Guidelines For Breed Assessors

[mikebailey]

I don't believe you can reliably identify breed just by looking at a dog. The NSW Government has declared the ANKC judges acting as "Breed Assessors" as infallible and not subject to appeal.

"A written statement by an assessor for the purposes of Division 6 cannot be challenged and any assessor who provides any such written statement does not incur any civil or criminal liability for doing so."

The full document can be downloaded here:

^{Guidelines for Breed Assessors}

INDEX

1. Introduction

1.1 Summary of Relevant Legislation

1.2 Notice of Intention to Declare a Dog to be a Restricted Dog

1.3 Outline of Breed Assessment Process

2. Applying to Become an Approved Breed Assessor

2.1 Criteria for Breed Assessors

2.2 Approval Process

2.3 Notification of Approval

3. Procedures to be Followed When Conducting a Breed

Assessment

3.1 Prior to the assessment

3.2 The Breed Assessment

4. Responsibilities of Approved Breed Assessors

4.1 Privacy and Confidentiality - Assessors Responsibilities

4.2 Liability

4.3 Privacy and Confidentiality - Department of Local Government

responsibilities

4.4 Records Management

4.5 Disposal of Information

4.6 Loss or Destruction of Information

4.7 Your contact details

4.8 Costs and Fees

4.9 Conflict of Interest

[Steve]

I don't believe you can reliably identify breed just by looking at a dog. The NSW Government has declared the ANKC judges acting as "Breed Assessors" as infallible and not subject to appeal.

"A written statement by an assessor for the purposes of Division 6 cannot be challenged and any assessor who provides any such written statement does not incur any civil or criminal liability for doing so."

The full document can be downloaded here:

^{Guidelines for Breed Assessors}

INDEX

1. Introduction

1.1 Summary of Relevant Legislation

1.2 Notice of Intention to Declare a Dog to be a Restricted Dog

1.3 Outline of Breed Assessment Process

2. Applying to Become an Approved Breed Assessor

2.1 Criteria for Breed Assessors

2.2 Approval Process

2.3 Notification of Approval

3. Procedures to be Followed When Conducting a Breed

Assessment

3.1 Prior to the assessment

3.2 The Breed Assessment

4. Responsibilities of Approved Breed Assessors

4.1 Privacy and Confidentiality - Assessors Responsibilities

4.2 Liability

4.3 Privacy and Confidentiality - Department of Local Government

responsibilities

4.4 Records Management

4.5 Disposal of Information

4.6 Loss or Destruction of Information

4.7 Your contact details

4.8 Costs and Fees

4.9 Conflict of Interest

Conflict of Interest? How is it not a conflict of interest to have someone who is a member of a group which doesnt recognise the breed and actively works against the concept of even breeding or owning dogs which are not able to get their papers not a conflict of interest?

[riddler]

''I don't believe you can reliably identify breed just by looking at a dog. The NSW Government has declared the ANKC judges acting as "Breed Assessors" as infallible and not subject to appeal''.

Given the protocols demanded by the BSL, (which is a law & whether you agree with it or not is not the issue here) is there a viable alternative other than a visual (& physical) assessment by highly qualified persons? Certainly a better proposition to council employees, breed experience unknown, working from a written description in any case.

The owner of a subject dog is given a list of approved assessors from which to choose & must sign an agreement to accept the assessors decision as final prior to the assessment. An owner always has the option of the legal system if the assessment route isn't to their liking.

I would suggest approved breed assessors could reliably identify what a breed isn't, which is certainly a step in the right direction.

Conflict of Interest?

Questioning a persons honesty & integrity without even knowing them is hardly fair.

[RottnBullies]

Trying to ID breeds by just looking at them, Is nothing but a guessing game, that's all well and good for most cases, but when a dogs life Is depending on It...................

Too many dogs lives have been cut short all In the name of LAW! and false pretences that these "bad" dogs are now of the streets so the comunity should feel safe blah blah

Until more reliable methods are proven to work councils need to stop lying and saying their methods are Infallible

As for the option of going through the legal system, well how many do you think could actually afford to go that route! It's not cheap that's for sure

[riddler]

I am asking the question ''Is a better, more viable method''.

A dog is declared by the council, not by the ANKC, & only after it comes to their notice. Which is the fault of the owner.

It is then up to the owner which route they choose go.

Being assessed as a restricted breed isn't the end of the section. The dog can then be temperament tested & if it passes it can be kept under the requirements of the BSL.

This thread is NOT about the BSL, it is about the legitimacy of the role played by appointed breed assessors. Breed type specialists.

So, again, is there a better alternative under the laws as they now stand?

There is one thread here lamenting the fact breed assessors, either from compassion or ignorance, are declaring pitbull types to be Staffordshire Bull Terriers.

It appears the breed assessors are in a lose, lose situation.

damned if they do.

Damned if they don't

[john.davey.1960]

It was also the law to discriminate against Jews in Hitler's Germany. In 1946 at Nuremburg "following legitimate orders" was found not to be reason enough to exculpate the perpetrators of race hate and neither should it be reason enough to allow breedism to flourish in Australia, especially as one can become a breed assessor beyond their own competence without even seeing a banned breed. In the US SBT=AST=APBT = Pit Bull, in the UK and Europe APBT=AST=Pit Bull. In the only court case which looked at the AST and APBT in Australia the latter was found to be the case. A corrupt government in decline decided to change the law to save it's own neck. That is why "it's the Law" arguement doesn't work. Laws are ignored all the time by police and others and killing people's dogs simply because "it's the law" is not just bad, it is wrong, especially when one is paid to do so. It shows how badly we have declined as a society and view each other.

People and organisations which support such archaic and offensive views should not be supported in any way shape or form.

[riddler]

It was also the law to discriminate against Jews in Hitler's Germany. In 1946 at Nuremburg "following legitimate orders" was found not to be reason enough to exculpate the perpetrators of race hate and neither should it be reason enough to allow breedism to flourish in Australia, especially as one can become a breed assessor beyond their own competence without even seeing a banned breed. In the US SBT=AST=APBT = Pit Bull, in the UK and Europe APBT=AST=Pit Bull. In the only court case which looked at the AST and APBT in Australia the latter was found to be the case. A corrupt government in decline decided to change the law to save it's own neck. That is why "it's the Law" arguement doesn't work. Laws are ignored all the time by police and others and killing people's dogs simply because "it's the law" is not just bad, it is wrong, especially when one is paid to do so. It shows how badly we have declined as a society and view each other.

People and organisations which support such archaic and offensive views should not be supported in any way shape or form.

Sigh.

The old Nazi chestnut.

That is very sad argument only used by very sad people. It has no bearing, no relevence & no comparison to the subject. To even suggest such a thing is appalling.

True, the BSL was enacted by a government in decline. Also true, & even more disappointing, it was supported by the public & actually enhanced the popularity of that Labor government. "Killing machines on a leash'' thundered Bob.

His government was returned btw. & no politician since has had the balls to include anti BSL sympathies in their policies.

Just as much off topic, but a personal opinion that may or may not display a neutrality of position to the issue.

Imo, the ANKC executive are ivory tower residents & together with their state level colleagues & goodly percentage of ANKC approved judges are an exclusive clique that treat the general membership appallingly. There is/was a move afoot to form a breakaway association such is the dissatisfaction with the current situation. Although I haven't heard anything of it for quite awhile.

However, this thread is about the legitimacy of breed assessing.

I believe that, at the very least, approved assessors do give a declared dog a much better chance than was previously afforded them.

If the ANKC forbade their members from perfoming the task who would fill the void? Would the task revert to the council rangers who declared the dog in first place perhaps?

Is that your solution?

Sigh.

The law & the protocols required are in place. Whether you agree with them or not.

So, until they are repealed, if they ever are, give me a better alternative than what is currently employed?

Sans sermons please.

[mikebailey]

''I don't believe you can reliably identify breed just by looking at a dog. The NSW Government has declared the ANKC judges acting as "Breed Assessors" as infallible and not subject to appeal''.

Given the protocols demanded by the BSL, (which is a law & whether you agree with it or not is not the issue here) is there a viable alternative other than a visual (& physical) assessment by highly qualified persons?

ANKC judges aren't qualified in breed identification.

Simply wanting something to be possible doesn't make it so. Anti witchcraft laws also required methods to identify witches and you can be sure fraudsters stepped forward to offer 'good enough' solutions.

Phrenologists could well have used the your argument to defend their quackery, "Is there a viable alternative for identifying future criminals than to measure the skull?"

How long before the ANKC follows The Kennel Club in demanding an end to BSL?

[mikebailey]

Questioning a persons honesty & integrity without even knowing them is hardly fair.

Then we should not question the integrity of Matthew Hopkins, Witch Hunter General

Methods of investigation

Although torture was unlawful in England, Hopkins often used various methods of browbeating, such as sleep deprivation, to extract confessions from his victims.[42] He would also cut the arm of the accused with a blunt knife, and if she did not bleed, she was said to be a witch. Another of his methods was the swimming test, used to see if the accused would float or sink in water. The theory was that, as witches had renounced their baptism, water would reject them. A suspected witch was tied to a chair and thrown in water. If they floated, they were a witch. Hopkins was warned against the use of "swimming" without receiving the victim's permission first.[43] This led to the "legal" abandonment of the test by the end of 1645.[43] Hopkins and his assistances also looked for Devil's mark. This was a mark that all witches or sorcerers were supposed to possess that was said to be dead to all feeling and would not bleed – although in reality it was usually a mole, birthmark or an extra nipple or breast. [44] If the suspected witch had no such visible marks, invisible ones could be discovered by pricking, therefore employed "witch prickers" pricked the accused with knives and special needles, looking for such marks, normally after the suspect had been shaved of all body hair.[45][46] It was believed that the witch's familiar, an animal such as a cat or dog, would drink the witch's blood from the mark, as a baby drinks milk from the nipple.

Who is more foolish, the fool or the fool who follows him?

[riddler]

Smoke & mirrors isn't a solution. Ditto red herrings.

The question is out there. Do you have an answer?

Repeat.

Given the laws & protocols we have in place NOW, at this place in time, give a better alternative than breed assessment by highly experienced dog people.

If ANKC approved judges aren't to your liking you could always go for the approved ANKC registered AST/SBT breeders with the required breeds experience option.

There are other alternatives open to the dogs owner besides assessment.

One not good for the dog, the other not cheap for the owner.

The easiest one of course, would have been ensure the suspect dog was properly under control.

Which is where it all came unstuck in the first place.

BTW.

The proposed ''Deed not Breed'' legistlation currently under review in the UK doesn't included repealing the banned breeds laws currently in place.

The more things change, the more they stay the same

Edited March 20, 2011 by riddler

[melzawelza]

.

The easiest one of course, would have been ensure the suspect dog was properly under control.

Which is where it all came unstuck in the first place.

You seem to think a dog would only have to go through the process if it or the owner had done something wrong.

This is NOT the case. Someone could be walking their dog down the street in a perfect heel and an 'authorised officer' could drive past and decide that dog was a pit bull and start the ball rolling for the whole process.

In fact this is the way it happens the majority of the time.

Edited March 20, 2011 by melzawelza

[riddler]

.

The easiest one of course, would have been ensure the suspect dog was properly under control.

Which is where it all came unstuck in the first place.

You seem to think a dog would only have to go through the process if it or the owner had done something wrong.

This is NOT the case. Someone could be walking their dog down the street in a perfect heel and an 'authorised officer' could drive past and decide that dog was a pit bull and start the ball rolling for the whole process.

In fact this is the way it happens the majority of the time.

With all due respects, you are missing the point.

How the law came into being or how a dog comes to be declared, whether it is actually a restricted type or not & whether you, or anyone else believes the law to be unjust, unfair or discriminatory is not the question. That's BSL. BSL is not the topic.

Mike Bailey has criticised the assessment process. He has accused Dogs NSW of profiteering from the BSL by conducting assessor seminars. (& if the $500 dollar fee is accurate I would tend to agree with him on that point, but that isn't the question either), he has been uncomplimentary & even had a shot at ridicule. Which does nothing for the cause. Never has, never will. That's a just ploy to avoid answering a question.

My question to him, & you, & anyone else who may have a better way of assessing declared dogs, is simply this, tell me what it is?

I believe, MHO, the way the law & the associated system is structured, the current method of ANKC approved assessors acting independently from any statutory body, is, if we need to have an assessment at all, the best system available.

One alternative of course, is, the ranger types of which you speak, who apparently snatch harmless pets from their owners when they are out walking, would be the judge & jury.....& executioner?

i would really love to hear some, any, sensible, workable alternatives to the government implimented ANKC approved assessor system.

Another point to remember,

Assessors are rigourously tested on their knowledge of the bull breeds.

They are pretty well up the task of recognition. Especially the breeders..

Whether that is good or bad isn't part of the question either.

[john.davey.1960]

Smoke & mirrors isn't a solution. Ditto red herrings.

The question is out there. Do you have an answer?

Repeat.

Given the laws & protocols we have in place NOW, at this place in time, give a better alternative than breed assessment by highly experienced dog people.

If ANKC approved judges aren't to your liking you could always go for the approved ANKC registered AST/SBT breeders with the required breeds experience option.

There are other alternatives open to the dogs owner besides assessment.

One not good for the dog, the other not cheap for the owner.

The easiest one of course, would have been ensure the suspect dog was properly under control.

Which is where it all came unstuck in the first place.

BTW.

The proposed ''Deed not Breed'' legistlation currently under review in the UK doesn't included repealing the banned breeds laws currently in place.

The more things change, the more they stay the same

Sigh, "Trust Me I'm an ANKC Judge" just doesn't cut it. Jews and gypsies destined for Auschwitz were also bound by laws and protocols in place by a democratically elected government!

The day anyone can determine an APBT from a dual registered APBT/AST then a case may be made, until then, not a chance. Innocent dogs will continue to die.These laws only work because we allow them to. Ignore them and the system would have to change.

[riddler]

Smoke & mirrors isn't a solution. Ditto red herrings.

The question is out there. Do you have an answer?

Repeat.

Given the laws & protocols we have in place NOW, at this place in time, give a better alternative than breed assessment by highly experienced dog people.

If ANKC approved judges aren't to your liking you could always go for the approved ANKC registered AST/SBT breeders with the required breeds experience option.

There are other alternatives open to the dogs owner besides assessment.

One not good for the dog, the other not cheap for the owner.

The easiest one of course, would have been ensure the suspect dog was properly under control.

Which is where it all came unstuck in the first place.

BTW.

The proposed ''Deed not Breed'' legistlation currently under review in the UK doesn't included repealing the banned breeds laws currently in place.

The more things change, the more they stay the same

Sigh, "Trust Me I'm an ANKC Judge" just doesn't cut it. Jews and gypsies destined for Auschwitz were also bound by laws and protocols in place by a democratically elected government!

The day anyone can determine an APBT from a dual registered APBT/AST then a case may be made, until then, not a chance. Innocent dogs will continue to die.These laws only work because we allow them to. Ignore them and the system would have to change.

Can't give a sensible answer to a simple question so off you go again on the Nazi thing.

What piece of work you are.

BTW.

There are no duel registered ASTs.

The UKC won't register ASTs these days & the AKC has never registered APBTs.

So that rationale is a no brainer.

Suits your style.

edit.

The reason there are/were so many ''dead dogs'' is because the brain dead did ignored the laws.

Still are, which is why the breed assessors have a job.

Edited March 21, 2011 by riddler

[jackie_a1]

:p You all obviously do not know. If it has a red nose. It's a pitbull.

[RottnBullies]

Welcome back Dougie.....how long for this time!

[john.davey.1960]

Smoke & mirrors isn't a solution. Ditto red herrings.

The question is out there. Do you have an answer?

Repeat.

Given the laws & protocols we have in place NOW, at this place in time, give a better alternative than breed assessment by highly experienced dog people.

If ANKC approved judges aren't to your liking you could always go for the approved ANKC registered AST/SBT breeders with the required breeds experience option.

There are other alternatives open to the dogs owner besides assessment.

One not good for the dog, the other not cheap for the owner.

The easiest one of course, would have been ensure the suspect dog was properly under control.

Which is where it all came unstuck in the first place.

BTW.

The proposed ''Deed not Breed'' legistlation currently under review in the UK doesn't included repealing the banned breeds laws currently in place.

The more things change, the more they stay the same

Sigh, "Trust Me I'm an ANKC Judge" just doesn't cut it. Jews and gypsies destined for Auschwitz were also bound by laws and protocols in place by a democratically elected government!

The day anyone can determine an APBT from a dual registered APBT/AST then a case may be made, until then, not a chance. Innocent dogs will continue to die.These laws only work because we allow them to. Ignore them and the system would have to change.

Can't give a sensible answer to a simple question so off you go again on the Nazi thing.

What piece of work you are.

BTW.

There are no duel registered ASTs.

The UKC won't register ASTs these days & the AKC has never registered APBTs.

So that rationale is a no brainer.

Suits your style.

edit.

The reason there are/were so many ''dead dogs'' is because the brain dead did ignored the laws.

Still are, which is why the breed assessors have a job.

There are many thousands of dual registered APBTs and ASTs and even SBTs in the US where they are considered quite rightly to be the same breed. Every 30 odd years AKC has had to open it's stud books to APBTs due to the small gene pool resulting in hideous genetic conditions. If they choose not to in the future then it is the dogs who will suffer.

The dead dogs result from a form of racism where US citizens don't want "those" people living in their community. ie lower socio-economic types like blacks and Hispanics who are disproportionately attracted to the breed. In Sydney even the most liberal types will say it's the Lebs who give the APBT a bad name. Unfortunately they can't see they are all in the RSPCA's and PETA's sights!

[riddler]

Smoke & mirrors isn't a solution. Ditto red herrings.

The question is out there. Do you have an answer?

Repeat.

Given the laws & protocols we have in place NOW, at this place in time, give a better alternative than breed assessment by highly experienced dog people.

If ANKC approved judges aren't to your liking you could always go for the approved ANKC registered AST/SBT breeders with the required breeds experience option.

There are other alternatives open to the dogs owner besides assessment.

One not good for the dog, the other not cheap for the owner.

The easiest one of course, would have been ensure the suspect dog was properly under control.

Which is where it all came unstuck in the first place.

BTW.

The proposed ''Deed not Breed'' legistlation currently under review in the UK doesn't included repealing the banned breeds laws currently in place.

The more things change, the more they stay the same

Sigh, "Trust Me I'm an ANKC Judge" just doesn't cut it. Jews and gypsies destined for Auschwitz were also bound by laws and protocols in place by a democratically elected government!

The day anyone can determine an APBT from a dual registered APBT/AST then a case may be made, until then, not a chance. Innocent dogs will continue to die.These laws only work because we allow them to. Ignore them and the system would have to change.

Can't give a sensible answer to a simple question so off you go again on the Nazi thing.

What piece of work you are.

BTW.

There are no duel registered ASTs.

The UKC won't register ASTs these days & the AKC has never registered APBTs.

So that rationale is a no brainer.

Suits your style.

edit.

The reason there are/were so many ''dead dogs'' is because the brain dead did ignored the laws.

Still are, which is why the breed assessors have a job.

There are many thousands of dual registered APBTs and ASTs and even SBTs in the US where they are considered quite rightly to be the same breed. Every 30 odd years AKC has had to open it's stud books to APBTs due to the small gene pool resulting in hideous genetic conditions. If they choose not to in the future then it is the dogs who will suffer.

The dead dogs result from a form of racism where US citizens don't want "those" people living in their community. ie lower socio-economic types like blacks and Hispanics who are disproportionately attracted to the breed. In Sydney even the most liberal types will say it's the Lebs who give the APBT a bad name. Unfortunately they can't see they are all in the RSPCA's and PETA's sights!

You are a sick puppy.

You need to be assessed before you do any real harm.

And soon.

Edited March 21, 2011 by riddler

[riddler]

Welcome back Dougie.....how long for this time!

If until you post something current, positive & encouraging?

Two?....maybe three lifetimes?

What pearls of doom, gloom & deception do you have for us today?

Your sidekick is blaming negroes, lebanese, the poor & the disadvantaged. (There's some new territory for you to investigate. google them & see what you can come up with)

The RSPCA, hey, everyone blames the RSPCA for everything, so that's not new.

P.E.T.A? forget them, they're morons, not worth the trouble.

When you run out of ethnics , organisations & other breeds to denigrate, then maybe, just maybe, the pennies will drop & you will realise the real problem is much closer to home.

At your front door actually.

Physician heal thy self as the saying goes.

BTW,

Did you answer the simple question?

Of course not.

[RottnBullies]

Welcome back Dougie.....how long for this time!

If until you post something current, positive & encouraging?

Two?....maybe three lifetimes?

What pearls of doom, gloom & deception do you have for us today?

Your sidekick is blaming negroes, lebanese, the poor & the disadvantaged. (There's some new territory for you to investigate. google them & see what you can come up with)

The RSPCA, hey, everyone blames the RSPCA for everything, so that's not new.

P.E.T.A? forget them, they're morons, not worth the trouble.

When you run out of ethnics , organisations & other breeds to denigrate, then maybe, just maybe, the pennies will drop & you will realise the real problem is much closer to home.

At your front door actually.

Physician heal thy self as the saying goes.

BTW,

Did you answer the simple question?

Of course not.

I don't have an answer to what you think Is a simple question!

Is there a better way, well I'd have to say no there isn't unless you're able to DNA but then you would need both parents of the dog

for that and off course It's not always possible! I don't know how reliable getting DNA alone from the dog "In Question" Is going to be

The point Is what they are doing now is wrong, It's a hit and miss and until more reliable methods are found they need to stop this practice, killing dogs based on a guessing game Is just not on, If the breed Is unknown It's unknown why In the hell do they need to label them otherwise If It Is not known??????

And yes "THEY" are most certainly profiteering from all this!

I repeat as It's been said many times ANKC Judges doing breed Identification on a breed they don't even recgonise

I ask you what are these supposedly highly qualified persons as you say they are using to ID??? The standards? Yes way to go

That's Illegal but I'm sure you already knew that

As for the doom, gloom and deception that's right up your alley