Just As We Suspected

[gila]

Okay I will write to Sue. But now I'm unsure of whether to write to council or not. Erny has a point, but if I don't let council know about what I heard, the rangers won't be taken to task over it. Of course, there's a pretty damn good chance they won't be anyway, but if the council doesn't know what happened they don't have the chance to do anything about it IYKWIM?

[sumosmum]

Contact details for Sue Pennicuik.

Sue Pennicuik

[mita]

I know I'm going over old ground, but the whole notion that a 'ranger' can legally make a life/death decision, based on what he/she decides a dog is 'likely' to do, astounds me. That means a totally subjective judgment is made. Silentchild is correct, a breed/size of dog that has all sorts of prejudices around it, wouldn't stand a chance.

Some time back, I was with 2 other women from the local library who went out of our way to coax into our care a straying Rottie...a magnificent big boy. Not only did we want him to be safe off the road, but we agreed that someone with a dose of paranoia about big Rotties, could start screaming for a police officer with a gun, or something else extreme. That dog was as much at danger for being wrongly judged, as he was for being hit by a car.

Won't surprise anyone to know, he turned out to be a big affectionate teddy bear who happily trotted to me, when I called him, 'Darling!"

By the way, I think that anyone whose job entails determining the life or death of a sentient being, should first be subjected to psychological assessment.

[sumosmum]

It is up to you of course Gila, but I think I would write to the council with your concerns. If someone has their dog destroyed without the correct process in the future, it may be of help to them that someone has already voiced concerns about their attitude. Totally up to you though.

[lovemesideways]

Makes me shake my head in disgust.

what is the new law? Is it/has it been put through? I hope they don't try and pull it through into NSW.

[gila]

Thanks for all your help and advice sumosmum. I think you're right. I'd hate it if someone in my council area had their dog destroyed by dodgy rangers and I hadn't said anything. If that happened it would be no use popping up and saying, "But I heard the rangers saying xxx" because the council will just say "well we never heard about it; if we had we could have addressed the problem". And they'd have a point.

[Dame Aussie]

I'd be going to the media, TT, ACA Herald Sun, whatever, they would love to pick up a story like this and it would create a sh*tstorm for them.

[DerRottweiler]

It was my previous understanding that a dog that attacks a person on its own property (provided that a warning exists so as to revoke implied lisence to entry) is not subject to any ill treatment.

Is this still the case? Or have the new laws changed this?

[sumosmum]

Double post, sorry

Edited September 9, 2010 by sumosmum

[sumosmum]

It was my previous understanding that a dog that attacks a person on its own property (provided that a warning exists so as to revoke implied lisence to entry) is not subject to any ill treatment.

Is this still the case? Or have the new laws changed this?

DerRottweiler, here is a link to the Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Act 2010

DAA (Dangerous Dogs) Act 2010

You would have to read this with the Domestic Animals Act 1994 I think, to make sense of it.

Here is a link to Domestic Animal Act 1994 incorporating amendments as at 1 January 2010

Domestic Animals Act 1994 amended 1Jan2010

[DerRottweiler]

Thanks.

I will read them both and post findings here.

[Adza]

Yep, I would have thought they would react and behave like that once this got through. What AH's. How do these people become rangers anyway? I would love to know what it takes.

I am not saying all rangers are this way but I think thats just their growing ego's due to the unfair authority given and they know it. So many dogs will be PTS (and who knows possibly abused going by the way they carried on - sorry I just wonder sometimes) but I think it will blow up in the future.

I'd be going to ACA, TT, general media about this. Then again, it's hearsay in the laws eyes.

[DerRottweiler]

Having read the legislation, while it is harsh and vests too much power in the local councils, the rules only really apply to dogs found at large, especially if they are subjectively deemed dangerous (very very dubious power there).

The dangerous dog provisions (i.e no bite work, attack training etc.) are pretty much the same (with harsher penalities I think).

I padlock my dog when he is at home, I have high fences which he cannot jump, or dig under. I would suggest all Victorians who have a dog that has escaped previously or can easily escape, to properly secure the dog, it isn't worth the risk as some psycho ranger who may have a grudge against a particular breed, now has the power to put down any dog, at will, based on his/her subjective opinion.

[Skruffy n Flea]

Having read the legislation, while it is harsh and vests too much power in the local councils, the rules only really apply to dogs found at large, especially if they are subjectively deemed dangerous (very very dubious power there).

The dangerous dog provisions (i.e no bite work, attack training etc.) are pretty much the same (with harsher penalities I think).

I padlock my dog when he is at home, I have high fences which he cannot jump, or dig under. I would suggest all Victorians who have a dog that has escaped previously or can easily escape, to properly secure the dog, it isn't worth the risk as some psycho ranger who may have a grudge against a particular breed, now has the power to put down any dog, at will, based on his/her subjective opinion.

this freaks the craaapP outa me

alz i can say is OP, get to it cuz if this legislation is deemed to be performing well in the state of vic, then dog help the rest of the country...

i can also imagine in some instances there being a ranger getting the sheets with a raggedy dog that isn't necessarily showing aggression, but it, in the eyes of the ranger, is deemed frikken dangerous [cuz it took so long to catch the bahluddy mutt] and with such powers it can be dispensed with summarily...

sum scary shite right thar!