Chris Clegg,
Editor, South Peace News
On July 10, Stacey L. Cunningham was fined $600 in High Prairie provincial court after pleading guilty to a Town of High Prairie bylaw.

Her sin was allowing her dog to have the run of the kennel, the kennel meaning Town of High Prairie boundaries.

At first glance, this seems like a princely sum to pay for letting Rover run loose. I mean, it’s $600. That is not chicken feed. Oops! Doggy feed!

There is a little more to this than meets the eye.

“It was her fourth infraction, said the town’s lawyer, Harry Jong. He was probably thinking this poor woman was in the town’s doghouse.

Under town bylaws, the fine starts at $75 and doubles. Therefore, Cunningham has previously paid fines of $75, $150 and $300. The $600 fine will mean it has cost this woman $1,200 to retrieve her beloved pooch.

As Judge Paul said, that will buy an awfully good fence.

“That’s a lot of money for a dog,” he added.

It appears Judge Paul is not a dog lover. Doggone it!

The question is, is this fine too “ruff” or are we barking up the wrong tree?

Before we go dumping on town council for making such a dog-eat-dog bylaw, we need to realize that in this case it’s not your docile hound dog, too lazy to get out from underneath the porch on a hot day. Earlier, court heard the dog has shown “aggressive” behaviour.

We have no idea how dangerous this dog is, except that the town’s peace officers deemed it valid to catch him and put him in doggy jail four times. I am sure it was a dogfight to catch him.

I asked senior peace officer Alan Bloom – and I did not want him to be too dogmatic – if there was a cap to potential fines. There is no cap.
Cunningham’s next fine is $1,200 and then $2,400 and so on. That stings! What a dog’s breakfast that is!

Of course, the bylaw is always open to amendments. There is no use going dog-ape over this.

I also had the chance to speak to the other peace officer, Erica Friesen. She is 100 per cent correct when she says to simply look after your dog. In other words, do not have the “dog in the manger” attitude.

OK, accidents do happen. The bylaw, however, is designed to give the dog owner a couple of breaks. A first fine of $75 and a second fine of $150 is not unreasonable. If the dog is escaping custody repeatedly, it does suggest the owner is being irresponsible, or the dog is the Houdini of all dogs. Or, the owner is the unluckiest person alive to have Rover run free and run into a friendly peace officer before he/she notices.

I admit my first feeling was the fine was too excessive and should be capped. Upon reflection, it probably isn’t. The first fines are not excessive. The owner is informed the price goes up after further offences so there is no surprise when the dog owner is socked with a $600 fine.

And there is the issue of simply being a responsible pet owner.

Town council has deemed these penalties to be fair, or not doggery in nature. I happen to agree. It does mean they are right. If you disagree, write council and express your opinion. Let the dogs loose! If there is enough concern, the bylaw will be amended.

In the meantime, as Judge Paul suggests, buy a really good leash, or build a really good fence. The investment will save you a lot of money.

Who let the dogs out?

What a dog-eat-dog world it is!