On the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2021, I was lying on the ground with my 10-pound mixed breed dog in my arms, trying to save his life. We had been on a walk one block from our home, when a loose Staffordshire Bull Terrier attacked us.
He knocked me to the ground and grabbed the lower half of my dog. As this dog tugged, pulled and shook my dog, all I could do was scream for help. No one was around. I feared my dog would die in my arms within minutes if no one came to help us.
A good Samaritan did come to our rescue.
After two weeks in the ICU and multiple surgeries, my dog was still alive but was losing the battle against infections from multiple bites. To save his life, he had to have a leg amputated.
I required medical attention for bites to my hand and arm. I still have PTSD.
Given the severity of the attack, I assumed some measures would be taken by Animal Control to prevent another attack. I was wrong. Nothing in Connecticut law requires it.
The state has statutes that impose strict liability on dog owners, but Connecticut is one of only eight states without an effective dangerous dog law. Some municipalities like Hartford, New Haven, Stamford, New Britain, Danbury and Enfield have opted to enact their own dangerous dog ordinances. The rest have only Connecticut General Statutes to refer to. Title 22, Chapter 435, Sec. 22-357(c) leaves the disposition of any biting dog, or other animal, to the discretion of the Chief Animal Control Officer, commissioner or other officer.
In the judgement of the Animal Control Officer in charge of my case, the dog who attacked us was not dangerous enough to warrant any action.
I subsequently contacted several of my state and local government officials about taking action on this public safety issue. I submitted a statement to my local legislative council. Other than sympathy for my experience, I got no response.
If my experience was an aberration, I could understand this lack of response. However, five of my neighbors (past and present) who live within five blocks of each other have been the victims of unprovoked attacks while walking their dogs in their own neighborhood. Those are just cases I know personally.
In Hamden, between 2019 and 2021, one dog was responsible for five attacks on other dogs, a dog owner and a cat (who died) before restrictions were put in place. Five attacks? With a dangerous dog law, proactive measures would have been taken after the first attack.
As I read the statutes, there is nothing requiring animal control officers to protect the public from a dog who has been responsible for an unprovoked attack. Animal control officers may use their own discretion. There is nothing stating what criteria they are using or what behavior they consider dangerous enough to place restrictions. A dangerous dog law would list objective criteria instead of leaving it to someone’s subjective opinion.
If there were an objective standard, there would be no way one dog would be able to be responsible for FIVE attacks.
I researched the prevalence of newsworthy dog attacks in my town spanning several years. In addition, I obtained years of my town’s Municipal/Regional Animal Control Officers Monthly Reports. I found unprovoked dog attacks occurring as often as three times a month. Those reports only track attacks that are reported to Animal Control.
I contacted the Connecticut Department of Agriculture, Animal Control Division, for annual dog bite statistics. They do not track that information. I requested that Animal Control find out if the dog who attacked us had a bite history. Nothing happened. I attempted to get this information myself, only to be told I would need the owner’s permission.
All this said to me was that a violent unprovoked attack by a dog on a dog and a human on public property does not matter. It is not a reason for concern or action. Had a person been severely injured or killed, then it would have mattered.
The Michigan State University Animal Legal & Historical Center states:
“Since fatal dog attacks and dog bite injuries are within a State’s public health, safety, and welfare police power standard, 42 states and the District of Columbia currently have statutes that regulate dogs believed to exhibit or engage in violent behaviors.”
A “dangerous dog” usually refers to the act or actions of a dog that puts the public or other animals at risk for injury or death, a dog who:
Engages in or is trained for animal fighting
Aggressively bites, attacks, or endangers or has inflicted severe injury on a human being on public or private property
Any dog which, when unprovoked, bites a person causing an injury
Kills a human being
Injures a human being
Severely injures or kills a domestic animal, which may include livestock, while off the owner’s property
Has, when unprovoked, chased or approached a person upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public grounds in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of attack
Aggressively attacks in a manner that causes a person to reasonably believe that the dog posed an imminent threat of serious injury to such person or another although no such injury occurs; provided, however, that the acts of barking, growling, or showing of teeth by a dog are not enough.
Once the determination is made and the owner(s) have had the opportunity to appeal the decision, typical requirements may include:
Dog must be leashed and muzzled when off property.
Dog must be securely confined when on property.
Dog must be spayed/neutered, microchipped or tattooed, the fees for which are paid by owner.
Dog must be registered on Dangerous Dog Registry.
Owner must post a clearly visible dog warning sign on their property.
Owner must maintain liability insurance of not less than $100,000.
We all want to live in communities where we feel safe. Ignoring the risk to public safety that some dogs pose is negligent and reckless. Victims of dog bites and attacks that are not dramatic enough to make the news are still victims of violence who deserve the protection that a dangerous dog law can provide.
Elizabeth Chambers lives in Hamden.