Iqaluit council considers 24-hour ‘hold’ before euthanizing loose animals
‘It’s no secret that we have a dog problem,’ says deputy Mayor Kim Smith
A pack of loose dogs roams Iqaluit. City councillors are expected to consider an amendment to the animal control bylaw that will allow municipal enforcement officers to euthanize loose animals 24 hours after being caught. (File photo by Jeff Pelletier)
The City of Iqaluit would be able to euthanize loose dogs and other animals 24 hours after picking them up if council approves proposed amendments to its animal control bylaw.
There is currently a seven-day “hold” period for impounded dogs, but changes to the 2022 Domestic Animal Control bylaw would shorten that to 24 hours, with some flexibility around holidays and weekends.
Animals “may be euthanized after a 24-hour hold period,” whether or not they are registered and licensed with the city, a proposed bylaw amendment says.
Councillors passed the amendments through first and second reading during Tuesday’s council meeting. They require one more vote at a future meeting before becoming law.
The new provision points to making “reasonable attempts to contact the owner” of an animal caught with a city-issued tag within that 24-hour period. It also states that the city may refuse to return an animal that has been caught more than twice.
Another amendment to the bylaw states municipal enforcement officers would be able to “seize, capture, impound or destroy any” animal caught running at large, unlicensed, or has chased, harassed or attempted to bite someone.
Some new fines are added, including “daily care and sustenance fee” of $30. There’s also a dog impoundment fee of $150 after the first offence, $250 for the second, $300 for the third and $350 for the fourth.
“It’s no secret that we have a dog problem,” said deputy Mayor Kim Smith during Tuesday’s meeting.
None of the other councillors added anything, other than Coun. Romeyn Stevenson, who said he agreed with the amendments. The text of the proposed amendment does not say why the city should change to holding an animal for 24 hours from the seven days it holds one now before euthanizing it.
The bylaw proposal comes a few weeks after the city’s public safety committee discussed how loose dogs are making community members feel unsafe, especially children, elders and those who leash their pets properly.
“No more playing around with the idea that it’s OK to own a pet and not take care of it,” said Coun. Amber Aglukark, the chairperson of the public safety committee, after Tuesday’s council meeting.
Aglukark also said she hopes the bylaw amendments will help the people who run dog teams.
Most of Iqaluit’s dog teams are kept in the West 40 area, away from the city’s core.
However, Aglukark — who also helps run a dog team — says loose dogs coming to the area sometimes cause trouble, including unexpected pregnancies.
“All dog team owners, they put time and effort and money and care and dedication to these teams,” she said.
“Having this new bylaw in place could potentially help minimize the risk of our dog team owners having to go through the uncertainty of what’s going to happen if a stray dog approaches their female.”
The proposed bylaw amendments await third and final reading.
Hey you donkeys.
Amber. You’ll fell the pain one day when your sled dog gets loose then gets killed. Just like the rcmp dogs back in the day.
There way better disciplinary actions then killing the dog after 24 hrs.
Sometime your kid opens the door and the dog runs out.
I know Elders who have dogs ut can no longer run a team. They do not tie thier dog up and it romes freely. But it goes on hunting trips with him and is by side side like a best friend. It’s his only way to have a close connection to a dog and his old traditional way of life.
What would you do if your kid or grandkids get attacked by loose dogs? I can guarantee you wouldn’t want any loose dogs eh?
If the dog has already been picked up, it’s no longer a danger, regardless of if the wait time to destroy it is 24 hours, 72 hours or one week.
As a lawful owner of said dog, you will be provided with 24 hours to request the return of your dog. If you can’t arrange this for your beloved dog, then perhaps you should never own any living thing. Get real, this city has a real problem which is getting worse. Enough of this drama and get with responsible doggy world.
I would first ask my grandkids, “what did you do to make that dog attack you?”
24 hours is more than enough time to realize your family dog is missing and to call bylaw. If you don’t realize within 24 it is probably ignored, not being fed and not being given water.
Still either way, people will still believe their dogs are being stolen and sold to the south for thousands of dollars.
I’d normally agree with this. But from what I’ve heard is people have had issues getting in touch with Bylaw to check if their dog has been picked up.
Also if you’re out of town and have an unreliable dog sitter, this could be too short of a window.
City Councillors:
You try walking around on a leash.
Keeping dogs tied up is cruel.
Dogs are runners. They feel good after they have run. They feel miserable if they have been kept from running for more than a day.
Human beings are getting close to being able to go to Mars. Within a few decades, the Moon and Mars will be an expensive destination for travelers. Within a couple hundred years we will be able to travel to the stars, where we will likely meet other life forms.
We need a better solution to our inter-species issues than “keep them tied up”. We need to learn to co-exist, before we eliminate all life on earth (including human).
Take your dog out for long walks and offleash runs. Huskies are high energy dogs and need at least an hour of exercise per day. Letting them roam off leash doesn’t count. Be responsible and think of that before getting a puppy for your kids.
You have got to be kidding me. dogs do not equal human. Dogs do not have the same feelings as humans. Dogs should be tied up and leashed.
Surely hope you don’t own a dog. It is a living being, be it a cat or a rabbit. While it does not have complex feelings of a human, it is us who brought this upon the dogs. The stray population stems mostly from the “I want to get my kid a puppy for christmas” and then when the puppy is now a dog, it is no longer cute and being let out on the streets. As Bob Barker used to say, “to remind you, help control the pet population – have your pets spayed or neutered.”
Take me to your dog leader
We literally have an animal rescue group that the City could work with but choose not to.
This is what happens when a bunch of old men run the City and have their little followers agreeing to them because they feel like they have to so they won’t “offend” them because they’re “respected elders.”
The City Counsellors, Mayor and SAO are a literal joke.
News flash Amber, most of the dogs that are running around lower base are sled dogs, did ya think of that?!
not every big dog or husky that’s running loose is a sled dog. Did ya think of that?
It’s disheartening that there often seems to be more public concern in Iqaluit for dogs than for the safety and well-being of Inuit children and families. The strong reactions over animal control are telling—yet we rarely see the same level of urgency when it comes to protecting our kids. I want to commend City Council for taking steps to address this issue and sincerely hope the new bylaw is properly enforced.
Regarding Nunavut Animal Rescue: based on the information I’ve found, they appear to be a clinic, not a full shelter. If they don’t have space to house animals at their current location, it raises an important question—where would they go? It’s understandable that residents in Apex might not want their neighbourhood turned into an impromptu shelter.
Old Man’s Club? The article points out that the female Deputy Mayor and female City Councilor both support this. It seems patriarchal and presumptive of you to suggest that just because they’re spent a lot of time submitting to old men that they will continue to do so on Council. I think they’re capable of speaking their own minds.
I agree with the need to do something about the loose dog issue. It gets scary sometimes, walking my own dog.
However, as a dog owner who has never let my dog loose and whose dog never escaped, I am scared about this proposed amendment.
What if I have to go out of town in an emergency, have to ask anyone I can find to dogsit, and they let my dog loose? 24 hours to figure out that she got loose and get someone to pick her up? That’s short.
What if for some reason she eventually escapes and looses her dog tag. Could she be euthanized on the spot if caught?
We take extremely good care of her. We have no kids, so she is our baby. If she were to be euthanized by an overzealous agent, I don’t know how I could bear it.
This timeline is too short, and for people whose dogs have tags too? How many attempts will be made to call the owners within 24 hours?
There’s a dog rescue in town. I am not sure why the city doesn’t work with them anymore as they used to. They do very good work and work hard to get vets in town. It’s hard to understand why there isn’t collaboration between the two entities anymore other than for petty reasons.
Ask the SAO or the mayor why they don’t work with the rescue organization.
Do like they did when i first came here and shoot them on the spot!
Great move city council! If it’s the first time bylaw impounds a loose dog, maybe hold off on the 24-hour death sentence. But for a frequent flyer like our neighbours’’ dog, let loose rather than walked, please impose the death sentence. Loose dogs are a nuisance and for those of us who have been bit or attacked by one, feeling unsafe in our neighbourhood is real.
The dog is not deemed to be the responsible party. Your neighbour is the responsiblle party.
It’s your neighbours who should be shot on sight if their dog is loose.
Don’t punish the innocent dog. Punish the criminal neighbour.
Didn’t there use to be a mandatory spay & neutral for dogs & other pets that come into Nunavut? When did it stop becoming a thing to enforce? I remember as a child, that rule used to be more heavily enforced for dogs that aren’t husky.
How would you feel if your kids or grandchildren were attacked by loose dogs? I’m pretty sure you would want loose dogs killed!
Perhaps, but this amendment will make no distinction between the aggressive dogs that are always let loose and the nice dogs who got out by accident.
If that amendment passes and someone lets my dog loose by accident while I am away and that results in her death, the city (and the person who let her loose, no matter who they are) will have bigger issues than an occasional loose dog.
Well said, don’t we have a wonderful bunch of clowns on council
To “About Time”:
Many years ago I was hit by a transport truck coming at me on a highway in my lane at night. By your logic Canada should ban all transport trucks, or maybe shoot all truck drivers.
Everyone’s worried about loose dogs attacking you.. I’d be worried about some of the violent people walking around here more..
Lmao this “city” could never effect meaningful change. Just polarizing change.
There is hardly any dogs that are aggressive and I walk all the time and all the dogs I see are kind and the people who don’t like dogs are just wanting this to happen hearing this is just to sad
The GN currently spends thousands on rabies immunoglobulin – often given to people after a dog bite. I think I heard we have the highest usage in the country. Almost every single person with a dog bite that comes in gets it. It’s something like $5000 a dose. And we have to use it like candy because there are so many dog attacks from stray dogs people come to the hospital for needing stitches etc. Little kids. it’s horrible.
It in is essential council does something to reduce loose and stray dogs. Keep little kids and all adults safer from dog bites. Current situation can’t go on.
It will help save lives, scars on people’s faces, the trauma of dog attacjER visits, and lots of money on rabies immunoglobulin.
We “give it out like candy” because we live in one of the only areas of Canada that has rabies regularly. It’s not the dogs that are carriers/reservoir, its the foxes, and any animal that interacts with foxes can become infected. So if the dogs weren’t here, providing a deterrent to the fox population, I suspect we wouldn’t suddenly stop “giving it out like candy”. Because rabies is horrifying and terrible, and dying from it is hellish.
The GN currently spends thousands on rabies immunoglobulin – often given to people after a dog bite. I think I heard we have the highest usage in the country. Almost every single person with a dog bite that comes in gets it. It’s something like $5000 a dose. And we have to use it like candy because there are so many dog attacks from stray dogs people come to the hospital for needing stitches etc. Little kids. it’s horrible.
It in is essential council does something to reduce loose and stray dogs. Keep little kids and all adults safer from dog bites. Current situation can’t go on.
It will help save lives, scars on people’s faces, the trauma of dog attacks, ER visits, and lots of money on rabies immunoglobulin.
As someone who’s 4 year old was bit by a loose dog and had to watch them get rabies shots this is about time. If anything it should be even stricter, every single loose dog in this town should be put down immediately.
Great example of why laws can’t be passed based on emotional reaction.
Considering how unorganized the city is, this 24 hours notice is a farce. Why isn’t the city working with the rescue? The root of the problem is the need for spay and neuter clinics. The rescue seems to always run this and it is even free to dog owners who cannot afford it. Maybe the councillors who all probably have PAL license should pull the trigger, take turns every week and see how this will affect your mental state.
It is not the dogs’ fault. There needs to be an education portion implemented and a change in mindset is required. People keep talking about what if someone is bitten etc. but no one looks to their own actions in what they’re doing to perpetuate the problem of loose dogs. There is no accountability and responsibility that humans are being held for. It is not the dogs’ fault and “euthanizing” them is not the way to go.
A good way to help this problem is free spay/neuter clinics.
The city should support the Nunavut Humane Society with this.
This is a good idea, but given how things are you may need to pay people to bring their dogs in
Catch, spay/neuter, release programs have worked in other parts of the world.
If a dog that gets picked up is not neutered/spayed, they do it before release.
I can’t speak for anyone else … but I love my dog. 24 hours would be way more than enough time for me to notice he was missing.
If you don’t notice your missing dog and let Bylaw know within 24 hours then how much did you really care about it? Most bad dog owners will pretend that Bylaw will kill their dog whether they notify them or not because contrived oppression is easier than honest accountability.
What about when you’re out walking your dog and someone runs you over and seriously injures you? Your dog runs off scared and you get hospitalized and are unconscious for two days. Dog gets picked up by by-law a couple hours later but they can’t reach you since you’re unconscious at the hospital. When you wake up, your dog has already been killed.
Point is, there are many situations where the 24 hours is way too short, especially when there is an organization in town that’s willing to work with the city to take care of the dogs.
Lol, sure. I’ll give you that, this wildly specific scenario would be tough.
1) Free spay/neuter clinics. Many small communities in Nunavut receive this wonderful service from southern vets, and we certainly appreciate it. Once-a-year visits may not be enough though.
2) A fee structure that rewards the responsible owner: All dogs must have annual licenses and tags. One dollar fee if your dog is spayed/neutered, $100 if it is not. No license, dead dog.
Nunatsiaq, please do better than just parrot the city propaganda that uses the word “euthanize”. Words have an impact and meaning, and “euthanize” means to end a life to prevent pain and suffering. These are mostly going to be healthy dogs, so “euthanize” is not the right word. They’re going to be killed, plain and simple.
Typical Iqaluit council. Ignore a problem and let it fester forever and then hugely overreact.
Okay, Big Ben, but if Council did anything proactive or early into a small problem, you and others would be the first to say ‘wE hAvE bIgGeR pRoBlEmS’
The only overreaction is the Janelle’s. Iqaluit has had a loose dog problem since the Janelle’s of Iqaluit stopped the killing of dog’s. If a dog kills one of my children, look out Iqaluit! Bravo to this possible new by-law!
If you don’t notice your dog gone for 24 hours, maybe it’s time for you to not be a pet owner.
Obviously there’s no easy fix at the moment. But having adults being chased by loose dogs right now, its not good. Because summer is around the corner and there will be A LOT of unaccompanied children walking around.
But I think 24 hours is too short a time, I’d say 72 hours is sufficient time.
This is great! now for them to start catching more than a loose dog per week.
As a hard working tax paying resident, it is past the time to tackle this. I do not ever see these do gooders chasing down all the loose dogs in town and now they are up in arms. Let them start adopting the loose ones so they aren’t put to rest. Some good cities have a few thousand dollar fine for loose dogs, perhaps the city should consider that too and see how these do gooders feel about that too. I applaud the council for moving on this.
Actually, the do-gooders used to receive loose dogs that people had picked up on the street as well as dogs that by-law had kept for the mandatory 72 hours. They were sending them down South to be adopted. They got accused of stealing the community’s dogs and making money off them (which is inaccurate, it’s a non profit, so all the money raised saves other animals).
Now, these dogs will instead be shot, after 24 hours. Much better :/
Anyways, I don’t know if I would react as much if there was no risk at all for my dog, but in this 24-hour scenario, I can think of ways where a combination of mistakes and bad luck could lead to my dog being killed, and that’s not acceptable.
Why can’t rcmp do something about them? They do take dogs and shipped them away for “a better home”. Not just rcmp, nurses and teachers too. But not in Iqaluit in other Nunavut communities.
This is not the Inuit way. Historically, Inuit have had strong relationships with dogs, and we treated them with respect. The decision to kill these animals reflects southern policies and approaches—not our own values.
Why are we allowing this to continue?
Instead of resorting to such measures, I believe the city should take real steps to create an independent and fully dedicated dog shelter—separate from the existing animal rescue or hospital—with the clear purpose of saving lives. Families should have the chance to reclaim, adopt, or support these dogs. This kind of initiative would take effort, labour, and funding—but it’s worth it.
Investing in a humane approach shows that we care—not just for animals, but for the kind of community we are building. I urge the city to push for this and create a plan that reflects compassion and respect, not just convenience.
The inuit way was to have dogs to go out on the land. Aside from a few people, novody hunts by dog team anymore. Is there really a need for dogs in Nunavut anymore? People keep giving out puppies that end up roaming the street. Nobody wants those dogs. Even if they get sent south they usually end up in shelters. A dedicated “no kill” shelter will eventually have thousands of dogs and be bursting at the seams. Killing them is the humane option.
At least dogs dont break windows or vandalize vehicles. And free alarm system in the neighbourhood.
Want the lose dog issue resolved.
Implement a purge once a month.
1, Any lose dog caught on the 21st of every month will be euthanized.
2. Any dog caught more than lose three times within a 6 month period will be euthanized,
3. Any lose dog that bites a person will be euthanized.
This is extreme. I agree with everyone who said the city should work with the fog rescue team. Dogs I have seen loose have been sled dogs and tiny little house dogs. Does the city have evidence in can they share evidence of attacks on people from loose dogs? Or,are they just an irritant to done people? My experience is to just leave these loose dogs alone. And when I take care of friends ‘dogs, I simply live in fear with such a bylaw if the dog accidentally and temporarily runs off. Well cared for, loved dogs do that sometimes. As for the unloved ones, they can get a home through the dog rescue team.
The plan is not to euthanize but to kill for convenience. Dangerous dogs are one thing but accidentally or even chronically loose dogs who are not aggressive is another. Compassion, I agree with another commenter, should be the approach, and working in partnership with others,whether you like them or not. The simplistic, bureaucratic, heartless approach that is proposed is terrible. People who mistreat dogs will mistreat people too, so education and accountability are needed for people; the dogs just need care and neutering.
What’s with everyone repeating the idea that this is not euthanasia? The definition of “euthanize” is “to put (a living being, especially a dog or cat) to death humanely”. I have no reason to doubt this is the plan – not to torture the animals to death, but to put them down as quickly and painlessly as possible.
Tag your dog and this won’t be a problem.
Also, just because you don’t like an idea doesn’t make it a “southern” approach.
It’s a common trope in comedy where there’s a conveyor belt on an assembly line and the protagonist needs to do a task to each thing that comes on the conveyor belt, whether it’s Lucy at the chocolate factor or Peter and his friends at the pharmacy, you see them make more and more mistakes as the conveyor belt speeds up.
The City of Iqaluit, with this bylaw, is speeding up the conveyor belt. They’re allowing Bylaw Officers to kill animals faster rather than addressing the root causes of the problem. They need to be looking at what’s behind the increase in loose dogs, and not just killing them faster and wondering why nothing is changing.
I don’t think anyone disagrees that loose dogs are a problem and a safety hazard, but the solution isn’t increasing the speed of the conveyor belt.
People who live in Iqaluit know:
– Bylaw struggles to catch dogs, and often is too late to the scene after the dog has moved on;
– Government workers (including bylaw) will do their work in the way easiest and most convenient for themselves;
– Bylaw only works certain hours of the day and is not on the roads after hours; and,
– It is hard to get in touch with government workers, even when you’re calling and leaving messages.
Dog owners can envision a scenario where their dog gets out, loses their tag (have you seen the small piece of wire they’re attached with?) and gets picked up. Not everyone has access to Facebook or other ways the city communicates or can even communicate with bylaw if they are unilingual. Despite their best efforts to call bylaw, can’t actually get in touch with someone, and when the bylaw officer goes to do their cull (early in the day so they can pick up their kids from school or run an errand), their beloved pet is killed despite their best efforts.
24 hours is simply not enough time, and people make mistakes. This will lead to innocent pets dying and responsible pet owners losing their loved ones.
Kyle Shepherd has be all over Facebook recently, saying that “responsible pet owners don’t have to worry” and that “bylaw officers will act with restraint and won’t target cared for dogs”, but the law they are passing has powers in it that are dangerous. Civil liberties are fragile, and enforcement officers powers should be done judiciously and cautiously. It’s a flippant and dangerous statement to say that you shouldn’t be afraid of harsh and heavy handed punishments if you are following the law. Laws are supposed to be proportionate and have due process.
I am begging city council to look at this from a lens of prevention and education rather than narrowing an already small window to recover your pet. Bylaw can already kill animals, they just want to kill them faster and without due process.
We shouldn’t be speeding up the conveyor belt on the slaughterhouse, and if it’s a matter of funds, then increase taxes. It’s a service the city needs, which is why we have taxes in the first place.
There is a reason they don’t work with the humane society. There is a lot of drama and pollitics involved with those responsible. Just look up past news stories about Nunavet, or about the old building the city let the Humane society use. The humane society has a problem of running up bills, and not paying them. They were also not operating, legally, as a non for profit as they had not obtained that status. They did not do any paperwork, taxes etc for a very long time. I doubt much of that has changed, although they did also change their name again.
Loose dogs are a problem, and irresponsible owners are to blame.
I agree that there was drama and history in the past, but can all of the adults involved just grow up and work together? I work with people I don’t particularly like all the time, it’s called life.
Unless the city manages the root causes of the loose dog problem and actually works with the humane society to find a solution, they won’t solve anything. All they’re doing is killing dogs faster, but puppies will keep being born in large litters to people ill equipped to care for them.
I’m guessing this is a knee jerk reaction to a very vocal minority, and has not been properly researched. The City of Iqaluit should consult on major changes to bylaws that affect so many people.
Fix the roads before shooting dogs, get your priorities straight
Euthanasia (from the Greek meaning “good death”) is the practice of intentionally ending a life to relieve pain and suffering. It can apply to both humans and animals, with the primary goal being a humane and painless death.
Death by shooting? Not humane or painless for the shooter or the dog. Call it what it is. A power grab by the weak and ineffective city council of Iqaluit. Fear mongering about deaths of children in other towns by dogs. Meanwhile the taxis here which have cause several deaths face few bylaws and regulations. Meanwhile nothing is done about the rampant femicide here in Iqaluit. Meanwhile everyone turns a blind eye on the human trafficking in town. Meanwhile nothing is consistently done about the price of housing. Meanwhile nothing is done about the roads. Meanwhile the city drops the ball on all of its responsibilities. God forbid a few dogs run loose.