The Truth About BSL

 

A Review of BSL in Ontario 

Better Yet

How Did BSL Happen In Ontario Anyway?

November 29th, 2021 begins the 17th year of breed-specific legislation. On this day in 2005 it was illegal for three different breeds of dogs and mixed breed dogs deemed "substantially similar" to be born in Ontario as a vast array of dogs had become officially illegal.  

I remember having to put a muzzle on my 14 year old dog.  It tore my spirit apart when she glanced at me looking bewildered and confused. Putting that muzzle over her devoted, sweet, obedient and trusting face was one of the most difficult things I have ever had to do.

WHY was I, a responsible dog owner, forced to do this? My Glory girl had been the mascot for the kid's baseball team at the 12th Street park for years. I was filled with grief and fury.  It was inconceivable blanket discrimination could be passed. Why were dogs deemed public enemy number one when it was guns and gang shootings that were making the papers on a regular basis in 2004/5?  Ontario citizens weren't locking their doors at night because they were afraid of dogs... 

Ontario's dog owning citizens lost the "presumption of innocence" and in spite of "reverse onus" being against section 11 in the  Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it was now legislated in Ontario.  The Canadian Charter is considered essential in preserving Canada as a free and democratic country, but now thousands upon thousands of Ontario citizens lost freedom of choice along with the "presumption of innocence".  How did this happen? 

 43 out of 44 experts spoke against the ban at the hearings for Bill 132 and to quote Michael Bryant, the ban's architect, "YOU DON'T ASK AN ATTORNEY GENERAL TO BE THE DOG EXPERT ... THE BOTTOM LINE IS IT'S GOING TO BE UP TO THE EXPERTS". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVaJpFHed9A

Dr. Tim Zaharchuk was president of the Ontario Veterinary Medical Association then and testified on behalf of the OVMA. The link to his testimony is below. When speaking about Michael Bryant in 2012 for a documentary "A Dying Breed" Dr. Zaharchuk reiterated, "I was absolutely shocked at the lack of consultation. He (Bryant) said he consulted with our provincial organization, which he did not".    https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/committees/legislative-assembly/parliament-38/transcripts/committee-transcript-2005-jan-24#P672_181318

In 2007 a study entitled "Panic Policy Making: Canine Breed Bans in Canada and the United States" conducted by the department of political science at West Virginia University hints at ulterior political motives why Bryant and the AG's office made an issue out of dogs. An excerpt from page 16 of Panic Policy Making; " In late August 2004 the Ontario Liberal Party's Attorney General, Michael Bryant, decided to legislate a ban on the ownership of pit bulls. Critics of the Liberals– the majority party in the Legislative Assembly or “the government”--have suggested that the ban was a tactic manufactured by the Liberals to deflect criticism of the growth of crime and gang activity, especially in Toronto (confidential Interviews). Opposition Progressive Conservative and New Democrat legislators also thought that he proposed the ban to deflect media attention from other issues and unpopular policies bedeviling the Liberal government. In their eyes, the identification of the pit bull problem was “all political.” It was a manufactured intrusive event.  NOTE: Every Liberal in the house voted for the breed ban yet not a single member of the Progressive Conservative or NDP voted for the ban. Legislation was NOT left to experts as Bryant stated it would be.   "https://supporthersheysbill.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Panic-Policy-Making.pdf

During the Bill 132 hearings, the vast majority of 106 witnesses, or sets of witnesses, representing organizations and all of the groups associated with animal welfare, animal rescue, animal training as well as kennel clubs along with all veterinary associations opposed the ban. Ontario media outlets quoted Bryant when he called 3 breeds and "lookalike dogs "inherently dangerous" and "ticking time bombs" but no quotes were reported in media by the vast majority of professionals, experts and animal organizations speaking against the ban. In the link below is a concise summary of testimonies given for and against the breed ban. The testimony given by experts in 2005 remain as true today as they were at that time. Breed bans don't work.   https://supporthersheysbill.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/bill132.pdf  

Reliable data is important in forming good policy. The Ontario government does not collect data on dog bites or even dog related fatalities. Since enactment of breed-specific legislation (BSL) no record keeping has been implemented and no Ministry has published information on the success or failure of BSL or how many citizens family pets have been seized, killed, sent to research or sent out of province. The devastating emotional, mental and financial costs to Ontario citizens along with the huge cost to taxpayers has ever been disclosed - despite analysis of monetary costs estimated to run a hundred million or more.  Public health information however showed dog bites increased by 138% in the first 12 years after the ban, proving the experts to be correct.  

As Ontario began its 17th year of systemic profiling of peoples family pets it did not matter what race, profession, religion, age, culture or gender citizens were -  if their family dog has a certain LOOK they are now second class citizens. Based on the science and expert opinions heard during the hearings, BSL should never have been legislated in the first place. 

There are numerous studies on dogs and information on how to improve public safety. Not a single study has recommended BSL but all recommended educating people on how to be better dog owners.  Myths of old have been discredited but due to sensationalized reporting, manage to live on in media and thus in public opinion.  Education, rather than discrimination brings about safer, kinder communities.  Breed banning is both overly and under inclusive. BSL is unscientific, costly, ineffective, cruel and unjustified - as the above photo demonstrates. 

To date, 24 US states debated the issue and  now have state laws against breed bans. In the last five years, 120 cities, towns, municipalities and counties throughout North America have repealed BSL. https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/ba1a575c-3b16-40fb-afaf-a1ca0039dcef/downloads/BSL%20Repeals%20LIST%202016%20-%20present.pdf?ver=1632488339260

Ontario has seen 6 private member bills put forth to remove breed-specific language in the Dog Owners Liability Act. Many of the bills have been lost along the way and mostly due to the proroguing of  different governments. 

https://supporthersheysbill.com/ontarios-bsl/about-hersheys-bill/

It's time that expert opinion, scientific studies and professionals were listened to. Politicians are NOT dog experts and neither are journalists.  Many in the Ontario legislature today do not even know what BSL is. Dogs should not be used as political pawns or when a dog bites be overly sensationalized in media. Around the world, dogs are deemed to be an important and integral part of families.  Looks do not determine behavior in people - nor do they in dogs. It has been found that even 20 minutes of teaching young school age children how to properly approach and interact with dogs can reduce dog bites as much as 80%. Just once I would like to see media mention something that would be educational rather than sensational when reporting on a dog related incident.  

https://www.canadianveterinarians.net/documents/legislation-concerning-dangerous-dogs-position-statement

Below is a detailed report put out in the Canadian Veterinary Journal. The title is "Breed Specific Legislation: Considerations for evaluating its effectiveness and recommendations for alternatives" and published under Animal Welfare, volume 46 in August 2005. It projects a realistic approach to the reduction of dog bites through alternative strategies. The most valuable strategies include educating dog owners on the importance of not breeding aggressive dogs, early socialization of young puppies; providing adult dogs with adequate care, training, and exercise; along with maintaining control of their dogs at all times. The UK has had a breed ban for 30 years. Since 2005 dog bites increased by 81%. and have increased by 177% since the ban was initially instituted.    https://www.canadianveterinarians.net/documents/breed-specific-legislation-considerations-for-evaluating-its-effectiveness-and-recommendations-for-alternatives

I have a bookshelf full of studies, and over 100 more on my computer on this issue. Before 2005 the Dog Owners Liability Act (DOLA) was two pages long. Since BSL, the DOLA now mostly consists of breed-specific terminology and the term "pit bull" is used no less than 69 times. Meanwhile there exists no descriptions as to what a potentially dangerous or a truly dangerous dog is, nor is there a single description of what constitutes a reckless or irresponsible dog owner.  DOLA needs to put in stiff progressive fines for careless, reckless dog owners in lieu of overburdening the court system. 

  A quote from the study Panic Policy Making: "Fear and injury can induce policy action, but the framework ignores the ability of one or two powerful people to manufacture a danger and push legislation through a municipal or even a provincial government with little real evidence to support the need for the policy".   https://supporthersheysbill.com/peer-reviewed-studies/

In April of 1998, eight-year-old Courtney Trempe was killed by a Bull Mastiff in Stouffville, Ontario and the Trempe family fought for a coroners inquest to be held.  A panel of select jurors heard 14 days of evidence as 29 witnesses were called and 63 exhibits were presented. In the end the inquest resulted in 35 recommendations. The 35 recommendations were dutiful, unbiased and fully supported by the animal welfare community. Similar recommendations have also been made by other DBRF coroners reports in Canada. As a vested individual Courtney's mother, Donna Trempe testified at the Bill 132 hearings. This is her testimony.   https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/committees/legislative-assembly/parliament-38/transcripts/committee-transcript-2005-jan-24#P889_245675

 Quote from Donna Trempe during a city TV interview in 2004. "He (Michael Bryant) didn't even know what he was. talking about. I don't think he's even read the coroner's recommendations.".

Advocates and vested stakeholders called for the Trempe recommendations as they do today. If the public, politicians and media are interested in improving public safety especially in relation to dogs and dog bites; media sensationalism should be ignored when an individual dog bites.  Gathering reliable evidence based data both evokes and elicits good policy making. Selective and sensationalized reporting does nothing to enhance or improve public safety. Public polices need to be dictated through intelligent, thoughtful and realistic methods as was done and achieved during the Trempe inquest.    https://canadiandogs.com/trempe-inquest/ 

 The Ontario government must order a full and complete review of the DOLA which includes the breed-specific language portion of the act.  Heed the Trempe inquest recommendations along with professional associations and experts instead of an overly zealous Attorney General whose one and only goal was a breed ban. DOLA is the only mechanism through which compensation for a victim of a dog bite or attack may be obtained in Ontario and includes the ability of destruction of a dog or prohibition on dog ownership. DOLA does not provide for provincial offense notices (tickets with set fines) and as such court summons remains the only option.  As 81% of dog bites have been found to cause little to no harm these type of situations are left to tie up an already overburdened court system in Ontario.    https://nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com/injurious-dog-bites/medically-attended-dog-bites/

In closing, Michael Bryant admitted in his book "28 Seconds" to being in a alcoholic state while Attorney General of Ontario and the ban was 50% ego.  His book was written after the vehicular death of Darcy Sheppard in 2009 when Bryant was initially charged with criminal negligence causing death and dangerous operation of a motor vehicle causing death. Darcy Sheppard's body was tested for drugs and alcohol, but no drug or alcohol test was conducted on the driver of the car, Michael Bryant. Nine months after Sheppard's death independent prosecutors Mark Sandler and Richard Peck withdrew all the vehicular charges against Bryant.   https://bryantwatch.wordpress.com/ 

The sad irony in all this, considering Ontario citizens lost presumption of innocence in a dog owners liability act,  Bryant later became executive director and general counsel for the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.  

               

Fran Coughlin

Advocate for Responsible Dog Ownership

Activist Against Breed-Specific Legislation

Dated November 29th, 2021.