Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 4324

TX-RPOA E-News
> From RPOA Texas Outreach and
Responsible Pet Owners Alliance
"Animal welfare, not animal 'rights'
and, yes, there is a difference."
Permission granted to crosspost.

May 15, 2009

HB 2732 regarding barking dogs in certain counties has been referred to the Senate Intergovernmental Relations Committee. No hearing has been set at this time and time is running out for passage through the Senate. If we can stall this bill, it will die in committee. Only two weeks left until the state legislature adjourns and only TWO bills left to defeat out of 14 anti-pet bills filed. This bill and HB 3180, the Breeder Bill.
HB 2732 allows barking dogs in certain counties to be declared a public nuisance if a reasonable person finds the noise objectionable due to the time of day the noise is produced; the proximity of the production of the noise to other premises; and whether the sound is recurrent, intermittent, or constant.

Please call, fax and email the Senate Intergovernmental Relations Committee members below to OPPOSE this bill:

Chair: Sen. Royce West (Dallas)
Vice Chair: Sen. Robert Nichols (Amarillo-Midland-Odessa)

Members:

Sen. Mario Gallegos, Jr. (Dallas)

Sen. Dan Patrick (Houston)

Sen. Jeff Wentworth



The Honorable Royce West (Democrat) - District 23 (Dallas)
P.O. Box 12068
Capitol Station
Austin, Texas 78711
(512) 463-0123
(512) 463-0299 fax

royce.west@senate.state.tx.us[/email]



The Honorable Robert Nichols (Republican) - District 3 (Jacksonville/Conroe/Nacogdoches/Lufkin)
P.O. Box 12068
Capitol Station
Austin, Texas 78711
(512) 463-0103

(512) 463-1526 fax
robert.nichols@senate.state.tx.us



The Honorable Mario Gallegos (Republican) - District 6 (Galena Park/Houston)
P.O. Box 12068
Capitol Station
Austin, Texas 78711
(512) 463-0106
(512) 463-0346 fax

mario.gallegos@senate.state.tx.us[/email]



The Honorable Dan Patrick (Republican) - District 7 (Houston)
P.O. Box 12068
Capitol Station
Austin, Texas 78711
(512) 463-0107
(512) 463-8810 fax

[email]dan.patrick@senate.state.tx.us



The Honorable Jeff Wentworth (Republican) - District 25 (San Antonio)
P.O. Box 12068
Capitol Station
Austin, Texas 78711
(512) 463-0125
(512) 463-7794 fax

[email]jeff.wentworth@senate.state.tx.us

__________________
SKY
___________________
Author of the novel "Follow Jennifer"

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 4044

help me understand why a constant barking dog should not be declared a nuisance?

__________________
the oldest ride in the park, but still the longest line.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 4324

There are ALREADY local laws to cover noises & barking dogs.
If you read the bill you'll see this is one the ways AR people can eliminate dogs kept in yards & outside kennels, etc. - just another way to chip away at pet ownership with the AR goal of ZERO pet population.

__________________
SKY
___________________
Author of the novel "Follow Jennifer"

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 4324

This is an H$U$/THLN bill.
HB2732 is aimed at areas where MOST of us with hounds and/or hunting dogs live. It is easier for the AR people to target the huge rural areas where residents will not be aware of the the bill & it could go unapposed into legislation, giving the AR people power to PERSECUTE & PROSECUTE those with outside kennels - a HUGE step. Remember - the AR people do not follow the rules (they LIE) - and when they target particular individuals, by the time those individuals are proven innocent, the targeted individuals have already lost their dogs, while suffering from damage to their reputation & also accumulating HUGE debt. Those who report "noise" often solicit the help of neighbors without ANY supportive validation. This scenario is a matter of record for victims across the country.

__________________
SKY
___________________
Author of the novel "Follow Jennifer"

Last edited by skyblu on 05-15-2009 at 03:41 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 4044

what are the other issues you were refering too other than barking dogs

__________________
the oldest ride in the park, but still the longest line.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 4324

If you are interested in preserving your rights to own pets of ANY type you SHOULD (by now) be aware of the NATIONAL H$U$/PETA/ASPCA, etc. legislative bills filed against pet owners. They have filed 20+ bills in 34 states to advance the cause of removing the ownership and breeding of dogs, cats & other domestic animals. Each bill includes items relating to particular facets of ownership, housing, breeding or training of pets. Each bill is given a name to create support from those who do NOT read the entire bill or from those unable to comprhend the ramifications for pet owners if those bills are passed into law. They ALL contain provisions that remove pet ownership rights.ALL of these bills add more restrictions & do not actually address the title they are given. I suggest that you go to the Texas legislative pages on the internet & PAY ATTENTION to the true goals of these bills. I participated in RPOA Lobby Day in Austin on 8 April & it was a real eye-opener as to how many legislators have NO IDEA about the H$U$ goals & agendas. They seldom read the whole bill because they are lengthy & when HSUS/THLN presents them with glib lobbyists, many legislators unknowingly vote for these AR bills, thinking they are actually HELPING ANIMALS & PEOPLE! The ONLY way to make legislators aware of the AR agendas is to phone their offices and send them emails & FAXES.
I joined a local "PAWS" group to "keep tabs" on their agenda. With my information we were able to shut them down because of facts I obtained. Otherwise, this whole COUNTY would now have restrictions on numbers of animals, housing and also require licensing. They already had purchased an ACO truck & had the city onboard with their plans.

__________________
SKY
___________________
Author of the novel "Follow Jennifer"

Last edited by skyblu on 05-15-2009 at 04:38 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 4044

i asked you a simple question. maybe you didnt read the bill yourself. yea im against hsus, im also against barking dogs and just blindly taking orders.

__________________
the oldest ride in the park, but still the longest line.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 4324

81R7103 EAH-D

By: Eissler H.B. No. 2732



A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to the regulation of barking dogs by certain counties as a nuisance.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
SECTION 1. Subchapter B, Chapter 343, Health and Safety Code, is amended by adding Section 343.0112 to read as follows:
Sec. 343.0112. BARKING DOGS IN CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. (a) This section applies only to the unincorporated area of a county with a population of 275,000 or more.
(b) It is a public nuisance under Section 343.011 to allow the barking of or another noise made by a dog outdoors on premises in a neighborhood if a reasonable person would find the noise objectionable.
(c) In determining whether a noise is objectionable to a reasonable person under this section, the following factors may be considered:
(1) the time of day the noise is produced;
(2) the proximity of the production of the noise to other premises; and
(3) whether the sound is recurrent, intermittent, or constant.
SECTION 2. This Act takes effect immediately if it receives a vote of two-thirds of all the members elected to each house, as provided by Section 39, Article III, Texas Constitution. If this Act does not receive the vote necessary for immediate effect, this Act takes effect September 1, 2009.
This law has been used by AR groups in other states when AR people have actually solicited false statements from neighbors in order to prosecute/persecute individuals with outdoor kennels or dogs in yards with doghouses. The bill is being used to "tighten the noose" on areas where we can kennel multiple dogs. There are ALREADY local laws to deal with unwanted/nuisance noise. This bill puts ALL dog owners under the hammer because those accusing the dog owners only need to make CLAIMS to cause loss, inconvenience and financial distress. Remember, H$U$ "trains" ACO officers that are blindly accepted by city, county & state officials, giving these so-called ACO officers the authority to remove your animals with all sorts of additional claims against the animal owner.

__________________
SKY
___________________
Author of the novel "Follow Jennifer"

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 4044

i dotn see any difference in this law than any other ordinance already in place in most everywhere. if you have barkign dogs you are going to have problems. i understand we have to fight peta and want what not, but im not sure how anyone can expect to own dogs in residential areas that bark alot w/o having problems. understand letting some things go by can be a slippery slope, but so can cryign wolf all the time

__________________
the oldest ride in the park, but still the longest line.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4502

quote:

---

Originally posted by rance56
i dotn see any difference in this law than any other ordinance already in place in most everywhere. if you have barkign dogs you are going to have problems. i understand we have to fight peta and want what not, but im not sure how anyone can expect to own dogs in residential areas that bark alot w/o having problems. understand letting some things go by can be a slippery slope, but so can cryign wolf all the time

---

__________________
2012 National Grand Show Champion, World Show Bluetick Female CCH GRCH 'PR' Southern Flame Blame it on the Rain (Rain)
2012 Purina Show Bluetick Breed Winner GRCH 'PR' Southern Flame Grt Balls o' Fire (Jerry Lee)
2013 World Champion Bluetick, 2013 AO Overall Bred By winner GRCH 'PR' Sexy and I know It (breeder)
2015 AO Overall Dual Champion NTCH GRCH 'PR' Sexy and I know It (breeder/owner/handler)
2016 Grand American Overall Dual Ch, Overall Show CHampion NTCH GRCH 'PR' Sexy and I know It

AKC CSG, UKC CCH GRCH 'PR' Southern Flame Bad News Bandit (Bandit)
2010 National Grand Champion Bluetick
2013 AO Bluetick Stud Dog winner

CCH GCH 'PR' Southern Flame Elvira - the one that started it all

southernflamekennel@earthlink.net

RIP Southern Flame Elvira (the cornerstone of the kennel) 5/16/02-1/17/14

RIP Southern Flame Scarlet (the lone Redbone) 5/11/01-7/19/13

RIP Southern Flame Wild Irish Rose (Rosie) 6/15/09 - 3/12/15

RIP Southern Flame Too Hot to Trot (Bonnie) 3/27/07 - 4/20/15

RIP Southern Flame Bad News Bandit (Bandit)

RIP Southern Flame Triple Trouble (TT) 12/17/04 - 11/19/16

RIP Southern Flame Blame it on the Rain (Rain)

RIP AdeleMay's a Smokey Bandit (Adele)

RIP Southern Flame I Like Ike (Ike)

RIP Bella the Beagle

Bear, Jerry Lee, Camo, Maybellene, Lacy, Thor, Sissy, Merle, Tina, Bridgette - the Blueticks, Hollie - the Aussie

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 4324

Thank you!

__________________
SKY
___________________
Author of the novel "Follow Jennifer"

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Jacksonville FL
Posts: 4044

here is the thing, if i called my state rep and said there is this law is being voted on and its trying to back door my rights as a dog owner. what proof in the bill could i show him. dotn point me to some other bill, im asking about this one specifically.

__________________
the oldest ride in the park, but still the longest line.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2008
Location: the late, great west
Posts: 104

Here is what I see. The animal rights folks are trying to get mandatory spay and neuter laws passed in almost all states right now, Texas included. Within these mandatory spay and neuter laws there is usually a clause that says you can apply (and supposedly - ha!) get an exemtion for your dogs (an 'intact license') if you want to pay the fee. HOWEVER if your dog causes problems and is declared a 'nuisance' (read barking while hunting, read barking treed, read barking at dinner time, under this proposed law all 3 could get you a nuisance violation) you will loose your 'intact license'. So therefore your dog is spayed/neutered against your will and quite possibly you will lose your 'intact permit' for your other dogs as well.
I would (and do) inform people to fight against ANY bill endorsed by any animal rights organization. I don't see it as crying wolf at all.
Little by little they will take our dogs and our hunting from us, they know how to play the word game system of politics...like I just showed you above. They are trying to make sure they can leave no loopholes for intact dogs when they get MSN laws passed.
The only way I can see to defeat them is to fight fire with fire...

A newspaper reporter stood on the street and asked folks if they thought there was a problem with apathy in the world...99% of those who answered said they didn't know and didn't care.

__________________
http://na-dem-koyo.webs.com/

Last edited by barktreed on 05-15-2009 at 07:26 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2004
Location: CT
Posts: 1022

3) whether the sound is recurrent, intermittent, or constant.
With this in the bill if your dog barked two times every hour your in trouble

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location: OKLA
Posts: 1125

My point of concern would be, could a person be offended by hounds on trail or tree? I read this bill, and all it says is a"reasonable person" has to object to your barking dog. If your "reasonable person" lives on a half-acre spot where you have permission to hunt on 5000 acres, can the barking of hounds on trail or tree offend him according to this bill, or is it just meant for yard dogs. The problem with these ambiguous bills is the way the legal establishment can interpret them, most of the time it isn't in the best interest of the hound person.

Thanks

__________________
Home of:
NTCH Honky Tonk Joe
GRNTCH The Duke
Dual GRNTCH Wendy
GRNTCH Cola
GrNtCH Honky Tonk Rock and Roll
Dual GRCH Bumper
Dual CH June
Dual CH Jill

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jun 2003
Location: Washington, NC
Posts: 3315

A prime example of the "Nuisance Barking Laws" is what happened to someone I know in Martin county. He is a farmer who had hunting dogs in a pen on his farm. Someone bought a lot adjoining the farm and built a house that is not even close to the dog pens. The new home owner used the barking dog law to force the farmer to remove his dogs and pay a large fine. The County officials said that was not what the laws was designed for but the courts upheld the complaint and fines.

Remember WHO will be enforcing the new laws if they pass, people TRAINED by HSUS. Look at Louisville, Ky and the mess they are having with pet ownership laws.

Look at another post on this board where a neighbor is on a campaign to force the writer to get rid of his dogs. The complainant comes and park in this man's yard to get the dogs barking and then video tapes them barking and takes the video to the police. There are NUTS out there that are after taking away YOUR DOGS, especially your hunting dogs.

__________________
Bill Harper
Washington, NC
252-944-5592

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 1522

Our country was founded because people were looking for FREEDOM. The most important Freedom was Freedom from Government. Regardless of what freedom the Government takes away from anyone we have all lost Freedom, while the Government grows in power and control. If it's a smoking law or seat belt laws it all about loosing your FREEDOM of Choice.
Barking dogs is often a complaint that ANTI hunters use to force hunters to spend huge amounts of money and time defending themselves against legal proceedings. I don't know many hunters that enjoy hearing their hounds bark their brains in the dog pen. The hunter may not always be right however the same can be said about the person filing the complaint.
The difference is the hunter has to spend his own money to defend himself, The persons expense who filed the complaint is paid by the TAX payer. If both had to spend their own dollars I suspect their would be far fewer complaints filed. When anyone looses their rights to the Government, We all LOOSE

__________________
Jess
Light Foot English

"They are often imitated but never duplicated"

Last edited by hellcat on 05-16-2009 at 10:17 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged