Animal Advocates Society
Box 114, 103-1075 Marine Drive,
North Vancouver, BC, Canada, V7P 3T6
604-984-8826
www.animaladvocates.com
animaladvocates@telus.net

February 20, 2006

Mayor Derek Corrigan and Councillors,
The City of Burnaby

Re: Anti-tethering bylaw

On January 9th I spoke as a delegation from Animal Advocates Society in favour, in principle, of your proposed anti-dog tethering bylaw. But we warned that the bylaw might result in worse treatment of dogs. I said that it was the experience of Animal Advocates that some people were now keeping their dogs in pens and garages after being criticized by animal-loving neighbours for keeping their dogs on a chain or a tether, after being inspected by the SPCA. Staff was asked by Mayor Corrigan if they had any evidence of that and replied that they didn’t. You sent the report back to staff with instructions to look into our concerns.

In my opinion, it is unlikely that any agency that does dog control is going to have the manpower or the interest in tracking how many dogs, that can no longer be chained, are then put in pens or garages; nor that any jurisdiction that has adopted tethering restrictions would want to admit that the well-meant law has increased suffering for some dogs.

On Monday February 13th, staff sent a revised report back to you with a recommendation that will prevent car-lot dogs from being chained all day, but not from being kept in a pen all day. There are at least as many car-lot dogs in pens and crates all day, if not more than there are car-lot dogs on chains. This photo is of a 4x8 pen beside the car-lot office that a dog lived in until closing time each day. There is nothing to prevent this in the PCA Act and there will be nothing to prevent this in the proposed bylaw, as the dog had food, water, shelter, the feces was cleaned, and the dog got exercise at night. And yet to permit it does not address the humane concern for mistreated dogs that this council and this bylaw intends. The dog in this pen was large, seriously depressed, and becoming angry, which means it was becoming dangerous. Many people were upset at this dog’s treatment. Repeated complaints to the SPCA resulted in no improvement in the dog’s life.