"ban Crossbreeds"

[cannibalgoldfish]

This lovely gem was in a paper here in Tassie.

http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2011/08/19/254351_tasmania-news.html

This is possibly the worst idea I have heard over the whole dog attack story. (complete with token "snarling dog"photo.) Unless they can prove what cross a dog is, anything goes. :rolleyes:

A NEW crackdown on dangerous crossbreed dogs in Tasmania has been urged after the fatal mauling of a four-year-old girl in Victoria.

A long-time campaigner against violent and aggressive dogs, state Liberal MP Rene Hidding, said yesterday that while pitbull terriers were banned in Tasmania, crossbreeds were flourishing.

He said people were at risk from up to 1000 pitbull-terrier crossbreeds and the dogs escaped the provisions of legislation that listed dangerous breeds.

Mr Hidding said it was time for the state to re-evaluate its laws concerning dangerous dogs.

However, animal protection groups say any legislation should focus on correcting owners' behaviour and education, not trying to prevent future attacks by banning specific types of dogs.

Tasmanian veterinary behaviourist Dr Katrina Ward said the issue was not about a particular breed but the wider problem of responsible ownership of dogs.

"A breed doesn't do these things, an individual dog does," she said.

"Hysteria of banning breeds isn't the answer.

"It's hard to generalise about a breed of dog -- the type of owner, the behaviour of the victim are also pertinent to the incident."

She said pitbulls were historically bred for fighting and appeared to have a lower pain threshold and very strong jaw.

"Their bites are likely to inflict more damage but I can't generalise about the breed being vicious as there are some extremely friendly and well socialised pitbulls.

"Ultimately it is the responsibility of the owner to keep the dog safe from scary situations and keep people safe from a dog that might be reactive."

Anne Boxhall from the Delta Dog safe program said there was no more tragic situation than to see a young child killed in this horrific way.

Ms Boxhall said breed-specific legislation would prove to be problematic in identifying specific breeds

She said statistics showed that children under five were more at risk.

This year it became compulsory for dog owners to have their dogs microchipped in Tasmania, with mandatory desexing of dangerous dogs.

Restricted breeds in Tasmania are dogo argentino, fila brasileiro, japanese tosa, american pitbull terrier or pitbull terrier and perro de presa canario (or presa canario).

These dangerous dogs are banned from entry into Australia by the Customs (prohibited imports) Regulations 1956.

The Local Government Office says that of these breeds it is believed only the pitbull terrier is found in Tasmania.

Crossbreeds are not covered by restricted breed legislation. However, the dangerous dog provisions cover these dogs.

If a dog declared to be a dangerous or restricted breed dog attacks a person or animal, the owner is guilty of an offence and may be punished by a fine or imprisonment.

[email protected]

[tarope]

The Media at it's best

[poodlefan]

There's actually some very sensible comment in that article. Nice to see the vets coming out on the side of sanity.

[sumosmum]

There's actually some very sensible comment in that article. Nice to see the vets coming out on the side of sanity.

Sure is Poodlefan.

Vet warning on banning

VETERINARIANS say banning breeds of dangerous dogs would not stop attacks, despite a Victorian government vow to crack down on vicious pets.

Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu said today the government wanted to "be rid of these dogs as soon as possible" following the death of a four-year-old girl who was mauled by an unregistered American pit bull mastiff cross in Melbourne on Wednesday.

The owner of the dog could face charges under the Domestic Animals Act and fines in excess of $19,000.

The government has also foreshadowed measures that could include the owners of dangerous dogs facing 20 years' jail in a similar law that applies to culpable drivers.

The amnesty for registering dangerous dogs will end, meaning councils can seize and destroy the animals, while a "dob in a dangerous dog" anonymous hotline will also be set up.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

make your own news service on igoogle

But Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) spokeswoman Kersti Seksel says socialisation of dangerous dogs rather than banning them would be more effective.

Over-regulation for dog owners has not improved the situation so far, Dr Seksel said.

"It's understandable that people are now calling for the banning of some breeds, however all the good evidence available shows that this doesn't work," she said in a statement today.

"Unfortunately, we believe the banning and over-regulation of dogs in our communities could be part of the problem as this leads to poor socialisation and increased risk of attacks."

The AVA is instead calling for the government to increase funding for education and socialisation programs for dogs, their owners and young children.

Its statistics show that the most likely victims of dog attacks are children aged under 10, usually by their own dogs at their homes.

"We're never going to be able to prevent every incident, but a really good way to help prevent bites and attack is through socialisation of puppies with people and other dogs at a young age, and teaching our children how to be safe around animals," Dr Seksel said.

Ayen Chol was killed when the dog escaped a neighbour's home and chased the four-year-old's cousin into her house in St Albans on Wednesday night.

Ayen was watching television in the house when the dog attacked, lunging at her as she clung to her mother's legs.

[Aidan3]

There's actually some very sensible comment in that article. Nice to see the vets coming out on the side of sanity.

Dr Ward is a very sensible person, although her comments got torn to shreds by the public who turned around what she said to imply that she blamed the poor child. The Editorial in today's Saturday Mercury was very well balanced and intelligent.

[Isabel964]

I wish people did not react in ways that will not solve the problem. I guess people who do not understand dogs or any topic, will be at risk of thinking the solution might be something that is actually not going to solve the problem.

People should listen to vets, to experienced dog trainers...people who know.

Edited because I keep missing the spacebar on my iPad !

Edited August 20, 2011 by Sky

[sandgrubber]

I wish people did not react in ways that will not solve the problem. I guess people who do not understand dogs or any topic, will be at risk of thinking the solution might be something that is actually not going to solve the problem.

It's a difficult problem. I don't think it will ever be fully solved. It's more realistic to look for improvements than solutions. The difficulty of enforcement, and the fact that the people who most need educating are likely to be the most resistant to education, bedevil the more enlightened approaches. Not to mention that enlightened approaches lack mob appeal, and we're facing mob mentality at the moment.

[Horse2008]

http://www.perthnow.com.au/a-load-of-pit-bull-from-selfish-dog-owners/story-fn6mhct1-1226119168251

Harsher penalties - applauded by me (typed by the owner of a rough collie who's been accused of attacking a woman(lies - I was there too!) and of being a pitbull cross by the council, I have his dogsvic pedigree)

BSL - why bother? The morons who want a 'tough dog' will just move on to other breeds. Start enforcing the rules we have rather then adding more unenforceable laws!

[mr.mister]

It's really interesting. When governments are upgrading infrastructure or creating new laws in regards to the environment or what have you, they normally consult the professionals in the particular field before doing anything. Not so in this situation. Something I find quite fascinating.

Hopefully (but improbably) they'll listen to those vets and professionals who are warning against these knee-jerk reactions.

[sandgrubber]

This wasn't a government speaking. It was TAS state Liberal MP Rene Hidding, and it's not clear whether he was saying ban crossbreeds in general, or something like "why bother with pitbulls when there are so many cross breed pig dogs around the place".

It's really interesting. When governments are upgrading infrastructure or creating new laws in regards to the environment or what have you, they normally consult the professionals in the particular field before doing anything. Not so in this situation. Something I find quite fascinating.

Hopefully (but improbably) they'll listen to those vets and professionals who are warning against these knee-jerk reactions.

[Aidan3]

Hopefully (but improbably) they'll listen to those vets and professionals who are warning against these knee-jerk reactions.

Particularly the academics who they have paid to investigate this sort of problem.

[Aidan3]

This wasn't a government speaking. It was TAS state Liberal MP Rene Hidding, and it's not clear whether he was saying ban crossbreeds in general, or something like "why bother with pitbulls when there are so many cross breed pig dogs around the place".

Rene Hidding wears his pro-BSL sentiments proudly on his sleeve, it's just not clear where he would stop.

[Quickasyoucan]

Hmm crossbreeds aren't they the one who are supposed to have hybrid vigour, not like those "deformed" purebreds. ;)

No wait, its only certain types of crossbreeds...

Geez this dog ownership thing is getting confusing.

What we really need to do is ACTUALLY ENFORCE the EXISTING legislation that we have.

[mr.mister]

This wasn't a government speaking. It was TAS state Liberal MP Rene Hidding, and it's not clear whether he was saying ban crossbreeds in general, or something like "why bother with pitbulls when there are so many cross breed pig dogs around the place".

It's really interesting. When governments are upgrading infrastructure or creating new laws in regards to the environment or what have you, they normally consult the professionals in the particular field before doing anything. Not so in this situation. Something I find quite fascinating.

Hopefully (but improbably) they'll listen to those vets and professionals who are warning against these knee-jerk reactions.

Sorry, my comment was on the whole BSL issue in general rather than just what has been sparked here.

[teddy]

This wasn't a government speaking. It was TAS state Liberal MP Rene Hidding, and it's not clear whether he was saying ban crossbreeds in general, or something like "why bother with pitbulls when there are so many cross breed pig dogs around the place".

It's really interesting. When governments are upgrading infrastructure or creating new laws in regards to the environment or what have you, they normally consult the professionals in the particular field before doing anything. Not so in this situation. Something I find quite fascinating.

Hopefully (but improbably) they'll listen to those vets and professionals who are warning against these knee-jerk reactions.

Sorry, my comment was on the whole BSL issue in general rather than just what has been sparked here.

The government is just worried about votes so goes with the general consensus rather than do any research or put in an interim measure. The Councils and governments are to blame as they should have put in stricter regulations for owning pit bulls so that not any idiot or redneck/yob could own one and the community all round would have been protected from these owners. The dogs are not to blame but the stupidity, ignorance by our government and the owners who do not prove to be responsible.

[mr.mister]

This wasn't a government speaking. It was TAS state Liberal MP Rene Hidding, and it's not clear whether he was saying ban crossbreeds in general, or something like "why bother with pitbulls when there are so many cross breed pig dogs around the place".

It's really interesting. When governments are upgrading infrastructure or creating new laws in regards to the environment or what have you, they normally consult the professionals in the particular field before doing anything. Not so in this situation. Something I find quite fascinating.

Hopefully (but improbably) they'll listen to those vets and professionals who are warning against these knee-jerk reactions.

Sorry, my comment was on the whole BSL issue in general rather than just what has been sparked here.

The government is just worried about votes so goes with the general consensus rather than do any research or put in an interim measure. The Councils and governments are to blame as they should have put in stricter regulations for owning pit bulls so that not any idiot or redneck/yob could own one and the community all round would have been protected from these owners. The dogs are not to blame but the stupidity, ignorance by our government and the owners who do not prove to be responsible.

But how do you stop a certain person owning a certain dog though? In the end I think the only way it can be discouraged is having severe consequences for the owners of the animals that do become dangerous, rather than a slap-on-the-wrist fine. And even before that happens, to invest in some serious education schemes to teach people how to handle their dogs (of any breed) and how to avoid dangerous situations.

[JoeK]

http://www.perthnow.com.au/a-load-of-pit-bull-from-selfish-dog-owners/story-fn6mhct1-1226119168251

Harsher penalties - applauded by me (typed by the owner of a rough collie who's been accused of attacking a woman(lies - I was there too!) and of being a pitbull cross by the council, I have his dogsvic pedigree)

BSL - why bother? The morons who want a 'tough dog' will just move on to other breeds. Start enforcing the rules we have rather then adding more unenforceable laws!

You needing to ask why the morons choosing this type of dog? The moron wants ezy aggression not dogs that need training is why they choose this dogs. Plenty morons owning other breeds also for tough dogs, but the other breeds from the morons not getting on the media for biting as much as these Bull breedings, so there is patten happening see?

Joe

[sandgrubber]

http://www.perthnow....1-1226119168251

Harsher penalties - applauded by me (typed by the owner of a rough collie who's been accused of attacking a woman(lies - I was there too!) and of being a pitbull cross by the council, I have his dogsvic pedigree)

BSL - why bother? The morons who want a 'tough dog' will just move on to other breeds. Start enforcing the rules we have rather then adding more unenforceable laws!

You needing to ask why the morons choosing this type of dog? The moron wants ezy aggression not dogs that need training is why they choose this dogs. Plenty morons owning other breeds also for tough dogs, but the other breeds from the morons not getting on the media for biting as much as these Bull breedings, so there is patten happening see?

Joe

Curious, Joe. I think I agree with you on the basics. Dogs bred for attacking bulls, bears, other dogs, large game, etc. pose greater danger and require owners who better understand how to manage their dogs, and who take responsibility for having a potentially dangerous dog.

How can you prevent 'morons' from using such dogs to enhance some sick macho image of being tough--or, for that matter, prevent calculating bad guys from employing such dogs to protect their drug production facilities or other illegal activities?