Breed Specific Legislation In Canada Puts Service Dog In Jeopardy

DaisyAn Itchmo reader, Deanna, sent us this story of a Canadian woman who is about to lose her dog Daisy to Breed Specific Legislation on pit bulls. Daisy, an 8 month old pit bull/lab mix, is a service dog in training for fibromyalgia as well as anxiety and panic attacks. Her owner, Tammy, adopted her and depends on Daisy as her service dog and companion.

When Tammy first adopted Daisy, the vet said that Daisy was an American Bull dog/labrador mix, but as Daisy grew older, Tammy realized that she was part pit bull instead. Ontario has a strict Breed Specific Legislation law that pit bull terriers or a dog that has a pit bull appearance must be spayed or neutered, microchipped, and muzzled in public. The law states that if a person is convicted of any offense, the dog must be destroyed.

The city called Tammy to ask her why Daisy wasn’t muzzled and why she was her service dog. On Monday, Daisy was seized from her house and taken her to a shelter. Why have authorities seized Daisy? Daisy has not been altered yet and there was an incident when Daisy greeted an elderly woman who fell and got hurt. Even though the lady said that Daisy did not attack her and was merely jumping up with excitement, the authorities are saying that it is an attack, citing Dog Owners Liability Act 5.1.

On Thursday, Tammy will go to court to plead for Daisy’s life.

50 Responses to “Breed Specific Legislation In Canada Puts Service Dog In Jeopardy”

  1. straybaby says:

    “Even though the lady said that Daisy did not attack her and was merely jumping up with excitement, the authorities are saying that it is an attack, citing Dog Owners Liability Act 5.1.”

    this type of thing is written into many dangerous dog laws that are on the books along with language regarding a person feeling threatened. i always worried that the public would misuse the laws, not the authorities.

    what a sad situation. hope like heck things work out for them.

  2. Flamin says:

    “Daisy, an 8 month old pit bull/lab mix. Daisy has not been altered yet and there was an incident when Daisy greeted an elderly woman who fell and got hurt.”

    This owner was not responsible, nor complied with the laws of Canada. She should have got her spayed right away, and trained her not to jump up! She’s a strong breed, and knocked down an elderly woman!
    It’s very sad for poor Daisy to be destroyed due to her irresponsible owner.

  3. pam says:

    this the perfect time for an animal rights lawyer to step up to the plate and offer his/her services. let’s give tammy the benefit of the doubt here, guys. maybe this story can have a happy ending.

  4. shibadiva says:

    There is a Saving Daisy thread on Dogster, and an update on the court case.

    “We have hired an attorney… they will be in court tomorrow morning.

    Tomorrow is a 1st hearing… Daisy will not be destroyed anytime soon, and quite possibly not at all.

    Tammy has been contacted by the attorney and they have looked at the paperwork she was sent.

    Flooding the shelter with emails will most likely hinder rather than help the situation. Right now it’s up to the judge in this case, and we don’t want to risk pissing him off either.

    At the moment, I am in the process of wiring funds to the attorney’s office and they will go to court tomorrow morning.

    Trust me — at this point the BEST thing we can do is wait until tomorrow. Because I am now a party to this whole thing (having been the one who actually hired the attorney), they will keep me informed via email on what’s going on.

    The initial retainer was $1000.00 Yeah, I know, ouch. But we had to do it. We will be needing more and I will keep everyone informed as to how much and when. Donations can be given at any time. They will stay in the account until needed.”

  5. For the Love of the Dog says:

    Flamin, just to clear up a couple of points. Tammy is a very good owner. Daisy was not spayed on the advise of her vet. She was scheduled to be so after her first heat cycle.

    Tammy was inside a store when the jumping incident took place. Her children were waiting outside with Daisy as the store complained about having her inside because she was not a certified service dog, she was a SDIT - service dog in training. The woman approached the children and dog. Although well trained, Daisy is still just a puppy and her primary handler was not at her side.

    Tammy has tried in every way that she can to be compliant with legal issues regarding Daisy. She has not been an irresponsible owner. Sadly a person cannot always control everything that happens.

  6. Flamin says:

    ” Tammy is a very good owner. Daisy was not spayed on the advise of her vet. She was scheduled to be so after her first heat cycle.”

    …I hope the vet that told her this will testify to that in court! It maybe Time for a new vet, when ones goes against the laws of the land. That was not in the dogs best interest.

    “Tammy was inside a store when the jumping incident took place. Her children were waiting outside with Daisy as the store complained about having her inside because she was not a certified service dog, she was a SDIT - service dog in training. The woman approached the children and dog. Although well trained, Daisy is still just a puppy and her primary handler was not at her side.”

    No responsible trainer, pet owner, or parent would leave their dog outside the store with children to supervise! How old are her children! I would never leave my child outside alone either! If she couldn’t bring the dog and children inside, she should have shopped elsewhere. Then later bring action against the store owner for not allowing the SDIT indoors if merited.

    “Tammy has tried in every way that she can to be compliant with legal issues regarding Daisy. She has not been an irresponsible owner. Sadly a person cannot always control everything that happens.”

    I don’t know all the facts of this case, however in reply to yours, you have to be in control of your dog at all times. responsible owners know this, and ask any good trainer. Maybe Tammy should have taken Daisy to a better trainer, or was she making an attempt to train this dog herself? Has she had obedience and training classes? Is Tammy a qualified dog trainer, or service dog trainer? Exactly what type of training did this dog really have!

  7. straybaby says:

    “you have to be in control of your dog at all times. responsible owners know this, and ask any good trainer.”

    yup. and dogs and humans are not perfect. it’s also very hard to train strangers how to act around your dog. i know this as i have been trying for years. and some dogs/breeds just have a heck of a lot more self control than others. doesn’t mean dog owners aren’t responsible or aren’t in fact pretty darn good trainers.

    i think you are really jumping all over a person who you don’t know, have never seen handle her dog etc. or her children and i just don’t understand why. we cannot control everything around us. most of us just do the best we can.

    and as far as the Vet’s advice, the vet may have had a very good reason and most “laws of the land” allow for that. same goes with Rabies shots . . .

  8. Flamin says:

    Ontario has strict BSL - Breed Specific Legislation on pit bulls! Laws like these are tough! So if you don’t protest them and they pass, you had better follow them. She have enough warning. Yes it’s irresponsible, or just plain laziness or trying to skirt the laws. To bad for the dog, the dog can’t read, but her owner could!

    From Tammy, Daisy’s Mom - June 4, 2007

    DAisy and TammySo much has happened in such a short time and now my Heart is breaking as Daisy sits at shelter and I have go to court over her being a pit bull and not being fixed. My Vet signed papers saying that she is a bulldog/lab and I was told when I got her she was a American Bull Dog/Lab AND THAT IS WHAT MY VET HAS ALL HER PAPERS UNDER.

    But as she has grown it was plain to see she was pit bull as I saw it so did people in our mall and stores. I was called by the city and questioned as why she wasn’t being muzzled as well as why she as my SDIT, was allowed in the mall/stores.

    http://tinyurl.com/2cacb3
    I read more and more cases like these where owners try to evade the laws, or abuse them then cry their dog is a service dog. This will only lead to new bills/laws passed to determine what is a service dog, and what type of disability will be covered.!

    I read where a woman wanted to take her pet into restaurant claiming her dog was a service animal. The dog was poorly controlled, and jumped up on everyone, and barked at the hostess! The owner of the dog claimed the dog relaxed her, and prevented her chronic heartburn!

  9. High Note says:

    I don’t think daisy really looks that big yet and if she is only a pup then it does take time to learn things. Elderly people sometimes lose their balance quite easily. I really do not feel this was the dogs fault since she was young. I sure hope she gets a second chance!

  10. furmom says:

    “I don’t know all the facts of this case, however in reply to yours, you have to be in control of your dog at all times. responsible owners know this, and ask any good trainer. Maybe Tammy should have taken Daisy to a better trainer, or was she making an attempt to train this dog herself? Has she had obedience and training classes? Is Tammy a qualified dog trainer, or service dog trainer? Exactly what type of training did this dog really have!”

    Even with the best training a youngish dog might jump on someone approaching, dogs are perfect. Kids, no matter how much practice they’ve had may not be fully prepared to handle a boisterous pup. So the Tammy made a slight error in judgement, the elderly lady should have known better than to approach a leashed strange dog if she wasn’t prepared for them possibly bumping or jumping. So everyone made a slight error in judgement. None of this has anything to do with a vicious or dangerous dog by the sounds of things, and the fact the dog is a PB mix is irrelevant. Anywhere that outlaws certain breeds rather than outlawing vicious *behavior* is seriously misguided.The laws should be reserved for actual cases of vicious behavior, and not tie up the courts with nonsense. If the dog was certified as a guide dog, I thought there is a certificate that owners can present, and stores, busses etc. have to allow them.

  11. Flamin says:

    Yes furmom, bad judgment indeed on the owners part. However I don’t think is to blame, since the dog was on a leash? However the size of this dog, the children never should have been left alone to control it.

    Anyway, A simple Doggie DNA test would prove or disprove if pitbull is in the mix. I don’t like these laws based on breeds at all. They should be based on if a dog is vicious! Pitbulls are not vicious, however it is more often then not, poor or little training with these breeds. Not to mention poor breeding, and or environments.

  12. straybaby says:

    “Ontario has strict BSL - Breed Specific Legislation on pit bulls! Laws like these are tough!”

    do you have a copy of the S/N portion? we have a strict S/N on ALL animals coming out of shelter and rescue here, but there are provisions. there basically has to be.

    she may not have been trying to get around anything. she’s being honest about how she and others were realizing the dog’s breed. she could be stamping her foot calling it a lab mix because she has “papers’! ;) i hope she get’s to keep Daisy and she turns into a great SD and is a fine example of the breed (if the situation warrants it and the dog isn’t a *problem*)

    I’d also hate to see that language in dog laws start getting applied in situations like this. i had a woman start screaming at me about my vicious Pit Bull when passin me on the sidewalk. my dog was at my side and actually behaving like a lady (she was still young). woman made a big ol’ stink. the way our law reads, she could have made a compalint about my dog because technically *she felt threatened*. btw, my dog is a Dalmatian . . .

  13. Flamin says:

    * However I don’t think the elderly lady is to blame, since the dog was on a leash? However the size of this dog, the children never should have been left alone to control it.

  14. straybaby says:

    “Anyway, A simple Doggie DNA test would prove or disprove if pitbull is in the mix.”

    i didn’t think they could identify pits yet? i know Dals and a few others aren’t able to be DNA’d yet. unless something has changed very recently. my dog was turned in as 3/4 Dal, and the only other possible breed i could see *perhaps* being in her would be pointer, so i was kinds hoping to find out :-/ she acts like a darn Dal, and that’s all i *really* care about! lol!~

  15. Flamin says:

    straybaby, try these.

    http://www.doginfomat.com/dog04.htm

    http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DB.....0d16_e.htm

    http://www.dogwatch.net/open_letter_liberals.html

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B.....egislation

    http://www.dogfriendly.com/ser.....ario.shtml

  16. furmom says:

    As far as knowing the breed of the dog (which is still irrelevant to me), a dog across the street from us looked like a yellow lab to me when she was a pup. As she grew up it became evident to me she was PB by appearance, they are legal in our province (we are more civilised than Ontario). But she is a sweetheart, gets along wonderfully with any dogs or people that come by. Now I understand why PB people say they are (normally) not a threat to anyone. I like having her around because I’m pretty sure no one would try to break in just because of her breeds reputation. And this stupid breed-based law, what do they do with a dog which has a PB mixed background but looks like a Golden Retriever?

  17. For The Love of the Dog » Blog Archive » Update on BSL in Canada - They’re Going to Kill Me on Thursday!! says:

    […] want to thank Itchmo and Dog Stories for answering my plea to help get the word out.  I will continue to try get in […]

  18. Flamin says:

    Yes pitbulls can be ID by DNA

    http://www.vetdnacenter.com/do.....rrier.html

    According to the laws, it’s the owners responsibility to prove/disprove if it’s a pitbull, and comply with the laws

  19. straybaby says:

    that is for identifying your dog and it’s parentage, not discovering the breed.

    here’s the breed discovery one:

    http://www.metamorphixinc.com/products2a.html

    they can only do 38 breeds so far. some (all?) BSL laws use vets for breed id . . .

    thanks for the other links! i’ll cruise through them after i finish up this work thing ;)

  20. Flamin says:

    High Note, scroll to the updated photo. It’s a pretty good sized dog.
    From Tammy, Daisy’s Mom - June 4, 2007

    http://i146.photobucket.com/al.....Daisy2.jpg

    straybaby, yes for that is for identifying your dog. They can’t say if it’s a pruebreed, bc several breeds may show up. They can ID around 100 breeds now, maybe more but it’s not available to the general public yet. However as with anything else, if you have the money, you can get the DNA test. They have more advanced technology then the public knows.
    http://www.vetdnacenter.com/dna-news.html

  21. Elaine Vigneault says:

    When I was a kid the bad dogs were Dobermans, now it’s Pit Bulls. Breed specific laws are like institutionalized racism for dogs. It’s not the breed, it’s the owner. Paranoia and fear shouldn’t legislate, logic and good public policy should rule.

  22. Sky Eyes Woman says:

    Ohhhhh, this makes me SO angry!

    When are the lawmakers going to get wise and wake up to the fact that the so-called “Pit Bull problem” is really a BAD OWNER problem and start penalizing PEOPLE for making their dogs vicious and just being bad owners in general? How about this- let’s fine and jail people for getting another dog OF ANY BREED after any dog they own attacks a person or is found running loose or if they violate a mandatory spay/neuter law?

    Banning certain breeds or dogs with the look of a certain breed doesn’t do a damn thing to stop the stupid people out there who make their dogs dangerous.

    This lady should move out of the area where this happened. Really. Why should she continue to support this city or province with her tax dollars when they’ve done this to her?

  23. Mags says:

    How’s the woman doing?
    The one with the broken hip…

  24. ohreally says:

    First of all, the owner did know Daisy was part pitbull when she got her. She had acknowledged that in posts on dogster. She is a liar and is an irresponsible owner and always has been. She has lost dogs to BSL before because of her negligence. And who suffers? The dogs.

  25. straybaby says:

    but that’s not available to the public until later this summer, so i don’t know how anyone would be able to use it. especially the *average* pet owner who would need to do a breed id now. that would prob fall back on conventional methods that are known. not all vets, lawyers, pet owners are current.

    thanks for posting the info though! hopefully one day i’ll know if my spotty monster is a PB spotty monster or not ;)

  26. straybaby says:

    ohreally,

    got links?

  27. Anonymous says:

    There was another PB case before the court very recently which I think hold out hope for Tammy and some other owners:

    as Judge Herman has effectively eliminated all of the dogs from the ban that the Attorney General originally pointed to as being dangerous.

    This ruling seems to tighten the legislation to the purebreds and those dogs that are substantially similar to the purebreds; ironically, the dogs in the media reports that propelled the decision to implement a ban would be highly unlikely to meet this new, tighter definition. It’s a very frustrating result for purebred dog owners in the province.

    What’s more, the judge has not yet ruled on what remedies she will accept to correct the unconstitutional portions of the law.

    Clayton Ruby, lawyer for the applicant, when he appeared on the Roy Green show on March 26, 2007, pointed out that both parties must go before Judge Herman to argue what specifically will correct the unconstitutional parts of the law. The scheduled court date is June 14, 2007.

    Ruby believes that the Attorney General will likely ask to have the portions of the law that Judge Herman declared unconstitutional eliminated while asking to allow everything else to remain.

    “The judge has not yet made a final order she says she wants to hear submissions. Mr Bryant has got to try to convince her that she should rewrite the legislation in accordance with her judgment and sustain it in rewritten form - realizing that she shouldn’t do that, that she should send it back to the legislature and let them do it if they want to. At the moment … the legislation is up in limbo,” said Ruby.

    Try this for a lega argument:
    Since the legislation is supposed to protect the public from vicious or dangerous dogs , therefore dogs of any breed, whether Pitt Bull , or a mix, or other breed would not fall under this law because they do not resemble the breed mentioned in the law which according to the law are vicious, aggressive by nature.
    Therefore a dog like Daisy who has shown not sign of aggression does not resemble the breed because she has shown no sign of aggression, and the law would not apply until such time as she does.

  28. furmom says:

    There was another PB case before the court very recently which I think hold out hope for Tammy and some other owners:

    as Judge Herman has effectively eliminated all of the dogs from the ban that the Attorney General originally pointed to as being dangerous.

    This ruling seems to tighten the legislation to the purebreds and those dogs that are substantially similar to the purebreds; ironically, the dogs in the media reports that propelled the decision to implement a ban would be highly unlikely to meet this new, tighter definition. It’s a very frustrating result for purebred dog owners in the province.

    What’s more, the judge has not yet ruled on what remedies she will accept to correct the unconstitutional portions of the law.

    Clayton Ruby, lawyer for the applicant, when he appeared on the Roy Green show on March 26, 2007, pointed out that both parties must go before Judge Herman to argue what specifically will correct the unconstitutional parts of the law. The scheduled court date is June 14, 2007.

    Ruby believes that the Attorney General will likely ask to have the portions of the law that Judge Herman declared unconstitutional eliminated while asking to allow everything else to remain.

    “The judge has not yet made a final order she says she wants to hear submissions. Mr Bryant has got to try to convince her that she should rewrite the legislation in accordance with her judgment and sustain it in rewritten form - realizing that she shouldn’t do that, that she should send it back to the legislature and let them do it if they want to. At the moment … the legislation is up in limbo,” said Ruby.

    Try this for a lega argument:
    Since the legislation is supposed to protect the public from vicious or dangerous dogs , therefore dogs of any breed, whether Pitt Bull , or a mix, or other breed would not fall under this law because they do not resemble the breed mentioned in the law which according to the law are vicious, aggressive by nature.
    Therefore a dog like Daisy who has shown not sign of aggression does not resemble the breed because she has shown no sign of aggression, and the law would not apply until such time as she does.

  29. furmom says:

    Sorry I screwed up the post.

  30. straybaby says:

    if i’m reading this right, it would include PB (maybe not immediately) as the breed description (per kennel clubs etc) is not one of an inherently (sp?!) dangerous dog by nature. so if they exclude mixes, there would be the basis to exclude PB’s in another round.

    question, didn’t gsd’s like dobermans have a bad rap at one time? seems like we have some mighty fine gsd service dogs these days. something to think about . . .

  31. furmom says:

    You can take a German Shepherd Dog with good solid breeding (the police like to breed their own lines for best temperament and physical soundness) and turn them into a lap dog, a search and rescue, drug detector, bad-guy apprehender, or crazed vicious junk yard dog. Obviously it is in the raising and training. But the Dobermans nowadays that I have seen while fine dogs, would not make it as police dogs.

  32. straybaby says:

    oh, i wasn’t saying dobies should be turned into gsd service dogs (able ones yes!) but that the backlash against certain breeds through the ages as far as negetive, could be turned to a positive when looking at how things have evolved with them.

    so the dangerous gsd breed has a proven history in service. pits also do some excellent service, so maybe highlight that when looking at bsl. tammy’s pit mix (?) is being trained as a service dog, so there is a parallel there. lordy, if we took away some of the working/service breeds because of their uncalled for reps, where would we be? goldens are starting to have issues because of bad/over breeding. i’m guessing if labs haven’t experienced it yet, they will also. give the public time, they can seriously mess up any breed.

  33. petslave says:

    daisy is certainly at least half something else by that updated photo–she’s tall & lean with a tucked up tummy & deep chest, not really a pitbully profile. I can’t see her face that well, but it does look more bulldog than pit.

  34. straybaby says:

    i noticed that also, and wondered if the other half was even Lab.

    check out the head profile here:

    http://petloverstips.com/ForTh.....y#more-322

    posted above by:
    Flamin Says:
    June 6th, 2007 at 5:42 pm

  35. rescuemom says:

    I have to agree with Flamin… I see no responsibility on the part of the owner so far. The point of this is, I believe, that the dog was an illegal dog. It is obviously older than the ban, which makes it illegal regardless of spay/neuter, microchip or muzzle.

    That said, when Terry realized (whenever that may have been) that Daisy was a pit bull, the dog should have been immediately spayed, chipped, and muzzled in public, service dog or not. There are numerous muzzles on the market today that are gentle and less obtrusive than the nylon standard. And there is NO excuse for leaving the children to watch the dog.

    I realize that law stinks, but the fact remains that it is what it is, and we’re not talking here about someone who attempted to comply, or was caught unaware. The owner knew the issue, the law, the risks, and chose to go ahead and ignore the reality of the situation.

    And no one has been able to show that this dog was in fact a SDIT. Where’s the trainer? The certification? Seriously, can I put a t-shirt on my St. Bernard and take her to the movies with us? I think that this is the type of situation that would infuriate those people with true service dogs who are increasingly questioned as to their validity.

    More information is needed before everyone jumps to defend this woman solely on the basis of their general hatred towards BSL (which stinks, btw).

  36. maji says:

    BLAME THE DEED NOT THE BREED!!

  37. Gynura says:

    I agree with you all the way Flamin. It is not the dogs fault if the owner is irresponsible. There are strick laws because too many people try to not do what they are supposed to do.

    I own rescue 7 dogs myself and they are all trained. If I would live in an area where the law says you cannot own a certain breed unless you comply to certains rules as having you dog spayed/neutered, muzzled,etc, I would simply not own that breed or do exactly what the law requires me to do.

    It is sad for Daisy and unfortunately, she was adopted by an irresponsible person. She knew Daisy had to be muzzled when walking outside, she wasn’t. She knew her dog had to be spayed and she wasn’t. I would not leave my dog, especially a bully breed, be supervised by my kids and let stangers approach them unless I am next to the dog myself. Period, dot!

  38. furmom says:

    I’d be interested in knowing how Daisy’s owner discovered Daisy was a PB mix, if it was only by appearance, her body looks more like a boxer than a PB.. I have seen a number of supposed pitt bulls in news items who very much seemed to be boxers by appearance.
    My point about the GSD was not so much about the Dobie temperament, except that people have had misconceptions about that breed too, but more about the wide variation of temperament or effect of training on any particular breed. Police dogs are not inherently vicious even though they can catch bad guys, they are usually very brave, but there are some German Shepherds who aren’t. You could train some Pitt Bulls to fight, I’ll bet the dog fighter trainers can tell you some wouldn’t make it at that, and even then you have to do a lot of training to get them to fight.
    At any rate there are plenty of other breeds you should outlaw if you were going to outlaw Pitts. Most of the terrier breeds would attack a human more easily than a Pitt or a Shepherd. And I’ve seen more aggressive Boxers than aggressive Pitts (although I’m sure the Boxer breed is a fine one when they are raised properly as well). This is why a breed specific law makes very little sense to me.

  39. rescuemom says:

    Just a quick note… you had asked for links to prove the suggestion that Tammy knew what Daisy was… and here it is.

    http://www.dogster.com/forums/.....ead/355075

    Not only did she know, she specifically went looking for a pit bull to rescue.

    Original Post:

    “HI im Zoey and i passed over rainbow bridge and now i want mom to be happy and do things again to finish what i started with her.

    Is there anyone in Ont Canada. She lives just North of Barrie that can help my mommy out she has so much love to give in her heart and having a hard time finding a 1-2 year old girl pity that is good with kids and would love a family to call her own in a forever home smile

    Cant you help me make her happy again PLZ

    Puppy Love and Belly Rubs
    Zoey and Tammy”

    Follow-up Post:

    “I WOULD LIKE TO PROUNDLY INTRDUCE YOU TO DAISY

    I want to take this time to thank all the caring and loving dogsters that help in my search for a pit bull to rescue. You ALL are truly one of a kind.
    I hope you take a few seconds to look at Daisy’s page i know yous will give her all the love you have showed my Dear Beloved Zoey and me.
    Daisy is as sweet as can be she has brought smiles back to all our faces and filled an emptiness in our house and family TY Zoey for bring Daisy in our lives smile

    HOPE ALL IS WELL WITH YOUS AND YOUR FUR FAMILY smile

    Puppy Love
    Zoey, Tammy and Daisy”

  40. rescuemom says:

    I just want to clarify that I’m not condemning the decision to purposefully adopt a pit bull. I think that those people who take on a rescue pit, knowing full well what added responsibility is involved, are incredibly dedicated and very brave.

    That said, for her to specifically search out a pit bull (especially for a “service dog”) and then to actively disobey the laws in place that govern ownership of that breed, well I’m sorry but you made your bed… my only point of concern here is that Daisy will suffer for her owner’s lack of responsibility and care for her wellbeing.

    Whether we like it or not, and regardless of how long it will hold up to challenge in the courts, DOLA is currently in effect and is enforced (generally) to the fullest extent of the law.

    Not only should Daisy not be returned to Tammy, I would hold that maybe Tammy should not be a dog owner of any breed.

  41. straybaby says:

    ok, in looking at Daisy’s dogster page, i noticed her arrival story:

    “It Began When… We where in the mall and this guy stopped Daddy because he heard that we where looking for a Girl Pup and his friend needed a home A.S.A.P for this sweet little girl he had 3 left out of a litter of 6-7 and the Lady next Door said she was calling Animal Control that he had 2 days. He didn’t want them to be put down so they where living in his parents basement in crate for 3-4 weeks, because they said “they didn’t want them all over there house making a mess” :( The next day Daddy brought her home dirty and stinky i didn’t care i grabbed her up and gave her a big hug and kisses :) ”

    wouldn’t that mean they know what the mother looks like?

    the pics on her page don’t convince me she’s a pit mix. or a lab mix! lol! her body is taking on a shape that doesn’t seem right for either and there is something about the profile of her head and ear set that also makes me curious about parentage.

  42. rescuemom says:

    It should also be noted that by Canadian law (to the best of my knowledge) ONLY service dogs for the BLIND trained by accredited facilities are protected by law and given full access to places like public transportation, malls and stores.

    As far as I am aware, there is currently NO certification program for service dogs in Ontario that are trained by their owners. I would also think it would be extremely difficult to find an accredited trainer to work with a dog like Daisy (banned breed born after legislation, without spay/microchip/registration).

    I am getting more and more bothered by the fact that this dog is being referred to as a “service dog” when there is NO evidence that this is the case. This is exactly the kind of situation that brings real service dogs under scrutiny.

    If the reality of this situation is simply that this woman has self-designated this dog as a service dog as a means to allow the dog access to otherwise inaccessible areas and potentially a way around BSL, then consider me thoroughly disgusted, and supportive of some form of punishment being doled out to the owner.

    One final note… in Daisy’s diary there is a post entitled “I have a boyfriend.” I certainly hope that this “boyfriend” (a pitbull named Ben) is neutered, and this wasn’t a meeting to assess compatibility for future breeding…

  43. furmom says:

    Well I don’t think anyone would seriously call her a service dog in training or otherwise, for fibromyalgia and panic attacks? Not to denigrate those with fibromyalgia or panic attacks (I’ve had both) but what’s a service dog to do, alert her that she’s having panic attack, or give her a massage when she’s in pain? Anyone with a real service dog does not leave them outside anywhere for anything. So the service dog thing is kind of a mute point. If she’s just trying to test the laws to bring them down, this seems a little more likely. There’s always more to a story than appears at first.

  44. Mellow says:

    The story as originally put out is not true. Here’s a link to the article in the local paper where Daisy lives and the story.

    http://www.thebarrieexaminer.c.....Local+News

    Dog attack leads to charges
    Local News - Wednesday, June 06, 2007 @ 07:00

    A 37-year-old woman faces several charges after her dog seriously injured an elderly woman last month.

    Southern Georgian Bay OPP and Penetanguishene animal control officers were called to the Village Square Mall around 3 p.

    m., May 23.

    A 76-year-old woman was walking through the parking lot when the dog jumped onto her chest, knocking her backwards onto the asphalt surface.

    She sustained a number of fractures, including a broken pelvis, as well as injuries to her elbow and ankle.

    Police say a young child had left the dog tied to the handle of a service door, near the pharmacy entrance.

    After the dog’s owner was located and charged with failing to prevent an attack and failure to comply with a regulation under the Dog Owners Liability Act.

  45. MarySmith says:

    I’ve searched all over for an update to this story since the Thurs court date. What happened during that court secession?

    Thanks

  46. Mellow says:

    Follow up article with further details.
    http://64.233.167.104/search?q.....&gl=us
    Dog Owner Charged

    (Penetanguishene, Ontario) - Late last month, officers from the Southern Georgian Bay Detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police and the Town of Penetanguishene Animal Control conducted a joint investigation after an elderly female had been injured by a dog at the Village Square Mall.

    On May 23, 2007, at approximately 3:00P.M., a 76-year old woman was walking through the mall parking lot when a large dog jumped up onto her chest and knocked her to the ground near the entrance to the pharmacy. She fell backwards onto the hard asphalt surface and sustained a number of fractures to the pelvis and also injured her elbow and ankle in the fall.

    Through the ongoing investigation that continued, the investigators were able to determine that the dog in question had been left with a young child tied to the handle of a service door near the entrance to the pharmacy while the owner went into the store. With the assistance of the public and staff at the store, the female was comforted at the scene until she could be transported to hospital for treatment. The owner, dog and young child did not stay after the victim was helped back onto her feet and seated on a nearby bench.

    The identity of the dog owner and the dog in question became known to the investigators a short time later and as a result, charges of Failing to Prevent an Attack under section 5.1(a) and a Failure to Comply under section 2(1), regulation 157/05 contrary to the Dog Owners Liability Act were laid against 37-year old Tammy Brown of Gignac Dr. in Penetanguishene. She is scheduled to appear in Provincial Offences Court on June 7, 2007 to answer to these charges.

    Dog owners are reminded that under this provincial legislation that they are accountable for the actions of their pets and must maintain control of them at all times when they are not secured in an enclosed compound or fenced in backyard.

  47. MarySmith says:

    Thanks Mellow, but that article still does not tell what happen after Tammy went to court on June 7th.
    That is what I want to know. I want to know what happened AFTER Tammy went to court.

    Can anyone tell me???

  48. Mellow says:

    Mary, the case been held over for trial or some type of hearing in September, its my understanding that Daisy is still in the shelter. Information on this is hard to come by, sketchy, and sometimes distorted, but I know that there will be a hearing of some sort in September.

  49. Alison says:

    The fact that Daisy is a pitbull has absolutely nothing to do with what happened - it was not even mentioned in several news articles. Tammy has lied and fudged the truth of the matter on Dogster and to everyone. It is her fault that poor Daisy is now kennelled. She lied to to everyone saying it that Daisy will be put to sleep because she is a pitbull. Then she lied to say she didn’t know Daisy was a pitbull when she specifically wanted one - Dogster again. She lied saying that she called the ambulance - she did not and she didn’t wait around either. I feel sorry for Daisy, I don’t feel one iota of sympathy for Tammy. Leave a dog tied up outside a store with a kid to look after it. Shame on you Tammy for lying. People have given you money and you have lied!

  50. Jim G says:

    This is what originally happened and it was culled from the police report. No mention of BSL:

    Dog Owner Charged
    (Penetanguishene, Ontario) - Late last month, officers from the Southern Georgian Bay Detachment of the Ontario Provincial Police and the Town of Penetanguishene Animal Control conducted a joint investigation after an elderly female had been injured by a dog at the Village Square Mall.

    On May 23, 2007, at approximately 3:00P.M., a 76-year old woman was walking through the mall parking lot when a large dog jumped up onto her chest and knocked her to the ground near the entrance to the pharmacy. She fell backwards onto the hard asphalt surface and sustained a number of fractures to the pelvis and also injured her elbow and ankle in the fall.

    Through the ongoing investigation that continued, the investigators were able to determine that the dog in question had been left with a young child tied to the handle of a service door near the entrance to the pharmacy while the owner went into the store. With the assistance of the public and staff at the store, the female was comforted at the scene until she could be transported to hospital for treatment. The owner, dog and young child did not stay after the victim was helped back onto her feet and seated on a nearby bench.

    The identity of the dog owner and the dog in question became known to the investigators a short time later and as a result, charges of Failing to Prevent an Attack under section 5.1(a) and a Failure to Comply under section 2(1), regulation 157/05 contrary to the Dog Owners Liability Act were laid against 37-year old Tammy Brown of Gignac Dr. in Penetanguishene. She is scheduled to appear in Provincial Offences Court on June 7, 2007 to answer to these charges.

    Dog owners are reminded that under this provincial legislation that they are accountable for the actions of their pets and must maintain control of them at all times when they are not secured in an enclosed compound or fenced in backyard.

    FLASH FORWARD TO THE PRESENT:

    Tammy is now claiming her evil neighbors cut Daisy’s leash. And that while Daisy was tied up in the back yard the leash broke. First thing is after all that she went through why would she leave her dog unattended again? Second does anyone buy that the neighbor cut the leash and Tammy did not notice?

    Okay now according to Tammy all Daisy did this time was greet a dog before she got picked up by animal control. But in the charges below, injury to a person or animal is cited. So what do we believe? I say nothing, this woman is not to be trusted.

    Here are the new charges:

    Case # op08194358 ( not sure if o’s or 0’s)

    The Charges are as follows

    Count#1
    Did being the owner of a dog, fail to comply with a final order contrary to section 4 (3) of the Dog Owner’s Liability Act

    Count #2
    and further that Tammy Brown on or about the 25th day of June 2008 at the town of Penetanguishene in the County of Simcoe did being the owner of a dog, fail to prevent biting or attacking a person or domestic animal contrary to section 5.1 of the Dog Owners Liability Act.

    Count #3
    and further that Tammy Brown on or about the 25th day of June 2008 at the town of Penetanguishene in the County of Simcoe did being the owner of a dog, allow a pit bull in her possession to stray contrary to section 6(e) of the Dog Owners Liability Act.

    Count#4
    and further that Tammy Brown on or about the 25th day of June 2008 at the town of Penetanguishene in the County of Simcoe did being the owner of a dog, fail to ensure a pit bull is at all times secured by a leash contrary to regulation 157/05(1) of the Dog Owners Liability Act.

    Court Date Aug 7th/08 @ 9:00am
    10 Roberts St West, Penetanguishene, ON

    Tammy has put up a petition site and will probably be looking for donators to bail her out of her legal situation, but will Daisy the dog be saved this time? I hope so. And if she is spared death due to her careless owner, maybe it would be best if Daisy was rehomed with someone who can atleast not tie her outside unsupervised. TWICE!!!

    BSL was not at issue here. Responsibilty was. Owners like this give all pit bulls and dog owners a bad name.


Close
E-mail It