After briefly reviewing salient features of selected anti-stalking legislation in Australian jurisdictions, the authors consider the rationale for and characteristics of intervention orders for the purpose of preventing the stalking of a particular person. The paper then considers in some detail the particular provisions of intervention orders that apply in Victoria (Australia). This is followed by a discussion of the use of anti-stalking intervention orders in one problematic category of disputes, namely, disputes between neighbors; the authors assess the utility of intervention orders for this type of dispute. The major aim of stalking intervention orders is the regulation of future behavior, including possibly more serious stalking behavior. Stalking intervention orders can involve significant restrictions on the liberty of a person, with drastic criminal consequences for a breach of the order. The prediction of future behavior is based, in significant measure, on the proof of past and present stalking behavior. Available data indicate that, where dual strategies for legally processing stalking exists, intervention orders have become the primary legal strategy for the management of stalking disputes, both in Australia and the United States. Regarding the use of intervention orders to address disputes between neighbors, it seems unlikely that this type of dispute was intended to be regulated by anti-stalking provisions. The breadth and generality of the stalking legislation, however, means that it has easily covered a wide range of human conduct, including comparatively petty matters. The paper concludes with a listing of relevant research issues the authors will continue to pursue.