Sheridan

So, even if DNA showed they were not restricted breed, it didn't matter because someone looked at the dogs and determined they were a restricted breed. The law is a donkey of indeterminate heritage. For those of you arguing in this thread, can you just stop? You're not helping. DNA would be applicable if for instance one parent was a papered Amstaff and the other was a papered Stafford and the DNA proved that the pups were from those parents, but DNA that is offered by organisations to determine breed is the type of DNA evidence that is not admissable..........I think there are too many questions in regard to the accuracy of these tests??. The DNA would not be used to prove breed type but parentage, which I believe is just as provable in dogs as it is in humans.

So, even if DNA showed they were not restricted breed, it didn't matter because someone looked at the dogs and determined they were a restricted breed. The law is a donkey of indeterminate heritage. For those of you arguing in this thread, can you just stop? You're not helping.

It logically follows that if the parents are identified as not being pitbulls then the children also cannot be.

If your Mum wants to chat some more, there is a Facebook group called SCWT Down Under. Thanks for that Sheridan! She gets on facebook every now and then so I'll let her know to check it out. I said to her, even if her dog wasn't a Wheaten, it looked very much like one and from what the breeders were describing had an incredibly similar temperament too - so either way it sounds like the Wheaten is a dog for her in the future! This dog died when I was only a year old (I'm 24 now) and I still hear all about her. :) Officially, the first wheatens were imported into Australia by the Annubis kennel but my wheatens' breeder swears one of his neighbours had them as farm dogs in the 1950s and 60s, so you never know! Your mum is more than welcome to have a chat with me if she wants, too. Flick me an email if you want. :)

If your Mum wants to chat some more, there is a Facebook group called SCWT Down Under.

I've recently discovered that next time I get a puppy I have to ask if dew claws are removed.

Then it sounds like what it needs is a challenge to the Supreme Court to start with. Of course, this is reliant on someone having the money to do so (or more many people having a little money).

Sumosum, I would expect the council to prove the dogs were what they claimed they were. What is the onus of proof in these laws? I can't recall if the owners retained counsel.

There were no DNA tests completed on any of the dogs. The parents must have passed the visual identification and there was a stat dec completed by the parents owner/"breeder" stating the dogs breeds. To me, and without a legal bone in my body but lots of logical ones, that seems to say hello lawsuit. Yeah to me it seems there were a few errors made on the councils part. It seems they wanted to make a statement and would do whatever necessary to make it. I hope it is taken further by the dogs owners, considering the dogs had not actually done anything wrong its just crazy in my eyes, and very sad. I wonder why they didn't take it further before the dogs were killed.

There were no DNA tests completed on any of the dogs. The parents must have passed the visual identification and there was a stat dec completed by the parents owner/"breeder" stating the dogs breeds. To me, and without a legal bone in my body but lots of logical ones, that seems to say hello lawsuit.

And this kind of thing is precisely why I will never go into co-ownership with a breeder.

Was the DNA testing in this case used to prove the dogs were (or were not pitbulls) or was it to prove parentage? Once it was proved the parents were not pitbulls, surely the only question left was whether the two dogs were children of the parents. Cos if it was used to prove that the dogs are pitbulls and it can be shown the test is unreliable for this (as DOLers have shown by having their own dogs tested), then my question is if that is, or rather, should have been, grounds for a legal challenge?

My Grumpy is drinking a lot lately so I'm taking him to the vet tomorrow. He's never had an issue concentrating his urine so I will be very keen to get the blood and urine test results.

And that's great but I suggest that most rescuers, including the majority of those here, don't put as much thought into it as you have and instead they learn on the job, so to speak. It's just as valid as any other method of learning. I also suggest that even the most experienced of rescuers fail now and again and those in glass houses, etc. I agree that every rescue needs to learn but perhaps the more experienced rescues could offer some gentle guidance to those less experienced rather than body slamming them off a cliff.

And where did rescue 'experts' learn their skills'? What qualification did you have before starting to rescue?

Whacktivist inspiration Peter Singer received an AC in the Queen's Birthday honours. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/queens-birthday-honours-2012/modern-thinker-asking-the-hard-questions/story-fne95kwp-1226390545807

Surely, it is the pound's responsibility to ensure the dogs they release are suitable for rehoming. Perhaps they should take a lesson from ARF and have temp tests in the pound so only dogs that pass are released to the shelter.

Yep, been there. Let Grumpy out in the yard, was gone around half a minute, then went back outside. Couldn't see him so I got a torch. No Grumpy. Checked the gates: locked. Checked the garage and the shed: shut and unable to be opened by even the most cunning of wheaten terriers. Called and called and called, no answer. By this stage I was in a bit of a panic. I ran inside to throw on my shoes and there he was. Snoring, sound asleep on my bed.

What a great idea! Best Friends Animal Society had an adoption drive for black dogs and cats across the US in May. Black dogs, especially, are often not adopted at all as rescuers here have often stated. Perhaps it's something Australian rescue groups could consider. http://events.bestfriends.org/upcoming/backinblack

These separate places indicate different (and more) dog hating nutters.

This is a closed group on Facebook.

Good article and it's great there's a point by point summary, too.

I remember Bonnie very well. Thank you for giving her the opportunity, kindness and love her previous owners did not.

Where were these latest poisonings, Pheebs?

Were the Rottweilers papered dogs bred by an experienced Rottweiler breeder who breeds to type or were they BYB's or perhaps crossbreeds?? Not sure what difference this would make? Too many dodgy unregistered breeders around breeding 'massive/awesome protection and security' dogs from whatever they can get their hands on - Rotties, Mastiffs, GSDs... And given the media's track record with identifying breeds, well.... And given the media propensity to misidentify breeds, what makes you think they wouldn't misidentify a pedigree dog?