Some Animal Control Bylaws in county are breed specific; owner beware

The Town of Killam recently enacted a new animal control bylaw which repeals a former restricted, vicious, and guard dog bylaw.

According to Town Councillor Diane Gordon, Council felt that the recent trend, away from breed-specific legislation, was something they wanted to follow.

Edmonton City Council voted late December to support a change to their animal control bylaw eliminating breed-specific rules.

Killam now joins Daysland, Sedgewick, Hardisty, and Galahad in having no breed discrimination legislation, defining the term “vicious” by an animal’s actions versus its breed.

Forestburg has just enacted a new Animal Control bylaw, but has not repealed Bylaw 7:2008 which regulates restricted dogs, guard dogs, and dogs determined to be vicious.

Forestburg CAO Debra Moffat says that she does not believe the bylaw to discriminate against any dog by breed, as it defines a vicious dog by its actions not its breed, however the all restrictions, licencing fees, and regulations that apply to vicious dogs apply equally to restricted dog breeds named in the bylaw, such as pit bulls, rottweilers, german shepherds, and others, requiring both vicious dogs and restricted dogs to be either crated, indoors, or muzzled when off the owner’s property.

Dogs who are found to be in this category also pay a substantially higher licencing fee.

Forestburg’s bylaw is very like bylaws in Lougheed, Strome, Alliance, and Heisler who all have similar versions of a Restricted, Vicious, and Guard Dog bylaw.

Read the rest of the story in the January 22, 2013 Edition of The Community Press