Arizona: After woman is terrorized by her neighbor's pit bulls, Pima Animal Care Manager ADAM RICCI refuses to enforce Pima County's own vicious dog laws. Why? Turns out he's founder of a pit bull advocacy group!

ARIZONA -- A local woman claimed she was chased into her home and trapped inside by two dogs that escaped from a neighbor’s yard.

She wants the dogs gone, but Pima Animal Care says that is not the way they do things.

  

Denise Hausler said the dogs, which appeared to be two young pit bulls, came charging towards her as she took out the trash in her neighborhood off of Bear Canyon Road.

“I happened to have a pizza box in my hand. I threw it down and they got distracted," she said. "I ran inside my home and called the sheriff's
department.”

Yeah, the cop showed up... and sat in his car. Clearly
he was concerned about being attacked by these two dogs

RIDICULOUS, PATHETIC RESPONSE FROM ANIMAL CONTROL
Both PCSD and Pima Animal Care responded.  County officials determined the dogs got out of a gate at a home behind Denise’s. They caught the two pit bulls, put them back into their own yard and secured the broken gate WITH TWO TIRES THAT WERE LYING NEARBY - AND DROVE AWAY!

Denise said other neighbors had seen the dogs roaming the neighborhood before. She said she has been attacked by a dog in the past, and she is worried these dogs will escape again.

“It interferes with you just kind of being happy and safe around your own home,” she said.

PACC’s enforcement manager, Adam Ricci, said the officers were able to secure the dog and contact the owners the next day.

The owners were cited for violating leash laws.

Ricci made it clear that pit bulls are no more aggressive than any other dog breed. He said all dogs need to be contained when left at home.

WHY WON'T ADAM RICCI ENFORCE PIMA COUNTY'S OWN LAWS???

Pima County, Arizona went through the trouble to create vicious dog laws. These dogs should have been seized and the owner issued a citation to court to get the dogs deemed dangerous/vicious. Even if they were declared vicious, the owner would get to keep them but s/he would be under orders from a judge to secure them, maintain liability insurance, etc. What's so bad about that? How much of a burden is that for the owner of dogs which could kill someone?

THE TRUTH COMES OUT ABOUT ADAM RICCI

This 2010 article in the Bangor Daily News lists Adam Ricci as co-founder of a pit bull advocacy group called SOME Pit!:

Pit bulls have had a bad rap, representatives from Southern Maine Pit Bulls, or SOME Pit! said at a presentation Saturday at the Bangor Humane Society.

“They are social, affectionate, face-licking sweethearts,” Jessica Dolce, co-founder and educator for SOME Pit! said after the hourlong presentation.

The term “pit bull” refers to three breeds: the American pit bull terrier, American Staffordshire terrier and Staffordshire bull terrier. Dolce said that media reports about pit bull attacks have made the public scared of the dogs.

“I don’t blame people for being afraid,” she said. “That’s the information they’re receiving. It’s caused a hysteria.”

Dolce and Adam Ricci, training coordinator and co-founder of SOME Pit! said that explaining to people the misinformation that surrounds pit bulls can change people’s perceptions. The duo travel the state educating people about pit bulls and asking pit bull owners to be educators themselves by being good examples while out in public.

"All SOME Pit! dogs are evaluated for 2 weeks before being placed in a foster home or being adopted. During this time they live with Adam Ricci, cofounder and certified trainer or an experienced foster home."

ADAM RICCI NEEDS TO BE FIRED

Clearly, Ricci cannot be objective when it comes to pit bulls. Two dogs, which clearly qualified themselves as needing to be deemed vicious/dangerous, are not only put back onto their property after terrorizing a woman, but Ricci refuses to issue dangerous dog citations to the owners. Instead, he issues a "running at large" ticket. Why? Because he refuses to believe that pit bulls can be vicious. Nothing wrong with that IF he were just Joe Citizen. However, as the head of Pima county animal control this is a huge problem. He will not enforce the laws; therefore he needs to be fired. 

Pima County Arizona ordinances
6.04.120 - Vicious or destructive animals
Edited for space. Click link above to see the law in its entirety

B. Prohibited activity.
1. It is unlawful for any person to keep, control, harbor or otherwise have under control any animal which is vicious or destructive. This section shall not apply to zoos, wild animal parks or animal shelters, or to persons who are in compliance with an order of a justice of the peace issued pursuit to this section.

2. The owner of any animal that bites, attempts to bite, endangers or otherwise injures or causes injury to human beings or other animals is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor, except as provided in Section 6.04.120D.

C. Penalty. 
A violation of any provision of this section is punishable by a fine of not less than two hundred dollars nor more than two thousand five hundred dollars, six months in jail, three years probation, or any combination thereof. No judge may grant probation in lieu of, or otherwise suspend, the imposition of the minimum fine prescribed.

In addition, unless the animal has been previously forfeited or destroyed, upon the declaration of an animal as vicious or destructive, a justice of the peace shall order the owner to do one or more of the following:
1. Comply with the provisions of subsection 6.04.150D and be subject to subsections E and F; or

2. That the animal be banished from the county limits of Pima County after first being spayed or neutered, microchipped and tattooed by a licensed veterinarian at the owner's expense. The owner shall provide a certificate of spaying or neutering and microchipping and tattooing from a licensed veterinarian to the Pima Animal Care Center within the time given by the court to ensure the spaying or neutering and microchipping and tattooing of the animal before banishment; or

3. That the animal be humanely destroyed. The animal may be forfeited to the Pima Animal Care Center to ensure the humane destruction of the animal. Subsections C1, C2, and C3 of this section shall not be construed to affect, in any way, the imposition of any mandatory minimum penalties provided herein.

6.04.150 - Dangerous animals
Edited for space. Click link above to see the law in its entirety

1. "Dangerous animal" means one which:
a. Has been declared to be vicious or destructive pursuant to Section 6.04.120, or dangerous or vicious or destructive or a danger to the safety of any person or other animal pursuant to Section 6.04.140 of this chapter; or

b. Displays a tendency, disposition or propensity, as determined by Pima Animal Care, pursuant to guidelines developed for that purpose, to:
1) Injure, bite, attack, chase or charge without provocation, or attempt to injure, bite, attack, chase or charge without provocation a person or domestic animal in a manner which poses a threat to public safety; or

Declaring an animal dangerous.
1. Whenever Pima Animal Care has reason to believe an animal may be dangerous, an evaluation of the animal shall be conducted pursuant to guidelines developed by Pima Animal Care. These guidelines provide for an evaluation of the animal's behavior both on and off of the premises of the owner, its behavior in and out of the owner's presence and its interactions with other persons and animals.

2. If Pima Animal Care declares that an animal is dangerous, the owner, as defined in Section 6.04.020 of this chapter, shall be notified and issued an order of compliance. Once an animal is declared dangerous the animal is dangerous until a hearing officer or judge determines otherwise.

Order of Compliance—Provisions.
When an animal is declared dangerous, Pima Animal Care shall issue an order of compliance requiring the owner within thirty days to:

1. Confine the animal sufficiently to prevent the animal's escape as follows:
a. Pima Animal Care shall determine the appropriate fencing requirements for the size and nature of the animal, which may require: A fence including gates to be up to six feet in height; the fence, from five feet in height to six feet in height to incline to the inside of the confinement area at a forty-five degree angle from the vertical; or that the confinement area be wholly covered by a material strong enough to keep the animal from escaping.

b. Pima Animal Care may require the bottom of the confinement area to be of concrete, cement or asphalt, or of blocks or bricks set in concrete or cement or if such bottom is not provided, then a footing of such material shall be placed along the whole perimeter of the confinement area to a depth of one foot below ground level or deeper, if required by Pima Animal Care.

c. The gates to the confinement area shall be locked at all times with a padlock except while entering or exiting.

d. Pima Animal Care may require temporary confinement measures until the order of compliance has been obeyed or the hearing officer determines that the animal is not dangerous. If the owner does not immediately comply with the temporary confinement requirements, the animal shall be impounded.

2. Restrain the animal outside of the confinement area with a leash, chain, rope or similar device not more than six feet in length sufficient to restrain the animal. When outside the confinement area, the animal must be under the control of a person capable of preventing the animal from engaging in any prohibited activity. Pima Animal Care may require that the dog be muzzled when outside of the confinement area.

3. Post a sign on every gate or entry way to the confinement area stating: "Beware of dangerous animal. Per Pima County Code Section 6.04.150." The sign shall be provided by Pima Animal Care.

4. Obtain and maintain liability insurance in a single incident amount of $50,000, or post bond in that amount of either cash or property, unless the animal has been declared to be vicious or destructive pursuant to Section 6.04.120 of this chapter, in which case the amount of insurance or bond shall be no less than $250,000, to cover any damage or injury that may be caused by the dangerous animal.

5. Owner must license the animal at the declared dangerous or vicious rate as indicated in subsection 6.04.070, have the animal spayed or neutered, microchipped and tattooed with an identification number, by the Pima Animal Care Center or a licensed veterinarian, at their own expense.

Owner's consent to inspection; failure to obey order of compliance—Penalties.
1. By continuing to own an animal declared dangerous, an owner gives consent to Pima Animal Care Officers or any law enforcement officer to inspect the animal declared dangerous, the premises where the animal is kept and the liability insurance or bond documents required for the animal(s), and the veterinarian's certification of spaying or neutering, microchipping and tattooing for the animal(s).

2. Pima Animal Care may seize and impound the dangerous animal if the owner fails to obey the order of compliance. Pima Animal Care shall humanely destroy the impounded animal, unless the owner demonstrates obedience to the order of compliance or judicial proceedings are pending.

JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT HOSPITALIZED FROM A DOG ATTACK DOES NOT MEAN YOU WEREN'T TERRORIZED BY THEM

Watch this video. The officer does not appear to have been bitten (or if so, he wasn't seriously bitten). Just because the officer wasn't hospitalized for dog bites, does it make the attack any less terrifying? 

Although this video shows the officers on the dog owners property, imagine you stepped out of your front door to go get the mail and your neighbor's two dogs were suddenly up in your face like these were with the officer. 

If your neighbor's dogs did this to you - and you didn't have the luxury of having a gun to shoot them, would you be happy with animal control's response - if they showed up, corralled the dogs back into their yard, leaned some old tires up against the broken fence and drove away???? 

Would you be satisfied if, instead of issuing vicious dog citations and trying to get court-ordered restrictions on these dogs, that animal control came out and wrote 'leash law' violation tickets - and left you to continue living next to these vicious dogs?


(KVOA Tucson News - Dec 14, 2016)