Steve

Quote Steve im a vicdog member,MBDA mmber,Frenchbulld dog club,Boston terrier club member. And from what i read the MBDA is the only membership that could help me. l WANT to keep my 10 dogs ...l want to be able to breed to improve whats in my yard SO PLEASE what should we do...??????? lm willing to help in anyway possible as the shire[wellington]will be trying there dammedest to cut down the number of dogs VCA member can own. These new regulations are made to make the piulic belive its to cut down Puppyfarms here,but it also includes US[VICDOG MEMBERS] IM NOT HERE TO HELP THE PUPPYFAMERS JUST US...IS THIS POSSIBLE??? I think if I answer this it will help lots of people to understand why we have been warning people about banging a drum about more laws and more power to the RSPCA to enforce local laws. So far in the state of Victoria many registered breeders thought they were safe form needing to have planning permits to breed dogs on their property as long as they kept their numbers under 10 fertile animals. Non registered breeders also felt that they could own and breed up to 5 fertile bitches without needing to bother with permits or licenses etc. There are fair reasons for this belief which is perpetrated by Vic dogs who fall over themselves telling their members what a great job they do for them and how they were able to manage exemptions for them. And they were. Registrations are cheaper, and you don’t have to pay for a permit until you have 10 breeding animals or comply with all of the extra stuff which goes along with a Domestic and Feral Animal business license. But the big deal and it’s the one I feel like I just bang my head against a wall with when I try to explain why we are against more laws being bought in is this. Any where not just in Victoria whether or not Canine councils have been able to get exemptions for their members or not this has nothing whatever to do with environment and planning laws which each and every person who ever breeds a dog in any place , in any state in Australia whether they are registered breeders or not has to comply with. These laws treat everyone equally – there is no distinction between someone who has 10 chi’s or 10 great Danes. There is no distinction between someone who breeds as a hobby even if they never actually ever sell a puppy and someone who only breeds for commercial purposes. In a recent press release Jo Helper said there were 70 breeders who have planning approval to be breeding facilities in the entire state. Given that registered breeders also need these planning approvals if they ever breed a litter or own more than 2 entire dogs at an educated guess I’d say that one hell of a lot of breeders who are breaking the law. Now to date many have been able to be ignorant of this requirement and those who did know they needed these permits via environment and planning in their shire could be pretty relaxed because council didn’t come looking and didn’t know you even existed unless there was a complaint. The new laws which are being pushed Australia wide which many registered breeders are backing as anti puppy farm and anti pet shop sales include legislation which will identify who you are , where you live , how many dogs you have and breed and whether or not you comply with these environmental laws. They will give the RSPCA the power to enforce these local environment laws because those breeders including registered breeders who keep their breeding dogs in their lounge rooms on satin pillows are the rogue breeders they are talking about when they tell of breeders who are breeding outside of environment and planning laws. Breeders such as Banksia Park comply with these environment and planning laws ,they have had complaints so the council has already given the nod and ticked them off .RSPCA won’t be able to ping them or tell them to do anything they don’t already do as long as they comply with local and state laws pertaining to keeping and breeding animals. When you see photos of 2 dogs in one pen on concrete floors miles away from the house that’s exactly what they have been forced to do to comply with these environmental planning laws and SO WILL EVERY PERSON WHO BREEDS A DOG as they should be now according to local laws. So let’s go back a minute and apply this knowledge to the question regarding Wellington shire. In Wellington shire Victoria the Planning scheme states that animal keeping is land used to a) Breed or board domestic pets; or b) Keep, breed or board racing dogs. In Residential 1 Zone, Low Density Residential Zone or Township Zone a planning permit is not required for the keeping of 2 animals. (This does not include animal boarding). You may apply for a planning permit to keep more than 2 animals but no more than 5 animals. In a Rural Zone the keeping of more than 5 animals requires a planning permit. If you have more than 2 dogs in a residential area but less than 5 you need to apply for a permit to keep them there whether you are CC registered or not. If you either don’t already have this permit or you have more than 5 dogs in this zoned area you are breaking the law and your dogs are at risk. If you live in a rural zone and you have more than 5 dogs you have to apply for a planning permit. This entails doing EXACTLY what any puppy farmer is required to do to get the approval including having a sign on your fence to let everyone know what you intend to do and therefore alerting animal lib to what you are up to. You will need to fill out an application form, which is available at Shire Services Centres or you can download a from our website www.wellington.vic.gov.au. The checklist attached to the application explains the type of information to be provided. As well as 3 copies of a site plan, you will need to submit a written description of the proposal. This should include: • maximum number of animals (existing and/or proposed increase) • waste disposal methods • traffic movements • landscaping • Any other information to assist Council in the assessment of the proposal. The site plan should also show the distances between the animal keeping activities (kennels, exercise yards etc) and adjoining houses and an assessment of effects of the proposal on the environment and other people. Now I don’t want anyone to answer this question here because if the answer is no you shouldn’t say so out loud. If you live in Wellington shire and you are a registered breeder do you currently comply with local environment and planning laws ? Are you a person with more than 2 dogs living in suburbia and if so do you have the necessary approvals to keep your dogs? If you don’t have this permit then the reason you have been able to do that is because council haven’t policed these laws. So when you join animal lib and push for new harder laws just remember its you who is the rogue and the one who will be in the spotlight that you have been able to avoid for so long. Go on humour me how many registered breeders do you reckon are complying with environment planning laws? How many do you think would still be able to do what they do now this time next year? When they come to your door to police the laws – remember who asked for it. In some areas [mainly Queensland] we have seen recent activity to make breeders think they have no worries by applying for a breeding permit. This then identifies who they are and where they are and according to dog registration etc what they are being told is true. Registered breeders feel all warm and snuggly because their CC has been able to get them reductions and exemptions on fees and wham in comes the environment and planning stuff and before they know it their lives have changed. Your state CCs and liaison officers can’t do a bloody thing either. Its no big deal though – right ? After all if we want to breed dogs then we should be doing what we need to do to comply with the laws and we have nothing to worry about right as long as we do the right thing. Can the MDBA help you? Im speaking with some people now to find out exact eligibility criteria on whats needed on your property to apply and get approval and we will be able to help you get it all ready for applying and Im consulting with some people on another aspect of it but the short answer looks like being that if these laws come in and you are not holding a planning permit which is needed in your zone. No. No one can. What are the chances of these laws coming in ? Extremely high as both Labour and Liberal have already said they will do so. In NSW its already a done deal and RSPCA can enforce these environment and planning laws and its why several breeders Im aware of have simply decided it’s too hard after having a visit and being told what they have to do to keep breeding their dogs and at least 2 rescue groups that Im aware of have had to shut shop after visits from the RSPCA. One more small point please take note that so far no one has said they will introduce laws to stop the sales of animals in pets shops. Stop running with animal lib, stop calling for new laws and stop thinking we are special. There are other ways to stop puppies being bred in poor conditions and if the calls for laws and more power to the RSPCA weren’t so strong we may be able to talk about them logically.

Im going to take your answer to another thread .

the 15th of October is National Vet Nurse day and in order to celebrate it and try to put a bit of a focus on the vet nurses of Australia who do a great job The MDBA in conjunction with Petplan Pet Insurance are offering 10% discount on new pet insurance polices for those who place a nomination in the MDBA Dog Owners Choice Awards for their vet nurse over the next 2 days. The Dog Owners Choice Awards are sponsored by Dogzonline with this particular category being backed up by Pet Plan insurance www.petplan.com.au When you log your nomination we will give you a reference number to give to Petplan to apply for your discount. Place your nomination here -Nominate a vet nurse

do i ring up the same shire that also houses 14 puppy farms in our region? we've had a permit with them for the last 26 years to house showdogs, we have a showdog permit i.e. dogs registered with DOGSVICTORIA. i asked the question when it was stated how many farms in our region, does this include registered breeders? the answer was no it does not include registered breeders. so we in this shire at least we are being exempt from being treated like the animal businesses in this region. This region as i've said many times before is puppy farm central and supplies the rest of the country. this shire does not check any people with permits no one came near us when our permit was granted we did not have to comply with anything, they did check our immediate neighbors and some did even know we had dogs. so if they didn't check us like they are supposed to imagine the large farms in the area? they get away with no checking as the shire stated themselves at the RSPCA puppy forum. not in wellington shire. don't know if its a good or bad thing. and i think you will find that most shires are like this, the country ones they are flat strapped to find help and don't have specific staff to inspect. they only have 2 people doing this for 14 farms, i did ring the DPI to ask if they inspect these properties to get told that they don't have funding to do this and they just assist councils and if they need help then they might assign inspectors but they rarily do. its left up to the councils who don't inspect as we found out about wellington shire with their 14 farms, remember i said, all the sheets were blank for 5 years, 5 years of records these farms were to keep there was nothing on them! the 2 people in this shire that are to inspect farms also double as traffic wardens. The council did try and shut down a farm or farms its not clear but the VCAT keeps ruling them back in again, i see another one went to court only to be told to get rid of half their animals some were seized by RSPCA because they were in appauling condition 150 dogs were left on the property. VCAT has a habit of favouring the farmers and leave them to remain open to breed up more dogs in misery when in actual fact the law states that if they violate the code which they have on a number of accounts, council can shut them down permanently when the council try to do that, the VCAT rule they can stay open. the laws are inadequate and very ridiculous! so the farmers go through loopholes so more laws aint gona do jack shit for those dogs stuck on farms living like battery hens. i really don't agree with tweaking the current laws we have which are failing the dogs and having more laws, i think its stupid the farmers will find ways of getting around it anyway and still there'll be thousands of dogs from these farms saturating our pounds. What the PUBLIC is asking for not registered breeders or anyone else is the shutting down of these places because we have enough animals trying to find homes in shelters society has no need to breed up more, and also the PUBLIC are asking for banning of sales of dogs and cats in petshops because this is where these farms 95% of the time are getting rid of their stock. what that has to do with people like us under a showdog permit i don't know. as far a i am concerned it has nothing to do with us. this is what the public want. whats wrong with a bit of education about mixed breed pups from these farms not being health tested adn having a bit more knowledge breeding dogs yourselves to add to the debate? and at the same time encouraging people firstly to go to shelters to get a pet and if they want a pure bred to go to a registered breeder? whats wrong with telling people about non-shedding and shedding coming from a breeders persepctive as many of the public don't know the aspects of grooming and the staff at petshops don't know either. no one knows the only people that know is experienced breeders. i have many people through my website, face book or what have you, asking me questions about where to get their next pet, so whats wrong with helping them out a bit sharing my knowledge and steering them in the right direction? then they tell someone else who tells someone else adn they might read the info on the internet using all medias just like the designer dog people (??) have done, fight fire with fire. to many registered breeders jsut sit back and yes, think they are better and don't share any information, promote promote promote its in our hands. not to keep quoting doom and there's nothing we can do. there's plenty we can do....without donating heaps of money, i don't donate money i feel like i am doing something and it feels good to talk to the public about the benefits of our pedigree dogs. it feels good to write letters to the premier, MP's, anyone that will listen about the problems about breeding these mixed breeds for money alone no other purpose as opposed to a well bred socialised pedigree dog. in the eyes of the law yes we are no better but that can be changed if people would just open up their mouths once in a while and have positive stuff coming out of it. this is the problem they don't think anything, i get heaps of enquiries about where to get a puppy from so you are wrong there, most people don't know about ETHICAL REPUTABLE registered breeders, so thats when you advise there are some good breeders there are bad registered breeders you have to learn the difference adn you give them the tools to learn the difference don't you. all this is in my website. i have had many visitors over the years and i have members of the public wanting help so i help them. i feel like i am doing something positive. why would you want to do this being a registered breeder?????? i dont' understand where you are coming from there. there is no distinction between our organisation and pet breeders in some shires is there? thats when the residents that are ANKC breeders/exhibitors must stand up and be counted then. i did move to a shire that didn't recognise DOGSVIC at all, so i write them a letter and they responded by saying its up to DOGSVIC to push for its members. what is causing all this big caffuffle in our communities some of the people in it who are breeding their little pet mixed breed dogs for pure profit without the welfare of their dogs without testing this is what is causing the filling up of our shelters. This is how i see it anyway. Thats the problem organisations like that are using their political gains or what not, to talk in the ears of peple in power because people in power have no idea they don't know any better, about anything and they dont want to have an idea. who speaks the loudest is based on who has the money. so far they are not listening to what the voters want. i had a long conversation (half an hour) about the pros and cons of pedigree dogs versus puppy factory mixed breeds dogs and in the end the guy said he only ever goes to a breeder for his puppies i said what sort of breeder, he said, DOGSVIC breeder. or a shelter, he will not go to a petshop, why not i said, because they usually come from a farm. lol meanwhile he quoted what all the councillors and a mayor has quoted direct from these farmers and that is, there is a market for these dogs so why not. i responded by saying there is a market for any type of dog but meanwhile we are killing quarter of a million dogs in the shelters. we had a nice conversation that ended well with the guy thinking about what i said, i've had similar conversations with lots of people through work and now people are coming up saying its bad to buy a pup in a petshop so the message is geting through down here anyway. we've had big billboards in Melbourne from RSPCA across the whole city telling ppl not to buy from petshops ad now people are actuall quoting it wanting to shut these farms down. my mother and i from the day dot, before the animal libbers came in to give us more media coverage, were trying to do something about the heaps of dog farmers who advertised in the local rag for years and years. puppies wanted, hundreds of adverts for mixed breed puppies we knew all this was coming. push out the old pedigree dog, in with the designer dog, out with the pedigree. so should we just sit there and think we have been beaten. i sure as hell aint gona give up......i refuse to just sit there and do nothing. anythign is better than just sitting there. i mean some think the animal libbers are bad but at least they've highlighted these farms in our community the farms we always knew were there. put up signs they did, we'd follow them around take them down, they'd put them back up. lol we'll never give up and ofcourse poor old mum is still writing to the wellington shire telling them to stop supporting this mass producing of our dogs. poor old mum. she's like me we will never give up promoting our pedigrees even if all the cards are stacked against us Steve. i think its good that the VCA has managed to get in the ears of the govt as pushed by its own members. thats something because the average person like us, has no hope of ever getting these politicians to listen. as they said, the government need to listen to the people that know how to breed dogs and dealt with genetics in dogs for years (the organisation and its members) not groups that only deal with pet issues not the breeding and genetics side. The animal libbers are bad and the fact that any breeder is sucked in by them and agreeing with anything they do is crazy and in all honesty very disappointing. In case you havent noticed the people who are telling governments and the people they are listening to about breeding dogs are people who think purebred dogs are unhealthy and that purebred breeders are pond scum.While ever you have the right to breed and promote your dogs everyone else does too and when you actively seek to stop them doing that the only outcome can be you are stopped too. That is a fact and nothing you can say will ever change that in this country.It amazes me that its so hard to grasp.

City Council changes controversial vicious dog law http://www.toledoonthemove.com/news/politics/story.aspx?id=525097 I think I would have felt better if it had said the law unfairly treats pit bull OWNERS. TOLEDO -- Toledo's vicious dog law has been changed. City Council voted Tuesday to change the law which has been ruled unconstitutional because it unfairly targets pit bulls. These changes include ending breed specific determinations. That means a dangerous dog will be defined by its behavior not its breed. There will be bigger fines for dog bites, restrictions on how long a dog can be tied up outside, and reckless dog owners could have their pets seized.

Yes thats how it looks. Not that simple. There are many things which impact here and a public forum isnt the place to chat about them. Suffice to say assuming people who are involved in the dog world will put the dogs first over numerous other things is folly.

Well, I'm not quite sure who you're really addressing here. Future buyers of puppies? Registered breeders have their canine councils, lobby them to act on your behalf, isn't that why you elect them? Registered breeders have to fight the fight themselves, they have to stand up and separate themselves.....in the eyes of the puppy buying public....from puppy farms, backyard breeders etc. And they have to tell the public loud and clear why it's better to buy a puppy from them. it is true, the majority don't care just whinge amongst themselves when the ones with the loudest voice are often heard. there's alot a registered breeder can do amongst the general public to promote ourselves but sadly not many are interested. lobby your breed club to conduct a friendly members comp to include members with pets to educate them about the pros of pedigree dogs. talk to your workmates about it, on facebook, on public forums, write to your councils, MP's the government,there is heaps you can do rather than telling each other, its not going to get us anywhere. you are preaching to the already converted. in our state the state controlling body IS doing something after they were bombarded by its members, they are holding a puppy farm forum, have invited its members to have input on how to deal with this issue. They are one of 5 approved organisations i hear to advise the government on canine issues. So the RSPCA is pushing their agenda but i see their proposed legislation does exclude Registered breeders of DogsVictoria. So Dogs Victoria are pushing for its members too. all the things RSPCA listed on their proposed legislation is what registered breeders are already doing. this is why they did set up this companion dog club thats going very well i see in Victoria. it promotes us in the general public and something for the average pet owner to join and learn about what we do best in a positive light. and all the while most registered breeders at shows that i talked to were grumbling about the general public coming in ruining their shows. how ridiculous, its getting us out there amongst the general public pushing something positive....but no, grumble grumble grumble..... sometimes i just don't understand the negative attitudes its not helping anyone at all isn't it any wonder that anything is said about us is just negative stuff ....!!! i get sick of hearing negative stuff its really depressing im sorry that way but i really do...... and i don't really agree with US and THEM policy of saying its animal libbers against US registered breeders. people who are against puppy farmers are not hard core animal libbers i will say it again. it is just normal people that want to see dog and cat sales banned in petshops and also puppy farms banned nothing else tacked on the end. becuse they believe in this they are called the dreaded "animal libbers" are they? its not a coo against registered breeders and stopping anyone breeding nothing has been said about this. if i can't find anything out in plain sight written about stopping registered breeders im sure no one of the average community can too. Toy dogs - Stop a minute. The new laws which are on the table are about who will police the laws which are already there - NOT JUST COMPANION ANIMALS LAWS but also laws which pertain to environment and planning . Do you understand that no matter what you think will be the exemptions via being a registered breeder that they dont mean jack shit as soon as enviromental laws cut in. Ring up and ask your shire what you have to do to run a business from home via environmental department - not companion animals department. You are not special, you are not able to have more rights than someone who breeds cross bred dogs, no amount of promoting purebreds or registered breeders is going to do a single thing to help the fact that environmental laws say what you can and cant do on your property and if they allow you to do it how thats going to be done. No one cares if you have 5 chis or 50 great danes .So far you have been able to breed dogs from your property and only have to worry about whether you comply with companion animal laws. 5 for unregistered and 10 for registered because council havent been policing environmental laws until there has been a complaint but what you are asking for is for the RSPCA to police these laws and to be able check you out with out a complaint to be sure you are complying with them. That you have your DA and your concrete pens and quarantine areas - NO MATTER WHAT YOU BREED OR HOW MANY YOU OWN. Your push to clean up puppy farmers and introduce tougher laws is based on your belief that everyone thinks you are better than and different to any one else because you breed registered dogs and in the eyes of the law and most other people you are not. Its a scam orchestrated by animal rights. Work with one side and tell em how hybrids suck and how any one breeding them is horrid. Work with hybrid breeders and tell them how much purebred breeders suck. Work with hobby breeders and tell them how anyone who looks like they breed for profit suck and work with commercial breeders to tell them how hobby breeders who breed for the better ment of the breed and not profit suck. Chuck in a couple of professors, TV gardeners and politicians and no one gets to breed dogs and every one fights each other until its a case of one group riding over all things welfare based with canines just has been recommeded by the Bateman report. Thats one umbrella group who gets to say what breed standards can and cant be left as they are and what breeds can and cant be bred, what COI we use, what we can and cant mate and everything else breeders might think of doing which they have decided isnt good for the dogs.

Where are these laws that say you have to raise a litter in kennels away from your house? This is the issue I feel like Im knocking myself out over. No matter where you live the minute you are deemed to be running a business from home the laws you are looking at regarding dogs are out the window. So when you see laws which relate to how many a person can have and there are no restrictions or conditions on how they are housed every one assumes its all O.K. It isnt - breeders have to comply with environment and planning laws. In NSW you can own as many as you want and you dont have to have a permit to breed according to state companion animals laws BUT the definition of a breeder is anyone who breeds a litter and once you are a breeder you are running a business from home no matter what you say and you therefore come under environment and planning laws. This is also true for anyone who ever rehomes one dog for a recue group from their home. In most shires there are restrictions on where you have to house more than 2 dogs and how. I can give you examples of breeders and rescue groups in NSW who have been placed in situations where they either have to have concrete pens blah blah blah or not be given approval to breed their dogs. They can own 50 - no problem but the minute they sell one, or breed one all bets are off. In Victoria state laws say if you are a registered breeder you can have 10 fertile dogs but environment and planning define having 5 as ruinning a business and its then That their envorinmental and planning laws cut in. I can give you stack of examples in this state too. In Queensland the dog laws sound pretty good too but a breeder is anyone who breeds a litter and that means that environment and planning say what can and cant be done. I can give you examples of peopel who are now this minute being told they have to have concrete pens, quarantine areas and drainage into septic tanks to breed a litter of pups and they live on huge acres. I can give you examples of people who own 2 entire dogs who need a DA for running a business for breeding dogs from home. If you breach council environment laws you are in a heap more problems than you are with any state companion law. Council by laws for breeding dogs in Victoria say you have to keep your dogs just like the Banksia park people are and its why they can and will be able to operate no matter who is policing the laws.But even though they have no choice according to environment laws animal lib sneak in and take photos of them on concrete in pens purpose built to comply with the laws and use that to tell people they suck. They may suck but they have no choice on how they house those dogs. The big whine is that councils havent policed these laws - and they havent because thats how - unless registered breeders have applied for a DA they have been able to do pretty much as they want and breed dogs in their homes without concrete floored pens etc . The joke of it is those calling for new laws think its going to stop places like Banksia park but instead it will make us all look like Banksia park. The new laws arent about how you do things they are about who will police the ones already there. Guess who will be worse off than they are now? Not puppy farmers who have already been granted DAs and who comply already.

My questions to breeders are: 1) Do you have to vaccinate, worm and flea your pups prior to selling as a condition of being a registered breeder? You have to vaccinate and worm.You cant sell pups with fleas so if you have them you have to do something to get rid of them . 2) Would you raise pups on nothing but a raw diet and sell them with the recommendation that they are fed nothing but raw and don't receive any vaccinations, worm or flea treatment? Absolutely not. 3) Do you educate your puppy buyers on the dangers of processed pet food? Yes 4) Do you think puppies need to have worm and flea treatments as babies and do you think they should be vaccinated? All puppies need to be vaccinated.

1) when dogs are on a natural, raw diet fleas and mosquitos are not interested in them so there is no need for flea or heartworm treatments. Sometimes - but its not as simple as just saying a natural, raw diet.You can feed some things which make them less tassty to mozzies and fleas and you can include other natural management things to reduce the risk but the fact is you still need to be vigilant and ensure that the other sik factors are reduced. I dont believe that people should do things to stop fleas until they know they need to. Ive never had a dog with fleas in 20 years so why would I put chemicals into my dogs to prevent them? However, if someone lives in an area where this is a problem they would need to take action including ensuring their dog's immune system is healthy. Learn the life cycle of the heart worm and consider the risks for your dog based on where you live and whether the dog is really at risk or not. If it is at risk learn what you can do instead of adding chemicals if you can avoid it but if there is any risk based on your geography and life style its not worth taking the risk and doing nothing.Not all chemicals are equal so you need to do what you have been doing- research but take it a bit further than you have so far. 2) if dogs are not subjected to chemical intervention, their bodies are able to develop the ability to deal with worms on their own. Sometimes but just dealing with them isnt necessarily the best thing for them. Again learn the life cycle of the worms and what worms your dog based on what it may be exposed to is at risk. of having or contracting. In the case of round worm and hook worm you wouldnt know whether your bitch has the lavae in her uterus which crosses the placenta when she is 6 weeks pregnant and infects her puppies and her milk.You can never justify the risk of not assuming your puppies have worms because it strips their immune system very quickly. You can learn how to determine whether your dog has worms and treat them if they do rather than treat them in case if you want to cut down the chemical exposure but you cant just assume without a check system. Not all chemicals are equal so you need to learn the difference between drugs and their action to determine which ones you think are best to treat your dogs if you need to. There are valid scientific argumenst against worming dogs just in case but again its not that simple. 3) vaccinations do nothing except poison your dog. Vaccinations give your dog anti bodies - and if they are exposed to those deseases without having those anti bodies they die. The chances that a dog can go through its life without being exposed to parvo are 100 to 1 - its endemic - that means its everywhere and that means in your yard and in your carpet and on people's shoes as they enter your property etc. Over vaccination does nothing except poison your dog but its not that simple and you need to consider the issues which affect canine immunology and when you should and should not vaccinate. 4) pups over 12 weeks of age are safe from Parvo. Pups over 12 weeks are not safe from Parvo unless they have been vaccinated. Much depends on their Mum's immune status and her antibody level and again its not that simple. Education and making the best decisions for your dog based on your own circumstances is a great thing but not everyone is able to conduct the research and follow through with what else is needed to be done to ensure your dog is safe.It really is a case of not enough info and you could make decisions for your dog which would put them at risk when you are trying to do the exact opposite. You can see some info - think you get it and make a decision only to find you missed a bit . The fact that you have done what you have so far and begun looking at it all is fantastic but you have only a part of the stuff you need to make informed decisions and know what the risks are in what you decide to do. Stay with it and ask lots of questions but dont make any decisions for your dog whether that be going with or without chemicals or current drug recommendations until you know what the real risks are for either thing and whether you are prepared to go one way or the other based on really knowing what the risk factors are. My questions to puppy buyers are: 1) Would you buy a puppy from a breeder who hasn't given the pups any vaccinations, worm or flea treatments? Yes I would but I would require much more information first . Would I buy a pup that I thought might have parvo when it arrived? No Would I buy a pup that I knew had a high worm burden? No Woudl I buy a pup that had fleas ? No. 2) Would you be happy with a pup that has gone from mother's milk to raw diet? All of my pups go from Mothers Milk to a raw diet and I would prefer to buy a pup that has been raised this way. 3) Would you be prepared to continue for the rest of the dog's life with no vaccinations and feeding a raw diet? My dogs are not vaccinated after their first birthday and they are fed a raw diet.

What is he eating?

This is the least of your problems. They are about to hand over the policing of laws which to date have been in the hands of councils to the RSPCA and at the same time bring in the ability to have your stuff seized and for you to pay bonds even before you are found guilty. If there happens to be a ranger who doesnt like the colour of your hair and uses his power corruptly too bad - prove it. By the time you get close to having a go at defending yourself you're bankrupt or your dogs are dead and your whole life is destroyed.

If things stay the same nothing will change and world wide none of the crap thats going on with more and more laws and rules are doing anything for those who they are supposed to be helping - the dogs. There is no evidence to show that going down the path we are on is going to prevent one single dog from suffering in fact there is strong evidence to suggest the opposite. Its going to take a different way of thinking to get to a point where we are all working toward the greater good - the dogs. Give up? Never. Identify the problem - the real problem not one thats beaten up and made to look like its the problem and then find the solutions. But part of that solution is going to have to be to acknowledge that regardless of what you choose to breed - whether you register them on a stud registry or not, whether you show them or not that we are all equal in the eyes of the law and we all have the same obligation to the dogs we breed and the families they live with. While ever we fall into the trap of beating a drum and pushing for ways of getting the other group shut down and run out of town because we are deluded into thinking we are the superior group and our beliefs and philosophies are the only ones which should be left standing we are writing our own death warrant and dogs will still suffer. I am a dog breeder - and Im a bloody good one. Ive made my mistakes and still make em now and then. Ive served my apprenticeship and devoted my life to getting it right and Im proud of what I do and so are the people who live with the dogs I breed - and you know what? Kate Scoffeld the leader of the AAPDB which represents commercial breeders who is 100% anti purebred says the same thing about herself and the dogs she breeds. If I expect that I am going to have rights to breed my dogs and have her rights removed or vice versa neither of us will be breeding dogs. Like it or not thats a fact and rather than each group concentrating on making the other look bad and pushing for tougher laws to shut the others down - its time we concentrated on our own back yard and made sure thats in order regardless of which group we belong to. In this country its not possible to make a law which disadvantages one group over any other and the sooner we realise that and stop expecting that we are going to be seen as the special ones over any other the quicker we can work out real ways of stopping dogs from suffering because bringing in laws to allow the RSPCA to police local by laws is a crap shoot especially with animal lib pointing out the targets.

Thats not the only problem I have but its the main one. Under the system as it stands there is nothing there that is going to make any distinction between you and a puppy farmer and every day the line in the sand is less and less obvious. The days of people assuming because you are a registered breeder you are in some way better than any other person who mates a dog and has a litter of puppies is long gone. The days of people assuming that because you are a registered breeder you are covering the bases and breeding better dogs is well and truly out the window. Those breeders who show their dogs and think that any thing thats said is about other people and not them because they are automatically superior still havent worked out that its them and their dogs which are being spoken of as being less healthy and they are being seen to be less ethical than any group. There is no point in trying to turn it around by applying pressure to the Canine Councils to amend their codes of conduct because its already been tested and they cannot stop people from selling their puppies to pet shops, they cant stop them from breeding designer dogs,they cannot stop them from breeding more than they should. If they dont know what I know they are pretty slow and that is that if they bring in many more regulations and bullshit rules their members will walk away in droves,so they are not going to go after mandatory testing and even if they do it comes down to what it is in the breeds that are already there. What is the point in making a breeder pay big bucks to test their stock when there is no restriction on what scores or results have to be eliminated from the gene pool and if there were the gene pool would be reduced and ruined anyway ? So from where I sit there are a couple of options but if I want to remain breeding registered dogs and not be seen to be swimming in the same pond as registered breeders who suck there are only 2 that I can see. 1 is to start a new registry and the other is to belong to a group which is more selective about who gets in and how they stay in based on what I think is ethical and leave the Canine Councils to do the only thing that they were ever set up to do and the only thing in my opinion they have ever been successful at. Keeping a record of births and organising dog shows. If their attempts at animal welfare are reliant on advice from people who dont now, nor ever have, bred a puppy, who want dogs treated like people when they are being bred and if their actions are motivated by politcal motives rather than what truly is best for dogs they should get the hell out of that part of the game because they are doing more harm than good. That's not likely so we go back to the beginning again. The MDBA. The MDBA will never back putting more quasi police powers in the hands of the RSPCA while ever there is no legitimate way for ordinary every day pet owners to have methods of defending themselves in line with natural justice as they do in every other circumstance in a democracy.The MDBA will not back laws which are in conflict with what is best for the species and remove the rights of their owners. Someone somewhere said that its cruel to debark dogs so we need council permission for our vets to do that - we cannot decide with our vet until we prove we have tried all manner of things to avoid it and yet we can ask our vet to kill them and we dont need council approval to do that - yet. How on earth did these crap laws ever get past go let alone make the RSPCA the policeman - and if you cant ping them because they debarked without council approval make crimminals out of them because they take em to a dog show? You have to be kidding! If thats not a demonstration that we have enough laws and enough powers to the RSPCA may God help us. No more laws- police the ones we have and realise that the people who are pushing for more laws are the ones responsible for the very things they call cruel happening.

Ethical is in the eye of the beholder.The term means different things to different people. The term ethical when it pertains to staying within the code of ethics for the Canine Councils in my opinion doesnt make you ethical according to what I believe is ethical.So just being a registered breeder and staying within the CCs codes of conduct - does not automatically make you any different to any puppy farmer. Whats more the Canine Councils have now admitted that they register puppies to breeders who are their members who break the law and do all manner of things the public should be able to assume is happening based on the way being a registered breeder is pushed and promoted. 2 states so far have introduced new accredited breeder programs. These breeeders have codes of conduct over and above what those who are not prepared to apy the extra money and agree to. They can still breed a thousand puppies as long as they say its for the betterment of the breed and they can still sell puppies to pet shops, they can still breed cross bred dogs. The Bateman report said introduce an accredited breeder program IN THE UK. In the UK they dont have the same system as we do here and they need an accredited breeder system because of these differences. But yet again instead of standing their ground and telling people we have a different system and saying all loverly warm fuzzy things about us they backed down and did what they were told.In Queensland instead of saying bugger off we are the breeders and giving examples and reasons as to why line breeding is used in all mammal breeding - putting the science out there they bow down to the animal rights pushers and tell the world that people who have never bred a pup know better. So as far as Im concerned we are still right in exactly the same spot we were in 6 years ago. People were bagging us out and no one was defending us least of all our Canine Councils, cross bred dogs and designers names were touted as being superior and for the first time I noticed breeding dogs was seen as a way of making mega bucks over night. Any one can get into the canine councils and still do all the things people who love dogs shouldnt even be thinking of doing. Redneck animal rights tell us what to breed at what age how often and how and unless the Canine Councils change from being a bunch of wimps with clearly little real knowledge of what is best for the species none of us will ever learn what we need to know about breeding dogs for the true better ment of the dogs and the breed. Real conversations and real education on canne husbandry has become fraught with political suicide if you dare to challenge the status quo animal rights driven crap and the Canine councils in order to suck up in case they get nasty about our breed standards in the future and fall over themselves too frightened to tell the truth even if they know it. So Oakway The canine Councils in this country are seen as the spokeman for purebred dogs and its not politically correct to say they dont agree with new laws to control puppy farmers and the standard rule is answer with - it wont affect anyone who is being responsible . Vic dogs have already made a statement to say they are backing the RSPCA push for new laws for stopping puppy farms and they have even got involved in writing submissions to councils telling them not to allow puppy farm DA when that has nothing what ever to do with what they are supposed to be doing for their members because it scores em points with animal lib and RSPCA. They have the biggest load of crap yet posted on their website re a meeting they are holding to restrict their own members this month. 6 years ago a bunch of us decided that if we were ever going to expect that the CC were going to defend registered breeders we had no hope. 6 years ago we saw that the codes of conduct which were lacking in what we felt was ethical could never be changed and that there was definitely a group of crook breeders.There was no point in denying these crooks existed because we all knew some. 6 years ago we saw that any one could get in to the CCs as a breeder and do all manner of things - they were never screened and never policed. We started the MDBA and Im more passionate and more convinced to day than ever that its the right thing to do for the future of our dogs. So if the CCs stand up and fight we will fight with them but unless they fight all we can do for now is set up a different battle plan which we will run past our members. We intend to work our hearts out to promote our members and what they do - Its harder for a breeder [ or a rescue] to get into the MDBA than it is to complete the accredited breeder process- work on building our numbers [votes] because numbers is the only currency that will pull the trigger.

Yep.

This is about what one of our members who live in a different shire was told when she attended a similar meeting early in the year. Up until now she didnt need to have her dogs registered because they are in a rural zone now the CC got her a discount of $20 per dog.Now she has to have the permit and cant sell a puppy without the permit - around $200 but because she has 6 entire dogs she has been judged as running a business so she has to have a development application to be able to breed them.Once only DA application fee of $1500 but the DA people have told her she needs kennels with concrete floors and a whole lot of other things have to be addressed as she is now a kennel rather than a breeder who only needs a permit. No permit until she complies with environment ruling. The fact that she is DQ hasnt made any difference to the fact that she is judged as being a business - there appears to be some line in the sand which places a registered breeder from a hobby breeder to business - The wording on DQ website does not instill confidence that anyone who has more than a couple of dogs with a litter every two years will be considered hobby breeders for too long.Even if those involved in dog laws are good with this for now sooner or later environmental laws have to cut in because without that people can breed a couple of hundred and keep them any way they like. They are not going to get away with saying CC members are hobby with 8 dogs but someone who doesn't register their litters with 8 dogs is breeding for profit because state law says its any activity of this description. And state law wins because these are more prohibitive for one group and they are anti competitive - Federal law which is the antz pantz and no one gets around them. Her working dogs which are also show dogs are not included in the figures. So she gets a discount but that is $20 more per dog per year than what she had, she has to pay a permit fee, she has to pay 1500 for the DA and put in kennels which can only have 2 dogs in each and a separate area to whelp them in and a quarantine area approx $20,000. Hopefully what you see now is what you will get but logically I think you can see it screaming warning.

I see this kind of stuff every day of the week. Rescue has to get the stuff in place to cover themselves before they take a dog especially if they are not incorporated and don't have insurances. You have to have your paper work in place. You have to have policies and procedures WRITTEN down so everyone knows exactly what you have to do before you take one single dog. You have to record things like tails docked and the person who is handing them over explaining what they know of this so when the new owners get the cops or Police to ask questions they can get the answers and so can you. you cant just take dogs off someone who says they found them - there are laws which say what has to be done with them.If its not someone who is saying they are the owner and who is prepared to sign the paper work to let you off the hook if someone says they were stolen you cant accept them. You have to have that paper work done and dusted BEFORE you take the dog .You cant just think you can go back later on. You make rescue look bad and that will lead to more laws which will run half of rescue out of business and a distrust from the community which impacts on all rescue groups. You also stand the risk of losing your houses, having charges laid and at the least a hell of a lot of stress. The MDBA has everything you need to help you to do this. If you need help - say so.

Steve - I for one am still quite skeptical about what the council is up to. Oh yes, I do want to beleive that they genuinely care about us.....but I have lived in this area for a long time and it is very hard to feel the love with the new MBRC when I can remember the past and the treatment that was given to dog owners is still right there in my head. When the councils first amalgamated the first thing they did was put the dog registrations up and remove the discount that CCCQ members and the greyhound owners previously got. So that was just the most recent thing that got us all off side. Dogs Qld have gone in to councils in regards to "their" members and what we can get. They haven't gone in to bat for the pet person who wants to keep an entire dog, or the farmers, or whomever else - that is up to them. However, what it has done for us in the MBRC - If you are a "MBRC breeder" then it costs you $130 to apply, then its $25 a year after that to maintain the permit. Dog rego for entire dogs drops then from $80 down to $20 per dog - entire or desexed. Entire dog $80 Entire dogs for CCCQ members (who are not breeders)/pensioners/obedience trained etc - $60 Desexed dogs $25 or for CCCQ/pensioners/obedience trained dogs = $20. That is a big saving - 4 entire dogs previously $320 - now $240 with CCCQ membership or with breeders permit $80. Exemptions from registration fees • Assistance dogs (including guidedogs) • Government entity dogs (service dogs) • Bonafide working dogs on rural land Please contact customer service for further details regarding these exemptions Now without going back through the topic - someone said that some law says that the local council cannot tell you how many animals you can have or what you want to do with your animals etc...... now if this is in fact true - why then has this never been challenged by anyone ???? It took years for it to be challenged by anyone in NSW and now the fact that council cannot impose limits on numbers is actually on the companion animals website but still many people being bullied by their councils continue to think they can only own 2 dogs. In NSW and Victoria you get a reduction on registration fees if you are a member of an approved organisation.Right now for dogs that is Dogs NSW and Vic Dogs but I know that the AAPDB is currently applying for this as well- which they are able to do and will be accepted as they now fit all of the criteria as they register their members dogs. The fact that some people in Queensland are being given reductions because they are DQ means that they will also have to give the same reductions to AAPDB members as they do for ANKC in Queensland too.The fact that ANKC are given these reductions and exemptions is a gold mine for the AAPDB because anyone can join them and they will instantly save money. For puppy farmers who own 100 plus dogs this will be very much to their advantage and a huge difference in registration costs. Some registered breeders will leave DQ and join them too. Over night this group will be a much more powerful group than ANKC. More members, more money , more backing and more media on their side. Federal and state laws have been made to ensure people still have basic rights and council laws cannot be enforced if they are more prohibitive than state laws.You cant for example have one shire define a breeder as someone who owns an entire dog unless that is the state definition. NSW definition is anyone involved in the activity of breeding dogs - that covers it even if you only have one dog and one litter so local laws cant define it as someone who owns an entire dog. No matter what council say I don't have to desex because state law doesn't say I have to and I am not considered a breeder even if I own a dozen entire dogs until I breed them even if I own a prefix with the CC. Usually whether they are enforceable or not is to be seen in the fine print and is in the wording for the punishment if you don't comply but it needs someone who is qualified to determine our rights to answer the questions which should be easy to find but never are. There are many other things which should be discussed and should have been discussed long before now and we need to be aware of the fact that if a law isn't enforceable this is the last thing council will let out of the bag and that they can and do change laws and introduce new ones all the time so what you think is the go today may not be what is the go next year. Once these things come in QC members have no option but to comply because their codes of conduct say they have to whether they are enforceable or not but if they are not enforceable and QC are the only ones who have to comply it doesn't really feel like QC have had much of a win. Someone needs to ask why the grey hound people can dodge this altogether on the Gold coast too.

You say you are not confused but then go on to again say something that has nothing to do with us. Because you are still clearly confused about what we do - Our only role at council level is to sometimes act as liaison for our members and disseminate information. For the record we can never be made applicable or acceptable organisations for exemptions etc at council level as we do not register our members dogs and we never will. We are not an ANKC alternative nor are we an ANKC competitor and we never will be. Trying to beat me up because you cant see anything the MDBA have done at council level that you can measure is a wasted activity. Our obligations are to our own members and not to compete with the Canine Councils. Think about it = if Dogs Queensland are in there negotiating and signing off on what they say is a good thing for their members and their dogs and I go in and say other wise - considering all of our members in your state are the very people Dogs Q are supposedly speaking for and they breed the same dogs it would be a bit of a wasted exercise - dontchya think considering how many members DQ are representing in comparison to how many we do? When we went in against impending laws in Victoria where people who took a debarked dog to a dog show could be made criminals how much would we have gained when they were CC dogs, CC members, CC shows if we had kept fighting? I have contacted the MBSC and gotten the facts. The reason I came into this conversation was to say what they say and what you get may not be the same so to tread carefully and now Im convinced that sooner or later there will be a pain for people who may have felt they were safe. This is based on what some of our members are now facing and knowing that registered breeder numbers who are not MDBA members drop every day with the main reason given - over regulation. Still the big question which seems to be too hard for anyone who should know to answer. Are these laws enforceable ?

Here is the biggest deal for me. As an Australian citizen why am I cheated and not informed of my rights when these new by laws are introduced? Why cant I make a quick visit to a website or make a phone call to be able to know that if I simply don't want to do as I'm told to do with my dogs what the real punishment may be? For as long as I can remember people in some shires in NSW have been told they have a 2 dog limit - people who have moved into these shires with more than 2 dogs have been distressed and have had to either move themselves or send their dog off to God or the pound.People I know have hidden their dogs and been bullied and intimidated by councils to do as they are told and comply with these by laws. Yet no council in NSW can legally restrict how many dogs a person owns if they house them according to local environment laws. Why has this been kept such a secret and why isnt part of what any council has to do when they introduce by laws to also state which ones are enforceable and which are not. Why does our state CC simply tell us that as members we have t comply w ith these by laws without telling us we had a right to refuse? Are these council by laws - namely the ones now in place on the Gold coast and the like enforceable and if they are not why on earth don't we all simply say bugger off? Why do we desex our dogs according to council laws when that is more prohibitive of our property rights than state laws - why doesn't someone tell us we don't have to if we don't have to? federal and state laws are there to protect our rights - yet council can make a proclamation and do as they please and we don't know question it because we have all been hood winked. Queensland state law does not say a dog owner has to do these things so are these laws enforceable or not?

Just one more question, when did it become politically correct to breed only one litter every 12-18 months. So if a breeder has 2 litters in one year, then they are now should be labled in the classification of a kennel breeder which is also where the puppy mills belong? Hum. The same time it became politically correct to have to have council approvals to debark a dog but no council approvals to kill it. The same time it became politically correct to decide when is the most appropriate time to mate a bitch and how often based on anything other than what is most suited to the species. Im interested in the check list that someone must have somewhere to decide who can and who cant qualify for a breeders permit. Considering you have to apply for this permit if you own an entire dog before you mate her, before she is pregnant and by the time you get to that you may have changed your mind then what is it exactly they are looking at to be able to decide that one person in a street is able to have this permit over any other? How can one person know what the criteria is for them to address before they buy their dog which they don't want to desex? What happens if you have one of these permits and when you go to re apply the rules have changed and you cant get it re issued?

MBSC via DQ website - quote. 2. So, there’s a difference between a Kennel License and a Breeder’s permit? Yes, definitely. The new Breeder’s Permit concept has been specifically designed to cater for the requirements of the vast majority of Dogs Qld members who live in the MBRC area - e.g. those members that wish to keep, usually up to 6 entire dogs for showing / obedience etc. and who also wish to breed a litter every 12 - 18 months, should apply for a Breeder's permit. Dogs Queensland members who have a need to keep more dogs and to breed more frequently may need to apply for a Kennel License through the Town Planning Dept of MBRC. This will depend on the zoning and planning requirements for your area. 5. So, why do I have to pay an initial Breeder's Permit Initial Application fee? This fee has been structured simply to cover the cost of a MBRC field officer conducting an onsite property inspection and processing the necessary paperwork. 6. What if I decide not to apply for a Breeder's Permit or a Kennel License? Our Dogs Queensland Code of Ethics clearly states: I shall comply with any and all valid legal provisions of the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 (Qld) and with the local laws and subordinate local laws relating to the keeping of dogs promulgated by my local authority. I accept that it is my responsibility to keep abreast of any changes to the local Laws. Any decision that you make regarding whether you, as a Dogs Queensland member, will or won’t comply with a Local Government Law is yours alone to make. But if you choose not to comply, you risk severe penalties being imposed by MBRC and you will be in breach of a Dogs Queensland rule. 7. So, how do I know if my application for a Breeder’s permit will be approved? There is no simple answer to this question, but common sense should prevail. All permits are considered on an individual basis and require minimum standards to be met and maintained. If your application is for a 6 dog Breeder’s Permit and you live in a rural / residential area on 2 acres and your facilities for keeping and managing your dogs is satisfactory, then it is very likely that your application will be approved. If, on the other hand, you live on a 600 sq mtr suburban block and you apply for a 20 dog Breeder permit, it is very unlikely that you will receive approval.

Designer Dog Breeders already have their own organisation. AAPDB and I am aware of the fact that they are involved in discussion with Morton Bay Shire now. You cant just say "we have new laws" which will decide whether one person has the same rights as another without covering many bases. One is that you cant just say we will take it all on a case by case basis - because that leaves the whole thing open to corruption and inequality and its against the law. people who want the same rights will be constantly yelling about them for anti competitive policies If a council is going to decide who gets a breeders permit and who doesn't they have to publish what will make a person eligible and being a member of a non profit group which has a code of ethics may get you a discount but you cant force people in this country to be members of a group. You cant allow one person to do something that you prohibit another from doing. A government cant decide a purebred dog is more worthy of being bred and if you are going to allow one breeder with 8 dogs to keep them and allow them to have them sleeping in their house without kennels then you cant say their neighbour cant do the same.Before you blink there has to be a mandatory code of conduct for breeders regardless of whether they belong to a non profit group or not and town planning laws are going to HAVE to be specific about how many , how they have to be housed and whole bunch of other things. Surely to God purebred breeders are able to see this coming! How can any of you really think that because you breed purebred dogs and agree to a code of conduct which doesnt restrict how many you own, where you sell them, how many puppies each year you produce or whether you breed cross bred dogs as well as purebred dogs that a council is going to give you what you think you are getting? The outcome - has to be that a group which is set up to represent commercial dog breeders with a high emphasis on first cross designer dogs is going to have more members and more acedemics and media and more power to back up that THEY are the superior breeders. The AAPDB registers dogs and their code of conduct is more strict in some areas than the ANKC ones.I was there in the room involved in a conversation where AWL who were instrumental in the Gold Coast pilot scheme and AAPDB were discussing exactly this. Any minute now any deal Mark Shepherd strikes for the ANKC the AAPDB will have too because the only thing thats different is the requirement to breed purebred dogs and all thats happened here is that people have more reason to join AAPDB and give them more numbers and more power. The aim is that every breeder regardless or what they breed or how many will be known to council and that will go hand in hand with the push at federal level for the RSPCA to police council regs as well as POCTAA. Im having a difficult time trying to understand how a registered purebred breeder can seriously think that they are so superior,that their dogs are so special because they choose to register their pedigrees,attend dog shows and agree to a code which is less prohibitive than mandatory laws will be able to be treated differently at law than any other person who breeds a litter! Didnt anyone see pedigreed Dogs exposed? Didn't anyone read the Bateman report ? Haven't you seen the push in the media and the public for designer dogs? Don't you see that NSW RSPCA have powers over council laws and that politicians from both sides have said they will give them the same powers in Victoria? Haven't you heard the RSPCA pushing for these powers Australia wide? Cant you hear that its not just dog laws that are going to squash you? You're not only telling them who you are and where to find you but you're giving them money via permit fees to do it! Perhaps reps of QC might be better employed to work out what is and isnt enforceable and notifying their members rather than meekly asking for some perceived exemptions.

Fit For a King the MDBA has not had anything to do with this so why would anyone expect to see results? I think perhaps you are a little confused about who the MDBA are and what we do. We are not now nor will we ever be in any type of competition with the state's canine associations or the ANKC . If QCCC have had any kind of win for registered breeders we are just as much cheering as anyone. I entered this conversation to simply warn people that there may be things other than those which are obvious to consider.