fbpx
Log in

Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Create an account

Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required.
Name *
Username *
Password *
Verify password *
Email *
Verify email *
Captcha *

Dangerous dog legislation in a shambles

dogdangerousFurther to the recent news item (July 31st 2015) concerning a man who was badly injured by a dangerous dog on Quarteira beach*, enquiries into the current laws covering dangerous dog breeds and their owners' responsibilities, have revealed a legal mish-mash that remains unresolved.

The modus operandi regulating ownership of dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs remains unpublished, two years after the proposed law made training mandatory.

The law prescribes a set of conditions for the owners of dangerous dogs (defined as dog breeds with a history of violence) or potentially dangerous dogs (defined as having scary physical characteristics), which included a "proof of training" from a registered training provider.

Owners must ensure their animals have been fully trained on a registered course on which their animal successfully has been 'socialised.'

This training must be administered by registered 'training institutions' but there are none in existence as inexplicably and inexcusably, guidelines and standards have yet to be published and the many professional trainers ready and willing to take on the work are prevented from doing so after two years of inexplicable delay.

The Ministry of Agriculture weakly commented that "a draft ordinance is being prepared establishing the requirements for the certification of trainers and for the training of dangerous dogs, it is awaiting approval."

The government Directorate-General covering the vetinary profession (DGAV) said there are 19,382 potentially dangerous dogs currently registered and 1,606 dangerous dogs in Portugal.

All of these animals are illegal under the law as training has not been given as there are no registered trainers or courses, yet there have been 1,658 court cases since the law came in to being two years ago, some of which have resulted in penalties and fines or simply a good telling off.

Other cases have been filed “due to the inexistence of the necessary elements for the delivery of the sentence," i.e the judges have realised that owners are prevented from following the law as it is impossible to do so.

With regard to prison sentences, since the law provides for punishment with "a term of imprisonment up to one year or a fine of up to 360 days," for anyone who, "by negligence, has on the road, in public places or common parts of urban buildings, a dangerous or potentially dangerous animal, or registers a blood alcohol level greater than or equal to 1.2 gl" the DGAV says it has no data.

This situation is a mess with laws passed that can not be adhered to by any owner of a breed of dog that needs a training certificate.

 

* Man savaged by dog on Quarteira beach: http://www.algarvedailynews.com/news/6302-man-savaged-by-dog-on-quarteira-beach

Pin It

Comments  

-1 #6 Piers H 2015-08-04 14:59
Quoting Peter Booker:
With reference to Piers H´s remark, I think that Albufeira was left in a financial mess by Silva halfway through his last term of office, a mess nearly as bad as that in Portimão. You could not say that of Tavira, nor of Faro, where Correia was Presidente, and where he served out his terms in full.

Correia may possibly have been guilty of minor planning infractions (no-one has actually said what they were), but in terms of financial incompetence, Desidério Silva and Manuel da Luz would be hard to beat.
i agree, Manuel da Luz was, quoting our excellent Ed's words, 'financially incontinent'
0 #5 Peter Booker 2015-08-04 12:09
With reference to Piers H´s remark, I think that Albufeira was left in a financial mess by Silva halfway through his last term of office, a mess nearly as bad as that in Portimão. You could not say that of Tavira, nor of Faro, where Correia was Presidente, and where he served out his terms in full.

Correia may possibly have been guilty of minor planning infractions (no-one has actually said what they were), but in terms of financial incompetence, Desidério Silva and Manuel da Luz would be hard to beat.
0 #4 Piers H 2015-08-04 11:38
Quoting Peter Booker:
What exactly do they do at the Ministry of Agriculture? One of the reasons for the PSD party hounding Macário Correia was that he reminded government in Lisbon on a daily basis of tasks yet undone. They apparently did not like to be reminded of their inertia/incompetence, and particularly by a mere Presidente da Câmara.

...and Correia's reward - running the Algarve rubbish collection service. How he must miss the trappings of power and influence.... at least the equally culpable Desiderio Silva gets invited to loads of free meals.
0 #3 Peter Booker 2015-08-04 11:07
What exactly do they do at the Ministry of Agriculture? One of the reasons for the PSD party hounding Macário Correia was that he reminded government in Lisbon on a daily basis of tasks yet undone. They apparently did not like to be reminded of their inertia/incompetence, and particularly by a mere Presidente da Câmara.
+5 #2 liveaboard 2015-08-04 09:26
These popular laws to protect the public from dangerous dogs rarely work; it's nearly imposable to legally define what a dangerous dog is before an incident takes place.
As the article says, people want to control those animals that look dangerous, but that's subjective.
We all know that 'pitbull' looking dogs are more likely to be dangerous, but then should all animals with that appearance be penalized? And of course there are many dangerous dogs that don't look like pitbulls.
Breed specific legislation will always be a mess, since it's so easy to produce a certificate that states your pitbull is another similar looking animal that isn't considered dangerous. There is no way to prove what breed a dog is.
In the end the only thing we can do is make the owner responsible for the actions of the dog.
This problem is not unique to Portugal.
+5 #1 Simon Williams 2015-08-04 07:52
At first sight we can all laugh this off as just 'Portugal'. This obsession with protecting the rights of the VIP elite who just may have, in this case, a dangerous dog. The owners honour is paramount - not the dogs welfare.

But as even Portuguese commenters are increasingly boldly pointing out - this is after 30 years of Portugal in the European Union! It is just not good enough. Not even remotely good enough. It fails the rest of the EU.

Does any Portuguese with sufficient brains to comb their hair stop to think for a moment - what if Portugal was left in charge of creating and then implementing legislation for the rest of Europe !

Get real ! The EU would be closed in a shambles in a fortnight!

You must be a registered user to make comments.
Please register here to post your comments.