The $500,000 Pit Bull

by Stephanie Feldstein · 2010-04-06 11:00:00 UTC

Tango, a brindle and white dog, escaped his yard and was picked up "on suspicion of being an American Pit Bull Terrier," which is punishable by death in parts of Queensland, Australia. Officials who examined Tango decided he was a pit bull, but his owners John Mokomoko and Kylie Chivers say he's an American Staffordshire Terrier mix.

Mokomoko set out to free his own dog and to expose the huge flaws in the town's breed specific legislation. He challenged the expertise of dog catchers in court, and found 5,000 Queensland dogs who had been killed or exiled after being wrongly identified as pit bulls. Like any town, anywhere in the world, the law relies on properly identifying one breed of dog that looks like dozens of other breeds.

Six years and $500,000 later, Tango was declared an American Pit Bull Terrier and had to be moved across the border. If he had been classified as an American Staffordshire Terrier, he could have safely remained at home. The kicker? They're the same breed.

The name "Staffordshire Terrier" was invented by the American Kennel Club in 1936 for people who wanted to register their American Pit Bull Terriers in the dog show circuit. It was a way of distancing the dogs from their fighting past. The United Kennel Club, originally formed in 1898 to register American Pit Bull Terriers, never adopted the Staffordshire Terrier name. As a result, many dogs hold a dual-registry as Pit Bull Terriers with the UKC and Staffordshire Terriers with the AKC.

Some American Staffordshire Terrier breeders insist that their dogs are a separate breed since the lineages (at least for those dogs who aren't dual-registered) have been separated for so long. But unless they've been cross-breeding to create an entirely new breed, all they have are American Pit Bull Terriers from a specific gene pool. Other breeds aren't clamoring to declare independence based on line-breeding, so this is really just a weak attempt to protect their own dogs from the stigma of being a "pit bull," when they should be out there protesting breed specific legislation. Even the AKC, who won't register American Pit Bull Terriers (to dual-register, you need to go to the AKC first, before registering your pit bull with the UKC), opposes breed specific legislation because it opens the door for other breeds to be targeted ... oh yeah, and because breed specific legislation is ineffective.

What happens next for blocky-headed dogs in Queensland is unclear. While Mokomoko's efforts helped overturn 57 other dog misidentification cases, the city council has asked the government to clarify whether American Staffordshire Terriers should be treated the same way as American Pit Bull Terriers. So, instead of conceding that they can't identify dog breeds and maybe they should look to punish the deed instead of the breed, they want to cover their bases by including more dogs in the legislation? Every dog owner in Queensland should be up in arms right now.

And what's wrong with being a pit bull in the first place? Absolutely nothing. American Pit Bull Terriers, American Staffordshire Terriers, and mixes are fun-loving, loyal dogs who consistently pass standardized temperament tests with flying colors. They are strong and tenacious with a history of being bred for dog fighting, but even in those days, they were known for being wonderful companions and gentle with children. Today, these dogs are the victims of urban myths, irresponsible journalism, and animal cruelty. They need protection, not legislation.

Photo credit: public domain

Stephanie Feldstein is a Change.org Editor who has been part of the animal welfare and rescue community for over a decade, and most recently worked for an environmental organization.
PREVIOUS STORY:
Bullfighting Demonstration: Torture is Not Culture
NEXT STORY:
Petitions Delivered Around the World for Release of Indonesian Circus Dolphins

COMMENTS (6)

    Comment Policy

    · All fields are required to comment.

    [X]

    Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the campaign on Change.org. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments which, as determined solely in our discretion: (1) are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; (2) include content solely intended to personally attack the campaign creator, (3) are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them; and/or (4) violate our terms of service and/or privacy policy. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion. Please also be advised that: (A) we do not actively curate and/or monitor in any manner whatsoever the comments made on the Change.org platform, and (B) the creator of each campaign on Change.org may remove any comment at her/his/its discretion.