Pit bull hounds owner

In the Hamilton Spectator it claims the city's animal control department is destroying an average of 10 pit bulls a month. How sad is that when you can't prove the dog is not a Pit bull over the vague definition. Still, for the dogs safety and you have no intentions of breeding the dog, why not get it spayed or neutered? I suppose it's a personal right that is involved here.

Pit bull law hounds owner
May lose Buddy to vague definition
Dana Brown

Sheryl Nadler, the Hamilton Spectator
Elli McAllister says her seven-year-old dog, Buddy, is only a partial pit bull and she worries that the SPCA will put him down because he is not neutered.

The city's animal control department is destroying an average of 10 pit bulls a month.

Susan McGrath, manager of standards and licensing for the city, said the city has put down 128 dogs in the 13 months since new pit bull legislation came into effect. Of those, 44 were surrendered for euthanasia, while most of the rest were abandoned.

"It's been consistent since '05," she said. "We haven't seen it rise and it's not dropping off."

McGrath said when dogs don't comply, there are three options: the animal can be destroyed, it can be transferred out of the province or it can be given to a research facility if requested. So far, the city has only used the first option.

Since Oct. 28, 2005, dogs identified as pit bulls must be spayed or neutered and leashed and muzzled in public.

Elli McAllister's seven-year-old pooch Buddy is now in the hands of animal control after being caught running loose. It may soon be put to death for not being neutered. Although Buddy was registered as a pit bull terrier with the city in 2004, McAllister said the dog is only a quarter pit bull and she wasn't aware he needed to be neutered.

"He shows no pit bull traits and because of his age, I didn't think I had to."

She argues the rules need to be more flexible. But McGrath said there's only so much wiggle room with the legislation and the city must obey what the province has mandated.

For McAllister, her only hope now is to prove to the city her dog is not a pit bull. So far, the three veterinarians she has approached have all said he is.

The city has not made a firm decision on whether Buddy will be put down.
McGrath said the city wouldn't be forced to destroy pit bulls if owners made sure their pets met the law.

There has been criticism that the amendments to the Dog Owners' Liability Act, specifically how a pit bull is defined, are too vague. In addition to listing several breeds, the legislation says "a dog that has an appearance and physical characteristics substantially similar to any" of the designated breeds can be labelled a pit bull.

A court challenge to the law's constitutionality awaits a judge's ruling.

David Lake, animal control supervisor for Burlington, said that in the past year, animal control has given two owners 30-day grace periods to get animals spayed or neutered. Animal control delivered them directly to the vet before they were returned home.

Lake said it's better to be cautious about destroying the dogs because of the unresolved court case. There are 857 licensed pit bulls in Hamilton.

dbrown@thespec.com
905-526-4629