Need To Update List Dogs That Kill In Aust

[stone]

K&P,

Read it,

I didn't notice any mention of the Customs Act being amended?

If that is the the case, the import bans will remain. Banned dogs will still be banned dogs.

The U.K is awash with ''Pitbull" type dog using various names, Irish Staffies, Working Staffies, Olde Style Staffies, Game Breed Staffies etc, etc, & it was/is costing a fortune to impliment the draconian DD act. You would have noticed numerous references to this in your links.

The new regs will allow the ACOs to issue infringment notices & compliance instructions direct to the owners. They will be able to order the "chavs"(bogans) to muzzle their dogs in public.

It will allow authorities to now act on private property where they previously had no authority.

They wont be grabbing a dogs on suspicion, they will be ''interviewing'' the owners.

Rather than dogs being confiscated for their appearance (good news) the owners will be harassed for having them ( no so good)

Revenue in as opposed to revenue out.

Responsible owners will nothing to worry about, as is the case already.

Do your really think things will be to much different?

''

If BSL was repealed Pitbulls would no longer be as attractive to the bogans and tough guys because they are no longer illegal,''

Talk about naive!....good grief. Why do think the breed became a problem in the first place?

The bogans & the tough guys were the problem when they were legal.

It was love at first bite.

Weapon dogs, or as they are so quaintly known in the U.K. ''status dogs" aren't the breeds of choice for mums & dads seeking a lovely little doggie for little Billy to grow with.

Bogans & wannabes will the be target market.

You like pitties, there will be plenty of ém if BSL is repealed.

Which is unlikely....IMO

Edit

ETA - I commented on their news story stating that the dog looks like and is registered as a Bull Terrier and that it is a separate breed and they have now change the breed from Pitbull to Bull Terrier.

The dog pictured is ''thought'' to be the dog involved. sigh...."thought to be?"

You identified as a pure breed bull terrier. I agree.

The photo also looks like it was taken over a fence with the dog in a back yard.

I think it would have been proper to mention that as well.

It may be the culprit, But then again maybe the perpertrator is still at large?

Time will tell.

Edited November 17, 2011 by stone

[geo]

Geo, are you saying that Amstaff's do have a predisposition for aggression and can be threatening to community safety in the wrong hands?

No Coat, I am saying that people like you will say any dog that looks like a pitbull could not be an amstaff or staffy unless it's ANKC rego'd.

A bit hard to mistake a rotti as a pitbull regardless whether is rego'd or not.

The fact is that there are many unregistered amstaffs, all of which you will happily see killed under legislation because they had the misfortune to be born without papers.

[Keira&Phoenix]

K&P,

Read it,

I didn't notice any mention of the Customs Act being amended?

If that is the the case, the import bans will remain. Banned dogs will still be banned dogs.

The U.K is awash with ''Pitbull" type dog using various names, Irish Staffies, Working Staffies, Olde Style Staffies, Game Breed Staffies etc, etc, & it was/is costing a fortune to impliment the draconian DD act. You would have noticed numerous references to this in your links.

The new regs will allow the ACOs to issue infringment notices & compliance instructions direct to the owners. They will be able to order the "chavs"(bogans) to muzzle their dogs in public.

It will allow authorities to now act on private property where they previously had no authority.

They wont be grabbing a dogs on suspicion, they will be ''interviewing'' the owners.

Rather than dogs being confiscated for their appearance (good news) the owners will be harassed for having them ( no so good)

Revenue in as opposed to revenue out.

Responsible owners will nothing to worry about, as is the case already.

Do your really think things will be to much different?

''

If BSL was repealed Pitbulls would no longer be as attractive to the bogans and tough guys because they are no longer illegal,''

Talk about naive!....good grief. Why do think the breed became a problem in the first place?

The bogans & the tough guys were the problem when they were legal.

It was love at first bite.

Weapon dogs, or as they are so quaintly known in the U.K. ''status dogs" aren't the breeds of choice for mums & dads seeking a lovely little doggie for little Billy to grow with.

Bogans & wannabes will the be target market.

You like pitties, there will be plenty of ém if BSL is repealed.

Which is unlikely....IMO

Edit

ETA - I commented on their news story stating that the dog looks like and is registered as a Bull Terrier and that it is a separate breed and they have now change the breed from Pitbull to Bull Terrier.

The dog pictured is ''thought'' to be the dog involved. sigh...."thought to be?"

You identified as a pure breed bull terrier. I agree.

The photo also looks like it was taken over a fence with the dog in a back yard.

I think it would have been proper to mention that as well.

It may be the culprit, But then again maybe the perpertrator is still at large?

Time will tell.

I just looked at the Customs Act in the UK and can see no ban on importation of any breeds of dogs? Please provide a link..

It allows them to act in the case of a dog being a menace or dangerous not just to do whatever they please. The laws in regards to private property are supposed to help in the case of ie: if a child is attacked at home by the family dog, they can press criminal charges against the parents or owners of the dogs, where as before if this attack happened they could not. This will apply to all breeds of dogs. This is the best step they can take for preventing dog attacks, punishing the owners of any dog of any breed that is involved in an incident. They won't be able to just go around ordering the "Chavs" to muzzle a dog that hasn't had a complaint against it.

Yes I do think it will make a huge difference, because responsible owners will be fine and the sh*tty irresponsible owners will not. At the moment responsible and irresponsible owners of only certain breeds are being punished and the irresponsible owners of other breeds are not. This will take a focus off PB's and onto irresponsible people, just like in Calgary, they will find these laws work a helluva lot better than BSL.

I am not saying it will prevent all idiots from buying them but it will make some difference and more decent responsible owners will have them and more of the responsible owners will be able to take their dogs out in public and show people what they are really like. All BSL does is suppress the good, responsible, ethical breeders but your crappy BYBers are still out there breeding these dogs and they won't stop.

It will make a difference, not right away but we all know Rome wasn't built in a day.

The picture in the news story was taken by a Year 11 student who took the picture when the dog was wandering in their yard, her father then reported the dog to the council, that was an hour before the attack. It is the same dog that was seized after the attack.

I never said it was purebred, I said Bull Terrier or cross of, it was rego'd with council as a Bull Terrier X so I would say it is a cross.

Edited November 17, 2011 by Keira&Phoenix

[stone]

K&P,

Read it,

I didn't notice any mention of the Customs Act being amended?

If that is the the case, the import bans will remain. Banned dogs will still be banned dogs.

The U.K is awash with ''Pitbull" type dog using various names, Irish Staffies, Working Staffies, Olde Style Staffies, Game Breed Staffies etc, etc, & it was/is costing a fortune to impliment the draconian DD act. You would have noticed numerous references to this in your links.

The new regs will allow the ACOs to issue infringment notices & compliance instructions direct to the owners. They will be able to order the "chavs"(bogans) to muzzle their dogs in public.

It will allow authorities to now act on private property where they previously had no authority.

They wont be grabbing a dogs on suspicion, they will be ''interviewing'' the owners.

Rather than dogs being confiscated for their appearance (good news) the owners will be harassed for having them ( no so good)

Revenue in as opposed to revenue out.

Responsible owners will nothing to worry about, as is the case already.

Do your really think things will be to much different?

''

If BSL was repealed Pitbulls would no longer be as attractive to the bogans and tough guys because they are no longer illegal,''

Talk about naive!....good grief. Why do think the breed became a problem in the first place?

The bogans & the tough guys were the problem when they were legal.

It was love at first bite.

Weapon dogs, or as they are so quaintly known in the U.K. ''status dogs" aren't the breeds of choice for mums & dads seeking a lovely little doggie for little Billy to grow with.

Bogans & wannabes will the be target market.

You like pitties, there will be plenty of ém if BSL is repealed.

Which is unlikely....IMO

Edit

ETA - I commented on their news story stating that the dog looks like and is registered as a Bull Terrier and that it is a separate breed and they have now change the breed from Pitbull to Bull Terrier.

The dog pictured is ''thought'' to be the dog involved. sigh...."thought to be?"

You identified as a pure breed bull terrier. I agree.

The photo also looks like it was taken over a fence with the dog in a back yard.

I think it would have been proper to mention that as well.

It may be the culprit, But then again maybe the perpertrator is still at large?

Time will tell.

I just looked at the Customs Act in the UK and can see no ban on importation of any breeds of dogs? Please provide a link..

It allows them to act in the case of a dog being a menace or dangerous not just to do whatever they please. The laws in regards to private property are supposed to help in the case of ie: if a child is attacked at home by the family dog, they can press criminal charges against the parents or owners of the dogs, where as before if this attack happened they could not. This will apply to all breeds of dogs. This is the best step they can take for preventing dog attacks, punishing the owners of any dog of any breed that is involved in an incident. They won't be able to just go around ordering the "Chavs" to muzzle a dog that hasn't had a complaint against it.

Yes I do think it will make a huge difference, because responsible owners will be fine and the sh*tty irresponsible owners will not. At the moment responsible and irresponsible owners of only certain breeds are being punished and the irresponsible owners of other breeds are not. This will take a focus off PB's and onto irresponsible people, just like in Calgary, they will find these laws work a helluva lot better than BSL.

I am not saying it will prevent all idiots from buying them but it will make some difference and more decent responsible owners will have them and more of the responsible owners will be able to take their dogs out in public and show people what they are really like. All BSL does is suppress the good, responsible, ethical breeders but your crappy BYBers are still out there breeding these dogs and they won't stop.

It will make a difference, not right away but we all know Rome wasn't built in a day.

The picture in the news story was taken by a Year 11 student who took the picture when the dog was wandering in their yard, her father then reported the dog to the council, that was an hour before the attack. It is the same dog that was seized after the attack.

I never said it was purebred, I said Bull Terrier or cross of, it was rego'd with council as a Bull Terrier X so I would say it is a cross.

I had it listed in with my "favourites" but it's gone missing.

I tried a search & couldn't find it either.

However, banned breeds are automatically banned imports, except under special license.

Repealing the BSL wont necessarily lift the ban on the currently banned breeds. Nothing has been mentioned in this regard as far as I could see.

I have googled the proposed legislation & while it appears as though seizure on appearance is to be given a miss, the powers of the ACOs & police have been significantly increased.

It looks as though dog ownership will get a little bit harder, more involved & quite a bit more expensive. Compulsory 3rd party insurance for dog owners for e.g.

So don't start your celebrations just yet,

The blue bird of happiness may just crap on your party cake.

Edit.

If you read the proposed amendments & listen to the ministers being interviewed it doesn't appear a total repeal of the BSL is likely.

The impression I get is more an admission the 1991 legislation was poorly conceived & implimented.

The amendments proposed are not a softening of the laws favouring the dog owner but rather a increase in powers, with the strengthening of current powers for those on the opposite side.

Maybe i'm just a pessimist, but I can't see any politician putting their neck on the block by abolishing or reducing DD laws.

Any votes they gain by such a move would be insignificant compared to those they lose.

Edited November 18, 2011 by stone

[Keira&Phoenix]

K&P,

Read it,

I didn't notice any mention of the Customs Act being amended?

If that is the the case, the import bans will remain. Banned dogs will still be banned dogs.

The U.K is awash with ''Pitbull" type dog using various names, Irish Staffies, Working Staffies, Olde Style Staffies, Game Breed Staffies etc, etc, & it was/is costing a fortune to impliment the draconian DD act. You would have noticed numerous references to this in your links.

The new regs will allow the ACOs to issue infringment notices & compliance instructions direct to the owners. They will be able to order the "chavs"(bogans) to muzzle their dogs in public.

It will allow authorities to now act on private property where they previously had no authority.

They wont be grabbing a dogs on suspicion, they will be ''interviewing'' the owners.

Rather than dogs being confiscated for their appearance (good news) the owners will be harassed for having them ( no so good)

Revenue in as opposed to revenue out.

Responsible owners will nothing to worry about, as is the case already.

Do your really think things will be to much different?

''

If BSL was repealed Pitbulls would no longer be as attractive to the bogans and tough guys because they are no longer illegal,''

Talk about naive!....good grief. Why do think the breed became a problem in the first place?

The bogans & the tough guys were the problem when they were legal.

It was love at first bite.

Weapon dogs, or as they are so quaintly known in the U.K. ''status dogs" aren't the breeds of choice for mums & dads seeking a lovely little doggie for little Billy to grow with.

Bogans & wannabes will the be target market.

You like pitties, there will be plenty of ém if BSL is repealed.

Which is unlikely....IMO

Edit

ETA - I commented on their news story stating that the dog looks like and is registered as a Bull Terrier and that it is a separate breed and they have now change the breed from Pitbull to Bull Terrier.

The dog pictured is ''thought'' to be the dog involved. sigh...."thought to be?"

You identified as a pure breed bull terrier. I agree.

The photo also looks like it was taken over a fence with the dog in a back yard.

I think it would have been proper to mention that as well.

It may be the culprit, But then again maybe the perpertrator is still at large?

Time will tell.

I just looked at the Customs Act in the UK and can see no ban on importation of any breeds of dogs? Please provide a link..

It allows them to act in the case of a dog being a menace or dangerous not just to do whatever they please. The laws in regards to private property are supposed to help in the case of ie: if a child is attacked at home by the family dog, they can press criminal charges against the parents or owners of the dogs, where as before if this attack happened they could not. This will apply to all breeds of dogs. This is the best step they can take for preventing dog attacks, punishing the owners of any dog of any breed that is involved in an incident. They won't be able to just go around ordering the "Chavs" to muzzle a dog that hasn't had a complaint against it.

Yes I do think it will make a huge difference, because responsible owners will be fine and the sh*tty irresponsible owners will not. At the moment responsible and irresponsible owners of only certain breeds are being punished and the irresponsible owners of other breeds are not. This will take a focus off PB's and onto irresponsible people, just like in Calgary, they will find these laws work a helluva lot better than BSL.

I am not saying it will prevent all idiots from buying them but it will make some difference and more decent responsible owners will have them and more of the responsible owners will be able to take their dogs out in public and show people what they are really like. All BSL does is suppress the good, responsible, ethical breeders but your crappy BYBers are still out there breeding these dogs and they won't stop.

It will make a difference, not right away but we all know Rome wasn't built in a day.

The picture in the news story was taken by a Year 11 student who took the picture when the dog was wandering in their yard, her father then reported the dog to the council, that was an hour before the attack. It is the same dog that was seized after the attack.

I never said it was purebred, I said Bull Terrier or cross of, it was rego'd with council as a Bull Terrier X so I would say it is a cross.

I had it listed in with my "favourites" but it's gone missing.

I tried a search & couldn't find it either.

However, banned breeds are automatically banned imports, except under special license.

Repealing the BSL wont necessarily lift the ban on the currently banned breeds. Nothing has been mentioned in this regard as far as I could see.

I have googled the proposed legislation & while it appears as though seizure on appearance is to be given a miss, the powers of the ACOs & police have been significantly increased.

It looks as though dog ownership will get a little bit harder, more involved & quite a bit more expensive. Compulsory 3rd party insurance for dog owners for e.g.

So don't start your celebrations just yet,

The blue bird of happiness may just crap on your party cake.

I would say if the law is if a breed of dog is banned it is not allowed to be imported then when they are no longer banned, they will allowed to be imported. Either or I am sure there are loads of them already in the UK and I am sure breeders would find a way to get them in if they wanted.

I would prefer dog ownership to get harder, move involved and more expensive, hopefully that will weed out the idiots who can't afford to have a dog or who can't be bothered putting in the time, effort and money required to succesfully raise a happy, healthy, friendly dog.

[stone]

I would say if the law is if a breed of dog is banned it is not allowed to be imported then when they are no longer banned, they will allowed to be imported. Either or I am sure there are loads of them already in the UK and I am sure breeders would find a way to get them in if they wanted.

But of course, I've already told you that. Same as here.

Don't you think the repeated references to cracking down on the "status" dogs gives a hint as to their motives.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the declared dogs to be ''unbanned'' the general population wont have a bar of it.

From memory the site re the import restrictictions was the DEFRA site, if my memory serves me.

It even listed the alias' to watch for, these included, AST & American Bull Dog as well as the usual UK suspects. Irish SBTs, Olde Style SBTs, Game Bred, Working etc, etc, etc.

[Keira&Phoenix]

I would say if the law is if a breed of dog is banned it is not allowed to be imported then when they are no longer banned, they will allowed to be imported. Either or I am sure there are loads of them already in the UK and I am sure breeders would find a way to get them in if they wanted.

But of course, I've already told you that. Same as here.

Don't you think the repeated references to cracking down on the "status" dogs gives a hint as to their motives.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the declared dogs to be ''unbanned'' the general population wont have a bar of it.

From memory the site re the import restrictictions was the DEFRA site, if my memory serves me.

It even listed the alias' to watch for, these included, AST & American Bull Dog as well as the usual UK suspects. Irish SBTs, Olde Style SBTs, Game Bred, Working etc, etc, etc.

Just jumped on DEFRA

Can't find anything about an import on "dangerous" types of dog.

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/pets/dangerous/

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/InYourHome/AnimalsAndPets/Dogs/DG_180098

http://archive.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/pets/dangerous/

I read through all 3 of these pages. As per laws in Australia it’s illegal to own, breed from, sell, abandon or give away a banned dog, nothing else. Obviously by technicality this would mean you can't bring a dog into the country but there is no specific laws against importation, and as such nothing to turn over. Once a breed is no longer banned then you can legally own, breed, sell, abandon or give them away.

You have your opinion on what the new legislation will mean and I have mine, no point arguing over something that we will eventually have clarification on.

Edited November 18, 2011 by Keira&Phoenix

[stone]

It will be interesting & that's a fact.

Like I said previously, an unbanning would be a positive for the registered, recognised pure bred bull breeds.

Save the Staffy- Repeal the BSL.

Bring it on.

[Keira&Phoenix]

It will be interesting & that's a fact.

Like I said previously, an unbanning would be a positive for the registered, recognised pure bred bull breeds.

Save the Staffy- Repeal the BSL.

Bring it on.

Woohoo we are on the same page! Even if we want BSL repealed for slightly varying reasons! (I love Staffy's (and Amstaff's) as well and would hate for them to ever go through what the APBT has)

[TheCoat]

Geo, are you saying that Amstaff's do have a predisposition for aggression and can be threatening to community safety in the wrong hands?

No Coat, I am saying that people like you will say any dog that looks like a pitbull could not be an amstaff or staffy unless it's ANKC rego'd.

A bit hard to mistake a rotti as a pitbull regardless whether is rego'd or not.

The fact is that there are many unregistered amstaffs, all of which you will happily see killed under legislation because they had the misfortune to be born without papers.

My point is, dogs that look like restricted breeds need to be met with caution in terms of aquiring them and people need to be more responsible in their choices which to me is a simple exercise, don't buy unregistered Bull breeds and crossbreeds of Bull appearance then your dog won't be seized which is common sense. There is no way I would raise a dog and love it knowing the breed is skating on thin ice to be in a position where it could be taken from me and the way to avoid that as I said, don't buy them in the first place, don't support BYB's, buy from registered breeders.

A friend a couple of months ago found some supposed Staffy pups in a pet shop and asked my opinion, what I advised her was if she wanted a Staffy I would help her get a papered one from a registered breeder, that she did and all is good, she doesn't have to worry about rangers knocking suspecting her dog is a Pitbull and loose her dog to BSL, make sense???.

People breed mongrels in the back yard and play on the compassion of dog lovers to provide a home for their products, sad as it is that lives are wasted in these type of breeding programs, this is not in my opinion as the right way to get a dog, I don't support BYB's and the sooner they make the random breeding of unregistered dogs illegal, the better, dog breeding is a technical process that should be left to people with the passion and expertise to do so who are the people I support when it comes down to adding a dog to the family.

Edited November 18, 2011 by TheCoat

[geo]

Geo, are you saying that Amstaff's do have a predisposition for aggression and can be threatening to community safety in the wrong hands?

No Coat, I am saying that people like you will say any dog that looks like a pitbull could not be an amstaff or staffy unless it's ANKC rego'd.

A bit hard to mistake a rotti as a pitbull regardless whether is rego'd or not.

The fact is that there are many unregistered amstaffs, all of which you will happily see killed under legislation because they had the misfortune to be born without papers.

My point is, dogs that look like restricted breeds need to be met with caution in terms of aquiring them and people need to be more responsible in their choices which to me is a simple exercise, don't buy unregistered Bull breeds and crossbreeds of Bull appearance then your dog won't be seized which is common sense. There is no way I would raise a dog and love it knowing the breed is skating on thin ice to be in a position where it could be taken from me and the way to avoid that as I said, don't buy them in the first place, don't support BYB's, buy from registered breeders.

A friend a couple of months ago found some supposed Staffy pups in a pet shop and asked my opinion, what I advised her was if she wanted a Staffy I would help her get a papered one from a registered breeder, that she did and all is good, she doesn't have to worry about rangers knocking suspecting her dog is a Pitbull and loose her dog to BSL, make sense???.

People breed mongrels in the back yard and play on the compassion of dog lovers to provide a home for their products, sad as it is that lives are wasted in these type of breeding programs, this is not in my opinion as the right way to get a dog, I don't support BYB's and the sooner they make the random breeding of unregistered dogs illegal, the better, dog breeding is a technical process that should be left to people with the passion and expertise to do so who are the people I support when it comes down to adding a dog to the family.

It's about the rights of an animal not just about what we think we should do because of BSL. Yes caution should be sort from people who just want a dog, buy something else unless you really want a bull breed and are prepared to put in the work. However this leaves thousands of dogs without a voice, anti BSL people are not only the voice for apbt but for any dog that looks like one.

On another matter, as i said before many rego'd breeders aren't in it for the long haul, proven track records, many many many litters, breeding for function not just looks or colour is what it takes.. many breeders fall short. Bull breeds suffer from people who want to make a difference but invariably suffer from over breeding, over representation in pounds and now being PTS like never before.

Remember it is society that is at fault. not dogs.

[TheCoat]

Geo, are you saying that Amstaff's do have a predisposition for aggression and can be threatening to community safety in the wrong hands?

No Coat, I am saying that people like you will say any dog that looks like a pitbull could not be an amstaff or staffy unless it's ANKC rego'd.

A bit hard to mistake a rotti as a pitbull regardless whether is rego'd or not.

The fact is that there are many unregistered amstaffs, all of which you will happily see killed under legislation because they had the misfortune to be born without papers.

My point is, dogs that look like restricted breeds need to be met with caution in terms of aquiring them and people need to be more responsible in their choices which to me is a simple exercise, don't buy unregistered Bull breeds and crossbreeds of Bull appearance then your dog won't be seized which is common sense. There is no way I would raise a dog and love it knowing the breed is skating on thin ice to be in a position where it could be taken from me and the way to avoid that as I said, don't buy them in the first place, don't support BYB's, buy from registered breeders.

A friend a couple of months ago found some supposed Staffy pups in a pet shop and asked my opinion, what I advised her was if she wanted a Staffy I would help her get a papered one from a registered breeder, that she did and all is good, she doesn't have to worry about rangers knocking suspecting her dog is a Pitbull and loose her dog to BSL, make sense???.

People breed mongrels in the back yard and play on the compassion of dog lovers to provide a home for their products, sad as it is that lives are wasted in these type of breeding programs, this is not in my opinion as the right way to get a dog, I don't support BYB's and the sooner they make the random breeding of unregistered dogs illegal, the better, dog breeding is a technical process that should be left to people with the passion and expertise to do so who are the people I support when it comes down to adding a dog to the family.

It's about the rights of an animal not just about what we think we should do because of BSL. Yes caution should be sort from people who just want a dog, buy something else unless you really want a bull breed and are prepared to put in the work. However this leaves thousands of dogs without a voice, anti BSL people are not only the voice for apbt but for any dog that looks like one.

On another matter, as i said before many rego'd breeders aren't in it for the long haul, proven track records, many many many litters, breeding for function not just looks or colour is what it takes.. many breeders fall short. Bull breeds suffer from people who want to make a difference but invariably suffer from over breeding, over representation in pounds and now being PTS like never before.

Remember it is society that is at fault. not dogs.

Geo, dog breeding IMHO is out of control and needs to be regulated, too many doggy lives are needlessly born and destined to be cut short by over supply, it is a society fault, the buggers who randomly breed them are the people I would personally address? It's totally senseless in my way of thinking that just anyone is allowed to breed dogs with any breed mix they can get their hands on, I think it's totally wrong and the cause of most of the problems.

I would like to see a licence requirement to breed dogs and a hefty fine if you get caught breeding without one, along with the licence a set of rules, health standards, hip and elbow exrays etc etc, make it too hard for morons to breed dogs, make it too much hassle for the random BYB to be bothered with it, something along those lines as the first step in proactively addressing the situation??.

Edited November 18, 2011 by TheCoat

[stone]

Only approved,licenced, ANKC registered/working dog register breeders allowed to have entire dogs?

[geo]

Geo, dog breeding IMHO is out of control and needs to be regulated, too many doggy lives are needlessly born and destined to be cut short by over supply, it is a society fault, the buggers who randomly breed them are the people I would personally address? It's totally senseless in my way of thinking that just anyone is allowed to breed dogs with any breed mix they can get their hands on, I think it's totally wrong and the cause of most of the problems.

I would like to see a licence requirement to breed dogs and a hefty fine if you get caught breeding without one, along with the licence a set of rules, health standards, hip and elbow exrays etc etc, make it too hard for morons to breed dogs, make it too much hassle for the random BYB to be bothered with it, something along those lines as the first step in proactively addressing the situation??.

We agree on something. :D

[geo]

Only approved,licenced, ANKC registered/working dog register breeders allowed to have entire dogs?

I don't see why responsible owners should need to desex their dogs. AKNC aren't law makers or the standard and many people will disagree with that idea.

People who wish to breed should require licensing, education, a clear breeding path, code of ethics and the list goes on. This needs to start with the banning of pet sales at pet stores, ridding australia of puppy mills, including registered ones.

[stone]

People who wish to breed should require licensing, education, a clear breeding path, code of ethics and the list goes on

good idea.

Just as ANKC registered breeders are......

[geo]

People who wish to breed should require licensing, education, a clear breeding path, code of ethics and the list goes on

good idea.

Just as ANKC registered breeders are......

Not as much as most would like to think. But it's better than nothing.

[TheCoat]

Only approved,licenced, ANKC registered/working dog register breeders allowed to have entire dogs?

I don't see why responsible owners should need to desex their dogs. AKNC aren't law makers or the standard and many people will disagree with that idea.

People who wish to breed should require licensing, education, a clear breeding path, code of ethics and the list goes on. This needs to start with the banning of pet sales at pet stores, ridding australia of puppy mills, including registered ones.

Looks like we agree on two things, there is hope yet

I don't know that keeping entire dogs contributes largely to litters bred by accident, I am thinking most BYB's are purposely bred. There would be literally thousands upon thousands of especially entire males that have never contributed to a litter, the last male I desexed was in 1983, one I did stud a few times in registered breeding programs, but none of my others have ever been bred accidently or otherwise. I prefer entire males especially in evaluation of health and character in the bloodline over a period of time without the effects of desexing causing secondary issues to cloud the result. One of my males is a breeders alternative line or newer bloodline used for monitoring purposes and perhaps a stud, the agreement terms with him was "not" to be desexed.

I have been asked numerous times over the years to stud a male in a BYB and crossbreed program, good luck

[stone]

I don't know that keeping entire dogs contributes largely to litters bred by accident

Not largely,no

Entirely. ......no pun intended.

How many accidental litters have been whelped by neutered dogs .

Edited November 19, 2011 by stone

[geo]

I don't know that keeping entire dogs contributes largely to litters bred by accident

Not largely,no

Entirely. ......no pun intended.

How many accidental litters have been whelped by neutered dogs .

The key word in the statement is ACCIDENTAL. I think most BYB dogs are bred on purpose.