Immediate Threat To All Dogs And Owners

[Salukifan]

This country has really turned to @#%!.

Run by a bunch of mental midgets. Followed by a bunch of mental midgets.

Change the script.

I'll just point out that the ACT has no breed specific legislation. Its not the whole country that's hysterical on the issue.

[GeckoTree]

Yes but we cant fit all dog & people refugees into the ACT, or the NT for that matter

Edited February 4, 2014 by DaffyDuck

[Salukifan]

Yes but we cant fit all dog & people refugees into the ACT, or the NT for that matter

RSPCA here never supported it. RSPCA nationally don't support it now.

Neither do the AVA.

Neither do the ANKC.

Seems to me that the best way forward is to start mustering opposition from the key organisations, rather than scaring the shite out of individual pet owners.

We also need intel as to what breeds might be being "considered".

[moosmum]

You mean this document?

http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/documents/Information/Companion%20Animals%20Taskforce%20report%20-%20Recommendations%20regarding%20dangerous%20dog%20management.pdf

Yes and the first one which was aimed at reducing euthanasia in shelters.

Many of the recommendations in the latest document were from the taskforce. None of the breed-specific ones were in there.

I've read it back to front numerous times and made a submission on it personally and on behalf of an organisation. These breed specific recommendations are not in there. You can either just believe me or read it yourself, it's up to you.

Sorry but there is no immediate threat to any dog that I own or breed. I might need to register annually and display a microchip when advertising but my happy well adjusted ANKC and Council registered dogs are in no danger.

You do realise they are looking to add more breeds to the menacing and restricted list? Why exactly do you feel your pedigree dogs would not be subject to this? They will be the first ones to be caught up as they are easily identified as of said breed. You do realise that pedigree dogs are banned and restricted in many countries around the world?

Because the deal was done long ago when Dogs NSW the then Canine Council made sure that ANKC registered breeds were exempt.

Providing my animals do not menace, rush, attack, then there is no danger to them being declared restricted or dangerous.

You are assuming that all owners of your breed will continue to be as responsible as you. The key word here is BREED, not just individual dogs. Pugs? Maybe a long way off before people will see them as menacing or dangerous. Or maybe not, relatively. If this sort of legislation is allowed to gain ground as the prefered method of dealing with human ignorance, since it leads only to more human ignorance.

You may think you are safe with ANKC registration and pedigree, but by allowing this sort of legislation with out defending the idea of deed instead of breed, you are supporting a future where any problems concerning dogs in society will look 1st to restricting dogs based on breed. ANKC papers will just make the restrictions easier to enforce. No risk in your life time, perhaps. But it directs focus to restrictions of dogs in society , rather than education and acceptance. If people accept and understand dogs LESS and LESS in society, where will the K.Cs be in future? Pretty much alone I think.

Edited February 4, 2014 by moosmum

[Queen Maeby]

You are assuming that all owners of your breed will continue to be as responsible as you. The key word here is BREED, not just individual dogs. Pugs? Maybe a long way off before people will see them as menacing or dangerous. Or maybe not, relatively. If this sort of legislation is allowed to gain ground as the prefered method of dealing with human ignorance, since it leads only to more human ignorance.

You may think you are safe with ANKC registration and pedigree, but by allowing this sort of legislation with out defending the idea of deed instead of breed, you are supporting a future where any problems concerning dogs in society will look 1st to restricting dogs based on breed. ANKC papers will just make the restrictions easier to enforce. No risk in your life time, perhaps. But it directs focus to restrictions of dogs in society , rather than education and acceptance. If people accept and understand dogs LESS and LESS in society, where will the K.Cs be in future? Pretty much alone I think.

I think you have made some good points, but I don't think this is of any concern to me let alone a threat.

Edited February 4, 2014 by puggedforlife

[BlackJaq]

Yes but we cant fit all dog & people refugees into the ACT, or the NT for that matter

RSPCA here never supported it. RSPCA nationally don't support it now.

Neither do the AVA.

Neither do the ANKC.

Seems to me that the best way forward is to start mustering opposition from the key organisations, rather than scaring the shite out of individual pet owners.

We also need intel as to what breeds might be being "considered".

Who wants to bet their knickers that the Bull Mastiff is on top of their list, closely followed by anything "Bull" in the title. Perhaps some of the breeds previously affected ?GSD, Dobe and such.

What non KC breeds do people believe might be in question here? German Coolies? Don't be ridiculous, of course they are talking KC breeds.

And since the Italian BSL has already been mentioned, poodles were in it as well. So much for your adorable cutie pie breeds not being affected. Dachshunde, too.

Edited February 4, 2014 by BlackJaq

[LisaCC]

Yes but we cant fit all dog & people refugees into the ACT, or the NT for that matter

RSPCA here never supported it. RSPCA nationally don't support it now.

Neither do the AVA.

Neither do the ANKC.

Seems to me that the best way forward is to start mustering opposition from the key organisations, rather than scaring the shite out of individual pet owners.

We also need intel as to what breeds might be being "considered".

Who wants to bet their knickers that the Bull Mastiff is on top of their list, closely followed by anything "Bull" in the title. Perhaps some of the breeds previously affected ?GSD, Dobe and such.

What non KC breeds do people believe might be in question here? German Coolies? Don't be ridiculous, of course they are talking KC breeds.

And since the Italian BSL has already been mentioned, poodles were in it as well. So much for your adorable cutie pie breeds not being affected. Dachshunde, too.

Bull Arabs were my first thought.

[Kajirin]

They'll probably take into consideration the data collected in the dog bite statistics

NSW Dog Bite Statistics 2012 PDF

Table 10 shows that the five pure breeds that were responsible for the highest

number of attacks in 2010/11 were the Bull Terrier (Staffordshire), Australian Cattle

Dog, German Shepherd Dog, American Staffordshire Terrier and Rottweiler. These

breeds were involved in 1,770 attacks, which represents half of all pure breed dogs

involved in attacks. The same breeds were the most heavily represented in dog

attacks in 2009/10 and with the same ranking.

The five pure breeds that had the highest rates of attack in 2010/11 were the Tibetan

Mastiff, Pit Bull Terrier, Chesapeake Bay Retriever, Central Asian Shepherd Dog and

Mastiff. The Tibetan Mastiff, Chesapeake Bay Retriever and Central Asian Shepherd

Dog together were involved in only four attacks and the small numbers of these

breeds makes it difficult to make any definitive statement regarding their liability to

attack. There have been substantial changes in the ranking in terms of attack rates

when compared to 2009/10. The reasons for these changes are unknown.

In total, 16 pure breeds had attack rates in excess of 1 dog attack per 100 dogs on

the Register, an increase from 12 breeds in 2009/10.

Edited February 4, 2014 by Noishe

[~Anne~]

Yes but we cant fit all dog & people refugees into the ACT, or the NT for that matter

RSPCA here never supported it. RSPCA nationally don't support it now.

Neither do the AVA.

Neither do the ANKC.

Seems to me that the best way forward is to start mustering opposition from the key organisations, rather than scaring the shite out of individual pet owners.

We also need intel as to what breeds might be being "considered".

Well said PF, your previous post as well was exactly what I was trying to convey.

Here you've given a 'suggestion for a moving forward' strategy which the discussion needs. It doesn't need panic and threats.

If the recommendations are actually broken down and considered carefully it shows that while there is some cause for concern, we are not being burnt at the stake yet.

The title of the thread needs to be changed to something that actually reflects what the OP would like the discussion to be about and the reality of the situation. All this thread is doing so far is turning the average pet owner further away from supporting any anti BSL movements.

[~Anne~]

They'll probably take into consideration the data collected in the dog bite statistics

NSW Dog Bite Statistics 2012 PDF

Table 10 shows that the five pure breeds that were responsible for the highest

number of attacks in 2010/11 were the Bull Terrier (Staffordshire), Australian Cattle

Dog, German Shepherd Dog, American Staffordshire Terrier and Rottweiler. These

breeds were involved in 1,770 attacks, which represents half of all pure breed dogs

involved in attacks. The same breeds were the most heavily represented in dog

attacks in 2009/10 and with the same ranking.

The five pure breeds that had the highest rates of attack in 2010/11 were the Tibetan

Mastiff, Pit Bull Terrier, Chesapeake Bay Retriever, Central Asian Shepherd Dog and

Mastiff. The Tibetan Mastiff, Chesapeake Bay Retriever and Central Asian Shepherd

Dog together were involved in only four attacks and the small numbers of these

breeds makes it difficult to make any definitive statement regarding their liability to

attack. There have been substantial changes in the ranking in terms of attack rates

when compared to 2009/10. The reasons for these changes are unknown.

In total, 16 pure breeds had attack rates in excess of 1 dog attack per 100 dogs on

the Register, an increase from 12 breeds in 2009/10.

That report is fascinating. I haven't looked at LGA bite stats for some years.

Hopefully the previous reports are still up. I'd like to see the change over the years.

[ruthless]

Anyone interested in getting involved and trying to be proactive can join the Team Dog page on Facebook. We're putting together a campaign and people power will be needed.

[Snoopy21]

This thread makes me feel sick to my stomach. Even if you don't own a threatened breed yourself, surely you know and care about someone who does or have met one that just makes you smile? How can you be so uncaring and disrespectful to people who are just afraid for their dogs?

I'm truly gobsmacked. I might head over to the Facebook page - thanks Ruthless.

[BoxerB]

Any guesses to which breeds and types they might add? In Qld before 2005 I think it was, a few Qld councils had dobes and rhodesian ridgebacks bull terriers and such declared as dangerous breeds.

this scares me a fair bit, as generally the Boxer falls in the "next" on the list category.

I know for example Boxer's have been banned/restricted in some European countries.

Given their powerful build i wouldn't be surprised.

I would though be devastated!

[moosmum]

You are assuming that all owners of your breed will continue to be as responsible as you. The key word here is BREED, not just individual dogs. Pugs? Maybe a long way off before people will see them as menacing or dangerous. Or maybe not, relatively. If this sort of legislation is allowed to gain ground as the prefered method of dealing with human ignorance, since it leads only to more human ignorance.

You may think you are safe with ANKC registration and pedigree, but by allowing this sort of legislation with out defending the idea of deed instead of breed, you are supporting a future where any problems concerning dogs in society will look 1st to restricting dogs based on breed. ANKC papers will just make the restrictions easier to enforce. No risk in your life time, perhaps. But it directs focus to restrictions of dogs in society , rather than education and acceptance. If people accept and understand dogs LESS and LESS in society, where will the K.Cs be in future? Pretty much alone I think.

I think you have made some good points, but I don't think this is of any concern to me let alone a threat.

O.K.

But in the human mind, Domestic dogs will remain a single species. Attitudes and beliefs will be reflected across the board, regardless of type breed or purpose. Their viability as a species depends wholly on their continuing to fill their communities needs, values and beliefs.On humans finding value in having them in their lives in changing times.

Legislation allowed to pass, and views promoted, play a huge part in that, and in forming the values of those communities and the direction that evolution takes. It WILL, sooner or later, have an effect on pedigree registered dogs since we are forming attitudes to the species "Domestic dog". Its evolution in progress.

I see a paradox in your views. If you say you are "Safe" because your dogs are pedigree and have the proof, That it makes all the difference in what you get, you are saying pedigree matters in these decisions. You promote discrimination based on pedigree.

Forget breeding practices. Forget ownership skills or knowledge.Forget management. It all comes down to pedigree. I don't see how that can not come back to bite you eventualy.

I agree with HDW. I don't think this will get much support from many of the bodies in question.

I don't do face book

Edited February 4, 2014 by moosmum

[Dame Aussie]

Anyone interested in getting involved and trying to be proactive can join the Team Dog page on Facebook. We're putting together a campaign and people power will be needed.

Thanks ruthless, checking it out now.

[Dame Aussie]

This thread makes me feel sick to my stomach. Even if you don't own a threatened breed yourself, surely you know and care about someone who does or have met one that just makes you smile? How can you be so uncaring and disrespectful to people who are just afraid for their dogs

Yep, it's a bit sad really.

[Nic.B]

I was not going to respond to this thread. I own a breed who will be sure to be targeted in the future and this scares the life out of me to be honest.

Having said that there needs to be some balance right across the board if anything is to change or move forward.

In terms of Bonnie (bless her soul) the shelter she was impounded at and the council who had to oversee her release worked openly and proactively with the people involved.

It did not assist Bonnie to make bomb threats where the shelter must be evacuated, nor threats to staff or protesters with signs screaming and hurling abuse. It did not assist Bonnie that it was written all over social media that Bonnie was caged for over three months with no interaction at all which is apparently why she failed the temp test, it is simply not true. People saw Bonnie penned during shelter opening hours yes. Along with the majority of every other dog regardless of breed, size or age who is not lucky enough to spend time with volunteers in the two exercise runs.

What the public or others did not see was what happened before opening, during lunch and afterwards for Bonnie. The public do not know how passionate the staff are in their roles, what levels they go to to save the dogs in their care, the crap that they put up with on a daily basis, from rescue, crap dog owners, dog attacks, surrenders, and abuse cases.

I have learnt a lot over the years, and scaring the shit out of people might get you started, though it wont get you the result you need and want for the breeds targeted.

[GeckoTree]

It's an attitude, life view. Like the proverbial not seeing the forest for the trees.

I do think the thread title would have been apt to drop the two words Immediate and all, but who cares? It's the content not the cover. If people want to focus on pugs they will focus on pugs, we know it isn't about pugs

Snoopy21, on 05 February 2014 - 07:59 AM, said:

This thread makes me feel sick to my stomach. Even if you don't own a threatened breed yourself, surely you know and care about someone who does or have met one that just makes you smile? How can you be so uncaring and disrespectful to people who are just afraid for their dogs

edit, my quote messed up.

Edited February 5, 2014 by DaffyDuck

[melzawelza]

I was not going to respond to this thread. I own a breed who will be sure to be targeted in the future and this scares the life out of me to be honest.

Having said that there needs to be some balance right across the board if anything is to change or move forward.

In terms of Bonnie (bless her soul) the shelter she was impounded at and the council who had to oversee her release worked openly and proactively with the people involved.

It did not assist Bonnie to make bomb threats where the shelter must be evacuated, nor threats to staff or protesters with signs screaming and hurling abuse. It did not assist Bonnie that it was written all over social media that Bonnie was caged for over three months with no interaction at all which is apparently why she failed the temp test, it is simply not true. People saw Bonnie penned during shelter opening hours yes. Along with the majority of every other dog regardless of breed, size or age who is not lucky enough to spend time with volunteers in the two exercise runs.

What the public or others did not see was what happened before opening, during lunch and afterwards for Bonnie. The public do not know how passionate the staff are in their roles, what levels they go to to save the dogs in their care, the crap that they put up with on a daily basis, from rescue, crap dog owners, dog attacks, surrenders, and abuse cases.

I have learnt a lot over the years, and scaring the shit out of people might get you started, though it wont get you the result you need and want for the breeds targeted.

Team Dog were heavily involved in working towards the release of Bonnie and ensured that Hawkesbury staff and volunteers were given the praise that they so deserved in every post about her for the wonderful care of her while she was there. Any person posting disparaging comments about the Pound were corrected and a separate post also put up that was seen by over 10,000 people:

Post thanking Hawkesbury staff and volunteers for all they did

People should be shit scared about these proposals, no matter what dog they own, or even if they don't own dogs at all. It's as simple as that.

Even if it's unlikely your breed will be targeted (pug owners, for instance), these laws have been proven time and time again to actually lessen community safety when it comes to dog attacks. Huge amounts of Council resources are taken up trying to enforce them, which means those resources aren'tbeing put in to the measures that do prevent dog attacks. Just adding one breed to either the menacing or dangerous risk would result in a workload that very few Councils have the resources to carry out effectively. Because this breed stuff is high profile it will be given priority. There won't be Rangers out patrolling the streets for off leash dogs, they'll be knocking on doors making sure that people have put up a 'warning dangerous dog' sign on their property for their dog that will never cause a problem. This means that even as a pug owner, this does pose a risk to you and your dog. Your dog will be more likely to be attacked by other dogs. Your family members or friends will be.

This is a community issue, not a 'big dog owner' issue or 'pit bull owner' issue.

Every time a community has been apathetic and just 'sat and waited to see' when these suggestions start, has ended in BSL. Every time people haven't taken it seriously and moved on it quickly, it has ended in BSL.

The places that have beaten it are the places that get on it at the first whiff of a possibly and take it very seriously, like it should be.

As previously mentioned, Team Dog is currently putting together a campaign. I encourage anyone, dog owner or not, to keep an eye on the page and get involved when it goes up.

Edited February 5, 2014 by melzawelza

[Erny]

In Victoria, when laws and then *tweaked* laws and then more *tweaked* laws came in, many people who believed their dogs and their preferred breed of dogs could not and would not be affected, sat back complacently, not really sitting up straight to listen or to help rally against those laws coming in. This has been happening for more than a decade. Well, that decade has now past and we have people who are NOW sitting up straight to listen (and some to help rally against) the laws that have been DONE - because now, in shock, the realisation has evolved that it does affect them and that THEY are the ones who are crying for help and crying for their dogs - dogs that *back then* they never thought would be touched. Too late to argue against the laws coming in the first place. Now they have to deal with the laws and work their way through the Courts and pray like hell that they will win and stop their dogs from being killed. Too late to be able to stop the dogs from being lawfully pulled from their homes and being forced through the stress and trauma of shelter life, and all for doing nothing wrong, for being good dogs.

Whether the thread title topic heading is relevant in some people's minds or not is insignificant. The point is, whether you gasped a breath, realised it wasn't about your dogs (yet) and then got pipped off because you were startled - at least it did get you sitting up straight.

The question now is - will you help do something about it even though it is not about YOUR dog or dog breed, *yet*?

Will you be like the hundreds/thousands of others who didn't think the laws would touch THEM but are (sadly) proven wrong and then all of a sudden, want help from others?

Instead of spending the time talking and writing about the title heading to this thread, what about putting those minutes into some correspondence addressed to the relevant Government department/person and at least putting up your hand in objection.

Try watching a completely innocent dog in complete confused turmoil being torn from its family, rendered a *subject* to be kept in a completely foreign pen in a completely foreign environment for weeks, months, years …. and then being killed.

Not you so doesn't matter?

You want people to help you when it does matter, to you?

Edited February 5, 2014 by Erny