Dog Licensing ( Is It Time ? )

[raz]

You talk about all these problems with prosecuting people and yet complain that existing laws aren't enforced? If existing laws were enforced you'd get the same result (ie repeat offenders paying fines or in jail) so what's the problem?

Pretty simple - they dont have the resources as it is. How is bringing in courses, testing, another piece of paper going to change the fundamental problem as it is? Add to that the ridiculous dob in a neighbour with a pitbull hotline. If the ACOs are already overburdened and under resourced, where are they magically going to find non existant time in the week? Make a dog complaint to your own ACO and see how long it takes for him/her to follow it up. It's not because they're lazy - it's because there isnt enough time in the day or week for them to keep on top of dog complaints, a lot of which come from vexatious complainants who hate their neighbours. And you havent answered the question - if you're so keen for repeat dog license offenders to go to prison - which prison? They're already full!

[WreckitWhippet]

Obviously continuous breaches should be prosecuted, they can't keep buying dogs if they are in jail or paying large fines.

So you think it's a good idea for someone repeatedly found without a dog licence to go to gaol? Which one - a purpose built prison complex for unlicensed dog owners or just shove them in any prison not already full to capacity, like what used to happen to people with overdue parking fines until one got his head bashed in and his brain left all over the floor at Long Bay. and what's going to happen to the already choked court system when all of your hypothetical breaches jam it even further? It would take the average person years to get a matter before the Local Court (who is going to pay months worth of impound fees while waiting for a court date - the tax payer because the dog owner wont be able to), or should we have a purpose built bad dog owner court as well? The Court of Canine Sessions?

Yes people who cannot follow basic requirements should go to jail, that's what happens to people who repeatedly drive without a license. Maybe once a few end up in the slammer people might begin to take their animal care responsibilities seriously!

You talk about all these problems with prosecuting people and yet complain that existing laws aren't enforced? If existing laws were enforced you'd get the same result (ie repeat offenders paying fines or in jail) so what's the problem?

The way I see it if something like this were set up it would be the perfect avenue for animal welfare and management issues to be handled by a government agency, as they should have been from day one, as government is the only agency equipped to administer it.

what kind of a deluded world do you live in ? People escape jail sentences now, for some horrific animal cruelty and it's highly unlikely that anyone , will ever do time for not having an licence to own a dog.

[WoofnHoof]

You talk about all these problems with prosecuting people and yet complain that existing laws aren't enforced? If existing laws were enforced you'd get the same result (ie repeat offenders paying fines or in jail) so what's the problem?

Pretty simple - they dont have the resources as it is. How is bringing in courses, testing, another piece of paper going to change the fundamental problem as it is? Add to that the ridiculous dob in a neighbour with a pitbull hotline. If the ACOs are already overburdened and under resourced, where are they magically going to find non existant time in the week? Make a dog complaint to your own ACO and see how long it takes for him/her to follow it up. It's not because they're lazy - it's because there isnt enough time in the day or week for them to keep on top of dog complaints, a lot of which come from vexatious complainants who hate their neighbours. And you havent answered the question - if you're so keen for repeat dog license offenders to go to prison - which prison? They're already full!

Obviously the system would need resources beyond that which are currently available I've never said it wouldn't. My point is not about the specifics which no doubt would be sorted out by people who are actually qualified in that sort of thing. I'm merely proposing a method which would enforce education because voluntary education is not enough.

How do they manage kids who won't go to school? I have no idea but I'm sure someone does. How do they punish people for minor traffic offences? I don't know but I'm pretty sure someone has a job to figure it out and they get plenty of chances to comply before they get thrown in with Bubba so most people can figure out that it's easier to comply than it is to argue about it. It would have to be a pretty special kind of idiot who would keep breaching the terms of their license as currently is the case with people who drive without one. Are you afraid that a little old granny might go to jail because she can't afford a license? Well that wouldn't happen in a transparent, accountable, government controlled system would it? There are already procedures in place help people do the right thing in similar instances.

I would certainly much prefer the resources from a stupid dob in a dog hotline to be spent on an actual education system which teaches people responsible pet ownership, that's all.

[raz]

I'm not afraid of your idea - I simply cant see it working. As I said earlier - all moot point anyway. A meeting is taking place today to propose changes to the Companion Animal Act so we'll all find out soon enough.

[WoofnHoof]

what kind of a deluded world do you live in ? People escape jail sentences now, for some horrific animal cruelty and it's highly unlikely that anyone , will ever do time for not having an licence to own a dog.

Maybe I'm a dreamer, maybe I've spent too much time listening to John Lennon, but hell it's better to push for mandatory education that may or may not work than sit by and let other groups enforce dangerous dog laws that definitely don't work.

Anyway this dreamer has to go to work so feel free to put forward any better ideas that might encourage the public to actually learn how to look after their animals properly

[murve]

ok 6 of 1, half a Dozen of the other, about the councils by laws being stretched to the Max, well does this tell you what my council is like,

I got bailed up at my front door last week (thank god me & my furies were on the inside) by a PB X, he was entire & wouldnt let me out, I rang the bylaws, reported this dog, told them it had me bailed up, there reply was "CAN YOU CATCH THE DOG, EITHER PUT IT IN YOUR BACKYARD OR TIE IT UP, TILL WE CAN GET SOME ONE THERE TO PICK IT UP" like shit no way was I going near that teeth bearing, growling, drooling animal.

Here I thought I was doing the right thing by reporting this dog on the prowl, having 3 elderly neighbors in my court, If I got paid Danger money I would have caught the dog

Sorry guys for the rant, But yes I do know the Councils are stretched to Max trying to keep up with the Regs & enforcing them.

[klink]

As mentioned in my original post I posed the question re licensing for dog ownership to try to address some of the many problems we are all facing with dog ownership if nothing changes. I suggested that we perhaps need a body solely focused on this matter .Not nescessarily councils, frankly I think it would be better to keep councils out of it anyway.They are already involved in too many things that they cant' cope with as it is.

Legal issues would have to be addressed and assuming these are done correctly and fairly would this be a solution perhaps.

It would be good , now dont' break out laughing if the Pet industry who make Billions of dollars out of us all maybe helped to fund a scheme like this.

[Steve]

I own a chihuahua and a female golden retriever and we have 3/4 acre so have plenty of room so does this mean I shouldn't walk my dogs. The way I see it people who keep there dogs in the yard 24/7 there dogs are the ones that are aggressive. Even if you have a large yard I still think its a good idea to take them out and about,that way they get socialized with people and other dogs. Not only that they get use to alot of noises and movements which all this builds up confidence and lack of fear aggression.

My dogs have people coming and going all day every day.I operate businesses from my home, I have 8 kids and 13 grandkids and if I took the dogs for a walk they wouldnt see another human or another dog - in fact all they would be exposed to is snakes and other dangers which I have eliminated from our environment. We dont all own the same breeds, live the same lifestyles or live in built up suburban areas.

Also one of my breeds is a Maremma which would rather never leave their own environment because they are bred to guard and part of that is knowing the potential threats and what is normal.

[Quickasyoucan]

I don't believe we need new laws, but I would like to see existing laws enforced. And I don't agree it is an area thing. I live in the next suburb to Mosman and there are plenty of people who walk their dogs off lead on the street, not in control, and if confronted (which I frequently do) tell me to shut up because "it is their right" to walk their dogs off lead on the street, even if they are DA (or in one case of a husky HA). People have an amazing sense of self-entitlement when it comes to what they perceive as minor laws...

I cannot remember which council it was that was sued over the death of the little girl out west Tyra Kuehne (was it Dubbo?), was just wondering if there have been more resources allocated by that council to policing given that they copped a civil suit?

The ACO's of some councils really do try to improve dog education and welfare. Warringah holds free responsible pet ownership and what pet is right for you evenings, and has guest speakers like Kersti Seksel. I remember one of the ACO's also telling me they were trying to increase the number of dog parks as they felt dogs in certain areas had no where to go off leash.

Councils need more resources and support not more laws to enforce.

[raz]

Councils need more resources and support not more laws to enforce.

Aint that the truth! Well said, Quick. Seems a pretty simple concept - not sure why some people arent getting it.

[WoofnHoof]

Councils need more resources and support not more laws to enforce.

Aint that the truth! Well said, Quick. Seems a pretty simple concept - not sure why some people arent getting it.

Not really about 'getting it' it's about getting it right. Also to me it's about whether there is a better way to educate and administrate those laws, I've often said that a federal (or at least state) government agency should be responsible for animal welfare compliance and enforcement. Let's face it it's easier to get one national government body to allocate funding for a project than it is to get however many councils all towing the line. Kill two birds with one stone, get education happening nationally and get animal welfare regulation and enforcement wholly into the public system.

[Leema]

1. 14 day cooling off period prior to puppy puchase. Object. to stop impulse buying of puppies from pet shops/ markets etc.

Though a nice idea in theory, any ethical breeders/sellers of puppies would not be selling to those making impulsive decisions.

For rescue groups, a 14 day 'hold' period would be hugely inconvenient and would take up shelter space that could be potentially used for new animals.

2. mandatory council ranger inspection of proposed home of future puppy e.g. containment issues/ safety for both dog and owner. prior to license issue.

Though this sounds nice in theory, as well, there is funding difficulties. Rangers don't have enough time to collect all the roaming dogs in my area - how would they find time to inspect my premises? Furthermore, how well educated are these rangers? Will they know that crating my dogs is perfectly humane?

3.A very nominal licence fee which by law must go back into the dog world e.g. education, health, research,rescue etc.

Registrations fit this current model - the registration fees must go back into the dog world (at least in SA). The dog systems within councils are still failing.

4. Compulsory State register of all dogs in that state ( not easy but could be done )

These registers are only as good as people willing to identify their dog and themselves as an owner, and the accuracy of owner statements. Registration system already seeks to do this, and fails.

5. A compulsory requirement to de-sex all dogs not being used for breeding by registered breeders.

Personally, I believe it is my right to have an entire dog if I choose. Registered breeders - registered by who? If you mean ANKC, does this mean that miniature fox terriers and coolies will have to die out as they are not ANKC registered?

A nice idea in theory, as well - but one that I have realised, over time, is too black and white.

6. limiting the number of litters by those breeders on a annual basis.

Why I can understand what this attempts to do (i.e. cut unwanted dogs), I highly doubt that any irresponsible breeder breeding many litters a year will heed legislation restricting this number. Those responsible breeders, who place their dogs into suitable homes, should be encouraged to breed more litters, not less.

I would support: Mandatory microchipping, and further enforcement of mandatory microchipping laws.

I think microchips are a great tool for identifying owners, dog populations, and also could be useful for identifying breeders later down the track.