Just As We Suspected

[gila]

I heard a disgusting conversation between council rangers today that confirms our suspicions about the new Vic dog legislation that gives rangers the power to immediately destroy roaming dogs that they deem "likely" to attack or they think are "dangerous".

I'm doing a ten week work placement at the Ringwood Magistrates' Court at the moment and today I went to sit in court to observe a few council matters concerning roaming dogs. The magistrate wasn't in the courtroom yet so the rangers were just chatting to each other. They started talking about the new legislation and what they said absolutely disgusted me.

One of them started off by saying in this gleeful voice that since the new legislation came in she's been driving the streets keeping her eyes peeled, implying that she just can't wait to start seizing and destroying dogs. Then they all start joking about how great it is that the owners won't be able to do anything about it. One of them then piped up and said "well there are internal procedures to follow". But another laughed and said something I didn't quite hear, and they all laughed. I wish I'd heard what she said, but the way they laughed afterwards it seemed like they think these "internal procedures" are a bit of a joke and they can ignore them without having to worry about any repercussions.

Oh and then a guy who I think was the prosecutor that the council had hired to prosecute their cases started talking about how he used to be a ranger. Boasted about how on his last day on the job he shot two "Rockwheelers" that were attacking a goat. Now I have no problem with famers and such in rural areas shooting dogs that are on their property chasing/attacking their stock, but this guy was laughing like it was a big joke and he took pleasure in doing it. Made my stomach turn. I was so mad I had to leave the room.

When the new legislation was first proposed most DOLers, including me, suspected that rangers might abuse their power, but to actually hear it straight from the horse's mouth was just shocking and disgusting. And these a-holes are rangers from Maroondah City Council - my municipality.

[Adnil444]

Horrible!!! I hope it isn't true, but I suppose it will certainly make sure that people keep their dogs contained properly.

[D4DOGZ]

Have you reported what you heard to your council?

[persephone]

Have you reported what you heard to your council?

x2

[WreckitWhippet]

I guess you could write to council and complain about their lack of professionalism

[Tapferhund]

I would not only report it to the council I would be going to the local paper and telling them what you heard and also making a complaint to the DPI who gave this "abuse of power" to councils and their fool rangers. This sort of thing needs to be exposed.

[Tapferhund]

I guess you could write to council and complain about their lack of professionalism

Sorry readysetgo ....but stuff their professionalism. These mongrels are going to take great delight in killing as many dogs as they can....like trophies......because they can. And I can well imagine they won't be the only rangers who will abuse their power in such a way. I would say there would be dozens of municipalities with kill happy rangers looking for every dog they can find.

[sumosmum]

I'm not surprised, but I am bloody disgusted.

A lot of the public are not aware of the details of this law. The first a lot of people will know about the law is when a dog is unfairly killed.

If the bloody rangers had been doing the job they were paid for, things would not have come to this. They are part of the problem and cause of a lot of dog issues.

[Staranais]

When the new legislation was first proposed most DOLers, including me, suspected that rangers might abuse their power, but to actually hear it straight from the horse's mouth was just shocking and disgusting. And these a-holes are rangers from Maroondah City Council - my municipality.

I'm sorry for all you folks who live in Victoria.

I've met some lovely dog control officers in my time - and also met some who have openly told me that they don't like dogs. I would hate to see them all given the power to PTS my dog if they decided she "might" bite someone.

[Shmurps]

How can a ranger take pleasure in shooting an animal?

Report them to council and media. That's disgusting.

[gila]

What should I write in a letter to council? They didn't say outright, "I'm going to abuse my powers and have dogs destroyed just cos I can under the new legislation". It was implied through the way they were laughing and joking about it. Although the point about owners "not being able to complain" was mentioned a couple of times. It WAS extremely unprofessional seeing as they were talking about it in an open courtroom in which several other people were sitting, and not even bothering to keep their voices down.

[casowner]

What should I write in a letter to council? They didn't say outright, "I'm going to abuse my powers and have dogs destroyed just cos I can under the new legislation". It was implied through the way they were laughing and joking about it. Although the point about owners "not being able to complain" was mentioned a couple of times. It WAS extremely unprofessional seeing as they were talking about it in an open courtroom in which several other people were sitting, and not even bothering to keep their voices down.

That is what I would be including in the letter, it was unprofessional behaviour on behalf of people representing the Council in a public arena

[Erny]

And for what it is worth (as there is hearsay and also assumption involved in the relation), perhaps relate this to Sue Pennicuik who is the "Greens" politician who argued against the Bill in the Upper House.

She wouldn't be able to do much with it, but perhaps if you put it in writing as you have done on DOL, it is one she'll be able to keep in her folder that might add up with others to be worth something later on. Sue remains interested in the affects of the laws in this Bill and has asked for 'stories' (factual of course and actual) that can evidence how the laws WILL be unfair (to person and/or dog) and how things won't run as seamlessly as the Labor Govt polly has promised.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Erny

[Staranais]

I guess you could complain to council, but would it help? The dog control officers might get told not to talk about their jobs in public, but that won't change their attitudes toward the dogs & owners.

[Erny]

Actually - second thoughts.

Should you write to the Council?

Isn't that only going to have them being careful about what they say out loud?

I'd rather they trip up over their laws and powers. It is the only way we're going to be able to get rid of them.

Although elections are coming up.

ETA: Oops! Staranais posted whilst I was still typing (and got distracted - so took a while to submit). We're on the same page, me thinks, Staranais .

Edited September 9, 2010 by Erny

[Tapferhund]

I guess you could complain to council, but would it help? The dog control officers might get told not to talk about their jobs in public, but that won't change their attitudes toward the dogs & owners.

EXACTLY !

[silentchild]

Reading this absolutely sickens me.. I've been worried about the new laws ever since I heard of them, especially as my dog is a "Rockwheeler". God forbid if for any reason in the future some random ranger suddenly decides she's going to kill babies!

[gila]

And for what it is worth (as there is hearsay and also assumption involved in the relation), perhaps relate this to Sue Pennicuik who is the "Greens" politician who argued against the Bill in the Upper House.

She wouldn't be able to do much with it, but perhaps if you put it in writing as you have done on DOL, it is one she'll be able to keep in her folder that might add up with others to be worth something later on. Sue remains interested in the affects of the laws in this Bill and has asked for 'stories' (factual of course and actual) that can evidence how the laws WILL be unfair (to person and/or dog) and how things won't run as seamlessly as the Labor Govt polly has promised.

Thanks Erny. Yes, the bolded bit is what I'm worried about. I was there and heard for myself what was said and how it was said. But they didn't admit anything outright, and I guess it's my "interpretation". It will be hard to convey what I heard in writing. How do I write to Sue?

Actually - second thoughts.

Should you write to the Council?

Isn't that only going to have them being careful about what they say out loud?

I'd rather they trip up over their laws and powers. It is the only way we're going to be able to get rid of them.

Although elections are coming up.

Well I thought the same at first, but then I thought that if I write at least then the council will know that people are watching them and that rangers WILL be held accountable. Ugh, I'm not sure now..

[Erny]

How do I write to Sue?

If you google, it will come up with her website to give you her electorate address. From memory, I think her office is in Brighton. I'd just send her a copy of what you've already written .... but just add a couple of sentences to introduce it and to acknowledge that it is nothing that she can use to make a difference now, but to know that it of course increases our (your) concern for what we already suspected is likely to occur at some stage .... and that filing this for some future use may potentially be helpful down the track.

... I thought that if I write at least then the council will know that people are watching them and that rangers WILL be held accountable. Ugh, I'm not sure now..

I wouldn't. I wouldn't credit those sorts of people (who think and act as you describe) with the moral conscience required to worry about people watching. They'll just do what they do, but they'll do it with more careful stealth.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Erny

[sumosmum]

And for what it is worth (as there is hearsay and also assumption involved in the relation), perhaps relate this to Sue Pennicuik who is the "Greens" politician who argued against the Bill in the Upper House.

She wouldn't be able to do much with it, but perhaps if you put it in writing as you have done on DOL, it is one she'll be able to keep in her folder that might add up with others to be worth something later on. Sue remains interested in the affects of the laws in this Bill and has asked for 'stories' (factual of course and actual) that can evidence how the laws WILL be unfair (to person and/or dog) and how things won't run as seamlessly as the Labor Govt polly has promised.

Agree Erny, yes, let Sue know about it. Also, find out who your local member is, and you can also convey your concerns to them. They are there to represent you, and a good one will follow up for you. Doesn't matter what party your local member represents, it is election year, and they might be able to send a letter and question council about it as well.