A Red Deer County councillor is concerned an updated Animal Control Bylaw might have too much bite if used the wrong way.
Coun. Dana Depalme said the section that outlines how an animal is deemed vicious and what steps can be taken leaves her a “little uncomfortable.”
Depalme fears the section as written could be used to settle a score between neighbours. She knows of a dog dispute between neighbours that ended up as a court battle.
“In my opinion, if this (bylaw) had been available it would have become weaponized and one dog would have been put to sleep,” she said, adding the human owners were the real problem in the situation.
Dave Brand, county community and protective services director said a reasonable approach would be taken when investigating complaints and the words “without provocation” are key.
An attack by a guard dog defending a property would not be considered without provocation, he said.
Coun. Lonnie Kennett was also concerned that section of the bylaw was too broad because it allows the county manager to consider declaring an animal vicious if it “attacks another animal without provocation and has inflicted a wound, injured, or killed another animal.”
Read literally, a farm dog that kills rabbits or a guard dog that defends a property could be at risk of being deemed vicious.
“I’m just concerned it’s going to be used as weaponization in neighbour feuds,” he added.
It was suggested the section be changed to refer to “domestic” animals being attacked. After much discussion, council opted to hold off on third reading to further look into the language of the vicious animal section.
Mayor Jim Wood was the only one opposed to deferral.
“To defer to get a better definition, I’m not sure we’re going to get it,” he said.
While vicious animals got a lot of attention, it was not the motivation behind updating the Animal Control Bylaw. The biggest driver was the desire to better clarify where “animal units,” such as pigs, goats, sheep, horses or other typical farm animals are allowed in the county.
As country residential homes and subdivisions sprouted up around the county complaints followed about farm animals on smaller country properties.
The revamped bylaw makes it clear there are no restrictions on farm animals on agriculture-zoned land, no matter the size.
“Red Deer County supports agricultural practices; therefore, there are no animal restrictions on parcels in the Agricultural District,” says the report to the council.
In country residential districts, there is a sliding scale of what how many farm animals are allowed, from none on the early 900 properties under two acres, one on properties up to 2.99 acres and two on properties three to 9.99 acres in size. For county residential properties over 10 acres — of which there are only 11 in the county — no animal limits apply.
The county put its bylaw out for public input. What came back were calls for regulating cats and guard dogs, requiring pet licensing, spaying or neutering, and bringing in more rules to deal with neighbourhood issues and boosting penalties for allowing dogs to run at large.
However, council was told the intent of the bylaw review was to clarify existing regulations not make major changes that the county does not have the staff to enforce.