RottnBullies

So precious

I agree the AVA needs to take a greater stance on It all, the fact that they're not willing to ID should be sending a clear message though well If they can't ID what makes a council think they can?

LINK VETS have been advised by their peak body not to certify the breed of dogs without DNA proof in case of future legal action.From next month, restricted breeds such as American pit bull terriers and their crosses can be seized and destroyed if not registered. The laws have sparked fears unrestricted breeds that look similar to pit bulls, such as American Staffordshire terriers, may be mistakenly destroyed. The onus will be on owners to prove their dogs aren't a restricted breed. But David Guest of Casey and Cranbourne Veterinary Hospital said vets were reluctant to certify dogs without categoric DNA proof. He said pit bulls were a "bitzer" comprising various terrier breeds, so it was hard to prove a dog was a pit bull, or conversely that a similar-looking dog was not. "This is the trouble. There is a bit of variation in the look of the animal and we don't have a specific DNA profile for a pure-bred pit bull because of all the breeds and genetic variations involved. "So we have to go on the look of the dog. If it looks like a pit bull, then it will be treated by authorities like a pit bull. But as vets, we can't categorically say what the animal is." The state government has unveiled visual standards as a way of identifying restricted breed dogs. The standards have photos and diagrams showing the proportions of an American pit bull, including the "general shape" of their heads, their jaws, muzzle and neck sizes. Susan Maastricht, state president of the Australian Veterinary Association, said vets could be subject to litigation if they certified a dog was not a restricted breed and it bit a dog or person and was later deemed to be a restricted breed. "Looking at the gazetted standards, one of the pictures of a pit bull looks like any staffie that you see around everywhere. Unless we have categoric evidence, we're recommending that vets don't issue certifications." Under the laws, council officers will use the visual identification standard for seizing and destroying restricted dogs. Last week, Cardinia and Casey councils stated they didn't believe they could identify a pit bull using DNA. A spokeswoman for Agriculture Minister Peter Walsh said the visual standards were used so there was a clearer way to identify restricted dogs "which were escaping visual identification". "It's up to the council officers to gauge how the dogs match up to the guidelines."

Please share this as much as possible Thanks Rally Against BSL

Have been following his story for some time, and been awaiting anxiously for today's verdict I hope they set him free

Steve I remember the crew quite well, I did say "mostly supporters" of the APBT not just people who actually owned the breed as I know that many did help even though they didn't own them, you can't deny though that more people seem to be wanting to get Involved this time round as apposed to years ago, that's just how I'm seeing It...as I keep saying It's not just a pit bull problem anymore and the sad truth Is many didn't get Involved because It didn't affect them at the time. I'm all for hanging together as long as It's for all dogs and not just the papered pure dogs In which seem to get favored

Unbelievable! This just keeps on getting better

Absolutely speechless!!!

Not exactly the kind of thing we need people doing right now! Just remember how long some have actually been fighting this, but then It was only limited to mostly supporters of the APBT breed, now I think It's hit home for a lot more people and their breeds Good point SM I hope that can be clarified by the AVA

Dangerous dog legislation is not the whole answer 6 September 2011 LISA CAMERON THE State Government's new legislation to crack down on dangerous and restricted dogs has been met with some apprehension by south-west veterinarians. Representatives from both Hamilton Animal Health and Hamilton Vetcare said while a definite solution was needed, this alternative might not have a strong effect on such a complex problem. The tragic death of a four-year old girl in Melbourne, after she was mauled by a pit bull cross, has heightened the debate on what to do with dangerous and restricted breed dogs. The State Government introduced new legislation to Parliament this week to better police restricted breed dogs and create a massive incentive for owners to register their animals. Minister for Agriculture and Food Security, Peter Walsh said the legislation was the first of several measures to get rid of restricted breed dogs including pit bulls. "The legislation…ends the amnesty to register restricted breeds on September 29, meaning any dog identified as a pit bull not registered after that time can be seized and destroyed," he said. "The changes will close legal loopholes to ensure pit bull crosses become a restricted breed and a visual standard for identifying pit bull terriers will be gazetted tomorrow to prevent some of these dogs escaping regulation because of uncertainty over their breed." Both Hamilton Animal Health's Dr Kristabel Lewis and Hamilton Vetcare's Dr Lauren Alexander –Shrive said just focusing on pit bulls was no way to fix the serious problem of dangerous dogs. Dr Lewis said the new planned legislation was focusing on pit bull cross breeds, but it was sometimes very difficult to determine the breed of an animal based on appearance alone. She said all dogs, no matter what breed, could present a danger depending on the situation and how that dog had been raised. "You can't predict it and you can't tell which dog it is going to be; it is such a risk particularly to children. "I do worry that if you get rid of one breed then you are going to possibly find that another breed, maybe in ten years or so, will come forward that have been bred to be aggressive. Getting rid of one breed is not going to fix the problem; people have to take more responsibility." Dr Lewis said it was the responsibility of the owner to ensure their dog was restrained and housed correctly and that it was trained and behaved in a safe matter. She said not just restricted breed dogs could be dangerous with dogs known to attack if their territory was invaded, or if they were panicked or scared. Dr Alexander-Shrive urged all south-west residents to register their dog ahead of September 29 so there would be no chance that their animal would be seized by council. She said the restricted breed issue was serious and unfortunately there was no easy solution that would fix the problem. "Some cross bred dogs look like a dog on the restricted breeds list but they are not. It is really important that people register their dogs so they are not seized by mistake. "This new legislation is a good thing because it will encourage people to register their animals. However a lot more is needed and owners need to ensure they take responsibility of the housing and behavioural training of their animal." The Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) has described the new legislation as a short-term solution with the risk of lulling the community into a false sense of security that the danger is over. AVA Victorian president, Susan Maastricht said the new legislation would do little to address the overall problem of dog bites and attacks. "It's important to recognise that most dogs don't bite, and only a tiny proportion of dogs are aggressive," she said. "However, effective control and management of these aggressive dogs is absolutely necessary through regulation that works. Owners must be held responsible for the education, control and actions of their dogs." Dr Maastricht said declaring that some breeds were dangerous and others were not was misleading. The AVA was asked, by the Bureau of Animal Welfare, if Victorian veterinarians would be willing or not to examine a seized animal to decide if it was a restricted breed and should be euthanised. The AVA advised the bureau that AVA members would not be willing to provide certification of unknown breeds based on a physical examination alone and more evidence would be required before that decision was made. Southern Grampians Shire local laws co-ordinator, Brain Urwin said the new legislation and any improvement regarding dangerous dogs would be welcomed by the shire. He said council advised people against owning a dangerous dog and welcomed another plan by the State Government to employ more Animal Control officers for Victorian shires. "Council welcomes any initiatives regarding more employment of Animal Control officers in the shire," Mr Urwin said. "Council does not have a dedicated animal control officer, but has two full-time Local Laws officers and part of their roles/ duties it to attend to animal control issues on an as needed basis."

It's made my day, so happy to hear of their safe return, and hope pups are also going to be ok.

I like that idea, as long as It's put in a realistic manner that not all the DD can be rehabilitated. But I do think It won't be easy, as It stands RB dogs are forced to live exactly as DD are under the the restrictions and they've done nothing wrong. In fact In Vic the restrictions for RB are a lot stricter than the DD, go figure It doesn't make any sense to me. A dog that's done the deed Is a little better off than one who hasn't I'm In and willing to help In any way that I can

I don't think I've ever checked a thread as much In hoping for good news, I hope and pray they are found and well before one's whelping time as I can't Imagine nor want for her to have to go through It without her loved ones, so heartbreaking

Makes for a positive step, I gather the pilot of what you speak If It goes ahead will be trialed first In a QLD shire? No not necessarily - I was thinking Victoria because they have the most horrible dog laws but Im in NSW . Anywhere we can find a shire which is prepared to give it a go will do. Thank you, that's what I was hoping for, hope you're feeling much better soon you'll need It to tackle this freundhund and Puppy_Sniffer As this Is what path I wanted the thread to take GT my thoughts exactly!

Makes for a positive step, I gather the pilot of what you speak If It goes ahead will be trialed first In a QLD shire?

Agree this Is an absolute piece of trash! And It wouldn't surprise me at all If this be another of those brain farts GS Is constantly having, the man Is evil, just pure pure evil

That's disgusting and downright nasty!

No doubt for pups If they were stolen, this Is just horrible I really hope someone with any decency has spotted them and comes forward Some people are just pure scum to commit such a thing Fingers crossed for a speedy and safe return for both girls

Yes Yes Yes..... I couldn't agree more, It's been on my mind for ages now

I'm not sure, but It's worth a shot to contact him If he Is, he can only say no, and nothing's been lost. The more good spokespersons that are willing to help the better

And are you listening! Read the OP post, It's about what can we do to help. You're stating that nothing can be done, so If you wish to start another on your thoughts please do so

I think that's a great Idea lilli And they don't need to nor do they deserve It, do you suggest we sit back and continue to let these Innocent dogs die I know It's Impossible to try and stop morons, but that doesn't mean there's nothing we can do about It to try and help That's just giving up and I'm sure owners good owners who are finding themselves In this mess are not going to give up on their dogs And you're missing the point, this Isn't a Pit or Pit X problem only anymore Please If you don't have anything positive to add to this thread, don't post, I don't want It to turn Into a negative, It's meant for people who want to try and help and do something. Thanks ETA

It should still be considered plagiarism if they used parts of it and changed the words

No, they created the show version, that Is all. You need to look deeper Into what path the Am Staff Is going In Australia, hell you only need to go to some shows and see, hardly a responsible quality breeding from some breeders. Get rid of BSL and I'm sure there will be responsible APBT breeders once again Oh and look at some of their adds, they're charging different prices for males and females and different colours, pied dogs for example are fetching a higher price, yep that sounds pretty ethical to me With the exception of some, most dogs are not born aggressive they're made aggressive ETA