Murray Wood: Hard to know how much confidence to have in the Sask. budget
After last year's Saskatchewan budget went from a tiny surplus to a major deficit, Murray Wood says it's difficult to sa...
The City of Regina will look to broaden the scope of potential changes to its animal bylaw after hearing from current and former councillors and advocates who say the review doesn’t go far enough.
One of those advocates is Angela McLean, whose seven-year-old son was bitten by a neighbour’s dog in 2024 in Rosemont.
Read more:
- ‘Game changer:’ Regina Humane Society opens doors at new facility
- Regina Police locate owner, dogs from video after attack last week
- Dog attacks prompt Regina City Council to review animal bylaw
“I had to carry pepper spray in the back just to protect myself after being cornered multiple times by barking, snarling dogs,” she said.
A report to Wednesday’s Executive Committee meeting makes recommendations from phase one of a review initiated in early 2025.
Included in those recommendations are steps to improve response times for dangerous animal and updating the bylaw to require animals be leashed while on public property, except for off-leash parks.
The report recommends against animal cruelty bylaw provisions, saying it could cross into provincial jurisdiction and create confusion.
That’s something the Regina Humane Society said is not the case.
“Responsible pet ownership provisions give municipalities the tools to address roaming dogs, poor containment or escalating behavior before they result in bites or other public safety concerns,” executive director, Lisa Koch, told the city committee.
“Through our discussions with the provincial ministry responsible for the Animal Protection Act, our understanding is that responsible pet ownership provisions in municipal bylaws are viewed as complementary to provincial legislation rather than duplicative.
“Municipalities also have the authority under the Cities Act to regulate animals, including provisions related to containment, control and responsible pet ownership.”
That sentiment was echoed by former councillor, Terina Nelson, who had worked to initiate bylaw updates and was disappointed by the report that resulted.
“This was intended to be a comprehensive review of animal care and control, including prevention, welfare and responsible ownership, not just in force after accidents occur,” Nelson said. “There are key areas identified in the original motion that have not been meaningfully addressed.”
Members of the committee passed an amendment to the motion asking that phase two of the review consider ways to promote responsible pet ownership.
“I would like, as part of the additional engagement, for us to not close any doors saying what we will or won’t consider,” said councillor, Shanon Zachidniak, in introducing the amendment.
“We’ve heard multiple organizations talk about responsible pet ownership and drawing a distinction between responsible pet ownership and animal welfare provisions, which are managed by the province.”
Deputy city manager of city operations, Kurtis Doney, warned that the experience of cities in other provinces may not apply here.
“Any time we bring something to council – bylaw changes or best practices – we’d be looking at other municipalities,” he said. “One thing that’s unique here, potentially, is that we’re under the provincial jurisdiction.
“So when we’re comparing to Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton, we have to make sure that we’re aware of what are the similarities and what are the differences.”
McLean hopes the further review is more comprehensive.
“Right now, we are relying on a system that waits until after someone gets hurt. That is not good enough,” she said.
