Steve

Sorry guys Ive just seen this Ive been helping pack the truck going into Queensland and we have one going to Victoria late next week but I can get crates in or pretty much anything else you need prior to that if someone wants to meet me half way - may be at the Rock - my phone number is 0269276706

This is pretty much what one of the things Pacers does. All it means is they fill out a form tell us why they are having trouble paying and we work out whether its genuine or really necessary. If its something un expected such as when we had the lady in Queensland who's son burnt her house down killing one of her dogs, and her little dog which she saved was run over the first day in their new home after staying in a women's refuge and the vet said the leg needed to be amputated - but no credit available because she didnt have an income other than her pension - we stepped in and paid her vet bills, gave her some supplies,linen,crockery, cultery,dog food, human food to help her out and paid her a cash payment too. We had another in Victoria where a single Dad needed help to pay for emergency surgery for the family dog or have it put down.The dog and the kids had a good outcome. We dont just do things like pay for desexing - there are other charities which do that - and its not an emergency situation - but if someone is in the position they are in due to some personal or natural disaster we do what we can.Sometimes it paying vet bills, or suppllying food for their animals for a period of time, helping with boarding or foster care. Even if its something we cant help with because they dont fit the criteria we help them work out their own solutions and give them support to be able to do it themselves. Pacers is Australia wide and so far we have helped lots of people in each state but we have now set up all the admin needed to take it to a chartered club situation. The aim is to have a Pacers group close to every pet owner in the country so if we are needed we can get in quicker and be better prepared and set up networks etc in each community. This keeps the fundraising in the local area its being raised in, it will allow us to see and understand local issues and resources etc while allowing each club to have the benefit of the wider Pacers community and resources and insurances,trademarks etc. Right now with the floods in Queensland and Victoria there are many issues which could be avoided and a lot less stress on animals and their owners. Apart from the obvious which is being able to identify risks pertinent to that area, having plans in place of where to go and quick access to portable pens and horse yards,crates,and necessities it solves many other logistical and administration issues. Of course it also allows people who need help to pay a vet bill or feed their animals, local help which can screen them and work with them. We havent been around that long yet but over the last 18 months with the wonderful help of Eukanuba we have fed thousands or Dogs and cats and we have also been able to feed horses, donkeys, poultry, birds etc. We have paid dozens of vet bills and provided every day supplies to pet owners to make their lives easier, we have provided foster care, paid boarding fees,we have cleaned kennels and houses when people have been taken to hospital,we have provided counselling services and grief counselling and even helped a couple start their own businesses or find employment, find pet friendly accommodation etc to be sure they are better prepared and they dont stay in the spot they are in. Everything you need to know about us and perhaps starting a Pacers club in your area is on our website. Within the next 5 years we want a Pacers club close to every animal owner in the country so when anyone needs a vet bill paid,an animal fed, evacuated or kept safe that help can get to them quickly and efficiently. www.mdbapacers.org.au or you can talk to me on 0269276706 Julie

Is there a ETA on these?? Any minute I had to wait for the order of mailers and then they were the wrong ones. Julie

An X ray can show you whether its caused by deformity or abnormality in the patella grove which is sometimes too shallow and this allows the patella to jump out or [luxate] out of the grove sideways causing the leg to sort of lock up. When this happens the patella can’t come back to normal until the muscle relaxes. This is most likely to be a genetic issue and dogs with this type of patella problem shouldn’t be bred with regardless of how they are graded. If its not caused by a deformity then there is some suggestion that nutrition can make the muscle and the ligaments function better and be less prone to slipping with suggestions of feeding a diet with little processing and board certified Aloe Vera juice. If I were in your position I would X ray to answer the question on whether the joint is deformed and the grove is not too shallow before I made any decision. This will tell you if it’s a deformity, whether it has been caused by an injury or perhaps just may need a nutritional tweak before the slipping causes damage to the joint. If it shows as no deformity I would feed him the correct diet and re test again in 6 months time. I wouldnt breed him if he is not all better then.

Its a bit of a joke really, people who breed cross bred dogs have no desire to breed the second generation. They promote what they do because there is less chance of recessive disorders showing up. They want to mass produce them send them home as pets and forget about them. They have no interest in strategies to ensure the next generation is healthier or predictible, no reason to keep records on genetic or health or temperament issues which may show up which may need attention for decisions on whcih dogs should be bred and no need to be concerned about whether someone may strike problems later on because the dog was desexed early.Their interest in and obligation to the dog or the buyer ends 7 days at most after the sale. Many of what they breed go out interstate to individual pet buyers agents and dealers. Pet shops in the ACT and puppy buyers in the ACT dont just buy puppies bred in the ACT. We are not able to take our dog to the vet and have them lower its voice which has no impact on the health of the dog for the rest of its life without jumping through hoops but if we dont take our dog to the vet and have its reproductive organs removed which is a much more radical surgery with more pain and more risks where there is conclusive evidence that this causes health issues we break the law. We can even take it to our vet and have them kill it without permission because its our property. Then we look at how this impacts on purebred breeders. You limit the numbers a breeder can own or breed,then carry on about limited gene pools and advocate for laws to limit how closely they are related when your laws limit the dogs available for use more than ever before. You ensure that we have no choice in desexing them which again limits the possibility that if the dog we keep for breeding is not the perfect choice for breeding that we have less options available to us. You shout about how breeders should be responsible for the dog into the future, take responsibility for things such as HD when the science says a dog desexed earlier has a far greater chance of being affected by that. You want us to be wealthy enough to pay for testing, licences, registrations, desexing vouchers and all the numerous other things which cost money in order to breed healthy dogs for consecutive generations ,not to mention the refunds and replacements we may need to cover and you expect us to pay money when we participate in our dog related activities yet you limit our ability to recoup any to put back into our hobby. You want us to comply with laws and regulations which have no regard for the health or the uniqueness of the species we are working with and even though you push and advocate for better education and greater knowledge of the science of breeding dogs and the things which are unique to the species you listen to people who have no knowledge on these things,completely over look our experience and knowledge and listen to people who have no understanding of what it takes to breed a great predictible pet puppy consistently with no other agenda than to stop us doing what we do. You push us to treat what we do as a hobby yet you want to take away our rights to privacy and property rights as if we are running a business. You push to introduce laws which you already know are virtually un enforceable to the very people you say you are trying to regulate and which have proven to be ineffective world wide. You push for laws which will make more of the small breeders walk away - including me and fewer to have any inclination to give the hobby a go and therefore increase the demand for puppies bred by people who are happy to do as you want because it gives them a growth industry. You either cant, dont or wont enforce the laws which are already in place but rather than seeing this as a problem you want to introduce more laws which you cant dont or wont enforce creating more scoff laws, over regulating and effectively being a major part of the reason puppy farmers began and thrive because you made it so hard for ordinary every day breeders to paritcipate in hobby. Its time you stop taking notice of bleeding heart rescuers and radical animal rights who have little or no knowledge of the culture and showed some objectively rather than seeing any thing we say as self serving as if we dont care as much if not more for the welfare of dogs as anyone else. The arrogance which is displayed by those advising you who have never been involved in breeding dogs who think they know it all is amazing but the fact that you overlook those who have been involved in the hobby is incredible.

Or that you dont know its there or you dont have the money to pay the fines.

We're helping them as well as the Queensland people. www.mdbapacers.org.au

It becomes frustrating when ever we start talking about legislation to curtail how many puppies someone can breed. Dog breeding,whether for hobby or commercially is not illegal. No law can interfer with one person's right to engage in the activity of dog breeding as long as they comply with planning laws and animal welfare codes of practice. People in this country have a right to free trade and equitability in all laws. Who is to decide what is too many puppies. The push for breeder licences came from the RSPCA.It was discussed at the round table meeting and the ONLY breeder group who wanted to see this happen was the commercial breeders group and that in itself should be screaming a warning. People who are breeding in less numbers ethically and being responsible for the dogs they breed way into the future are walking away because its all become too hard and way way over regulated.The current laws are not being enforced and surely that should be the first thing to address. The gold coast program which is supposedly being used as a pilot program has been running since April and yet still people are advertising puppies for sale without their breeder numbers. When the council was asked why - the answer is that they cant make the newspapers do anything and they have no way of enforcing it anyway.The only people following the law are the people who are least likely to be doing the wrong thing - in the mean time the more of us they chase off the bigger the market is for the commercial breeders. Just because you want to breed your dog doesnt mean to say you have to loose your right to privacy and right to free use of your own property even if some of us think you should. Obviously mandatory desexing hasnt worked and animals are still being dumped,bred in mass numbers in poor conditions and pet shops still have dogs to sell and people are still buying puppies. The UK people are telling us the licensing of breeders which has been in for 10 years hasnt done much to help anyway and people have found simple ways around it. When will they stop making more laws which have consequences which create a BETTER environment for the very people they are trying to curtail and make those who could make a difference walk away.

Thank you. Full marks to you for going above and beyond to ensure your dogs are tested. Well done.

Gee that seems a bit hard.

Have you tried Petplan as far as I know they are not underwritten by the same people.

Showdog Im really impressed that you go to these lengths to have your dogs tested. Do you mind me asking what these tests are?

Judges dont and cant check for heart murmurs or numerous eye conditions etc. Those kinds of problems aren't clearly visible though, which is what GayleK was trying to get at. Yes I know there are more that are not able to be seen on the day than there are those which can but a heart murmur can be heard and several eye issues are able to be spotted with the naked eye.

I agree that it is a pointless exercise if you assume they are trying to test for all hereditary conditions. Hopwever the article did make it clear that the vets would only be looking for easily visible stuff like lameness, severe ectropion/entropion, inability to exercise reasonably without breathing distress, etc. My assumption is that it is more of a public relations exercise with the KC saying "look our winners don't have these conditions". They are trying to support their breeders I believe. The question I am asking is do you think this is a right way to do it or not? Hmmmm, and maybe some judges do need their eyesight checked? I think if they have already made up their mind they are going to do vet checks this is probably a good solution to having to check every dog. It eliminates some of the logistical issues especially considering how many dogs attend. I think its probably a good start but for me I think its only about half way to what Id like to see and to what will shut animal lib and the like up.

Judges dont and cant check for heart murmurs or numerous eye conditions etc.

To consider that a vet check is being used to identify genetic conditions rather than spotting for symptoms and health conditions is a bit off track I think. If I were going to do vet checks on dogs in this circumstance it would be basic stuff , stethescope, eyes, checking its breathing well etc. The rest which can be tested for or not tested for via other methods would be left to the breeder to do before breeding.Im assuming the aim is to ensure the dog appears to be as much as possible - healthy on the day.

So if this registry is just about health, why the shows, change breed standards etc? We have no mandatory health testing in my breed, I have been pushing for it via the Vic Club. We tried to get a National Body again so we could take it to the ANKC, the some of the other clubs would not agree. I will still test for my sake and my puppy buyers sake regardless. If you check my site you will see I am one of only a handful in my breed who hip and elbow score, and yet I go further by doing ECG and Thyroid - I think there is 2-3 who do this, including myself - My results are public. Unless the ANKC brings in mandatory health testing it will do people no good. As only those who want to be open and honest will be, the others will keep it to themselves like they do now. An example, on my results site which gets over 5000 hits a week world wide there is a Hip and Elbow score page. Breeders/owners can submit there results for all to see OR submit the results as Anonymous ( to try and encourage people to submit results) I care more about the breed average score then the dog who the results belong to - Sure if I plan to use a dog/buy a puppy etc I want to know, but if it's just dog XXXX it does not concern me. The breed average is what concerns me. In 2 years we have 24 dogs listed, 80% are pet owners. 2yr old page. The site has been widely promoted by various methods and people, yet people still don't want to test nor advise others of there results. As only those who want to be open and honest will be, the others will keep it to themselves like they do now. ETA The words - change breed standards etc? Changing breed standards ? Changing the breed's criteria for being able to register puppies isnt quite the same as changing the breed standards. We will not be judging dogs on their breed standard. We are not having shows the way shows have been traditionally and when we have shows/events it will be for the same reason the ANKC have their traditional shows to test or exhibit the dogs against others of their kind but it wont be by having them handled by a judge and running around a ring. The current show system provides titles for conformation champion dogs so why would we want to knock ourselves out and do nothing more than replicate that when all we have to do is add the titles to the certificates to know the dog is a champion? We will be adding Schutzhund titles and we have no intention of ever doing Schutzhund event. We will be adding herding titles and obedience titles and there isnt any need for us to conduct them because they are already happening. In your case with the Danes you are asking for exactly what we are doing - introducing mandatory testing before the litter can be registered and having the information available so it can be used when choosing a dog to mate with yours. Carrying that through to all future pedigrees where that dog is represented. The things you have said regarding wanting some tests made mandatory, and making the results available is why the registry was introduced, because we agree with you.

The certificate [piece of paper] is always the property of the issuing registry but the information is in the public domain and able to be used just as they have been used all over the net in hundreds of situations and data bases. There are also several precedents where this has happened where ANKC pedigrees have been used by another registry any way. We enter all of the usual stuff which the owners provide and then add in DNA and test results - other titles and in some cases job descriptions and anything else which may interest someone who is looking at the pedigree to work out what is the best dog to use. We dont take the pup's pedigree certificate which has been generated by the ANKC and copy it we dont need to see it we add the data from the information and various certificates for health and screening microchipping etc given to us by the breeder and the certificates we produce remain the property of the owner of the dog.

But it's not a case of one or the other, is it? I thought I read earlier that it is about dual membership. Which basically means that for a whole $55 per year you have another organisation filling voids that the other one (which you still need to belong to for the reasons you mention) can't, won't or doesn't. The dual membership/fee doesn't bother me, it might bother some others. The voids the MDBA might fill do not fix any of the ANKC problems there might be, instead it takes it away from them and doesn't make them stand up and fix the problems. If you were to say we are starting a business/organisation to tackle the ANKC problems, I would be the first to put my money where my mouth is. Two registries, how is that helping out the purebred registered dog world? You would have one registry that can register puppies/show/FCI/World Wide etc and another who might have a better COE but won't be recognised by the rest of the world in regards to puppies/show/FCI etc So yes it is a case of one or the other for many Breeders/Showies/Obedience etc World Wide recognised puppies and Titles, vs Recognised in Australia Only. I dont see its a case of one or the other at all, Its certainly not for me and it isnt for anyone else who has registered their puppies with us so far. Our registry is helping out the purebred dog world in a way the ANKC doesnt and there are a hell of a lot more than 2 registries Given that all of our breeder members are ANKC members and the code of conduct says they have to register every live pup on the ANKC registry then every pup that goes on our registry is also on the ANKC registry. How is this a problem or doing the purebred dog world any harm?

Problem then becomes that a group decide they dont like some part and then they form their own registry. Opps thats what has already happened. Trouble is that certain groups making new registries all the time simply compound the issue. If we only had the one registry (ANKC) then there would be no need for this discussion. But the forming of various different groups and their registries simply makes the situation where members of the public are confused. And a new registry just started by a certain body only adds fuel to the fire. Our registry was started as a service to our members to enable them to track genetic , health and temperament issues and to ensure that any dogs being placed on that registry had the necessary proofs in place to ensure the genetic data was being collected and recorded. We do not have one breeder member who is not also an ANKC member - our registry isnt an instead of but rather an as well as and there is nothing fuelling any fire except people who want to make it into something it isnt by accusing us of doing the most ridiculous things. A handful of people decided it was one thing and the crap that is spread is taken as what it is. For over 6 years the MDBA has worked to encourage people to join the ANKC and to promote purebred dogs but now because we introduced something which is a tool our members can use which helps to see things in a pedgree which to date hasnt been available we have to be treated like we have committed some crime. The only thing we have done which is any different than hundreds of others have done is that we have done it for all breeds rather than just one. Pick a breed and most of them have a separate registry and they have had for years which records genetic test results and makes them available to their members. If Annie had been talking to someone who was registered with the MDBA then she wouldnt have had a problem because the expectation is what is expected for an ANKC member. The problem has nothing to do with us providing extra data on a pedigree it occurred because she bumped someone who was registered as a breeder with a commercial cross bred registry using the same language she expected only purebred regsitered breeders would use. As far as any registry such as the pet breeders registry is concerned the government is responsible for that because they have given exemptions to the ANKC and the only way any other group could get the same exemptions for their members is to register their dogs. If Annie or anyone else bumps into someone saying they are registered with less requirements on them than an ANKC breeder that has nothing whatever to do with us. Accredited breeder schemes via the ANKC elevate one registered breeder over another and put more requirements on what a breeder has to do to register their puppies and that is seen as O.K. but because we have made it much harder than they have for our members and to be able to register their puppies it's frowned upon. Dogs NSW and Dogs queensland can say that some of their members are better than other members who they still register and who they still register puppies for but when we say our members are better than some other breeders all hell breaks. Some of the breeders who have been given accredited breeder status wouldnt get into the MDBA and their puppies would not be able to be registered on our registry. Across the board everyone has seen what we have done as something great with the exception of a handful of purebred breeders who made a snap decision based on assumption and feed it up to be something it isnt. Councils have been registering breeders and their dogs, issuing permits and the like and so have the the AAPDB for years . Breeders have been saying they are registered when they are not ANKC registered and trying to pin the situation on us as fuelling the fire by introducing ours makes little sense. Firstly Julie I am not going to get into any discussion of what the MDBA does or why. Thats between you and your membership. The fact still remains that if you have a single registry there wouldn't be the confusion but when you have a registry as maintained by the ANKC then another maintained by the Working Dog group and another maintained by the Pet industry and yet another maintained by the MDBA for whatever reason that is where members of the public get confused. They don't understand the reason for these different registries. As such members of the public think they are all the same thing when they are not. That is why there is so much confusion about the term "registered breeder". When a member of the public buys their dog and gets some piece of paper from the AAPDB or whoever they assume it means the same as the papers issude by other organisations. There are even some that conjour up their own registry name and create their own "papers" to go with the dogs they sell. And to Joe Public this means the same as papers issued by ANKC, FCI, MDBA or any other register. The public don't know the difference unless they find out at some point afterwards and then its too late. They then discover that the papers they got for their precious pup don't mean what they thought they did. As for the health matters to which you refer I am quite happy to leave that for my ANKC affiliated breed council to deal with it. And Yes I do realise that not all breeds are so represented. As for the accusations and problems you mentioned I don't know what they are nor do I care, so I cant see the relevance in including that statement when replying to my post. As to the accredited breeder scheme I don't agree with it. The reason I don't agree with it is because who are they to say breeder X is better than I. They have no idea the measures I take with my dogs. They don't know the health testing and profiling I do. It strikes me as simply a money grabbing exercise. Further I didn't try and pin the situation on your body. I simply pointed out that having different registries issuing different papers etc only serves to confuse the public who have no idea of the difference. In regard to councils issuing permits etc. this is usually because they need the money. No amount of different registries or breeder bodies is going to solve that problem Yes I agree.

Just commenting on this, when the MDBA started up I don't think its' goal was to start it's own registry, it had other agenda's. This discussion is about the registry, not the MDBA. I would be saying the same thing if XXX wanted to do the same thing. That's right we had no intention what ever of getting anywhere near a registry and this thread was about how people could find a reputable breeder not the registry. The code of conduct which has been under the microscope is about members not pedigrees. Being able to offer the ability to breeders to better profile a pedigree is not some big sin. No one has expected that any of them will leave the ANKC or do anything different via registrations than they have always done. If someone wants to use the service we offer to do a better job of breeding healthier puppies and provide that data to other breeders and puppy buyers where is the harm in this? If we want to say you cant register your puppies with us unless you do certain mandatory tests which the ANKC dont have as mandatory - how does this hurt anyone ? If I want to DNA my parent dogs and enter that , if I want to test my parents and enter that and if I want to be able to access that sort of info from other breeders over generations how does this cause a problem? If I want to give my puppy buyers an extra piece of paper to let them know the parents had to be profiled and tested and what the results are of them and their ancestors why is this something I have to defend? What is it exactly that people are so against us having a register of our members dogs?

QLD is the only one who has that program at present as far as im aware, and no I don't agree with the tick the boxes and pay you get it. As I have previously said.. No fee, an award. Sounds interesting - how do you see that managed? We hand one out at every awards evening with the Diane Gunn Scarcella memorial award. Its the only one we dont take nominations for from the public. How do you pick your winner then, It comes from within the organisation same as I Imagine it. Yes it does but its hard to do and its one stand out per year for something way out of the ordinary - how would they choose which breeders to elevate to some level over any other and what criteria would be used. How would you come to their attention over any other? How would you prove your worthiness and how many , and how often should this award be handed out?

For a whole year, I presume? yep or 77 if they are partnered.

This is what I don't understand. Here comes along an organisation that seeks to fill the voids that exists within another organisation (who is not dumb to what's going on; the grumblings; etc). Breeders have a choice. Refuse to join the second organisation and work with what they've got and what they've had for ....... how long? Ummmm ..... 60 years now? ... ok, that's a choice, although people have tried to communicate; have voiced their concerns; have voiced their opinions; etc. etc. And it is how far a long to being better? They can, if they wish, join another newer organisation. One which expresses its acknowledgement of problems that need addressing; that have needed addressing for a long long time but which (not for the want of nudging/trying) aren't being addressed satisfactorily and without detriment to the very breeders that are the 'other' organisation's members (this is as I understand things). It will cost a fee. Certainly. I'd even expect that. But if that organisation was no threat to what I did as a breeder (if I was one) and indeed if that organisation could provide me with some benefit, be that by way of support/attestation to what I do and/or by support in working for better laws (or helping prevent or at least working against laws that are degenerative and in opposition to my very [ethical] aims and goals), then I can't see what the problem would be. I would happily pay that fee. Btw .... What fee are we talking about, for breeders, Steve? $55

oops