Fifteen dogs will now guard 3,000 sheep on a rural property near Delacour.
During a subdivision and development appeal committee meeting held in Rocky View County council chambers, Jan. 9, Ralph Poffenroth appealed a decision made last December to deny his permit application for more dogs on his property.
The application was denied because County regulations only allow a maximum of six dogs on a property.
“My sheep operation is greater than most so I have a greater problem,” said Poffenroth.
He said since October, he has lost 18 sheep to coyotes and he loses about 40 a year. He added about 25 per cent of his farm revenue comes from lambing and noted during heavy hail year (he has seen two in the last four years) his lambing operation makes up 50 to 75 per cent of his income.
Poffenroth said guard dogs are the best defence against coyotes. He said he has tried using poison, hiding the pills in sausages, but noted there is a danger of his dogs or neighbouring dogs ingesting the food.
He said unless the County had another solution on how to protect his flock, he saw no reason why he couldn’t have the dogs. Poffenroth noted other counties make allowances in their land-use bylaw for working dogs.
In total, 11 letters of support for Poffenroth were presented to the appeal committee. Three people who live nearby, were opposed. Those who were against the additional dogs claim the dogs run at large and attack other animals and neighbours.
Poffenroth rebutted these comments. He said he tries to balance the dogs’ temperament so they will guard well but not attack people. He said he sells sheep right off of his property and while the dogs bark, he has never seen them bare their teeth at people.
He currently has 12 dogs on his land but requested permission for another three if needed.
Councillor Earl Solberg, a member of the committee, suggested approving Poffenroth’s request but said more work needs to be done with the bylaw.
Under the land-use bylaw, there is no category dealing with working dogs. Poffenroth had to apply under a hobby-kennel license, which allows for six dogs on a property because it was the most closely related to his situation.
“There’s a flaw in the bylaw,” he said. “I am disturbed by the fact Rocky View prides itself (and says) we are dedicated to supporting agriculture, but doesn’t have a category to deal with working dogs.”
He opted to approve the permit that will expire in 2023 or six months after the operation ceases to exist if that happens before.
Solberg also asked to remove two clauses — the first requires dogs stay inside between 9 p.m. and 7 a.m. and the second requires dogs that cause a nuisance by barking have to be kept inside at all times.
Chair Margaret Bahcheli and Vice Chair Bruce Kendall supported Solberg’s motion. Committee member Omkar Channon opposed. He requested a friendly amendment to deal with noise but was defeated by the committee.
Kendall echoed Solberg’s concern and said this was an agriculture issue that needs to be more clearly defined in the land-use bylaw so this type of application doesn’t have to keep coming to the appeal board. He requested administration revisit this in an upcoming land-use-bylaw review.
“It’s been duly noted that the land-use bylaw falls short,” summed up Bahcheli, adding the issue will be brought forward at the next review of the bylaw.
