Dangerous dog classification upheld for staffy that knocked cyclist out
The owners of a dog that knocked a 75-yearold woman unconscious and bit a postie twice in the course of a month have had their bid to quash the dog’s classification as dangerous rejected.
Nelson residents Ricky and Monique Tasker own Max, a staffordshire bull terrier.
At a Nelson City Council hearing yesterday, the pair argued that the dog had suffered past trauma and was triggered by bicycle saddlebags.
Max was described by council officers as having an “extensive history of aggressive behaviour”.
Adopted from the SPCA in June 2022 by Monique Tasker, Max first came to the council’s attention on May 18 the following year, when a staff safety employee from New Zealand Post reported an attack at 10.35am.
A postie was doing a delivery run along The Ridgeway when the dog lunged and bit him twice.
The second incident took place on May 26, when the postie was biking down Songer St at 11am and saw the dog being walked on a leash by the same man.
The dog lunged and bit his finger. The postie got off his bike and stood behind it, using it to protect himself.
An animal control officer classified Max as menacing on May 29, requiring him to be muzzled in public.
But less than three weeks later, on June 13, Max rushed a 75-year-old woman on a bicycle.
An affidavit by the cyclist, Juliet McLintock, said the attack left hervery shaken. Had she not been wearing a helmet, she could have been seriously hurt, she said.
Riding on the Railway Reserve in Stoke, McLintock had just dismounted to cross Saxton Rd and begun pedalling again when the dog, muzzled but not on a lead, jumped up and hit her on her right side.
The force knocked her from her bike, and she hit her head on the pathway and lost consciousness for a few minutes.
When she came to, passers-by had called an ambulance, and she was vomiting.
McLintock, speaking at the hearing, said it “seemed to take a while” to get over her concussion. As she recalled how scary the incident was, she said she felt “shaky”.
She described seeing claw marks left on her jacket from Max, who “leaped up quite high”.
The man walking the dog, a neighbour of the owner, told her that her head had “hit the ground, bounced up, and then hit the ground again”.
She went in and out of consciousness, and ambulance officers thought that her neck was broken. McLintock said she now felt very nervous about dogs whenever she saw them.
She worried the dog would attack again and that an innocent person could be harmed.
The Taskers said they did not dispute that the incidents happened, adding that they felt “terrible” about them.
However, Max was an adopted dog who had “obviously been beaten” and who carried “quite a bit of trauma” around different people, Monique said.
The dangerous dog classification was something that affected her own “psyche”.
It meant that the registration fees were higher, they couldn’t sell the dog, and they couldn’t take him anywhere for more than 72 hours without notifying the council where he was, she said, describing the measures as “over the top”.
Max was “one of the most obedient dogs”, who responded to voice, hand signals and clapping. The incidents did not arise because of aggression or violence, but rather because he was insecure, she said.
“It’s the saddlebags that are the problem for Max ... That’s what gets him.”
The couple asked for Max’s dangerous dog classification to be brought “back a step”.
The council’s regulatory team leader, Chris Bascombe, said prosecution was considered after the June 13 attack because of the seriousness of the injuries. However, it was discarded after discussion with officers and because McLintock did not wish to proceed with it.
After an adjournment, the hearing’s chairperson, councillor Tim Skinner, announced the panel’s decision to dismiss the objection and uphold the classification of Max as dangerous.
“The dog has had a record of three attacks in recent periods, and the need to protect the public is paramount,” he said.