When it comes to animal welfare in Haliburton County and beyond, things have changed and not for the better. Incidents, such as an Oct. 30 attack on a resident and her dog on her own property, have again highlighted a broken system locally and across Ontario. The resident claims the dog that attacked her, and her pet, had been on her land before, and was known to roam the area. 

She further claims the dog is a foster from a rescue organization that had been flagged as not being good with other dogs, or cats. We live in the country and generally like to give our domestic animals a little more freedom than in the city. We also know that containment isn’t always 100 per cent guaranteed. 

Despite our best efforts, sometimes dogs get out. However, if we are in care of an animal that has a question mark or exclamation mark on its record, we must be hyper-vigilant. The most recent attack wasn’t the first and won’t be the last in our area. 

The broken system unfortunately ensures that. It used to be that the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (OSPCA) had a larger influence in animal welfare matters. However, the organization divorced the Ontario government in 2019 after a century of service. 

It said it would no longer take a lead role in investigating and enforcing animal cruelty laws.

It shifted into a support role in investigations, providing animal shelter, forensic evidence collection and vet services. 

The closest operations are in Bracebridge and Orillia. It was replaced with the Provincial Animal Welfare Services or PAWS. People can find a website and call a toll-free number 1-833-9-ANIMAL but the focus is on animal cruelty, not domestic dogs at large or attacking people and their pets. In the case of the Oct. 30 attack, the victim called the OPP. 

They subsequently laid a charge against the dog owner, which they can do under the Dog Owners Liability Act. The police told us they notify bylaw in the area and provide the pertinent details. Then, bylaw may implement their procedures, given the nature of the situation. However, the OPP could not confirm whether bylaw was notified in this case, although the victim did contact the department. 

Bylaw departments in other jurisdictions can do things such as issue a muzzle order, charge or fine dog owners. There appears to be a lack of communication between responsible agencies, whether PAWS, OPP, bylaw, and the health unit (they can order a dog to be quarantined to ensure it does not have rabies). 

On top of that, our townships don’t have the resources to respond to the majority of animal call-outs. The bylaw departments are one-or-two-person operations attached to the planning and building department. With the explosion of new construction and renovation, they’re busy doing inspections, not responding to animal complaints. 

Nor do they have a pound for animals they’ve picked up. To say there are gaps in the system is an understatement. There are huge cracks and unfortunately it is victims of animal attacks, and in some cases, helpless animals, that generally fall right through them. 

What can we do? As a community, we have to be responsible for the animals under our care. It means making tough decisions, such as having to fence that yard or tie that dog up, even though we would love our animals to have freedom. 

And it means that we must provide food, water, shelter and love to the animals in our care, whether household pets or working animals, such as hunting dogs or horses. It’s up to us as a community, since the systems are unable to do it for us. 

The Ontario government’s More Homes Built Faster Act isn’t perfect, but if passed, will certainly help the Highlands housing crisis. In case you missed it, the province introduced the Act Oct. 25. 

The plan is to build 1.5 million homes over the next 10 years. The minister of municipal affairs and housing said what it is proposing will ensure towns and rural communities grow with a mix of ownership and rental housing types that meet the needs of all, from single-family homes to townhouses and mid-rise apartments. 

The change with perhaps the biggest impact locally will be removing exclusionary zoning, which allows only one single detached home per lot. 

Instead, it would permit property owners to build three units without lengthy approvals and development charges. I have personally encountered people in the Highlands who have quite a bit of land and want to build a second home on their property for an aging parent, or a son or daughter. 

This would allow them to do that. It is crucial to providing more, and affordable, housing for locals. It also means the building of more triplexes and garden suites. This fits in with our community housing profile, as opposed to townhouses and mid-rise apartments. However, there are places for those types of developments as well. 

The government is also targeting delays and red tape to get more homes built faster and local developers will tell you that has been a problem in the County, sometimes exasperated by having to go through a lowertier municipality and then the County. 

The changes also look to reduce government fees, which should help with the cost of inflation and how it is impacting the building industry. Some other measures include increasing the non-resident speculation tax rate to 25 per cent, from 20, to deter non-resident investors, making home ownership more attainable for Highlanders. There’s lots of good things in this bill. However, one concern is that regional authorities won’t have the same chance to review and comment on development applications.

How much could that affect the environment? Limiting public hearings and resident appeals will cause concerns, and is aimed squarely at eliminating NIMBYism.

Some will see this as undemocratic. It would have been nice to see more empowerment for regional and municipal governments to directly build affordable housing on land they own, either on their own or with partners. Some have said they should allow four accommodations per property, up from three. A lot of people like the direction, however, including the MacdonaldLaurier Institute. They said the government is finally recognizing the root cause of high prices is a lack of supply due to overburdensome fees, regulations, zoning restrictions and time-consuming application processes. 

The Ontario Real Estate Association likes the tack the government is taking as well. They favour the rolling back of exclusionary zoning, lowering fees for new home buyers and pushing back on NIMBY forces. However, many say even the 50 actions in the Act do not go far enough and more is immediately required. We agree. For example, Ontario should give first-time home buyers instant relief by getting rid of the land transfer tax, or upping the existing rebate. The tax can add thousands to closing costs. 

Eliminating it would be a welcome bonus for families looking to get into the market.