Specifically, PETA is protesting a "blanket policy" implemented by the Columbus, Ohio-based insurer that excludes applicants with certain dog breeds from qualifying for their homeowners insurance. The PETA said it is urging company policyholders to write letters of protest.

"Many terribly distressed customers of Nationwide Insurance have contacted PETA regarding the company's irresponsible policy concerning certain breeds of dogs--specifically Dobermans, German shepherds, pit bulls, rottweilers and chows--who are automatically labeled as vicious animals," PETA reported on its online Action Alert section.

The group urged its readers to contact W.G. Jurgensen, Nationwide's chief executive officer, and "ask him to do the right thing" for both policyholders and their companion animals.

PETA's Web site, www.peta-online.org, posted its notice under the headline "Nationwide not on the Animals' Side."

"Nationwide requires, without exception, that customers who have dogs of these breeds 'get rid of' the animals," the group said.

PETA also said its files are "bursting with complaints from former Nationwide customers whose animals have been ordered to be removed, including an 8-year-old Doberman suffering from cancer, an 11-year-old chow, and other indoor, spayed or neutered dogs."

Commenting on its Internet campaign, Laura Brown, special assistant for domestic animal issues & abuse department at PETA, told National Underwriter that her group has been getting complaints on this issue since late last year.

"We oppose such blanket policies based on dog breeds. It tells responsible animal owners that their only option is to get rid of their animals if they want homeowners insurance," said Ms. Brown.

But Kevin Craiglow, spokesperson for Nationwide, defended his company's policy, calling it "fair and rational."

"Our policy is that vicious dog breeds are ineligible because of the increased chance of injury to children, adults and other animals," Mr. Craiglow said.

"It's a fair policy based on data from the Center for Disease Control as well as our own research. While we appreciate the fact that certain individual dogs may not be vicious, we felt that we needed to have a policy that is fair and consistently implemented," he added.

Typically, if a policyholder's dog injures someone and the policyholder is sued as a result, homeowners insurance can offer protection against legal fees, medical expenses and other jury awards, explained Alejandra Soto, spokesperson for the New York-based Insurance Information Institute.

"But insurers started seeing a steep rise in dog-bite liability claims a few years ago. They started seeing some pretty high-profile cases that ended up in the courts that cost insurers millions of dollars," Ms. Soto said.

In 1996, for example, the property-casualty insurance industry paid out $250 million in dog bite-liability claims, she said, but that figure had jumped to more than $310 million in 2001.

"When that happened, some companies decided that this is not something they can afford to insure anymore," Ms. Soto said.

But she added that homeowners insurers have been taking different approaches in solving this problem. "There are three things that insurers have been opting to do," she said. One is to look at it case by case--in certain breeds, companies may request more information and find out whether dogs have been spayed or neutered or have taken training classes, steps that can reduce aggressive behaviors in dogs.

Another strategy is the "one-bite" rule, where "if a dog bites someone for the first time and gets sued, insurers will cover it. But if the dog bites for a second time, they will no longer cover it," Ms. Soto explained.

And the last, and the most strict, is the "blanket policy," which disqualifies those who own certain dog breeds without exception.

Currently, State Farm, the largest home insurer in the country, uses a "case-by-case" approach, while others, like Farmers Insurance Group, are using a "one-bite" rule.

But Ms. Soto estimated that, overall, only one-quarter of all homeowners insurers have adopted any measures to lower dog-bite liability in the past few years.

Commenting further on PETA's action, Ms. Brown said her group is not against all such measures, but just the blanket policies that some insurers like Nationwide have adopted.

She also added that her group has received some 40 complaints in the past few months. "Many people contacted us recently and told us that they are having trouble finding homeowners coverage now. Some people are really put in a tough spot even when they are responsible guardians for their dogs," Ms. Brown said.