sandgrubber Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 What would be a better approach to BSL? (Assuming that there are some dogs that are not safe in public, or even next door if the fences aren't so great). Most participants in this forum seem to agree that the core problem is THEM, the breeders who breed for fighting or in ways that make the breed or cross breed, or whatever, more dangerous, and the dog owners who don't train properly and have dogs as statements of macho nonsense or as weapons. I would imagine that some people who participate on this forum know some of these people well. I don't. I've met a few of them on the street with a snarling dog or two straining on a line (often with a heavily spiked collar or nasty looking chain), and I give them wide berth. If anybody knows such people . . . would they have any suggestions about how to get through to them? I know of places that require ANYONE with an entire dog or bitch to hold a license, and they take away licenses and desex the animals of offenders. Is that a (partial) solution? How do you identify violators? There seems to be a consensus that vets shouldn't be given the job. Ozzie tradition hates dobbing people in . . . would people make an exception in such cases? Is peer/neighbour/postman reporting likely to work? If you identify an offender, what do you do? Remove dogs? Mandate training? Given the scarcity of suitable trainers in some places (eg, WA, which I'm told is dominated by Delta trained trainers, and very short on Cesar Milans), how can 'training' solutions work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 No its not. Desexing should not be compulsory and you should not need a license. There is no consensus that vets should report people for what they think are dangerous dogs. Thats an awful idea. Infact we have just talked a bit about that in a thread about a new law in Italy. They are not qualified for one thing, and they would never accept the responsibility anyway because they would lose alot of money. With compulsory training - We all have different ideologies, and there are more bad trainers out there than good, so we must be able to choose the accredited trainer. Maybe we could set it up so that your given say 2 years from when you purchase your dog to complete a given program of training, and perhaps there could be refresher training at other intervals through the dogs life. This would not only provide training to dog and owner, but bring knowledge together, create an environment of support. The industry would grow thats for sure. Now thats forward thinking, thats something that really is good for everyone, but as always the devil is in the detail. We also need serious criminal charges brought against the owners of dogs which bite somene (unless they are proven to be intruders or threats) and very important to support ethical breeders. We cant support ethical breeders if where forcing them to operate underground can we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted March 21, 2009 Author Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) There is no consensus that vets should report people for what they think are dangerous dogs. Agreed. What I said is: "There is a consensus that vets shouldn't be given the job [of deciding which dogs are dangerous]." But who should? Should the authorities wait until the dog attacks a person or another dog? That worries me, cause first "mild" attacks tend to get swept under the rug (they have been by our Rangers, anyway), and action is only taken when someone ends up in hospital or a dog killed. Edited to complete thought Edited March 21, 2009 by sandgrubber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) Sorry my mistake. Yes if there is a compulsory training initiative, support of ethical breeders, and serious criminal charges if your dog attacks, I think that covers all bases. The council can have the job of identifying dangerous dogs I dont see the big complication ? I suppose the problem with it is thier definition of dangerous isnt it. My friend had her Rottweiler declared dangerous because it ate the neighbours rabbits. Other dogs are bieng declared dangerous because they are guard dogs. Her dog could have gotten a double whammy, "super dangerous" Scary stuff. It barks at strangers and eats rabbits. Get rid of the BSL, bring in intelligent initiatives that will actually reduce dog attacks and are fair to all, and ill close my mouth and put up with dogs bieng declared dangerous for eating birds and rabbits. Edited March 21, 2009 by calsonic350z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Midol Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 I actually fully support a licensing system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 For owning an undesexed dog ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Midol Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 Missed that. Nope, support licensing of all dog owners. Unsure how effective it will ever be though. So while I support the "theory" side of it I'd have to see how it'd be implemented in practice first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) What are your ideas about the licensing process ? Maybe a license could be something like getting a green card, youd know about that. You go and have the rules explained to you, get some ideas on the basics of responsible ownership, be provided with information with regard to the mandatory training you will have to carry out, penalties with regard to what happens if you dont carry out those responsibilities or if your dog attacks someone, questions and answers, ect, you pay your fee, and recieve your license. Theres another industry. So far in the last few posts iv boosted 1 industry by about 10 000% and created a new one all together Its a good question because we do need to offer alternative ideas. When bsl falls down they are going to want to replace it with something, and maybe this time it can be something that will work. Sometimes I wonder if politicians are really as dumb as they seem, or if its because real solutions require effort, time, and money. So instead they come up with harmful slap stick legislation like bsl. Makes you wonder how much they are really concerned about dog attacks. Edited March 21, 2009 by calsonic350z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Midol Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 Similar system to the gun license. But... how do we ensure that people have a license? Require it to be attached to their dog leash? The trouble I have is the enforcement side of it. It'd require multiple reforms covering the selling of dogs, management, council organisation... It wouldn't be simple nor easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 (edited) What are your ideas about the licensing process ?Maybe a license could be something like getting a green card, youd know about that. You go and have the rules explained to you, get some ideas on the basics of responsible ownership, be provided with information with regard to the mandatory training you will have to carry out, penalties with regard to what happens if you dont carry out those responsibilities or if your dog attacks someone, questions and answers, ect, you pay your fee, and recieve your license. Theres another industry. So far in the last few posts iv boosted 1 industry by about 10 000% and created a new one all together That is basically how we got greyhound legislation changed. It's not a green card, it's a green collar. And the dog undergoes a behaviour assessment too. Industry? :rofl: I don't think so. Edited March 22, 2009 by Greytmate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Midol Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 I think the way the greyhound people tackled the greyhound issues is how BSL should be tackled. Baby steps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 That is basically how we got greyhound legislation changed. It's not a green card, it's a green collar. And the dog undergoes a behaviour assessment too. I dont know anything about Greyhound legislation or this green collar. I'd like to hear more about it though. I wasnt aware anything had changed with regard to the muzzling. Nothing iv suggested is breed specific everything there is for all dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Midol Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Greytmate knows more than I do, since she was involved in it obviously but rather than push for the ban to be removed they've managed to get exemption for dogs who undergo a behavioural assessment, they wear a green collar. There is probably more to it and I have no idea if they'll ever push for a complete reverse of the muzzle laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted March 22, 2009 Author Share Posted March 22, 2009 Ok . . . say all dog owners need licenses. This also applies to a 75 yr old with a 4 kg lapdog who would have trouble taking on a mouse? Would all family members need to be licensed? If not, could a 7 yr old kid, with no license, walk a 65 kg entire dog, who behaved well enough when the adult owner took it through training, but who was more than the kid can handle? What about the mean ACD, worth his weight in gold for stock management, but ready to put other dogs and strangers in their place with a bite or two? Farm exemptions? Would the dog fighting crew just nick out of the system and hide their dogs? Messy. It's hard to write good dog legislation. Can anyone suggest a place (including urban/suburban neighborhoods) that has really good dog laws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 I think the way the greyhound people tackled the greyhound issues is how BSL should be tackled.Baby steps. Yes and they did it by complying with current legislation, unlike many who oppose BSL and do not chip, register or comply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 If existing dangerous dog legislation was effectively enforced with we wouldn't need any more laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 If existing dangerous dog legislation was effectively enforced with we wouldn't need any more laws. NSW has one of the best and most workable pieces of companion animal legislation, the only thing missing is that it's not fully enforced. Now to convince councils that by not enforcing they are missing out on revenue through registrations. Time for a mass door knock by council staff and spot checks on every dog they come across for chip and registration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted March 22, 2009 Author Share Posted March 22, 2009 NSW has one of the best and most workable pieces of companion animal legislation, the only thing missing is that it's not fully enforced. Please expand, eg with a link to NSW companion animal laws and a brief on how they deal well with dangerous dogs and other problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/con...act/caa1998174/ This one should do it. Basically, for offending dogs, there is a system of " notice of intent" to declare a dog to be dangerous, various opportunites for owners to appeal along the way and for council to revoke orders. We have had mandatory chipping and registration for many years now and the CAA is very fair to dog owners, when it comes to setting out their rights and their responsibilities. If only dog owners could comply with the basics and councils had the resources and the inclination to enforce it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 (edited) Ok . . . say all dog owners need licenses. This also applies to a 75 yr old with a 4 kg lapdog who would have trouble taking on a mouse? Yes. All dog owners, all dogs. Would all family members need to be licensed? No. The owner is responsible. There can never be absolutely every base covered. Firstly its impossible, and secondly its not necessary. The only thing that can happen if you strive for a goal like that is they come up with things like bsl, or banning all breeds above a certain weight, or banning dogs all together. What about the mean ACD, worth his weight in gold for stock management, but ready to put other dogs and strangers in their place with a bite or two? Doesnt matter what the dogs work is, its upto the owner to keep it away from other people if its vicous. If the dog does bite someone, then the owner gets charged. Would the dog fighting crew just nick out of the system and hide their dogs? Dog fighting is a crime and if people are found to be doing that they should be charged. Messy. It's hard to write good dog legislation. Yes it is hard, but not because its hard to come up with something thats fair, I think all of it is straight forward. The part thats hard is getting the government to take it seriously enough and allocate the priority and resources to make it happen. Like I said before if they really cared about dog attacks the way they keep banging on about it then there shouldnt be a problem. Can anyone suggest a place (including urban/suburban neighborhoods) that has really good dog laws? The majority of Sydney seems to be good. One of the best in my view and first hand experience is Marrickville. Edited March 22, 2009 by calsonic350z 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