geo, on 05 November 2011 - 08:49 AM, said:
Yep, but the standard should only be applied to dogs of proven heritage, so if it's applied to a cross breed that fits the standard then it will have been applied incorrectly.. which is why they state that it is only to be applied to pure bred dogs.
In a court of law who knows how it would play out?!
Once you put anything on the net, it is always going to be used by someone else.. sadly in this case for all the wrong reasons.
Sorry, but your rationale is a little leftish leaning skewywhiff.
when under the pump, who in their right mind would admit, to authorities on a mission of destruction, their dog was an unregistered pure breed APBT, or even a cross of a pure breed APBT
No one. No one of sound mind & body anyway.
If, by some cataclysmic alignment of the planets, someone did, third party I.D. (opinion) wouldn't be necessary, would it?
Which brings us full circle.
Those on the other side have sought a definitive breed description to assist them in their endeavours.
What could be better than the criterior by which the breed club supplies to their accredited breed judges to choose what they consider to be the as near as possible perfect representation of the breed?
As previously opined. Any protest from the ADBA re the use of their written description will be just pissing into the wind.