Brian Rudman: Days of freedom to roam numbered for menacing dogs

COMMENT

It's good to see that three of the four Auckland city councils are not dragging their feet when it comes to implementing the tough new dog control law passed last December.

The savage mauling of Thames toddler Alex Josey last month was a sad reminder of how necessary the legislation is, and how vicious a household pet can suddenly become.

Particularly quick off the mark was Manukau City, which has sent out 538 letters to owners of dogs that were automatically classified "menacing" under the act, notifying them of the classification and ordering that the male dogs be neutered.

The act banned importing of american pit bull terriers, dogo argentinas, brazilian filas and japanese tosas. It also created a new category of "menacing", which is defined as a dog that poses a threat to a person or animal because of any observed behaviour or because of any characteristics typically associated with the breed or type.

A council must, if it has reasonable grounds to believe a dog belongs wholly or predominantly to one of the four banned breeds, classify it as menacing. It may also order that it be neutered.

Menacing dogs must be muzzled and on a leash in public. From June 1 this year, dog owners must also ensure at all times that, when their dog is on their property, it is either under the direct control of an adult or confined so that it cannot freely leave the property.

Manukau and Waitakere Cities have both chosen to make neutering compulsory and an Auckland City spokesman says "we're leaning in that direction ourselves". Auckland plans to start sending out notices to owners of registered menacing dogs within a week.

North Shore is the council dragging the chain, saying, "It's something we'll be looking at in the next month or so". As for neutering, that is something that will be considered case by case.

Of course the attack on the Thames child illustrates that singling out breeds and neutering are not the perfect solutions. The dogs involved in that assault were apparently a staffordshire-cross bitch and two of her 8-week-old puppies. Also, council dog registers, based as they are on the dog owners' descriptions of their dogs, are probably less than definitive.

Across the four Auckland cities, there's not one dogo argentina, japanese tosa or brazilian fila on the books. As for pit bulls, they're far from evenly spread, according to the official records.

Auckland City has about 300 registered, either pure or crossbred, and Manukau 538. But across the harbour, genteel North Shore lays claim to fewer than 50. Most amazingly, out in the poodle-loving West, fewer than 20 of Waitakere's 12,000 registered dogs are pit bulls.

Auckland City is taking a sceptical approach to owners' classifications and plans to make personal visits to around 1300 dogs to check exactly what the owner means when he claims to have an american staffordshire, or staffordshire-cross, or even perhaps a terrier.

At that stage it would pay for the dog to be polite, because it is in the power of the officer to declare it "menacing" if it is threatening, no matter what breed it is.

Dogs can also be red-carded if they rush or otherwise threaten. All of which is great to know. This ability to classify a dog as menacing, on the basis of observed or reported misbehaviour, is one of the best aspects of this law.

We should, I guess, be grateful there seem to be so few representatives of the prohibited breeds in the country. As for pit bulls, the quicker they - and anything that looks or walks like them - are neutered and die out the better.

But what is vital is that councils take a hard line, both in classifying dogs and in policing and enforcing the new law. North Shore's apparent leisurely pace is disappointing.

Public support for the legislation was overwhelming last year following the attack on the little girl in a central Auckland park that triggered it. It's up to councils to carry on the rage and get the new controls in place before more savagings take place.

The new law may not be perfect, but it's a lot better than the legislation it replaces.