Rules loosened, but dog owners unhappy
By SALINA KHALID

Metro, 24 Dec 2005

ONLY the disabled in Shah Alam can keep Rottweilers, not able-bodied people. The Shah Alam City Council (MBSA) is willing to go easy on the blanket ruling to ban Rottweilers in the city after considering the need for such a breed among the disabled community. However, the others can't keep the dog, nor can they keep the other breeds in the council's blacklist.  

“The handicapped depend on Rottweilers for assistance,'' deputy Shah Alam mayor Za'ba Che Rus said at a dialogue session with dog owners at 

He was speaking at the dialog session with the Shah Alam dog owners Wisma MBSA on Tuesday.  

Organised by the Malaysian Association for Responsible Pet Ownership (Marpo), Selangor branch, 50 people, including MBSA officials, dog owners, veterinary services department officials and representatives from non-governmental organisations, attended the session.  

Za'ba (second from right) and Licensing Department director Rosli Bakar listening to the problems of pet owners at Tuesday's dialogue.

Most pet owners disagreed with the adjusted ruling. They want the able-bodied people to also be allowed to keep Rottweilers and that no dogs should be banned from homes. 

Za'ba said a special committee would be set up to look into the issue closely. He said it would consist of representatives from the council, dog owners' associations, veterinary services and police.  

The committee, he said, would conduct more dialogues to work out a better guidelines for dog owners and their neighbours. 

Earlier, the city council had announced additional rules for dog owners. These included getting written permission from their immediate neighbours prior to obtaining a dog's licence.  

Owners must pay a RM50 processing fee and RM20 for the licence. 

Applicants are required to submit a photograph of their dogs, the kennel and their house compounds.  

A health certificate, issued by a veterinarian, must be submitted with each application.  

Those who stay in bungalows or semi-detached houses will be allowed to keep two dogs, but the others can only keep one. A sign to show the presence of a dog in a premise must be displayed. Beside Rottweilers, the other dogs banned by the council are the Akitas, American Bulldogs, Dogo Argentinos, Fila Brazileiros, Japanese Tosas, Neopolitan Mastiffs and Pit Bull Terriers. 

Under the Dog Licensing By-Law (1982), offenders can be fined up to RM1,000 or serve a jail term of not more than six months. The ruling takes effect on Jan 1.  

Dogs are not allowed on public playgrounds and recreational parks. If their owners flout this ruling, they can be fined a maximum RM300. (Dogs used by security companies are excluded from this ruling). 

In its earlier reports, the city council had required owners of banned dogs to surrender their pets immediately. However, now they are allowed to keep them until the dogs die.  

The dialogue was part of Marpo's efforts in voicing out its objection to the ruling. It holds on to the belief that “it is everyone's right to own a pet.''“We insist that pet owners be consulted when laws involving their animals are drafted out to help arrive at an effective and pragmatic approach to better pet management,'' said Marpo pro tem president Dr Jon S. Satyamoorthy. “Everybody should be entitled to a pet, regardless of whether it is a dog or a cat.” Marpo has garnered more than 10,000 signatures, mostly residents in Shah Alam and Subang Jaya, who objected to the ruling.  

Dr Jon said he was disappointed by the outcome of the dialogue. “It did not meet our objectives nor was the ruling scraped,'' he said.  

In response, Za'ba said 70% of Shah Alam's 450,000-strong population were Malays. “As such the city council has to consider their sensitivity, especially in the religious context,'' he said. 

“This is not only in the case of keeping dogs, but also in other matters including the call for prayers (Azan) for the non-Muslims.'' 

Za'ba said the city council was awaiting a comprehensive guideline over the keeping of dog from the Housing and Local Government Ministry, which then would be applicable nationwide. Currently each local authority has its own set of ruling on the matter. 

“For now we have to abide by the existing rule.''