No to Breed Specific Legislation in N.S.W

In October 2005 the New South Wales state parliament pushed through Breed Specific Legislation laws through the senate and by April 2006 they are fully in place.

These laws target innocent, law abiding citizens and their families.

Breed Specific Legislation does not solve anything, rather targets the WRONG people, people who have done the right thing by the law, and registered their pets thinking they were doing the right thing.

These laws take away all the joys of having a dog, they deprive dogs of the key ingredient to a beneficial well-balanced life, which is HUMAN INTERACTION.  A dog is required to live its entire existance in a 10sq metre enclosure, to be muzzled and leashed anytime it is out of the enclosure INCLUDING THEIR OWN HOME.  These laws make it illegal to laze on the couch with your beloved pet and watch a movie, it is ILLEGAL for a dog lover to be able to do this.

A dog is also required to wear a bright red and yellow striped collar, indiciating that it is a dangerous dog, even though it has never done anything dangerous to be labelled this way.  This is BREED SPECIFIC DISCRIMINATION, further sensationalising the media propaganda and hype directed at the American Pit Bull Terrier.

The American Pit Bull Terrier, properly bred, is known for its human loyalty and temperament, they are used as lawdogs, therapy dogs, search and rescue dogs all over the world.  They are not the blame, and they are certainly not responsible for the majority of dog attacks. 

The New South Wales Government needs to ammend or abolish these Breed Specific Laws and consider the following:

-   Laws pertaining to irresponsible dog ownership
-   Tougher laws and sentencing in animal cruelty, dog fighting cases
-   Outlawing irresponsible and backyard breeding of all breeds
-   Spay and Neuter programs across the board, for all breeds
-   More power to Police and Council rangers to access properties of those who are suspected of being involved in dogfighting, illegal activies or anyone who is keeping a dog in questionable circumstances
-   Possible licencing of all guard type dogs, and individual assessments be made rather than targetting owners of an entire breed








NSW COMPANION ANIMALS ACT AMENDMENT
PRINCIPLES PAPER - JUNE 2005

Background

On 3 May 2005 the Premier, the Hon Bob Carr MP, announced in Parliament that the Government would introduce legislation to ban restricted breeds, including pit bull and American pit bull terriers. The proposed ban was announced after the completion of a review of the Companion Animals Act 1998, which has resulted in a number of recommendations for legislative amendment. The Government is now aiming to implement stronger measures for the control of dangerous dogs along with the breed ban to reduce the number of dog attacks and, in particular, the more serious types of dog attack.

Accordingly, the Director General met with peak Companion Animals Stake-holders on 8 June 2005 to discuss amendments to the Companion Animals Act 1998 to implement the Government's announced ban on restricted breed dogs. The meeting also discussed other provisions to be included in the Act to improve companion animal management in NSW.

The following is a summary of the proposed reforms to the Companion Animals Act resulting from the Premier's announcement, discussion with Stake-holders and the Act review recommendations. Further comment from the Stake-holders is encouraged to ensure that the proposed amendments are effective in practice.

1. Controls on restricted and dangerous dogs

* The definition of restricted dogs will remain broadly the same as the existing provision and includes pit bull and American pit bull terriers. However, more specific provision will be made for inclusion of further breeds or types whose importation into Australia might be prohibited under the Commonwealth Government's customs regulations;
* Prohibit the breeding, sale, acquisition and supply of restricted dogs;
* Require compulsory de-sexing of restricted dogs;
* Councils will be given power to approve and enforce strict control requirements for existing restricted dogs;
* Prescribe new restricted and dangerous dog enclosure requirements. As indicated in the Act review recommendations, this would also include changing terminology from child-proof enclosure to terms akin to “an enclosure which is sufficient to restrain the dog and will prevent a child from having access to the dog”;
* The enclosure requirements may be prescribed by the regulations and will be determined by reviewing interstate requirements and the Rangers Institute proposal which includes the following:
- floor area minimum 10 square metres;
- walls to be minimum 2.2 m high, made of prescribed size and strength mesh to which no child can enter and no part of dog protrude;
- floor to be solid washable material;
- enclosure to be covered with a partial solid roof to provide shelter from elements with remaining area to be covered with wire mesh to prevent dog from jumping out;
- dog to be supplied with sufficient food and water and to be exercised each day;
- door to enclosure to be self-closing with lockable door, which should be locked unless enclosure is being tended to.

* Effective control to be required both on the owner's premises (ie once a dog is out of its enclosure) and when in public places. In particular, restricted and dangerous dogs to be muzzled and under the control of a person over 18 years of age and the person is to have no more than 2 such dogs when in a public place or out of the prescribed enclosure;
* Require warning signage to inform members of the public that a restricted or dangerous dog is kept on the premises;
* Restricted and dangerous dogs to wear a highly visible collar at all times (type to be prescribed by regulations);
* Strengthen requirements relating to the notification of change of address to local council/s (both former and new if moving to new LGA) by restricted and dangerous dogs;
* A general duty to be placed on councils to take such steps as are appropriate to ensure that they are notified of the existence of all restricted and dangerous dogs within their areas.

2. Breed identification, cross breed management & temperament assessment

* Where a council officer identifies a dog as a restricted dog, the onus will be on the owner to prove that it is not. The Royal NSW Canine Council (RNSWCC) has indicated that it is prepared to issue identification certificates;
* Authorised identifier able to refer dog to council for identification where the identifier reasonably suspects that the dog is a restricted breed. Where vets are authorised identifiers, amendment to the Veterinary Surgeons Regulation may be necessary to allow release of this type of information;
* Provision will be made for the accreditation of organisations for identification and temperament assessment. Accredited organisations will be provided with indemnity for certification decisions made in good faith;
* Existing restricted dogs only permitted to change their breed or type on the register after owner obtains a certificate as to breed/type by an accredited organisation;
* All cross breeds or offspring of restricted dogs will be deemed dangerous dogs unless certification after temperament assessment indicates otherwise;
* Use of temperament assessment to assist councils to determine whether to declare a dog as dangerous. It is not anticipated that this will require legislation.


3. Veterinary surgeons to be provided access to Companion Animals Register

* The department to actively investigate giving veterinary surgeons access to the Companion Animals Register for the purpose of identifying owners of stray animals;
* If this occurs, Petline will be reduced to an after hours service or cut altogether.


4. Linking Road and Traffic Authority driver's licence and vehicle registration details

* The department to actively liaise with the Roads and Traffic Authority and Parliamentary Counsel to examine the feasibility and develop a system under which RTA licence and registration registers would be flagged to allow changes in location of restricted breeds and dangerous dogs to be tracked within NSW.
* Ability to obtain owners details for issuing an infringement under the Companion Animals Act 1988 from the RTA register to be examined.

5. Increased fixed and maximum penalties for offences

* Fixed penalty amounts to be increased by up to 1.5 times the current amount by amending the Regulation;
* Maximum penalty amounts to be increased by up to 3 times the current amount by amending the Act.

6. Enforcement, offences and seizure

* Enable authorised officers to issue a penalty notice for dog attacks under the Companion Animals Regulation;
* Review controls on dogs when in a motor vehicle in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture (responsible for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1979) and the Roads and Traffic Authority;
* Council to be able to declare a dog dangerous after an incident notwithstanding that the dog does not ordinary reside in that council's area;
* Where a dog has been seized, give council the ability to hold the dog until any relevant Court action has been finalised. Provide for council to recover the costs of holding the dog in those circumstances;
* Allow vets and animal welfare organisations to hold stray animals for 24 hour period or until next council working day;
* It will be made clear by addition of explanatory notes that Chapter 8, Part 2 of the Local Government Act 1993 (powers of entry) will apply to the Companion Animals Act; and that councils can exercise their functions outside their areas, in accordance with s. 357 of the Local Government Act.