Dogs Leave Pony For Dead, The Law On Side

[whippets]

I'll probably get pummeled for this but those dogs would have been shot if I found them on my property.

[tuscany69]

Dogs leave pony for dead, and have the law on side

TAHNAE GOLDSWORTHY

17 Feb, 2010 11:37 AM

FRIDAY, February 5, was a day that “couldn’t get any worse” for Bargo resident Rachelle Corfield.

At 9am, neighbour Lyn Wren let her animals out only to find the paddock across the road and its miniature ponies owned by Mrs Corfield were under attack.

“I let my animals out and saw two dogs chasing the stallion,” she said.

“I ran across to chase them and that didn’t work so I ran back and got my husband who chased them away.

“Then I noticed the dogs were in the long grass and I realised there were more ponies in there.”

Arriving on the scene after being notified by neighbours Mrs Corfield said there were two dogs, what looked to be a “great Dane as big as one of my ponies” and another “tall back one”.

“We couldn’t save her [thepony].

“They had torn her hock joints and nearly ripped one ear off,” Mrs Corfield said.

“Torn open to the bone with ligaments all out.”

With only a 15 per cent chance of survival according to veterinarians from Cobbitty University, Mrs Corfield decided it was better to put the one-yearold pony down.

“The dogs even came back while we were sitting here trying to save this little one and it tried to drag the carcass of the white pony off,” Mrs Corfield said.

After following the dogs through the back of the paddock, they claimed they saw the dogs jump into a backyard. Visiting the property owners with a ranger from

the Wollondilly Development Services Section, Mrs Corfield asked the pair for their details with the knowledge that enormous vet bills were on the horizon.

According to Mrs Corfield they simply said, “Don’t

come around here telling us your problems.”

With the dogs in the yard at the time, blood smeared on their muzzles, Mrs Corfield expected action to be taken.

To her amazement, the Companion Animals Act states that after an attack is witnessed and the incident is investigated by Council’s officer, Council has no power to seize the dog if the attacking dogs have been adequately secured on land occupied

Council will then issue the dog owner with a notice of the intention to declare the dog dangerous, which the owner has seven days to appeal.

Once a dog is declared dangerous it needs to be kept in accordance with the control requirements for Dangerous Dogs under the Act that specify a certain type of enclosure the dogs must be kept in and the manner in which the dogs must be controlled when outside of the enclosure.

In these cases Council can issue a fine of $550 per dog for the attack, but this matter is still under investigation.

While a fine is a possibility that may give some satisfaction to Mrs Corfield, she simply cannot believe the law protects the animals that tore hers apart.

“The law protects the dog and the dog owner,” she said.

“I can’t believe that they have to re-offend to do something.

“It’s the same fine as if they were trotting down the street unleashed.”

However, Mrs Corfield was even more to find out that if the victim was a child, and not one of her miniature ponies, the council action would remain the same. Bargo resident Leanne Hancock said it has already happened in the two days prior to the pony attack.

“Two kids were attacked on their way to school,” she

said.

“A mum walking with her dog and three little girls had

dogs attack them.”

http://bowral.yourguide.com.au/news/local/...spx?storypage=1

[Gumnut]

Poor, poor little pony

[Undershotfan]

I'll probably get pummeled for this but those dogs would have been shot if I found them on my property.

Yep lights out

[tuscany69]

I heard of this attack. I'm up the road and have ridden past on my 17hh TB many times past these cute minis.

I and my neighbour was shocked and appalled to say the least of what happened to these poor animals. I can't even believe the dogs were not shot on site as they are vicious and a dangerous animal by the sound of it, hunters obviously. I love all animals and if my Lab, which she is old now and placid as. If she was to bite or attack another animal or human being, i would have no choice but to put her down even if council didn't tell me I had too.

The owners of these dogs should have sense about them and destroy the dangerous dogs. There is no law is there???? Questions have to be asked in this regard. How wrong, i have had to avoid these dogs, as I think I know which ones have been described and where they do live.

I ride past there now in amazement that something like this could happen as these ponies were well cared for and for this to happen down the road from me is appalling and I was horrified.

Still shocked and saddened by these little ponies being killed.

[sandgrubber]

People love their pets as family members. In my book, allowing your dog to kill another person's pet is a felony, similar to rape or GBH, and should be pinned on the owner of the dog, with heavy fines and possible jail sentence. Especially where the dog has a history of attacking other animals. A dangerous dog declaration is not nearly harsh enough.

[Natsu chan]

This sort of thing is just so frustrating. Not the dogs fault really since all dogs have prey drive in varying degrees we have just redirected it and for the dogs it's self rewarding behaviour. Which is of course why you keep them locked up.

Dogs just chasing animals can kill them. Horses can and do go through fences, I've seem one cart wheel over a fence with a dog hot on it's heels. Pregnant and lactating animals can go down with eclampsia, which can be fatal too. The stress can also cause them to abort. People love their animals every bit as much as we love our dogs, and farmers have enough to contend with without people letting their dogs run wild amoung their livestock which is also their livelyhood.

These dogs will have been getting out for awhile to have been so bold and fearless, so their owners have been failing them for awhile. I don't have any answers but boy it makes me mad, and really by the sound of it these two would be better off pts. Poor animals all round really!

[spottychick]

I don't have any answers but boy it makes me mad, and really by the sound of it these two would be better off pts. Poor animals all round really!

Along with the owner/s.

[sandra64]

Sorry as an animal owner that had a pet killed by neighbours dogs recently and has also been in the situation with neighbours dogs attacking horses, sheep and pet emus I am now under the belief if they are caught they will not make it back home. I am tired of irresponsible owners that have dogs that can chase or kill peoples pets and/or livelihood and have little repercussions. I am sick of catching peoples dogs and taking them home, their dogs are their responsibility, not mine. My responsibilty is for my family and my animals.

RIP little pony

I'm with you casowner, sick and tired of irresponsible people who dont do a thing to keep their animals in and dont feed them properly which makes them hungry and aggressive, which brings them into my yard looking for food and attacking my livestock. Cost us a fortune in extra fencing to keep neighbours dogs out of our front and back paddocks. Ours dogs are contained in the acre around the house, and then the idiot next door brings home a chihuahua with a skin problem that just walks through the dog mesh, and barks all night long. Cant win. At least the other 2 unsocialised big dogs cant get into my dogs

[sausy.dog]

You've just described a dog that chases other animals. Not a stock killing dog.

A dog that merely chases - does and can kill stock!

One and the same in my opinion.

The aftermath of 'just chasing' can be just as deadly.

Chasers don't get a second chance here.

I agree, and I don't get why so many people find this concept so hard to understand. Both are as bad as each other - a dog which is just chasing can do as much damage. Stock being chased through fences and stressed to the point where they die anyway is no prettier than a dog that kills.

[centitout]

I have seen 10 sheep killed by a JRT- it got a bout 50 head into a panic and they crushed into the corner of a paddock,but thats ok-it didnt actually rip into them i suppose

[WoofnHoof]

My dog would chase stock, it's terrifying the thought that he might get out one day and chase the horses or the neighbours cattle. I wouldn't want him shot for an accident though, he is a high prey drive dog so I do my best to ensure he doesn't ever get out and keep him occupied so he doesn't feel inclined to try to get out. I don't share my house even though I need to financially because it is so difficult to find people who understand how important it is to never ever leave the gate open.

I understand the reality that if he did get out someone might shoot him but I would like to hope someone would try to catch him first.

[Swiss Girl]

I'll probably get pummeled for this but those dogs would have been shot if I found them on my property.

Not from me, I would help you.

Its common sense to me, if these dogs are PTS then the other animals in the area are safe, a fair trade off.

[nellbell]

If there is irrefutable evidence it was those dogs-then yes,it should be automatically impounded and euthanased,no appeal.

After seeing an old horse run into a fence by 2 german shepards and breaking two legs,staying with the old girl while they got the cops out and the sound of the old horse as she tried to get up,then her being shot-i have no compassion,sympathy for animals like these and they do not deserve to be around,whether contained or not.Sorry if that offends anyone with stock killing dogs.

You've just described a dog that chases other animals. Not a stock killing dog.

And therein lays the problem.

Whose dog wouldn't chase and kill another animal. I have both, one I think probably wouldn't and one who I know would.

If I f*ck up and my dog gets out, chases and kills someones cat, I expect the council to be around on my door step slapping a dangerous dog order on me. I would also expect to be taken to small claims court for any veterinary fees by the cat owner... that's if I didn't go around, apologise and see if there was something I could do to begin to make amends.

Would my dog deserve to die? I think as long as it never, ever gets the chance to happen again, then no benefit comes from killing it. Am I a 'bogan' who would inflame the situation by being insensitive? No; but there's no law you can create that applies only to people who are insensitive bogans.

It's all very well waving pitchforks and baying for blood, but when you 'toughen up' these laws, they don't just target 'those horrible owners', but everyone equally.

Suddenly people who made a very grave error in losing their animal one day, are having their pet seized and destroyed. Which is fine unless it's you.

You have obviously never seen an animal ripped apart by dogs. My parents used to have a siamese cat that was killed just in that fashion. Very much loved, very traumatic and never to be forgotten. Its like loosing a child, and giving the owner a stupid little order slapped on them is a total insult to the pets family. Come on...'as long as it never gets out again' what a joke. That can never be guaranteed, meanwhile there is a family with their lives changed through this type of experience. As was said before aminal are entitled to live peacefully on their own property. I have no problems with wandering dogs being shot by farmers.

[shel]

It's fine if we want legislation which means impoundment and death for dogs who stray and cause other people/pets problems.

We can have whatever kind of 'justice' we desire.

But when so much time is spent fighting legislation that makes it harder to be a pet owner, we must realise we can't chop and choose.

We can't get hysterical when the media reports 'pitbull attacks', then be unhappy when the government passes BSL and starts killing our dogs.

We can't get hysterical when the media reports 'people being rushed', then be unhappy when the government dreams up crazy legislation like 'public muzzling' and 'anti-fence running' law and starts killing our dogs.

We can't get hysterical when the media reports 'stock being attacked', then be unhappy when, when our dogs get loose we have no recourse because there are no longer any second chances... and now our dogs - us! The good people who shouldn't have this law applied to them! are having our dogs killed.

Why can't we learn that when we try and dream up ways to punish the 'horrible awful' owners, history says the only one who suffers is the dogs?

[OSoSwift]

Whilst I am aware that accidents happen and some dogs may chase stock or other animals when they get out. I am still of the opinion that any dog seen worrying my stock will be disposed of.

I have seen 30 odd sheep ripped apart with unborn lambs ripped out of them, many still alive and having to be shot. You don't get over something like that very quickly.

I have two sheep here, they were bottle fed from around 12 hours of age, they were crated and I got up during the night to give feeds. I have a horse that was born here and I got to see his very first steps, I have an aged Clydesdale mare with arthritis who would find it very hard to evade an attack, I have cats and Guinea pigs, some babies I have bred and raised myslef. I have WHippets and an aged Stafford. Any fight would kill my Stafford and if my Whippets couldn't out run them, they would be badly injured as well.

Now tell me in all honesty that it is okay if even just one of them is injured or slaughtered and it is okay if the perpetrator gets away with it????? I am really sorry but I cannot agree. Those dogs slaughtered a pony, they inflicted agony and drawn out suffering on an animal that in no way could defend itsself. But they should be allowed to remain where they were AFTER they came back and tried to drag the carcass of a pony away??????

They should have been euthanased and if it happened on my place they would have been shot - no questions asked, no second chances given. I would not risk another or my animals to them.

Incidentaly in the properties around us we have Cattle dogs, Pitbulls, kelpies and Border Collies among others. None roam, we have never had a problem in 11 years. They are all close enough that the could easily reach our place but they are confined and monitored appropriately.

[Swiss Girl]

Why can't we learn that when we try and dream up ways to punish the 'horrible awful' owners, history says the only one who suffers is the dogs?

"the only one who suffers is the dogs?"

Maybe because it was the pony that suffered. There are loads of other animals that also deserve and are entitled to be safe. And you dont think those 2 dogs will be back to that field again? Of course they will. The owners is an idiot, the dogs had fun, and the owner of the pony will never be able to leave her stock out and unguarded until the dogs are gone, whether PTS or sent to the city.

[spottychick]

Seems the owner of the pony will be best served to keep her rifle handy and take matters into her own hands next time the dogs are on her property. Hopefully she's around when they return and gets them before they kill anything else.

That is the only option left to people at the moment.

Can't help thinking there should be a better one, you know, like penalising owners properly, but what would I know.

[OSoSwift]

Another reason I have decided if I ever have problems with dogs I will be researching a flock guardian breed of dog to help me patrol.

Wonder what people who think if their dog perishes due to one of those, after all he/she probably didn't mean it did they?

[shel]

To quote the original article:

Council will issue the dog owner with a notice of the intention to declare the dog dangerous, which the owner has seven days to appeal.

Once a dog is declared dangerous it needs to be kept in accordance with the control requirements for Dangerous Dogs under the Act that specify a certain type of enclosure the dogs must be kept in and the manner in which the dogs must be controlled when outside of the enclosure.

Can't help thinking there should be a better one, you know, like penalising owners properly, but what would I know.

Which part of this isn't strict enough in your opinion?