Proposed New Victorian Dog Laws Dead Wrong

[Steve]

An exemption is to apply to a dog that is in a designated off-leash area, whose owner is a member of an applicable association, whose owner has, in the previous 12 months exhibited the dog for show purposes at a fixture conducted by an applicable association and where the person in apparent control of the dog has with him or her the council identification marker."

So, this means that if your dog is out with you and isn't wearing its plastic council tag on its body (even if you have it in your pocket) then you can be fined. I think from memory the amount is about $240.00 - I need to back track to that bit of detail.

BUT if you are a VicDogs member AND you have "exhibited your dog for show" in the previous 12 months, and you are in an off-leash area, then you are exempt from this law and immune to the fine.

I am wondering if this section also includes VCA/DOGS VIC/ANKC sanctioned events like obedience, agility, flyball, tracking, herding etc not just conformation showing and does "membership of an applicable association" mean VCA membership AND/OR membership of an obedience club, agility club, tracking club etc. This way "associate dogs" ie neutered and cross breed dogs would be covered.

This part needs to be expanded upon to ensure clarity of the law. If this is not the case then only one of my dogs is exempt as the other two are not shown yet are VCA registered, but they compete in obedience and herding, with tracking to follow later.

My interpretation of the above (bolded) is that if you have the council tag in your pocket then you are exempt from the fine.

Last time we applied to be an applicable association in Victoria the criteria is that you are a dog registry.It wasn't when we first applied but between us applying and them telling us we needed more info the laws had been amended.Therefore because at this time we are not a registry we cant be an applicable group to enable our members to gain exemption.I would never agree to a law that made a person who shows dogs more advantaged than one who doesn't and given that only a very small percentage of people show their dogs in comparison to those dog owners who don't its time someone pointed out they will be losing more votes than they are gaining.

[Erny]

But why a council tag in the first place?Why set it up so they have to give out exemptions in the first place?

Surely they are not serious in suggesting that if you show your dog you are a better more responsible owner?

Something stinks.

This is exactly my argument.

We don't need to entertain the argument of "not fair" (other than the fact that it does reveal prejudice and discrimination allowances). The point is, it is a stupid and unnecessary law.

If a person is with their council-registered and microchipped dog who is under effective control of their owner/handler in an area that is designated off-lead is more than easily identifiable. I know that first-hand.

So with all of the above having been ticked on the check-list, what is so necessary about having a plastic tag?

What makes this particular component of the proposed law even more laughable is that if the person in charge of that dog has the tag on their person but not on the dog, the fine can still be imposed. (*cough* unless you and your dog is a VicDogs member, of course).

So, what difference did the wearing of the tag on the dog have compared to not, when all else was easily able to be ticked off the check list anyway?

I agree Steve. Something is very off kilter.

ETA: Come to think of it ............ if Council Registration along with the dog having to wear its tag is so absolutely and mandatorily necessary (because if it wasn't, why is the Government pushing for these fines), then what's the point in microchipping as well? Don't take this the wrong way - I think chipping is good because all of us logical owners understand that there are times when it is safer for dogs to not wear collars, or where those collars or tags accidentally come off, but I'm trying to view it from the angle that the Government is forcing us to view it as a result of these laws.

We have to microchip to ID our dogs or we cop fines and our dog could pay the penalty with his life.

AND

We have to have an outside plastic tag to ID our dogs or we cop fines and our dog could pay the penalty with his life.

What next? Will our dogs have to start complying with the "100 points" system that opening bank accounts have?

The plastic tag thing is simply over-kill. Serious pun intended.

ETA: And ok .... back to the VicDogs matter. The Council Officer comes across a person and his/her dog whilst they are out walking in an off-lead designated park area somewhere within that Council's precinct, does all the ID checks and balances on the dog but notices the dog is not wearing its tag. The owner says "oh wait, I have the tag in my pocket". The Council Officer says "that's not good enough - it must be on your dog and it isn't so I'm going to penalise you $240.00." The owner says "oh no .... it's ok. I and my dog are VicDog members and I exhibited my dog at a show within the last 12 months."

How is the Council Officer going to be able to check that one out? Is s/he going to spend time making phone calls to Vic Dogs? What if it is outside VicDog hours, or you get their answering machine and have to wait until they can call you back? Will owners now have to go around with their VicDog ID in their pockets? Oh - and also with their "show card" to prove they exhibited their dog in a show in the last year? What if they forget it? Will they bring in a law that says they can fine you for not wearing your VicDog member's ID and for not having your "show" card on you? When will any of this ever stop?!!!

Edited June 18, 2010 by Erny

[sumosmum]

Totally agree. And microchips are compulsory here now anyway. Dogs can't be registered now for the first time if they are not microchipped. That has been in force for the last 3 years. They could have at least said chipped or tag. That way, it may have encouraged the people with older dogs that are not chipped to get them done. That would have been a step forward rather than a step backward.

[Erny]

Could someone help me out here with an explanation please?

From "the Brief" :

... A new exemption category is inserted stating that an exemption is to apply to a dog that is in a designated off-leash area, whose owner is a member of an applicable association, whose owner has, in the previous 12 months exhibited the dog for show purposes at a fixture conducted by an applicable association and where the person in apparent control of the dog has with him or her the council identification marker.

What could be the possible variations on "applicable association" ?

[Steve]

Theoretically any group can apply to be an applicable association - BUT the eligibility criteria is very hard and last time I looked there was only one applicable association in Victoria - Vic dogs.

[lmwvic]

In the latest version of the Domestic Animals Act 1994 (No.81 of 1994)

Part 1 Preliminary, on page 3 has:

applicable organisation means an organisation

that is declared by the Minister under

section 5A to be an applicable organisation;

On page 9,

5A Applicable organisations and recognised

organisations

(1) The Minister may declare, by notice published in

the Government Gazette, that an organisation is an

applicable organisation if—

(a) the organisation has applied to the Minister to be declared an applicable organisation;

and

(b) the Minister is satisfied that the organization meets the criteria set out in the relevant

guidelines; and

© the organisation does not represent owners of dogs of a breed whose importation into

Australia is prohibited under the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations 1956 of the

Commonwealth.

(1A) The Minister may declare, by notice published in the Government Gazette, that an organisation is a recognised organisation if—

(a) the organisation has applied to the Minister to be declared a recognised organisation; and

(b) the organisation represents the owners of restricted breed dogs; and

© the Minister is satisfied that the organization meets the criteria set out in the relevant

guidelines.

(2) An application to be an applicable organisation or a recognised organisation must include—

(a) a copy of the organisation's annual report of the preceding year; and

(b) the organisation's code of ethics and details of how the code is enforced; and

© the outcome of any disciplinary action taken by the organisation for breaches of the ethics

code during the preceding year; and

(d) any other information required by the Minister.

Not sure where to find the “relevant guidelines” setting out the criteria as referred to in (1) (b)

At the moment the following are recognized as applicable organizations:

(see http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/DPI/nrenfa.nsf/L...ganisations.pdf

The Cat Authority of Victoria Inc.

Dogs Victoria

Waratah National Cat Alliance Inc.

Feline Control Council (Victoria) Inc.

The Governing Council of the Cat Fancy (Victoria Inc.)

Definate need for other applicable dog organisations. How about "Real Dogs Victoria Inc."

[lmwvic]

Or more seriously, MDBA

[Steve]

Theoretically any group can apply to be an applicable association - BUT the eligibility criteria is very hard and last time I looked there was only one applicable association in Victoria - Vic dogs.

oops sorry Vic dogs is the only one relating to dogs - there are 3 for cats.

[Erny]

oops sorry Vic dogs is the only one relating to dogs - there are 3 for cats.

Yep - that's what I thought. Thanks guys.

Makes it a very narrow playing field, doesn't it. A complete mandate.

Also, we don't know, do we, if what the Government defines by "exhibited the dog for show purposes" extends to trialing, agility competition etc. etc.?

Edited June 18, 2010 by Erny

[Steve]

We went through the whole process - took us months and right at the last minute they told us we had to keep a registry of our members DOGS.We are looking into whether thats viable or not but its not what we are about and there is something hovering which threatens ANKC members about having their dogs on another registry that we are currently checking out with our legal people.

[lmwvic]

Theoretically any group can apply to be an applicable association - BUT the eligibility criteria is very hard and last time I looked there was only one applicable association in Victoria - Vic dogs.

oops sorry Vic dogs is the only one relating to dogs - there are 3 for cats.

Knew that was what you meant

[Erny]

Thanks Steve. Would be good if you could check those 'things' out and let us know when you can.

In the meantime, I edited my preceding post with the addition of a further question. You were too fast for me :

But going to now (just finished meal preparation for my dog's food tomorrow - running a bit behind with time, as we all do and often are). I'll check back here tomorrow.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Erny

[lmwvic]

We went through the whole process - took us months and right at the last minute they told us we had to keep a registry of our members DOGS.We are looking into whether thats viable or not but its not what we are about and there is something hovering which threatens ANKC members about having their dogs on another registry that we are currently checking out with our legal people.

Doesn't sound like they gave you guidelines with clear criteria. Did they give you anything to follow?

[Steve]

Sleep? What a waste of time

[Steve]

double post

Edited June 18, 2010 by Steve

[Erny]

Well, you said it twice, so you must be sure about that.

[Steve]

We went through the whole process - took us months and right at the last minute they told us we had to keep a registry of our members DOGS.We are looking into whether thats viable or not but its not what we are about and there is something hovering which threatens ANKC members about having their dogs on another registry that we are currently checking out with our legal people.

Doesn't sound like they gave you guidelines with clear criteria. Did they give you anything to follow?

We were given the list of criteria and I spoke with the DPI several times to be sure we were covering it and we were pretty confident we had it all covered but between when we applied and when we were in the home stretch there was the registry thing in there which wasn't there in the beginning.

[Erny]

In case it was missed, this was my other question :

"Also, we don't know, do we, if what the Government defines by "exhibited the dog for show purposes" extends to trialling, agility competition etc. etc.?"

Anyone know (for certain)? Or is this a definition we need to ask the Government on?

[Steve]

In case it was missed, this was my other question :

"Also, we don't know, do we, if what the Government defines by "exhibited the dog for show purposes" extends to trialling, agility competition etc. etc.?"

Anyone know (for certain)? Or is this a definition we need to ask the Government on?

Show purposes is pretty specific and certainly doesn't imply to me that any other activity is acceptable for the exemption - what a bloody joke.

There are some other things too going on but I dont want to chat about them on a public forum and show our hand yet.

[APBT Club of Aust Inc.]

IMHO the only dogs that should be exempt should be obedience trained dogs. Afterall their owners are responsible and are willing to put the time and effort into ensuring their canine friends are good citizens.

To give exemptions to dogs just because they are shown is ludicrious.

I have attended quite a few ANKC shows and they often had more incidents with dogs behaving badly at just one show than we had in all the years we were able to hold shows. BSL put a stop to that