Herr Rottweiler Posted December 9, 2008 Share Posted December 9, 2008 Hi all, Just had word from a few freinds in the schutzhund community that they are being dragged into court at the start of next year simply for doing what they have always done, Schutzhund. They have done nothing wrong, they have just enjoyed being a social community and sharing a passion for high end training. At this stage, they have being charged with 30+ offences according to local councils, (who are just a runaway law unto themselves) and they face a really tough fight ahead. The big picture problem here is that if they lose, eventually so do many dog owners because it's just another nail in the BSL coffin which will ultimately effect many of us. There does come a time in peoples lifes where they have to do more than just feel pissed off or robbed and this is one of those times. A community working together can do great things and move mountains and i sincerely believe this is a mountain that needs to be moved, permanantly! Victoria has been dubbed, "The Nanny State" for some time now as our governments love to pass law upon law and ban everything they can. It has to stop There is a group organising a fighting fund as we speak to which some canine enthusiasts have generously donated to so we can have our say in court. If you would like to know more and are genuinely interested, pst me and I will send you more info on how you can help. HR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke W Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) What are they being charged with? ETA: Is this really a BSL issue? It's about the deed, not the breed right? Edited December 10, 2008 by Luke W Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Rottweiler Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 What are they being charged with? I dont know the individual charges. ETA: Is this really a BSL issue? It's about the deed, not the breed right? A fair question but a somewhat short sighted one. The BSL will never be about the deed. In this case however, it will have a profound effect on titled dogs being imported into the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) What are they being charged with? A fair question but a somewhat short sighted one. The BSL will never be about the deed. In this case however, it will have a profound effect on titled dogs being imported into the country. How so? There's nothing in the import regs about titled dogs? My guess is that relevant council regs deem any "attack trained" dog to be a dangerous dog (that is the case here) and that Schutzhund dog owners have not kept their dogs in accordance with those requirements (eg. fenced runs, muzzles etc) But its just a guess. Edited December 10, 2008 by poodlefan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonElite Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Can we have more info pls Herr Rott? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke W Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 What are they being charged with? I dont know the individual charges. Aren't you jumping the gun a bit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Rottweiler Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 I will post more info after I speak more with the original party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Rottweiler Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 What are they being charged with? I dont know the individual charges. Aren't you jumping the gun a bit? no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) From what I know of Schutzhund, it is a very disciplined sport - disciplined for the dogs AND disciplined for the people. What I'd like to know is of the dogs who have been Schutzhund trained, how many of them have been recorded as having caused a nuisance within the community. HR .... I think people do need to have an idea of the 'charges' that have been laid against these people. If it is a charge merely because of holding Schutzhund 'schools' and in the absence of proof that this alone has or is causing problematic dogs, then I think the charges are fraudulent (so to speak) and would indicate the authorities are charging them simply because "they can". People will continue to work their dogs the way they want to. The more 'bans' and criminal offenses that are held against the good supervisors, the more the training will go 'underground' and I know for a fact and first hand that's where things go seriously wrong for the dogs and for the community. This has been evidenced with the implementation of laws which preclude many from having and training 'working dogs'. The law might be there ..... but it doesn't mean it is right. I agree HR .... can we have more information please? ETA: Coincidentally, I just got off the phone from someone who informed me of what was happening and was going to pass on this email. Your post here came in first. I am getting really tired of how inch by inch, topic by topic, dog enthusiasts are being suffocated in what they do and somehow or other it all gets done under the guise of "dog-welfare". Is 'going' for these people a deflection of the real work that needs to be done to penalise the people who are really irresponsible dog owners? Edited December 10, 2008 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Rottweiler Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 This is the original email I recieved. I suggest contacting the email address provided if you genuinely want more information. I will be speaking with John McDonald tonight so I will get a better account on what happened. TIME FOR UNITY AND ACTIONHello Dog Enthusiast This in as important email concerning the international sport for working dogs – IPO (or VPG or Schutzhund). Here in Australia, and in particular Victoria, we are struggling with a kennel club, some breed clubs and government officials in trying to get them to understand the concept of WORKING DOGS. This has been going on for many years and nothing to date has worked. They are hell bent on trying to control it without any understanding whatsoever. These groups and individuals are aiming to have IPO dogsport totally banned. The dilemma that they face is that banning this dogsport activity will ultimately lead to an importation ban on certain working breeds. The Victorian State government has colluded with these groups to introduce laws that only allow a licensed security officer to train a dog for dogsport but any person can own a dog that is trained for dogsport. The Victorian government is promoting its laws as being the best legislation of its type in Australia and recommends that it be adopted in other States and Territories of the country. The Victorian government is the only State government that has a specific department/bureaucracy committed to animal welfare. This department/bureaucracy seeks to have the agendas of animal liberation/rights groups enacted into law. The Law states: Unless you are a licensed security officer you are not allowed to train or have trained your dog in any form of protection training. Now we all know the ramifications of this legislation. It will flow on throughout Australia and it’s coming to you. URGENT ASSISTANCE REQUIRED John and Lynne MacDonald who have devoted their lives to dogsport, Istvan Lakatos, Crystal Mears and Southern Cross K9 Inc, the club they have all been associated with, are being prosecuted by their local council for conducting an illegal activity, yes illegal. Something they have been doing for over 20 years is now illegal. DOGSPORT; can you believe that? Think about it!! Ladies and Gentlemen it’s time to step up and fight for our rights to do Dogsport !!! Not only for these four people and the club, but for anyone who believes that there are certain things that are simply unjust! The sport is going to need funding to fight this legally and we ask you all to dig deep into your pockets and help. We are keen to establish a Fighting Fund that will help the sport and these people. We urge you all to get back to us or the Australian United Sportclub Clubs Inc. Board of Management to pledge your most needed financial support. Everybody who receives this e-mail and who has participated in dogsport, or other people, should feel obliged to contribute to the Fighting Fund. This time it’s John, Lynne, Istvan and Crystal – next time it could, and more than probably will be, YOU. We have all spent a few hundred dollars at some point in our lives on frivolous non essential items – THIS IS ESSENTIAL – this is our lifestyle and our freedom to participate in an international activity that we all cherish and whose legislative status is laughable – this is the one time that the few hundred dollars will not be frivolous – PLEASE MAKE THE EFFORT!!! Every time we receive a pledge or donation this e-mail will be sent to everyone again with the list of donations – please send it to as many people as you can. THIS IS A SITUATION WITH FAR REACHING CONSEQUENCES!!! DONATIONS SHOULD BE FORWARDED TO : Account Name: Australian United Sportdog Clubs Incorporated BSB: 064467 Account Number: 10192293 When making your donation please include who it is from and for the Fighting fund, as we will need to make sure these donations are kept separate The short term goal is to raise $50,000 AUD (100 donations – this is kids play!! But will assist in a way that cannot be under estimated) The long term goal with the help of our overseas friends should be to raise in excess of $100,000 AUD to ensure that the fight can continue until it is won!!!!! The table below will start the ball rolling 20 names by the beginning of February 2009 = $10,000 AUD This will not go away and it must be contested in a court of LAW in February 2009. Eagerly awaiting your donations/pledges, response or any further suggestions. Warmest Regards, Australian United Sportdog Clubs Inc. [email protected] (Secretary of Australian United Sport Dog Clubs Inc.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessca Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) DP sorry Edited December 10, 2008 by Jessca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessca Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 any one who feels affected by this, and would like to help out please go to the forum linked in my signature, our forum is dedicated to stopping this bs, and preserving the true working dog. please help out in any way you can. even if its just numbers, anything you can do to help is good enough. http://www.specialistcanines.com/ HR-you bet me to it i was about to post that. thank you, Cheers, Jess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 I thought the current law already stated that though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) My guess is that while that tone of email continues to be used, the chance of IPO enthusiasts influencing any of the "consipirators" against them will be negligible. Time to get cooler heads on this one HR and now. Oh, for the record, the bitework aspect of Schutzhund training (when did it start being called Dogsport?) would already be illegal under quite a few state laws. Edited December 10, 2008 by poodlefan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Question HR? When this matter goes to Court and let's assume the prosecutors lose the case ..... do they have to pay the Court costs of the defendants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 My guess is that while that tone of email continues to be used, the chance of IPO enthusiasts influencing any of the "consipirators" against them will be negligible.Time to get cooler heads on this one HR and now. PF .... you often have good ideas. Any suggestions (bearing in mind the urgency)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 (edited) I think the "Christmas Card Challenge" (see info by MDBA) is something everyone could do - no matter WHAT their preferences to dog activities they have. Christmas Card Challenge Edited December 10, 2008 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Rottweiler Posted December 10, 2008 Author Share Posted December 10, 2008 Question HR? When this matter goes to Court and let's assume the prosecutors lose the case ..... do they have to pay the Court costs of the defendants? That's a good question erny. One that I dont know the answer to. PF They have been calling Schtzhund Dog sport for over a decade. Back in the days that I was involved with the clubs they called it dogsport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Question HR? When this matter goes to Court and let's assume the prosecutors lose the case ..... do they have to pay the Court costs of the defendants? If the activity is now illegal, I'd not be making any such assumption Erny. Is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmolo Posted December 10, 2008 Share Posted December 10, 2008 Does anyone have the current legislation handy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now