Board denies kennel appeal

The Mountain View County subdivision and development appeal board has denied an appeal by a dog kennel owner in the Water Valley-Winchell Lake area regarding the cancellation of the development permit for the facility.

The appeal hearing took place on Sept. 4 in council chambers, and the board issued its ruling last week.

The property involved is located along Highway 579 and Rge. Rd. 52 within a multi-lot residential subdivision.

The development permit was for a kennel facility with a maximum of 24 dogs.

In its written ruling denying appeal, the board cited four reasons for its decision:

• The board determined that the development has a long history, even after repeated warnings and citations, of having dogs running at large, in direct contravention of the development permit.
• Although the board accepts that the appellant has attempted to mitigate the odour concerns of the property through the purchase of lids for the manure receptacles, the board has determined that the development has, and continues to have, large odour concerns due to the manure created by the development, in direct contravention of the development permit.
• The board determined that the respondent had issued the stop order correctly and granted adequate time for the appellant to comply with the requirements of the stop order including the issuance of a time extension.
• The board determined that the respondent has appropriate authority granted by the Municipal Government Act and Mountain View County land use bylaw to cancel the development permit and has determined that an additional 30 days is adequate to comply with the conditions of the cancellation.

In issuing the cancellation notice, the county cited five reasons, including having “dogs at large”, having “dogs attacking or killing neighbours' pets”, having “strong odour of dog manure”, having “undisposed dog manure in buckets”, having the “kennel facility in a dilapidated and ruinous condition” and having the “kennel facility larger than approved site sketch.”

In a briefing note to the board, administration said, in part, that, “The county has a long history of complaints received related to the kennel facility which include contravention of the issued development permit conditions for the appellant’s kennel operation.”

Administration cited eight dates when complaints were received related to the property. Those complaints included dogs at large, dogs attacking other animals, noise, manure management, dogs being aggressive, and dogs killing cats and a pig.

A total of 17 tickets have been issued regarding the property under the county’s dog control bylaw, including five tickets issued on Sept. 13, 2016 and eight on May 12, 2017.

The July 25 cancellation notice required permanent removal of all but three dogs from the property and decommissioning and removal from the property of all components of the kennel structure.

In his notice of appeal, appellant and property owner Allan Charles Pace called on the board to reinstate his development permit issued in July 2001 or allow a new permit.

“If the appellant is unable to carry on as a hobby breeder, as he has done for the past 30 years, and for the most part without incident, it will cause emotional distress to lose the remaining dogs and financial hardship to lose the supplemental income that he has come to rely on,” he said.

“I am not aware of when the number of dogs on a landowner’s property became a consideration and required a development permit. I question whether I need a development permit to have up to 24 dogs or even 16 dogs on my property. I am wondering whether this is a licensing issue as opposed to a development issue.”

Pace told the board he has recently improved fencing on his property and also made changes to the way he handles dog manure to reduce odours.

Also during the hearing, a number of Pace’s neighbours related stories of animals being attacked by dogs from the property, and noise and odour concerns.

With the appeal board ruling upholding the cancellation of the development permit, Pace must now meet a number of conditions, including the permanent removal of all but three of the dogs from the property, the decommissioning and removal of all components of the kennel structure, and must ensure all animal manure has been contained, bagged and removed to a waste management facility.

The board’s appeal ruling could itself be appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal.