Is Denver running scared?

There was some great news out of Denver this week!

Most of you remember the --the Dias vs. Denver case, that was filed in 2007, dismissed in 2008 and then reinstated in 2009 by the Federal Court of Appeals and is still ongoing. That lawsuit is now in the Summary Judgment phase. The short answer of what that means is that Denver filed a motion that no matter what, the case can't win at trial so the judge just needs to sort of look at it and give a judgment without a trial. Denver filed that motion, then the plaintiffs filed a reply to that, and now Denver is going to file a reply to the plaintiffs' reply and the judge will rule on it sometime this spring. If Denver wins the motion for summary judgment, it doesn't go to trial. If the plaintiffs win, it goes to trial at some point.

There is another federal court case that has been ongoing in Denver. The Arnold vs. Denver case.

The Arnold case has been settled by the City of Denver for an undisclosed large amount of money.
 

Included in the monetary settlement are some procedural changes to Denver's ordinance. What those procedural changes will do is make it easier for people to understand the often inscrutable system of pit bull pick-ups at animal control. Details on that will come later. Denver will start implementing these procedural changes this spring. These changes came after hours and hours of mind-numbing meetings with the city about the minutia of the procedures. Hopefully, it will help people whose dogs were picked up and who don't have any kind of advocate with them.

One of the plaintiffs in the Arnold vs. Denver lawsuit dropped out of the settlement and will file her own lawsuit in federal court with a top constitutional law firm. This is also fantastic news!

Rumor has it there is yet another suit being filed on a constitutional basis against the city of Denver. I'll let you know the details as they are made available.

Denver's city attorney's office is short staffed so they've hired an outside law firm to handle the rest of the Dias vs. Denver case. The law firm is Wells, Anderson and Race and they began to take over the case in/around December. Denver is paying them about $150 dollars an hour to handle it. So far, payments to the law firm regarding this case are: $4768.68 in December, and $10,336.75 in January. This is from a city with a massive budget deficit! Great to see those taxpaying dollars hard at work, senselessly killing innocent dogs based on how they look!

Translation and summary of this latest news out of Denver, Co.

The city of Denver obviously knew they couldn't win the case against Arnold. Hence the settlement out of court! That is terrific news on the overturn the ban front!!

Generally speaking, many jurisdictions "think" they can "wear dog owners down" by dragging them through court and exhausting them of money. It looks as though the proverbial shoe is on the other foot. Denver is sporting a huge deficit and the dog owner court cases are mounting against them.

Round of applause for all dog owners willing to stand by their dogs and fight for their lives. Constitutional rights (as in the right to own what breed or type of dog you choose to have in your own home) is worth fighting for. Innocent lives targeted by hatred and ignorance are well worth fighting for. This insanity MUST stop once and for all. Too many innocent lives of dogs and innocent dog owners have lost their pets because of irrational fear and lack of common sense. 

There is a better way! Revenue neutral, common sense laws along with education and encouragement for proper training, containing and socializing pets is the solution. Witch hunting and attempting to wipe out a certain "look" or "type" of dogs does absolutely NOTHING to preserve public safety. It does endanger the safety of innocent dogs and haphazardly targets responsible owners who happen to own dogs that may "look" to be what the ignorant perceive to be dangerous!

Well thought out article

I came across a well thought out article on a blog called Ethics Alarms.

The article is called "Pit Bulls and Bigotry". I encourage you to read this post.

 Pit Bulls and Bigotry

Writer Charles Leerhsen has experienced a conversion. After witnessing his best friend being viciously attacked and nearly killed on a city street without provocation, he has embraced bigotry with both hands. Now he writes screeds condemning not the attacker, but all individuals of the attacker’s race. In a passionate and angry essay for The Daily Beast, he denigrates not only those individuals but also anyone who defends them, such as “certain PC urban professionals who long to tell the world that they are super-sensitive and understanding souls.”
It’s an ugly essay, emotional, doctrinaire, and illogical, employing the well-worn racist technique of generalizing from the individual to the group and back again. Why would any respectable media outlet print such bile?

Read on...

PETA's 2009 numbers are in...

Nathan Winograd has an article titled The Butcher of Norfolk (4th Edition).

The numbers are finally in. In 2009, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) impounded 2,366 animals. They killed 2,301 and found homes for only 8. Another 31 were transferred to killing shelters and their fates are unknown. That’s a 97% rate of killing. While the No Kill movement is having unparalleled success and with No Kill communities now dotting the American landscape—in California, Nevada, Kansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Colorado, Utah, Virginia, and elsewhere—PETA continues to move sharply in the other direction. This is the fourth time I have run this very blog. This is my fourth plea to stop the Butcher of Norfolk.

Please read the whole article... 

Way to hurl Bob Barker

Bob Barker Donates $2.5 Million to PETA

Bob Barker, host of “The Price is Right” from 1972 to 2007, has donated $2.5 million to animal rights charity People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). The money was used to open a new PETA office in Los Angeles.
Barker announced the donation at a ribbon-cutting ceremony in front of the renovated building on Sunset Boulevard Tuesday afternoon. Barker was joined by PETA President Ingrid E. Newkirk.

 

This seriously cracked me up! Animal Rights Activists peed upon...

h/t Jody!

This story is satire, and I am not a supporter of violence (at least not admittedly) but this story made me laugh. I had a couple side fantasies of this happening to Pam Anderson, Heather Mills, Bill Maher, Wayne Pacelle, Ingrid Newkirk and other infamous AR wanks..

Enjoy!

Activists Missing After Declaring “War on Leather” at Motorcycle Rally

Johnstown, PA (GlossyNews) – Local and state police scoured the hills outside rural Johnstown, Pennsylvania, after reports of three animal rights activists going missing after attempting to protest the wearing of leather at a large motorcycle gang rally this weekend. Two others, previously reported missing, were discovered by fast food workers “duct taped inside several fast food restaurant dumpsters,” according to police officials.

“Something just went wrong,” said a still visibly shaken organizer of the protest. “Something just went horribly, horribly, wrong.”
The organizer said a group of concerned animal rights activist groups, “growing tired of throwing fake blood and shouting profanities at older women wearing leather or fur coats,” decided to protest the annual motorcycle club event “in a hope to show them our outrage at their wanton use of leather in their clothing and motor bike seats.” “In fact,” said the organizer, “motorcycle gangs are one of the biggest abusers of wearing leather, and we decided it was high time that we let them know that we disagree with them using it…ergo, they should stop.”

According to witnesses, protesters arrived at the event in a vintage 1960’s era Volkswagen van and began to pelt the gang members with balloons filled with red colored water, simulating blood, and shouting “you’re murderers” to passers by. This, evidently, is when the brouhaha began.

“They peed on me!!!” charged one activist. “They grabbed me, said I looked like I was French, started calling me ‘La Trene’, and duct taped me to a tree so they could pee on me all day!”

“I…I was trying to show my outrage at a man with a heavy leather jacket, and he…he didn’t even care. I called him a murderer, and all he said was, ‘You can’t prove that.’ Next thing I know he forced me to ride on the back of his motorcycle all day, and would not let me off, because his girl friend was out of town and I was almost a woman.”
Still others claimed they were forced to eat hamburgers and hot dogs under duress. Those who resisted were allegedly held down while several bikers “farted on their heads.”

Police officials declined comments on any leads or arrests due to the ongoing nature of the investigation, however, organizers for the motorcycle club rally expressed “surprise” at the allegations.
“That’s preposterous,” said one high-ranking member of the biker organizing committee. “We were having a party, and these people showed up and were very rude to us. They threw things at us, called us names, and tried to ruin the entire event. So, what did we do? We invited them to the party! What could be more friendly than that? You know, just because we are all members of motorcycle clubs does not mean we do not care about inclusiveness. Personally, I think it shows a lack of character for them to be saying such nasty things about us after we bent over backwards to make them feel welcome.”
When confronted with the allegations of force-feeding the activists meat, using them as ad hoc latrines, leaving them incapacitated in fast food restaurant dumpsters, and ‘farting on their heads,’ the organizer declined to comment in detail. “That’s just our secret handshake,” assured the organizer.

Sarnia is bottom of my list of places I would live!

There is an article in the Sarnia Observer today.

I want to make 2 comments about this situation and quotes from the article.

First off, congrats Korinn Seabrook on getting your dogs back.

Maddi and Carter (puppies) and their father, all three boxer mixes, were seized by city animal control officers in early September. We are now into March. That is 6 - 7 months Korinn has been without her dogs.

The statement below is from city manager Lloyd Fennell.

City manager Lloyd Fennell said he's happy to see the situation resolved. It's unfortunate it took so much time, but he thinks all parties agree the right decision was made.
"Getting it right when you're dealing with someone's pet, and the protection of the public, is the ultimate thing."
The dogs must be spayed or neutered and registered with the city before they can be released. The city will review its animal control policies and from now on will consult an expert before it decides to euthanize an dog of questionable breed, Fennell said. Animal control staff were just enforcing provincial law when they seized the dogs, he said.

I wouldn't put it as a mistake," he said. "Animal control staff are vigilant about what they perceive as similar characteristics. For those that aren't actual breeders it probably isn't an exact science."

Lloyd, you were doing well up until your last statement. Now I have returned to thinking you are a douchebag!

Of course it was a mistake! What I assume you are saying is this and if I'm wrong prove me wrong:

1. You believe there is such a thing as a "pitbull". That is absolutely FALSE!

2. There is a threat that the public must be protected from, based on dangerous dogs classified by breeds or "non-breeds" in this situation. That is absolutely FALSE!

3. You believe that breeders or anyone else for that matter can correctly identify the lineage of mutts. That is absolutely FALSE!

3. If you can read at all, DOLA uses the word "MAY".
From DOLA:
Same
(1.1) A proceeding may be commenced in the Ontario Court of Justice against a person if it is alleged that the person contravened a provision of this Act or the regulations or a court order made under this Act. 2005, c. 2, s. 1 (6).

So what that means is you may use DOLA but you are not obligated to murder any dog you find on the street (that ac perceives to be a "pitbull") or while our trolling that isn't an actual danger to society. Two of these dogs were puppies for shit's sake! They got loose. It happens. That hardly qualifies as public enemy #1!

There is nothing vigilant, or valiant or any other description of how Sarnia's animal control department is conducting themselves. Their job, as in all jurisdictions is to catch loose dogs, enforce dog licenses, investigate irresponsible dog owners that are causing a problem and collect a paycheck. They are not Elmer the Safety Elephant or Super Heros that are dramatically saving the public in Sarnia from supposed rogue "pitbulls".

I could do a quick check for you and see how many purebred banned dogs there are in Sarnia. You may have ZERO! There are only less than 1500 in the whole province so odds are you don't have any. If you really put your thinking cap on and do the arithmetic, you will even come to the realization that the most common mutt (the short haired mutt) walking around any town Ontario is not likely mixes derived from any of the three named banned breeds at all. How could they be. They would be some awfully busy breeding dogs.. don't yathink?

Also, while I'm at it, does the city of Sarnia have a mandatory s/n bylaw? Just wondering why Korinn Seabrook must s/n her dogs as a condition of getting them back? Or does the council also buy into the BS that unaltered dogs are dangerous? That is also absolutely FALSE! They are simply still able to breed. It isn't against the law to breed mutts, frowned on maybe? But people are purposely breeding cock-a-poos, lab-a-doos and what-have-you's and getting good money for them. Nobody is forcing them to stop?

Dogs that are trained, contained and socialized are good canine citizens. This has NOTHING to do with breed, reproductive status or looks. It has everything to do with responsible owners and thoughtful bylaws such as the Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw in Calgary. There is nothing stopping municipalities in Ontario from adopting Calgary's bylaw and implementing something that actually works instead of senselessly targeting and killing innocent dogs!

Here is the article from the Sarnia Observer.

Three dogs mistakenly believed to be pit bulls, and sentenced to death by the city, will be set free this week.Puppies Maddi and Carter and their father, all three boxer mixes, were seized by city animal control officers in early September. According to a provincial law, any dog resembling a Staff ordshire bull terrier must be destroyed because the breed is banned. Maddi's owner, Korinn Seabrook said she's relieved her dog is coming home. "I'm beyond happy," she said. "I just wish that we didn't have to go through all of this."

Maddi escaped Seabrook's home through a broken screen door and was found by animal control running loose. When Seabrook went to the shelter to retrieve the animal she was told it would be euthanized. But, thanks to the intervention of two experts, who both agreed the dogs were not pit bulls, the pups will go free.
Seabrook will still have to pay over $600 in kennel, medical and licensing fees to get her dog back. That is deeply frustrating, she said. "They just kept trying to find a way to win," she said, of city staff . "Well, guess what, you win. I'm paying the money because I want my dog back."

Seabrook said she was amazed at the support from the community during the ordeal. She said without it they might have lost their dogs. "I'm glad there were people who stood behind us," she said. "They supported us and thankfully things are better."

City manager Lloyd Fennell said he's happy to see the situation resolved. It's unfortunate it took so much time, but he thinks all parties agree the right decision was made.  "Getting it right when you're dealing with someone's pet, and the protection of the public, is the ultimate thing.

The dogs must be spayed or neutered and registered with the city before they can be released. The city will review its animal control policies and from now on will consult an expert before it decides to euthanize an dog of questionable breed, Fennell said. Animal control staff were just enforcing provincial law when they seized the dogs, he said.

"I wouldn't put it as a mistake," he said. "Animal control staff are vigilant about what they perceive as similar characteristics. For those that aren't actual breeders it probably isn't an exact science."

Comment from Cheri DiNovo

This is a comment from NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo on the throne speech.

So the throne speech suggests poverty will be eradicated by volunteers. Since housing wasn't mentioned - no substantive housing initiatives. Watch for cuts to our social services (hinted at) and privatization of key assets like the LCBO - pointed to. A sad day for Ontario and since prorogation killed all our private members bills - we start again. Even the Harper Tories didn't kill private members bills!

Bill 222 to have breed specific portion of DOLA repealed is dead

Thanks to McGuinty's prorogation of the Ontario Legislature, Bill 222 is dead in the water. I guess prorogation is the "trendy" thing to do? This isn't the first time McGuinty has shut down the legislature. My first inclination is to say that there is less harm done when McGuinty and company are not sitting, however all bills tabled that were up for further readings are now dead. Included is the former bill 222 by Cheri DiNovo to have the breed specific portion of DOLA repealed.

NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo will reintroduce the legislation again once the house gets back to work.

Here is an article by Amanda Street at Niagara This Week.

A bullied breed. Sandra Alway with her dog Olive, a five-year-old American Pit Bull Terrier. In 2005, the Ontario government banned pit bulls and related breeds which NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo is trying to reverse with a Private Members Bill, Bill 222.

A bullied breed

It’s the deed not the breed says MPP who tabled bill to repeal pit bull ban

Sandra Alway can’t imagine a life without her dogs. But it’s a hard reality she may soon have to face.
In 2005, the Ontario government banned pit bulls and related breeds. Alway has owned the breed she described as “incredibly smart and sweet” for 22 years. She got her first, a rescue, at age 18.
The Dog Owners Liability Act banned pit bull terriers, Staffordshire bull terriers, American Staffordshire terriers, American pit bull terriers and any dog “that has an appearance and physical characteristics that are substantially similar” to those listed. Existing dogs were grandfathered into the act, but there were stipulations — muzzled and leashed in all public places, and they must be spayed or neutered.
The legislation left two options for puppies born after November 2005 — euthanization or relocation to a province that allows the breed.
“Five years later and I’m watching my dogs grow old at a rapid rate,” said Alway who has six pit bulls, the youngest of which were born just before the ban was enacted. She had 23 dogs when the ban came into effect. “I’m losing them and it’s really hard to deal with.”
Alway, who is president of the Golden Horseshoe American Pit Bull Terrier Club, said DOLA, without the breed ban, is “a perfect piece of legislation.” It includes jail time and high fines for owners of vicious dogs.
“I love DOLA, it would be fantastic piece of legislation if they just removed the breed specific legislation,” said Alway, who advocated for pit bulls when Bill 132 was brought into legislature.
With the help of Niagara West-Glanbrook MPP Tim Hudak, Alway collected more than 100,000 signatures on a petition against the breed ban. “We’re all for jail time, we’re all for high fines. If we had excluded the BSL, it would be perfect.”
The ban was brought back into the public eye on Nov. 18, 2009, when NDP MPP Cheri DiNovo introduced a Private Members Bill, 222, that called for a repeal of the breed specific legislation. “It’s the deed not the breed,” DiNovo shouted from the steps outside Queen’s Park during a rally in support of Bill 222.
The bill was tabled five months after the Supreme Court of Canada ruled it would not hear an appeal to the Supreme Court of Ontario’s decision to not rescind the government’s pit bull ban of 2005.
A recent seizure of two dogs, alleged to be pit bulls by the City of Brampton, has also brought the breed ban into the public eye. Rambo and Brittany, who the owners’ claim are boxer/American bulldog mixes, were seized by the city in January and labelled pit bulls. As the dogs are two years old, and born after the ban went into effect, the dogs were scheduled to be euthanized. The owners are taking the city to court and residents across the province are reacting.
A Facebook group, Injustice Brampton Dogs on Death Row – Free Them Now, has more than 10,000 members.
“These are puppies,” said Alway. “They’re only crime is that they are pit bulls. The ban doesn’t take into consideration how these animals are raised. How the dog behaves is a direct impact of how they were bought up. It’s bad ownership not bad dogs.”
In 2007, 43 pit bulls met their demise at the Lincoln County Humane Society. Staff do their best to relocate the animals, having sent dozens to provinces that do not ban the breed or to the United States, said Kevin Strooband, executive director. The ban, said Strooband, has not stopped people from breeding the banned dogs, noting he has seen full litters of pit bulls and related breeds since the ban was enacted.
“We, at the Lincoln County Humane Society, oppose breed specific legislation because it punishes an entire breed for attacks made by a few dogs,” said Strooband, describing the breed as a “sweet and loving” animal. “I’ve met a lot of pit bulls that are great dogs.”
A study published in the Canadian Veterinary Journal in 2008 found that out of 28 dog-bite related fatalities in Canada between 1990 and 2007, only one was caused by a breed banned under DOLA, an American Staffordshire terrier. Dogs most responsible for fatalities in that same period were listed as huskies, shepherds and Rottweiller-type dogs. According to the study, those breeds were responsible for 65 per cent of dog attack deaths.
According to a similar study in the United States, it was found that the top biters by breed are German Shepherds, Rottweillers, Cocker Spaniels, and Golden Retrievers. While it may be shocking for some to see the most common pet, a Golden Retriever, in the top four, it’s a reality, said Strooband.
A 2002 report by the Canadian Hospitals Injury Reporting and Prevention Program, found that German Shepherds, Cocker Spaniels, Rottweillers and Golden Retrievers had the highest prevalence of reported dog bites.
“Pit bulls have been painted with the wrong brush,” said Strooband, who is also the lead investigator for the Ontario Society for the Protection of Animals. “The onus should be on the owners not on any specific breed. We’ve banned pit bulls, what’s next Dobermans?
Chihuahuas? When does it end?”
Welland New Democrat MPP Peter Kormos called the original bill a “knee jerk reaction” that “ignores the reality of the dog world” and “provides a false sense of security” for the public.
“At the end of the day it does nothing to protect the public from vicious Labradors, retrievers or poodles,” said Kormos, who voted against Bill 132. “A dog is inherent, through part of its genetic makeup to have an instinct to act up, to act wild. It is the responsibility of the dog owner and the dog breeder to keep that instinct in check.”
Hudak, who is now the leader of the provincial Progressive Conservative party, said his party supports Bill 222 because it is similar to a private member’s bill introduced by York North MPP Julia Munro in 2004.
“My view is, and has always been, that a category be created for vicious dogs rather than impose sanctions on an individual breed,” said Hudak. “Punish the deed not the breed.”
Hudak said Bill 132 does nothing to recognize responsible owners and does not protect the public from the “vicious dog next door.”
Calls to St. Catharines Liberal  MPP Jim Bradley were not returned.
“I do believe there is hope that one day the ban will be repealed,” said Alway. “I think it will be a while, but I have I hope. I have to. I can’t imagine not owning these dogs.”
A second reading of Bill 222 is expected to take place in the fall.
For more information on Bill 222 and to send a letter to your local MPP and Premier Dalton McGuinty, visit www.stopcanineprofiling.com 

Brampton dog allowed visit

The Brampton Guardian published an article about Brittany, one of the dogs seized in Brampton January 13, 2010, getting her first visit from her owner Ines Branco.

Neither owners of Rambo or Brittany have been allowed visits until now. Thank goodness someone finally came to their senses and at least allowed the dogs owners some peace of mind that the dogs basic needs are being met. Previous requests for vet examinations and visitations were turned down until this week.

Here is a link to the story. 

Brittany gets a visit

By Pam Douglas 

The City of Brampton has relented and allowed two Brampton families to visit their impounded pups.
Ines Branco and her mother spent a heart-lifting hour with two-year-old Brittany late Friday afternoon at the Brampton Animal Shelter.
After two months of separation, it was a reunion full of love and licks.
“She jumped all over me and started licking me all over,” Ines Branco said.
“I got a dog bath,” she chuckled. “She was so excited.”
She said Brittany looks fine, and seeing her has alleviated her worries about her condition.
“I am relieved,” she said. “I do miss her a lot. She was my life, that dog. She’s a great dog.”
She said she now knows Brittany is getting out of her cage regularly. The dog has become very attached to one of the shelter workers, who Ines Branco said interacts with Brittany in the same ways she does.
“She sings to her, like I do,” she said. “And I’m generous with treats.”
Maria Gaspar has also been given permission to visit her dog, Rambo, but she is 75 years old and taking the separation hard, Ines Branco said. A visit might be too hard on her.
The families can now pre-arrange more visits, they were told. The shelter workers were accommodating and allowed them to stay as long as they wanted. The visit lasted about one hour.
The dogs have been front and centre in a dispute between the city and the families. The city has labelled them “illegal pitbulls”, the families insist they are boxer/American bulldog mixes.
The Brancos were told they could take Brittany for a walk, but they didn’t want Brittany to think she was going home, so they chose to spend time with her inside.
Brittany was very familiar with the room they were taken to for their reunion, where the shelter worker has a desk, according to Ines Branco. She was told Brittany sits by the woman’s side while she does computer work during the day.
“I was so worried all day. I couldn’t eat lunch, I couldn’t think. I was worried about how she was going to react,” Ines Branco said.
But the worry was all for nothing.
They brought toys and treats that her brother, Rui Branco, bought the night before. Rui Branco had Brittany’s mother, Jersey, a purebred boxer, lie on a mat he bought so her scent would be on it.
“She (Brittany) went right to it and laid down,” Ines Branco said.
Ines Branco also brought along her Brampton Battalion T-shirt that Brittany would always suck on whenever she would wear it.
“She sucks like a baby,” Ines Branco said. “That’s why I call her ‘Babies’.”
She left it there for Brittany, hoping her own scent would give her pet even more comfort.
When the Brancos left, the shelter worker distracted Brittany with a leash and promise of a walk, and the two women slipped out, anxious to return next week.
“It was very hard to leave,” Ines Branco said. “I want her back now. I miss her again already. I really hope I can see her once a week.”
She didn’t leave empty-handed, though. The shelter worker took pictures of them with Brittany, and printed them on the spot and gave them to her.
The city never gave a reason for their refusal to allow the families to see their dogs, but despite numerous requests, the families were told they could not.
In fact, earlier in the day Thursday, the families were told they could bring toys and blankets to the shelter for the dogs, but they would still be barred from seeing their pets.
Similarly, no reason was offered to explain why city officials suddenly changed their minds and are now allowing visits.

 

Ines and Brittany

 

Toledo Ohio (Formerly Skeldon's Killing fields) is onto Calgary's success

I am simply blown away at how municipalities, counties, states, provinces and countries don't jump at the chance to adopt Calgary's common sense approach to responsible pet ownership!

The Toledo Blade has an excellent article; 

Canadian city changes tack to cut dog deaths
Calgary focuses on actions of irresponsible owners

By JC REINDL
BLADE STAFF WRITER

Bill Bruce, director of animal and bylaw services, is responsible for many of the city's current policies.
( CALGARY HERALD/TED JACOB )

First of two parts Two different approaches to dog wardening have reaped very different results for their respective communities. The older method, exemplified by roving and aggressive dog catchers, breed-specific targeting, and frequent euthanasia, was perfected by former Lucas County Dog Warden Tom Skeldon. The outcome: 1,951 impounded dogs killed last year in a county of about 440,000 people and 357 "investigated" bites or attacks. The flip side is a system of service-oriented patrols, incentives for self-regulation, and a philosophy of punishing irresponsible owners rather than dogs. Those are the methods adopted by the Canadian city of Calgary under Bill Bruce, director of animal and bylaw services for this city commonly known among Midwestern Americans for the Flames, of the National Hockey League, and the 1988 Winter Olympics. Although Calgary has more than twice the population of Lucas County, its animal shelter euthanized 203 dogs last year - just under 5 percent of all impounded dogs, compared with Lucas County's 72 percent kill rate - and reported only 158 dog bites, most of the "no puncture" variety.But similar to Lucas County's dog warden department, Calgary's operation receives no government subsides - running solely on the proceeds from licensing fees and fines.

As local officials search to hire a new head dog warden with his or her own approach to animal control, the Calgary model of Mr. Bruce illustrates how effective public safety and humane treatment of dogs are not mutually exclusive concepts. The key, according to Mr. Bruce, is giving people the right incentives to be responsible pet owners. Consider it a tough-love approach: tough on bad owners but loving of the animals. "The whole model is about responsible pet ownership," Mr. Bruce, 56, said in a phone interview. "In North America, we don't really have an animal problem; we've got a people problem. I think that's the first realization you've got to come to - it's not about the animal, it's about the people."

Penalizing people

One significant difference between the Lucas County and Calgary models is the penalties law breakers face. Although Lucas County routinely excuses owners from various citations if they surrender their dogs - a step that often leads to the animals' euthanasia - Calgary hits irresponsible owners in their wallets. Those whose dogs defecate on public property in Calgary are fined $250 - the same fine as for having an unlicensed dog. The penalty is $100 for a dog that chases or threatens to bite a person. A person caught teasing or tormenting a dog is ticketed $100. "Tormenting a dog is an offense here because if that dog gets out, it's going to bite the first kid it comes to, just because it's got this pent-up anger and frustration," Mr. Bruce said. The Calgary system was built to penalize and correct relatively minor behaviors before they can escalate into something serious. "No dog wakes up and decides to start biting people today," Mr. Bruce said. "It always starts with lesser behaviors that are left unchecked." Fines increase with the severity of the offense. Owners are ticketed $350 if their dogs bite and $750 if the bites are serious enough to require some medical attention. A severe bite or all-out attack results in a $1,500 fine. Mr. Bruce's staff will seize vicious dogs who attack and hold them for 30 days until the matter goes to court. His department will then destroy the animal if the judge orders so, as is done in Ohio. "When you have a vicious dog, you can almost guarantee the owner's a jerk," Mr. Bruce said. "The dog reflects the owner's behavior."

Local sanctions

Lucas County has no similar system of incremental fines. If deputies pick up a resident's dog and it's unlicensed, the penalty is having to buy a dog license and perhaps pay a $25 late fee - but only if the owner wishes to reclaim the dog from the pound. Many don't, leaving the fate of the animal to the dog warden's office. Still, dog owners in Ohio can be charged with a felony and are fully liable if their animals are involved in a serious attack. Area dog advocates complained for years that under Mr. Skeldon, dog warden deputies wouldn't cite people for violating Toledo's rabies or vicious dogs laws - misdemeanor offenses - provided the owners agreed to surrender their dogs for probable euthanasia. Acting Dog Warden Bonnie Mitchell has defended that practice of dropping citations against people if they hand over their dog. "They surrendered their dog to us; why would we double-slap them by citing them too?" she said to members of the Lucas County Dog Warden Advisory Committee. Jean Keating, co-founder of the Ohio Coalition of Dog Advocates, is among those who criticize the practice, likening it to getting "pulled over for drunk driving and you giving up your car and not getting cited." "If you don't have that license, they should smack you with a big fine," she added.

The 'pit bull' issue

Many of the dogs surrendered to Mr. Skeldon were "pit bulls" or "pit bull" mixes, which the former warden refused to make eligible for adoption under a policy still in place. As a result, well over 1,000 "pit bulls" or mixes are killed each year at the pound. Ohio law singles out "pit bulls" as inherently vicious. Yet "pit bulls" fare significantly better in Calgary, where there are no breed bans or breed restrictions. "If you've got a 'pit bull' and it's properly licensed and it's not bothering anybody and it's well cared for - it's none of the government's business," Mr. Bruce said. "But if the dog becomes a threat to the community, oh yeah, it's my business." Of the 203 dogs euthanized last year at Calgary's shelter, 145 were considered irredeemably vicious. Thirty-six were put down for health reasons and 22 for serious injury, according to Mr. Bruce. "We don't euthanize anything that is healthy and adoptable," he said. "I euthanized 203 dogs last year in a city of [nearly] 1.1 million people." About 105,000 dogs are licensed in Calgary at $31 per spayed/neutered dog (nonsterilized dogs are $52). The compliance rate is 93 percent to 95 percent, Mr. Bruce said. Mr. Skeldon last year said that Lucas County has roughly 62,500 licensed dogs.

Bill Bruce, with a dog available for adoption, says he ‘saw a huge need for a change in thought.’
( CALGARY HERALD/TED RHODES ) 

Change in Calgary

Calgary was not always so pet-friendly or safe from dog bites. The city had 621 dog bites a year in the mid-1980s, even though its population was then much smaller at just over 600,000 people, according to the Calgary Herald. The city also was euthanizing many more dogs at the time and had a policy against adopting out "pit bulls." Mr. Bruce, who considers himself an animal lover, took the reins of animal control in 2000 after years in Calgary's traffic enforcement department and a stint as assistant to the city's commissioners. He was responsible for enacting many of the current animal policies. "It was an area where I saw a huge need for a change in thought and an improvement in how we do things," Mr. Bruce said. His initial plan involved emphasizing animal control as a service and less as an arm of law enforcement. He added owner education programs and invested proceeds from license fees and fines into new facilities and equipment. The department's vehicles are now equipped with GPS positioning devices and laptops connected to a license database, helping staff to immediately return loose dogs or cats to their owners rather than transporting the animals to the shelter. "Again the goal here is to get the dog home - back in the care of a responsible owner," said Mr. Bruce, who is often sought as an event speaker by animal groups throughout North America, including the Ohio County Dog Wardens Association. Tomorrow: The effort to name the dogs up for adoption at a Chicago shelter is one simple step among an array of best practices designed to help save shelter dogs from needless deaths.

Contact JC Reindl at:
jreindl@theblade.com
or 419-724-6065.

h/t JC Reindl at the Toledo Blade!