By Ed Asher
Tribune Reporter 

Last summer, Bernalillo County sheriff's deputies broke up a cockfight in a South Valley back yard, citing 21 people and seizing 30 roosters, one dead bird and a box of bloody hooks.

But that was in county territory. As far as anybody knows, no one has ever been cited for cockfighting inside Albuquerque city limits.

"We've done investigations of complaints of cockfights. But we can't find any record of anyone ever being cited for cockfighting," said Denise Wilcox, associate director of Albuquerque's Environmental Health Department and head of the city's animal control services, on Wednesday.

Cockfighting has been illegal in Albuquerque since 1978, but it is tough to make a case against cockfighters, authorities say.

"A lot of cockfighting has been slipping through the cracks. When the police shows up, everyone says, `It's not my chicken' and it's hard to prosecute," said City Councilor Sally Mayer, an advocate for humane treatment of animals.

Wilcox agrees: "It's hard to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they were participating in a cockfight."

Even Bernalillo County agrees that cases are hard to prosecute.

"How often do we confiscate birds? Not as often as we'd like," said Diane Snyder, manager of the Bernalillo County Animal Control Department. "When we get there to investigate, either they've seen us coming and everyone takes off running, or they hide the birds and the evidence."

But that is about to change, at least inside Albuquerque city limits, authorities say.

The City Council on Wednesday approved two animal control ordinances. One beefs up the city's existing cockfighting ordinance; the other will allow officials to take pre-emptive measures against owners of dangerous dogs before the pets injure anyone.

The bill makes it illegal to transport or breed fighting birds with the city limits, and possession of cockfighting paraphernalia - such as razors or hooks often tied to the feet of roosters - will be illegal.

Perhaps the strongest measure is a provision that makes simply attending a cockfight enough to be cited and fined $500. The law also provides for jail time of up to 90 days.

"This will make a difference. This opens the door and provides us with another tool to stop this," said animal control Lt. Earl Baca.

The bill was proposed by Mayor Martin Chavez and was sponsored by Mayer.

Not everyone thinks it's a good idea.

"I believe it is a waste of time to even discuss it. Cockfighting is already illegal. I believe he (Chavez) is stressing this issue for political gain only," said David Lopez, 35, who said he raises and trades show birds. "To worry about cockfighting is idiotic. I support the rights of individuals."

Carlos Cansino, 73, said, "It's an old Spanish and Mexican tradition guaranteed by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo," referring to the 1848 treaty signed between the United States and Mexico.

"I'm in favor of cockfighting," he said.

Animal advocates support the new law.

"It's illegal to participate in an illegal activity. If you're there, if you're attending, you're participating," said John Merritt, executive director of the Animal Humane Association of New Mexico.

Viki Elkey, campaign manager for Animal Protection Voters, the lobbying arm of the advocacy and education group Animal Protection of New Mexico, said, "When you show up, everybody there claims not to own the roosters. You don't have anybody saying, `Those are my cocks in there fighting.'

"That's why we have this push for this ordinance. If you're a spectator, an owner, a handler or a referee, it doesn't matter. You get the same penalty."

The dog ordinance allows animal control officers to identify potentially dangerous dogs and to require the owners to meet certain conditions or face a fine.

Owners could be issued a warning for allowing a dog to run off of a leash or keeping the pet on unsecured property. The owner could be cited if children are able to enter the property.

Dogs seen chasing or menacing a person without provocation would also qualify.

Owners would be given a warning and could be required to secure the property or take other steps such as sending the dog to obedience training.

An inspection would ensue. If the steps were not taken, the owner could be cited. The penalty is a $500 fine or jail up to 90 days.

Dangerous dogs, those that have caused injury, were previously cited as potentially dangerous and have been impounded two or more times could be seized, sterilized and embedded with a microchip.

The dog, its microchip identification number and the owner's name and address would be placed on an Internet site maintained by animal control.

Mayer's bill was submitted without an appropriation. But she said she will introduce an appropriations bill next week calling for hiring five more animal control officers.

She said it would cost the city about $500,000 a year for the new officers, including trucks and equipment.

And she said she believes the Internet site could easily be maintained.

"The ordinance forces people who are not responsible to take action so their animals are not going to pose a threat to somebody else," Merritt said.

Source: http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_local_state_government/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19859_3484657,00.html