[ Close Bar ]  
FREE BOOK: "Top 10 Ways to Save Money at the Veterinarian":   Email: 
 

« | Home | »

HELP! HALIFAX WANTS TO KILL MY DOG!

By Dr. Andrew Jones

From: Dr Andrew Jones
Author: Veterinary Secrets Revealed
Website: http://www.veterinarysecretsrevealed.com

Re: HELP! HALIFAX WANTS TO KILL MY DOG!

//////////////////////////////////////////////

Good morning to everyone.

This is a Newsletter in support of a very dedicated dog guardian fighting to save her dog.

Her dog Brindi was seized by animal control for some relatively minor offenses, and put on ‘death row’.

This is what is on her site:

=======================================================

She has never hurt a person or seriously injured a dog. She’s gentle around kids and likes most dogs. A fence, a muzzle, and more training are all that is needed.

Please help save my beautiful dog!

Her guardian has an incredibly detailed website with the complete story- you can see it by going
here:

http://freebrindi.blogspot.com/

=======================================================

Here are specific ways you can help:

SIGN the petition:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/FREEBRINDI/

Contact Nova Scotia SPCA

http://www.spcans.ca/contact/index.html

Phone the Mayor:

* Call MAYOR Peter Kelly to PARDON Brindi!

(902) 490 4010

//////////////////////////////////////////////

P.S. In my opinion the Right thing to do is to free her dog. This is a case of common sense being lost and authorities NOT thinking.

I am signing the petition, and I urge you to do the same thing.

P.P.S. The BEST way to Prevent authorities from EVER seizing your dog is having a well trained dog. I have an EXTENSIVE Dog Training Bonus as part of my Course, the Veterinary Secrets Revealed Complete Home Study Course.

This is a 120 page comprehensive Dog Training Manual, in which I reveal my own Dog Training Secrets.

Get it for Free with the course by going here:

http://www.veterinarysecretsrevealed.com/course/

It’s Your Pet. Heal Them At Home!

Best Wishes,

Dr Andrew Jones, DVM

Be Sociable, Share!

STAY INFORMED

Sign up here for Free Updates (and get my free e-book "Top 10 Ways to Save Money at the Veterinarian"):

To post a comment, click the 'Comments' link below:

Topics: Cat Health, Dog Health, Pet health | 24 Comments »

24 Responses to “HELP! HALIFAX WANTS TO KILL MY DOG!”


  1. Sandra janoski Says:
    October 3rd, 2008 at 1:34 pm

    Dr Jones; I thank you so much for putting this story I sent you on your site. I wish you’d call & talk to them, you have a great way with words, maybe they’d hear you better than the everyday person. Again, thank you. I feel for the owner, its so sad she can’t even see her dog!! I know they do that just to be ugly!!! There’s no law saying you can’t see your dog. I pray something good will come out of this, & they let her dog go home.

  2. David Brown Says:
    October 6th, 2008 at 10:15 am

    Just another case of authorities gone mad. I have been to the website and signed my partition. I still cant understand what exactly did the the dog do wrong to be put in such a predicament. The dog does not even look vicious.
    But at the same time let this be a warning to all dog owners, sure a dog will do what a dog will do and that can mean protect protect the pack which include you its guardian and we are all denied the right to self defense both human and animal, but its OK to bear arms (isn’t that the right to self defense technically). Unfortunately authorities are just so 2 bit and some I believe they enjoy creating misery for those who are weak, defenseless and poor.
    For some reason they (the authorities) have this belief that absolute perfection must be adhered to at all times, which includes animals both domestic and wild and that for animals both domestic and wild they are not excluded from ignorance of the law is no excuse.
    I sincerely hope the owner get her dog back alive and well.

  3. Carol Waterman Says:
    January 3rd, 2009 at 7:01 pm

    COURT DATE IS ON JANUARY 5, 2009 IN HALIFAX.

    THAT DAY, BRINDI’S FATE WILL BE DECIDED!

    LET US PRAY THAT TRUE JUSTICE WILL PREVAIL.

    Carol
    Montreal,Qc. Canada

  4. Peggy MacIntyre Says:
    January 17th, 2009 at 11:02 pm

    Dr.Jones, I have been a subscriber to your news letter for years,which I used some of your info on my own dog as he was dying of Cancer (eg: massage,herbal remedies etc).
    I live here in NS and I also support Francesca & Brindi.I am,as I’m sure Francesca is so grateful that you would support her on your web site.

    My will-dog passed away Jan.13 2007 and I miss him dearly ,but I know your solutions made him feel better in his last months.He lived over 4 mths after the vet said to put him down.I am a true believer in natural herbal medicines, as I know they helped in my case to allieviate any pain and my dog was able to go out & walk with me up to the last few days of his life.
    Again, I just wanted to thankyou & let you know that the judge ruled in Francesca & brindi’s favor.Brindi will be going home.
    From the East coast to the West coast…Thankyou

  5. Dr Andrew Says:
    January 18th, 2009 at 2:06 pm

    Hi Peggy –

    Great news for Brindi! And thank you, I appreciate your comments- glad I’ve been of help.

    Dr. Andrew J

  6. Peggy MacIntyre Says:
    January 19th, 2009 at 12:55 pm

    Hi again, With more news about Brindi. Although the judge squashed the kill order and Brindi gets to live.The HRm are still not allowing Brindi to go home with Francesca Rogier(her rightfull owner).
    Francesca was allowed visitation with Brindi.They both were overjoyed to see one another.The HRM are not allowing Francesca to just pay a fine & take Brindi home- like everyone else can.
    So our fight to have Brindi returned to Francesca is still ongoing and causing quite a stir.
    Save Brindi..
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=35473542760
    Francesca’s blog page…
    http://freebrindi.blogspot.com/2009/01/see-this-chart-to-compare-brindis-case.html
    Again thanks for caring about animals.

  7. rotts4ever Says:
    February 12th, 2009 at 11:31 am

    Brindi is NOT being released because Fran never fought the law in respect to Brindi but as Fran herself. The law was quashed but NOT against Brindi. Also, this owner is NOT responsible enough to have this dog. There is nothing wrong with admitting something is to much for you. Esp when trying to save its’ life. A responsible owner does NOT allow escapes to happen. Once or twice can be accidents BUT out without the muzzle.. wrong. Now there is a fence. Some fence… it is chicken wire. So Dr. John.. with all due respect, you should maybe really look into what is REALLY happening and why. Yes this owner does love her dog but love is NOT going to keep her safe.

  8. Peggy MacIntyre Says:
    March 30th, 2009 at 12:09 pm

    There are some people,(Like Gail above), who have a vendetta against Ms. Rogier. That would be fine ,if they did just that. But,those who make it a life mission ,to defame her character,by making deroggatory remarks about her, are themselves “irresponsible people”.

    Responsible people,don’t go about trying to have a dog taken from it’s rightful owner,only because ,they think it so.
    I would like to know,who gives them authority to call anyone names?

    Fact is Brindi was siezed illegally, and is being held illegaly, to date.
    That is why, the judge seen, they had no authority to do what they did.
    – He quashed that part, of the bylaw, which gave Animal Control the total right to enter her home & “seize” Brindi,to euthanize her, based on his opinion only, that the dog was dangerous,
    and only after,the dog was euthanized,inform the owner it had been done.

    Fran did not fight for herself!! She was fighting the only thing she could, which was the bylaw, to save Brindi’s life!

    Her laywer, thought it more important to fight the bylaw, with respect to seizing dogs & killing them,but failed to ask for a release of the dog.

    Francesca took the HRM & Animal Control to court, because ,there was no other way to save her dog’s life.
    She couldn’t contess any charges,because there was none. She did the only thing ,she could to spare Brindi,from being killed on Aug 7/08.

    Francesca nor Brindi were, ever charged for anything from July 08- Jan 16 09!

    Only after, the city of Halifax, NS heard on
    (Jan. 16,09) the court ruling, that their bylaws wre faulty and they had no legal right to hold brindi, did they lay a “1” charge against Francesca with another part of the bylaw.

    The city ,thought they would just kill Brindi, and that would be that. The never anticipated someone ,actually fighting them. There were probably hundreds of innocent animals put down, because of this “faulty” bylaw.

    So there was nothing she could do,in her or Brindi’s defence.Except what she did ,take it to the Supreme Court.
    How could she fight a charge if there isn’t one?
    If Ms Rogier did not file the charges ,when she did, then Brindi would be dead!

    There are so many things,these people don’t know, or are only intent on seeing Brindi dead, or taken away from her owner.How sad for them.

    I’m wondering if they know Brindi , is not aggresive not human nor dogs,she is not property protective.
    Brindi is reactive.
    Brindi reacted to a dog walking past her property, because a few weeks prior,the same dog attacted her. Brindi never forgot it.
    This is the woman ,who so-called ended in a ditch(which is a little county ditch).This is the same woman ,who only wanted AC to talk to Ms Rogier. Not charge her.
    Simply because Ms Rogier didn’t charge her,nor call animal controlon her .
    Ms Rogier, seen 1 nip(Not 4)on this dog, but paid to have the dog checked out, trying to be a good neighbour.
    That dog is fine & was fine at the time of the incident(wagging it’s tail etc).

    This is where Animal Control officer, decided to order a muzzle order,as a favor to this woman,So Ms Rogier ,would have the money to pay the vet bill.She asked that Ms Rogier ,not be fined.

    The so-called hearing aid dog, was not being walked by it’s owner. This person kept kicking Brindi in the head, which only escalated the fight. Brindi couldn’t tell who was hurting her, as far as she knew it was the dog.
    This was self defence.This dog too was fine.
    People say the owner of the hearing aid dog, never walks it, and was given the them.
    Not bought. That’s a responible owner. Not!

    Brindi deserved to go home with her rightful owner, who wants to resume the training, she was doing.
    She is a responsible ,loving pet owner.
    She has had a few mishaps, but does not need to be crucified for them.
    She has a standard animal fence. It’s not chain linked, but sold as animal proof (16gua).
    Brindi is not strong enough to chew through it. That’s just plain rediculous to say.

    So again , I say Stop it Gail(rotts4ever), if you don’t want to support her, then Don’t, but Don’t fight against her getting her dog release, instead of dead.
    Rehoming is not an option,it has been rejected.
    No animal Resucue, ever offered to take Brindi, in the interm, or ever.
    The trainer, refused, because she did not want the responsibility for Brindi’s actions and be caught up in a city battle.
    I know this,because I personally checked.

    So as far as Brindi’s life is concerned.
    Brindi will either be returned to her rightful owner or she will be killed,by the city’s orders to the SPCA (Society for Protection of Cruelity against Animals)
    They (NSSPCA) will carry out the euthanization.

    I’m sorry Dr Jones, to have to put this here, but these people, have been slandering Ms Rogier for some time and are posting stuff like this all over the net. It is cruel,untrue, not to say very childish.

  9. rotts4ever Says:
    April 11th, 2009 at 5:29 pm

    What is the matter Peggy, you afraid of the truth? Everything is now coming out. Seems people are not in favor of Fran having Brindi as you claim… You can be childish all you want towards me. I don’t need to be like you and be blinded by the sob story that you all have put forth. This por man is only going by what YOU and Carol are saying which is from Fran. We all know how truthful she is now don’t we? So you all have a great day.

  10. rotts4ever Says:
    April 11th, 2009 at 6:13 pm

    “and only after,the dog was euthanized,inform the owner it had been done.”
    Brindi is alive and well.

    “Brindi reacted to a dog walking past her property, because a few weeks prior,the same dog attacted her. Brindi never forgot it.”

    Brindi attacked 3 different dogs

    “This person kept kicking Brindi in the head, which only escalated the fight. Brindi couldn’t tell who was hurting her, as far as she knew it was the dog.”

    The son of the dogs owner had to kick Brindi in order to get Brindi OFF THAT DOG. A witiness driving by was honking his horn to attrack Brindi to try to help.

    “People say the owner of the hearing aid dog, never walks it, and was given the them.”

    Not true.. SD’s are NOT bought unless you buy one and train it yourself with the help of a SD trainer. They are always ” on loan”.

    “Brindi deserved to go home with her rightful owner, who wants to resume the training, she was doing.”

    What training?? Basic obedience… fat lot of good that did. It never covers ” property aggression / reaction”

    “She is a responsible ,loving pet owner.”

    If she was Brindi would NOT have 4 incidents ( 1 running at large, 3 attacks ). A responsible owner would have fixed that immediately

    “She has a standard animal fence. It’s not chain linked, but sold as animal proof (16gua).”

    Galvenised chicken wire that bends when Fran leans on it

    “She has had a few mishaps, but does not need to be crucified for them”
    No Brindi don’t need to be but an irrsponsible owner does for allowing this to happen so many times and now will not do what is right making Brindi saty in a shelter what will end up being probably over a year.

    “Brindi is not strong enough to chew through it. That’s just plain rediculous to say.”

    You really don’t know dogs. It is also low enough that IF Brindi wanted to she could jump it with no problem

    “Rehoming is not an option,it has been rejected.”

    A reputable rescue offered to take Brindi months ago but FRAN REFUSED. The court will not allow Brindi to go somewhere where Fran or her coHURTS can harass / go there. Like they do those things now.

    “The trainer, refused, because she did not want the responsibility for Brindi’s actions and be caught up in a city battle.”

    Not truth, you want the letter Silvia wrote and posted on Poocini.com? The letter she wrote me, the leter she has written Fran herself?

    “Brindi will either be returned to her rightful owner or she will be killed,by the city’s orders to the SPCA (Society for Protection of Cruelity against Animals)
    They (NSSPCA) will carry out the euthanization.”

    Not true.. If Fran made a petition to the HRM /AC to have Brindi rehomed to a REPUTABLE rescue where Silvis would train her and then be adopted out to responsible owners, they would have another option and will go for it. But Fran don’t want to do that and keeps saying they just want to kill her dog.She says the HRM says no deals… they said No deals for FRAN to have Brindi.

    So while you say sorry to this poor man that you have sucked in with lies., I thank him for posting my side. I don’t care who likes me or not, I am not doing this to be liked or disliked. I actually care what happens to this poor dog who have NEVER had a good owner.

  11. Wondering Says:
    April 14th, 2009 at 11:36 pm

    SO, Gail turns up here! Still cyberstalking Francesca?

    Why do you claim to care more than anbody else about a dog you don’t know? How can you speak as if you know what the courts and the city are thinking? Do you really think anybody believes you? I notice you never name the “reputable rescue” you keep talking about, or bother explaining that up to and well after the day Brindi was seized, all Francesca ever got were warnings. Plenty of owners are charged with four violations – even multiple incidents. Why don’t you go after them?

    It really sounds as though you just want to get at this person for some weird reason. Force the situation so that her dog is stolen away from her. You must be googling all day to find places to spread your poison. I’ve seen your smelly droppings on dogkissers.blogspot.com, poocini.com, facebook groups, thecoast.ca, and any number of other places, including your own dedicated blog. Same old same old; chicken wire, irresponsible owner, blah-blah-blah!

    Get a life, Gail! Pay more attention to your own dogs, take them for a walk, get into better shape! In all this time, you could have saved dozens of dogs from certain death. Why don’t you care about Gail Benoit’s dogs, sick with parvo at her puppy mill? Do you even know what happened to them??

  12. rotts4ever Says:
    April 15th, 2009 at 11:40 am

    I see another sheep is here. You can’t help find things on Fran… she put herself EVERYWHERE. You are quiet laughable seeing you have no idea what I do or don’t do.. oh wait, did Fran tell you that or are you just like this in real life? My dogs are home safe and sound with me. My dogs never bother anyone, my dogs are not in a shelter because I was irresponsible on MORE then one occassion. How many dogs have you rescued? Did you do anything about Gail Beniot? Guess not, you probably just read about it. Wonder who is stalking who? You seem to know places I have been. Yes I did write on the coast, my name was brought into it,yes, I did write on dogkisser, no I haven’t wrote on poocini, yes I do have a blog… hmm I am allowed. Do you know first hand of anything you so state as truth… probably not. If you did, you would know more truth about me. Ahhh but you are a blind sheep right. If you want to stalk me more , I will give you my number so you can call and I will give you my daily events.

    It is time Fran’s lies are told and for her followers stop harassing people , lying about the SPCA, Silvia Jay , Best Friends rescue and so many other things. Ohh and if you really read anything I have said, I did say the rescue that Fran TURNED down. Bye Bye lil sheepy, come back when you actually have knowledge.

  13. June Trenholm Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 8:44 pm

    Wow, let’s get back to matter at hand. The city has a bylaw that shouldn’t have been passed. Brindi should not have been labelled a dangerous dog for behaving like a normal dog. The animal control officer had no right to sieze Brindi and the city is keeping the dog in the pound illegally. If the law that put Brindi in the pound and subject to instant euthanasia was applied to all dogs equally, Brindi would have a lot of company. The Supreme Court said it was wrong and they should have had the teeth to issue their own stay of warrant instead of waiting for Fran’s lawyer to do so.

  14. rotts4ever Says:
    April 19th, 2009 at 6:37 am

    I agree, the law sucked big time. BUT Fran STILL never followed any of the basic laws, she was warned,dogs still got attacked etc. IF she followed the by-laws from the get go this would NOT be happening anyway. For a responsible owner, how many times does it take to smarten up and do what is right? Fran herself contacted the other dog owner and said she couldn’t pay both a fine and the vet bill… she started the ball rolling for the muzzle. All the emails back and forth from Fran and the owner, who inturn contacted the AC were entered into court. THAT is how the muzzle order got to be there. The HRM finds Fran as an owner to much of a liability to allow HER to have Brindi back. Who would be the one on the hook WHEN it happens again. I say WHEN because it will. Fran DOES NOT see how serious this is, Fran does NOT understand that the other dog owners that were attacked DO NOT think this is MINOR on their dogs, Fran does not understand that all of her so called support letters from people, groups,rescues ,mail person,hairdresser,family with kids etc. were not the ones who had this happen when they walked by her home with THEIR dog that Brindi didn’t know. Fran does NOT understand that Brindi can have all the obedience training in the world but that will NOT help the issue and the issue will get worse if not dealt with properly. Fran has said that she will allow Brindi off leash again. Again, Brindi is property reactive.. which means HER PROPERTY. Not at the vet, not in the shelter, not at the beach, not at friends homes etc. So all those letters and testimonies are for not. Brindi is NOT human aggressive. So people saying how kind she is with them, means nothing with what is at hand.
    Sorry but Fran DOES NOT GET IT. Fran will be the one who is the cause of Brindi’s death if she doesn’t smarten up. Her neighbors don’t want the dog back as long as Fran is her owner. They don’t feel it is safe for their pets. They have a right to feel safe in their neighborhood. The HRM has a right to protect themselves from lawsuits because of Fran’s wants. The HRM has a right to protect the rights of it’s citizens.

  15. June Trenholm Says:
    May 3rd, 2009 at 2:46 pm

    So the woman who reported Brindi accepted Fran’s money to pay the vet bill? The animal control officer issued a muzzle order for an incident that would have cost another citizen $250 at most. The animal control officer knew the muzzle order put Brindi one small step away from being euthanized. This action of the animal control officer has been deemed to be against the constitution of Canada. So Brindi should not have been taken to the pound and Fran should not have to prove herself as expert at dog handling any more than any other dog owner. How is Fran’s offer to help with the vet bill being villified and being used to say she has brought this all on herself?
    Respected animal trainers have identifed Brindi’s behaviour as being specific to property boundaries and that she does not display aggression with other dogs under other circumstances. This means she would be as safe to run off lead as any other dog in a designated area (and we all know that dogs are also running safely off lead in non designated areas, mostly safely). So instead of a muzzle order, the goal of keeping the community safe would involve a snug sweater for Brindi to wear (according to Temple Grandin, animal behaviourist) and a retraining of her property boundaries and perhaps a fence or an electronic fence.
    I can’t help but wonder if Fran has been given this “special treatment” because she is from away and her neighbours were not as flexible with her as they would be with each other and the city was not expecting anyone to stand up for her.
    I do see this as a way the city will be able to keep dog owners in fear of losing their dogs if they don’t behave. I know of people who are afraid of walking their dogs in case an incident occurs and their dog is seen as the aggressor. People need advice and education about their dogs, not punitive measures. There is no way anyone should be out thousands of dollars to win a case in Supreme Court in the hopes that justice will be done, only to find they are still being rolled over by the city. Fran has done dog owners a huge favour in bringing the shortcomings of the animal bylaw to the attention of the Supreme Court. She deserves out thanks and her money back and mostly, her dog, Brindi, back.

  16. rotts4ever Says:
    May 3rd, 2009 at 3:26 pm

    OMG now that post is rich… Maybe you would be better off actually reading truth instead of fiction. Fran was given MORE THEN ONE chance…. aww who cares.. you are only going to believe what Fran says. You just go with that and continue with all you are doing… I see how far you are now .

  17. June Trenholm Says:
    May 10th, 2009 at 4:38 pm

    Hello rotts4ever,
    Actually I have never spoken to Fran or read her blog. I read the report from the Supreme Court and noted that the animal control officer said that they had tried all possibilities and this is why the dog was siezed. Since I know that there are possibilites that were not tried and that most dog owners don’t know about, it is not logical to me that the ACO gets to make these life and death decisions. It is also not logical to me that dog owners are expected to know all the ins and outs of their dogs. That is why the city needs educators / animal behaviourists / trainors involved early in the process. How do I know some of these things? Because I went to the bookstore and got some books. It resonated with my experiences with dogs and people and so I chose to believe the behavior experts instead of the ACO. I don’t want to discount the experiences of the people who were walking the other dogs involved. So far in my life I have been “approached” by a fully grown black bear, a rotweiler, 2 German shepherds, a Yarmouth Toller a chihauhau and a sky terrier. The “approaches” would fall under the description of an “attack” in the animal bylaw. The only ones that bit me were the chihauhau and the sky terrier. I was not walking a dog at those times. When I was walking my dog, it was such a frequent occurance that I lost count. The people who think Fran has been done a disservice are far from the sheep you suggest we are. I know what big teeth look like. There is a way that we can all live together in a civilized society with our animals being happy and well-adjusted. It starts with us being helpful to each other, sharing ideas and working out our problems. I can think of a lot of people who could be in Fran’s shoes if what has happened to her was applied evenly across society. I’d rather solve the problem by addressing the underlying limitations than by trying to control the symptoms. The confrontational way puts everyone at greater risk of being attacked or of losing their dog.

  18. rotts4ever Says:
    May 17th, 2009 at 7:28 am

    Hello June….
    I am glad you read books, good way to learn SOME things, unfortunitly books are black and white. BTW… what is a Yarmouth Toller?? NEVER in my life of working with dogs have I EVER heard that one. That’s over 30 yrs.
    I agree on one thing, ACO’s should NOT be the ones making a descion like this. It is logical for dog owners to KNOW their dog. If you don’t, it isn’t a family member and ” just a dog”. Fran has NOT been done a disserve. She had been warned on more then one occassion. How many times would you need to be warned? Anyone who is patting Fran on the back instead of shaking her into reality is a sheep. You and the few ( that is all that is doing the harassing for her) are doing a disserve to Brindi who will pay the price WITH HER LIFE. Nowhere did we allow that law to be passed. Some of us that actually work in this stuff day in day out fought it. But you have people like Fran that say ” I can’t see it so it isn’t there” UNTIL all of a sudden they are crying because they paid no attention to the law let alone the first warning. I have tried talking to Fran… yes I have met her personally which is more then most of the people who are blindly following her. There is NOTHING done that would indicate she understands or realizes what she needs to do to be responsible. Instead of getting people to harass others with emails / faxes / fb msges etc. how about some education on her part, how about errecting a PROPER fence, how about abiding by the laws ( Brindi wasn’t even licensed )how about instead of not listening to REAL behavorists and trainers she took some training herself. I have tried everything before to help her, same with all the other people who really could. But because she didn’t like what we said…. ( and that wasn’t at that time to keep Brindi away). What Fran has shown is she only cares about her image. Who cares about Brindi. Her lawyers have quit ( 3 of them) and she is being sued by one. She has made enemies of anyone that could help. All these people from everywhere CAN’T help her. Honestly, What can the President of USA gonna do?? What that group has done is made a big joke at Brindi’s expense. I think before you feel we don’t know what we are talking about, you best read everything with a clear mind. I mean everything. Anyway, there is only a few weeks left, unless she postpones the court date AGAIN which means Brindi will be in the shelter for over a year by the time she gets another date OR they may say enough is enough no more delays, by which time… the gavel will come down and if Fran don’t have another plan… BYE BYE BRINDI.

  19. June Trenholm Says:
    May 22nd, 2009 at 6:55 am

    Hi Rotts4ever,
    You sound like a decent person who has been burned out trying to help. What I mean by people not knowing their dogs is that they see their good sides as most dogs feel safe within the family unit and are surprized by their aggressive side. All dogs have aggression and big dogs have an even mix of aggressive and submissive traits which allow them to communicate with each other instead of tearing each other appart at the drop of a hat. Some are triggered to fear at a lower threshold and sometimes over unexpected things. People would prefer to overlook and not talk about or admit thier dogs could do bad things and therefore do not seek help. A snug sweater would be an easy fix for Brindi’s problem. I’m not guaranteeing it would work but it is not something the average dog owner knows about and the ACO gave the statement in court that “everthing had been tried”. I’m sure there are alot of other ideas out there. And, yes, Fran would have to be in listening mode. People on the defensive do not hear any better than dogs that are on the defensive. So good education and communication could be helpful to many dog owners. I had my last dog for 17.5 years and I thought I knew her pretty well. I wish I had read a few more books about dog behavior back then as I see there were some small changes I could have made that would have made a big difference to her quality of life. I don’t need to know Fran to know that I see the same pattern being played out over and over with dog owners and until public money gets spent on education and strong fences, the tragedy will be ongoing. A person doesn’t have to be perfect to deserve justice. A $200 fine would have been appropriate and may have prompted Fran to erect a fence sooner. And what ever happened to neighbours who help someone build a fence? The ACO acted inappropriately and not within the law and as a result Fran has been subjected to way more stress and insult than other dogs owners. She faught a law that was wrong and won in Supreme Court at an expense that other dogs owners are not likely to want or be able to repeat. I hope Brindi comes home to Fran and I hope Fran can get more help to give Brindi the freedoms she can handle and recognize and manage her limits to keep everone feeling safe.
    PS: A Yarmouth Toller (not sure about the spelling) is a Nova Scotian dog that is generally quite adorable and active. The one that went after me belonged to a friend of mine and I knew the dog from the time she was a puppy, just hadn’t seen her in a while and she hates cats. I now have cats and she was not expecting me to smell like one – surpize! Dr Jeckle and Mr. Hyde.

  20. tired of Gail (she rotts4ever) Says:
    June 9th, 2009 at 5:21 pm

    Brava, June!

    Since “Fran” (her name is Francesca, is it not?) was offering conditions and to pay fines from the very first day, I see that as taking responsibility.
    If you read her blog you will know she could not build a fence right away because her home was under renovation- the entire property has been dug up and there are huge boulders and piles of dirt all around the edges.
    I cringe every time Gail – she who rots forever – makes another false statement about how this owner didn’t care, had so many chances, etc.
    By my count, her dog got reported once for being loose (big deal in a rural area); once for attacking a dog on her property line (no injury) – and then muzzled for the next time, with a very minor injury (too small for stitches!).
    THen what? her next chance? She did not know there was a report and they just came and too her dog.

    Does not sound like a lot of chances to me. If she were a longtime neighbor none of these reports would have been made. Worse, far worse, things happen around there.
    And offering to pay a vet bill sounds like something a responsible person would do who cares about dogs and is making amends. Not seen very often in these parts, either!

    Why did that owner feel it necessary to call the animal control people, when she got “restitution” – and handsomely, with, as I understand it, a full medical exam?? Maybe she liked the free vet service so much she wanted more?? Didn’t her dog threaten Brindi long before anything happened on her property? Then it was not unprovoked, was it? – so who is really responsible? ? Why was this woman walking past Brindi’s house, knowing that her dog was aggressive to her?? Does Gail know that “truth”??

    I don’t know why Gail Gallant is posting all over the internet, every day, everywhere, against this person she doesn’t know, instead of actually rescuing dogs, as she claims she does (when??)

    It’s embarrassing to see a fellow Nova Scotian behaving like this and I am really tired of it! SO are a lot of others here. Give it a rest! PLEASE!!

  21. rotts4ever Says:
    July 29th, 2009 at 10:18 am

    LMAO you are so laughable. Nowhere does it state that ANYONE has to tell a dog owner who has proven not to be responsible after the first time with a dog running loose and not even licensed. Maybe if the TERRIBLE ACO issued her a fine then for that she would have smartened up…. then the first attack, the second attack oh wait… the third attack. How many times does it take? Oh and then cry foul when a person wants her dog that was attacked checked over for injuries that may not be seen right away…. Ohh right FRAN is a vet right. She checked the dog so there was no need for a vet. You have to get real.

    BTW I will post wherever I want and I have facts. I am not lead by the nose with her half truths and lies.

    If you are tired of me… how tired do you think people are of poor Brindi still in AC hands ( living at the shelter ) because of the stupidity. All the emails, faxes, fb postings, the whining, all the media reports and then cries because some people ( more and more) are seeing the truth are not supporting her and crying at her feet. Heck she can’t even follow conditions to see her dog once a week. So dearly, if you are tired of seeing me post… don’t come online where this story is. Tell your leader to stop posting and actually learn how to become a better dog owner, get her home done and get a real fence for Brindi. As it stands now she isn’t any better of an owner then the day Brindi was taken. So… you give it a rest and actually help her become a better owner. You may be surprised at the support she would get then.

  22. rotts4ever Says:
    July 29th, 2009 at 10:24 am

    Ohh and June…. there is no such thing as a Yarmouth Toller… they are Nova Scotia Duck Tollers. Thanks for your concern but no I am not burnt out, I am just sick of stupid people who’s dogs end up paying the price. If people REALLY cared about Brindi they would make sure FRAN did everything she could to be a better dog owner and her home “dog friendly”. Not with the hole in the closet floor that she got out through once before ( so her little ” fence” wouldn’t mean anything there would it?

  23. Willis Lund Says:
    May 29th, 2010 at 3:01 am

    If only more than 87 people would read this.

  24. rotts4ever Says:
    March 24th, 2011 at 8:07 am

    Ok, it’s been over a year since I updated what it happening. Rogier got her dog back and low and behold, the dog attacked again. Now the court gave Brindi back with an order to have muzzled at all times outside the home and outside the APPROVED fence( by AC ). That was in April of last year. Her dog was returned in July of 2010. Well less then 2 months, the dog was OUTSIDE the home and fence at a PARTY with no muzzle or leashed. Against COURT ORDERS. Then shortly after that, Brindi jumped out of Rogiers car window( no muzzle or leash ) and attacked another dog. The dog required a vet. Though not “major” wounds, the bite did break the skin. This was a smaller dog then Brindi. On top of this, Rogier called the HRM call center to talk to a friend of hers that worked there. She didn’t know the call(s) were being recorded ( as they all are )and said in the first call that Brindi attacked the other dog. Between Rogier and the ” operator friend” they filed a false report claiming the other dog attacked Brindi. For a few weeks Rogier hid the dog but was later seized. The next court date for this is now in Nov 2011.
    For those of you who has supported this woman and her lies, I am sorry to say, you are helping to put the needle in Brindi’s vein. Brindi should not die because of this irresponsible owner who feels no law pertains to her, that she is above the laws. Brindi is never in trouble when not in the care of Rogier. She is a very sweet girl who has now because of this owner spent more then half her life in a kennel. She refuses to allow Brindi to be rehomed and says they refuse(HRM) which is not the case. They refuse her demands on having contact / knowing where Brindi is.
    So people if you really and truely don’t want Brindi to die…. stop supporting Rogier and support BRINDI instead.

Comments



Dr. Andrew Jones, DVM
Help your pet and learn how to save money at the Veterinarian today
Get my Free eBook and Newsletter:

Dr. Andrew Jones' Top 10 Ways to Save Money at the Veterinarian
Enter your email and click the button below - and quickly learn simple ways to heal your pets at home and save money today:


I hate spam as much as you do - your information is 100% safe and will NOT be shared with anyone else. You can unsubscribe from my newsletter at any time.
[Close Box]