Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD-50-98 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REPORT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE P\~ . A\\.J File # \='0 I. ~C Date: October 5, 1998 Report #: CD-50-98 Subject: FENCING OF DOG OWNERS PROPERTIES Res. # 6~1C\ - .5 37 -9 g" By-law # It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council: THAT Report CD-50-98 be received for information. BACKGROUND On June 1, 1998, Council requested that the Clerk's Department review and report on the possibility of requiring dog owners to fence their properties. Section 210 of The Municipal Act provides municipalities with the authority to pass by-laws related to the keeping of animals. Within that authority, a municipality can require the owner of a dog to keep the dog leashed and under control of a person when the dog is off the property of the owner. Also, when a dog has bitten, a municipality can require the dog to be leashed at all times. There is no authority for a municipality to require the property of the owner to be fenced. By-law 87-156, as amended, prohibits dog owners from allowing their animals to run at large. As with all of the municipality's by-laws, this by-law is enforced on a complaint basis. This year, to date, approximately 30 charges have been laid by the Animal Control Officers under this by-law. As well, the municipality passed By-law 97-167 to regulate and control vicious dogs. Under this by-law, a dog who is found to have bitten or attacked a person or domesticated animal without provocation will be declared to be vicious and must be kept either indoors or in an outdoor enclosure while on the owner's property. When taken off the owner's property, the vicious dog must be muzzled, leashed and under the control of an individual aged 18 years or older. .. Report CD-50-98 -2- October 5, 1998 Given the authority that the municipality has been granted by the Province to regulate the control of animals, the Municipality of Clarington has passed the relevant by-laws. Although it is preferred that dog owners fence their properties, there is no authority for the municipality to require it. Respectfully submitted Reviewed by f&?~ W.H. Stockwell . Chief Administrative Officer . / IJ 3