I am writing with respect to the recent opinions in The Herald pertaining to proposed changes in New Tecumseth’s canine bylaw which will limit the number of dogs to three in urban areas and five in rural ones.

Having an arbitrary number as to how many canine companions someone can live with is wrong — not to mention an ineffective and lazy way to deal with irresponsible people with dogs. I’ve seen many people responsibly raise numerous dogs in an urban setting. I’ve also witnessed many who couldn’t look after one, leaving the neglected animal outdoors day and night where the unfortunate animal’s barking annoyed others.

Municipalities need to create and enforce, canine bylaws that not only ensure that dogs are humanely cared for, but that they do not constantly bother others.

Significant incentives for neutering, training, providing effective identification and adopting dogs from humane societies and animal shelters are a few things that should be included in an effective animal control bylaw. Having qualified people to enforce the bylaw is also important.

In the June 13 edition of The Herald, Gord Kinnon asks, “...why would anyone in their right mind living in Alliston, Beeton or Tottenham want more than three dogs?”

In a perfect world many people might not want more than a few dogs. However, in the less than perfect world that our species has created where dogs are often treated as disposable items, many people adopt more dogs than they might normally in order to provide the animals with a good home.

Because I have worked with several humane societies our family has always consisted of many canine members. In fact, the two dogs who we currently share our lives with are the fewest my wife Lynn and I have had since we’ve been married.

Anyone who has had the wonderful opportunity of living with dogs who were in need of a good home wouldn’t question why people choose to welcome four, five, or more, dogs into their families.

N. Glenn Perrett,
Lisle