The 1996 Dog Act and the subsequent amendments are more than adequate to protect the general public- if they are enforced. The reality is that the Wanganui District Council have never actioned the subsequent amendments and in particular the 2004 amendment which covered in full -menacing and dangerous dogs.
The media release from the Wanganui District Council dated 26.1.04
Recent dog attack incidents and dog control policies will be up for discussion when the Wanganui District Council meets on Monday, January 29.
The Council has a clear policy that if a dog inflicts a serious bite on a person then, in all instances, destruction of the dog will be sought and the victim or victim’s family will be asked whether they wish the Council to proceed with a prosecution against the owner.On Monday the Council will discuss whether to introduce an additional policy that if two instances of ‘rushing’ are recorded against a particular dog then destruction of that dog will be sought.
It is also suggested that the fee for uplifting unregistered dogs from the pound be substantially increased when fees are set in the 2007/08 Annual Plan. A number of the offending dogs in recent attack incidents have not been registered. Increasing the fee should encourage the registration of dogs generally but may act as a disincentive for dangerous dogs to be uplifted from the pound.
What a joke- What is the point on increasing the fee for non -registration if it isn’t charged in the first place. I also doubt that a fine over and above what is already set in law would be legally enforceable. Existing fines as per the 2003/2004 amendments 1996 Dog Act are set out below
The existing laws on dangerous and menacing dogs is set out below
Posted by Carol Jones 
Whatsup 