Flexistentialist Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) "The fight to save big Bruce from death row 2nd Oct 2014 THE owners of a declared dangerous dog are taking on Ipswich City Council to save it from being put down after it attacked a meter reader in their backyard. Despite displaying eight signs warning that a dangerous dog was on the property, the Energex meter reader entered two series of gates to access the meter at the back of the Denmark Hill home where he was bitten by the dog. Council seized and impounded the dog after the attack in August and it is set to be put down on October 16. Owners Kev and Chris Thomas set up a Facebook page this week to help save their dog Bruce from being destroyed. They will be appealling the decision before the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal." http://www.qt.com.au/news/facebook-followers-try-to-help-save-big-bruce/2406269/ ... And this update: "Dog owners take fight to save Bruce to court 14th Oct 2014 OWNERS of a declared dangerous dog are taking their fight to the courts to save the pet from being put down and have called for changes to the State Government's dangerous dog laws. Ipswich City Council seized the Thomas family dog, Bruce, and issued a destruction notice late in August after it bit an Energex meter reader who had entered two gates and ignored four dangerous dog warning signs to read the meter in the backyard. Energex has confirmed to The Queensland Times the property was logged in their system as having a dangerous dog on site but the owners were not given any notice of a meter reader having to access the backyard of their Denmark Hill home." http://www.qt.com.au/news/dog-owners-take-fight-to-save-bruce-to-court/2418187/ Edited October 16, 2014 by Flexistentialist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YippeeGirl Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 Sounds like another case of owners being irresponsible if he has bitten someone else and has been out roaming around. That is certainly not the breed of dog I would want to meet out on a walk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakita Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 His owners have taken steps to be responsible owners. Give them some credit. It is not their fault some nong decides to be stupid and enter the property despite the signage! Why does the dog have to pay because some meter reader ignores signs on THEIR property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YippeeGirl Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 It sounds like in this article they were not complying up to not that long ago: The spokesman said the Thomas family did not meet conditions of keeping a declared dog by not providing adequate signage, not housing it in a compliant regulated dog enclosure and by not getting him desexed within three months of notice being issued. In May 2013 further advice was given in lieu of a fine and further warnings were issued. At the time of the incident the dog was not being kept in the enclosure he was supposed to be either. I guess I wouldn't want to be the owner of a dog that sounds like it just bites people indiscriminately. A meter man isn't exactly a threat that needs to be neutralised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HazyWal Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 The owners have a "history of non compliance"...dickheads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Sigh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redsonic Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Bruce's owner: "We still struggle to believe that people want to kill Bruce when he has never bitten or attacked anyone or anything outside his yard," the Facebook post states How on earth would the owner know that Bruce has never bitten anyone/thing outside his yard? How can the owners know what their roaming dog gets up to? The dog and his owners first came to the council's attention because Bruce was roaming and there were complaints about the dog being aggressive. Council spokesman: the owners of Bruce have a long history of non-compliance dating from early 2010 when Bruce was reported as roaming and complaints were received about the aggressive nature of the dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Her Majesty Dogmad Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Why is it so hard for these owners to comply, they simply shouldn't have a dog. They really do not deserve to have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 They are the reason this dog has a destruction order. Not the council, the meter reader not anyone else but themselves. If they had of kept the dog confined as they should, there would never have a dangerous dog order. If the dog had been confined as per the rules it woudl never have been able to bite the metre reader. Having said all that, how freaking dumb is the meter reader to go past 4 sighns and two gates - which incidentally should have been padlocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cody Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I really hope Ipswich City council don't give in like Gold Coast City Council. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redsonic Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 They are the reason this dog has a destruction order. Not the council, the meter reader not anyone else but themselves. If they had of kept the dog confined as they should, there would never have a dangerous dog order. If the dog had been confined as per the rules it woudl never have been able to bite the metre reader. Having said all that, how freaking dumb is the meter reader to go past 4 sighns and two gates - which incidentally should have been padlocked. I would say that the meter reader felt safe because the council specified dangerous dog signs indicated to him that the dog would be confined in a pen. The council report that the dog was to be kept confined to a pen under the house at all times when not under direct supervision. It is the householder's responsibility to make sure that their meter, letterbox & front door are accessible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Very True Redsonic, but personally I would proceed with caution just in case! In this case this whole situation is the owners fault and no-one elses and I have to say, the dog appears to be of an unstable character. The owners have shown they cannot be trusted to do the right thing. In this case that leads to one necessary conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuralPug Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 Idiot owners. History of non-compliance, reports of aggression when the dog was roaming loose, they think a few signs gives them the right to deny access to meter reader? No, it doesn't. Who is to say that the meter reader didn't proceed with caution, and then once he was past the final gate the dog came at him out of nowhere? I can't imagine a meter reader opening a gate right into the face of a large slavering, menacing dog when there are "Dangerous Dog" signs posted on the property! The owners did not comply with the council directive not to have the dog loose in the yard except when supervised. Another dog will probably suffer due to the idiocy of his owners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 Very true, the dog could have been asleep adn not realised the meter reader was there until he heard a noise. BAsically the dog is dangerous, the owners have flouted the law repeatedly and now the dog will die for it, but realisitically I think that is the best outcome for this particular dog. 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