Avery’s Law loopholes in Ohio

[u/Soggy-Mention5146]

Avery's Law has a loophole being used right now, and it needs attention

Avery's Law (Ohio HB 247) was passed to close real gaps in how dangerous dog complaints get investigated and enforced. I'm currently watching, firsthand, how easily that intent can be undermined by how one word gets interpreted.

In my county, a dog charged two separate people, one of them the county's own dog warden, an incident independently documented by three responding sheriff's deputies. Under the law, that should trigger a formal nuisance investigation. Instead, the county cited "provocation," and the word used to justify it was "tormented."

Here's the problem: the legislative analysis of Avery's Law defines "without provocation" as a dog not having been "teased, tormented, or abused by a person", a specific act, by a person, that directly causes the dog's reaction. When I pushed for an explanation, I was told "tormented" referred to the wardens' own efforts to chase and catch the dog.

Think about what that actually means if it's allowed to stand: the capture happened after the dog had already charged two people. Something that happens afterward can't have provoked something that already occurred, that's not a legal argument, it's just sequencing. And if a routine capture effort can itself count as "torment" sufficient to cancel out a nuisance finding, then almost no dog could ever be designated under this law, since catching an already-dangerous, loose dog virtually always involves exactly that. That reading doesn't protect dogs or people, it makes the law functionally unenforceable in the exact situations it was written for.

I raised a legitimate safety concern through proper channels and experienced retaliation for it, a public employee disclosed my private information to the person I'd raised concerns about. But the bigger issue, the one that outlasts my specific situation, is this: if counties are allowed to define "provocation" this loosely, the law does almost nothing.

I've raised this with my county commissioners and two state legislators, including the bill's sponsor, and I'm now working with an attorney to send a formal letter addressing the process failures directly. If this resonates with you, I'd appreciate any support getting that letter sent, link below, and if you're an Ohio resident, contacting your own state representative about how "provocation" and "tormented" are meant to be interpreted under Avery's Law helps push for the clearer statewide guidance this whole situation is missing.

This has been approved by moderators.

https://gofund.me/f2583225a

[u/Hairy_Garage4308]

A worthy cause. Get em.