Shelteez2
03-01-2004, 01:34 PM
http://www.canada.com/calgary/story.asp?id=E9AAD9E8-927C-4E26-A8C9-5E1263D281FA
---------------------------------------------------
Bad dog breed ban barks up wrong tree
'We punish behaviour' -- Bylaw Bill
Calgary's bylaw cops are rejecting moves by other Canadian centres to outlaw so-called dangerous breeds over dog attack fears.
Several municipalities have recently instituted breed-specific legislation that bans or restricts types of dogs considered dangerous, with the County of Newell in southeastern Alberta being one of the latest to consider the tactic.
But Calgary officials believe such laws do not get to the heart of the issue, maintaining their focus on responsible ownership through intensive licensing, hefty fines and education are more effective approaches.
"We don't punish breeds, we punish behaviour," said chief bylaw officer Bill Bruce. "The bottom line is, we believe all dogs are capable of biting."
Jurisdictions in Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario and Saskatchewan that have banned the ownership of dogs such as Rottweilers and pit bulls insist it is better to keep such animals out of the community altogether.
But Bruce says Calgary statistics back his approach.
The latest city figures, provided to the Herald, show the number of aggressive dog incidents edged up about eight per cent in 2003 to 592. That included 216 chases, 269 bites and 107 cases of damaged property.
However, the number of such incidents has plunged by two-thirds since 1984, while the dog population has nearly doubled to around 100,000.
"Responsible pet ownership is the number one reason (for the decline)," Bruce added.
Year-earlier stats show Rottweilers, pit bulls and German shepherds are involved in more attacks than other breeds. But officials also point out that there are a large number of the dogs in Calgary, as they are among the most popular breeds.
So of the 2,444 purebred and crossed Rottweilers licensed in the city in 2002, less than five per cent were involved in aggressive dog incidents.
Allison Archambault, of Southern Alberta Rottweiler Rescue, believes people are more likely to report incidents with larger dogs, such as Rottweilers, than smaller pets.
Dog behaviour comes down to good ownership, regardless of breed, Archambault said.
"A household that is not committed to giving these dogs a job, keeping them well exercised and well socialized, like with any other breed of dog, (its) positive qualities quickly become a detriment," she said.
Still, in towns and cities across North America, there is a growing concern of what some breed-ban advocates call a "dog bite epidemic."
In the United States, about five million people are bitten by dogs annually. In Canada, such figures are unknown because they are rarely tracked.
But high-profile attacks, such as the fatal mauling of a four-year-old boy by three Rottweilers last year in New Brunswick, have spurred several communities to either ban or place restrictions on breeds associated with such incidents.
Guysborough, N.S., last month passed a bylaw banning residents from owning Rottweilers.
In January, Moosomin, Sask., outlawed Rottweilers, Dobermans and pit bulls, arguing it will make the town a safer place to live.
A spokeswoman for the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies said the dog bite issue is "a huge concern," but added it is not known whether there is an increasing number of incidents or if people are just hearing about them more.
However, the organization believes breed bans are the wrong way to go.
Rather, it lauds Calgary's approach, citing it as an example for other municipalities.
"Having a strong licensing program, that has a good compliance rate, that has a good enforcement program, certainly does contribute to improving the dog bite situation," said Tanya O'Callaghan, communications co-ordinator for the humane society.
In Calgary, 90 per cent of dogs are licensed, allowing bylaw officers to keep track of pets and owners. The city also has a strict fine structure that includes a $250 penalty for chase incidents and $350 fines for bites.
Officials can have a dog with aggressive tendencies declared "dangerous," a label that carries higher license fees, muzzling rules and age restrictions on the dog's handlers.
A pet can only be destroyed by owner request or a court order.
O'Callaghan said Calgary's approach is better than breed-specific legislation, which can ban good dogs and miss canines that, if raised badly, can still be dangerous.
"It gives a bit of a false sense of security," she added.
The County of Newell, which represents about 10,000 people in the Brooks area, was looking at a bylaw that could place restrictions on certain breeds. However, it is reconsidering the plan and will likely scrap it.
The county received dozens of letters and e-mails from around the world from people who oppose breed restrictions, said deputy reeve Jack Harbinson.
"We decided after listening to the people, they were right," he said. "We don't need to address the dangerous dog issue; we need to address nuisance dogs running free."
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------
Bad dog breed ban barks up wrong tree
'We punish behaviour' -- Bylaw Bill
Calgary's bylaw cops are rejecting moves by other Canadian centres to outlaw so-called dangerous breeds over dog attack fears.
Several municipalities have recently instituted breed-specific legislation that bans or restricts types of dogs considered dangerous, with the County of Newell in southeastern Alberta being one of the latest to consider the tactic.
But Calgary officials believe such laws do not get to the heart of the issue, maintaining their focus on responsible ownership through intensive licensing, hefty fines and education are more effective approaches.
"We don't punish breeds, we punish behaviour," said chief bylaw officer Bill Bruce. "The bottom line is, we believe all dogs are capable of biting."
Jurisdictions in Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario and Saskatchewan that have banned the ownership of dogs such as Rottweilers and pit bulls insist it is better to keep such animals out of the community altogether.
But Bruce says Calgary statistics back his approach.
The latest city figures, provided to the Herald, show the number of aggressive dog incidents edged up about eight per cent in 2003 to 592. That included 216 chases, 269 bites and 107 cases of damaged property.
However, the number of such incidents has plunged by two-thirds since 1984, while the dog population has nearly doubled to around 100,000.
"Responsible pet ownership is the number one reason (for the decline)," Bruce added.
Year-earlier stats show Rottweilers, pit bulls and German shepherds are involved in more attacks than other breeds. But officials also point out that there are a large number of the dogs in Calgary, as they are among the most popular breeds.
So of the 2,444 purebred and crossed Rottweilers licensed in the city in 2002, less than five per cent were involved in aggressive dog incidents.
Allison Archambault, of Southern Alberta Rottweiler Rescue, believes people are more likely to report incidents with larger dogs, such as Rottweilers, than smaller pets.
Dog behaviour comes down to good ownership, regardless of breed, Archambault said.
"A household that is not committed to giving these dogs a job, keeping them well exercised and well socialized, like with any other breed of dog, (its) positive qualities quickly become a detriment," she said.
Still, in towns and cities across North America, there is a growing concern of what some breed-ban advocates call a "dog bite epidemic."
In the United States, about five million people are bitten by dogs annually. In Canada, such figures are unknown because they are rarely tracked.
But high-profile attacks, such as the fatal mauling of a four-year-old boy by three Rottweilers last year in New Brunswick, have spurred several communities to either ban or place restrictions on breeds associated with such incidents.
Guysborough, N.S., last month passed a bylaw banning residents from owning Rottweilers.
In January, Moosomin, Sask., outlawed Rottweilers, Dobermans and pit bulls, arguing it will make the town a safer place to live.
A spokeswoman for the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies said the dog bite issue is "a huge concern," but added it is not known whether there is an increasing number of incidents or if people are just hearing about them more.
However, the organization believes breed bans are the wrong way to go.
Rather, it lauds Calgary's approach, citing it as an example for other municipalities.
"Having a strong licensing program, that has a good compliance rate, that has a good enforcement program, certainly does contribute to improving the dog bite situation," said Tanya O'Callaghan, communications co-ordinator for the humane society.
In Calgary, 90 per cent of dogs are licensed, allowing bylaw officers to keep track of pets and owners. The city also has a strict fine structure that includes a $250 penalty for chase incidents and $350 fines for bites.
Officials can have a dog with aggressive tendencies declared "dangerous," a label that carries higher license fees, muzzling rules and age restrictions on the dog's handlers.
A pet can only be destroyed by owner request or a court order.
O'Callaghan said Calgary's approach is better than breed-specific legislation, which can ban good dogs and miss canines that, if raised badly, can still be dangerous.
"It gives a bit of a false sense of security," she added.
The County of Newell, which represents about 10,000 people in the Brooks area, was looking at a bylaw that could place restrictions on certain breeds. However, it is reconsidering the plan and will likely scrap it.
The county received dozens of letters and e-mails from around the world from people who oppose breed restrictions, said deputy reeve Jack Harbinson.
"We decided after listening to the people, they were right," he said. "We don't need to address the dangerous dog issue; we need to address nuisance dogs running free."
[email protected]