Hon.d.boyle Kill Amstaffs Set Pit Bulls Free?

[tybrax]

Are the American Staffordshire terrier and the American Pit Bull terrier one breed or are they two different breeds of dog?

It is generally accepted that the Amstaff and Pit bull came from a common blood line or stock, descending from the Staffordshire bull terrier originally.

The split happened when the UKC, United Kennel Club, preferred their Pit bull stock to be bred for gameness or performance and other dog groups wanted to move towards conformation and show qualities.

The American Staffordshire terrier was then line bred with the best of what was available within their registries to only other registered American Staffordshire terriers for the next 90 years, keeping this breed pure to the original blood line.

What I found out here in Australia, at least, because there is no national registry for the American Pit Bull terrier and as this breed is not recognised by the Australian National Kennel Club or groups like the CCCQ ect, owners and breeders had an open hand at what they were allowed to do in regards to improving or enhancing the look of their particular dogs.

When looking at individual breeders and their dogs, one will boast at how larger their blood lines head is or another will claim that theirs are the biggest most muscular Pit bulls in Australia, now looking nothing in anyway like the original American Pit Bull terrier from the USA, or in fact nothing like the original imported dogs to Australia.

With the introduction of the BITSA DNA dog breed identification test, many American Pit Bull terrier owners were horrified that their secret cross breeding program would come to light exposing how their dogs came to be so individual and distinct from the original imported blood stock to Australia.

After completing now over 30 DNA tests and working with the DNA lab in Victoria it had become indisputably clear that many of the once known American Pit Bull terriers are now showing to be nothing but lookalike cross breed dogs, holding any number of breeds unlike the original cross breed combination which was the American Pit Bull terrier.

The American Pit Bull terriers breeders are not totally to blame for altering their breed or dilution of their blood line, as the prohibition on importing blood stock and the banning and destruction of good breeding stock by the Qld Governments BSL law 17A forced many if not all dogs to go underground. What choice did dog owners have? The blame rests still with this Qld Government who must hold part of the blame for all the consequences of this badly thought-out law.

With the American Staffordshire terrier, the BITSA DNA identification test shows very clearly, scientifically and without any doubt that a suspected dog either is a pure breed American Staffordshire terrier or an American Staffordshire terrier cross breed dog, showing what it was cross bred with, or just a lookalike cross breed, showing what dogs made up the lookalike combination.

With the court case run on the 29th of March, 2010, BRISBANE SUPREME Court. CHIVERS Vs Gold Coast City Council. Ms Chivers went to trial to fulfil a magistrate order asking her to prove her dog was an American Staffordshire terrier so she may be allowed to return her dog to her home on the Gold Coast.

She was not only successful in proving this point uncontested, she also was able to prove that the method of identification used by councils in South East Qld in identification of suspected Pit bull terriers was knowingly false, and that the Qld Government staff, (Animal Control Officers for respective Councils) held no formal or academic qualifications clearly showing they could and would never be considered an expert, in any field in dog breed identification or experts in general under the rule of law.

However in a final twist, at the end of the trial, the GCCC Barrister entered a new submission, which was never presented to Ms Chivers Barrister, changing their whole point of view, stating they had admitted over the past 7 years they had got things wrong and now seen the light and found the truth.

Despite presenting expert evidence in some 10 to 20 trials, that the American Staffordshire terrier and the American Pit Bull terrier were two separate breeds and that with the training of their expert Debora Pomeroy and the 22 point checklist they could without any reservation prove that the dogs were two separate breeds, they now contend that they are the same breed of dog.

As this was submitted at the end of the trial, Ms Chivers Barrister without prior notification had 10 minutes to come up with a reply, thus leaving it to the judge to base his decision on what was before him, the court ruled that an American Staffordshire terrier and the American Pit Bull terrier were the same breed.

Ms Chivers Barrister was clearly blindsided, the rules or principles of natural justice, also known as procedural fairness, were developed to ensure that decision-making is fair and reasonable. Put simply, natural justice involves decision-makers informing people of the case against them or their interests, giving them a right to be heard (the ‘hearing’ rule), not having a personal interest in the outcome (the rule against ‘bias’), and acting only on the basis of logically probative evidence (the ‘no evidence’ rule).” And in a way the judge showed he knew this by his comments and not awarding any costs a clear indication that one side did not follow the rules.

How does this affect dog owners? As the Gold Coast City Council so cleverly tricked a Supreme Court Judge in giving a false ruling, by disobeying the rules or principles of natural justice, their win has given all Pit bull terrier owners a free get out of jail card. I will explain.

The GCCC’s win that American Staffordshire terriers and American Pit bull terriers are one and the same.

Here's the Kicker, there is a DNA test for the Amstaff, 100% accurate, the same test that all the American Staffordshire terrier clubs use to check the validity of a suspected members true breed, the same test the ANKC and the CCCQ use, that is the BITSA Dog Breed Identification DNA test.

Therefore there is a DNA test for Pit bulls...the Amstaff DNA test, so any other dog that does not conform to the Pit bull DNA test (Amstaff DNA test) must not be a Pit bull terrier.

With me so far....

Kill all the Amstaffs, a group of the dog community that have never caused any problems just so a dog called Tango could not be returned to the Gold Coast and win at all costs, has in effect made the GCCC set the Pit bulls free to breed/grow in number and really become a problem as the Pit bull terrier will never pass the Amstaff test.

Just think, when the Restricted dog owners (Gold Coast and South East Qld) find out that all they have to do is send a DNA test to the lab and should the results come back their dog is not an American Staffordshire terrier, they then, don’t have an American Pit bull terrier, no need to put the signs on their gates, no extra fees, compensation for the harassment /desexing their dogs, then the need for an explanation to why the GCCC falsely identified their pet wrongly in the first place?

Wow, Gold Coast City Council how smart do you feel now!

The QLD Government’s Honorable Desley Boyle, Minister for Local Government and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Partnerships who has had two terms as Minister for Local Government over the past 7 years, and Mr Logan Timms, Senior Policy Officer of the Department of Infrastructure and Planning, have been placed in this situation by the GCCC. They are in a stalemate situation; it’s finally up to the dog owners in QLD to write to the Minister demanding that she fix this problem immediately, sack the GCCC or resign enabling hopefully another Minister to come up with a competent solution to fix this problem.

There is currently a case on the GCCC "Whereo" and "Mo" who were both placed under a destruction order by the Gold Coast City Council, Animal Management (Cats and Dog) Act 2008, section 127, Destruction Order.2010/01, Both dogs have been tested for Breed identification, known as BITSA which you are familiar with, and the results are:

Mo: Boston Terrier/ Golden Retriever

Whereo: Staffordshire Bull terrier/ Boxer

Both do not hold the cross breeding to be American Pit bull terriers (or American Staffordshire terriers either, same thing) so how is it that they were identified as American Pit bull terriers or restricted dogs or how have they broken the law?

The first of many back cases to come forward.

Mr Logan Timms, Senior Policy Officer of the Department of Infrastructure and Planning, has been made fully aware of this case for well over a month and has done???

Contact Mr Logan Timms on 3033 0594 or email [email protected] , [email protected] .

Contact Minister Desley Boyle on (07) 3227 8819 (07) 3227 8819 or email [email protected] or PO Box 15031, CITY EAST QLD 4002.

Forgot to add........

This Supreme Court decision has in effect, with the introduction of BITSA DNA testing, made the BSL section of the Animal Management (Cats and Dog) Act 2008, in Qld, unworkable, therefore powerless and Ineffectual.

Kylie Chivers

tybrax

Edited July 10, 2010 by tybrax

[RottnBullies]

[TessiesTracey]

lol bl**dy fools GCCC!! Didn't even THINK of it that way round. Nice one!

[tybrax]

If any readers on this site know any reporters, TV newspeople, councillors who control animal management ect, send them a copy. If you happen to know anyone who has a registered Pit bull terrier in South East Qld, please do likewise.

Type in BITSA on your computer and you will be able to get the DNA test very easily, send a copy of your results to poor old Mr Logan Timms as he is collecting them at present.

If any dog owner is facing a destruction order claiming that their dog is a Restricted dog, (Pit bull terrier) then this would be very handy.

The more people who know the truth on how incompetent the Qld Government are, the sooner we can make a change.

The Gold Coast City Council's way of fixing a problem is to make the whole thing much, much, worse, just out of spite. The Gold Coast City Council, head of Animal Control Geoff Irwin, has over stepped his authority (Abuse of Power).

John.

tybrax

[GeckoTree]

They do seem to put there foot in it, over and over again. Very slow learners that lot.

[sandra64]

Oh this has just made my day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! thankyou tybrax for posting that

Edited July 10, 2010 by sandra64

[tybrax]

Your Welcome.

[kylielou]

If you write to the Minister or Logan Timms, this is the standard fob off letter, it does not answer your complaint, it really only states we don’t know what the f#@K we are going to do, but if we stall you stupid people long enough the problem may fix itself or just go away!

Include this section in your complaint; they might even try to give you an honest attempt at relying to your complaint….(..no won’t happen..)

“Thank you for your letter …….to the Honourable Desley Boyle MP, Minister for Local Government and Aboriginal and Torrest Strait Islander Partnership, regarding the recent Supreme Court decision on American Staffordshire Terriers.

The Minister has asked that I respond on her behalf.

It was never the State Government’s original intention to include American Staffordshire Terriers in the definition of a “Restricted dog”. Accordingly, the Department of Infrastructure and Planning is carefully analysing what, if any, implication the Supreme Court decision may have and consequently, any actions the state may take.”

Should you require any further information in relation to this matter, please contact…bla..bla..bla..

You will then ask for the person in the reply letter, when you call the phone number you have been given, who will not be at his/her desk for a couple of days as he/she is in hiding.

Kylielou

[kylielou]

Here is a copy of an email today with a reply, slowly affected dog owners will challenged their local council action:

Thanks Jon,

It's very interesting isn't it!! literally i could come straight back to the coast with my dogs and say well you can't prove they're amstaffs so tough shit!!

I do feel for all the amstaff owners who all along thought that they were getting a 'legal' pitbull, because without a doubt that's what many people assume, and again there are many people who think they are one and the same, and it will always be an argument.. purists believe there is no such thing as a Blue pitbull, same as no amstaffs have rednoses, but there are genetic throw backs in the states where registered amstaffs have red noses... and so on.

Pure bred Amstaffs in this country have at least had some professional input from some great breeders, whereas many good pitbull lines have probably deteriorated due to the bans and being forced underground, if only they had the balls to put proper controls on dog ownership and breeders we wouldn't be in this situation.

So the question is where now? The GCCC will probably change the goal posts, and make the law on looks alone and get rid of genetic profiling in their quest to cull all dogs that could possibly look dangerous.

I have emailed Logan Timms, mentioned ethical breeding and tighter controls but he did say that councils can add whatever breed they want on their banned list, regardless of import and federal laws, I think one of the QLD councils (Harvey bay) may have changed their view on it and only declares dogs dangerous on their behavior.

thanks again

Dear G

In the past all councils in South East Qld used Phenotype, (the 22 point checklist) (a phenotype is any observable characteristic or trait of an organism) to identify suspected Pit bull terriers, and in 17A BSL laws they also had the term TYPE which can mean anything, now removed from the Animal Management (Cats and Dog) Act 2008.

After the Chivers Vs GCCC they openly admitted without contesting the fact the 22 point checklist was false, the use of Animal Control officers as expert did not come to the standards as experts under the rules of law, so the only scientific way to determine breed is a DNA test, the problem here is, the Gold Coast City Council, were being to smart by, adding Amstaff as Pit bulls, is like a double edged sword, "something that has or can have both favorable and unfavorable consequences".

This will stand up in court, as the GCCC was the one who paved the way for this to happen.

They opened this door, we are more than happy to use it.

Email Geoff Irwin and state, "I have done a DNA BITSA test on my dog, it has not come back as an Amstaff so it is scientific proof that my dog in not a Pit bull terrier but simple a cross bred look-alike dog, so can you give me a lawful reason why I can not return him to the Gold Coast City Councils jurisdiction”.

What do you think.

John

[sandra64]

This all makes my head hurt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RottnBullies]

This all makes my head hurt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, but In such a good way!

[kylielou]

A reply from a council in Qld:

Hi Kylie

My officers and I are of the belief that it’s not the dogs (regardless of breed) that are the problem, it’s the owners. Some people should never be allowed to have dogs – however that would be unpopular/politically incorrect legislation I guess… Easier to blame it on the dog…

Kind regards,

Tudor Tanase | Manager Environmental Health Services | Hinchinbrook Shire Council

Edited July 12, 2010 by kylielou

[tybrax]

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2010/0...coast-news.html

PUSH is on to use DNA testing to identify dangerous dog breeds after testing found two Gold Coast dogs on death row were not a restricted breed.

A Coomera family has been torn apart after the Gold Coast City Council identified their dogs as outlawed American pit bulls.

Rangi Nikau and her children were supposed to join husband and father Mete Waikai in Melbourne last month after the construction worker moved there to find work.

But they have stayed on the Coast while they wait to find out if their dogs, Whero and Mau, would be destroyed.

The council seized the dogs on May 19 and ordered them to be destroyed.

The family appealed against the decision and last week lodged DNA tests conducted by a private company to support their case.

The $299 tests by the Melbourne lab revealed that Whero was a golden retriever/Boston terrier cross and Mau was a Staffordshire bull terrier/boxer cross, which are both legal crossbreeds.

Ms Nikau said the council should have to conduct DNA tests before seizing a dog, rather than relying on the 22-point visual marker test used to identify pit bulls.

"I felt deceived that they could just look at a dog and say that's an American pit bull without having any evidentiary support or documentation," she said.

She said the dogs were seized after neighbours rang the council when Mau got loose, but she said neither dog had ever attacked anyone.

Her children, Shylah, 9, and Deaze, 5, should have been starting the second semester of the school year in Melbourne, but instead have returned to their Gold Coast school.

"My two kids are asking me, 'Mum where are the dogs?' And I tell them they've just gone on a holiday," she said.

She said it was depressing to see the dogs locked up at the Coombabah pound, where she has visited them almost daily.

"I don't know if the council realise that dogs aren't dogs to us, they're more our family," she said.

A council spokesman confirmed the DNA tests had been received and the case would be processed within a fortnight.

The council's animal management boss Bob La Castra backed DNA testing in principle.

"I think there's a strong argument for us doing DNA tests because that's the only way to be 100 per cent sure," he said.

"Unless there's a reason why we shouldn't, then that should be looked at very seriously."

He said there could be a case for compensation.

"If we find that the DNA testing shows that these dogs are not a banned breed, then I certainly think that council needs to look very, very closely at any cost that's been incurred by the owners," he said.

"The other side of the coin is we've got a duty and we could be seen as being negligent if we don't act on what our officers are trained to identify (by seizing the dogs)."

tybrax

[kylielou]

Newspaper comments:

http://www.goldcoast.com.au/article/2010/0...coast-news.html

andrew richards mr pitbull Posted At 2:02pm today

"anyones dog identified by the checklist or the experts that gccc admitted in supreme court is fiction is due for compensation after cr la castras comment today.gccc dog laws need an urgent overhaul and where do i apply"

Julie Posted At 10:09am today

"All dog owners who have been paying restricted dog fees for their dogs which GCCC have mistakenly identified as "pit bulls" should have their dogs DNA tested. Who knows how many were just cross-breeds? When their dogs come back as just cross-bred unrestricted breeds they can then seek compensation and pull their fences and signs down. The GCCC have got it wrong so many times, I doubt they have ever identified a real "Pit bull"!" :p

Karma Posted At 4:06pm today

"Nice one GCCC!!So I wonder how many dogs have been mis-identified over the years and either been ordered to be PTS or desexed? I urge everyone to use the BITSA DNA test now that it is available. Oh, and as a side note the American Staffordshire Terrier is a completely seperate breed to the APBT why you might ask? The American Staffordshire Terrier has a breed signature found through DNA. The APBT is nothing more than a mixture of breeds as the BITSA test will prove this!Better start saving GCCC".

Edited July 15, 2010 by kylielou

[kylielou]

I have an interesting reply to the Question: can a Supreme Court Judge rule and change the Customs importation laws on importing restricted dogs.

Changing_Customs_Act.doc

[kylielou]

Just saw the interview with Rangi on the Gold Coast News on Channel 9. The Gold Coast City Council claim that the DNA may not have come from her two dogs. What a joke, if that is the only explanation the Gold Coast City Council Animal Management can come up with, that’s nothing but pathetic, it's not rocket science GCCC. Since you have had the dogs in the pound for months why not DNA them yourself? Oh hang on, that's too sensible and easy.

Would you like me to come and do it for you? I'll even pay for the test.

Kylie Chivers

Step 1: I will give you a kit with the cotton buds to take samples or ask Cr Dawn, CEO Dale Dickson or even ACO Geoff Irwin as I have already given them kits in the past.

Step 2: Put cotton buds in one end of dog, the wet end, not the brown end.

Step 3: Wiggle it around, for a few seconds, get a good sample.

Step 4: Air dry it, put it in the envelope provided.

Step 5: Fill out form, send cheque, post.

Results will be in 5 days.

I know it all sounds hard but look Step 2: it's not the end with the tail, does that help any?

Edited July 15, 2010 by kylielou

[RottnBullies]

Just saw the interview with Rangi on the Gold Coast News on Channel 9. The Gold Coast City Council claim that the DNA may not have come from her two dogs. What a joke, it's not rocket science GCCC. Since you have had the dogs in the pound for months why not DNA them yourself? Oh hang on, that's too sensible and easy.

Nice try....Fail!

[tybrax]

Any excuse will do when it comes to councils.

They say the onus is on the owner to prove there dogs not a pit bull, well they proved there dogs are not pit bulls.

Yes council fails.........

[kylielou]

This is the reply from the Gold Coast City Council, regarding the newspaper and the Ch 9 news yesterday:

Remember this is why we have a problem with this councils ability to identify a suspected dog as anything.

Apart from the Bits Breed identification certificate dated 23 June 2010 and "Breed History Revealed" document, there is no evidence management documentation to confirm how the DNA sample were taken from the subject dog and how those samples reconcile with the DNA results.

To assist me in the following conducting an internal review of this desion, it is necessary for you to supply Council with the following information within seven days:

Provide details of:

1 Where and when the samples were obtained.

2 Who took the samples.

3 Is the person who took the samples, approximately qualified to otherwise trained to take DNA samples.

4 Details of the sample methodology.

5 Chain of custody documentation for each sample.

Should you require information assistance regarding this matter, please contact Animal Management Inspector Norton 5581 6664.

Edited July 16, 2010 by kylielou

[kylielou]

Answers:

1 The dogs are at the GCCC pound, 9 days before the results.

2 The dog owners.

3 You follow the instruction from the test kit, it's not hard to put a cotton bud in your dogs mouth ( maybe for some)

4 Read instruction with test kit, if too hard read web page.

5 Air dry cotton bud, put in plastic envelope provided, seal, as instructed, put in envelope provided, mail. (The GCCC have been watching too much CSI I think.)

Rather than accuse Rangi of being a liar and committing fraud or attempting to deceive them in some way, for shit's sake, they have the dogs, do the test themselves, why the need for all the Buls@#t?

One thinks they are stalling or trying to look professional or something.