Survey For Dangerous Dog Legislation On Vic Dpi

[Erny]

I believe it is up to the individuals involved and council should only step in if requested.

I agree. And that formed part of my answer to the State Government.

I hope your daughter healed both physically and mentally after the incident. Would have been frightening for all.

[Odin-Genie]

Should medical practitioners or hospitals be required to report any dog bites to the Government Chief Medical Officer or the Police or Councils?

Erny I said yes to this. The reason being that it will help give a more accurate picture of bite statistics. Yes, you will still get breed bias to some degree when it comes to identifying the breed responsible, but it will capture the incidents of owners' dogs biting family members a lot better than currently recorded when people go to the emergency dept of hospitals. With a lot of dog bites people tend to go to their GP and that data is lost. It is possible that it will help balance some of the media hype surrounding dog bites.

I understand, Grumpette. That's why I deliberated about it. But, as the survey was going to kick me out if I didn't complete it in 15 minutes (because it had sat static), I answered "No".

My reasoning behind this is that EVERY dog bite stat recorded is a nail in dogs' coffins and there are many a times when the bite does not equate to an aggressive dog. For example, a dog who suffers a pencil being thrust down its ear cannal by a child; a dog who I might have worked with for the very reason that it was a bit snappy (leadership) and before behaviour modification had the opportunity to be effective, snapped me and caught my hand or whatever - I'd class that as "my fault" and whilst I might need a stitch or two, would not class that as something the dog or dogs in general should be tainted with. Another example would be one from when my own boy was a titchy pup with needle point sharp teeth. He and I made the mistake of heading for a crash course (accidentally). It was only an accident that his mouth was open as he went for a toy. It was only an accident that I bent down in his 'line' and his tooth caught my lip. It opened it up but fortunately didn't need stitches. If it did, then this potentially would have had to have been reported as a "dog bite" if this law was in.

I possibly wouldn't mind as much if we could have the equivalent of stats which indicated when dogs have been good - maybe that would weigh the balance a bit better.

I answered "No" to this as well for the same reasons. If all dog bites have to be reported, it would be the dog that would suffer the consequences, whatever the situation may be. It should be up to the individual.

[Silvawilow]

Should medical practitioners or hospitals be required to report any dog bites to the Government Chief Medical Officer or the Police or Councils?

Erny I said yes to this. The reason being that it will help give a more accurate picture of bite statistics. Yes, you will still get breed bias to some degree when it comes to identifying the breed responsible, but it will capture the incidents of owners' dogs biting family members a lot better than currently recorded when people go to the emergency dept of hospitals. With a lot of dog bites people tend to go to their GP and that data is lost. It is possible that it will help balance some of the media hype surrounding dog bites.

I answered the same Grupmette and put basically the same as you've said here. I don't think the headline "Family's SWF attacks toddler" is a eye cather, although with current trends they'll probably still focus on the "bigger" dogs

[tybrax]

http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/newsroom/9200.html

COMMUNITY VIEWS SOUGHT IN BID TO STAMP OUT DOG ATTACKS

From the Minister for Agriculture

Friday, 15 January 2010

The Brumby Labor Government will seek the views of the community as it

prepares to introduce legislation to toughen laws around dangerous dogs.

Visiting the Nillumbik Regional Pound today, Agriculture Minister Joe Helper

said the Government was launching an online survey to ensure any proposed

dangerous dogs legislation meets community expectations.

“The Brumby Labor Government understands the community wants a tough stance to reduce dog attacks and that’s why we are making changes to the laws around

dangerous dogs,” Mr Helper said.

“We have taken action to toughen legislation in recent years but clearly the

message needs to be reinforced that owning a dog is an important responsibility that comes with conditions.

“In 2005, the Government introduced laws to stop the breeding of dangerous and

restricted breed dogs, including pit bulls. We also doubled the penalties for

irresponsible dog owners in 2007.

“But we have seen an unacceptable number of dog attacks in the community in

the last 12 months. There are too many people flouting existing laws by not

registering their dogs, or not ensuring dangerous dogs are suitably restrained.

“To those people we say the net is closing in and their irresponsible

behaviour will simply not be tolerated.”

Mr Helper said the new laws would further toughen penalties but also give

local councils more powers in dealing with unregistered and dangerous dogs.

“Proposed changes to the legislation would remove the right of appeal for

owners and allow council officers more time to focus on the job of keeping

dangerous dogs off Victorian streets,” Mr Helper said.

“We need to give councils greater power so they can operate more effectively

in stopping dangerous dog attacks.

“The survey launched today asks important questions of the community such as

whether they feel councils should be able to immediately seize and destroy

unregistered dangerous dogs found at large.”

Other survey questions include:

• If a stray dog is suspected by a council officer to be a danger to the

public by virtue of its size, breed or disposition and it is also not

registered – should councils have the power to immediately seize and destroy

the dog?

• If a dog has already been declared a “dangerous dog” by a council and it

is found at large should councils be able to seize it and immediately destroy it?

• Should there be a penalty for possession of an unregistered dog and what

should that penalty be?

• Should medical practitioners or hospitals be required to report any dog

bites to the Government Chief Medical Officer or the Police or Councils?

• Should restricted breed (such as pit bull) owners be able to keep their

animal only if its de-sexed and muzzled when off the property and registered

or should they all be destroyed?

The Government is planning to introduce its dangerous dog legislation into

Parliament later in 2010.

Mr Helper said the survey would be available by visiting www.dpi.vic.gov.au

and would be open until Monday, 15 February, 2010.

tybrax

[Cosmolo]

I answered no to the mandatory reportingof dog bites for the same reasons Erny mentions.