The Jurupa Valley, California city council will discuss a proposed ordinance that would mandate all pit bull-type dogs be sterilized on Thursday, June 5, 2014. The meeting takes place in the former Sam’s Western Wear building, 8930 Limonite Avenue, and begins at 7:00 p.m.
The proposal to pass an ordinance targeting “pit bulls” was brought forward by Councilman Micheal Goodland, who compared pit bulls to “wild animals,” and likened pit bull ownership to owning “a tiger.” Goodland further advised in an interview that he’d like to see pit bulls banned altogether.
If adopted, Jurupa Valley’s ordinance would apply to “pit bull” breeds that include the Staffordshire bull terrier, the American pit bull terrier and the American Staffordshire terrier.
While the ordinance was brought to the table by Goodland, in reality, its part of a mission taken on by Riverside County, which passed the same ordinance last October, to have the ordinance enacted in all the cities within Riverside County. In an interview with KNX1070, Riverside County Supervisor Jeff Stone advised that the County’s goal is to “pass the ordinance in the remaining twenty-eight cities in the county” because pit bulls are “bred to be dangerous.”
In a report to council members, said report being based on the same information being distributed to cities throughout the county, the Jurupa Valley City Manager cited statistics and information relative to Riverside County as a whole, and not Jurupa Valley individually. Reference is also made to dog attacks in surrounding cities, and not within the Jurupa Valley city limits.
I know there are some who don’t take issue with mandatory spay/neuter laws, even when they target a specific breed of dog only, and as someone involved in rescue, I get that.
But here’s the problem…
Breed specific legislation (BSL) comes in varying forms, and we can’t pick and choose to fight it when it happens to promote something we would otherwise support (such as spaying and neutering). BSL is discriminatory, and it unfairly targets and stigmatizes a specific breed of dog based on misrepresented “statistics” and cherry-picked information and, in this case, information that doesn’t even apply to the city considering its implementation.
Please reach out to the Jurupa Valley city officials with your polite and respectful opposition to their discriminatory proposal. Let them know that mandatory spay and neuter laws fail to decrease pet populations, and statistics show they actually result in an increase in intake at animal shelters.
Moreover, explain to them that the primary reason people do not spay or neuter their pets is because they can’t afford to or because they don’t have access to affordable spay/neuter services. Because of this, when these ordinances are passed, they disproportionately target people in lower income brackets. A more reasonable, fair and effective solution is to offer free or low-cost spay/neutering services along with educational programs which will promote responsible dog ownership and create more responsible dog owners in Jurupa Valley.
Talking points opposing breed specific legislation can be found here.
Mayor and City Council