melzawelza

Double post.

The base level staff aren't the problem with the RSPCA. They are generally as you said, good caring people who are very upset and frustrated - probably because their organisation's appalling set up and use of funds means they have to kill lots of animals. That doesn't change the fact that the RSPCA (with the exception of the ACT) is an appalling organisation that thoroughly deserves to be criticized.

Batshit crazy.

This thread is really irritating and I hope your poor cat doesn't pay for your stubbornness in the future. As someone who owns dogs and cats all living together - the cat is in the wrong and why you wouldn't separate and prevent the cat from going near the dogs food is just beyond me.

Fantastic!!! Big grin here!!!

Been reading the last 5 or so pages of this thread, and last night sounds like a definite improvement! Great work!

Anyone involved in rescue knows that 99.999999% of dogs can happily cope and re-adjust to a new owner/life, as long as that owner/life is well suited to that individual dog (that's not to say that 99% SHOULD be rehomed, obviously some dogs are not rehomable). Some might take a little time to settle in, sure. That doesn't warrant killing the dog. What a selfish woman with an idiotic family.

Pretty sure the answer is no, considering they kill 40% of unreclaimed dogs every year for 'behavioral' reasons.

Happy birthday beautiful boy!!!

Looking to start this with my rescue Pit Bull/Amstaff type dog when I can.. For people in Sydney the Alaskan Malamute Club are in the process of setting it up (all breeds). Join their facebook group to keep up to date: http://www.facebook.com/groups/248281438529547/ If anyone else is really keen to get it going, Farmer Dave has been considering it out at his canine sports centre at Box Hill too but has it on the backburner at the moment as he's focusing on other sports. Jump on his page and tell him you want to attend! If he gets enough people asking for it, it'll hopefully mean he'll put it as more of a priority: http://www.facebook.com/AustralianCanineSports?fref=ts

Such a tragedy... and so avoidable. That poor girl and her family. What a way to go. I'm assuming you're talking about the white dog with the patchy nose? That definitely is not an American Pit Bull Terrier. The dog is much too large, and it's construction is not that of an APBT. Looks to me like an American Bulldog (which are not banned) and I've read other articles where the dog was quoted as such. A great article re: this incident on the KC Dog Blog. http://btoellner.typepad.com/kcdogblog/2013/04/failure-of-breed-specific-policy-in-the-uk-1.html There was another fantastic blog post I read discussing why this attack wasn't shocking at all when you look at the circumstances, and how easily it could have been prevented.. I can't find it now though.

Ah. From the photo lf her shown in the video I'm 99% sure This woman was at the Australian Institute of Animal Management conference last year. She piped up that she was proud to call herself a puppy farmer and there is nothing wrong with being labelled as that term. She sing her own praises about how experienced she is with breeding and how she breeds wonderful pets etc. why am I not surprised to see this.

I had a good giggle :laugh:

I second Glenn!

As the dog has been sold as a pet to a non-farm, the law is clear that the puppy should've been microchipped. What I'd like to know is about the price. Does the last sentence mean that her puppy's 'breeder' could've had him microchipped for free? The other thing, my friend is not planning on having him chipped until he's desexed at 6 months old because she's been told that the microchip isn't activated until the council rego gets paid. I don't know who's giving her this information, but I told her that if her puppy gets lost between 8 weeks and 6 months, if the microchips aren't 'activated', how are the owners located? I do know that she's getting her info from a person who hates registered breeders because my friend said that she needs to take her cross breed to agility to show up all those purebred dog snobs. I'm feeling very annoyed with her because she's using her dog as a competition with Zeus -- I'm doing agility with him, so she's trying to build him agility jumps and the likes and he's only 12 weeks. I had to tell her about growth plates and waiting until at least 12 months before getting him jumping. It's sounding a lot like anything Zeus can do, my pup can do better at the moment -- not to mention that she's stolen my favourite dog name (which I as planning for my dog) for her puppy. Council officer here. She has to chip the dog NOW. She can't wait until six months. She is breaking the law and if she is caught she will get a $165 fine. If the dog is a working dog, the chip isn't free but the lifetime registration that has to be done at six months is. If she won't chip the dog, call your local Council and tell them and they'll go out there and make her do it.

At the Australian Institute of Animal Management conference in October last year, Andrew Cornwall did a presentation re: the taskforce. One of the AMO's asked what measures the Gov't was going to put in place to actually measure the effects of these proposed legislative changes, to see whether they actually make a difference, good or bad. He gave a faffy politician answer that essentially said there would be no such measurements of success whatsoever. The president of AIAM brought that up quite a few times during the four days about just how sad it is that Gov't makes legislation that us AMO's are supposed to police, without talking to us and without putting ways to measure it's effectiveness in place.

This whole thing is completely horrendous and disappointing.

Sorry, I had a giggle. What a character he is! :laugh:

I don't know anyone who advocates the educated use of e-collars who HASN'T tried it on themselves. That's why we advocate them. We know that they are used at such low levels that they certainly aren't devastating or painful. More mildly annoying for the dog. They get fantastic results in training and dogs that are trained properly with them end up more confident and punchy than they were beforehand. MY question is - have you tried one on yourself?

Dogs can be (and some are) bred to promote aggressive tendencies. Let’s not forget that many cute white fluffies were originally bred as ratters and with irresponsible breeding some of those aggressive tendencies can re-emerge. Failure to properly socialise and train dogs can also reinforce these negative tendencies. Unfortunately, what most responsible owners don’t want to acknowledge, is that there are far too many morons out there who actively seek dangerous and aggressive dogs. Just do a Google search and you will find plenty of nuts asking questions like “I want to get a dog that will rip the nuts of anyone that comes through my front door, and won’t be put down by a few gunshots, should I get a pit-bull or a Rottweiler or what?” As usual it is these jerks and their dogs that give the breed a bad name. The difference I suppose is this: If an irresponsible owner buys a “white fluffy” from a bad BYB, and doesn’t train and socialise the dog properly, they may end up with a psychotic little nutter that will bite someone, and which they will end up dumping at the pound. If an irresponsible owner buys a “pit bull” from a bad BYB, and doesn’t train and socialise the dog properly, they may end up with a psychotic nutter that will savage someone, possibly fatally. So the solution to your problem is to ban every dog over about 10kg right? Because any dog over 10kg that hasn't been trained or socialised properly has the potential to savage someone, possibly fatally. The other point you are forgetting is that banning breeds doesn't eliminate them, it creates a DEMAND on the black market for that specific demographic you mention, making the problem much worse. Anecdotally it seems that in NSW there are more pit bull type dogs around now than there were prior to the legislation coming in, and certainly pups of unknown heritage are fetching $1000+ when prior to the legislation they would have been worth a few hundred bucks at most.

I think it's probably more the fact that the dog would be totally freaked by the sound of the prior shots etc and 'attacked' the dog. I don't think the dog knew it was saving her life necessarily but I still think it's an awesome story and dog.

And yours too Akayla.

What a beautiful dog.

I've seen a lot of rangers here throughout Sydney misrepresent the facts to people to get a dog surrendered so I certainly wouldn't be surprised if it was happening in Dubbo. Awful.

People continally say this in regard to training dogs to be aggressive and bite which really couldn't be further from the truth. Unless an individual dog is genetically equipped to do so, at best you may get most dogs to bite if cornered and abused perhaps, but the ability to be actively aggressive is in the dogs genetics. Where professional training of biting/attacking dogs is active, police, security, armed forces etc, a large proportion of individual dogs of breeds renowned for successfully training in these disciplines will not attack/bite people and consequently fail in that role, even dogs who are trained to bite sleeves and suits worn by people, many are biting/attacking in prey drive for reward of the equipment (tug toy) and will not bite/attack people without the equipment being worn regardless of the training to do otherwise. The German Shepherd is the most commonly used breed globally for professional biting/attacking working roles which is said to be only aorund 1% of the breed in general is genetically capable of being trained in such a role? With that said in relation to Pit Bulls, yobbo's are often blamed for Pit Bull aggression by raising/training dogs to show aggression and ultimately bite, but the question is: Why are the yobbo's using Pit Bulls and not GSD and Rottweillers etc to create dangerous dogs? It's often said by anti BSL activists that the yobbos at breed ban will move onto something else on the basis that "any" dog can be trained to be dangerous?. The next question: How are the yobbos going to train just any dog or breed to fullfil a role that professional trainers can't achieve with the wrong dogs and breeds? Is the Pit Bull type of dog easier genetically for the yobbo to extract aggression from, than other breeds, are they an easier dog to make dangerous? I don't know the answer to that from a BSL perspective, but is it to do with genetic capability to attack/bite being greater than other breeds being a reason for restriction? M-sass