What Can We Do

[Horse2008]

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

What about the 'I Disagree with the 2010 Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Bill!' facebook group? The group has Mike Bailey, a big voice in the issue.

[Steve]

OH came up with a great idea

we need to fight the media back with their own weapons - words and pictures. Photos of our dogs how they REALLY are. Playing with children, hogging couches, frolicking in the backyard. All breeds. A dog is a dog and their true purpose to be with us is being tainted by the medias flooding of vicious looking animals.

come up and plaster them all over the wall of the coucil offices. Let them see the true nature and face of the animals they want to ban

This wont work. It was used last time and failed dismally.

I can post pictures of people swimming with great whites and patting tigers but it won't convince a lot of folk that the animals are "safe".

The MOMENT you get drawn into an argument about what breeds are safe and what breed aren't you've lost. The only way ahead IMO is to talk about what makes DOGS safe and what doesn't.

The emphasis has to be on education to socialise, train, desex and contain ALL dogs. That has to be coupled with effective laws to deal with dangerous dogs - which we have alreadly. Move away from that theme to talk about breeds and you play right into the hands of the BSL proponents.

Yep but I think it needs one more thing we havent tried yet.

[Lhok]

I was just out walking Chopper, Angel and Trixie. They're well and truly broken in so when I see a kid reaching out to them I always stop and ask if they want to pet them. I don't care if the parent is in the process of trying to instill fear in the child, I think it's important to let people see that bull breeds aren't all sharks on legs [that's why Chopper's on a short lead on my other side where he can't reach them with his ginormous tongue! ]

It got me thinking. What if I created a nationwide event and encouraged owners of all powerful breeds to put a tutu or a feather boa on their dog [or anything silly really, maybe a superhero costume, just as long as there are no spiked collars or chains], take it somewhere there'd be lots of families and encourage people to say hi to their dogs. Obviously it would need to only be dogs that are placid and would handle a situation like that well. But imagine if we all got out there and just got through to one person that it's not a breed issue, it's an owner issue. It could be a small step in making a difference.

This idea could be expanded on and used in the main stream social networking sites to promote it further.

--Lhok

[rep628]

OH came up with a great idea

we need to fight the media back with their own weapons - words and pictures. Photos of our dogs how they REALLY are. Playing with children, hogging couches, frolicking in the backyard. All breeds. A dog is a dog and their true purpose to be with us is being tainted by the medias flooding of vicious looking animals.

come up and plaster them all over the wall of the coucil offices. Let them see the true nature and face of the animals they want to ban

This wont work. It was used last time and failed dismally.

I can post pictures of people swimming with great whites and patting tigers but it won't convince a lot of folk that the animals are "safe".

The MOMENT you get drawn into an argument about what breeds are safe and what breed aren't you've lost. The only way ahead IMO is to talk about what makes DOGS safe and what doesn't.

The emphasis has to be on education to socialise, train, desex and contain ALL dogs. That has to be coupled with effective laws to deal with dangerous dogs - which we have alreadly. Move away from that theme to talk about breeds and you play right into the hands of the BSL proponents.

Yep but I think it needs one more thing we havent tried yet.

Which is what Steve?

[sumosmum]

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

What about the 'I Disagree with the 2010 Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Bill!' facebook group? The group has Mike Bailey, a big voice in the issue.

No, Mike Bailey's group is Good for Dogs, which is about all dog matters.

'I Disagree with the 2010 Domestic Animals Amendment (Dangerous Dogs) Bill!' is mostly about the dog laws in Victoria, but has other dogs stuff at times.

[Steve]

OH came up with a great idea

we need to fight the media back with their own weapons - words and pictures. Photos of our dogs how they REALLY are. Playing with children, hogging couches, frolicking in the backyard. All breeds. A dog is a dog and their true purpose to be with us is being tainted by the medias flooding of vicious looking animals.

come up and plaster them all over the wall of the coucil offices. Let them see the true nature and face of the animals they want to ban

This wont work. It was used last time and failed dismally.

I can post pictures of people swimming with great whites and patting tigers but it won't convince a lot of folk that the animals are "safe".

The MOMENT you get drawn into an argument about what breeds are safe and what breed aren't you've lost. The only way ahead IMO is to talk about what makes DOGS safe and what doesn't.

The emphasis has to be on education to socialise, train, desex and contain ALL dogs. That has to be coupled with effective laws to deal with dangerous dogs - which we have alreadly. Move away from that theme to talk about breeds and you play right into the hands of the BSL proponents.

Yep but I think it needs one more thing we havent tried yet.

Which is what Steve?

The fact of the matter is that bsl comes in because the laws we already have in place are never enforced. They just keep making more and more knowing all they do is attempt to make the community think they do something and that the people can feel they are safer.

For years - at least 10 that Ive been involved Ive seen this thing fought by people who disagreed with BSL being on the back foot. Feeling they need to promote a breed or the type of dogs which have been victim so far of BSL.

I have seen facts and figures presented and watched court cases and evidence all over the place that it doesnt work - yet everytime there is an incident it goes down the same path.

If you for one minute take restricted breeds or dogs which resemble restricted breeds out of the mix and have a look at what goes on in our towns and cities every single day of the week caused by irresponsible owners - this is a huge problem- which no one seems to get.

People avoid walking ther own dogs, they have routes to walk in order to avoid areas where dogs are able to roam and harrass them, There is rarely a day here on this forum where someone hasnt had an incident which has placed them or their dogs or their families at risk - caused them stress or sometimes injury. No amount of promoting a breed, or of promoting dogs etc is not going to eliminate the fact that there is an element there which puts people and their dogs at risk .

Irresponsible dog owners exist and sometimes they own dogs which can do and do damage that no clear thinking person can condone. When we hear of one we either blame the dog or the owner .When we have to organise our walks and our lives to aavoid problems we blame the owner. Laws bought in appear to address the dog and the owner. Bigger penalties for owners who blah blah blah and more restrictions on how you can keep em and contain them etc.

If your dog does this then this will happen to you and this will happen to the dog and if its a breed which has been decided is more dangerous if the owners are idiots than others - big trouble.

However, in my opinion before we will ever see any improvement or a movement toward taking out laws which are breed specific we need to give it back a bit to the people who have been charged with ensuring their streets are safe enforcing the laws, educating their residents and preventing problems before they occur rather than after.

We need to be pushing for councils to be more into prevention, and enforcement regardless of breed because they too play a role and need to be held accountable . the dog that killed that child in Victoria wasnt registered and wasnt kept securely. Just a simple walk down that street by rangers to ensure all residentS who owned a dog had them registered and they were aware of the importance of keeping them secure and ensuring their fencing and security would keep them on their own property may have had a huge impact on whether that dog could have ever been out of the yard and could have ever done what it did.

Thats about all the detail Il go into here but we need to focus on fighting for safer communities - which is what they are receptive to and what council and residents want - rather than anti bsl or pro pit bull. This will show them that what breed it is wont matter . We need to rally and beat a loud drum to change the job descriptions of council rangers - get a pilot program up and running to show how it can be done and pay for itself with better results than anything they have come up with to date. Thats what I think has been missing.

Edited September 16, 2011 by Steve

[ruthless]

I totally agree. My friend is an animal control officer. When she told me she's the only one for that particular council area I was gobsmacked!

If I'm out walking in the morning and I see a roaming dog I can't call my council and speak to a person. I have to leave a message on a machine. It could be late afternoon by the time they return my call. Useless!

[Steve]

I totally agree. My friend is an animal control officer. When she told me she's the only one for that particular council area I was gobsmacked!

If I'm out walking in the morning and I see a roaming dog I can't call my council and speak to a person. I have to leave a message on a machine. It could be late afternoon by the time they return my call. Useless!

Yep and they should be out walking being there in the middle of it when it's happening. I hear there is no funding but a couple of fines a day pays a wage and if they start doing whatthey are supposed to do life for everyone including them becomes much easier. I hear there isnt enough work for them to justify them only working in animal control but if they picked up a bit of prevention and education type duties every one wins. Councils everywhere dont hestiate to tell us that only approx 1 third of all dogs are registered - they just accept it and do nothing about it. Time we started yelling and rallying about it.

[Tapua]

Regarding the BSL legislation - there is a principal in law that you cannot lock someone up for what they 'might' do wrong or what harm they 'might ' do. Or else the prisons would be full. However this BSL law allows people to PTS or remove dogs who 'look like they might' bit someday. It doesnt make sense.

I totally support, following reasonable investigation of circumasances that if a dog goes out of its way to attack or bite an adult, child or other dogs/cats, stock etc with aggression I have NO Arguement having the dog in question PTS regardless of the breed. But where do you draw the line on what looks like it might bite and injure?

[Tapua]

I totally agree. My friend is an animal control officer. When she told me she's the only one for that particular council area I was gobsmacked!

If I'm out walking in the morning and I see a roaming dog I can't call my council and speak to a person. I have to leave a message on a machine. It could be late afternoon by the time they return my call. Useless!

Yep and they should be out walking being there in the middle of it when it's happening. I hear there is no funding but a couple of fines a day pays a wage and if they start doing whatthey are supposed to do life for everyone including them becomes much easier. I hear there isnt enough work for them to justify them only working in animal control but if they picked up a bit of prevention and education type duties every one wins. Councils everywhere dont hestiate to tell us that only approx 1 third of all dogs are registered - they just accept it and do nothing about it. Time we started yelling and rallying about it.

There is the Responsible Pet Ownership program in NSW which currently goes into the schools - it starts with the kids in Kinder - yr 2 and it covers all the issues regarding safety around dogs. It is presented positively so that fear is not imposed and on kids but the message of the pleasur of owning a dog/cat also comes with responsibility etc - There is accurate and useful safety information to be taken home to parents/guardians as well. It has been identified that children will get to their parents quicker than standard education TV/news media. The NSW govt has copied the Vic program, which has been running for 10 years.The Victorian program goes to Year 6 and it would be good to lobby the NSW Govt to continue to fund the program to year 6. Rather than re-invent the wheel why not push for this well designed program to be supported to it maximum potential. It would be greta for the program to go national its well designed and age appropriate.

[sumosmum]

I totally agree. My friend is an animal control officer. When she told me she's the only one for that particular council area I was gobsmacked!

If I'm out walking in the morning and I see a roaming dog I can't call my council and speak to a person. I have to leave a message on a machine. It could be late afternoon by the time they return my call. Useless!

Yep and they should be out walking being there in the middle of it when it's happening. I hear there is no funding but a couple of fines a day pays a wage and if they start doing whatthey are supposed to do life for everyone including them becomes much easier. I hear there isnt enough work for them to justify them only working in animal control but if they picked up a bit of prevention and education type duties every one wins. Councils everywhere dont hestiate to tell us that only approx 1 third of all dogs are registered - they just accept it and do nothing about it. Time we started yelling and rallying about it.

Yes, I agree,this is part of the problem. I have always thought that the councils are part of the problem. If they had done their jobs properly, we may not have been in this situation. And I have always wondered how they come up with the figures of how many dogs aren't registered. If they can state figures, they must know where these dogs are, so why are they still unregistered?

And in my area, the current trend is to walk your dog early in the morning, or after business hours, weekends, with the dog off lead, either running 3 houses ahead or behind the owner. The owner usually sporting the leash around the neck, like some sort of fashion statement. Cracking down on these people would surely cut down the risk of an incident. And when these owners do this with 2 dogs, the problem is worse. They can't grab 2 dogs at once if something does look like happening. Add to that, earphones in the ears, and they don't even realise at times that the dog has caused a problem because the dogs are out of sight and owners don't hear anything.

[Steve]

I totally agree. My friend is an animal control officer. When she told me she's the only one for that particular council area I was gobsmacked!

If I'm out walking in the morning and I see a roaming dog I can't call my council and speak to a person. I have to leave a message on a machine. It could be late afternoon by the time they return my call. Useless!

Yep and they should be out walking being there in the middle of it when it's happening. I hear there is no funding but a couple of fines a day pays a wage and if they start doing whatthey are supposed to do life for everyone including them becomes much easier. I hear there isnt enough work for them to justify them only working in animal control but if they picked up a bit of prevention and education type duties every one wins. Councils everywhere dont hestiate to tell us that only approx 1 third of all dogs are registered - they just accept it and do nothing about it. Time we started yelling and rallying about it.

There is the Responsible Pet Ownership program in NSW which currently goes into the schools - it starts with the kids in Kinder - yr 2 and it covers all the issues regarding safety around dogs. It is presented positively so that fear is not imposed and on kids but the message of the pleasur of owning a dog/cat also comes with responsibility etc - There is accurate and useful safety information to be taken home to parents/guardians as well. It has been identified that children will get to their parents quicker than standard education TV/news media. The NSW govt has copied the Vic program, which has been running for 10 years.The Victorian program goes to Year 6 and it would be good to lobby the NSW Govt to continue to fund the program to year 6. Rather than re-invent the wheel why not push for this well designed program to be supported to it maximum potential. It would be greta for the program to go national its well designed and age appropriate.

Thats all great and I agree with it 100 % but it hasnt done anything in 10 years to correct what has always been the problem. Pulling the people into line - many of whom do know better and enforcing the laws we have.

[Steve]

I totally agree. My friend is an animal control officer. When she told me she's the only one for that particular council area I was gobsmacked!

If I'm out walking in the morning and I see a roaming dog I can't call my council and speak to a person. I have to leave a message on a machine. It could be late afternoon by the time they return my call. Useless!

Yep and they should be out walking being there in the middle of it when it's happening. I hear there is no funding but a couple of fines a day pays a wage and if they start doing whatthey are supposed to do life for everyone including them becomes much easier. I hear there isnt enough work for them to justify them only working in animal control but if they picked up a bit of prevention and education type duties every one wins. Councils everywhere dont hestiate to tell us that only approx 1 third of all dogs are registered - they just accept it and do nothing about it. Time we started yelling and rallying about it.

Yes, I agree,this is part of the problem. I have always thought that the councils are part of the problem. If they had done their jobs properly, we may not have been in this situation. And I have always wondered how they come up with the figures of how many dogs aren't registered. If they can state figures, they must know where these dogs are, so why are they still unregistered?

And in my area, the current trend is to walk your dog early in the morning, or after business hours, weekends, with the dog off lead, either running 3 houses ahead or behind the owner. The owner usually sporting the leash around the neck, like some sort of fashion statement. Cracking down on these people would surely cut down the risk of an incident. And when these owners do this with 2 dogs, the problem is worse. They can't grab 2 dogs at once if something does look like happening. Add to that, earphones in the ears, and they don't even realise at times that the dog has caused a problem because the dogs are out of sight and owners don't hear anything.

Yes and when I walk with my kids and see their dogs running off leash I have to be on full alert and it takes the enjoyment away from my walk. They let em run wild and before you know it we get more in case laws and we are more restricted on what we can do and where we can go with our dogs. Thisis council repsonsibility and if they got off their bums and fined the people who are walking their dogs off leash we can all move around our community without fear of running into an idiot as much as we do now.

[melzawelza]

Problem is as Ruth said, Councils may have one person who is responsible for absolutely everything to do with dogs and cats in the entire council area. Think attack investigations, barking complaints, defecation, microchipping/registration, all the paperwork, and on top of that try are also supposed to be everywhere at once catching every single person with their dog off the leash.

Funding is the issue and more money needs to be put into having adequate resources so that these things CAN be policed, as at the end of the day if there is too much work placed on one person, you know exactly what will have to be reduced to get everything done - patrolling the area for off leash dogs.

[Steve]

Problem is as Ruth said, Councils may have one person who is responsible for absolutely everything to do with dogs and cats in the entire council area. Think attack investigations, barking complaints, defecation, microchipping/registration, all the paperwork, and on top of that try are also supposed to be everywhere at once catching every single person with their dog off the leash.

Funding is the issue and more money needs to be put into having adequate resources so that these things CAN be policed, as at the end of the day if there is too much work placed on one person, you know exactly what will have to be reduced to get everything done - patrolling the area for off leash dogs.

If they police them they will have the money.

[melzawelza]

Problem is in the meantime the dog attack investigations, barking complaints, defecation and paperwork would have to be ignored until the people allocating the money figure that out. An until they see the money try won't put more people on. Vicious cycle really.

In essence I agree exactly with what you're saying but the problem is getting the councils to put two and two together.

Edited September 17, 2011 by melzawelza

[Steve]

Problem is in the meantime the dog attack investigations, barking complaints, defecation and paperwork would have to be ignored until the people allocating the money figure that out. An until they see the money try won't put more people on. Vicious cycle really.

In essence I agree exactly with what you're saying but the problem is getting the councils to put two and two together.

Thats why we need a pilot program

[RottnBullies]

Please share this as much as possible Thanks

Rally Against BSL

[megan_]

Baylee and I did the Responsible Pet Ownership education program for 4 years until she retired due to old age. She loved it and so did the kids and teachers. She changed many people's perceptions about Rottweilers. Zephyr has just been accepted as a Pets as Therapy Dog through Dogs Victoria and I have no doubt that he will change people's ideas about the breed as well.

Many people have written over the last couple of weeks that they are not willing to take their dogs out in public for their walks for fear of them being ceased by council rangers. I am of the firm belief that if responsible owners took their dogs out in public and showed people how well behaved they can be, that slowly by word of mouth people's attitudes would change. I have walked my dogs around this area for years, taken them to markets and town fairs, stopped and talked to people who wish to ask questions and slowly the community has gotten to know my dogs as well trained, well socialised, well behaved dogs who are not to be feared. They have also realised that it is not the breed of dog that is the problem, that it is the owner of the dog that determines if the dog is a problem. Some people we have not convinced, but with others we have been able to change their minds, to the point that when something happens they say that not all Rottweilers are killers because we know some of them and they are great dogs as they have responsible owners.

This has happened through quiet and consistent education, not ranting and raving and coming across as a zealous owner. As they say, from little things big things grow, and word of mouth is so powerful.

Just a thought and maybe a different approach. I know it takes a long time to get results, but it is a great way to reach the general public, because not much of the general public goes to organised dog events like shows and trials.

Like x1000. If people don't get their dogs out-and-about they will have fewer social skills which could lead to more tragedies.