moosmum

We need to be concerned about BSL for survival of the BYB cross breed industry and the illegal breeding of APBT's for what reason? The people breeding these dogs that are not APBT related but fit the looks criteria need to take more responsibility for what they are breeding and selling IMHO. No one needs to breed Amstaff X Labradors selling them to naïve people who become attached to their pets for the council to seize them is gross irresponsibility on the breeders part. Better to ask why they see the need to do it in the 1st place. Why do they feel their needs can't be met through the K.Cs?

Pedigree dogs don't need non pedigree dogs to survive. There could be no cross breeds or dogs of unknown origin left in this country and we could still continue to breed pedigrees. Some of the primitive and Sighthound breeds accept the use of native stock or desert dogs when breeding and occasionally stud books are opened from time to time but when they are it's controlled and doesn't encompass a random mating with muttly nextdoor. You won't see an ANKC breed added to BSL, not going to happen. I know it as do countless other owners of ANKC breeds with papers and corresponding chips. The only people that can't see it are those with generic brindle pound mutts, wannabe's without papers that owners refer to as Amstaffs and those who have come under council scrutiny. For those of us with ANKC registered animals, we have nothing to fear, DogNSW negotiated our freedom a long time ago when we distanced ourselves from the sinking Pitbull ship. And so you demonstrate a closed environment, distancing itself from all out side and becoming more "typical" with time as you influence each other. You are using the pedigree as a symbol to set yourself apart. Instead of responsible, good breeding or ownership.

Human organization mimics cellular organization. Success or failure of an organization depends on an understanding of basic, biological laws. If you allow the possibility that this theory is correct, and have a even a basic understanding of biological law,you can see how the K.C constitution and charter can not possiblely work in a sustainable way. The blue print for the K.Cs is faulty and its end result is to take dogs out of the community. They should be left to the K.Cs. And the K.Cs are not part of the community. They are issolated by their ruling against their environment. They are left to define themselves by what they are not. Defined AGAINST the community. And that list will keep growing endlessly while there are dogs being kept outside of the K.C charter. I have confirmed to my satisfaction that this is exactly whats happening through psychology and cultural change brought about by the K.Cs constitution and rules. Their charter. Much of this can be demonstrated. A pedigree is a piece of paper. It verifies a recording of knowledge and history. Its a certificate that says the dog has been bred to protocols and a framework set up by the K.Cs to maximize the use of history and knowledge. It does not define the dog or its breeder in any way apart from its undiluted continuity but represents its available history or knowledge for those who will use it. It doesn't guarantee it will be used, or used correctly, or bring best results. Certification doesn't bestow any qualities on the dog. The dog came 1st. Through practices, not through certification. Certification doesn't guarantee progress , only that its recorded. Best practices lead to pedigrees, not the other way around.If you want best practices, thats what you promote, not pedigrees. The message of responsibility is missing from the whole and will remain so until the fault is repaired. Allowing members to breed mixed breeds would have no effect on the protocols in place for pure breeds. It won't dilute what is not mixed. It won't cost any extra. A member who breeds only mixed breeds adds nothing to the workload through any mixed breeding they undertake. They will still pay any dues in membership and mixed dogs will still lie outside of the K.Cs charter and responsibility, except where those members are now bound by any protocols that don't relate soley to the pedigree itself. They will not recieve a pedigree ever, unless the K.Cs themselves decide thats in their own best interests. It has no effect on pure lines. All it does is allow an interface of communication and SHARED responsibility to domestic dogs instead of attempting to divide responsibilty along undefined, imaginary lines. It DOES increase interest and involvement in pure breeds. They now have relevence out side . A pedigree becomes a symbol and verification for a membership that stand for history, knowledge and best practice. Not just proof of an undiluted continuity (or purity, since thats how it is most often interpreted) Allowing members to breed mixed breeds does no harm to pure breeds or the pedigree system. People who cross breed will not flock to the K.Cs and over run the organization. They will not be there if they have no interest in pedigree dogs and what that system has to offer. There will be nothing in the K.Cs to bring them but an involvement with PURE breeds. They will alow an environmental influence, keeping the K.Cs connected to whats happening outside and the demands that must be met from the environment to stay relevant. Breeding and owner ship of dogs becomes an art promoted by the K.Cs.simply because they are no longer defined solely by an adherence to closed line breeding or purity. H.D.W.... Yes, I know its that word again, but theres no alternative to its use when I'm talking about how the K.Cs are defined. You and I know better, but undiluted by outside influence = purity to most interpretation. It removes the elitist label and separation of goals. I think this is the best I can do to explain, unless there are questions to show where I have failed.

It is a fact that pedigree dogs are more predictable in terms of temperament, behaviours, type, structure and soundness, that is the very reason they are what they are, a "breed". They are also predictable when it comes to behaviour despite the "human element", be it aloofness, merriness, boldness, prey drive, aggression, territorial behaviour and the list goes on. Wether you are a responsible dog owner or not, it plays little part in your Cockers merriness, your Staffords bold fearless temperament, your Sighthounds aloofness, your Terriers prey drive etc, a breed is what it is, as are their temperaments in general. You can control the behaviours with training but the basic underlying temperament and behaviours associated with the various breeds are always going to be there. Your average working dog will chase stock, your average Terrier has a level of prey drive that will see it hunt, the Gundogs are invariably "birdie", the Bull breeds will fight, the breeds traditionally used to protect livestock and property invariably do so when they typically pass the puppy stage. But is it clear to people who comprize those dogs environment how to respond, maximize and make use use of those traits? Or their own role in doing so? What is expected of them in return? Do they understand their own role in keeping the partnership a successful, biologicaly sustainable one? Their responsibilities? Doesn't look like it to me. The problems get worse rather than better. So maybe we should just continue to legislate dogs away through more restriction? Reject the idea theres any environment for dogs outside of K.Cs membership? Just let them go because they have no relevence to US only to the K.Cs? Maybe it really is nothing to do with the environment and dogs are only a K.C concern.

I've explained the guide rules for writing a successful constitution re: negative rulings and ruling outside your environment. It does all sound vague. The theory behind them is based on Biological or natural law. That the biological laws governing microbes, genes and cells are repeated endlessly, governing all natural existence. Hendrick Gommer, a Proffessor of Law, explains in more detail. To see how they work in practice you need to see all of humanity simply as a population. Say single cells. As the population grows and crowds closer the individual cells become organized. They form groups that specialize to become more efficient in response to environmental demands. Messages are passed and while the organism called humanity grows, cells are constantly splitting off to take on new tasks and specialities. When humans split off to form specialist sub populations its their constitution that binds them together and gives intent.Their biological blue print. It contains their instructions on how to behave and connect with other cells, or parts of its environment. It allows them to connect with the rest of the organism and allows for information to pass from one part to another. The whole can only work effectively while mesages are clear and unambiguous with no interference. As for environment, its not static. Its the medium it takes to grow . There are environments within environments within environments endlessly. A subject originated in an environment that supports it. A human body is an environment for our cells, microbes and viruses. Environment is simply whatever medium the subject you're looking at grows in. So you are now looking at the K.Cs as a sub population of these "cells" and the dogs as their specialty. A product for the organism, their environment. The relaying of messages is critical for survival and integration. We're back to basic cellular biolgy. Looking at human populations through a microscope. There are parallels where ever you look. Survival of a culture depends very much on the messages being recieved within, and to and from the environment.Same principles we see at a cellular level. They work. Through human psychology and language. What you, personaly believe and think is irrelevent because the whole of the culture is shaped over time to reflect the messages being sent and recieved. The culture you create works as a single entity, but its survival depends on its environment continuing to support it, and it continuing to support its environment. It must remain relevent to whats expected of it and its supposed to be doing. The environment WILL react according to messages sent. And theres clearly something wrong there. So I look to the message and the language. In the only organization thats dedicated solely to the procreation of dogs in a sort of symbiotic relationship with man. Is that relationship going to remain relevent to its environment. Sound too far fetched? I have already given examples of how The K.Cs influence their environment.There are many more. They DO bear out this theory, even if you have trouble seeing it. Its why some countries are re writing their constitutions and Govts. are working to reduce and simplify legislation. Because the effects are subtle and intent isn't always clear. My gennys going off and thats a lot to digest already.

The possession of a recorded history of ancestry going back at least 5 generations, and usually a hell of a lot more. Not "partially recorded", fully recorded. What sets these dogs apart is a documented histrory of breeding true to a type specified by the breed creators and documented in the breed standard. -**** That definition is a wholly human created construct. None of that is inherent in the dog itself. It doesn't definitively separate the pedigree from run of the mill domestic dogs, it can be can be recreated and duplicated. The pedigree doesn't have a life of its own, Eligibility to pedigree status is bestowed. -*****I say partial history because it doesn't nessasarily record how long the dog lived, his temperament, health etc. It doesn't record how he lived and its all relevent. I agree though, history and the desire to use it( and knowledgethrough its use) I'm sorry MM I just don't get what you're trying to say about dogs and their "envrionment". You either want a dog that's going to be far more predictable in its adult characteristics and far more likely to be within a specified set of characteristics that you want, or you don't. If you don't then there are plenty of dogs around who will fit the bill and plenty of breeders supplying them. Why those who care about pedigrees have to take responsibility for the actions or knowledge of those that don't sure beats me. I dont' see how "environment" influences that. I'll get there. -***** Replies above. I don't expect those who care about pedigrees to take responsibility for others. Only to engage with others with out negative bias. Will explain.

Re: my staus as a member here, youre right but not every one will see it that way. You are dealing with me in this conversation. I know you don't understand. I will keep trying to explain but as I said, its not going to be quick.I'm used to thinking in these terms but its still taken me years to see the mechanics of it demonstrated. B.S.L comes into it because B.S.L is an indirect result of changes of perception in the community. A misunderstanding of how the divion between breed traits and owner responsibility work together. This is where language comes into it. The message the community as a whole recieves from the K.Cs has led many to believe the predictability of breeds on its own can account for the behaviour of individuals, diregarding a human element and responsibility. The questions will have to wait. Hopfully tonight. My p.c hasn't been working. Theres a lot for me to catch up on and its going to take me awhile to work out the best explanations.

The possession of a recorded history of ancestry going back at least 5 generations, and usually a hell of a lot more. Not "partially recorded", fully recorded. What sets these dogs apart is a documented histrory of breeding true to a type specified by the breed creators and documented in the breed standard. I'm sorry MM I just don't get what you're trying to say about dogs and their "envrionment". You either want a dog that's going to be far more predictable in its adult characteristics and far more likely to be within a specified set of characteristics that you want, or you don't. If you don't then there are plenty of dogs around who will fit the bill and plenty of breeders supplying them. Why those who care about pedigrees have to take responsibility for the actions or knowledge of those that don't sure beats me. I dont' see how "environment" influences that. Before I answer this post and your next H.D.W Id like to make some more personal comments. I know how controversial I am as a member of this forum and that I can't rely on remaining a member. So I'm going to go native and speak from the heart. It makes me very happy to see you elected to the position you hold. I think you are a very level headed, inteligent and fair person who it will do the position justice. Regardless of how you deal with me, You have my respect and Its good to know A.C.T Dogs are in very good hands. I need to repeat, (though I suspect you at least know) that I don't stir the pot here because I want to be controversial. I'm not here to damage the K.Cs or pedigree dogs in any way. I WANT them to succeed and be the best they can. I have seen changes in the culture of dog owners and the choices they make. Its not getting better. Our communities are getting more and more intolerant of dogs, less knowledgable and increasingly seeing dogs as accessories than for any other purpose. I see this as a community phenomenom and its gaining momentum faster as time passes. Not a K.C phenomonem or a cross breed one. I wanted to know why. To find that out I had to look to the K.Cs simply because the K.Cs are the single biggest influence on dogs and those who keep them and have been since their inception 150 or so years ago. When the K.Cs were set up to improve and make better what we had,that should only have had a positive influence. So why have we gone backwards? So here I find myself in a place where I realy believe I have my answer, backed by science. I want to use it to change the future I see ahead. Its scareing crap out of me because if I am right, the situation is far worse than I ever expected. It has repercussions far worse than I dreamed and gains momentum. I'm not a scientist who can just publish. Theres no one field this fits because it incorporates language, psychology, anthropology, Law ,medicine and many more. In my mind, its all biology and natural law. I have always been comfortable thinking in these terms. I have no idea how to explain to an organization that shaking a basic tenet of their belief is not an act of malice or ill will. That it will not damage them or their goals but will actualy give to them far more than it takes away and make them a very powerful, active force. Theres clearly no benefit to me personaly. Just the opposite. So I just want to thank you for listening with an open mind. And now I need to go to do things for me and mine and hope to continue when time allows. My thanks.

This is a good example. Domestic dogs survive in our communities as a single species. You can't divide them. They are interdependent. If you do divide them by artificial lines they can't be antagonistic to each other. If you destroy one half you destroy both. Damage one half and the other suffers equaly. Domestic dogs and pedigree dogs are a single entity. They share their foundations. You say get a pedigree and no worries. If you allow this on the basis that it won't affect you, you are wrong. You just can't predict how. I suspect people will become even more irresponsible. If we let people think a breed can be inherently dangerous, regardless of how its raised and trained, Why Shouldn't they believe breed is responsible for a lot more. Any thing that takes handler responsibility. An "Its got nothing to do with me, I'm just the owner" mentality. You encourage that by your inaction and complacency. Unless you tell people otherwise, All they see is that every problem comes down to breed. Its the breed. But you let that pass because it doesn't affect your world. It does. You share the same foundations. You damage your foundations and undermine what you stand on. Not just some mysterious other half. Its all undermined. Then I suppose we will complain again of how "they", the public should take responsibility and learn more. Start agitating for compulsory dog owners licenses. And its already starting to get a bit too tedious to be bothered anymore. By By domestic dogs for a lot more people. Fewer still to Join ANKC. If you let your base be undermined, theres nothing to grow from. Pedigree dogs don't need non pedigree dogs to survive. There could be no cross breeds or dogs of unknown origin left in this country and we could still continue to breed pedigrees. Some of the primitive and Sighthound breeds accept the use of native stock or desert dogs when breeding and occasionally stud books are opened from time to time but when they are it's controlled and doesn't encompass a random mating with muttly nextdoor. You won't see an ANKC breed added to BSL, not going to happen. I know it as do countless other owners of ANKC breeds with papers and corresponding chips. The only people that can't see it are those with generic brindle pound mutts, wannabe's without papers that owners refer to as Amstaffs and those who have come under council scrutiny. For those of us with ANKC registered animals, we have nothing to fear, DogNSW negotiated our freedom a long time ago when we distanced ourselves from the sinking Pitbull ship. Sorry W.W. but thats just not true. As you distance yourself, you loose more of the base you stand on, and loose support yourself. K.C members don't just depend on K.C support. They depend on community support. Domestic dogs originated in the community of dog owners and lovers. Not in the K.Cs. We would never have had pedigree dogs at all if we didn't have a diversity of people who valued dogs breeding or owning them for their own specific roles and purposes. That whole community of people was the foundation of pedigree dogs. It what grew them and supports them. Its their environment and it was accomplished with out the K.Cs. If you are antagonistic to any part of that, and allow it to fade, die out etc. you loose a corresponding part of your own environment and support base. By the time you eliminate every thing out side of the K.Cs so that all dogs are K.C registered pedigrees, You will be so far "distanced" from it, you are completely irrelevant to it (your environment). You won't be meeting that environments needs either. You can't separate yourself from your environment, its not possible. All you can ever achieve that way is an endless cycle of trying to eliminate environmental influences. There is no separation of environment from what it holds. Define a pedigree dog. What definitively separates it from a run of the mill domestic dog apart from a partialy recorded history? Or you can allow for the FACT that people must be able to breed and own dogs suited to their own purposes, for their own environment and their own specific needs, or dogs are irrelevant. Theres no purpose to having them. If and only if you allow for that can the K.Cs have a free flow of information to and from their environment. To have a positive influence on it. Not by separating themselves. And then they will because they won't stand just for a pedigree, they will stand for knowledge and improvement. And all of a sudden, they REPRESENT their environment. We get better dogs and environment (community) through the K.Cs because they represent knowledge and improvement. Purity alone does not represent the environments needs. Good dogs do.

This is a good example. Domestic dogs survive in our communities as a single species. You can't divide them. They are interdependent. If you do divide them by artificial lines they can't be antagonistic to each other. If you destroy one half you destroy both. Damage one half and the other suffers equaly. Domestic dogs and pedigree dogs are a single entity. They share their foundations. You say get a pedigree and no worries. If you allow this on the basis that it won't affect you, you are wrong. You just can't predict how. I suspect people will become even more irresponsible. If we let people think a breed can be inherently dangerous, regardless of how its raised and trained, Why Shouldn't they believe breed is responsible for a lot more. Any thing that takes handler responsibility. An "Its got nothing to do with me, I'm just the owner" mentality. You encourage that by your inaction and complacency. Unless you tell people otherwise, All they see is that every problem comes down to breed. Its the breed. But you let that pass because it doesn't affect your world. It does. You share the same foundations. You damage your foundations and undermine what you stand on. Not just some mysterious other half. Its all undermined. Then I suppose we will complain again of how "they", the public should take responsibility and learn more. Start agitating for compulsory dog owners licenses. And its already starting to get a bit too tedious to be bothered anymore. By By domestic dogs for a lot more people. Fewer still to Join ANKC. If you let your base be undermined, theres nothing to grow from. Pedigree dogs don't need non pedigree dogs to survive. There could be no cross breeds or dogs of unknown origin left in this country and we could still continue to breed pedigrees. Some of the primitive and Sighthound breeds accept the use of native stock or desert dogs when breeding and occasionally stud books are opened from time to time but when they are it's controlled and doesn't encompass a random mating with muttly nextdoor. You won't see an ANKC breed added to BSL, not going to happen. I know it as do countless other owners of ANKC breeds with papers and corresponding chips. The only people that can't see it are those with generic brindle pound mutts, wannabe's without papers that owners refer to as Amstaffs and those who have come under council scrutiny. For those of us with ANKC registered animals, we have nothing to fear, DogNSW negotiated our freedom a long time ago when we distanced ourselves from the sinking Pitbull ship. Sorry W.W. but thats just not true. As you distance yourself, you loose more of the base you stand on, and loose support yourself. K.C members don't just depend on K.C support. They depend on community support. Domestic dogs originated in the community of dog owners and lovers. Not in the K.Cs. We would never have had pedigree dogs at all if we didn't have a diversity of people who valued dogs breeding or owning them for their own specific roles and purposes. That whole community of people was the foundation of pedigree dogs. It what grew them and supports them. Its their environment and it was accomplished with out the K.Cs. If you are antagonistic to any part of that, and allow it to fade, die out etc. you loose a corresponding part of your own environment and support base. By the time you eliminate every thing out side of the K.Cs so that all dogs are K.C registered pedigrees, You will be so far "distanced" from it, you are completely irrelevant to it (your environment). You won't be meeting that environments needs either. You can't separate yourself from your environment, its not possible. All you can ever achieve that way is an endless cycle of trying to eliminate environmental influences. There is no separation of environment from what it holds. Define a pedigree dog. What definitively separates it from a run of the mill domestic dog apart from a partialy recorded history? Or you can allow for the FACT that people must be able to breed and own dogs suited to their own purposes, for their own environment and their own specific needs, or dogs are irrelevant. Theres no purpose to having them. If and only if you allow for that can the K.Cs have a free flow of information to and from their environment to have a positive influence on it. And then they will because they won't stand just for a pedigree, they will stand for knowledge and improvement.

What is your reasoning behind being so adamant that no ANKC breed will ever be added? Seeing as every other country that has implemented BSL has had at least one kennel club registered breed included... Because ANKC recognition implies breed eligibility for unrestricted keeping. Because of the amount of people owning the breed in sheer numbers enables the potential for a easily funded class action law suit to be initiated which the government would be unlikely to win as no ANKC recognised breeds have a breed standard defined as a threat to the community as a family pet. A handful of individual dogs non compliant with the breed standard won't shut down an entire breed to restrictions. It implies nothing. Registered breeders are subject to "most" of the same restrictions on keeping as the general public. BREEDERS face MORE restriction. Increasingly. Regardless if they are papered or not. You are implying ANKC registration alone guarantees public safety, and safety for our dogs. It doesn't take much to show thats not the case. When, not if, a certified pure breed makes the papers for an avoidable attack who are the public going to blame then? When you encourage unrealistic expectations based on a pedigree instead of people or their dogs?

This is a good example. Domestic dogs survive in our communities as a single species. You can't divide them. They are interdependent. If you do divide them by artificial lines they can't be antagonistic to each other. If you destroy one half you destroy both. Damage one half and the other suffers equaly. Domestic dogs and pedigree dogs are a single entity. They share their foundations. You say get a pedigree and no worries. If you allow this on the basis that it won't affect you, you are wrong. You just can't predict how. I suspect people will become even more irresponsible. If we let people think a breed can be inherently dangerous, regardless of how its raised and trained, Why Shouldn't they believe breed is responsible for a lot more. Any thing that takes handler responsibility. An "Its got nothing to do with me, I'm just the owner" mentality. You encourage that by your inaction and complacency. Unless you tell people otherwise, All they see is that every problem comes down to breed. Its the breed. But you let that pass because it doesn't affect your world. It does. You share the same foundations. You damage your foundations and undermine what you stand on. Not just some mysterious other half. Its all undermined. Then I suppose we will complain again of how "they", the public should take responsibility and learn more. Start agitating for compulsory dog owners licenses. And its already starting to get a bit too tedious to be bothered anymore. By By domestic dogs for a lot more people. Fewer still to Join ANKC. If you let your base be undermined, theres nothing to grow from.

To join the K.C or not IS my own choice. I have seen the K.C members here lamenting more don't do so. They brush aside my reasons why instead of looking at them. I won't get an ANKC pedigree for anything I might breed, but I have the choice to breed what suits MY needs and MY environment. Reliably. If I join the K.Cs I loose that "luxury". I'm under immense pressure to breed what is currently in favor with the K.C environment. Not my own. So I agree, its not hard. Its not suppression that I don't get an ANKC pedigree. It is suppression that my practices will be labelled inferior only because I don't have those papers. I don't see the similarity to a specialist car club being asked to teach all car owners to drive. There is a single authority that grants a drivers license after you've shown you have learned the lessons. Drivers pretty much all grow up in an environment in which driving skills are taken for granted and are on demonstration every day. Thats not true of dog breeding. Another point re; not taking this discussion too personaly, or laying blame for problems on the K.Cs. If I happen to be right, There will be many, many organizations here and around the world that have made the very same mistakes.

It's not about "purity" - you've got that wrong. It's about knowledge of ancestry and predicability of progeny. Pedigree breeders think the dog is better BECAUSE it has a pedigree. And not every pedigree dog by the way. If people want to breed to a code of conduct and lack knowledge, they can join, adhere to that code of conduct and gain it. But I would never suggest that the ANKC is the font of all knowledge when it comes to dog breeding or that every ANKC breeder IS knowledgeable. Perhaps more knowledgeable than some others but that's it. However you're asking the equivalent of a specialty car club to teach all car owners to drive. That's not what the ANKC is about. That's why the State Departments of Primary Industry or their equivalents are now playing in this space. Commercial dog breeding is a relatively new venture and the DPIs are weighing in on it. The State CCs have enough of a battle getting states to differentiate between large scale profit breeders and their hobby breeders without taking on the load of the occasional crossbred breeders who do not financially contribute to their running. It's ironic we're having this discussion on a forum dedicated to the promotion of purebred dogs and funded in part by their breeders. Look at the education of the general public that occurs here - including purebred dog breeders helping people that bought pups other sources. Can you give an example? Can't remember the thread title now, but I started one asking if Dol members would support a publication dedicated to dogs of all stripes as a means to open education of the public to better understand pedigree dogs.. I think there may have been one yes? Other commented it was not suitable if the likes of Don Bourk (Sp?) were also free to use it. The thread died very fast through lack of support. I think you need to re-read my post. I said its not about purity and tried to say its about quality.

The ANKC isn't suppressing crossbred breeding. It's suppressing its members from doing it. Membership is voluntary and given that ANKC bred pups represent 20% of those born every year, I don't see how its suppressing breeding? Don't like the rules? Don't join. Not hard really. You won't get an ANKC pedigree for what you breed? Is that "suppression"? None of the currently banned breeds are or have ever been recognised by the ANKC. BSL is a utter nonsense. But you can't blame the ANKC for its existence. it has far more to do with purebreeds than their mixes because the people who came up with it know SFA about dogs. Don't sheet that home to an organisation that does not and never has supported it. Powerlegs: The Federal Government doesn't have an agreement with the ANKC. There is no federal breed specific legisatiion beyond the placement of 4 breeds on the banned from import list. I wish it were that simple H.D. Suppressing just its members from cross breeding removes a bridge between pedigree dogs to their environment, the communities who will own them. It stands in the way of a more balanced approach for both sides. Consensus can't be reached for agreement on what best practices should mean, or what we, as the environment for dogs, should expect of them. Reg. Breeders struggle to meet K.Cs demands from within 1st, before they can meet the demands from outside the K.Cs. Reliability is an environmental construct. The environment the K.Cs exist in has no way to connect with the environment outside itself. I don't lay all the blame for these problems on the K.Cs. I don't for a minute believe these were intentional results of their charter and rules. I do think that the people who originaly put the charter and rules together made mistakes tho', and that current members have a hard time understanding where they lie. Thats part of the taboo on mixed lines. Its in our nature not to look too closely or objectively at a taboo subject. Because there HAS been a line drawn by the K.Cs, What I say can't be seen as a way forward. Its not accepted as environmental input because it doesn't come from within the K.C or reflect what they CURRENTLY stand for. So instead its seen as a personal attack. Its not meant to be. I want the same thing you do. The success of the K.Cs and our pure breed dogs into the future. Human beings seem to think because they have self determination, their populations are immune to biological laws. But self determination can only be had by understanding how they work and using them to our benefit, not by ignoring them. The K.C is just another population we have set up. If it doesn't maximize its potential through understanding biological and natural laws that govern its success, its not USING self determination.

Pedigree dogs are a great accomplishment we should all be proud of. they are the culmination and demonstration of good breeding practices. THAT is their biggest selling point, or should be. They have been leading the way because of that. They are still gaining members who believe in that. The best breeders don't breed a dog because its pure, they breed it because its good. But a line has been drawn. The K.Cs attracts those members of the community who believe in better breeding practices, yes. But you can concentrate knowledge within the K.Cs for only so long. A member of the K.Cs can have little influence on the general public. How many times do we see breeders refusing use of commonly used publications or media because they don't approve of the company? So while knowledge is concentrated in the K.Cs, Its lost else where. Knowledge isn't shared and spread, its with held. Ignorance outside of the K.Cs increases and thats the base you draw new memberships from. What message do these ignorant people get from the K.Cs as incentive to join? Are they going to be attracted because they see pedigree dogs as the pinnacle of good breeding? Or because they think a pedigree itself will always demonstrate better breeding? That is the paradox contained in the charter. People join because they believe the former and thats what they want to promote. The rules and charter say otherwise and favor those who joined for the latter reasons. An organization will, over time, get the culture that is written in to their constitution and rules. Its the culture that always gets the advantage to grow. What makes a good a good breeder is no longer clear and needs to be constantly redefined. It can't be defined by practices. Practices can't ever be unique to the pedigree itself. Pedigree dogs are the RESULT of Best practices. They can't replace best practices. Pedigree dogs are the logical conclusion of best practices, but don't always equal them. So breeders are left to define themselves by what they aren't. I can only explain what I see. I can't swear I'm right, but theres been nothing to tell me I'm wrong so far.

H.W (Tried to reply to specific lines in your post and deleted quote tags) The benefits you mention for associate members with mixed breed dogs are given on condition those dogs genes will not be passed on. The benefits come with an acceptance of suppression. Breed specific legislation is entirely dependent on recognition of breeds as specific.It has far more to do with pure breeds than their mixes.

I apologize for my confusing posts. I tend to think in terms of natural or biological law so need to find a way to translate what I see into a more usual language. Pedigree dogs are inextricably tied to mixed line dogs. They will not survive with out them. If you eliminate or suppress the cause of your existence, where is the demand for what you have become? What drives you to become more, or decides what "betterment" means? If somethings improvement is not driven by environmental demands, who decides its an improvement? For an organization/organism to be successful it has to reliably meet the needs of its environment. The most successful will also have the most positive influence on its environment.

Care to provide an example of a Kennel Control ruling beyond its boundaries? The ANKC has been openly against BSL from the get go and continues to hold that line. The fact that an organisation established in the interests of purebred dog breeding and registration is not in favour of crossbreeding should be a no brainer. Nonetheless has plenty of members wo neither breed, nor own purebred dogs via its Associate register and thought its CC affiliated dog training clubs has done a lot for dog training ordinary pet owners throughout Australia. Frankly I have no idea what you're on about with all these "rulings". What rulings? Very happy to try H.W. Don't know how this will go since my i.net connection is near zilch atm.So may have to do this over several posts/days even. I have spent the last 10 years or so trying to figure this out and confirm. I believe I have done so, to my own satisfaction at least. But an explanation won't be done in a few minutes. These rules for writing a successful constitution are not hard to find. I haven't made them up.Seeing how they work in practice is much harder. 1 explains about the effects of negative rulings. Another the effects of ruling out side of your charter. You write your charter to set the goals of your organization. In the K.Cs case, to set up a registry for the breeding of pure bred dogs. An organization can ONLY operate on the messages and instructions contained with in that charter, and WILL do so. Language and nuance is critical. I agree, cross bred dogs have nothing to do with that. Therefore, any ruling concerning cross breed dogs and open lines is out side of K.Cs charter. Its sets up what I believe is called a double negative. Your charter has already set up a registry that does not include mixing breeds, so the ruling against members partaking of the practice is superfluous. If they breed cross breeds, they will not be eligible for registration with K.Cs any way.Cross breeding has no bearing on what the K.Cs do. That ruling outside of the K.Cs charter means now it DOES affect the K.Cs, The membership has chosen to sit in judgement of the practice.Its seen as antagonistic to K.C goals. So there has been a line drawn between whats done within the K.Cs, and whats done outside of them. The K.Cs can NEVER allow a positive influence to those practices. Because of that, those practices will suffer disadvantage, or a sort of oppression. They are not free to thrive and evolve in a healthy manner.They are always under attack. The message radiated by the parent body has been corrupted. Those messages inform the intent.Instead of using the registry as means to record whats gone before to make better decisions for the future and work towards betterment of our pure breeds, the message has become that purity and closed lines alone lead to better dogs. You aren't defined by knowledge or your practices. Purity it is. Closing and keeping lines closed is the key to improvement, else why are open lines a threat? The theory behind the advise not to rule outside of your charter is that an organization takes on a biological life of its own. Its a population. Such a ruling is usualy a ruling against against that organizations environment. The environment for pedigree dogs can be defined as what they grew from. What gave rise to them. So foundations are a better description here. What gave rise to our pure breeds must be retained if they are to remain relevent to their environment. With out it, they loose their place, purpose or role in their environment.

Yes. Me. I don't call it a win for dogs or against BSL. You don't want ABPTs banned. Fighting against BSL by advocating that another dog breed be banned? That's the flaw in your logic. Any line of argument, as used by the APBT people during the fight to stop BSL, that tries to put other breeds in the crosshairs, is hardly going to endear the wider dog community to the APBT side of the argument. Don't use the "we're all in this together" argument while shoving other breeds into the spotlight for targetting. That's illogical too. It's also bloody unfair. Nope we aren't all in this together, as clearly those who have ANKC registered animals are not subject to BSL Yes Ricey, I also read and care. I work in my own way to bring change, because I think BSL is just one symptom of the mess the dog world is in, and that there is a common cause. That it affects ALL dogs and owners regardless of affiliation and the only way to over come these problems is to aknowledge that we ARE all in this together. The K.Cs cant survive with out their grass roots, or foundations. Its their support base, source of growth and new blood. Its made up of all the ordinary people who choose to have dogs in their lives. The current K.C constitution binding members asks us to sign up to a belief there is no legitimacy to what occurs out side of the K.Cs. Passes judgement on its foundations by disallowing them within its membership. Because there can be no separation from your environment,Your definition of yourself and what holds you apart can only narrow. Its a double closed system with no out side influence permitted on breeds, OR those who breed them. It has ruled negatively on its foundations and therefore as an organization, regardless of the individuals who make up its membership, can only ever have a negative effect ON its foundations. Legislation such as B.S.L is just one way we shrink our environment. Its a symptom. Ruling negatively on an issue ( such as cross breeding) is a way of restricting the environment you work within. A negative ruling or law can ONLY restrict. It becomes taboo and we don't look too closely at whats taboo. So, when problems are caused by restrictions that make us unviable, we tend to try to restrict them too instead of being able to see where the problem starts. Like a noose, it gets tighter. A closed environment, such as the K.C, can only shrink, unless its self contained. Its no longer self contained when it rules beyond its own boundaries and a negative ruling can only have negative effects on that. The K.Cs ruling against members breeding out side of their own charter means that as an organization, they will always hold themselves apart from whats seen as a hostile environment. It will be treated accordingly. What individuals believe is not relevent to the direction set by the charter. It forms the intent of the organization and rules dictate how the intent is to be achieved. Negative rulings (ie against) limit direction and alter or corrupt intent, positive rulings clarify it.

So sorry to hear this. Your boy lived with love,in the best of hands. Run free Teddy.

Hi outbackdean, There are people here much better qualified to help you out, but I have a few questions that will make it easier for them anyway. How much time a day do you spend with your boy? Does he spend plenty of time inside with you or out side mostly? How much excersize and mental stimulation does he get daily? When you are not with him, what has he got to keep him occupied? Does he like to chase things? (apart from his tail ) Is he a nervous or does anything in particular stress him ? Do you still do obedience or any other training with him? Till some one better qualified comes in ( they will) I would be interrupt the behavior whenever I see it, get him to focus on something else, starting with me 1st.( 'cos only I can correct and redirect) try to teach him better ways to cope with what ever is causing this.Basicaly try to give him plenty else to think about. You describe him as higher drive. What "drives" him most? Wishing you well with this, must be very upsetting.

My 1st dog lived to 18. There from when I was 11 years old till I had 3 kids of my own. As long as I can remember he had a black rubber ring he found some where. It would go with us on walks and when he got tired of carrying it I would place it 'round his neck. He was not a lab, but we often had people think he was a guide dog when they saw me use his toy as a 'handle' :laugh: That toy either followed us, or he found identical all his life through at least 6 moves and a year he was 'fostered' while we were over seas. Haven't seen one like it since

I don't think its too unusual, I've known a few cats who were quite protective of their 'pride'(?) and if their people or other pets are included in that, then they get the same. Brilliant footage, and cat tho'!! And a very lucky little boy. The best I saw was a large black Lab. who stuck his raging head in a cat door under a house, where a mother cat had kittens.Mum was behind him. A tiny little black thing barely a kitten herself. She Screamed, leap on his back with back arched and tail upright clawing into him with all feet at once. The dog yelled and reefed his head out of the hole and ran circles with the cat riding him till he took off out of the yard. :laugh: