Dear Editor:
I'm wondering why the City of Burnaby charges four times as much to license a "vicious" dog, as it does a non-vicious dog?
When I talked to city staff, I was told that the fee was because there was an increased cost to the city to deal with incidences from these dogs; all dogs belonging to specific breeds are deemed "vicious" whether there has been an incident or not, and so the increased licensing fees are paid by the owner, regardless of the dog's history or behaviour.
The city staff explained that the SPCA charges fees when called out to handle a situation, and that since "vicious" dogs were more likely to have situations requiring the SPCA's involvement, there would be an increase of cost to the city. I asked if these fees from the SPCA were not directly levied against the owner in each instance. Yes, I was told, they were. The owner pays fees on a per-incident basis.
So, what then is the supposed increased cost that is borne by the city? How do they justify the licence fee being four times as much as a non-vicious dog?
Our dog has not had an incident with the SPCA, and so we're wondering if there's a cost report by the city, shown clearly in their financial reports, that can justify this unfair, increased levy against innocent dogs and their owners?
Shawn Serdar, Burnaby
