justin19801

Who glorifies fighting dogs? Caricatures are next in line for dog control measures a la PDE doco. As I've already explained, BSL isn't about the dogs, it's about the owners. The UK is reviewing the DDA and could see massive changes there, and b4 we know it, here as well.

Ths GSD was never attacked as the APBT has been. It was more of a fear of dogs breeeding with dingoes to produce a super wolf. It all sounds so silly now. The fact BSL was overturned was because Don Chip the Minister for Customs was apparently involved with the breed. The Schutz breeds have escaped BSL as it is virtually non-existenent as a canine sport in Australia. This is coupled with the fact when a Rotti kills a child as in Melbourne in 2008 the APBT is blamed!!!! And BSL strengthened. Unfortunately this leads to further dog attacks as APBTs are dangerous and that makes all other breeds safe. How many people even remember that the APBT was banned from importation when an English Bull Terrier killed a child in Sydney? I'm told Hugh Wirth owned one at the time and was why he moved against the APBT, though I have never found any positive proof Tigger (I think was his name) was an EBT. APBT you are quite correct that the true SBT is as the photo you posted. The caricatures which we see now are nothing like the dogs dogfighters like Joe Malam and the like fought to have accepted in the show ring.

Irish staffies are KC registered SBTs which are bred longer in the leg and used by dogfighters in Ireland. The dogs have KC papers and are safe from BSL. As usual most are simply family pets. I assume that's what APBT means by working stafford. The show staffie is too short in the leg to be a working breed of any sort. In fact staffie owners from the UK find Aussie staffies impossible to be the same breed as the UK staffie, which of course they are. Many (not all thankfully) are a caricature of the old english pit bull. Off topic, when does one use the terms Staffy, Staffie, Staff or Stafford? Are they interchangeable? I use them interchngably but some people claim there is a difference but can't explain what it is.

Spend a bit of time googling and you'll answer your own question . . . The Dogo originated as a fighting dog. See http://www.bulldoginformation.com/dogo-argentino.html The Presa has a reputation for killing people due to a few spectacular cases that got a lot of press, and there has been a worry about them gaining popularity among people wanting 'tough' dogs. see http://www.igorilla.com/gorilla/animal/200...sa_canario.html All the breeds covered by BSL are or have been abused by dogfighters. Authorities should be spending their limited resources on fighting dogfighters, not killing pet dogs.

The AST, SBT and APBT are not the same dog, please dont post that kind of information on a public forum for uneducated people to believe it. They aren't the same, similiar, but not the same. They are not even the same by apearence. Working staffords could pass as an APBT by appearence, but not all working APBT could pass as a staff by apearence. This by its self shows the difference in the 2 breeds and the different direction some of the breeding programs have went over the last 100 years. I would say they were the same if they were continually crossed into one another or even every couple generations but it has been a long seperation and breeding goals have probably been slightly different even though they are both working dogs. Anyone who studies the history of the breed/s knows that they are the same. Yes they do differ in appearance as the standards for judging differ but they are still the same dog. Dogfighters don't make the distinction you are making, neither do legislators throughout the world. The UK sees ASTs and APBTs as the same, only Aust & NZ differentiate the two. I'm not saying its good or bad or right or wrong, just fact. By working Staffs I presume you mean Irish Staffies, KC registered longer legged staffs. Yes they too are the same. Trying to distance the breeds hasn't worked anywhere else and there is a move to classify them all as dangerous. Even the Am Bulldog. Rather than arguing amongst ourselves and navel gazing we should be fighting BSL no matter which "breed" is affected as in the end it affects us all as it's not about the dogs, it's about us, the owners.

The issue of BSL is an extremely complex one. It is not based on a breed or public safety but support from different groups for different reasons. The SBT, AST and APBT are one and the same. Animal welfare groups support BSL as it is a leg - in to end pet ownership a la PETA and HSUS and our own local versions who also use it to scare people into donating to them. It also gives the option of killing dogs because "it's the law", the fact that breed id's are being done by unqualified people and dogs are even being temperment tested to death with unscientific methods. More money for those executives lucky to travel at the dogs expense. Individuals like it as it allows them to clean up society and if you listen closely to their words "the types of people who own those types of dogs" are the real target of BSL. Governments like it as it allows legislation to control people and gain access to their property to be passed without anyone opposing it. Just like the anti-terror legislation which closely mimicks bsl. Anyone who thinks their breed is safe will be woken up when Australia follows the UK with legislation based on the PDE doco. The sooner dog owners get their head around the fact that BSL is not about dogs the sooner it will be overturned.

Couldn't agree more.

This is my biggest beef with the no kill movement, it just seems the dogs are taken elsewhere to die in most cases, they have to be honest that the same number of dogs are dying, just in different places. What you are referring to is not the no kill movement but people trying to cash in on it's philosophy. Nathan Winograds Redemption is worth a read. I haven't read the updated book or his new one but they have received positive reviews. It's not the organisations name that counts, but it's philosophy.

CM believes in training the owner not the dog. That is where the vast majority of canine problems lie. Jealousy I believe lies behind his detractors who make money from training the dog, a much harder and longer prospect. I wish I could have seen him in Oz.

If you don't have funds to act as a shelter, then don't. There's nothing worse for animals than organisations that profess to do one thing but in reality do the complete opposite. My understanding is that is known as fraud.

APBTs and ASTs are the same breed. If the RSPCA want to seize the dog they should go to the media or better still video and place on Youtube and expose the farce which is BSL. Either way a temperment test for a cross could be arranged in NSW I thought. No DNA test or measurements can tell the breed of a dog. I'm appalled the obedience club wouldn't let them join. They do the right thing and this is their reward. BSL isn't about controlling dogs, it's about controlling people through their dogs.

The CDC site is down at the moment. Try this one instead: http://www.dogbitelaw.com/Dog%20Attacks%20...6%20Clifton.pdf number of dogs involved in killing or maiming a child or adult in Canada or the US 1982-2006: Score 1100+ for APBTs, 400+ for Rottis, 2 for beagles (but one was a child who got strangled in a game of tug), 1 for pugs, 2 for JRT's . Precisely my point. Relying on ambulance chasing lawyer sites and hate sites who themselves rely on information garnered from unscientific media reports such as the Clifton report achieves nothing. CDC are the epidemiological experts and are good enough for me. Remember too in the US AST, APBT and SBT are legally one and the same breed. Lack of compassion for the victims of small breeds continues to astound me. But those who believe in BSL, why not ban those breeds because they have killed in Australia or show up in attack stats here. For the same reason - they are unreliable. The UK introduced BSL and the RSPCA now admits dog attacks and APBTs are now more prevalent than ever. South Australia was the first state to introduce BSL and they've had to have an inquiry on the massive increase in dog attacks ( an indictment of the Dog and Cat Management Board and BSL). These results are replicated world wide. The science is well and truly in, BSL doesn't work. It is a way to control owners, not dogs, and it even fails to do that so will eventually encompass more breeds.

I'm getting old myself, though I've got awhile to run before turning frail. I would sure as hell rather be attacked by a couple feral silky terriers (I'd clobber them with my cane or kick the little buggers) than by a couple feral Rotti's, mastifs, GSD's, Akitas, cattle dogs, pig dogs or other 25+ kg dogs with strong guarding instincts and possibly strong prey drive. I agree that bad owners of a large dog are likely to be bad owners of a small dog. But the owners of feral large dogs tend to be of the 'size matters' school, and given a choice between a pet rock and a small dog, I think many of them would choose the rock. If you check any data on fatal attacks (Google away to your heart's content) you'll find that small dogs are rarely the culprits. If what yoiu are saying is true then CDC which has studied dog attacks more intensely than anyone else would list breed or weight as a determinant of dangerousness. They don't. Most breeds have killed and injured. Lacking compassion for the victims of non-APBT types is a hallmark of the supporters of BSL.

The APBT, AST and SBT are one and the same. Historically, legally and visually. The world recognises this except for countries where the lobbyists have successfully convinced governments otherwise, like Australia and NZ. The argument that they are all the same breed has been done to death on this forum. If the owners of the APBT believe this then why the hell aren't they purchasing papered Amstaffs which you are allowed to own and isn't at risk of an ACO seeking to destroy your APBT!! Because the breed stds and judging in different dog clubs results in the same breed having different looks. BTW not the only breed affected by this. Why ACOs take pleasure in seizing and killing harmless pets should be directed to them.

The APBT, AST and SBT are one and the same. Historically, legally and visually. The world recognises this except for countries where the lobbyists have successfully convinced governments otherwise, like Australia and NZ. The argument that they are all the same breed has been done to death on this forum. If the owners of the APBT believe this then why the hell aren't they purchasing papered Amstaffs which you are allowed to own and isn't at risk of an ACO seeking to destroy your APBT!! Because the breed stds and judging in different dog clubs results in the same breed having different looks. BTW not the only breed affected by this. Why ACOs take pleasure in seizing and killing harmless pets should be directed to them.

The APBT, AST and SBT are one and the same. Historically, legally and visually. The world recognises this except for countries where the lobbyists have successfully convinced governments otherwise, like Australia and NZ. The argument that they are all the same breed has been done to death on this forum. If the owners of the APBT believe this then why the hell aren't they purchasing papered Amstaffs which you are allowed to own and isn't at risk of an ACO seeking to destroy your APBT!! Because the breed stds and judging in different dog clubs results in the same breed having different looks. BTW not the only breed affected by this. Why ACOs take pleasure in seizing and killing harmless pets should be directed to them.

best definition i've seen yet

The APBT, AST and SBT are one and the same. Historically, legally and visually. The world recognises this except for countries where the lobbyists have successfully convinced governments otherwise, like Australia and NZ.

APBTs are not turning on anyone. Dogs are being labelled as APBTs when they are simply short-haired muscular animals. Councils rarely release breed details they are media reports to sell papers. Labelling a breed as dangerous sends out are clear message that other breeds are safe.

Easy bidability in dogs may or may not be polygenetic, we don't know because it is not actively bred for. A Lab x Kelpie is toned down due to lack of breeding for working ability. Labs are not bred for working ability. Lack of objectivity is fine, just don't confuse it with fact. There are dozens if not hundreds of keeps and conditioning programs published by dogmen when dogfighting was, if not legal, at least not prosectuted by the authorities, bait animals have never been mentioned. Since dogmen have been replaced by gangs I'm sure this has changed. There dogs are not in the same league as the likes of Peterbilt etc. You are correct in one respect that figures in all areas concerning dogs are rubbery at best.

Not entirely. All dogs will fight just as all people will fight, given the right incentive/conditions. You need to get your head around the fact that a Fighting Dog (as opposed to a dog which fights) is not "vicious", it was purpose bred for a reason, no different than a Border Collie being purpose bred to herd, a Labrador to retrieve, a Rottweiler to herd and guard. Our forebearers manipulated the natural tendencies of dogs to suit their purposes - the herding instinct is no more or less than a short-circuited hunting instinct, round up the prey so the pack can attack is a normal and instinctive behaviour. Yes, certain breeds of dog are more "successful" if put in a position where they need to fight. This doesn't make them DA or vicious or dangerous to people, it makes them a product of their manipulated genes. However it is a very easy tendency to dumb down with training (not completely eliminate) and with breeding because it is a really unnatural genetic manipulation - no species of animal naturally fights without submitting even when beaten (they will either submit or run). You need to understand that you cannot force a dog to be a Fighting Dog - a Fighting Dog needs to have the mindset not to submit even when loosing and this is inherited. Not all "fighting breed" dogs inherit it to the same degree and sometimes dogs of other breeds do inherit it, but by and large it is a genetic thing confined to a small range of breeds. Of course you can chuck two dogs in a confined space and force them to fight, but this does not make them Fighting Dogs. Training does have a certain bearing on it - giving the dog confidence with easy opponents, all sorts of horrible things can be done, but if the dog is confronted by a stronger dog and doesn't have the instinct to refuse to submit, all the training in the world won't turn a "cur" into a "Fighting Dog". Personally I think the vet was being refreshingly honest. I'm afraid this is a misunderstanding of genetics. Selective breeding produces a line of dogs which is more likely to produce a successful fighting dog. Dogs from fighting lines (such as Peterbilt) did not produce successful fighters. Being polygenetic (such as many traits) it is quickly lost and BC from show lines are not likely to produce successful herders. The fact that APBTs have excelled at so many sports and tasks means there are other less easily explained attributes. Giving a dog a weaker opponent or a bait animal destroys it's usefulness as a fighter. Another common misconception is that APBTs are not HA. Dogs such as Bullyson, Indian Bolio and some Corvino dogs (where the referee carried a club to defend himself in the pit) were human aggressive and highly bred. These lines are so dilute now as to be non-existent, but throwbacks no-doubt exist. In the end the APBT is just a dog, an athletic one at that, but just a dog undeserving of the hype heaped upon it.

Filas, Tosas, Presas don't even show up in attack stats but GSDs, SBTs labs etc do. Those proposing BSL need to come up with non-rubbery figures to back their case. Otherwise they're confusing opinion with fact.

According to the media release dog ownership will be limited to current levels. This surely can't be good for owners as a whole, can it?

Game bred APBTs are dogs which accomplish a task no matter what, whether it be herding, sniffing, SAR whatever. The numbers involved in fighting are so small as to be insignificant and not representative of the breed as a whole.