The Restricted Breeds list?

pokertalk

they were bred to protect humans and themselves .so what were they bred to protect humans from then ? other humans??

pokertalk

whatever the case list does not reflect the dogs of today that are on it and should be abolished.

Discodog

It doesn't matter a jot what a breed was originally bred for, donkey's years ago. Many posters here know an awful lot about Bull Breeds. We spend hours on these boards trying to inform & explain that there is no such thing as a dangerous breed, only dangerous people.

These people use the "reputation" of restricted breeds in a stupid attempt to increase their own "reputation". By doing this they scare governments into pointless legislation. If a dog bites a man in Ireland, the dog is punished & not the owner. We might as well go back to the middle ages when animals were called to give evidence - their silence was considered a sign of guilt !.

pokertalk

btw does anyone know of a good bulldog breeder in dublin someone who maybe has bought 1 off them in the past .looking for a bitch

Discodog

pokertalk wrote: »

btw does anyone know of a good bulldog breeder in dublin someone who maybe has bought 1 off them in the past .looking for a bitch

Based on your previous posts are you planning to start Bull Baiting or Human Baiting ?

pokertalk

based on my posts bull dogswere bred to these things along time ago not now

Shane Fitz

Pokertalk, i think we all know why the bull breeds are on the list and whilst you may think you have ALL the facts regarding the history of the bull breeds, you have more than anyone shown me how misinformation is behind the legislation. now please dont think i am having a pop at yo, i'm not!:)
i think, whilst not agreeing with, i know why some of the restricted breeds are listed eg bad press of the bull breeds. but apart from the recent accident in dublin i am unaware of any incidents where Akitas were involved? Were there ever incidents involving Rhodesians that led to their listing, or as i asked earlier are Tosa's that common that they were listed?
I'm fully aware that the media play their part im the bad reps of RB's. The recent thread of a young boy being bitten by a Terrier only highlights this, no media coverage. And whilst i'm not taking issue with the gentleman who posted, his decision to not take it beyond speaking with the owners shows his common decency.
ISDW, EGAR thank you for your input, it was you, owners of RB's that i was hoping to hear from

ISDW

Shane Fitz wrote: »

Pokertalk, i think we all know why the bull breeds are on the list and whilst you may think you have ALL the facts regarding the history of the bull breeds, you have more than anyone shown me how misinformation is behind the legislation. now please dont think i am having a pop at yo, i'm not!:)
i think, whilst not agreeing with, i know why some of the restricted breeds are listed eg bad press of the bull breeds. but apart from the recent accident in dublin i am unaware of any incidents where Akitas were involved? Were there ever incidents involving Rhodesians that led to their listing, or as i asked earlier are Tosa's that common that they were listed?
I'm fully aware that the media play their part im the bad reps of RB's. The recent thread of a young boy being bitten by a Terrier only highlights this, no media coverage. And whilst i'm not taking issue with the gentleman who posted, his decision to not take it beyond speaking with the owners shows his common decency.
ISDW, EGAR thank you for your input, it was you, owners of RB's that i was hoping to hear from

I actually don't own a RB at the moment (although one of mine might be a GSD cross, or she could be a sibe/mal cross, who knows?) but, with the legislation in place, and the knee jerk reaction to anything that happens with dogs, I could well own a RB very soon. They could add dogs to the list any day, so all dog owners and lovers have to stick together on this and not think that just cos you have a nice fluffy dog thats not on any list, it doesn't mean it won't soon be! So we are all potential RB owners.

Phenix

They could add dogs to the list any day, so all dog owners and lovers have to stick together on this and not think that just cos you have a nice fluffy dog thats not on any list, it doesn't mean it won't soon be! So we are all potential RB owners.

i think this is the saddest things i have read today . atm i only have one rescue who is a collie/spaniel cross. i am hoping to take more dogs from rescues and would have no problem taking dogs of any breed. it is so depressing to think that just because you have a certain breed they are not allowed the same freedom of other breeds - through no fault of their own - just human lazyness

Discodog

Stories like this don't help.

"A WOMAN has been charged after her pet Rottweilers attacked and mauled a 10-year-old girl while she was riding her bike. Rhianna Kidd was riding in Dundee, in northeastern Scotland, when the powerful dogs attacked her on Sunday, Sky News reported.
The girl suffered a fractured jaw, bite marks to her face and injuries to her right arm and left leg.

She is in stable condition at Ninewells Hospital, but doctors said she will need an operation to repair some of the damage.
It is understood that the Rottweilers will be put down and a 33-year-old woman has been charged under Section 3 of the 1991 UK's Dangerous Dogs Act for failing to keep the animals under control."


http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/woman-charged-after-her-rottweilers-maul-young-girl-on-uk-street/story-e6frf7jx-1225912125724

adser53

The RB list is the bane of my life tbh. It's the most ridiculous, outdated piece of crap and only exists because of media hype surrounding a few high profile dog attack cases in the UK and the good auld Irish government jumped on the band wagon instead of doing their research and talking to animal welfare groups.

This law has no basis on statistics or facts and is frankly just silly IMO. The question does remain about why some breeds are on it. I'm not justifying the inclusion of pits or rotties but they are a favourite target of the media and seeing as how this law was based on media pressure, it's clear why they were included (I don't agree with it at all btw, just saying that the high profile cases I mentioned involved these breeds and the media became fixated on them) But I really don't understand the inclusion of Akitas, Rhodesian Ridgebacks, Tosa's etc as they are quite rare. I know in the last 2 years there have been 3 (I think) akita attacks (1 recently in Dublin and 2 up north) and all were non-fatal (thank god) but I've never heard of a Tosa or RR attack

It's very sad and a constant worry to me that there will be a fatal dog attack (by any breed) here in the ROI that'll bring about an outright breed ban based on media pressure and screaming mothers and unfortunately I think it's inevitable because of the amount of bad owners here.

Can anyone explain why the Control of Dogs (Restriction of Certain Dogs) Regulations 1991 listed the Bulldog but the revised Regulations from 1998 had them removed from the list? How did this come about? Will it ever be possible for other breeds to be removed from it?

Bullseye1

Not all the dogs on the restricted list are bull breeds. Rhodesians are sight hounds and are on that stupid list. I bet a politican wouldn't recognise one if they cocked a leg.

ISDW wrote: »

I don't think theres any point in trying to figure out how the list came to be, there is no real logic behind it, if it was logical there wouldn't be a list, because a dog is a product of its breeding and rearing, not its breed.

Look at it totally logically - it was brought in to deal with potential dog attacks against people. The bull breeds were bred to fight other animals, not people. They were bred to NOT bite their handlers, so in actual fact are logically the least likely to attack people. But, logic doesn't come into it, and you will drive yourself mad trying to figure out the warped logic in this law.

adser53

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Not all the dogs on the restricted list are bull breeds. Rhodesians are sight hounds and are on that stupid list. I bet a politican wouldn't recognise one if they cocked a leg.

I think ISDW was just using the bull breed analogy to highlight how illogical the law is in the first place. The breeds on the list have no connection to eachother and were all bred for purposes that are completely different. it just shows that they must've picked these breeds out of a hat!

I still can't figure out why Akitas, RR and Tosas are on it (amongst others) as I'd say there may have been at most 5 of each of them in Ireland when the law came about in 1991. that being said, I was only 7 at the time so my dog breed knowledge was a bit rusty:p

Bullseye1

I could be wrong but weren't Tosa Inus employed as fighters in Japan. Now I know its a kind of Sumo fighting.

Shane Fitz

you're right there Bullseye, the Tosa Inu was a fighting breed... but! is that the only reason they are restricted. Given, as Adser said, and i agree... are there any, or were there any in the country that they had to be included??
The same applies to Akitas and Rhodesian... does anyone have acces to a database, eg IKC registrations, and it might be possible to estimate the populations of the RB's in '91

pokertalk

Shane Fitz wrote: »

Pokertalk, i think we all know why the bull breeds are on the list and whilst you may think you have ALL the facts regarding the history of the bull breeds, you have more than anyone shown me how misinformation is behind the legislation. now please dont think i am having a pop at yo, i'm not!:)
i think, whilst not agreeing with, i know why some of the restricted breeds are listed eg bad press of the bull breeds. but apart from the recent accident in dublin i am unaware of any incidents where Akitas were involved? Were there ever incidents involving Rhodesians that led to their listing, or as i asked earlier are Tosa's that common that they were listed?
I'm fully aware that the media play their part im the bad reps of RB's. The recent thread of a young boy being bitten by a Terrier only highlights this, no media coverage. And whilst i'm not taking issue with the gentleman who posted, his decision to not take it beyond speaking with the owners shows his common decency.
ISDW, EGAR thank you for your input, it was you, owners of RB's that i was hoping to hear from

im only telling you what im studying at the min know your not having a pop at me;).im not pertending i know it all when i dont i was just giving a background on the bull breeds .im not the kinda person that jumps on the media bandwagon i know its mostly knee jerk . i have a mastif myself that i rescued and the only thing thats dangerous about him is his farts and im looking for another one. i know alot of people on this site know there stuff when it comes to dogs but there is still alot that got there k9 degree off wikipedia;)

pokertalk

i know my posts are scaty at times think ido be typing faster than i can type:D and too late in the night. the joys of being a student

lrushe

Shane Fitz wrote: »

The same applies to Akitas and Rhodesian... does anyone have acces to a database, eg IKC registrations, and it might be possible to estimate the populations of the RB's in '91

Don't have an accurate figure but the Rhodesian Ridgeback Club was set up in 1986 so presumably there were enough registered dogs to warrant a Club then????
Registered dogs would also only account for a certain percentage of dogs as there are many PBNR dogs out there for sale so even registration figures would be somewhat inaccurate.

Bullseye1

Shane Fitz wrote: »

you're right there Bullseye, the Tosa Inu was a fighting breed... but! is that the only reason they are restricted. Given, as Adser said, and i agree... are there any, or were there any in the country that they had to be included??
The same applies to Akitas and Rhodesian... does anyone have acces to a database, eg IKC registrations, and it might be possible to estimate the populations of the RB's in '91

I had seen a program on them. I don't think the actually bit each other it was more a question of strength and pushing each other.