Open Letter to the City of Calgary

Open Letter

To the Mayor and Council of Calgary, Alberta

We wish to outline our concerns about the possibility of breed specific legislation (BSL) in our city.

As you know, Calgary’s Animal Services department has requested public feedback on elements of the Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw. We participated in Phase One of this review, and in all the comments we heard and read from the public, including the 93-page summary report, there was no mention of BSL. In the published internal staff engagement report (26 pages) there was only one passing mention of anything vaguely breed-specific.

As such, we were surprised to see BSL included on the Phase Two survey - featured quite prominently in fact, with specific questions about muzzling and leashing requirements, higher fines, exclusion from dog parks, mandatory insurance, and household limits. It is difficult not to infer that BSL is being strongly considered by Animal Services and/or City Council, since there were only twelve questions overall. 

This is a confusing and disappointing development.

Calgary was once a leader in animal control, under the leadership of Bill Bruce in the early 2000s. Our city had some of the strongest enforcement, most progressive outreach, highest licensing rates, and lowest bite rates on the continent. All of this was done without targeting breeds. The solution was strong, clear bylaws that promoted owner responsibility and targeted known risk factors for dog aggression. These laws were coupled with enforcement and legislation. This combination worked, just as it continues to work in other jurisdictions that used Calgary’s laws as a model. 

BSL is flawed. Should Calgary choose this approach, here is what we can expect.

-- BSL enforcement will rely on visual identification. BSL assumes that two dogs that look alike will always act alike, and that behaviour is correlated with physical characteristics. Studies show that visual breed ID is usually flawed, especially when it comes to mixed breeds and dogs of unknown parentage – which make up a majority of Calgary’s dog population.

--BSL is an inefficient use of animal control resources. Instead of investigating behaviours and actual risk factors, our officers will be required to police dogs based on the way they look. Neighbours can call in complaints not because a dog is barking or running loose but because a dog *looks* like a restricted breed.

--Bite rates and nuisance concerns will stay the same – or increase. This has happened in the vast majority of BSL jurisdictions. In the last decade in Calgary, an average of 12% reported bites are attributed to “pit bulls”. That may seem concerning, until you note that similar levels are attributed to groups like German Shepherds, Labrador Retrievers, and herding breeds (all subject to the same visual identification concerns of course). Over 60% of all bites are by other/unattributed breeds. A total of 180 breeds have been implicated in bite incidences in Calgary. By targeting only one type of dog for restrictions, you are doing nothing to address the majority of aggression incidences. You are only gaining a temporary, false sense of security.

---You are subscribing to the “pit bull” umbrella definition, which is problematic. Most dogs in our community labelled “pit bulls” are mixed breed dogs and/or dogs of unknown parentage. They range from 30 to 130 pounds, have a variety of body shapes, and come in almost every colour and set of markings. Their personalities vary to the same degree. It is impossible and flies in the face of animal behaviour science to assume they will all behave the same. Calgary Animal Services has claimed that “pit bulls” are responsible for more serious bites, but this cannot be attributed to an umbrella breed label – there is nothing in their genetics or physiology that would explain this.

---Restricted breeds will proliferate in the shelter system. When these dogs are targeted because of their visual appearance, it makes life more difficult for responsible, law-abiding owners. If a dog is caught as a stray, for example, an owner may be afraid to claim him and face harsh penalties and judgement. If the city restricts these dogs, landlords will too, leading to more surrenders. At the same time, the dogs will be less adoptable for all these reasons. 

---You will be alienating responsible dog owners and a large segment of the community. While these dogs have been stigmatized in the past, “pit bull” type dogs are increasingly mainstream. They are used in advertising and movies, and as therapy, service, and police dogs. The majority of Canadians don’t support discrimination by appearance when it comes to dogs. In Montreal, Mayor Denis Coderre pushed through a breed ban and months later was voted out in favour of an underdog candidate who made breed-neutral legislation a major part of her platform. 

--You will be moving backwards when other communities are moving forwards. Every year, more communities reject breed bans enacted in the 1980s and 1990s in favour of evidence-based, breed-neutral legislation: the exact legislation that Calgary pioneered at one time. 

---You would be acting against the recommendation of dozens of reputable organizations. Every professional organization associated with animal welfare, animal behaviour, and animal control takes a position against BSL. So does the SPCA and the Calgary Humane Society, as well as the Centres for Disease Control and the American Bar Association. 

There are better alternatives. We can look to the successes in Calgary in the early 2000s, and expand and improve upon them. These could include clarification and refinement of existing bylaws, expanded and proactive enforcement, dog bite prevention programs (these are available for free), training and spay/neuter programs, and public education. 

Calgary is a progressive and diverse city, and our animal legislation should reflect that. Please do not punish responsible dog owners and allow our bylaws to discriminate based on visual appearance.