License and Registration

Please...

©David J. Arthur, February, 2009 Los Angeles County Animal Control came to the home of Dawn Martinez-Byrne. Three times, between February 11th and the 13th, Mrs. Byrne found herself face to face with California’s latest rendition of animal control. Mrs. Byrne, who suffers from a form of epilepsy, depends on her Standard Poodles Mia, Mercedes, and Bandy to alert her to oncoming seizures. All three are trained service dogs, and all three are licensed with the county. Or at least she thought they were. According to the Los Angeles County Code, altered pets may be licensed for $20, and unaltered pets for $60, however there is a one-time $5 registration fee for service dogs. Mrs. Byrne had previously purchased permanent tags under the exemption. On this day, the animal control officer told Mrs. Byrne that there was no exemption for seizure dogs, and that she would have to pay the full licensure fee, and that all three dogs had to be altered. When Mrs. Byrne corrected the animal control officer concerning the law, she was told such a provision didn’t exist for her dogs. “The officer who has been here said that there is no service dog recognized by the county except guide dogs and police dogs,” Mrs. Byrne explained. In fact, the section of the County Code stated on their exemption application does include that a: “Service Dog” is a guide dog or seeing-eye dog ... , a signal dog or other dog individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability. The ordinance continues: To qualify for an exemption as a Service Dog, the dog owner must provide documentation satisfactory to the Department that certifies the dog in question is a qualified service dog and the dog must have a service dog license with a completed affidavit. As for the one-time permanent licensure, the County’s animal control code clearly states: Permanent exemptions, such as permanent medical waivers, law enforcement dogs, and service dogs do not need to be renewed. So are Mia, Mercedes, and Bandy legitimate service dogs? According to the U.S. Department of Justice website, under the Americans with Disability Act (ADA), a copy of which Mrs. Byrne handed to the officer: The ADA defines a service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to provide assistance to an individual with a disability. And as for the Officer’s assertion that seizure dogs required local certification, the Act stresses that: If they meet this definition, animals are considered service animals under the ADA regardless of whether they have been licensed or certified by a state or local government. When Mrs. Byrne pointed out the federal law, she was told that if she didn't pay immediately, they would seize the dogs, have them fixed, and she would then pay $840 plus the cost of spaying. She stated further, “The County refuses to recognize them (but) the federal government says that they are protected service animals. Los Angeles County says they don't have to listen.” So what is the present situation concerning Mrs. Byrne and her Poodles? Will this ordeal come to a beneficial end for Mrs. Byrne, Mia, Mercedes, and Bandy? We wait and worry because Mrs. Byrne says simply, “March 19th, I get to go to court and demonstrate to a judge that the county is violating Federal law.” The AC officer says if she doesn’t comply, not only will the county take her dogs and neuter them, she will have to pay for the unwanted surgeries, nearly $1,000. Going to court to tell the judge what the law is seems ludicrous but that is what she must do. Mrs. Byrne, who is disabled with a seizure disorder, depends on her three dogs to alert her to oncoming seizures. As trained service dogs, they are protected under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and according to the Los Angeles County Code, only required a one-time $5 registration fee for their tags. The animal control officer argued that there was no exemption for seizure dogs and that Mrs. Byrne would have to pay the full licensure fee and alter her dogs or face charges under the Los Angeles County Code regarding animal control. When Mrs. Byrne pointed out the federal law, she was again told that her three service dogs would be seized, the county would have them altered and that she would have to pay that fee too, an estimated $840! Intending to defend against the action, Mrs. Byrne was given a court date of March 19th. “I get to go to court and demonstrate to a local judge that the county is violating Federal law. What's truly, amazingly, preposterously, stupid about the whole thing is that California Law specifically lists seizure alerters as service dogs,” Mrs. Byrne pointed out, citing Section 12926 of the California Government Code. While there are some differences, California code is still fairly consistent with the federal ADA regarding service animals, and according to Anne Raduns, an attorney and fellow dog lover, "The County is trying to enact laws that they can't possibly enforce.” Says councilor Raduns, "This is the simple reality of the state workers not being familiar with state statutes or federal regulations, [and] this is more common than you think, particularly when dealing with ADA regulations.” She continued, “It's a shame that that the State has immunity to suit when things go very, very wrong, as they did in this case.” On March 5th Byrnes received another communication regarding her dogs. “Today I got the ‘courtesy notice’ from the county,” she said. “They've ‘generously’ set my bail at $301 per dog.” What is the real source of this situation? As Mrs. Byrne pointed out, “It sounds so benign. ‘let's not have so many unwanted pets in shelters, and if we spay and neuter, it will help, won't it?’” Shelter statistics refute that belief. As politicians – many of whom do not even own pets – try and grapple with this question, they end up enacting laws like those found in LA County, that further restrict pet ownership and wind up punishing those who are compliant. And while the ADA will take precedence over state and local ordinances, it still leaves Mrs. Byrne on a legal treadmill. So what is in store for her and her poodles? “The County sets a date, [and then] you go that date and get a new date for the arraignment,” she explained. “Then you go to the arraignment and get a different new date for the trial.” “It wouldn't be so bad, but I don't drive, and it takes the bus two and a half hours to get from here to the courthouse, a distance of 7 miles,” she lamented. “Because of the county’s finances, they've eliminated many buses, so every one of them is packed.” The irony is that all of this adds stress to Mrs. Byrne’s life, something that could trigger the very seizure disorder the Los Angeles County Animal Control refuses to accept. Mrs. Byrne says, “The dog world needs to understand that this sort of nonsense is happening everywhere.” Counselor Raduns agreed, “What really needs to happen is that those people in the 'dog world' need to be as active in conscience-raising as those in PETA or HSUS organizations. Until that happens,” she continued, “the atrocities that Mrs. Bryne has endured are going to continue.” UPDATE: On March 19th, Mrs. Bryne went to court, representing herself, and the Los Angeles County Animal Control was in attendance. In a matter of ten minutes, the judge repudiated the Animal Control officer for their ignorance of the law and immediately dismissed all actions against Mrs. Bryne.