Impounded Bull Breed Put Down Before Breed Assessment In Nsw

[Plan B]

Whatever the owner behaviours were, the essential point is that a dog was put down for a reason based on its appearance, not on its behaviour.

The dog was put down because the owner failed to:

a) microchip

b) register the dog with Council

c) claim it after 7 days

I agree with mita. If the above were the reasons the dog got put down, why wasn't the other dog put down at the same time?

Maybe the other dog was chipped or registered, or they were trying to locate the owners? Someone has said the other dog wasn't theirs, it was apparently at their house but belongs to someone else.

Regardless, the dog wasn't put down because it was un-microchipped, unregistered, and not claimed within 7 days.

It was put down because the pound decided they did not like the look of it and, instead of giving it a chance to either a) go home or b) find a new home, they killed it.

Telling owners they are irresponsible and have let their dog down is one thing - but letting pounds get away with needlessly killing is another.

[BlackJaq]

I think a lot of pounds are scared of liability issues in case they let out a dog that ends up harming somebody... Maybe they actually believe that dogs of a certain look are dangerous? I have met a lot of people in real life who will swear that pitbulls are killing machines who go berserk without reason, even when they have never shown issues before....

People outside DOL are often a lot less knowledgeable than the DOL crowd

Edited July 18, 2013 by BlackJaq

[kelpiecuddles]

Our local pound adopted out a dog as an amstaff but 6 months later the dog escaped through no fault of the owners, ended up back in the pound and now the same pound is putting the poor owners through an absolute nightmare because they listed him as a pitty cross when he was impounded despite him being chipped by the pound as an amstaff X. He's a lovely dog and they are having to keep him muzzled, penned and pay for a breed assessment out of their own pockets to reinstate the pounds original breed assessment!

[Rebanne]

Whatever the owner behaviours were, the essential point is that a dog was put down for a reason based on its appearance, not on its behaviour.

The dog was put down because the owner failed to:

a) microchip

b) register the dog with Council

c) claim it after 7 days

I agree with mita. If the above were the reasons the dog got put down, why wasn't the other dog put down at the same time?

Maybe the other dog was chipped or registered, or they were trying to locate the owners? Someone has said the other dog wasn't theirs, it was apparently at their house but belongs to someone else.

Regardless, the dog wasn't put down because it was un-microchipped, unregistered, and not claimed within 7 days.

It was put down because the pound decided they did not like the look of it and, instead of giving it a chance to either a) go home or b) find a new home, they killed it.

Telling owners they are irresponsible and have let their dog down is one thing - but letting pounds get away with needlessly killing is another.

If the lazy arsed owners could have bothered the dog could have gone home. And how do we know what it's temperament was like? The owners said it was lovely but who could believe them.

[Plan B]

If the lazy arsed owners could have bothered the dog could have gone home. And how do we know what it's temperament was like? The owners said it was lovely but who could believe them.

Right. The owners are lazy, so it's fine a dog died? You can berate them all you like but that's not educating and that's not trying to prevent dogs needlessly being killed in pounds.

Nowhere in the article did it say there was anything negative about the dog's behaviour. In fact, the quote from the Council's team leader suggests the only reason this dog was killed is because information didn't reach people in time and:

“Council is confident that an independent assessment would have confirmed the dog’s breed as a pitbull,” Mr Mulvey said.

“Had this been the case, the dog would have been euthanised under NSW legislation.”

The fact that the Council don't even seem to know the legislation in NSW (even if the dog was declared a "Pit Bull," if owners were able to comply with the requirements of keeping it then the Council would have been obligated to return the dog) is appalling. The fact that they bypassed a breed assessment because of their own prejudices is outrageous.

I don't understand why a dog dying, needlessly and without other avenues being explored, is okay just because its owners let it down.

[*kirty*]

Its not ok, and I'm sure everyone feels sad for the dog. But I don't feel sad for its careless owners who sealed its fate.

[mita]

Whatever the owner behaviours were, the essential point is that a dog was put down for a reason based on its appearance, not on its behaviour.

The dog was put down because the owner failed to:

a) microchip

b) register the dog with Council

c) claim it after 7 days

With the information provided by another DOL member on here I hope the paper runs an article on how these "poor hard done by owners" left a second dog in the pound to possibly the same fate. With BSL in place why do people keep buying unpapered bull breeds, not register them and then cry "victim" when their unregistered, unpapered dogs are picked up at large? They should get no sympathy, only their poor dogs and should be banned from owning a dog for x amount of time. The amount of AST, SBT and AmBull dog and their crosses available on FB is so sad, there was 32 puppies go up on one day from different "breeders" - surly if someone's dog is seized under BSL they can sue the breeder?

Read the rest of what I wrote. The fact that BSL is in place, put the dog in the category of restricted breed. That's in the account in the first post.

Mr Black was told he couldn’t have his dog back as it was a restricted breed, unless it was inspected by a breed assessor and reclassified.

It also seems there's possibilities of dogs from that pound being adopted, or going to rescue, if they're not claimed.

The fact that this dog was said by the Council to be a restricted breed, took it out of that possibility. Note...possibility (it might or might not have happened) NOT probability (it would likely have happened).

So.... again.... whatever the behaviour of the owners in what they did or did not do.... a bottom line was BSL being applied. I repeat, any jurisdiction which has such unscientific beliefs, is back in the dark ages.

I'm not the owner hollering unfair. I'm a person who finds it totally stupid... & unjust to dogs... to have laws which equate appearance with behaviour.

Edited July 18, 2013 by mita

[Trisven13]

The pound were not able to rehome this dog as the rangers had IDed it as a restricted breed.

[mita]

The pound were not able to rehome this dog as the rangers had IDed it as a restricted breed.

Exactly... so any possibility of rehoming was ruled out.

Edited July 18, 2013 by mita

[melzawelza]

The pound were not able to rehome this dog as the rangers had IDed it as a restricted breed.

Sorry that is crap. The dog was unmicrochipped, therefore it was not a restricted dog at the time of impound.

The rangers chose to try and apply an unscientific process of visual breed ID to the dog. The Rangers are not breed assessors. If they 'suspected' the dog to be a restricted dog they could have followed the breed/temperament assessment process set out in the Act, which would have been incredibly likely to clear the dog and allow it to be rehomed.

The Rangers/Council also lied to the press and said that the dog would have to be euthanased anyway if found to be a restricted breed. This is NOT the case when the dog has owners that wish to reclaim the dog, as this one did. They seem to be being very over-zealous in their perceived 'powers' when it comes to restricted dogs, which is resulting in dead dogs. That is to be condemned.

Edited July 18, 2013 by melzawelza

[Trisven13]

It is how it has always been at Albury Pound and was, as I understood it when rescuing from there, how it worked with breed specific legislation. If a dog or pup comes in that the rangers ID as a pitbull then it can't be rehomed. Are you saying that if a dog appears to be a pitbull they have to have a breed assessor come in and assess it? I can't imagine many pounds would have that kind of money available?

[mita]

The pound were not able to rehome this dog as the rangers had IDed it as a restricted breed.

Sorry that is crap. The dog was unmicrochipped, therefore it was not a restricted dog at the time of impound.

The rangers chose to try and apply an unscientific process of visual breed ID to the dog.

Sorry.... but what Trisven wrote is factual. I'm puzzled why you called it 'crap'.

The dog did not have a chance of being rehomed, because the the Council rangers had categorized him as a restricted breed. BSL legislation relies totally on a visual appraisal, as you say. And even worse, from a science point of view, it's based on a belief that the appearance of a dog, not its behaviour, is predictive of aggressive traits. Different matter entirely if the dog had failed a behavioral assessment....

Edited July 18, 2013 by mita

[melzawelza]

It is how it has always been at Albury Pound and was, as I understood it when rescuing from there, how it worked with breed specific legislation. If a dog or pup comes in that the rangers ID as a pitbull then it can't be rehomed. Are you saying that if a dog appears to be a pitbull they have to have a breed assessor come in and assess it? I can't imagine many pounds would have that kind of money available?

It is not the way it needs to be. The rangers have two options to save the lives of more dogs in their pounds.

1. Not attempt to breed ID dogs by their appearance, as it is unscientific.

2. If they choose to breed ID dogs, follow it through and complete a breed/temperament assessment process which is highly likely to allow the dog to be rehomed if it has a good temperament.

This is what every major pound in Sydney does. The cost is passed on to the adopter or rescue that is taking the dog.

The pound were not able to rehome this dog as the rangers had IDed it as a restricted breed.

Sorry that is crap. The dog was unmicrochipped, therefore it was not a restricted dog at the time of impound.

The rangers chose to try and apply an unscientific process of visual breed ID to the dog.

Sorry.... but what Trisven wrote is factual. I'm puzzled why you called it 'crap'.

The dog did not have a chance of being rehomed, because the the Council rangers had categorized him as a restricted breed. BSL legislation relies totally on a visual appraisal, as you say. And even worse, from a science point of view, it's based on a belief that the appearance of a dog, not its behaviour, is predictive of aggressive traits. Different matter entirely if the dog had failed a behavioral assessment....

That's not how it works in NSW Mita. There is a process that can be followed to clear a dog, and a Ranger's word is not 'gold' like it is in Victoria.

[Trisven13]

I've NEVER heard of it working like that in a country pound and it sure as hell isn't how the Pound in Albury have been told it works. I will pass this on to them.

[mita]

[

That's not how it works in NSW Mita. There is a process that can be followed to clear a dog, and a Ranger's word is not 'gold' like it is in Victoria.

Ah. I think I've been brain-damaged from the stuff that comes out of Victoria re dogs.

I must say, I've been impressed by the lovely, lovely natured 'bully' type dogs that come up for adoption at AWL Qld. Few years back, when applying BSL was at its hysterical worst, those dogs would've been condemned on sight

[melzawelza]

I've NEVER heard of it working like that in a country pound and it sure as hell isn't how the Pound in Albury have been told it works. I will pass this on to them.

That's great :) if they want to talk practically to another pound about it then Rach at Renbury, Marcia at Blacktown and Lisa at Sutherland are all lovely people and I'm sure would be more than happy to chat to them.

Basically they chip the dog as belonging to the pound, issue a notice of intention and go through the process the same way the owner would. If they're concerned that the money may be wasted they can wait until the adopter or rescue have stepped up for the dog so they can pass on that cost.

[mita]

[ if they want to talk practically to another pound about it then Rach at Renbury, Marcia at Blacktown and Lisa at Sutherland are all lovely people and I'm sure would be more than happy to chat to them.

Basically they chip the dog as belonging to the pound, issue a notice of intention and go through the process the same way the owner would. If they're concerned that the money may be wasted they can wait until the adopter or rescue have stepped up for the dog so they can pass on that cost.

Good to hear something that actually works... & some pounds showing how.

[melzawelza]

[

That's not how it works in NSW Mita. There is a process that can be followed to clear a dog, and a Ranger's word is not 'gold' like it is in Victoria.

Ah. I think I've been brain-damaged from the stuff that comes out of Victoria re dogs.

I must say, I've been impressed by the lovely, lovely natured 'bully' type dogs that come up for adoption at AWL Qld. Few years back, when applying BSL was at its hysterical worst, those dogs would've been condemned on sight

Absolutely, was happening here a few years ago too. But the legislation in NSW gives every dog at least a shot to be rehomed, as Pit x are not restricted if they pass a temp test, and very few breed assessors are ever confident enough to say a dog is a pure bred pit bull (as the likelihood of that is pretty slim!). Most pounds are getting with the program and allowing every dog in their care the opportunity to be rehomed if their temps are good :)

[mita]

[Most pounds are getting with the program and allowing every dog in their care the opportunity to be rehomed if their temps are good :)

Exactly. The way it should be. Good dogs saved & the community protected.

[melzawelza]

[ if they want to talk practically to another pound about it then Rach at Renbury, Marcia at Blacktown and Lisa at Sutherland are all lovely people and I'm sure would be more than happy to chat to them.

Basically they chip the dog as belonging to the pound, issue a notice of intention and go through the process the same way the owner would. If they're concerned that the money may be wasted they can wait until the adopter or rescue have stepped up for the dog so they can pass on that cost.

Good to hear something that actually works... & some pounds showing how.

It's still a ridiculous system that is detrimental to the community and the dogs (last year it saw a dog drop fourteen puppies in the pound because they had to wait for the breed assessor to come out before releasing her. Any other dog would have been immediately released under duty of care), but it's certainly much better than Victoria :)