Coroner Calls For Laws On Breeding Restricted Breeds

[m-sass]

double post sorry

Edited October 23, 2012 by m-sass

[m-sass]

What Megan said.

It is completely irrelevant to the legislation how i keep, train and contain my dogs. They can still do exactly what Megan has described- regardless of how responsible i am. How on earth can i and people like me be responsible for our own destiny in this situation!

What's wrong with a bit of creative management........we are talking box tickers here......what would you need to produce for a ranger to leave happily without your dog on a seizure mission

[steamboat]

I don't think he's the other person, nor a troll. That's what worries me! What we're seeing is not too far from public opinion.

I am no other person.

My opinions are my own.

Public opinion is overwhelming support of B.S.L.

My opinion is that people be responsible for the type of dog they own. Including the ancestory.

My opinion is that most of those who rail against the suggestion they be liable for breed I.D. of their declared dog is more fear that an easy & convenient method of avoiding censure & a fine will be closed to them.

My opinion is it's a exercise in personal protection rather than protection of their "pets"

The reason for my mounting posts is because I have tried to answer the many questions, challenges & uninformed attacks to an honest opinion. " Eek, it's a troll" What lamentful admission of nothing of any value to add. Pathetic actually.

It's the bottom rung of the mob mentality.

There is more sycophantic "opinion" here than there is rational thought.

Many run with the hounds seeking a fox to attack so as to curry favour with the pack.

My opinion is valid.

This fox isn't running.

[WreckitWhippet]

I don't think he's the other person, nor a troll. That's what worries me! What we're seeing is not too far from public opinion.

Yes and there has been very little if any shift in this attitude since BSL was introduced.

[Aphra]

Edmonton in Canada has repealed its breed specific legislation.

This is the report:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/109410329/Report-on-restricting-dogs-by-breed

They consulted seven different major companion animal stakeholders who were unanimous in their lack of support for BSL, which is true of the major groups in the US as well:

http://stopbsl.org/bsloverview/the-lack-of-professional-support/

In a win for commonsense, Edmonton revised legislation is putting more emphasis on making owners responsible for their dogs' behaviour.

Enforcement efforts will centre on holding dog owners more accountable for their dogs’ actions,increased sign use and greater education on codes of conduct in off-leash areas.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/110328489/Bylaw-to-Amend-the-Animal-Licensing-and-Control-Bylaw

[steamboat]

Edmonton in Canada has repealed its breed specific legislation.

This is the report:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/109410329/Report-on-restricting-dogs-by-breed

They consulted seven different major companion animal stakeholders who were unanimous in their lack of support for BSL, which is true of the major groups in the US as well:

http://stopbsl.org/bsloverview/the-lack-of-professional-support/

In a win for commonsense, Edmonton revised legislation is putting more emphasis on making owners responsible for their dogs' behaviour.

Enforcement efforts will centre on holding dog owners more accountable for their dogs’ actions,increased sign use and greater education on codes of conduct in off-leash areas.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/110328489/Bylaw-to-Amend-the-Animal-Licensing-and-Control-Bylaw

Is Edmonton anywhere near Melbourne?

I thought Victoria was the issue?

Owners responsible for their dogs?

Common sense?

Well go on, who'd of thought such a thing?

[Linda K]

I am bemused too Steamboat - by you. Have you actually done the conversion to kilos from the standards you quoted?

I am rather bemused about that. At 40kg, the dog is well outside the standard. "The Publc" seem to think that APBT are really big, but they are not. I don't know how the dog can fill the criteria at that size. Not allowing any photos is worrying too, + if the sire is not restricted breed, how can the dog itself fit the standard, and be declared?

I am rather bemused as well.

But for a different reason.

From the UKC APBT standard

Height and Weight

The American Pit Bull Terrier must be both powerful and agile so actual weight and height are less important than the correct proportion of weight to height. Desirable weight for a mature male in good condition is between 35 and 60 pounds. Desirable weight for a mature female in good condition is between 30 and 50 pounds. Dogs over these weights are not to be penalized unless they are disproportionately massive or rangy.

You do realise that 35-60 pounds = 15-27 kg, and 30-50 pounds is 13.6-22 kg. 40 kg in that case is definitely as the original poster said, way over the weight range, nearly double. But not the first time you have let facts get in the way of making a point

[steamboat]

I am bemused too Steamboat - by you. Have you actually done the conversion to kilos from the standards you quoted?

I am rather bemused about that. At 40kg, the dog is well outside the standard. "The Publc" seem to think that APBT are really big, but they are not. I don't know how the dog can fill the criteria at that size. Not allowing any photos is worrying too, + if the sire is not restricted breed, how can the dog itself fit the standard, and be declared?

I am rather bemused as well.

But for a different reason.

From the UKC APBT standard

Height and Weight

The American Pit Bull Terrier must be both powerful and agile so actual weight and height are less important than the correct proportion of weight to height. Desirable weight for a mature male in good condition is between 35 and 60 pounds. Desirable weight for a mature female in good condition is between 30 and 50 pounds. Dogs over these weights are not to be penalized unless they are disproportionately massive or rangy.

You do realise that 35-60 pounds = 15-27 kg, and 30-50 pounds is 13.6-22 kg. 40 kg in that case is definitely as the original poster said, way over the weight range, nearly double. But not the first time you have let facts get in the way of making a point

The UKC standard for the APBT has no set parameters for height or weight. Neither does the Amstaff btw.

The standard describes what is considered to be ideal.

However, 20 - 100lb APBTs are all equal under the standard as long as they fit the physical requirements.

A 90lb pit bull is not particularly unusual.

The ADBA has introduced the new category of ''bullies'' for the squat behemoths that weight well over 100lbs...they are still pit bulls though.

BTW, I have seen staffies that weigh over 30kgs, not pretty & that's a fact.

It's not hard to get a pitbull up to & over 40kgs...& that's a fact as well.

And if they are bandogs, neo x pitty....the skies the limit.

Nice try though.

edit to add.

100+ lb'er

http://www.raisingcainkennels.com/

Edited October 24, 2012 by steamboat

[Cat]

But if they are double their weight chances are they are too overweight too chase anyone.

Why did you bother quoting the standard if you are so dismissive of it?

Edited October 24, 2012 by Cat

[m-sass]

My opinion is that people be responsible for the type of dog they own. Including the ancestory.

The bottom line in this situation IMHO is that in most council areas there have been restricted breeds in place for years. We understand that many people don't know and don't bother to research council law and how it applies to a dog they intend to potentially own, but that is their choice not to research dogs, breeds and the application of laws and making the wrong choices is no one else's fault but their own.

Pitbull's have been restricted to some degree in most council areas for a long time and have always been determined by appearance and dogs have been determined as Pitbull's in the past with the associated restrictions applied.........I know of one personally who bought a BYB puppy supposedly a Staffy X Boxer that was declared a Pitbull a couple of years ago and they had to comply with the enclosure, signs and leash/muzzle laws, the dog was dobbed in for excessive barking by a neighbour........"the Pitbull next door barks too much" and the dog was declared becasue the owner couldn't prove ancestory. There was nothing wrong with the dog, it was a good dog and the owner was pissed at the declaration, but it goes with the territory even back then that if a dog looks like a Pitbull it can be declared.

The point is: If you take a punt buying Bully crossbreed pups or dogs with Pitbull appearance and lets face it, rarely do you see two dogs declared as Pitbull's look the same, it's a breed that has quite a wide range of accepted features, colours, size etc, you could always have faced a problem with dogs like this long before the tightening of laws and crossbreed targeting and the policing of, nothing has changed other than you used to be able to get away with Pitbull featured dogs more easily and lies were more easily accepted as to the dogs determined breed. With that said, no one is forced to buy a Bully crossbreed pup, they could have bought a papered Staffy or Amstaff if they like that style of dog and remained safe and off the radar?

Edited October 24, 2012 by m-sass

[Cat]

1351059939[/url]' post='5997348']

The point is: If you take a punt buying Bully crossbreed pups or dogs with Pitbull appearance and lets face it, rarely do you see two dogs declared as Pitbull's look the same,

That's because they usually aren't pit bulls at all

[steamboat]

But if they are double their weight chances are they are too overweight too chase anyone.

Why did you bother quoting the standard if you are so dismissive of it?

Change of mind.

Some questions are just ridiculous to warrant a genuine reply.

[Jed]

What Megan said.

It is completely irrelevant to the legislation how i keep, train and contain my dogs. They can still do exactly what Megan has described- regardless of how responsible i am. How on earth can i and people like me be responsible for our own destiny in this situation!

What's wrong with a bit of creative management........we are talking box tickers here......what would you need to produce for a ranger to leave happily without your dog on a seizure mission

In my experience (which is more than you would think), a switched on and Hitleresque lawyer!!

m-sass

The point is: If you take a punt buying Bully crossbreed pups or dogs with Pitbull appearance and lets face it, rarely do you see two dogs declared as Pitbull's look the same, it's a breed that has quite a wide range of accepted features, colours, size etc, you could always have faced a problem with dogs like this long before the tightening of laws and crossbreed targeting and the policing of, nothing has changed other than you used to be able to get away with Pitbull featured dogs more easily and lies were more easily accepted as to the dogs determined breed. With that said, no one is forced to buy a Bully crossbreed pup, they could have bought a papered Staffy or Amstaff if they like that style of dog and remained safe and off the radar?

And do you think it is fair, reasonable and equitable that someone should acquire a cute puppy which is the product of two crossbred dogs - neither of which have any pitbull - and when it grows up, it is tan with light eyes, it never does anything wrong, and it is sitting on the lawn one day, minding its own business when the ACO comes and grabs it, and the council will not let the owners see it again, or have the body returned after they have knocked it off?

Can you tell me why that dog should die?

It's not a pitbull. It has never done anything wrong. It should be killed, why?

Someone who only thinks purebred dogs should continue to live, is not, imho, a true dog lover.

Mantis, of course you are correct.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Jed

[Sheridan]

Once more Jed makes sense.

[mantis]

I am bemused too Steamboat - by you. Have you actually done the conversion to kilos from the standards you quoted?

I am rather bemused about that. At 40kg, the dog is well outside the standard. "The Publc" seem to think that APBT are really big, but they are not. I don't know how the dog can fill the criteria at that size. Not allowing any photos is worrying too, + if the sire is not restricted breed, how can the dog itself fit the standard, and be declared?

I am rather bemused as well.

But for a different reason.

From the UKC APBT standard

Height and Weight

The American Pit Bull Terrier must be both powerful and agile so actual weight and height are less important than the correct proportion of weight to height. Desirable weight for a mature male in good condition is between 35 and 60 pounds. Desirable weight for a mature female in good condition is between 30 and 50 pounds. Dogs over these weights are not to be penalized unless they are disproportionately massive or rangy.

You do realise that 35-60 pounds = 15-27 kg, and 30-50 pounds is 13.6-22 kg. 40 kg in that case is definitely as the original poster said, way over the weight range, nearly double. But not the first time you have let facts get in the way of making a point

The UKC standard for the APBT has no set parameters for height or weight. Neither does the Amstaff btw.

The standard describes what is considered to be ideal.

However, 20 - 100lb APBTs are all equal under the standard as long as they fit the physical requirements.

A 90lb pit bull is not particularly unusual.

The ADBA has introduced the new category of ''bullies'' for the squat behemoths that weight well over 100lbs...they are still pit bulls though.

BTW, I have seen staffies that weigh over 30kgs, not pretty & that's a fact.

It's not hard to get a pitbull up to & over 40kgs...& that's a fact as well.

And if they are bandogs, neo x pitty....the skies the limit.

Nice try though.

edit to add.

100+ lb'er

http://www.raisingcainkennels.com/

But they are bandogges, which my boy was, not an APBT. His mother who was a purebred APBT weighed no where near that. If there is a Staffy close to 30kg, they wouldn't be able to move, you talk total crap.

Edited October 24, 2012 by mantis

[moosmum]

What Megan said.

It is completely irrelevant to the legislation how i keep, train and contain my dogs. They can still do exactly what Megan has described- regardless of how responsible i am. How on earth can i and people like me be responsible for our own destiny in this situation!

What's wrong with a bit of creative management........we are talking box tickers here......what would you need to produce for a ranger to leave happily without your dog on a seizure mission

In my experience (which is more than you would think), a switched on and Hitleresque lawyer!!

m-sass

The point is: If you take a punt buying Bully crossbreed pups or dogs with Pitbull appearance and lets face it, rarely do you see two dogs declared as Pitbull's look the same, it's a breed that has quite a wide range of accepted features, colours, size etc, you could always have faced a problem with dogs like this long before the tightening of laws and crossbreed targeting and the policing of, nothing has changed other than you used to be able to get away with Pitbull featured dogs more easily and lies were more easily accepted as to the dogs determined breed. With that said, no one is forced to buy a Bully crossbreed pup, they could have bought a papered Staffy or Amstaff if they like that style of dog and remained safe and off the radar?

And do you think it is fair, reasonable and equitable that someone should acquire a cute puppy which is the product of two crossbred dogs - neither of which have any pitbull - and when it grows up, it is tan with light eyes, it never does anything wrong, and it is sitting on the lawn one day, minding its own business when the ACO comes and grabs it, and the council will not let the owners see it again, or have the body returned after they have knocked it off?

Can you tell me why that dog should die?

It's not a pitbull. It has never done anything wrong. It should be killed, why?

Someone who only thinks purebred dogs should continue to live, is not, imho, a true dog lover.

Mantis, of course you are correct.

Its even worse when they actively promote and support B.S.L to that end.Thats more than just not caring,or prefering Pedigrees.Thats hate.

Extremism.

I also think they are who they say.Different styles.Even scarier.

I keep trying to find a way to say it with out offending any one.I can't but that attitude is fostered here on Dol.(and else where )There has to be a better way to bring change than labeling anyone who breeds out side of the KCs as irresponsible.Mostly it may be so, but its not a given.Its taught to be a given.These guys believe it whole heartedly enough to cheer on a slaughter.

If the KCs could find a way to include non pedigree dogs, (Appendix registries? Novelty show events? Something?)They could be gaining new members who learn about goals and purpose. The Kcs would gain a big voice.And be given some thing new to to measure themselves against,even if only in novelty events.

Otherwise,there are new registries popping up that cater only for D.D and commercial farms who are just as extreme,or more, towards the KCS. They will take up the slack and the KCs will suffer for that.

If I get booted for these views,so be it.

Edited October 24, 2012 by moosmum

[m-sass]

And do you think it is fair, reasonable and equitable that someone should acquire a cute puppy which is the product of two crossbred dogs - neither of which have any pitbull - and when it grows up, it is tan with light eyes, it never does anything wrong, and it is sitting on the lawn one day, minding its own business when the ACO comes and grabs it, and the council will not let the owners see it again, or have the body returned after they have knocked it off?

Can you tell me why that dog should die?

It's not a pitbull. It has never done anything wrong. It should be killed, why?

It's interesting to note how people are fast to determine that a crossbreed dog of Pitbull appearance is not a Pitbull or has no Pitbull ancestory where in fact in most cases of crossbreed combinations the breeders wouldn't know the ancestory behind the breeding let alone the buyers.......so what's the "no Pitbull" based on??, the breeder said so I suppose which makes it alright then?? Point is: Crossbreed Bully pups could be Pitbull X or near on pure for that matter and the choice is buy one and take a punt or not

Edited October 24, 2012 by m-sass

[Aidan3]

Jed was putting forward an example, the dog was not a pit bull.

[steamboat]

http://www.raisingcainkennels.com/

But they are bandogges, which my boy was, not an APBT. His mother who was a purebred APBT weighed no where near that. If there is a Staffy close to 30kg, they wouldn't be able to move, you talk total crap.

Well there you go.

The NEO x APBT is just another mongrel that is marketed as the modern "bandog".

You want to pretend your ''bandog'' is not a pitbull or pitbullx?

Speaking of talking crap.

A good example of the reason for my opinion of owner required breed I.D. tho.

You obviously haven't seen many staffies either.

They aren't all the fit, muscular little 16'' dogs pictured in the breed profiles - of which incidentally, most of the males would run to over 20kg. Some as close to 30kg as they are to 20kg.

If the dog in your avatar is the dog you have ''adopted".

I would suggest you read my reply to the question asked of how to keep suspect dogs safe & give the advice serious consideration.

You are my idea of a troll btw.

[steamboat]

What Megan said.

It is completely irrelevant to the legislation how i keep, train and contain my dogs. They can still do exactly what Megan has described- regardless of how responsible i am. How on earth can i and people like me be responsible for our own destiny in this situation!

What's wrong with a bit of creative management........we are talking box tickers here......what would you need to produce for a ranger to leave happily without your dog on a seizure mission

In my experience (which is more than you would think), a switched on and Hitleresque lawyer!!

m-sass

The point is: If you take a punt buying Bully crossbreed pups or dogs with Pitbull appearance and lets face it, rarely do you see two dogs declared as Pitbull's look the same, it's a breed that has quite a wide range of accepted features, colours, size etc, you could always have faced a problem with dogs like this long before the tightening of laws and crossbreed targeting and the policing of, nothing has changed other than you used to be able to get away with Pitbull featured dogs more easily and lies were more easily accepted as to the dogs determined breed. With that said, no one is forced to buy a Bully crossbreed pup, they could have bought a papered Staffy or Amstaff if they like that style of dog and remained safe and off the radar?

And do you think it is fair, reasonable and equitable that someone should acquire a cute puppy which is the product of two crossbred dogs - neither of which have any pitbull - and when it grows up, it is tan with light eyes, it never does anything wrong, and it is sitting on the lawn one day, minding its own business when the ACO comes and grabs it, and the council will not let the owners see it again, or have the body returned after they have knocked it off?

Can you tell me why that dog should die?

It's not a pitbull. It has never done anything wrong. It should be killed, why?

Someone who only thinks purebred dogs should continue to live, is not, imho, a true dog lover.

Mantis, of course you are correct.

Its even worse when they actively promote and support B.S.L to that end.Thats more than just not caring,or prefering Pedigrees.Thats hate.

Extremism.

I also think they are who they say.Different styles.Even scarier.

I keep trying to find a way to say it with out offending any one.I can't but that attitude is fostered here on Dol.(and else where )There has to be a better way to bring change than labeling anyone who breeds out side of the KCs as irresponsible.Mostly it may be so, but its not a given.Its taught to be a given.These guys believe it whole heartedly enough to cheer on a slaughter.

If the KCs could find a way to include non pedigree dogs, (Appendix registries? Novelty show events? Something?)They could be gaining new members who learn about goals and purpose. The Kcs would gain a big voice.And be given some thing new to to measure themselves against,even if only in novelty events.

Otherwise,there are new registries popping up that cater only for D.D and commercial farms who are just as extreme,or more, towards the KCS. They will take up the slack and the KCs will suffer for that.

If I get booted for these views,so be it.

The entire post is an uninformed & disgusting misrepresentation of the truth.