# Switzerland's Dog Laws



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

You might be surprised but Toni has always had a Preference for Staffordshire Bull Terriers and Bull Terriers.

I grew up in England opposite my girl friend's home and they had a Staffie, Sally. She was a great dog and we loved her to bits.

Now the comeuppance!!

Switzerland is trying to rot out the Bull Terriers, Staffordshire Bull Terriers & co.

If we wanted to buy either of the above, we would have to produce a 100% reputable record, i.e. no entries in the police records, etc. 

Furthermore, we would each have to pay SFr. 1000 for an intensive training where we would be visited at home to check out how we lived, how we were able to train the dog, etc. etc.

Funnily enough, the Mini Bull Terrier, although maybe nearly as large as the Bull Terrier, does not undergo These regulations. 

Also our neigbouring County would be no problem for either breed, Staffie or Bull Terrier.

I think Switzerland is trying to rot out these breeds. I just wunder, if they succeed, what will be the next "dangerous breed" given the fact that all breeds have teeth!!!!

There are so many "dangerous breeds" on the lists here but our neighbouring County does not have them???


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

Easy problem to solve. Tell your county to stuff it and move house to the next county just over the line. A PITA for sure but unless you have disposable income and don't have a problem with your county invading your privacy you have no choice. Or, you need a pet shark (Very good lawyer). 

How does your county/country accept service dogs? There's a lot of folks in the U.S. who use the service dog moniker and the A.D.A. to get by the breed bans. Good luck to you.


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Howard Knauf said:


> Easy problem to solve. Tell your county to stuff it and move house to the next county just over the line. A PITA for sure but unless you have disposable income and don't have a problem with your county invading your privacy you have no choice. Or, you need a pet shark (Very good lawyer).
> 
> How does your county/country accept service dogs? There's a lot of folks in the U.S. who use the service dog moniker and the A.D.A. to get by the breed bans. Good luck to you.


We can't move - just like that.....

We are thinking of an Old German Shepaherd or a Middle Schnauzer at the moment. However it is not urgent - we are still missing our Big Bad Buster!!


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

I get it. I can't imagine moving just to keep my dog. Do you have service dog laws there?


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

The laws vary quite a bit throughout different cities, towns and States here in the US.

Many areas now outlaw Pits and some go as far as saying "and any dog that looks like a Pit".

How dumb is that!

Some areas have given in and change the BLS (Breed Specific Laws) to read Viscous dogs.

Even thats and issue because those that may be in charge of determining what makes a viscous dog have no clue about dog behavior.

Some of those areas can declare your dog viscous if the do nothing more then run at the fence "barking in a viscous manner".

When mine stop doing that I'm gonna put my boot where the sun can't shine on it.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

That sounds like madness :sad:

On the bright side Mini bull terriers are awesome


----------



## Gillian Schuler (Apr 12, 2008)

Hi Matt

Enlighten me please


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

I'm not a fan of any breed that is developed for nothing more then a smaller/larger size, color, head shape, over angulation, etc. I could go on forever on that subject. 

In time those breeds very often loose out in soundness.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

re : "I'm not a fan of any breed that is developed for nothing more then a smaller/larger size, color, head shape, over angulation, etc. I could go on forever on that subject. “

i wish you would post more on this, because even tho i think i know where you’re coming from, the statement itself does not make sense to me when looking at the big picture.

ALL breeds are developed as ‘breeds’ by standardising attributes like size, color and head shape; plus MANY more attributes of course
- when you chose the words “over angulation” and chose to use the adjective “over”, you are implying up front that is NOT a proper attribute (as opposed to “proper” angulation). and yes, of course i am assuming you used this term in ref to the modern gsd show breeding trends
- but i think you also have to recognize that is "right or wrong" will always be partially in the eyes of the beholder; regardless of the breed
- a great example is the bulldog. if you go back to the origins i doubt there were any breeders who deliberately wanted to create a breed with a weakened nasal tract
- another example is a floppy ear mal. many will say it doesn’t matter but most will not prefer a floppy eared mal if they have a choice

Regardless, gsd's are definitely bred with color in mind …. white has generally been considered a disqualifier right off the top, regardless of how well a white gsd could work. and if you look further at many gsd breeders, you will see in their bloodlines that color has definitely played a role in their selection of studs/dams. color matters … it always has and always will
- dogs are just like tigers…they are all tigers, but some will prefer the white ones … same goes for lions 

if white pops up in the mal, some people will probably want to make more if it happenned to be from a well known working line. and it might not be culled; prob just spayed or neutered and ‘ejected’ as a ‘pet’. if it gets trained and titled or sold to LE and performs well, there could be more bred 

but i'm not too worried about that happening, since “white” dogs rarely appeal to those who breed for aggression (which is not a bad word for me), or want a protection dog. black gsd’s will always be badass and white gsd’s will often have the connotation of biddability … or abnormal unstable freakiness 

i could go on too, and i’m not just trying to pick a fight either 

i'm just saying that if it is a “breed", it has only become one because the founders were looking for uniformity in many of the things you say you don’t like
- when the working breeds was first developed as a “working” breed, ability to work was a priority 
- when working breeds started being judged in a ring, the ability to do work was often lost because it was no longer being judged. I’m assuming that is probably what you meant when you imply that physical traits are not a proper way to develop a breed

all i’m saying is that physical traits are the main ways to define and separate one breed from another, so for me they do matter

to debate whether breed standards and breed organizations are good or bad, or whether show competitions are good or bad is a whole other issue 

as far as the thread goes, i see NO problem if there were higher standards imposed and required for ownership of certain breeds but i also know that it would be impossible to establish that fairly ... and it will never happen 

- unfortunately laws are often written to try and protect a few at the expense of the majority who don’t need protection. But i also think laws are necessary because societies don’t self regulate and all people are not always good people. I’ve also posted specifics on how i think we could do our share to prevent these dumb laws from being passed …. waste of time … nothing changes and if this forum doesn’t die off completely, i’m sure this type of thread will surface again


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Rick, I understand where you coming from and can't disagree about the first origins of different "breeds" of dogs.

That was predominantly during the Victorian era when dog shows started. 

Originally most were "types" of dogs and not breeds.

Before that time culling was pretty much the normal but that started to slide when slow but sure looks became more important then function. 

I've personally seen it happen to the Border Collie, the Australian Shepherd and even to the JRT. 

With the Border Collie Club of America the pups can't be registered unless both parents have legit stock working titles.

Same with the Australian Shepherd. The AKC show folks have turned them into big, heavy, beautiful dogs. Some that couldn't get out of their own way if it was pulled with a rope.

Some of the Tri-colored Aussies look more like Bernese Mountain Dogs.

The JRTCA titles only individual pups and they have to be clear on genetic issues known to the breed.

The AKC will title any litter that comes form AKC registered parents yet they have narrowed down size, coat texture. 

Start breeding for looks and the character of the dogs looses out over time.

I showed terriers in the breed ring for the better part of 15 + yrs.

I've put CH titles on 5 different terrier breeds. As to AKC standards most all of them were a far cry from the same breeds back in mid century America. 

I had only one "Champion" that could do the job it was bred for mainly because of the size of today's terriers. 

No need to even talk about todays GSD. I also saw the GSD go down hill in the 70s here in the States when the show folks started loosing interest in what the GSD should be for the sake of excessive angulation, roached backs, overly long coats, etc.. 

I've seen numerous White GSDs but only one that I would own.....and that one would never make a good Schutzhund dog.

JEEES! I said I wasn't going to talk about the GSD. ](*,):lol: :wink:


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

many years ago i knew a few people (USA; breeding white gsd's) who said they were going to be recognized as a separate breed.

- curious if that ever happened anywhere ?


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

re : "as far as the thread goes, i see NO problem if there were higher standards imposed and required for ownership of certain breeds but i also know that it would be impossible to establish that fairly ... and it will never happen 

in the interest of trying to stay closer to the thread topic 
....does anyone agree with this ??


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

Yep, I agree with it. Just as I agree that just because someone can pump out kids that doesn't qualify them to be parents.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

The UKC (United Kennel Club), second largest dog registry in the USA recognizes them as the White Shepherd.

http://www.ukcdogs.com/Web.nsf/Breeds/HerdingDog/WhiteShepherd12012014

UKC was always more of a performance registry but it's going down hill and also registers such "breeds" as Labradoodles and a few other fancy mutts.

FWIW, from back in the 1890s I believe there is a white GSD in the registry of the breed.

When it became a disqualifying color I have no clue.

In the past few yrs I recall a big deal about Panda Shepherds. Seems some one had a black and white GSD in a litter and DNA test showed it was a pure GSD.

NOW there is a Panda Shepherd registry and they are being bred for the B&W color.


----------



## Sarah Platts (Jan 12, 2010)

It's a shame the AKC holds such sway. Back in the day, it was standard for Irish setters to be red and white with that as the preference. Then it became unfashionable and the solid red preferred so the ones with alot of white were killed off. The breeders are trying to recover the red/white and have established a breed registry for them. Which is both good and bad as they are now treated as a seperate breed when it's really just a color variation. Much like the black/white gsp.


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

Sarah Platts said:


> It's a shame the AKC holds such sway. Back in the day, it was standard for Irish setters to be red and white with that as the preference. Then it became unfashionable and the solid red preferred so the ones with alot of white were killed off. The breeders are trying to recover the red/white and have established a breed registry for them. Which is both good and bad as they are now treated as a seperate breed when it's really just a color variation. Much like the black/white gsp.



I believe there is/was a group of Monks in Ireland trying to bring back the red and white Irish Setter.

Many breeds are now two different breeds for no other reason then some physical difference.

Wire Fox Terrier - Smooth Fox Terrier divided into tow different breeds in the 1930s because of a coat preference.

Norwich Terrier - Norfolk Terrier divided into two different breeds in the 1970s because of a preference for different ear carriage. 

_In Europe and also in the UKC here the _ Mal, Dutch, Gren, Lacon, Terv, etc are nothing more then varieties of the Belgian Shepherd while the AKC divides them into different breeds. 

Cocker Spaniels, at the very minimum are American and English. From there it's different colors in classes by them selves.

The English Bulldog, Chi dog, Boston and a few others would disappear if not for c section births. More often then not the heads are to large to pass through the birth naturally. 

Then the Daschund and on and on and on....and on.



All for nothing more then looks.


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

I agreewith the above


----------



## Matt Vandart (Nov 28, 2012)

Gillian Schuler said:


> Hi Matt
> 
> Enlighten me please


They are very drivey things, absolute maniacs as puppies, tough as old boots, every one I have had has been bomproof environmentally, long lived, cast iron guts, basically indestructable. I have had three. Most of the ones i have met have been the same. When i am an old fart, I will have only minibulls if I dont breed my own line of pitty pats, which I will defo put some mini bulls in 
Having said that I have heard a few lines have very sharp instability problems with serious dog agression, never met one personally though.


----------

