Why Is It So?

[Steve]

Why is it that people jump up and down and go to war because councils are not being seen to be doing their jobs in policing planning laws and mandatory codes for breeding dogs and call for more laws and licencing of dog breeders in the belief that making it harder for the people who are already doing it right is the key. The kind of people they are aiming to ping are the very people who will find new ways of ducking any laws anyway and avoiding getting a licence.

Then we start to hear calls for new laws to licence dog owners when the same applies because only a handful will get the licences anyway.It wont make them keep their dogs on leads, it wont make them have more secure fencing or grow some brains

In the meantime none of us can walk our dogs or our kids around the block without a bloody big stick or a recon to know where the nutty neighbours are who let their dogs charge at you because the laws that are already there are never bloody policed people waiting for a train get attacked by dogs which should have been in their owners yards and every time you turn around there are more places you cant take your dog and more thing either have to do or not do because some idiot now and then ignores the laws we have and thinks they have special dogs and they are special too. What on earth makes anyone think any new laws will make any difference ?

They told us in NSW when they started to take all of this loverly money from microchipping and regsitration they would use the funds to police the laws. Nup not true.

So what they will use the money they get in for licences to police the licence laws ? Sure they will. They already know less than 20 percent of dog owners have their dogs registered so why dont they police these laws, use the money for either increased regsitrations or fines and do something with it to ensure the leash laws and the rest are enforced.

Every day its harder to buy a dog, breed a dog, live with a dog,choose the breed you want to live with and take your dog out of your yard and to find the money needed to keep it and maintain it.

We have to stop this call for new laws and more power to council and RSPCA.

Why arent we screaming just as loudly [ more loudly] about councils not doing their job and enforcing dog owner laws as we are about puppy farms ? Why arent we demanding more rangers and more fines more preventative checks and education when these thing affect PEOPLE and not just their dogs no matter where they live whether they are dog owners or not ?

I think perhaps the world has gone mad and for Dogs NSW to be calling for licences to be introduced for pet owners it leaves me dumbfounded.

Say no to more laws.

[Christina]

I believe people in Australia like laws & rules & being told what to do.

& say & how to think & how to raise children & what to eat & what to wear & watch & read etc etc.

Saves thinking for yourself, figuring it out & protesting I guess.

Yes the world has gone mad.

[WreckitWhippet]

Why ? because it makes people who really don;t have a clue, feel good, as they are seen to be doing something.

[Erny]

We have to stop this call for new laws and more power to council and RSPCA.

Say no to more laws.

Amen to that. We can regulate ourselves - the responsible dog/pet owners through the unison we share the privilege in being members of orgs such as MDBA and other educationally based organisations such as the NDTF and, if they would step up to the plate, orgs such as the ANKC and the State Council Bodies. These places help/could help guide those who need the education, the wisdom and the know-how to get things right. We don't need a law that tries to get the non-law-abiding to abide the law. As Steve says - THAT doesn't work and only binds up those who are already law-abiding, just like a dose of plaster of paris.

Edited November 3, 2010 by Erny

[Steve]

Yep call for a new law for a little old lady who lives alone on a pension with a little lap dog because somewhere someone owns a dog which isnt contained or controlled.

Call for new laws for the breeder who has a litter now and then in their lounge room because somewhere someone might breed dogs in poor conditions.

better yet lets put peple in to write these mandatory codes who dont own a dog or breed a dog or maybe dont even like dogs. That will do it.

[Erny]

Why ? because it makes people who really don;t have a clue, feel good, as they are seen to be doing something.

And again I agree ..... in the eyes of the Government - both Federal and State, and also in the eyes of orgs such as the RSPCA, these laws are PR, vote catchers and money cajolers.

[moosmum]

Agree with all the above.

Most people seem incapable of looking at the bigger picture for themselves. Hear of the problems and can't see the root causes.

We seem to have a "Make the buggers pay for it" attitude with out being able to see that we will all pay for it and still not solve the real problem.

I dread the future we leave our kids.

It would be lovely if people could unite for education before legislation.So many representative bodies are failing us.

Legislation will only isolate us all from the non-domestic animal community further and lead to yet more ignorance.

[~Anne~]

I think, like it is in many other areas, that Councils do what they feel is right at the time. This may mean that the decisions are based on a lack of education and or knowledge and a failure to see the bigger picture.

I don't agree with the cynics that feel they are doing it to make themselves feel better or that they don't care or simply for PR. I am sure that these points would be there somewhere though, decision makers are only human afterall.

If people seriously feel that the local, state and federal governments and the decision makers are on the wrong track and are making a mess of things, then the simplest solution is to become a participating member of your local, state or federal goverment and the decision making groups.

Edited November 3, 2010 by ~Anne~

[Erny]

I think, like it is in many other areas, that Councils do what they feel is right at the time. This may mean that the decisions are based on a lack of education and or knowledge and a failure to see the bigger picture.

I don't agree with the cynics that feel they are doing it to make themselves feel better or that they don't care or simply for PR. I am sure that these points would be there somewhere though, decision makers are only human afterall.

If people seriously feel that the local, state and federal governments and the decision makers are on the wrong track and are making a mess of things, then the simplest solution is to become a participating member of your local, state or federal goverment and the decision making groups.

Anne, there are many of us who spend the many hours, days and weeks of our free (and also our not so free) time trying to converse with Government and Councils about the laws they bring and propose to bring in. If it were the case of "Councils do what they feel is right at the time" then they would either be able to explain with reasoning the questions that we raise about these (often) inadequate, unfair and sometimes unnecessary laws. Instead they tend to dodge the questions and overtly bull-doze through them. Such was the case with the recent Victorian Laws that went through and have been in force since beginning September. In that case, NOT ONE of my many, many questions were answered and if you'd had opportunity to listen to the Parliamentary Debate, you would acknowledge my point. Not only did Labor arrogantly dismiss any argument against the many laws that were raised by Sue Pennicuik (Greens) by saying something insultingly flippant like "its complex and there's no need to go into it here" (Lordy- if not at Parliamentary Debate BEFORE the laws are passed, then when ??? ) but the Liberal and the National Parties asserted that "the laws are flawed but we will not be opposing them".

So my apologies to you in debating your opinion that you are of course entitled to, but I cannot for one second write things down to the authorities doing "what they feel is right at the time". This sort of thing is not about being human, it is about arrogance, PR and vote catching. These points are not just "there somewhere though" ..... they plague the many of the laws that have been brought in, especially since 2004.

Edited November 3, 2010 by Erny

[Natsu chan]

It came out recently too that the dangerous dog laws in Victoria were actually brought in to prevent people from having time to mount a legal case against the councils. As fighting them was costing councils too much money. Brumby actually said this recently I can't think where I saw it. Now if that doesn't make you feel cynical I don't know what to say, it certainly reinforced my cynicism.

The thing is pollies never seem to think past the next election and if it gets them votes they'll pass it what ever it is. The other problem is, that the vast majority of people can't see that nothing can be taken in isolation. Every law they bring in affects everyone it just cascades but most people can't or won't see that.

[Erny]

It came out recently too that the dangerous dog laws in Victoria were actually brought in to prevent people from having time to mount a legal case against the councils. As fighting them was costing councils too much money. Brumby actually said this recently I can't think where I saw it. Now if that doesn't make you feel cynical I don't know what to say, it certainly reinforced my cynicism.

Yes - I was informed this as well, from someone who I remember was a person in authority, but I can't recall whom.

The thing is pollies never seem to think past the next election and if it gets them votes they'll pass it what ever it is. The other problem is, that the vast majority of people can't see that nothing can be taken in isolation. Every law they bring in affects everyone it just cascades but most people can't or won't see that.

And again, I agree. Brumby announces that if he is re-elected, he'll bring in a law that prevents under 18's from purchasing pets from pet stores. Big Deal. Does that really go to the heart of the problem? I don't think so. But it sounds good to the Jo Public, who by inference will assume that the problem is about under 18's buying pets. So there will be some of the Jo Public who will think he's doing a great thing by this and send him their vote. And it will basically cost him next to nothing - the Pet Stores won't mind because I suspect that the majority of their pet sales is not to under 18 year olds. So he won't lose the votes of the Pet Stores, nor will he have to suffer their angst. For him it's a win/win based on a shallow promise.

And then let's not forget how the Victorian State Government brought in a law that banned the good use of the PPCollar. By their own written admission, they have no recorded evidence of harm having been caused by these collars. Indeed, I have cringed at some things I have seen being done with the ineffectual use of other training tools that are not only readily available but which are heralded as "kind, gentle" training tools, where both dog and owner would have benefited welfare speaking, with the use of the PPCollar. Wrong is the law that divides one's sense of doing right by welfare and doing right by law. But no, even without evidence of harm, they ban the PPCollar. And funnily enough, that was around the time when the public were putting pressure on the RSPCA to do something about live exports. Guess something needed to 'give' to take the heat of that little baby. And I spent 3 years of my free (and not so free) time putting together a documentary to prove the worth of the PPCollar and the ills of the law. The documentary was acknowledged. The Government even went so far as to say it raised a few eyebrows. But no ...... for the time being they will reinstate the law that bans its use.

Edited November 3, 2010 by Erny

[Steve]

I think, like it is in many other areas, that Councils do what they feel is right at the time. This may mean that the decisions are based on a lack of education and or knowledge and a failure to see the bigger picture.

I don't agree with the cynics that feel they are doing it to make themselves feel better or that they don't care or simply for PR. I am sure that these points would be there somewhere though, decision makers are only human afterall.

If people seriously feel that the local, state and federal governments and the decision makers are on the wrong track and are making a mess of things, then the simplest solution is to become a participating member of your local, state or federal goverment and the decision making groups.

Maybe - except that most of us are not able to become a participating member of their local, state or federal government and like you I have no doubt that councils do what they think is right based on what they have been advised is whats best for the residents etc .

My main issue isn't really with councils it's with the people who want to yell and scream and demand more laws because people don't follow current laws.

[dogbesotted]

Yep call for a new law for a little old lady who lives alone on a pension with a little lap dog because somewhere someone owns a dog which isnt contained or controlled.

Call for new laws for the breeder who has a litter now and then in their lounge room because somewhere someone might breed dogs in poor conditions.

better yet lets put peple in to write these mandatory codes who dont own a dog or breed a dog or maybe dont even like dogs. That will do it.

yep.. that is exactly what happens. in my shire when they introduced a two dog only rule (with a permit for an additional third dog for that dogs life payable annually etc etc) then they went door to door seeking out tall those xtra dogs.. terrifying and terrorising elderly people with their litrtle dog friends.. it was appalling plus a waste of money when those whose dogs roamed etc were never approached.. sigh.

sadly i feel that the world has gone mad and those of us who actually want to share our lives and homes with dogs are beingmarginalised. they way regulation andlegislation is going only the big factory sty;le dog breeders will survive...

Helen

[Erny]

My main issue isn't really with councils it's with the people who want to yell and scream and demand more laws because people don't follow current laws.

*Bump* this because I'm sorry Steve, that I went off track.

[~Anne~]

Erny, reading, asking questions and firing off correspondence is not participation, at least not in the way I mean it.

If you want to effect change, become a decision maker. Run for Council. Run aas a local member. Join committees and groups. Be there and have your say counted when these things are planned, discussed and debated.

I think, like it is in many other areas, that Councils do what they feel is right at the time. This may mean that the decisions are based on a lack of education and or knowledge and a failure to see the bigger picture.

I don't agree with the cynics that feel they are doing it to make themselves feel better or that they don't care or simply for PR. I am sure that these points would be there somewhere though, decision makers are only human afterall.

If people seriously feel that the local, state and federal governments and the decision makers are on the wrong track and are making a mess of things, then the simplest solution is to become a participating member of your local, state or federal goverment and the decision making groups.

Maybe - except that most of us are not able to become a participating member of their local, state or federal government and like you I have no doubt that councils do what they think is right based on what they have been advised is whats best for the residents etc .

My main issue isn't really with councils it's with the people who want to yell and scream and demand more laws because people don't follow current laws.

I totally agree.

However, thinking back over the decisions I have made and the opinions I have held in the past, I too was one that called for more laws once. I had little understanding at the time of the bigger picture and the consequences and potential consequences of more laws. I am now educated and have a much broader view of animal control and animal laws (I might add, in part becuase of you).

I would think that the narrow view thinking and the enlightenment scenario is a common one amongst doog owners. If I can learn and alter my view, why can't decision makers? Through joining them and participating we can gently effect change in the way thigns are viewed perhaps. Pie in the sky stuff maybe, but I'd rather do it this way then become cynical, hardened and frustrated.

Edited November 3, 2010 by ~Anne~

[Erny]

Erny, reading, asking questions and firing off correspondence is not participation, at least not in the way I mean it.

If you want to effect change, become a decision maker. Run for Council. Run aas a local member. Join committees and groups. Be there and have your say counted when these things are planned, discussed and debated.

Why should I have to give up my career, in part or in full, to be able to offer and deliver good information, argument, discussion etc. with my Council or Government? I don't want to run as a local member. I don't want to join committees or groups. I just want good common sense and a right to voice it and have it listened to. I hate the 'argument' of "if you want something done or have them listen to you, you have to join them". (That strikes me as a bit of "having a dog and having to bark yourself".) And if that is the case, then I don't think Council or Government is as innocent as you seem to suggest they are. THEY are the ones who chose their career - one of serving the people. They need to listen to them and stop playing us as pawns.

But anyway - this goes back to Steve's opening post about people calling for more and more laws. You cannot legislate against stupidity. And the more laws we call for, the more "pawns" the Government have to play with.

Edited November 4, 2010 by Erny

[Greytmate]

I just think its funny that Brisbane actually has a law basically saying that every dog has to be vaccinated to the satisfaction of a vet.

Anyone here ever had a visit from the BCC enforcement team to inspect your dog and check your vacc cert.

[Steve]

Erny, reading, asking questions and firing off correspondence is not participation, at least not in the way I mean it.

If you want to effect change, become a decision maker. Run for Council. Run aas a local member. Join committees and groups. Be there and have your say counted when these things are planned, discussed and debated.

I think, like it is in many other areas, that Councils do what they feel is right at the time. This may mean that the decisions are based on a lack of education and or knowledge and a failure to see the bigger picture.

I don't agree with the cynics that feel they are doing it to make themselves feel better or that they don't care or simply for PR. I am sure that these points would be there somewhere though, decision makers are only human afterall.

If people seriously feel that the local, state and federal governments and the decision makers are on the wrong track and are making a mess of things, then the simplest solution is to become a participating member of your local, state or federal goverment and the decision making groups.

Maybe - except that most of us are not able to become a participating member of their local, state or federal government and like you I have no doubt that councils do what they think is right based on what they have been advised is whats best for the residents etc .

My main issue isn't really with councils it's with the people who want to yell and scream and demand more laws because people don't follow current laws.

I totally agree.

However, thinking back over the decisions I have made and the opinions I have held in the past, I too was one that called for more laws once. I had little understanding at the time of the bigger picture and the consequences and potential consequences of more laws. I am now educated and have a much broader view of animal control and animal laws (I might add, in part becuase of you).

I would think that the narrow view thinking and the enlightenment scenario is a common one amongst doog owners. If I can learn and alter my view, why can't decision makers? Through joining them and participating we can gently effect change in the way thigns are viewed perhaps. Pie in the sky stuff maybe, but I'd rather do it this way then become cynical, hardened and frustrated.

I agree Im a tad cynical and frustrated though Id probably challenge hardened but I dont think its as easy as joining councils,state governments and federal governments - in fact I know its not. I think its about education and holding them accountable because its my experience that unless there is outside accountability and outside pressure and education they wont learn and wont consider too much past their own understanding or comfort level. Now and then you can place someone with a bit of brains in there and they may be able to educate em a bit and maybe even sway them a little but usually there's too much politics going on to get too far very quickly.

[Steve]

I just think its funny that Brisbane actually has a law basically saying that every dog has to be vaccinated to the satisfaction of a vet.

Anyone here ever had a visit from the BCC enforcement team to inspect your dog and check your vacc cert.

In NSW and Victoria if you dont vaccinate your breeding dogs every year its a crimminal offence unless you have a get out of goal free card signed by your vet that they have given you permission not to vaccinate. Its enough to have your breeding permits pulled at least and in cases where they want to ping you for anything its most definitely used against a breeder. Heard of exactly this just 3 days ago in one Victorian shire. Its one of the laws RSPCA can police in NSW and will soon be able to police in Victoria. In NSW you can give your dog a vaccination which you can purchase off the net - you cant in Victoria so you have to have a vet sign off that the dog has been vaccinated. I dont need to point out that protocols for vaccination say dont do it right? they may not rock up just to check vaccination certs but I promise you if they come in for anything else they use it.

[Steve]

And while we are at it-

How is it that I can make a decision to have my dog killed without a second opinion because its my property and yet I cant decide to have a vet lower its voice?

Is it that those making laws do really think its better for a dog to die than have its voice lowered?