Jed

And, frankly, if they were my dogs, I would, regretfully, have them pts. Because the risk of them escaping and doing it again would be too great. The one witnessed killing the dog should (and will) be pts. I would have ordered the other 2 pts as well, but they should now under existing legislation, be declared dangerous, and the regulations for dangerous dogs should be enforced. I actually didn't think they were staffy x, Cords, but maybe they were. Who cares, they were badly socialised, badly trained, badly contained dogs belonging to someone who probably shouldn't have a dog at all. Someone who put little value on this dogs, and even less on the grief and hardship they have caused. If this moronic bogan had put the effort into training and containing the dogs that he put into defending them in court, none of this would have happened. 5 little chis would still be enjoying life, an elderly couple wouldn't be heartbroken, and wouldn't have lost their entire bloodline -- which may well be important.

How many horses have you had euthed with lethobarb? Not many from that statement. Ditto with colic. I have never seen one which wasn't sweating - and I've seen a lot, luckily, mostly belonging to other people, and in vet and uni clinics. And I don't much care whether the horse was shot or injected, the results are the same, except that if the RSPCA vet and another vet were attending, I think it is extremely unlikely that the horse would have been shot by a vet. I am not even sure the horse was shot, I just think the fact that it had a bag over the head indicated head trauma which was not wanted in the photos. It is not normal practice, and a lot of vets are not au fait with shooting horses - although I presume the RSPCA vet would be. Again, perhaps the RSPCA vet does shoot rather than inject, but it would be rare. I have no knowledge, I am simply theorising. The story smells, so I have to question other items. I have never seen a severe colic which has not sweated. Unless it was euthed before that happened, and if that was done, there are more questions, about the level of care they were prepared to give to the horse to ensure recovery. There are few simple cases of colic which do not sweat either. There are no signs at all of this horse sweating. I don't like untruthfulness much, although it seems to be endemic in our society, from politicians up. I don't like to think the RSPCA bumped this horse off as a punishement to the fosterer for going to the newspaper. There are discrepancies in the newspaper accounts you could drive a sherman tank through. And I dont like to think that a horse would have so little value to the RSPCA t hat it would be killed for spite, to satisfy someone's need for power and need to win. All living things have value (even toads) and the RSPCA is the last organisation which should be killing animals without an excellent reason .... but they do. Fact is, in the past foster carers have been warned not to speak to the media, and those who have, have been "punished" in one way or another. People who are under investigation have been threatened if they went to the media, it could get nasty. But, because I am not a huge fan of the RSPCA, I'd like to work through it, in case I am being unfair to them.

I would be interested to see if the USA site- kaccents does in fact ship to Australia.

Abigail Abigail I fail to understand how you can say you don't support BSL, yet your statements (above) DO support BSL. Do you not understand what BSL means (I explained it for you earlier) or is your cognitive literacy extremely low? I get sick of saying this, but ANY BREED OF DOG CAN KILL - most dog breeds have been involved in attacks on dogs and humans. Any dog or breed, similarly treated and contained, could have perpetrated this attack. And that brings us back to the breed of the dogs. I do not think they were staffies. Per se, this forum does not support BSL. It may be that you would be more comfortable on one which does support it? And cavaliers and westies are quite capable of killing - given the right situation.

:D :D coffee splurk And you are recomending the rum/chardy nerve calmer ??!!! I want to go to the Jed schhhkooool of Shhhow training... :D :D :D :D fifi Yep, the show after that was when I packed the rum/chardy!! I also learned not to gossip before challenge!! Didn't even get reserve. I reckon the dog did the workout, shoud have got reserve ;) I feel better now, knowing stuff happens to others. I think I told you about my dacshund that I bred? He was my pet, and I had trained him to do quite a few tricks. He was also a good show dog. I showed him sometimes, but my mother would take him for group etc, if she was in the mood. I was about 11 or 12 One of his tricks was to fall on his side and lie like a stone - "dead" - if you shouted "bang" or fired a cap gun. He was BOB - Grafton or Coffs, I think. In for group, gaiting nicely and evenly - a balloon or something went "pop" and he fell over dead. My mother went for a couple of steps, realised he was on the ground, was going "get up George". The steward and judge thought he had died or was unconscious. Whole class stopped, everyone rushed over, George hopped up, bit of grass in his coat. Mother was mortified. I don't think they believed her explanation, they thought he had some sort of fit. It was a very very long way home in a car with an irate mother going off like a frog in a sock. I had strict instructions to immediately train him not to do that. I had no idea how to do it, of course!! Luckily, he never did it again. It's funny now!!

I did that, though I didn't expect everyone to reply, was surprised when so few did though :D now that I think on it - I wonder if most thought it was a dodgy enquirey just based on the amount of people I'd emailed at once? lucky for me there were really great people who got in touch and saw my HUGE email full of info and questions for what it was - a puppy buyer who gave a crap but was just a bit new to how to go about finding the right breeder No shame in that, and certainly not an idication of how much of a life I have :D I did "buy something" though, and I made damn sure that once I started talking seriously with one breeder (though not at the stage of having been approved) I let the few others know so they were in the loop. I'd done all my breed research and was looking for the right breeder, not the breeder with a pup right that second and I think I made that clear. Perhaps that is tirekicking to some Personally I emailed over phoning because I hate catching people in the middle of something - an email means a person has time to reply at their lesuire...or not :D The breeder I got a pup from had replied to my email with a phone number and suitable times to call and discuss, which was a relief! It wasn't you. It came with a 2 page questionaire. I thought that was a bit rich for the first enquiry. Breeders talk, everyone got one. A few suspected her of being a PETA rep, a couple thought she might buy a pup off them ... the ones who completed the questionaire, most didn't, and in the end she didn't buy anything. Maybe she was a PETA rep> :D And I would have emailed you back, saying, thank you for your enquiry, but I don't currently have any pups available, you might try xxxx or xxxx. Good luck in your search.

Dog knowledge suggests all 3 were involved - but only one was witnessed killing. So, it's fair to put down the dog which was attacking. The other 2 should be subject to dangerous dog restrictions Abigial I You are absolutely and totally and completely an advocate of BLS, Indicted by your very own words. Breed Specific Legislation is legislation which applies to a single breed, or some breeds, so that not all dogs are treated equally under the law. And the BSL we mention on the forum is generally that which applies to the American Pit Bull Terrier, and crosses thereof. The reason it is wrong is because the deed is the problem, not the breed. You cannot equitably blame an entire breed for misdeeds committed by some dog of that breed. And, just for your information, I very much doubt that these dogs were "staffies" - they didn't look like "staffies" to me, nor to anyone else either, apparently. Whether the owner identified them as "staffies" because he didn't know any better, or whether the media labelled them "staffies" because it makes a better story, I don't know. And that's not the point. The point is an irresponsible, uncaring owner, who didn't bother to contain his dogs, so they got out and caused a lot of damage.

Although I am not sure, I think the horse was shot. The fact that it had a bag over it's head at the dump, and there was no sign of an intraveneous injection in the jugular on the near side (which was the side in the photo). The body did not appear at all sweaty either, sweating is normally a symptom in every serious colic. It would not be usual for a vet to shoot a horse. They normally have lethobarb, and would take it to a serious colic case, and the RSPCA vet would certainly have it in the clinic. Just something else to ponder. In addition to 2+2 = 17!!

Who knows, the dog would have had to be mated at the beginning of March! But even then, if she was in season in December/January, she shouldn't be back in season now. Approximately 6 months between seasons is normal Bitches often have a discharge for a few weeks after whelping. I have one who discharges for 6 - 8 weeks. Her bitch might have had the pups, they've died, or as Ceilidh says, adult dogs killed and ate them (happens) and she has a post whelping discharge. The universe should save dogs from people like that

It's difficult to advise without knowing the terms of the breeding contract, or even what you are unhappy about. If you think there is a breach of the code of conduct of the canine council, report the breeder to them. Each state has one, and if you go to the ANKC website, it will tell you how to contact yours. Anything else is seen as a civil matter by the canine councils, and they will advise you to seek legal advice, and take the matter through the courts. Angelsun We don't know what Graeme's problem is, whether it is transport, docking, name of the vet or whatever, so it's all only speculation.

Scouty, I have a (previously secret ) passion for ceramic statues, large and small (preferably large) ditto concrete. It seems, from my research, to be terribly difficult to find any. I have a friend who trolls ebay and often sends me links, but I haven't seen any GSD ones. I would suggest googling, with all sorts of combinations. Off topic - I found some lovely boxer ones in USA, but they wouldn't ship.

Roses2905 The dog is probably trying to whelp! If you don't know the difference, it could happen.

How did this digress to behaviour at shows? Trouble is, the public sees a lot of people sitting/standing around, and want to begin a conversation. Those people are intently watching their dog or their friend's dog in the ring, or watching to see when they will be called for group. And if they begin a conversation with someone, they will probably miss their class. The public doesn't understand that, why should they? And they should be nicked off nicely and appropriately. It doesn't take much to say "hang on, I'm going into the ring in a minute, that's my gazebo over there, the one with the pile of empties out the front and the prawn chowder cooking, come on over later, love to talk to you then" I was in a sweepstakes not long ago - the usual 50 entries, dog stacked on the long side away from the table. A nice family came over - kids having a night out - and wanted to pat the doggy, and have a conversation. All good with me, except the dog wanted to climb over the rope and lick 'em to death, the pup beside me was having a heart attack, his owner ditto. "Hang on, we are in a class now, that odd looking old bloke in the middle is actually the judge, and my dog is supposed to be paying attention. I'll be finished in a minute, and will come and talk to you." Off they went. They had no idea there was judging going on. But - exhibitors are nervous, don't want to spend the time explaining, and they want the distraction to go away. They probably yearned all week for this minute, it cost them $100 in immediate fees, they are in with a chance, and someone is going to distract them and make them miss their chance. See it from both sides, folks, see it from both sides. People can't tell what is going on at a show.

That doesn't make the principal point any different to what it is. A cat took one of the birds who frequented my parents' property. We were fond of that bird. Going by the consensus of opinion on how to deal with these issues of an animal encroaching on another's property and killing something that someone is fond of/attached to, that cat should die. It seems. I'm not saying that the dog-owner in this situation should not be heavily penalised. Although I guess it goes to follow then that cat-owners whose cats offend other people likewise should also be heavily penalised (and fair enough, if it makes them keep their cat and the other of my preferred animals safe). I'm not even saying that these dogs should be returned to their owner if the owner is moronic enough to not be responsible and do the right thing. And I agree ..... the dogs wouldn't stand much chance of rehoming so their outcome would likely be a sad one even if they were given that chance. But I am saying that the views that are being expressed here have such general blanket statements behind them and in that respect I very strongly disagree and sometimes think they are no better than the sensationalism that is often created by the newspaper reports that so many criticise them for (myself included). Not to mention the assumption that is also being generalised to support those general blanket statements being that the dogs were DA. They might not have been - it might have been prey drive no different to that of cats. Motor vehicle injury and fatalities exceeds that which is caused by dogs. I don't understand or see your point or relevancy on this, Jed. Probably wasn't one, Erny!! I have a thing about people blithely driving over native animals on the road, when simply slowing down would have avoided a death, and people driving into birds, when the same action would have meant they flew away. How hard is it? I was reminded when the local koala group published stats on injured koalas - more injuries and deaths by cars than anything else. *sigh* Sorry about your wild bird, it's enver nice.

where did anyone quote AKC data involving the number of APBT in USA?

I will respond to people with a mobile number, or a hotmail account - but I wont sell anyone without a landline a puppy, or a dog. Particularly not a rescue dog. Unless I know heaps about them. I also receive email enquiries sent from mobile phones, and I can't reply via email. So they never get a response. I have a standard response to all enquiries. I give basic information, prices etc. Don't ask them anything. I invite them to contact me again if they are interested. If they do, we go from there. Lots don't, but that's fair.

Swissgirl, I disagree with you. We should not have to take responsibility for the actions of animals which trespass on our property. The fences on the property were sufficient to contain the dogs that lived there. The attacking dogs' owner had a responsibility to contain his dogs within his property. Most dogs have prey drive. I do think that some owners encourage that drive towards smaller animals. It is possible to train dogs away from that behaviour - to some extent. Bottom line is that all dogs should be contained within their own properties. Dogs attacks, on dogs and humans would be reduced 80% if dogs did not leave their own yard unless on a leash. Councils couldn't be bothered, it's all too hard, and too expensive. From a council's point of view, the occasional attack is acceptable, and a lot cheaper than enforcing by laws. When a dog has attacked and done some damage, it is called a pitbull or pitbull cross, no matter what it is, which partly negates councils' responsbility in these matters. Without BSL, councils would be a lot quicker off the mark with badly kept and contained dogs. Because they would then bear some responsibility. And all dogs should be socialised as pups and juveniles.

Pricing decision by the breeder. I can think of lots of reasons ... to encourage people to buy pet pups, orbecause the MR ones are just stunning, and the breeder wants them to go to show homes, and thinks a higher price will encourage this. I charge the same for all mine, so the above is just a guess ..... In a way, it's correct, I suppose if you look at it, perhaps a showing and breeding dog of top qualilty is worth more than a pet dog? I can see that rationale. Mine all cost the same to breed and keep, so I charge the same, but I have no idea whether that is right or not!!

Two words: Rescue Remedy.. One word - Rum or, two big glasses of chardy

Gossiping, not watching the judging -someone said "you're in for challenge". Really embarrassed, grabbed the dog, threw the (slip) lead on, did a nice triangle, halted in front of the judge - lead seemed a bit loose, looked down. NO dog. Where's the flamin dog? Supposed to have a dog? Dog was casually trotting along behind me. Didn't get challenge. Sort of slunk out, hiding behind tufts of grass!! Everyone laughed. Mongrels.

One of our nicer citizens!

Quote from "The Bulletin" (P1 of this thread) Quote from Michael Beatty Quote from "The Bulletin" Quote from "The Bulletin"

There were a number of show chihuahua's killed in Melbourne - I think last May or June. Is this the same story, or is this another, different attack? Just seems a bit coincidental. People who do not adequate fence their animals usually have no concept of the damage they can do, nor do they have any empathy for others. I don't think I would want one of these dogs, if they were separated and rehomed. I would prefer to take a dog without a black past, because I would always worry that he would kill another dog. Some dogs would never attack a dog, some need some early training so they don't, and if that early training is missing, they can be a big problem. Re wildlife and birds, Erny. I think it is because wildlife and birlds are not owned and our perceptions are different. Whilst we are talking about cats killing wildlife, the carnage of wildlife on the roads would equal, or exceed those killed by cats. I think cats are wrongly blamed for a lot of things. Before that loony in WA was running around with the cat skin for hair, and blaming cats for everything, including lunar eclipses, it was acknowledged that cats killed mammals, and the odd bird. I used to have 6 cats, and a lot of wildlilfe. Hundreds of finches came to the bird feeder, superb blue wrens and their wives caught insects on the lawn, wagtails gave the cats the finger, parrots ate the fruit and the seed. The cats busily caught rats and mice and the odd baby snake. Every couple of years, they caught a little bird - and I wondered whether it was sick or old. It's also possible to have feeders and waterers which are "cat proof", and I really do think most of the birds cats get were destined for bird heaven. A peewee fell out of the sky, missing me by centimetres, and fell dead on the lawn. I guess birds have heart attacks too!! But, just in case, the 2 I have now live inside. And I do believe cats are better inside. Some are hunters, some are bird hunters, some are not. I guess the ones I had weren't bird hunters.

I don't write my ads with "no time wasters". There are plenty of time wasters out there. There is a constant stream of emails from people who want photos. You send the photos, and they never contact you again. They didn't want a pup at all, they wanted photos. There was nothing wrong with the pups, they were rippers, but these people didn't want a pup, they wanted a photo. I often wonder if they own websites in far countries, and want photos to put on the websites I once got 87 email enquiries for a litter. At least 50 of them were time wasters. A girl emailed every breeder on the east coast, with a huge list of questions, and expected everyone to reply to them. Every breeder. Someone without a life. Of course, she didn't buy anything. And I love tyrekickers. If you want to know about the breed, and are upfront, phone me. Don't tell me you want to buy one, tell me you want information. That's my job as a breeder.

That presumes that the RSPCA spokesman is telling the truth. There is no proof that anyone was consulting, only someone's say so. There is not even any proof that any vet saw the horse. And according to the foster carer, she was not advised, so who is lying? Michael Beatty says the foster carer agreed to go by the vets decision, but she says she didn't know. There is no proof that a vet even saw the horse. No one needs to collude - someone just needs to be lying. Just one person. Someone obviously is, question is, who? If the RSPCA was the sainted and wonderful organisation for all creatures great and small, as they tout themselves as, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. We would know they were wonderful, and we would presume the carer was a fibber. That we are even having this discussion is interesting. In those circumstances, the second post in this thread would have been "what a rotten carer, fancy saying that". . There must be a hell of a lot of people in Townsville being prosecuted by the RSPCA, or they must have many many friends!!\ Fact is, someone is lying, big time. I have no idea who, and neither does anyone else.