Canards Canins

Montréal Dog Owners Journal

Editorials

September 12, 2002

There will be a MARCH-O-THON called Les pattes de l'espoir for the Canadian Cancer Society. It is a walk with the family dog starting at the Nature Center in Laval on September 22nd.

Montréal faces an acute housing shortage. The lack of apartments in town has given landlords an upper hand; lots of them have decided to enforce a no-pets policy for their tenants. This has forced lots of people to part with their companions. Some at least have brought them to the SPCA for adoption; others have just abandoned them, letting them fend for themselves. The SPCA has been swamped with pets these last few days. These require people either to adopt them or at least to act as foster parents to them while the situation improves.

If you can help, please contact the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA)

May 12, 2002

The following editorial is part of a letter sent to Henry Aubin, The Gazette's Municipal Affairs Columnist:

As a retired teacher who does not go out very far from home but likes to keep well informed in municipal politics because of his great interest in dog runs, I have been examining the Internet site of the City of Montréal with great attention... [I can make] the following observations on that site ...

• The only part of their web site that is really kept up to date is the one on the Summit; and even that one was very slow starting
• The ordre du jour of the City Council available online are of little use at least to me. There is not enough information to know what will be talked about
• There are no minutes of these meetings available online. None of the by-laws approved by the new City are available online; nothing is found on the question period, either the questions or their answers. In fact there is total Internet opacity with this new administration while it was not the case under the Bourque regime. ..
• This same sorry state of affairs exists in the case of most boroughs. Only three offer some online transparency as of this morning: Verdun, Rosemont-Petite-Patrie and Mercier-Hochelaga-Maisonneuve
• It is still impossible to tell what of the City’s site refers to the whole City (i.e. the new one as a whole) or to the parts that used to be the old City; and that after five months! For instance, everything found on the Greffe site refers exclusively to the old City territory. Its statement that it is up to date is completely false, and it does not worry the Greffier at all, as she was told. Obviously, the web part of the Greffe is of no interest to her.

It is quite obvious that Internet Democracy, that is, citizen empowerment by knowledge of what is decided at City Hall and in the Boroughs is in practice very low on the list of priorities of both bureaucrats and politicians.

Not only that, but I tried to have permission to reproduce the various by-laws concerning dogs in the City of Montréal on my web journal. I was told that I could not be given such a permission but that they probably would not do anything if I did reproduce some of them. And, of course, they would in no way provide me with them free of charge. I wanted to offer a public service so that dog owners would know what are the rules in each and every Borough. But, obviously, this should not be put in the hands of an amateur like me. Permission could not be granted, was I told, because the Greffier does not have such a power according to the Charter; and the politicians did not want to act to see that such a permission be granted. Why should I not be able to reproduce by-laws when I can get permission to reproduce laws (as I did)?

May 5, 2002

There was an interesting article in this week's Mirror written by Noemi Lopinto called Police and pet owners lock horns in Parc Lafontaine and available until the 8th through the above hyperlink. This article is interesting for all kind of reasons.

For those who cannot be bothered to read it, the writer interviews a dog owner who represents the concerns of a number of dog owners in the Parc Lafontaine area.

Here is a summary of the essential points that come out:

1. the person interviewed represents affluent dog owners;
2. she, like others, does not want to use the available dog run because:
   1. it stinks
   2. the rocks used to cover the ground hurt the dogs' feet
   3. at least one dog got sick because of the lack of hygiene
   4. even if the owners pick up the poop, there will be a build-up of microbes without serious maintenance
3. she wants the dog run closed and dogs to have the run of the park as "the great majority of owners are responsible and leash their dogs when there are children or people about"
4. she - and others - have been given numerous tickets by police for letting their dog loose outside the dog run, with increasing fines in the case of repeat offenders
5. she - and others - consider that a case of "police intimidation"
6. she considers that it is not fair that the other infractions, like riding a bicycle or a skateboard in a park, are not acted on by police.

The writer then get the reaction of the director of communications of Access Montréal. Here are her points:

1. it is the dog owners who are responsible for keeping the dog run clean;
2. if the owners do not want the dog run, let them talk to their elected officials;
3. let the owners remember that the residents are complaining about
   1. the noise
   2. the owners' lack of discipline.

So these are the essential points given in this article. What is there to say about it? Well, an aweful lot.

It is the duty and responsability of dog owners to keep the dog run they visit really clean. That means, picking up your dog's excrements and any others that you notice whithin that dog run. Of course, if you know which dog is responsible for some droppings, you have to inform the dog owner. If that person refuses to clean up, then you have to tell him to leave the dog run. Irresponsible dog owners should not be tolerated in a dog run. And, as most people have cellular phones with them these days, calling the police to signal that infraction should be a sweet revenge for our lady.

If this dog run lacks the proper organization to see that the terms of the contract between it and the City (which are to be found near the door) are not respected, indeed the dog run should be closed. Period. No alternatives. If dog owners cannot be trusted to look after a limited enclosure, surely they cannot be trusted with the whole park!

I am not saying that this person has no valid complaints; far from it. But she is barking the wrong tree. The police are doing their jobs. That repeat offenders are targeted is only fair; the police understanding and application of the by-law is also fair: you do get increasing fines according to the City by-law for repeat offences; the leash lenght limit is 2 meters; and you are fined if your dog does not wear its (valid) licence and if you do not carry anything to remove the poop. It is also fair to insist that adults (who should give the example) be more obedient of by-laws than children.

Now that being said, it is a fact that:

1. both dogs and owners find the 25 mm diameter pebbles that the City bought at great expense to cover the main surface of that dog run very difficult to move on. So much so that the dogs refuse to run on them. Most dogs hate them. So we end up with a dog run where dogs cannot run;
2. the dog run is filthy;
3. there are dog fights quite often as their owners do not exercise proper control on them and do not care one for the other.

All dog runs need a strong organization to run it and see that the rules of the game be applied. If that lady and her fellow owners who find this dog run unacceptable want to see their dogs run in this park, they have to be prepared to unite to "fight City Hall" for a new dog park running surface after taking on the job of creating there an effective dog owners'association. They have to be ready to clean it themselves to give the example to others. They have to be ready to remind the other owners of the rules written near the dog run doors; they have to be ready to organize the dog owners to petition their elected officials for a new surface on which the dogs can effectively run and which is easier to keep clean.

Dogs can indeed get sick in a dog run. But there like elsewhere one has to keep in mind some basic rules:

1. keep the dog run as clean as possible;
2. do not let dogs share water but bring your own water bottle that you can fill from a tap once emptied;
3. make sure your dog gets all its shots and is immunized against kennel cough

To finish, a good dog run is a fun place to be for both dogs and owners as they can socialize and play. It is a place to meet and make friends in a society where no one knows his neighbours. But this requires first a lot of work, patience and perseverance as well as some understanding of the foibles of self and others.

April 23, 2002

Four more dog runs are listed in the Dog Parks registry. This brings the total of dog runs to 29. There are two dog runs in Verdun, one of which is on Nuns' Island.

There is one near the Maimonedes Hospital in the district of Côte-Saint-Luc of the Côte-Saint-Luc - Hampstead - Montreal-West borough. And Mont-Royal borough has one in its Recreation Park.

I called the Saint-Laurent borough where I was told that there was no dog run in its territory. So, of the four boroughs called on Friday, three had dog runs. I will continue calling so as to put the list up to date.

April 23, 2002

There is a new event taking place these next few days: the "Don't skip a beat" tour going to a good number of dog parks. Do look if it is coming to a place near you and look at the text of there pamphlet at the address above.

April 23, 2002

I put on line yesterday a new section - in French only - intitled Quelques articles du Code criminel that could be useful.

I have heard that intimidation, threats, and intended dog fights have happened here and there in the past, without the police being called and complaints filed. These events, if they indeed happened, are against the Criminal Code, and a responsible citizen has a duty to see that the perpetrators be brought to justice. Just like in the case that a dog attacks either a human or another dog.

April 20, 2002

I have just put on line - in French only - a new section called Pour le bien-être de votre chien!, that is, for your dog's sake. Only its first section is completed, which is called ses soins médicaux préventifs . It tells you which vaccines and medications you should get and why. Hope you find it useful and easy to understand -even in French!

April 14, 2002

I have just finished revising quite a few sections of Canards Canins, and finished constructing a section called Detailed structure of the whole site . This section can easily be accessed at the beginning of the Narthex.

This section will permit you, the reader, to see at a glance (!) what there is on the whole site, English and French. Hope it will be of some use to you.

April 10, 2002

On the City of Montréal website, there is something called the "carrefour communautaire"; if you choose "mille et un sites", you find a long list of websites of interest to Montrealers. For some site to be put on this list by the City, someone who oversees the organization's website has to make a formal request on line.

I went through the whole list yesterday; of sites for dog people, there are none; of sites for gays and lesbians, I found seven. Why is that?

Well, I think it is quite easy to explain. Not that long ago, gays were being attacked physically and verbally; the police was considering them as second class citizens, not really worth their while. Faced with such hostility, they decided to organize, fight for their rights and show what they could do. They created the organizations required to help each other and to thrive. They became a community.

Today, the dog people are considered second class citizens. The requirements that they have to fulfill to get and keep dog runs are much more stringent than that for any other group; they are harassed by some citizens who want them out of their neighbourhoods and sometimes by the police itself. They were the only group who had, in the old city of Montréal, to face a special patrol, with someone in charge who didn't care for the city's by-laws but was making them up, by city councillors who again invented non-existent by-laws and imposed them on the dog people. And what did this group do? Well, very little. It just did like the gays used to do.

The dog people have a certain number of organizations to oversee their dog runs. What to they do? They try to become as quickly as possible a kind of local dog people's club, looking after their own interests and nothing else. Any kind of need the further the cause becomes very unimportant when the dog run seems to be assured. Dog people are not militant by nature. Like their dogs, they want peace and to relax, have fun and socialize together.

This attitude means that no fundamental change for the better is possible. We have to unite, we have to help each other, we have to fight for better by-laws and a better public perception of who we are and what we bring to the City. This process will take off only if a large number of dog people get involved.

For such a process to succeed, the dog people need their own "newspaper" where they can get informed, exchange views, and where the various organizations' leaders can bring up to date all the dog people. Now this is what I am hoping that Canards Canins can become.

For this to happen requires that enough people get involved in such a project. I have no intention of imposing my ideas and my "baby" on anyone. I have done a certain amount of work, slowly and patiently, one day at a time. I have tried to gather under one "roof" as much useful information as I could get. But I cannot succeed all by myself. Dog people have to want this web Journal, they have to support it, feed it and then it will thrive. Otherwise it will remain "a voice that cries in the wilderness".