The "22 point checklist" is a "tool" or "methodology" that local councils are trying to use as a tool to identify the breed of dogs of unknown heritage visually, it's a nonsensical fraud that's been perpetrated against dog owners, councils and ratepayers alike.
It was created by Ms Perkins & Ms Pomeroy both of whom have shrunk back into obscurity after being exposed to be frauds trying to make a quick buck at the cost of the community at large charging local councils $1500 per ACO followed up by witness appearances where they proclaimed themselves to be experts until the De Frey case that is....
That's when the junket came to a screeching halt and they all disappeared back to wherever they came from here's the.........
"22 POINT CHECKLIST"
Ratings -
0 - Does not comply NB :- (comment required)
1 - Partly Complies
2 - Substantially Complies
3 - Fully Complies
Body Part Rating Please make comments
1. Head - medium in length and is brick wedge shaped 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __ Councils have added wedge
2. Head shape - has a skull shape which is flat and widest at the ears with prominent cheeks free from wrinkles 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
3. Muzzle - square, wide and deep 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
4. Muzzle - well pronounced jaws, displaying strength 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
5. Upper teeth - meet tightly over lower teeth (scissor bite) 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
6. Ears - set high on the head and free from wrinkles 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
7. Eyes - round to almond 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __ Councils have added almond
8. Eyes - set far apart, low down on the skull 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
9. Nose - wide open flared nostrils 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __ Councils have added flared
10. Neck - muscular and slightly arched 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
11. Neck - tapers from shoulder to head 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
12. Neck - free from looseness of skin 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
13. Shoulders - strong and muscular with wide sloping shoulder blades 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
14. Back - short and strong 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
15. Back - slightly sloping from withers to rump 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
16. Back - slightly arched at the loins with the loins slightly tucked 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
17. Chest - deep, but not too broad, with well wide sprung ribs 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __ Council add well
18. Tail - short in comparison to the size of the dog, tapers to a fine point and not carried over the back and dose not extend beyond the hocks 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __ Council added Does not extend over hocks
19. Legs - medium to large, round boned and reasonably strong 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
20. Feet – of medium size should be in proportion to leg size 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __ Council have added should be proportion to leg size
21. Thighs - well developed muscles 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
22. Coat - short and stiff to touch 0__ 1__ 2 __ 3 __
23. Height - from withers to ground ____________cm
24. Common photo match Yes____ No____
Total Points: _________/66
Officers Comments:.......................................................................
...........
Vet Name:...........................................................................
.......................
Qualifications:.................................................................
...........................
Veterinary Stamp or Staple Business Card..........
Now here's what
"STEPHEN COLLIER"
of University of New England, Armidale, in the State of New South Wales,
states:- Expert witness statement 1.
I have been asked to provide expert opinion evidence in this matter about certain scientific issues which have relevance to the proposition that dog breed can be determined by identification from physical characteristics when the actual breeding of a dog is unknown"
"Consistency of the current points system with scientific method 40. It is my understanding that the points assessment system has never been tested in any of the ways above.
Most of the identification points relate to many breeds of dog, and some relate to all dogs.
It clearly does not involve any unique identifiers of an APBT.
For example, Point 7, eyes round or almond relates equally to all dogs. Dog eyes only come round to almond, with nearly all being almond. Point 5 also relates to all but a few short-faced breeds.
Many other points require subjective judgement to a degree that makes them meaningless from any perspective of scientific or factual reliability to identify a specific breed, for example, Point 4, Muzzle – well pronounced jaws, displaying strength.
Dogs are predators that catch prey with their jaws. They must be pronounced and strong.
All this really means objectively is that the dog has jaws and the muscles to work them.
The points that might relate mainly to APBTs and similar breeds are either absent or not weighted.
As all 22 points are of equal weight, a dog can qualify as an APBT Type without having any specific APBT features.
In current practice, the real test of whether a dog is of APBT Type is the decision to apply the test, that is, the suspicion that a dog might be of the proscribed type.
If the test is applied, almost any dog will score 46 points or more. This is true for Golden Retrievers, Kelpies etc."
Well that's pretty straight forward He thinks it's impossible and does not support the science or the methodology of visual identification of dogs of unknown lineage.
VALERIE HODGSON
Valerie Hodgson, an experienced breeder, dealt with the proper purpose of breed standards. She explained how, from the perspective of those with proper understanding of breed standard terminology, not one of the features in the "checklist" is a unique identifier of the APBT.
A dog with that feature could have inherited it from ancestors of any number of breeds. This evidence was effectively unchallenged under cross-examnation.
Messrs Pomeroy and Perkins were askd to explain how their system ensures that a check list feature is definitely inherited from an APBT ancestor, rather than some other breed.
That is, they were asked to explain how the 22 point test has a safeguard to ensure that it does not identify dogs of breeds other than APBT. They could not do so. All they had to say was that it was "impossible" for a dog with features matching all of those on the checklist to be anything other than APBT.
Their theory is that this "cluster" of features is unique to the APBT.
All of this witnesses testified that the "22 point checklist" is un-supported science and is nothing more then a fraud and clearly should not still be used by councils, especially where the dogs only crime is the way the dog "looks" councils leave themself open to litigation under such circumstances as even if the "22 point plan" worked there's no-one been trained and/or qualified to use it and those that are qualified routinely reject it.
Lora Bauer:
" Messrs Pomeroy and Perkins swore that their process unfailingly distinguishes between an APBT and an Amstaff. They based this on differences in the respective breed standards.
The ANKC Amstaff standard copies the AKC (USA) standard almost word for word. Ms Bauer tells the Court about her dogs, judged as championship APBT when judged against the UKC APBT breed standard, and also as championship Amstaffs when judged against the AKC Amstaff breed standard.
Lora was, unknown to Mr Da Fre, terminally ill when she gave her evidence, and she died before the final judgement."
Aco's are being sue for abuse of power etc and yet the councils continue with the latest being Toowoomba council recently seizing a dog using this methodolgy despite knowing it's not scientifically supported nor is it lawfully supported clearly with the many cases being lost indicates.
Norman Blackman," a past President of the Australian Veterinary Association, told the Court about the extent to which, in his opinion, an undergraduate veterinary degree, such as that held by Ms Perkins, qualifies a person in APBT breed identification.
Mr Perkins asserted to the contrary but was unable to point to any course content in her degree relating to breed identification processes or methodologies for dogs whose actual parentage is unknown."
Check out all the details of this case and more at the link below
