Alabama Animal Advocates

Dogs-at-Large Laws in Alabama

Dog running along farm fences.

When we see dogs running loose, we tend to assume they are off of their own premises because the owner does not care or allowed the dog to roam. This is not always the case: Accidents happen. Children leave doors open, contractors leave gates opened, dogs jump fences (or dig out from under fences) and dogs flee when scared.

If you see a dog running loose, the owner may be looking the dog. Please follow the steps to assist animals who are lost, stray, or abandoned. Your efforts may help the dog return home. If you see a dog running loose repeatedly, it is possible the owner allows the dog to run loose or does little to prevent that from happening.

Applicability

In the Alabama counties that have adopted the statute, the requirement that owners confine their dogs typically applies countywide. The statute does make an exception of municipalities require dog license tags (an example of a license tag requirement can be seen at Oneonta § 3-31). Where both the statute and a municipal dog confinement ordinance apply, citations are generally written for violations of the municipal ordinance (and its nearly always steeper penalty).

In the absence of an applicable state or local law there is no confinement requirement, as established by the 1952 decision of the Alabama Supreme Court in Owen v. Hamson. See Advocacy for steps you can take.

Advocacy

While many people presume allowing a dog to roam doesn’t hurt anyone, that is not the case. Dogs running loose can cause car accidents, can lead to fights with other animals, may result in injury or death to another person, or may result in the dog being shot. It is incumbent on all of us to take extraordinary measures to keep dogs confined for the benefit of human and animal residents alike. If confinement is required at your location, do not hesitate to report violations.

If confinement is not required at your location, there are several steps you can take:

Officials and residents who would like a confinement requirement can reference Guide for Counties & Municipalities for how a requirement can help, impacts on local government and law enforcement, considerations prior to adopting, and discussion of common concerns and misconceptions.

Enforcement

Enforcement of at-large laws is prompted by a resident’s report or an officer’s witnessing of a dog running loose. Enforcement may be handled by a ACO, another law enforcement officer, or an appointed agent. A responding officer or agent may address the situation in a variety of ways:

If no citation is issued and/or violations continue, the resident can ask whether the agency or official will address the situation again. The resident also has the option of bringing evidence directly to the court. This is known in Alabama law as a complaint, though we more commonly hear it referred to as “pressing charges” or “swearing out a warrant.”

If the magistrate or judge finds sufficient evidence of a violation, the dog owner will be summoned to court and will have the opportunity to plea or to contest the charge.

Penalties

Violation of Alabama’s confinement statute is a misdemeanor which carries a fine of $2 to $50, plus locally-determined court costs. The range of court costs that we are aware of is from $175 to $332.

Generally, violation of municipal laws carries a more severe penalty than the state law’s $2 to $50 (which, when established in 1915, was equivalent to $60 to $1500 in today’s dollars).

License Tags

The “license tag” exception in the At-Large statute's second paragraph [Alabama Code § 3-1-5(b)] refers to a tag issued upon registration or licensing of a dog. Mandatory licensing was common in Alabama when this law was enacted in 1915 but is uncommon now, so this reference can be confusing.

In late 1800s and early 1900s Alabama, many counties and municipalities issued license tags to mark paid-for dogs. Just as a car license plate (“tag”) indicates that the car is registered, taxes paid, and “given privilege or free range,” the 1919 dog tax statute specified that “a suitable metal tag” be issued and then worn by the dog. The statute ordered officials “to kill on sight any dog found by them running at large, not wearing the identification tag showing the registration number.”

Only when tax had been paid was a dog considered property. Clip from Alabama dog tax statute
Only when tax had been paid was a dog considered property and thus afforded the same protections as livestock and inanimate household objects.

Today, it is illegal to harm kill a dog for merely running at large, with or without a license tag (though unfortunately, we commonly hear that some officials advise residents to shoot loose dogs).

—

A Note About Word Choice: The laws addressed on this page are often called running-at-large laws (RAL), ‘leash laws,’ or containment laws. Running-at-Large is from the name of the statute, Permitting Dogs to Run at Large. ‘Leash law’ is a misnomer for the statute, which makes no mention of leashing.

We prefer the term ‘confinement’ rather than ‘containment’ because a) ‘confine’ is the term used in the statute, and b) ‘contain’ can skew toward restricting something hazardous whereas ‘confine’ is usually defined more neutrally, e.g., simply to enclose within boundaries. Extremely few dogs are dangerous: only 0.01% of dogs (or roughly 1 in 10,000) bite with enough force to cause an injury, according to Nathan Winograd, and the percentage of truly aggressive dogs is perhaps a quarter of 1%. Thus, the neutral term more accurately represents the function of such laws.