Woolwich & Wellesley Township's Local Community Newspaper | Elmira, Ontario, Canada
Get notified of breaking news and more in the community.

Sign up for The Weekly. A Round up of the most important stories of the week, Breaking News and additional exclusive content just for subscribers.

St. Jacobs neighbours want township to act on suspect pit bull-cross

Suspecting the dog that came with a new family in their neighbourhood is a pit bull-cross, some St. Jacobs residents want quick action from the township.

The dog attacked a rabbit hutch on the property next door, with one of the animals having to be euthanized. Owners Todd and Melissa Metzger had contacted Woolwich officials in the spring when the new neighbours moved in, expressing concerns the dog appeared to be a pit bull-cross. Pit bulls have been ostensibly banned in the province since 2005.

Melissa Metzger said her concerns were dismissed by the township. Since the attack in August, Woolwich bylaw enforcement staff has launched an investigation, but has not been responsive to the couple’s request for an update. Nor is the township following its own guidelines that seem to indicate the owners should be forced to muzzle the dog even while the investigation continues, she added.

She and other neighbours who were out in support appeared at Woolwich council Tuesday night to express fears the dog might harm one of their children.

The Metzgers, for instance, have four kids, foster others and run a home daycare.

“Please don’t make us wait for a dog to attack one of our children before you do anything,” she said, noting the dog remains unmuzzled and is not always on a leash, with no fencing separating most of the large yards in the area.

Natasha Felder, the dog’s owner, said she and her husband are willing to make reparations, but argued that muzzling isn’t necessary. She challenged assertions the dog is a pit bull-cross, adding that the neighbours are welcome to come talk to them directly.

“We’ve done everything that we possibly can as a tenant. We are not looking to escalate this any further,” she said.

Coun. Mark Bauman suggested that the dog be leashed at all times when it’s outside, as the neighbours need assurances that their kids are going to be safe while playing outdoors.

“On their behalf, I’m asking you right now,” he said of keeping the dog leashed for the neighbours’ sake.

“Dogs will do things on their own. They have their own minds,” he said, pointing out that an animal can act in the moment, despite its owner.

Coun. Murray Martin asked Felder if she’d considered getting rid of the dog, suggesting that might be the best solution.

“If that dog ever gets hold of a child, you would wish that you would have got rid of him.”

Felder said she has considered that option.

Coun. Patrick Merlihan, saying he empathizes with the neighbours, called for the issue to be dealt with in a timely manner.

“I really hope this investigation can get moved along.”

Chief administrative officer David Brenneman said he would keep councillors apprised of developments ahead of the next meeting in October.

  1. Seems in the article only thing from the owner was that she thought I’m getting rid of her dog nothing more. It is one sided and not very fair. You can say all you want that it isn’t but anyone reading it can plainly see it is one sided. The reporter needs to talk to the owner more and get her side better.

  2. From what I understand the dog just wanted to play with the rabbit. The rabbit could have been treated instead of being euthanized if the owner’s were available.

  3. Would be interested to know if you got both sides of the story? Seems very one sided to me, and not very responsible journalism.

    1. Thanks for your comment. We would ask that you read the article again. Both dog owner, neighbours and Councillor views were clearly articulated within the story. Should new information arise from the investigation The Observer will provide readers an update.

      1. I have read the article very fully, and as a dog owner I am disgusted by your bias. What is to say that a racoon or other animal did not create that hole? Was their solid proof provided the dog made that hole?

        Is it not true that Melissa allowed her children to play with this “viscous” animal? Is it not true that Natasha and her husband both offered multiple times to fix the cage? Also, is it not true that at the town meeting Melissa was heard saying that in April 2017 when the Felder’s moved in she called by law immediately to ask that the animal be muzzled? This to me would show a clear bias on any large muscly dog that could even be mistaken as a pitbull. How come these facts were not presented? Shame on you for your shoddy reporting!!!

        I live in the community and know that this couple has a one year old child and the dog interacts with grace, patience and is well trained around the child. I also know that this couple understand he is a wild animal and always do their part as responsible pet owners. Did you check these facts?

        Shame on you.

Comments are closed.

Previous Article

Kings start season winless

Next Article
First of new heritage plaques go to old township hall, bandstand in Elmira

First of new heritage plaques go to old township hall, bandstand in Elmira

Related Posts
observerxtra.com uses cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. See Cookie Policy.