Barking up the wrong tree

Say a door knocker comes to your property, “selling” widgets, or religion, or perhaps the latest vacuum cleaner you can’t live without.
Your dog is chained up around the back. You have signs warning, ‘beware of the dog, enter at own risk’.
The door knocker tries the front door and gets no answer. Being persistent (or some would say, very stupid), they head to the back door. Your chained up dog bites the door knocker.
The council dog control officers take your dog and a judge orders your dog to be destroyed.
Does this sound right?
A similar situation befell a Waikato resident recently, so we approached Waikato Council to gain comment.
Megan May, Animal Control Team Leader at Waikato Council advises, “In regards to that scenario, the dog owner may be prosecuted depending on the severity of injuries and the potential ongoing threat to the public. If this happens, the case would go to Court where a judge would determine the outcome.”
Councils do not make the decision whether to destroy a dog, that is a judge’s decision.
Megan continues, “Under law, if the owner is convicted, destruction of the dog is mandatory, unless there are extenuating circumstances that lead to the offence. It’s up to the owner and the lawyer to present the circumstances to the judge.”
Every situation is different. For instance, that door knocker could have been a young child retrieving a ball.
New Zealand’s implied entry laws mean in general, anyone can come onto your property, through a gate and up to your door.
So if you think a sign is going to stop your dog from being destroyed, unfortunately you’re barking up the wrong tree.
Since you’re here… we have a small favour to ask. More and more people want the Post than ever but advertising revenues across the media are falling fast. And unlike many news organisations, we haven’t put up a paywall – we want to keep our journalism as open as we can. So you can see why we need to ask for your help. The Post’s independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. With investigative reporting, we often don't know at the beginning how a story will unfold and how long it might take to uncover. This can mean it is costly – particularly as we often face legal threats that attempt to stop our reporting. But we remain committed to raising important questions and exposing wrongdoing. And we do it because we believe our perspective matters – because it might well be your perspective, too. If everyone who reads our reporting, who likes it, helps to support it, our future would be much more secure. For as little as NZ$5, you can support the Post – and it only takes a minute. Thank you. Support The Post

One response to “Barking up the wrong tree”

  1. I would be interested to find out what education the company provides to their workers regarding the known risk of entering a property where dogs are present. As part of the new H & S requirements the staff should have been aware of the risks and behaved accordingly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *