Sheridan

We have to kill our dog or dump him in a pound because we didn't consider him when we decided to Reno the house.

He needs some better photos, those big wide smiley staffy ones.

Oh, westiemum, you mean, mean mum. Those poor put upon, bed deprived westies ... :p

You need to look outside Group 2 a bit more often Dougie. It's called Field Trialling and quail are central to the sport. :) And just how many of the previously docked breeds are from group 3 And since field work is restricted to group 3 dogs I don't see how they would affected. But just out of curiousity, what percentage of the dogs that compete in ANKC trials suffer tail damage that requires amputation? Rather a lot of terriers are workers and were traditionally docked. I've never owned a dog with a full tail. Unless there is news that this motion was passed by a majority, by 'will' I think you mean 'may'.

Ruin Maniac, hence Woof's suggestion, which I agree with, that studies should look at owners.

"It is very hard to give Pit Bulls the benefit of the doubt," Dr Smith says. "If it looks like a Pit Bull, it is a Pit Bull." http://dogshome.com/...ublic-and-pets/ I am told LDH killed 14,000 dogs in the last financial year. What do you think the chances are of Victoria's biggest pound giving dogs a chance? ETA: Victoria's biggest pound has a total of 11 dogs up for adoption today. 11 dogs. That's actually a pretty good figure for them.

Precisely what I was going to say. Victoria does not have the equivalent of a Clause 16D.

Yes I did read them. Is this a "guess on your part" or do you have some hard evidence to that? If it is designed to scare people who are working outside the rules and the law then I doubt that it will have any effect. If you feel that it an attempt at a "scare" then why do it so secretly ? Or do you also believe that the leak was deliberate as well ?? Qiute a conspiracy theory I think and a strange way to go about it. All it has done is upset honest people and cause a huge controversy. Whatever the reason for this motion I feel that it is ill conceived. It's now placed all people who have legally docked dogs under the same cloud of suspicion as those that are the apparent target. If they have specific details and have proof, why do they not act upon this via the rules and regulations that already exist, or simply go to the state authorities or RSPCA ?? I doubt that there are large numbers of breeders deliberately harming puppies in order to obtain a "legal" tail docking procedure. IF this is happening then I personally think that it would be very few. From my own experience with kinked tails I believe that there is probably a high percentage of legitimately occurring kinked tails in certain breeds and bloodlines. It is a complex genetic situation and a difficult one to address for a serious breeder that has over a long period of time developed and refined a top winning bloodline only to find that they have a genetic bottleneck regarding tail conformation which previously was not needed to be considered because they were docked ! People often choose to think the worst of others especially when the politics of competition arises. Cruzzi, read (and attempt to understand) the definition of "chinese whispers". See the bit where I said 'It's is a guess on my part'? That means it's a guess on my part.

And now you make me see RED, here you go suggesting the small dog was to blame. Read the article again. The black dog was offleash. It was a much bigger dog. This was an unprovoked attack - it sounds like it was so sudden that noone had time to do much, they didn't see it coming! It RIPPED THE INNARDS out of the smaller dog. What does it take to make you and people like you realise that this is abnormal? It is completely unacceptable and this owner should go to jail and pay an enormous fine, his dog should be euthanased. The owner did nothing at all to prevent this attack and I'd like to know how many other dogs and animals have been killed already by this large dog - you can put money on it that it's done it before. wow, so many posters suggesting i'm excusing an unprovoked attack. Read what i actually said and try again. I did not place blame on either dog, I simply stated I'd really like to know the full story, not just what the media has told us. Did this occur in an offleash dog area? Did the larger dog approach the smaller dog and the larger dog ended up reacting to the smaller dog acting aggressively? Was the small dog really on leash? Lots of questions which we probably will never know the answer to. What does it take to make people like me reaslie that this is abnormal? What does it take to make morons who own little yappy fluffballs to realise that it's not ok for their dog to aggressively approach other dogs? I didn't intend for my comment to suggest that a dog getting barked at was reason enough for the other dog to react in such a manner, however anyone who lives in the real world will see stupid owners of all sized dogs allow their uncontrolled dogs to act dominant or aggressively toward other dogs, the majority of those are little fluffy yap yaps. It doesn't take much for a large dog to rip a small dog apart! BTW, I'm absolutely sick of stupid owners(mostly owning little fluffball yap yaps) who allow their dogs to charge and carry on toward my dog. It may well be the case that this little dog was completely innocent and the larger dog(well it's owner at least) was completely at fault but I'd like to know the full story, not just what we're told by the media! You're the one suggesting this is a little yappy fluffball and yet it clearly states it's a mini schnauzer. You're the one suggesting that this dog provoked the bigger dog and that's why it's dead. You did blame the dog that was killed and you're doing so again. You have no sympathy for the owners. You are offensive and extremely nasty.

But they won't be filtered to the right owners. They'll be pts. Why are people continually saying 'Oh they'll be rehomed to the right owner?' If they are in a pound, they'll be pts. As was pointed out early in this thread, pounds don't have the resources.

I wrote a few scenarios in a previous post as to why this has come up, Wundahoo. My personal belief is that it's not chinese whispers, that they're acting on evidence they've received (the examples are quite specific and none are 'This dog was born in WA when docking was still allowed). Given it's coming out of Victoria where dog laws are quite draconian in some regards, it's to scare people or to show they're acting before the authorities do. The motion doesn't have to succeed if the aim is to scare people into acting legally. It's a guess on my part but it's a better one than the ones suggesting the guy is a undercover AR crazy.

Gee...sue me....or should I say soo me? one spelling slip compared to how many in the OP? jeeze...(is that how you spell that?) The POINT BEING.....a letter lobbying a major organization with such issues.....reminds me of the many overseas scams starting with "I am the wife of recently murdered king blah, blah It's clearly a bad OCR scan as someone else has already said not actually written like that.

Define 'gameness' - if we are on the same wavelength when talking about gameness, I don't consider it a trait of it's own accord, but rather a certain 'collection' of underlying temperament traits that results in the behaviour that we see as 'gameness'. Basically, I would say a dog that has moderate to low emotional reactivity, a very proactive 'coping strategy', few social and non social fears (and a good rebound) and some marked degree of chase proneness (aka prey drive or tendency towards strong predatory behaviours) is what most people would refer to as gameness (i.e. the dog thinks on it's feet, is comfortable using force when pressed, is 'balanced' in how it responds to environmental stimuli and shows relatively strong predatory tendencies). Bearing in mind that we've done no analysis as yet and I'm just commenting on what I've seen during the tests we've done so far (so when we've done the analysis this could all mean nothing), the only thing listed above that we don't seem to getting a fairly clear picture of during the tests is chase prone-ness/predatory tendancies, as there seems to be issues with arousal/stress levels inhibiting the dogs responses to prey stimuli. I'm not sure I'm fully understanding your comment further on about dog aggression and gameness, as I'm reading it as you implying that they are mutually exclusive (i.e. that a game dog which reacts inappropriately and aggressively towards other dogs is not dog aggressive or potentially lacking in social skills because it's game)? I note that you didn't address my comment about classifying by group. Breeds within groups are different. I don't know that the part I've bolded above makes sense. Seems a bit circular? I completely understand both of the above points and to some degree, agree with them (or aspects of them) - in regards to the 'justification' for euthanasia, I think the pendulum has been on it's way to swinging in the other direction for a while now (save everything at all costs because preservation of life, irrespective of quality, is paramount). My hope is that the 'big swing' will drag the choice few that live in the dark ages closer towards centre, and we'll be able to get some rational, mainstream dialogue happening about it soon... we shall see though (and thanks - here's hoping we actually find something useful :) ). On the MacDogs point, given that a fairly large portion of the 'generic' pet dog owning population want a particular type of dog (fairly chilled, actively sociable but not easily excited or aroused, not too smart and just happy being 'there' without any great need for extensive training... 'boring' is a word I've used before myself :cool: ), I can't see the issue with breeders who also like that type of dog selecting for it, even if this means selecting for a different 'job' to what the breed did 150 years ago. People created a huge number of different breeds to fulfil roles 'back when', so I honestly can't understand why there is such a huge fuss over people doing the same now when the job is 'modern pet dog'. That doesn't mean that we can't also have other breeds that fulfil different roles (or the same role in a different way), with different temperaments, as long as we make sure we understand what the dogs need and choose wisely when selecting both breeding dogs and our next pet :D (and as my timid kelpie X and boofhead pedigree Rott will attest, we 'do' different here very well). I'm yet to fully understand the logic behind the 'purebred breeders shouldn't breed for the pet market' sentiment, when the vast majority of dogs are pets and humans created dogs to fulfil the roles we needed them too (which currently is usually as a suburban pet...) - is being 'just a pet' not considered a 'real job' by those some? Well, what I'm getting from that is that you prefer or at least, are aiming for the McDog. How awful. My dogs are pets. Why would you suggest that dogs that don't fit the ideal McDog are not pets? What a strange thing to imply. Having a McDog would drive me mad. You may like dumb dogs but some of us actually like the clever and excitable dogs rather than timid dogs. People in pounds don't match dogs to people. When does this ever happen? Except you know people in pounds don't have the time or the resources to think outside the box and everyone in rescue keeps saying that you can't tell a dog's true personality in a pound situation. Doing something about shite owners is too hard and academia is all about the next grant. I don't think breeding for the pet market is entirely bad either because the vast majority of dogs are pets not show dogs and not breeding dogs. That said any breeder who aims at the McDog is failing their breed.

Actually, I don't think you feel at all sorry for the family.

As far as I am aware the President of Dogs NSW. Isn't he the bloke who said he wasn't voting for the motion? So, why would he say 'unfortunately'?

But Buster's a good name for a police dog!

Who wrote this??

Then lock the gate.

Don't apologise, Jelly. This is very hard for you. If you're not busy on Saturday, go see Nekhbet. At this stage it can't hurt and sometimes an opinion of someone you're not paying can help.

I'm with the others. How do people get to the door?

But is she otherwise inside? Perhaps if they take her outside they can keep her on lead.

Given the docking laws won't be repealed its pointless even bringing it up.

The fact is.....I don't like it. Maybe i'm just old fashioned because I think when you cross two different breeds you get a mongrel. MONGREL n animal esp a dog of mixed breed. Obviously those who own them & breed them don't have dictionaries. Then again, dictionaries may not be all they don't have. A discussion for a different thread perhaps.

Have they worked out how she escaped?

Getting back to the original topic how do they KNOW that they have a APBT and NOT an AST? is it just a case of calling what they like better? If you look at any topic where an accusation has been made that a pit bull has been involved in an attack, it appears the only people who can identify one are those who have them and sometimes not even then.