Bite fallout prompts push for changes to London’s dog licensing rules

Article content

A city councillor wants London’s dog licensing bylaw to start requiring owners to share information after a biting incident, motivated by a resident who says he was left searching for details after his pet was attacked.

“Say you’re in a car accident, right? You have to present information to say you’re insured and that you can essentially cover damages,” Ward 1 Coun. Hadleigh McAlister said. “In a case of a dog attack, there’s nothing really compelling the person whose dog attacked to provide any information.”

Article content

This was flagged for McAlister by resident Stephen Karchut, who says his six-year-old Old English Sheepdog, Samson, was bitten by another dog in October while Karchut was walking him along their usual route near Hamilton and Clarke roads in east London.

Karchut says the incident involving Samson, who is “not an aggressive dog at all,” ended with the other dog pulled away by its owner. She left without providing her dog’s licence number, Karchut said, adding Samson wasn’t badly hurt but the unknowns were concerning.

“Not everybody gives their dogs vaccines, and that’s why I want to make sure I don’t have to have a $10,000 vet bill for getting him re-upped on and checked for everything,” Karchut said.

He says he found the owner after some Facebook detective work. A subsequent bite investigation by London Animal Care Centre (LACC), which is contracted by city hall to handle animal control, eased Karchut’s concerns.

But not having the information immediately prompted him to contact McAlister, his ward councillor, about tweaking London’s dog licensing bylaw and making it mandatory for the owner to share information after a dog bite.

Article content

Kent Lattanzio, director of operations for the LACC, said they investigate about 360 bites annually against both people and other pets, with the vast majority settled in some capacity. That can mean warnings, muzzle orders, or fines.

Most owners share information right away, he said, but not always.

“Information will come our way regarding a bite, because people know all the other dogs in their neighbourhood,” Lattanzio said. “Every once in a while, it can pose a challenge, for sure, but I don’t think there are too many bites that are reported to us where we don’t find out who the accused is.”

Lattanzio says it could be difficult to enforce a bylaw that mandates information-sharing, but noted that’s city council’s decision.

Karchut downplays any privacy concerns about sharing a dog’s licence number, noting the health of the dogs involved should be the priority. He also wants owners to be reminded with their annual licence renewal to put their dog’s number on its collar.

McAlister’s proposal is on the agenda for the next meeting of city council’s community and protective services committee, on Jan. 6.

jmoulton@postmedia.com

@JackAtLFPress

Article content