tybrax

Fantastic story.

Cr Dawn managed to get an ACO called Len to talk to her where she asked did these two dogs attack or hurt anyone, ACO Len told her no, that’s not true. There was nothing on the FOI reports that stated the dogs attacked liars. ;) tybrax

This poem was written by a dear friend of mine Bob MacBean from Mongrel Hordes. tybrax

A huge thank you to John and Kylie and there team, and to all the people that stood by us and wrote letters, sent in submissions. Thank you for you dedication over the last 6 years, without you this would of never happened. Amstaffs are safe because of you. Go the 4 mousekeeters. tybrax

And to Kylie Chivers and John Mokomoko (and all of us who sent letters every week) for continually proving that hard work and perseverance pays off. Without them continually working hard to rid QLD of BSL, and proving several points along the way this may never have happened so quickly. A huge thank you to John and Kylie and there team, and to all the people that stood by us and wrote letters, sent in submissions. Thank you for you dedication over the last 6 years, without you this would of never happened. Amstaffs are safe because of you. Go the 4 mousekeeters. tybrax

The AST and APBT and even the SBT are one and the same breed. The DNA confusion is because people think they own an APBT when they don't. ADBA even issue papers to Aussie ASTs if they can trace their history back to US imports. AKC opens it's stud registry to APBTs as their gene pool is so low. Rather than fighting over what breed of dog someone has better to fight BSL and it's proponents before our ability to own and breed dogs is taken from us completely. DNA testing does not identify purebreds, just closely related dogs. Given that over a century ago Bostons were APBTs it is not surprising they show up in APBT and AST dog's history. The American Staffordshire Terrier has a breed signature found through DNA. The APBT/pit bull is nothing more than a mixture of breeds.

As they have done this without witnesses and being signed off on by the owners I would get their lawyer to immediately draw up a letter of complaint and ask for a re-test with their presence. GCCC what a bunch of complete w**kers!!!! On to it now, and the Media.

That's right they have made out the family have lied about the true test. How do we no the Council haven't lied, the family gave permission on the grounds that they be there to video the event, for Court. That was the agreement. As far as l am concerned the test is invalid.

So laughable, and pathetic and the same time. The family were notified today that there dogs had already been DNA by Council. The family does not know anything about this as they were awaiting the time and date to attend as there agreement was the family were to be there and video the Council performing the test. They have been told the test was performed before they recieved the permission letter from the owners. This test was not to be done without the owners being there to witness and video the event for Court purposes. Council have gone behind there back and taken it on there own back before they recieved permission. Shame on the GCC. The dogs have not been allowed to be returned home.

KCC will grab that with both arms, I think. ETA: Kaye's not going into the details of such important matters such as the Council having power to destroy on the spot and what conditions Council have to meet, because of the time of the night. Great one Kaye. Yet you thought the most important part to spend most time on was the (by comparison to death of the dog) the more benign topic of the fines. Right. Kaye didn't wont to go into details at all. Pretty poor excuse Kaye!!

You need to go read the thread Hon.D.Boyle kill Amstaff set pit bulls free. tybrax

So laughable, and pathetic and the same time.

Bring on the pic's :p tybrax

There only trying to find a loophole to cover there own butts. One big can of worms has been opened..... because they failed. tybrax

Any excuse will do when it comes to councils. They say the onus is on the owner to prove there dogs not a pit bull, well they proved there dogs are not pit bulls. Yes council fails.........

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2010/0...coast-news.html PUSH is on to use DNA testing to identify dangerous dog breeds after testing found two Gold Coast dogs on death row were not a restricted breed. A Coomera family has been torn apart after the Gold Coast City Council identified their dogs as outlawed American pit bulls. Rangi Nikau and her children were supposed to join husband and father Mete Waikai in Melbourne last month after the construction worker moved there to find work. But they have stayed on the Coast while they wait to find out if their dogs, Whero and Mau, would be destroyed. The council seized the dogs on May 19 and ordered them to be destroyed. The family appealed against the decision and last week lodged DNA tests conducted by a private company to support their case. The $299 tests by the Melbourne lab revealed that Whero was a golden retriever/Boston terrier cross and Mau was a Staffordshire bull terrier/boxer cross, which are both legal crossbreeds. Ms Nikau said the council should have to conduct DNA tests before seizing a dog, rather than relying on the 22-point visual marker test used to identify pit bulls. "I felt deceived that they could just look at a dog and say that's an American pit bull without having any evidentiary support or documentation," she said. She said the dogs were seized after neighbours rang the council when Mau got loose, but she said neither dog had ever attacked anyone. Her children, Shylah, 9, and Deaze, 5, should have been starting the second semester of the school year in Melbourne, but instead have returned to their Gold Coast school. "My two kids are asking me, 'Mum where are the dogs?' And I tell them they've just gone on a holiday," she said. She said it was depressing to see the dogs locked up at the Coombabah pound, where she has visited them almost daily. "I don't know if the council realise that dogs aren't dogs to us, they're more our family," she said. A council spokesman confirmed the DNA tests had been received and the case would be processed within a fortnight. The council's animal management boss Bob La Castra backed DNA testing in principle. "I think there's a strong argument for us doing DNA tests because that's the only way to be 100 per cent sure," he said. "Unless there's a reason why we shouldn't, then that should be looked at very seriously." He said there could be a case for compensation. "If we find that the DNA testing shows that these dogs are not a banned breed, then I certainly think that council needs to look very, very closely at any cost that's been incurred by the owners," he said. "The other side of the coin is we've got a duty and we could be seen as being negligent if we don't act on what our officers are trained to identify (by seizing the dogs)." tybrax

Your Welcome.

If any readers on this site know any reporters, TV newspeople, councillors who control animal management ect, send them a copy. If you happen to know anyone who has a registered Pit bull terrier in South East Qld, please do likewise. Type in BITSA on your computer and you will be able to get the DNA test very easily, send a copy of your results to poor old Mr Logan Timms as he is collecting them at present. If any dog owner is facing a destruction order claiming that their dog is a Restricted dog, (Pit bull terrier) then this would be very handy. The more people who know the truth on how incompetent the Qld Government are, the sooner we can make a change. The Gold Coast City Council's way of fixing a problem is to make the whole thing much, much, worse, just out of spite. The Gold Coast City Council, head of Animal Control Geoff Irwin, has over stepped his authority (Abuse of Power). John. tybrax

Are the American Staffordshire terrier and the American Pit Bull terrier one breed or are they two different breeds of dog? It is generally accepted that the Amstaff and Pit bull came from a common blood line or stock, descending from the Staffordshire bull terrier originally. The split happened when the UKC, United Kennel Club, preferred their Pit bull stock to be bred for gameness or performance and other dog groups wanted to move towards conformation and show qualities. The American Staffordshire terrier was then line bred with the best of what was available within their registries to only other registered American Staffordshire terriers for the next 90 years, keeping this breed pure to the original blood line. What I found out here in Australia, at least, because there is no national registry for the American Pit Bull terrier and as this breed is not recognised by the Australian National Kennel Club or groups like the CCCQ ect, owners and breeders had an open hand at what they were allowed to do in regards to improving or enhancing the look of their particular dogs. When looking at individual breeders and their dogs, one will boast at how larger their blood lines head is or another will claim that theirs are the biggest most muscular Pit bulls in Australia, now looking nothing in anyway like the original American Pit Bull terrier from the USA, or in fact nothing like the original imported dogs to Australia. With the introduction of the BITSA DNA dog breed identification test, many American Pit Bull terrier owners were horrified that their secret cross breeding program would come to light exposing how their dogs came to be so individual and distinct from the original imported blood stock to Australia. After completing now over 30 DNA tests and working with the DNA lab in Victoria it had become indisputably clear that many of the once known American Pit Bull terriers are now showing to be nothing but lookalike cross breed dogs, holding any number of breeds unlike the original cross breed combination which was the American Pit Bull terrier. The American Pit Bull terriers breeders are not totally to blame for altering their breed or dilution of their blood line, as the prohibition on importing blood stock and the banning and destruction of good breeding stock by the Qld Governments BSL law 17A forced many if not all dogs to go underground. What choice did dog owners have? The blame rests still with this Qld Government who must hold part of the blame for all the consequences of this badly thought-out law. With the American Staffordshire terrier, the BITSA DNA identification test shows very clearly, scientifically and without any doubt that a suspected dog either is a pure breed American Staffordshire terrier or an American Staffordshire terrier cross breed dog, showing what it was cross bred with, or just a lookalike cross breed, showing what dogs made up the lookalike combination. With the court case run on the 29th of March, 2010, BRISBANE SUPREME Court. CHIVERS Vs Gold Coast City Council. Ms Chivers went to trial to fulfil a magistrate order asking her to prove her dog was an American Staffordshire terrier so she may be allowed to return her dog to her home on the Gold Coast. She was not only successful in proving this point uncontested, she also was able to prove that the method of identification used by councils in South East Qld in identification of suspected Pit bull terriers was knowingly false, and that the Qld Government staff, (Animal Control Officers for respective Councils) held no formal or academic qualifications clearly showing they could and would never be considered an expert, in any field in dog breed identification or experts in general under the rule of law. However in a final twist, at the end of the trial, the GCCC Barrister entered a new submission, which was never presented to Ms Chivers Barrister, changing their whole point of view, stating they had admitted over the past 7 years they had got things wrong and now seen the light and found the truth. Despite presenting expert evidence in some 10 to 20 trials, that the American Staffordshire terrier and the American Pit Bull terrier were two separate breeds and that with the training of their expert Debora Pomeroy and the 22 point checklist they could without any reservation prove that the dogs were two separate breeds, they now contend that they are the same breed of dog. As this was submitted at the end of the trial, Ms Chivers Barrister without prior notification had 10 minutes to come up with a reply, thus leaving it to the judge to base his decision on what was before him, the court ruled that an American Staffordshire terrier and the American Pit Bull terrier were the same breed. Ms Chivers Barrister was clearly blindsided, the rules or principles of natural justice, also known as procedural fairness, were developed to ensure that decision-making is fair and reasonable. Put simply, natural justice involves decision-makers informing people of the case against them or their interests, giving them a right to be heard (the ‘hearing’ rule), not having a personal interest in the outcome (the rule against ‘bias’), and acting only on the basis of logically probative evidence (the ‘no evidence’ rule).” And in a way the judge showed he knew this by his comments and not awarding any costs a clear indication that one side did not follow the rules. How does this affect dog owners? As the Gold Coast City Council so cleverly tricked a Supreme Court Judge in giving a false ruling, by disobeying the rules or principles of natural justice, their win has given all Pit bull terrier owners a free get out of jail card. I will explain. The GCCC’s win that American Staffordshire terriers and American Pit bull terriers are one and the same. Here's the Kicker, there is a DNA test for the Amstaff, 100% accurate, the same test that all the American Staffordshire terrier clubs use to check the validity of a suspected members true breed, the same test the ANKC and the CCCQ use, that is the BITSA Dog Breed Identification DNA test. Therefore there is a DNA test for Pit bulls...the Amstaff DNA test, so any other dog that does not conform to the Pit bull DNA test (Amstaff DNA test) must not be a Pit bull terrier. With me so far.... Kill all the Amstaffs, a group of the dog community that have never caused any problems just so a dog called Tango could not be returned to the Gold Coast and win at all costs, has in effect made the GCCC set the Pit bulls free to breed/grow in number and really become a problem as the Pit bull terrier will never pass the Amstaff test. Just think, when the Restricted dog owners (Gold Coast and South East Qld) find out that all they have to do is send a DNA test to the lab and should the results come back their dog is not an American Staffordshire terrier, they then, don’t have an American Pit bull terrier, no need to put the signs on their gates, no extra fees, compensation for the harassment /desexing their dogs, then the need for an explanation to why the GCCC falsely identified their pet wrongly in the first place? Wow, Gold Coast City Council how smart do you feel now! The QLD Government’s Honorable Desley Boyle, Minister for Local Government and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships who has had two terms as Minister for Local Government over the past 7 years, and Mr Logan Timms, Senior Policy Officer of the Department of Infrastructure and Planning, have been placed in this situation by the GCCC. They are in a stalemate situation; it’s finally up to the dog owners in QLD to write to the Minister demanding that she fix this problem immediately, sack the GCCC or resign enabling hopefully another Minister to come up with a competent solution to fix this problem. There is currently a case on the GCCC "Whereo" and "Mo" who were both placed under a destruction order by the Gold Coast City Council, Animal Management (Cats and Dog) Act 2008, section 127, Destruction Order.2010/01, Both dogs have been tested for Breed identification, known as BITSA which you are familiar with, and the results are: Mo: Boston Terrier/ Golden Retriever Whereo: Staffordshire Bull terrier/ Boxer Both do not hold the cross breeding to be American Pit bull terriers (or American Staffordshire terriers either, same thing) so how is it that they were identified as American Pit bull terriers or restricted dogs or how have they broken the law? The first of many back cases to come forward. Mr Logan Timms, Senior Policy Officer of the Department of Infrastructure and Planning, has been made fully aware of this case for well over a month and has done??? Contact Mr Logan Timms on 3033 0594 or email [email protected] , [email protected] . Contact Minister Desley Boyle on (07) 3227 8819 (07) 3227 8819 or email [email protected] or PO Box 15031, CITY EAST QLD 4002. Forgot to add........ This Supreme Court decision has in effect, with the introduction of BITSA DNA testing, made the BSL section of the Animal Management (Cats and Dog) Act 2008, in Qld, unworkable, therefore powerless and Ineffectual. Kylie Chivers tybrax

Recieved an e-mail this morning regarding the card. For $10 (yes the owner has to pay!) we can buy a card from the DV that will give us proof our dogs are AST and not APBT. tybrax

What are pedigree papers for????

Welcome back Jed, so sorry for your loss. R.I.P. Maggie :D

Great Submisson tybrax

http://www.qt.com.au/story/2010/05/26/coun...-baiting-rural/ Council to assist with dog baiting 26th May 2010 RURAL residents concerned about wild dogs on their properties can now contact Ipswich City Council direct to instigate individual baiting programs with council assistance. Health and Regulation Committee chairman Andrew Antoniolli said wild dogs were a class-two declared pest under the Land Protection (Pest and Stock Route Management) Act 2002. “Under the provisions of this Act wild dogs must be controlled by the landholder,” he said. “Ipswich City Council started conducting wild-dog baiting programs in September 2005 and ran two programs in May and September in each year since. “Council's first baiting program attracted 10 landholders who participated in the program and, over the years, this number has reduced to just two landholders, and council officers conducted the service on their land. “We believe the program managed to resolve the problems on most properties and, because of the low numbers, we will now continue to offer the service when requested by landholders.” Cr Antoniolli said, if rural landholders had concerns with wild dogs on their properties, the council would provide a baiting service on the properties provided the area to be baited fell within the required guidelines.

Yeah thats the guy in the OP. A couple months ago he didnt even know what BSL was. "Rubbish" He knows. Buddy story comes to mind. tybrax