What Can We Do

[Tapferhund]

I think that's a great Idea lilli

Unfortunately in the short term a lot of dogs are going to suffer.

And they don't need to nor do they deserve It, do you suggest we sit back and continue to let these Innocent dogs die

I know It's Impossible to try and stop morons, but that doesn't mean there's nothing we can do about It to try and help

That's just giving up and I'm sure owners good owners who are finding themselves In this mess are not going to give up on their dogs

And you're missing the point, this Isn't a Pit or Pit X problem only anymore

Please If you don't have anything positive to add to this thread, don't post, I don't want It to turn Into a negative, It's meant for people who want to try and help and do something. Thanks

ETA

Isn't Peter Hitchener (News presenter) patron of Dogs Victoria? Perhaps he could be spokesperson? What we need is everyone to get together and organize a meeting with him or someone like him who is in the media ....air our concerns on everything including media sensationalism which is not helping the situation at all.

Just an idea???

[Tapferhund]

This is a problems for owners of all dogs now. With this standard, so many other dogs have been put in danger. And there is also the chance that this standard can be changed at some time to put even more types of dogs at risk.

There are things we can do to try and get the Government and the population to listen. Local papers, writing to MPs and also writing to the opposition, to get some sort of discussion going on this is a start. Don't just let it slide through without a whimper.

It is the fault of irresponsible dog owners that this has happened. Dog owners of all dogs, that have done the wrong thing, have brought this down on us.

Ain't that the truth!

[RottnBullies]

Isn't Peter Hitchener (News presenter) patron of Dogs Victoria? Perhaps he could be spokesperson? What we need is everyone to get together and organize a meeting with him or someone like him who is in the media ....air our concerns on everything including media sensationalism which is not helping the situation at all.

Just an idea???

I'm not sure, but It's worth a shot to contact him If he Is, he can only say no, and nothing's been lost. The more good spokespersons that are willing to help the better

[Teebs]

I am happy to help in any way i can. Just like everyone else... dont know where to start?

Maybe it is time someone like the EDBA got back up and running?

[RottnBullies]

I am happy to help in any way i can. Just like everyone else... dont know where to start?

Maybe it is time someone like the EDBA got back up and running?

Yes Yes Yes..... I couldn't agree more, It's been on my mind for ages now

[LizT]

I am happy to help in any way i can. Just like everyone else... dont know where to start?

Maybe it is time someone like the EDBA got back up and running?

Same here re" wanting to help. I've got nothing 'new' to add but like what is being said here.

It is a very frustrating situation and Public Education re Dog Ownership has been lacking for so long already. I would have liked to have seen more on the TV years ago.

I think it needed to start at the 'root' of the problem. Tackling problems such as

"Where does your puppy come from?" Responsibility, care and education. It begins with Puppy selling Pet shops/BYB's and education (or lack thereof) of the Public in Dog Ownership.

IMO alot of the problems we have regarding Dog Ownership have snowballed from these areas to the mess we have today, creating kneejerk reations such as BSL and leaving the fundamentals of the situation untackled.

[Steve]

I am happy to help in any way i can. Just like everyone else... dont know where to start?

Maybe it is time someone like the EDBA got back up and running?

Same here re" wanting to help. I've got nothing 'new' to add but like what is being said here.

It is a very frustrating situation and Public Education re Dog Ownership has been lacking for so long already. I would have liked to have seen more on the TV years ago.

I think it needed to start at the 'root' of the problem. Tackling problems such as

"Where does your puppy come from?" Responsibility, care and education. It begins with Puppy selling Pet shops/BYB's and education (or lack thereof) of the Public in Dog Ownership.

IMO alot of the problems we have regarding Dog Ownership have snowballed from these areas to the mess we have today, creating kneejerk reations such as BSL and leaving the fundamentals of the situation untackled.

I think we need a whole new approach and a whole new plan. In order for us to get anywhere it seems pointless for us to keep saying what we have been saying for what seems like forever. We have been rpesenting the science and arguing and arguing common sense including demonstrating that what they are doing hasnt worked in other places, has made it anything but better here or anywhere and it wont stop dogs biting people regardless of their breed and it wont stop irresponsible owners.

We have been taking a look around at what has shown to work or at least that which has shown that it may work in other areas.

We think we need to present a better probable solution and go after a pilot program in at least one shire to show it is a better, safer alternative. Ive just come out of hospital and Im running at half speed for the next few days at least but we are just putting together a strategic plan to consider having a crack at it. It's different but I think its got a fair shot at cleaning up the whole mess.

[RottnBullies]

We have been taking a look around at what has shown to work or at least that which has shown that it may work in other areas.

We think we need to present a better probable solution and go after a pilot program in at least one shire to show it is a better, safer alternative. Ive just come out of hospital and Im running at half speed for the next few days at least but we are just putting together a strategic plan to consider having a crack at it. It's different but I think its got a fair shot at cleaning up the whole mess.

Makes for a positive step, I gather the pilot of what you speak If It goes ahead will be trialed first In a QLD shire?

[Steve]

We have been taking a look around at what has shown to work or at least that which has shown that it may work in other areas.

We think we need to present a better probable solution and go after a pilot program in at least one shire to show it is a better, safer alternative. Ive just come out of hospital and Im running at half speed for the next few days at least but we are just putting together a strategic plan to consider having a crack at it. It's different but I think its got a fair shot at cleaning up the whole mess.

Makes for a positive step, I gather the pilot of what you speak If It goes ahead will be trialed first In a QLD shire?

No not necessarily - I was thinking Victoria because they have the most horrible dog laws but Im in NSW . Anywhere we can find a shire which is prepared to give it a go will do.

[Guest Ams]

Steve, I hope you are okay.

[freundhund]

Please accept my apologies for a very long post. Also if you don’t agree, please understand these are my thoughts on how we need to deal with BSL and Dangerous dog legislation and I would like to debate suggestions, my ideas need to be perceived as a starting point and I am happy to listen to other points of view.

Firstly I believe that anyone that owns currently either a prescribed breed under BSL, those breeds that are listed as able to compete in Schutzhund (I will deal with the reasons for this late) and in some cases large breeds in general ie almost every breed where the dog measures more than 20 inches or 50 -52 cm at the shoulders, need to be concerned about short and long term proposals regarding dog legislation.

To deal with current and preposed legislation, I believe we have to take a leaf out of the GSD breeders’ book and look at how they managed in 1972 to achieve having the ban on GSD’s lifted. Whether you agree with the GSD’s clubs and breeders current ideals they did manage to achieve changing legislation and this is where we need to go, the GSD fraternity managed to get a ban lifted at a Federal level and this should be a good starting point for us.

We as a group of concerned dog owners, breeder’s etc need to remember that ANKC and ANKC affiliated clubs are registration bodies only and for them in particular unregistered breeds are not on their radar. As such we need to form a political or friends of, or concern group of dog owners. I personally believe we need to go down the political route, particularly in this day and age of minor parties achieving seats at local. State and Federal level and holding a balance of power! I believe that there are more dog owners than, fishing persons or Gun owning persons!

I honestly feel that we need to create in each state a group and that group make suggestions and create a Federal body. These bodies are to have a nominated spokesperson, were that spokesperson is able to give very clear, controlled and emotive statements to the media etc when there are negative dog situations whether it is a dog attack or when preposed legislation is brought up in the media or even random by unqualified people.

We need to set up a fighting fund, were monies go towards advertising campaigns, government lobbyists and assisting in creating schemes where by we can work to prove that our dogs are safe. We have to look at paying solicitors and barristers to give us learned opinions on how changes to dog legislation can affect us as dog owners. We also need to work to bring in requirements that local governments have to proper requirements for dog inspector/catchers not any person can become a dog/inspector/catcher without a minimum of 2 years study at a TAFE or recognised institution. (We need to even put what needs to be in these courses together).

We need to set up a form of Breed Survey where the dog has to pass a set of basic tests to show that the dog doesn’t have a temperament issue, where the dogs’ microchip number is put on the paperwork. This test eventually has to be designed to be accepted in a court of law, so we even need to set standards for those people doing the testing.

Whether we like it or not we have to unite as currently most of us are writing letters as individuals, were we are seen as individuals, unless we are seen by the major political parties as having numbers and clout, we are basically powerless. We also cannot have people making emotional statements ie this is going back to Nazi Germany but in the dog world, whether we feel or believe this statement is true, it is the sort of statement that the media would jump on in a very negative way. Possibly in the future we would even need to utilise the services of a paid spokesperson to get the most politically correct and sympathetic comments across to the media.

To my mind in the last 5 – 10 years the media has really started run a campaign against dog and dog ownership. We as dog owners again need to be very aware of this and make sure we have people able to put a positive spin on dogs and dog ownership, including making media companies realize that if they continue to spin negative publicity about dogs we will try and hit them where it hurts in the hip pockets with boycotts etc.

My concerns have been growing over the pass couple of years on hearing various political spokespeople, members of state government commenting on, why do we need dogs taller than 50 – 52 cm (20 inches) at the shoulder, why do we need dogs that can bite (ie the Schutzhuund breeds) and it will only take one politician or media representative to find a list of accepted Schutzhund breeds for these breeds to be placed under BSL or when a dog is declared dangerous for the fact that it is a listed Schutzhund breed to be brought up.

I would also like us to ask the science community to provide us with papers and give seminars and conferences on what they have on BSL and Dangerous dogs, ie markers, research that either proves or disproves that dogs are dangerous. This would include veterinary papers, maybe in the long term we would have to pay for a Phd student or researcher to do papers to help or prove whether some types of legislation will or will not be effective.

Whether you agree with this or not, local councils should provide X amount of local park space for dog parks depending on the number of dogs registered in their municipality. As well local council rangers should be running basic obedience clubs for local ratepayers, so that people can learn basic obedience and control of their dogs. A lot of councils are unwilling to have obedience clubs in their municipalities due to insurance requirements. (Note basic obedience clubs by the councils could be conducted under State dog controlling bodies under their insurance umbrella).

At the moment the Dangerous Dog Legislation in a lot of states is changed by stealth, no-one in the dog community ie dog clubs, obedience clubs or State Dog Controlling bodies seem to be involved as far as I can ascertain or if they are they do not appear to be able to promote the welfare of the dogs under a lot of states legislation.

Do we have people willing in each state to start the ball rolling? Book a venue, call a meeting and start to form local and state bodies? I really feel that unless we start to do something we as dog owners don’t have a future. Do we really, really want to save our current dog and our future dos? So is there anyone interested in these ideals as starters or am I on my own with my thoughts and ideas.

FH.

[Little Gifts]

OK, I can give you a govt insight as I actually draft and edit things for Queensland parliament as well as for four state govt Ministers in general. I also see the responses prepared to issues from Federal Government Ministers. While the set up here in QLD is slightly different (we have our own constitution) it will be similar.

The thing that get the attention and support of your local MP, who in turn pushes the issue on the state Minister in the hot seat for this legislation is people making informed and ongoing complaints. Unfortunately this may only result in this MP raising it in parliament when that Minister is not even in the room or it may result in that MP writing one letter to that specific Minister. Low impact.

The next approach is for anybody and everybody to write to the relevant Minister AND the Premier. Don't bother writing to other state Minister's as they will simply refer your letter on. The letters should be similar but not the same. Stick to facts and avoid emotive or finger pointing language. If you can draw it back to studies or legislation it may breach (such as our very own consitutional rights!) then it means someone has to do some actual work to respond to your letter. The reason you should avoid them all being the same is because then all your responses will just be a blanket one. The more factual your letter and the more questions or issues it raises means that the more knowledgeable the person who responds to it needs to be. It might also need to be run past their legal area. I'd be asking them to tell you what process they followed to create this legislation and studies they used to determine this approach would provide the best outcome and was the most enforceable. The more letters there are overall means that the Minister and their Policy Advisor and even the Premier can't fail to notice the public's discontent. Remember they are in power due to public votes! Until you get attention it is unlikely that a Minister or the Premier will agree to meet with you to discuss this in person. Medium to high impact.

To maximise impact I suggest you add the following to the point above:

1. Who is the opposing party leader in your relevant state? Meet with them and bombard them with letters because they will be looking for something they can use against the opposing party in Parliament. Public unrest is just the thing.

2. Start a lobby group and build it up to include support from legitimate key bodies but let people lobby independantly as well. People can follow the advice or direction of the group that way so you are all working for the same thing. Remember if they don't have this legislation then what do they do? The lobby group could provide suggestions or even have reps on the board drafting new legislation.

3. Think about events to attract media attention like public marches or even approaching your local community paper to cover good news stories on that dangerous breed. ALL govt depts monitor media in their state, even those little local stories.

4. This is an important one - check if your parliament ever sits in community locations. Here in QLD it is called Community Cabinet. At every Comm Cab there is a chance to meet with the Premier and whatever Minister you wish. These are called deputations. Take advantage of these. Bombard the Comm Cab with requests for meetings on the issue (seperate people of course), wear t-shirts, provide them with studies, whatever you can do to get theirs, the media and the public's attention. Comm Cabs are a lot of work and the Premier and Ministers do not want to be caught out during them. It is likely that they would agree to meet with you more privately on this issue.

4. Be persistent! They need to know you're not going away quietly! They hate that!

Even though this is currently happening in other states there is a risk for all of us. If a lobby group gets going then it can be emotive to get public attention but just not to govt as that isn't tangible.

I'd love to make a t-shirt up with a gorgeous 'dangerous breed' puppy on the front saying something like "You want to kill my dog?" with details of what's happening on the back. That would get attention. I have a catch phrase going round in my head that is not quite there yet but it is something like "Police dogs? POLICE PEOPLE!"

[GeckoTree]

IMO the best thing to happen in Vic is when the challenges start to come in. If every single person with an innocent dog challenges and appeals the declaration who is caught in this takes up the offer of VCAT, then either sues the state to recover costs, or pain and suffering the sooner they might say Oops.

edit I wonder if someone can take that state to court the next time a "non dangerous breed or X thereof" attacks maims or kills.

Edited September 11, 2011 by -GT-

[rep628]

OK, I can give you a govt insight as I actually draft and edit things for Queensland parliament as well as for four state govt Ministers in general. I also see the responses prepared to issues from Federal Government Ministers. While the set up here in QLD is slightly different (we have our own constitution) it will be similar.

The thing that get the attention and support of your local MP, who in turn pushes the issue on the state Minister in the hot seat for this legislation is people making informed and ongoing complaints. Unfortunately this may only result in this MP raising it in parliament when that Minister is not even in the room or it may result in that MP writing one letter to that specific Minister. Low impact.

The next approach is for anybody and everybody to write to the relevant Minister AND the Premier. Don't bother writing to other state Minister's as they will simply refer your letter on. The letters should be similar but not the same. Stick to facts and avoid emotive or finger pointing language. If you can draw it back to studies or legislation it may breach (such as our very own consitutional rights!) then it means someone has to do some actual work to respond to your letter. The reason you should avoid them all being the same is because then all your responses will just be a blanket one. The more factual your letter and the more questions or issues it raises means that the more knowledgeable the person who responds to it needs to be. It might also need to be run past their legal area. I'd be asking them to tell you what process they followed to create this legislation and studies they used to determine this approach would provide the best outcome and was the most enforceable. The more letters there are overall means that the Minister and their Policy Advisor and even the Premier can't fail to notice the public's discontent. Remember they are in power due to public votes! Until you get attention it is unlikely that a Minister or the Premier will agree to meet with you to discuss this in person. Medium to high impact.

To maximise impact I suggest you add the following to the point above:

1. Who is the opposing party leader in your relevant state? Meet with them and bombard them with letters because they will be looking for something they can use against the opposing party in Parliament. Public unrest is just the thing.

2. Start a lobby group and build it up to include support from legitimate key bodies but let people lobby independantly as well. People can follow the advice or direction of the group that way so you are all working for the same thing. Remember if they don't have this legislation then what do they do? The lobby group could provide suggestions or even have reps on the board drafting new legislation.

3. Think about events to attract media attention like public marches or even approaching your local community paper to cover good news stories on that dangerous breed. ALL govt depts monitor media in their state, even those little local stories.

4. This is an important one - check if your parliament ever sits in community locations. Here in QLD it is called Community Cabinet. At every Comm Cab there is a chance to meet with the Premier and whatever Minister you wish. These are called deputations. Take advantage of these. Bombard the Comm Cab with requests for meetings on the issue (seperate people of course), wear t-shirts, provide them with studies, whatever you can do to get theirs, the media and the public's attention. Comm Cabs are a lot of work and the Premier and Ministers do not want to be caught out during them. It is likely that they would agree to meet with you more privately on this issue.

4. Be persistent! They need to know you're not going away quietly! They hate that!

Even though this is currently happening in other states there is a risk for all of us. If a lobby group gets going then it can be emotive to get public attention but just not to govt as that isn't tangible.

I'd love to make a t-shirt up with a gorgeous 'dangerous breed' puppy on the front saying something like "You want to kill my dog?" with details of what's happening on the back. That would get attention. I have a catch phrase going round in my head that is not quite there yet but it is something like "Police dogs? POLICE PEOPLE!"

One of the BEST comments on this thread +1,000,000,000. I was having a chat with someone today, we were trying to figure out how all this Aussie mumbo-jumbo works

[RottnBullies]

We have been taking a look around at what has shown to work or at least that which has shown that it may work in other areas.

We think we need to present a better probable solution and go after a pilot program in at least one shire to show it is a better, safer alternative. Ive just come out of hospital and Im running at half speed for the next few days at least but we are just putting together a strategic plan to consider having a crack at it. It's different but I think its got a fair shot at cleaning up the whole mess.

Makes for a positive step, I gather the pilot of what you speak If It goes ahead will be trialed first In a QLD shire?

No not necessarily - I was thinking Victoria because they have the most horrible dog laws but Im in NSW . Anywhere we can find a shire which is prepared to give it a go will do.

Thank you, that's what I was hoping for, hope you're feeling much better soon you'll need It to tackle this

freundhund and Puppy_Sniffer As this Is what path I wanted the thread to take

GT my thoughts exactly!

[freundhund]

Okay, is there a lobby group that I have missed that is already working towards halting the progress of BSL and Dangerous Dog Legislation?

If there is not, I was wondering about putting a poll up on DOL. possibly in the General Section, asking how many people are interested in forming a lobby group!

I truely believe that we need a lobby group for each state, to deal with state legislation, as well as a Federal group to deal with Federal legislation, particularly in light of remarks being made in Federal Parliment with regards to the Federal Government legislating against BSL and Dangerous dogs.

Do readers on here really feel that we could get a lobby group of the grounds? Funding? How much do members feel that they would be prepared to pay to belong to a group, with the group having properly audited books and being financial accountable but realising we are going to have to pay people ie solicitors, barristers, lobbyists etc.

Are we going to be able to successfully fund raise, are we going to look at this as a serious enterprise with the idea of getting people onto local, state and federal positions? I know we have members that have a lot of expertise but we are not going to be able to continuously work for free, we will have to cover costs etc.

Do we have people here that can agree to disagree for the greater good. Can we manage this all without stabbing ourselves in the back before we have even started to get off the ground?

The reason I am playing devils advocate is I believe if we seriously start down this track we will have to be prepared to work very hard at it, sometimes with very little to show for it, as well as be prepared for a long time to ask for minimums to gradually get towards maximums. My other concern is that people will find it difficult not going into attack against legislation boots and all, when we possibly need to do the softly, softly catchee monkey route.

Please again give your thoughts.

[GeckoTree]

I'm in!

[SpotTheDog]

I'm in, I'll pay, I'll lobby, I can write and edit and I have some media knowledge. Any skills I have I'll give to the group, and as much time as I can physically put to it.

[Steve]

I'm in, I'll pay, I'll lobby, I can write and edit and I have some media knowledge. Any skills I have I'll give to the group, and as much time as I can physically put to it.

Over the years there have been several including the EDBA which is still active very much behind the scenes.

Personally I think that simply yelling about the laws without supplying a viable, realistic solution is going to have us stil doing it all again for another decade and Ill be too old then to bother.

If we can cover all their woes and dont come at it as if its about BSL but rather about all the things we see dog owners and non dog owners complaining about wrapped up in one we can have the whole community prepared to chuck in with us.

[freundhund]

Hi Steve

Thank you for your comments, they are extremely valid. This also shows that one thinks something but until someone comments I forget that I might not have written my views on an area.

I know that at one stage EDBA was a very active organisation, however, when I went in search of it on Google, I couldn't find anything current or active in the last few years. This is why I felt that a new lobby group might be needed.

My views with regards to Dangerous Dog legislation is at the moment in NSW, there is only black or white. Once a dog is declared dangerous there is no chance of rehabilitation, I feel that one of the areas if we form a lobby group is that we need to work on levels of Dangerous Dog legislation with the ability for dogs being rehabilitated with accredited instructors. Again we would need to agree on who and what are accredited instructors. Under current legislation, in NSW a dog is basically permenantly locked in a cage, unless it is taken for a walk on a lead and muzzle, if your dog is declared dangerous you cannot even have it in the house, even if wearing a muzzle.

From what I am gathering from various people that are involved in helping people whose dogs have been declared dangerous, is that there is a higher standard of proof required to show that the dog is not dangerous, than for a normal dog. ie a dog that has been declared dangerous could fail the proof to show it is not dangerous as it is happy and excited to meet another dog, unless a dog that has been declared dangerous can completely ignore another dog. Again a dog that has been declared dangerous has to pass a test showing it can ignore cats, where the average dog doesn't.

I also firmly believe that our other charter if we had one would be to educate dog owners in training their dog and the law and their dog. I firmly believe if the general public actually understand how the legislation impacts them and their dog they might put more thought into how they interact and train their dog.

Edited September 11, 2011 by freundhund