Coroner Calls For Laws On Breeding Restricted Breeds

[mantis]

Question for Mantis.

Did you get ANKC registration papers with your adopted staffy?

If you did?

That's wonderful.

If you didn't?

How do your know it's really a staffy, as in a pure bred Staffordshire Bull Terrier?

It may be a cross of one of those little pitbulls people here abouts are talking about.

Because I got her from the very reputable "Staffy Rescue", or do you think they lie.

[steamboat]

Question for Mantis.

Did you get ANKC registration papers with your adopted staffy?

If you did?

That's wonderful.

If you didn't?

How do your know it's really a staffy, as in a pure bred Staffordshire Bull Terrier?

It may be a cross of one of those little pitbulls people here abouts are talking about.

Because I got her from the very reputable "Staffy Rescue", or do you think they lie.

Is that a "no"..?

[Cosmolo]

I'd agree with that Pav lova. Personally i'd actually be happy for their to be some kind of dog assessment AND an owner assessment for ALL dogs over a certain size. While small dogs can do terrible things as well, i know what i'd rather encounter.

But i'd also like to see councils go after the people breeding the dogs in the first place. Working at the tail end is not ideal.

[mantis]

Question for Mantis.

Did you get ANKC registration papers with your adopted staffy?

If you did?

That's wonderful.

If you didn't?

How do your know it's really a staffy, as in a pure bred Staffordshire Bull Terrier?

It may be a cross of one of those little pitbulls people here abouts are talking about.

Because I got her from the very reputable "Staffy Rescue", or do you think they lie.

Is that a "no"..?

So you're saying a wonderful organisation like "Staffy Rescue" lie?

OK that's it, I am no longer giving you oxygen.

[steamboat]

But i'd also like to see councils go after the people breeding the dogs in the first place. Working at the tail end is not ideal.

That's part of what the coroners recommended.

It's one half of the whole.

Took awhile, but we are half way there.

[Zhou Xuanyao]

I'v found that the irreverence/apathy toward the law on this issue is quite marked, both from a public and council perspective. BSL today seems to me only a big issue in tabloids, some peoples imaginations, and of course a minority of dog owners who do get unlucky or live in an uncharacteristically active BSL council area.

[steamboat]

Question for Mantis.

Did you get ANKC registration papers with your adopted staffy?

If you did?

That's wonderful.

If you didn't?

How do your know it's really a staffy, as in a pure bred Staffordshire Bull Terrier?

It may be a cross of one of those little pitbulls people here abouts are talking about.

Because I got her from the very reputable "Staffy Rescue", or do you think they lie.

Is that a "no"..?

So you're saying a wonderful organisation like "Staffy Rescue" lie?

OK that's it, I am no longer giving you oxygen.

I didn't think so.

So what we have is breed expert/s sight the dog & declared the dog to be a pure breed staffy & you accepted the opinion without question.

Yet, if a breed expert declared a dog to be a APBT or a cross you would not accept it.

Go figure.

Edited October 25, 2012 by steamboat

[WreckitWhippet]

I'd agree with that Pav lova. Personally i'd actually be happy for their to be some kind of dog assessment AND an owner assessment for ALL dogs over a certain size. While small dogs can do terrible things as well, i know what i'd rather encounter.

But i'd also like to see councils go after the people breeding the dogs in the first place. Working at the tail end is not ideal.

Tackling back yard breeding and BSL are two completely different things, although it's commonly the BYB dogs that end up the victims.

Cosmolo, it would be a bitter pill and one the general public is not likely to swallow if you start calling for temp tests across the board. They and the pollies may however be more accepting of TT's for suspected restricted dogs or crosses.

[Zhou Xuanyao]

I'll help you figure it. If someone reckons a dog to be anything other than a restricted breed, it's of no consequence, so let us call it a 'Staffy', for example, if that seems a reasonable enough best guess.

If council reckons it to be a restricted breed however, it is of consequence, and as bull breed owners we demand that compelling evidence is produced to support the claim, 'reasonable enough best guess' is unacceptable.

[steamboat]

I'll help you figure it. If someone reckons a dog to be anything other than a restricted breed, it's of no consequence, so let us call it a 'Staffy', for example, if that seems a reasonable enough best guess.

If council reckons it to be a restricted breed however, it is of consequence, and as bull breed owners we demand that compelling evidence is produced to support the claim, 'reasonable enough best guess' is unacceptable.

That is the now.

however,

That isn't the topic.

[Jed]

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

I told you the pup had no pitbull blood.

You do think it is ok to knock any medium sized short haired dog off as "pitbull" no matter that it has done nothing wrong, whether it has any pitbull blood or not.

That is sad.

[Quickasyoucan]

I'd agree with that Pav lova. Personally i'd actually be happy for their to be some kind of dog assessment AND an owner assessment for ALL dogs over a certain size. While small dogs can do terrible things as well, i know what i'd rather encounter.

But i'd also like to see councils go after the people breeding the dogs in the first place. Working at the tail end is not ideal.

Tackling back yard breeding and BSL are two completely different things, although it's commonly the BYB dogs that end up the victims.

Cosmolo, it would be a bitter pill and one the general public is not likely to swallow if you start calling for temp tests across the board. They and the pollies may however be more accepting of TT's for suspected restricted dogs or crosses.

Although it is markedly unfair that any breed should be deemed dangerous by dint of being such a breed not by dint of any actions, I agree with both Cosmolo and Pav Lova. Having met Cosmolo's dogs I am sure that if they lived in NSW and were they to receive an NOI they would pass a temp test and live unrestricted lives. The options for a well-behaved unpapered bull breed are a darn sight better in NSW than they are in Victoria. Even if the entire premise of BSL is incorrect at least bringing it into line with NSW legislation would give dogs a chance and I hazard would cost far less than fighting numerous cases in VCAT.

Edited October 25, 2012 by Quickasyoucan

[Katdogs]

Excellent. Problem solved - Cos moves to Sydney! I want her nearby so much, whether we get a puppy or not :)

[Salukifan]

Excellent. Problem solved - Cos moves to Sydney! I want her nearby so much, whether we get a puppy or not :)

Of course if Cosmolo moved to Canberra, she wouldn't even need to DEAL with BSL - none of that malachy here. :)

[Katdogs]

Yes, but Canberra is boring and either too hot or too cold and the roads go round in circles and it's full of public servants. So there!

[Salukifan]

Yes, but Canberra is boring and either too hot or too cold and the roads go round in circles and it's full of public servants. So there!

Our misinformation campaign continues to do its job I see. God forbid that everyone finds out what a great place it is to live.

Wearing a brown cardigan during tourist season is a small price to pay. :cool:

[moosmum]

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.

It exists in the form of the "associate register" for any desexed mutt, mongrel, non papered look-a-like and dogs of unknown parentage

There's also the "sporting register" which allows for the "working" dogs such as those Kelpies registered with WKC, to be listed on the register, remain entire and compete in agility, herding etc.

The purpose of the KC's is to maintain the "Pedigree" dog register, not to provide "novelty events" for dogs that are not recognised in any way

Don't you find it hypocrital that some manning the ramparts screaming ''save the pitbulls'' & accusing the pure bred registeries & owners of not only supporting BSL but revelling in the ''slaughter'' are the same persons supporting the puppy millers, bred for profit only, shelter choking produce.

If the truth be known, there are probably more abandoned "oodles:, deliberatly bred mongrels, put down in week than there are pittie ''types'' in a whole year.

Disgusting and ill informed misrepresentaion of the truth? You do it so well.

Where have I Screamed "defend the Pitt bulls? Where have I accused pure breed registers of supporting BSL or reveling in the slaughter?

I assure you I don't hold you or M-sass as representative spokes persons for the KCs.

Where do I support puppy millers or bred for profit only?

I support responsible breeding by anyone who undertakes it,on the grounds that you will not stop cross breeding,but thats no excuse to say it shouldn't be done with out thought or care about the results.I will never support breeding for profit only.

I believe the KCs could be in a far better position themselves, stronger than ever,with more support and membership,better financialy,politicaly and far less misunderstood if they accept that today,an expanded role is appropriate. KCs could have much more say in legislation and policy.

Find a way to show it is REALY about better dogs,not JUST show dogs.If I had no regard for the KCs,I would hardly be urging them to fill the gaping holes before a real KC adversary does,for dogs sake.You can be sure D.D inc. will be quick to recognise the potential and use it to swing things their way.

My only argument with you has been the proof of breeding onus being on the owner in cases where there is real doubt.You have made it quite clear you don't care that innocent people are caught up in this mess so long as they are only cross breeds we are talking about.

I may disagree with M-sass's reasoning,but can respect that it IS reasoned.

Edited October 25, 2012 by moosmum

[m-sass]

Time to face some facts, then general public on the whole and politicians are not anti-BSL, infact they welcome legisaltion that makes them feel safer. regardless of it not being effective when it comes to providing a safer community and reducing bite stats.

I for one do not support BSL but the reality is that it's not going away any time soon, there is not about to be an overnight back flip in VIC (certainly hasn't happened in NSW in the 7 or 8 years since we've had it ). A great many of the anti-bsl supporters look like red necks and are not taken seriously because of the way that they have attempted to tackle the problem and comments made. It certainly does not help the cause to make references to Nazi Germany, Hitler, Jews, Holocauts and the like. Protests to date have been futile.

What can be done in the meantime to lessen the destruction of pets and innocent dogs ?

My suggestion is that the powers that be in VIC are pushed to adopt the NSW model. I know there's going to be people screaming blue murder at this suggestion but it does offer a way out, via breed assessment and temp testing, which is a hell of a lot more than the VIC legislation has going for it at the moment.

Want to keep your nice cross bred dogs safe ? then fight to have a reliable method of temperament testing included in the VIC laws.

ETA: seeking a better option in the short term, makes more sense than continuing to jump up and down and not be heard

Excellent post I totally agree

[m-sass]

Cosmolo' timestamp='1351130783' post='5998327']

But i'd also like to see councils go after the people breeding the dogs in the first place. Working at the tail end is not ideal.

Breeding dogs shouldn't be the given rights for just anyone in a free for all environment, breeding dogs IMHO needs to be controlled sooner rather than later and the breeders of crap dogs need to be held questionable as to what they are producing.

If council reckons it to be a restricted breed however, it is of consequence, and as bull breed owners we demand that compelling evidence is produced to support the claim, 'reasonable enough best guess' is unacceptable.

Given that primarily only Bull breeds and crosses are potentially effected by BSL, if you buy a papered one instead of a BYB, you don't have to worry about what the council reckons do you??

I told you the pup had no pitbull blood

Tell the ranger that and it will all good then??

Edited October 25, 2012 by m-sass

[steamboat]

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.

It exists in the form of the "associate register" for any desexed mutt, mongrel, non papered look-a-like and dogs of unknown parentage

There's also the "sporting register" which allows for the "working" dogs such as those Kelpies registered with WKC, to be listed on the register, remain entire and compete in agility, herding etc.

The purpose of the KC's is to maintain the "Pedigree" dog register, not to provide "novelty events" for dogs that are not recognised in any way

Don't you find it hypocrital that some manning the ramparts screaming ''save the pitbulls'' & accusing the pure bred registeries & owners of not only supporting BSL but revelling in the ''slaughter'' are the same persons supporting the puppy millers, bred for profit only, shelter choking produce.

If the truth be known, there are probably more abandoned "oodles:, deliberatly bred mongrels, put down in week than there are pittie ''types'' in a whole year.

Disgusting and ill informed misrepresentaion of the truth? You do it so well.

Where have I Screamed "defend the Pitt bulls? Where have I accused pure breed registers of supporting BSL or reveling in the slaughter?

I assure you I don't hold you or M-sass as representative spokes persons for the KCs.

Where do I support puppy millers or bred for profit only?

I support responsible breeding by anyone who undertakes it,on the grounds that you will not stop cross breeding,but thats no excuse to say it shouldn't be done with out thought or care about the results.I will never support breeding for profit only.

I believe the KCs could be in a far better position themselves, stronger than ever,with more support and membership,better financialy,politicaly and far less misunderstood if they accept that today,an expanded role is appropriate. KCs could have much more say in legislation and policy.

Find a way to show it is REALY about better dogs,not JUST show dogs.If I had no regard for the KCs,I would hardly be urging them to fill the gaping holes before a real KC adversary does,for dogs sake.You can be sure D.D inc. will be quick to recognise the potential and use it to swing things their way.

My only argument with you has been the proof of breeding onus being on the owner in cases where there is real doubt.You have made it quite clear you don't care that innocent people are caught up in this mess so long as they are only cross breeds we are talking about.

I may disagree with M-sass's reasoning,but can respect that it IS reasoned.

Another disgusting misrepresentation of the truth.