Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 18 of 18

Thread: The Victorian "Pitbull" Standard

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    SE QLD


    I wonder if it would be an appointed vet or if you could use your own?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2011


    If the document says "a" veterinary practitioner, that would indicate that it can be any vet?

  3. #13


    Quote Originally Posted by Beloz View Post
    That is a ridiculous document to use for identification purposes indeed.

    But I did find this quite interesting:
    "A dog that meets the description of a dog in this Part is an American Pit Bull Terrier; except a dog in respect of which the owner has one of the following certificates stating that the dog is an American Staffordshire Terrier –
    a. a pedigree certificate from the Australian National Kennel Council;
    b. a pedigree certificate from a member body of the Australian National Kennel Council;
    c. a pedigree certificate from a national breed council registered with the Australian National Kennel Council;
    d. a certificate signed by a veterinary practitioner stating, or to the effect, that the dog is of a particular breed."
    They also had (and still have) this clause in Qld Legislation but it made no difference to Tango and my friends dog Brax, they ignored the vet certificates anyways.

    So not necessarily going to help Victorians

  4. #14


    A labrador would be an ABPT under that id check. Also, page 4, figure 3, surely that is a SBT head?

  5. #15


    Yes there will be a lot of crossbreeds who don't even have bull breed in them that meet these standards, that is what makes them so scary and ridiculous. We need to kick up a stink and fight this. Otherwise we will have a lot of dead innocent dogs.

    Looks like an SBT head but is so close and only a side shot so hard to say.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    May 2009


    It can't be used in all honesty because the document is a standard, not a descriptor.

    ie. The standard (if there was one) for a caucasian human would tell you what is ideal in a caucasian human. It might say fair haired and blue eyed. It might say it is that they would be between 150cm and 200cm in height. It wouldn't mean though that someone who was shorter or taller, or had brown eyes, was not caucasian.

    Does that make sense??
    A pessimist sees the glass as half empty;
    An optimist sees the glass as half full;
    A realist just finishes the damn thing and refills it.

  7. #17


    Oh yeah it makes sense Anne which is why this whole thing is so ridiculous because you just CANT have a standard for crossbreed dogs it is ridiculous. What if it is a Pit X Neo Mastiff....that dog will weigh well and truly more than 36 kgs plus it probably wouldn't look anything like those is just plain stupid.

  8. #18


    Quite a strange thing seeing as not on of those pics show what they were trying to describe!. They have a dog sitting on it's backside next to the chest description wtf? That is no way to see a chest ....By any standard....

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts