Dogs Nsw Supporting And Profiting From Breed Bans

[Janba]

I am going to ask a question

How many of the people who criticise the ANKC/ DogsNSW etc in regards to BSL are members? The ANKC and state CCs are not a goverment bodies but a societies made up and run by its members. If you don't like what they do join and become active and change how it is run.

I am against BSL and don't necessarily agree with what DogsNSW is saying but I also don't expect any club/society etc to go to bat for people who don't belong to it when those people only criticise them.

So why the hell are they in there at all ? They dont recognise a pitty as a breed yet they can identify it and teach others how to identify it as a breed. Not to help their own members and their own members dogs. Shameful.

Steve I don't disagree with you but I can't see how you are going to get them to change and fight for a non recognosied breed when the owners of that breed give them no support.

Maybe someone like the MDBA is the body to lead the fight.

Edited March 7, 2011 by Janba

[Janba]

They wont even judge another purebred against one of their members dogs because its not counted as a purebred of that breed unless its registered with them. Yet they go in to say they can judge a dog that isnt even a breed they recognise.

And a lot of the other purebred registries don't recognise ANKC pedigrees either.

[Steve]

I am going to ask a question

How many of the people who criticise the ANKC/ DogsNSW etc in regards to BSL are members? The ANKC and state CCs are not a goverment bodies but a societies made up and run by its members. If you don't like what they do join and become active and change how it is run.

I am against BSL and don't necessarily agree with what DogsNSW is saying but I also don't expect any club/society etc to go to bat for people who don't belong to it when those people only criticise them.

So why the hell are they in there at all ? They dont recognise a pitty as a breed yet they can identify it and teach others how to identify it as a breed. Not to help their own members and their own members dogs. Shameful.

Steve I don't disagree with you but I can't see how you are going to get them to change and fight for a non recognosied breed when the owners of that breed give them no support.

Maybe someone like the MDBA is the body to lead the fight.

Im not asking for them to fight for pits Im saying why are they involved in this at all. Its not their dogs, their members or one of their breeds. But their response and participation in this is detrimental and gives weight to the whole crap shoot.

Under no condition would I ever expect them to fight for a breed that isnt one of their own so why are they in there teaching people how to identify a dog which they are not in any way shape or form involved in? It shouldn't be necessary to identify a bloody dog by breed in order to judge whether its able to do XYZ or live or be treated as if it were any other dog and thats the message that should be out there - not we will look after our own by identifying thise which are not our own.When their own can only be a dog with papers anyway.

[RottnBullies]

Members can stop decisions by the ANKC as was done recently with some LRLs but done through the correct channels of the national breed council. BSL totally aside your talking about a non ANKC recognized breed and expecting the ANKC to fight when you provide no financial or other support. They are fightimng for their breeds and while it may prove to be the wrong way that is where their loyalty lies. What is needed is a non affiliated body to fight these fights.

People come on and say that no one can accurately recognise a pitbull or a pit bull cross. Maye there is therefore no such breed or you need to get people who you trust as assessors into the scheme. The requirement for council officers to identify bull and hunting breeds is not going to miraculously disappear overnight while NSW has its current regulations. The requirement for accurate identification goes beyond bull breeds - how often have you seen a ticked working border collie labelled as a ACD cross - more often than they are accurately identified.

Well going from someone who's already done this course, a ranger to be specific, there is a whole section devoted to the identification of American Pit Bull Terriers from other Bully breeds! yes others breeds are touched on, but NOTHING to the extent of the American Pit Bull, so to me they're using the others breeds and the whole course as nothing more than a smoke screen so to speak for what really Is a hidden agenda

[Janba]

I am going to ask a question

How many of the people who criticise the ANKC/ DogsNSW etc in regards to BSL are members? The ANKC and state CCs are not a goverment bodies but a societies made up and run by its members. If you don't like what they do join and become active and change how it is run.

I am against BSL and don't necessarily agree with what DogsNSW is saying but I also don't expect any club/society etc to go to bat for people who don't belong to it when those people only criticise them.

So why the hell are they in there at all ? They dont recognise a pitty as a breed yet they can identify it and teach others how to identify it as a breed. Not to help their own members and their own members dogs. Shameful.

Steve I don't disagree with you but I can't see how you are going to get them to change and fight for a non recognosied breed when the owners of that breed give them no support.

Maybe someone like the MDBA is the body to lead the fight.

Im not asking for them to fight for pits Im saying why are they involved in this at all. Its not their dogs, their members or one of their breeds. But their response and participation in this is detrimental and gives weight to the whole crap shoot.

Under no condition would I ever expect them to fight for a breed that isnt one of their own so why are they in there teaching people how to identify a dog which they are not in any way shape or form involved in? It shouldn't be necessary to identify a bloody dog by breed in order to judge whether its able to do XYZ or live or be treated as if it were any other dog and thats the message that should be out there - not we will look after our own by identifying thise which are not our own.When their own can only be a dog with papers anyway.

I feel (and I may be wrong) that they are in it to protect their own and because of their egos. Unfortunately while we have BSL people are going to want to identify breeds so they can enforce the legislation.

I do know the real answer is to remove BSL and judge a dog as itself not as to what it "may" just be capable of because it is a certain breed but until that happens rangers etc are going to be asked to identify what breed a dog is and judge it accordingly. In a way I would rather DogsNSW ran this than the RSPCA.

[RottnBullies]

What I'd like to know Is what Is Dogsnsw using for this breed Id?? If they're using either breed standards from the UKC or ADBA whether In part or in full they should realize that they don't have permission and that It's illegal to do so and It does state this on their websites

[geo]

Totally agree with you Steve and RnB!

I think they're doing this is to further distance themselves form the APBT, oh sure they'll use them to make money and protect the papered dogs, but they fail to recognise them as a pure bred, then they're saying that they are the experts on a dog they don't even register!

This would have been driven by SBT and AST breeders within the ANKC. Without a doubt.

They're effectively denying the dog that gave the AST existence (read there is no history for the AST on it's website?) and trying to kill it off.

Will they only be happy when there are no APBT''s? or unpapered dogs anywhere?

Thinking in the long term they could stand to make a lot of money by pushing for tighter regulations on a national level, that just so happens to fall in line with a service that they can provide like paperwork and parentage of an animal.

They're trying to corner a market whilst they teach people to ID a breed that they cannot ID themselves!

Dishonest and deceitful.

[mikebailey]

mikebailey, your questions are excellent. And I agree with your comments, geo.

Thanks Mita!

I'm looking for people to help with a national campaign against breed discrimination. Please get in touch if you want to help.

My last campaign, StopTheClock, has been very successful. I think it will be a longer struggle to get rid of BSL but fortunately the US and UK are already in the process so we'll be playing catchup as usual.

[mikebailey]

How many of the people who criticise the ANKC/ DogsNSW etc in regards to BSL are members? The ANKC and state CCs are not a goverment bodies but a societies made up and run by its members. If you don't like what they do join and become active and change how it is run.

I am against BSL and don't necessarily agree with what DogsNSW is saying but I also don't expect any club/society etc to go to bat for people who don't belong to it when those people only criticise them.

That's a pretty inefficient way of achieving change.

I think a better idea is:

1. Research the current setup

2. Ask Dogs NSW to clarify a few things

If they give reasonable answers then that's it. If they don't,

3. Make membership aware of the situation

4. Inform wider community (media, social networking, etc)

5. Take up issues with Government bodies (challenge course accreditation)

I think most Dogs NSW members would be shocked to hear ANKC judges were signing death warrants for dogs based on visual breed identification which I think we both know is a farce.

I'm guessing you're a Dogs NSW member and am sorry if drawing attention to abuse by your judges is embarrassing. As a Catholic I know how that feels! I think you'll agree protecting the innocent is more important than protecting feelings.

[Steve]

Totally agree with you Steve and RnB!

I think they're doing this is to further distance themselves form the APBT, oh sure they'll use them to make money and protect the papered dogs, but they fail to recognise them as a pure bred, then they're saying that they are the experts on a dog they don't even register!

This would have been driven by SBT and AST breeders within the ANKC. Without a doubt.

They're effectively denying the dog that gave the AST existence (read there is no history for the AST on it's website?) and trying to kill it off.

Will they only be happy when there are no APBT''s? or unpapered dogs anywhere?

Thinking in the long term they could stand to make a lot of money by pushing for tighter regulations on a national level, that just so happens to fall in line with a service that they can provide like paperwork and parentage of an animal.

They're trying to corner a market whilst they teach people to ID a breed that they cannot ID themselves!

Dishonest and deceitful.

Why they are doing it is open to speculation - doesnt really matter in the big scheme of things because the end result is that they are participating in it which in effect gives their tick on the concept that you can judge a dog by breed.Sure they are judging it based on how it looks not necessarily on how it behaves but I would rather have seen them say we dont agree with BSL and its not our business because they are not our dogs or our member's dogs.

No dog in their system can be judged without the basic start point - registered papers which have been accepted on their own registry. For them the proof of a dog's parentage is in the papers. As a dogs NSW member I am restricted by rules and regs and codes about what I can and cannot do with my dogs NSW papered dogs but I can do anything I want with any dog I own which is not papered - why? Because their only interest lies in those animals which are registered on their stud registry.

Yet they have put their hand up to judge dogs without papers which in reality could have any mix in their parentage and define it as a breed even though for them the breed does not exist because they dont recognise them even if they have registered pedigrees as valid proof of parentage.

The argument that we would rather they did it than the RSPCA isnt doing it for me either.

However, once again the deed is done and at a guess Id say most Dogs NSW members will accept that what is being done is in their dog's , their breed's and their own best interest. Maybe it is - but its hard to understand why simply saying its not our business - they are not ours and we know nothing about them would not have served them just as well.

Hope they have good insurance.

Edited March 7, 2011 by Steve

[Steve]

In Queensland the CC cheered that ammendment 63a gave a definition of breed recognition. Either ANKC papers or a certificate from a vet.

Surely anything that doesnt have ANKC papers or doesnt have a certificate from a vet to say what the breed is cannot be identified as being a dog of a particular breed.

All dogs NSW had to do was say if it has our papers its not a pit bull but instead they are saying they can identify a breed by looking at it and papers dont count - seems to undo any cheering from queensland and goes against all they stand for - identification via a stud book.

[mita]

I'm guessing you're a Dogs NSW member and am sorry if drawing attention to abuse by your judges is embarrassing. As a Catholic I know how that feels! I think you'll agree protecting the innocent is more important than protecting feelings.

As a fellow Catholic, I love that comment.

Seriously, I'm amazed how this ID issue is being picked up again after all the tragic fall-out from the Qld experience. Where an amazing 21 point checklist, was used to visually ID PB-type dogs. Caused mayhem, until even the CEO of RSPCA Qld publicly admitted being chastened & repentant of it all (more Mick-talk there ). He said the issue had just led to many 'innocent family dogs' being seized & put down.

The original point about breed banning was in the interests of public safety. But every bit of evidence has shown that breed or breed guesses are not the key to predicting which dogs are unsafe around humans. It comes down to how they're bred, raised & managed by humans. So now RSPCA Qld keeps saying publicly that it's a matter of deed, not breed.

Examples of evidence are a study from one of the Spanish universities, which highlighted owner behaviour as the critical variable. And there's a clear statement from the American Veterinary Association, saying that chasing up the means for dog-safe environments, is not a matter of chasing certain breeds.

[tybrax]

I am going to ask a question

How many of the people who criticise the ANKC/ DogsNSW etc in regards to BSL are members? The ANKC and state CCs are not a goverment bodies but a societies made up and run by its members. If you don't like what they do join and become active and change how it is run.

I am against BSL and don't necessarily agree with what DogsNSW is saying but I also don't expect any club/society etc to go to bat for people who don't belong to it when those people only criticise them.

So why the hell are they in there at all ? They dont recognise a pitty as a breed yet they can identify it and teach others how to identify it as a breed. Not to help their own members and their own members dogs. Shameful.

[melzawelza]

Someone I know has done this course and said that the content isn't really how to ID pit bull, it's more putting to bed the myths about them i.e anything with a red nose is a pit bull and that sort of rubbish.

She said it's more a 'how to ID what is NOT a pit bull rather than what is. I still don't know if that's a good thing or not. It's good for the idiot rangers who think anything with a red nose deserves an NOI put on it, but it is still playing along the same lines of saying you can ID a breed by looking at it which is an attitude that needs to change.

[tybrax]

Someone I know has done this course and said that the content isn't really how to ID pit bull, it's more putting to bed the myths about them i.e anything with a red nose is a pit bull and that sort of rubbish.

She said it's more a 'how to ID what is NOT a pit bull rather than what is. I still don't know if that's a good thing or not. It's good for the idiot rangers who think anything with a red nose deserves an NOI put on it, but it is still playing along the same lines of saying you can ID a breed by looking at it which is an attitude that needs to change.

Disgusting What about Visla X and Kelpie x and the rest, they dont have a clue!!

[melzawelza]

Sorry I didn't make that clear. They are dispelling the myth of the 'red nose pitty' and actually teaching just just because it has a red nose DOESN'T necessarily mean it's a pit bull.

[mikebailey]

Sorry I didn't make that clear. They are dispelling the myth of the 'red nose pitty' and actually teaching just just because it has a red nose DOESN'T necessarily mean it's a pit bull.

They're supporting the myth that you can do visual breed identification. It's fraud.