ricey

Jed, old friend! There are things happening here in WA at the moment and I hope that we are finally going to get an active pro dog/anti BSL group up and active in WA. It is something that I have trying to have happen for over 10 years now. It is not going to be a strident anti BSL only action group. These single issue groups are doomed to fail. Our group/association/collective/whatever will be more inclusive and encompass wider dog related issues than "just" BSL. BSL is just a part of an "anti dog" agenda (if that is not too strong an appellation) that some of Australia's media seems to be following. I like dogs; a lot more than I like some people. That statement probably paints me into the corner populated by dog tragics and makes me of a similar ilk to the mad cat lady that lived in the next street. But hey! Aren't dogs worth a bit of passion? They are the only species that have chosen to co-exist with humans. All the other species like cows and horses did not do it by choice. They were forced to do it. Dogs did it by choice. I have a bit of difficulty discerning the difference between a dog of a breed that the Australian Kennel Club recognises, and a dog of the breed that the United Kennel Club or the American Dog Breeders Association recognises. To me, they are all dogs. No more, no less, no different. I would be very pleased if we all decided to stop squabbling about which dog breeds are worthy and agreed that dogs are dogs and they are all worthy of our respect and our support. Too simple really, and therefore too unlikely to happen. ricey

Hi all, I did not mean to upset so many people as I obviously have by my original post. I just asked why this subject didn't get much traffic, as I personally consider it important to dogs, and I consider that dogs are important. Having read most (not all) of the subsequent posts (I only log on to DOL once or twice a month) I feel I need to reply to some of the posts I have read. WreckitWhippet, many kennel club breeds have been targeted by breed specific legislation in other countries, and the German Shepherd dog has the all time world record for the length of time being a banned dog here in Australia, so I fail to see how your points have any substance. Stating that "your breed could or will be next" is not scaremongering, it is just pointing out what has happened in the other countries that have gone down the BSL track. It is certainly not bullshit; this targeting of other breeds (including kennel club breeds) has been amply demonstrated as the next logical step in most of the jurisdictions in the world that have implemented BSL. To deny this is to deny the facts. I don't have a problem with our kennel club here in Australia in particular, or kennel clubs in general. They do a fine job in looking after the interests of their breeds. That is their job and I would not ask kennel clubs to do anything else. I do however have a problem with people who deny that the problem of BSL could ever target their chosen kennel club sanctioned breed; they are living under a false sense of security if they do. Those of us who have been involved in dealing with various state governments over the last 10 or more years know how close some Australian governments have come to legislating against kennel club breeds. I don't suppose that you live in Queensland, WreckitWhippet? Me, I care little about whether a BSL targeted breed is a sanctioned Australian Kennel Club breed, or a breed sanctioned by some other kennel club, or whether it is a recognised breed at all. I care about the individual members of the species "canis lupus familiaris" and I'd like to point out that we humans have a responsibility to this species as we got them into this mess. Believing that this BSL stuff couldn't possibly affect ones own chosen breed is a bit like thinking "racism does not affect me because I am white". ricey

Hi all, To me, breed specific legislation that unfairly targets pet dogs due to their breed or appearance is an important topic. Dogs get targeted and killed by governments and councils because they may be pit bulls, or Dogos , or Filas, or what ever the flavour of the month is for "bad dogs". I am a little saddened that this "BSL" forum gets so little traffic. I suspect that a lot of owners of pedigree pure bred dogs think that this is not a problem that concerns them, but it should. It can happen to any breed, and it happened in Australia to the German shepherd dog. At the moment the main dog breed targeted by Breed Specific Legislation in Australia is the American Pit Bull Terrier. The APBT is the same dog as the American Staffordshire Terrier, and the AST is at risk also. But AST owners and breeders think that this BSL thing won't get applied to their dogs. Well, why not? If the APBT is such a dangerous dog, surely the AST is as well, as it is the same dog. The only dogs ever used to breed AST's were APBTs, and so the AST is a pure bred APBT. There is no pure bred AST in the world that is not descended from pure bred APBTs. Anyone who tries to deny this is deluded. So, if all APBTS should be banned, then therefore all American Staffordshire Terriers should also be banned. Anyone out there who'd care to dispute my logic? ricey

In WA, everything revolves around what breed you registered your dog as. For instance, if you own a Dogo Argentino (one of the "banned breeds") that would be a problem for you in Western Australia as you would have to go the full distance with WA's "Restricted Breeds" legislative framework. Big time responsibilities and expectations! However, if you didn't know that your Dogo was a Dogo, and you thought it was a somewhat bigger than normal dalmation with no spots and you'd registered it as a dalmation, you'd be fine! Honestly, under the WA Dog Act, no one (with the exception of the WA Chief Veterinary Officer), no one is empowered to dispute the breed of dog that you have entered on the dog registration form. You say your dingo is a great dane/red cloud/chinese crested cross, well that is what it is. No one is allowed to disagree with you. And the Chief Veterinary Officer, he ain't going to upset your apple cart either. He is on record stating he will never use his discretionary powers to determine the breed of a disputed breed dog as you can't determine a dog's breed just by looking at it. Don't you love hearing sense from a government official? All you dog people in Qld, NSW, and Vic; don't you wish your state's dog laws were like WA dog laws? My 14 year old American Pit Bull Terrier is registered as a Staffordshire Bull Terrier. This was not my decision; it is what was done for me by the pound when I adopted him, way back when in 2001. Back then, I really had no idea and I thought that he probably was a SBT. I did not understand back then why the pound manager was so insistent that my dog was a SBT. I am glad now that they did this for me and my dog. To get back on topic, in WA you can own a dingo or a Fila Brasiiero, or a Dogo Argentino, or the hound of the Baskervilles, but do remember to identify it's breed as something inoffensive. Hey, call it a pugalier! ricey (and no, I am not joking)

Well, the results are in; Hobbes is a little deaf, his vision is not perfect, and he has a bit of osteo-arthritis in his shoulders (not hips) but his kidney function, liver function etc is spot on normal. Heart sounds are normal, and he is at an ideal weight. No diabetes. He also has lots of very small lipomas but I am assured that these are benign and quite common for his breed. But he still stands and barks at the open door to be let in, so I guess I am just going to have to learn to live with that. ricey

Yes, pain (apart from a bit of arthritis in the front legs) is not a problem for Hobbes. And the bit of discomfort he shows when he first wakes quickly goes after a bit of a prance around the back yard... Good point; his eyes are getting a bit clouded. I'm taking him off to my vet for one of their "senior dog" health checks. Maybe clouded vision and deafness are the problem. I'd also like to make sure that liver and kidney function are OK. Ah Ricey, Hobbes has been your beloved constant companion for so many years. He's your boy. You will know when the time has come for him. You know and understand everything about your boy. You'll know better than anyone if his quality of life is causing him distress. I wonder if dementia is as distressing for a dog as it is for a human. I suspect not. Dogs accept 'what is' with good grace. He'll look to you for guidance when he's unsure of himself as he always has.One of my older dogs is now deaf and she looks to me for guidance more so now than when she was younger, as Hobbes does to you.For now, for today, live and love the good life with Hobbes. He expects nothing less of you. Yeah, no way I am going to give him the green dream any earlier than absolutely necessary, but equally no way am I going to make him suffer. My dog, my best friend; I just wish I had been allowed to pull the pin on my mum (nobody should be made to suffer what she went through in the days before she died). Yes, like I said Hobbes is as fit as a mallee bull (whatever that means, but it implies a level of robustness). I am a bit heartened; I am off to my vet this week. My vet has been telling me for the last few years that Hobbes is a senior dog and we should run a battery of tests on him. I have declined previously as I thought that Hobbes was way fit and vibrant and I guess I was a touch pissed off that he thought Hobbes was an old dog. But he is an old dog so I guess I should be dealing with that. Denial about health issues is a common problem for males and I owe it to Hobbes to care for him properly. Just because most male Australians ignore their own health issues does not allow me to ignore my dog's health issues. So, whilst I have successfully avoided being physically examined for prostate cancer, I will get Hobbes fully checked out. Its the least I can do. Peter D (ricey)

Hi all, My American pit bull terrier Hobbes is getting a tad old; he will be 14 on his next birthday in September 2014. If he makes his 14th birthday, he will have lasted 2 years longer than most dogs of his breed. Hobbes is possibly one of the last American Pit Bull Terriers in Australia (except all those pit bull terrier pups I see at my dog park most days). Physically he is as fit as a mallee bull, and he is still the best ratter of any of my dogs. However, I am getting a bit concerned about his mental state. He has taken to standing out side the back door and barking to be let in. This would not be too concerning, but the door is effing open! Hobbes won't come in until I have invited him in. I am fairly sure that he has not been bitten by a vampire and that his reticence to enter my house is not related to an undead nature. He just doesn't seem to realise that the back door is open. Other than his problem with entering via an open door, he seems much the same as always. He still does not seem to like cats or most other dogs (other than Lulu and Lizzie, who he both adores). He is nearly as deaf as a post now, and I think that his deafness may be exacerbating his canine confusion. I watched my mum die with dementia and it was not compelling viewing. Fortunately, we can treat our pets better than we treat our parents. So, when do you think I should pull the plug on Hobbes? At the moment, there is no time soon as he has a very good quality of life. But when would you think was the right time? If he had become incontinent and was shitting in his bed? If he was totally confused and was biting his friends? Me, I don't have a clue as Hobbes is currently just a nearly perfect dog, but he concerns me. Hobbes has been my best friend for 12 years now and I'd want him to continue on for ever, but that ain't going to happen. Hobbes is not what he used to be. I probably have not explained how he is too well; Hobbes has always been a vibrant, full on dog that never backed off or seemed to not know what to do in the circumstances, but now he seems to be unsure. Sheesh, maybe I am just fixing up a problem for me that just does not exist. Hobbes is my best friend and I love him more than just about anything I can think of. He is my dog. And a boy loves his dog. Good night; talk to you tomorrow.

Hi, We have 3 dogs at the moment but we would happily have 4, 5, 6, 7 or more if it were legal and we thought we could look after them properly and give them the attention and care that they require. We have Lulu (the feral 14 year old shih tsu/silkie/Maltese/hyaena cross), Hobbes (the 13 year old American pit bull terrier), and Lizzie (the 11 year old cream kelpie/corgi/dingo/ferret cross). Our dogs are all rescues, and they are getting old. Our next dogs will also all be rescues. As long as you are sure that you can properly look after your dogs and give them everything they need, then it should not matter how many you have. Calgary, Canada (which has about the most progressive dog legislation in the world) does not put a limit on how many dogs you can own. As long as you are doing the right thing by your dogs, you can have as many as you like. I fear that in Australia this possibly would not work. The thing about the Calgary legislation is that you must be doing the right thing by your dogs. I think that this is where some Australians might fall down. ricey

OK, I am going to do something that everyone advises you not to do on a public forum. I am going to tell you who I am. My name is Peter, my mobile phone number is 0419 949 367, and I live in Garratt Road in Bayswater about 400 metres from the Frank Drago off-lead dog park. My e-mail address is [email protected] I have a geriatric American pit bull terrier called Hobbes who is usually good with other dogs if he has been introduced to them properly. Hobbes is 13 maybe 14 years old. Hobbes has been used by a couple of dog trainers to socialise "rambunctious puppys". He is generally good with other dogs, but he certainly doesn't take any shit from them. I think it is time we all met; maybe first time we will have to do that on lead but that is no great problem. E-mail me, text me, phone me or message me on DOL. Lets start this. Cheers, ricey

OK, I admit that I haven't read all the 3 pages of posts but I will admit to calling the dogs "the kids" and bragging about how our nest is empty but our kennels are full. The human kids left home years ago, and now we have 3 dogs that we refer to as "the kids". But the term is a bit of a joke and we do not think that our dogs are furry, four legged kid substitutes. That is just anthropomorphism and an insult to our dogs. Dogs are way better than kids, and if more people realised this earlier we would not have the human over population problem that our world suffers from. ricey

Sheesh! $1,000 for a pound puppy? Go with Steve or Jed, and get a dog with a pedigree and a guarantee; you would be mad to pay $1,000 for a pound mutt. Of course, having said that I'd like to point out that there are lots of reputable dog rescues who could fit you up with a dog that suits you for well under $450 and possibly quite a bit less. And I'd like to stress "a dog that suits you". Just as a reputable pure bred breeder will take pains to ensure that their pup suits you and your circumstances, a good rescue will do the same. Also, as a reputable pure bred dog breeder is by your side as your puppy develops, so are the better dog rescues. If it does not work out, it is not the end of the world. ricey

Shit it is sad that a lovely little girl got killed by a dog, but by a pit bull? These dogs have have been banned and actively eradicated in the UK since 1991. So, not by a pit bull, but by some other dog of some other breed. Still sad, but not a pit bull. No such dog in the UK. And if there are pitties in the UK, why? Really, does the breed matter? Thirteen years since 1991 when the UK banned pit bulls; most pit bulls would be dead by now. My 13 year old pit bull Hobbes is older than most pit bulls, and he prances about like a puppy but he really is an old dog that is not too far from the rainbow bridge. I think that it is unlikely that an American Pit Bull Terrier killed this little girl. More like a big poorly trained and poorly controlled dog killed this little girl. But hey! Lets blame a pit bull. ricey

What is my relation with the breed? I have an American pit bull terrier; same dog, different name. American Staffordshire Terriers have been bred from pure bred American Pit Bull Terriers since 1934 and no other breed of dog has ever featured in the American Staffordshire Terrier's bloodline. All American Staffordshire Terriers are American Pit Bull Terriers, but not all American Pit Bull Terriers are American Staffordshire Terriers. The AST is a subset of the APBT. And back in 1974, when the AmStaffs bloodline was getting a bit poorly, the American Staffordshire Terrier mob opened up its bloodline to an injection of (you guessed it) American Pit Pull Terrier DNA. Both the AST and the APBT are fine dogs, but they are really the same dog. And they both have big teeth, M United. ricey

All my dogs are chipped; all of them are registered, all of them are on the pets register web site, and all of them are on my property behind secure fences and gates. Not one of them ever gets beyond my borders unless I say so (except Lulu the Shih Tsu/silky/she devil cross, who was possibly Harry Houdini in a former life, but with a much smaller brain). Woe betide anyone who is stupid enough to try to take them from me. They would regret that, in spades (especially if they took Lulu; they would certainly regret that; I have been trying to give her away for years, but no takers). And Hobbes, the pit bull would readily march off with any human who said "here boyo, lets go". Like most pit bulls, he thinks all humans are ok. He is a great judge of other canines' characters, but does not have a lot of insight into humans. Seriously, I guess the best we all can do is chip our dogs and do the best we can to secure them. If someone really, really wants your dog, your dog is gone unless you lock your dog in your house always (and what sort of a life is that for a dog?) ricey

Hi kelpiecuddles, thanks; I thought I was going out on a limb; I thought I was going to get shot down in flames. I have been involved in dog rescue for quite some time now. Try rehoming American Pit Bull Terriers anywhere in Australia if you want to have a hard life! But these pit bulls are no more difficult to rehome than any other dog breed that no one wants. At least the RSPCA here in WA actively rehomes pit bulls. A bit hard to to believe given what was happening only a couple of years ago, but now it is true. I am a bit concerned that Lynne Bradshaw has relinquished the RSPCA presidency; what happens now? At least Hugh Wirth has acknowledged his errors. The RSPCA is comfortably back within the fold. But I am not comfortable,......

Really, all reputable dog rescues are killing animals who could be kept alive. However, just because an animal has a heart beat, should that be the sole criterion for keeping it alive? To me, the rescues that are not responsible are the "no kill" shelters. These shelters refuse to euthanase animals who have no realistic chance of being rehomed or really should not be rehomed. There are far more animals up for adoption in Australia than will ever get rehomed. So, some animals will always be euthanased. And some of those killed animals would have made fine pets or companions if they could have been linked with the appropriate humans. And I find it excruciately sad that these animals are being killed. However, any euthanased animal is just another statistic to show that we humans are failing our animals and I do not agree that the RSPCA or any other animal rescue is failing here. Blaming the RSPCA for euthanasing animals that they can't rehome is like blaming a cancer ward for smoking related deaths. I never thought I'd ever be vociferously defending the RSPCA for anything ever, but hey! The RSPCA is not the problem; we people are the problem. ricey

I'd want someone like my friend Dan (who is a very competent dog behaviourist who spends most of her time analysing the human's behaviour and dealing with it) to assess this dog owner and her dog. Maybe then we'd know what this situation actually entails. Meanwhile, I treat anything I read in the popular press with a healthy dose of cynicism (cynicism the word, as a complete aside comes from the ancient Greek word 'cynos', which means the followers of Diogenes; Diogenes beleived that dogs were nobler and purer than humans). Hey, I don't have a problem with that. Seriously, dogs that majorly damage their humans or any other humans need to be controlled and prevented from doing this. Is this a problem with the dog, or this this a problem with the human, or is this a bit of both? My gut tells me it is probably a bit of both, but I am just guessing. Possibly one or the other or both need the green dream (whoops! I am not allowed to say that in Orstraya!). Cheers, ricey

Wow! This thread is still going but nobody has met up with anybody yet. I am still up for a Perth meet with me and my geriatric pit bull, Hobbes. Hobbes, the poor old bugger is around 13 or 14 years old and he hasn't realised that he is close to death. He still thinks he is a puppy. Hey, I'm 57 and I think I'm still a puppy! So, a meet at the Frank Drago reserve is still on the cards. Cheers, ricey

I'd hazard a guess that most kelpies have a bucket of dingo blood in them, especially the cream kelpies. If I was a farmer that wanted a dog that could go all day in the heat back in the day, I'd have wanted a dingo cross. I'd be surprised if any modern day kelpie breeder would try to deny that dingos were not a major part of the kelpie blood line. The kelpie is recognised as the iconic Aussie dog, but it is mainly dingo, and the dingo is more iconic. ricey

Yes, I remember well. At least Hugh Wirth has recognised the errors of his previous pro BSL stance and has recanted. I respect him for that, as any of us can make mistakes and I laud him for so publicly and openly admitting he was wrong about BSL. It would be churlish of any of us to continue to deride Hugh Wirth. Hugh Wirth has shown himself to be a 'wirthwhile' human being LOL! However, Graeme Smith continues to be a nasty anti-dog campaigner that should not not be pissed on if he is on fire. The 'Lost Dogs Home' FFS! I'd say "abandon hope all you dogs who enter here". The dip stick who runs this "shelter" really does not like dogs, and should be court ordered to not have anything to do with dogs. ricey

My big tiger brindle pit bull Hobbes is 13 going on 14 years old now. Not much longer for this world; a bit arthritic, a lot deaf, so grey around the muzzle. But still a puppy, and the best dog I have ever known. And he is still the best ratter I know; makes most Jack Russells look amateurish. My next dog (if I get a next dog, I'm not sure about that right now) will be a rescue pit bull terrier and I will call him Staunch. At least I will be sure that there'll be no other dog in the park that answers to that name. I do think that it is very sad that the American Pit Bull Terrier is the current "evil hound"; just the current popular press "hound of the Baskervilles". The German Shepherd, the Rottweiler, the Doberman all go before the American Pit Bull Terrier as "evil dogs", and no doubt the pit bull will be followed by the Akita, and the Neapolitan Mastiff, and the Great Dane, and the Labrador, and the standard poodle. ricey

Yes, the pit bulls I have known have all been marvelous dogs. I have had around 15 or more rescue pit bulls come through my back yard escaping the horrors of NSW, Qld and Victoria. A lot of crap is spouted about how pit bulls are 'fighting dogs' and therefore untrustworthy, but the reality is that these dogs are the most dependable and staunch dogs you'd ever know. 'Staunch' is an old word that is not commonly used now in Australian English but it describes well the pit bulls I have had the pleasure to know- "stalwart, loyal, faithful, trusty, committed, devoted, dedicated, dependable, reliable, steady, constant, hard-working, vigorous, stable, firm, steadfast, redoubtable, resolute, unswerving, unwavering, unhesitating, unfaltering........." These dogs are just the best of dogs, ever. ricey

I have a "cream kelpie" who is probably a dingo; chews her nails something fierce, howls at the moon and at anything else; kills anything a tad fluffy. Not really good with humans except her own pack; a touch nervous and a bit flighty. Not that good around other unknown dogs. But really good at the dog park with the dogs she knows. ricey

These are not my views, they are a literal reading of data taken from the City of Calgary's website. Dog bite incidence (green) has more than doubled from 2009 to 2012. The dramatic decline in overall incidences comes in 1999-2000, before the new model of dog control was implemented. . . it is not a decline in bites but in chasing. Bites do decrease dramatically in 2009, but go back up again thereafter. Mita may be right that there is a change in reporting. It would require research to figure out what is behind the numbers; the figure caption indicates that there was a change in how bites were recorded after 2009. Without further research I would not say the stats indicate that the Calgary model has been a great success. there has been an increase in reported bites in 2012, which is one year out of 12. All other years show a decline

Hi, You list your state as SA, and as I am not clairvoyant I don't know anything else about you. You do seem to like being somewhat confrontational, and that is your prerogative. However, there are stuff all Dogos in Australia and probably none in South Australia, so unless you have spent considerable time in South America, your actual experience of Dogos will be limited to what you have read about them. If your experience of Dogos is actual, perhaps you would be so kind as to outline it here. Cheers, ricey p.s. and whatever your experience is with Dogos, your assertion that American Pit Bull terriers would not defend their humans is wrong.