Quickasyoucan

I'm surprised that, given that dogs have been the main predators of this colony causing a lot of deaths, they would use a predator in close proximity to the burrows in so much as isn't it likely to disturb/frighten the penguins? I thought one of the reasons for banning dogs and cats from the national parks was not only that they kill small mammals but that the scent they leave behind can disturb animals so much they stop mating, leave etc... On a side note, people who still persist in letting their dogs off leash in that area need to have the book thrown at them. There are plenty of places around Manly to walk your dog off leash you can still have an enjoyable walk with your dog on the foreshore with them on leash, why are people such idiots.

Me too with a bull breed owning friend.

We used Professor Johnson for Jake's TPLO surgery. He and his team were excellent. He is head of department at USYD.

On of my sister's friends adopted an adult male (about 10 mths to a year). I assume it was a dog that was run on by a breeder. I see him at the dog park, he is either called George or Harry (i forget) but he is very cute! He is actually their first dog, husband wanted airedales but wife said too big. They have been very happy with him.

How very sad that someone who is the editor of a purebred but nonetheless dog magazine should have such a disregard for the lives of many sweet natured cross bred dogs. I understand he wants to protect Amstaffs but its a big leap to say every person who buys a registered dog is automatically a "responsible owner" and everyone who buys a crossbreed is not. I would certainly never buy that magazine whilst he continues to be editor based on those comments, he obviously is not an animal lover. "There are those out there in the community indiscriminately cross breeding large and dangerous dogs, then not looking after them,effectively unleashing them on the public. These people should feel the full weight of the law that have been devised to combat them. So he is effectively saying he is pro-BSl disgusting.

I think at the end of the day it is very easy to be in opposition to something, but the battle is not going to be won without proof that BSL does not work AND a realistic policy that will work and that you can convince the public will actually work. I think it was Spot very succinctly put that even if you don't like ABPTs and even if you don't like dogs you should be against BSL if it does not work, as it has the potential to cost taxpayers a lot of money whilst doing nothing to dent dog bite statistics. I think that is one front where concrete evidence of the failure of BSL (the UK should be a good example) should be presented. But secondly and most importantly there need to be a viable alternative presented. I think Steve mentioned a pilot. We need a set of 'model rules' and a 'model town', if you like, where dog bites are being reduced, (actual real life proof) by an alternative method. Pollies are just going to grab the easiest option available, it is up to the dog world and those interested in animal and child welfare to come up with an alternative that benefits everyone.

Have you read the laws? Do you know them well for what they read, or are you reading and conjuring your own interpretation of them? You're incorrect, Zuri. The laws have changed in that dogs fitting a description are targets. The Govt knows PB's don't have a record of DNA markers. Contrary to your assertion, it's not about "blood". You might well trust your Council officer (both present and future and regardless of experience, intent etc) but I'm not gonna. It is wrong to put laws into place where people have no control over whether they can abide by them or not. Think outside the square is my recommendation, Zuri. At the moment, you've boxed yourself in so that you can't see the big picture. ETA: You able to answer to the requests I've posted? IE Links to show evidence of BSL proving to be a success? And also, what State you reside in? Methinks Zuri needs to look at what happened in the Republic of Ireland, starting with APBT's and now I believe up to the teens in restricted PUREBRED REGISTERED dogs. Anyway besides that I care about all dogs being restricted, not the correct way of dealing with dog bites and leaves us no safer as a community (even if you didn't like dogs wouldn't you want something that actually works?). I don't trust any dog though that looks at you with those big brown or blue eyes when you are trying to eat something tasty as if to say "I'm starving". One cave in and you will never eat alone for the rest of your life

It'll round up anything that moves. ;) And yes folks, its a purebred dog. Really just with a different name Completely off topic but I met one of these (a Spanish Water dog) in Dee Why yesterday. It was so unusual looking that I went and accosted the owner who told me what it was, lovely looking dog. He was nine and they had brought hiim over from the UK. Sorry back on topic.

Unless of course, both breeds carry recessive genes for genetically identical PRA. You know, breeds like Labradors and Poodles. :cool: Yes thank you I thought I was covering that but was only discussing risk factors for these two breeds with PRA. edited to ad so its easier for everyone to understand the PRA gene in cavs is c-PRA in mini and toy poodles its prcd-PRA . In lab x poodle its prcd- PRA in both so anyone breeding them would need to test - but you can only test if they are registered. Other words in this particular recessive - PRA depending on whether or not the two breeds are known to have the same kind of PRA some cross breeds are more rather than less likely to show up than it is in purebreds though in the cav x poodle chances are remote. Steve sorry for those non-genetically inclined what does that mean? That theoretically a lab dad and a poodle mum could have the same 'strain' of PRA? Also why do they have to be registered to be tested? But a cav and a poodle cant as they don't have the same "strain" for want of a better word? Just curious Yep thats it - Labs and mini and toy poodles have the same type of PRA so their puppies can get it because both can be affected or carriers .Cav and mini or toy poodle have a different type of PRA so their puppies could be carriers of both but not affected. the DNA people wont accept the samples unless the dog is registered . So if the parents are registered they can test if not its back to pot luck and its a higher risk because they dont know the ancestors etc. Thanks

To be quite frank, unless they have papers, I doubt they WILL pass a simple exam. I think she means people who pass the registered breeders exam can pump out dogs like that and they will be safe? That's what I read it as ie they might not be an ethical breeder, the dogs might be dodgy but they will be safe becuse their dogs are registered.

Unless of course, both breeds carry recessive genes for genetically identical PRA. You know, breeds like Labradors and Poodles. :cool: Yes thank you I thought I was covering that but was only discussing risk factors for these two breeds with PRA. edited to ad so its easier for everyone to understand the PRA gene in cavs is c-PRA in mini and toy poodles its prcd-PRA . In lab x poodle its prcd- PRA in both so anyone breeding them would need to test - but you can only test if they are registered. Other words in this particular recessive - PRA depending on whether or not the two breeds are known to have the same kind of PRA some cross breeds are more rather than less likely to show up than it is in purebreds though in the cav x poodle chances are remote. Steve sorry for those non-genetically inclined what does that mean? That theoretically a lab dad and a poodle mum could have the same 'strain' of PRA? Also why do they have to be registered to be tested? But a cav and a poodle cant as they don't have the same "strain" for want of a better word? Just curious

What Cosmolo said, I have met a fair few people with bull breed x's and the vast majority were rescues quite often via the RSPCA and AWL meaning they would also have been temp tested. A lot of us wanted to save a life and chose a crossbreed dog with a great temperament, 'breed' was not always the first consideration. A lot of us own dogs who have led a blameless life and been a loving family pet. Why should we be penalised for that and is their life worth less because they are not protected by a pedigree certificate. Honestly to take a harsh stance the Vic pounds should simply stop rehoming bull breed x's or anything likely to meet the standard as they are just lining people up for a whole heap of heartache. I don't think any dog who temperament tests well regardless of breed or appearance should be penalised and the criteria should be based on temperament and be safe if the temperament is good, the same if a good dog is purchased through the RSPCA or AWL, the owners have done the right thing and the dogs life is as valuable as any other, but I agree also with Poodlefan that in the present situation to buy a Bull cross breed is a choice that could end in tears for the owners and the dogs, personally a choice I would avoid at all costs and something people should seriously consider when choosing a dog, or if someone wants a Bull breed specifically, buy a papered dog from a registered breeder. I agree but that's not much good to people who have had (and loved) their dogs for years and years...

Unless of course, both breeds carry recessive genes for genetically identical PRA. You know, breeds like Labradors and Poodles. :cool: I thought cockers did too? My boss's spaniel x poodle has some bad stuff going on with its eyes not sure if it is PRA (I did ask him) but it appears to be going blind at around 7 years of age.

Same here. I am really pissed off at the breeders of these dogs. I find it curious that more anger isn't being directed at them considering the feelings of people here towards DD. Cosmolo I do feel for you. The fact is that although the stated purpose of the laws may be to catch those who do the wrong thing by not registering their dogs and keeping a restricted breed the way the law is written it is capable of sweeping up a whole load of innocent and registered dogs in the dragnet. Irresponsible owners will just get rid of the pittie and get another breed of dog instead or ignore the rules hide the dog in the backyard (remember the dog that killed Ayen had not been sighted by the family who had lived there for 3 years) and increase the risks to the general public. Even if your dog is registered (for now) the laws give councils the power to decide that they think it is a restricted breed based on a very broad description and refuse to reregister the dog leaving it open to being destroyed in the future. So even if you have done the right thing, rescued registered and trained your dog, your dog is still at risk of losing its life because of how it looks. Councils can now go round and check every dog registered for example a a staffy x decide its a RB and refuse to reregister. As I said before, not every bull breed without papers was acquired from a BYB by someone who couldn't be bothered to get papers wanted a cheaper dog as a status symbol. Lots of dogs who on the papers fit the description are rescues owned by responsible people and don't even have an iota of RB in them. I have seen boxer x that would fit that description. Besides if bull breed appearance is a predictor of behaviour (which is the premise of the law) why should papered SBTs and AST's get a free pass? Someone is going to challenge that one way or another, in the States and in Europe they don't give dogs a free pass because they have papers, a pitbull type is a pitbull type.

What Cosmolo said, I have met a fair few people with bull breed x's and the vast majority were rescues quite often via the RSPCA and AWL meaning they would also have been temp tested. A lot of us wanted to save a life and chose a crossbreed dog with a great temperament, 'breed' was not always the first consideration. A lot of us own dogs who have led a blameless life and been a loving family pet. Why should we be penalised for that and is their life worth less because they are not protected by a pedigree certificate. Honestly to take a harsh stance the Vic pounds should simply stop rehoming bull breed x's or anything likely to meet the standard as they are just lining people up for a whole heap of heartache.

I think it works to put your own dog behind you and talk/shout at the dog to go away. Unless they are obviously ferociously human agressive (in which case you are stuffed anyway) they are usually more interested in your dog than you. I have used this to good effect several times.

If it's a surrender why can't the person just give a reason for surrender. That covers the problem of say someone who is an excellent owner dying in a car crash. It could also be fed into responsible owner education. ETA: I know it doesn't cover strays, but if every dog was chipped AND registered there wouldn't be any strays would there!

So am I right in reading that if your dog is not a restricted breed and has not previously been declared dangerous or menacing then you cannot be prosecuted. So the dog that killed Ayen (not being at the time a restricted breed as it was a cross) and not being the subject of previous declarations, the owner would not have been prosecutable.

Tybrax what I was trying to argue was that Amstaff/APBT and possibly even SBT would all be classed as 'pit bull type' (as they are in states) under the visual standard published in the Vic gazette. The Vic law is contradictory as it states that breed is not important but then goes on to say Amstaffs with a pedigree are exempt (which is a breed). Hope that explains what I was trying to say. I mentioned Tango as I seem to remember there was a lot of discussion as to whether an ABT was an Amstaff and vice versa. As I said before I think we all need to fight this, not just say "I have a pedigree dog so I am okay". I am pretty sure that Joe public can't tell the difference. Pedigrees didn't stop the extension of breed bans in other countries, irrespective of what agreements might have been brokered with breed clubs and the govt atm. For that matter pedigree didn't stop APBT's being banned here did it? ETA: not trying to be alarmist or promoting conspiracy theories, but history has not protected pedigree dogs from BSL worldwide.

Should have a batch of these ready by Christmas. They come in a sitting position and don't tend to move much. ;) OMG a canine chucky

Cross posted from my response to this in the BSL Forum The American Staffordshire Terrier club of Vic has already spoken to Wyndham council about this, and they have already issued letters to say they effed up because ANKC Registered Amstaffs are most absolutely NOT included in this new legislation. We have also made flyers to hand out in the area to residents, explaining the COUNCILS ballsup, in case they dont actually come through on their promise to send out amendment letters. Please, people need to get the facts before freaking out. The ASTCV is working tirelessly on this and has been for a long time, the DPI contact us directly with any updates, or info so if you would like to keep abreast of the situation, including any updates/facts, or have any concerns then you can join our FB page. I am on the Committee of the ASTCV, and (I think) the only committee member active on this forum so if you need info quickly, please PM me. I hate to say this since I am vehemently against the legislation but there is an obvious logic flaw against the exemption of pedigreed Amstaffs or SBT's for that matter if you understand the intent of BSL and the Victorian legislation. BSL is based on the premise that breed and appearance is a predictor of behaviour. The legislation clearly states that what they are seeking to ban is a pitbull type (not a breed) and the visual standard that they have provided would cover both Amstaffs and SBT's unless they were petite ones (given the weight range). I think this has already been poined out by RSG. The information also clearly states that DNA testing will not be taken into account by rangers, therefore why should a pedigree (which is another form of proof of breed) give you exemption? I understand the the the ASTCV have worked hard for an exemption to this and at the moment are indeed exempt. But how long before this gets challenged legally? Wasn't there already a muddying of the waters after the Tango case in QLD? I don't think a pedigree certificate protects dogs against BSL in France, Ireland, USA. I know for a fact pedigree SBTs are deemed guard dogs (laughable I know) in France and are to be muzzled in public etc, etc. On another note, even if I had a pedigree bull breed I would still want to assist those who might not have one, still are responsible owners and dearly love their dogs. To me this is a dog problem and goes to wider restriction of dog owners rights.

Yep it is still in force - and costing a fortune to implement. I wonder how the figures compare with the 6-12 million stg spent by the NHS on dog bites annually - and how far that figure has gone down... See if I want to turn this into a proper submission to a broadsheet that's the stuff I need to sit back and research. I might leave this up a bit longer for other ideas and feedback, then ask the mods to take it down and I can work on it as an article with input from interested parties, then go to the papers. Here is a link to DEFRA which talks about the public consultation they had last year on the laws (still under consideration) and also invites people to make submission to the Home Office on th measures to stop anti-social behaviour which includes the dog laws: http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/pets/dangerous/

Great article. I wonder what is actually happening in the UK though as I had a look at the relevant government dept today out of interest and the law is still atm in force. I thought there was a bill to amend, but I now I think of it they might be calling for public submissions. will have a hunt... ETA current situation note the comments regarding type being important not breed: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/HomeAndCommunity/InYourHome/AnimalsAndPets/DG_180098

They are fab though all of em even the whippets

my nearly nine year old still does zoomies, I love to watch makes me laugh every time!