Justice For Tango.supreme Court 29th March Brisbane

[JustinMorgan]

Mita it has been this way for quite some time now. There are quite a few different breeds of dogs banned from certain Council Shires.

[mita]

Mita it has been this way for quite some time now. There are quite a few different breeds of dogs banned from certain Council Shires.

Yes, I agree, JM. It's been there as long as the BSL laws were brought in. But not many people know that the Qld councils can legally introduce any laws they like, about restricting any breeds they like. They think the only breeds that can be restricted are the 5 or so named in the State law.

Edited April 9, 2010 by mita

[justin19801]

Yes they are initially the same dog but Amstaffs have been bred as show dogs for many years where as a lot of Pittbulls have been bred for fighting for many years.

Our Amstaff like most, is of absolutely lovely nature and would never hurt a fly. Every Pittbull I have met has been lovely as well to be honest and I guess we're lucky in Darwin, that we are still allowed to have Pitbulls. There is a major difference however when it comes down to it, Pittbulls are far more likely to be aggressive, Amstaffs just aren't bred that way.

If all this crap goes ahead in Qld all Amstaffs will be more than welcome in the NT

I really feel for this couple, I couldn't imagine having people turn against our boy.

APBTs have been bred as family pets since before they were first registered in 1896. In the US fighting strains of both exist and they are dual registered. Claiming they are a different breed when they are one and the same wont help anyone other than the BSL supporters. Fighting BSL and giving something back to the dog community is something which ANKC is about, not just safeguarding their own breeds especially as it is now common law APBT = AST. Papers will mean nothing in a court of law.

[justin19801]

If people want the ANKC to fight for their unregistered dogs then they need to join as an associate and make your feelings known to them as a member. You wouldn't call the NRMA to help with your car if you weren't a member, but you expect a purebred dog registery to fight on your behalf without you joining?

NRMA fights for car safety for all drivers, not just it's members. The comparison appears specious at first but is in fact the nub of the matter at hand.

[justin19801]

The most worrying thing is that the Qld Act allows for Qld councils to introduce local laws to cover whatever particular breeds of dogs they like.

So, even if negotiations with the State Gov Dpt successfully make the point that Amstaffs (papered) are not interchangeable with Pitbulls, councils can continue to make their own laws about whatever dog breeds they like.

Geo posted in another thread a reply from the Qld State Gov Dpt which covers local government matters:

Importantly, the State Act gives local councils the autonomy to introduce separate local laws for particular breeds of dogs which is the case with the Gold Coast City Council which has put in place a local law that bans pit bull terriers.

The decision to make such a local law is at the discretion of each local government. State Government laws do not force any council to ban any dog breed.

When the CEO, RSPCA Qld, first publicly turned against the notion of BSL, he made the point that some councils had exercised the power given them by the Act... to a full extent... resulting in innocent family dogs being PTS.

All of which means lobbying/influencing, has to get down to a council by council level.

Lobbying has to be at Qld govt level. Dog owners should be pressuring the parties and R$PCA to overturn BSL not wasting their efforts at local government level. First place to start is the hip pocket nerve.

[Are You Serious Jo]

Think about it. It takes money to fight BSL, who would an organisation protect first if they have limited funds, those who pay money for membership or those who don't? A lot of pitbull people have nothing nice to say about ANKC breeders, even though some of their biggest BSL fighters are registered breeders who don't even have amstaffs.

Did Chivers have legal representation, WTF was any of the applicants team thinking when they introduced some of their evidence? Why not rehome the dog instead of letting it spend 5 years in a kennel and put all that wasted money into a fund to actually fight BSL. I'd be mighty pissed at them if I were am amstaff owner right now. I feel so bad for all those owners, their dogs are now under a cloud of uncertainty.

[justin19801]

Think about it. It takes money to fight BSL, who would an organisation protect first if they have limited funds, those who pay money for membership or those who don't? A lot of pitbull people have nothing nice to say about ANKC breeders, even though some of their biggest BSL fighters are registered breeders who don't even have amstaffs.

Did Chivers have legal representation, WTF was any of the applicants team thinking when they introduced some of their evidence? Why not rehome the dog instead of letting it spend 5 years in a kennel and put all that wasted money into a fund to actually fight BSL. I'd be mighty pissed at them if I were am amstaff owner right now. I feel so bad for all those owners, their dogs are now under a cloud of uncertainty.

I agree, AST owners will be pi##ed off as they have been in denial for so long they probably really believe their own propaganda.

BSL is a threat to all dog owners as has been shown by groups such as R$PCA, H$U$, PETA, animal liberation etc who want to end pet ownership. If ANKC think they can save themselves by abandoning everyone else then they too are in denial as the latest SC case proved. Pressure from the media is also at hand to include SBT and the R$PCA to include Am Bulldogs in BSL.

[chrisjc]

to make it clear none of my previous comments about ANKC members were to be taken as aimed at all ankc members far from it actually, my comments were aimed more at SOME people who in my eyes have only their own best interests at hand and i only commented on my own personal experience with SOME members. i would have never expected them to try to help the Apbt, as its on the list and has been for what seems like eons.

Not all APBT owners think so little of ANKC breeders or members, but it doesnt mean we havent been critisised from some members for our breed of choice. some come across as being on a high horse while we are merely fodder for them to talk about. someone like me painting all with the same brush would be no different to people painting all APBT with the same brush.

i also think just because there are two? regs worldwide who dual reg their dogs that hardly makes them the same breed.

just because i dont own an amstaff it doesnt mean i wont be trying to put my two cents in to help prevent all this from happenning, i dont want any dmore dogs added because i dont think it will acommplish anything other than ruining alot of families lives by seizing their dogs or cutting down their options of where they can live due to the breed they own.

ive just left a loving partner and a 60k a year job because i couldnt have my dog in brisbane. it will take me longer to get the same paying job back in sa than it would in qld, its just a fact but my dogs are my responsibility and id rether see out my pets life legally and in a safer environment than risk seizure or even the looks i would get from some on my daily walks.

and i dont think people are out there falsifying any papers i think its more of a thing that someone has suggested could be done from the APBT owners to make their dogs safer, and if they do they need to be exposed.

if the Apbt,s in nt have a higher chance of attacking in Nt than the amstaffs there i would like to think the main difference is the type of owners who have them more than the dogs. breed makes no difference, unless you are talking about DA then i would expect all Apbt to be more DA than most Amstaff, if not they one of the biggest goals of amstaff breeders has failed which i dont beleive it has.

[J.H.M]

So I was watching Monk on tv the other night crap show but thats another topic, anyways they had this chess player guy who was basically playing the cops for fools and he made a comment about a chess move called "poison pawn" where basically the player places the pawn that is too much of a temptation for the other player not to take then wham check mate, and it got me thinking after reading the transcript and other comments about how the council conceded that the 3 points about breed id, training of officers etc was flawed, thereby virtually daring the chivers legal team to push their evidence from Brashears and

Harvey (surely the council barristers had this evidence long before the trial started), now maybe I am just getting so jaded with the world and am very cynical but it really does seem to me that the barristers for the council played the chivers legal team.

Dirty pool yes to pull it out at the last minute but hardly surprises me as we don't live in a fair and equitable society.

I am not pro BSL, I hate living in a nanny state where everything needs to be regulated and no one is made to have any accountablity for their own actions but unfortunately society proves time and time again that we are not ready for all of the freedoms that we take for granted.

I really do hope that some sense can be made and 10's of thousands of dogs are not caught in this rubbish law. Personally if I was the head of dogs QLD I would be looking after my members first, win that fight, then work for the unregistered dogs. Sad fact is that dogs QLD main aim is to promote the betterment of purebreed registered dogs.

[ZBC]

It would seem the CCCQ will continue to demonise the APBT to save its registered breed,allowing the "all bred to fight" sham to continue , but NOT take on BSL itself!

This divide and conquer attitude with "papers" and "not registered" labelling of DOGS has enabled the true Wirth et al agenda to creep slowly but surely over this land!

Will they EVER wake up and see that any threat to ANY breed is a threat to them all eventually?

Justin--please clarify--I heard the Qld "trainers" were NOT ANKC folk but two women(hesitate to a call either a lady) Mesdamses P and P?

The NSW assessors were certainly "trained" and I use that word loosely,as were as council rangers in Victoria,by ANKC and in NSW, they ARE members of ANKC

It is considered by many dog owners the ultimate betrayal of dogdom!

Otherwise I agree with you, and await the legal challenge to their "expertise" in both states,should the Chivers verdict stand.

It should make rivetting reading as they try to show the distict characteristics of the APB that NO OTHER breed has to pass to offspring"unpapered" and unregistered by their organisation, and prove their method to detect reliable continuity of genetic traits in crossbreds!!!

[ZBC]

Think about it. It takes money to fight BSL, who would an organisation protect first if they have limited funds, those who pay money for membership or those who don't? A lot of pitbull people have nothing nice to say about ANKC breeders, even though some of their biggest BSL fighters are registered breeders who don't even have amstaffs.

Did Chivers have legal representation, WTF was any of the applicants team thinking when they introduced some of their evidence? Why not rehome the dog instead of letting it spend 5 years in a kennel and put all that wasted money into a fund to actually fight BSL. I'd be mighty pissed at them if I were am amstaff owner right now. I feel so bad for all those owners, their dogs are now under a cloud of uncertainty.

Excuse me, but were you around when the DaFre case went to Magistrate's court in Qld?

That is where the late Mrs Brashears first gave evidence in Australia, and where, like Ms Chivers, the dog owner sought to show that the checklist method of identification was rubbish,and the council and its "consultant identifiers" were promulgating rubbish!

Were all the critics of Ms Chivers and her legal team and witnesses, criticise one it implies all, so full of foresight that they THEN said, do not use this attack as it will end up putting the AST in the crosshairs?

Didn't think so--all the angst now is due to the magic of foresight and we all can be superlative at that when we choose!

But it helps NOBODY!

[tybrax]

Think about it. It takes money to fight BSL, who would an organisation protect first if they have limited funds, those who pay money for membership or those who don't? A lot of pitbull people have nothing nice to say about ANKC breeders, even though some of their biggest BSL fighters are registered breeders who don't even have amstaffs.

Did Chivers have legal representation, WTF was any of the applicants team thinking when they introduced some of their evidence? Why not rehome the dog instead of letting it spend 5 years in a kennel and put all that wasted money into a fund to actually fight BSL. I'd be mighty pissed at them if I were am amstaff owner right now. I feel so bad for all those owners, their dogs are now under a cloud of uncertainty.

Excuse me, but were you around when the DaFre case went to Magistrate's court in Qld?

That is where the late Mrs Brashears first gave evidence in Australia, and where, like Ms Chivers, the dog owner sought to show that the checklist method of identification was rubbish,and the council and its "consultant identifiers" were promulgating rubbish!

Were all the critics of Ms Chivers and her legal team and witnesses, criticise one it implies all, so full of foresight that they THEN said, do not use this attack as it will end up putting the AST in the crosshairs?

Didn't think so--all the angst now is due to the magic of foresight and we all can be superlative at that when we choose!

But it helps NOBODY!

Good post. ZBC

[RottnBullies]

It would seem the CCCQ will continue to demonise the APBT to save its registered breed,allowing the "all bred to fight" sham to continue , but NOT take on BSL itself!

This divide and conquer attitude with "papers" and "not registered" labelling of DOGS has enabled the true Wirth et al agenda to creep slowly but surely over this land!

Will they EVER wake up and see that any threat to ANY breed is a threat to them all eventually?

Justin--please clarify--I heard the Qld "trainers" were NOT ANKC folk but two women(hesitate to a call either a lady) Mesdamses P and P?

The NSW assessors were certainly "trained" and I use that word loosely,as were as council rangers in Victoria,by ANKC and in NSW, they ARE members of ANKC

It is considered by many dog owners the ultimate betrayal of dogdom!

Otherwise I agree with you, and await the legal challenge to their "expertise" in both states,should the Chivers verdict stand.

It should make rivetting reading as they try to show the distict characteristics of the APB that NO OTHER breed has to pass to offspring"unpapered" and unregistered by their organisation, and prove their method to detect reliable continuity of genetic traits in crossbreds!!!

Absolutely, I couldn't agree more with your ultimate betrayal of dogdom

[justin19801]

ANKC makes tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars each year through the various CCs from unpapered dogs competing in Obedience, Tracking, Agility and soon Flyball. By abandoning any breed they are also abandoning their members.

[JustinMorgan]

Mita it has been this way for quite some time now. There are quite a few different breeds of dogs banned from certain Council Shires.

Yes, I agree, JM. It's been there as long as the BSL laws were brought in. But not many people know that the Qld councils can legally introduce any laws they like, about restricting any breeds they like. They think the only breeds that can be restricted are the 5 or so named in the State law.

Ah , I see now mita

[TessiesTracey]

Out of interest then.. can anyone tell me COULD happen regarding imported dogs?

i.e. two dogs brought over from the UK recently, with United Kingdom kennel club registration papers, who obviously don't have ANKC papers?

Should I now be considering registering them with the CCCQ???

You shouldn't have any worries as the KC dogs are able to be re-registered. It's the same if you have AKC papers.

I would chip if not already done and re-register with the chip to be included on the papers.

ETA: you would probably need an export cert from the UK and the breeder would need to sign the docs. It's not as simple as just sending the papers into the CCCQ.

Hi SBT123.

They're already chipped, have been since pups. So I can just re-register them with CCCQ?

Got the export certs, but not signed by the breeder as it wasn't necessary (they're my dogs brought with me from UK, not just imported by me from the UK if that makes sense), so only signed by the vets, etc. as required by AQIS.

Thanks for the info.

[GK & Saxon]

to make it clear none of my previous comments about ANKC members were to be taken as aimed at all ankc members far from it actually, my comments were aimed more at SOME people who in my eyes have only their own best interests at hand and i only commented on my own personal experience with SOME members. i would have never expected them to try to help the Apbt, as its on the list and has been for what seems like eons.

Not all APBT owners think so little of ANKC breeders or members, but it doesnt mean we havent been critisised from some members for our breed of choice. some come across as being on a high horse while we are merely fodder for them to talk about. someone like me painting all with the same brush would be no different to people painting all APBT with the same brush.

i also think just because there are two? regs worldwide who dual reg their dogs that hardly makes them the same breed.

just because i dont own an amstaff it doesnt mean i wont be trying to put my two cents in to help prevent all this from happenning, i dont want any dmore dogs added because i dont think it will acommplish anything other than ruining alot of families lives by seizing their dogs or cutting down their options of where they can live due to the breed they own.

ive just left a loving partner and a 60k a year job because i couldnt have my dog in brisbane. it will take me longer to get the same paying job back in sa than it would in qld, its just a fact but my dogs are my responsibility and id rether see out my pets life legally and in a safer environment than risk seizure or even the looks i would get from some on my daily walks.

and i dont think people are out there falsifying any papers i think its more of a thing that someone has suggested could be done from the APBT owners to make their dogs safer, and if they do they need to be exposed.

if the Apbt,s in nt have a higher chance of attacking in Nt than the amstaffs there i would like to think the main difference is the type of owners who have them more than the dogs. breed makes no difference, unless you are talking about DA then i would expect all Apbt to be more DA than most Amstaff, if not they one of the biggest goals of amstaff breeders has failed which i dont beleive it has.

My Amstaff is my first dog and I don't understand alot of the doggy lingo that is been said. I do understand that Amstaffs have been bred to be calm, lovely, quiet dogs and mostly for the purpose of showing. Though like I said before all Pittbulls I have met have been of a lovely nature but I know of at least one case in the NT where a family raised and loved Pittbull attacked the young son just out of the blue. I also understand however that there are probably a lot of other dog attacks that we don't hear about, because they are not Pittbulls and the general misconception about the breed is huge. Anyway back to the Amstaffs, there is no way they have the risk of having the same aggressive streak in them, they have been bred apart for too long. I think as long as you can prove that your Amstaff, is indeed an Amstaff then there should be no question.

[ZBC]

ANKC makes tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars each year through the various CCs from unpapered dogs competing in Obedience, Tracking, Agility and soon Flyball. By abandoning any breed they are also abandoning their members.

The dog breeding member in my extended family heartily agrees with you and argues thus --hence my comment earlier of the ultimate betrayal--

Surely it is not too much to ask that all dogs be represented, is it, in fact take that further to the argument that had ANKC from its instigation grown to be the custodian for ALL dogs no matter the breed and just managed show competition as ONE of their many functions with parity for all functions and levels of registration,they might have prevented the introduction of ANY BSL in Australia.

It seems they have been too parochial and timid to take on the RSPCA headed by Wirth.

Edited April 10, 2010 by ZBC

[sandgrubber]

I don't think the ANKC is sufficiently mercenary to understand what it takes in its $$ from to look after it's broader consitituency . . . nor do I think it is sufficiently tight in organisation to take on a political bun fight. Pedigree breeders need an institution to track and validate pedigrees and to support competitions that promote excellence in dog performance along working, obedience, or clever play (dancing with dogs) standards.

I think you'll be disappointed if you ask the ANCK to step up to the plate in a BSL-related legal dispute.

ANKC makes tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars each year through the various CCs from unpapered dogs competing in Obedience, Tracking, Agility and soon Flyball. By abandoning any breed they are also abandoning their members.

The dog breeding member in my extended family heartily agrees with you and argues thus --hence my comment earlier of the ultimate betrayal--

Surely it is not too much to ask that all dogs be represented, is it, in fact take that further to the argument that had ANKC from its instigation grown to be the custodian for ALL dogs no matter the breed and just managed show competition as ONE of their many functions with parity for all functions and levels of registration,they might have prevented the introduction of ANY BSL in Australia.

It seems they have been too parochial and timid to take on the RSPCA headed by Wirth.

[ZBC]

I don't think the ANKC is sufficiently mercenary to understand what it takes in its $$ from to look after it's broader consitituency . . . nor do I think it is sufficiently tight in organisation to take on a political bun fight. Pedigree breeders need an institution to track and validate pedigrees and to support competitions that promote excellence in dog performance along working, obedience, or clever play (dancing with dogs) standards.

I think you'll be disappointed if you ask the ANCK to step up to the plate in a BSL-related legal dispute.

ANKC makes tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars each year through the various CCs from unpapered dogs competing in Obedience, Tracking, Agility and soon Flyball. By abandoning any breed they are also abandoning their members.

The dog breeding member in my extended family heartily agrees with you and argues thus --hence my comment earlier of the ultimate betrayal--

Surely it is not too much to ask that all dogs be represented, is it, in fact take that further to the argument that had ANKC from its instigation grown to be the custodian for ALL dogs no matter the breed and just managed show competition as ONE of their many functions with parity for all functions and levels of registration,they might have prevented the introduction of ANY BSL in Australia.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sadly true--the ANKC has shown its parochial colours before and no doubt will again refuse to act for what aren't their own "papered" dogs.

Should we have more hope when one of their own breed is now distinctly threatened?

Leaving that for others to answer

It seems they have been too parochial and timid to take on the RSPCA headed by Wirth.