Charlie, Sharni (front) and a family friend (back)…
In early November last year, Shannon’s two family dogs Charlie and Sharni escaped their yard and despite frantic efforts to find them, got themselves into big trouble.
They killed a cat owned by someone in the neighbourhood. The dogs were impounded by Frankston Council and held at the Lost Dogs Home.
Knowing that her dogs weren’t mean – Charlie was adopted from Animal Aid, and both dogs lived with kids, cats and other pets – and that the family had lived at her property for more than four years without incident, Shannon believed that she and her dogs would be treated fairly and reasonably.
Shannon did not contest the charges brought against her in court. She was prepared to be fined, and realised her dogs may be declared ‘dangerous’, even though they weren’t aggressive and had never been in trouble before. Shannon thought that as a pet lover with a history of caring for her pets without issue, if she was willing to pay the fines and invest in the appropriate care and containment for her dogs, she would be allowed to take them home after the last court date.
In short, she was willing to accept a reasonable penalty for her family’s mistake.
Fast forward to today and the case is still not resolved. The dogs are still impounded at the Lost Dogs Home, and the care and upkeep charges are now in excess of $6,000. With two small children, Shannon has been forced to get a second job to try and begin to cover these expenses. In addition the family have had to pay for a laywer, barrister and had fines from the court.
For four months these dogs have been held with only one visit to from their family. In what seems like a deliberate effort to maximize their distress, the dogs are not being held side by side, but separately from each other.
The family has built an escape proof enclosure. They have had the dogs assessed by an extremely experienced veterinary behaviourist, who deemed them to be safe around humans and other dogs. They have hired a lawyer and barrister to try and fight the directive. All in an effort to save their dog’s lives.
Still, this week, the Council has declared it will be killing the dogs.
Rather than walk away from her pets, Shannon has made herself and her family broke trying to save them.
Rather than show Shannon and her family compassion, Frankston Council will kill Charlie and Sharni this Wednesday, after the long weekend.
Killing a dog for killing a cat, seems an extraordinarily harsh penalty when the owner is compliant and willing to ensure that the animal is not given the opportunity to make another mistake.
To kill two dogs for the death of a cat when both dogs have been assessed as not dangerous, seems like genuinely excessive action from council.
No one denies what these dogs did was incredibly shitty – but is kill-punishing them really the most appropriate way for us to react? I personally hope Council will review this decision and see that there is no benefit in causing further devastation by ending the lives of this family’s pets.
|
If you want to register your protest of the treatment of Charlie and Sharni, please let Frankston council know how you feel on their Facebook page. Also email Frankston council ([email protected]) as well as the councilors addresses here: The CEO of Frankston Council is Dennis Hovenden. |
Frankston council, I’m speechless an shocked wot I have jst read, u must all be a bunch of retards to do wot u r doing to this family an there beloved pets, u all r a bunch of spineless jellyfish an suppose to be human beings, wtf!!!
As an owner of a dog and 3 cats I disagree with what the council is doing. The owner of the cat should have been careful thebdogs got out which was an accident, the owner s have went above and beyond to prove that the dogs are in no way aggressive. Yet this council is still putting these dogs. All councils seem to try and destroy dogs theu label vicious even ig the dog isn’t by true nature. The pooe dogs should go back to their owners. Compensation may be paid but I reallt don’t feel much towards the owner ofbthe cat that was apparently killed. I love my cats hut i never let them wander. Frankston council… this is just shocking. Let these beautiful dogs go back to their family
Who are the People, that they can decide to kill the dogs….for no apparent reason…..
are they ,,,The High Court ??…..
Who can help against this crazy decision ????
Sometimes you need a heart, something in which this council is lacking,how do you think this make our future generation think ! That killing is the answer to all the problems in life, think that everything that goes wrong can’t be dealt with has to be killed,this is not the answer these creatures are breathing and living and have been accessed and given a approval by a specified person,when will you look at the bigger picture here this family has been through enough how do you think they are trying to cope with the grief and stress you have laid on this family ,have a heart Frankston councillors,give them back their family!
I have read on Frankston City Facebook page that this case is off to the Supreme Court.
It is good that this council has been publicly shamed. They surely deserve it.
To destroy a young couple and cripple them financially shows the council lack morals and decency.
Has anyone even heard from a single councillor? Not a single one of them has had the decency to reply
The comment by the Mayor showed much ignorance and breaching peoples privacy is playing very dirty. Shame on this Council. No way would I live there.