Justice For Tango.supreme Court 29th March Brisbane

[poodlefan]

If the BSL train carries on its momentum and goes in the direction of some US states/councils or European countries, I don't think being a pedigree is going to matter.

It does make me fearful for the future of dogs.

BSL has to be fought on the one irrefutable fact that BSL breed discussions tend to ignore.

It doesn't work. It has never worked. Targetting "dangerous breeds" fails to protect community from all dangerous dogs.

End of story.

Edited April 7, 2010 by poodlefan

[geo]

my post was generated towards you whippets and no one else.

yeah whatever.

Misplace blame on "people like me". I don't care. I wasn't the one that provided evidence that put Amstaffs in the same basket as APBT's. That curtesy goes to Ms Chivers.

Totally agree with you chrisjc, and as for the above comment, puhleeeeeeeeeeeeease start helping not whinging.

I know all amstaff owners must be slightly upset but now is the time to help out all dogs.

[Quickasyoucan]

If the BSL train carries on its momentum and goes in the direction of some US states/councils or European countries, I don't think being a pedigree is going to matter.

It does make me fearful for the future of dogs.

BSL has to be fought on the one irrefutable fact that BSL breed discussions tend to ignore.

It doesn't work. It has never worked. Targetting "dangerous breeds" fails to protect community from all dangerous dogs.

End of story.

I wholeheartedly agree, the only way out I can see is to get some sort of pilot going to actively reduce dog attacks based on owner education (not indiscriminate killing of dogs deemed to be dangerous based on breed), to provide actual proof that this is how dog attacks can be reduced.

I just don't understand why lawmakers cannot see this. I guess it is a question of votes, the quick fix answer.

I think this relates to something bigger than the Amstaff/Pitbull debate (no offence to owners of either breed intended), while everyone bickers about the fact their breed of choice should be saved, no progress is going to be made.

I would like to see dog attacks reduced (irrespective of BSL), getting something going that really worked woudl benefit everyone - the victims and the dogs.

ETA horrible spelling.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Quickasyoucan

[poodlefan]

I wholeheartedly agree, the only way out I can see is to get some sort of pilot going to actively reduce dog attacks based on owner education (not indiscriminate killing of dogs deemed to be dangerous based on breed), to provide actual proof that this is how dog attacks can be reduced.

I just don't understand why lawmakers cannot see this. I guess it is a question of votes, the quick fix answer.

No need to pilot. The Calgary (Canada) example exists for all to learn from.

Edited to add link for those interested. Calgary example

And more on Calgary

Edited April 7, 2010 by poodlefan

[Quickasyoucan]

I wholeheartedly agree, the only way out I can see is to get some sort of pilot going to actively reduce dog attacks based on owner education (not indiscriminate killing of dogs deemed to be dangerous based on breed), to provide actual proof that this is how dog attacks can be reduced.

I just don't understand why lawmakers cannot see this. I guess it is a question of votes, the quick fix answer.

No need to pilot. The Calgary (Canada) example exists for all to learn from.

Yeah but wasn't that twisted by someone recently to show it didn't work.

How do we get that to the forefront of the argument?

[poodlefan]

I wholeheartedly agree, the only way out I can see is to get some sort of pilot going to actively reduce dog attacks based on owner education (not indiscriminate killing of dogs deemed to be dangerous based on breed), to provide actual proof that this is how dog attacks can be reduced.

I just don't understand why lawmakers cannot see this. I guess it is a question of votes, the quick fix answer.

No need to pilot. The Calgary (Canada) example exists for all to learn from.

Yeah but wasn't that twisted by someone recently to show it didn't work.

How do we get that to the forefront of the argument?

News to me.

How do you do it? By establishing a dialogue with those with the capacity to overturn the laws.. the RSPCA and politicians. Bear in mind that these are the very same folk who've been demonised by a sector of the anti BSL lobby.

[tybrax]

Mr Logan Timms

Senior Policy Officer

Strategic Policy and Legislation

Department of Local Government, Sport and Recreation

PO Box 15031

CITY EAST QLD 4002

Contact Logan Timms

[Quickasyoucan]

I wholeheartedly agree, the only way out I can see is to get some sort of pilot going to actively reduce dog attacks based on owner education (not indiscriminate killing of dogs deemed to be dangerous based on breed), to provide actual proof that this is how dog attacks can be reduced.

I just don't understand why lawmakers cannot see this. I guess it is a question of votes, the quick fix answer.

No need to pilot. The Calgary (Canada) example exists for all to learn from.

Yeah but wasn't that twisted by someone recently to show it didn't work.

How do we get that to the forefront of the argument?

News to me.

How do you do it? By establishing a dialogue with those with the capacity to overturn the laws.. the RSPCA and politicians. Bear in mind that these are the very same folk who've been demonised by a sector of the anti BSL lobby.

I am sure there was something on here, might have been a Hugh Wirth extract, stating that the Calgary example had been a failure or something to that effect, I am sure I remember comments that was wrong. Of course I could be going completely crazy

[geo]

Mr Logan Timms

Senior Policy Officer

Strategic Policy and Legislation

Department of Local Government, Sport and Recreation

PO Box 15031

CITY EAST QLD 4002

Contact Logan Timms

He is on secondment apparently until August 8th according to the email reply i recieved.

He left these two names to be contacted; Nancy Spencer on 300 30588 or Magdi Elhag 322 58649

Their emails will probably be [email protected] and so on.

[Are You Serious Jo]

yet 90% of ANKC breeders will hapily take $900 off a buyer for a non papered dog.

What the? Where did you get your stats?

[geo]

Mr Logan Timms

Senior Policy Officer

Strategic Policy and Legislation

Department of Local Government, Sport and Recreation

PO Box 15031

CITY EAST QLD 4002

Contact Logan Timms

nancy Spencer and Magdi Elhag were the two names i was given as Logan Timms is apparently on secondmant elsewhere.

geo

[Kelly_Louise]

Mr Logan Timms

Senior Policy Officer

Strategic Policy and Legislation

Department of Local Government, Sport and Recreation

PO Box 15031

CITY EAST QLD 4002

Contact Logan Timms

He is on secondment apparently until August 8th according to the email reply i recieved.

He left these two names to be contacted; Nancy Spencer on 300 30588 or Magdi Elhag 322 58649

Their emails will probably be [email protected] and so on.

I got that too... but it says August 2009... sooooo??? Not sure.

[R00]

If the BSL train carries on its momentum and goes in the direction of some US states/councils or European countries, I don't think being a pedigree is going to matter.

It does make me fearful for the future of dogs.

BSL has to be fought on the one irrefutable fact that BSL breed discussions tend to ignore.

It doesn't work. It has never worked. Targetting "dangerous breeds" fails to protect community from all dangerous dogs.

End of story.

I wholeheartedly agree, the only way out I can see is to get some sort of pilot going to actively reduce dog attacks based on owner education (not indiscriminate killing of dogs deemed to be dangerous based on breed), to provide actual proof that this is how dog attacks can be reduced.

I just don't understand why lawmakers cannot see this. I guess it is a question of votes, the quick fix answer.

I think this relates to something bigger than the Amstaff/Pitbull debate (no offence to owners of either breed intended), while everyone bickers about the fact their breed of choice should be saved, no progress is going to be made.

I would like to see dog attacks reduced (irrespective of BSL), getting something going that really worked woudl benefit everyone - the victims and the dogs.

ETA horrible spelling.

Because most non dog owning people want to see an end to the pitbull.

Those who doubt my comment go and randomly find 10 people you do not know and ask their opinion on a whether pit bulls should be banned.

Part of the issue is a bad media wrap and opinions turning into fact due to the number of times a person hears it. A lot of people I talk to have never even seen or met an Amstaff or an APBT and still think they should be banned.

The best thing any owner can do is become an ambassador for your breed, get the dog out and about meeting people and try to change opinions from at the ground level.

It will take a brave (read: unusual) politician to try and change BSL if s/he even has the slightest thought that a bull breed may attack a child. At the very next dog attack the politician faces having his name dragged through mud as the person responsible for abolishing BSL which led to the attack. In very simple terms BSL is well and truely in the too hard basket to be changed in a positive way, however politicians can get cheap votes by toughening it up.

There is just no incentive for any member of govt. (including councils) to remove BSL. It needs to be changed at the ground level by public support and education. Which quite frankly is not currently working, the message of deed over breed is just not getting out there.

Just my view.

Roo

Edit for clarity

Edited April 7, 2010 by Roo

[tybrax]

American pit bull owners vow to fight on

Thomas Chamberlin | April 7th, 2010

Related Links

$500,000 to keep dog off death row

AFTER spending almost $500,000 on their fight, a couple plan to appeal against a Supreme Court decision that ruled their dog was an American pit bull, preventing it from returning to its Parkwood home.

The court yesterday ruled American staffordshire terriers were the same breed as the outlawed pit bull.

The decision has potentially dire consequences for Queensland's 25,000 AmStaff owners, including at least 1000 on the Gold Coast.

Kylie Chivers and John Mokomoko took on the Gold Coast City Council in court over the identification of their dog Tango as a pit bull, rather than an AmStaff.

It meant the dog was deemed dangerous and needed to be put down but they moved the animal to a safe location in a kennel south of Tweed Heads more than five years ago. In NSW, Tango could be registered as an AmStaff.

Yesterday, Justice Glenn Martin dismissed Ms Chivers's application, stating that Tango was an American pit bull -- the same breed as an American staffordshire terrier.

This followed expert evidence, supplied by Ms Chivers, that the council ultimately relied upon.

"The conclusion that I draw from that evidence is that the name American staffordshire terrier is a name which was adopted in the United States of America for purposes of promotion or other similar reasons and that that name was applied to American pit bull terriers," said Justice Martin.

"That practice appears to have been adopted in Australia.

"Therefore, as I am satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated that Tango is an AmStaff, it follows that Tango is also an APBT and is thus subject to the restrictions under the local laws referred above."

Related Coverage

$500,000 to keep dog off death row

Outside court, Mr Mokomoko said the decision would set a precedent and he predicted Queensland councils would now enforce AmStaffs as pit bulls, declaring them dangerous.

"They will have to register as a restricted dog (if born before 2005) and have them desexed," he said.

"If born after 2005, it has to be destroyed. We are going to appeal with the help of the Australian national kennel club and the American pit bull club."

The Gold Coast City Council yesterday called on the State Government to clarify whether the ruling effectively outlawed AmStaffs.

Local Government Minister Desley Boyle said the council's local laws were responsible for prohibiting dogs, but the Government would examine the ruling to see if it had any implications for state animal management legislation.

In a surprise twist, Mr Mokomoko yesterday said he was contacted by the council which was considering making changes to local laws which could allow the dogs to live on the Gold Coast under strict guidelines.

Justice Martin did not order Ms Chivers to pay costs.

[chrisjc]

im sorry i wont claim that my 90% claim is a statistic that you will be happy with or taken from countless interveiws with ANKC breeders.

What i will say is that i have never ever met a single ANKC breeder that wouldnt have sold me a dog without papers had i asked, and that is a statment i will take to the bank. WHY? because for three years i owned a company and 80% of my clients were ANKC breeders. thats a stat i will say is 100% correct.

[justin19801]

If the BSL train carries on its momentum and goes in the direction of some US states/councils or European countries, I don't think being a pedigree is going to matter.

It does make me fearful for the future of dogs.

BSL has to be fought on the one irrefutable fact that BSL breed discussions tend to ignore.

It doesn't work. It has never worked. Targetting "dangerous breeds" fails to protect community from all dangerous dogs.

End of story.

This is the crux of the problem. Not the breed or even the deed but responsible pet ownership. The AST/APBT/SBT arguement was settled long ago. Now SBTs in Australia will be next in the R$PCA/ALP sights which use divide and conquoer tactics to fund raise for their bloated salaries. They need to be taken head on, not pandered to.

[APBT Club of Aust Inc.]

"If born after 2005, it has to be destroyed. We are going to appeal with the help of the Australian national kennel club and the American pit bull club."

Just curious about a couple of things mentioned here.

1. I was not aware that Qld had added to their legislation that APBT's born after 2005, had to be destroyed.

When was this introduced?

2. What "American pit bull club" are you referring to here?

[GeckoTree]

On the news someone from the APBT association qld, is going back to southport court on the 16'th I think,he's been in and out of court for years about the dogs. That might be it?

[Quickasyoucan]

Just out of interest has the Gold Coast Council or the Queensland Government produced any bite statistics to show that BSL is actually working?

As Poodlefan said in an earlier post, BSL has been shown not to work in Canada and Calgary has a model set up that is working that does not have BSL and does not have mandatory spay neuter but does invest money in dog ownership education and has resultant high rates of dog registration.

I know this does not help Tango, but a focus on what does work IMO would be better than arguing semantics over breed.

Edited April 8, 2010 by Quickasyoucan

[chrisjc]

as far as i know the Qld club has been closed down for years? or maybee gone into hiding since the laws got stricter?

the only Club left as far as i know is the club based in victoria, who i would assume is the above poster, i am pretty sure i am familiar with a couple of the dogs in the above avatar from my old bulletins.