New Category In Qld Animal Management Act

[Tarmons]

This quote is taken from the Today's Townsville Bulletin. All Queensland owners of large dogs should take note. The Animal Management Act [Dogs and Cats] 2008 came into force on July1 2010

In yesterday's Sunday Mail the State Govt was bemoaning the fact that within Queensland 18 local Council regions did not have any dogs declared as Menancing. Bundaberg got a Gold Star and went to the top pf the Class because so far since July1 this year Bundaberg have declared 48 dogs as menancing

A new category of dangerous dog "menacing" has just been introduced under the Animal Management (Cats and Dogs) Act 2008.

Local Government Minister Desley Boyle said the Act ensured councils had the ability to fine dog owners if their animals frightened people.

The Act now has three categories of regulated dogs: restricted (from importation), dangerous (have attacked) and this new category of menacing.

"Queenslanders have had enough of dog attacks. Dog owners are liable for their charges and that means jumping at a fence or snapping at passersby should not be tolerated," Ms Boyle said.

"If a dog is regulated then there are specific rules that kick in including having a certain height of fence, muzzling the dog and that the dog owner is required to have effective control of their animal in public."

If a dog is declared menacing the owner can face a fine of up to $2000 while the owner of a dog that bites someone can face a fine of up to $30,000.

"The category of menacing is relatively new and is aimed at getting people to report badly behaving animals and their owners so action can be taken before a dog attack occurs and someone is terribly hurt," Ms Boyle said.

"If you or someone in your family feels threatened by a dog please don't sweep it under the carpet. You don't have to wait for someone to be bitten."

[Sue]

So Bunderburg has a population who does not train its dogs, or an over zealous council, whereas the other communites have citizens who train and control their pets.

The article makes declearing dogs meanacing sound like a public sport for councils.

[KatrinaM]

I am not sure why owners of large dogs should take note. The QLD laws do not discriminate based on size, only on behaviour. The laws were being ridiculed the other day as there were toy breeds declared menacing for aggressive behaviour.

There will be statistics that say (for example I don’t know the statistics and they are usually expressed as a "Pyramid") for every 1 fatality there are 2000 hospitalisations, 10000 medical treatments and 50000 counts of menacing behaviour. The plan looks to be if those dogs that are menacing are identified and controls put in place to stop these events before they escalate then it makes a whole lot less medical treatments, hospitalisations and fatalities in the future. I am pretty sure there are a whole lot more dogs that deserve the title menacing in every shire but are flying under the council’s attention or the council don’t want to deal with it.

Sadly it sounds to me as if a good plan has been misconstrued to sound like a competition for local government to "get" dogs and dog owners.

[Tarmons]

The problem seems to be that if a dog rushes the fence and barks at anyone passing by, the dog can be declared menancing. All the person has to do is to notify that Council that they are scared of the dog in house # xxx in street X because it barks at the fence.

Small dogs don't bother anyone but Medium sized and large dogs seem to cop it. I guess that is what has happened in Bundaberg: Dogs barking at the fence at passers-by and an over zealous local Council.

The following Letter to the Editor was written by a resident of an area known for its Bogans, Vandalism and Break 'n' Enters:

Issue of menancing dog behaviour.

Another rule, another way that I can be bullied and threatened by government. I have a large dog behind a big fence which rushes out and barks like she will eat you if you come in my yard (although she has a lovely nature and is extremely well behaved and polite when we go out).

I have her because I cannot count on anyone else to protect my family and property against the thugs that are allowed to roam around my suburb, threaten us, steal from us and generally ruin what was once a great community. They can verbally and physically abuse people and they get nothing but a slap on the wrist, yet I face the prospect of fines and higher registration costs if my dog, which is inside my yard behind a picket fence lets these idiots know they cannot come in.

When the authorities make it safe for me to live in my own home, then come and talk to me about my 'scary' dog. I am just very grateful that I was born in the sixties and had the opportunity to experience the Australian way of life - we were the last as this country is now overregulated and soft.

[GeckoTree]

Good letter!

[Lollipup]

I moved to Bundaberg 2 years ago. I don't know if its just the area but there is a lot of bogans, 90% of dogs are from BYBs, markets etc. and people tend not to take responsibility or dog training seriously. Its disappointing. Its not everyone but I do notice it. The foxie cross mentioned in the article is likely the foxie cross Jack russell that lives in our street and is allowed to wander the street. She chases the postman so he reported it and now she is declared menacing and her owner fined. She is still out in the street. It is ironic that the owner also has a huge rottweiler and a large cattle cross ridgeback who are both well behaved and nicely contained in his backyard, while his little foxie-JRT cross is out "menacing" in the street.

As for the Council, I'd better not comment.

I can say there are a lot of incidents where a dog lunging at a fence is reported as a "dog attack"

And on the front of the local paper today is an article about this issue where an obedience trainer says "mongrel owners" are to blame. Which is pretty spot on.

Edited November 8, 2010 by Tenille W

[Rebanne]

The problem seems to be that if a dog rushes the fence and barks at anyone passing by, the dog can be declared menancing. All the person has to do is to notify that Council that they are scared of the dog in house # xxx in street X because it barks at the fence.

Small dogs don't bother anyone but Medium sized and large dogs seem to cop it. I guess that is what has happened in Bundaberg: Dogs barking at the fence at passers-by and an over zealous local Council.

they sure as hell bother me as they are the only ones rushing fences on boundaries where I walk. The very nasty cattle dog is behind a side gate, up the drive way, across the road and 30 metres from the bike path I am walking on. So I and my dogs can ignore him, the small ones who are trying to get through or over the fence to attack me and mine are a nightmare, while I am trying to get to and from the walking track.

[KatrinaM]

Why do people think that a dog that rushes the fence and barks would be any good as a protection dog?

[KitKat]

Why do people think that a dog that rushes the fence and barks would be any good as a protection dog?

It's not necessarily the expectation that they will 'be good as a protection dog' but that they are a visual and noise deterant to people thinking of breakign and entering - at least that's how i see my two GSD's as first and for most ín regards to 'security'.

[Liath]

Why do people think that a dog that rushes the fence and barks would be any good as a protection dog?

Because they are a deterrent for would be thieves.

Awhile ago 2 teenage girls were caught inside a house two doors down. In their possession was a list of houses that they were going to 'hit' and not hit. The not list were all the houses that had dogs, including ours. Our dogs a little fluff balls that yap that wouldn't stop anyone but they make alot of noise if anyone comes near the house.

Edited November 9, 2010 by Liath

[KatrinaM]

The letter writer wrote -

"I have a large dog behind a big fence which rushes out and barks like she will eat you"

"I have her because I cannot count on anyone else to protect my family and property "

A dog full stop is a deterant to would be theives. A dog that rushes the fence and barks like it will eat you is a problem as it isnt just would be thugs who are concerned, it is the general public.

We have a Toy Poodle who WILL bite if you walk into my girls bedroom in the middle of the night and DOES bark like a banshee when somebody outside our family comes to the door or in the yard. He doesnt need to use the footpath as entertainment by rushing the fence barking meanacingly at passers by.

[Greytmate]

If people want to keep dogs that are a visual and audible deterrent to thieves, they are quite within their rights to do so.

And the public is within their rights to require these dogs to be kept behind adequate fencing, with warning signs.

Having your dog declared Menacing isn't going to hurt your dog at all. This is a great dog control law.

[KitKat]

It's a great law...unless you have PITA neighbours who will find it easier to find more ways to bother you then just creating barking dog complaints - however as far as i knew the BCC already had in place that if a dog 'frightened' you the dog could be deemed dangerous - eg rushes at a fence as you walk by etc.

I have my back yard and front yard seperated to lessen the chances of the above - both my dogs bark etc at people walking their dogs by, or at kids who drag sticks across my wooden fence or at people that enter the yard - if i'm home they quieten a hell of a lot quicker then if i'm not.

[KatrinaM]

I agree with you Greytmate, I think it lets dog owners feel safe with a dog that they think will scare off the bad guys and lets the public feel safe from dogs they think are the bad guys.

Edited November 9, 2010 by KatrinaM

[shelby-001]

I think the law is fantastic and yes small dogs do bother me. One poked it's head through a FRONT fence that ran along the foot path and bit my dogs nose, he had stopped to sniff a post. If the fecning was adequate or the dog was behind a 'backyard' fence (ie: one that returns from the side fence to inline with the house frontage) it wouldn't have happened. We walk past a multitude of dogs twice a day and these are the only two that behave this way and the owners should be made to do something about it. Next time it might be a kids hand and I bet the parents won't be as understanding as I was. I was VERY cranky though and did make a complaint to the council. The lady I spoke to was so uninformed she wasn't even aware of the new laws. I rang to follow up today but the laws officers were out. I was asked to ring back tomorrow. I firmly believe it's an avenue for councils to work with owners to rectify animal behaviour before the animals get to the point of being declared dangerous and then all the issues that go along with that have to be dealt with, or worse still the animal escalates to causing damage before intervention occurs

[Tapferhund]

Tarmons, dog people are fighting a losing battle...................on ALL fronts.