Sally Hage’s dog Sophie, who was nearly killed in an attack in October 2025.
Reminder Publishing submitted photo
LONGMEADOW — Longmeadow resident Sally Hage is taking action by proposing a dangerous dog amendment to the town’s animal control ordinance after an attack left her dog on the brink of death.
The amendment looks to strengthen the regulation, control and enforcement of dangerous dogs in order to “protect public and animal safety,” according to the proposal.
It adds a definition of a “dangerous” dog, strengthens owner responsibility, increases fines, mandates insurance coverage and grants animal control officers 24-hour inspection authority to ensure compliance.
A dangerous dog includes any dog that inflicts unprovoked bodily injury on a human or domestic animal or demonstrates repeated unprovoked aggressive or menacing behavior. It will be up to voters to decide if it passes at the Annual Town Meeting on May 12.
Hage was on a break from work on Oct. 6, 2025 when she decided to take her dog Sophie, a 10-pound Havanese, for a quick walk. Her neighbor’s dog, an English mastiff weighing over 120 pounds, got out of the yard and onto the sidewalk, raced towards them and attacked before Hage could react.
The attack left Hage injured, in physical therapy for months and nearly killed Sophie. She said the dog attempted “multiple times to rip my dog apart and throw her to kill her,” comparing the situation to a tiger attacking a gazelle.
“My dog still will not walk further than a block from the house,” Hage said. “She sees another dog and I have to hold her. She’s so afraid, I mean, I don’t think she’ll ever get over it.”
The Select Board had already labeled the mastiff as a “dangerous dog” at the Sept. 3, 2024, meeting after an incident where it killed a resident’s chihuahua, ordering it to be fitted with a muzzle and a leash tied around the walker’s waist when the dog is removed from the premises.
Hage said she had never seen the mastiff with a muzzle and that it was kept unleashed and unsecured on a porch behind a small, “saloon style” swinging door. The porch had been kept shut by a small bungee cable, which was found on the ground after the attack, according to Hage.
The town currently only includes nuisance dogs in town law but redirects to state law for cases of dangerous dogs. Hage said explicitly including a dangerous dog ordinance, along with nuisance dogs, “increases both awareness for residents of the town that these laws exist and increases the likelihood of enforcement.”
“The goal is to improve public safety, promote responsible dog ownership and provide the town with effective enforcement tools, including the use of registration funds to support enforcement,” Hage said. “The amendment is not breed-specific and allows for situations in which a dog is acting to protect itself or its owner. Importantly, the amendment does not mandate immediate euthanasia. Instead, it requires that appropriate measures be taken to protect the community in cases where a dog has inflicted bodily injury on a person or domestic animal, or has demonstrated repeated, unprovoked aggressive behavior.”
She added that she found enforcement is uneven when talking to residents with dogs who have been attacked by other dogs and that this ordinance will “support more equitable enforcement and better protection of the community.”
The proposal states that “once a dog has been deemed dangerous as a result of a hearing, some or all of the following actions will be required of the dog owner,” such as being securely confined indoors or in an enclosed structure no less than six feet in height with secure sides and a top, suitable to prevent the entry of children and designed to prevent the animal from escaping.
“This provision is informed by a review of dangerous dog regulations in other communities,” Hage said. “A six-foot fence is generally considered necessary to prevent a dangerous dog from escaping or causing harm, as it better addresses the jumping, climbing and strength capabilities of large, athletic or highly motivated breeds. While a four-foot fence may be sufficient to contain smaller or less active dogs, a six-foot barrier provides a significantly greater level of protection against larger, stronger dogs that can easily clear lower heights.”
The proposal also adds onto state law and requires that warning signs of a dangerous dog must be visible on the property.
“The additional enforcement methods are standard practices used in other communities to ensure that regulations are meaningful rather than merely symbolic and that the community is fully informed and protected,” Hage said. “For example, prior to attacking my dog, this dangerous dog was loose and had even charged my fence. If a warning sign had been posted or if an animal control officer had conducted an inspection to ensure the dog was properly secured, I, or the town, could have taken steps to protect my dog before the attack occurred. These measures help ensure that no child approaches the enclosure of a dangerous dog, risking harm, and that no resident keeps such a dog in an unsecured area.”
Assistant Town Manager Mike Barbieri said the animal control officer currently follows up on specific orders issued by the Select Board, such as making sure a fence is properly installed by the date required.
“Not all regulations are easily enforceable,” Barbieri said. “For ongoing behavioral requirements, like muzzling or restraint, we must rely on the dog owner’s good-faith compliance.”
The amendment would require animal control to inspect properties twice a year and any dangerous dog may be seized immediately and held at the owner’s expense if the dog is not “validly registered, not maintained in a proper enclosure or is outside of the dwelling or enclosure and not under the physical restraint of the owner,” according to the proposal. Penalties include a $300 first-offense fine and a $500 second-offense fine. Continued violation calls for confiscation and humane euthanasia following due process.
“I want this amendment incorporated into the town’s ordinances so that residents are aware of state law and so the town is required to take proactive steps to protect the community from dangerous dogs,” Hage said. “In my case, little action was taken even after the dog killed another resident’s pet in front of its owner. The dog continued to be kept in an unsecured area, was repeatedly loose and ultimately attacked my dog as well, nearly killing her and leaving me with injuries.”
