Jump to content

Gold Coast City Council You Make Me Sick!


Baz+Rome
 Share

Recommended Posts

Can't post link for some reason but this article was in the Local paper today and also on their website for the Gold Coast Bulletin. :laugh:

Rego for staffordshire terriers on hold

Melinda Marshall | April 21st, 2010

Couple's dog fight on shaky ground

REGISTRATIONS of American staffordshire terriers have been frozen as the Gold Coast City Council comes to grips with a controversial court ruling.

The freeze puts Gold Coast American staffy owners at risk of a $200 on-the-spot fine for breaching laws requiring registration of dogs more than three months old.

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court ruled that American staffies were the same breed as outlawed American pit bulls.

The court decision addressed a Gold Coast couple's appeal against the council's identification of their dog Tango as a pit bull, rather than an American staffy.

A council memo, obtained by the Bulletin, reveals that the council has ordered staff not to register American staffies or crossbreeds, or process any transfers of ownership.

Separately, the council has warned that American staffies found wandering at large could be destroyed as a restricted breed.

American Staffordshire Terrier Club of Queensland president Melissa Greenall said the freeze was devastating for the Gold Coast's roughly 200 American staffy owners.

"Council is forcing people to do the wrong thing," she said.

"If they're not allowing people to register their dogs, then what are these people supposed to do?

"Essentially they're being punished for having the wrong name or label on their dog.

"From a breeder's perspective it means we cannot sell to anyone who is in the Gold Coast region."

The council's animal management chief Cr Bob La Castra said the council had to treat American staffies as a restricted breed until the State Government decided to make changes to the law or the court decision was successfully appealed.

"That means a permit is needed to keep them and our local law currently does not provide for the issuing of new permits," he said.

"Council cannot consider its position on the local law until the State Government has made a decision and the appeal process has been completed."

Councillor Dawn Crichlow said the council was saying one thing and doing another.

"The state hasn't determined that it should be a restricted dog and yet our council, as sneaky as they are, have decided to restrict that breed."

edited as added extras by accident. :laugh:

Edited by Bully T
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Amazing!

How deep is the hatred for one AST , apparently,when all are to suffer--maybe to try to "hurry" the Qld government to some sort of ruling?.

More owners and innocent dogs to suffer for their inane machinations.

Oh ,to have been a fly on the wall to know just HOW many councillors decided THAT court tactic in the Supreme Court of Qld!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stay out of the BSL debates for the most part for the reason that I am not the most rational being when I get wound up, I wouldn't last very long on here or do the reputations of responsible AST, SBT & APBT folk any favours by going on a rant :laugh:

edit sorry left out APBT

Edited by JRM75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is scary to think they are okay with targeting a breed which currently has NO restrictions placed on it!! I hope everybody on the Gold Coast read the paper and keeps their Amstaffs secure in the backyard, thats for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Separately, the council has warned that American staffies found wandering at large could be destroyed as a restricted breed.

"The state hasn't determined that it should be a restricted dog and yet our council, as sneaky as they are, have decided to restrict that breed."

Not surprised at all, If fact I wouldn't be surprised If they continue to do so regardless

of the outcome :grouphug:

GCCC are nothing but a bunch of vindictive heartless morons :grouphug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:nahnah:

My friend has an American Stafford on the Gold Coast! She looks nothing like a pit bull to start off with! I would hope they would not destroy any dog they find wondering around which are lost! The people in the article were doing the right thing and actually registering there dog!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you blaming the council?

"[45] In this case there is unchallenged evidence as to the identity of the APBT and the

AmStaff. The conclusion that I draw from that evidence is that the name “American

Staffordshire Terrier” is a name which was adopted in the United States of America

for purposes of promotion or other similar reasons and that that name was applied to

American Pit Bull Terriers. All the evidence points to the same dog being given

different names, that is, American Pit Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire

Terrier, so that a dog recognised as being of one of those “breeds” is the same as a

dog identified as being of the other “breed”. That practice appears to have been

adopted in Australia. It follows then that the views held by the Council when it

entered into the “consent order” were unfounded and that there is no difference

between an APBT and AmStaff. Therefore, as I am satisfied that the applicant has

demonstrated that Tango is an AmStaff it follows that Tango is also an ABPT and is

thus subject to the restrictions under the local laws referred above.

Conclusion"

The applicant in this case and every single anti-bsl campaigner that were involved with this case can take a slice of that blame cake.

It's a sad joke that the people involved, who provided this evidence, wanted it used in a different way then expected the defendants to "place nice in the yard" with the evidence used.

Shame on you all for dragging another breed into all this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are you blaming the council?

"[45] In this case there is unchallenged evidence as to the identity of the APBT and the

AmStaff. The conclusion that I draw from that evidence is that the name “American

Staffordshire Terrier” is a name which was adopted in the United States of America

for purposes of promotion or other similar reasons and that that name was applied to

American Pit Bull Terriers. All the evidence points to the same dog being given

different names, that is, American Pit Bull Terrier or American Staffordshire

Terrier, so that a dog recognised as being of one of those “breeds” is the same as a

dog identified as being of the other “breed”. That practice appears to have been

adopted in Australia. It follows then that the views held by the Council when it

entered into the “consent order” were unfounded and that there is no difference

between an APBT and AmStaff. Therefore, as I am satisfied that the applicant has

demonstrated that Tango is an AmStaff it follows that Tango is also an ABPT and is

thus subject to the restrictions under the local laws referred above.

Conclusion"

The applicant in this case and every single anti-bsl campaigner that were involved with this case can take a slice of that blame cake.

It's a sad joke that the people involved, who provided this evidence, wanted it used in a different way then expected the defendants to "place nice in the yard" with the evidence used.

Shame on you all for dragging another breed into all this.

Spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It means they would be prohibited from the GCCC area, ( they are waiting for the state governments responce to the court ruling now)

APBT's are pohibited on the GC, not just restricted with high rego, muzzels etc.

Only those dogs registered with council before some date a few years ago are allowed to reside on the GC with restrictions. So if the state finds the court ruling is correct then ASTs will be prohiited too except those that were allready registered, but they wil now be restricted.

Thats why the council has ceased new registrations waiting for the states opnion on the ruling.

They could just list them in the local laws though, I think they were just waiting for an excuse to do so, not that they needed any excuses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on you all for dragging another breed into all this.

Yet another poor pathetic finger blaming response from the sour lemon ;)

It's obvious you can't see past this, so why do you even bother coming In here

ETA: Continuing to blame the very people who have been and are still fighting hard In regards to BSL and for ALL dogs is very poor form, If you can't see that this is nothing other than a personal attack on one dog then you and the rest are not seeing the bigger picture.

Edited by RottnBullies
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame on you all for dragging another breed into all this.

Yet another poor pathetic finger blaming response from the sour lemon :laugh:

It's obvious you can't see past this, so why do you even bother coming In here

ETA: Continuing to blame the very people who have been and are still fighting hard In regards to BSL and for ALL dogs is very poor form, If you can't see that this is nothing other than a personal attack on one dog then you and the rest are not seeing the bigger picture.

Must agree rottn, get over it whippets, what have you done lately to help stop BSL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How ironic.

All the finger pointing at governments and councils but when the finger is pointed at you all the response is "get over it".

This case has succeeded in dragging another breed into your anti-BSL crap and we should "get over it". I'm sure the Amstaff people would appreciate that. I feel really bad for all the ANKC registered Amstaff breeders/owners in these precarious times.

Nobody involved with the applicant side of this case will take any accountability for what has been done to the Amstaff except to "get over it".

If you buy an unpapered or BYB dog that bares any resemblance to an APBT or AST then prepare to put up with the councils backlash for you to prove what breed your dog is ....... so "get over it".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How ironic.

All the finger pointing at governments and councils but when the finger is pointed at you all the response is "get over it".

This case has succeeded in dragging another breed into your anti-BSL crap and we should "get over it". I'm sure the Amstaff people would appreciate that. I feel really bad for all the ANKC registered Amstaff breeders/owners in these precarious times.

Nobody involved with the applicant side of this case will take any accountability for what has been done to the Amstaff except to "get over it".

If you buy an unpapered or BYB dog that bares any resemblance to an APBT or AST then prepare to put up with the councils backlash for you to prove what breed your dog is ....... so "get over it".

I'm not denying the harm that's been done, and i do feel for all the amstaff owners out there, it was terrible news, all i'm saying is that harping on about whose fault it is doesn't help anyone. As for anti BSL crap, what have you done, how have you made a difference?

So if you care about amstaff owners, tell us what you've done to help them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here here, what geo said.

how many letters have you written to the GCCC and the QLD government??

I personally have written about 20 all up (both email and handwritten and posted) and im in Tassie!!!

Why? Because as a concerned former Amstaff owner I want to be able to own my chosen breed again in the future.

Want to help start typing on that keyboard and get some letters/emails off to the powers that be, the more voices from ALL walks of life the better,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...