Wag the Dog » News

City of Brampton hires an outside lawyer

Steve — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 04:46:49 +0000

The city of Brampton has hired an outside lawyer to continue to persecute the owners of docile family pets, including a 75-year-old lady on a pension.

Original story here:

http://www.bramptonguardian.com/news/cityhall/article/623570–city-hires-pitbull-lawyer

Text of story below:

City hires pitbull lawyer

February 24, 2010

The City of Brampton has hired a Toronto lawyer to help defend the seizure of two dogs last month.

Barnet Kussner of the firm Weirfoulds is on the case for the city, and that has one of the canines’ owners feeling like the underdog.

“Personally, I feel like it’s David versus Goliath,” said Rui Branco, whose family owns Brittany, one of two dogs held by the city since Jan. 13. Weirfoulds specializes in advisory work for municipal and other governments in all areas including contracts, land use planning and development.

Branco said with no other option to try to get the dogs home, he will take the city to court, but no one will win because he has to pay his own legal bills, and, as a resident of Brampton, his tax money will also be used to pay for the city’s lawyer.

“The taxpayers lose. I lose, being a taxpayer and also paying for my attorney. Most of all, the poor dogs lose because they are in captivity throughout the proceedings, which I understand can take months.”

Branco and Maria Gaspar, whose family owns Rambo, insist the dogs are boxer/American bulldog crosses, but the city has labelled them pitbulls and taken them from their separate homes. The families have not been allowed to visit them at the animal shelter.

Branco is concerned about the dogs’ health and well-being because they are being kept away from their families and kept in cages.

“I don’t care how much walking or attention the shelter or city says those dogs are getting, they have to be locked up because of liability issues and manpower issues at least 22 hours a day,” Branco said.

The families say a city Animal Control Officer seized the dogs without a warrant, adding they were intimidated into turning over the dogs when police arrived on Branco’s doorstep.

Attorney General spokesperson Brendan Crawley pointed to the Dog Owner’s Liability Act (DOLA) on the issue of seizure. The DOLA indicates a warrant is needed to seize a dog from a home. Seizure without a warrant is possible only if “… it would be impracticable to obtain a warrant because of exigent circumstances…exigent circumstances include circumstances in which the peace officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that entry into any building, receptacle or place, including a dwelling house, is necessary to prevent imminent bodily harm or death to any person or domestic animal.”

Dogs can also be seized in a public place under DOLA:

www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90d16_e.htm.

News articles and letter to the editor info re seized Brampton dogs

Steve — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 07:39:24 +0000

chicobandido has news articles and letter to the editor info for five newspapers, four of which have already written about Rambo and Brittany.

There’s also some good advice on writing a letter to the editor.

Bye Bye Skeldon

LeeAnn — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:18:56 +0000

Bye bye Tom Skeldon…..

http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091119/NEWS16/911199999

Gandhi stated that the greatness of a nation is measured by the compassion given to its animals.If this is true, the Toledo Ohio became moved a little closer to greatness by accepting the resignation of Mr Skeldon.

Decades of death may soon end for dogs that are born without benefit of a pedigree into a city that ruled its dogs with a net and a hypodermic needle.

But a word of caution.

He may have been the king of the kill, but he leaves behind minions that could readily continue his swath of death.

Do not stop the public pressure, continue to speak up, and never stop speaking out against BSL .The truth must prevail.BSL only kills dogs, it does not make our communities any safer from IRRESPONSIBLE DOG OWNERS.

Until all references to breeds or to a ‘look’ of a dog are struck down and replaced with nonbreed specific dangerous dog bylaws NO DOG IS SAFE.

Toledeo dog owners….we salute you.

Dog nearly killed for having too large of a head!

Lori — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 00:34:00 +0000

Here is a perfect example of the absolute bull**** going on here in Ontario!

In Kitchener, Ontario this week, Shon Carroll, a humane society officer was “told” to investigate the background (lineage?) of a dog that was brought in stray.

** Kitchener has had a breed specific ban in place since Febuary 1997, put in place prior to the province enacting a province wide ban in 2005.

Jack Simpson as he put it, inherited a mutt 18 months ago from a neighbor. Simpson’s dog got loose and went to explore the neighborhood, but was picked up by the humane society in Kitchener. When Simpson called looking for his dog he described him as a “lab/pit cross”. The word “pit” activated the antennae of the HS to “investigate” the lineage of the dog.

This proves my point that most people who work with dogs in shelters, pounds and the like have no clue about dog genetics or breeds. They clearly have bought into the BS that “pitbulls” actually do exist and they must be identified and killed. Some shelters and pounds do not identify cross bred dogs and declare short haired mutts as breeds people “view” as “friendly” and find them homes but others such as Kitchener choose to kill dogs based on LOOKS NOT BEHAVIOR!

With each passing day this mass dog murder in Ontario gets more and more insane! Thanks Dalton McGuinty you useless piece of dog ****.

Mr. Simpson took the matter of what is now saving his dog’s life to a humane society committee hearing where they would decide if the dog fit their criteria to be able to live or be designated as having some weird characteristics in how he looked that would declare a date with Dr. Death!

I have to include a lengthy excerpt because it is just too bizarre not to share.
Here is a link to the rest of the story where you may also see a picture of Jack Simpson and his dog Charlie.

Carroll met with Simpson and his dog on Sept. 2 to take pictures and measurements.

Someone please direct me to the information that leads these wanks to believe they can justifiably kill dogs because:

- Their head is too big

- Their forehead is too wide

Their hindquarters are lower and smaller than their front end

-Their chest is too big

-And for God’s Sake DO NOT HAVE A BOX SHAPED MUZZLE!

It appears that a flippant decision was made that Charlie seemed to also have a friendly demeanor, seeing as though he visits the OLD AGE HOME AND DAYCARE TO VISIT on a regular basis!

The moral of this story is; if you live in this Dogforsaken province of Ontariostan, erase the word “pit” from your vocabulary. Don’t even use it to describe what exists in the center of most fruit for fear of having your dog killed because his head it too big!

Where do some shelter workers and animal control officers come up with this BS?

“My biggest thing is the width of the head, the wideness of the forehead,” Carroll said at the committee hearing.

The
hind quarters were visibly lower and smaller than the front shoulders.
The dog also had a big chest. But Charlie’s head was most concerning
for humane society officer tasked with enforcing the Pit Bull ban.

Charlie’s muzzle has a box shape too, Carroll said.

Carroll
told the committee the lab traits in Charlie are stronger than the Pit
Bull traits. Carroll also said Charlie appeared to be friendly.

But
mainly because of the size of the dog’s head Carroll designated Charlie
a Pit Bull-like animal that was banned and would have to be destroyed.

“Because
I left a message with the humane society that he is a lab-pit cross,
the fact that I said ‘pit’ was enough to raise red flags,” Simpson said
to the committee.

“Had I known then what I know now, I would
never have mentioned the word ‘pit,’ I would have said a ‘lab cross’
and that would have been the end of it,” Simpson said.

He told
the committee the dog never bothered anybody. Simpson said he brings
the dog to the old age home where his mother lives and his sister’s
daycare. He submitted letters from both women as evidence.

“My mother’s in an old age home. I take Charlie there, everybody loves Charlie,” Simpson said.

“I
take him to my sister’s, she has a daycare centre, all the kids play
with Charlie, and they all love him. There isn’t a soul in the city who
doesn’t like Charlie and yet they were willing to put him to sleep
because of the size of his head, which doesn’t seem fair,” Simpson said.

The
committee members — Coun. Geoff Lorentz, Coun. John Smola and Anne
Lawrence of the K-W Kennel Club — listened to the evidence.

Simpson said a lot of people are not aware dogs that are half Pit Bull can be designated and destroyed.

“It’s not an exact science I can tell you that,” Lorentz said.

Lawrence, the committee chair, wanted to know why Simpson described Charlie as a “lab-pit.”

“It’s
just an easy way to explain what kind of dog he is rather than rattling
off a whole bunch of different breeds I see in him,” Simpson said.

“OK so this wasn’t because you were told this by a vet?” Lawrence said.

“No, this is something I came up with as a short way of telling people what I think he is,” Lawrence said.

The committee members deliberated behind closed doors for a few minutes.

“Based
on the evidence the committee is rescinding the designation which means
you are free to license your dog, no restrictions. Thanks you every
one,” Lawrence said.

No further explanations were given.

Simpson was visibly relieved as he walked out of the council chambers where the hearing was held.

“I am pleased, very pleased,” Simpson said.

The whole process has left Simpson shaking his head.

“Because they didn’t like the size of his head they wanted to kill him,” Simpson said.

“They gave me two options. Go get a DNA test done on him and find out
what his lineage is, which is several thousand dollars, or leave the
province,” Simpson.

High Five to Arnold Schwarzenegger

DLCC Admin — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 08:49:19 +0000

Thank Dogness there is still some good old common sense left in the world!

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has vetoed Assembly Bill
241 which would have prohibited any person or entity from having 50 or
more intact dogs or cats. He returned the bill with the following veto
message:

To the Members of the California State Assembly:

I
am returning Assembly Bill 241 without my signature. This measure would
make it a crime for any person or entity to own or control more than 50
unsterilized adult dogs or cats for breeding or raising for sale as
pets. I support measures designed to prevent animal cruelty and that
punish persons engaged in the abuse of animals. However, this measure
simply goes too far in an attempt to address the serious problem of
puppy mills. An arbitrary cap on the number of animals any entity can
possess throughout the state will not end unlawful, inhumane breeding
practices. Instead this measure has the potential to criminalize the
lawful activities of reputable breeders, pet stores, kennels, and
charitable organizations engaged in raising service and assistance
dogs.

For these reasons, I am unable to sign this bill.

Denver’s breed identification was challenged

DLCC Admin — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 03:51:00 +0000

In a case against the city of Denver where 3 “breed ID experts” identified a dog (Dexter) as a “pitbull”; Dexter's owner challenged this identification and won!

My face is blue from mentioning this important tidbit of knowledge..

“Pitbull” is a slang term for a shape or look of dog. It IS NOT a breed! No wonder there are problems identifying something that cannot be defined and does not exist. Nobody is truly qualified to ID the breeds of a cross bred dog. Unless a dog is registered with a reputable dog registry, there is no way of proving the lineage of the animal. Fun game at the shelter but when your dog's life hangs on the balance, it isn't so damn fun anymore.. Unless you are a sociopathic dog killer (Kory Nelson and gang in Denver).

The above video is courtesy of KDVR in Denver, CO.

The comment was made in the video that thousands of mis-identified family pets have likely lost their lives as a result of Denver Animal Control mis-identifying. Ya THINK? See previous post!

In an excerpt from an article at The Westword News it was not Dexter who actually did anything wrong, AC was called regarding another issue with a different dog.

Kevin O'Connell was away on business when he got a call from a Denver animal-control
officer: His dog, a Presa Canario, had mauled a Chihuahua. O'Connell, a
civil engineer who lives in Thornton,
had left his two dogs with a friend who lives in Denver; he gave the
officer his friend's address. Then his friend called: She said that
animal-control officers had shown up at her house, but instead of
impounding the Presa Canario, they'd taken his other dog, Dexter, who'd
been in her back yard.

“What?” O'Connell replied. “Why?”

“They say he's a pit bull.”

It is high time for the WITCH HUNTERS to give it up. Seek therapy for your irrational fears and get on with your life. If you truly want to do something constructive about protecting public safety from irresponsible dog owners then take a look at the Responsible Dog Ownership bylaw in Calgary, Alberta. No targeting breeds, discrimination or throwing responsible dog owners under the bus in Calgary. Simple, enforceable, common sense bylaws that have been in place for nearly 2 decades and is a proven winner!

Denver's going down baby!

Time to wake up to the horrors of BSL

DLCC Admin — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 10:19:00 +0000

It is due time to “out” the visual and background story behind breed bans. Please let this burn into your mind. Please share this with as many people as you possibly can. The content is difficult, but what those of us who live with breed bans have witnessed and live with every hour of every day is not to be turned away from. The only way we can see our way through this is by speaking openly. We must educate people about the facts. There is an alternative. We must show our governing bodies the way. It is our duty as dog owners and citizens of municipalities, towns, cities, counties, states and provinces. It matters not what breed or cross breed of dog you own. It matters not if you even own a dog. It matters not if you even fancy dogs. This insanity MUST STOP! We owe it to the innocent.

A dog owner who was
forced to move out of Denver because of the pit bull ordinance, passed along a portion of her difficult account of life as a dog owner in Denver.

Many of you B.A.N.D. (Breed Awareness, Not Discrimination) members have
been here with me and so many others since Denver reenacted the breed ban in May
of 2005. Various members have done and continue to do rescue, fostering, letter
writing, phone calls, and every other kind of action that goes into helping
those affected or changing these insane laws to something saner, kinder, and
smarter than rounding up family dogs and killing them.

Lately, for several reasons, I've not sent out much information about what
is going on with the court cases or what you can do to help if you're looking
to. A small part of those reasons is that doing some of this is hard and awful
and I just plain don't want to relive it by telling others–I've pretty much
clammed up as a defense mechanism. For me, one of the worst aspects of this is
helping people through the system to get their dogs out. Animal control does not
make this easy and anyway, almost everyone is scared and crying, and that's just
the people.

When these people go to visit their dogs in the Denver shelter, and have to
leave their dogs there–actually walk away–as the dogs are screaming to go with
them, it is almost too much to take. And the dogs have no idea how they got from
their comfy sofas to that concrete hellhole. I know many of you on this list
have experienced this firsthand and some of you have said you've never heard
your dog make that panicky sound before.

The point of this is that so many people do not know what the end
result of breed discriminatory legislation is. I've heard people say, “Oh, you
just can't have them there.”

No! That is not it at all. Not even close.

Breed discriminatory legislation manifests itself in the rounding up and
killing of good, well-loved, well-trained, passive, sweet, family dogs. I've
included photos as proof that that is the end result of a breed ban. Please do your part and help spread the word. I can attest that
these are indeed photos from Denver's breed ban as I took them myself.

Also, there's so much need out there with the dogs, even if you don't want
to send these disgusting photos out or don't want to become an advocate for
people going through the system, there is plenty more you can do with whatever
time and resources you have. We need it all and we need it now! Thank you!

Your tired friend,

Xxxxx

About the photos…

These are pictures of just one load of dogs that Denver has rounded up and
killed as part of their breed ban. “Well,” you might say, “dogs are killed every
day in shelters across the land.” Yes, they are and it is all awful. But these
were dogs who had homes. These were owned dogs that got picked
up and killed for what they look like, not for anything they did. Underneath
this pile of dead dogs, but not shown, were something like twelve puppies that
were not even weaned yet. The photographer wanted to show them, but didn't have
the heart to move the bodies of the adults around to show the puppies. Either
way, this is how a breed ban manifests itself–in the rounding up and killing
family dogs.

__._,_.___

Now, just before you lean back and wipe your brow to think this is a Denver issue or this isn't happening here.. think again.

This happens every day right here in Ontario. We have the numbers. Over 5000 dogs have been killed right here in Ontario since August 25, 2005!

Tin Pot Award for this month goes to Neguac, NB

DLCC Admin — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 03:03:16 +0000

I cannot find the words to comment on this lack of thought from the town council of Neguac, New Brunswick. My only comment would have to be; way to hurl Neguac! I hope your pop drops from 1623 to ZERO.

In an article from the Times and Transcript, the witch hunt is described in detail.

NEGUAC - The village of Neguac is hoping to rid itself of a number of dog
breeds that fall under the pit bull label and owners are now required to
surrender their pets, no questions asked.

The community, located about 30-minutes northeast of Miramichi, passed a
bylaw banning the ownership of the breeds that are considered pit bulls.

Pit bull is a blanket term used to describe several breeds within the
molosser family that share similar physical characteristics.

Typically lumped into the pit bull-type dog category are breeds like the
American Staffordshire Terrier, American Pit Bull Terrier, Staffordshire Bull
Terrier, and sometimes the American Bulldog and the Bull Terrier.

Village administrator Denis Bujold told Canadaeast News Service that
council's decision to revamp its dog bylaw to include the enforced ban on pit
bulls stems from a few incidents involving the dogs showing aggression towards
people and other dogs.

Bujold said the new legislation allows the municipal animal control
officer to seize any of the breeds covered by the ban.

Under the ban, even pit bulls with a perfect track record of
non-aggression and a quality family life are required to be surrendered.

“He will seize it there and there will have to (be) some arrangement with
the dog, whatever they want to do with it,” said Bujold. “That's up to that
owner what they want to do with it, but there's one thing sure; he cannot own
his dog in the municipality.”

Sarnia dogs released! But no pat on the back for Sarnia…

DLCC Admin — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 07:17:19 +0000

I was away for the weekend so wasn't able to update on the Sarnia dogs..

Chicobandido has the story.

The dogs have been released to their owners.

Thank you to Al Bennet for injecting some sense into this situation.

Here is the media release from earlier today:

City of Sarnia
Media Release

Date: September 21, 2009
Release Date: Immediate
From: Lloyd Fennell, City Manager
Subject: Release of Dogs

The City of Sarnia is arranging for the release of the three mixed-breed dogs
that were detained on the basis of having similar characteristics to a “Pit
Bull” as outlined by the Dog Owners Liability Act (DOLA).

Following the detentions, the dogs Capone, Maddie and Carter were examined by an
expert of the owners choice and one of the City's choice.

Both examinations found that the dogs were not “Pit Bulls” nor do they have the
appearance or physical characteristics of the “Pit Bull” breed.

While the dogs were detained, extensions were given to the euthanasia of the
dogs to allow for the examinations.

The City wanted to get the necessary information to ensure the right decision
was made and that is now the case.

Following discussions with the owners' lawyer, the dogs will be released to
their owners subject to them being spayed and neutered in accordance with the
recommendations of the owners' expert.

The city is satisfied that the release of the dogs back to their owners is the
right decision and will work with the owners to ensure that the recommendations
are followed in the release.

Lloyd Fennell

City Manager

A couple of comments..

First off, do you think maybe part of the problem is that some people (at least AC in Sarnia) are still believing “pitbull” is a breed! “Pitbull” is a short haired mutt. You cannot identify the lineage of a cross bred or mutt dog, period. Cannot be done, nada, no no no.

Why is the city stipulating the dogs be neutered and spayed? The dogs have been declared legal. These owners have done nothing wrong. Why are they being ordered to alter their dogs? Don't assume I am advocating they do not alter their dogs but shouldn't it be a choice?

At least the dogs' have been released back to their owners.

I guess we shouldn't hold our breath for an apology. I do not see any heroics on behalf of the city of Sarnia. May they hang their heads in shame for targeting dog owners (again) within the city of Sarnia. Targeting owners of short haired mutts based on looks not behaviour. If a dog is acting in a dangerous manner, no matter how it looks, the owner should be dealt with. If your dog accidentally gets loose well, as they say (**** happens). If it is chronic there may be a problem. To kill someone's dog while hiding behind the BS the Fib's have brought to this province is despicable.