melzawelza

There's been some pretty remarkable strides in progress as regards our knowledge of dog behaviour, but people need to be educated to benefit. Quite so. The fear of of a trainer with qualifications from a cereal box is valid though. Might be better if part was video, to ensure quality of information. Well meaning, but misinformed volunteer trainers giving out incorrect advice to all and sundry won't help. NCRC are totally awesome, as are Animal Farm Foundation when it comes to data and science driven approches to animal management. I just spent five days with AFF which included a lecture with the president of the NCRC. Incredibly valuable information.

Horrific attack. Completely unacceptable and I'm glad the dogs have been put to sleep (although I wish further assessment of their temperament and behaviour, as well as an autopsy was done). Lots of people with ideas on this thread on what they think may work to reduce these sorts of attacks. Some have some merit, other breed-specific posts are ridiculous. Thing is, we don't need to speculate about all this. We already know what the answer is to dramatically reducing dog attack incidents. It's been done already with great success in towns and cities around the world. Our legislators should be charged as far as I'm concerned for persisting with BSL (proven NOT to work by many many studies) and ignoring the models that do work. For those that are interested in understanding the issues the NCRC website is a wonderful well resourced and educated site. National Canine Research Council This page in particular is relevant to the discussion, on what actually works and is enforceable when it comes to community safety with dogs: Effective Vs Ineffective laws It's not rocket science but it just seems to be too much effort for our legislators to bother with, especially when BSL is so popular amongst the uneducated general public (and it seems some passionate dog owners going by this thread, which is very disappointing). I think we need to remember to that overwhelmingly dogs are incredibly safe to be around. These incidents do happen but the likelihood of being badly attacked or killed by a dog is very slim. Almost all dogs of all breeds or types in our society do not attack.

The story that pools put a chemical in them so that the water turns purple if you pee has been around for ever and told around the world too, doesn't make it true. I'm not saying they don't have the dogs fight other animals, I'm saying that these people with more experience with dog fighters and actual fight bust dogs have not seen any evidence that this 'bait dog' idea actually happens on any sort of notable scale. The dogs are faught against other fighting dogs to train them - they want them to have the challenge and the resistance to better their skills. They don't want a dog that will just take it because try can't or won't fight back. It is of no use to them. It certainty does happen occasionally on a very very small scale, but this is generally by idiot street thugs who have heard about this 'bait dog' idea from stories or the media and decide they want to give it a go. Maybe if we stop perpetuating the myth over and over and over again it will stop hurting ALL dogs - non pit bull and pit bull type dogs alike.

Well, I've just spent two days in Oakland, California with BADRAP, one of the most well respected Pit bull rescue and advocacy group in the states. Donna and Tim have had extensive experience with dogfighters themselves, the police who discover and charge the fighters, and they test the actual dogs used for fighting and determine which dogs are adoptable with retraining and which are to be euthanased (most are rehomable). They assessed the Michael Vick fight bust dogs and retrained and rehomed a number of them (many who are now therapy dogs and live with other dogs). We discussed yesterday this 'bait dog' phenomenon and these articles that seems to constantly come up in the media about so called stolen 'bait dogs' which draw from no evidence at all. Their opinion after fifteen years working on fight busts, dogs that have actually been faught and speaking to dogfighters themselves is that as a whole bait dogs don't exist. They have no value to the dogfighter. There is no value in the dog being trained against a dog that doesn't or can't fight back. They want the dogs to develop their skills and that doesn't happen with 'bait dogs'. They have no doubt that it happens on rare occasions but that is NOT the true dogfighters doing it. It's idiot kids and street dogs that wouldn't even know what the concept of a 'bait dog' was if it wasn't for these idiotic articles constantly being run in the papers. True Dogfighters aren't doing this, and if we stop sensationalizing this crap on no evidence the very very few idiots who copycat after reading these articles just might stop too.

I'm sorry but where is the evidence that the dogs are being stolen for dogfighting? I'm so sick of these constant articles coming out with absolutely no evidence of such activities occurring.

In NSW the Council could take action as the person who finds an animal is required to 'as soon as possible' take it to it's owner, the Council or the Pound. Not sure if QLD legislation has the same stipulation though.

Screencap the comments on the facebook page straight away in case they delete them, Then send all screencaps to the Council the rescue resides within. Scummy actions by this so called 'rescue'.

My girl tells puppies off when they won't stop trying to bounce all over her but it's totally appropriate and I have no issues with her doing it. It's good for the puppy to learn what is rude behaviour that won't be tolerated. It sounds like your girl is fearful though if she's hiding between your legs, which changes things a bit. My girl isn't fearful, she's supremely confident in that situation and just won't tolerate rudeness.

Excactly - I was about to say the same thing. Surely not all of the other animals are unable to be rehomed due to pending legal cases etc. The are morons. LAst time the WA RSPCA was going ona bout being overcrowded etc they had a grand total of two dogs up for adoption, yep two. SAFE Perth had 150.................hmmmmmmm It is SUCH a joke!!

Vet for sure. Such a change in behaviour is usually cause for concern, especially when you add the growling (I assume that's not normal for him?).

This is such a load of crap. If they are overflowing then maybe they should explain why the total animals listed on the RSPCA's 'adopt a pet' website for ALL WA shelters is: Dog: 4 Cat: 3 Horse: 1 Goats & Sheep: 10 Either they are lying, or they are not bothering to do even the basics to get the animals in their care adopted. I understand that some are unable to be put up for adoption due to the court cases but the numbers above that ARE up for adoption are just abysmal. http://www.adoptapet.com.au/search/searchResults.asp?regionID=40&pagesize=16&task=view&statusID=3&tpage=1

This thread is disgusting. I can't believe people have incontinent dogs in their beds!!

Yep! http://www.facebook.com/pages/Help-save-Rocket-Another-victim-of-Victorian-BSL/323124094447754?fref=ts

That's appalling, melz. Utterly disgusting that because a dog looks a particular way, a family is treated as criminals. Actually worse because at least criminals have visiting rights. Agreed totally Sheridan. I can't imagine how I'd feel if it were my dog. Some had been held for over a year before being released (or killed, as Bobo was). From what I understand Rocket's owners still don't know where he is and he'd be coming up to a year now. Aphra I agree totally with your post and assessment or why LDH love BSL so much.

Sheridan there's nothing in the legislation to say that but I don't know of one Council yet that has allowed the family to visit. A lot don't even know where their dogs are being held.

For the reasons the others have posted I wouldn't send any dog to Vic that looks even slightly bully. As you can see in Aphra's link, most of the dogs being seized are mutts and mixed breeds that have lost in the genetic lottery as far as the 'appearance' that is allowed in Victoria. It's a nightmare and it's heartbreaking.

This dog may not be DA though. I know that might sound crazy to some people considering the injury to the lite dog, but many many dogs are VERY territorial about their fenceline but fine when off the property. The owner may not have known or realised that the dog would take it's role as protector of the property so seriously in this context. Obviously he does now and if the gap is still there it's very disappointing that the owner hasn't now voluntarily taken extra precautions to prevent anything similar happening again.

Yes and Yes to your two bolded points.

Great Rangers. Always so good to hear. You've done the right thing. Lets hope there's a good result for the family, the dog and the community as a whole.

A dog doesn't have to bite or touch a person in NSW for it to be considered an attack. What Aloysha describes absolutely comes under the description of an attack as per the act.

I agree, you have to report. You're a dog person and can obviously tell when there is intent, and it's only likely to escalate unless the owners take it seriously and enlist the help of a behaviourist.

Horrible, horrible situation. A terrible end for the poor little poodle and awful for the owner to witness that. I don't envy the Council on this one. When you have cases like this it can be so hard to ascertain fault. In NSW, the poodle putting it's head through the gate would pretty much clear the dog as the Act states that an animal trespassing on property is a defence for an attack. But of course if the poodle was just plodding along and the dog stuck it's head through and grabbed it that is completely unacceptable. A minor detail that can be next to impossible to ascertain without doubt, but which changes the entire outcome. Poor little dog, poor owner. I feel sorry for the attacking dog too if it ends up being PTS or caged because its idiot owner didn't ensure the fence was secure and the dog couldn't get it's head through. A lot of dogs are very territorial about their fenceline but perfectly fine away from their property.

That paperwork wouldn't have stopped them declaring her - the only thing that will protect the dog is a pedigree certificate stating the dog is an Amstaff or a purpose written certificate from a vet staying that the dog is an Amstaff (which most vets won't do). You're very lucky especially considering it was LDH.

My aunt is the same, she has categorically stated that he will NEVER own a male dog because their bits are out and she likes patting her girls stomach.

So the RSPCA NSW doesn't kill 40% of unclaimed dogs then?