RDCO's new dog bylaw and survey

[western_star]

RDCO is asking you to do their survey in regards to the new dog bylaw that has passed 1st and 2nd reading but not 3rd reading yet. Submissions will be closed Feb 2, 2014
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/Responsi ... rshipBylaw

RDCO's new dog bylaw
Item 5.2 Responsible Dog Ownership Bylaw No 1343
http://www.regionaldistrict.com/media/1 ... ._1343.pdf

Its a pretty good survey because it lets you make comments.

One thing I would like to see is that RDCO catch barking dogs themselves. RDCO tells people they have to identify the barking dog and to take a photo of the dog, but how can you in the dark or when you can't see the barking dog, besides that the RCMP tell me that if you go for a walk on the road to go see which dog is barking, that is called Besetting and its a criminal offence.

That is why I feel RDCO should be going to barking complaints when barking is occurring.

[Hassel99]

Besetting is just a fancy word for harassment, it has nothing to do with "going for a walk" but is more about displaying constant and regular threatening behavior. Have you had run-ins with the law or animal control before?

[Amarow121]

Overall I think it looks alright.


IN regards to picking up dog poop, what does "timely manner" mean?
Is that my definition, my neighbours definition, animal controls definition..... Does the timeline vary depending on the season? I'm sure it's meant for situations where someone is not cleaning up AT ALL, but I would be curious to see "timely manner" defined.

Dogs in Vehicles. No time line is given, which gives the impression that it will be up to the discretion of the animal control officer. That's probably fine, but as someone who does on occasion leave the dogs in the car while running into the bank or the grocery store... it'd be nice to have that defined.

[Fancy]

Overall I think it looks alright.


IN regards to picking up dog poop, what does "timely manner" mean?
Is that my definition, my neighbours definition, animal controls definition..... Does the timeline vary depending on the season? I'm sure it's meant for situations where someone is not cleaning up AT ALL, but I would be curious to see "timely manner" defined.

Dogs in Vehicles. No time line is given, which gives the impression that it will be up to the discretion of the animal control officer. That's probably fine, but as someone who does on occasion leave the dogs in the car while running into the bank or the grocery store... it'd be nice to have that defined.

Not time limits I hope except for picking up dog piles.

[mexi cali]

I did the survey and when asked if I felt that proposed fines were Ok or not, for the most part I felt that they weren't high enough to make a difference.

Much like fines for texting and speeding etc., if it doesn't really have an impact there will never be an impact.

People by and large will not be dissuaded by fines that are manageable.

[nikonfan]

removed/Trip

[Darlin06]

I did the survey and when asked if I felt that proposed fines were Ok or not, for the most part I felt that they weren't high enough to make a difference.

Much like fines for texting and speeding etc., if it doesn't really have an impact there will never be an impact.

People by and large will not be dissuaded by fines that are manageable.

That's basically what I told them as well....

I also mentioned in the share your comments part... We caught 3 dogs running around in 2 days. Not one of them had on an id tag... No name, no phone number, no address. The first time, we sat in town with the 2 and waited for animal control. Ok. The second time was about 10pm. No officer would come. We kept her with our two in the house overnight, then drove her to the pound where they could punch in her license number. Guess what? She lived 2 blocks away from us. I think that when we license our dogs every year, it should be mandatory that we also have a name tag complete with working phone number. This would be a help to those of us who are trying to reunite lost dogs with their parents and would free up the employees at the pound to deal with more serious issues.

[western_star]

RDCO can't enforce its current dog bylaw, how can RDCO enforce this new one?

1. A $100 ticket has no effect on the 9 dogs in my subdivision who come every year for 2 months in each of the last 5 summers to stay at their summer cottage.

2. The Armstrong RCMP who work the North Westside Road area, told me that they can't ticket a barking dog, because RDCO either can't or won't enforce the ticket. Please contact Sgt Rob Daly of the Armstrong RCMP 250-546-3028 to verify.

3. And did you know that either yourself or RDCO is required to canvass your neighborhood to solicit more complaints, in order to be able to ticket a barking dog, because you alone are not believable by the adjudicator? RDCO was unable to issue a ticket for barking in my subdivision, despite more than several complaints.

4. How can you stay anonymous going to court? RDCO is causing neighbor relation problems telling you that you are required to see the dog barking and take a photo of it, so that you can identify it and testify in court. Sgt Rob Daly told me it is section 264 of the criminal code to beset property and that I am not to go out for a walk on the road to try and see which dog is barking behind trees or in the dark, or to take a photo. RDCO needs to come out when the dog is barking, not the next day.

5. Did you know that one single dog control officer can deem your dog dangerous for euthanization. Most people don't have $50,000 to take a dangerous dog case to court so they have no choice but to put their dog down. Prior to euthanization, three behaviour assessments should be done by qualified professionals.

6. A dog should NOT be declared dangerous or aggressive for life if it can be rehabilitated. In the case of one RDCO dog named Tali, a conditional order was drawn up and Tali went to training. Tali is no longer required to wear a muzzle.

7. I don't see why an aggressive dog is required to be in an enclosure when outside if it has a muzzle on.

8. In regards to the definition of aggression, what does "ATTEMPTED TO ATTACK" really mean... does it mean the dog barked and lunged on leash at a car, dog or person? I want to see a badly needed policy for dog control officers.

9. The BC Ombudsman told me that RDCO does not have to enforce its dog bylaw if it doesn't want to.

Oh and when I asked RDCO about barking dog statistics they tell me they don't have those stats.

[LANDM]

RDCO can't enforce its current dog bylaw, how can RDCO enforce this new one?

1. A $100 ticket has no effect on the 9 dogs in my subdivision who come every year for 2 months in each of the last 5 summers to stay at their summer cottage.

well at least they are being ticketed. A fine is meant to deter most offenders without putting them into bankruptcy. Evidently it is not enough to deter your neighbour. Can't anticipate everything.

2. The Armstrong RCMP who work the North Westside Road area, told me that they can't ticket a barking dog, because RDCO either can't or won't enforce the ticket. Please contact Sgt Rob Daly of the Armstrong RCMP 250-546-3028 to verify.
Armstrong isn't in the RDCO.

3. And did you know that either yourself or RDCO is required to canvass your neighborhood to solicit more complaints, in order to be able to ticket a barking dog, because you alone are not believable by the adjudicator? RDCO was unable to issue a ticket for barking in my subdivision, despite more than several complaints.
maybe they consider you a chronic nuisance. If it bothers nobody else, maybe it isn't a problem.

4. How can you stay anonymous going to court? RDCO is causing neighbor relation problems telling you that you are required to see the dog barking and take a photo of it, so that you can identify it and testify in court. Sgt Rob Daly told me it is section 264 of the criminal code to beset property and that I am not to go out for a walk on the road to try and see which dog is barking behind trees or in the dark, or to take a photo. RDCO needs to come out when the dog is barking, not the next day.
and who wants to pay for additional bylaw officers to stand around waiting for dog barking complaints just so they can instantly respond? Not I.

5. Did you know that one single dog control officer can deem your dog dangerous for euthanization. Most people don't have $50,000 to take a dangerous dog case to court so they have no choice but to put their dog down. Prior to euthanization, three behaviour assessments should be done by qualified professionals.
Don't have a dangerous dog then.

6. A dog should NOT be declared dangerous or aggressive for life if it can be rehabilitated. In the case of one RDCO dog named Tali, a conditional order was drawn up and Tali went to training. Tali is no longer required to wear a muzzle.
see above

7. I don't see why an aggressive dog is required to be in an enclosure when outside if it has a muzzle on.
which is why they don't trust you to rehabilitate the dog....you don't see the problem.

8. In regards to the definition of aggression, what does "ATTEMPTED TO ATTACK" really mean... does it mean the dog barked and lunged on leash at a car, dog or person? I want to see a badly needed policy for dog control officers.
so you question the need for the new bylaw and now you say you want new policy??? Which is it?

9. The BC Ombudsman told me that RDCO does not have to enforce its dog bylaw if it doesn't want to.
all enforcement needs to have latitude. Have you ever had a warning for speeding? Do you want Bylaw officers to enforce every infraction? I don't!!

Oh and when I asked RDCO about barking dog statistics they tell me they don't have those stats
thank god my taxes aren't paying to compile dog barking stats! You are obsessed. Perhaps find a new focus. Knitting?.

[western_star]

Armstrong isn't in the RDCO.

Armstrong enforces the North Westside Road area which the North Westside Road area is in the RDCO.

People may not want to complain about barking, or they will be taken to court to testify. Or maybe because they don't want to get involved due to harassment by barking dog owners.

[Rwede]

Already being discussed here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=55407