As many of you know, I have ranted about the dog laws in Canyon County repeatedly ... and will continue to do so. If you are going to write to me about my opinions and would like information based on my extensive research, please note a few things.
1. If you are wanting to change the dog laws, but you are not in compliance with the dog laws already on the books, please understand that your arguments fall on deaf ears. You start out with people not taking you seriously because you've done nothing about the laws until you're up against them. It doesn't bode well for you.
2. If you write to me and find out that I'm a sarcastic bitch, tough shit. Don't write to me. Ever.
3. If you've got non-herding or non-livestock guardian type dogs, and are hoping to base your defense on something like the "Right To Farm" Act, please don't rely on me for support. It. Won't. Happen. I am not interested in trying to pass a law that gives puppymills the "right to farm" puppies. I don't care if your dogs are registered with the Allbreed Kissmyass Committee or one of the lesser registries, if your dogs are registered at all, or if you claim your dogs are purebred, or if they're mutts. If they are not herding dogs or livestock guardian dogs, they do not belong anywhere near the "Right to Farm" act.
4. If you're writing to threaten me with legal action, please have more experience in law than I do, and have a clue what you're talking about. See deaf ears comment earlier.
Do I think the dog laws in Canyon County need changing? Absolutely. $2,000 for a conditional use permit for anything over five dogs is outrageous, and is not likely to lead to very many people volunteering to stick their heads up and request one.
Do I think there should be a personal kennel license and a commercial kennel license, where the differences would be the amount of allowed dogs and the price of the license? Hell no. Why not? Because handing out a "commercial" kennel license is giving people permission to be a legal puppymill so long as they lay out enough money. Unfortunately, because there are people in this world who don't care about the dogs, and will produce a bazillion litters and keep their breeding dogs in filth and squalor, there needs to be laws. And I think those laws should hold true for everyone ... same number of dogs ... same rules to follow. With one exception...
Police dogs ... do they fall under the same pet laws that pets do? If they do, that should be changed.
Service dogs ... do they fall under the same pet laws that pets do? If they do, that should be changed.
Search & rescue dogs ... do they fall under the same pet laws that pets do? If they do, that should be changed.
Herding dogs ... They fall under the same pet laws that pets do, and that should be changed.
Livestock Guardian dogs ... They fall under the same pet laws that pets do, and that should be changed.
Because I deal with the latter two, I can speak most knowledgeably about them. The simple solution is to deem them as livestock, and then they would fall under a different set of rules. However, does that mean all herding breeds whether or not they are actively working? Is it only the listed herding breeds that it would apply to? Or would mixed breed working dogs be okay, too? If someone claims their dogs are working dogs, how does that get proven? Is there manpower enough for an officer -- who has been previously educated on what a herding dog does -- to go out and validate such claims? This is where it gets complicated. But then if we lump in non herding dogs, basic couch potato, useless ankle biter biscuit eaters ... it blurs the lines completely. And puppymills jump and grasp at anything ... especially when their backs are up against the wall. It's one of the reasons I haven't pursued this any further. I haven't figured out a good enough plan to propose.
Maybe some day I will. But until then, I will actively oppose any such legislation attempting to deem non-working dogs as livestock. I promise.