|
Title: RPOA - Oppose HB 998 restrictions for dogs 20 lbs or more!! Post by: jls41 on February 11, 2011, 08:09:44 am This is one reason why EVERYONE should push the Falzone/LSWDA Working Dog Preservation Bill Proposal!! There will be MANY more just like this to come!!
EVERYONE should contact their State Representative and tell them to OPPOSE this Bill!!! February 10, 2011 HB 998 by Rep. Ruth Jones McClendon, D-San Antonio, is a bill that all dog owners should oppose, not just hunting dog owners! Rep. Leo Berman, R-Tyler, wants something done "that would require total security of any animal that is known to attack human beings." Rep. Chuck Hopson, R-Jacksonville, has been quoted in the media as saying a bill is also being drafted by his office. So HB 998 is only the beginning of a very long and heated legislative session as usual. They don't think this bill goes far enough. It would also be very easy to make this bill breed specific. From our friends at US Sportsmen: http://www.ussportsmen.org/page.aspx?pid=2665 Texas Bill Would Cost Sporting Dog Owners Big Bucks 2/10/11 A bill introduced in Texas would require sporting dog owners to purchase liability insurance for many of their dogs. Take Action! Texas sportsmen should contact their state representatives today and ask them to oppose House Bill 998. Tell them the bill will create a financial hardship for many responsible sporting dog owners. House Bill 998, introduced by Rep. Ruth McClendon (D- San Antonio), would require owners of unneutered male dogs weighing 20 or more pounds, that are not restrained at all times, to carry a minimum $100,000 insurance liability policy. A dog is only considered restrained if it is either kept in an enclosure or kept on a leash under the immediate control of a person at all times. Failing to purchase the insurance would be a class C misdemeanor. Under the bill, many sporting dog owners will be forced to buy the insurance policy, neuter their dog, or face criminal charges. In addition, a large number of sporting dog breeds weigh more than 20 pounds and would be considered "unrestrained" under the bill's definition when hunting, training, or field trialing. Even a securely tethered dog would be considered unrestrained by this bill. "It is completely unreasonable to require a dog owner who wants take their dog hunting or to even play fetch in an unfenced back yard to require them to purchase liability insurance to do so," said Jeremy Rine, U.S. Sportsmen's Alliance associate director of state services. "In addition to being costly for dog owners, this bill sets an arbitrary weight threshold - what happens if you have a dog that regularly fluctuates between 19 and 20 pounds? This bill is unnecessary and unreasonable and should be opposed by all dog owners alike." To find your state representative's contact information, please visit www.ussportsmen.org/LAC Title: Re: RPOA - Oppose HB 998 restrictions for dogs 20 lbs or more!! Post by: Milam County Hog Hunter on February 24, 2011, 01:30:43 pm I just got a letter back from my state representative thanking me for writing to share my opposition to house bill 998........I really hope my voice was heard
Title: Re: RPOA - Oppose HB 998 restrictions for dogs 20 lbs or more!! Post by: slimpickins on February 24, 2011, 01:33:14 pm Good deal, thanks for the support.
Title: Re: RPOA - Oppose HB 998 restrictions for dogs 20 lbs or more!! Post by: jls41 on February 24, 2011, 03:52:12 pm Thanks Milam County!! Every person helps in this crusade to help protect our working dogs!!!
|