During the 09/13/2023 Board of Health meeting, Officer Matt Fillebrown, the Humane Officer at the Appleton Police Department gave a not-quite 15-minute presentation on how the city handles dangerous animals. The video for the meeting was a couple weeks late in being posted, so I didn’t get an opportunity at the time to recap it, but I thought now would be a good time to revisit it.
I’ve prepared a transcript of the discussion for download:
The prohibited dangerous animal declaration that was before the Board of Health as an information item during that meeting pertained to Millie, a female pitbull who had been first declared a dangerous animal after having attacked a family member. After having been declared a dangerous animal, she had gotten free, unleashed and unmuzzled, and attacked another dog. As a result, she had been declared a prohibited dangerous animal and was no longer allowed within the limits of the City of Appleton.
Officer Fillebrown told the board that there were thousands and thousands of dogs in the city, not all of whom were well trained or obedient and he expected that almost everybody has had a negative encounter of at least some degree with an animal while walking in the city. There were a number of things that the Police Department did to help respond to aggressive animals.
The first response was education, letting owners know that Appleton had a leash law and individuals did need to be in control of their animal. If that didn’t work the police could move up to issuing a ticket.
The city has ordinances to deal with dogs running and acting aggressively, even if they don’t bite someone. “Dog can’t act aggressively. It can’t scare people in the city of Appleton. Everybody’s got their right to walk on the street.”
If an animal actually bites, that is considered an attack. In that situation, the police can issue a citation or issue an order to quarantine. It’s also the police’s responsibility to determine if an attack is provoked or unprovoked and find out whether the animal is vaccinated.
Per Officer Fillebrown, “Sometimes in the city, we get an attack that’s so egregious, or it’s been so repetitive, that we’ve got to take the next step.” In that case, the police can issue a Dangerous Animal Declaration. If it escalates to that point, the animal owner would have 72 hours to contest the declaration which they would do by contacting the city’s Health Officer. If the dangerous animal declaration is upheld, the owner would have to follow a number of rules laid out in city code which include getting the animal licensed, neutering the animal, taking out a $1 million insurance policy, putting up warning signs on their property, and keeping the animal leashed and muzzled every time it is taken off the property.
Officer Fillebrown thought that there were currently 4 dogs in the City of Appleton who were subject to dangerous animal declaration and whose owners were abiding by the city’s ordinances.
The case before the Board of Health as an information item that day was for Millie, a female pitbull. Per Officer Fillebrown, “Millie had ripped open a family members face, and they needed I think 23 stitches to sew it back on up. That was a one-time instance.[…] So, what happened with Millie is that we declared it dangerous, and they did everything they needed to do. They got the insurance policy, they got it neutered, they got it licensed, they got it registered. Unfortunately, Millie got out and went and attacked another dog. And that attack lasted about two minutes on video, that took three people to break up, mace, everything else and the dog just would not let go.”
As a result, Millie was declared a prohibited dangerous animal, which meant that she was no longer allowed within the city.
In order to reach a prohibited dangerous animal declaration and animal (a) has to be dangerous and (b) has to be in violation of the dangerous animal ordinances. In this case, Millie was in violation of the requirement to be leashed and muzzled while outside of her owner’s property.
Officer Fillebrown noted, “[E]very case is different. Every situation is different. Every pet owner is different. And every animal is different. […] [I] t doesn’t matter the breed. It just a matter is the action of the animal.”
He also noted that, while animals are treated as property by state statute, “These decisions don’t come lightly.” He recognized that these animals are generally viewed as a part of the family. “So, when these things happen, it’s very emotional, because we are putting a lot on people for a million-dollar insurance policy or telling them you have to move because your dog can’t be here, or you have to put your dog down or give it to somewhere else. And then we still have to know where it is. Because I have a legal right to protect the next jurisdiction where this dog is going to chew. So, we probably have—and I’m gonna wrap this up—we probably have close to 100 bites, maybe more in the city every single year. And I only do maybe five dangerous animal declarations in a year. So, it’s not that if a dog comes across my desk, the Baba Yaga is going after it. It’s just they have to meet these criteria for us to act at this level.”
Mayor Woodford asked how prohibited animals were tracked across jurisdictions. Officer Fillebrown explained that when an animal was declared prohibited, the owner had 24 hours to remove them from the city. He would then followed up by asking what the address was that the animal was moved to and request a photograph of the dog at the address where the mailbox with the address label was visible. Officer Fillebrown would then figure out what jurisdiction that property was located in and let the local law enforcement know that an animal that was prohibited in Appleton had been moved to that area. The law enforcement in the new jurisdiction would then go over to the house and verify that the dog was located there. Appleton did not, however, have dragnets at its borders to ensure that people did not bring their dogs back into the city, but if the police became aware that a prohibited animal was back in Appleton they could get a search warrant, seize the animal, and go from there.
Officer Fillebrown mentioned that the purpose of tickets was not punishment but rather “We’re writing a ticket for compliance to make sure it never happens again.” He recognized that dealing with a dangerous animal was hard for owners. “If they want to euthanize or remove it from the city, we work with them too as well. We’re not about being vengeful. We’re about being compliant.”
Mayor Woodford asked him when citizens were required to report a bite, and Officer Fillebrown answered, “[I] f your animal has been involved in a bite that breaks the skin, it’s got to be reported. And that’s just not a city thing. That’s a state thing. That’s a state law. All animal bites need to be reported.”
The bite reporting requirements was actually part of an effort to reduce incidents of rabies, and per Officer Fillebrown, the canine strain of rabies in Wisconsin had been pretty much wiped out due to this and other measures, although rabies still existing among wild animals such as bats and raccoons.
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1115327&GUID=8FC2D170-2AB3-4A87-AD15-FE6B59DF9FD0
Be the first to reply