7 July 2025

Enforcement of proposed new dog laws 'just impossible' - but also not the whole point, RSPCA says

| By James Coleman
Join the conversation
33

RSPCA ACT’s Million Paws Walk was the organisation’s biggest annual fundraiser. Photo: Thomas Lucraft.

The committee in charge of drafting a new Code of Practice for dog owners in the ACT admits more conversations are needed about how the rules can be enforced.

But it’s also not the “spirit” of the new laws, according to RSPCA ACT.

CEO Michelle Robertson told Region: “It is a tricky one to enforce – this is going to have to be where the ACT Government has to have further conversations and put their thinking caps on.

“But I don’t think it’s the spirit and intent of the Code of Practice to try to police every single day if people are spending three hours a day with their dogs – that’s just impossible.”

READ ALSO Dogs must have minimum three hours a day of human contact under proposed new ACT laws

The draft Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs in the ACT is currently open for feedback on the ACT Government’s community feedback website YourSay Conversations, with a final version to be enshrined in law as soon as early next year.

It introduces new mandatory standards, such as placing heavy restrictions around surgical debarking operations and requiring owners (or carers) to spend “a reasonable length of time each day, three hours minimum” with their dogs.

There are also guidelines where non-compliance “will not in itself constitute an offence under law” but it certainly won’t help an owner’s case “in the event of prosecution”.

These list retractable leads as “not a responsible, or safe way to walk a dog as it limits control, poses risk and could be dangerous to both the dog and the walker”, and recommend drinking water supplies should be topped up at least twice a day and bedding changed at least weekly.

Three women dog walking through park.

The Code of Practice recommends against using retractable leads. Photo: Michelle Kroll.

The RSPCA was a member of the government’s Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (AWAC) that drafted the Code of Practice and Ms Robertson said a large part of the code’s role was legal.

“How it works in the ACT is the Animal Welfare Act provides the laws and then you have the regulations that say if you break this law, here are the penalties, etc, and then you have the codes of practice, which include the mandatory standards and guidelines designed to help from an enforcement perspective,” she explained.

“So, if we look at a notion of abandonment, for example: What does that mean? How would we prove abandonment? And how would we prosecute for abandonment?

“But if somebody leaves their dog in the backyard for two weeks and chucks a bag of food outside, that’s not good animal welfare. That’s where this code of practice, from an enforcement perspective, could be really useful for us. It gives us definitions we can use to build a case.”

READ ALSO Mandating minimum ‘human contact’ time for dogs? Sounds like a paw-ful joke

Ms Robertson said few dog owners in the ACT had anything to worry about because most were already meeting or exceeding the proposed standards.

She described the ACT as generally “animal-loving” and the cases that do cross the RSPCA’s desk are more to do with “people who don’t know any better”.

“I’d venture to say most dog owners already spend more than three hours a day with their dogs – you feed them and when you come home, you spend some time greeting them, most people do take their dog for a walk, you’ve got a bit of playtime.

“If you add all of that up, that’s already three hours.”

RSPCA CEO Michelle Robertson said Cupcake Day is one of the most important fundraising events of the year. Image: Supplied.

RSPCA ACT CEO Michelle Robertson said few ACT dog owners would be impacted by the proposed laws. Image: RPSCA ACT.

She said the code would come in handy as an educational tool – an encyclopaedia of dog care people can turn to.

“It’s truly about helping people be better pet owners … there are different objectives of a code of practice, but RSPCA strongly supports having literature and information and education tools around animal welfare and pet ownership, and this is one of those ways in which it can be done,” she said.

She asked the community to read over the draft legislation and give feedback because “we need more information on it”.

“We’ve got to acknowledge that this is a code that’s out for consultation and that all of the comments will be taken into account.”

The draft Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs in the ACT is open for public feedback on YourSay Conversations until 22 August.

Free Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? We package the most-read Canberra stories and send them to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.
Loading
By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.

Join the conversation

33
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

The ACT Government has totally lost the plot. Wasting billions of dollars of our money on light rail, when electric buses would have been so much cheaper and way more practical. All to please the Greens but Labor has now fallen out with them any way. Tried to charge every ratepayer from Forrest to Charnwood a possibly illegal $250 health levy. And now threatening to fine dog owners for not spending a compulsory 3 hours a day with their pooch for heavens sake!

Felix the Cat8:42 pm 10 Jul 25

The article is about new proposed new laws relating to caring for dogs, nothing about light rail, so suggest you save the rhetoric for the other 3536 threads relating to light rail.

It is the RSPCA behind these unnecessary, over prescriptive and unenforceable legalistic attempts to control dog owners, even when the vast majority of dog owners are fully aware and more than compliant with dog ownership responsibilities.
What should be done, but isn’t because of misguided RSPCA advocacy, is that a dog that attacks and injures a child, or an adult, or another animal must be put down. Must.
But the RSPCA disregards, finds excuses for, prefers behaviour mitigation strategies and routinely fails to act on dangerous dogs that have made unprovoked attacks and seriously mauled a person or pet. We have seen this happen time and time again in Canberra and is a reason why some people no longer will donate to the RSPCA.

“It is the RSPCA behind these unnecessary, over prescriptive and unenforceable legalistic attempts to control dog owners, even when the vast majority of dog owners are fully aware and more than compliant with dog ownership responsibilities.”

Complete nonsense. Firstly it’s a draft code so you can still contribute if you can put together a cogent argument *cough*. Secondly they clearly are necessary if dog owners are leaving their pets unintended for significant periods and think it’s acceptable. Thirdly the code is clearly not aimed at the “vast majority of dog owners” who do the right thing. It’s aimed at those who don’t and gives the government the scope to act when necessary. The whole enforcement argument is a furphy, there are many, many like this that a really on enforced when they become an issue…jay walking for example.

“What should be done, but isn’t because of misguided RSPCA advocacy, is that a dog that attacks and injures a child, or an adult, or another animal must be put down. Must.”

What are you basis this on? Where have the RSPCA advocated for dangerous dogs?

Eileen Newmarch9:23 pm 08 Jul 25

Current dog laws regarding dogs on leads are not enforced. So many dogs off leads in leads only areas. Enforce current laws before introducing more.

Can confirm. As mentioned in another post, just last week saw two ACT Govt rangers at Tuggeranong dog park ignore a lady walking her dog off leash outside the park. The dog wandered onto the road, the rangers had to stop the car to avoid hitting the pooch but just waved at the lady as she moved to grab her dog….not even a reminder to her that dogs must be on-leash on all paths and roads in the ACT.

Many unfenced areas immediately adjacent to cycleways in Canberra have been designated “dog off lead” areas (and many dog owners think that also includes the paths as well) – it’s all part of the ACT Government’s anti-cycling campaign to get people into cars by making it too dangerous to commute by bicycle.

So typical to see them blocking the whole path in the second photo above. Now imagine the outrage if cyclists “shared” the road like that (blocking all lanes, and stopping traffic in both directions – people get mad enough when cyclists block only one lane!)

There’s literally no one else on the path. It’s a shared path not a bicycle throughway….you have a bell (at least you’re supposed to).

Bit of a double standard there – you also have a horn on your car (at least you’re supposed to)…. so according to your reasoning, cyclists should similarly block the whole road and only move out of the way (eventually) when you toot your horn (“there were no cars last time I looked”), or would you expect them just to leave space for others to pass? Afterall, it’s a shared road, not exclusively for cars.

Ah it’s not a road it’s a shared pathway, so your analogy is irrelevant.

As I said, it’s a shared path Bill, not a bicycle throughway.

“Give Way to Pedestrians:
Cyclists must give way to pedestrians on shared paths. “

Why is this you might ask? Because many of the pedestrian users of these pathways are families with young children, dogs on leads and the elderly and less able.

Only the ACT Government could put canines ahead of homeless.

Please explain how this code puts “canines ahead of homeless”?

What a bizarre thing to post.

I agree that most owners are probably already acting within the rules.

But.

If a dog owning family goes to Sydney for the weekend, leaving Friday and returning Sunday, do they need to hire a pet sitter to spend at least 3 hours with their dog on the Saturday?

Will the kennels that people put their dogs in when they go away now have to have a person spend at least 3 hours per day with each dog they are boarding? How many dogs can such an employee spend time with at once?

Good questions – obviously, the family that goes to Sydney should do something better than arrange for a visit from a neighbour once a day to feed it. And the questions about boarding kennels are also “edge cases” for discussion- but the real point of the regulation is to target obvious abuse – like consistently leaving a dog without companionship. I just heard of one such case, and the dog was in very poor shape, psychologically, by the time the owners were forced to surrender it.

sickofthewhinging4:00 pm 08 Jul 25

I’m sorry, but are you seriously asking if a family should organise for someone to look after their dog while they are away for a full weekend? The answer is yes, and the fact it needs to be answered at all shows how important these laws apparently are. It seems all the faux outrage is bubbling out of the people that know they are doing the wrong thing and are upset for finally being called out about it.

When my neighbours left their dog alone for three days over Christmas last year and there was nothing I could do to get DAS involved highlights the importance of having enforceable laws in this area.

As far as I can see it’s a guideline. If people can’t typically spend three hours a day with their pet dog should they really have one? It’s something all pet owners should consider if they’re concerned about the welfare of the animal.

But like many rules that are not enforced every day in every circumstance there is scope for authorities to act in egregious circumstances.

One example that comes to mind is it’s not legal to park on median strips but people do it around here all of the time. The only time it’s ever actually “enforced” is usually the result of a complaint about damage or access.

Felix the Cat8:58 pm 10 Jul 25

It is impossible to police. Are owners required to keep a stamped logbook filled out and signed by a witness stating they spent the required amount of time with their pet? Or are they just going to go with an honour system and take the word of the owner as the truth. No pet owner would ever embellish the truth…

Parking is enforced at most major events such as footy/cricket matches, Canberra Show, Summernats, Skyfire etc. Posts are prolific on social media from people whinging that they got pinged for parking in the wrong place after said events.

Seems to be a total lack of understanding of laws and how they are applied, and confusing codes of practice, standards and guidelines which typical have different legal effect. All laws must be enforceable otherwise they shouldn’t be law but rather guidance. The ACT Government may like to move with the times and introduce a general duty like most modern legislation and then frame their legislation around the concept.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Region Canberra stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.