tybrax Posted October 10, 2008 Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 Edition B - MainFRI 10 OCT 2008, Page 007 New Bill has few teeth for savage dogs Back to the bad old days as changes loosen leash By by Geoff Chambers council reporter DANGEROUS cross-bred dogs, including the notorious American pitbull terrier, could be allowed to run free on the Gold Coast under new state laws. Council heavies are perplexed by plans to overhaul the Animal Management (Cats and Dogs) Bill, which would weaken restrictions on dangerous dogs. The changes would make it tougher for council officers to keep track of pure-bred and cross-bred dogs and leave the council in the dark on the declaration of dangerous dogs. Dog owners could also cop bigger infringement fines, with a ..wandering at large' charge increasing from $75 to $220 and dangerous dog fines increasing from $375 to $1760. Robina councillor and pet expo convener Jan Grew said the victims of dog attacks would be ..outraged' if the relaxation was adopted. An animal lover, Cr Grew revealed that she and her Jack Russell dog had been involved in an attack this week. She said the proposed Bill would remove the ability to prohibit restricted dogs and those dog owners would be able to undermine the system, similar to the ..bad old days'. ....These mooted changes would be horrendous for any person who has been involved in a dog attack,'' said Cr Grew. ....They would be sickened and appalled by this piece of legislation. ....The community expects that council delivers a stringent animal management service and to change this would be outrageous. ....I was involved in a dog attack with my Jack Russell and we need to keep check on what dogs are out there and the types of owners allowed to keep these dogs. '' Council CEO Dale Dickson will write to Local Government Minister Warren Pitt outlining the councillors' fears about the Bill including the removal of cross-breeds from the restricted dog list and the removal of the prohibition on restricted dogs being kept and sold. Mr Dickson will also ask the State Government to re-consider its fine increases because dog owners responded better to smaller fines. Councillors have told The Bulletin they are worried that the State Government will ignore their concerns. In 2004, there were 550 attacks by dogs on the Coast but that figure has dropped dramatically over the years. Mayor Ron Clarke said attacks on humans have also dramatically dropped since the banning of dangerous breeds. ....It is not a question of just limiting this to pure breeds. It is the cross- breeds that are the real worry,'' he said. ....From what officers tell me they are the big problem and the most dangerous. There is no pure-bred registry. ....So basically according to this Bill, there are no restrictions on breeding, keeping or on-selling of these dogs. '' He said dogs including the pitbull and savage cross-breeds must be included in any restricted dog list. Council officers would also be removed by the Bill from the process of declaring a dangerous dog. The Bill supports a blanket approach, where officers would not look at attacks on a ..case by case' basis. ....This is just another case of bureaucracy gone mad,'' said Cr Clarke. GO THE FOUR MOUSEKETEERS TYBRAX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melp Posted October 10, 2008 Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 Hiya Does your area keep a record of dog attacks by breed? if so do you happen to know what the top 10 breeds are for attacks? Personally I think an increase in fines is a good idea. Of course people respond better to smaller fines-they can afford to let their dogs cause problems I dont get the bit about pure breeds and cross breeds. What do they think PBT's are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave the dog Posted October 10, 2008 Report Share Posted October 10, 2008 DANGEROUS cross-bred dogs, including the notorious American pitbull terrier, could be allowed to run free on the Gold Coast under new state laws. Council heavies are perplexed by plans to overhaul the Animal Management (Cats and Dogs) Bill, which would weaken restrictions on dangerous dogs. The changes would make it tougher for council officers to keep track of pure-bred and cross-bred dogs and leave the council in the dark on the declaration of dangerous dogs. They are all dogs for pities sake! Pure bred v Cross bred? The dogs don't care about their parentage, only humans seem to put any value on that. I love my GSD's but I don't care if they don't have a pedigree! Dog owners could also cop bigger infringement fines, with a ..wandering at large' charge increasing from $75 to $220 and dangerous dog fines increasing from $375 to $1760. Erm, Doesn't that rather go against the first sentence? We don't have another example of media or political misreporting here, do we? Surely not! Robina councillor and pet expo convener Jan Grew said the victims of dog attacks would be ..outraged' if the relaxation was adopted. An animal lover, Cr Grew revealed that she and her Jack Russell dog had been involved in an attack this week. She said the proposed Bill would remove the ability to prohibit restricted dogs and those dog owners would be able to undermine the system, similar to the ..bad old days'. ....These mooted changes would be horrendous for any person who has been involved in a dog attack,'' said Cr Grew. ....They would be sickened and appalled by this piece of legislation. ....The community expects that council delivers a stringent animal management service and to change this would be outrageous. ....I was involved in a dog attack with my Jack Russell and we need to keep check on what dogs are out there and the types of owners allowed to keep these dogs. '' Council CEO Dale Dickson will write to Local Government Minister Warren Pitt outlining the councillors' fears about the Bill including the removal of cross-breeds from the restricted dog list and the removal of the prohibition on restricted dogs being kept and sold. Mr Dickson will also ask the State Government to re-consider its fine increases because dog owners responded better to smaller fines. (I agree with Melp) Councillors have told The Bulletin they are worried that the State Government will ignore their concerns. In 2004, there were 550 attacks by dogs on the Coast but that figure has dropped dramatically over the years. Mayor Ron Clarke said attacks on humans have also dramatically dropped since the banning of dangerous breeds. (If the 'banning of dangerous breeds' was so successful, why the panic, surely there is no longer a 'dangerous breed' problem?) ....It is not a question of just limiting this to pure breeds. It is the cross- breeds that are the real worry,'' he said. They might bring down the tone of the neighbourhood! (Sorry for being flippant (No I'm not)) ....From what officers tell me they are the big problem and the most dangerous. There is no pure-bred registry. Being on a Registry stops dogs being dangerous? What do they do, sign an ASBO contract! ....So basically according to this Bill, there are no restrictions on breeding, keeping or on-selling of these dogs. '' He said dogs including the pitbull and savage cross-breeds must be included in any restricted dog list. "and savage cross breeds" Wow there is an open door for some people! Council officers would also be removed by the Bill from the process of declaring a dangerous dog. The Bill supports a blanket approach, where officers would not look at attacks on a ..case by case' basis. Surely if they are moving away from BSL then all cases would have to be on a case by case basis. This one sentence seems to contradict both sides. My head hurts........ ....This is just another case of bureaucracy gone mad,'' said Cr Clarke. From the same forum:http://www.pets.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=671495#post671495 "OMG! Bureaucracy must be going mad if they are actually considering passing a bill that not only addresses the issue - dogs running at large - but actually looks at attacks on a case by case basis!! Imagine - people actually being fined for having dogs that attack while running loose on the streets! Can it be true!?" I can't find the Bill via Google so can't really make any informed comments apart from the slight sarcasm above. Perhaps others will have more luck. If it is a move away from BSL and towards case by case judgements based on the deed and background then I would be impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tybrax Posted October 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2008 Why the Change? Civil Action. http://www.premiers.qld.gov.au/About_the_d...ty/misfeasance/ The Bill. http://www.cairns.qld.gov.au/content/counc...p&e_cl6.pdf Hi Melp l do have stats from a couple years ago, l will see if l can get an update. Chrissie aka tybrax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave the dog Posted October 13, 2008 Report Share Posted October 13, 2008 Thanks tybrax, I'll have a look at that later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts