Random Person Taking The Dogs Photo

[Dame Aussie]

I have to agree with Sheridan on this one.

I don't at all agree with what the woman did, she's clearly uninformed. However suggestions like she's a sadist who wants to see people's dogs destroy seem extremely far-fetched. What if in the past she, someone close to her or a pet she had/knew was a victim of a dog attack involving a bully (to avoid starting fights, yes, I am WELL aware that it's not JUST bullies who do this)? That seems more likely, in my opinion, but it's impossible for any of us to know what her motivations are without having spoken to her.

Even if that is the case she's still a miserable bitch who threatened to have a harmless dog declared dangerous......

[Ruin Maniac]

I have to agree with Sheridan on this one.

I don't at all agree with what the woman did, she's clearly uninformed. However suggestions like she's a sadist who wants to see people's dogs destroy seem extremely far-fetched. What if in the past she, someone close to her or a pet she had/knew was a victim of a dog attack involving a bully (to avoid starting fights, yes, I am WELL aware that it's not JUST bullies who do this)? That seems more likely, in my opinion, but it's impossible for any of us to know what her motivations are without having spoken to her.

Even if that is the case she's still a miserable bitch who threatened to have a harmless dog declared dangerous......

I think it's awful, as said in my first comment on the thread. I just think assumptions that she's a sadist and that she's doing it for fun are outrageous.

[tdierikx]

Some people are just sadly misinformed about certain dog types... and some of those people also see themselves as guardians of public safety...

Whatever this woman's motives, she just also happens to be somewhat wrong about Ziggy... and if it results in a ranger visit, I doubt anything will actually come of it.

I probably would have asked her for her email address and offered to send her some much better pics of my dog for her to use... *grin*

T.

[dee lee]

However, since she still has the photo, you just have to get yourself ready for some authorities to show up in your place if they ever know where you live.

Highly unlikely, Ziggy was adopted from the pound by Staffyluv, so would have been breed identified by the rangers firstly when he arrived at the pound & secondly when he was sold & microchipped.

The rangers at Queanbeyan are personable & professional - you have nothing to fear, Staffyluv, & hopefully the woman has taken up residence under the bridge again..... or wherever else she came from!

This is a very good point & I think you should focus on that.

This woman was wrong on all counts & even if she did proceed with her threats, the council won't just assume she is correct.

The experience I have had with reporting an agressive dog has shown me that there is a lot more process involved than just reporting.

The council are required to follow up, but there are a whole heap of requirements that need to be fulfilled before they can take action.

[Staffyluv]

Thinking about it some more and reading the responses here, I think the lady honestly didn't know any better and thinks all dog that look like Zig should be muzzled (media hype doesn't help these issues).

[JulesP]

Even if that is the case she's still a miserable bitch who threatened to have a harmless dog declared dangerous......

No, she thinks the dog is a dangerous dog that doesn't have the correct gear on.

A rather unsettling incident Staffyluv. Hopefully nothing will come of it.

[Staffyluv]

Even if that is the case she's still a miserable bitch who threatened to have a harmless dog declared dangerous......

No, she thinks the dog is a dangerous dog that doesn't have the correct gear on.

A rather unsettling incident Staffyluv. Hopefully nothing will come of it.

I don't think it will Jules.. I haven't seen her again and I don't think I have ever seen her before (perhaps she chose Quangers for a holiday, although god only knows why anyone would do that)..

Like I said above - perhaps she thinks all dogs that look like Zig are required to wear muzzles..

Zig is a good boy, I have no major issues with his behaviour at home or in public, so I think we are pretty safe.

My biggest issue was that a random could take out pic without asking - I would have posed better if I had time to prepare for it..:)

It has now been established that anyone can take our pic in a public place..

[mita]

I have to agree with Sheridan on this one.

I don't at all agree with what the woman did, she's clearly uninformed. However suggestions like she's a sadist who wants to see people's dogs destroy seem extremely far-fetched. What if in the past she, someone close to her or a pet she had/knew was a victim of a dog attack involving a bully (to avoid starting fights, yes, That seems more likely, in my opinion, but it's impossible for any of us to know what her motivations are without having spoken to her.

Even if that is the case she's still a miserable bitch who threatened to have a harmless dog declared dangerous......

All options are open about the woman's state of mind which motivated her to behave as she did. She could be anything from more than a bit paranoid, to a poorly informed social crusader fuelled by bad experience. And everything in between.

What is beyond dispute is how she behaved during the exchange and what she said. Fortunately, the OP felt secure about how her dog would be viewed by the rangers. So wasn't unduly distressed about the woman's stated aim, to report the dog as needing to be declared 'dangerous' based only on what she read into the dog's appearance. However, an owner who didn't feel so secure, could have been badly shaken and worried by the encounter.

And meanwhile, that woman is still out there, with her camera at the ready, for some other harmless dog and unsuspecting owner.... So TD's suggestion she would have offered to send her some alternative information makes some sense. It would also have been a test for how rigid the woman's beliefs were. But overall, I think the OP did well in a damn unpleasant situation.

Edited January 2, 2013 by mita

[yarracully]

Having just had a read of the NSW act, under the act unless this particular dog has been identified as a dangerous dog then it is not required to be muzzled. So really no matter what the person in the original post has done the OP has not broken any law. There is no way for the old woman to know if the dog has had such a declaration.

The act specifically identifies Greyhounds and declared dangerous dogs are to wear the muzzle. Now since this dog doesn't look like a greyhound and the woman wouldn't know if its a declared dog I still think she is just looking to cause trouble to gain attention. Now wether its attention from you by creating this situation and resulting distress or from some other means, I don't know.

If you interact with the public enough you will see there are many people that do this for a variety of reasons ranging from mental health issues to previous unpleasant experiences. May never know this persons reason. And you will probably drive yourself insane trying to figure it out. Ultimately I doubt a complaint would be taken seriously without more details. Just presenting a photo to a ranger won't be enough to warrant an investigation. Without additional evidence of an attack as well as details of the dog and its owner there are no grounds to complain.

Consider if I was to take a photo of a person in the street and then go to the police and claim the person assaulted me and beat me up. With no further evidence than a photo of them walking down the street there are no grounds for investigation and I would probably be told to go away.

[melzawelza]

Having just had a read of the NSW act, under the act unless this particular dog has been identified as a dangerous dog then it is not required to be muzzled. So really no matter what the person in the original post has done the OP has not broken any law. There is no way for the old woman to know if the dog has had such a declaration.

The act specifically identifies Greyhounds and declared dangerous dogs are to wear the muzzle. Now since this dog doesn't look like a greyhound and the woman wouldn't know if its a declared dog I still think she is just looking to cause trouble to gain attention. Now wether its attention from you by creating this situation and resulting distress or from some other means, I don't know.

If you interact with the public enough you will see there are many people that do this for a variety of reasons ranging from mental health issues to previous unpleasant experiences. May never know this persons reason. And you will probably drive yourself insane trying to figure it out. Ultimately I doubt a complaint would be taken seriously without more details. Just presenting a photo to a ranger won't be enough to warrant an investigation. Without additional evidence of an attack as well as details of the dog and its owner there are no grounds to complain.

Consider if I was to take a photo of a person in the street and then go to the police and claim the person assaulted me and beat me up. With no further evidence than a photo of them walking down the street there are no grounds for investigation and I would probably be told to go away.

Pit Bulls are required to be muzzled too and this is what the lady believes the dog to be.

However a dog is NOT a restricted breed in NSW unless it is chipped as a pure bred of one of the breeds, or it has been through the breed assessment / temperament testing process and failed one or both.

As Ziggy doesn't tick either of these boxes he's not required to be muzzled. However if, upon the report, the Council believes the dog to be a restricted breed they can place a notice on the dog to force it through that breed assessment / temp test process.

I would think looking at Ziggy it would be pretty unlikely for 1. the Council to issue a notice, or if they did for him to fail either section.

I wouldn't be concerned Staffyluv but if you have any issues PM me.

[skelp2]

Unlikely this person has a happy, fulfilled life and then tries to get other people's dogs destroyed for no apparent reason. I feel sorry for her if this is the best use if her time. Unfortunately when you're on the receiving end of this kind of thing it is worrying and creepy. Sorry you had to be the target of her ill will.

Dear me, exaggeration much?

Hankdog is most likely correct. Happy, normal people don't usually dislike certain breeds of dogs, to the point where they will take a photo and threaten to report someone for having a dog that may look something like a pit bull.

The term 'bitter old busybody' comes to mind.

Staffyluv, if you see her taking your photo again, I would suggest you take a photo of her, and advise her that it's evidence if she continues to stalk you. It may make her think about her actions.

[Staffyluv]

Having just had a read of the NSW act, under the act unless this particular dog has been identified as a dangerous dog then it is not required to be muzzled. So really no matter what the person in the original post has done the OP has not broken any law. There is no way for the old woman to know if the dog has had such a declaration.

The act specifically identifies Greyhounds and declared dangerous dogs are to wear the muzzle. Now since this dog doesn't look like a greyhound and the woman wouldn't know if its a declared dog I still think she is just looking to cause trouble to gain attention. Now wether its attention from you by creating this situation and resulting distress or from some other means, I don't know.

If you interact with the public enough you will see there are many people that do this for a variety ohttp://www.dolforums.com.au/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.giff reasons ranging from mental health issues to previous unpleasant experiences. May never know this persons reason. And you will probably drive yourself insane trying to figure it out. Ultimately I doubt a complaint would be taken seriously without more details. Just presenting a photo to a ranger won't be enough to warrant an investigation. Without additional evidence of an attack as well as details of the dog and its owner there are no grounds to complain.

Consider if I was to take a photo of a person in the street and then go to the police and claim the person assaulted me and beat me up. With no further evidence than a photo of them walking down the street there are no grounds for investigation and I would probably be told to go away.

Pit Bulls are required to be muzzled too and this is what the lady believes the dog to be.

However a dog is NOT a restricted breed in NSW unless it is chipped as a pure bred of one of the breeds, or it has been through the breed assessment / temperament testing process and failed one or both.

As Ziggy doesn't tick either of these boxes he's not required to be muzzled. However if, upon the report, the Council believes the dog to be a restricted breed they can place a notice on the dog to force it through that breed assessment / temp test process.

I would think looking at Ziggy it would be pretty unlikely for 1. the Council to issue a notice, or if they did for him to fail either section.

I wouldn't be concerned Staffyluv but if you have any issues PM me.

I got him from the pound melza, they were the ones who originally assessed him as a staffy cross and chipped him as such.

Plus he is a good boy and very friendly :D

[Staffyluv]

Unlikely this person has a happy, fulfilled life and then tries to get other people's dogs destroyed for no apparent reason. I feel sorry for her if this is the best use if her time. Unfortunately when you're on the receiving end of this kind of thing it is worrying and creepy. Sorry you had to be the target of her ill will.

Dear me, exaggeration much?

Hankdog is most likely correct. Happy, normal people don't usually dislike certain breeds of dogs, to the point where they will take a photo and threaten to report someone for having a dog that may look something like a pit bull.

The term 'bitter old busybody' comes to mind.

Staffyluv, if you see her taking your photo again, I would suggest you take a photo of her, and advise her that it's evidence if she continues to stalk you. It may make her think about her actions.

Thanks, I have talked to heaps of people about it, here on DOL and here at home and I sort of think that the poor woman has probably had a scare from a bull breed and thinks (based on media hype over the years) that all bull breeds are supposed to be muzzled (that is what her issue was - she thought he was supposed to be muzzled for whatever reason in public)..

I haven't seen her since but if she turns up again, I will make sure Zig sits nicely for his next photo.. :)

[Sheridan]

Unlikely this person has a happy, fulfilled life and then tries to get other people's dogs destroyed for no apparent reason. I feel sorry for her if this is the best use if her time. Unfortunately when you're on the receiving end of this kind of thing it is worrying and creepy. Sorry you had to be the target of her ill will.

Dear me, exaggeration much?

Hankdog is most likely correct. Happy, normal people don't usually dislike certain breeds of dogs, to the point where they will take a photo and threaten to report someone for having a dog that may look something like a pit bull.

The term 'bitter old busybody' comes to mind.

Staffyluv, if you see her taking your photo again, I would suggest you take a photo of her, and advise her that it's evidence if she continues to stalk you. It may make her think about her actions.

Then you're as bad as hankdog. There is no evidence to suggest this. There is no evidence even to suggest the woman dislikes a certain breed of dog, only that she though Staffyluv's dog should be muzzled.

People shouldn't be quite so ridiculous.

[melzawelza]

Having just had a read of the NSW act, under the act unless this particular dog has been identified as a dangerous dog then it is not required to be muzzled. So really no matter what the person in the original post has done the OP has not broken any law. There is no way for the old woman to know if the dog has had such a declaration.

The act specifically identifies Greyhounds and declared dangerous dogs are to wear the muzzle. Now since this dog doesn't look like a greyhound and the woman wouldn't know if its a declared dog I still think she is just looking to cause trouble to gain attention. Now wether its attention from you by creating this situation and resulting distress or from some other means, I don't know.

If you interact with the public enough you will see there are many people that do this for a variety ohttp://www.dolforums.com.au/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.giff reasons ranging from mental health issues to previous unpleasant experiences. May never know this persons reason. And you will probably drive yourself insane trying to figure it out. Ultimately I doubt a complaint would be taken seriously without more details. Just presenting a photo to a ranger won't be enough to warrant an investigation. Without additional evidence of an attack as well as details of the dog and its owner there are no grounds to complain.

Consider if I was to take a photo of a person in the street and then go to the police and claim the person assaulted me and beat me up. With no further evidence than a photo of them walking down the street there are no grounds for investigation and I would probably be told to go away.

Pit Bulls are required to be muzzled too and this is what the lady believes the dog to be.

However a dog is NOT a restricted breed in NSW unless it is chipped as a pure bred of one of the breeds, or it has been through the breed assessment / temperament testing process and failed one or both.

As Ziggy doesn't tick either of these boxes he's not required to be muzzled. However if, upon the report, the Council believes the dog to be a restricted breed they can place a notice on the dog to force it through that breed assessment / temp test process.

I would think looking at Ziggy it would be pretty unlikely for 1. the Council to issue a notice, or if they did for him to fail either section.

I wouldn't be concerned Staffyluv but if you have any issues PM me.

I got him from the pound melza, they were the ones who originally assessed him as a staffy cross and chipped him as such.

Plus he is a good boy and very friendly :D

Pound assessments aren't breed assessments - pound assessment doesn't keep the dog safe. Breed assessment does. It's with a government approved assessor and you have to pay for it. The results are recorded on the dog's microchip in a seperate section to the breed so you can see that the dog has been through the process.

Lets say a new ranger has started since you got Ziggy that doesn't like bull breeds; there is nothing stopping him issuing you with an NOI and forcing you through the process, even though a previous ranger sold you the dog.

You'll probably have no issues at all but it's worth knowing where you stand and if you do get any issues just send me a message and I'll help you through the process. :)

[Staffyluv]

Thanks Melza, I did know they were different things.

I guess if a breed assessment was done, he could be deemed a type of dog.

I am pretty confident that we are doing enough training and socialisation with him to make him a good canine citizen..

I would hope to never go through it - I read the anti BSL forums and the horror stories of innocent dogs being held for months on end is terrible.

So keeping to the rules and not bringing any unnecessary attention to him is the goal - that and continue his training and socialisation..

He had a few of the staff swooning over him over at Petstock today - we had to go to get a new (bigger) kong.

He carried his new kong to the register and I tried to get him to put it up but he just dropped it.

[melzawelza]

Thanks Melza, I did know they were different things.

I guess if a breed assessment was done, he could be deemed a type of dog.

I am pretty confident that we are doing enough training and socialisation with him to make him a good canine citizen..

I would hope to never go through it - I read the anti BSL forums and the horror stories of innocent dogs being held for months on end is terrible.

So keeping to the rules and not bringing any unnecessary attention to him is the goal - that and continue his training and socialisation..

He had a few of the staff swooning over him over at Petstock today - we had to go to get a new (bigger) kong.

He carried his new kong to the register and I tried to get him to put it up but he just dropped it.

We're no where near as bad as Victoria - he couldn't be taken off you and held (unless you break the rules), and you'd most likely pass the breed assessment or at least go on to a temp test that of course he'd pass. It's an inconvenience and stressful but I think you'd be fine and it's unlikely to happen in the first place :)