moosmum Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 About to join obedience with my new pup. I also hope to train her in tracking and to a level where I could take her to schools, nursing homes etc for educational/therapy purposes. Anything we can accomplish to show case the usefullness of a well trained dog. Just heard that all large dogs must be muzzled in public according to local council regs. This is unverified as yet and too late to ask today. I was told its "Taken for granted" when I asked the source. Is this a common council regulation? ( we are well out of town so unfamiliar with in town regs) If its true, I find it discriminatory. I think it would lead to a false sense of security for some,unreasonable fear for others and possibly lead to behaviour problems with both dogs and their handlers. Opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Check local council regs before jumping to conclusions. What you've heard and what the real story is may be quite different. It would certainly be an Australian first as far as I know. Aren't the regs online? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VizslaMomma Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 About to join obedience with my new pup. I also hope to train her in tracking and to a level where I could take her to schools, nursing homes etc for educational/therapy purposes. Anything we can accomplish to show case the usefullness of a well trained dog. Just heard that all large dogs must be muzzled in public according to local council regs. This is unverified as yet and too late to ask today. I was told its "Taken for granted" when I asked the source. Is this a common council regulation? ( we are well out of town so unfamiliar with in town regs) If its true, I find it discriminatory. I think it would lead to a false sense of security for some,unreasonable fear for others and possibly lead to behaviour problems with both dogs and their handlers. Opinions? Would it be rude to ask which Council? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted February 25, 2014 Author Share Posted February 25, 2014 Check local council regs before jumping to conclusions. What you've heard and what the real story is may be quite different. It would certainly be an Australian first as far as I know. Aren't the regs online? I'm not taking it as gospel,I have a feeling its misinformation. I will call council tomorrow and find just what the regs are. I can't find them online. Very little there. It is worrying that this is not the 1st time I have heard of this, but now in 2 different council areas. I was told by the owners of a dog in Lithgow they were informed of the same regulation when registering their pup. Even if it turns out to be misinformation, It makes me uneasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted February 25, 2014 Author Share Posted February 25, 2014 About to join obedience with my new pup. I also hope to train her in tracking and to a level where I could take her to schools, nursing homes etc for educational/therapy purposes. Anything we can accomplish to show case the usefullness of a well trained dog. Just heard that all large dogs must be muzzled in public according to local council regs. This is unverified as yet and too late to ask today. I was told its "Taken for granted" when I asked the source. Is this a common council regulation? ( we are well out of town so unfamiliar with in town regs) If its true, I find it discriminatory. I think it would lead to a false sense of security for some,unreasonable fear for others and possibly lead to behaviour problems with both dogs and their handlers. Opinions? Would it be rude to ask which Council? certainly not rude, but I'd rather not say more than it borders on Lithgow city council area. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancinbcs Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Never heard of it and there is certainly nothing in the current NSW companion animal act or the new proposals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dancinbcs Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Never heard of it and there is certainly nothing in the current NSW companion animal act or the new proposals. These are the only regulations for Lithgow. Lithgow Council Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulesP Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Are the people getting mixed up with the rules for restricted and dangerous dogs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christina Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 No idea but how ridiculous anyway. How would it even be regulated as in what does large mean ? Are they going to have officers parading around with a ruler. It would be a great idea if some people were muzzled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaneLover233 Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 No idea but how ridiculous anyway. How would it even be regulated as in what does large mean ? Are they going to have officers parading around with a ruler. It would be a great idea if some people were muzzled. Hahaha I giggled at the ruler comment - so true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashsmum Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 Check with council, as I think it may be incorrect unless the dog has been declared dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VizslaMomma Posted February 25, 2014 Share Posted February 25, 2014 certainly not rude, but I'd rather not say more than it borders on Lithgow city council area. :) Got that :laugh: Hopefully this may be what I call an urban myth. Some half baked repeat of grossly inaccurate info being given as real. I was thinking of all the Assistance,Companion & Therphy dogs I have meet in NSW. I have never seen a muzzled Lab. And we all know how they can fit the description of 'large'. DOL will provide a reply thanks to the knowledge of the users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted February 25, 2014 Author Share Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) O.K, Called council and confirmed that it is NOT required unless the dog has been declared dangerous, as most here have suspected. It seems this is becoming a popular urban myth, possibly helped along by some council employees. I can understand how tempting that would be at times :D But it drives home to me how we are failing to educate people to live with and accept dogs and instead relying more on regulations and laws that are only going adversely affect dog ownership. And how easy it is to open the way for more of the same. How can we reverse that? Edited February 25, 2014 by moosmum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuralPug Posted February 26, 2014 Share Posted February 26, 2014 O.K, Called council and confirmed that it is NOT required unless the dog has been declared dangerous, as most here have suspected. It seems this is becoming a popular urban myth, possibly helped along by some council employees. I can understand how tempting that would be at times :D But it drives home to me how we are failing to educate people to live with and accept dogs and instead relying more on regulations and laws that are only going adversely affect dog ownership. And how easy it is to open the way for more of the same. How can we reverse that? How about we require any animal owners at fault of not taking reasonable steps to protect their community to wear a forehead stamp proclaiming then as such? This idea was inspired by the "some people should be muzzled" comment by Christina. Crime: dog has never been trained to basic obedience or been socialised adequately and the owner regularly just lets the dog out in the evening to take itself for a walk. Result: owner must wear green IPO (Irresponsible dog owner aka Idiot Prick Owner) stamp on forehead. Ink takes six weeks to wear off. Crime: owner selects dog for aggressive traits and encourages aggression towards other dogs or cats or people Result: owner must wear red IPO stamp on forehead. Ink takes six months to wear off. During that six months owner may not reside in a household where dogs are kept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moosmum Posted February 26, 2014 Author Share Posted February 26, 2014 O.K, Called council and confirmed that it is NOT required unless the dog has been declared dangerous, as most here have suspected. It seems this is becoming a popular urban myth, possibly helped along by some council employees. I can understand how tempting that would be at times :D But it drives home to me how we are failing to educate people to live with and accept dogs and instead relying more on regulations and laws that are only going adversely affect dog ownership. And how easy it is to open the way for more of the same. How can we reverse that? How about we require any animal owners at fault of not taking reasonable steps to protect their community to wear a forehead stamp proclaiming then as such? This idea was inspired by the "some people should be muzzled" comment by Christina. Crime: dog has never been trained to basic obedience or been socialised adequately and the owner regularly just lets the dog out in the evening to take itself for a walk. Result: owner must wear green IPO (Irresponsible dog owner aka Idiot Prick Owner) stamp on forehead. Ink takes six weeks to wear off. Crime: owner selects dog for aggressive traits and encourages aggression towards other dogs or cats or people Result: owner must wear red IPO stamp on forehead. Ink takes six months to wear off. During that six months owner may not reside in a household where dogs are kept. Anything that makes us point and laugh sounds good. I was thinking more along the lines of how to get people more interested in their dogs. So many just "have" them. There aren't many incentives to do or learn more more. Social benefits are decreasing. If there were ways to increase social benefits and involvement to encourage a sense of community in dog ownership, I think we would see better informed ownership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now