Regulations Summary Hunting & Furharvesting - Kansas: Fill & Download for Free

Skip to Main ContentHomeFishingHuntingLicenses & PermitsConservationLearningExploreHomeFishing Ocean Regulations Sport Fishing2018-2019 Saltwater Sport Fishing RegulationsRegulations | Illustrations and Additional InformationRegulationsNOTE: The red abalone season closure has been extended through 2020.2018-2019 Saltwater Sport Fishing RegulationsRegulations effective March 1, 2018 – February 28, 2019 unless otherwise noted.This is the annual sport fishing regulations booklet distributed in late February, 2018.Full booklet download (PDF)General Provisions and DefinitionsFinfish Fishing RegulationsIncludes limits, filleting, individual species regulations, and moreFinfish Fishing Gear RestrictionsInvertebrate Fishing RegulationsNOTE: The red abalone season closure has been extended through 2020.Includes limits, seasons, gear restrictions, individual species regulations, and more for abalone, crab, clams, lobster, mussels, scallops, and other invertebratesMarine Plant Regulations2018-2019 Sport Fishing Regulations SupplementRegulations effective through February 28, 2019 unless otherwise notedThis is the annual supplement that contains final 2018 ocean salmon seasons and other fishing regulations. Also includes up-to-date Pacific Halibut regulations and freshwater salmon and trout fishing information.2018-2019 In-Season Ocean Fishing Regulation ChangesThis page provides links to CDFW news releases detailing the reasons behind in-season regulatory changes as well as a summary of changes.California Ocean Sport Fishing Regulations MapUp-to-date sport fishing regulations online - just click on the map to see regulations for your area.California Marine Protected Area Maps and RegulationsSummaries of Recreational Groundfish Fishing RegulationsUpdated California Spiny Lobster brochure (PDF)Includes sport diving and hoop netting regulations, spiny lobster life history information, fishing tips, and more!Ocean Salmon Season InformationUpdated Dungeness and Rock Crab Season InformationFishing License InformationFish Identification, How-To Videos, Maps, and Additional InformationCalifornia Fishing PassportA fishing incentive and recognition program to highlight and promote fishing throughout the state. Pick up your free copy of the California Fishing Passport book listing 150 different popular fresh and saltwater finfish and shellfish that occur throughout the state. Try to catch one of every species listed, and you will receive stamps in your passport book documenting each achievement.Fish Identification IllustrationsSelected Rockfish of CaliforniaSelected Saltwater Fish of CaliforniaCommon Surfperches of California (PDF)Marine Bait Fishes of Northern California (PDF)More Fish Identification InformationBlack, Blue Rockfish ID FlyerThis flyer lists identifying features that can be used to differentiate between black rockfish and blue rockfish.English Version (PDF)Spanish Version (PDF)Vietnamese Version (PDF)Chinese Version (PDF)Canary, Vermilion, Yelloweye Rockfish ID FlyerThis flyer lists identifying features that can be used to differentiate between canary rockfish, yelloweye rockfish, and vermilion rockfish.English Version (PDF)Spanish Version (PDF)Vietnamese Version (PDF)Chinese Version (PDF)VideosCrabbing for Dungeness Crab from a Vessel - Part I (YouTube)This video shows different types of gear, and how to prepare for a day of crabbing.Crabbing for Dungeness Crab from a Vessel - Part II (YouTube)This video shows how to deploy and retrieve crab pots, as well as how to handle and measure Dungeness crab.Rockfish and Lingcod Fishing Tips and Tricks (YouTube)This video provides guidance and tips for having a successful day of fishing for rockfish and lingcod.Live Bait Fishing (YouTube)This video shows how to set up and fish surface waters using live bait.Pier Fishing (YouTube)This video shows how to set up and fish from a Southern California pier. Basic information applies to pier fishing at other locations in California, as well.Demonstration Video (YouTube): California Abalone Reporting and Tagging RequirementsThis video shows abalone sport divers and rock pickers how to comply with abalone regulations enacted April 2008.MapsCowcod Conservation AreasFort Ross Red Abalone Closure Map (PDF)Regulations (Section 29.15(b)(1)) effective January 1, 2014Additional InformationMeasurement Methods for Finfish and Invertebrates (PDF)Health Advisories and Fishery Closures for California Finfish, Shellfish, and CrustaceansMarine Region (Region 7)Regional Manager: Dr. Craig ShumanMain Office: 20 Lower Ragsdale Drive, Suite 100, Monterey, CA [email protected] | (831) 649-2870Office Locations | Marine Blog | SubscribeLoginSelect LanguageAfrikaansAlbanianAmharicArabicArmenianAzerbaijaniBasqueBelarusianBengaliBosnianBulgarianCatalanCebuanoChichewaChinese (Simplified)Chinese (Traditional)CorsicanCroatianCzechDanishDutchEsperantoEstonianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrisianGalicianGeorgianGermanGreekGujaratiHaitian CreoleHausaHawaiianHebrewHindiHmongHungarianIcelandicIgboIndonesianIrishItalianJapaneseJavaneseKannadaKazakhKhmerKoreanKurdish (Kurmanji)KyrgyzLaoLatinLatvianLithuanianLuxembourgishMacedonianMalagasyMalayMalayalamMalteseMaoriMarathiMongolianMyanmar (Burmese)NepaliNorwegianPashtoPersianPolishPortuguesePunjabiRomanianRussianSamoanScots GaelicSerbianSesothoShonaSindhiSinhalaSlovakSlovenianSomaliSpanishSundaneseSwahiliSwedishTajikTamilTeluguThaiTurkishUkrainianUrduUzbekVietnameseWelshXhosaYiddishYorubaZuluPowered by TranslateConditions of Use Privacy Policy AccessibilityContact Us© 2018 State of California

There is a proverb from West Africa: "Until lions have their historians, tales of the hunt shall always glorify the hunter."When we are constantly reminded of the horrors inflicted in Cambodia, the Soviet Union, North Korea, Uganda, or Germany, it can be a daunting task to find dictatorial rulers that challenge the norm. I wrote an answer to a similar question about Joseph Pilsudski. Has there ever been a "good dictatorship"? Is humankind capable of doing this? But this time, I will focus on another dictator, one who remains largely unknown in the western world.Thomas Sankara (1949-1987) was dictator of the west African nation of Burkina Faso from 1983 to 1987. His regime was authoritarian to say the least, but it was one of brief and peculiar form. Despite after thirty years, many African scholars and political philosophers look to Sankara's vision of a united Africa. Even today, he is considered a hero by many Burkinabe as well as Africans.When I first heard of Sankara, which was just a few years ago, I was really shocked. This guy was really a piece of work, and yet I never heard of him until then. As a former resident of Africa, I admit to being embarrassed over my own ignorance. Even my father had met him briefly during Sankara's visit to Addis Ababa.Thomas “Tom Sank” Sankara was an officer in the Burkinabe military when the country was known as Upper Volta. His father served in the French army during WW2 and was held as a POW by the Germans. As an officer cadet, Thomas Sankara was influenced by marxist writings during his military education in Madagascar. He gained a heroic reputation during the 1974 border war with Mali and was also a popular guitar player. He was strongly influenced by Che Guevara and fashioned his rock star image in a similar manner. Even as president, Sankara continue to wear his signature military fatigues and red beret. As such, he is commonly known as "Africa's Che".Courtesy of Guardian.com. Sankara arrives in Addis Ababa. I suspect my father is somewhere in this crowdIn 1983, with broad support from fellow officers and citizens, Sankara was installed as president after Jean-Baptiste Ouedraogo was overthrown. Some support was provided by Qadaffi, who at the time was not on friendly terms with the French (Chadian-Libyan conflict).In the brief period he ruled, Sankara initiated a number of policies which has given him a favorable reputation throughout the continent. I'll write them all in bullet point.* On the first anniversary of his coup, he got rid of the name "Upper Volta". In accordance with his anti-imperialist stance, Sankara removed the name as it was given by the French colonists. He renamed the country as Burkina Faso, which means "Land of Upright (or Incorruptible) People" in the local Mossi and Djula languages. He even personally composed the national anthem which remains used today.* Another early change he implemented was the replacement of the government's luxurious Mercedes cars, such as this 1980s model...with this...The Renault 5, at the time the cheapest available car in Burkina Faso. Under Sankara's presidency, it was the official vehicle for all government employees, including himself. Honestly, can you think of a single 'democratic' African president willing to drive in this?In addition, officials, including ministers, were not permitted to hire private chauffeurs or use 1st class airline tickets. Sankara stated that before his presidency, the country's ministers took more luxury trips to the US and Europe than to the countryside of Burkina Faso.* He changed traditional power structures among tribal chieftains. No longer were they allowed to extract tribute from peasants or forced labor. Local farmers now owned the land they worked on. This allowed Sankara to further implement a policy of self-sufficiency. By redistributing feudal landholdings and instituting large-scale irrigation and fertilization projects, Burkina Faso was producing enough of its own food and no longer dependant on foreign aid. In 1986, Burkina Faso was producing 3800 kg of wheat per hectare, more than double of the average 1700 produced by other countries in the Sahel region."The science of the multinationals does not offer them these means, preferring to invest in cosmetics laboratories and plastic surgery to satisfy the whims of a few women or men whose smart appearance is threatened by too many calories in their overly rich meals, the regularity of which would make you—or rather us from the Sahel—dizzy"* With the aid of Cuban doctors, he launched a national vaccination program to eradicate polio, meningitis and measles. In one week, 2.5 million Burkinabe were vaccinated, a feat that earned Sankara the congratulations of the World Health Organization. Sankara was also the first African leader to publicly acknowledge the threat of AIDS to Africa's development, a revolutionary act considering that AIDS denialism is still thriving on the continent.* Promoted women's rights and their political participation. He was among the first African leaders to appoint female cabinet members and his government consisted of 20% women, more than most African nations. Even military service was open to women. (Some say that, like Qadaffi, Sankara had female bodyguards that rode motorcycles. But I haven't found any evidence indicating this is more than a rumor)He also banned female genital mutilation, forced marriages, child marriages, and polygamy. Right to divorce and widow's right to inherit were introduced. Contraception was promoted and if a girl became pregnant, she was allowed to remain in school. He argued it was discrimination if a girl should remain at home because of her pregnancy, while the boy who made her pregnant may continue his education. By placing the pregnant girls in the same class, boys would be reminded of their irresponsibility on a daily basis and be less encouraged to "fool around".In addition, he introduced "women's day" every year, in which men would perform the chores traditionally assigned to women, such as buying food at market or cooking. Men were to experience first-hand the conditions endured by their wives and daughters."The revolution and women’s liberation go together. We do not talk of women’s emancipation as an act of charity or because of a surge of human compassion. It is a basic necessity for the triumph of the revolution. Women hold up the other half of the sky"Excerpt from Sankara's speech to the Organization of African Unity in Addis Ababa* In a number of international forums, such as the Organization of African Unity, Sankara advocated for African nations to oppose the economic exploitation by western corporations and repudiate the foreign debt. He argued that the poor and exploited do not have the obligation to pay the rich and exploiting. The purchase of weapons from western nations to be used against fellow Africans was also an obstacle to development. And last but not least, he pushed for a common African trade organization (similar to the European Union) which would allow African nations to trade and exchange labor. These ideals have also been promoted by other pan-African leaders.* Privately, Sankara was a man of very few possessions. He lowered his monthly salary to $450, owned one Renault car, four cheap motorcycles, three guitars, a fridge and a broken freezer. His simple home had no air conditioning, and he would not install any until every Burkinabe had one in their home.By refusing to wear a business suit, Sankara denounced the opulent lifestyle of politicians. Wherever he went, he either dressed in his iconic military uniform or traditional African shirts.* His portrait did not hang in any public places, unlike many African nations where they have laws requiring a portrait of incumbent presidents in public areas.* Launched a nation-wide reforestation campaign to prevent the gradual encroaching Sahara. 10 million trees were planted, and new owners or tenants of new housing units were required in their housing/rent contract to plant and care for a minimum number of trees. Women and youth built tens of thousands of improved stoves to reduce the consumption of firewood. An old tradition of cultivating trees in towns and villages was revived, and each family was given the means to plant one hundred trees per year. The cutting and sale of firewood was strictly regulated.In summary, Sankara's policies were radical, massive, and groundbreaking, even by modern standards. All of these campaigns were conducted by the minimal resources the people had at their disposal, and their accomplishments surpassed most African nations at the time. And each of these projects were performed for one reason only: to improve the nation in all aspects, whether they be educational, political, social, economical, environmental, or spiritual. And not once did Sankara claim praise for these accomplishments. As far as dictators go, I can't think of a single one which surpasses his modesty.Now that I'm done with listing his positive contributions to Burkina Faso, I'm going to list the negative consequences of his leadership."Our revolution will be the most authoritarian thing there is; it will be an act through which the people impose their will by all available means, including arms if necessary"Sankara's regime did not go uncriticized by humanitarian organizations, including Amnesty International and Freedom House. Shortly after the revolution, seven officials from the previous administration were summarily trialed and executed.As far as dictators go, Sankara would no doubt be among the top "least violent" authoritarian leaders of modern history. Capital punishment was banned and none of his political opponents were executed. Even Sankara's predecessor Ouedraogo is alive and well, running a medical clinic to this day. Sankara's standard punishments of dissent were often job dismissal, community service, or public humiliation. Even the OECD admitted that although violence was not uncommon, killings were remarkably few.It is difficult to determine whether many of the crimes committed during this period were in accordance with Sankara's instructions or self-serving members of his regime. Many of his comrades were ideological followers of Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Enver Hoxha. They were less concerned than Sankara over potential abuses, were intolerant of dissent, and favored coercion. They favored harsher reprisals over Sankara's lenient methods. In 1987, Oxfam recorded the arrest and torture of several trade union leaders.In addition to the regime's negative aspects, there were also mistakes. As popular as he is today, Sankara did implement a number of failed policies. Among his setbacks were his educational programs to combat the country's 90% illiteracy. In 1987, 2,500 teachers went on strike to protest. Instead of negotiating, Sankara had them dismissed and tried to replace them with volunteers, but their lack of teaching experience did not lead to any improvements.Another of his dubious policies was the People's Revolutionary Tribunal, a series of courts he introduced where average citizens could accuse government officials of tax evasion, corruption and "counter-revolutionary" behavior. Although these courts were initially approved by the people for their inclusive process, the trials became increasingly haphazard and sometimes exploited for personal gain. Fortunately, the sentences were lenient and often suspended.Apart from the Tribunals, Sankara also created Revolutionary Defense Committees, inspired by the Cuban Committees for the Defense of the Revolution founded by Fidel Castro in 1960. Similarly, Sankara's CDR was to promote social and political revolution while opposing counter-revolutionary influences. Unfortunately, many abused these committees for personal gain, behaving no better than armed thugs. At the very least, Sankara himself publicly admitted that the Committees had failed in their original intent.In the end, the negative results of the Revolutionary Teachers program, the Tribunals and the Defense Committees would lead to a growing discontent towards Sankara. Though still popular among the poor, disdain had been stimulated among the middle class and tribal chieftains, those who gained the least from his leadership. Not to mention that the Ivory Coast and its patron France were growing concerned over Sankara's pan-African activities.Sankara seated with Blaise Compaore, a member of the trio behind the 1983 coup which brought Sankara to powerOn October 15th 1987, Sankara was killed during a coup organized by his closest ally and deputy Blaise Compaore, alongside Zongo and Lengani. Relations between the two had turned sour, and Blaise defended the coup on the grounds that Sankara was deteriorating relations with nations such as the Ivory Coast and France. Some argue that the French were worried that Sankara's revolutionary ideals would spread to other former French colonial holdings, including the Ivory Coast. It's worth noting that Compaore's wife was very close to Felix Houphouet-Boigny, president of the Ivory Coast at the time. Houphouet-Boigny was founder of the term "Françafrique " and opponent to other left-leaning leaders in western Africa such as Ghana's president Kwame Nkrumah, another leader with pan-African views similar to Sankara. When the French magazine JeuneAfrique printed allegations that Houphouet-Boigny was involved in Sankara's assassination, he demanded the French government ban the publications.The "Communist Officer's Group". Compaore, Lengani and Zongo were the officers who liberated Sankara from prison and installed him as president. Two years after Compaore's coup in 1987, Lengani and Zongo were charged with treason and executed. Compaore would remain in power until 2014After becoming president, Compaore immediately reversed many of Sankara's policies, and rejoined the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. He took out big loans in order to "repair" the country's economy, yet after 27 years with little improvement, one wonders where all that money really went.Currently, Burkina Faso is one of the poorest nations in Africa and Compaore would remain president for 27 years before being ousted in a coup in 2014. During the coup, the BBC described Compaore as the strongest ally of the French and Americans in western Africa. Coincidentally, Burkina Faso has also become one of the top producers of gold on the continent, actively mined by the following firms.Goldrush Resources (Canadian), Gryphon Materials (Australian), Orbis Gold Limited (Australian), Golden Rim Resources (Australian), Cluff Gold (English), Randgold Resources (English), Channel Resources (Canadian), Etruscan Resources (Canadian), Goldbelt Resources (Canadian), High Rivers Gold Mines Limited (Canadian), Orezone Gold Corporation (Canadian), Riverstone Resources (American), Societe Semafo (Canadian)It's worth pointing out though, that Sankara's legacy can arguably be attributed to the brief period he ruled. Four years is not much of a "dictatorial reign", so there is always the possibility that his passionate committment may have deteriorated over time. There are countless examples of dictators that eventually refuse to back down, regardless of their intentions prior to becoming dictators. A friend of mine once joked, "Thomas Sankara was one of those dictators who was lucky enough to die before he screwed things up." In retrospect, there may be truth to these words, but we will never truly know.But what we do know is that Sankara's policies were reversed immediately by Compoare, thus reducing the benefits they had provided to the country. Even after almost thirty years, many Burkinabens today describe the 83-87 period as a highlight of their modern history.Now that Compoare has been ousted from government, it remains to be seen how prominent Sankarist ideals will become in the new Burkina Faso.So in conclusion, Sankara was a dictator with traits that made him stand out. He was authoritarian, but not corrupt. He had firm, yet not brutal control. He was radical, but also a visionary. He was honest, but sometimes misguided. He also had a sense of humor and personality, almost always smiling in public and using jokes to point out the absurd situation in post-colonial Africa. An interesting combination of leadership traits.Jazz, rivalry and revolution: Burkina Faso recalls spirit of Sankarahttps://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/05/thomas-sankara-burkina-faso-assassination/Thomas Sankara's Speech at the United Nations / Discours de Thomas Sankara aux Nations UniesWhy Burkina Faso’s late revolutionary leader Thomas Sankara still inspires young Africans

Yeah, we have the same problem—since over 76% of fatalities of young black men in the US are caused by other young black men -it seems reasonable that we apply the same bans against black people-You know, to ‘stop the violence’ and ‘protect the children’.So far my ‘Ban the Blacks’ program keeps meeting with ridiculous resistance: people trying to claim the I am pursuing this agenda without addressing pesky things such as fact and actual statistics. Kinda like all of the statistics that show Breeeeed Specific Legislation doesn’t work.And before anyone unleashes any well meaning shit on me, a formal girlfriend (Why yes, she IS Black! How did you know?) suggested I started this whole column with this smart-ass take.I mean, according to the Telegraph the UK has had OVER 17 deaths due to dog bites since 2005; practically an epidemic.We can ignore preventable causes of death -such as Coronary Heart Disease which racked up a minuscule 376,157 in 2016 alone, or Lung Cancer (Somewhat preventable) which took almost 185,316 just as long as we are concentrating on the .00003001%. We want to really make a difference in this brave new world.As far as ‘Protect the Children’-no. Just no. You can’t haul a crew of crumb-snatchers into Mickey D’s for colas and deep-fried whatever and meat-like substances and tell me ANYTHING about wanting to keep your children safe.Chicken McNuggets are awesome!Breed Specific Legislation is Similar Other Forms of Discrimination. (Didn’t we have a movement with the Jim Crowe laws that oppressed anyone with dark skin in order to stop rapes and murders?? And how well has THAT played out?)You see, Homo Sap has had witch hunts before.Here’s some Biology 101.Breeds of dogs are analogous (or similar) to the populations of humans we often refer to as ‘race’.Different species–Homo sapiens, Canis lupus familiaris (the domestic dog), and Felis catus (domestic or “house” cats)–have numerous subpopulations organized by various factors, such as geographic isolation or selective breeding to name a few.In other words, different populations of dogs we call ‘breeds’ can be more common in some places than others. We can also influence the organization of dog populations by our selective breeding practices.All of this means that the group of terrier breeds often referred to as ‘pit bulls’ are, biologically speaking, just domestic dogs like every other subpopulation of the species.But we can take an analogy between dogs and humans a step further. Dogs are mammals like us (well, most of us, anyway) , which means we share similar features or traits that place us in that taxonomic grouping, traits often due to our shared evolutionary histories.One might even say that dogs have relevant brain structures and exhibit the behavior suggestive of individual experiences and a ‘point of view.’ (Admittedly, this point of view might be from beneath the counter where a particularly tasty prime rib is standing prior to carving) From this we can infer that each individual dog experiences aspects of the world from a particular perspective similar to how we each experience the world from a different perspective based on our own personal histories (emotional, psychological, etc.).All of these similarities between dogs and humans seem reasonable, and certainly verifiable by anyone who owns dogs or works closely with them.The claim that dogs, and other non-human animals, are some Cartesian automata (or machines) without minds, individual personalities, or the capacity for pain experience is a fancy of only the most radical skeptics in philosophy of mind. So let’s stick with our reasonable starting point.The similarities above are commonly used to support arguments against the discrimination of certain dog breeds. That is, breed discrimination is wrong (or, more importantly, ineffective) for the same reasons we think discrimination against humans grouped into certain categories is wrong (e.g. categories such as race, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation).Discrimination historically seems to be a bad thing when it causes unequal or unfair treatment and harm. Anti-discrimination laws are in place to “prohibit us from singling out individuals for less favorable treatment because of certain traits (Moreau 2010, 143).As a discriminatory regulation, Breed Specific Legislation is exactly what it sounds like. Regulations are put in place that single out individual dogs due to a common set of physical traits. Often the reason given for a ban on those breeds with the target traits is an assumed connection with aggression towards humans. . Such differential treatment results in targeted dogs receiving unequal treatment that often results in harm to them, such as death.Given the value of life (among most people, anyway) , a loss of it calls for careful consideration.We often look back to discriminatory laws concerning humans enacted twenty or even thirty years ago and feel embarrassed about the systemic injustices they were used to enforce.This includes the blood donor controversy concerning gay donors, racial segregation laws up to the mid 20th century, and the residential school system that took place in Canada (sorry, US, you don’t get to escape this either. Remember Ruby White?) up until the 1990s just to name a few.Thankfully, we’ve seen what some might call moral progress. For example, bans on same-sex marriage have been overturned across North America. We continue to work on discriminatory issues as a nation and through grassroots movements on social media, such as challenging the glass-ceiling for women in the workforce.What all of these morally-charged social changes have in common is a general condemnation of discriminatory practice based on physical characteristics or behaviors.The lesson of the story goes something like this: we’ve learned that judging a book by its cover is an unsound judgment as time and time again we discover that what’s inside doesn’t always meet our expectations. In other words, we’ve discovered that discriminatory judgments like this are epistemically suspect–there are no grounds for thinking that outward characteristics, such as physical traits or particular orientations, necessarily determine individual psychology and behavioral tendencies. But how does all of this talk of social movements concern dog breeds?If it is wrong to judge the individual personality and behavioral tendencies of someone because of that person’s race or other physical characteristics we must carefully scrutinize the claim that all pit bulls (even though we don’t have a concrete on what this means) are ‘vicious’ and ‘should be banned’.That is, to say that entire populations of dogs are vicious because of some connection between viciousness and the way they look should cause alarm bells–this is the very same discriminatory line of reasoning now recognized to be problematic and outdated as described above.Breed Specific Legislation is Scientifically Unfounded( this is IMPORTANT-one doesn’t follow a premise simply because wants to believe it in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary…oh, wait a minute…) so any attempts to justify discrimination against breeds labeled ‘pit bulls’ rely on one alleged factor that is supposed to distinguish those dogs from the rest: aggressive behavior. Folks in favor of BSL (Breed Specific Legislation for those of you that are having trouble keeping up) often speak to the aggressive behavior these dogs were bred for “in the pits” from when dog fighting was considered a sport to the thug-like enterprise we know it as today.There is, however, a tendency to ignore research on aggression, which is problematic for at least two reasons. The first comes from work in cognitive ethology and the second from biology.First, cognitive ethology is the study of animal mental experiences (Ristau 2013). And “it has been recognized for many years [i.e. since at least 1923] that aggression is not a unitary phenomenon” with studies that analyze the relationship between inter-species and intra-species aggression (Huntingford 1976). Way back in 1966, K. Lorenz distinguished between two situations in which aggressive behavior is known to occur: [1]inter-specific or ‘between species’ aggression versus [2]intra or conspecific aggression as fighting within the same species. In categorizing aggression we find a distinction between aggressive behavior within species and between species.In other words, we have good evidence to support a distinction between dog-dog (conspecific) aggression and dog-human (interspecific) aggression. We see real examples of this distinction all the time, such as dogs in shelters who are described as needing ‘one dog homes’, but nevertheless make excellent family pets.Furthermore, the aggression pit bulls might show in the fighting pits (though not all do and are often killed because of that) does not immediately translate into aggression towards humans (oopsy. Better make sure no one knows about this little fly in the ointment…).In fact, if our concern is what the dogs were “bred for,” then dogs that showed aggression towards humans during dog fights were likely not selected for as it would be detrimental to the handler. Given that aggression has also been analyzed in terms of the function it serves in addition to “its motivational basis” (Huntingford 1976, 485), this suggests that the function of aggression in the fighting pit along with the motivations to do so are very different than your standard loving home, which counter-conditions against such behavior. In sum, to say that all pit bulls are aggressive is often a statement made in ignorance concerning the evident nuances of aggressive behavior generally.Second, one cannot assess the nature of particular dog breeds in a vacuum–biology has something to say about the relationship between genes and the phenotypic expression of them, such as behavioral tendencies.In popular media, Cesar Milan (a.k.a the Dog Whisperer) claims that all dogs are a product of their environment–change the environment and you then change the behavior of the dog (another one of those pesky, verifiable facts, dammit) .Alternatively, particular advocacy organizations have taken a stand against Milan’s position and claim that dog characteristics “are all about genetics” (Pit Bulls Against Misinformation is one organization).Despite the disagreement, both sides emphasize the need for responsible and knowledgeable handlers to manage and address dog behavior. These claims are based on direct experience in handling dogs in training and rescue. Alternatively, those who support BSL typically claim that pit bull breeds are inherently aggressive such that it’s in their genes to be that way. So is dog behavior due to nature or nurture?To address that question, one should not ignore how the nature-nurture debate over the cause of phenotypic traits reached a far more sophisticated conclusion after the biologist R.C. Lewontin published a landmark paper in 1974. This paper marks the beginning of the interactionist consensus concerning the relationship between genes, environment, and phenotypic expression (traits such as behavior included). This means that all traits (physical characteristics, behavior, etc.) result from a complicated interaction between genetic and environmental factors.Since 1974, there has been a live debate over which factor more heavily influences the phenotypes, in addition to the role of information theory, innate versus acquired characteristics, and phenotypic plasticity (Pigliucci 2001, Kaplan 2000, Northcott 2006, Griffiths 2009, Tabery 2014 to name just a few).If all of this sounds complicated, it’s because it is.The point is that talk of a single cause of dog behavior is not supported by scientific and philosophical literature, which has been around for over forty years. So aggressive behavior is not only due to genes and it’s not only due to the environment, but instead results from a complicated interaction between both. Therefore, to say the all pit bulls are inherently aggressive due to genetic cause is insensitive to tons of relevant research on the multiple causes of phenotypic traits.Overall, what we learn from studies on the nature of aggression and the relationship between behavior, genes, and the environment matter for public safety when the aim is to manage our complex companionship with another species, which lives so closely alongside us. How to put into practice what we learn from our research is up to the policy makers and animal professionals, which brings us to the final point.-Breed Specific Legislation is Condemned by Animal Professionals. (I mean, why would any of us accept the word of trained professionals that work with dogs in the field, as opposed to listen to 3 second sensationalist media bites and the extensive and exhaustive research done by John Stewart? Well, you SHOULD-he’s got two pit bulls, and has gone to bat for them repeatedly.)To put this plainly, BSL is downright lazy policy-making. It takes actual work to construct animal control regulations that truly make a difference to public safety. Why? Because a multitude of experts must be consulted, which includes research into what counts as an expert and pursing verbal or written suggestions and direction for how to shape the laws. A similar instance might be likened to the 1994 passing of the “Hate Crime Laws”. In these, a gay man was brutally murdered by gay-bashers, so we passed a bunch of laws to ‘stop’ this kind of behavior. Funny, because I thought that Assault and Battery, Kidnapping, and bloody MURDER were already illegal. But passing these EXTRA laws certainly made us feel good about our politicians “standing up for our safety” (sound familiar?) and passing yet another set of ineffectual laws.)Animal professionals that count as “dog experts” will be anyone with significant knowledge about dog breeds and behavior through experience by occupation (i.e. working directly with dogs) or through research by obtaining facts from reliable sources (i.e. competent knowers in a certain field, such as cognitive ethology for example).Veterinarians, rescue agencies, humane societies, and animal control officers all fit the bill. Notice that law enforcement officials (unless directly trained in dealing with dogs), as well as journalists who think they’re tracking a pattern, are not included on this list. Being more famous does not automatically incur more credibility.The opinions of animal professionals are not just some opinions among many, they are the only opinions that actually matter when trying to determine how to reduce dog bite incidents and maulings. Not all opinions carry the same weight in a given contextThe sorts of people a dog expert category excludes are those of us who have little to no experience with dogs, as well as people whose only experience with a dog is a bite incident. As traumatizing as a serious bite incident might be, that the person has been attacked does not make that person an expert on dog behavior.We must be careful of those who pose as experts, such as certain website hobbyists and others who cook up statistics and facts outside of peer review. Ignoring the testimony of actual animal professionals is tantamount to ignoring the testimony of doctors for legislation concerning euthanasia–alarming and negligent especially for matters of public safety.It’s very well-known that animal professionals condemn Breed Specific Legislation for various reasons, such as its ineffectiveness for promoting public safety and its near impossibility to enforce.Why is BSL ineffective? In 2014 The American Veterinary Association published a peer-reviewed summary that concludes pit bull type breeds are not found to be disproportionately dangerous in controlled studies.Read that again: the absolute defining AUTHORITY on this matter concluded that pit bulls are not automatically bloodlust enfueled ravenous baby eating automatons.They also find that breed bans cannot be expected to work even if some breeds could be identified as high risk. Here are some other minor reputable sources that discuss the problem, although none of them have the fine investigative reporting standards of John Stewart (I actually like him-using his name here is not intended to be snarky) and the Guardian UK: ASPCA, Home | BAD RAP, Pit Bull Rescue Central, The National Canine Research Council, The American Veterinary Medical Association, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association, the American Kennel Club, the Canadian Kennel Club, the Dog Legislation Council of Canada, the American Temperament Testing Society (which shows American Pit Bull Terriers scoring better than Golden Retrievers on temperament tests in 2008), the Human Society of the United States, the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies, as well as numerous (if not all) provincial SPCAs in Canada. I haven’t even begun to mention individuals. But somehow they must all be wrong, and a few sensationalists journalists must be right.Reminds me of this:And there are many more including associations, rescues, and animal control operations that operate at both the provincial and municipal levels that reject BSL. The voice of these professionals should heavily influence the direction of legislation. It’s up to public officials to translate that information into laws. Unfortunately, the enactment or continuation of BSL clearly indicates how public officials are ignoring the people they should be listening to. In doing so, they inevitably fail to protect the public.Why is BSL nearly impossible to enforce? There are discrepancies with visual identification compared to actual DNA (Voith et al. 2013). To complicate identification further, the use and meaning of the term ‘pit bull’ is disputed.‘Pit bull’ is often used as an umbrella term used to refer to at least four different types of terrier breeds who share similar characteristics and history: The Staffordshire Terrier, the American Staffordshire Terrier, the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT), and the American Bull Terrier. Using this term is not as accurate as identifying dogs by their specific breeds. But the scope of ‘pit bull’ as slang has widened to the dismay of some advocacy groups.For example Pitbulls Against MisInformation (PBAM), as well as Bully Breed Soldiers Unite (BBSU) condemn a liberal use of the term and maintain that only the APBTs should be referred to as ‘pit bulls’. This is likely for a number of reasons, but restricting the use of the term prevents other breeds that merely look similar from misidentification by the media and society generally.Breed identification is extremely difficult, especially for persons without training. What is the point of enacting regulations which cannot be enforced? This is impracticality at its finest, which results in a waste of public funds. Breed misidentification by non-professionals who minimally interact with and track the actions of dogs, such as many police officers and journalists, fuels public hysteria.Public hysteria demands action from public officials, but hysteria is not an excuse for enacting regulations that do not promote public safety and ultimately waste our tax dollars at the same time.So there it is. Breed Specific Legislation is outdated, scientifically unfounded, and condemned by animal professionals. This means that BSL is enacted when it shouldn’t be.It’s continued when it shouldn’t be. As a matter of public safety concerning dogs, animal control regulations require careful attention to detail; the research matters. At this point, there is no good reason to continue a spotlight on particular breeds as if it’s supposed to increase the safety in our communities. So what should we do now? Non-human animal issues, especially those concerning companion animals, are social issues.Breed Specific Legislation is just one of many animal issues that matter.For example, offenses against animals in the Canadian Criminal Code have not been substantively updated since 1892 (with a bestiality loophole?!?! Come on people).At least Animal cruelty in the States is now considered a felony and investigated by the FBI, which means that the U.S. is exploring how to address animal cruelty as a first step in preventing larger crime.Moreover, Best Friends Animal Society in the U.S. took on the task of rehabilitating and rehoming most of the 50 dogs found on Michael Vick’s property in 2007 ( I was directly involved in this as part of our Rescue group).Many of these dogs went on to achieve Canine Good Citizen Status in addition to therapy dog certifications. Best Friends changed the way fighting dogs were treating in the years to follow as the public began to view them as victims in need of rehabilitation.Yet for some reason the massive dog-fighting bust in Chatham, Ontario early this year has yet to see any progress in determining the fate of those dogs, who are still kept in an undisclosed location by the Ontario SPCA.Additionally, the Obama Administration spoke out against BSL claiming it to be “largely ineffective and often a waste of public resources.”In May 2016, Arizona became the 20th State to prohibit cities and counties from enacting or enforcing breed-based dog regulations with others States soon to follow.There are many real examples to turn to in order to address the complexity of breed-neutral regulations that decrease dog bite incidents.A great majority of this information came from Alison K McConwell-thanks for your help! She is a contributor on A Philosopher’s Take if you guys want to look her up.This is Ms. Faith. She just got rolled and creamed by not one but two cars, and she is scared shitless and in a lot of pain in this photo.I was the one who ran screaming with her into the local emergency Vet for Triage; she was covered in blood and whimpering.Yet, all she did was keep licking me (supplication) as if she was asking me to make it stop hurting-as she was bleeding out all over my back seat. Burned dog hair and flesh is pretty damn acrid.No biting, no snarling-just another soul that is begging for help.Which is the way that I interpreted it, quite literally.Today, she has scars that form a roadmap of the London underground down her side from all of the third degree burns that she got when she was swept up under truck #2 against the exhaust manifold.She runs, barks, hates baths, and plays with her owners pretty much every day.This is NOT the face of a mean animal.here she is being petted and loved on after 12 ablative treatments where they literally rip the dead skin off.It was her last treatment-she is a little groggy because they took her out to McDonalds for a treat and to celebrate. My understanding is that she feel asleep in one of the kids laps on the way home.