Ban BSL, Not the Dogs

Kal, my dad’s dog, would really like some cheese

In August of 2020, the City of Calgary released a survey asking people to weigh in on their proposed changes to the Responsible Pet Ownership Bylaw. Phase 1 of their engagement study indicated that people supported more stringent rules and harsher penalties for dogs that were determined to be dangerous. Somehow the word “dangerous” was extrapolated to include all dogs that have the capacity to cause harm as a type but have not shown a personal history for doing so. I grew up with pit bulls and have seen them demonstrate the most gentle, affectionate behaviour. In June of 2020, a pitbull severed and ate the top half-inch of my right index finger, causing me to require plastic surgery and learn to type with nine fingers. There are friendly dogs and dangerous dogs in this world and, as a dog lover, I have encountered both and suffered the consequences. Capacity for harm cannot be determined by the appearance of a dog and Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) is a step backwards in how we manage pet ownership and public safety.

Pitbulls are banned under the logic that these dogs have the capacity to cause harm and are therefore inherently dangerous. The City of Calgary terms pit bulls as “a pit bull terrier, a Staffordshire bull terrier, an American Staffordshire terrier, an American pit bull terrier,[and] a dog that has an appearance and physical characteristics that are substantially similar to those of dogs…