If anyone has visited before, you might notice the new name.  I didn’t really care for the old one, and it was nothing more than a place-holder until I came up with something better.  I’ve settled for the moment on “Waldo’s Shack,” named for my newest little baby, Waldo.  Waldo is an 8 month old MinPin-Labrador-Blue Heeler mix.  I call him a Mini Lab-Heeler, but most people seem to think he’s a chihuahua.

This news article comes from the KARE11 news team in Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN.

OLIVER, Wis. — Authorities in northwestern Wisconsin are looking for the person who threw a dog off a 30-foot bridge, breaking its back.

A passer-by rushed the 1-year-old chocolate Labrador to a veterinarian but it had to be euthanized.

The dog’s owner is Bob Mittlestad of the town of Oliver, near the Minnesota border. He says he returned from out of town Saturday night to find his door open. The dog was gone but nothing else was missing.

A number of fishermen reported that a dog had been thrown off a bridge that afternoon.

Douglas County deputy Sgt. Ed Anderson says authorities were following up on a new lead Tuesday.

Anderson says there’s no reason to think the dog wandered onto the bridge by itself, and even less reason to think it jumped. He says a person was almost certainly involved.

(Copyright 2009 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

I will update this story as new information develops.

Story comes from the Hutchinson Newspaper (www.hutchnews.com)

Incident prompts call for ban on pit bulls

By Darcy Gray – The Hutchinson News - dgray@hutchnews.com

Hutchinson resident Chris Glass is hoping the city will consider banning pit bulls after his grandmother was recently attacked by one while walking her own dog down a local street.And Glass says he knows there are two sides to the controversial issue of banning pit bulls: Many supporters say “it’s the owner, not the dog” who is ultimately responsible for any vicious actions by a pit bull, he said.

“I don’t think that’s true at all,” Glass said. “In this case, it’s a really nice, young couple who owns this dog, and they said the dog had always been nice. This kind of blows that theory away.”

Glass’ grandmother, Margie Brown, 79, of Hutchinson, was walking her pet sheltiedown Sherman Street in her neighborhood on July 19 when a pit bull mix attacked her, according to Hutchinson police reports.

The pit bull jumped the fence and ran to attack the smaller sheltie, Glass said. When Brown tried to get the pit bull off her dog, Sadie, the pit bull knocked her down, attacked Brown, “then attacked her dog again,” Glass said.

Brown was taken to Promise Regional Medical Center for dog bites and lacerations to her leg following the attack.

“She’s still in the hospital,” Glass said, adding that his grandmother would probably be there for another week. “She was out for a day, but her leg got swollen and really red. She has a tissue infection from the dog bite because the teeth went so deep.”

Sadie, Brown’s “best friend and companion,” was seriously injured with punctures to its skull, requiring numerous stitches, Glass said. The sheltie is making a recovery, though.

Laura Medina, 26, of Hutchinson, was subsequently summoned to municipal court for allowing a dog to run at large. Although Medina did not return calls from The News, Glass said the dog’s owners have already offered to pay for Brown’s medical bills.

Debra Kramer, a Hutchinson animal control officer, said the pit bull that attacked Brown had been taken to the local animal shelter. On Friday, Kramer learned the dog had been released to its owner “for immediate transfer to a family member’s home in Las Vegas.”

In general, in the case of vicious dogs, a judge would consider whether the dog had attacked anyone before and if the dog could be taken somewhere else, Kramer said. Depending on the circumstances, a judge would determine whether the dog needed to be euthanized or whether “nothing happens to the dog,” she said.

Some dogs have territorial aggression, Kramer said, but if the dog jumped over the fence to attack Brown’s dog, it would have “clearly completed a vicious act.”

“It would be different if she was walking around on their property,” Kramer said. “Citizens should be able to walk down the sidewalk.

“Not all pit bulls are mean – it does have to do with how they were raised – but I think they do have a predator disposition.”

Kramer believes the dog was probably going after Brown’s dog and did not intend to hurt Brown.

“I do see more aggression from pit bulls,” she said of her experience as an animal control officer. “If pit bulls show aggression toward animals, it’s more of a predator-prey instinct, but if there’s people aggression, they were probably taught that.”

Now, Glass hopes the city of Hutchinson will take up the issue of a possible pit bull ban.

“Personally, I’d like to see the law changed on pit bulls,” he said. “I’d like to see them banned. There are several other towns that have done it – I don’t know why we can’t.”

According to previous reports by The News, Turon, Salina, Dodge City, Holcomb and Pratt have all implemented a ban on the breed since 2004. Liberal also has a pit bull ban, said Kramer, who previously worked there as an animal control officer.

Neither Reno County nor the city of Hutchinson has a breed-specific ban in place.

Earlier this month, the city of Wichita enacted new restrictions on residents who own pit bulls. Owners of pit bulls there are required to have their dogs implanted with a microchip and spayed or neutered within six months, unless they have a breeder’s license, according to The Wichita Eagle.

Hutchinson City Council member Cindy Proett acknowledged Glass had expressed concerns to her about implementing a ban. Proett also noted she lives across the alley from Brown and was not far from the scene after Brown was attacked. Other neighbors had already called for help, she said.

“I told (Glass) I can’t promise to absolutely enact an ordinance, but we can look into it,” Proett said. “It would pull quite a bit of opinion from each side, but at the same time we really need that.”

Research would need to be done to find out how many reports of vicious dogs are attributed to pit bulls, she said, along with how many dog bites in the city are attributed to that breed of dog.

“It’s a highly charged, emotional issue, and we do need to look at it and see if this breed is a problem in our town,” she said. “We will hear from pit bull owners who’ve had them for many years and think that they’re the most gentle, loving animals.

“It’s definitely something to look at, but I’m not going to make a commitment to either direction. We need some expertise on (the issue). It’s easy when something happens to maybe overstep it without thinking.”

Vicious Dog Ordinance

The city of Hutchinson has not banned its residents from owning pit bulls. It is illegal, however, to have a vicious dog. Here’s how the ordinance reads:

“It shall be unlawful for any person to keep or harbor any vicious dog within the city. Dogs determined to be vicious shall be euthanized or otherwise disposed of by order of the municipal judge.”

According to the ordinance, the definition of an owner is any person, firm, corporation, organization or department possessing or harboring or having the care or custody of a dog.

The term “vicious dog” is defined as:

* Any dog with a known propensity, tendency or disposition to attack unprovoked, to cause injury to, or otherwise threaten the safety of human beings or domestic animals;

* Any dog which because of its physical nature, or vicious propensity, is capable of inflicting serious physical harm or death to humans and which would constitute a danger to human life or property if it were not kept in the manner required by this chapter;

* Any dog which, without provocation, attacks or bites, or has attacked or bitten, a human being or domestic animal; or

* Any dog owned or harbored primarily or in part for the purpose of dog fighting, or any dog trained for dog fighting.

Those who violate the ordinance can be found guilty of a misdemeanor and may be punished by a fine. In addition, the court can order destruction of the vicious dog.

A judge’s decision to euthanize a dog would be based upon the frequency or severity of any injuries to a human being or domestic animal from the dog, along with a determination that confinement of the dog is not likely to prevent future harm to human beings or domestic animals.

Chime in if you have a thought.

The Liberty Legal Institute has setup a website dedicated to preventing what I would call the most vile act of vandalism one might imagine on a war memorial.  I urge anyone who reads this to visit their site, www.donttearmedown.com, watch their presentation on the issue, and if you feel as strongly as I do, please sign the petition.  The precedent must be set here.  Help us stop this madness now before they begin trying to rip the headstones from Arlington because they are “religious icons” on government land.

In the near future, this will be my own ramblings on events in the dog world.  I have a sizable pack myself, and I will post pictures and info on all of them in the near future, and I’ll bring forward dog-related (and other pet-related) news stories that I see or hear about, as well as news on my own pack and local stuff.  I may also post non-pet-related content from time to time more or less as a means to let off steam and to do my small part to bring important issues to public attention.

If anyone sees this before I delete it, please leave a comment and let me know.  This is new and exciting territory for me, and I want to hear from you, even if all you have to say is “this is one lame-a$$ blog, man.”