Jed

If she has papers as an American Bulldog, she is fine. Get her chipped as that, using the papers as proof. The American Bulldog is not an ANKC breed, but there is a perfectly valid registry for them, and they are bred in Australia, and registered in US. Sugar may or may not be registered with the AB registry (and probably isn't), but it doesn't matter if the paperwork says American Bulldog. She may even be x bred. A dog was seized in Qld as a pitbull under the 22 point checklist. The owner took the council to court. The dog had been purchased from a pet shop as ???? (not a pitbull, anyhow). The pet shop owner was a witness, said the dog was a ???? sourced from ????. Case dismissed, dog not a pitbull. That one will put councils off, if the dog has paperwork of any kind from a source such as a pet shop. Councils read the results of these cases. So, that's all good. American Bulldogs are fantastic dogs. Be aware though, if you are rehoming her, that she needs responsible and knowledgable owners. They are used for protection, hunting (squirrels, raccoons, WILD HOGS) and a bit of bull wrestling. Not a difficult breed, but not a pushover either. Photos are good.

When I was a kid, our family dog, which I spent a lot of time went, went to the bridge. He had sarcoptic mange, and we couldn't have another dog for a period of time. I was hanging out for a dog, and "found" a few lost dogs and took them home. Oh, the embarrassment, they were were loved dogs that I had mistaken for strays (read "stole") We then got a couple of dogs, and they bonded to my mother. I was pretty ticked off about this. Then it was decided we would buy a pup which would be MY dog. This was done. My mother largely ignored the pup for the first couple of months. I fed her, groomed her, trained her, toilet trained her. My mother never gave her any commands, and ignored her. After a couple of months she was bonded to me. After that, she was fed with the other dogs, and my mother would call her, and pat her, but I was the one who spent time with her, she slept on my bed etc. When my daughter was 9, she said she wanted a "dog of her own" for her 10th birthday. We had dogs, but she wanted her own dog. Her choice was a Cavalier. Not a breed, I would have thought, who would have bonded particularly to one person. However, I did what my mother did - largely ignored Nancy for a month or two, and my daughter spent time with her, trained her. fed her, brushed her, washed her, t ook her for walks, spent time with her. Nancy slept on the bed, and if my daughter watched TV, Nancy sat on the couch with her and was generally encouraged to spend time with my daughter. And she did bond to her. When Nancy was 10, my daughter was at Uni, living in a flat where there was a no dog rule, so Nancy lived with me. We got on well, no problems, but whenever my daughter came home, it was obvious whose dog it was!! When Nancy moved out to live with my daughter in dog friendly digs, she didn't even bother waving goodbye to me!! :D The above experiences may help your friend. I hope so. Worked for us! There is nothing more frustrating for a child for the dog to "belong" to someone else. Oh, the first breed was a dacshund. Two totally dissimilar breeds. Good luck, let us know how your friend goes?

I phoned up about something advertised for sale here, asked what I t hought was a perfectly reasonable first question, and got roundly abused. Perhaps it's the same person? Surely there couldn't be that many rude loonies out there...... or could there be? :D

Ah, I know. Could never happen like that for me. but ask how the next generation goes? Probably never find out.

This Is nothing short of laughable, and you then wonder why people have digs at your comments ETA: As for your past comment on google and copy and paste.........where are you getting your information from? Are you In converse with APBT breeders? My bet Is you're just a follower following the hype! Baaaaaaa She's having a go at me, because I countered the breed specific legislation stuff she was going on with, with quotes from websites in the USA, in answer - and got accused of plagiarism The reason I quoted them is because they say it better than I could, and provide proof. If I say somthing, I have no credibililty. Inroads have been made towards overturning BSL. Don't forget, it took the GSD lobby over 20 years, BSL has only been in force for 8 years. But the ANKC breeders wont fight for the pitbulls now, they are too busy fighting for their own breeds. Oh and I've been in heaps of "converse" with pitbull owners. And met and known heaps of pitbulls. I've taken my cavalier champion to pet expos so he could spend a day with those ravening pitbulls. And a nicer, kinder lot of dogs would be difficult to picture. And I've seen more pitbulls dragged off and knocked off than you've had hot dinners. Nice friendly pitbulls too, never did anything wrong. Old ones, young ones, might be pitbulls, staffies that had no papers, brown dogs, black dogs, Amstaffs, yellow dogs, 60cm tall dogs which looked like labrador x, and probably were. . And you know what? NONE - NOT ONE - of those thousands of dogs had EVER done anything wrong. None had ever "turned", none had ever exerted 2000 lbs jaw pressure on some unsuspecting child, they were all snoozing around the house, playing with the kids, riding in the car when the catching pole went around their throats, and they stopped being nice homely pets and were nasty savage pitblls, then dead meat. Then they were in the council skip. Because if your dog is judged a dangerous breed, you can't have his body back after the council drags him away, terrified, torments and teases him, and kills him. Yep, he might have been a pet yesterday, but once the council gets him, he's vermin, so of course you can't bury him. He's for the tip with all the other dangerous dogs. Some of you just don't get it. BSL is not just about banning pitbulls, it's about banning breeds. There is no reason for pitbulls to be banned. Except that governments then had an excuse to crack down on dogs, and negate their legal responsibilities for dog attacks. If you don't believe me, ask a council CEO. They know perfectly well why the bans are in place. Pitbulls are a scapegoat. If you ask the right one, or you go to an UAM conference, he'll tell you. Half the dog attacks in Aust. attributed to "pitbulls" were done by some other breed. It's not in the media, but it's in pm reports, court transcripts etc. No one is releasing to the public that the attacking dog was a cattle x labrador x boxer x chihuahua. Doesn't fit the picture. And there has never been a fatal attack by a pitbull in Australia. There have been fatal attacks by other breeds though. Why weren't they banned? Pitbulls are just dogs. They don't do anything any other similar breed doesn't. They don't suddenly "turn" - there are always triggers, as there are with any breed. The two dogs who attacked the woman on the Sunshine Coast were Amstaffs. It doesn't matter what they were, they were dogs who should have been properly contained, but were owned by owners who didn't take sufficient care to ensure they didn't attack. How many pages did it take to tell you about the Toowoomba attack, Sandgrubber, and it also took Tarmons, who said she knew the family for you to believe it? Boxers are included in some pitbull stats in US, because bull breeds are lumped together. Bull terriers, AST, staffies, boxers, bullmastiffs, blah blah. Pitbulls originally baited bears, I believe, and attacked rats in the pit, dog fighting came much later. Boxer ancestors baited bulls. They are both "bull" breeds. The only reason boxers aren't banned is because the governments decided to pick on pitbulls. And boxers are mostly bred by show breeders, who tend to be middle aged, and tend to sell to responsible homes. And there aren't many byb, so owners tend to be responsible, and the dogs are socialised and trained, and there is less cross breeding. Believe me, while you are shitting yourself about a pitbull creeping in the window and crushing your skull, worry about boxers too, they could do it just as well, and just as fast. So could any reasonable sized dog. And if it doesn't worry you that dogs over a certain weight are restricted in Germany, because the pitbull bans didn't reduce the bite stats, you haven't thought about it very carefully. But it's ok, it's not your breed, and probably not likely to be. However, if the German model is followed here, Labradors, Greyhounds, Springer Spaniels, Clumbers and GR's will be restricted. Maremmas, Rhodesian Ridgebacks, Amstaffs and Newfoundlands and 8 other ANKC breeds are already banned in some shires in Qld. And as the shires are amalgamating, the area of the bans widens. And the rot is spreading.

That's just so wrong. It's also illegal. It's wrong to call the dog something it isn't. Wrong to the other breed/cross, and wrong to anyone who may take the dog on, be faced with the laws, NOI, tt, ba, etc when they thought they were getting a lab x. Just wrong, and lacking in sense, for a whole lot of reasons. And yes, I do differ, because I can see the looming problems someone else will face. No, it's not nice to see good dogs pts, but there is nothing we can do about it, that's the law, and passing the dog on - if it is a pitbull -only widens the problem. I've saved dogs, but not by doing anything illegal. Causes more problems than it solves. And, for the dog, it's wrong too. Somewhere along the line, someone is going to point the finger, and the dog is in trouble. Sending to rescue wont work, no rescue will rehome. It's illegal. You'll never beat these laws by doing anything illegal. And I'd have to wonder about a pet shop advertising and selling a pitbull in NSW. I suppose it could happen in one of the smaller shops, but I wonder if the owners dreamed the breed?

Sandgrubber, I came to the conclusion, after doing my head in, that most of the stats on dog bites are only a guide, but if you are intent on using them, find as many as you can, and read them. Stats for dog bites in every Aust state are available, and you need to consider popularity of breed and density of it in the public arena. There are stats adjusted numerically. I've got a drawer full of them, but I'm over reading them. ACD topped the list a few years running, because every red/blue dog, no matter what parentage, was listed as ACD. The people classifying the dog at the time of the attack are often "having a guess". If you interview some of them, you are simply bewildered. Labs figure high on some lists - more labs in the population? More pitbull attacks in US - more pitbulls there. And you need to research more than stats. And pitbulls are rarely human aggressive. That is not bred into them. A pit dog which was HA would not have survived - because it could not be handled, and pit dogs needed to be handled. From reading detailed reports on pitbulls which attacked, or court transcripts, it is obvious that most of the dogs which attacked had far from responsible owners. eg - The pitbull, Zeus, which killed the child in Germany had not eaten for 3 days, and was full of drugs (forgotten which ones, steroids??), according to the pm report. Unfortunately, since the bans, the ethical breeders are no longer breeding, but all the underground ones are. Whippets, the reasons people are quoting "t shirt slogans" at you is because they are valid comments. The bottom line is that BSL didn't solve anything. It hurt an enormous number of people, but the dog bites didn't fall. The bull breeds, bigger terriers, some of the bigger guarding breeds are "harder" dogs than most of the toys, and spaniels. For BSL to solve dog attacks, every dog over 10kg needs to be banned. There will still be attacks then, but the damage wont be as severe. Read the laws in Germany, that's where we are headed. People who use this forum have been aware, long before you joined, that the media reads the forum, as does the RSPCA. And the forum has often been referred to by the media over the years. The media often contacts people on the forum for information etc, including stats LOL. You agree with BSL, you don't agree with pitbull ownership. Your choice. Because people disagree with you doesn't make them morons. And the whole deal is not about pitbulls, it's about dogs, and responsible ownership, and the ability of people to legally own dogs over 20cm high. People who come to the forum to glorify dog fighting seem to be either pitbull owners, or would be pitbull owners. And the media does read the forum. Makes you wonder why you bothered. Oh, and the people from this forum have made a difference to BSL. Get your t shirt ready, Whippets - responsible ownership is the answer. Enforcement of existing legislation, follow up by councils on reports of dogs biting or rushing, or menacing, follow up on dogs misbehaving at off leash parks. Follow up on roaming dogs. Not more unenforced legislation, and not BSL.

Jed I like that. Its always fascinated me that they call moggys Domestic Short Hair or Domestic Long Hair. When I got my first cat and the vet clinic wrote this on her vaccination card, I thought they were mad. She really doesn't need a fancy pants name, she's just a grey and white tooty pat, but very well loved of course. Thanks. Years ago, when people asked "what is it", we'd name them!! We had some rippers - I remember the Long Terrier, the Black and White Retrieving Terrier, the Staffordshire Houndlet - blah blah. Of course, the people who owned the dog were no further ahead, but at least it was called SOMETHING!!

Probably people like this have no place in our society.

This is quoted from http://www.vkwrottweilers.com/rottweiler-heart.htm vkm rottweiler site. The mode of inheritance is currently unknown, and dogs may be bred BEFORE there is any indication of a heart problem. That tells me it would be quite possible to unknowingly breed a rottweiler pup with SAS and unknowingly sell it to someone. It appears that some dogs are sub-clinical, and there is absolutely no way of ascertaining that they will throw pups with SAS. So, I don't think the breeder can be blamed for this pup having a problem. To breed the parents to each other again is not something I would do, and I don't believe it is best practise. IMHO, the breeder should take back the pup, refund your money, and allow you to purchase elsewhere, if you wish. However, it seems to me, that like MVD in Cavaliers, there is basically no way of knowing when you buy a pup, that it will develop SAS.

Neither of the parents was purebred. She could be anything. It's not important. the only way of knowing would be to see the mating which produced the pups, and I still don't think you could tell. I think she is about 3 generations off purebred. She's an Australian Suburban Dog. treat her nicely and train her well and she will be a joy forever

So I'm an idiot yet you agree with me. My head is spinning. And what is this obsession with making out "pit bulls" are LARGE powerful dogs. The real ones are generally around (or under) 20kg - which doesn't make them LARGE by any stretch of the imagination. Naw, boxers are heaps bigger. Pitbulls are squidgy little things. And if bigger = more damage, ban them. Zug Zug's been attacked by one. Of course, there are still Bullmastiffs etc. Bans make no sense at all. Centitout Me too. You see it all the time. People want adolescent dog to do something. He growls. They give him time out. Next time, they give him time out. He still doesn't understand, and finally he bites someone. Happens all the time It's called "Training your dog to Bite", but owners don't understand. SBT123 asked the question - how many boxes did this dog tick? I'll bet he ticked a lot of them. The idea is to stop the dog when he ticks the first box. Or before he ticks the first box But people don't see the first box being ticked.

Mantis, the angelfire website seems to have disappeared - some time ago. Do you have another link? What is Mantis talking about? In Germany a pitbull and a staffy cross, both belonging to criminals and both used for fighting attacked and killed a little boy. I think he was 6. On PM, it was found the pitbull had not eaten in 3 days. Authorities knew about these dogs (which had caused other problems) and their owners, who were hardened criminals. The police were reluctant to do anything about the dogs prior to the attack - presumably because of apprehension of the owners. After this, a lot of large dogs - GSD, mastiffs, Amstaffs, pitbulls, boxers were set on fire, stoned to death, run over, bashed to death with clubs and pipes, drowned, choked, or half killed and left. Owners were set on and attacked. I seem to remember that a GSD was half killed on a bus, and the owner was severely injured when he attempted to save the dog. I think a man was killed defending his dog. Then bans were enacted. Pitbulls, staffies, amstaffs - just about every dog over 10 kg, and Corgis. I believe the corgi owners had their dogs removed from the bans, but I can't be sure. According to a Corgi club in Europe they are not banned, but they sure were. There was an extensive website on it, but it disappeared. And don't think it couldn't happen here - it could. Maybe not the extreme violence towards people's dogs, but the bans certainly could. In fact, it has happened. Mantis Well, they came for the 13 year old dog discussed elsewhere on this forum. They came with catching poles for thousands of dogs in QLD. Dogs like Kenny, which never did any harm. Dogs were snoozing on the lawn, dreaming of bones and rides in the car when they were set on by ACO's, and terrified, were dragged off on catching poles and killed. Mantis That's not evil, that's intelligent. One of mine greets me when I get home with a song, and always brings me something - a toy usually - and gets rewarded for bringing me a present. She'll never stop!! Neither will Kenny. Good for him.

Yes Souff But it will not be cross breed derivatives that are targeted instead pedigree breeders of medium-big breeds, anything that the public and other dog breeders dont know much about and or are afraid of. I dont believe in divide and conquer - or that we can stand by ameliorate why other breed types fall. As a big breed person I feel the future of my dogs lies with the future of all dogs ... To be honest small breeds like pug, mini poodle, cav, chi really are insignificant to me, and on some level I view them with contempt so legistlation which would restrict-to-cease their breeding on health grounds is inconsequential - such legistlation would never be drawn up for my breeds - the health problems simply aren't there to the extent that they are in many small companion bred dogs ... nevertheless I will fight the RSPCA on their PR crapola campaign denigrating pedigree breeds and calling their health a significant welfare issue - even if mine are never likely to fall under that RSPCA radar. I read respondants afraid or ignorant of big dogs (and the psyche of certain other dogs) yet in the same breath they are espousing solutions for the 'control', ownership and future of these dogs ... yet they would be the first to demand that breeders not the RSPCA be the ones to oversee the health and future of their own dogs. Tell me how does a dog attack, come to ownership of all medium-big dog breeds needing to be controlled? It comes to pass when self-flagellating dog owners/breeders dont support each other, and espouse solutions for things they do not know much about. Worse still, they assume that a legistlative system knows more about where dogs can be owned and bred, more so than any breeder or breed specialist. When the RSCPA come knocking on their door to decreee that their cav's brain is the incorrect size for its skull, and cant be bred, (and owned) or pug's airways are too distorted to breathe and cant be bred (and owned) that is the dog control legislative system at work. We've got healthy mutts Vs sickly pedigrees and small dogs (excluding the sickly pedigree ones) Vs big dogs. I suppose you cant use the health stick to go after all dogs, so just as well we can incorporate 'scarey potential' as well. Aye too much nonsense, give me my scallop shell of quiet night Well said, lilli. I couldn't give a rats arse about pitbulls, or staffies, personally. The reason I stand against BSL is because it is totally wrong, for staffies, for pitbulls, for the public, and globally. And there is the potential to add other breeds. 12 other breeds are banned or restricted in Queensland, including Amstaffs, RR and Maremmas. I have no idea what breeds, if any, are restricted in other states. If dog owners cannot stand together to fight this cancer, who will? Dog owners/breeders are so busy knifing each other and pointing the finger at other breeds, they ignore the danger - which is that their breed could be added. The legislation is in place, only the names are missing. It's all well and good to say smugly "oh, my breed would never do that", but your breed could be banned because it's brain is too big for it's skull and it suffers excrutiating pain, or your breed could be banned because it has stenotic nares, and its eyes fall out or it has spinal problems because of the curly tail. This is not a breed problem, peeps, this is a DOG problem. You might not want to own a big dog, as I do not want to own a pitbull, but see the global picture, stand up for others to own the breed they want. Recognize the problem for what it is - a dog which is not controlled or trained with an owner who perhaps did not see that the dog was not suitable as a pet - before - disaster struck.

I have brought this post forward to highlight the important fact in the dog attack we are talking about. I have known boxers to behave as Zug Zug's aunt's dog did. He was a dominant dog, and he was raised poorly. He did not have respect. He had taken over leadership of the household, because his human did not provide appropriate leadership. He was deciding who should do what. If it didn't suit him, he would do whatever he felt was appropriate, including attacking people. Dogs need appropriate leadership and guidance. Most boxer breeders are careful where their dogs go, and most do breed for slightly milder temperament. Fortunately, no one who wants a boxer wants to make it into an attack dog, and most know how to raise and train them. This dog was very dangerous, and if he had belonged to me, he would have had his wings. But then, he probably wouldn't have taken over leadership, so there would have been no problem.

My vet reckons if chihuahua's were the size of rottweilers, they would have wiped out the human race by now. Too many badly bred ones with no respect for their owners. A good one is totally delightful, a bad one IS a turd. I went to my neighbours one night. While watching the ACD, the bloody chihuahua jumped up and attached himself to my finger, grinding his needle like teeth to the bone. People with toy dogs think this is funny. Dogs like this need a bloody good kick before the nonsense begins. And most of those attacking dogs wouldn't have done it, it they had been scruffed as pups, or someone who knew what they were doing gave them a damn good kick somewhere along the line. Val Bonney believes that one reason dog attacks have increased is because of the increase in the use of positive training.

Dogs which attack are dogs which have no respect for their owners. Many dog attacks are perpetuated by dogs of unknown breeding, most of them are crossbreds - all that can be done is guess the breeding. I very much doubt that the people who bred them gave much thought to temperament or genetic influences. They realised the bitch was pregnant because she was fat!! I suspect these dogs are bred by accident, and given, or sold cheaply to people who see the cute little pup, not the big dog needing leadership. I don't think many of them are sold via pet shops. Maybe some are. However, there are often litters on notice boards and in the papers - and most of the crosses - if the parentage is correct - make me shudder. The dog accords the owner no respect, and somewhere down the track, because it has spent its life getting its way, it takes the process one step too far, and someone is hurt. Many toy breeds show little respect for their owners either - and some of the crosses are very unsuitable imho - but a toy breed probably isn't going to rip your arm off. Many chihuahuas would like to, but they aren't big enough. Many of the larger breeds are owned by people who are frightened of them. Most of the larger breeds are not for everyone. There are people on this forum who couldn't cope with a medium to large breed -- in fact, we have proof of that in various threads. Unfortunately, some of these dogs, both cross and purebred, do end up in the wrong hands. Well intentioned, but wrong. I don't think anything was mentioned about this particular dog being used for fighting was there? I got the impression he was simply a pet. And I note the breed is wavering between pitbull x and staffy x. Whilst governments spend resources and time pointing the finger at pit bulls, nothing is done about preventing dog attacks. I listed breeds and crosses in dog attacks in USA earlier - the breeds are different here, and it is not a "pitbull problem" in either country, it is a dog and owner problem. Souff I don't think most of the dogs who attack were deliberately bred to be able to take a persons arm off. I think most of these dogs had the potential, and as I said earlier, had no respect. It doesn't seem, from reading about these dogs, that they were deliberately bred for anything. They were just disasters waiting to happen--- probably owned by the wrong people. Until the gov stops blaming breeds for everything, and begins to see that dog attacks, and tries to discover why these attacks occur, nothing will change. Except that more pit bulls, pit bull crosses, staffyx, and indeterminate brown dogs will unnecessarily lose their lives, or life like lions in a bad zoo. puggerup Are you SURE? There's no way of knowing.

If they cannot keep her, get him to take her to their vet and have her pts whilst they are with her. There is no future for her. Rescues will pts, so will pounds. Why shift her from pillar to post and stress her out for weeks, when the outcome will be the same Have them do the decent thing, the last good thing they can do for their dog.

And it is that attitude, whether you mean it humorously or semi-seriously or not, that will sink everyone. I have Pugs so I don't care if they ban all those "big powerful nasty dogs that are born vicious" Oh no, now the law makers have decided my "hideously deformed Pugs" need to be banned too. What's that old saying about hanging together or we'll surely hang separately? If Souff is going to be hanged then I would be prefer not to be hung with a bunch who chose to breed dangerous dogs. String me up with the deranged if you will, but I cannot defend the breeding of dangerous dogs. Souff So, are you saying pitbulls are dangerous? Staffies are dangerous?

I always think it would be much better if people addressed the topic. And didn't make assumptions in threads. Happens all the time.

Good for you. Hope you are on the mend, and back to your usual 120% very soon. We know you aren't an idiot!!

What training???............a few months ago Brooke, your dog was running away when someone was attacking you, now it's biting everyone. have you been ramping up the dog's suspicion levels and defense drives and now it's backfired???. I believe someone named you as "a tool", Longcoat. I'd like to second that.

Whippets Because they have the greater depth of knowledge on the subject. And the quoted pieces are NOT my words, which is why they are in quotations. People are not applauding me for the quotes, but for my stance against BSL. Plagiarising is using someone else's words as your own. I did not do that. And I would prefer to show that you are wrong by using expert opinion, to back my own views. Why should anyone believe what I say? No reason at all. Much better to quote people who do know, and let others make up their minds. It is people like you who will bring the dog world down, because you can't understand, and will not believe that BSL is wrong. Whilst BSL is promoted, seriously aggressive dogs are still running around. Have the bite stats decreased since BSL? Not at all. So, the government has killed tens of thousands of dogs, so people would be safe from these crazed killers. Yet the bite stats have not fallen. Are these good laws you are promoting? Why? And did your brother's dogs suddenly turn and kill someone? How many times? Dogs attack, not breeds. Ban the deed, not the breed. If the government was serious about stopping dog attacks, and they believed that breed bans would do it, they would ban the ACD, German Shepherd, and the other 2 breeds which top the list of breeds which perpetrate the most attacks, whatever those breeds are.

Souff Ah,but the problem is they don't know the dogs have "this temperament".

Poor little kid, hope she recovers. What a strange story. Surely the RSPCA would have taken the dog and euthed it, if they had asked? I thought the RSPCA in UK did that? Maybe not. Obviously not. Some people have no idea.