It was only a matter of time until the case of Rambo, the alleged pitbull on death row at Mississauga's Animal Control Centre, came onto City council's political radar.
Since The News began writing stories about the sad case of Gabriela Nowakowska and her 10-month-old cross-bred dog, the case has been latched onto by the myriad of animal welfare groups across Ontario who are always looking for more kindling to throw on the funeral pyre on which they would like to sacrifice Bill 132. That's the muddy piece of legislation, still under appeal, that already has had a couple of its key legs (including the definition of a pitbull) pulled out from under it by the courts.
At Wednesday's general committee meeting councillors, who are being inundated with comments from residents far and near, weighed into the fray. (They have been on their holiday break for a while.)
There are several dog-lovers on council, including Pat Saito who competes in dog sport competitions at a very high level, Mayor Hazel McCallion (owner of the late, lamented German Shepherd named 'Hurricane') and Carolyn Parrish, who owns a young bulldog named Charlotte.
They quizzed their staff on the issue with the same clear intent: how do we make sure that Rambo does not become a martyr to the cause?
No one, including the animal control officials and administrators who are charged with enforcing the flawed law, want to see Rambo put down.
In a letter to a local resident, Mississauga Director of Enforcement Elaine Buckstein noted that, "no one involved with this matter, including staff
is happy about this. Once passed into law the City of Mississauga must enforce the law as it is written. Failure to do so would result in serious liability issues
should one of the dogs in question seriously injure a resident. Regardless of our feelings toward this legislation, staff are expected to do their duty as spelled out in the law. This process cannot be administered on an emotional basis regardless of how difficult this may seem."
The City politicians would like to make the whole thing go away by shipping the dog to a reputable rescue organization outside Ontario.
The problem is that staff say the option of rescue is not on their menu at the moment because Gabriela still owns the dog and it is a prohibited animal, since it was born after Nov. 30, 2005.
So this is where the politicians come in. Saito and Parrish have both done their puppy homework and report that by all accounts of animal control staff, Rambo is not a problem. "I'm told he's really a sweet dog and everyone at animal control plays with him. He's just a darling," says Parrish.
"It is unacceptable that there are so few options for a puppy like Rambo," says Saito. "We should have more options than just to put the dog down."
But the City is generally in the business of enforcing laws, not skirting them, and whatever it does, council has to be careful that if there is a dog that is dangerous in future, they don't set a precedent which they will regret, says Saito.
Parrish (or Our Lady of the Fireworks as she is known at Random Access) has a slightly off-the-wall proposal to deal with the situation: neuter the dog and approve a 24-hour exemption for Rambo so you can ship him out to a pitbull rescue group. "There has got to be a humane set of rules put in place when the law is an ass," she ways, with her usual colour and candour.
If that doesn't work, the man who quarterbacked the legislation through Queen's Park, Michael Bryant, "should have to put on gloves and come out here and use the hypodermic," says the Ward 6 councillor.
While the politicians figure out how to make the best of an impossible situation, the really difficult decision still lies in the hands of Gabriela, who was officially charged with having a prohibited animal yesterday and ordered to appear in court Feb. 29.
She now has the cash in hand to retain a lawyer and fight the charge that Rambo is a prohibited pit bull. She is hopeful that the courts will provide "bail" for the dog while the case is decided.
That seems highly unlikely, as desirable as it may seem. Which would leave her with the choice of leaving her beloved pet in a cage for months on end until the court proceedings are finished or — if the City councillors have their way — saving Rambo's life by shipping him outside of Ontario to a new home and owner. Talk about a Hobson's choice.
P.S. A report about Rambo is scheduled to run tonight on the 6 p.m. Global News supper newscast.
Comments (15)
Further to my last comment, here's a post about the Louisville ordinance - one of the worst in the US, scripted and promoted by H$U$.
Check it out at Blue Dog State:
http://bluedogstate.blogspot.com/2008/01/hsus-toadies-feelin-pain-in-louisville.html
Or, if you're worried about links, just Google 'Blue Dog State' and read today's post.
Example: In Louisville, you have to vaccinate your dog every single time you board him, even for a few days. Every time.
You have to notify the Politburo - er, Animal Services, every time you plan to be away for three days or more. You have to tell them where you're going, when you're leaving and when you're coming back.
Gee, who is away a lot for three days at a time? Oh, hobby breeders who attend dog shows.
Posted by Caveat | January 22, 2008 12:38 PM
Posted on January 22, 2008 12:38
Brewster is absolutely correct. It is not possible to 'breed for aggression', contrary to the popular wisdom. No genetic component to this complex behavioural cluster has been identified to date - and greater minds than mine have been working on it for some time.
It is learned behaviour, perfected through practice.
The fact is, the law is before the courts.
The law has already been found unconstitutional in part.
The government appealed the Superior Court ruling so it is expected to be heard some time in 2008, depending on scheduling.
I don't know why anyone would be trying to test it at this time.
This law, as with the infamous DDA in the UK, should be used as a teaching example of poorly written, vague, difficult to enforce and difficult to understand legislation.
But then, it's quite difficult to try to 'ban' something that can't be defined and can't be identified.
All dog owners are on notice. There is a precedent, until we get this thing struck down, for the provincial banning of purebred animals in Canada.
Purebred animals are governed by the Pedigree Act under the federal department of Agriculture.
By banning purebred animals, Ontario has not only usurped the paramountcy of a federal Act but has opened the door for future purebred bans.
Every dog owner should be standing up for the two CKC breeds and the one ADBA/UKC breed banned in Ontario.
Complacency is what allowed this law to pass.
Complacency is what will allow it to not only stand, but spread like a virus - as we are already seeing.
It's time for dog owners to stand up for their civil rights and for their friends, the dogs.
No breed bans. No mutt bans.
No mandatory sterilization.
No ridiculous ownership regulations.
No pet limits.
No 'guardianship'.
No anti-hobby breeder laws.
And that's the bottom line.
All of these anti-pet owner laws are not the result of simultaneous epiphanies on the part of politicians or journalists.
They are the result of a deliberate long-running campaign by very well funded organizations with a clear and publicly stated goal: the end of pet ownership and all domestication of animals.
How this is being achieved is too complex for the space here but let me just say that every time you donate to an animal rights group such as Peta, you put another nail into the coffin of animal ownership.
Most people think this is 'conspiracy theory', only because they believe what these groups say, rather than find out what they actually believe and do. You don't have to dig deep.
They are NOT animal welfare groups. Useful Idiots like Michael Bryant and his ilk across this continent and others buy right into their propaganda. They lobby at all levels of government, insinuate themselves into the legislative process, cultivate journalists, position themselves as experts, graduate lawyers, elect public officials and more. People keep sending them money, while honest groups who are challenging thes laws in the courts are scraping for funds.
The case before us is the result of that agenda, as are the thousands more all across the continent.
Time to stand up, show up, dig deep and help your local groups fight these laws.
This isn't about 'pit bulls', my friends.
It never was. They are a red herring and a very well crafted one at that.
Posted by Caveat | January 22, 2008 11:17 AM
Posted on January 22, 2008 11:17
Well now, here`s an interesting case I just happened upon.
Sounds a lot like Rambo and this dog actually jumped up on someone accidentally breaking their hip(Gov`t called it an "attack")
And this dog looks more like that fictional "Pit Bull" breed than Rambo,IMO.
http://petloverstips.com/ForTheLoveoftheDog/news-updates/update-on-daisys-bsl-in-canada-case
[quote]In the past 5 months there have been petitions, lawyer meetings, court appearance, negotiations and more, and during that entire time Daisy has remained in state custody in a shelter away from her family.[/quote]
Tada
[quote]Fast forward to the present and the the final court hearing yesterday.
Through months of negotiations a deal was been worked out with the Crown that Daisy would be returned to Tammy under the following circumstances:
* Tammy would plead guilty to not properly supervising Daisy and would agree to pay a fine of $500.00. Tammy will be given 9 months to pay the fine.
* Daisy must be spayed by January 13, 2008 and proof furnished to the court.
* Tammy and Daisy must complete an obedience course and again, proof must be furnished to the court. The lawyers and group working to save Daisy located an excellent dog trainer in Penetang and Tammy has been instructed to set up the training course.
* Tammy must return to court on April 14, 2008 to prove that she has complied with the settlement terms.
[/quote]
Maybe your Lawyer can cite this case Gabriela!
Posted by Mac`s Gang | January 21, 2008 8:44 PM
Posted on January 21, 2008 20:44
There’s no two ways about it. Who ever architected the bill couldn’t have considered the “Window Affect” racial profiling man’s best friends would copy cat and reflect on the rest of McGuinty’s departments before the riding associations were never included in the commentaries nor consulted on.
The bill should have been repealed or done something to take out the stigmatizing on the basis of appearance before it got of hand with the $66 million yearly “Pooling” of us dudes into the “Ghettos”
Michael Bryant could end euthanizing us all under these Privy guide lines.
http://www.thestar.com/article/238413
Posted by Wayne Nagy | January 21, 2008 6:08 PM
Posted on January 21, 2008 18:08
[quote]Having seen all the photos, I couldn't testify in court that this dog is any particular breed or mix. He could be a Dogue de Bordeaux mix, based on his head and colour, he could be any number of mixes.[/quote]
After reading this comment by Caveat,I have the Rambo solution.
Let`s have former Attorney General Michael Bryant(The architect of Bill 132) identify Rambo.
There`s an extremely good chance that he`ll be identified as a large Jack Russell Terrier or a small Presa Canario or something else equally as ridiculous.
Even when he cheats,he can`t get it right.
Please people,you need to view the Michael Bryant/Alix Pierson interview if you haven`t already seen it.
It`s legal for home viewing only.
I have it!
The powers that be, don`t want you to see it but
we have the technology to get it from my home to your home.
Posted by Mac`s Gang | January 21, 2008 10:55 AM
Posted on January 21, 2008 10:55
I don't understand why they don't just declare that the dog is not a 'pit bull' and send him home.
Having seen all the photos, I couldn't testify in court that this dog is any particular breed or mix. He could be a Dogue de Bordeaux mix, based on his head and colour, he could be any number of mixes.
The point is, he's a mutt. His ancestry can't be verified. He's not a problem.
The city is under no obligation to enforce this law or to declare that any dog is a 'pit bull'.
Even if they do decide to declare him a 'pit bull' and take the risk, they are still within the law by shipping him out of province.
How do they know Gabriela actually owns the dog, if he's not licensed or chipped?
By the way, the law doesn't mention using a rescue, just placing him where he's legal and will be looked after.
There are a lot of these cases going on in Ontario right now and there will be a lot more. And what's been achieved?
- Dog owners have fewer civil rights than other citizens, some dog owners fewer still
- Dog bites have increased
- Fatalities have remained stable - about one a year on average across Canada, with a few blips here and there due to packs running loose on reserves
- Thousands of pets have been killed
- Nobody is safer, dog owners are a lot less safe than they were before Bryant
- an unbelievable amount of time and money has been wasted
This whole thing makes absolutely no sense, it is wrong, un-Canadian and geared towards death. Worse, it is based on fiction.
I shake my head over what's happened to Ontario and Canada over the past few years - and this issue is only one of the reasons.
Posted by Caveat | January 21, 2008 12:54 AM
Posted on January 21, 2008 00:54
Should Rambo be put to death?
Poll
http://www.rogerstelevision.com/option.asp?lid=9&rid=51
89% say NO!
Posted by Mac`s Gang | January 20, 2008 10:47 PM
Posted on January 20, 2008 22:47
[quote]A report about Rambo is scheduled to run tonight on the 6 p.m.[/quote]
Was that clip run or was it bumped by another shooting of another innocent bystander in Toronto?
Maybe the authorities could catch these gang members if they weren`t so busy chasing down dogs.
Posted by Mac`s Gang | January 20, 2008 3:05 PM
Posted on January 20, 2008 15:05
It's been said that these dogs have been bred for aggression. Really,? just how do you do that?
I can believe that dogs can be bred for size, strenght,agility and speed. I do believe that the aggression, the nastiness, comes from us humans.
Has the Michael Vick fiasco taught us anything? Those dogs were fed gunpowder, steroids and were beaten half to death to get them to fight.
This is an ill-advised piece of knee-jerk legislation, and if you search Bill 132 you'll find a link setting out who voted for,against,and the abstainers.
Rambo will be the face of the dog killing legislation.
And if they kill the puppy, his picture will reappear at election time.
Posted by Brewster | January 20, 2008 2:40 PM
Posted on January 20, 2008 14:40
Dear Mississauga News
when I was young I was bit by a large breed dog and it traumatized me, but after 5 yrs I accepted a german shepard into my life who gave me nothing but unconditional love.
We are humans and have to realize that dogs are all animals and almost all the same inside no matter what breed they are and should be treated kindly, for they do not speak and sometimes we cannot tell if they are truly happy cause we as humans crop there ears and tails for our own weird reasons.
I think pittbulls are a loving breed as of any dog pure bred or a mixed cute dog , and they definitly deserve to live there lives on earth. If anything at all it is us as humans who truly make a qoute "bad dog."
Sincerely, with high hopes for Rambo
Holly Davey
Posted by Holly Davey | January 19, 2008 7:33 PM
Posted on January 19, 2008 19:33
Note to Council
[quote]... would result in serious liability issues
should one of the dogs in question seriously injure a resident.[/quote]
If your AC picks up a Jack Russell Terrier or a "substantially similar" dog,
DON`T allow it to be released to owner or adopted out!
http://www.wtvq.com/midatlantic/tvq/news.apx.-content-articles-TVQ-2008-01-19-0001.html
Posted by Mac`s Gang | January 19, 2008 12:17 PM
Posted on January 19, 2008 12:17
Or plainly and simply, ask George Carlson to ask the "local riding associations" to give the puppy back to Gabriela then repeal the bill before Rambo gets side dished in the Asian Cuisine commodities?
The bill in itself contravenes our Canadian culture codes that questions the validity of "global inside trading" the more we find out about NAFTA in the Mulroney-Schreiber hearings.
Posted by Wayne Nagy | January 19, 2008 11:39 AM
Posted on January 19, 2008 11:39
The cognitive approach would be to ask the riding association captains here and in Kitchener to directly repeal the Bill
The big problem is that the Ontario Works in Peel people had cut off bus fares along with political membership fees because they ‘re all appointed “Conservatives” who forced $66 million pooling struture because farce programs don’t work either.
http://www.ontarioliberal.ca/en/Previewpage.aspx?id=74
Posted by Wayne Nagy | January 19, 2008 8:02 AM
Posted on January 19, 2008 08:02
Thank you so much for keeping Rambo's story alive, Mr. Stewart.
Again, the City of Mississaga is tripping over its doublespeak. To quote Elaine Buckstein, "Once passed into law the City of Mississauga must enforce the law as it is written. Failure to do so would result in serious liability issues
should one of the dogs in question seriously injure a resident." Ms. Buckstein, a law so up in the air as the Fiberals' unfounded, unjust, vague and shoddy breed-specific legislation should be ignored. My concern would be whether Animal Control is adequately enforcing law about dangerous dogs, regardless of breed. Ms. Buckstein should be truly concerned about whether AC is apprehending the owners of dogs that are in fact dangerous, without regard to breed, shape or appearance. Not about a puppy with a sweet disposition.
As has been said by many, no one on this earth can PROVE what Rambo is, other than a dog. They may speculate, they may guess, but they cannot prove anything.
The honourable route for the City of Mississauga is to declare Rambo a dog of uncertain origin and return him to his owner with a caution that she have him neutered, participate in obedience training, and keep him confined and safe.
And to tell the Ontario Fiberals loudly and firmly to go bite themselves.
Now, that would be responsible and just government.
Posted by Social Mange | January 18, 2008 11:38 PM
Posted on January 18, 2008 23:38
[quote]Rambo is not a problem. "I'm told he's really a sweet dog and everyone at animal control plays with him. He's just a darling," says Parrish.[/quote]
There are thousands of other little "Rambos" that have already been slaughtered due to Bill 132.
Just ask the shelter workers across Ontario!
Don`t anyone be fooled into thinking this is an isolated incident.
These other little pups are being seized before they have an owner to fight for them.
If they`re "lucky",they`re being euthanized,if they`re unlucky,they`re being shipped to a Research Facility.
This owner and dog have just put a face on the ugliness of Bill 132.
It`s too bad we don`t have pictures of the heaps of puppies and dogs that have been killed in Ontario due solely to looks.
If you`re charged under this Bill,go public.
We need to see the faces of those puppies and dogs before they`re in the freezer.
The Fiberals passed the buck.
There really is no out for any city council.
There are going to be more dogs.
There are going to be more fights,just the name of the city council will change.
Posted by Mac`s Gang | January 18, 2008 3:27 PM
Posted on January 18, 2008 15:27