Mr. Speaker;
I am delighted to be afforded the opportunity to propose the second reading of a
BILL FOR AN ACT TO REPEAL AND REPLACE THE DOG LICENCE
ACT;
TO REPEAL CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE PENAL CODE IN
CONNECTION WITH THE CONTROL AND REGULATION OF DOGS,
CATTLE AND OTHER ANIMALS, POUNDS, INJURIES AND
CRUELTY TO ANIMALS AND TO PROVIDE FOR CONNECTED
MATTERS.
Mr. Speaker;
I thank the good and gracious people of Long Island and Ragged Island for granting me the privilege to serve in this place and trust my service will add to the development of this country in a meaningful way.
Mr. Speaker;
The Bill before us, when enacted, will repeal and replace the Dog License Act which was enacted around 1942 and dealt only with the licencing of dogs ; the establishment of a dog pound, etc.
The Bill will also repeal certain provisions of the Penal Code, which dealt with the regulation of dogs, cattle and other animals, pounds , injuries and cruelty to animals and liability for damages caused by animals.
In general, the Bill seeks to enact new statutory provisions and regulations for the protection and control of all animals, including farm animals, and dogs in particular.
The Bill is an outcome of extensive consultations and arise out of a felt and express need for greater control and regulation of roaming and stray animals in this country.
Additionally to ensure that persons that suffer injury to their person or property from animals, whether they be dogs or farm animals, have recourse under the law to recoup damages for the losses which they have suffered.
The Bill ensures that all animal owners and persons who keep animals, are made responsible for the welfare and control of animals in their charge.
It covers guard dog facilities and what the Bill refers to as Animal Holding Establishments, which comprise all premises, including private dwellings that are used as a breeding kennel; as a pet shop; boarding kennel or stable, where or from which animals are sold, rented or boarded for a fee.
We are all aware that stray dogs and ferocious dogs present a problem not only for tourists, but for locals alike.
They are a threat to children walking to school and playing in their own yards.
Many adults cannot walk their neighbourhoods for fear of being bitten by unrestrained dogs.
The Bill promotes responsible animal ownership.
Dogs will have to be restrained in public.
Mr. Speaker;
This Bill is not new.
It is the culmination of many years' sustained work, dating as far back as1998.
Drafting Consultation Process
Legislation from several countries was examined and contributions from veterinarians animal owners and the various organizations holding and caring for animals.
But it is fair to say that most interest developed in the late 90’s as a result of several incidences such as:
In 1995- a female tourist was attacked by a dog while walking the beach in North Bimini , she was almost killed.
The incident was reported in the South Florida newspapers.
The Sr Commissioner of Bimini, in 1996, indicated his concerns over the “rapidly increasing number” of bitbulls on the island.
He noted that there had been 4 incidences of dog attacks on tourists over the previous year.
Mr. Lester Turnquest, as the Member of Parliament of Malcolm Creek lamented the death a child, in his constituency, who was fatally attacked by a pit bull in 1996.
You see, Mr. Speaker;
This Bill has been in the making for over twelve years involving the work by the Ministry of Agriculture & Marine Resources, a consultative group comprising representatives of interested publics and animal professionals.
The draft Bill has recently been posted on the Government’s website for 6 weeks after wide consultation over the many years since the first draft years ago.
After posting and advertising, 39 responses were received all in favour of the passing of the Bill.
Many persons bemoaned the cruel and inhumane treatment of animals and the neglect of animals in the country.
The need for educating the public on responsible animal ownership was also stressed.
A resident of San Souci reported that a dog wandered in her front yard and hid under some shrubs.
The dog had been badly scalded with most of the skin off its neck and front shoulders.
She eventually caught the animal and took it to a Vet.
The case was diagnosed as hot grits being thrown on the dog causing severe scalding down through the skin into the animal’s muscles.
The vet, she said, did a remarkable job in treating the dog and the dog is now with her, only gradually losing its fear.
She said that no one had posted signs of a lost dog in her neighbourhood.
Since posting on the web, a few minor modifications have been made mostly to the language of the Bill.
Mr. Speaker;
It is clear that the problem of out-of-control and dangerous dogs is growing across The Bahamas.
There are now several reported dog attacks each year.
(Cite examples here – Exuma, Eleuthera – tourists
Long Island & Eleuthera – pastures
The consequences of straying animals, especially livestock, for the Bahamian public are many, and far reaching.
The daily threat to crop, other livestock farmers, visitors and the general public alike including vehicular traffic, is a source of great mental and emotional distress.
(Here in New Providence – wandering cattle in Carmichael and Cowpen Road area.)
The fact that the practice of loose and wandering livestock over the years has gone unattended, has resulted in the emergence of a non-caring and brazen attitude towards crop farmers by the owners of these animals.
In general, the prevailing attitude can be perceived as follows:-
- The owner of straying livestock has the inherent right to keep as many livestock as he/she wishes, usually on lands which is insufficient for livestock production and without concern for the damage that may be inflicted on any crop farmer or the general public.
- Animals may graze at will on lands which he/she neither own nor legally control in any way.
- Crop farmers/home owners have to incur cost by enclosing their farms/yards, to keep roaming animals out.
A distinction needs to be made between
(a) animals which have been disowned or abandoned and are no longer claimed as anybody’s property and
(b) animals which belong to some one, but have strayed.
Almost all roaming dogs are considered to be in group (a) sheep, goats and cattle may be in group (a) but it is not known what proportion of the population of these species no longer belong to anyone, nor are most owned animals clearly identified.
Wild horses of south Eleuthera, wild hogs in Abaco and Long Island, donkeys in Inagua, goats in Long Island, cattle & horses in Rum Cay and South New Providence etc., all serve as examples of the ongoing problem of roaming animals.
Given the scope of the damage being inflicted by stray animals, government is the only agency with the sovereign and all inclusive rights that can end this problem in a manner that is both final and comprehensive.
To achieve this, the following strategy is suggested:
For the short term;
- capture by animal wardens
- impounding, where pounds are established
- euthanizing after a reasonable time without ownership claim.
- Enforcement of legislation
For the long term
- development of pounds and animal control units on Family islands
- comprehensive computerized database of registration for animals
- Identification tags for all pets and other animals used for guarding, shows, zoos etc. ( this may include micro-chipping and/or Ear-tagging/freeze branding of ruminants)
- public education especially for livestock farmers & pet owners.
To control the problems highlighted, compulsory identification of all cattle and small ruminants by ear-tagging/freeze branding is recommended.
Over time, this will enable the rapid identification of animals which belong to somebody and those which are abandoned or truly wild or loose.
Animal wardens can then take appropriate action with those which are not owned/identified.
Micro-chipping dogs causes little distress to the dog, but enables identification of the owner of a captured animal.
The problem with feral dogs is likely to remain serious despite attempts to control them since they range widely on the island and a reservoir breeding population will perpetuate the problem until feral dogs have been eliminated from all parts of the country.
As a long term policy, it is recommended that neutering of all pet animals is encouraged and may be subsidized.
This can be a major task for veterinary officers in the country.
Mr. Speaker;
The Bill is divided into 7 parts and contains 3 schedules.
Part 1 of the Bill (clauses 1 & 2) deals with preliminary matters – the title and interpretation of specific words and terms.
Part 2 PROVISIONS OF THE BILL
(PART II - ESTABLISHMENT OF ANIMAL PROTECTION AND CONTROL BOARD AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY
Section 3: Establishment of Animal Protection and Control Board)
In Part II, section 3; The new Bill establishes an Animal Control Board which is to serve as the Competent Authority, in New Providence, with responsibility for the welfare and protection of animals.
An Authority will be established for the Family Islands in each local government district.
The Animal Control Board shall advise the Minister responsible for the control and protection of animals, on matters relevant to the welfare and control of animals.
Importantly, the Bill provides for the Board to issue and revise the code of practice.
The Minister shall appoint 12 persons to the Board, one of which is the Director. The Director issues the dog licences under s. 7.
This institutionalizes the cooperative view of animal control and protection.
Section 4: Establishment of Competent Authority
Establishes A Competent Authority will be established for each local government district for the protection and control of animals. The local government board will appoint 5- 7 persons to serve on the authority.
The authorities among other things will administer local animal control and welfare activities, grant certificate of inspection in respect of guard dog facilities and animal holding facilities and supervise and monitor the local animal control wardens.
The powers of competent authorities under the Dog Licence Act are confined to the establishment of pounds and the seizures of unlicensed dogs.
These authorities are required to liaise and cooperate with the Board (see s. 4 (3) (g).
Therefore with regard to the issuance of dog licences, the Competent Authorities in the family islands would be instructed by the Director.]
Mr. Speaker;
PART III deals with the ADMINISTRATION
In Section 5 The Minister will appoint animal control wardens who will report and be responsible to the Competent Authority in the local government district to which they are assigned.
The warden can go on any land or premises, including vehicles and vessels, except dwelling houses, where he has reasonable cause to believe someone is in breach of the Act.
The animal control warden can enter these places in the course of his duty to make inspections and investigate.
If he feels it necessary, he can bring a police officer, a veterinarian or public health officer or member of a society or association specializing in animal welfare and control.
He can seize animals causing public nuisance or presenting a danger to the public and dispatch them to animal control units.
If the animals need medical care, he can ensure that they receive it at the expense of the owner.
These provisions empower the official to undertake activities related to the protection and control of dogs and provide a nomenclature for the person authorized on behalf of the competent authority under the Dog Licence Act.
In Section 6
A person must be at least eighteen years old to own a dog, which must be licensed at three months of age.
If the dog is transferred from one keeper to another, the transferor must notify the Director within 28 days of the transfer; giving the name and address of the new keeper and the dog identification number.
The Director must be notified within 28 days of when a dog dies or is permanently moved oversees.
The alteration from the existing legislation is that it provides a minimum age for ownership and for the transfer of ownership.
Under Section 7: Issue of Licence
A significant feature of the Bill is that Licences are issued annually and the Director must determine if the person is qualified to hold a dog licence, which must be accompanied by an identification tag which bears the number identifying the dog and the tag must be attached to the dog collar.
Importantly, Licence fees are waived for dogs used primarily as assistance dogs for persons with disabilities or any dog in training as an assistance dog.
Also for dogs used by the Police, e.g arson/drug sniffing or any job that furthers the mission of the agency to protect the public interest (Customs and Prison)
Under Section 8: Dog Identification Collars Mandatory
All dog owners and persons who keep animals must at all times while the dog is in a public place, ensure that they are wearing a collar, with the identification tag.
The Dog Licence Act under s.7 also requires a badge to be worn constantly.
No collars would be required for dogs under the care of a veterinarian or used by the Police, Customs or the Prison.
Under Section 9: Female Dogs In Heat
Dog owners will have to assume greater responsibility for their pets.
It will be an offence for any one to leave a female dog where a male dog can approach it.
Owners as well as keepers of dogs can only allow a male dog to approach a female dog in heat, if they wish for the dogs to mate. This provision simplifies and modernizes the language in section 13 of the Dog Licence Act.
Section 10: is the benchpin of the Bill in that it seeks to address the vexing problem of roaming and stray animals.
The Penal Code under sections 161 and 162 deals with dangerous and ferocious dogs.
Dogs and other animals, including farm animals will not be able to roam and cause a public nuisance.
These animals will be seized by an animal warden; police officer or other authorized person.
If a roaming animal causes injury to any one, the owner of that animal will have to fully reimburse the victim for the damage or injury.
Impounded animals that are sick, are to receive veterinary care and the owner will be billed for the same.
(It shall be a defence to any prosecution that the keeper took all reasonable precautions to prevent the animal from roaming and that it roamed without his knowledge and consent.)
Section 11; Establishment of animal control units
Each of the Family island Competent Authorities will establish Animal Control Units to hold animals that have been impounded. The Competent Authority will designate a keeper of the pound, who will be responsible for its management.
The owners of these impounded animals will have to pay the prescribed pound fees even if the animal is not claimed from the pound.
Where impounded dogs are not licensed or have no dog tag, the owner will be required to get the dog licensed and tagged before it’s returned to them.
The keeper of the pound will keep a register of all the prescribed particulars relating to impounded animals, along with details of the owners and provide the competent authority with a monthly report.
The owner will be given a certain time frame (4days from seizure) to collect his animal, pay the pound fees, including food costs and any other expenses incurred.
If not claimed, the animal will be disposed of or euthanized.
A peace officer can kill, in a humane manner, any animal that poses a threat to the health of a human or animal.
A $500.00 fine will be charged to anyone who releases or tries to release any lawfully seized animal and where any damage is done to the pound, the person will have to pay the damages.
Section 12: addresses Certificates of Inspection
None of the current legislation address the phenomenon of guard dogs facilities and animal holding facilities.
The regulation of such establishments is an essential part of the Bill.
All guard dog facilities and animal holding establishments will be inspected annually and must comply with the prescribed standards in order to operate their facilities.
A provisional licence will be issued to persons not complying with the prescribed standards.
The licence will be for 90 days, during which time the owner will bring the facilities up to standard. The certificate of inspection is not transferable.
Under Section 13: Appeal against refusal to grant or renew Certificate of inspection
An applicant who is refused a certificate of inspection or is not granted one on the expiration of their provisional licence can appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision.
Section 14; Register, duplicates and production of certificate of inspection
Section 14 permits The Competent Authority keeps a record of all holders of certificate of inspection in each local government district. The certificate must be produced at the request of an animal control warden or peace officer.
Under Section 15:
The Minister will ensure that the names of all certificates of inspection holders are published on the government website and on the Notice Board of each family island administrator.
Section 16: allows for the Revocation of certificate of inspection
Where certificates of inspection have been revoked, the names of the holders will be gazetted.
PART IV - GUARD DOGS
Mr. Speaker;
The use of guard dogs is not presently regulated.
Under Section 17: Requirement for certificate of inspection
All persons owning, operating or maintaining guard dog facilities must, 6 months after the Act comes into force, have a certificate of inspection.
Any person found to not be in compliance with this provision will be liable upon summary conviction to a fine of $1,000.00
Section 18: Application for certificate of inspection
Allows Persons wishing to own, operate or maintain a guard dog facility to apply to the Competent Authority under section 12 for a certificate of inspection.
Section 19: Grant of certificate of inspection
The application is made under section 12 and the applicant must meet satisfy the Competent Authority that the kennels used to house the guard dogs meet the prescribed standards.
The kennels must be inspected by the animal control warden or a person authorized by the Competent Authority.
Additionally the applicant must buy a minimum amount of public liability insurance from an approved Insurance company.
A copy of such insurance must be provided to the Competent Authority.
All dogs must be vaccinated and on a health maintenance programme under the supervision of a veterinarian.
All guard dogs must be permanently identified with a microchip.
(Lastly operators of guard dog facilities can not be convicted of cruelty of abuse toward animals.)
Section 20 calls on
Owners and operators of guard dog facilities must post clearly legible warning signs, indicating that fact, at each entrance to any premises where the guard dogs are kept.
In Section 21: Records
All guard dog facilities are to keep accurate records of each guard dog, including the medical history, bio data and microchip information.
Such records are to be shown to animal control wardens and peace officers, upon request.
Section 22 refers to the Control of Guard Dogs
Guard dogs will not be permitted to be used unless, the owner or operator of the facility ensures that the dog is either under the control of a competent dog handler at all times or where the guard dog is left on the loose, at any premises, a warning sign indicating that fact is clearly displayed at each entrance of the premises.
PART V - CONTROL OF DOGS AND OTHER ANIMALS
Section 23: Roaming Animal Offence
A keeper of an animal who allows the animal to roam commits an offence.
It is a defence to any prosecutions that the keeper took all reasonable precautions to prevent the animal from roaming and that it roamed without his knowledge.
Section 24: Procedure when a roaming animal is found or seized
Any member of the public who finds a roaming animal can seize it and as soon as possible before 48 hours expires return it to the owner or keeper; the police; Department; recognized society or notify the latter two.
The animal can be sold or disposed of if not claimed within 4 days. The animals are not to be used for any form of experiment or research.
The owner or keeper of any animal sold or disposed, shall be liable for all expenses incurred in the disposal in excess of monies received for the sale.
Section 25: Identification of seized animals
The Director or a recognized society can cause any seized animal to be permanently identified with a microchip.
Section 26: Control of dangerous dogs and other animals
The owner or keeper of dangerous animals must keep them under control and take all the necessary measures needed to protect humans and animals from these dangerous animals.
A dog is considered dangerous or dangerously out of control where there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that the dog, whether he does or not, will injure any person or animal.
(This will not apply to a dog used by the police for a lawful purpose)
A dog is NOT considered to be dangerous or dangerously out of control if it inflicts injury or damage on a person who is willfully trespassing or damaging the premises occupied by the dog’s owner.
Also where the person is teasing or abusing the dog or is committing or attempting to commit a crime.
Where the dog is defending itself against other domestic animals allowed to torment, abuse or assault the dog or protecting its owner or other person from attack or assault by another animal or person.
Where the dog is protecting its young, whether erroneously or not.
The owner must have knowledge of the animal’s propensity to be aggressive or defensive and take all necessary precaution to ensure the safety of persons and animals.
A police or animal control warden that has reasonable grounds to believe that an animal is dangerous, can require the owner to identify the dog with a microchip, sating the number; to display warning signs that there is a dangerous animal on the premises; require the animal control warden to approve the enclosure where the animal is kept and ensure the animal is adequately muzzled while it is off the owners premises.
Section 27: Control of dogs
Its an offence if a dog repeatedly makes noise to the annoyance or one or more persons in the neighbourhood; if the dog is allowed to deposit faeces on other persons property and the keeper fails to dispose of it in a reasonable manner or if they repeatedly urinate or defaecate on the property of others without their consent.
All dogs shall be on leashes or otherwise constrained, when in public, except in areas designated, by order through the Director, as areas where dogs can be unrestrained.
If the owner or person for the time being in charge of a dog allows it in a public place and the dog injures a person or animal, an aggravated offence occurs.
The same is so, if the owner or person for the time being in charge of a dog allows the dog to go on someone’s premises without their consent and the dog will injures a person or animal.
The fine associated with such aggravated offences if $5,000.00 or a maximum term of 6 months or both.
Subsequent offences attract a fine of $10,000.00 or a maximum term of 12 months or both.
Section 28: Protection for assistance dogs
Dogs used to assist persons with disabilities may enter public places. However, any person accompanied by an assistance dog must comply with any reasonable conditions imposed by the person occupying or controlling the premises in relation to the entry or presence of the dog.
This section overrides any enactment or bye-laws prohibiting or regulating the entry or presence of dogs in relation to the premises.
Section 29: Fighting of animals prohibited
It is an offence to own animals for the purpose of fighting, tormenting or baiting.
It also an offence to allow ones premises too be used for such purposes; and to receive money for such activities.
It is also illegal to encourage.
Unprovoked attacks on animals or persons.
Section 30: Restrictions on animals presenting a serious danger
The Director can, by Order, and in consultation with the Animal Protection and Control Board, impose restrictions or requirements that he thinks fit, where it appears that a dog/ animal presents a serious danger to the public.
(Can include, but not be limited to spaying and neutering; micro chipping; public liability insurance; etc)
Section 31: Destruction and forfeiture orders
The Court can order the destruction and disposal of an animal.
PART VI - ANIMAL HOLDING ESTABLISMENTS
Section 32: Requirement for a certificate of inspection
All animal holding facilities must secure a certificate of inspection issued by the Competent Authority within six months after the Act comes into force.
Section 33: Grant or renewal of certificate of inspection
The application is made under section 12 and the applicant must satisfy the Competent Authority that the animal holding establishments used to house the animals meet the prescribed standards. The animal holding establishments must be inspected by an animal control warden or a person authorized by the Competent Authority.
All animals must be vaccinated and on a health maintenance programme under the supervision of a veterinarian.
Section 34: Microchip identification
All persons in possession of a certificate of inspection in respect of a breeding kennel must ensure that that every dog bred and sold in the kennel is permanently identified with a microchip, which is not to be interfered with except by a veterinarian.
Section 35: Records
All animal holding establishments must keep records of animals. The requirements vary fro breeding kennels; boarding kennels; pet shops; and stables.
They must keep records in all cases where microchips are implanted in animals and the methods of disposal of the animals. Such records are to be shown to animal control wardens and peace officers, upon request.
PART VII - MISCELLANEOUS
Section 36: Regulations
The Minister may make regulations to carrying out the provisions of the Act.
Section 37: Authorization of ticketing
Aside from bringing an information before the Magistrate.
Tickets can be issued for offences under the Act.
Section 38: Form of ticket
Any word or expression in the Second Schedule describing the offences listed is sufficient to describe the offence for proceedings in regard to that offence.
Section 39: Issue of ticket
A police officer can, where he has reasonable cause to suspect that a person has committed an offence under the Act, issue a ticket by serving him the summons part of the ticket in accordance with section 40.
Section 40: Summons
This section makes provision for the execution of the summons in respect of the ticket.
Section 41: Payment of penalty out of court
Makes provisions for the penalties for ticketed offences to be paid without having to go to court.
Section 42: Information
Covers the procedure to be followed for the content of the information part of the ticket.
Section 43: Amount of Penalty
The Court can impose any penalty authorized by law with reference to the commission of an offence under the Act.
Section 44: Record of Conviction
A record of conviction on a ticket information in respect of an offence will be forwarded to the Commissioner of Police.
Section 45: Amendment of Schedules
The Minister may make regulations to amend the Second Schedule, to include by adding or deleting offences or changing the penalties.
Section 46: Offences of cruelty to animals
An offence is committed when an animal is or permitted to be cruelly kicked, ill treated, tortured or overworked.
Also where it is inhumanely killed; sexually assaulted; neglected being deprived of water, food and shelter; is caused unnecessary suffering.
The Magistrate can, in addition to imposing any other penalty, also order that the animal be forfeited to the Crown and disposed of in such a manner as the Minister may direct.
He can also order that such person be disqualified for such period as he thinks fit from having custody of any animal or any animal named in the order.
Where a person who is convicted under this section, operates or maintains a guard dog facility or animal holding establishment, the court may also revoke the certificate of inspection.
Section 47: Water, shelter and movement
It is unlawful to leave a dog unattended on any premises, without access to drinking water; reasonable shelter and an area of no less than 18 square feet to move freely in.
The thickness of each link of a chain shall not exceed ¼ inch. The Director can from time to time issue guidance as to the proper method of containing or restraining dogs.
Section 48: Other offences
Provides the penalty for offences that penalties were not assigned to under the relevant provisions.
Section 49: Offender liable to costs, etc
The levying of fines or imprisonment term does not relieve the offender from having to pay any fees, charges or costs that he is liable for under the Act.
Section 50: Procedure for offences
An animal warden, peace officer or other person who reasonably believes that a person has contravened any provision of the Act, he shall lay an information with the police, who may issue a summons to the accused ordering the person to appear before the Magistrate.
Section 51: Seizing and impounding animals
An animal control warden or police officer who has reasonable cause to believe that an offence has been committed under the Act, he can seize and impound the animal and the owner of the animal must pay for all the expenses incurred by the animal warden in impounding, feeding and caring for the animal, whether or not his application for the return of the animal is granted.
Section 52: Protection from dogs
A police officer designated by the Commissioner of Police or any person designated by the Director may lawfully destroy any dog which they see attacking a person or domestic animal or bird.
The Director can set traps on any land, with the permission of the occupier, for the purpose of capturing roaming dogs or can tranquillize them in a manner prescribed by the Minister.
It is an offence to release a dog from any trap placed b y the Director.
Section 53: Action for damages
A person bringing an action for damages when a dog causes death or injury to a person or animal or damage to property does NOT have to prove:
- That the keeper knew the dog has a previous mischievous propensity;
- nor that that the dog had a previous mischievous propensity;
- that the damage or injury was attributable to the keeper’s neglect.
However, where a person is trespassing on property the keeper of the dog is not liable.
Section 54: Exemptions
Nothing in the Act applies to dogs used by the Police, Prison and Customs.
Section 55: Repeals
The Dog Licence Act and certain provisions of the Penal Code are repealed by the Act.
Section 56: Transitional provisions
Merits of the Bill
The establishment of an Animal Control and Protection Board will provide the collective expertise needed to comprehensively advise the Minister on matters related to the making of regulations and the welfare and control of animals.
The Board will give focused attention to all matters related to the welfare and control of animals under the Act; including educational programmes and conferences. The Board and the other Competent Authorities in the local government districts will also work together in attacking the problems in animal welfare in the family islands.
The Bill will also provide employment opportunities for animal control wardens; veterinarians; pound keepers; pharmacists and other persons in the pet care business.
Provides for TICKETED OFFENCES which should speed up the prosecution of offenders.
Requires the owner to assume a greater responsibility for his animals.
Under (164) of the current Penal code, a person seeking compensation for any injury done to his animal by any dog, had to show a “previous Propensity “ in the dog or show the injury was attributable to the neglect of the owner of the dog.
However that requirement has been eliminated.
In the new Bill, cruelty and neglect of animals is addressed.
The public can claim damages for injuries and damages to property caused by stray animals, particularly dogs.
Farmers and the public at large also have recourse under the law to claim damages for stray cattle which can cause great damage to farms and yards.
The public and tourists alike will be able to move around without fear of dog attacks.
This will serve to improve our tourism product and improve our image internationally in regard to our treatment of animals.
Mr. Speaker;
In closing,
I wish to commend the many persons, too many to name here, who contributed to the drafting of this historical Bill.
Groups such as:
Advocates for Animal Rights;
Animals Require Kindness;
The Veterinary Medical Association of the Bahamas;
Bahamas Kennel Club;
Bahamas Guard Dog Association;
Bahamas Humane Society, both New Providence and Grand Bahama;
Proud Paws;
BAARK
Public Officers from the
Department of Environmental Health;
Department of Customs;
Royal Bahamas Police Force;
Ministry of National Security;
Department of Local Government;
Office of the Attorney General;
BEST Commission and
Veterinarians from the Department of Agriculture.
Private veterinarians-
College of the Bahamas
Bahamas National Trust
There are countless others who have provided their input including those who availed themselves of the opportunity to respond to the invitation to provide inputs on the Government Website.
To them all, I express my gratitude and that of the government,
for their dogged determination in drafting and bringing the Bill forward.
I also thank the many members of the public who have followed the progress of the bill and contacted us and edged us on with their comments.
The public and tourists alike will be able to move around without fear of dog attacks. This will serve to improve our tourism product and improve our image internationally in regard to our treatment of animals.
I hope that members agree that the bill is worth while.
It gives local authorities and the police the legislative tools to deal with the growing problem of out-of-control dogs and attacks by dangerous dogs in both public and private places.
Mr. Speaker, I so move.
The Effects and Consequences of The Bill, Inclusive Of The Organizational, Infrastructural, Staffing and Public Education Requirements
Organizational Framework
MINISTER ( responsible for the control
and protection of animals)
*Animal Protection and Competent Authorities Control Board
Animal Control Unit/s
Animal Control Wardens
(appointed by the Minister)
* Animal Protection and Control Board is the Competent Authority in New Providence. The Minister shall appoint 12 members, one of which is the Director, responsible for the protection and control of animals. The Director issues the dog licences under s. 7.
** Competent Authority - also means, in respect of any other island, the authority for the protection and control of animals, which is to be established for each local government district. The local government board will appoint 5- 7 persons to serve on the authority. These authorities are required to liaise and cooperate with the Board (see s. 4(3) (g). Therefore with regard to the issuance of dog licences, the Competent Authorities in the family islands would be instructed by the Director.
Animal Control Unit is place or vehicle established by the Competent Authority.
Animal Control Wardens will be appointed by the Minister.
The first Schedule provides the constitution and procedure of the Board, Schedule 2 refers to Offences and Penalties while the third Schedule lists the acts and sections repealed by this Bill when enacted.
Section 12 makes provision for the owner of a dog that was injured or killed while attacking livestock to take legal action provided that the dog was wearing a valid licence badge at the time.
The Bill before us today makes it a violation for any dog to be at large at any time and the owner should be liable for the actions of his dog while the animal is at large.
Mr. Speaker;
One reason why I believe that new Legislation is needed is that we should look at the root cause—that is, owners, who are responsible for dealing with their dogs.
I know that this has caused a great deal of concern for those who own dogs.
The purpose of the Bill is to deal, in a more targeted way, with those who own dogs and other animals in a manner that leads them to being desocialised and used in that way.
Mr. Speaker;
The Bill when enacted, makes it an offence to:
Own an un-licensed dog.
Have dog in public place without a collar and ID tag unless has a permit to do so.
Keep a female dog in heat in an area exposed to a male dog.
Own, operate or maintain a guard dog facility without the grant of a certificate of inspection after 6 months of the coming into effect of this Act.
Permit an animal to roam without supervision.
Own a dog that repeatedly makes noise to the annoyance of neighbours, deposits faeces on other persons property and not clean it up, or without the consent of the owner of the property.
Has a dog in a public place that is dangerously out of control
Whose dog while out of control injures a person (aggravated offence)
Whoever encourages or assists at the fighting or baiting of an animal or bird, keeps or uses or manages a place used for the purpose of fighting or baiting an animal or bird.
Any person found inside a place used for animal fighting or baiting without lawful excuse
Any guard dog owner who fails to ensure that his/her dogs being bred or sold has microchips inserted beneath the skin by veterinarian.
Any person who mistreats an animal by beating punishment, starvation, torment, teasing or torture of any type such as overloading, overworking or kills or sexually assaults an animal.
Any person who releases a dog from a trap placed by the Director or who interferes with such a trap.
Other minor offences.
Closing Comments:
The purpose of the Bill is to deal with the problem of roaming and stray animals.
Roaming and stray Dogs have caused socio-economic and health problems in The Bahamas for many years.
They continue to be the number one constraint to small ruminant production in the country, as well as to terrorize and bite humans, destroy property, overturn garbage, pollute and contaminate beaches, parks and other people’s property with their urine and feces, cause traffic accidents, strife between neighbours and emotional distress to our visitors among other things.
At the root of the overwhelming majority of the problems caused by dogs is the fact that the majority of dogs in our country are not kept under adequate control.
I have lived in the Family Islands for most of my life, and I represent a rural constituency.
When developing the bill, we had in mind the interests of rural communities as well as those of urban areas.
The bill will bring certain benefits.
I hope that more responsible dog ownership will follow from it.
Public safety will be improved through preventive measures that will help people who are out with children or with their dogs.
Also, the welfare of dogs will be improved, because dogs that are not properly cared for, exercised or socialized will benefit from specific measures being imposed on their owners.
The thrust of the Bill is to promote responsible ownership of animals in general and of dogs in particular.
Many politicians have direct experience of out-of-control dogs while campaigning.
That is a good reason to vote for this bill, if ever there was one.
Although the hazards of our profession are cyclical, many workers experience daily harassment from dogs.
People walking their dogs are intimidated by out-of-control dogs, and some parks are a no-go area because of a local delinquent dog.
All those situations and a myriad of others can be addressed by the bill, which will help to improve in a small and practical way the ordinary lives of the ordinary people The Bahamas—which is what we are here for.
By this it is meant that the majority of dogs in our country are able to leave their owners premises and roam freely, without supervision or control.
The solution to the problem lies in having all dog owners keep their animals confined to their property at all times unless they are under the direct control and supervision of a responsible person.
This will require a change in attitude and behaviour such that all dog owners become responsible animal owners.
Animal ownership confers a dual responsibility upon an individual in that, that person has a responsibility to the animal for its care and well being, as well as a responsibility to his neighbours and community for preventing his animal from committing any trespass against them.
It is not really surprising that the Dog Licence Act has failed.
This Act permits licensed dogs to roam freely about without being attended by a person, the only exceptions being bitches in heat and that they should not be in highways or other places of public resort between 10pm and 6am.
