geo

My post was in relation to weight, i did not say that the ADBA doesn't have a written description. It does and i have read it. I made no reference to the UKC breed standard, same as all the AST breeders here, you'll find a a wide variety of the same type, from 16-22 inches tall, big, small, terrier type, bully type etc.. I mentioned many UKC breeders were producing large dogs. I don't really care for club politics, as this is clearly the issue between the 2 clubs, core enthusiasts would more likely prefer a APBT bred with the ADBA conformation in mind. Funny how the AKC wont recognise them as a pure breed, but had opened it's stud books to them. As for your last comment i do find that extraordinary, most likely tit for tat.

I'm not a fan of the oversized monsters that are being peddled as APBT by some (probably many) UKC breeders. I think most of the people that i've met that are interested in the APBT here in Australia prefer the ADBA type dogs, it's the same in NZ, many breed fanciers are only interested in the APBT in it's original form. Though the ADBA standard doesn't mention weight, it's clear by all of the shows i've seen that there is definitely a standard size that is applied when judging and i've not seen any large dogs, same as i hadn't seen any really small ones. This isn't to say there aren't any though. I think the general public are also misinformed about what an original style pitbull looked like, and will always think it's a large dog, and with the variances between the 2 clubs it's very easy for other breed representatives to argue that they are not a pure breed of dog. Are we going to see another breed (ambull, bullypit, short wide and stupid looking) strive for independence from the APBT and decide that they're not pitbulls (which they're not) to get away from BSL, but all the while give the general public the idea that they are pitbulls.

Have you not taken any note of the positives i've written? or the bit where i said i agree with you...? It certainly isn't a slanging match, besides calling you narrow minded I've yet to sling a single slur your way. Feel free to make your point without getting smart and throwing 'facts' around, try adding a solution into the mix and then it may turn out better. Certainly wasn't trying to ruffle your feathers on purpose.

You can't tar all people with the sweep of one brush, unless you know all pitbull people. I'm quite sure that not all SBT and AST owners share your views. I've lost count of the amount of times people say it's not a pure breed, you know there's also another few hundred breeds that the AKC doesn't recognise, along with the fact that they're stud books were open several times to the APBT until i think the 70's. I'm quite sure there's no interest in APBT people wanting AKC affiliation, they have the show dog so it doesn't really matter, it would probably only muddy the waters even more. This isn't a dog problem, it's a people problem. As Robbi put it, wouldn't all bull breed owners be better off fighting BSL together? i have posted several times that i feel thee same way. If you only want to save the ANKC registered dogs then I feel really sorry for you. As i assume you're a dog lover you'd think that all dogs deserve a fair chance. Plus you have still yet to provide an instance of a dog attack where someone has called the dog a staffy when it has later been proven to be a pitbull, and where the media has reported it as a staffy. Most of your argument is circumstantial backed up with supposition and you're scared because of the uncertain future that bull breeds face and are desperately trying to protect your breed (which as i've said i understand) but laying the blame squarely on the pitbull and it's owners isn't justified. How about the BYBers? how about the hundred plus breeders of SBT's on this site? (they can't all be perfect) how about spending more time lobbying for the good of dogs in general, you can write a good letter, Though i'd leave out the french it would only confuse our local pollies. My dogs are calling force majeure, act of dog and need walking.

Of course this is about BSL, that's why we're on this forum. People like me read the QLD report on dog bites and SBT's were above APBTs. Again that doesn't bother me as I agree for the most part that the dogs are probably a crossbred or lookalies but for you to think they're all pitbulls is ludicrous, yes i know the point is bogans but stop saying pitbulls are the problem!! Also i'm not sure where bite stats mention KC rego's, maybe the ACO's or Cops ask the offending dog, "excuse me sir are you a member of a kennel or breed club, because this will certainly disqualify your membership"!!! Same as the only proof of a dog being an APBT is 6 gen paperwork, as we all know there are no experts in breed ID, (thanks Kylie and jon) If you read my previous post you'd understand that i agree with most of what you say, just don't slander the pitbull where clearly the offending breed is not APBT, same as it's not pure bred SBTs

It was meaningful until you posted things like this, "If the incident involves a person, I am sorry the stafford is again copping the blame for the deeds of some bogans pitbull." Have you ever owned a pitbull? I understand you don't want the SBT being misrepresented by people who own lookalike dogs, but the same goes for pitbull owners who don't want any 'joe' owning one and having the potential to harm the breed even more. This side of your discusion i completely agree with. Not all pitbull owners are bogans, some are great, just like not all SBT owners are great. Blaming pitbulls for the potential demise of SBT's is not the way to try to protect them, especially as there are thousands more staffies around than pitbulls. Sure there are pitbull types about and unfortunately staffie crosses fall into that category, which is exactly why BSL doesn't work and is not fair. PS I do know plenty about the subject, I just choose not to lecture people about it. Where ever you believe the AST, APBT, come from it doesn't make one an angel and the other a monster, neither does it make one ounce of difference in changing BSL laws. BSL has not reduced dog attacks, calling dogs a different name will not reduce dog attacks, only social change and education will help reduce dog attacks. Until then i suggest people with pitbull type dogs, start working to get rid of BSL instead of trying to protect just one breed.

I don't agree, the poor lady that died in Toowomba was reportedly attacked by a pitbull... But it was a Bull terrier x lab. This helped ban the pitbull but they had nothing to do with that attack.. I've lost count of the times the media will immediately say "pitbull attacks" with absolutely no proof of breed. I had people cross the road because they thought my SBT was a pitbull, even people at dog classes, so t think the media doesn't try to sensationalise an attack with the words "pitbull" is just plain wrong. BSL in the USA & UK is about TYPE (though SBT in the UK are not restricted), BSL here is about trying to seperate the type by paperwok, and fortunately it's saving alot of AST"s, but the poor ones without paperwork are on a slippery slope to the injection room. If you seriously believe that your dog is so far removed from the bogans pitbull down the road you are delusional. The difference is that if you owned the bogans pitbull I'm sure you would have raised a better dog / bought one from a decent breeder etc.. The thing is bogans own SBT's and AST's in more numbers than pure bred pitbulls, they don't care where they come from, they don't read this forum to expand their knowledge about their chosen breed and this is the problem all the breeds are facing. How you come to the conclusion that just because a dog attacks a human it must be a pitbull i never know, what a bigoted view point, i suppose all the criminals in your area are black, the women don't leave the kitchen, pitbulls have lock jaw, and the good lord above created the world in 7 days..!!!

If you read the apbt breed standards you will also note a "solid disposition, fearless, bold etc.." or words to that effect. I'm surprised you don't know how big pure bred apbt's are, you sure seem to "know" a lot, I have met plenty of 20kg staffies, easily big enough to pass for apbt, sure they look different to us but to the news reporter they look like pitties so unfortunately that gets reported, not vice versa as you keep saying. I do not seek to denigrate any pure breeds, how you came to that conclusion i never know. Staffies are incredibly popular and sadly they too are involved in dog bite statistics, more so i may add that apbt's (again if you read my posts you'll know i don't read too much into stats) If SBT's are your beloved breed then i understand your viewpoint but bagging everyone else out is not the way to win people minds, To deny the facts that plenty of staffies are involved in dog attacks is a display of "duplicity in the charade". I have owned an SBT so i noticed when they were in the media spotlight for the wrong reasons, it certainly wasn't because the dogs involved were pitbulls and not SBT's, or people saying their pitbulls were infact SBT's. Shame on me, I think not wiseguy. maybe you should change your name to, "narrow minded breedest looking to save his own kind"? does that fit?

The thing is that most people now are buying amstaffs with or without papers and they're the ones who're going to ruin the breed, especially while AKNC rego'd breeders advertise dogs with massive heads, huge muscle mass etc.. These breeders are doing it to the breed, not pitbull owners. I'm not so sure about your facts but i've yet to read a case where a dog that has attacked has been proven to be a pitbull but the owner has called them a staffy. Usually they'll be accused of being a pitbull first so generally the damage has already been done, and as usual the pitbull is at the rough end of the deal not the other way around. There's plenty of AST's and SBT's (that are big enough to look like a pitbull) and there's plenty out there more than capable of misbehaving, I hope you don't think that having a pure bred papered dog makes it less likey to attack?

You only have to look at AST breeders pages to see that they're also breeding to their own opinions and what they take from the standard. Why would anyone want to get into dog breeding only to breed to a standard that they must conform to, it's against human nature not to try and improve something (it can still fit the standards), even judges vary their opinions on their take of the breed standards. I've lost count of how many people are breeding for "solid muscle" "big bone mass" "rare blue", these people are registered breeders flaunting their wares as they think this is what people want to buy and this is the direction they feel the breed should go... these breeders aren't 20 year plus veterans they've got their rego and prefix and that's it. If you know what you're looking for you can spot the decent breeders a mile away, usually by their dogs, but sadly many owners of the AST nowadays don't have the feintest idea.

That many years ago so called dogmen were less concerned about certain breed but more into Type, which is where some areas of origin for the APBT vary. Many articles state that they come from Bull terrier type dogs from the UK, some say the old buldog/ or bull & Terrier... just because they weren't in a kennel club means nothing to me. I'm sure there's genuine APBT's in Australia other than the AKNC amstaffs and the American Imported amstaffs probably have apbt papers somewhere along the lines..? , though I'm happy to call them amstaffs if that suits everyone. I have no proof but have been told that they were imported before breed bans... Do you have an issue with Tybrax?

Re Chivers;I think that unless you've walked a mile in someone elses shoes may not understand where it is they're coming from. I fully support what they were trying to achieve. The amstaff world groaned (not pitbull owners) because someone was calling their precious dogs pitbulls, the truth is pitbulls were hung out to dry whilst everyone else looked after their own back yard. Granted it wasn't an ideal situation as some may say the pitbulls fate had already been sealed and basically there's not too many people out there trying to save them. The GCCC are bumbling fools who were desperate to win against Kylie and Jon at all costs, the ACO's involved in the case proved themselves less than professional, and when reports etc.. "are lost" you question their honesty.

Totally no excuse i agree, and i don't believe my dog to be a threat but was thinking along the lines it's better to be safe than sorry, and for people with dogs that could be accused of being a restricted breed it would stop ACO's just entering your property to apprehend your dog without your permission.

Thanks for that info Jed, i will be looking at getting a sign for my gates. Not that I foresee any issues as plenty of friends walk straight in my yard with no incident. Akayla, No mention of the dogs behavior was given before the incident. The dog may have been riled up by the domestic that was going on, also the cop may have missed any warning signals that the dog may have given. People who are not familiar with dog behaviors often say that the dog "just attacked for no reason", when the majority of the time there's always a trigger or warning. I think that's what many of the posters who've copped a bit of flack on this thread were possibly trying to get across..

Yeah no blue and white pits in Aus, and no rednose amstaffs here either... or are there, there's rednose amstaffs in the states.

Great link, I think it would be advantageous to some dog owners to have signs stating, "enter at your own risk", or "no public entry". I would never put up a sign saying "dangerous dog" that's just asking for trouble imo.

This is a great thread! I bet the dictionaries are getting a working out!

I totally agree.

Another bad news day for bull breeds. I know I wouldn't enter a yard that had 3 pitbulls in it unless i was with a) a dog handler b) a tazer c) or at least without trying to let the owners contain them. The story says approached the yard, so maybe the dog jumped over..? I didn't know you could be charged with owning an attacking dog? what makes an attacking dog, one who's guarding territory? Perhaps I own attacking dogs... Unless the story refers to events after the fact. These headlines scare the general public which sadly form public opinion and law makers minds, it's generally only decent dog owners that read between the lines.. That is once again, bogan owner, poorly trained dogs = accident waiting to happen Poor officer I hope that he isn't scarred, i hope the other 2 dogs get a chance at a decent life with a decent owner.

Another sad thing about this sort of incident is that the dog that was attacked may become DA as a result and being a bull breed this is not an ideal thing to happen. I've purposely tried to avoid any situations where my young male may encounter a DA dog, or be led into a situation where he feel he must attack another dog. In the BSL section there is a thread on SBT's and this is exactly what they don't need.

Your correct, I do agree in principal, not challenging it just playing devils advocate.. Yes I know all about the APBT here, I'm also from the UK and know plenty about the restrictions over there. As for Amstaffs/pits being the same breed, it depends on which side of the fence you sit. As far as public safety goes none is no-more dangerous than the other so it's a pointless argument. According to many local councils if it has no papers it's a pitbull but if you have AKNC papers your dog is safe. The law makers need to move away from breed id and breed bans, and just target bad owners and dogs who have committed an offence.

You don't believe that all the bites that are blamed on SBT's are APBT"s do you? And although Staffy crosses are not SBT's that is still the part that gets reported and what the public form their opinions on. (sadly) APBT owners have used the same argument for years, saying that the dog that attacked wasn't a pure bred pitty and if the truth be known many pitbull attacks are not by pure bred pits, but BYB lookalikes.. but then if you're in the UK or US if it looks like one it is one... which is BS.

Breed ID is always going to be a tough decision and where there is a chance that a dog is crossed with a SBT people will say it's a SBT cross. Now I'm not saying that's right or justified, especially as the SBT has enough bad owners to get themselves in trouble. More dog attacks are committed by breeds other than the APBT, this includes SBT's. Everyone wants to put a label on a dog to give them a reason why dog attacks occur, if a lab attacks it's "out of character", but if a bulldog of any breed attacks, "well you can't trust them dogs can you". I hope the SBT can withstand any restrictions but until BYBers, bogans and the like are stopped then they will continue to appear in bite stats (not that i care for stats)

Any dog that resembles a restricted dog breed is in need of help.

So sad Liz. But you gave it your best.