Dog lovers fight proposed bylaws

A group of dog owners are taking the Regional District of Central Okanagan's newly proposed dog bylaw to task.

Several area residents met on Saturday to discuss the bylaw and draw up 'improvements' they felt would be more 'dog and dog owner friendly', while still keeping to the goals of the RDCO and dog control.

The group refers to themselves as the 'Concerned Citizens of the RDCO', and believes there are some unreasonable clauses in the bylaw.

The RDCO allowed those with concerns or comments to respond through an online forum to the new laws by Sunday Feb. 2.

Cathy Nesbitt, heads up the group and was the one responsible for sending in a letter to the RDCO which stated; "The 'Concerned Citizens' feel that an 'open house' with Dog Control staff is an inappropriate platform to address issues of concern as many concerns stem from a lack of trust of the staff themselves."

On Wednesday Jan.29, the RDCO held an open house where several district staff members were on hand to answer all the communities' questions about the new bylaw. RDCO Communications Officer Bruce Smith says the open house was well publicized, and approximately 35 people took the opportunity to attend.

Nesbitt who is also a local dog trainer says she joined the group because of her concerns over the definition of a leash by the RDCO.

"I can understand where they are coming from but I don't think you should be able to dictate whether people can buy flexible leashes or not. I think 'flexie' leashes are used a lot by seniors to take their little shitzus out."

The definition of a leash under the responsible dog bylaw is: a leash with a fixed total length of 2 meters or less.

During the open house, Smith told Castanet that all extendable leashes can be locked at the appropriate length. He says far too often they hear stories of people get tripped or tied up in the long extendable leashes.

There are several other definitions the group believes should be improved under section 2 of the bylaw.

The group believes the words 'without provocation' should be added to the definition of both aggressive and dangerous dogs. Currently the definition describes an aggressive dog as one which has attacked, bitten or caused injury to a person or animal, while a dangerous dog, by definition, has seriously injured of killed a person or domestic animal.

Other definitions the group wishes to have revised include hobby kennel, nuisance dog, and owner.

In Part 3- Right of Inspection- the bylaw states 'an Animal Control Officer may enter at all reasonable times upon any property in order to inspect and determine whether this Bylaw is being followed.'

The group of 'Concerned Citizens' believes a warrant should be obtained to enter premises based on reasonable cause.

Smith responded at the open house by saying the RDCO has always had the right under city bylaws to check out premises, however, a complaint must be made before bylaw officers would investigate.

“We are, under the local government act and community charter, given the power to, in reasonable circumstances, go on property. We wouldn’t necessarily be going on a property looking for poop and we wouldn’t necessarily be going at two o’clock in the morning and be looking as to whether you have a dog license or not in your house, but if we get a complaint from someone, we will look into it.”

Part 3 also states that 'upon request an Animal Control Officer, an Owner in contravention of any provision of this Bylaw shall stop and immediately provide the Animal Control Officer with photo identification showing his or her full name and current address, and the licensing information of the dog.'

The group takes a strong issue with this clause claiming 'most, if not all, people do not take their dog’s licensing information with them anywhere'.

According to Nesbitt, dog walkers may not even have their own I.D. with them if they are close to home.

"There should be a time allowance of 24 hours for that information to be located and presented. It is also worthy of note that the dog’s info would be available to the officer on their own computer system," she says.

To which Smith responded, "This is nothing new. We are just making it clear that this authority already exists for any bylaw enforcement officer, including animal control. As pointed out, a dog is required to wear its license on its collar now and in the new bylaw."

Nesbitt and her concern citizen's group also say the RDCO's demand that a dog owner notify dog control regarding any change of ownership or the death of a dog is what they believe to be 'a complete abuse of authority'.

Smith explains that the current bylaw already requires licensed dog owners to notify the regional district if the dog dies or is transferred to a new owner. 

"This requirement helps ensure the most recent information is available should the dog need to be reunited with its owner. When owners don’t let us know, it delays the return of the dog."

A response to the 'Concerned Citzens of the RDCO' as well as to the 900 other inquires submitted regarding the new bylaw will be reviewed by staff and considered in preparing a report to the Regional Board.

A staff report is expected for the February 24th evening meeting of the Regional Board, when the bylaw will be coming forward for final reading.

The bylaw was drafted by RDCO Corporate Services staff, not the Dog Service Resource Group as some residents may have assumed.

"It took a good portion of last year for staff to review other bylaws and prepare several drafts that were reviewed many times by staff. The group did review the bylaw and provided input during the fall. Of course it has been thoroughly reviewed by the RDCO legal counsel," says Smith.

The Dog Service Resource Group Terms of Reference was drafted by the RDCO Dog Service Review consultant, Alan Neilson, last summer as one of the recommendations of his Dog Service Review from the fall of 2012.

Based on the terms of reference, people were invited by the RDCO to be on the group which advises staff on dog issues, not just the bylaw.  

"No one had to apply to be on the group," says Smith.

The entire suggested revisions to the proposed bylaw can be found below, (unedited).