애완동물 관리 잘 하세요. - 법 위반땐 벌금에 감옥행까지
작성자 정보
- 작성일
컨텐츠 정보
- 13,798 조회
- 3 댓글
- 목록
본문
지난 월요일부터 새로운 동물복지 수정법(the Animal Care Amendment Act)이 효력을 발휘하면서 애완동물을 기르고 있는 교민들의 주의를 요합니다.
■ 새로운 법에서의 벌금과 형벌
- 동물복지 위반에 대한 최고 벌금이 처음 위반시 $5,000 에서 $10,000 로 인상되었고, 2번째 또는 재범일 경우는 $10,000 에서 $20,000 으로 인상됨
- 금고(감옥)형 기간이 재범일 경우 최고 6개월에서 최고 12개월로 증가됨
- 수정된 법은 법원에 위반한 사람은 평생동안 애완동물을 소유하거나 관리하는 것을 금지하게 하는 권한을 줌과 함께 금고기간과 벌금을 2배 증가시키고 평생동안 애완동물 소유권을 갖지못하게 법적인 권한을 더함.
새로운 법은 2년전에 위니펙 프리 프레스가 어떤 개를 키우는 곳의 나쁜 환경을 보도한 후에 만들어 졌습니다.
새로운 법은 더욱 자주 개사육지의 검사를 요구하고, 개나 고양이 등 많은 동물을 기르는 사육자(breeder), 애완동물점(pet stores) 등은 면허취득을 요구하게 변경되었습니다.
사육자(breeder)는 5마리 또는 그 이상의 숫암놈 동물(female animals)을 기르는 사람으로 정의되며, 면허(Licensing)는 그전에 구입한 애완동물이 병들거나 비싼 진료비때문에 피해를 본 소비자를 더욱 잘 보호하기 위한 목적입니다.
또한 새로운 법은 동물보호 공무원(animal-protection officers)들에게 해를 방지하기 위하여 즉각 조치를 취하게 하거나 동물이 학대를 받거나 버려졌다고 생각되면 즉시 동물을 압수할 수 있도록 권한이 더욱 강화되었습니다.
수의사들(Veterinarians)의 역활도 확장되었는데, 동물학대 또는 동물방치의 경우는 신고를 하도록 요구되게 바뀌었습니다. 만약 신고가 되면 동물들은 불이익으로 부터 보호될 것입니다.
이상 위니펙 프리 프레스에서 요약함.
다른 신문 기사에서 애완동물을 잘 못 관리하여 법정에 까지 불려가고 벌금낸 기사가 있어서 옮겨왔습니다.
애완견 Peanut 이 지나가던 아이를 할퀴어 벌금 $500, 격리금(quarantine) $231 등 $1,000 가까운 비용을 청구받았고 3개의 소환장(summonses)을 받은 Staub.
A few weeks ago, Donna Staub picked up her daughter's dog, Peanut, from Animal Services. The Shih Tzu-Yorkie cross spent 10 days in quarantine because she was involved in an alleged dog bite.
When you hear of dog bites, most of us envision large aggressive canines. This wasn't the case. Peanut, Staub says, loves people and regularly visits a local elderly care facility.
So why was she quarantined? According to Staub, her daughter Kim returned from the store and when she opened the door, Peanut, Mitzy (Donna Staub's dog) and Bella (a dog they were dog sitting) slipped by her. The dogs became excited and jumped on a boy who'd just delivered flyers. He was wearing shorts, and Peanut scratched the boy's thigh. Staub said her daughter "called the dogs (back) and asked if he was OK." Just to make certain he was all right, her daughter asked if he'd been bitten. She said that the boy told her he hadn't been.
"Two hours later animal services came by," Staub said. Despite her pleas, officers explained that they needed to quarantine Peanut to ensure she didn't have rabies. Staub was further upset because the officers wouldn't show her a report.
She decided to go to the police to see if the incident had been filed. It had been, but she wasn't allowed to see that report either. It upset her that the dog was taken even though she couldn't see the evidence against Peanut. She and her daughter are certain Peanut scratched, not bit, the boy.
After Peanut's quarantine ended, Staub, a widow on disability, got another surprise: a hefty bill. Because she didn't realize all dogs needed a licence, the Staubs faced $500 in fines for Mitzy and Peanut (on top of licences). The quarantine cost $231. Unless Staub signed three summonses, Peanut wouldn't have been eligible for release. In the end, various fines and fees could have been around $1,000.
One representative waived a large chunk of the fines and two summonses; Staub was thankful. Nevertheless, she said that the situation "was the most horrible experience I've ever encountered.... No one wanted to listen to my side of the story."
At no point did it sound like the Staubs denied that something happened. Donna Staub wished the boy's father would have talked to her; she could have apologized directly. But since animal services and police refused to reveal the complainant's name, the Staubs could not apologize.
Because of the alleged bite, Kim Staub still faces an additional fine of $350 and a summons for a Thursday court date.
Donna Staub explained that owners shouldn't "assume your dog has to be vicious for police and animal services to come... it can happen to anyone."
It's easy to feel for the Staubs. They're average owners who weren't aware of the licence bylaw or the quarantine rule. But how many of us know all the animal bylaws? Isn't knowledge of our laws the first step to obeying them?
This is the reason I chose to write her side of this story. Winnipeggers often contact me with their pet problems. Some cases involve neighbours battling like the Hatfields and McCoys; others are individuals who break bylaws they didn't know existed.
Pet bylaw information is on 311; it can be accessed through either licensing or animal services. Some of the information is plainly written, but the bylaw information is written in what I call legalese. This formal style is something most of us don't understand. Want proof? Does the average person know what mutatis mutandis means? No, it's not a line from The Lion King.
A former Calgarian contacted me to explain how Winnipeg's household dog limit bylaw affected her. Prior to moving, she researched pet information and didn't find anything about a three-dog limit. The bylaw wasn't on 311; nor was it on the animal services site. She discovered the law when she licensed her four dogs.
Those with more than three must apply for an excess animal permit. To receive this permit, you have to inform your neighbours, because they have rights to disapprove. A notice is placed in plain view. When she described the experience, the new Winnipegger sarcastically said: "Welcome to Winnipeg."
To find the dog-limit information, she would have had to read 2443/7924 of our bylaws and scroll down to page 24 (of 48 pages).
Situations like the above often anger owners. animal services officers bear the brunt of this anger. It's one reason their job is difficult. Still, they don't want to come between owners and pets.
This is why greater bylaw awareness is important. Loads placed upon Animal Services and our courts might be lighter if owners knew the rules. Naturally, not every issue will evaporate. However, many owners might avoid what Staub calls "an eye-opening and expensive experience."
char.adam@mts.net twitter.com/charspetpage
Know the rules (꼭 알아야 할 내용)
A few pet bylaws Winnipeggers should know:
Households are restricted to three dogs and three cats (which are older than six months, no matter how many people live in the home).
Cats are not allowed to roam outside. This means they have to be controlled by the owner when the cat is off the owner's property; no leash can be longer than six feet.
Dogs are not allowed to pursue anyone on or off private property.
A dog can be quarantined if there is a reason to believe it bit a person or animal, whether or not there is a wound or if blood was drawn.
Leashes can't be longer than six feet when a dog is in parkland and dogs are not allowed on school or playground property.
The dog must be under the owner's control at all times (this means six-year-olds might not be the best choice to walk your Great Dane).
Pit Bulls are banned from the city (some dogs that resemble pit bulls are also banned)
All dogs are required to have a licence. There are no size or breed restrictions (a fine of $250 per dog can be charged if an owner doesn't license his dog).
Dog licence tags must be worn.
Dogs are not allowed to disturb neighbours with barking or howling.
Animal services does not licence cats. However, cats must be micro-chipped, tattooed or wear a collar with owner information.
Some pets allowed in Canada may be banned in Winnipeg.
By the way, mutatis mutandis means: the necessary changes having been made.
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition September 21, 2010 D5
이상 위니펙 프리 프레스에서 인용함.
관련자료
정프로님의 댓글
- 정프로
- 작성일
지시랭이님의 댓글
- 지시랭이
- 작성일
곰돌이1님의 댓글
- 곰돌이1
- 작성일
