tybrax

The 22 point checklist Qld by D.P. and Seqroc was plagiarised copied from the UKC Standards.

This was proven in the several court cases thats it illegal to use the UKC breed standards as they own

the copy right.. The Victorian Gov has used the same UKC breed standard that in its self

is criminal..

Wasn't there already a muddying of the waters after the Tango case in QLD?

Nope!! Tango family were the one that got the laws changed..

The 22 point checklist Qld by D.P. and Seqroc was plagiarised copied from the UKC Standards.

This was proven in the several court cases thats it illegal to use the UKC breed standards as they own

the copy right.. The Victorian Gov has used the same UKC breed standard that in its self

is criminal..

Seems like AQIS and Customs, federal law enforcement officers, are not as smart as Council workers. Councils can spot them and have a standard now, but the professionals can't! Yeah, right.

Makes the Vic Gov look likes idiots...lol

http://www.adbadog.com/uploads/conformation%20_%20weightpull%20pic/2008%20conformationBreakdwn.pdf

ADBA..

http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/WebPages/LrnBreedInfo

UKC Disclaimers...

Does any one know the expenditure this will cost local councils? in excess of other animal management?

Yep 140,000 + thats with out compenstion..

the vet is on a committee, it doesn't say she represents the AVA?

The all breeds judge doesn't necessarily represent DogsVic either? I assume she is a private citizen and can do what she wants. That said, if I was a showie I'd pull my dog out of everything she judged and would encourage fellow showies to do the same.

Dogsvic were consulted by the previous government and they were pleased to help.

Thats true Sumosmum... They might be able to interpret the breed standard but they have no idea on what a APBT/Pit Bull is..

The

working group therefore concentrated on written and

pictorial standards for that breed.

It has been written on both their standards ADBA and UKC that they are strictly prohibited to be used In this manner

I'm sure that would Include changing It to their own words etc does It not

I'm waiting on the pictorial. I'm sure it will contain images that have been used without authorisation and I reckon they might even have a stuff up or two and there could well be an Amstaff floating around in there.

Yep, sorry forgot the link

LINK

I thought they were different breeds, whats this about "His Honour also determined that the Amstaff was merely a name adopted in the United States of America for APBTs. The Court found that Tango was an Amstaff, but therefore also an APBT and a restricted dog"

This was overtuned. http://www.cabinet.qld.gov.au/mms/StatementDisplaySingle.aspx?id=70902

Nothing wrong with the Pitbull, But there is something Real Wrong within the Publics Perception.

This breed of dogs (pitbull) needs to be banned, period. They have been bred over many, many years to be fighting dogs. That is their pedigree, it is what they were bred to do. They weren't bred to be cuddly playthings for the kids to poke and prod. They fight, maim and kill and once they have experienced the taste of human blood they will more often than not be involved in repeat attacks. It is as simple as that and arguing otherwise is just plain stupid and irresponsible. There is no need for these kinds of vicious dogs to be kept as pets by anyone. I don't care how much of an expert on this breed someone claims to be, you cannot make this breed of dogs a safe breed. It is imprinted into their brains to fight and takes just one moment, one thing for them to be set off and then there's virtually no stopping them except a Police Officer and his gun. Jailing or fining owners is not the answer, as it will not save victims of these aggressive, powerfully built dogs. We need to be more proactive, rather than reacting only after someone has been maimed or killed. The only responsible course of action is for the breed to be banned and for breeding these dogs to also be banned until they cease to exist.

This breed of dogs (pitbull) needs to be banned, period. They have been bred over many, many years to be fighting dogs. That is their pedigree, it is what they were bred to do. They weren't bred to be cuddly playthings for the kids to poke and prod. They fight, maim and kill and once they have experienced the taste of human blood they will more often than not be involved in repeat attacks. It is as simple as that and arguing otherwise is just plain stupid and irresponsible. There is no need for these kinds of vicious dogs to be kept as pets by anyone. I don't care how much of an expert on this breed someone claims to be, you cannot make this breed of dogs a safe breed. It is imprinted into their brains to fight and takes just one moment, one thing for them to be set off and then there's virtually no stopping them except a Police Officer and his gun. Jailing or fining owners is not the answer, as it will not save victims of these aggressive, powerfully built dogs. We need to be more proactive, rather than reacting only after someone has been maimed or killed. The only responsible course of action is for the breed to be banned and for breeding these dogs to also be banned until they cease to exist.

l owned one for 12 years, raised with my children and grand children. She was very cuddly spoilt girl, loved the kids grandkids never once in all those years

did she bite, attack, have a brain snap. Your comments are ridiculous. Do you honestly believe its only one breed that attacks and maims? Like sticky says there no such breed as a "PIT BULL"

My heart goes out the the family so tragic. R.I.P. Little one..

Dr Collier.. Dangerous or a defamed breed

http://www.dapbt.org/collier.htm

Very sad news R.I.P. Louis Barton Colby.

No flaming from me on that one!The best start I think would be More EDUCATION.. Education and more education! pure and simple. How about following everyone of those vicious dog attack articles with a piece on what not to do with your dogs, highlighting responsible dog ownership etc no matter the breed. Keeping your dogs safe and how to avoid attacks. Maybe the governments can use some of that money that they used and keep on using In enforcing BSL and killing Innocent dogs and trying so hard to wipe out a certain breed like that's going to be the answer to their dilemma??... to something like responsible dog ownership campaigns/adds on tv, schools and all other media forms out there. And most definitely harsher penalties for owners caught not doing the right thing by their animals Including cruelty cases. If they're not fit to own a dog hell ban them from owning them again. And please don't tell me there aren't the resources out there to do It. If council can employ their ACO's to go out and inspect for BSL purposes, In which some of them have been known to actually spend considerable amounts of time spying In on people's homes to see If they've got RB's! and trying to ID them among the many other dirty ways and things they do to notch up a killing!!!....They can most certainly police for these other things. Put some of that hard earned tax payers money to some better use. I'm sure these are all some of the ideas that have been mentioned before but yet really to be put In place. Also more proper Investigations following attacks not just pts and all attacks not just certain breeds because they're know for being lovable etc and It's so out of character for them to attackI would like to add that not all ACO's are as what I've mentioned, I know a lot of them do care as wellThe amount of Innocent dogs taken from people's back yards and killed for doing no wrong since BSL has been Introduced Is staggering and most of all heartbreaking These are the things I and many others will never forget or forgive And apologies for somewhat going OT

Well said RottnBullies...

tybrax

Any news yet???

Re: Being illegal I believe it was around 1992 that QLD bought in the law against Pitbulls not sure about other states. The ACT and NT have no restrictions on pit bulls though.

BSL was introduced into Qld in 2003. Commonwealth Import Ban laws were 1992..

tybrax

FFS! are you for real! What a really stupid comment to make

This Is a very tragic story, I feel for this woman her family and all who had to witness what would have been pretty horrid and shocking to say the least

That poor lady and that poor traumatised man in the car, he will probably never forgive himself.

Waits for anti-BSL people to come in and take thread off track and trivialise the fact a lady died.

Horrific attack and that poor poor woman and witness. Completely unacceptable and yes those particular dogs should be put to sleep.

However the person above that made the offensive comment about pit supporters and the breed should apologise for her ridiculous remark. No anti-bsl person would defend these dogs or their actions, but that also doesn't mean we extrapolate what has happened to blaming an entire breed. Educate yourself about the breed and about how successful BSL has been in other countries and our own and maybe you will learn a thing or two and not embarrass yourself again. And it was YOU that made a point about the breed first, NOT us.

Well said.. tybrax

I don't think council officers can enter your house while you're out.

They have done this heaps of times in Qld. Buddy case come's to mind. No warrant Buddy was sprayed with capsicum spray,seized while

his family were out..

As for News paper reports are nothing but media hype, they proved that with there story in the hearld sun on the 12th March!!

tybrax

How about the real story?

How can the owner sue for civil action when he did not see the fight?? Mr Anderson did not see

Any fight between any dogs swimming in the dam.

Why didn’t the reporter print what the magistrate stated he was in the court room, he heard the Magistrates

Comments??

Shame on the Councils and reporter for printing such rubbish.

Who are you to judge Dogmad do you honestly believe newspaper reports??

tybrax

Someone I know has done this course and said that the content isn't really how to ID pit bull, it's more putting to bed the myths about them i.e anything with a red nose is a pit bull and that sort of rubbish.

She said it's more a 'how to ID what is NOT a pit bull rather than what is. I still don't know if that's a good thing or not. It's good for the idiot rangers who think anything with a red nose deserves an NOI put on it, but it is still playing along the same lines of saying you can ID a breed by looking at it which is an attitude that needs to change.

Disgusting What about Visla X and Kelpie x and the rest, they dont have a clue!!

I am going to ask a question

How many of the people who criticise the ANKC/ DogsNSW etc in regards to BSL are members? The ANKC and state CCs are not a goverment bodies but a societies made up and run by its members. If you don't like what they do join and become active and change how it is run.

I am against BSL and don't necessarily agree with what DogsNSW is saying but I also don't expect any club/society etc to go to bat for people who don't belong to it when those people only criticise them.

So why the hell are they in there at all ? They dont recognise a pitty as a breed yet they can identify it and teach others how to identify it as a breed. Not to help their own members and their own members dogs. Shameful.

Last Tango for Council

Matthew Killoran

After six years, seven months, and 28 days in exile,Tango the American Amstafordshire terrier is back on the Gold Coast.

The dog, owned by Kylie Chivers and John Mokomoko, was the centre of a legal battle with the Gold Coast City Council

about whether he was a restricted American pit bull.

While in April the Supreme Court ruled ruled that Amstaffs were pit bulls, in July, the State Gov amended Legislation to

specify the animals are a different breed, which meant Tango could come home..

Thumbing there nosese up at the Council, Ms Chivers and Mr.Mokomoko made Tango's stop outside the city Council Chambers.

Calling on animal control officers officers to take the dog away or leave them alone.

"If they honour and integrity they would come put and apoligise," Mr Mokomoko said.

Mr.Mokomoko said he had spent close to 40.000 on kennel fees over the past six years and he would be seeking compensation

from the council. While a Council spokeman declined to comment, community and Cultural services boss Bob La Castra said the council

had acted within the law at all times.. :D :D.

Congrat's to John and Kylie

Yay! Glad he's home, hope everything works out.

Well, maybe those involved in the case, which forced the State to provide legislative protection for every Amstaff in Qld, and made it virtually impossible to identify something as an APBT without direct evidence, were not as hopeless, incompetent etc as some of the posts in April/May suggested. Or maybe it was all just dumb luck. Either way, it is the best news.

;) tybrax

Thank you for posting.. tybrax

Once again Council prove they are just liars...

tybrax

LOGAN: One large porker on acreage may be OK under Logan City’s proposed new animal-keeping laws.

But try keeping 21 little guinea pigs anywhere in the city and you could be in trouble.

Logan City Council is streamlining the domestic-animal laws it inherited when it amalgamated with parts of Beaudesert and the Gold Coast.

New rules will cover the keeping of all domesticated animals from dogs and cats to farm animals such as pigs, cows, goats and horses.They will also cover chickens, geese, pigeons and loud, squawking birds such as cockatoos and galahs, and involve a $200 permit for most owners and $100 for pensioners.

Council animals and city standards committee chairman Cr Graham Able said a fee would cover the cost of checking the property was suitable and the animals were correctly housed.

Cr Able said the public would be able to comment on these proposed rules before they became law.

Unlike council’s new heavy-vehicle-parking laws which raised the ire of hundreds of truck owners in the city, Cr Able does not think the new animal laws will generate as much negativity.

Cr Sean Black disagrees, saying the new laws were just another incursion by council into people’s backyards and private lives.

Electrician Alvin Berry and his mate, Siale Ikafoli, who lease 8093sqm at Logan Reserve, said they would definitely have input into the new rules.

As well as raising a 272kg pet pig called Charley, the pair own 12 goats, 15 geese, four dogs and three cats.

Mr Berry said he would not be happy about paying multiple permits every year. ``It would be a bit pricey if it was every year and for every set of animals,’’ he said.

Cr Black said the new rules were ``just beyond nonsense’’ and just a money-raising exercise.

Cr Able said he had already spoken to a couple wanting to keep a little pig on 1300sqm and he had encouraged them to put their case forward during the public consultation phase.

Proposed new rules:

- One miniature horse or pony can be kept on a block larger than 4000sqm without a permit.

- One pig may be kept on a block between 2000sqm and 4000sqm with a permit, depending on the zoning.

- One sheep or goat can be kept on a minimum 2000sqm with a permit.

- A maximum of six guinea pigs can be kept without a permit, but a permit is needed to keep a maximum of 20 guinea pigs in an enclosure that is a minimum of 30 metres from houses.

- A minimum of 4000sqm is needed to keep one large animal such as a horse, cow, camel, deer, llama or alpaca.

- Chickens cannot be kept on blocks smaller than 450sqm. Up to six chickens or ducks can be kept on blocks between 450sqm and less than 10,000sqm without a permit. Up to 20 can be kept on this same size block with a permit so long as the coop is a minimum of 15 metres from houses.

- Up to 40 chickens or ducks or a combination of both can be kept on land between 10,000sqm and up to 20,000sqm without a permit. More than 40 requires a permit.

- Only two geese or turkeys can be kept on land larger than 4000sqm and less than 10,000sqm without a permit.

- Roosters, peacocks, peahens, guinea fowls or pheasants cannot be kept on blocks less than 25,000sqm.

- Birds such as cockatoos and galahs cannot be kept on lots smaller than 600sqm.

- Pigeons cannot be kept on small lots, but up to 40 can be kept on other premises if aviary is a minimum 25m from houses.

- Ostriches and emus cannot be kept on a property smaller than 20,000sqm.

http://albert-and-logan.whereilive.com.au/...rmits-for-pets/

Out Rage Over Pet Plan.

http://albert-and-logan.whereilive.com.au/...-over-pet-plan/

LOGAN: Thousands of outraged pet owners are expected to sign petitions protesting against Logan City Council’s proposed new animal-keeping laws.

Already 31 Logan pet and produce stores have launched petitions, with another 20 stores and veterinary practices expected to join the protest.

Torey Holman, of Doc Torey’s Pet Centre at Beenleigh, said he thought the proposed laws were unfair and would make it difficult for people to keep their animals.

He said he had collected 300 signatures in three days and hoped up to 10,000 people would sign by August 31.

``I think people are upset because council is playing big brother and because they’re depriving people of having the animals they want to keep on their own properties,’’ he said.

Included in the proposed laws are restrictions on keeping horses, guinea pigs and cockatoos.

Council is proposing a minimum of 4000sqm is needed to keep a horse; roosters cannot be kept on less than 25,000sqm; permits are needed for seven or more guinea pigs and cockatoos can’t be kept on less than 600sqm.

Logan Village produce store assistant manager Donna Morton said 99 percent of people who came into the store were flabbergasted at the proposed new laws.

Logan City councillor Phil Pidgeon, who is on the committee deciding the new laws, said the petitions were an overreaction, as the proposals were not law.

Cr Pidgeon said permits would mainly deal with small lot properties and would not affect those who lived on acreage.

``Between 600sqm and an acre lot that would seem to me the area that council would require permits to be issued for some animals,’’ he said.

Submissions on the proposals close on September 3, but Cr Pidgeon said council would not make a decision on any new laws until after it had considered all the public feedback.

Logan councillor Hajnal Black said she believed the proposals were a grab for cash and ``blatant daylight robbery’‘.

She advised as many people as possible to log on to council’s website and lodge a submission.

The new laws are expected to not only affect pet owners but also connected industries such as pet and produce stores, vets and animal breeders.

tybrax