Menacing dog classification challenged
The dog’s owners dispute that the injuries shown here were caused by their dog. Photo: Supplied.
A local couple have challenged the classification of their dog as “menacing” by Tasman District Council.
The 12-month-old Rhodesian ridgeback, named Ruby, was given the menacing classification after biting a cyclist along Redwood Park Road in the afternoon of 11 March 2022, inflicting minor scratches and slight bruising.
But owners Manuela and Michael Smit, in a public hearing of council’s animal control subcommittee, questioned whether the dog had even bitten the cyclist.
A description of the incident said the victim was cycling along the road, approaching Manuela on his bike while she walked two dogs off-lead. Manuela put one of the dogs on the lead as the cyclist approached but Ruby went up to the cyclist and bit him on his calf with no warning, inflicting a minor scratch and slight bruising.
“There were no signs of aggression, growling or barking,” Manuela said. “The biker was not yelling, screaming, or kicking, something you would expect if there was a dog attack.”
She suggests that perhaps the minor injuries in the image supplied to council were inflicted by slipping on a bike pedal, as she believes a bite mark from Ruby would do greater damage.
However, hearing panel member councillor Kit Maling disagreed with that assessment.
“It looks like some marks there that would certainly come from a dog bite. Not a serious dog bite, because I’ve been bitten by dogs on more than one occasion,” he said. “But I can see some bruising, some redness, and what looks like two little puncture marks.”
But Michael said, given the size of Ruby’s teeth, that if one of their dogs had bitten the cyclist, then there would be four puncture marks, larger than the two in the photo.
Manuela also challenged Ruby’s menacing classification on the grounds that her two dogs, both Rhodesian ridgebacks, are almost indistinguishable and it was possible the victim incorrectly identified which dog bit him, which would mean their other dog, Kya, could be classed as menacing, not Ruby.
The menacing classification means the dog has to be muzzled when in public, which stops it from fully participating in training courses with other dogs.
“Taking away [Ruby’s] opportunity to be part of socialised dog training courses does not benefit anyone,” Manuela said.
A decision from the panel is expected in three weeks, but regulatory support officer Tabatha Kingi said in her report on the hearing that rescinding the menacing classification would “make it very difficult to consistently deal with any future dog attacks of a similar nature”.
