The County of Stettler's dog bylaw had its second and third readings at the county meeting on Wednesday, Sept. 9, and passed into law.
The bylaw, which was re-examined after an incident in 2014 where a property owner's dog was savaged by loose pitbulls, eventually dying of its wounds. The owners of the pitbulls were fined and one of the dogs was put down after demonstrating aggressive behaviour.
County councillors voted in favour of amendments to the old bylaw in its first reading at a council meeting on Aug. 11. In between now and then, no written submissions were heard, though Wanda Webster and Pat Hamilton came to speak.
Webster, who lost her dog Hershey in the incident with the pitbulls, was the one to come to council asking it to take a stiffer stance on loose and violent dogs. While she said she was glad for the amendments, she did not believe the bylaw went far enough.
Hamilton, who in the past had loose dogs terrorize and scatter her herd of cattle, came to support the changes to the bylaw. In her case, one of her cattle had to be put down after it broke bones trying to escape the menacing hounds. The RCMP came, but by that time the hounds had left and the police helped round up the cattle – a task that took Hamilton hours.
The big changes to the bylaw are in language, adding terms like “harass” (instead of just chase) and “kill” (instead of just injure).
Councillor James Nibourg, aware of the sentiment that the bylaw wasn't stiff enough, recommended stiffer sentences for those in violation of the bylaw, which council approved.
A person convicted for the first time of a dog running at large will now face a fine of $250, up from $80. A second offence is now $500, instead of $200, and third and subsequent offences are $750 instead of $300. Dogs barking or howling to disturb others also have the same changes, although the first offence was $100 instead of $80.
In cases where a dog injures animal or people, the situation goes to court.
The bylaw passed with unanimous support from council.
Deadfall a fire risk: resident
Council was approached with a request that residents be allowed to remove “horizontal” deadfall from environmental reserve (ER) land, something that is not allowed under the ER designation.
Ken Smith, of Scenic Sands, appeared before council.
The residents do not want to remove the deadfall to allow for “prettier” property, but instead to reduce the fire risk the dead, dry wood presents to property owners on adjacent land, he explained.
The property owners have no trouble leaving the land natural, Smith said, but they do want to ensure that their property is as safe as it is from potential fire hazards. Incidents like the fire at Slave Lake, where half the town was burned down, only serve to remind owners that a fire can take off quickly and leave little or no time to evacuate.
The county has recently, through bylaw changes, changed most land between the provincial right-of-way on lakes and property owned by owners to ER, from Municipal Reserve. As part of this change, the county is sending surveys to land owners to find out what they would like to have allowed and not allowed.
The process is not complete, explained Johan van der Bank, director of planning and development with the county. Until it's complete, he said he didn't want to make rules for one area only.
Council advised Smith that they were of the same mind as van der Bank, and said they'd wait until the surveys were complete – but would definitely take fire risks into consideration.