manditory spay and neuter in Victoria

[horshur]

http://www.hounddawgn.net/forum/templates/BlackAndWhite/images/icon_minipost.gif (http://www.hounddawgn.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=130834#130834)Posted: 26 Nov 2007 01:16 pm Post subject: MAndatory S/N Law in Victoria BC????????http://www.hounddawgn.net/forum/templates/BlackAndWhite/images/lang_english/icon_quote.gif (http://www.hounddawgn.net/forum/posting.php?mode=quote&p=130834) I thought I'd send along a piece of mail I received today. THESE IDIOTS DON'T STOP!!!

WE MUST STOP THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!
Irv
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mandatory spay/neuter is trying to be passed in Victoria BC.
Pass along.

Victoria, BC - Manditory S/N law
Everyone had better gear up for this fight. If you think it won't happen in your area just do nothing and see.
>
Below is Victoria's bylaw excerpt pertaining to dogs - the full bylawwording can be found here:
http://www.victoriaadoptables......losphy.htm (http://www.victoriaadoptables.com/pet_philosphy.htm)
> >
MANDATORY SPAY/NEUTER BYLAW PROPOSAL
> >
Purpose
> >
The Spay/Neuter Action Bylaw Committee is proposing a mandatory spay/neuter bylaw for domestic cats and dogs across the Capital Region.
> >
The over-population and abandonment of cats (and to a lesser extent dogs) has reached CRISIS status in the Capital Region. To date, educational programs have not been successful in bringing the situation under control.
> >
Proposed Spay/Neuter Bylaw
> >
Spaying and Neutering of Dogs:
> >
No resident of the municipality of _____ shall own or harbour a dog over the age of five (5) months which has not been spayed or neutered by a licensed veterinary surgeon unless the owner is in possession of a breeding permit.
> >
Any impounded dog which is not sterilized shall not be released to the original or new owner until the animal is spayed or neutered.
> >
If a dog with or without I.D. has not been spayed or neutered, the owner shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a minimum fine of $200. This fine shall be waived upon proof being furnished to Animal Control that the dog has been spayed or neutered within thirty (30) days of issuance of a Spay/Neuter Tracking Number.
> >
Spay/neuter exemption may be permitted for dogs that present a surgical risk due to age or illness. The caretaker of such animals must have in their possession a letter from a licensed veterinarian stating the reason for exemption, and must provide the letter to an Animal Control Officer on request.
> >
Any person providing care or sustenance for a period of sixty (60) days or longer shall be deemed to be the owner and must adhere to the provision of this bylaw.
> >
Sale or Adoption of Dogs:
> >
Any person or licensed business offering a dog for sale or adoption shall disclose to any purchaser or adoptive owner information regarding the spay/neuter bylaw.
> >
Dog Breeding Permits:
> >
No resident shall cause or allow any dog owned or harboured to breed without first obtaining a breeding permit.
> >
Each applicant who is issued a permit to breed dogs shall pay a $500 fee per dog. The permit will be issued one (1) time only, is valid for twelve (12) months and is issued at the discretion of the Animal Control Officer.
> >
No offspring may be sold or adopted until reaching an age of at least eight (http://www.hounddawgn.net/forum/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif weeks.
> >
Any permit holder advertising to the public the availability of any dog for adoption or sale must display the permit number in any publication in which they advertise.
> >
Any licensed business who offers dogs for sale or adoption must display the permit number of the source breeder of each dog.
> >
Revocation of Permit:
> >
Any permit issued may be revoked if the Animal Control Officer has reasonable cause to believe any of the following to be true:
> >
The permittee is in violation of any regulation regarding animal care or control
> >
The permittee has failed to comply with any condition or requirement of the permit or has failed to pay any fee imposed under this section
> >
The permittee refuses to allow inspection, upon forty-eight (4http://www.hounddawgn.net/forum/images/smiles/icon_cool.gif hours of written notice, of any dog covered by the permit or the premises on which the animal is kept
> >
The permittee has transferred, sold, or otherwise disposed of the dog for which the permit was issued.

> >
Penalty for Violation:
> >
Any person who violates the permit provisions of this bylaw shall have no more than thirty (30) days to have their dog spayed or neutered or provide proof from a licensed veterinarian indicating that arrangements have been made to spay or neuter their dog(s). The Animal Control Officer shall inform persons subject to this law to the availability of reduced cost spay/neuter programs available for low-income persons. If a dog is not spayed or neutered within thirty (30) days of the notice, he or she shall be subject to a $200 fine for each thirty (30) days the animal is not spayed or neutered. Funds generated pursuant to this section shall be used to fund low-cost spay/neuter programs.

[porcupine]

I knew that they were trying to do this in North Saanich, but have not seen anything published about Greater Victoria. Where is the source of this info?
________
MagneRide (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/MagneRide)

[Steeleco]

Ironic, they're tripping over rabbits on every corner, but go after the peoples pets. BS

[Marc]

I bet you there is probably more deer running around town then abandoned dogs.

[Gerry]

I bet you there is probably more deer running around town then abandoned dogs.

That's so true. Unlike other cities that I have lived in I never see stray dogs in Victoria. But I sure do see lots and lots of deer (rabbits too!).

[416]

Each applicant who is issued a permit to breed dogs shall pay a $500 fee per dog. The permit will be issued one (1) time only, is valid for twelve (12) months and is issued at the discretion of the Animal Control Officer.


If this isn't another form of taxation, nothing is!! By making people obtain "licenses" it becomes illegal by default to own an open pet without paying 500 bucks per year to avoid breaking the law.
I have a hard time seeing responsible pet owners letting their pets get bred then turning the offspring loose to fend for themselves.

[Spokerider]

Yup, just another tax grab!

As it stands, I really, really, begrudge having to buy a dog license each year. The license / tag does absolutely nothing for the pet or pet owner. I know because I grill the animal control officer on this subject every year he comes knockin at my door to collect the licensing fee. Their "best" answer to date is that "the fees go towards funding animal control officers responding to aggressive dog reports".
Come licensing time, I make sure they come knocking for at least two separate occasions before I cough-up the fee. For the last two years they've been threatening me with a $100.00 fine for not licensing one of my dogs that's been dead for four years! Yessir, gotta appreciate municipal govt. competence at it's best!

And now this bylaw??

Hummmm......


Can you say bureacratic bullying?


I'm all for spaying and neutering, as long as we start with those whose IQ's reside on the right side of the decimal point.........grrrrrr.

[Ubertuber]

It's too bad that years of idiot dog owners ruin it for the rest of us by making these types of rules necessary. I have no problem with this at all because a "fixed" dog is a better dog IMO not because of any local population explosion. Females don't go in heat and attract all the horny males from the neighborhood (pissing everywhere and howling all night). Males don't have the urge to wonder off at the slight smell of a female in heat or hump legs of every passerby.
I never understood why so many people are against fixing their dogs. If you can't afford to do it, you can't afford a dog.:-)

[TripleB's]

When I first found out about this I thought it was legislation in the process because I had been told it had already passed first reading. After having been given more info that apparently is not true. It is a proposal put forth by John Q public for consideration by Sannich Council. Anyone can do such a thing but it sure has stirred up alot of unnecessary grief.

The BC All Breed Pointing Dog Club and the Vancouver Island Pointing Dog club are aware that this nonsense is in process. If it gets any further than a member of the public doing what motivates them then I'm sure we will be voicing our opinion loud and clear.

Chris Bibby
President VIPDC

[guntech]

It's too bad that years of idiot dog owners ruin it for the rest of us by making these types of rules necessary. I have no problem with this at all because a "fixed" dog is a better dog IMO not because of any local population explosion. Females don't go in heat and attract all the horny males from the neighborhood (pissing everywhere and howling all night). Males don't have the urge to wonder off at the slight smell of a female in heat or hump legs of every passerby.
I never understood why so many people are against fixing their dogs. If you can't afford to do it, you can't afford a dog.:-)

I agree - the fixed dog is a better companion and concentrates on hunting better as well.

I would like to see an improved noise bylaw that was more easily enforced. It seems like everyone ignores the annoyance their barking dog creates for all the neighbors. Keep it in the house if it is a barker or teach it not to bark. The owner should be smarter than the dog!

Registered breeders of the Canadian Kennel Club breeding registered stock should not have to pay any extra fee. Mutts breeding mutts pay an extra fee.

[patbrennan]

This entire subject is a sore spot with me.
While spaying/neutering has it's place and value, I am fundamentally against "government", or anybody for that matter, deciding what I should be doing on this topic, or making me pay more if I do not comply.
Licensing a dog may be more acceptable if you also do the same thing for every other pet in the region (cats, horses, etc.).
I cannot understand why it is acceptable to have to license a dog that remains in it's own yard and does not disturb anyone, while having no llicensing in place for every cat in the neighbourhood to yowl all night, hunt down songbirds and leave the "best part of itself" in the neighbour's flower beds is beyond me.
Same difference with dog owners cleaning up behind their animal but it being okay for a horse and rider to leave 10 pounds of it behind them in the middle of the trail, and that being acceptable.
On the same vein, an owner with a dog that is a nuisance (running the neighbourhood, barking excessively, etc.) needs to be held responsible. Same with some of the good citizens in my neighbourhood that clean up behind their dogs in daylight hours but leave it behind on my lawn after dark. I really "appreciate" that sort of neighbour and look forward to discussing the situation with the individuals involved when I catch them in the act.
If common sense was a little more common, we wouldn't be looking to government deciding what is appropriate behavior for us.

[steel_ram]

Repeat offender stray dogs should be dealt with. Cat's shouldn't be given any special rights over dogs.

Many of the dogs up for adoption in Victoria are imported from the interior. In fact many are "reservation dogs". Last ones I looked at were from Quesnel.

[Calum]

Many of the dogs up for adoption in Victoria are imported from the interior. In fact many are "reservation dogs". Last ones I looked at were from Quesnel.

The BCSPCA and esp' the Victoria branch ship in dogs from other shelters from all over the province.
I used to work at the Duncan shelter a few years back, and saw this first hand.

It's simply a matter of population density/more chances of finding a dog a home, and yes in the long run it doesn't help as the problem is more often from reservations which go largely uncontrolled aside for a spring stray dog hunt on some reservations.

Also I disagree with this Victoria bylaw, as it lumps responsible owners in with responsible ones.
But guess what folks...if it comes to it, this bylaw can be defeated in court.

And in my opinion as a dog trainer/behaviorist this bylaw must be challenged, as it is not a solution to the canine overpopulation problem.