|Canada - Saskatchewan - Dangerous Animals||S.S. 2005, c. M-36.1, s. 374 - 380||This set of laws comprises the Saskatchewan, Canada dangerous animal laws. Under the Act, any person who owns an animal for the purpose of fighting, or trains, torments, badgers, baits or otherwise uses an animal for the purpose of causing or encouraging the animal to make unprovoked attacks on persons or domestic animals is guilty of an offence. In addition, a peace officer or designated officer may destroy any animal that he or she finds injuring or viciously attacking a person or a domestic animal. The Act outlines the actions that result in an animal being declared dangerous (i.e., chased a person in a vicious or threatening manner, bit a person or domestic animal without provocation, etc.) and the procedure to declare such an animal dangerous.||Statute|
|Canada - Saskatchewan - Dangerous Dog Law||SS 2005, c M-36.1, 374-380||This set of Saskatchewan, Canada laws comprises the Dangerous Dog laws.||Statute|
|Canada - Saskatchewan - Northern Municipailities Act (dangerous animal)||S.S. 1983, c. N-5.1, s. 100 - 100.09||SS 2010, c N-5.2||
Dangerous Dog Laws for Saskatchewan's Northern Municipalities
|Canada - Saskatchewan - The Animal Protection Act||S.S. 1999, c. A-21.1, s. 1 - 28||
This set of laws comprises the Saskatchewan Animal Protection Act. Under the Act, no person responsible for an animal shall cause or permit the animal to be or to continue to be in distress. The Act also outlines the powers of humane societies to rescue animals in distress and then sell, give away, or euthanize such animals if the owners cannot be located. A person who contravenes the Act is guilty of an offence with a fine of not more than $25,000, to imprisonment for not more than two months or to both for a first offence;  Further, in addition to any other penalty imposed, if a person responsible for an animal is found guilty, the court may make an order prohibiting that person from owning or having custody or control of any animal for a period specified by the court. Section 20 of the Act outlines the provisions relating to damage or injury done by dogs.
|Canada - Yukon Statutes - Dog Act||R.S.Y. 2002, c. 59||This set of laws comprises the Yukon Dog Act. The law provides that an owner must keep his or her dog fed and watered and not punish it to an extent that is cruel or unnecessary. Dogs found at large contrary to the Act are impounded for a period of five days for owners to reclaim them. The Act also states that a person may kill a dog that is running at large in the act of pursuing, worrying, injuring or destroying cattle, horses, sheep, pigs or poultry.||Statute|
|Canada - Yukon Statutes. Animal Protection Act||R.S.Y. 2002, c. 6, s. 1 - 14||This set of laws comprises the Yukon, Canada Animal Protection Act. The Act provides that no person shall cause or allow an animal to be in distress. Any person who contravenes this Act is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than $500 and, in default of payment, to imprisonment up to six months, or to both fine and imprisonment. A judge may also prohibit a person convicted of an offence under the Act from owning an animal or from having charge of an animal for any specified time period. The Act also outlines the power of peace officers to seize animals in distress as well as those powers of humane societies to provide care for such animals.||Statute|
|Canada's Anti-Cruelty Laws||Jessica Pask||
Brief Summary of Canada's Anti-Cruelty Laws
|Canada's Dangerous Dog Law||Jacquelyn Shaw||
Brief Summary of Canada's Dangerous Dog Laws
|Canadian Animal Anti-Cruelty Legislation||Charles Hall||Animal Legal & Historical Center||
This paper examines the substance and history of animal anti-cruelty law in Canada. In doing so, it discusses the controversy surrounding the last amendments to the existing law (Bill C-50) introduced in parliament last year.
|Dangerous Dogs in Canadian Law||Jacquelyn A. Shaw||Animal Legal & Historical Center||
This detailed legal discussion focuses on the Canadian legal approaches to dog-related injuries. The traditional common law doctrines of scienter and negligence are discussed, and compared with the legislative approaches of Canada's provinces and territories as well as Canadian federal criminal law. The article also discusses the similarities and differences between Canada's and the United States' incidence of dog-related injuries and some possible reasons for the differences.