m-sass

What we need to accept and understand from a public viewpoint is that the majority of the serious attacks and the death of Ahen are the same type of dogs over and over again. On this news page alone, 3 serious attacks, 3 dogs of the same "type". It's not so much what these dogs are as such, it's what they are not, they are not GSD's, they are not Rottweilers, they are not Belgian Malinois, they are not Standard Poodles, Greyhounds or Great Danes, they are 95% of the time a crossbreed Bull something reflective of the "type" already BSL listed. A type or "style" of dog that continues to feature in serious attacks at the proportion that these Bull whatever breeds do, will naturally raise public concern wanting this type/style of dog ejected from the community.

The arguement that all dogs have teeth and all dogs regardless of breed can be dangerous in the wrong hands is all bulldust as everyone knows, this model of thought process concludes that if the Ahen killer was a Labrador as registered by council, the Lab would have done the same thing which is absolute rubbish. The arguements put forward by anti BSL crusaders are too stupid to be taken seriously in the public view. No government is going to release restrictions upon breeds or types of dogs considered a danger to the community whether that is right or wrong whilst the same type/styles of dogs continue to feature in serious attacks and the sooner we accept this and move on the better IMHO.

But the Principal of Lawyers for Companion Animals, Anne Greenaway, said so-called aggressive behaviours were often exhibited by animals that were "terrified".

What's this crap??, terrified dogs are spook dogs, fear biters, weak nerve WTF would anyone want to bother with dogs like that for, they are sadly duds that take a lot of work and time spent on spooky behaviour where the time spent on a decent dog could be so much more pleasurable with a whole lot more achieved.

Dougie, I am sick of your crap. You are not a dog lover. If you knew anything about dogs, you would know that dogs who are lost & end up in the pound are usually stressed & display totally different behaviour than they would if they were in their own environment.

OK, that's it, not feeding you anymore.

Who's Dougie

I know that dogs terrified by the inablilty to handle the stress of environmental change have a nerve issue, one of the primary factors that will fail a police dog candidate, inefficient stability. The event of the stress encountered by the lost dog at the pound reveals the true character of the dog under pressure and it fails the test of temperament stability. Too many excuses for dogs of poor temperamemt.

Cosmolo' timestamp='1351130783' post='5998327']

But i'd also like to see councils go after the people breeding the dogs in the first place. Working at the tail end is not ideal.

Breeding dogs shouldn't be the given rights for just anyone in a free for all environment, breeding dogs IMHO needs to be controlled sooner rather than later and the breeders of crap dogs need to be held questionable as to what they are producing.

If council reckons it to be a restricted breed however, it is of consequence, and as bull breed owners we demand that compelling evidence is produced to support the claim, 'reasonable enough best guess' is unacceptable.

Given that primarily only Bull breeds and crosses are potentially effected by BSL, if you buy a papered one instead of a BYB, you don't have to worry about what the council reckons do you??

I told you the pup had no pitbull blood

Tell the ranger that and it will all good then??

Time to face some facts, then general public on the whole and politicians are not anti-BSL, infact they welcome legisaltion that makes them feel safer. regardless of it not being effective when it comes to providing a safer community and reducing bite stats.

I for one do not support BSL but the reality is that it's not going away any time soon, there is not about to be an overnight back flip in VIC (certainly hasn't happened in NSW in the 7 or 8 years since we've had it ). A great many of the anti-bsl supporters look like red necks and are not taken seriously because of the way that they have attempted to tackle the problem and comments made. It certainly does not help the cause to make references to Nazi Germany, Hitler, Jews, Holocauts and the like. Protests to date have been futile.

What can be done in the meantime to lessen the destruction of pets and innocent dogs ?

My suggestion is that the powers that be in VIC are pushed to adopt the NSW model. I know there's going to be people screaming blue murder at this suggestion but it does offer a way out, via breed assessment and temp testing, which is a hell of a lot more than the VIC legislation has going for it at the moment.

Want to keep your nice cross bred dogs safe ? then fight to have a reliable method of temperament testing included in the VIC laws.

ETA: seeking a better option in the short term, makes more sense than continuing to jump up and down and not be heard

Excellent post I totally agree

But the Principal of Lawyers for Companion Animals, Anne Greenaway, said so-called aggressive behaviours were often exhibited by animals that were "terrified".

What's this crap??, terrified dogs are spook dogs, fear biters, weak nerve WTF would anyone want to bother with dogs like that for, they are sadly duds that take a lot of work and time spent on spooky behaviour where the time spent on a decent dog could be so much more pleasurable with a whole lot more achieved.

And do you think it is fair, reasonable and equitable that someone should acquire a cute puppy which is the product of two crossbred dogs - neither of which have any pitbull - and when it grows up, it is tan with light eyes, it never does anything wrong, and it is sitting on the lawn one day, minding its own business when the ACO comes and grabs it, and the council will not let the owners see it again, or have the body returned after they have knocked it off?

Can you tell me why that dog should die?

It's not a pitbull. It has never done anything wrong. It should be killed, why?

It's interesting to note how people are fast to determine that a crossbreed dog of Pitbull appearance is not a Pitbull or has no Pitbull ancestory where in fact in most cases of crossbreed combinations the breeders wouldn't know the ancestory behind the breeding let alone the buyers.......so what's the "no Pitbull" based on??, the breeder said so I suppose which makes it alright then?? Point is: Crossbreed Bully pups could be Pitbull X or near on pure for that matter and the choice is buy one and take a punt or not

My opinion is that people be responsible for the type of dog they own. Including the ancestory.

The bottom line in this situation IMHO is that in most council areas there have been restricted breeds in place for years. We understand that many people don't know and don't bother to research council law and how it applies to a dog they intend to potentially own, but that is their choice not to research dogs, breeds and the application of laws and making the wrong choices is no one else's fault but their own.

Pitbull's have been restricted to some degree in most council areas for a long time and have always been determined by appearance and dogs have been determined as Pitbull's in the past with the associated restrictions applied.........I know of one personally who bought a BYB puppy supposedly a Staffy X Boxer that was declared a Pitbull a couple of years ago and they had to comply with the enclosure, signs and leash/muzzle laws, the dog was dobbed in for excessive barking by a neighbour........"the Pitbull next door barks too much" and the dog was declared becasue the owner couldn't prove ancestory. There was nothing wrong with the dog, it was a good dog and the owner was pissed at the declaration, but it goes with the territory even back then that if a dog looks like a Pitbull it can be declared.

The point is: If you take a punt buying Bully crossbreed pups or dogs with Pitbull appearance and lets face it, rarely do you see two dogs declared as Pitbull's look the same, it's a breed that has quite a wide range of accepted features, colours, size etc, you could always have faced a problem with dogs like this long before the tightening of laws and crossbreed targeting and the policing of, nothing has changed other than you used to be able to get away with Pitbull featured dogs more easily and lies were more easily accepted as to the dogs determined breed. With that said, no one is forced to buy a Bully crossbreed pup, they could have bought a papered Staffy or Amstaff if they like that style of dog and remained safe and off the radar?

Sorry to say and i am NOT suggesting this is the case with anyone posting on this thread but there are some trainers and training schools that hand out prong collars like lollies- because they are 'quicker' or 'easier'. No consideration for the fallout of incorrect use and what happens to the dog while the owner learns how to use it etc. Too much focus on a tool can also come at the expense of reward rates and reward history, creating handlers that are quick to correct and slow to reward. It doesn't have to be this way of course- i am just suggesting that care should always be taken with ANY tool that has the ability to correct at a significant level and the we need to consider how a tool is LIKELY to be used before giving it to someone, not just how it SHOULD be used.

I have seen the results of many an inconsistent or inexperienced owner who has been handed tools with high levels of corrective function (not just prongs) straight off the bat and it's not pretty.

Excellent training tool for many dogs but not all IMHO

What Megan said.

It is completely irrelevant to the legislation how i keep, train and contain my dogs. They can still do exactly what Megan has described- regardless of how responsible i am. How on earth can i and people like me be responsible for our own destiny in this situation!

What's wrong with a bit of creative management........we are talking box tickers here......what would you need to produce for a ranger to leave happily without your dog on a seizure mission

double post sorry

And one more time, the Vic legislation says that if your dog has the characteristics listed on the checklist, then the ONLY way to prove that it isn't a pitbull type is to have pedigree AMSTAFF papers or a vet declaration

What ANKC papered pure breeds meet the standard that are not Amstaff's, and how many papered dogs of other breeds have been euthanised under the legislation to date from the inability to produce Amstaff papers??

Please let us know which vets are willing to declare breed, because most vets won't participate because they don't agree with the legislation.

I heard that most of the vets wouldn't participate because they weren't brave enough to put pen to paper in case "their" career was jeopardised. As long as they are ok Jack, bugger the poor dog they have the power to save, weak as water they are. So what's stopping the vets who don't agree with the legislation getting together in protest by signing them all off as Amstaff's to satisfy the legislation and save some lives??

if, as has occured O/S, legislation is enacted to declare an ANKC registered breed as ''restricted/banned'', ANKC papers will merely confirm a dog is a ''restricted/banned'' breed & subject to all the ''restrictions''

The basis of BSL is the restriction of serious fighting breeds.......there are no serious fighting breeds recognised by the ANKC, it's not based on bite statistics, so what currently recognised ANKC breeds are going to be determined as serious fighting breeds over night contrary to their breed standards?

Dogs that are registered with local council can still be identified as restricted breeds and forced to be kept as such so i'm not just referring to people who do not register their dogs.

Dogs resembling restricted breeds could be indentified as restricted breeds for years, nothing much has changed in that regard other than the level of policing and action taken against them. Council's have had the power for years to see a dog and say "hey that's a Pitbull" and slap a dangerous dog or restricted breed order on it regardless of what the dog is registered as or what the owners reckon the breed is.......Bull crossbreeds have for a long time have been risky if council wanted to make an issue of it, it's happened to people along with as I mentioned previously, dogs that resemble Dingo's have been under the spotlight in the past also.

You have yet to answer the question re: how people prove their rescue dog isn't a pitbull given that Victorian law doesn't allow for DNA testing

Simple, take the dog to the vet and get a letter written confirming it's an Amstaff :D

In Vic that piece of paper will be useless to you unless it says your dog is an AmStaff, no other breed papers are accepted. So now what do you do?

What ANKC papered dogs have been seized that have supposedly fit the standards and weren't Amstaff's. The rangers won't seize a Staffy for example after the owners produce the ANKC papers, that's silly They are not going scoop up a Rotty with ANKC papers and declare it a restricted breed because it doesn't have Amstaff papers are they??

The legislation goes BEYOND Pit bulls. Have you even looked at the standard! The standard has been around for 5 minutes. People who adopted dogs before it existed had NO IDEA it was going to be made and NO IDEA that it would be done in such a way that their dogs who are NOT pit bulls could be targeted!

To include crossbreeds which appears to be what people claim the offending dogs to be in Pitbull incidents, the characteristics of a Pitbull X dependant upon what it's crossed with will naturally extend the standard beyond the that of a Pitbull. The owners of these targeted crossbreeds have the option to prove otherwise and some have successfully done exactly that, but unfortunately, ignorance of the laws in this country doesn't provide a statutory defence. Every council practically has a list of restricted breeds and a set of rules for dog owners, but I suppose there are people around who didn't know their dogs had to be council registered either so I guess having no idea or researching their aquisition has come to bite some on the bum it seems?

And If you are seriously advocating the abolition of all non pedigree dogs,bear in mind you better be sure they can stand alone in future

No, I am speaking purely about crossbreed dogs that resemble restricted breeds.

M-Sass,On one hand you argue in favour of B.S.L as a solution and tell us the parameters won't be changed or broadened.That people who do the right thing have nothing to fear as long as they are ANKC members,or only buy ANKC Reg. dogs.

On the other hand,you show us just how easy it is to use that fear to broaden the parameters and include dogs that were never intended targets and have done nothing wrong.

So the government has definitely listened to the THAT'S NOT A PITBULL but a CROSSBREED cry and with the collection of data where Pitbull types have been falsely registered as crossbreeds.......what??, you can't understand why they are targeting crossbreeds??.........I surely can!!

Do those worried about their dogs of unknown heritage really have as much to fear as the owners of the pure breeds most commonly nominated in the pit bull masquarade?

The amstaff & staffy in particular & to a lesser extend the bull mastif, rhodesian ridgeback, the labrador etc.

Some of these breeds have already been banned in various locations simply by the association.

Do they even really care about the fate of the at risk pure breeds?

I'm guessing the coroner of this thread recognised the M.O. of the owners of suspected restricted breeds & made her suggestion to place the onus of identification on the owner rather than them claiming "xbreed'' & challenging the authorities to prove otherwise.

The easiest option is impose a blanket ban to cover all the possibilities. As has happened O/S

If it came to pass here, your ANKC papers wouldn't be your saviour.

There is no risk to ANKC recognised breeds..........it's already been tested when a court ruled the Amstaff was the same breed as a Pitbull and was fixed immediately. Same applies with the Amstaff's very pointed exemption in the Victorian legislation.........they are after Pitbulls and crossbreed of, or anything that may contain Pitbull that the owners can't prove otherwise.

But for many people being affected it wasn't the case when when they bought their dogs at all

It was the case really at anytime for years a dog with a Pitbull resemblence could be declared a restricted breed if the owners couldn't prove otherwise and the dog if not seized depending on the council area inwhich it was registered could be placed under restricted breed limitations and that has happened many times in the past. There has always been a risk involved with dogs of particular appearance.......people have been through the same thing with dogs who resemble Dingo's, so to me there has always been potential inevitability if you sail close to the line with dogs resembling restricted breeds or Dingo's that you couldn't prove otherwise that dramas could easily be approaching.

It's no different in some parts of the USA........you dont do the GSD X Husky route as they are likely to be scooped up as a wolf hybrid which are illegal in those areas......same thing really??.

M-Sass,On one hand you argue in favour of B.S.L as a solution and tell us the parameters won't be changed or broadened.That people who do the right thing have nothing to fear as long as they are ANKC members,or only buy ANKC Reg. dogs.

On the other hand,you show us just how easy it is to use that fear to broaden the parameters and include dogs that were never intended targets and have done nothing wrong.

BSL really only ever effected Pitbull owners, as the other breeds listed are virtually non existant. Personally, I don't see a need for anyone to own a Pitbull and if someone wants something similar they can safely buy an Amstaff even put a studded collar on it and call it a Pitbull if they wish, I don't care one way or the other, but to jump on board with the Pitbull supporters in anti BSL regimes on the basis of scare tactics that other breeds will be next, I strongly disagree with that suggestion which has already been tested as I mentioned in an earlier post with the Amstaff's exclusion. The Amstaff is the closest you will get to an APBT and if they have provided Amstaff exclusion from the legislation, any other ANKC recognised breed is as safe as houses.........unless you want to keep a Pitbull legally, BSL is really of no consequence to the rest of the dog community IMHO??.

I have absolutely nothing against Pitbull's and I know of a few personally bar one who has massive dog aggression, the others are nice dogs, but all are registered with the council as crossbreeds to mask their identity.......people with Pitbull's have been doing this for years to avoid restricted breed declarations.........and you wonder why the legislation has been extended to crossbreeds ........perhaps the Pitbull owners who have lied about their breed to misconstrude their true identity for so many years have contributed to the crossbreed hunt for like characteristics and the amount of times a dog is reported as a Pitbull incident all you hear from the Pitbull and anti-BSL crusaders is THAT'S NOT A PITBULL IT'S A CROSSBREED ........so who has bought the crossbreed under attack then??, more than likely the very people trying to do a turn about after putting their foot in it

So the government has definitely listened to the THAT'S NOT A PITBULL but a CROSSBREED cry and with the collection of data where Pitbull types have been falsely registered as crossbreeds.......what??, you can't understand why they are targeting crossbreeds??.........I surely can!!

This is essentially a pure breed forum is it not??, personally I don't like crossbreed dogs to the point of owning one, even having a good crossbreed dog, how do you replicate the traits of unknown bloodlines and ancestory to produce good dogs into the future........personally I am not into throwing males and females together to produce lucky dips or neither do I support BYB practices I think it stinks, so perhaps the supporters of crossbreeds anti BSL crusaders which ultimately supports crossbreeds BYB's and breeds unrecognised in the pure breed registries are on the wrong forum??

And this is where you're going wrong.

People aren't advocating the breeding of crossbreed dogs.

People are saying that just because certain dogs happen to be a crossbreed, it doesn't mean it should be killed.

When there are breed restrictions in place which has been the case for 20 odd years, if you happen to have a crossbreed dog who resembles a restricted breed and you can't prove it isn't, then you have a problem which has always been the case. If someone doesn't know what they are buying in terms of breed or know how a puppy may turn out physically as an adult, that's the chance you take with crossbreed dogs.........my point is, if don't want to be tangled up with BSL problems, don't buy dogs like that, plenty of BSL safe choices.

But i think you're missing a major issue. When we adopted our dogs aside from what the shelter called them (which is what Avergae Joe would believe mind you) we did not believe for a moment the dogs were pit bulls OR pit bull cross breeds- i have done plenty of breed id in my life and know a bit more than average Joe. The Vic legislation goes beyond pit bull and talks about a 'type', a dog that fits the 'standard'. How do you expect that people should have known about that before last year!!?

Who's forcing anyone to get a dog from a shelter, again it's about choices isn't it??.

Please don't feed the troll guys. You will never, ever get anywhere. It's pointless.

This is essentially a pure breed forum is it not??, personally I don't like crossbreed dogs to the point of owning one, even having a good crossbreed dog, how do you replicate the traits of unknown bloodlines and ancestory to produce good dogs into the future........personally I am not into throwing males and females together to produce lucky dips or neither do I support BYB practices I think it stinks, so perhaps the supporters of crossbreeds anti BSL crusaders which ultimately supports crossbreeds BYB's and breeds unrecognised in the pure breed registries are on the wrong forum??. Why on a pure breed forum are people trolls because they support only pure breed dogs............wouldn't it be common sense to expect on a pure breed forum to encounter people not supportive of crossbreeds and restricted breeds and their look a likes??

Because not everyone supports restricted breeds and crossbreeds doesn't make them trolls, but it's interesting to see debates unfold where the BSL supporters are lost for answers which to me is obvious as a loosing battle, a waste of time I think people need to accept the laws and get on with it and next time don't buy a dog who's breed cannot be proven to satisfy the requirements?

We're approaching what 7 or 8 years of BSL now ? and there's been no headway made in having the laws repealed, they are here to stay, regardless of what we think of them and I personally don't see any major about faces happening in the next ten years.

So in the mean time, my suggestion is that people who want a bull breed , get themselves a pedigree dog and then they won't have to worry about being caught up in BSL. If it means that people do not take on bull breed rescue mixes, then so be it. They won't have to worry about rangers knocking on their doors, issuing NOI's or siezing their pets.

ETA: The rescues and shelters should NOT be rehoming these dogs. NSW should be considered the exception, as there is a means of breed ID and temp testing that will protect dogs.

Pitbull's have been a restricted breed for around 20 years and even though nothing much in the past has been done to police them, still at any time a dog resembling a Pitbull could have been declared if the owners couldn't prove otherwise and then be subject to the housing and muzzle requirements etc.........I recall a couple of cases where that occurred a few years ago.........so Pitbull's have been in the "grey area" for a long time, hence why owners have falsely registered them with council as crossbreeds or something totally unrelated like the Victorian killer registered as a Labrador wasn't it??.

People have known the ramifications of owning Pitbull's for years and sailed under the radar with lies and deception and I am sure half of the supposed Pitbull's anyway are crossbreeds bred by BYB bogan sellers of potentially tough looking dogs...........so really, I don't buy this poor innocent people caught out on legislation condemning their poor innocent restricted breed look a likes which reflects people contemplating the purchase of a dog are merely doing so blindly without any research into what is restricted and what isn't on a she'l be right mate attitude, they don't chase up restricted breed look a likes, just register them as a Labrador now worries??

These situations of scooping up innocent dogs on looks still remains the result of poor choices........no one has to buy a Bully cross breed, plenty of crossbreeds to choose from who look nothing like restricted breeds..........it is the law with the writing on the wall for a long time and anyone who didn't research dog breeds in general enough to get caught in the BSL situation only have themselves to blame when the laws and policing of these types opf dogs became tighter. Only a a couple of months ago my niece bought a new puppy Staffy X Lab........I have had this conversation with her 10 times, she knows, I have told her repeatedly, but she will winge like the rest when council scoop up her dog even if it is genuinely a Staffy x Lab, a prime potential look a like to fit the resticted breed criteria.........it's time people used common sense IMHO.

I got the same impression reading this article through. It frustrates me to no end that people continue to recycle the "some breeds are vicious no matter how you train them" myth.

Dogs like that need good handlers. Unfortunately, they don't end up with them often enough. I'd blame lack of regulation on dog breeding and sales, not the breed itself. I'd also like to see mandatory dog training classes for first-time owners, and education programs for children about how to approach dogs (and how to avoid them) in schools.

In the right hands, any breed of dog is safe, but breeds or types of dogs that take extreme handling and management to maintain saftey are hardly fit for the average dog owner in an urban community. Seriously what was that dog good for??, it was a thick head that didn't understand it's boundaries, it chased some kids on their front lawn for what reason..........were the kids a threat that needed mauling the stupid thing it was??, So then it chases the kids inside then looses the target and redirects onto a toddler and kills the poor little girl.........what for?? the dog didn't have a brain in it's head and it's not like it killed an intruder coming through a window at 3am using some territorial aggression for a useful purpose....why anyone would want a dog like that is beyond me........a useless animal IMHO.

More people are killed by sharks and horses in this country than dogs.

trouble is, m-sass, that many of the dogs being blamed and vilified are not restricted breeds at all. And your breed - whatever it is - could well be in the same situation with a change in attitude by the government.

BSL has been overturned in a lot of countries, as not working. It will happen here. Unfortunately, these findings do nothing to help prevent another dog attack tragedy.

It is all too easy to see how this could have happened. Too easy to never release photos of the dog, but say it was a restricted breed. Who knows? How disappointing.

I disagree with the fact that other breeds will be next as this has been tested with the Amstaff........if a breed is ANKC recognised it's as safe as houses from the BSL list. No government is going to overturn BSL and release import restrictions on Pitbull's Fila's Dogo's etc, absolute nonesense.

As it is a numpty law which has not prevented any dog bites, and it is the same law which has been repealed in numerous places around the world, I believe it will be overturned.

If it is not repealed, Australia will be the same as other countries, and more breeds will be included in the mix. Newspapers are already speaking of banning staffords and rottweilers.

Do you have any research on import restrictions to allow you to say "absolute nonsense" with confidence, or is that your opinion?

They won't be included in the mix at all, the precident was set with the Amstaff........why did the Amstaff get excluded from the Victorian witch hunt and why wasn't the Amstaff added to the BSL list when the QLD court ruled them a Pitbull with a different name.......anything ANKC recognised is protected and will remain that way........there is no chance of banning Rotts and Staffords, it will never happen.

So very sad for 4 month old puppy & his devoted owner. Hope puppy pulls through & doesn't have any issues as a consequence of this vicious attack

I can't help it but am 'out of there' at the sight of a Bully anything heading our way. I am afraid of them & they are just so powerful. Having said that any dog is capable of having

a brain snap & it only takes a split second. I am always extremely careful & keep my 2 away from unknown dogs regardless of size/breed. Paranoid yes but you just can't be too careful.

I hope the BT owner is held accountable for the expenses of this poor little puppy. It is the very least he could do IMHO.

As a BT owner I totally agree with you and I do exactly what you do. I don't allow my dogs anywhere near unknown dogs - people probably think I'm very unfriendly but when another dog is coming the other way, I move as far away as possible. While I'm very confident of the temparament of my dogs, I still don't take chances because it's not worth it.

Totally agree with above comments - unknown dogs with unknown temperaments = recipe for disaster. So hoping for good recovery for the poor puppy and his owner. My GSD can still be reactive and I have lost count of the number of times people have approached me with their dog with the common greeting "my dog is friendly" to which my reply is always "mine is not!!". Not always a good line to make new friends but they usually get the message.

Reactive GSD's are usually the result of breeding dogs short on nerve or the mentality that reactivity is required in the breed for protection qualities..........we manage and deal with what we have but it would be refreshing to see some breeders who knew what they were doing with the reproduction of powerful breeds.

More people are killed by sharks and horses in this country than dogs.

trouble is, m-sass, that many of the dogs being blamed and vilified are not restricted breeds at all. And your breed - whatever it is - could well be in the same situation with a change in attitude by the government.

BSL has been overturned in a lot of countries, as not working. It will happen here. Unfortunately, these findings do nothing to help prevent another dog attack tragedy.

It is all too easy to see how this could have happened. Too easy to never release photos of the dog, but say it was a restricted breed. Who knows? How disappointing.

I disagree with the fact that other breeds will be next as this has been tested with the Amstaff........if a breed is ANKC recognised it's as safe as houses from the BSL list. No government is going to overturn BSL and release import restrictions on Pitbull's Fila's Dogo's etc, absolute nonesense.

Imagine if they made vets report.. Some vets would refuse.. Some owners would just not take their dogs to the vet..

And if people didn't aquire restricted breeds they could take them to the vet and not have to worry.