Julie R

Perhaps this link on the Dogs Vic website might be useful to read, it is under the heading the law and you. . http://www.vca.org.au/Content.asp?ID=287 Pam Operation of Dog and Cat Breeding Establishments Legislation Under the provisions of the Domestic Animals Act 1994 any person who runs an enterprise (being a business) for profit (whether the business makes a profit is irrelevant) that breeds dogs and/or cats, that person must register their premises as a domestic animal business with their local council before they can operate. While this type of business is known as a breeding and/or rearing establishment, some members of the public call these businesses “puppy farms” or “puppy mills”. Council domestic animal business registration is an annual process and Councils are required to report the number of domestic animal businesses registered with them to the State Government annually. Dog and/or cat breeding establishment proprietors must operate in accord with the mandatory Code of Practice established by the State Government for the purpose of providing minimum standards of accommodation, management and care which are considered appropriate to the welfare, physical and behavioural needs of the animals housed at these establishments. In the case of a breeding establishment the mandatory Code is known as the ‘Code of Practice for the Operation of Breeding and Rearing Establishments’. A person who is a member of an Applicable Organisation (including Dogs Victoria, Cat Authority of Victoria, Feline Control Council, Governing Council of the Cat Fancy and Waratah National Cat Alliance) that registers their puppies and/or kittens with that Organisation and has less than 10 fertile females of either species is not required to be registered as a breeding establishment with their Council. The reason for this is that these groups have been approved as Applicable Organisations due to their members being required to operate in accord with a Code of Ethics established by their Organisation. The Code of Ethics established by these organisations mandate responsible breeding and responsible pet ownership principles which are similar to the aims of the mandatory Code of Practice. Breeding establishment proprietor responsibilities Proprietors of breeding establishments must provide for the well being of all the animals kept at their establishment. They are responsible for supervision of staff, collation of records relating to breeding, the supervision of appropriate feeding programs, maintaining a high level of hygiene at their premises and ensuring veterinary care for the animals kept at the establishment. Proprietors of breeding establishments can only offer animals for sale that have been vaccinated at least fourteen days prior to sale and must on sale or giving away an animal ensure the animal is implanted with a microchip. The proprietor must notify the Council in which the animal is to be kept of the name, address and microchip number of the animal sold from or given away from their premises. Proprietors must provide literature to a person who purchases animals from them; this literature must include information on responsible pet ownership, appropriate housing and feeding. The proprietor must also provide a guarantee to the purchaser stating that if the animal is unacceptable for any reason that the animal can be returned within three days for a 75% refund of the purchase price or an offer of an animal of equal value with the same guarantee. Also within seven days, the proprietor must provide a similar guarantee on health grounds if supported by documentation from a veterinarian that the animal is sick after purchase. If the animal dies or is euthanased due to a disease traceable to point of sale, the proprietor must refund the purchase price or offer a replacement animal with the same guarantee. Council responsibilities Council must register breeding establishments to allow them to operate and should conduct annual audits or regular inspections to ensure these proprietors are operating their establishment in accord with the mandatory Code of Practice. Council should follow up on the registration of animals purchased from breeding establishments as they must be notified by the proprietor of the establishment when an animal sold from their business is expected to be kept in that municipal district. If you have an issue with the operation of a breeding establishment in your area As the council is responsible for registering and authorising the operation of breeding establishments, you should report any concerns you may have to the Council for their action. Council may expect you to provide the information in writing to provide them with ‘reasonable grounds’ to investigate your claims. Council has Authorised Officers that have the power to enter breeding establishments on reasonable grounds and at reasonable times to investigate the compliance of these establishments with the Act and mandatory Code of Practice. If the breeding establishment is unregistered the Council can prosecute the proprietor for operating an unregistered breeding establishment, this offence carries a penalty of 10 penalty units in the Magistrates Court. Also, if the proprietor sells an animal from an unregistered premise this is also an offence which carries a penalty of 10 penalty units in court. If the breeding establishment proprietor is not operating their business in accord with the mandatory Code of Practice, Council Officers can issue infringements or file charges in the Magistrates Court. Each breach carries a penalty of up to 10 penalty units in court.

Hi Greg Have you ever given any thought that it might be on the directive via the ANKC that information is posted on CC websites such as DOGS Vic. ?? Pam Agree entirely, I have not posted on this site for a cple of years but this issue of Basterdizing pedigrees by the ANKC(tho funny that all state canines disavow all knowledge--So dogs Vic claim its just administrative --well who died and made them God.) OH dear hang on maybe dogs vic think they are the ANKC. Whilst many of you are justifying positions or apportioning blame are you also putting the same effort into ensuring this issue collapses at the conference in October. Have you instigated motions thru your breed clubs??? Have you written your State Canines to push your views on this debacle--time is runnin out Greg

Not that I know either of these people but I wish them both all the happiness in the world and I couldn't think of a better place than Gracelands to get married.. GOOD luck to the both of them and I wish them years of happiness together. :0))

try her email address. [email protected] As far as I am aware you can just turn up but make sure you take along your dogs vaccination card.

This was one of the lowest acts the R$PCA have done, poor Clifford a Pitbull never had a chance. Poor Clifford was thrown from a car in Sydney in 2004, emaciated and injured he was taken to the R$PCA the society that claims to care for all creatures great and small. The R$PCA said please donate as much as you can to help poor Clifford and raised about $3500, then announced this poor dog had suddenly become aggressive or some BS to that effect and PTS poor Clifford and kept the money. Why was poor Clifford PTS ? Because the R$PCA does not rehome Pitbulls that's why. Shame, Shame, Shame R$PCA. Why did they not euthanize as soon as they recei ed him, if that is their policy??? ;) ;) Not that I'm saying I agree with the policy (which imo is ridiculous), but why make poor clifford suffer if he was to be PTS anyway? The R$PCA used this poor dog to get as many donations as possible, as this is all they care about and played on the public's sympathy then killed poor Clifford when they couldn't get any more money. Remember this happened in 2004, but it wasn't till 2006 that the state Government changed the law making it illegal to sell or rehome Pitbulls. This means poor Clifford a pitbull who had done nothing wrong was murdered by the R$PCA for money, and of course their policy. The R$PCA does not think the Pitbull is suitable to have as a pet and claim that this breed would not be happy in this environment, as the document below states. I wonder how many other breeds the R$PCA think are not suitable as family pets. Next time someone wants to give a donation to this evil society, please tell them about poor Clifford.

Whooops I am sorry, and of course it makes sense to do so. .

Interesting read. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/better-b...0814-1248k.html

No, actually it isnt, according to the link that you gave. My apologies are extended to the RSPCA. Perhaps Pam, you might like to ask the organisers of the rally that that you are promoting to come on to this site and tell us about Mr Hinch's credentials in the area of dog breeding? Souff Souff I was not promoting this rally ...... what I was TRYING to do was to make people aware that it is taking place, so they could come along, but hopefully there will be responsible people who care enough about breeding and owning dogs who will make the effort to attend and at least listen and see what these people have to say as it is they who will have the media’s attention, just like Don Burke did a few years ago. Pointless after the event to say “Oh I wished I had known it was on I would have said this or I would have said that” .... yer well the dog world appears to be full of gunna’s ...... and it is about time people got off theirs bums and starting fighting for their rights and not sitting back and expecting others to do it for them, only to then criticize those who tried. But that old saying, if you don't do anything you can't get criticized, and ain’t that so of so many dog owners and breeders in general.

Pam, Who is speaking on behalf of the legitimate breeders of purebred dogs? What are Derryn Hinch's credentials as an authority on dogs? edited cos I spelled Derryn's name wrong ... would never do Souff Hi Souff I have NO idea, and can not answer your questions, but that is why I will be attending, to find out. It is a tad worrying what these high profile people who can and do get media attention will have to say and will ALL breeders be put in the same basket, therefore I think it is important for as many breeders of pure bred dogs and ethical breeders regardless of breed attend to see what is said. No good complaining after the event if we are not prepared to attend and find out, hopefully some good suggestions will come from this rally though. Pam Pam, I will be a long way from Melbourne on that day so will not be able to attend. Perhaps one of the RSPCA's event organisers could explain to people on this site what relevance and authority Mr Hinch has in relation to the breeding of dogs? Also, perhaps they could also tell us who is going to speak on behalf of those breeders who consider themselves to be acting in the best long term interests, i.e those who are trying to ensure that whole breeds of dog don't get wiped out by the zeal of those who seek to eradicate "puppy farming". In all things in life BALANCE is required, particularly in nature. I don't see or hear any balance in the promotion of this event. Souff Pity you can't attend, but I didn't realise the rally was being organized by the RSPCA.. are you sure it is?

Pam, Who is speaking on behalf of the legitimate breeders of purebred dogs? What are Derryn Hinch's credentials as an authority on dogs? edited cos I spelled Derryn's name wrong ... would never do Souff Hi Souff I have NO idea, and can not answer your questions, but that is why I will be attending, to find out. It is a tad worrying what these high profile people who can and do get media attention will have to say and will ALL breeders be put in the same basket, therefore I think it is important for as many breeders of pure bred dogs and ethical breeders regardless of breed attend to see what is said. No good complaining after the event if we are not prepared to attend and find out, hopefully some good suggestions will come from this rally though. Pam

You can't have prevention and proactivity without starting somewhere. Going back to the start of this thread, publicity and increasing public knowledge about puppy farming issues is an attempt at prevention, at solution. Regardless of other issues people have or don't have with RSPCA, don't we agree that the average Joe who goes looking for their next puppy online and is charmed by the hyped up image of the latest "oodle" needs and deserves to know the other side of the story? Some people on here would be stunned to know just how ignorant many citizens are to the concept and practice of puppy farming. Many on DOL live and breathe dogs and can't imagine not knowing these things. But surprisingly enough they are actually not public knowledge. Most people know about battery farms but many are still willing to buy cage eggs, so how are we even going to start shutting down puppy farms without even having a base level of common knowledge? People need to know before the situation can be resolved. Media attention gets messages across. ************ Maybe the rally being held in Melbourne will bring awareness to the general public, having Derryn Hinch as a speaker I think should bring plenty of media attention. http://www.oscarslaw.org/ Puppy Farm Awareness Day Rally Sunday September 19th - 12pm Parliament House, Melbourne. Guest Speakers include Derryn Hinch Moira Rayner

******************************************** Hi David I would like to congratulate you and your Comm. on running such a well organised show today. You should all by now be sitting and patting yourselves on your backs for running another successful show, they just seem to get better and better. It was quite obvious that a lot of thought had gone into making more room available for exhibitors, which was much appreciated. . The rings looked great, the chocolate treats were much appreciated as was the trophy table. Luckily the weather stayed fine, the grounds are still very wet under foot, but that is to be expected seeing there has been such a huge amount of rain over recent weeks. Thanks again to you and your hard working Committee. Pam.

Well then , I suggest you reconsider your opinion - if this breeder is a member of Dogs Victoria all puppies must be registered & , under State law, must be microchipped I agree that all living puppies must be registered with Dogs Vic and under state law at the age of 12 weeks must be micro chipped, but to my knowledge micro chipping is not compulsory when registering a litter with Dogs Vic. or before they go to their new homes at 8 weeks of age.

WELL SAID, COULDN'T AGREE MORE.

Yer thanks I had already read that, hence my questions.

Nekhbet, Steve's comparison is a fair one. If councils KNOW where someone has kennels, there is a better chance of them being under surveillance by groups such as the RSPCA who can legally visit the premises etc. When you have unknown numbers of dogs on properties that are not identified as kennels, then you have the situation where the council doesnt know what is going on, and the likes of the animal libbers taking the law into their own hands and doing midnight raids with cameras etc. This is not the way to go. In another thread on here an RSPCA officer describes the overwhelming stench of ammonia at one place. Why let it get to that? The RSPCA already has the laws to ensure that the welfare of dogs is taken care of - IF they know where these places are. Whether we like it or not, the current trade laws allow people to "farm" puppies and there is little that can be done to legally stop this practice. Pet shops also have the law on their side. The police and the RSPCA already have the laws within which they can act to ensure that at least the dogs used in this awful trade are well looked after. As I see it, is a matter of enforcing the existing laws and codes that are already in place. People have to act within the law, otherwise we might as well not have laws. Stopping "puppy farmers" completely is a pipedream imho, and in the first instance, nobody seems to be able to accurately define what a "puppy farmer" is. If a legal definition of a "puppy farm" does not exist, how on earth do well meaning people think they can shut down "puppy farms"? Sorry if I sound negative, but the ideas of many on this site recently are a bit too idealistic and not realistic enough. I'm with Steve on this one. Better to know where they are and let "the authorities" pay them regular visits. Souff Yes I agree... if the dogs in these people hands are not being bred to death every time they come into season and IF the council and the RSPCA would use their powers and put a stop to the cruelty BUT they do not... so if people have to over react and get emotional then so be it. BUT someone and somehow we have to protect these poor dogs, and if it takes people’s emotions taking over and if they can achieve something, anything then so be it, but at the moment it appears that no one with the authority and power is doing anything to stop it. So the more pressure we can put towards putting a stop to this over breeding/overcrowding, lack of care and attention, and actual cruelty, then I say go for it. No animal regardless of species deserves to be treated unkindly or cruelly for human gain, they were not put on this earth for humans to treat in a manner that is just so unacceptable in our society today. Everything regardless has a right to live their life without pain, fear or suffering.

From the first post: Tuesday August 3, 2010 - North Central Review ..... .............. lodged an application with the Mitchell Shire to run 50 breeding dogs from a property off the Kilmore-Glenaroua Road (Broadford Victoria) on June 8. Since the permit request was lodged the RSPCA, Dogs Vic and Animal Liberation Vic all lodged formal objections to Mitchell Shire against the application. .......However on Thursday July 29 the application for the breeding permit was withdrawn. But what I was asking in my previous post, was do you know that it is factual that Dogs Vic actually lodged an objection.

And where do you get your data from to draw this conclusion? My bitch won Best Opposite In Specialty Shows (Open & Champ) at seven weeks pregnant recently and was completely OK. We haven't received adequate consultation from the Canine Health Committee on this issue.CC Have you contacted D/V canine health and asked them for an explanation, if so what was their reply. ????? Pam

You're preaching to the converted ,however the people who wrote submissions against these people - RSPCA and Vicdogs are the very people who are calling for a mandatory code which includes them doing it the way these people attempted to. Noone watching that will stick their head up and try to get an approval and will instead simply do what ever they want - just as most of them do now. What are Vicdogs doing getting involved in this anyway ? Many of their own members own 50 plus dogs. Its not so long ago that this was seen to be a good thing for registered breeders. Some of the best in the country owned more than 50 purebred dogs and many still do. Do you know for sure that Dogs Vic submitted an objection to this application??? Pam

Hi Sway I didn't realise a date, time and venue had been set for this meeting, thank you for posting this info. . As for the Puppy Farmers within our organization and if Dog Vic was really fair dinkum and not just after the money generated from all the registrations I wonder why they keep registering all these litters from these well known puppy famers..... ??? OH heaven forbid !!!! please don't tell me it is a restriction of trade and our rules can't stop them......... and that money has nothing to do with the issue ???? Pam

Just wondering if all other countries recognize and publish all titles gained in Aust, and do these titles appear on the dogs “new” pedigree papers when issued.

According to the Dogs Vic website, Dogs Victoria are now on Face Book inviting all members to have their say on Puppy Farms. Pam.

you will find that they weren't going to include registered breeders until we all kicked up a stink. they were going to just put it across the board like the RSPCA are proposing now. Sorry I don't quite follow you, could you please explain.

you will find that they weren't going to include registered breeders until we all kicked up a stink. they were going to just put it across the board like the RSPCA are proposing now. Sorry I don't quite follow you, could you please explain.

a few years ago the government tried to put in place legislation about diseases and the consumer but the VCA was informed and they fought it tooth and nail and got the govt to liaise with them so we all stopped it we can do it again. we need to write to our state controlling bodies because i agree we pay enough money for them to liaise on all our behalfs. many years ago they use to actually publish our addresses in the monthly gazette, does anyone remember this?????? going back in the 80's now. ***************** Hi You will find the VCA did not stop the legislation at all, and yes I can recall when names and addresses were published in both the KCC Journal and also the Royal show catalogues. copied below is from Dogs Vic website CLAUSE 89 - BREEDING OF ANIMALS WITH HERITABLE DISEASES The Heritable Defects Code of Practice is now in effect as of 18 June 2009 - More Information (.doc) Visit the DPI's page of Victorian Codes of Practice for Animal Welfare to download the full Code (listed under Heritable Defects) The link to this page is as follows http://www.dogsvictoria.org.au/Content.asp?ID=287