Dog Attacks Put Bite On New Law

[Hairy Maclary]

Changes to the Dog Act in WA proposed - there's not much detail on what the changes might entail though:

Article

Perth's six biggest councils dealt with 616 dog attacks in the past six months and 190 victims went to hospitals for treatment, new figures show.

The statistics, which combined equate to about 15 incidents a week, come amid mounting pressure on the State Government to move on long-awaited changes to the Dog Act, which tighten rules on restricted dog breeds and expand ranger powers to deal with nuisance behaviour.

In one recent incident, the City of Swan, which dealt with 154 reports of dog attacks on people and dogs, successfully prosecuted an owner on eight charges after his two dogs attacked a person. The owner was fined $3000 and the dogs were destroyed.

Councils classify dog attacks to include incidents such as chasing and harassing, as well as biting and attacks on other dogs.

In the City of Rockingham, which investigated 44 dog attacks, the owner of a Staffordshire-cross boxer was found guilty in court and fined $600 after the dog escaped from its lead and mauled a Jack Russell.

The City of Stirling said a high- profile case involving an attack by a Japanese akita in which a man had his finger severed was one of six prosecutions and 86 reported dog attacks in the past six months.

The City of Wanneroo recorded 123 dog attacks and the City of Melville reported 56, including one where a boy needed stitches after being bitten by a golden retriever.

The City of Joondalup issued 12 cautions for serious incidents, from 153 complaints.

Royal Perth Hospital said 78 people were treated for dog bites, with a further 70 treated at Fremantle Hospital, 15 at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital and 27 at Swan District Hospital. Princess Margaret could not provide specific data, but said it treats about 90 children every six months.

WA Local Government Association president Troy Pickard said yesterday the figures were high but not surprising, given the high rates of dog ownership and increased awareness of reporting systems. He said feedback showed many attacks were the result of a dog being startled and reacting.

Mr Pickard said changes to tighten the Dog Act were needed.

Shadow local government minister Paul Papalia said Labor had given its support to fast-track the legislation in Parliament.

"(The Liberals) seem to be pushing on the path of forcing (local council) amalgamations instead of things that impact on people's lives," he said.

There is also this article about changes to the Dog Act to make nuisance dog complaints easier for rangers to manage.

Link

It says that the current provisions make it difficult for rangers because they have to:

a) gather evidence from reliable witnesses

b) establish proof of the dog being a nuisance to convince a court beyond reasonable doubt

So it sounds like the WALGA is pushing for these provisions to be changed. Maybe I'm naive, but they sound fair to me and should protect dogs and their owners from malicious complaints.

Just wondering what others think of this?

[asal]

Changes to the Dog Act in WA proposed - there's not much detail on what the changes might entail though:

Article

Perth's six biggest councils dealt with 616 dog attacks in the past six months and 190 victims went to hospitals for treatment, new figures show.

The statistics, which combined equate to about 15 incidents a week, come amid mounting pressure on the State Government to move on long-awaited changes to the Dog Act, which tighten rules on restricted dog breeds and expand ranger powers to deal with nuisance behaviour.

In one recent incident, the City of Swan, which dealt with 154 reports of dog attacks on people and dogs, successfully prosecuted an owner on eight charges after his two dogs attacked a person. The owner was fined $3000 and the dogs were destroyed.

Councils classify dog attacks to include incidents such as chasing and harassing, as well as biting and attacks on other dogs.

In the City of Rockingham, which investigated 44 dog attacks, the owner of a Staffordshire-cross boxer was found guilty in court and fined $600 after the dog escaped from its lead and mauled a Jack Russell.

The City of Stirling said a high- profile case involving an attack by a Japanese akita in which a man had his finger severed was one of six prosecutions and 86 reported dog attacks in the past six months.

The City of Wanneroo recorded 123 dog attacks and the City of Melville reported 56, including one where a boy needed stitches after being bitten by a golden retriever.

The City of Joondalup issued 12 cautions for serious incidents, from 153 complaints.

Royal Perth Hospital said 78 people were treated for dog bites, with a further 70 treated at Fremantle Hospital, 15 at Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital and 27 at Swan District Hospital. Princess Margaret could not provide specific data, but said it treats about 90 children every six months.

WA Local Government Association president Troy Pickard said yesterday the figures were high but not surprising, given the high rates of dog ownership and increased awareness of reporting systems. He said feedback showed many attacks were the result of a dog being startled and reacting.

Mr Pickard said changes to tighten the Dog Act were needed.

Shadow local government minister Paul Papalia said Labor had given its support to fast-track the legislation in Parliament.

"(The Liberals) seem to be pushing on the path of forcing (local council) amalgamations instead of things that impact on people's lives," he said.

There is also this article about changes to the Dog Act to make nuisance dog complaints easier for rangers to manage.

Link

It says that the current provisions make it difficult for rangers because they have to:

a) gather evidence from reliable witnesses

b) establish proof of the dog being a nuisance to convince a court beyond reasonable doubt

So it sounds like the WALGA is pushing for these provisions to be changed. Maybe I'm naive, but they sound fair to me and should protect dogs and their owners from malicious complaints.

Just wondering what others think of this?

wonder if things have improved in the northern territory?

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2008/07/30/4868_ntnews.html

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2009/11/1...181_ntnews.html

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2009/09/2...791_ntnews.html

[poodlefan]

It says that the current provisions make it difficult for rangers because they have to:

a) gather evidence from reliable witnesses

b) establish proof of the dog being a nuisance to convince a court beyond reasonable doubt

And so they should have to!! If people are to be penalised under the law then the rangers need to be able to prove the offences, not stick a wet finger in the air and be the judge as well.

Not one of the events mentioned in that article is by a so called "restricted breed" so where's the evidence for toughening up laws relating to them?

Edited October 19, 2010 by poodlefan

[geo]

wonder if things have improved in the northern territory?

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2008/07/30/4868_ntnews.html

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2009/11/1...181_ntnews.html

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2009/09/2...791_ntnews.html

Living in a remote town i can tell you that the indigenous (in my town) don't need to register their dogs, so town camp dogs roam the street, though they're generally harmless.

The council charges $15 for rego if your dog is desexed, $65 if not. They occasionally cull the strays, it's ownership that is the problem, lots of people who let their dog roam whislt they're at work. They seem to think that their dogs do no harm but they annoy the crap out of dogs behind fences!

There would be 1 poor lab that has had so many pups, most of them that roam the streets are hers, mostly lab/sharpeis.

It's even worse this time of year as the dingoes come in of the flood plains and close to the town, they attack some of these domestic dogs that are not kept home, or even worse mate with them.

We have a ranger who is more interested in killing dogs than re-uniting with them with their owner and ID'ing a dog is hard as there are many looking similar mongrels.

I'm concerned should my 2 get out and get taken in by the council i'll not see them again.