melzawelza

RIP Lennox, you will not be forgotten and your death is the beginning of the end of BSL. Depends on the state and country, TLC. In Belfast and Victoria, any dog that is 'of type' (i.e fits arbitrary measurements and physical standards) is a pit bull type dog. You can keep a pit bull type dog in Victoria based on some points but if you don't meet those the dog is killed. As you have seen in Belfast, the dog is killed as well. Here in NSW a dog is not restricted unless a Council has issued a notice to declare it restricted and it has failed a breed assessment and/or temperament test. Breed assessors are DogsNSW judges (from memory you must have been a terrier specialist judge for 2 years or an all breeds judge for four), and they base their decision on what the dog looks like. There are no official guidelines they must follow to assess the dog. If they come back as pure they are restricted and must be kept the same way a dangerous dog must be kept. If they come back as a cross breed of a restricted breed they can go on to a temp test. Pass = not restricted, fail = restricted. Or they can be assessed as not a restricted breed at all. That's just two states, it's different everywhere as to how they go about it.

The council should consider issuing him with a Court attendance notice with the aim of having him banned from owning dogs. The interview with him has shown he is incapable of understanding the responsibility of owning a dog in my opinion. There's a good chance they'll just destroy the dog and be done with it though. It's a big process to have someone banned from owning dogs.

Goldie X Rottie? :laugh: I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case, she looks exactly Goldie to me except for her colouring.

No problems. If the first attack wasn't reported then Council basically has to act like it hasn't happened as they have no evidence to show tha it has - unless the owner is willing to come forward now and give a statement etc. In that regard if the previous attack on sarge was the first they'd heard of this dog I can *maybe* understand not declaring the dog at that point, depending on the severity of injury. If they hadnt gone with dangerous they had the choice of a control order through the courts or a nuisance order as well though.

Double post!

No one is saying belting a dog out of frustration is ok. But the idea that a dog will never understand a smack or it will never work is incorrect. There is a difference between taking your dog out the back after a show and laying into it, and a short, sharp smack on the rump when you catch the dog with their head in the kitty litter. The latter, if timed correctly WILL punish the behaviour and the dog will associate it with the behaviour you want to deter. The smack doesn't hurt more than discomfort, and serves much more to startle the dog than anything else. Like I said, I'm not promoting smacking as a be all and end all, it's only really useful in a very small amount of situations, but I disagreed with the notion that a dog will never understand a smack or learn from it, no matter what the scenario.

This isn't true. Smacking a dog is positive punishment and if the timing is right and the dog has deliberately not followed a known command then a dog will know exactly why it's being smacked and it can serve to reduce that behaviour in the future. I'm not necessarily advocating smacking (although my dog has had a few quick backhands across the rump when she's done the wrong thing), but if it's done correctly then there is no reason why a dog wouldn't 'understand' it. My girls mouth / bite and get hold of their their pups for 'discipline', I guess that's punishment. And it works. When mama growls the pups know to back off or else; and when mama puts a bone in the middle of the pups' play group, as enticing as that bone is, if its mama's they cant touch it or she will wallop them. Subordinate dogs will also receive treatment similar to the above. The dogs dont smack (obviously :laugh: ), but they certainly discipline by physical reprimand. Exactly.

Rozzie, I'm assuming this is NSW due to the amount of fine given out to the owner. I would be pursuing it further. Under the legislation, the dog could have been declared dangerous after it killed the first dog and kept in an enclosure. I'm really surprised that it hadn't been declared dangerous upon attacking Sarge if it hadn't already, due to it being a second attack. The fact that has attacked a THIRD time, and killed a second dog... that absolutely warrants a dangerous dog order under the legislation. I think you should be sending written correspondence to the Council requesting the dog be declared dangerous. Re: Destroying the dog - Council has no power to do so unless the owner surrenders the dog. However they did have the right to seize the dog and declare it dangerous, or seek a destruction order through the courts.

M-sass has never shown any tact. I'm sorry Rozzie. Please ignore him/her.

What you have described (Except for the rego breeder bit) is pretty much exactly what is in place in NSW. Bite stats haven't been reduced, there are more 'black market' pits around than there ever were, and you end up creating what you are trying to prevent by sticking a dog in a cage and muzzling it and not allowing it to socialise in public. ALL breeds are proven to attack humans and other dogs. Of all the fatalities in this country (30 something) since the stats were compiled in the 70s, only ONE has been attributed to having any pit bull in it - Ayel Chol's killer. Banning doesn't work - it makes the problem worse. Restricting certain breeds doesn't work - it makes the problem worse. Targeting owners in education campaigns, strong enforcement on leash laws and registration, financial incentives for registering, desexing and training and tiered enforcement on dogs that have attacked are proven to be the strategies that vastly reduce dog attacks. Breed bans do the opposite. Just google Calgary, Canada animal control if you want to read what works.

That is horrible, I'm so so sorry We're the other two attacks reported to Council? Did they do anything? What state/council area?

I'm out of this thread. Like Lo Pan said, way too much bullshit that to be honest I'm sick of arguing.

^^ Sorry Tazar, but where did you get this information from? It's a complete myth that put bulls or bull breeds do not give warning signs before attacks. The same myth was applied to the dobermann back in the day when everyone was scared of them. It's not true and never has been. All dogs show signs before they attack, the problem is the humans that don't recognize them. M-sass... BSL existed in Vic at the time that Ayen Chol was killed. The dogs were already restricted but the Council had no idea the dog existed. So tell me again how BSL would have saved Ayen Chol?

But sandgrubber, 'pit bull' over there also includes SBT and AST. Include those under the banner of 'pit bull' here and we'd probably have the same stats in our shelters.

Great stats!! Please don't tell me the author was blaming the dogs for the failings of humans that puts them in the shelter?

Oh Jesus... look for some Shibas in the local pound in ten months time

I know the person who runs Terrigal and Dural and I know staff at both, and there's no way any of the people I know would allow anything but great care of the animals. Very passionate people.

Yep, In fact I remember someone saying that at a seminar I went to years ago. Talking about some breeds in the US and popular sire syndrome - everyone using an imported dog young and the dog and his progeny going on to have hassles as they aged and it being near impossible to find lines clear of that dog 5 years down the track. They went on to say that they think it better to only use them a few times while young and then when they reach double figures if they are healthy and able to do the deed. and the progeny from the litters they sired when they were young are healthy then they are a good contributor to the gene pool so let them be used a few more times. Makes sense to me!

I got my tickets! :thumbsup:

Couldn't agree more. I also know quite a few people at Pet Resorts and they are true friends of the dog. Go with Pet Resorts Glenn Cooke who oversees all training is arguably one of the best trainers in the country. Boarding '& Training works well as long as you have a good handover lesson and you commit to continue working hard. It will give you a good head start - but that's it. You need to continue. Also agree on Guard Dog Training Centre stay well away!!!!

Exactly. I'm not defending the owners for not registering prior. But these laws were highly publicised. The gov was taking out big ads in the paper saying 'IF YOUR PIT BULL IS NOT REGISTERED BY X DATE IT WILL BE DESTROYED', underneath describing the visual identfication. The internet was buzzing with people urging everyone with anything vaguely bull breed to register immediately. The owners obviously took notice of this and tried to do the right thing by registering them. I'm not 100% happy with the lack of action taken on the owners part in the VCAT hearing but they did try and do the right thing at the beginning of all this and were punished for it.

No, as the dogs were younger than allowed. Dogs born or entering the state after a particular date (I think it was September 2010 from memory) cannot even be registered as restricted breeds and kept in the prescribed way, they MUST be destroyed. It just may have meant that they wouldn't have been on the Council's radar. But had they come to their attention in some other way they'd still have been in the same boat, registered or not.

Fenced parks are a recipe for dog fights. Avoid them. Go to the unfenced areas with a long lead and train your dog to come back when called

Love it!!

Considering it has been legislation since 2008 that ALL Cats MUST be confined to your property at ALL TIMES... Sigh.. Don't get me started.. Not in NSW it isn't.