City puts bigger bite on dog barking
New system should make it faster and easier to resolve complaints, and aims to work with owners to solve issue
The city has put more teeth into measures to stop incessant dog barking.
An animal control officer, rather than a noise bylaw officer, will now be the first to pay the offending dog owner a visit — to tell them there has been a complaint. There will be discussions on solving the problem, and if another complaint follows, it could trigger a small investigation or go straight to a fine, say city staff.
(By the way, the officer will also check for a valid dog licence — and if the owner doesn’t have one, there is a fine for that, too.)
The change is the result of the Responsible Animal Ownership Bylaw, which city council recently amended to include dog barking.
Dog barking complaints used to go only under the noise bylaw. Now both bylaws can be applied.
So, if the visit and fines under the responsible ownership bylaw doesn’t solve the problem, the noise bylaw kicks in, and the fines go up substantially (to $10,000 maximum or $25,000 for repeat offences) and the dog owner is taken to provincial offences court.
The new system makes it easier to resolve dog barking complaints, says Ken Leendertse, the city’s director of licensing and bylaws.
Last year, the city received 594 barking complaints, but laid no charges.
“We weren’t dealing with barking dogs in the best way we could,” says Leendertse. “The burden of proof under the noise bylaw (was that) it had to be persistent … Before we could even deal with it, we had to build a case.”
“Now under the responsible ownership bylaw, it doesn’t have to be persistent. We tell them we have a complaint, and if we come back, we can lay a charge.”
The charge and fine are laid under a city penalty system, but the matter gets bumped up to provincial offences if the dog owner doesn’t comply.
The bottom line is that complaints are dealt with more quickly now, Leendertse adds.
Leendertse said the responsible ownership amendment makes the process and use of personnel more efficient. Where the city used to send an animal control officer at the same time as a noise bylaw officer, it now sends just one, he says.
And the animal control officer has the authority to also employ the noise bylaw if necessary.
“I think we could do a better job having a dedicated officer assigned full time to deal with both (bylaws),” says Leendertse.
Paying the offending dog owner a personal visit is also a better way to deal with a complaint, he says. “The process is to seek compliance and solve the problem.”
“The first step is supposed to encourage compliance, and then if it