84(R) - 2015
House Public Health
House Public Health
Relating to the care and unlawful restraint of a dog; creating an offense.
No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated.
HB 2562 would repeal Section 821.079(b) and (e), Health and Safety Code and provide definitions and requirements for the care of a dog left outside and unattended.
A violation of this chapter is a Class C misdemeanor. Each dog and each day creates a separate violation. Under the provisions of the bill, the money collected as a penalty would be deposited into a general fund of the municipality or county served by the court. The bill would also not prevent a municipality or a county from furthering regulations relating to the care of a dog. This legislation would also:
- Prohibit an owner from leaving a dog outside and unattended without providing the dog continuous access to adequate shelter, shade from direct sunlight, and potable water.
- Prohibit an owner from restraining a dog outside and unattended by use of a restraint that is not attached to a properly fitted collar or to any harness specifically designed to be used for a dog, and which would harm the dog.
- Remove the exceptions to the statutory provisions regarding the conditions constituting the unlawful restraint previously applicable to a dog restrained to a running line, pulley, or trolley system and that is not restrained to the running line, pulley, or trolley system by means of a pinch-type, prong-type, choke-type, or improperly fitted collar and to a dog restrained for a reasonable period, not to exceed three hours in a 24-hour period, and no longer than is necessary for the owner to complete a temporary task that requires the dog to be restrained.
- Expand the conduct that constitutes the Class C misdemeanor offense of knowingly violating statutory provisions regarding the care of a dog left outside and unattended and the unlawful restraint of a dog by removing the condition that such a violation be committed knowingly.
Vote Recommendation Notes
HB 2562, while benevolent in its intentions, duplicates existing laws on city and county levels which regulate this behavior concerning animal treatment. We oppose this bill as it represents an expansion of government power over a local matter and infringes on private property rights.