Steve

True. I've heard some horrible stories about reports being ignored. It is really about what is in the reports that are made. Child protection is the same. People can and do report, but they give so little information that they do not have enough to go on. Child protection is based on reasonable belief, police warrants are based on reasonable belief. The police cannot prove you committed a crime without finger prints, DNA or the like and these cannot be taken without you being arrested first. They are simply required to have reasonable belief. Child protection cannot prove a child is being harmed without seeing the child. In order to see the child they have to have reasonable belief. Are there children who slip through absolutely, are there children who are taken who should not be, absolutely, and way too many. I can assure you there are websites of parents who seriously have done nothing more than the average parent and the kids were taken away, often at 3 am by the police, and put in some institutional setting with total strangers, kids are not placed in foster care at 3 am that is left until the following day. Don't think that traumatises a child?? All of these things are based on reasonable beliefs. If the caller gives bare minimum information then little is done. IF the caller says a whole lot fo bullshit, then something very different is done. And it is the same for all of it. The RSPCA does have to provide proof, via photo's and the like in court in order to prove what was going on. I did watch RSPCA rescue and while I remember a docked tail, I do not remember the dog being seized. I do remember the owner being given the third degree over it, but the dog was not removed. The only time I rember them breaking into a property and removing a dog was when there was no one there, and neighbours, many of them all said no one had been to the property in days. Whatever one might think of dail docking it is illegal in ALL states of Australia. The RSPCA cannot just do as they like, they are required to get court orders to keep any animal in their care. They can enter to investigate, just like child protection and the police. Brookestar - I promise you that you are wrong on many counts including the episode I am discussing. You may have seen a different episode but be careful about accusing me of making it up.I believe Melzawelza saw the same episode. Best you take a better look at state laws and what they can and cant do before you stick your neck out.

working dog breeders still think they are immune to the legal issues and are of the belief that its a code of ethics thing - its not its the law. My point is as a breeder you should be able to determine what is best for your bitch depending on the variables you are working with not some crap put into laws in case some puppy farmer breeds a bitch when she shouldn't be bred.

You couldnt breed her anyway in NSW before her first birthday

It's amazing that we can be told that if a guinea pig isnt able to breed young she hits massive problems and thats accepted but we have allowed animal rights to dictate our best practice - to a point where new people believe it and want to crucify a breeder for daring to discuss the scientific facts. Theoretically they control us in case some body somewhere is going to mate a bitch when she is in poor condition and shouldnt be mated - fact is though if the bitch is sick or lacking in anyway she wont fall pregnant. We should ALL be fighting anything being trotted out by over emotional loonies and being carried over into law which isnt based on science and isnt good for our dogs. Maybe if we did this then breeders in Victoria with ten toy breed dogs wouldn't be being made to keep them in concreted pens and they could stay in their lounge rooms. Pathetic!

6th Annual Dog Owners Choice Awards. National vet Nurse Day is coming up on the 12th of October. We want to help celebrate what a great job vet nurses do so for the next 2 weeks we are offering rewards to people who nominate their vet nurse for the Vet Nurse of the Year category this year. The rewards we are offering are: · The opportunity to purchase our Good Health and the Family Dog Course at half price and · Entry into a draw for a gift pack of Hamish McBeth grooming products. Drawn on the 21st of October To claim half price on the course please email us to let us know what email address you used to nominate your vet nurse. Nominate your vet nurse here this week for these great rewards.

This from Leon Mills - though the rest is pretty damning Quote Another benefit of a transfer to Police is that all Police investigations are subject to review by independent authorities such as the Ombudsman or I C A C. This is not the case with R S P C A inspectors, they answer to no one other than themselves. On the 18th of February last I attended the local branch meeting of the R S P C A as the head of the organization Mr Steve Coleman was attending. During the course of the meeting he answered a number of questions re the Waterways incident. Mrs. Dodd asked him a question being, “who can I complain to”, Mr Coleman’s response was “the Chief Inspector of the RS S P C A”. From a community point of view in this day and age it is totally unacceptable that we have an organization such as this that when a complaint comes in they investigate themselves. and this Quote The RSPCA since about 2000, to my knowledge, have been engaging private solicitors to conduct their prosecutions and one might ask why did they move to this system.<br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; line-height: 19px; background-color: rgb(250, 251, 252); ">It is my submission that this practice should cease and that Police Prosecutors should conduct the prosecutions for the RSPCA. I say that on this basis. By engaging private Solicitors or barristers there is no obligation on them to place before the Court evidence that may disadvantage their case. Legal and Professional Costs come into play. If their prosecution is successful they would ask for these costs. It seems unbelievable that recently in one of their prosecutions at Narrabri an amount in excess of a quarter of a million dollars was sought for costs in a matter heard in the Local Court, and as I said before, an offence not serious at law.

Well how does that marry up with what Troy was told and this? Q. What if I'm a breeder advertising the future availability of puppies or kittens that aren't born or are too young for sale? A. As long as your advertisement relates only to the future availability of litters (litters not currently born), and does not include reference to animals currently "for sale", the microchip requirements do not apply. However, once puppies or kittens are born they must be advertised with a microchip number or have a veterinary certificate stating that they are too young to microchip as it would be prejudicial to their health. Such advertisements must be kept up to date; as soon as these animals are of an age suitable for microchipping,in the opinion of a veterinarian, the microchip details must also be displayed in the advertisement. No bloody wonder no one understands the law let alone know when they are breaking it - just depends on who answers the question on the day apparently.

But why = why do you think it is excessive ? It simply doesn't fit with the science. With every other species we trot off to the zoo, watch documentaries and go "WOW' and walk away in awe about the different and unique reproductive systems . Yet when it comes to dogs we let animal rights - people who have probably never bred a dog and never will dictate what we should accept as the science of breeding - in the mean time putting our bitches at risk . Its gotten to a point where if you dare say that bitches should be bred each season you are bagged and slagged . What the hell is the point of us pushing for people who want to breed dogs to go after greater knowledge - give them the facts and the science and then tell them they cant do that because its against the law. Its the same with laws which tell us we have to vaccinate every year etc etc and no law should ever be introduced which is not conducive to sound science - the fact the CCs went that way first is disgraceful.

All canine reproductive specialists will tell you its better for the bitch to breed her every season and in fact detrimental to their health not to those of us who have been around long enough know this as well but that is irrelavant in NSW and Victoria it is illegal to breed your bitch every season whether you are a working dog breeder or not - best you tell your friend this so he doesnt tell anyone else what he is doing or he will be gone gone gone.

We went looking for insurance to help our members. You might like to look at Bow Wow Meow They offer a free policy to all of our members as pet plan only offers breeders so our rescue people can give the free policies as they send their dogs to new homes as well too plus a free travel voucher even if they don't take out further insurance than the free first few weeks. They have less exclusions and the prices we were given for our breeders who often purchase a 12 month policy for their puppy buyers was much less. Really quick turnaround, usually pays in 48 hours as they have a different system for pre existing conditions etc. Worth looking at anyway when doing your comparisons. http://www.bowwowinsurance.com.au/

Yes but at the end of the day its what you are prepared to compromise on to attain the goal regardless of what the goal is.You also need to be educated on what compromises may exist and how to determine how that may impact and if you can stand it before you make your decisions. Its why the term betterment of the breed isnt such a mickey mouse term after all because understanding what that means ensures that people think about and try to avoid anything or any compromise that may do harm over time to the breed - regardless of the primary goal.

Im living the dream - wouldnt change any of it except Id pay it off and not have to worry about a mortgage.

She could see the dog before she went in through the window and clearly she was able to see before she carried the dog out that the docking had taken place months ago. The dog was not at risk nor was it suffering. In fact it was very healthy and happy.

Remember every state is different as far as I know in Victoria they cant enter a dwelling without a warrant in NSW they can

I watched RSPCA rescue where there had been a report of a dog with a docked tail located around Bankstown. I watched while the inspector knocked on the door got no response so she got a ladder and climbed up to the second floor - open window - went in and seized the dog. Left the owner a note to get in touch with them. The dog was about 6 months old and did have a docked tail which had been done some 6 months earlier. So based on that I guess the answer is they can and do. owner said the dog was docked when she got it and her ex boyfriend had purchased it for her so she didn't know who the breeder was and the ex was travelling overseas and she had no idea how to contact him to ask him. So they returned the dog to her.

there is no more wrong in breeding for money than there is for breeding for a champ or a pet or a working dog as long as the other things which mean the benefit of the breed as well as the dogs are not compromised. There are some people who are doing worse things to breeds in the name of breeding for goals other than money.

No harm either way as long as XYZ and ABC are being bred covering all of the other bases as well. Its only when you get someone breeding for XYZ that hasnt covered the rest of the alphabet. Nope, No harm catering to popularity while its backed by independent understanding of your breed as well,but not a sound basis on its own for improvement. Agreed any more than it is a sound basis to only breed for a winning show champ or a great working dog.

oops forgot bitza

No harm either way as long as XYZ and ABC are being bred covering all of the other bases as well. Its only when you get someone breeding for XYZ that hasnt covered the rest of the alphabet.

I see your point too but- I dont want any live animals sold from pet shops regardless of their story or where they are from.

mutt , mongrel, Heinz,

Parrotpea - You did the best you could and you should have had much better support from the rescue group. There were several things here which just were not conducive to best practice to ensure you and the new owner and especially the dog had a fair deal.

Doubtful.

Yep but that doesn't mean that the people who are doing the talking and calling the shots know what they are talking about or if it really is what is in the best interests of the dogs as well as the breed. So what is looked upon as bettering the breed isn't always what is best for the breed. When you get some saying one thing and a less saying another both believing they are doing what is needed to do the best for the breed its usually the majority rather than the wisest which wins.

I think some of it is impacted by where you live and what breed you are in and what activities you do with your dogs. The RSPCA have no option but to investigate complaints.