Dogs On The Menacing Dog List

[Guest Ams]

http://www.news.com.au/national/chihuahua-...r-1225948875890

CHIHUAHUAS and pomeranians are on the list of Queenland''s 100 most menacing dogs.

They might stand less than 30cm tall, but the small pets have now officially been declared menacing creatures by authorities, under controversial new state laws aimed at slowing the state's rising number of dog attacks.

More than a year after the laws were introduced, only 110 dogs have been declared menacing in Queensland, but authorities predict that will soar as awareness of the new laws spreads.

While the expected bigger breeds, such as german shepherds, have made the list, it is not just large dogs spreading fear.

The list also includes chihuahuas, a pomeranian, a shar pei, maltese-crosses, a fox terrier-cross and a poodle-cross.

Under the new laws, introduced last year, dogs can be declared menacing if they cause fear, which could include a behaviour such as rushing at a person on the other side of a fence.

Once their animal is on the list, the dog's owner could be forced to take action, such as posting a Menacing Dog sign on their fence.

Local councils have been put in charge of administering the laws, with Bundaberg Regional Council so far listing 46 dogs as menacing.

But there are concerns the message is yet to get out in other council areas, with 18 councils yet to add a single dog to the menacing list.

Local Government Minister Desley Boyle said residents could help curb the recent spate of dog attacks by reporting bad behaviour before it gets out of hand.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/chihuahua-...0#ixzz14YTNKi00

[Staranais]

Under the new laws, introduced last year, dogs can be declared menacing if they cause fear, which could include a behaviour such as rushing at a person on the other side of a fence.

Oh good god, that's ridiculous. If someone's really scared of dogs, then me walking my girl past them on a leash could "cause fear". That's their problem, it shouldn't be made into ours.

[Rebanne]

Under the new laws, introduced last year, dogs can be declared menacing if they cause fear, which could include a behaviour such as rushing at a person on the other side of a fence.

Oh good god, that's ridiculous. If someone's really scared of dogs, then me walking my girl past them on a leash could "cause fear". That's their problem, it shouldn't be made into ours.

I read it the opposite way, all those nasty little mongrels that rush at you while you are walking past their front yard. You should be able to go for a walk without having to plan your trip to get past these ferals safely.

[Cat]

Surely that would be more of a problem with the owner rather than the breed.

[Monah]

Under the new laws, introduced last year, dogs can be declared menacing if they cause fear, which could include a behaviour such as rushing at a person on the other side of a fence.

Oh good god, that's ridiculous. If someone's really scared of dogs, then me walking my girl past them on a leash could "cause fear". That's their problem, it shouldn't be made into ours.

I read it this way. I dont understand how this can work properly. What may be frightening for one perosn may not be for another. There are 2 dogs that rush their fences daily where we walk. Both are gorgeous, one ACD and one Lab. Owners are good too, not feral in any sense. THe blocks are a couple of acres and the fences on the front of the property. I pat them etc. THey are not menacing at all, but maybe someone who was 'new' would think they were.....

I understand some dogs are menacing, I just dont know how this could be policed fairly... :D

[GeckoTree]

I know lol its a bit iffy, my dog may just not like the authorised person or religion converter trying to brainwash me, besides chihuahuas might not like big feet!

No more sik em rex :D

A menacing dog declaration may be made if:

• the dog has attacked or acted in a way that caused fear to a person or another animal; or

• may in the opinion of an authorised person from observation of the dog’s behaviour towards a person or animal attack, or behave in a way that causes fear to the person or animal.

[Greytmate]

I think this law is a really good one.

It gives councils an option other than to declare a dog dangerous, which is what they have to do now if there is a validated complaint of even a minor or once-off incident of aggression.

Also, it enables a council to take action about a dog before it can actually cause harm, instead of having to wait until the dog does something.

There are so many properties in QLD, with really poor fencing, where instead of being confined to the backyard, the dog has the whole run of the property. It can be really scary walking past some of these places. Traffic on one side of you and a really vicious, lunging, growling dog inches away from your head on the other. When a flimsy old fence is the only thing keeping you safe, it is good to know that we now have an avenue to force a owner to upgrade their fencing to an appropriate level fro their dog.

Dogs declared menacing do not have to be muzzled, but they do have to be behind fencing of a good standard. That is a good thing.

[asal]

I know lol its a bit iffy, my dog may just not like the authorised person or religion converter trying to brainwash me, besides chihuahuas might not like big feet!

No more sik em rex

A menacing dog declaration may be made if:

• the dog has attacked or acted in a way that caused fear to a person or another animal; or

• may in the opinion of an authorised person from observation of the dog’s behaviour towards a person or animal attack, or behave in a way that causes fear to the person or animal.

lol then i can dob in the mastif on the corner and the two idiot staffies down the road eh?

the charged their front fence so fast my horse in the first instance totaly freaked out and did three spins as i tried to stop her leaping onto the road and maybe hit by a car, n managed to avoid a broken nose when some part of her hit me in the melleee.

as for the wretched staffies. she managed a 15 foot leap from a standing start they simply came from "nowwhere" to screaming in her face n hitting the fence with their full weight. thought i was a goner for sure. lucky the leap was down the footpath n not onto the road n get cleaned up by a passing car in either instance. (no i dont ride on the edge of the road anymore. after two motorists ran into the butt of my horse with the excuse " i didnt see you". horses tend to be hard to panel beat. broken bones are usually fatal) pity they are allowed access to the front fence when they are like that, these lot are on acagerage. suppose at least they were fenced in?

so many owners just let em roam to have a go whenever they please.

some days i wish i had a gun.

i know the dangers my dogs have no access to the front fence for just that reason.

Edited November 7, 2010 by asal

[GeckoTree]

Sure you could, I dont think it has to do with fences in particular, just that it caused fear.

[raz]

I didnt realise this was a new law. I thought it had been around for a while.

[Moselle]

http://www.news.com.au/national/chihuahua-...r-1225948875890

CHIHUAHUAS and pomeranians are on the list of Queenland''s 100 most menacing dogs.

They might stand less than 30cm tall, but the small pets have now officially been declared menacing creatures by authorities, under controversial new state laws aimed at slowing the state's rising number of dog attacks.

More than a year after the laws were introduced, only 110 dogs have been declared menacing in Queensland, but authorities predict that will soar as awareness of the new laws spreads.

While the expected bigger breeds, such as german shepherds, have made the list, it is not just large dogs spreading fear.

The list also includes chihuahuas, a pomeranian, a shar pei, maltese-crosses, a fox terrier-cross and a poodle-cross.

Under the new laws, introduced last year, dogs can be declared menacing if they cause fear, which could include a behaviour such as rushing at a person on the other side of a fence.

Once their animal is on the list, the dog's owner could be forced to take action, such as posting a Menacing Dog sign on their fence.

Local councils have been put in charge of administering the laws, with Bundaberg Regional Council so far listing 46 dogs as menacing.

But there are concerns the message is yet to get out in other council areas, with 18 councils yet to add a single dog to the menacing list.

Local Government Minister Desley Boyle said residents could help curb the recent spate of dog attacks by reporting bad behaviour before it gets out of hand.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/chihuahua-...0#ixzz14YTNKi00

Things are getting beyond RIDICULOUS! I cannot see how a dog rushing at someone on the other side of the fence prove menacing???? It isnt as though they can actually attack a person if the fence is acting as the barrier . With such a law in place, your average joe blow who happens to detest dogs can make a complaint about the slightest thing and one is faced with having to declare one's dog as "menacing" ????? PATHETIC !!!

My mum owns a fox terrier and a mini fox terrier, she has an 8' fence in the front yard; on one particular day both dogs were out in the front yard with her (normally they are in the back yard). A teenager walked past, he could see the dogs well ahead of time....the dogs barked at him a couple of times, there was no way in hell they could have gotten to him....yet this weakling got home and whinged to his father and the next thing you know....his father approaches my mother and complains that her dogs frightened his boy! The dogs only barked twice...which is typical of most dogs when somebody walks past the boundary. Things are getting way ouf of hand in a world where people are forever suing others for the littlest of reasons!

Edited November 12, 2010 by Moselle

[WreckitWhippet]

I didnt realise this was a new law. I thought it had been around for a while.

NSW CAA was amended a few years back to include the acts of rushing etc. You might be thinking of that.

[raz]

I didnt realise this was a new law. I thought it had been around for a while.

NSW CAA was amended a few years back to include the acts of rushing etc. You might be thinking of that.

Thanks.

[Zhou Xuanyao]

Atleast 50% of dogs are "menacing" under that definition, I have heard about it before. It goes against the grain of a dogs character not to rush to the fence and bark at strangers.

If councils start enforcing these laws in any meaningful way, brace yourselves for people trying to tap in to the emerging "mute" breed market. Followed by mute and immobile, followed by statues

[Greytmate]

Atleast 50% of dogs are "menacing" under that definition, I have heard about it before. It goes against the grain of a dogs character not to rush to the fence and bark at strangers.

If councils start enforcing these laws in any meaningful way, brace yourselves for people trying to tap in to the emerging "mute" breed market. Followed by mute and immobile, followed by statues

If it is a dog's character to rush at fences and bark at strangers, then there needs to be a way to enforce a good minimum standard of fencing for dogs of that character. This law provides an opportunity for that.

An alternative might be to put your dog's enclosure or yard away from a public boundary, so that people are not scared that the dog will break over under or through the fence at them, and nobody will report the dog.

Not all dogs scare people with their behaviour Lo Pan, and I see nothing wrong with menacing dogs being declared menacing. The dog couldn't care less. This law is a good one, as it enables potentially dangerous dogs to be kept behind a good standard of fencing before they cause harm.

There is no reason why every single dog should have to be behind a extra secure fence, but there are very good reasons why some of them should be, and now council can force their owners to provide decent fences.

[whiskedaway]

I agree the law is a good one, however there are some instances where a dog could be declared "menacing" when it is not really. For example, my puppy gets extremely excited on a walk and we're currently working on getting her to walk calmly past other people and dogs. However, average Joe isn't going to realise that my Husky puppy that is jumping around, whining and pulling on her lead is excited rather than menacing, especially when she looks like a fully grown adult. The thing I'd be most worried about would be someone who hates dogs making a complaint and a perfectly fine, though possibly excitable dog getting labeled as "menacing".

[Zhou Xuanyao]

Some dogs are dangerous, and I do like the ideology, but I fear it's execution will be flawed and it will not be implemented in a way which is just.

Menacing is defined by this law as causing fear to a person or animal.

Different people have different thesholds to fear, and different prejudices and perceptions of dogs and dog behavior.

Under this law, if you walk a timid or unsocialized dog and it becomes afraid of another dog being walked in the vicinity, then that other dog meets the definition of "menacing". If someone walks past a house and starts at the sound of a barking dog, then that dog could be declared menacing. If someone simply does not like the look of a dog and is afraid or claims to be afraid, that dog could be declared menacing.

I think this law is too open ended. In the end it comes down to the council officer's opinion, and I do not want to place my confidence in the judgement of council officers.

[Tim'sMum]

An alternative might be to put your dog's enclosure or yard away from a public boundary, so that people are not scared that the dog will break over under or through the fence at them, and nobody will report the dog.

Tough if you live on a corner. Our last house was on a corner and people walked past our side fence all day and night. If someone stepped off the footpath, walked down the drive and stuck their head over the gate...the dogs would go ballistic.

That was something that I was actually not all that unhappy about...as it gave us the security that only a bloody idiot would attempt to climb over the fence or gate.

The fence was besser block, the gate was sturdy metal, covered in panels and padlocked and the dogs could not see through either the fence or the gate.

Someone had to be of adult height and stick their head over the gate for the dogs to see them....so if they were scared by the dogs...tough! What were they doing prying into our yard anyway?

Laws concerning dogs are getting more ridiculous by the day.

[55chevy]

This menacing dog legislation is rediculous the way I see it. A dog is allowed run the fence line and bark, providing it doesn't cause anyone fear???. How is fear, a state of mind confirmed???. Anyone could say they feared a dog secured behind a substantial fence, I can think of a dozen dogs that bark behind fences in people's yards that I would fear if they got out, but it's not logical to fear a dog that you can see the fencing properly prevents the dog's escape I can't see how they can act upon a state of mind that can't be confirmed if a person genuinely felt fear in a particluar situation.

Edited November 23, 2010 by 55chevy

[MolassesLass]

It sounded like a good idea at first but the implementation has made it pointless. The ONLY difference between owing a dangerous dog and a menacing dog is that the dog doesn't have to wear the flouro collar and doesn't have to be muzzled in public. It still has to pay the $300+ a year in registration, still has to have a sign on your fence, still must be kept in a super-max enclosure, no kids, no selling without special conditions etc. So, big waste of tax-payers money when these dogs could already be declared dangerous for causing fear.

Edited November 23, 2010 by molasseslass