sumosmum

I disagree with the new laws. Doesn't mention anything about a temperament test! This is for a dog that has no collar and no chip. Don't forget, collars fall off, can be taken off by other people, and chips can get missed. "Clause 23 inserts new sections into the Act that allow for Councils to destroy a dog that is not registered and the owner is not identifiable, that is at large and that is reasonably believed to have caused or is likely to cause an offence under section 29 (attacking or biting a person or animal, or rushing at or chasing any person). If all of these preconditions are met, Councils may destroy the dog no sooner than 48 hours after a record is made by an authorised officer." So, from what I gather from the above quote, if the council thinks the dog may attack or rush at a person or animal if it were lose, then they can to destroy it within 48hours. Keep in mind, to get to this point, they would already have the dog in custody. Why can't they just keep it for the 8 days. It can't do any harm if it is already locked up! Too many ifs, thinks and mays for my liking! So, what IF the chip is missed when the dog is scanned.

My highlights. Who is the "Hugh" that the ANKC "CC'd" their emails to? Please tell me it is not Hugh Wirth. Please. It wouldn't be. No. Would it?

So, do you have to have a papered purebreed dog to be a member of the Companion Dog Club that is mentioned on the Dogs Victoria website? I have just found the answer to that question. The website states, What is Companion Dog Club? The club provides pedigree and non-pedigree dogs and their owners with a club that will promote and appreciate the uniqueness of all types and breeds of dogs. It also recognizes that each one of our canine friends is in a class of its own and a companion in its own right. As a member of the Companion Dog Club you and your dog will receive a number of benefits that encourage responsible dog ownership and welfare from within your own community. So, I take it that any of these owners of dogs that are members of this Companion Dog Club could also have their dogs at risk with the standard that is to be written? Because, the dogs in this club do not need to be purebred dogs! Is that correct?

Thank you Kylielou. I find it absurd that they can pass a Bill, make it an Act and not disclose what the rules actually are. It is like saying to some one, "Lets play a game, I won't tell you the rules, but if you break my rules I will penalize you, and I am going to make the rules up as we go." Seems to be a favourite strategy at the moment! Well, seems like our Laws come into being on 1st September, so they have about 9 days to "know where to go"....... I know where I would like to tell them to go.

Million dollar questions! They are all pissing in each others pockets. ETA, While Vic Government has been brought up, is anyone able to show me what the Breed Standard is that they they mention in the new Victorian Law to identify a Restricted Breed and crossbreeds? Are they writing their own "Standard" with the help of Vic Dogs, and if so, where is it? I hope that isn't a silly question, but I see it mentioned in the Act, but can't actually find The Standard anywhere! If someone could actually point me in the right direction to find it, that would be great. Is it another checklist type deal?

I think they need a Fair Go For Responsible Pet Owners Party. Ok Erny, we have a few years to prepare for it.

He looks like a Sumo in that photo doesn't he. It isn't a very good photo, it was from my daughters phone. He doesn't look like that really in person/dog. Erny, I know, I was wondering the same thing about all the minor parties. There were loads of them I had never heard of!

Good on you Erny. Glad to hear they will be still trying if they get the votes. Well, they are getting my vote. I will be putting Labour and Liberal down the bottom, the Greens up the top, and the others in the middle. Adza-baby, I agree. If I remember correctly, I think the Greens or someone mentioned that during the Parliamentary discussions, about most attacks being from a dog within the home or owned by someone known to the person or child that was attacked. The whole argument for the Bill was a load of rubbish really. And it amazes me that there always seems to be so much media when a dog is involved in some drama, however, there was nothing in the media about the Bill going through or the fact that it comes into being on the 1st September. The did get a lot of mail from people objecting to the Bill, but I feel there would have been a lot more, if more people knew it even existed and what was really in it.

That is great news. Well done little Charlie. You are a great owner. You have taken such wonderful care of him. Well done to you too. I am so pleased for you.

If you go to the link below, to the Research Brief for the Bill, you may find it easier to understand. It contains the information and explanations. Also shows who supported the new Laws. A long read, but shows more. I found the Brief easier than reading the DAA Amendment 2010 in conjunction with the Domestic Animals Act 1994.... to hard going from one to the other. I will still post a link to the Domestic Animals Amendment 2010 and Domestic Animals Act 1994. Think I have all of that correct, please let me know if I have that wrong or if the links don't work. Research Brief DAA 2010 Bill Domestic Animals Act 1994 Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Act 2010 Hope that helps baciandollie76.

They just did not want to listen at all Mita. Really poor show for government, I think. They actually received an overwhelming amount of letters of disapproval from what I have heard, but it became apparent that they were going to push this through no matter what was suggested or said. Very disappointing.

Irresponsible owners and the media brought this on. In the research brief behind the actual law, they used media reports to back up their research. Just goes to show how damaging it is. Also, when they report a pit bull as attacking someone or something, a lot of the time the media gets the breed wrong. This has just strengthened BSL. I also think the sensational way they report it has a lot to do with it. However, the media failed to report the fact that this law was going through the legislative process, therefore a lot of people did not seem to get a chance to object to it. hmmm... They are now going to use some "standard" to id crossbreed restricted dogs as well. It may be some sort of checklist like the one used in Qld. This standard is mentioned in the Law, and in the research brief, but I can't find exactly what the "standard" actually is that they will be using. Does anyone else know for certain what the "standard" actually is? They, the Premier and his mob, wanted to look like they care about the safety of the community. They may care, but they have gone about this the wrong way. Also, Dogs Victoria supported this Bill. The research brief in the attached link shows who was all for this to become a law. Vic Dog Law Research Brief There is nothing that can be done about it at the moment. Only thing that people in Victoria can do is to try to be heard with their vote when we have our elections in November. Labour and Liberal both voted for this to be passed. Both thought it was a good idea. The Greens tried to have it amended.

A lot of people are unaware of these new laws. Apparently they are in from 1st Sep. The first knowledge a lot of people will have of the new laws will probably when they get in trouble for breaking them. The whole process was disgusting, and they were not going to listen to anyone. The Labour and Liberal parties were all determined to get this through. Even certain MPs who think the new laws are dreadful would not stand up and voice how they really felt. I am just disgusted in the whole thing. This is very scary stuff, and everyone should read and know what is going on. Expect a rise in registration fees next year. We will be paying for these new laws. To the Organisations and clubs who backed this Bill, shame on you. You make me sick. You have sold owners, dogs and cats out over this.

Double

No, they aren't joking unfortunately. :D Thanks for the link.

Is there any news regarding this please?

This is a link to the Proof Version of debate from yesterday, 12 August 2010 on the Bill. It appears that Sue Pennicuick (The Greens) had another shot at amending the part about killing a stray dog within the 24-48hour time(under certain circumstances), and again was unsuccessful.........in answering her, Pakula stated that in these circumstances the dog had already committed an act of attacking prior to this time. He got that totally wrong. She was not talking about a dog that was already declared dangerous, she was talking about any dog. You would think that he would at least know the facts in a Bill that his own party had put forward. Sue Pennicuick did correct him on that matter, but I doubt it even sunk in. They just were not prepared to listen at all. She also tried to have the part about the scientific use of pound animals removed from the Bill. Again unsuccessful. During her speech she suggested better regulation on the supply side, in terms of puppy farms, and point of sale. I am pleased that she at least tried to get the point across. It is all in the link below. I am glad she tried to have a few things changed in this Bill. I am so sorry that she didn't succeed. It seems to me that the rest of them in Parliament are just hell bent on killing more dogs. That seems to be their answer to the problems. That is how I am seeing it at the moment anyway. So, we will have the new laws and I suppose we will just have to deal with them. Expect a rise in the registration fees next year. I feel this will be the first a lot of the public will know about the new Laws. Most people I have spoken to who are not members of DOL, have no idea that this law has been going through Parliament, apart from the fact they have no idea of how serious the changes are, and how they and their pets may be effected. On a personal note, for the first time ever, I have now decided to change my vote and the Greens have won me over this time. At least they tried. I don't agree with all of their beliefs, but on this matter, they have won me over. I had sent a lot of letters to the MPs and I only received answers or acknowledgments from the Greens, Nationals and the Libs. Nothing at all in writing from the Labour Party. I had spoken to some of the Labour MPs in person as well, but got nothing in writing from them! Seems they were going to push this through no matter what was said or done. Hansard (Proof Version) DAA 2010 Upper House 12/08/10 Edited for spelling

Parliament is sitting this week, starting today, and the Bill is listed as no. 3 in the Orders of the Day under todays date. I don't know when it will be on, but will try to post if I hear anything happening. Link to Notice Papers You can click on today's date which will bring up the Notice Paper for today. The Orders of the day are on page 5 of the windows version of the document. This is the link to listen to the Legislative Council live. Parliament Live Broadcast

Hopefully,they will be home for the weekend? Thanks for the update.

Yep, and I reckon that is fair enough too. They have no reason for holding these dogs any longer. ETA, The last date on the letter says to return the dogs by end of 02jul10. Should read 02aug10 I think!

Great news! Hope that there is some help for Charlie. Good on you for not giving up. You are a fantastic owner. :D

kylielou, thank you to you guys for putting in all the time and effort. It takes so much to fight things like this, and being a fight against Government and Councils, makes it even harder. This must have taken a huge chunk out of your lives. So pleased that some progress has been made. We in Victoria will hopefully also benefit from the progress you have made, when our new laws will come into effect next April. Looks like we are heading for some sort of check sheet down here. I hope that Tango will be back where he belongs very soon. With the dogs that are being held pending this second DNA test.........I think this is almost like theft! They seem to be stalling, because they are trying to decide what to do next. Good on you all. I appreciate what you are doing, and I am sure a lot of people would have, indeed have given up long ago. Throwing in the towel means losing. At least to keep fighting means there is a chance of winning. :D

Oh Ruth, so sorry. Thinking of you and your family. Very sad for you. Hugs to you from our family. RIP Ivan. Lovely boy.

Congratulations to all involved, and well done. A long fight, and so hard. Good on everyone who has stuck with it, and battled on when so many have given up.