Charges over dog attack
Kennel owner pleads not guilty to neglect
A KENNEL owner has pleaded not guilty to animal neglect after a border collie was left in a “critical” condition after another dog attacked it on his property.
Black River Boarding Kennels and Cattery owner Andrew Ive appeared in Townsville Magistrates Court on Friday charged with breaching a duty of care to an animal.
It’s alleged that on November 9, 2019, a then-13-year-old border collie named Jack was attacked by another dog in the exercise yard of the kennel, and Mr Ive failed to take reasonable steps to treat the injured dog.
The court was told Mr Ive had not known both dogs were in the exercise yard when the attack happened at 8.15am on Sunday.
Mr Ive said he washed Jack’s wounds with diluted Dettol several times throughout the day did not charge the owner for Jack’s stay, and recommended Jack be taken to a vet on “Monday or Tuesday”.
Jack’s owner told the hearing that on the day of the attack she had received a call from an unknown number but no message was left.
She said when she went to collect Jack at 4pm, the dog could not walk, so she asked Mr Ive to pick him up – which he did after wrapping him in a towel.
The owner said she saw blood on Jack’s white fur and on parts of the towel.
A second witness, a veterinarian who treated Jack at the JCU vet clinic, said the dog had been in an early stage of shock, couldn’t stand or walk, had a laceration on his left ear, and had puncture wounds and bruising on his front legs and chest.
Jack spent eight days in the clinic, and underwent treatments including X-rays, wound flushing, and had a drain placed under his left armpit.
Jack’s owner said the dog had “never fully recovered” and walked with a limp.
In an audio recording played before the court, Mr Ive told an RSCPA inspector he “would have” taken the dog to the vet if he thought the situation was “that bad”.
Instead, he said he cleaned the wounds, and fed and watered the dog himself.
Taking to the witness stand,
Mr Ive said he had been “back and forth” checking on Jack all day.
Mr Ive’s lawyer Tim Fedorowytsch submitted his client had provided care to the best of his ability, supplied water and food, monitored the dog, and attempted to call the owner – all things a “reasonable person” would have done for an animal that did not appear in “distress”.
But a representative for the RSPCA, Travis Schmitt, said it wasn’t alleged Mr Ive should have provided “veterinary care”, but that he should have
taken the dog to the vet for treatment.
Magistrate Steve Mosch is expected to hand down a decision on October 28.