HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS-14-076 - Dog Designation CommitteeStaff Report
rTC.�r R finance and Corporate Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Mayor C. Zehr and Members of Council
DATE OF MEETING: May 5, 2014
SUBMITTED BY: Dog Designation Appeal Committee
PREPARED BY: Daphne Livingstone, Committee Administrator,
519- 741 -2200 x7275
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All
DATE OF REPORT: April 16, 2014
REPORT NO.: FCS -14 -076
SUBJECT: DANGEROUS DOG DESIGNATION APPEAL - RUGE
RECOMMENDATION:
That the decision of the Dog Designation Appeal Committee regarding an appeal filed by
Alex Ruge, wherein the Committee substitutes the Dangerous Dog Designation applied to
his dog `Nessa' by the Kitchener - Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society and
assigns the Designation of Potentially Dangerous Dog along with conditions for keeping of
said dog, be ratified and confirmed as amended.
BACKGROUND:
On March 17, 2014, the Kitchener - Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society designated
`Nessa', a Border Collie mixed breed of dog owned by Mr. Alex Ruge, as a Dangerous Dog,
resulting from an unprovoked attack on another dog, `Max', on October 13, 2013. The Office of
the City Clerk subsequently received correspondence from Mr. Ruge appealing the Dangerous
Dog Designation; and accordingly, a Notice of Hearing was issued to the Appellant (Alex Ruge)
and the Respondent (the Kitchener - Waterloo and North Waterloo Humane Society).
REPORT:
On April 14, 2014, the Dog Designation Appeal Committee, considered the evidence and
exhibits introduced regarding the October 13, 2013 incident, finding that in the absence of
mitigating factors, `Nessa' did attack and cause injuries to another dog, `Max', while off its
owner's property. However, the Committee agreed to substitute the Dangerous Dog Designation
applied to `Nessa' pursuant to Chapter 530.11.2(b) and assigned requirements for the keeping
of a Potentially Dangerous Dog.
On April 16, 2014, additional information was received from Mr. Ruge indicating that `Nessa' is
expecting to deliver puppies. The information was provided to the Committee members via
email and they determined that the condition related to sterilization should be modified. The City
6. -1
Solicitor advised that the appropriate course of action would be for the Committee to endorse
the recommendation contained herein with the following modified condition:
"to have the dog sterilized and to provide a proof satisfactory to the Poundkeeper that
such procedure has been performed ", be replaced with "to have the dog sterilized at the
earliest opportunity following the pregnancy and to provide a proof satisfactory to the
Poundkeeper that such procedure has been performed ".
The revised conditions for keeping the Potentially Dangerous Dog are as follows:
That the owner shall:
a) keep the potentially dangerous dog, when it is on the lands and premises of the owner,
confined:
within the owner's dwelling; or,
within an enclosure erected to the satisfaction of the Poundkeeper, directly off the
residence to restrict access to the remainder of the unenclosed property;
b) keep the potentially dangerous dog under the effective control of a person of at least 14
years of age and under leash and muzzle, such leash not to exceed 1.8 meters (6 feet)
in length and to be approved by the Poundkeeper, at all times when the dangerous dog
is off the owner's property and not caged, penned, confined to the satisfaction of the
Poundkeeper.
c) To have a microchip inserted in the potentially dangerous dog by a licensed veterinarian
and to permit the Poundkeeper to verify the implantation of such microchip and supply
the microchip information to the Poundkeeper.
d) provide the Poundkeeper with the new address and telephone number of the owner
within two (2) working days of moving the potentially dangerous dog.
e) provide the Poundkeeper with the name, address and telephone number of the new
owner within two (2) working days of selling or giving away the potentially dangerous
dog.
f) advise the Poundkeeper within two (2) working days of the death of the potentially
dangerous dog.
g) advise the Poundkeeper forthwith if the potentially dangerous dog is running at large or
has bitten or attacked any person or animal.
h) to purchase and display, at the entrance to the owner's dwelling which a person would
normally approach, and at any other place on the property as directed by the
Poundkeeper, a warning sign or warning signs provided by the Poundkeeper. The signs
shall be posted in such a manner that it/they cannot be easily removed by passersby
and the sign posted at the entrance which a person would normally approach must be
clearly visible to a person approaching the entrance or, when in a multiple unit dwelling,
the owner will provide the name of the property owner and property manager if any and
allow the Dog Designation Appeal Committee to request that person to post a sign.
6.-2
i) to have the dog sterilized at the earliest opportunity following the pregnancy and to
provide a proof satisfactory to the Poundkeeper that such procedure has been
performed.
j) provide a copy of this designation to any person who keeps or harbours the dangerous
dog.
k) To cause the dog to wear the tag(s) provided by the Poundkeeper at all times.
1) Not to keep or harbour the dog in a multiple dwelling or lodging house and where the
owner's current dwelling is a multiple dwelling or lodging house the dog may be kept or
harboured at other premises subject to all the conditions imposed on the keeping of the
dog under this by -law.
Pursuant to Chapter 530.11.5 of Kitchener's Municipal Code, all decisions of the Dog
Designation Appeal Committee must be ratified by Council before taking effect; and, Council
may affirm, rescind, add to, vary, or substitute the designation and any of the restrictions
imposed upon the keeping of the subject dog as set out in the Committee's decision.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Enforcing the provisions of Municipal Code Chapter 530 (Dogs) aligns with the Strategic Plan by
ensuring that the City is a safe place to live for all residents, while providing a fair and equitable
process for dog owners to seek redress of designations applied to their dogs.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
All those in attendance at the April 14, 2014 Hearing, were advised of the Committee's decision
and that it would be considered at the May 5, 2014 Council meeting. In addition, a Notice of
Decision was served on the Appellant and the Respondent via registered mail on April 24, 2014;
thereby, further notifying both parties of when the Committee's decision would be considered by
Council and the process for registering as a delegation.
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Dan Chapman, Deputy CAO - Finance & Corporate Services
6.-3