TriniTuner.com  |  Latest Event:  

Forums

Dangerous Dogs Act - Trinidad and Tobago

this is how we do it.......

Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods

User avatar
DrunkenMaster16
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6247
Joined: February 15th, 2004, 11:19 pm
Location: Bush, Beach, Swamp..Repeat.
Contact:

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby DrunkenMaster16 » March 18th, 2014, 11:04 pm

Dr.Kriyaan Singh

The basis of this Dog C ontrol act is that we assume that certain breeds of dog, pitbull and its types and three other breeds which there are only about 10 in Trinidad , are in fact the breeds capable of causing grievous bodily harm by bite and death.
We must accept that this assumption by the government is based not on scientific data; but rather on scandalization, perversion and reckless inaccuracies of dog attacks by the Media. Their inaccuracy can be seen just from all the reports of " Dangerous Dog Act passed " the act isn't even called that. We cannot use the Media reports as a database to make these decisions and law. The much referenced attack on a pregnant woman has been incorrectly highlighted as being pitbulls without any breed standard being used to determine the breed of the dogs involved.
Another attack reported it was perpetrated by a pitbull, published a photograph of a pitbull in the newspapers when the actual dog attack was by a German Shepherd crossed with Akita. So I ask this senate to take these " local statistics" for what they really are; not facts but glamorization and scandalization to sell newspaper and inadvertently target the pitbull. Accurate headlines should have simply and correctly stated " A dangerous Dog".
The attempt by the MP who is also a veterinarian to paint a picture of gore and relentlessness of the pitbull breed should also be disregarded this honorable MP Dr Glenn Ramadarsingh tried to highlight and insight fear against this breed by stating it can bite on and hang its entire body weight by the strength of its jaws. What this honorable Dr Glenn Ramadaesingh failed to mention, probably he is not educated in the field sufficiently, that all breeds of dogs can hold up their entire body weight by their jaws! I reference Millers Anatomy of the Dog, a text used worldwide at veterinary schools: that it is in fact " an evolutionary trait to enable a dog, descendants of the Grey Wolf, to hunt prey that are attempting to escape after being bitten. Must I remind this honorable MP that dogs and the grey wolf , hunt in packs and can only bring down a prey larger than itself when sufficient members of the pack collectively have a body weight , pinned by the jaw, heavier than the prey animal.
It would therefore stand to reason that a dog be classified as potentially " dangerous" not by its breed but by its body weight. It's weight would be a representation of its size and its ability to bite, hold on and overpower a human being. Seeing as the average weight of an unsupervised child should be around 25kg I would recommend such a weight as the lower
limit for a Class A dog

The intention of this Dog Control Act to use kennel clubs' description of a breed standard is also controversial. The intention to use the Canadian and American kennel club is ridiculous considering that American pitbull terrier and American bully is not recognized by either club! The United Kennel Club recognizes the American Pitbull Terrier as "excellent family companions and have always been noted for their love of children....it is not the best choice for a guard dog since they are extremely friendly, even with strangers." It fails to reach the breed standard for " viciousness or extreme shyness". So how can we use a breed standard that says this breed is harmless to then implicate it as a " dangerous dog". Further more the complexity of measuring for Breed Standards is very time consuming and vets are not trained to do this. This is however the job of a qualified Breed Judge of which only 3 exist in Trinidad. With this factor in consideration I again put forward the suggestion of the TTVA and myself to use a dogs body weight as determination of class.
Could I for the record state that it was never the private veterinarians intention to use this act to make money. In fact it was the TTVA suggestion that registration and certification be done by the local government council. And I suggested the microchipping be done by Government Veterinarians who are paid a fixed salary regardless of the number of dogs they see. This will remove this ridiculous connotation that vets are trying to make money by this act. Furthermore the euthanasia and death certification of these Class Adogs should be done by the government veterinarian not a private practitioner. In the same way humans are registered by the government and certified dead by a DMO. This would remove any conflict of interest between the private vet and clients.
It would then be the government authority who will delegate over its own employees. As for the expected argument that there aren't sufficient government vets to deal with this problem, my simple suggestion is to creat more position! Employ more Vets in the Government Service. Each year an average of 30 new Local veterinarians are graduated all of whom have had their tuition fully paid for by Tax Payers. According to GATE they are suppose to work back for the government for at least 5 years. Remember when medical doctors are needed in the public health care positions are created. So I say hire new graduates in the government service and let the government service handale the needs of this act.
The role of the local government council has to be seriously addressed. The Dog Act 1918 called for the registration of all dogs at the local council. Has anyone in parliament attempted to register their dogs? Since the answer is " NO" are we all criminals? If you go to the local council in San Fernando they will tell you they have no system for registering dogs. And this is infrastructure tat has had 96 years to be in place. So how can we now claim suddenly the infrastructure will be there. If you call the dog catchers to deal with a stray dangerous dog they will tell you they have no vehicle and to call the police. If you call the police they will tell you they are not trained to deal with that situation and to call a vet. So infrastructure needs to be first put in place to deal with the existing Dog Act 1918 before we claim this new act will be properly enforced.
To say here that there is no money to do this demonstrates an unwillingness to try but also a direct admission that this proposed law will not work. $24 M could have paid for the infrastructure instead of renting and securing an empty building. We cannot be claiming there is no money for this infrastructure when money is being thrown away. Infrastructure that the Dog Act 1918 , 96 years now, has called for. Furthermore what infrastructure has been put in place since the Dangerous Dog Act 2000 and its re-emergence in 2012 and then now . Nothing has been done.
The hope that the pound in San Fernando ( which is in deplorable condition) and other shelters would rescue these discarded and relinquished dogs is a fairy tale. Currently the San Fernando pound is in shambles both infrastructural lay and organizationally. No dangerous dog can be securely or humanely kept there. The TTSPCA is overcrowded currently and cannot accept any more dogs. Animal Alive who were given a grant has only 50 kennels and intend to build 50 more. However their policy is no kill so those 50 kennels will be occupied for the dogs entire life. Their figures show in excess of 300 pitbulls needing to be rehoused in the last two years. So they clearly cannot be expected to play an adequate role in dealing with the subsequent release of pitbulls this act will cause.
The result is that these dogs will in fact have to be euthanized. Which leads me to my next point.
There is again an MP who is a veterinary surgeon and who I would hope have alerted the government of the flaws in the Veterinary Surgeons Act. I wonder if this honorable MP Dr Glenn Ramadarsingh made the Minister of Food Production aware that currently in Trinidad there are a number of quacks who are not veterinarians , that fraudulently portray themselves as veterinarians and doctors of veterinary medicine. For example a Mr Manmohan Ramnarine of Matilda issues Vaccination Certificates and signs prescriptions in the name of the owner or veterinarian of Centaur Veterinary Services. Gail in Point Fortin and Rousillac is doing the same in the name of the owner of Centaur Veterinary Services. Neither of which are veterinarians! I wonder I the honorable Dr Glenn Ramadarsingh who is a veterinarian and stated during the Dog Control act debate stated " I am no longer actively involved in the profession" , can recall or is aware of which veterinarian is the owner if Centaur Veterinary Services. I am sure the media can investigate and inform the public with an upcoming headline.
And there are many more. Chad Dixon, working fraudulently as a vet using the vaccination certificates of the long deceased Dr Ernest Caesar. Chunilal Narine in Rio Claro, Raymond Ramnarine in San Francique and Lisa Rampaul in Garth Road. All of whom are fraudulently working under the guise of being certified veterinarians.
Mr Raymond Ramnarine was recently advertising Husky puppies for sale which were smuggled into the country from Venezuela. Is the Minister of National Security , Senator the Honorable Gary Griffith aware if this, because I know he has a fondness for venezuelan Huskies. Huskies which are one if the top 5 breeds of dog responsible for the majority if dangerous dog attacks in the USA cited by Mr Colm Imbert. Coming unvaccinated from a country which has canine Rabies!
The Fyzabad Veterinary Clinic owned by Dr Anil Ramnanan the Conciliate for Miami is run by a non veterinarian Terrence Mark for over 12 years. And Dr Anil Ramnanan ordered the dismissal of an employee of the conciliate for lying on his résumé.
And my point is that when a dog owner is faced with having to certify his dog at a Registered and Certified Veterinarian and insurance he will seek out these quacks. He will go to all attempts to avoid cost and legal implication. He may even seek euthanasia for his dog at the hands of these non- vets, who are writing fake prescriptions for the lethal injection drug or stealing ketamine, one of the date rape drugs, from the government veterinary services to euthanize dogs illegally.
I recognize that the Dog Control Act specifies euthanasia is to carried out only by veterinarians but what is being done to ensure the " vet " that dog owners are seeing is in fact a qualified veterinarian. So I ask that before any attempt is made to pass a Dog Control Act we must review the Veterinary Surgeons Act and enable the proper control of the veterinary field and the eradication of quacks.
As for veterinarians being willing to euthanize healthy dogs on the basis of them being classified according to breed as dangerous without showing any tendency to attack; it goes agains the veterinary oath and what we are taught. "Primum non nocere" - Above all do No Harm. So I assure you that any ethically sound veterinarian would not be euthanizing dogs to enforce this act.
The veterinary fraternity of Trinidad and Tobago recognizes the need for dog control. They have been told that the government has taken into consideration their suggestions but the government is adamant that its policy is against dangerous breeds, in particular pitbulls. So in other words they have by and large thrown out the suggestions of the professionals but expect the same professionals to carry out the law. The TTVA has suggested a dog registration based on a dogs weight and body condition score. I must remind the government that without the cooperation of the veterinarians this law cannot work. They have already said they will not certify any dog by breed for the purposes of this law.

My Advice to the government is as follows:

1. Completely repeal the Dog Control Act and Dangerous Dog Act

2. Put the necessary infrastructure in place first before trying to pass an act like this. It's intention can already be enforceable by the Dog Act 1918, with minor amendments to the technological requirements for registering such as microchipping and increasing of the fines and penalties.

3.Subsequently amend the act to classification of a dogs potential to be dangerous in terms of Weight and Body Condition Score, NOT breed.

4.Let all registration , certification, microchip ping and euthanasia of seized, stray and relinquished dogs due to this law be by the local government council authority and government veterinary services. A dogs registration permit or license must be presented to any attending veterinarian.

5. Let death certificates also be issued by the government veterinarian services for class A or dangerous dogs.

6.Expand the government service to employ more vets and include small animal or companion animal services for the needs of such an act.

7. Just as with farmers registering and receiving subsidized veterinary care and reductions in vat and duties on equipment, so to registered dog owners may be able to access subsidized pricing for the microchipping, fencing, dog food etc. This would encourage owners of non class A / dangerous dogs to also seek to register their dogs.

8.Empower the police and local authority with proper equipment,training and facilities to seize from a delinquent owner any dog kept in an unhealthy or inhumane manner. Fines and imprisonment should be strictly enforced.

9. In the event that insurance becomes a necessary part of a dog control act it should be afforded to all persons owning a dog and not based on house insurance. Keep in mind house insurance only covers for incidences occurring within the confines of the house, not dangerous dogs outside their yard. Written assurance must be established before the law that ATTIC has in place Dog Insurance.

Only after these changes are made should veterinarians be obligated to :

1. Educate their clients about their ownership of a class A (according to weight and BCS) and the need to have it certified and registered by the local authority.
2.Issue a referral for certification that is recorded by the veterinarian.
3.Report to the relevant authority the failure of such clients to have their dog registered after a stipulated time.

These amendments would make a Dog Control Act a stepping stone to the ideal of all dogs being registered, identifiable, traceable, humanely treated and at the same time achieve the government's' and veterinary surgeons' intention to have a safer dog population and responsible owners.

It is with all these factors in mind that I cannot as a Veterinarian, Trinidadian, animal lover and an independent senator agree with these amendment or Dog Control Act. And I ask my fellow senators , independent, oppositional and government to oppose it in its current state.

Couldn't be happier my vet is an independent senator!

Sheriff
Sweet on this forum
Posts: 265
Joined: October 8th, 2007, 12:46 pm
Location: Gamo Hunter 1250

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Sheriff » March 19th, 2014, 10:44 am

I am.
[quote="anilramlal81"]how much of you all standing up for your dogs[/quote]

User avatar
Bezman
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6635
Joined: April 24th, 2003, 2:47 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Bezman » March 19th, 2014, 3:53 pm

i will be very surprised if this is declared by the President before the PP loose the elections next year.. the reality is that NONE of the regional corps, vets nor insurance agencies have anything in place yet to handle this law.. so even if it is declared, chances of getting any vet or regional corp to corporate etc will be slim to none and insurance comps still have not agreed on a policy that can work for all.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » March 20th, 2014, 3:42 pm

I waiting to see which insurance company going to volunteer to implement this kind of policy. Gov't may have to open their own insurance company for this to work, & they just might. It would just be considered another means of lining corrupt pockets a lil thicker.

User avatar
Halfbreed07
30 pounds of Boost
Posts: 2694
Joined: September 22nd, 2005, 10:44 am
Location: living vicariously through me

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Halfbreed07 » March 20th, 2014, 4:45 pm

88sins wrote:I waiting to see which insurance company going to volunteer to implement this kind of policy. Gov't may have to open their own insurance company for this to work, & they just might. It would just be considered another means of lining corrupt pockets a lil thicker.


*whistles*

User avatar
Spitfir3
punchin NOS
Posts: 3654
Joined: September 1st, 2009, 11:11 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Spitfir3 » March 20th, 2014, 6:22 pm

88sins wrote:I waiting to see which insurance company going to volunteer to implement this kind of policy. Gov't may have to open their own insurance company for this to work, & they just might. It would just be considered another means of lining corrupt pockets a lil thicker.


im sure they would do this considering what "easy" money it would be

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » March 20th, 2014, 8:25 pm

yeah. "easy money" .


Till time to pay out. Keep in mind insurance is a game of risk assessment of incident potential vs having to pay out on claims. The bigger question is who will decide how much compensation an injured person is to receive from the insurance company after an incident. If a person suffers from severe facial injuries after an attack & they require extensive cosmetic surgery, how much you wanna bet the insurance companies NOT going to pay out sufficient funds to cover those surgeries? I can tell you for a fact that cosmetic surgery here in T&T is EXTREMELY expensive. Here's an example, for a simple procedure like breast augmentation, the surgeons fees alone is on average 50K-60K, not to mention hospital stay & meds. Now imagine the cost of facial reconstruction, which is a lot more complex than stickin an expander & a saltwater balloon inside a boob. And dont forget neurosurgery may be required also, & those fees can & often do go into the 100K region in the private sector of health care in T&T

It have more to it than just have a company start issuing policies. Particularly when it comes to protecting the public from these insurance companies & their significantly less than straight forward settlement practices, as well as the intended objective of finding a way to compensate victims of dog attacks.

User avatar
DrunkenMaster16
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6247
Joined: February 15th, 2004, 11:19 pm
Location: Bush, Beach, Swamp..Repeat.
Contact:

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby DrunkenMaster16 » March 21st, 2014, 1:12 pm

There is an online petition for the president to not proclaim the bill as law. anyone interested feel free to sign.

http://www.change.org/petitions/the-pre ... experiment

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » March 21st, 2014, 2:29 pm

signed

anilramlal81
Street 2NR
Posts: 77
Joined: November 7th, 2012, 10:51 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby anilramlal81 » March 22nd, 2014, 11:51 am

some of the two legged dogs killing almost every day how about a dangerous man act a little power in government goes a long way in people head , how it is this man became AG of this country what good has he done

toyolink
3NE 2NR Power Seller
Posts: 2781
Joined: May 22nd, 2010, 11:24 am

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby toyolink » March 22nd, 2014, 2:00 pm

This debacle reminds meet of the anti-gun vs pro-gun scenario in the USA.
I firmly believe the end result will be no different here.
Oh, what a silly bunch of people they may be.

User avatar
DrunkenMaster16
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6247
Joined: February 15th, 2004, 11:19 pm
Location: Bush, Beach, Swamp..Repeat.
Contact:

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby DrunkenMaster16 » May 13th, 2014, 10:14 am

So local government run out of $$ for propaganda... thus ministry of food production has to put this bs out for them. The DDA has not been proclaimed afaik. Why is a dog act more important than the murder rate that is what 160+ by now?

But they busy making these ad's....

Image

:roll: Really? REALLY??

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » May 13th, 2014, 11:31 am

So I want to know a few things, like when was this proclaimed, & more importantly, by who?

Who is providing this "official training" in the handling of these dogs?

Do they have enough resources for those that "voluntarily relinquish" their animals? Food, shelter, space? Without these things, even though the animals are to be euthanized, the state will be in breach of animal cruelty laws.

Who is providing the insurance? If these asses can demand that you insure your dog for liability, they should at the very least disclose what company is issuing such policies or riders to existing policies.

What alternatives are being put in place for those law abiding citizens whose dogs assist them in protecting their loved ones & property? Easier access to legal firearms? Greater police presence, as in an officer on every corner day & night? free CCTV systems & burglar proofing to all property owners? Are they going to make it legal to have an electric fence around your property?


I just realised the true meaning of PP in relation to this gov't













P P
I O
S O
s R

User avatar
Spitfir3
punchin NOS
Posts: 3654
Joined: September 1st, 2009, 11:11 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Spitfir3 » May 13th, 2014, 11:55 am

DrunkenMaster16 wrote:So local government run out of $$ for propaganda... thus ministry of food production has to put this bs out for them. The DDA has not been proclaimed afaik. Why is a dog act more important than the murder rate that is what 160+ by now?

But they busy making these ad's....

Image

:roll: Really? REALLY??


1. to make it seem like they're doing something
2. to appeal to the dog hater masses #freevotes #superior species
3. dumb as bricks
4. the yanky do it so that automatically makes it a good idea
5. dumb as bricks

with that said AG won't go anywhere near the crime situation that is way over his head and he knows it
Last edited by Spitfir3 on May 13th, 2014, 12:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » May 13th, 2014, 12:11 pm

I want to know why after half a century of independence, there are no laws to deal with these lying thieving useless skidmark politicians.
When they start locking up politicians & bureaucrats & their parasitic affiliates for misappropriation/misuse of public funds & corruption/illegal activity,THEN i MIGHT take them on.

Till then, the rum-pickled leader, the goat molester, & every one of the rest of those rat-bastard pig-bullers could kick rocks

Sheriff
Sweet on this forum
Posts: 265
Joined: October 8th, 2007, 12:46 pm
Location: Gamo Hunter 1250

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Sheriff » May 13th, 2014, 12:17 pm

Guys a friend of mine called the number just to find out what info they have, and funny enough the number printed on that flyer is the wrong number. He isnt giving up his dogs.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » May 13th, 2014, 12:55 pm

i aint calling no number, & I sure as hell ain't giving them bastard sons of desert jackals my animals.

If they want my dogs, they gonna have to give me a license for a 30-06 springfield & a .40 cal semi-auto pistol.

If left to their own idiot devices, they'll just keep adding breeds to the list as incidents occur, so by the time they're done you will not be allowed to have a first line of defense, nor a companion, regardless of breed.
But what else yuh go get from a bunch of firewater worshipers living in a den of snakes & scorpions



Now somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but IIRC last time that dotish piece of legislation wasn't repealed? Cuz if it was, they'd need to go thru the whole process again, & the President would have to proclaim it's passage into law & it's subsequent enactment and commencement date.

Something about the way they're trying to do this seems not-so-legal.

User avatar
snypaz
I LUV THIS PLACE
Posts: 1036
Joined: March 22nd, 2007, 7:37 am

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby snypaz » May 13th, 2014, 1:10 pm

So this ad is real? Cause Why would the Ministry of Food Production print it?

And post a cellphone number for a ministry contact.

Sheriff
Sweet on this forum
Posts: 265
Joined: October 8th, 2007, 12:46 pm
Location: Gamo Hunter 1250

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Sheriff » May 13th, 2014, 1:21 pm

Just got this info:
Taken from FB Forum.

Please stop circulating this I just spoke to one of the members on the govt strategic committee for the implementation of the dog control act they met last Friday and they know nothing of this nonsense it's still the 6 dogs on the list that was passed in parliament. If you call the number on this ad the poor fella does not know anything about the dog control act...clearly some idiots are up to mischief...pls stop helping them share their BS
Last edited by Sheriff on May 13th, 2014, 1:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » May 13th, 2014, 1:25 pm

had a mind so

Sheriff
Sweet on this forum
Posts: 265
Joined: October 8th, 2007, 12:46 pm
Location: Gamo Hunter 1250

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Sheriff » May 13th, 2014, 2:28 pm

Not sure if you guys have this:
http://www.ttparliament.org/legislations/a2014-03.pdf

Also getting conflicting info with respect to the FB statement above, someone says its true but the info on the flyer is wrong, and was indeed sent out by the MOFP. Anybody have contacts in MOFP and can confirm?

User avatar
88sins
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 10110
Joined: July 22nd, 2007, 3:03 pm
Location: Corner of Everywhere Avenue & Nowhere Drive

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby 88sins » May 13th, 2014, 3:03 pm

until i see a notice in a major newspaper, I remain unaffected, whether true or not

User avatar
Bezman
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6635
Joined: April 24th, 2003, 2:47 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Bezman » May 13th, 2014, 7:49 pm

I saw it in Sunday papers

1) went Diego Martin regional corp for more info, got greeted with "eh? Me eh know about no dog and ya can't bring it here". All I wanted is info

2) no insurance companies have a comprehensive policy and the insurance act has not been amended to support such policies

3) no vets have chips as far as I know. Nor have the govt issued forms to categorize your dangerous dog. Nor do the vets want to put their name via opinion as opposed to fact, categorizing dogs with DNA and genetic testing. One vet may say my dog is a pure bred American pit, when infact it's a stafford shire terrier x American pitbull x pot hound and another will say American bull dog...

4) there are no shelters set up and the existing shelters aren't taking the dogs as they are all already over crowded

5) there is no national verification/license for dog handling and no governing body that will issue such licenses. Can anyone say that they are a trainer, and then say I am an expert based on their humble opinion?

6) the poor fella on the hot line. Lol

Yet we supposed to be pro active and register our animals? And on the news the basically saying that the police know who kill the sc and they not saying cause thy frighten?

Well yes. I going to register my dog...

User avatar
DrunkenMaster16
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6247
Joined: February 15th, 2004, 11:19 pm
Location: Bush, Beach, Swamp..Repeat.
Contact:

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby DrunkenMaster16 » May 29th, 2014, 12:22 pm

From : Trinidad & Tobago Canine Advocates

One of our supporters sent me this message and I thought it would be a good idea to share her experience with you.

She says that she wanted to get some more information about the Dog Act so, because "the notice issued by Min of Food states that the Act will be in effect from 2nd June and anyone with enquiries should ring 338 8989, I did so. A man eventually answered and said I had the wrong number.
So I telephoned the Min of Food Production, Chief Vet Office (625 5997). They said they know nothing about the Act but they were asked to provide the poster by Corporate Communications (628 1617/1618).
I called Corporate Communications (628 1617/1618) and my first question was where would I find a registered Dog Trainer. They said that they (quote) are still having meetings and if they find any trainers a list will be published next week in a newspaper..they are advising people not to panic as none of the infrastructure pertaining to the Act has been put in place.
My second question was when did His Excellency sign and proclaim the Act, and they said (quote) ..we have no idea, you will have to contact the AG as he is the one who has instructed us. I said "Yes but doesnt His Excellency have to sign it?" And they said (quote) I dont know, its the AG who has authorised us, you will have to phone the Ministry of Legal Affairs."
So I telephoned the Min of Legal Affairs (624 1660/625 9971) who told me that they know absolutely nothing and suggested speaking to the Law Revision Commission.
I telephoned the Law Rev Comm (625 5095/625 9860) and they know absolutely nothing, but suggested that I try Parliament.
I called Parliament (624 7275) and spoke to a very nice man (name at this stage withheld) who stated that the Act was passed in Parliament, but as far as he knows it has not been signed and proclaimed...he suggested that for further info I should call the office of His Excellency (625 9815)
I called 625 9815 and between myself and the sec we had a slight breakdown in communication. I will try her again tomorrow."

If this wasn't so tragic, it would be funny. As a point of interest - I doubt very much that being a registered dog trainer qualifies you to train people in "dog handling".

User avatar
X2
TriniTuner 24-7
Posts: 8649
Joined: April 18th, 2003, 1:54 pm
Location: 3 stories above the Batcave...

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby X2 » May 29th, 2014, 12:32 pm

SO they have testing procedures to qualify a proper trainer ?

DNA testing to determine the dog's lineage ? If your dog doesn't have 'papers'... it's a pot hound ent ?

We country so jokey.... the citizens have to get their legal updates from Facebook ?

User avatar
pete
3NE 2NR Moderator
Posts: 9834
Joined: April 18th, 2003, 1:19 pm
Location: Cruisin around in da GTi
Contact:

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby pete » May 29th, 2014, 2:11 pm

I doubt they would randomly do DNA testing. But with the law implemented, if your dog attacks someone and they decide to do DNA testing for that one incident and it's found that you're in violation of the laws and requirements, well then you in some trouble.

It's like the breathaliser, they're not out every weekend doing it. But if you run off the road and kill someone and they hit you a breathaliser test and find you're drunk..

anilramlal81
Street 2NR
Posts: 77
Joined: November 7th, 2012, 10:51 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby anilramlal81 » May 29th, 2014, 10:10 pm

has anyone ever tried to import a wolf pup what might be the cost to do so this not in the dangerous dogs act

User avatar
Halfbreed07
30 pounds of Boost
Posts: 2694
Joined: September 22nd, 2005, 10:44 am
Location: living vicariously through me

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby Halfbreed07 » May 30th, 2014, 6:24 am

anilramlal81 wrote:has anyone ever tried to import a wolf pup what might be the cost to do so this not in the dangerous dogs act

How was cxc?

User avatar
kaylex
Riding on 16's
Posts: 1204
Joined: January 28th, 2008, 7:57 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby kaylex » May 30th, 2014, 7:12 am

Halfbreed07 wrote:
anilramlal81 wrote:has anyone ever tried to import a wolf pup what might be the cost to do so this not in the dangerous dogs act

How was cxc?



LMAO..... MY WORD... Halfbreed you serious ?? :shock: :shock: :roll: :roll:

User avatar
DVSTT
Trying to catch PATCH AND VEGA
Posts: 6759
Joined: November 28th, 2011, 9:11 pm

Re: Dangerous Dogs Act goes into effect August 1, 2012

Postby DVSTT » May 30th, 2014, 10:07 am

Halfbreed07 wrote:
anilramlal81 wrote:has anyone ever tried to import a wolf pup what might be the cost to do so this not in the dangerous dogs act

How was SEA ?


Fixed*

Advertisement

Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 73 guests