Nannas

Hi Sandra, Yup. Same goes when it comes to IDing a pit and who gets to do it. IF they use the same people to identify pits when attacks occur and everyone is happy to take the assessors word for it,,,,then why cannot those same assessors identify the dogs for the attack data?? I know there will be heaps of mistakes. No matter what happens, people are only human and mistakes will occur. It is only big cases and/or people with money etc that get to do testing to confirm the breed involved. I cannot imagine that would happen regularly. I guess with most in here being dog people we have a certain knowledge of dogs, that we assume most people must know as it is just general knowledge (to us), but some people really have no clue. I was walking my pit and GSDX a few weeks ago and 2 women stopped to talk. I was telling one lady not to touch my GSDX and to keep her kids away as the GSDX doesn't like kids. (yes she is muzzled and has warning collar) This women proceeded to tell me she is OK as she knows ALL about dogs, was a breeder of champions, owned kennels for years, yadda, yadda, yadda. She then turned to my 6yo almost black, pit bitch and said ""Not a bad Great Dane but he's a bit small" She looked behind my girl and then said "You got him castrated too young and stunted his growth" As I was walking away this woman was lecturing the other woman about dogs and giving her the run down on dogs in general. Now imagine the information THIS woman would be passing onto people, who may even believe her as she is *loosley used* a breeder, kennel owner etc etc etc. These are the people we have to get to first. The people who are listening to these "woman" out there. There are so many that have no clue, no idea and actually listen to the people who can "talk under water". I own 2 breeds that are high on that list and 1 that is already restricted. Why would I be pointing fingers at my own dogs? I am saying it is time we all were more aware of what is going on and what our state is doing in regards to dogs/attacks. The list wasn't made for me, to help me post. The list was made by NSW and is for a reason. Contact NSW and ask them who ID's the dogs and if it is fair. Let them know of your concerns and tell them your US story. This is what it is all about. Collecting and sharing information, ideas and thoughts to make sure our dogs have the best life they possibley can.

Yep and even this is happening in the NSW pounds with adults. The staff think because it is a nice temp dog it needs to be saved and then chipped as a SBT cross or a ASBT cross. This then give the SBT and ASBT bad names when a incident occurs. I also see a lot of people in Sydney walking their PBs with no DD collar on, there is no way the identifier can get the breed wrong. Are the people that are chipping these animals collecting a bit of money under the table? Hi nickojoy, I think there would be a few people from all areas thinking they are helping and chipping/registering pits/crosses as something else. I know of a pound that knew people that owned a pit cross and after it was caught roaming for the umteenth time (the first few times the pound dropped it off at home) the pound chipped it as a staffy cross for the people, as the pound guy said the dog was friendly etc. Needless to say the dog wasn't so freindly and is now dead. I knew the dog from a puppy and she was lovely, but her owners got sick of her and so the neglect began. They didn't want to sell her or give her away, but didn't want to look after her either. There are some vets I know of in NSW that will help with pit/crosses. I guess they think they are helping, and probably are, but it gets icky sticky trying to sort it all out.

When we got the dog in the pic (avatar, whatever it is called) she had had KC left untreated. By the time we got her she had pneumonia and the people thought it was parvo as she had been coughing up phlegm and she stunk. (they thought she was vomiting) Thank Heavens for 24 vets who are willing to go that extra mile in the middle of the night!!! Hope your dogs are OK. It is terrible to see them sick.

Lilly is a cutie. Reminds me of a dog we used to have called Sally. We went out one day to come home and find someone had broken into our house. After calling police we found nothing was missing but we found a beer box with a small black puppy in it..LOL Sally! I used to have a GSDX that was kind of small and we weren't sure what she was crossed with. She basically looked GSD but smaller and investigation found out she was GSD X Kelpie. Each other pup out of the litter (that we found) looked Kelpie. Now I have a GSD X Rotty that looks exactly the same as our GSD X Kelpie. Yet everyone mistakes her for a GSD X Wolfhound??? (Mainly due to her being hairy I think)

Hi, Yep, we get alot of pits registered as staffies/crosses etc here. Problem is when people are getting puppies microchipped/registered at 8 or 12 weeks old they can be a bit hard to ID. Also some states they are legal so people just go interstate to register them. As far as IDing the breeds go. I can understand a few issues with the mixes, but really you want to know who decides if the dog is a GSD or a poodle??? In the top 20 list I can understand people doubting a few of the breeds but the majority I thought would be pretty basic and clear. What if I said the SAME people who do the "Breed Assessment" on our dogs when we are served with NOI's are the same ones doing the ID on dog attacks.? Would that suit everyone? To know that the same people who are there to harrass us and declare our dogs 'restricted' are the same ones checking the breeds for attack reporting.... It can actually depend on what the dog attacks and how bad it is. Sometimes the dogs appear to be exactly as they are registered and the owner doesn't argue the point then the dog is listed as such. Some actually have papers and there you go for those. Others that are thought to be a pit cross, if there is a dispute and an investigation actually go through proper testing. You could check the lists and read about it yourself. It states how many were PTS, how many were fined, how many were taken in then released (after testing) etc. If you were really interested you could contact NSW State Companion Animals ACT and find out all the answers for yourself, rather than relying on me to pass on info. I cannot put up the link,,I tried before and I don't think it worked. Maybe someone else could do it.

Hi, In regards to the GSD import ban and the work that went in to fight it (which was great) The GSD Club did point out that 'other breeds' were at fault. During the fight other breeds were mentioned alot. The GSD Club did promote the GSD well and did alot of hard work, but do not think for a minute that noone pointed fingers at other breeds. That although some people mistook a large, pointy eared dog as a GSD when attacks were reported they were easily disproved, as lets face it a GSD is pretty easy to recognise. The ban was only in fear of attacks on sheep/cattle etc. (not people) There wasn't a prior poor history of the GSD from other countries to instill fear into people like that which has happened with pit types. The GSD Club called on ALL people to join with them and fight for the GSD. Now don't go getting up me for having a say as I have usually owned GSD's and they have always been my dog of choice. I am just saying people cannot keep comparing and rationalising the GSD issues that went on for almost 1/2 a century to what is going on now with BSL. I doubt many people in here could even remember that start of the ban on GSD and if they could they would be about 80yo. We are talking about 2 different eras in time and 2 different reason for bans. Imagine how many newspaper reports went out in 1930 compared to a report in 2000. How many dogs of imported breeds would have been around in 1930 compared to how many breeds now. You would think with almost 1/2 a century, and most areas wanting them desexed, that if the good old GSD owners followed the LAW as it was stated back then, then the GSD would have been wiped out from Australia. (I mention that as so many people keep saying restricted breed owners should follow the law and do what the GSD supporters did, but infact most GSD owners were not following the law.) It took almost 1/2 a century to lift the ban on the GSD so it wasn't one group of people fighting the battle. It would have been generations of people. ALL asking for help. The pit has gotten off on the wrong foot due to it's history (which far exceeds that of the GSD), plus the popularity of it's breed especially regarding the types of people often associated with owning them, which often makes them more notorious than famous. It just may take 1/2 a century to clear them, as it did with the GSD. Just let us have the same chances and opportunities.

Hi Paula, That isn't naming a breed. That is a whole list of breeds. That is also not me blaming anything, that is the actual list taken from NSW State. IF I was trying to palm off 'faults' on a certain breed by stating,,"it wasn't a pit, the XYZ breed did it" then I would understand. I am not doing that. I am saying that out of 1,929 attacks listed the pit was not involved in ANY. Out of the full reports in NSW of 2,188 attacks the most any pit type could have been involved in would be 30 or less.(otherwise it would have made it onto the list) Now if you are really thinking, what do you think is going to be done with these reports. Stop worrying about fighting a point of whether I am 'pointing' at another breed and think about what these reports will be used for. Me listing the reports hasn't got anything to do with how they will effect me..(as I have stated I also own 2 dogs that are high up on those lists) It is not me posting the reports that is an issue. It is what the reports are being tallied for and what the state will use them for.

Sorry SBT that is incorrect. In the past Councils had not been reporting properly but in fact now ALL Council reports (in 2009) are ACCOUNTED for and ANY Councils that returns are 'zero' attack report are contacted and their reports are double checked and varified. There are 152 Council districts covering the whole of NSW and every single Council has submitted their reports. Also I don't think it matters what I read into it. What matters is what the NSW State reads into the reports. It was NSW State that chose to only list the top 20 dogs, not me. You have to actually write to them in hopes of being able to get the list of the dogs below the top 20. Do you think it has to do with the actual amount of attacks or rather the areas where most attacks are occuring?

Hi Chris, When they were first bringing BSL into my area in NSW they were actually going to place a BAN on APBT and Pit bull and just restrict cross breeds. All pure breds were to be PTS and just the cross breds restricted. My kids were going crazy wanting to move. I once found my 18yo son hiding with our girl, in a 'secret' cubbyhole they had made under his bed. (one of those wooden based bed with the drawers under it. They had removed the sides of the drawer, made clips to lock the front of the drawer in place , from the inside, so it looked like a fake drawer, and were teaching our girl to run in there on command and hide quietly) This was incase the Rangers and Police came to get her...LOL she could hide. We began looking into moving and nowhere seemed safe. Just as we were planning to move to ACT, we were informed BSL would be placed on us and not a ban. As we only have the one pit and never really intended to breed with her we decided to stay in NSW. Apart from our girl looking like a large licorice allsort it's not really bothered us too much. (she is almost black and the red and yellow collar is disgusting) As we are on the ACT and NSW border there are quite a few pits getting around here. People just go to ACT and buy them. I know of a few people illegally breeding them here but not alot you can do about it. So far as I know we haven't had a pit attack here (not a reported one). Although we fall low in the attacks category anyway. The problem with dog numbers is that soooo many are unregistered/unmicrochipped. There would be no way to get an actual record of numbers of each breed as it would only include the registered dogs. Anything else would be a 'guess'. In one way of thinking I am concerened BSL is working. Numbers of pits are falling (APBT and Pit Bull, not the crosses) BUT the attack rate is rising. That is my concern. If the Government gets to say "YES BSL is working there have been almost NO pits attacks in NSW" then all the Government will do to is place more breeds on BSL to "prove" they are acting to prevent the rising dog attacks. That is what others seem to be missing. No breed is safe against BSL while the attack rate is rising. As long as the attacks keep happening at ridiculous numbers each year, there will be a need to keep placing other breeds on BSL.

chris, that was exactly Poodlefans point if you focus on breed. If people are going to use the stats, then be careful that they can't be used against you. If you say that there are no APBT's or PB's in the current NSW stats, then it could be argued that BSL is working as they are not on there and why not add other breeds to the list seeing as though BSL was a success when it came to Pit Bulls. I'm a bit of a cynic . Bite stats seem to come and go over the years and are made public when it's convenient. I doubt we'd be seeing any of these stats ( except for a leak to a newspaper ) if there were APBT's or PB's featuring in them. SBT, NSW has made it compulsory for all Councils to report quarterly ALL reported dog attacks. Not only is the breed and number of attacks recorded, but also how many people, animals, how many needed medical attention etc etc. The basics are public online and anyone can read them whenever they like. Contacting the departments for more information is beneficial as it gives a better understanding of how everything fits in together. These lists are on actual reports of attacks and not a ratio of attacks. Normal bite stats are usually a ratio of dog attacks per percent of registered dogs of that breed, OR attacks per percent of dogs registered in an area. These reports are not a ratio of anything. They just list the number of attacks. I agree that the more popular a breed, just due to larger numbers, will be more likely to be making the lists. I just think the great difference in numbers should be taken into account. I have noticed some people say "well who is doing the dog ID to state what breed it is?" I agree there may be some mis-identifications BUT on a whole, when it comes to certain breeds (especially ones topping the list) they are pretty recognisable breeds. I doubt there would be many wrongful ID's there. The unknown breeds (mutts) with just too much of everything for anyone to really be able to pin it on any breed, I can understand making the top of the list. I know alot of people who love their mixed mutts (and have had a few myself over the years) but I find these are the dogs people usually get for free, and being a freebie don't always get the time, care and attention given to a dog someone has paid $500 for. OH, almost forgot. I see your point and have already agreed with the point of "they might think BSL is working" That is the point. IF they think BSL is working as the pit doesn't make the list (as they are diminishing in numbers) BUT the attack rates are rising,,how many people think they will leave BSL the way it is,,,,,,how many think they will just add other dogs to the restricted list???? I am not pointing fingers at any breed. I am stating that the State of NSW is collecting thier information and it really isn't going to have any effect on owners of ALREADY restricted dogs. The ONLY effect the information collected can have is on breeds NOT already restricted. Me listing the information in here that NSW is collecting is not going to have any effect on BSL. Christ, if I had the power to change anything by posting in here then I would be making LOTS of posts (one including me winning the lottery) Instead of some people being aggressive and some just ridiculous, it would be a whole heap better if people looked at the reasons WHY NSW is collecting information and WHAT NSW is planning to do with it. Shooting the messenger is hardly going to win anyone anything, and people who PM me and warn me to 'shut up' and threaten me is hardly going to stop NSW from collecting their information and acting on it.

How can people 'prove' the pit is not making the most attacks (in NSW) without listing the dogs that are? You are the one always saying to people "prove it", "where's your facts" etc Well, there you go. If I just said pit's don't make the top 20 list you would have replied "well what dog did ", "prove it" Now, I am not saying blame a breed. I am saying do something about the dogs that are attacking. In my papers I also have the areas where most attacks occur. Some Council areas (nearly always the same ones) go as high as almost 50 attacks in 3 months and most areas have 5 or less. Maybe those Council areas need to have a good look at their dog laws and how they are enforcing them. I'm not sure. What do you suggest would be a good idea?? IF you were placed in charge of "lowering dog attacks' what would be your first move???

Hi SBT, Very good!!!!! That IS the point. BUT as you can see the attcks are still happening, and GROWING!!!! Not only that but as they grow, the number of attacks on children is growing. 591 attacks in Jan-March (75 children involved) 774 attacks in Apr-Jun (86 children involved) 823 attacks in Jul-Sept. (108 children involved) So what do you think will happen now?? Do you think with Pits not making the list they will just leave BSL as it is and watch the attack rate rise each quarter OR do you think they will start adding MORE dogs to the restricted list????????? At the end of the year when all data is collected and the attack rate has been slowly rising, what steps do we think they will take to try and lower the attack rate??? NSW has some of the strictest dog laws in the whole of Australia. I wonder why NSW is one of the ONLY states that brought in a quarterly (compulsory) register to collect dog attack data on a state level? Maybe NSW recognised that BSL was not working and thought the best way to confim or deny was to start a compulsory register on a state level to record dog attacks.

No, it wouldn't. Its been tried and failed.. this is what BSL is. Which part of "breed alone doesn't make a dog dangerous" aren't you getting Nannas? :D Hi, In that quote above WHICH breed did I mention???????? Your reply seems to be a common one so I will make a point of it here. Tell me,,,in the part you quoted from me,,,,mentions a breed????? From your reply """Which part of "breed alone doesn't make a dog dangerous" aren't you getting Nannas? """ I AM getting it. It is you who is NOT getting it as I never mentioned a breed and dangerous dog registration has NOTHING to do with a ''breed' anyway. Lets start talking about what is stated and what is known instead of making up stuff as we post. BSL and 'dangerous dog' lists (registers) are two different lists. Lets stop swapping them about as we see fit because they rarely have any effect on each other. I am not sure where you come from but "dogs attacking" isn't a breed.

I think you will find there has already been multiple attempts world wide to place all sorts of different breeds on "dangerous dog" lists - most overturned or blocked by reasoned debate in the correct arena - which doesn't include ranting and raving on a dog forum. I find it extremely difficult to believe that "the Government body" (whatever that may be) did not have the information to know they were excluding "staffies" (which sort ) Bull Terriers etc by wording the legislation as they did. The people manning the front office may well be idiots - the guys in the back room writing the legislation generally aren't. Hi Sandra, By Government body I meant the group of people in Government employ (either as employees or contactors/advisors) that were writing the drafts for BSL. The people who decide which breeds, what rules etc. I did state (as you quoted) some Council areas. Yes, they would be the people manning the areas NOT the guys drafting the BSL. I also do not consider my post a 'rant and rave'. I had made about 10 posts before this OP, and I would not consider ANY of them a 'rant and rave'. The information I had posted here in the OP, was just a brief of information I have collected, that I use when writing letters and calling different departments. I find that MOST dog forums often have some great ideas, good points and some valid reasonings that I do note and include in my information. Posting some of it here is hardly ranting and raving. It is actually called 'sharing' information. Another thing is, although alot of people say 'dangerous dog' that isn't the issue. BSL has NO effect on 'dangerous dog' listings. You can have a pit that is NOT on the DD register and you can have a fox terrier that IS on the DD register. The Dangerous Dog register is completely different to the Restricted Register. They are 2 different lists. So as for your statement ""I think you will find there has already been multiple attempts world wide to place all sorts of different breeds on "dangerous dog" lists - most overturned or blocked by reasoned debate in the correct arena - which doesn't include ranting and raving on a dog forum."" Contacting any department anywhere and debating about Dangerous Dog Lists would get you nowhere. There is no area in Australia which would "overturn" or "block" the Dangerous Dog List (as you call it) The Dangerous Dog Register has been around many many years before BSL, and really has no bearing on BSL.

Whatever happened to deed, not breed? Hi Paula, In what part of what you quoted from me,,,is there a breed mentioned???? I can see where a 'deed' is mentioned.

wow, I haven't read ALL the posts in here yet but I'm going to. For one, I am NOT going to read USA stuff as that just has no bearing on anything. Now for those saying "those stats don't tell us anything about how severe, what type of attack, etc etc...YES those 'stats' DO list the types of attacks and severity,,,but I didn't think I needed to list 4 pages of information, I tried to post the LINK for you all to check that for yourselves but obviously LOOKING, READING and CHECKING for yourselves is way too much effort. For the people who stated " difference between attacks on people to attacks on dogs" During Jan to March out of the 591 attacks there were 367 attacks on people with 254 of them needing medical treatment. 75 of the attacks were on children 16yo and under and 1 attack resulted in the death of a child (from mix breeds) Apr-Jun- out of the 774 attacks, 443 were on people with 333 needing medical treatment. 86 attacks were on children 16yo and under. Jul- Sept- out of 823 attacks, 482 were on people with 341 needing medical treatment. 108 of those being children 16yo and under. I am waiting on more detailed information but what I have already. During the Jan-Mar quarter from the 591 attacks, 493 were from the breeds in the top 20 lists. That leaves 98 attacks made by dogs who did NOT make the top 20 list. Out of those 98 attacks not any breed remaining made more than 8 attacks on people or animals. Apr-Jun out of the 774 attacks, 697 of them were from the breeds in the top 20 list. The remaining 77 attacks were by breeds who didn't make the top 20 list. Out of those 77 attacks not any breed remaining made more than 11 attacks on people or animals. Jul-Sept out of 823 attacks, 739 were from the breeds in the top 20 list. That leaves 84 attacks from breeds that did not make the top 20 list. Out of those 84 attacks not any breed remaining made more than 11 attacks. I will go back through and read each post and try to reply to those that make sense (some of them just mention ridiculous stuff that I have no idea what those people are talking about) Also, about pointing fingers. I have a GSDX and an Am Staff as well as my pit. SO if I was listing attacks to point fingers at anyone then I would be pointing them at MYSELF!! IF I was trying to palm BSL onto another breed I would be passing it onto MY other dogs. If you care to look back at the lists the Am Staff and GSD (crosses) didn't fair very well. That would only put me in a position of owning 3 restricted breeds of dogs.

Hi Chris, I am really pleased that where I am the Rangers etc are really supportive. I really think Councils etc could do more good if they sent out notices explaining to people the laws in regards to restricted dogs. In the last few years I have had so many issues with people acting 'ridiculously' around my dogs and the Rangers have always been helpful. From people letting their dogs 'rush' us, barking and growling to kids/people kicking my fences and stirring up the dogs, throwing stuff at the dogs. The Rangers have always been really great in helping deal with these idiots. One guy (on our walks) will tell his cattlex dog to "get us" then when it gets close he'll call it back, then tells it to 'get us' again, then calls it back. (this is in an area for ONLEASH ONLY, but his dog is never on a leash) My girl gets scared as she has her muzzle on and has been attacked twice with her muzzle on and couldn't defend herself. He seemed to think IF his dog got too close and there was a fight that my dog would be in 'sh*t' and be blamed as she was the restricted dog. (people forget phones have video/camera) Most people who do not own restrcited dogs have no real idea of the laws regarding them. Some people who do own restricted dogs still have no idea. I know of some areas where walking a restricted dog gets you nothing but dirty looks and rude comments. I am so glad here it isn't like that. (apart from a few idiots who are trying to stir them up)

I thought you said BSL was rubbish? Seems to me you're suggesting that BSL would be OK provided it didnt' affect the APBT. Read my previous post carefully Nannas. You're following the same line of reasoning that got us BSL in the first place. Hi, I do read carefully but so should You!! I didn't say I thought any breed should have BSL.. I actually stated "Placing BSL RESTRICTIONS on the dogs TOPPING THE LIST WOULD HAVE MORE ON AN EFFECT THAN A DOG THAT DOESN'T EVEN MAKE THE LIST" eg. Fining all drivers for Drink Driving isn't going to do much except p&ss people off. Booking the drunks driving would have an effect on the amount of drink drivers. Another words IF they were deciding to bring in BSL to have some effect dog attacks, then placing the BSL on the dogs attacking the MOST would have more of an effect.

BSL is based on nonsense. As soon as people fall into the trap of discussing breeds in relation to dog attacks (just as has been done here) then they follow the same line of reasoning that led to the nonsense becoming law in the first place. Furthermore, its only when you examine the number of attacks vs the number of dogs of that breed in the population that breed stats mean anything anyway. The solution to the issue is not to identify breeds that bite more than the currently banned ones but to focus on the owners that produce dangerous dogs. Every time I see the argument "but other breeds are more dangerous" I see potential for breed bans to be extended, not repealled. The solution to the banning of the APBT does not lie in pointing the finger at other breeds. Hi, I am not pointing fingers. I am just quoting facts. (something I see people in here, everyday asking for) IF those facts don't point in a direction that people like, I really don't care. It may be the fact there are not as many pit in the whole state of NSW, compared to mutts BUT why PTS the pits to lower the attack rate? I would agree with you if at some point a pit or pit cross made any of the 3 lists. There are a whole heap of pit crosses out there. I would say more or equal numbers of pit and pit crosses in some areas than pure bred Siberian Huskies, or Alaskan Malamutes, Great Danes...Let alone a few others on the list. Those breeds made it to the list yet pit/crosses didn't. I am not arguing that 'those breeds are more dangerous' I am saying that THOSE breeds are obviously in positions to attack. As they are! I am saying to STOP pointing fingers at pits and start looking at what is really going on. Funny how between all people there is no 'right' to defend. IF pit owners say they are lovely dogs and not HA. Everyone says ""they have rose coloured glasses on" IF pit owners deny the amount of attacks listed as pit attacks "yeah well where's your facts to prove it" IF pit owners list the top attacking breeds "they are pointing fingers" No matter what pit owners/supporters say, there are always a heap of people just waiting to 'have a go' about anything. IF pit owners/supporters do not manage to do something about BSL it IS going to get worse. It was only a Government 'slip up' that Am Staffs and Staffy's and other bully breeds were NOT included in BSL. IF BSL stays, those breeds will probably be next. When the ABPT and Pit Bull were listed in the BSL, the Government body actually thought it included Am Staffs etc. (That's why most places have "pit type breeds and crosses" listed.) Some Council areas thought it included Staffies, bull terriers, certain bully breeds. You think if BSL carries on they won't be placing those on the list too?? Me pointing a finger at ANY dog/breed is NOT going to change what the Government already thought it had set in stone. They slipped up. Even if there are more mutts than anything else in NSW, banning pits is NOT going to stop the mutt attacks. I am not sure what the stats are at now,,as with all the referencing the Government moved the lists and I have been unable to find them since, BUT last time I looked (probably early last year) pit attacks only ranked in the 3% of attacks in the whole of Australia, (here I go pointing fingers again) but GSD at 75% and Rotty at 75% (GSD southwards and Rotty north) with the list going down to Cattle dogs, Kelpies, bull terrier in some order. (That was for all attacks needing hospital attention and included crossbreeds) I still believe if they want to stop the attacks, they must do something about the dogs that ARE attacking. I wonder in how many of those attacks (or over any period) the same owner was involved in any attacks?? That might be something to look into...*notes to self*

Hi, Those were NOT statistics. Those were actual reported attacks. What more can people want than an actual reports of ATTACKS???? No matter what type of attack... The breed at the TOP of the list is obviously the breed being in a POSITION where it is able to attack!!! That IS the problem... WHY euthanize someones APBT because an 'unknown breed' attacks 400 odd times???? This IS the issue!!! The report covers ALL of NSW. It doesn't matter IF there are less pits than muts,,,,the fact that pits don't MAKE the list is what matters. BSL is supposed to be "stopping" dog attacks. HOW can banning PITS stop the mutt attacks??? The issue isn't how many pits are out there,,,the issue is 'banning pits' is NOT going to stop the attacks. Killing 500 pits won't STOP the 400 odd mutt attcks. Those mutt attacks will keep on happening. Why not place BSL on mutts or the dogs topping the list??? (I don't wish that on anyone and think BSL should be abolished) Certainly placing BSL restrictions on the dogs topping the list would have more of an effect than having BSL on a dog that doesn't even make the list.

Sorry if this comes through twice. I had it already, bumped a key and everything disappeared. (don't know if it sent but couldn't see it on the boards, so am trying again) **I need new glasses for my glasses I think** Anyway, Each quarter NSW Councils have to report to NSW Government (Companion Animals ACT) of ALL reported dog attacks. A dog attack can include incident where a dog rushes at, attacks, bites , harasses or chases any person or animal (other than vermin), whether or not any injury is caused to the person or animal. The reports for each quarter list the top 20 breeds involved in attacks. From January 2009 to September 2009, the pit bull has NOT made the list even once! The highest offender is UNKNOWN breed (muts) at 429 attacks. Bull Terrier (Staffordshire)- 288 attacks. Australian Cattle Dog- 158 attacks. German Shepherd Dog- 137 attacks. Bull Terrier (Staffordshire) X- 110 attacks. American Staffordshire Terrier- 103 attacks. Rottweiler- 91 attacks. Australian Kelpie- 65 attacks. Jack Russell Terrier- 63 attacks. Labrador Retriever- 56 attacks. Siberian Husky- 51 attacks. Australian Cattle Dog X- 48 attacks. Boxer- 47 attacks. Mastiff X- 42 attacks. Border Collie- 41 attacks. Bull Mastiff- 28 attacks. Alaskan Malamute- 27 attacks. Australian Kelpie X- 26 attacks. Rottweiler X- 14 attacks. Mastiff- 14 attacks. Bull Terrier- 12 attacks. Bull Terrier X- 12 attacks. Maltese- 12 attacks. GSD X- 10 attacks. Rhodesian Ridgeback- 10 attacks. AST X- 9 attacks. Great Dane- 9 attacks. The dogs/breeds listed highest on the reports are mentioned on each quarter. These are the dogs/breeds attacking more often and regularly throughout the year. I was thinking of checking each state (maybe someone from each state might like to check) and see what is reported on a state level. If the pit cannot even make INTO the top 20 list (let alone to the TOP of the list) in three quarters of a year, then what is BSL based on??? Are they assuming that all the 'mut' unknown breeds that top the list might have some pit in them somwhere??? Believe me if they even had an OUNCE of 'thought' that one of those ''unknown breeds'' had even the slightest 'pit' in it,,it WOULD have been listed as a "APBT CROSS" on the list. The FACT is, NOT ONE of any of the dogs listed above was shown/proven to have ANY APBT in it. I know there ARE pit attacks in NSW,,,but not enough to warrant being on the "top 20 attacks list" HOW will banning/killing/eliminating the APBT (types/crosses) have ANY effect on the "reported dog attacks' listed above?? HOW will the death/elimination of thousands of APBT stop the "unknown breed" attacking 429 times in 3/4 of a year??? Chicken noodle skooters people!!!! The Jack Russel and Maltese EVEN made the frigging list and the APBT didn't!!!! Thinking time!!! PS. I did recheck my adding up but my eyes are not the best. So if anyone wants to check my adding and/or just read up. http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/dlg_...;mi=9&ml=10 Hope links work in here.

LOL, My freezer is about the same. I also have a few packs of old frozen peas with big X marks on them. We used them as ice packs,,,just throw them on the ground a few times and they snuggley fit over any area (without being heavy or awkward) I have a few frozen oranges in there, kids love them for school. Keeps thier lunches cold too. On a good look a few frozen stubby holders!! Must be the sons but no idea why they are in my freezer?? Lots of rubbish at the bottom. Escaped peas, broken frozen pastry, bits of plastic, odd frozen chip..*reminds self it is time to defrost and clean out freezer*

Hi Diablo, I guess this is where everything does appear to be seen through 'rose coloured glasses'. I actually know quite a few people who own pits/crosses who have NO IDEA at all about any dog really. Of course they hate BSL like most others but their reasoning is different. One guy who has now had 2 pits and is planning on another told me "you can't feed a pit raw meat, that's what gives them the taste for blood, then they attack things" another told me "if you kick the sh#t out of them often enough they are too scared to do anything" (the list could go on, and on) So it all goes back to the 'uneducated' owners, of ANY dog. APBT, like any other dog is capable of horrid damage to people, animals and furniture. The problems are that some people should NOT be allowed to own any animal, let alone a dog.

Hi Bundy's Mum, Our local Horse shop has it (Hiscocks) don't know if others do. Also Health Food Stores usually. Our last bottle we got from a local health food store.

Thanks for the link Tybrax. That was just the best!! He stole the show!! LOL