|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
As recently reported, more than 2500 dog attacks on people and animals were recorded from July 1, 2024 – June 30, 2025, Auckland Council figures reveal. Laws are in place but are they being sufficiently enforced? Former chief executive of the Auckland Business Chamber and Franklin local, Michael Barnett writes:
A good friend was walking her small companion dog in Karaka recently when it was attacked by a neighbour’s Rottweiler. The smaller dog required veterinary treatment, and when my friend attempted to protect her pet, she was knocked to the ground, suffering bruising, cuts and significant distress.
Following the incident, Auckland Council was notified and removed the larger dog. However, only a few days later the dog was returned to its owners on the understanding that it would be securely contained in a purpose-built compound.
My understanding is that no such suitable compound or protective fencing been constructed. This raises concerns for my friend and others who walk their pets, with their children or simply enjoy their neighbourhood.
There will always be debate about whether such incidents are the result of irresponsible ownership, inadequate training or the behaviour of individual dogs – these are important discussions. However, the immediate issue is much simpler: a serious attack occurred, resulting in injury to a pet and a person, and many residents remain uncertain whether sufficient measures have been taken to prevent it from happening again.
Council has a responsibility to balance animal welfare with public safety. When a dog has demonstrated dangerous behaviour, residents should be confident that any decision to return that animal is supported by clear safeguards, proper containment and evidence that the risk of further incidents has been appropriately addressed.
In this case, it’s difficult to understand why the dog was returned before agreed containment arrangements were implemented.
Confidence depends on knowing conditions imposed are enforced. This is not about punishing dogs or owners, it’s about ensuring people can walk their streets without fear of being injured and pet owners can feel safe exercising animals in their own neighbourhood.
I encourage council to review this case, communicate clearly with affected residents and ensure appropriate safeguards are in place before similar decisions are made in the future.
I would ask readers to consider a simple question: if it had been your spouse, your child, your parent or your family pet who had been attacked, would you be satisfied that enough had been done to protect the community from a repeat occurrence? Public safety must come first.
Michael Barnett CNZM
