I've been warning people about chipping/registering their dogs for some time. You better believe the broke governments (federal, state, county, city etc.) have already calculated how much dog tax revenue they're missing. It seems an easy thing to grab the chip registries and mail out the bills. Not in the registry? That's next -- fines for unchipped dogs. There's already a fine for not paying your dog tax, but it's too hard to enforce so they will start fining you for not making it a self-enforcing process. I realize you can chip/register with non-identifying information but you shouldn't be surprised if most people not only provide their full name but also their federal tax payer id. If you didn't give it to the registry, you probably gave it to the vet (enrolled agent). Papers please.


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen (Mar 29, 2006)

Candy Eggert said:


> Suprised they haven't gone after more breeders for not submitting sales tax on every puppy sale too.


We already have to (in Holland, in the EU AND (officially) abroad):-? :roll: 19% to be exact. Because we breed more than 20 puppies/yr or more than 2 litters we're officially in business (less than that it is hobby and I have to declare it as extra income)....so we've to pay the normal high rate tax


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Bart Karmich said:


> I've been warning people about chipping/registering their dogs for some time. You better believe the broke governments (federal, state, county, city etc.) have already calculated how much dog tax revenue they're missing. It seems an easy thing to grab the chip registries and mail out the bills. Not in the registry? That's next -- fines for unchipped dogs. There's already a fine for not paying your dog tax, but it's too hard to enforce so they will start fining you for not making it a self-enforcing process. I realize you can chip/register with non-identifying information but you shouldn't be surprised if most people not only provide their full name but also their federal tax payer id. If you didn't give it to the registry, you probably gave it to the vet (enrolled agent). Papers please.



I chip all the dogs, but never register them. As I purchase the chips if a dog becomes lost and isn't registered to an owner, then I'm contacted anyways as the implanter. That doesn't mean I owned, or sold or produced the animal. Just means I am the "implanter" and purchaser of the chips. Tattoo "too" and don't register the tattoo #, but most working folks know that OV ___ is me.


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

Selena van Leeuwen said:


> We already have to (in Holland, in the EU AND (officially) abroad):-? :roll: 19% to be exact. Because we breed more than 20 puppies/yr or more than 2 litters we're officially in business (less than that it is hobby and I have to declare it as extra income)....so we've to pay the normal high rate tax


Hi Selena,

Most breeders here do pay sales tax on puppies, since they don't want to risk an audit of their legitimate business. But there are some that just don't pay it because they are hobby breeders, maybe even more than hobby breeders but really have nothing to risk business wise. Other than pay some penalties if they get caught. Seems that the ones that do things legitimately are the ones who "pay" the most.

Ouch!! 19 % tax? Must be that VAT (value added tax) thing I've heard a bit about. I'm curious how they enforce and/or regulate kennels in Holland? How do they know how many litters/pups are produced? Are all of your pups registered with some governing body? Not like a pedigreed registry but perhaps a records database of sorts.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I agree..the INTENT does not sound good at all....keep us posted..
can't annoy or tease a dog?? ](*,)](*,)](*,)](*,)


----------



## Anna Kasho (Jan 16, 2008)

The language in that code (?) is simply bizzarre. point (i) seems to be well on the way towards banning use of pinch collars, ecollars, etc. And WTF is point (q) is or may be offensive to public decency?? Next thing someone decides that seeing testicles of a dog is offensive, and bingo, all working dogs need to be neutered. 

Whatever happened to common sense, that people feel the government needs to legislate every little detail...:-k


----------



## Ashley Campbell (Jun 21, 2009)

Good God!!! That whole thing is "offensive" to me, I say they do away with it. These are the people that can't even keep up with real animal abuse, so they're making stuff up as they go to pull in the revenue from law abiding people. It reminds me of gun control - If guns are made illegal, then only criminals will own guns. 

And my husband wants to move us to California (Sacramento area) when he get's back from Afghanistan and dropping a recruiter packet - that boy is smoking crack.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

a couple years back they banned bonfires on the beach, cause they are an "environmental hazard", the funny part when I saw they had passed it on the news there was also 100's of thousands of acres burning in wildfires..go figure...


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

They don't call the Federal Court in CA the "9th Circus" for nuthin' ha ha.

DFrost


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

David Frost said:


> They don't call the Federal Court in CA the "9th Circus" for nuthin' ha ha.
> 
> DFrost


Hey now  Can't you feel our pain?! [-o<


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

wow, makes ya rethink a few things for sure..... 

here is the full/ actual code and it does say "schutzhund"....

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0751-0800/sb_769_bill_20011001_chaptered.html


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

I think it is IMPOSSIBLE most likely to train a dog for SCH. without ever teasing it or annoying it. LOL. then comes the stick and whip...sounds even more ominous now...


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

tracey delin said:


> wow, makes ya rethink a few things for sure.....
> 
> here is the full/ actual code and it does say "schutzhund"....
> 
> http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/sen/sb_0751-0800/sb_769_bill_20011001_chaptered.html


Thanks for the info. So schutzhund is mentioned and the exact paragraph that is quoted in the county cover letter is in the CA State Code. It's not in the County Code included in the packet...


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> I think it is IMPOSSIBLE most likely to train a dog for SCH. without ever teasing it or annoying it. LOL. then comes the stick and whip...sounds even more ominous now...


But, since none of us are training to sell or as a business, but as a hobby/for fun, I think we don't meet the criteria. Or, is this wishful thinking? Just because you train a dog for fun and later may sell it because it doesn't work out for what you want it for..I don't think that's "business". For me, business is my boarding and my selling of puppies. I don't have a business specifically to train my or other people's dogs and sell these dogs for a profit. If one adds up your hours training a sport dog..there's no "profit". I'll have to see what comes of all this from the County. So far, the lady that wrote the letter is not returning to work until Sept 23rd and "unavailable". The guy in charge while she is out "Cris Lowery (sp?)" has not returned my message. I left a voice mail on Saturday morning with "Tammi's voice mail" and left a message yesterday morning with the operator for Cris". Still waiting for a call back.


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

My guess is that since they admitted (right?) that they are finding people by websites and yours shows your hobby as well as your business of boarding all on one domain name with the name of your company at the bottom of your "for sale" pages showing dogs "working", they are making an assumption..... may want to rethink that :-k

t


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

tracey delin said:


> My guess is that since they admitted (right?) that they are finding people by websites and yours shows your hobby as well as your business of boarding all on one domain name with the name of your company at the bottom of your "for sale" pages showing dogs "working", they are making an assumption..... may want to rethink that :-k
> 
> t


This old page: http://www.pawsnclaws.us/les_info.htm on my web page with Beaucerons running and jumping? Pix dated 2006? 

It has one "friends" dog for sale.

No dogs for sale by me???? 

I'm not re-thinking anything I'm doing. Re-think what that I live in a fascist state? Yeah, been thinking about that, but not re-thinking my dogs, helping my friends and rescues or such. Playing with my dogs and teaching them "tricks" such as biting natural fiber... :-o


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

if everyone thinks it just applies to the puppy mills, then it just applies to breeders, then protection dogs, then sport dogs..well soon they come for you. Soon everyone owning working dogs are singled out as the "pet" people stand by and say it doesn't apply. At some point the gov't regulates everything and everyone and it's a bit late then to do something. 

Re-think the position that I am somehow wrong for posting photos of my dogs and my friends' dogs on my web site. 

It is "freedom" to do so. It becomes a sad day in America if we must hide from the county, state, feds our dogs. What were dogs domesticated for originally? Pretty soon they will say that it's cruel to ride horses as well. It's just frustrating.

People post pixs of all sorts on their one "domain" web page -- family pixs, vacation pixs, hobbies, business, etc... So now we need to watch what pixs are on our web pages as they might be interpreted by the gov't in a manner that they can go after us??? CA really is not a business friendly state.


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

um no the whole site has multiple references to dogs for sale, litters, imported for clients, working etc.

From what I can tell you have "hostmonster" for an extra $10/ yr you can get a separate domain name and "separate" the business from the hobby with not much more than a link.... or you can attempt to fight it and pay the permit fees and possible fines.... obviously up to you and probably too late now anyway.... 

t


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

> People post pixs of all sorts on their one "domain" web page -- family pixs, vacation pixs, hobbies, business, etc... So now we need to watch what pixs are on our web pages as they might be interpreted by the gov't in a manner that they can go after us??? CA really is not a business friendly state.


Not a dog friendly state either. Its not just that you have everything on one domain name, which blurs it, but you have the domain name = your business name and then you registered it under your "kennel" name of Les Ombres Valeureux at the exact same address...(which is all public info, you may want to rethink that also)..... just makes it more difficult to separate the two when it comes to fighting it...


----------



## Tiffany Damm (Jun 1, 2010)

It doesn't rally matter if you are a business or not. At some point in the near future we are to report anything that is paid or taken in the amount of $600 or more in a fiscal year. Basically 1099 but they are going to get a lot more strict per my CPA and other advisors. Hobby, business, its not going to matter. People who breed but aren't really business have been getting nailed. All I can say is ask for cash and buy a safe. If it goes in the bank account it will be reported. They did't hire all those new IRS agents for nothing


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

tracey delin said:


> Not a dog friendly state either. Its not just that you have everything on one domain name, which blurs it, but you have the domain name = your business name and then you registered it under your "kennel" name of Les Ombres Valeureux at the exact same address...(which is all public info, you may want to rethink that also)..... just makes it more difficult to separate the two when it comes to fighting it...


Yes, the PawsnClaws, Inc is my corporation/business and includes boarding and also the breeding and selling of puppies and that's all under my Riv Co Business lic and my Kennel Lic. We do not train any dogs to guard or protect an area or train dogs for resale. I used to import dogs and resale..but, that's before the EURO$.

I just talked with the Lieut in charge on the phone and he says they want to license everyone that sells and/or trains dog(s) for police, sport, protection. 

He doesn't know how the list was compiled. I was told by the first kennel that came under scrutiny (and that was actually raided) that the list was compiled off the internet. 

So far Animal Control is being very vague. 

He read the code to me on the phone. I said that a police or sport dog or protection dog is not trained to guard an area. He said well it says guard or protect an area. I repeated that sport, protection, police dogs are not trained to protect or guard an AREA. He said "yes they are".


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Tiffany Damm said:


> It doesn't rally matter if you are a business or not. At some point in the near future we are to report anything that is paid or taken in the amount of $600 or more in a fiscal year. Basically 1099 but they are going to get a lot more strict per my CPA and other advisors. Hobby, business, its not going to matter. People who breed but aren't really business have been getting nailed. All I can say is ask for cash and buy a safe. If it goes in the bank account it will be reported. They did't hire all those new IRS agents for nothing


Hobby is my training of my own dogs and my fun. I don't think I should have to have a permit for my "fun". I have my lic and permits already for the business and have a cpa.

Breeding and Boarding is my business. The breeding is heavy in expenses and offsets the boarding profits.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

all I can say is keep us posted please...I'd like to hear how hard they push this stuff...


----------



## tracey schneider (May 7, 2008)

considering the economic state of California, my guess is they are gonna push it.... desperate times = desperate measures.... good luck and def. keep us posted...

t


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

](*,)](*,)](*,)

I'll let everyone know.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Update. I talked with the person in charge today as she was back in the office starting today after a couple weeks absence. 

She said they were researching using the internet and that anyone that houses or trains a dog(s) regularly on their property in protection, police, protection sports (and named french ring, mondioring, schutzhund) falls under this requirement of having to identify with microchip # and name of dog(s) on their property. 

She said this would be shared with fire department in case of an emergency. 

But, that there are not fees right now. I mentioned the fee of $500 on the internet. She said that the Board of Supervisors and discussing what the fee schedule will be. 

The way she explained it is that anyone owning a sport dog or protection dog falls under this code and must supply the information to the County of Riverside. Almost sounds like licensing a hand gun. :?


----------



## Mike Lauer (Jul 26, 2009)

sounds to me like that is her "interpretation" of the law
or even that county's interpretation, but that doesn't mean they are correct.

Schutzhund is a breed suitability test, not protection training.
All dogs bite. We just gauge the genetic predisposition of a particular dogs grip.

tell her having sex is legal 
being a prostitute is illegal
just because you practice doesn't make you guilty of prostitution statutes.


you need a copy of the real law as it exists on the books.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Mike Lauer said:


> sounds to me like that is her "interpretation" of the law
> or even that county's interpretation, but that doesn't mean they are correct.
> 
> Schutzhund is a breed suitability test, not protection training.
> ...


The CA Code was revised in 2001..someone posted the link on this thread a page or so back. Regretfully it was revised to include Schutzhund or any similar classification. 

The county code doesn't say Schutzhund. However, she said that Riverside Co. will be enforcing the State Code. I agree with you that what they are doing is completely wrong-headed and misguided. I didn't even know of this CA Code until last week. This has never been enforced before, but I think they are doing this so they can charge a Permit Fee as our county along with the rest of CA is broke and they are searching for $$ for the gov't.

Hey, but I just did another "first" a couple weeks ago and had to get my diesel truck smogged. This is new for CA in order to get my tags.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Since the county is researching on the Internet, I guess there is no more posting photos of dogs working with descriptive captions. From now on it will be like the following.










Unknown trainer working no-name dog in non-descript discipline at an undisclosed location <sigh> 

How demoralizing to not be able to post pixs and vids openly of our dogs since we are all proud of them and the training and owning of these dogs are a big part of our lives.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Sounds like they will use this to selectively fukk with whoever they feel like fukking with, whenever they want to..

all the things you can't do on those guidelines, are all the things necessary to train a dog for those types of work....

it still reads very very ominously, even though it seems on the surface that they are not asking for much from you...can't annoy a dog??? WTF???

Like I said you guys set the pace out there.....so keep up to date please...


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> Sounds like they will use this to selectively fukk with whoever they feel like fukking with, whenever they want to..
> 
> all the things you can't do on those guidelines, are all the things necessary to train a dog for those types of work....
> 
> ...


It all started with a well established board/train facility. They have a neighbor that is out to get them and then the Board of Sup got involved. I think it was the neighbor that was doing all the searching through the codes and found this one. 

After that the county decided to "do research" and start enforcing this code. I think it's an attempt to find revenue for a very broke county. I was told by Tammy Belmonte that they sent out about a dozen certified letters (mine being one of them) and there will be more to follow. Again the fee schedule has not been determined yet, but online it says $500 permit fee/year. Everyone that has a sport dog falls under this State Code the way the county is interpreting it.


----------



## Candy Eggert (Oct 28, 2008)

Debbie Skinner said:


> It all started with a well established board/train facility. They have a neighbor that is out to get them and then the Board of Sup got involved. I think it was the neighbor that was doing all the searching through the codes and found this one.
> 
> After that the county decided to "do research" and start enforcing this code. I think it's an attempt to find revenue for a very broke county. I was told by Tammy Belmonte that they sent out about a dozen certified letters (mine being one of them) and there will be more to follow. Again the fee schedule has not been determined yet, but online it says $500 permit fee/year. Everyone that has a sport dog falls under this State Code the way the county is interpreting it.


I have "Pets" and don't you forget it :-\":lol:


----------



## Ashley Campbell (Jun 21, 2009)

Candy Eggert said:


> I have "Pets" and don't you forget it :-\":lol:


LOL, one time where someone saying "your dog is nothing but a pet" is a good thing and not derrogatory.

I can't imagine, not a bit, that your county/state has any right to tell you what to do with your property. They better watch out, next thing you know they'll be mandating rabies shots for the Easter Bunny.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Ashley Campbell said:


> I can't imagine, not a bit, that your county/state has any right to tell you what to do with your property.


A lot of places in CA you need a "permit" to have a small controlled fire in a chiminea on your back porch...and other states as well..


----------



## Ashley Campbell (Jun 21, 2009)

Oh I've heard of it, I know we have restrictions in Denver on burning (due to pollution though) - it's just beyond something I can fathom really.

My husband is from Vacaville and wants to move back there - I told him he is welcome to but I am not going, I don't know why anyone would willingly give up rights like that.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Ashley Campbell said:


> Oh I've heard of it, I know we have restrictions in Denver on burning (due to pollution though) - it's just beyond something I can fathom really.
> 
> My husband is from Vacaville and wants to move back there - I told him he is welcome to but I am not going, I don't know why anyone would willingly give up rights like that.


Denver is a anti-pitbull city isn't it? I know when there are dog shows held there that the premium lists warn exhibitors where and how they need to manage their Am Staffs, etc.


----------



## Ashley Campbell (Jun 21, 2009)

I believe they do have bans, I don't know, I don't live there. I moved here on military orders, not by choice 
It is not my ideal place to live, I hate snow and cold weather.

However, in the same note, most military bases have banned pits and several other breeds (Fort Drums list was Rottweilers, pits, Dobes, akita's, chows and wolf hybrids) from living on base. My breed not included nor are Mals or DS - but I choose to live off base most of the time anyway.


----------



## Jeff Oehlsen (Apr 7, 2006)

Denver has a ban on pitbulls, but they are not really ravenous about enforcing it.

When I lived there, the people that got busted really were borderline retards. They were always doing something really stupid, and repetitively before they got the boot.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Ashley Campbell said:


> I believe they do have bans, I don't know, I don't live there. I moved here on military orders, not by choice
> It is not my ideal place to live, I hate snow and cold weather.
> 
> However, in the same note, most military bases have banned pits and several other breeds (Fort Drums list was Rottweilers, pits, Dobes, akita's, chows and wolf hybrids) from living on base. My breed not included nor are Mals or DS - but I choose to live off base most of the time anyway.


I know about the military ban on pits as I've boarded a few for families while they search for off base housing.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Debbie Skinner said:


> Denver is a anti-pitbull city isn't it? I know when there are dog shows held there that the premium lists warn exhibitors where and how they need to manage their Am Staffs, etc.


The next town over from us...North Chicago IL has a (semi ban) a whole group of dogs pitbull "like" need to have fist pay $50 for application.

If approved then it is $500.00 *per year, per dog* for a license for up to 2 pitbull "like " dogs...they can't even spell Pitbull correctly..not more than 2 are NOT allowed

Dogs even in your own yard if outside the kennel, by law, are supposed to be on a 4 ft leash or less...and if outside of of their kennel or fenced area, even on your property they have to be muzzled...

once this went into effect I lost one of the best dogs I ever saw in training, a one in a million dog...cause it was sold to a hog hunter in texas...
SECTION 1: Definitions “Pitt Bull” shall be defined as:
1. The bull terrier breed of dog.
2. Staffordshire bull terrier breed of dog.
3. The American Pit Bull Terrier breed of dog.
4 The American Staffordshire Terrier breed of dog.
5. Dogs of mixed breed or of other breeds than above
which breed is known as pit bulls, pit bulldogs or pit
bull terrier.
*6. Any dog which has the appearance and
characteristics of being predominantly of the breeds
of bull terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American
Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier; any
other breed commonly known of any of these
breeds.* *(my dutch shepherd would probably fall under this, according to the "experts" at animal control)*
SECTION 2: Licensing of Pit Bulls
No person shall own, keep or harbor any Pit Bull over
six months of age in any household, residence, or any
property whatsoever within the City of North Chicago
without first obtaining a Pit Bull Kennel License from the
City of North Chicago.
Applications for a Pit Bull Kennel License shall contain
the following info:
1. Name of applicant/Owner of pit bull if different than
applicant.
2. Address where Pit Bull will be kept.
3. Number of Pit Bulls to be kept on premises.
4. Method to be used to secure or restrain the
animals.
5. Name of person or persons responsible for care
and confinement.
6. Any other information requested by the City.
All applications shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable
$50.00 Application Fee.
Pit Bull Kennel Licenses shall be issued by the City/
Animal Control Officer only after the appropriate fees
have been paid and if the applicant has complied with
all applicable codes, statutes, and regulations.
Pit Bull Kennel License fees are as follows:
One Pit Bull—$500.00 per year
Two Pit Bulls—$1,000.00 per year
No person shall own or harbor at any one time within
the City of North Chicago more than two pit bulls without
written permission of the Animal Warden.
SECTION 4: Insurance
Any person who owns, keeps, or harbors a Pit Bull
must produce either renter’s insurance or homeowner’s
insurance to the City of North Chicago showing
that there is coverage to the owner for any damages
caused by the Pit Bull in the minimum amount of
$100,000.00 per person.


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Wow  I know one of the pit type dogs that I boarded was taken out of the families' yard by on base Animal Control and then DNA was done on it to determine that it was a pitbull. They adopted it as a young pup years before as a boxer-x. It did look as an adult to be pit. But, heck many mixes look sorta like a breed, but are not.


----------



## Ashley Campbell (Jun 21, 2009)

That's pretty ridiculous. When we were still at Ft Drum NY, the ban was put into effect (sometime in late 2008 early 2009) anyway, I used to have a little pitbull bitch. We were grandfathered in, no questions asked. They were not allowing new pitbulls on post though. We did have the MP's come to the door and check over all our dogs paperwork and such once though - that turned out to be a nightmare.

I think here they allow them with a temperament test, but I don't know 100% on that. I no longer have any pits nor do I intend on moving onto Carson.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Debbie Skinner said:


> Wow  I know one of the pit type dogs that I boarded was taken out of the families' yard by on base Animal Control and then DNA was done on it to determine that it was a pitbull. They adopted it as a young pup years before as a boxer-x. It did look as an adult to be pit. But, heck many mixes look sorta like a breed, but are not.


my dutchie X is a pit-shepherd mix in the eyes of AC here...been told as much...by a "certified" dog expert from AC...


----------



## Debbie Skinner (Sep 11, 2008)

Joby Becker said:


> my dutchie X is a pit-shepherd mix in the eyes of AC here...been told as much...by a "certified" dog expert from AC...


Of course your dog is as many have never seen a Dutchie before so it must be a Mal or GSD x with a pit to give it that "brindle" color.

For years with Beaucerons, people give me their expert opinions of what my dogs are mixes of...Rottie, Dobie mixed with GSD are the most common. They say because of the color being bi-color they must be part rottie or dobie. Well, I say maybe they are part doxie since they come in that color too..geeze..


----------

