Dog Attacks Cat In Dogs Own Yard

[Chompadomp]

Is this NSW we're talking about?

If so no, they shouldn't be declaring the dog dangerous and have no grounds to stand on.

Here is a link to the act:

http://www.legislati...+87+1998+cd+0+N

Scroll to section 16 and read 2b

(2) It is not an offence under this section if the incident occurred:

(a) as a result of the dog being teased, mistreated, attacked or otherwise provoked, or

(b) as a result of the person or animal trespassing on the property on which the dog was being kept, or

© as a result of the dog acting in reasonable defence of a person or property, or

(d) in the course of lawful hunting, or

(e) in the course of the working of stock by the dog or the training of the dog in the working of stock.

Either the Council doesn't understand the act they're enforcing or they're bluffing her which they often do.

ETA:

The section they are referring to is section 33 in regards to dangerous dogs:

33 Meaning of “dangerous”

(1) For the purposes of this Division, a dog is dangerous if it:

(a) has, without provocation, attacked or killed a person or animal (other than vermin), or

(b) has, without provocation, repeatedly threatened to attack or repeatedly chased a person or animal (other than vermin), or

© has displayed unreasonable aggression towards a person or animal (other than vermin), or(d) is kept or used for the purposes of hunting.

The attack would not be deemed unreasonable though based on section 16 and the definition of what an attack is.

But wouldn't almost killing the cat be classed as 'unreasonable aggression'?

Appreciate the help with this too, Cheers.

IMO yes killing another animal just for the sake of it is unreasonable aggression, I have always had dogs and no way would I think it was acceptable for any of them to kill an animal that wandered into my yard, I have to say I am a little shocked that people are saying yeah well that's what dogs do.

FWIW I don't like cats and think they should be indoors 24/7.

So when a cat stalks it's prey i.e. mouse, rat, native bird, small lizards & animals then kills it either instantly or slowly, plays with the corpse for it's amusement and possibly later consumes, you wouldn't say that's their natural instinct or have they been taught to? And shall it branded a Dangerous Aggressive animal?

That would be a substantial number of offenders.

In individual cases it's unknown what a dog(s) is capable of until the situation arises. I would be mortified and sadden if my dogs were the perpetrators but it's not beyond the realms of possibility. There are dogs out there inclined to exhibit their animal instinct if called upon for whatever circumstance.

As I mentioned I don't like cats, I volunteer for a wildlife rescue group and if you want my honest opinion any cat roaming should be euthanised, because yes they are aggressive killers. Probably a good thing they aren't the size of a Dane ;) Unfortunately I can't see that becoming a reality any time soon. Plenty of possums and koalas are maimed and killed by dogs and cats alike and I think the whole "it's natural instinct" card is too readily thrown around as an excuse for people to be blasé about their animals killing other animals.

My 2c :)

[ChloeEastwood]

Is this NSW we're talking about?

If so no, they shouldn't be declaring the dog dangerous and have no grounds to stand on.

Here is a link to the act:

http://www.legislati...+87+1998+cd+0+N

Scroll to section 16 and read 2b

(2) It is not an offence under this section if the incident occurred:

(a) as a result of the dog being teased, mistreated, attacked or otherwise provoked, or

(b) as a result of the person or animal trespassing on the property on which the dog was being kept, or

© as a result of the dog acting in reasonable defence of a person or property, or

(d) in the course of lawful hunting, or

(e) in the course of the working of stock by the dog or the training of the dog in the working of stock.

Either the Council doesn't understand the act they're enforcing or they're bluffing her which they often do.

ETA:

The section they are referring to is section 33 in regards to dangerous dogs:

33 Meaning of “dangerous”

(1) For the purposes of this Division, a dog is dangerous if it:

(a) has, without provocation, attacked or killed a person or animal (other than vermin), or

(b) has, without provocation, repeatedly threatened to attack or repeatedly chased a person or animal (other than vermin), or

© has displayed unreasonable aggression towards a person or animal (other than vermin), or(d) is kept or used for the purposes of hunting.

The attack would not be deemed unreasonable though based on section 16 and the definition of what an attack is.

But wouldn't almost killing the cat be classed as 'unreasonable aggression'?

Appreciate the help with this too, Cheers.

IMO yes killing another animal just for the sake of it is unreasonable aggression, I have always had dogs and no way would I think it was acceptable for any of them to kill an animal that wandered into my yard, I have to say I am a little shocked that people are saying yeah well that's what dogs do.

FWIW I don't like cats and think they should be indoors 24/7.

So when a cat stalks it's prey i.e. mouse, rat, native bird, small lizards & animals then kills it either instantly or slowly, plays with the corpse for it's amusement and possibly later consumes, you wouldn't say that's their natural instinct or have they been taught to? And shall it branded a Dangerous Aggressive animal?

That would be a substantial number of offenders.

In individual cases it's unknown what a dog(s) is capable of until the situation arises. I would be mortified and sadden if my dogs were the perpetrators but it's not beyond the realms of possibility. There are dogs out there inclined to exhibit their animal instinct if called upon for whatever circumstance.

As I mentioned I don't like cats, I volunteer for a wildlife rescue group and if you want my honest opinion any cat roaming should be euthanised, because yes they are aggressive killers. Probably a good thing they aren't the size of a Dane ;) Unfortunately I can't see that becoming a reality any time soon. Plenty of possums and koalas are maimed and killed by dogs and cats alike and I think the whole "it's natural instinct" card is too readily thrown around as an excuse for people to be blasé about their animals killing other animals.

My 2c :)

My reply never implied you liked cats as you clearly stated in your last paragraph of your first reply, but simply putting that, is it not still simply an animal the cats behaviour? Same applies for canines just because they've been domesticated doesn't mean you've reared and bred out it's complete animal instincts.

[fuzzy82]

Isn't there a law that says cats aren't allowed to leave the owner's property? There is here, which means it's the cat owner that is at fault if it's roaming and ends up getting hurt.

Blaming the dog for it is like letting your dog off leash, it gets hit by a car and you blame the driver.

[Alyosha]

Not in NSW. There are rules about cats being identified and not a nuisance, but not confinement laws.

[WExtremeG]

Just had a look at our rules and it states that cats should be locked up at night to protect them from other cats, cars and killing wildlife. So it seems that they are expected to wander.

[Alyosha]

This is the NSW Companion Animals Act: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/caa1998174/

Part 4 deals with control of cats. Pretty straightforward, section 32 is a but more involved and relates to cats entering other lands, and being a threat to other animals etc.

[Astese]

It depends on the Council concerned. We had a Rotty and two little white x poodle- come onto our land up our driveway (some 200 mtrs) and attack our two GSD in our garden . This happened three times. Each time the owners said their dogs were not home and had friends swear affidavits to say the same. The Council said we were making it all up and they would do nothing about it. The last time they attacked my husband handled the dogs I had a video camera and photographed the whole incident. I rang the Council and asked for a meeting with the head Ranger and CEO. Guess what I was told when I said that we were sick of these animals being allowed to wander free and attack other dogs. The CEO (who happened to be a friend of the dog owners and drank at their Pub,) to me that the dogs were no in town on that day and they had affidavits to verify that. I said is that true and received a reply yes. I than said that I have here in my hand a video of the incident - well the look of shock on the Council Officer's faces told it all.

Unknown to me the dogs attacked another dog further down the road and that person had complained also. The Council was forced to take action four attacks later. Not the end of the story yet the owners defended the Court action but eventually the dog was declared dangerous. The Council did not insist on the owners taking action as stated in the Dangerous Dog Act - that is having the dog contained in a escape proof yard, muzzel etc etc. We were home and we heard their little dog screaming (they we down at the Pub) I insisted that my husband had a look as I thought the dog had its head caught in a fence or something and needed help. Sure the dog had it head caught the Rotty had killed it and was dragging the body around the yard. We rang the owners and told them what had just happened and they came home and the next thing we see is the Rotty being driven off in their vehicle.(This was two years ago)

Sunday I was at the car wash and I noticed a Rotty tied up in the back of a car (I thought it looked like the one that attacked own animals). I asked the owner the name of the dog and guess what it was the same name as the attacking dog!!!! It appears that the dog was not putdown but given away to someone else (which is an offence). So it appears that the Council did not know about the killing and the dog was allowed to live to kill another day. Sorry about any spelling or grammer mistakes aswriting this has made me cranky again.

[Alyosha]

Any local council inaction or corruption allegations don't change the laws. Each state has it's own companion animals legislation, which local councils are usually empowered to enforce. Whether they do that effectively or otherwise doesn't change the laws themselves.

[pixie_meg]

Is this NSW we're talking about?

If so no, they shouldn't be declaring the dog dangerous and have no grounds to stand on.

Here is a link to the act:

http://www.legislati...+87+1998+cd+0+N

Scroll to section 16 and read 2b

(2) It is not an offence under this section if the incident occurred:

(a) as a result of the dog being teased, mistreated, attacked or otherwise provoked, or

(b) as a result of the person or animal trespassing on the property on which the dog was being kept, or

© as a result of the dog acting in reasonable defence of a person or property, or

(d) in the course of lawful hunting, or

(e) in the course of the working of stock by the dog or the training of the dog in the working of stock.

Either the Council doesn't understand the act they're enforcing or they're bluffing her which they often do.

ETA:

The section they are referring to is section 33 in regards to dangerous dogs:

33 Meaning of “dangerous”

(1) For the purposes of this Division, a dog is dangerous if it:

(a) has, without provocation, attacked or killed a person or animal (other than vermin), or

(b) has, without provocation, repeatedly threatened to attack or repeatedly chased a person or animal (other than vermin), or

© has displayed unreasonable aggression towards a person or animal (other than vermin), or(d) is kept or used for the purposes of hunting.

The attack would not be deemed unreasonable though based on section 16 and the definition of what an attack is.

But wouldn't almost killing the cat be classed as 'unreasonable aggression'?

Appreciate the help with this too, Cheers.

IMO yes killing another animal just for the sake of it is unreasonable aggression, I have always had dogs and no way would I think it was acceptable for any of them to kill an animal that wandered into my yard, I have to say I am a little shocked that people are saying yeah well that's what dogs do.

FWIW I don't like cats and think they should be indoors 24/7.

so you think its a choice for a dog whether it hunts or not. thats naive. i can tell you that my second borzoi while being wonderfully gentle natured, soft and cuddly to all kids, i believe he would hunt and kill a chicken or possibly a cat. it is not some big bad aggression. its instinct. maybe you're typical cavalier wouldn't but there are many breeds that were bred to guard, or hunt.

[Dame Aussie]

It depends on the Council concerned. We had a Rotty and two little white x poodle- come onto our land up our driveway (some 200 mtrs) and attack our two GSD in our garden . This happened three times. Each time the owners said their dogs were not home and had friends swear affidavits to say the same. The Council said we were making it all up and they would do nothing about it. The last time they attacked my husband handled the dogs I had a video camera and photographed the whole incident. I rang the Council and asked for a meeting with the head Ranger and CEO. Guess what I was told when I said that we were sick of these animals being allowed to wander free and attack other dogs. The CEO (who happened to be a friend of the dog owners and drank at their Pub,) to me that the dogs were no in town on that day and they had affidavits to verify that. I said is that true and received a reply yes. I than said that I have here in my hand a video of the incident - well the look of shock on the Council Officer's faces told it all.

Unknown to me the dogs attacked another dog further down the road and that person had complained also. The Council was forced to take action four attacks later. Not the end of the story yet the owners defended the Court action but eventually the dog was declared dangerous. The Council did not insist on the owners taking action as stated in the Dangerous Dog Act - that is having the dog contained in a escape proof yard, muzzel etc etc. We were home and we heard their little dog screaming (they we down at the Pub) I insisted that my husband had a look as I thought the dog had its head caught in a fence or something and needed help. Sure the dog had it head caught the Rotty had killed it and was dragging the body around the yard. We rang the owners and told them what had just happened and they came home and the next thing we see is the Rotty being driven off in their vehicle.(This was two years ago)

Sunday I was at the car wash and I noticed a Rotty tied up in the back of a car (I thought it looked like the one that attacked own animals). I asked the owner the name of the dog and guess what it was the same name as the attacking dog!!!! It appears that the dog was not putdown but given away to someone else (which is an offence). So it appears that the Council did not know about the killing and the dog was allowed to live to kill another day. Sorry about any spelling or grammer mistakes aswriting this has made me cranky again.

Oh my god, that's just horrible

[Scarlet]

Isn't there a law that says cats aren't allowed to leave the owner's property? There is here, which means it's the cat owner that is at fault if it's roaming and ends up getting hurt.

Blaming the dog for it is like letting your dog off leash, it gets hit by a car and you blame the driver.

In Qld cats are NOT allowed to leave your property and you are fined as you would be a dog.

Different councils may may be vary in the way they apply this rule and I doubt if many people are aware of it.

[Astese]

In NSW cat are bound by the Companion Animals Act same as dogs. But it is harder to police. I know the law is the law but our Council seems to take sides depends on how much money you have. As I said in my earlier post it took four dog attacked before the Council did anything. The Council also did not prosecute them for swearing false affidavits (which is an offence) nor did they make the owners take appropriate percaustion as detailed in the Dangerous Dog Order.

Dogs who are not taught manners and are aggressive are a reflection on the owners - the owners should be liable for more severe penalities (because the dogs suffers and in some cases are PTS) and what does the dog owner dog go out and buys another.

[Chris the Rebel Wolf]

It depends on the Council concerned. We had a Rotty and two little white x poodle- come onto our land up our driveway (some 200 mtrs) and attack our two GSD in our garden . This happened three times. Each time the owners said their dogs were not home and had friends swear affidavits to say the same. The Council said we were making it all up and they would do nothing about it. The last time they attacked my husband handled the dogs I had a video camera and photographed the whole incident. I rang the Council and asked for a meeting with the head Ranger and CEO. Guess what I was told when I said that we were sick of these animals being allowed to wander free and attack other dogs. The CEO (who happened to be a friend of the dog owners and drank at their Pub,) to me that the dogs were no in town on that day and they had affidavits to verify that. I said is that true and received a reply yes. I than said that I have here in my hand a video of the incident - well the look of shock on the Council Officer's faces told it all.

Unknown to me the dogs attacked another dog further down the road and that person had complained also. The Council was forced to take action four attacks later. Not the end of the story yet the owners defended the Court action but eventually the dog was declared dangerous. The Council did not insist on the owners taking action as stated in the Dangerous Dog Act - that is having the dog contained in a escape proof yard, muzzel etc etc. We were home and we heard their little dog screaming (they we down at the Pub) I insisted that my husband had a look as I thought the dog had its head caught in a fence or something and needed help. Sure the dog had it head caught the Rotty had killed it and was dragging the body around the yard. We rang the owners and told them what had just happened and they came home and the next thing we see is the Rotty being driven off in their vehicle.(This was two years ago)

Sunday I was at the car wash and I noticed a Rotty tied up in the back of a car (I thought it looked like the one that attacked own animals). I asked the owner the name of the dog and guess what it was the same name as the attacking dog!!!! It appears that the dog was not putdown but given away to someone else (which is an offence). So it appears that the Council did not know about the killing and the dog was allowed to live to kill another day. Sorry about any spelling or grammer mistakes aswriting this has made me cranky again.

So much wrong with that... unbelievably slack council action. So the rotty that killed the poodle x was from the same household?

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

It depends on the Council concerned. We had a Rotty and two little white x poodle- come onto our land up our driveway (some 200 mtrs) and attack our two GSD in our garden . This happened three times. Each time the owners said their dogs were not home and had friends swear affidavits to say the same. The Council said we were making it all up and they would do nothing about it. The last time they attacked my husband handled the dogs I had a video camera and photographed the whole incident. I rang the Council and asked for a meeting with the head Ranger and CEO. Guess what I was told when I said that we were sick of these animals being allowed to wander free and attack other dogs. The CEO (who happened to be a friend of the dog owners and drank at their Pub,) to me that the dogs were no in town on that day and they had affidavits to verify that. I said is that true and received a reply yes. I than said that I have here in my hand a video of the incident - well the look of shock on the Council Officer's faces told it all.

Unknown to me the dogs attacked another dog further down the road and that person had complained also. The Council was forced to take action four attacks later. Not the end of the story yet the owners defended the Court action but eventually the dog was declared dangerous. The Council did not insist on the owners taking action as stated in the Dangerous Dog Act - that is having the dog contained in a escape proof yard, muzzel etc etc. We were home and we heard their little dog screaming (they we down at the Pub) I insisted that my husband had a look as I thought the dog had its head caught in a fence or something and needed help. Sure the dog had it head caught the Rotty had killed it and was dragging the body around the yard. We rang the owners and told them what had just happened and they came home and the next thing we see is the Rotty being driven off in their vehicle.(This was two years ago)

Sunday I was at the car wash and I noticed a Rotty tied up in the back of a car (I thought it looked like the one that attacked own animals). I asked the owner the name of the dog and guess what it was the same name as the attacking dog!!!! It appears that the dog was not putdown but given away to someone else (which is an offence). So it appears that the Council did not know about the killing and the dog was allowed to live to kill another day. Sorry about any spelling or grammer mistakes aswriting this has made me cranky again.

Did you report this? It's appalling.

[Astese]

Yes the Rotty was from the same household and killed one of their two little white dogs ( the other was locked in the house) or it could have been two dead dogs). Yes we reported the Rotty Killing, their own dog ,to the Council and then asked what action if any they took and were it was none of our concern end of story. I am positive that the Rotty bitch I saw last week at the car Wash is the same animal. Same ,bitch, similar appearance, with long tail and same name. The Law states that if you rehouse, moved or destroy a dog that has been declared dangerous you must inform the Council so I have a feeling that they did not inform the Council and that the Council does not believe what we are saying.

If it was the same dog well time will tell as it will surely kill again. and this time someone maybe hurt. Thank goodness we kept a video of dog carrying the body of the other dog around the yard dropping it and coming back and attacking the dead dog again and again. Before anyone asks we took the video so that these people could not deny the incident happened. The dogs name was Camilla and the dog it killed was Emily. Since then the people have another two dogs that are continually escaping, barking and are untrained. Some People Should Never B e Allowed to Own Dogs!!!!

[tdierikx]

I'd be getting a cat trap and taking any roaming cat to the pound if it was known to "invade" my yard regularly. Let the owners find it at the pound and pay costs a few times...

T.

[persephone]

Hmmmmm..

killing another animal just for the sake of it is unreasonable aggression, I have always had dogs and no way would I think it was acceptable for any of them to kill an animal that wandered into my yard, I have to say I am a little shocked that people are saying yeah well that's what dogs do.

Dogs rarely kill 'just for the sake of it ' that's human behaviour

IMO dogs attack/kill in response to their perception of things like - invasion of their territory - possible attack- prey animals-possible loss of resources like food .

Dogs and cats are predators/carnivores/animals , and they will behave as such when their instincts kick in .Vocalising, hunting, killing are all natural behaviours .Not acceptable in suburbia, perhaps, but natural behaviour.

[Dame Aussie]

Hmmmmm..

killing another animal just for the sake of it is unreasonable aggression, I have always had dogs and no way would I think it was acceptable for any of them to kill an animal that wandered into my yard, I have to say I am a little shocked that people are saying yeah well that's what dogs do.

Dogs rarely kill 'just for the sake of it ' that's human behaviour

IMO dogs attack/kill in response to their perception of things like - invasion of their territory - possible attack- prey animals-possible loss of resources like food .

Dogs and cats are predators/carnivores/animals , and they will behave as such when their instincts kick in .Vocalising, hunting, killing are all natural behaviours .Not acceptable in suburbia, perhaps, but natural behaviour.

So true perse. I know my LGD thinks his job is to guard my house from ANYTHING. This has been bred into him for thousands of years, I can't change that.

[gsdog2]

I'd be getting a cat trap and taking any roaming cat to the pound if it was known to "invade" my yard regularly. Let the owners find it at the pound and pay costs a few times...

T.

Hitting the hip pocket works!