Dog control shouldn’t bark
Having just now returned from Okanagan Park’s off-leash dog park I remain more than just a little perturbed.
I go there regularly with our three-year-old Australian Shepherd and our seven-year-old miniature Pinscher.
They are well behaved dogs that are certified St.John Ambulance therapy dogs who visit Village by the Station every week.
Jasper the miniature Pinscher likes the social aspect with other dogs but does not like water he always stays close by and never wanders off.
Chloe, our Aussie, is the real water dog but is extremely food motivated with an incredible memory.
A couple of weeks ago someone disposed of a bag of dog food at the Penticton Creek’s opening into Okanagan Lake. Chloe remembers this spot well.
When she thinks it is safe to make a break for it she goes to look for possible leftovers.
This afternoon I was told by dog control that if I cannot control my dogs to stay in the dog park that I should leash them in the park.
Did I mention it was an off-leash dog park?
I politely said I would take my dogs elsewhere.
Chloe can round the fence in the water without getting her torso wet. Both our dogs are well controlled so I really wonder what chance there is for most dogs.
Any dog owner knows that if there is a small opening in a fence there may as well be no fence.
At least it should not be called an off leash dog park because it surely is not.
In May, my wife and I were at this very park where we heard a tourist warned by this same bylaw officer when his dog stuck his face out between the loosely closed vehicle entry gates.
The offending dog was very small six-pound ball of fluff and was on leash. Since this time we have both consoled other tourists and dog owners upset with this same lack of tact and sensibility.
I have not witnessed any dog at any time at this park being a danger to anyone and if dog control really wants to be a service to the community they should be ticketing those dog owners that do not pick up after their dogs or possess a current license.
I have asked many a dog owner to pick up after their pet but they do not seem to think it is their responsibility.
In my opinion this is a much more worthwhile endeavour than harassing tourists and dog owners alike or working with the city to make sure the off leash dog park is properly fenced off to avoid these situations.
Bruce Neufeld
Penticton
*****
B.C. ambassador appreciates support
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the city of Penticton for supporting me throughout my candidacy for British Columbia ambassador.
I am proud to be one of the three newly crowned 2013 British Columbia ambassadors.
This journey has helped me overcome obstacles and injuries I received from a recent car accident, and I am very proud of my accomplishments.
I am very honoured to be from such a kind-hearted community. Thank you to everyone who helped me along this journey.
Camelia Vokey
B.C. Ambassador 2013
*****
Harper avoiding issues
Is Stephen Harper heading for the closet again?
This time it’s the Senate, and not knowing what to do about it, what better action than to prorogue Parliament.
To be fair, this time it is a lot more complicated.
In Bev Oda’s case he was dealing with only one person and a single issue that ended with the Conservative government losing a vote of confidence, and being found in contempt of Parliament.
This time at least four Senators are involved, and while he was procrastinating, the matter slipped out of his hands and is now with the RCMP.
Having admitted to having perused Senator Wallin’s spending and expressed an element of comfort with her claims, the optics are not good.
The larger issue is the future of the Senate.
In its present form the Senate can only stall legislation, and only for six months.
To be truly effective, our Senate needs the same legislative authority as the U.S. Senate, which can propose, amend and defeat legislation, and by being able to do so provide much needed balance to the House of Representatives, which is the equivalent to our House of Commons.
The tricky part for Harper is how to handle the process of determining whether we keep the Senate, change the role of the Senate, or eliminate it.
Will he acknowledge that we are still a colony and exercise his colonial powers to implement his decision or, will he insist that we are a democracy and let the people decide, by means of a binding national referendum?
Trying to unload it onto the courts is completely irrational, and just another cop-out.
Andy Thomsen
Summerland
