BJean

Before we add more misinformation, let's establish immediately that the The mtn cur breed is not a landrace.

The moment the public and the systems you voted in 'banned' the Pit Bull as part of BSL that same action also removed any possibility of an organised effort to breed 'good PB' (and as a consequence, good PB mixes.) Banning the breed resulted in the banning of good breeders, who otherwise could have set standards in place. In many ways, this is what you get when you have no professional breeders nurturing a breed and leading the way for new breeders to follow. No professional breeders to be very picky about where their puppies go and to whom no professional breeders to defend their breed and bring in new lineage when needed. (Yes there'd be a handful of professional PB breeders, rightly ducking and keeping beneath the radar, but these smart folk aren't going to put their heads up now, they're keeping their good dogs and good lineage underground where they're safe.) Back above ground: Australia created this sealed cesspool of poorly bred pitbull genes + other breeds bred in add-hoc to fill in the void And now Australia reals in horror when all these mixed goodness-knows-what-combinations go running around biting people. Well really, what did you think would happen, when you ban organised registration systems and breeding standards that only professional breeders can put in place and uphold? Yes the naive and daft still continue to believe in breed bans and that you can sweep up genetic footprints with the assistance of your local ranger ... but really. You wanted a breed banned, well applaud BSL. The registered breeders and the breed are gone. But the dogs and their progeny, their mixed progeny, their owners,and their owners who will breed, they still exist. When you brought in BSL you kicked the PB custodians out, so now all you're left with is the nuff nuffs with no knowledge; and their bad dogs and bad dog mixes that noone can tell apart from the good dog mixes. Every dependable breed of dog in Australia that is held in high regard, is this way because of the organised breed club and professional breeders nurturing the breed.

Perhaps its the people that choose to own them??? If you want a vicious dog looking dog that attacks people or a "guard dog" or a "pigging dog" you're not exactly going to get a SWF or even a beagle or golden retriever are you? ETA= absolutely no offence meant to responsible people who love pitties, and I know there are many out there. Unfortunately the "look" of the dog also seems to draw some undesirable owner is what I was trying to say No offence taken, I am curious as to how you differentiate a staffy/lab mix from a "pit bull mix"?

Thank god for someone like Steve Austin to voice what many are thinking. Too too many attacks by this type of dog, when will it stop? I completely agree. Get rid of those dogs. The councils don't do enough, they are easy to buy, and the dogs kill their "prey". An innocent child has been killed, and her family will suffer for the rest of their lives. We do not need these dogs. How will we determine Labradors and staffy mixes, from "pit bull type" mixes? Can you tell the difference between the aforementioned mixes?

Perhaps it seems Pit bull type dogs are more frequently involved in dog attacks because staffys and Labradors are very common breeds and their mixes are dubbed "Pit Bull Mix".

You dont breed Papillons past 7yo? (Excuse my assumption that you breed Papillons, I am just deducing from your signature )

Why don't you charge more for your puppies then?

if all dogs had a home to go to they wouldn't be in the system in the first place would they. so as a society we still keep pumping out pups and yes If all dogs have homes to go to, it will not prevent them from being unwanted hence the dogs would still be in the system. According to your overpopulation myth: Less puppies/dogs available for sale, would engender better dog owners that fulfill the responsibilities of owning a dog so all dogs would have homes to go to and not end up in the pound system. Under this cause and effect paradigm, puppy/dog availability is the 'cost driver' for the reasons dogs end up in pounds - whereby the numbers of dogs in pounds represents the amount by which dog/puppy numbers exceed the demand for dogs/puppies:community, and the scarce resource that is in 'undersupply', ie homes in the community regards pound dogs, pedigree dogs; all dogs as perfect substitutes. Hence 10 beagle puppies becoming available from a breeder in Ballan, takes away 10 potential homes for the 4 chi/JRT bitzer mixes, 2 bull arabs, 1 GSD and 3 doodles at the local pound. ie there is a direct relationship between the number of puppies produced and the number of dogs in pounds. You could actually formulate a mathematical model for your overpopulation myth, and use the algorithm to provide outputs estimating how many puppies should be available for sale (dependent variable), based on a function of the numbers of dogs in pounds (independent variable). Maybe you could take this to VCAT next time?

Maybe you just can't find them.

So Australia has been suffering from a dog overpopulation crisis of epidemic proportions since 1997? AUSTRALIA WIDE RSPCA BRANCHES AND SHELTERS 2009 - 2010 DOGS RECEIVED - 68,746 EUTHANISED - 20, 177 (29.4%) REHOMED - 19,007 (27.6%) RECLAIMED - 24,223 (35.2%) AUSTRALIA WIDE RSPCA BRANCHES AND SHELTERS 1997-1998 DOGS RECEIVED - 80,776 EUTHANISED - 36,037 (44.6%) REHOMED / RECLAIMED - 37,503 (46.4%)

Address it; manage pound systems better. But it wont change the situation on the outside ie: owners no longer wanting their pets, or no longer being able or willing to be responsible for them. The numbers of dogs euthd is a pound management issue not an 'overpopulation' issue. The numbers of dogs received through pounds is what your yardstick should be to assess the number of dogs unwanted (or the excess amount of dogs in your overpopulation notion). If there really is an overpopulation epidemic, then the numbers of dogs received by pounds today, would be in 'epidemic' proportions compared to the numbers of dogs received by pounds a decade ago. RSPCA NSW: in 1999-2000 they received 20,631 dogs, killed 44.7% of them and Rehomed 36.5%. ...... in 2009-2010 RSPCA NSW received 20,619 dogs [they transferred 709 to other non RSPCA facilities ie RESCUE], killed 40.5% of them and rehomed 24.8%.

woops I missed this No Tazis I have seen in Kazak but there are Tazis in Turkey - (the Iranian Tazi is much like the Turkmen Tazi - Middle East ancient sighthounds are all called Tazi is this what you mean? Cant you both PM each other with OT junk? You have not responded to my posts re pound stats Lilli. I am looking forward to your response, you are avoiding so far. tsk How rude. Alyosha has just as much right to participate in thread discussion and ask questions, as you do.

woops I missed this No Tazis I have seen in Kazak but there are Tazis in Turkey - (the Iranian Tazi is much like the Turkmen Tazi - Middle East ancient sighthounds are all called Tazi is this what you mean?

Not really. Even if we make the Chi 80kgs and give it adaptive intelligence, it still will not have the same constitution, because the muscle proportions, nervous systems, immune systems differ. Yes of course. And it's important to know what they are. And to learn these are a breeder has to read their dogs in the context of generations and their total environment. Or failing that, allow other breeders to do so. To believe that Breed A and Breed B should be tested for the same problems because they are both 'canine' belongs with the notion of pure science and its infallibility.

oooh another one about 'the document'. A quick Troy search: www.ccac.net.au/files/Mandatory_Desexing_in_the_ACT_Cats.pdf http://www.ccac.net.au/files/The_issue_of_unwanted_animals_UAM06Lawrie.pdf http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/192781-rescue-here-is-our-chance-to-make-a-difference/page__st__30__p__4434350__hl__unwanted__fromsearch__1#entry4434350 If a pound dog is pts does that mean it died due to oversupply? Im just trying work out what you are protesting against wrt the OP quote, and how a pound dog pts equates to oversupply. The Literature review posted by Mita and the study carried out both arrive at the same conclusion: http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/documents/Biosec...eport-Part2.pdf Centre For Cpmpanions Animals in the Communiy: http://www.ccac.net.au/files/Mandatory_Des...he_ACT_Cats.pdf Very few dogs are killed in Australia because there are more dogs available than there homes. Dogs and puppies are euthanised in shelters most frequently because they are not suited to available homes, rather than because there are no homes available. Dogs are not dying in pounds because of an 'oversupply' problem. dogs are being pts for other factors health, temperament, etc. There is an oversupply of cats, but these cats are mostly unowned cats, and therefore are not impacted by legislation. Dogs face an unwanted problem. Independent of supply. So the OP quote is correct. There is a PERCEIVED oversupply problem; dogs dont get pts in pounds because there is an advertised supply on the outside. Nor do people dump their pet because there are too many; dogs get pts in pounds because there is an unwanted problem. Sheilaheel02, on 1st Apr 2010 - 04:06 PM, said: If there is an undersupply of rehomable dogs, I must be deluded for losing sleep and weeping over the ones we consider deserving of rescue who are PTS weekly. I'll just tell myself that what we see day in day out is not actually reality, euth my 7 foster dogs at home, return others in kennels/care to the pound and head off to enjoy a much more relaxed and happy lifestyle with a sh*tload of spare cash in my back pocket. An adult dog pts at a pound is pts as there was no AVAILABLE home durng that time frame. That's not oversupply. That's a funding and pound/shelter management issue. That pound dogs are pts due to oversupply of dogs Australia is a MYTH. Pound dogs are pts because there is an unwanted problem and the ones that are healthy with no temperament problems - ie the rehomeable get pts because of the way the pound/shelter is run. in a no kill shelter that rehomeable unwanted dog would find a home. But in most pounds/shelter that rehomeable dog has a timeline and if it cant be met, or the pound pen:dog quota is exceeded - the dog gets pts. That's not oversupply. http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/188842-rescue-self-perpetuating-a-band-aid-solution/page__hl__overpopulation__st__45 http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/157391-sites-to-shame/page__st__45__p__3360464__hl__overpopulation__fromsearch__1#entry3360464 http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/157391-sites-to-shame/page__hl__overpopulation__st__45

Why would you base your stats on the number of dogs euthd?

really, one article? Ohh you mean the one I posted in our last dance on Puppy farming ... yes I remember the article. I was posting on DOL about the overpopulation myth long before that article was penned. and even more remarkable, quoting other sources and studies. I dont have the inclination to do a search right now, but if you're adept you will find them. Unwanted is the problem, not overpopulation. (For your state of mind, I penned that phrase long before the person you met wrote the article; there's a big world of ideas out there if you dare to look.) You're thoughts on your version of utopia really aren't that radical. They're predictable and erroneous, mostly because of the paradigms they're built from.

yes it's called democracy. You know where the citizens of a country agree to abide by a set of systems and regulations, buy their own land and then act accordingly. Who cares what you want. You want something different for the land in Ballan? - Next time a big piece of land goes up for sale, buy it for yourself. And be happy when you make your bank repayments that you prevented a puppy farm from being established. according to your signature you don't even come from this country so do you know what is going on behind the scenes at all? and comments about me buying land and preventing puppy farms is uncalled for really, it is irrelevant. You're really funny My immigration movements are relevant, yet me telling you to go buy the Ballan land yourself, is uncalled for? You dont think it is logical for someone to suggest that if you want to control the way a property is run - when the current owner already operates within the law - that you should buy the freehold title of the property yourself? For your state of mind: I am Australian, but I found freedom in Turkiye and Kazakhstan.

Can't say it's going to give us much when smartasses put 15+ litters against breeders who don't health test... Well at least we know that since there are 7 votes in each of the 15+ category, they are most likely all trolling so we can ignore that option altogether :p I think large-scale breeding is rarely justified. We already have so many puppies and dogs in the pounds that lose their chance of getting adopted every time someone decides to bring a litter into the world, breeders can't be doing that much good to the breed that they feel the need (for speed!) to breed every few months. That's just my opinion; I also think it's sad when breeders have 10+ (or some other high number) of dogs on their property--I mean even if they are getting fed well and looked after etc, how on earth can you provide so many dogs with..like.. love. I sound like a tree-hugging hippie, but whatever! I think dogs have a right to be in a place where they get an adequate amount of attention and affection bestowed on them, and it seems almost impossible to do that when you have a dozen or so dogs on the property. I could never do that, I'd need to hire staff to cuddle and pat so many dogs a day. :p Can't say it's going to give you much when smartarse bigots who can't see beyond their own small perspective and experience ...

what? I am talking about the reasons why dogs end up in pounds. It sounds like you need to learn more about what you are trying to go on about. toy brought up statistics, false ones. (the usual suspects that are dragged out when puppy farms are discussed) toy asserted that there that pounds were overflowing, as there were not enough homes and too many dogs. the overpopulation myth, is just that. Before you talk about statistics, you need to understand where pound dogs come from and why pounds kill so many dogs each year or rather why they kill about the same this year as they did a decade ago. if you want to link puppy farms up to dogs in pounds and correlate that in to your arguments, you need to explain why you believe this is so. - particularly when pound stats tell a different story.

Depends on the lifespan of the breed and breeding history of the bitch's lineage.

I believe if you look at population growth in the last decade Vs the number of dogs in shelters you would see that your hysterical assertions are false. im sorry but i don't believe it is "hysterics" as you say, i am one of many many people who don't want these puppy farms and im talking about actual residents in that area who dont' want it coupled with a large proportion of the public, what im talking about is NOT REGISTERED BREEDERS let us be clear on this, it is about DESIGNER DOG CROSS BREEDS being bred for profit in highly intensive breeding farms. i believe this is nothing to do with a hobby registered breeder is it????????? or is it????? You claim dogs are dying and end up in pounds because there is an oversupply of dogs / undersupply of homes. This is incorrect. It is hysterics when you use false emotive arguments as a means of persuasion.

Nice to meet you too

I don't have that problem :D lol