Provincially banned canines common in Ottawa and Ont.'s pit bull ban re-affirmed

Vast views of opinions in Ontario's cities regarding the Pit bull ban is causing the law hard to uphold. For some that agree or appose for a variety of reasons, there is also the cost factor and manpower. Leave it to Michael Bryant to wedged a major dilemma to all involved by placing all the cost of his bill into municipality hands.

Look who's fighting now and it NOT the Pit bull-type dogs...but then again, it never was. It took only one bully to start it all and his name is Michael Bryant as his Fiberal gang followed.

Provincially banned canines common in Ottawa
Officials will act against dangerous animals, but lack resources to enforce law
Patrick Dare
OttawaCitizen.com
October 24, 2008

OTTAWA - The Ontario government was on a mission a few years ago to rid the province of pit bull-type dogs and passed a law to ban them. But, in Ottawa, the animals are commonplace and city officials are opting to let them alone, as long as they behave.

The City of Ottawa says it will act when a dog of any breed presents a threat to public safety, but the city is not trying to crack down on pit bull-type dogs because it doesn't have the resources to do so, and the law pertaining to the dogs is difficult to enforce.

Susan Jones, director of bylaw enforcement for Ottawa, says that Ontario municipalities told the provincial government in 2005 that they would need some help from the province if it wanted a crackdown on the dogs. No assistance was sent.

Four years ago, pit bull-type dogs were judged a public menace by the Ontario government after a series of horrific attacks on people and other animals in the previous year.

Former attorney general Michael Bryant made it his mission to bring in a legal ban that required owners to sterilize their dogs, tightly control their movement and muzzle them in public. Mr. Bryant called the dogs "ticking time bombs."

The ban passed in the Ontario legislature despite the protests of dog lovers who said banning particular breeds was unfair. The law included fines of up to $10,000 and six months in jail for owners of pit bulls involved in violent incidents.

The law survived a court challenge in 2007, though minor elements of the law were struck down. The outcome of another legal challenge, by lawyer Clayton Ruby at the Ontario Court of Appeal, is being awaited. Even if it stands, the law is having limited impact in Ottawa.

The City of Ottawa has received many complaints about pit bull-type dogs being unleashed, unmuzzled, lunging at people and attacking other dogs since the law came into effect.

A Citizen municipal freedom of information request for complaints about the dogs from January 2006 to July of this year generated about 300 reports on calls to the city's bylaw services.

While some of the calls were simply owners of pit bull-type dogs trying to get information about the law, most were complaints about the dogs, and sometimes owners, who were making neighbours fear for their safety.

Some callers told of homes with two or three pit bull-type dogs. Some complainants said the animals were being bred, clearly in violation of Ontario law. The most common complaints were that the dogs were running around without being leashed and were not muzzled.

While the complaints released do not include names and locations, they do give a clear sense of the intimidation factor with these animals.

"The dog freaks out and lunges at people. Client is deadly afraid of both the owner and the dog," says one report from March of this year. Another report has parents fearful for their children returning home from school due to the presence of a pit bull-type dog running free. In August 2006, two of the dogs "terrorized" the neighbourhood of Alta Vista, according to one complaint.

Officials will act against dangerous animals, but lack resources to enforce law.

On several occasions, Shih Tzu dogs have been attacked. One of these small dogs had to be euthanized in March 2006 in the Bay ward after an attack from a pit bull-type dog named Fubu, which was itself later euthanized. In one report in June 2007, a loose dog in Nepean horrified neighbours by eating a groundhog.

In Ottawa, 20 bylaw officers look into 68,000 complaints in a year on everything from excessive noise to property standards. That work includes about 7,000 animal calls and 200 dog bites.

Susan Jones says her staff only have time to spend on cases of dogs that are a clear danger to the public. She said that in the last eight years, the city has only pushed to euthanize a pit bull-type dog in five or six cases. Most complaints in Ottawa simply result in a warning to the owner.

Ms. Jones says the city doesn't want to spend a lot of money and time pursuing a court case against owners of the dogs when dog breeders say that identifying pit bull-type dogs is not something that can be done with scientific certainty because a "pit bull" is not a breed.

"We don't have the ability to prove it," said Ms. Jones.

Under the provincial law, the banned dogs are defined as American pit bull terriers, Staffordshire terriers, American Staffordshire terriers or any dog that looks similar.

Ms. Jones' philosophy matches that of the Ottawa Humane Society, which supplies pound services for the city and believes dogs need to be dealt with based on their behaviour, not their breed.

Tara Jackson, communications manager with the Ottawa Humane Society, says the society tries to move young pit bull-type dogs into Quebec, where they are legal to have as pets. She says the Humane Society will only euthanize dogs if the animals are extremely aggressive or have an untreatable health condition.

"We don't euthanize based on breed at all," said Ms. Jackson.

Other Ontario cities, such as Toronto, Hamilton and Mississauga, have been more aggressive, holding onto pit bull-type dogs when they are apprehended and often euthanizing the animals, following the letter of the law.

Mississauga euthanized 38 of the dogs in 2007, according to Mississauga Councillor and former federal MP Carolyn Parrish, who is fighting to improve the treatment of pit bulls in her city. Ms. Parrish has been helping a 21-year-old woman fight to save a young pit bull-type dog named Rambo from being euthanized. They were successful and the animal will soon be relocated to Nova Scotia. But the fight began last December and took thousands of dollars to wage.

The City of Toronto has occasionally euthanized entire litters of puppies, though the city tries to find out-of-province homes for the animals.

The City of Hamilton added an officer to deal with the issue and made the animals "a priority call" after the province banned them, says Paul Buckle, manager of animal control. When a pit bull-type dog is taken in after a violent incident, the city finds that most owners consent to euthanasia.

Hamilton euthanized 103 pit bull-type dogs in 2005, 113 in 2006, and another 91 animals last year. So far this year, 54 of the dogs have been euthanized. Mr. Buckle says the gradually declining number of pit bull-type dogs being taken in suggests the provincial law is reducing the population in Hamilton.

Officials will act against dangerous animals, but lack resources to enforce law.

Brendan Crawley, a spokesman for the Ministry of the Attorney General, said that while the government heard "loud and clear" that people wanted to be protected from "the menace of pit bulls," it's up to municipal governments to make decisions on enforcement of the new law.

To improve the control of the dogs, Ottawa Councillor Bob Monette recently proposed to the Ontario government that the pit bull law be changed to allow bylaw officers to fine owners of pit bull-type dogs for a set amount.

Mr. Monette says that the provincial law, requiring municipalities to euthanize pit bull-type dogs that are apprehended, is "an extreme punitive measure." He supports the provincial law on the dogs, but says "there's no real enforcement" because the city isn't interested in euthanizing pit bull-type dogs that aren't a public danger and is reluctant to get drawn into big legal battles over the animals.

Ontario Attorney General Chris Bentley replied in a letter that the existing Ontario law banning the dogs had reduced the population, and that allowing set fines may have the effect of minimizing the seriousness of the offences. He said in his letter to the councillor that the government won't allow the change to the law.

Another story in the OttawaCitizen.com is a statement by Clayton Ruby, our lawyer fighting against the breed ban.

Ont.'s pit bull ban re-affirmed

Canwest News Service
October 24, 2008

TORONTO - The Ontario Court of Appeal on Friday re-affirmed a law banning pit bull-type dogs in the province.

Last month, lawyer Clayton Ruby told a three-judge panel the definition of a pit bull under the Dog Owner's Liability Act is vague because it snares dozens of breeds that look like pit bulls, but are other breeds, half-breeds or mutts.

Ruby said Friday he was disappointed by the ruling.



The Ontario Court of Appeal on Friday re-affirmed a law banning pit bull-type dogs in the province.
Scott Webster
Windsor Star

Sadly, the absolute and unnecessary ban on 'pit bulls' in Ontario remains," the lawyer said in a statement.

"We are very disappointed with the decision of the court of appeal. We continue to believe that the definition of 'pit bull' is overly broad and vague. The evidence clearly demonstrates that the definition captures dogs that pose no threat to any person or animal."

He added the court has simply accepted the government's assertion that there is a 'reasoned apprehension of harm' about 'pit bulls' to justify the ban, without allowing opponents to show that there is no credible evidence to support this.

Under the provincial law, pit bulls are defined as American pit bull terrier, Staffordshire bull terrier, American Staffordshire bull terrier or any dog that looks similar.

Owners are required to have their dogs neutered, muzzled and on a leash in public. Violators face a maximum penalty of $10,000 and six months in jail.