The cities of Ste Anne de Bellevue and Dorval currently enforce bylaws that mandate the killing of any dog that has killed or injured another animal within a mere two days, without considering circumstances—such as self-defence or the potential for the dog's rehabilitation. Ste Anne de Bellevue doesn’t care if the dog was defending the family from a robber; the dog is killed regardless.  Dorval at least considers defence during a break in, suggesting a dog is not dangerous in this case, but mandates killing dogs who have caused serious injury or death to another animal, which is not defined.  Many cities have adopted more compassionate and effective approaches that aim at rehabilitation rather than immediate execution. These methods take into account the context of the aggression and the possibility of reversing the perceived dangerous state of the animal through professional intervention.

Consider cities where such measures are in place. These municipalities thrive with comprehensive bylaws that not only promote public safety but also offer a second chance to dogs who may have acted out due to fear, provocation, or as a rare occurrence in their behaviour. For plenty of dogs, one incident does not define their disposition for life. They can recover through structured programs that assess their behavior, allowing them to be rehabilitated and re-integrated into society.

The cruelty of an immediate death sentence does not accommodate growth, understanding, or transformation. It turns away from the modern and humane practices embraced by various parts of the world, such as in certain areas governed by the SPCA’s model municipal bylaws available at https://spca.bc.ca/programs-services/working-for-better-laws/model-municipal-bylaws/.

These lead with understanding and negotiations, respecting both safety and the possible redemption of an animal.

Please support a change in the bylaws of Dorval and Ste Anne de Bellevue that would consider rehabilitation before irreversible measures. By signing this petition, you are standing with countless others who believe in a fair chance for all living creatures, endorsing a just, progressive, and merciful local legislation. Your signature matters, make it count.

Hudson, Quebec focuses on animal welfare, rather than animal control. It is breed neutral, has a non lethal approach to dog bites, (regardless of Dunbar level), has feral cat TNR programs, bans pet sales, licences kennels, and is considered one of Canada's best city animal protection bylaws.

Niagara Falls  has a coyote feeding ban, a breed neutral non lethal response to dog bites (regardless of Dunbar level), and a ban on "killer traps" anywhere, inside and outside. The only problem is they allow hunting in the city, do not allow neuter programs for feral cats, and pet impoundments are covered under the Animals in Research Act.

Toronto Animal bylaws have a breed neutral non lethal response to dog bites, (regardless of Dunbar level) bans pet sales, has a city wide free TNR program for feral cats, and is considered to be one of the best in Canada. Toronto brought in a wildlife feeding ban.  Their Animal Services is considered no kill.​

Caledon, Ontario, has an excellent Animal Services website, great info, and excellent bylaws. Like Beaconsfield Quebec, the bylaw focuses on animal protection, rather than control. They have a breed nuetral no kill response to dog bites, (regardless of Dunbar level) a TNR program for feral cats, a strict, easy to follow feeding ban for wildlife, and is one of Canada's best animal bylaws.