A fond farewell to four dead Texas pet bills

By the time Westminster
Kennel Club champion "Stump"
visited the Gov, these bills were
dead. AP/Harry Cabluck

The Texas Legislative session ends June 1. Some bills have missed their deadlines for being voted on by the House and are considered dead. However, it is always possible for entire bills to be attached to other bills as amendments. Here are four bills the dog fancy is glad to see die:

HB 1982 Author: Martinez Fischer (D-San Antonio) Relating to the regulation of dangerous and vicious dogs; providing penalties.
Last Action:      The committee heard testimony against the bill from dog clubs, humane groups and the Texas Veterinary Medical Association, and did not vote.
     This bill would have allowed dogs to be declared “vicious” and face the same sanctions as “dangerous” dogs without ever being at large or physically harming anyone. It also banned any off-lead activities for dogs over 40 lbs. in cities over 1 million people.

HB 458 Author: Leibowitz (D-San Antonio)  Relating to limitations on the number of dogs at a residence in certain counties.
Last Action:   Did not get a vote by the full House.
      This bill would have allowed counties to impose dog limit laws in unincorporated areas, changing the rules on pet owners who have bought homes with no HOA or dog-related deed restrictions.

HB 925 Author: Dutton (D- Houston) Relating to the handling of or caring for a pit bull breed of dog by certain minors; providing penalties.
Last Action:   Did not receive a hearing in a House committee.
      This was a completely unnecessary breed-specific bill, as cities can already impose laws regarding juvenile delinquency. However, each session a Representative from Houston finds it necessary to introduce a breed-specific bill which is always soundly defeated. This one did receive honors, though -- the Texas Observer bestowed it with a "Bad Bill" award. Congrats, Representative Dutton!

SB 634 Author: Seliger (R- Amarillo) Relating to the unlawful restraint of a dog.
Last Action:     Many hunting clubs, dog clubs and pet owners testfied against the bill at the committee hearing. The committee never voted on the bill.
      This bill would have prohibited tethering under any condition and mandated 150 square foot kennel requirements even for short periods of time. The requirements could not have been met by hunting kennels, lower income or elderly dog owners. A statewide bill of this nature with no money or resources to help people comply would have resulted in more dogs being surrendered to shelters, at-large dogs and dog bites.