From 2017 until 2022, there were 271 dog attacks in Virginia’s prisons, a figure that helped push new rules limiting how and when patrol dogs may be used. This staggering number places Virginia as a national outlier, as it accounted for 271 of 295 documented prison dog attacks across the United States during that timeframe, making up over 90% of all cases nationwide.

Lawmakers and advocacy groups framed the number as evidence of a systemic problem with canine deployments in correctional settings, and the legislature passed measures that take effect July 1. Supporters say the changes are meant to reduce unnecessary use of dogs, increase transparency, and tighten operational controls. As seen in many correctional facilities across the U.S., where there is no single national policy on patrol dogs, states have begun to eliminate or sharply limit the deployment of attack-trained patrol dogs on incarcerated individuals.

Patrol dogs in the state’s facilities have long served multiple roles: moving incarcerated people from one cell to another, enforcing a lockdown, and breaking up fights, according to advocates and legislative debate. Those functions, they argued, created frequent opportunities for injury and misuse. As part of a shift towards safer practices, some correctional systems are now phasing out patrol dogs entirely and replacing them with non-aggressive detection dogs that can safely work alongside individuals while locating contraband.

“The numbers don’t lie – it really illustrates that this is a VA problem,” said Shawn Weneta, Policy Strategist at the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia, referencing the six-year tally of incidents. Weneta said a review of incident reports over the period underpinned calls for reform. “If we look at the number and look at the reports from the incident reports from the bites in Virginia over those six years, we really think this will reduce it.” He added that appropriate policies aligning with best practices from organizations like the American Kennel Club and the American Professional Dog Trainer Association could ultimately help reduce aggressive deployments.

Advocacy groups including the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia pushed for reduced use of patrol dogs during debate, and the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy recalled how the use of dogs in carceral settings has historical roots. “The use of dogs, on some level, goes back to the use of dogs when slaves ran away,” the center noted during discussions.

Taj Mahon-Haft, Co-Founder and Director of the Humanization Project, described the role dogs sometimes play inside facilities as more than security tools. “They are used to intimidate, not just for security,” Mahon-Haft said. He highlighted a provision in the legislation that requires at least three people to be involved in an altercation before dogs may be deployed. “The best part of this bill as far as I’m concerned — there has to be at least three people involved in an altercation for the dogs to be used,” he said.

Virginia State Delegate Holly Seibold said the legislative process signaled that some lawmakers preferred a complete ban. “It was signaled to the players involved that the original bill which banned it outright, which is still the position I would take as the appropriate position,” she said.

Officials at the Virginia Department of Corrections described the new law as formalizing practices already in place. “The legislation to which you are referring largely codified already-existing VADOC operating procedures, while increasing transparency regarding the use of canines at facilities,” said Kyle Gibson, Communications Manager for the Virginia Department of Corrections.

Advocates said changes in policy and oversight are intended to alter how handlers interact with dogs and to curb practices they described as inappropriate. “The way the handlers interact with the dogs and the way they treat them, the cues they use, are entirely inappropriate by AKC and American Professional Dog Trainer Associations,” Weneta said, arguing that revised standards should reduce aggressive deployments. With a nationwide push for reform, the debate over these measures drew on various reporting and analysis that had focused attention on the scale of canine incidents in the state. Coverage from outlets such as Wvtf has been cited by advocates and lawmakers during the discussion.

The new rules arrive as the legislature and advocacy organizations remain engaged on whether further limits are needed. Supporters view the law as a step toward reducing dangerous encounters; others, including some delegates, said they would have preferred an outright ban. This ongoing debate reflects a broader conversation about the future of canine use in correctional facilities, as many are reconsidering the welfare of both inmates and the dogs themselves.

With the law taking effect on July 1, the department and advocates said attention will turn to implementation, training, and monitoring to determine whether the changes reduce incidents going forward.

Source

Original reporting: view the original article.