Dog Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,780 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,167 Posts
I heard about this yesterday. It makes me very mad that this was even passed in the first place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Breed Specific Legislation does not actually work :/ - they would be better off taking the money that they will be spending trying to enforce it and offering people free basic obedience classes and maybe printing up some pamphlets on canine body language.

A better educated public will go a lot further towards solving the problem than banning/killing perfectly nice dogs based on the size of their head.

Beth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,637 Posts
I'm extremely involved in this issue as I volunteer for 2 Montreal area based rescue organizations. I am a coordinator with Freedom Drivers: Animal Rescue Transport and One Last Chance Animal Rescue Team.

We are horrified, shocked and dismayed that this piece of legislation was actually passed. The mayor of Montreal, fast tracked this bylaw into being after a woman was mauled to death by what was reported to be a pitbull. DNA testing, actually confirmed this was alse breed identification and the dog in question was found to be a boxer x. He refused to listen to experts, scientists, animal welfare groups - anyone that would logically refute his arguments that BSL simply does not work. Although, pitbull and pitbull type dogs are not the only ones being affected with this legislation. The way it reads, if your dog kills another animal - frog, fish, mouse, etc. your dog can be deemed "dangerous", removed from your care and euthanized without appeal.

There are meetings and lawsuits going on to 1. try to legally challenge the constitutionality of the bylaw and, failing that, to ensure that the dogs affected are either 1. safely extracted from the area to rescues with no BSL in place or 2. financially assist families, who wish to keep their family members, but haven't got the financial means to comply with the requirements to obtain the special permits needed to keep their beloved pets. In order to obtain a special permit, all dogs that fall into the bylaw must be sterilized, microchipped and licensed with the city. The permit will cost each dog owner $150 now, and then must be renewed by December 31st of each year to the tune of $150.

This is a farce on the highest level.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,780 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I'm extremely involved in this issue as I volunteer for 2 Montreal area based rescue organizations. I am a coordinator with Freedom Drivers: Animal Rescue Transport and One Last Chance Animal Rescue Team.

We are horrified, shocked and dismayed that this piece of legislation was actually passed. The mayor of Montreal, fast tracked this bylaw into being after a woman was mauled to death by what was reported to be a pitbull. DNA testing, actually confirmed this was alse breed identification and the dog in question was found to be a boxer x. He refused to listen to experts, scientists, animal welfare groups - anyone that would logically refute his arguments that BSL simply does not work. Although, pitbull and pitbull type dogs are not the only ones being affected with this legislation. The way it reads, if your dog kills another animal - frog, fish, mouse, etc. your dog can be deemed "dangerous", removed from your care and euthanized without appeal.

There are meetings and lawsuits going on to 1. try to legally challenge the constitutionality of the bylaw and, failing that, to ensure that the dogs affected are either 1. safely extracted from the area to rescues with no BSL in place or 2. financially assist families, who wish to keep their family members, but haven't got the financial means to comply with the requirements to obtain the special permits needed to keep their beloved pets. In order to obtain a special permit, all dogs that fall into the bylaw must be sterilized, microchipped and licensed with the city. The permit will cost each dog owner $150 now, and then must be renewed by December 31st of each year to the tune of $150.

This is a farce on the highest level.
It's the fact that it contains BSL, and the fact that most of it is so loosely written, that dismays me most.

Under the bylaws any dog that looks remotely like a pit bull has to be registered. It doesn't matter if the owner knows that the dog does not contain any American Pit Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, or Staffordshire Bull Terrier blood, if it looks like it may it has to be registered, When out in public with the dog the owner must have it muzzled, walk it on a harness if it's over 20 kg (44 lb), and the leash can not be over 1.25 m (4 ft in) length .

I do understand that the attacking of other animals was likely meant to apply to domestic animals, but it's so loosely written, without any give in it, that if my dog attacks and kills a cat that hopped the fence and got into my yard, my dog could then be taken from me and euthanized. It wouldn't matter if that cat was a feral or not. It's the same with rabbits, if my dog killed a rabbit, it wouldn't matter if the rabbit was wild or domestic, my dog would pay with his life.

Then there's stuff like this: no dog, doesn't matter the breed, may drink or swim in a public pond. If it does so it's deemed a nuisance and the owner pays a fine.

Last but not least... They can modify the list of dog's prohibited, so hey one fine day when there's no more pit bulls to persecute maybe Mastiffs, Chow Chows, German Shepherd Dogs, Akita's, Doberman's, Rottweilers, or some other large, strong, breed, will then be the witch of choice:(
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,637 Posts
@Rain, you are preaching to the choir. What strikes us most is that they have given bylaw officers the right to enter the home of anyone who is suspected of owning a "dangerous" dog to do spot checks to ensure they are compliant with the new legislation. So, essentially, these city employees (with no training or education) can enter people's homes without a warrant, without probable cause, but just.....because. I believe that is one of the key points that is prompting constitutional lawyers all over the country to take on this case pro bono.

The whole situation is absolutely corrupt and insane.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
614 Posts
That's similar to the laws her in Aus. Except if a dog simply bites another dog or human (not mauled) they can be taken away from their owners.
This happened to me my male kelpie cross apparently bit another dog and human, while wearing a muzzle ( I wrote about this on another thread ages ago) and the council wanted to declare my dog dangerous and have him euthed over ONE bite that I never saw happen.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,599 Posts
The BSL part is ridiculous, as are all BSL laws. However, there are also a few good things coming from the new by-law. For example, cats aren't allowed to wander off your property (much to the joy of birds), dogs over 20 kg must wear a halter or harness (hopefully that means no prongs and no e-collars?), and pets must be spayed/neutered unless your dog is registered with an appropriate dog body and is able to breed.

I don't know why people are never held responsible for what their pets do...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,031 Posts
The statute is so badly written it begs to be voided. And that got me thinking. Apparently the incentive for the law was a dog incident, and I'm sure there were a bunch of people loudly urging that 'something be done'.
It actually crossed my mind that the statute was deliberately poorly written, activated to appease those who wanted to be appeased, and because it is so badly written it will be thrown out soon. By then, the local government can say they tried their best so they are not sitting on the hot seat, and the law will be gone.

Politics at its most devious.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,167 Posts
Apparently the Montreal spca is sueing the city because of the bylaw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,637 Posts
Apparently the Montreal spca is sueing the city because of the bylaw
Yes, they are. They began planning for this lawsuit before the bylaw was passed on September 27th. It's anyone's guess as to whether it will have traction, but we are hopeful that they are successful in having the vote overturned.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top