HEARINGS COMMITTEE AGENDA

Similar documents
Annual Dog Control. Report to Secretary LOCAL GOVERNMENT 2016/17. Te Kaunihera o Papaioea Palmerston North City Council

HEARINGS COMMITTEE AGENDA

Report to ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & REGULATIONS Committee for decision

Manawatu District Council. Dog Control Policy

DOG CONTROL POLICY 2016

THAMES COROMANDEL DISTRICT COUNCIL REPORT ON DOG CONTROL

ANNUAL REPORT DOG CONTROL POLICY AND PRACTICES

REPORT ON QUEENSTOWN LAKES DISTRICT COUNCIL S DOG CONTROL POLICIES AND PRACTICES Financial year

1 INTRODUCTION 2 GENERAL

GUIDELINES FOR AFFILIATES WHEN DEALING WITH AGGRESSIVE DOGS

CARTERTON DISTRICT COUNCIL DOG CONTROL BYLAW 1997

The Corporation of the Town of Essex. Appeal Hearing with Resped to a Notice to Muzzle

Acting Inspections and Enforcement Manager Mark Vincent, Team Leader Animal Control

Registered/Unregistered Dogs

Chapter 506. Dangerous and Vicious Animals Adopted July 21, 2008

INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS WITNESS STATEMENT

THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF GREY HIGHLANDS BY-LAW NUMBER

Annual Dog Control Report

DOG CONTROL POLICY. Effective from 28 August 2018

R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER D.16

The Corporation of the Town of New Tecumseth

Pit Bull Dog Licensing By-law

Dog Control Act 1996 and amendments in 2003, 2004 and 2006 hereafter referred to as the Act. Enforcement Guidelines (under the Act), May 2009

TOWN OF LANIGAN BYLAW 2/2004

Veterinary Client Mediation Service (VCMS)

CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF HUNTSVILLE BY-LAW NUMBER Being a By-law for the Control and Licensing of Dogs

Dog Control Policy and Practices 2017/18

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF ENDERBY BYLAW NO. 1469

STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL Hamilton Dog Control Bylaw 2015 & Dog Control Policy

MINUTES OF THE APPEALS COMMITTEE Sitting as the Vicious Dog Appeal Committee

Dog Control Policy. Hauraki District Council. Hauraki District Council PO Box 17, Paeroa William St, Paeroa

Manawatu District Council Dog Control Bylaw 2014 Contents

Article VIII. Potentially Dangerous Dogs and Vicious Dogs

BY- LAW 39 of 2008 OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF ST. MARYS

Waitomo District Dog Control Bylaw 2015

AND WHEREAS by motion 13-GC-253 the Council of the Corporation of the Town of Bracebridge deems it expedient to amend By-law ;

Pets and Animals Policy

CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO. 411

B Y - L A W N U M B E R Passed the 27th day of September, 2004.

THE KEEPING OF ANIMALS, CATS, POULTRY AND BEES BYLAW 2018

ORDINANCE NO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIPON AS FOLLOWS:

A1 Control of dangerous and menacing dogs (reviewed 04/01/15)

Dog Control Act Hearing Panel DETERMINATIONS

Contact the Community Safety and Enforcement Division at or access relevant background material at

1.0 TITLE AND COMMENCEMENT INTERPRETATION MANDATORY OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE ACT...

VILLAGE OF ROSEMARY IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA BYLAW NO 407/09 And AMENDMENT with BYLAW 428/11

Bylaw No. 641, Amendment to 605 Dog Control Bylaw

1 SB By Senators Livingston and Scofield. 4 RFD: Agriculture, Conservation, and Forestry. 5 First Read: 25-JAN-18.

EDWARD RYDER of 40 Selkirk Road, Jimboomba, states:-

This bylaw may be cited as the Dog Control Bylaw.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS THE CITIES OF JACKSONVILLE, LONOKE NORTH LITTLE ROCK AND BEEBE, ARKANSAS

Chapter 8.02 DOGS AND CATS

BISHOP PAIUTE TRIBE DOG CONTROL ORDINANCE NO BISHOP PAIUTE RESERVATION BISHOP, CALIFORNIA

CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS MACOMB COUNTY, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO.

VILLAGE OF ELNORA THE CAT CONTROL BYLAW BYLAW NUMBER

BY-LAW NUMBER A BY-LAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE MUZZLING OF VICIOUS DOGS

SCHEDULE A. Bill No By-law No.

The Corporation of the Village of Cumberland Regular Council Meeting March 10 th, 2014 at 5:30 p.m. Village Council Chambers

FINAL DECISION AND SECTION 43 STATEMENT TO THE VETERINARY COUNCIL BY THE COMPLAINTS ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE Dr B. CAC (Complaint by Mr A)

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF WELLINGTON NORTH

2016 No. 58 ANIMALS. The Microchipping of Dogs (Scotland) Regulations 2016

C. Penalty: Penalty for failure to secure said license shall be as established by Council resolution for the entire year. (Ord.

2015 No. 108 ANIMALS, ENGLAND. The Microchipping of Dogs (England) Regulations 2015

A regular meeting of the Village of Victor Planning Board was held on Wednesday, May 25, 2016, at the Village Hall, 60 East Main Street.

GORE DISTRICT COUNCIL DOG CONTROL BYLAW 2013

TOWN OF STE. ANNE. Animal Control By-Law. BY-LAW No

REGULATIONS. SECTION R The REGISTER and REGISTRATIONS

ALEXANDRINA COUNCIL DOGS BY-LAW By-law No. 5 OF 2016

VILLAGE OF ROSALIND BY-LAW A BYLAW OF THE VILLAGE OF ROSALIND IN THE PROVINCE OF ALBERTA, PROVIDING FOR THE CONTROLLING OF DOGS.

BYLAW NUMBER

TMCEC Bench Book CHAPTER 17 ANIMALS. Dangerous Dogs. 1. Dogs that Are a Danger to Persons. Definitions:

CONTROL OF DOGS BYLAW

THE LAY OBSERVERS REPORT TO COUNCIL AND THE PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION COMMITTEE S RESPONSE

Contract and Bill of Sale

PLEASE NOTE. authority of the Queen s Printer for the province should be consulted to determine the authoritative statement of the law.

CITY COUNCIL APRIL 3, 2017 PUBLIC HEARING

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF AJAX BY-LAW NUMBER

MEMORANDUM. City Council. David J. Deutsch City Manager. Animal Shelter Update. DATE: November 20, 2013

THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF PORT HOPE BY-LAW NO. 48/2015

DOGS POLICY (Made under s 10 of the Dog Control Act 1996) LEG

BYLAW NO SUMMER VILLAGE OF YELLOWSTONE DOG AND CAT CONTROL BYLAW

5. COMPLIANCE. Policy 5.5. Companions Animals Policy. Version 2

CHAPTER 6.10 DANGEROUS DOG AND POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG

CHAPTER 2.20 POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS AND DANGEROUS DOGS

BYLAW NUMBER

NZS 9201:Part 13:1999

Policy on Approval of Greyhound Muzzle Exemptions

CITY OF PARKSVILLE BYLAW N A BYLAW TO PROVIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF ANIMALS

VSBSA NEWSLETTER. Other (i.e. joint owners), 8, 28% Female, 13, 44% Male, 8, 28% COMPLAINTS OVERVIEW 2009/10

DOG LICENCING BYLAW NO EFFECTIVE DATE JULY 24, 2000 CONSOLIDATED FOR CONVENIENCE ONLY

RSPCA SA v Ross and Fitzpatrick Get the Facts

Vicious Dog Ordinance

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

Proposed new Dog Control Bylaw and Dog Control Policy 2016

SUNSHINE COAST REGIONAL DISTRICT BYLAW NO A Bylaw to regulate the keeping of dogs within the Keats Island Dog Control Service Area

ANIMAL PROTECTION AND CONTROL

Revision History. Revision Rev Date Details 2007 Bylaw First Adopted 13 March 2012 Bylaw Revised. Authorised Name Signature

ATHABASCA COUNTY BYLAW NO

REGULATIONS. SECTION R The REGISTER and REGISTRATIONS

Community. Dogs, cats, neighbours and you. Your guide to the laws about owning a dog or cat in Victoria

Transcription:

HEARINGS COMMITTEE AGENDA Extraordinary meeting to be held THURSDAY 6 OCTOBER 2016 8.15am In the Manawatu District Council Chambers, 135 Manchester Street, Feilding Dr Richard Templer Chief Executive

HEARING PANEL Chairperson Councillor Howard Voss Members Councillor Tony Jensen Councillor Shane Casey Councillor Barbara Cameron 2

ORDER OF BUSINESS PAGE 1. MEETING OPENING 2. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 4 Draft resolution That the minutes of the Hearings Committee meetings held 8 July 2016 and 30 September 2016 be adopted as a true and correct record. 3. MEETING CLOSURE 3

HEARINGS COMMITTEE FRIDAY 8 JULY 2016 9.00AM Minutes of a meeting of the Hearings Committee held on Friday 8 July 2016, commencing at 9.00am in the Manawatū District Council Chambers, 135 Manchester Street, Feilding. PRESENT: Cr Howard Voss (Chairperson) Cr Shane Casey Cr Tony Jensen IN ATTENDANCE: Shayne Harris (General Manager-Business) Lou Fairest Harper (Acting Senior Animal Control Officer) Fred de Burgh (Animal Control Officer) Allie Dunn (Business Support Team Leader) Nichole Ganley (Business Support Officer) HC 16/023 Trevor Cook MEETING OPENING (Objector) The Chairperson welcomed attendees to the hearing, introduced committee members and officers that were present. He explained the general procedure that would be followed. HC 16/024 OBJECTION TO CLASSIFICATION OF MENACING DOG OBJECTOR Mr Trevor Cook spoke to his brief of evidence. Issues he raised were: Trevor acknowledged that Snap his 4.2kg Jack Russell was present during the attack and his dogs were responsible for molesting the hens but stated Snap most likely was the instigator in leading his other dog Maui off the property but believed she would not have been involved in killing the hens. He accepted the classification of menacing for the other dog. He stated his concern the limitations that the menacing classification would have as the dog frequently travelled with him. He advised the dog posed no risk to people or other animals when travelling with him. In conclusion he said this incident was caused by a change in routine and was an unusual event. Steps had been taken to ensure that it would not be repeated. Mr Cook concluded his evidence at 9.10am MANAWATU DISTRICT COUNCIL Councillor Voss sought clarification that there were two dogs present and that Snap was the leader. He also asked if the dogs were normally tied up and if they were microchipped. Councillor Jensen raised his concerns about the other dog Maui and if Trevor knew whether the complainant Bruce Brownlee knew they were his dogs. He also sought clarification that Mr Brownlee did in fact receive recompense for the chickens. He sought clarification from Animal Control Officer Fred de Burgh of the infringement applicable for failing to contain dogs. 4

HEARINGS COMMITTEE FRIDAY 8 JULY 2016 9.00AM Animal Control Officer Fred de Burgh had nothing further to add to his brief of evidence but confirmed the complainant Mr Brownlee did receive the recompense for the hens as he desired and the infringement for failing to contain dogs was $200.00. Councillor Voss sought clarification from the written evidence sent to Council from witness Ryan Henson, that the dog who was described to be hiding in the bushes was Snap. OBJECTOR RIGHT OF REPLY Mr Cook said the dogs were restrained on the property when he and his wife were not out on the property themselves and when they leave the property, otherwise they have 23 hectares they can essentially use. He didn t believe that Mr Brownlee knew they were his dogs, there was a phone number on one of the dog tags which Mr Brownlee rung but had no reply as no one was at home. Consequently the dogs were taken to the pound and identified via their microchips. HC 16/025 DECISION CLASSIFICATION OF DOG SNAP AS MENACING UNDER SECTION 33A(1)(B)(I) DOG CONTROL ACT 1996 The Chairperson opened the discussion noting that it seemed Snap was guilty by association in this instance. The consensus was a classification of menacing was not a suitable punishment given the circumstances and taking into account the complainant had been recompensed. However if there was a repeat offence of similar nature there would be a different outcome. RESOLVED 1) That the menacing classification imposed on the dog Snap belonging to Trevor Cook, pursuant to Section 33A(1)(b)(i) of the Dog Control Act 1996 be rescinded. 2) That the Hearings Committee takes note of the actions of the dog Snap and advises should there be a similar repeat of the actions of the dog then the Council would have no option but to enforce the requirements of the Dog Control Act 1996. Moved by: Seconded by: Councillor Howard Voss Councillor Tony Jensen CARRIED HC 16/026 MEETING CLOSURE The Chairperson declared the meeting closed at 9.30am Approved and adopted as a true and correct record: CHAIRPERSON DATE 5

HEARINGS COMMITTEE FRIDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2016 8.30AM Minutes of a meeting of the Hearings Committee held on Friday 30 September 2016, commencing at 8.30am in the Manawatu District Council Chambers, 135 Manchester Street, Feilding. PRESENT: Cr Howard Voss (Chairperson) Cr Shane Casey Cr Tony Jensen IN ATTENDANCE: Rachelle Johnston (Consents and Monitoring Team Leader) Robert Petersen (Senior Animal Control Officer) Trevor Gunn (Animal Control Officer) Herb Verstegen (Animal Control Officer) Lou Fairest-Harper (Animal Control Officer) Allie Dunn (Business Support Team Leader) Terry Healy Peter Simpson (Objector) HC 16/036 HEARING OPENING The Chairperson welcomed attendees to the hearing of an objection lodged by Terry Healy against the issuing of a menacing dog classification relating to the dog known as Steinie pursuant to the provisions of Section 33C(1) of the Dog Control Act 1996. The Chairperson acknowledged additional information tabled being a copy of notes made by Animal Control Officer Trevor Gunn of a phone conversation between himself and Terry Healy, and a copy of the signed affidavit of Trevor Gunn, which was made available to all parties present. HC 16/037 MANAWATU DISTRICT COUNCIL SENIOR ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER Robert Peterson, Senior Animal Control Officer, answered questions from the Hearings Committee around the process of serving the menacing classification letter, the timeframes between classification of the dog and the follow up visit. In response to a question from the Hearings Committee, he confirmed that there had been no reported complaints relating to the behaviour of the dog Steinie. He also explained that the pit bull type as listed in the Dog Control Act 1996 was not a recognised breed whereas the American Staffordshire Terrier was a recognised breed. With regard to Annex I to the agenda, which listed information from the Auckland City Council relating to their recognition of American Staffordshire Terriers as pit bull type, it was clarified that the Manawatu District Council did not adopt the same procedure in its Dog Control Policy or Bylaws. HC 16/038 OBJECTOR TERRY HEALY Mr Healy tabled a letter from himself to the Hearing Committee outlining the background of breeding of American Staffordshire Terrier, documenting the temperament of his dog, and including references confirming his dog s temperament and behaviour. Following questions from the Hearings Committee, he confirmed the process undertaken at the veterinary clinic where the DNA sample was taken, noting that the dog s microchip was scanned to confirm the dog s identity and that there was the vet and vet nurse present during the taking of the sample. 6

HEARINGS COMMITTEE FRIDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2016 8.30AM Following questions from the Hearings Committee regarding the documented breeds of the dam and sire of the dog Steinie, Mr Healy noted that the documentation showed the information provided by the owners of the dogs, which has shown to be incorrect by the DNA results. HC 16/039 MANAWATU DISTRICT COUNCIL SENIOR ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER RIGHT OF REPLY Robert Peterson, Senior Animal Control Officer, in his reply clarified the wording of Section 33C of the Dog Control Act 1996 as requiring an Animal Control Officer to classify a dog as menacing if the Animal Control Officer believes the dog to be wholly or predominantly of pitbull type. They base this belief on their experience and he referred to Annex J of the agenda that set out responses received from other Animal Control Officers after viewing a photo of the dog Steinie. He confirmed that there was no issue with the ownership or behaviour of the dog, it was about enforcing the Dog Control Bylaws in accordance with the requirements of the Dog Control Act 1996. HC 16/039 DELIBERATIONS AND DECISION OBJECTION TO CLASSIFICATION OF DOG AS MENACING The Hearings Committee discussed the DNA evidence provided by Mr Healy which showed the dog Steinie to be an American Staffordshire Terrier by breed, and showed no other breeds in its bloodline. Following direction from the Hearings Committee, officers confirmed with Palmerston North City Council that the sire of the dog Steinie known as Shady and shown as American Staffordshire Bull Terrier and Sharpei on their database, had not been classified as menacing. The committee noted that the listing of the breeds of the dogs in vet records and Council records is based on information provided by owners, which may or may not be correct. In considering the objection the Hearings Committee had regard to the evidence which formed the basis of the classification, took into account the clarification of the process followed for the DNA sampling of the dog in question, and also the explanation of how the breeds of the dog, and its dam and sire were entered into Council and vet records. As a result, the Hearings Committee accepted the evidence provided by Terry Healy that the dog Steinie was an American Staffordshire Terrier and not of pitbull type. RESOLVED That the menacing classification imposed on the dog Steinie belonging to Terry Healy, pursuant to Section 33C(1) of the Dog Control Act 1996, be rescinded. Moved by: Seconded by: Councillor Howard Voss Councillor Tony Jensen CARRIED 7

HEARINGS COMMITTEE FRIDAY 30 SEPTEMBER 2016 8.30AM HC 16/040 CLOSURE OF HEARING The Chairperson declared the hearing closed at 9.35am. Approved and adopted as a true and correct record: CHAIRPERSON DATE 8