Forwarded message - for info, please visit
http://www.anc.org/pets/pets_article.cfm?identifier=2002_0622_tag

New Tag to Identify Aggressive Dogs
by Sherry Morse
Posted on June 22, 2002

New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey recently signed into law a bill
that requires owners of dogs deemed dangerous to attach a scarlet-
colored tag to their pet's collar.

The dogs also must be muzzled and walked on a three-foot leash under
the new law. A dog will be deemed dangerous if he or she severely
injures, kills or poses a threat of death to another animal, or even
mildly injures or poses a threat of injury or death to a person. A
dog will not be considered dangerous if he or she behaves
aggressively only after being provoked.

The new requirements stem from complaints about aggressive dogs from
residents of Princeton. Owners who fail to comply with the new law
are subject to seizure of their dog and a fine of up to $1,000.

Sources

The New York Times
June 16, 2002, p. C3
Once You Curb Your Dog, Make Sure It is Muzzled
by John Sullivan

New Jersey Legislature
www.njleg.state.nj.us/2002/Bills/A0500/298_T1.HTM
A 298

© 2002 Animal News Center, Inc.

More info. forwarded from: PetLawPupsandKitty@yahoogroups.com

In New Jersey, "dangerous dogs" must now wear a scarlet tag (is that
a Scarlet "D" - sorry, I couldn't let it slide) on their collars, be
muzzled and walked on a three-foot leash. Dangerous dogs are ones
that severely injure, kill or pose threat of death to another animal
or even mildly injure or pose threat of injury or death to another
person. This does not apply if he agressive behaviour was due to the
dog being provoked. The penalties can include seizure of the dog and
$1,000 fines.

Below is the new wording of when a dog is "dangerous". It is good to
note that the way the law reads, the dog is not automatically
considered dangerous - each case begins with the legal presumption
that the dog WAS provoked and is NOT dangerous and it is then the
municipality's job to prove that it was not provoked and is
dangerous - so often we see this the other way around when it comes
to animal laws. It also appears good because people who are
responsible caretakers but have dogs that are cranky/grumpy/whatever
(like one of mine is) do not lose their dogs automatically or have
them subject to instant death. My dog hates other dogs and
automatically attacks so I always muzzle her when we go to the vet's
office, contain her in my fenced yard, or take whatever precautions
are necessary to not have her around other people's dogs.
Unfortunately, the first time she did this at age 7 it was completely
out of the blue and I had no inkling since she had such a good
relationship with my older dog who had died about 6 months earlier
(since then her attitude towards other dogs has really gone down
hill). Under this law, if something happened with a dog, it appears
that the person would be required to do what I already do as a
precaution but the dog would not automatically lose its life - it is
a shame that it requires a law but unfortunately not everyone
is "responsible".

http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/2002/bills/a0500/298_t1.htm

7. a. The municipal court shall declare a dog to be potentially
dangerous if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the dog:

(1) caused bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(a) to a
person during an unprovoked attack, and poses a serious threat of
bodily injury or death to a person, or

(2) severely injured or killed another domestic animal, and

(a) poses a threat of serious bodily injury or death to a person;
or

(b) poses a threat of death to another domestic animal, or

(3) has been trained, tormented, badgered, baited or encouraged
to engage in unprovoked attacks upon persons or domestic animals.

b. A dog shall not be declared potentially dangerous for:

(1) causing bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(a) to a
person if the dog was provoked, or

(2) severely injuring or killing a domestic animal if the
domestic animal was the aggressor.

For the purposes of paragraph (1) of this subsection, the
municipality shall bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that the
dog was not provoked.

Posted on SHARE Yahoo group Jun 27, 2002