LAWS ABOUT DOGS 



15 



Hawaiian Quarantine 



The Hawaiian Islands has set up a 4- 

 months quarantine for U. S. dogs (there 

 is no custom's charge), at the expense of 

 the consignee (approximately 25c a day). 

 There is no quarantine for dogs from 

 Australia or the British Isles, as these 

 countries presumably are free from rabies. 

 Importing Dogs into the U. S. 



Tariflf duty of 15 per cent of the declared 

 value must be paid on dogs imported into 

 the United States. 



If the dogs are purebred and are regis- 

 tered in a foreign stud book, and are 

 imported mainly for breeding purposes, 

 under Par. 1606, Tariflf of 1930, the cus- 

 toms duty need not be paid provided a 

 three-generation pedigree certificate and a 

 statement showing transfer of ownership 

 to the person importing the dog, are 

 available at the port of entry. 



The importer must make an affidavit 

 of his United States citizenship. A second 

 certificate guarantees that the United 

 States Department of Agriculture will issue 

 a certificate of purebreeding. 



The forms necessary can be obtained 



from the Bureau of Animal Industry. 

 Washington, D. C. known as AH105 and 

 AH283. 



If the necessary papers are not avail- 

 able in time or do not accompany the 

 dog, the 15 per cent must be paid but 

 later it will be refunded when the papers 

 are obtained and sent to the Bureau of 

 Animal Industry. 



Canadian Requirements 



Dogs can be imported free of duty from 

 U. S. into Canada if the dog already is 

 registered in both the AKC and CKC stud 

 books, these registration papers accom- 

 pany the shipment, and the bill of lading 

 states: "Imported for breeding purposes." 

 No health examination or rabies inocula- 

 tion is required. Otherwise the duty is 

 10 per cent. 



Bitches shipped into Canada for breeding 

 are carried on a temporary bond, which 

 amount is refunded when the bitch is re- 

 turned thru the same port as entered. Dogs 

 going into or out of Canada for show 

 exhibition are handled without duty, and 

 on a temporary bond (dog club holding 

 show usually attends to formalities). 



ABOUT OHIO DOG LAWS 



ADDENDA TO 4TH EDITION OF JUDY'S LAWS ABOUT DOGS 



We are indebted to that enterprising 

 journalist, book author, dog club official 

 and field trial judge. Maxwell Riddle, 

 Ravenna, Ohio, for the following com- 

 ments on Ohio dog laws based upon a 

 specific case which the author sent to him 

 just before presstime. 



First, the "sunset to sunrise law'' of 

 the state of Ohio expressly exempts hunt- 

 ing dogs from the provisions that a dog 

 may be shot at any time during hunting 

 season without liability for damage (Sec. 

 5652-14a, Ohio General Code). In part it 

 says : "or when lawfully engaged in hunt- 

 ing accompanied by an owner or handler." 



Second, the Ohio courts have ruled that 

 a dog is not at large when hunting "at 

 the command and within call of the owner 

 EVEN THO ON THE LAND OF 

 ANOTHER." 



Third, the courts have held that "one 

 who wounds a dog trailing rabbits or 

 other game on his land and incidentally 

 worrying sheep, and leaves the dog man- 

 gled, is not exempt from prosecution 

 therefor under G. C. Sec. 13376." 



Fourth, Sec. 13363, governing trespass- 

 ing, gives the landowner the right to kill 

 a dog, if and when he is trying to drive 

 it oflf his land. That is, the killing would 

 be an accident which happened during the 

 driving oflf the land. However, the 

 statute states that the killer must pay for 

 the damage done to the dog, less any 

 damage the dog did to the killer's livestock. 



My conclusions, therefore, in the specific 

 case Capt. Judy presented, are these. 



First, Mr. A's dog was hunting ; if he 

 got over onto Mr. B's land, B had no 

 right to shoot the animal. He could be 

 prosecuted for this. 



Second, B wounded the dog, which surely 

 can be considered mangling it. There- 

 fore, he can be prosecuted on a separate 

 charge of cruelty to animals. 



I might add that the Ravenna Kennel 

 Club brought a successful prosecution for 

 this. A man owned a bitch in season. 

 He shot a neighbor's dog which came into 

 his yard, not killing it but paralyzing it. 

 He left it there. Neighbors called police. 

 The shooter was fined heavily. 



Third, B cannot claim he shot the dog 

 because it was worrying his sheep, since 

 obviously the dog was hunting. And if he 

 had been worrying the sheep incidentally, 

 B still would not have the right to shoot 

 the animal. 



Fourth, B is still liable for the value 

 of the dog which he shoots. 



I believe, therefore, that A can bring 

 action against B on several counts. Per- 

 haps he and his neighbors should insure 

 that they have plenty of witnesses the 

 next time such thing happens — then "go 

 after him" in court. However, A should 

 turn over the present case to the county 

 prosecutor, and ask that B be summoned 

 and put under bond to keep the peace. 



THE END 



