Council introduces animal control bylaw

Staff ~ The Record
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

By Dave Mathieson
The Record
SPRINGHILL - Dogs beware. There's a new animal bylaw in Town and it's pointed almost directly at you, especially if you're yappy or like to ride around town in your owner's car - or if you like to do both.
Springhill Town Council had its first reading a new animal control bylaw during Tuesday's monthly council meeting.
The fifteen-page document was drafted with the intent to, "Register dogs and control dogs and other animals within the Town of Springhill."
The 'other animals' the document refers to include cats, snakes, lizards, horses, colts, ass, mules, ox, cows, pigs, skunks, ferrets, monkey's, rabbits, rodents, goats, goose, turkey's or other fowl - but the by bylaw focuses mainly on dogs.
If your dog has a problem with being quiet it could result in death.
The bylaw states that a warning letter will be issued if your dog, "persistently disturbs the quiet of the neighbourhood by barking, howling or otherwise, or unreasonably disturbs or tends to disturb the peace and tranquility of a neighbourhood." If your dog continues to disturb the peace after a letter has been issued, you will be fined $50 for each subsequent offence.
The bylaw also states that, "the dog shall be destroyed by the Pound Keeper and cannot be redeemed by it's owner if the dog was impounded for 24(3)a running at large or 24(3)b persistently disturbs the quiet of the neighbourhood by barking, howling or otherwise, or unreasonably disturbs or tends to disturb the peace and tranquility of a neighbourhood for the third time within a period of 24 months, and the Pound Keeper shall dispose of the dog as if the redemption period had expired."
Driving around with your dog or other animals could also lead to a $50 fine for each of the following three offences. You must ensure the animal is "secured so that it is unable to fall out or vacate the vehicle, the animal is secured so that it is unable to reach any of the sides or rear of the vehicle, and therefore prevent the animal from disturbing people or animals when walking by" and, third, the animal is secured so that it is unable to reach the driver of the vehicle, and therefore prevent the animal from impeding the driver when the vehicle is moving."
Also, a $50 fine will be issued to owners for the following infractions - whose dog is not wearing a registration tag, who fails to notify staff of cessation of ownership of a dog, who neglects or refuses to provide a written statement required by this bylaw, who keeps more than three dogs on any property and whose dog runs at large in the Town.
A $200 fine will be issued to an owner that, "habours, keeps, or has under care, control or direction a dog that is fierce or dangerous."
A $50 fine will be issued to a dog owner who, "fails to completely remove, in a sanitary manner, the dogs feces from public property or private property other than the owners."
Also, $50 fines will also be issued owners of the animals other than dogs mentioned above that are allowed to run at large.
A public hearing regarding the animal control bylaw will be held Nov. 18, at 6:30 p.m. at the Town Hall council chambers.
Two other bylaws will also get a public hearing at the same time - the "Surface Drainage Bylaw" and the bylaw to "Establish the Springhill Board of Police."
All three bylaws will receive their second reading at the public hearing and all three documents are available Town Hall.

Organizations: Springhill Town Council, Town Hall council, Springhill Board of Police

Geographic location: SPRINGHILL

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

    March 09, 2010 - 09:26


  • colin
    March 09, 2010 - 09:26

    I agree that there has to be something done
    1 - about dogs being permitted to bark constantly
    2- dogs sitting on the laps of drivers while they are operating their vehicles, 3- dangerous dogs that are not cofined so they out of danger to the public,

    But some of the rest of the by-law needs some fine tuning.

  • Troy
    March 09, 2010 - 09:26

    Springhill town council is barking up the wrong tree. What gives you the right trying to pass a bylaw about barking dogs and destroying them. I think you are going to have more people against this then votes you received in the last election. What about the speedway racetrack on Junction Rd, maybe put more effort into that. Yes I agree there is issues with animals but destroying an animal is no answer in any form. Shame on you all that vote for this.

  • Cece
    March 09, 2010 - 09:26

    Now we're supposed to report our neighbours whose dogs get a bit yappy. Sorry, but I have no intention of participating. This article really made me feel sad, and I wish that council had expended the effort towards something meaningful, like derelict structures around town. I can't help but wonder when the by-law about noisy children playing will be presented.

  • crystal
    March 09, 2010 - 09:26

    i think ill attend the next town council meeting ,,my dog isnt only a part of my family but she alerts my family when someone who doesnt need to be lurking around my property is there,,,she is our security and she looks out for us ....maybe i should take my dog with me to the meeting !

  • Mama Bear
    March 09, 2010 - 09:26

    I believe this law is an outrageous way of going about dealing with this issue. Some of these points could be addressed in a more humane way for the animals at question. I agree with some of the points.. ie: Driving with dog on your lap is dangerous for many reasons. As well as dogs that DO bark incessively. There is a difference with dogs that bark to protect their own and dogs that may have an actual problem or reason of some sort to keep up the barking. I believe the owners should take full responsibility of their animals and if for any reasons they cannot then they should find someone who can !