City Of Wyndham Proposed Ban On Dogs Barking At Front Boundaries

[wolfgirl]

Why would anyone keep their dog in a frontyard anyway? Wouldn't a dog be safer out of sight?

Maybe that was the case years ago but now our particular area has gone downhill, lots of gangs of different nations roaming around and although we live in a quiet court we do get many cars cruising our court so my dogs are often out the front behind a fence where they can be seen. We have had a spate of cars being broken into the last couple of weeks a few houses down and one stolen from the start of the court only 3 weeks ago.

Our front gates are locked at night and if someone comes close to our property we are alerted to that fact, I feel safe through the day with my dogs here as most of my neighbors work so often I am the only one around.

[Erny]

Up-dating this thread because (a) the meeting that will determine whether the Council will bring in the law they have been proposing (and what other adjuncts to that law there will be which will affect) is TONIGHT at Wyndham City Council Chambers, 45 Princes Highway, Werribee at 7pm.

Refer Dog Decision Looms - Leader Newspaper

This part is a worry ....

The controversial laws proposed by Wyndham Council in January would make it an offence for dogs on their owners’ property to act aggressively towards people or animals walking past, including striking, biting or jumping at boundary fences, or barking along them.

;) Holey moley ..... I can just imagine how far they'll be able to go with that when they want to seize your dogs and make you liable for suing by passer byers.

Edited April 27, 2010 by Erny

[Ashanali]

I'm afraid I'm with Corvus and Greytmate on this.

Is it necessary for dogs to be in the front yard unsupervised? I wouldnt let my dog be, purely for her own safety. If she was aggressive I would feel even more strongly about it.

Because some people have yards like me where the entire boundary is fenced.

The dogs had full run of the yard for ages but we have put up fences where marked. However when we have a bitch in season we keep them seperate by having one run the main yard and one run the dog yard. (the dog yard also includes the courtyard out the back and our verandah).

We only rent. We have no option to change the existing fencing and we've only been given permission to construct the two fences we have.

I'm not going to lock my dogs up all day and it's impossible for me to stay out the yard with them 100% of the time and supervise them.

[Erny]

And what happens for those who back on to roads (such as what I've seen with estate homes). So, their dog isn't allowed to bark at the rear boundary either. What happens to them?

[Jed]

The problems Corvus and Greytmate experienced were mainly caused by dogs not being inside their fences.

If councils responded to complaints about dogs inside fences rushing fences, instead of ignoring them, there wouldn't be a problem.

Can no one else see that the areas where we can keep dogs are being eroded?

Not everyone owns the "ideal" yard for dogs, with a huge backyard.

My opinion is that if it is your property, your dog should have access to all of it. And any dog which is not being kept according to the current bylaws should be dealt with.

Seems to me it is simply another council eroding the freedom of the ratepayers to save themselves work and trouble.

Bloody hell.

Soon councils will legislate that you need 5 acres to be able to keep a dog at all.

[Erny]

Can no one else see that the areas where we can keep dogs are being eroded?

Yes - I can. I would have been at the meeting tonight, save for the fact I only became aware of the fact that it was on and already had a couple of appointments that prevented me from getting there in time. I live in Berwick, so the drive would have been 45 - 50 minutes away. The drive wasn't a biggy - the time element was.

Bloody hell.

Indeed. I don't understand how there are the numbers there are in this thread alone who can't see where this can end up leading.

Soon councils will legislate that you need 5 acres to be able to keep a dog at all.

And then tell you that they're no longer issuing permits for 5 acre subdivisions .

Edited April 27, 2010 by Erny

[RottnBullies]

Can no one else see that the areas where we can keep dogs are being eroded?

I can, and quite frankly It's getting kinda scary

And as always the responsible ones are the ones who always pay the price

If they policed the laws that are already In place, with hefty fines for those that don't.....they wouldn't need to be adding more nonsense laws such as this one!

[wolfgirl]

Can no one else see that the areas where we can keep dogs are being eroded?

I can, and quite frankly It's getting kinda scary

And as always the responsible ones are the ones who always pay the price

If they policed the laws that are already In place, with hefty fines for those that don't.....they wouldn't need to be adding more nonsense laws such as this one!

In total agreement here, we have many animals problems but this law they want passed really is the least of them

[wolfgirl]

I wasn't able to make the meeting tonight but according to one of our local papers you can get the outcome of tonight here

thewyndhamleader.com.au

My dogs are quite often out the front yard which is securely fenced and most times I am out there with them or just inside keeping an eye on them as they will alert bark is someone is heading towards our property and I immediately go straight outside.

We have one lovely old guy here who delivers pamphlets and each time my lab goes crazy with excitement, my husband often says to him just put them halfway through the fence and she will take them from you nicely and run off with them and drop them at the front door, he is quite scared of her and she is only happy excited and he obviously isn't a dog person and can't read dog body language so what's to say he doesn't complain about her barking with excitement which could by non dog people be seen as agression and I would then be slapped with this ridiculous menacing dog act for a dog being happy

[Snowball]

It doesnt really make sense. It punishes the majority for the irresponible dog ownership of the few. If anything laws for appropriate fencing when a dog has access to the front would make more sense, then a blanket rule no dogs in the front.

[Erny]

It doesnt really make sense. It punishes the majority for the irresponible dog ownership of the few. If anything laws for appropriate fencing when a dog has access to the front would make more sense, then a blanket rule no dogs in the front.

Most of our dog laws in Victoria are about that. Our Government seem hell bent on the "ban it for everyone" reflex to problems. That's why we have a "Nanny State" reputation.

Edited April 27, 2010 by Erny