Thread: Domestic animals amendment (dangerous dogs) bill 2010

Dear Sir or Madam,

DOMESTIC ANIMALS AMENDMENT (DANGEROUS DOGS) BILL 2010

Thank you for your recent correspondence, in which you write about your concerns regarding the changes to the domestic animal and dangerous dog legislation. As the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) is responsible for this legislation, I have been asked to respond to you directly on this matter.

The government is committed to promoting animal welfare and responsible pet ownership under the provisions of the Domestic Animals Act 1994. This includes development of strong legislation to protect the community from nuisance and dangerous dogs.

The aim of the legislation is to give councils greater powers to control dogs that are a danger to the community or are of a restricted breed, particularly if they are unregistered or unidentifiable to an owner, and to increase court imposed penalties on irresponsible dog owners.

This legislation is not about punitive measures against responsible dog owners or their pets. It is aimed at sending a clear message to irresponsible dog owners who are persistently and repeatedly non-compliant with the law, particularly in regard to allowing their dogs to stray at large or to cause attacks and fear or to allow their animals to remain unregistered. Responsible dog owners have nothing to fear from the changes proposed in the legislation.

For example, it is incorrect to assert that anyone who loses a pet will be automatically fined $1,200 or that elderly pensioners who forget to renew their annual pet registration will be fined $2,400. All councils have in place policies to use reminder notices, warning letters and standard infringement penalties of up to $240, which all remain unchanged. While the legislation increases the maximum court imposed penalties it has not altered the standard infringement penalties that are predominantly used. The increased penalties are aimed at serious and repeat offenders who leave councils with no option but to take the matter to Court. A council’s enforcement policy is a matter for their Domestic Animal Management Plan that is developed through public consultation.

The government’s intention is to toughen action against individuals who practice irresponsible dog ownership. At the same time the legislation seeks to protect responsible dog owners who fulfil their responsible ownership obligations to register, use micro-chip identification and to control, care for and train their dogs.

The information gained from an online Dangerous Dogs Survey conducted in January 2010 and the views of major stakeholders (including the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the Australian Veterinary Association and Dogs Victoria) and community submissions have been considered in preparing and debating the legislation which balances the interests of animal welfare, animal control and community protection.

Thank you for your correspondence on the matter. Please find enclosed a fact sheet, which I hope you will find informative.


Yours Sincerely,




DR HUGH MILLAR
Executive Director, Biosecurity Victoria / Chief Veterinary Officer


Encl.