Steve

Jack Waddington- aged 4 has been nominated for Best Junior in Canine Helpfulness or kindness. His Mum is very proud of him and with good reason! Lisa Finch from VSC in Ryde and who also doubles as a foster carer for No Kill Dog Rescue has been nominated for best Vet Nurse of the Year. This category this year is sponsored by Pet Plan Insurance www.petplan.com.au Gayl O Grady who is a member of Delta has been nominated for Best Dog Trainer of the Year. Gayle helps out free of charge with training issues faced by No Kill Dog Rescue with some of their rescue dogs.

My puppies were taken at 4 weeks and I dont chip them until 6 weeks so mine never came home.

geez none of that makes much difference to me. Someone pinching puppies from anywhere is horrible and makes us all more aware of the possible hazards of letting people come in and look at where the puppies live and where they are housed. Be fair about this if you were a thief what better way of casing the place. Lucky they were looking for puppies I guess - might have been looking for little boys.

have you nominated them? www.mdbaawards.net.au

Ok that makes me a bad owner then. I was still in PJ's at ten. Did not have to go to work til 11 and I was cuddling on the couch with two labs and two cats. Looks like what I wear is more important than all attention mine were getting.My kids as teenagers stopped wearing PJs and wore trackies and tshirts instead. That way its hard to tell if they have just got up or not. Funny to think they would be better dog owners than me going on that reasoning. That has to be one of the craziest reasons I have heard of. It was showing she was disorganised apparently but I made sure no one thought that about me for that reason again Of all the things I would be worried about with someone coming to check whether I should have a dog or not that would have been definitely about the last of them. Not any more - no pjs in this house

Ill probably cause a drama when I talk about this one but the experience changed some things that go on in my house. I was asked by a rescue group via this forum to do a house check for them as the people didnt live in their area. I wasnt able to do that for 2 days so they sent someone else around and they had decided not to give the lady a dog. O.K. Fair enough so perhaps she told lies or something, perhaps she didnt have fencing etc. The reason given was that the person who had done the check attended at around 10 am and her 3 kids were still in the pyjamas. I thought - bloody hell if that's what people think if they catch your kids in their pyjamas past a certain hour Id better be aware of that. I threw out every single pair of pyjamas that were in the house and from then on my kids sleep in Tshirts and track pants - so if any dog people come to my house they wont think Im a bad dog owner if I havent made sure the kids get dressed as soon as their feet hit the floor. - True story we have not had pjs or dressing gowns in this house ever since.

She is also a vet who is giving a plug to breeders. Do you think its not counted if she is a registered breeder her self?

Around about now its probably a good time to say that checking whether someone should receive help isnt as easy as it sounds. PACERS has processes in place and everyone who needs a hand has to follow the procedure so we know we are not being taken for a ride. Even if they are sent to us by counsellors from known agencies we still have to make them go through the process because sometimes people tell counsellors lies in order to get something they want too. On two occassions the counsellor [ the same counsellor] has been the one telling the lies. Sometimes the help they need is to find new homes for their animals too.When someone is asking for help to feed 94 animals they own which they say they dont breed and they have no idea how they will have money in the future to feed them then part of the help they should be accepting is working with us to thin the crowd out. This is one of the reasons we have moved to setting up the chartered clubs which aims to put a pacers club in every locality so that when someone is in trouble there are people right there on the spot to help and so that any money raised in one area stays there for when someone in that community needs it. In our situation we have to do general fundraising as well as fundraising for specific cases mainly because we are new and we dont have a bank to cover us if we are called on or if we strike an unexpected expense. For example we have one in at the moment where the owner has had to go away [with no choice] for 6 months. One of her little dogs is in need of vet work - rotten teeth. The bill for this is 450 dollars.I guess we could decide the dog can wait until its owner comes home but thats not on and so we have to find the money to pay the vet bill. Hopefully when the owner gets back she will re imburse any of our expenses but this is doubtful considering where the owner will be for 6 months and that she is unlikely to have any funds to cover this. In order to be able to do this we need general funds because if we ask for help with one case all of the money received goes to that case - when we raised money for openarms for example every thing that was donated was used for openarms and when we had just under $100 left over we used it to buy her a new rug for her new home so her dogs wouldnt slip on the polished floors as much. Money raised for the bushfires is used for the bushfire victims - we dont just take some of it for the floods which were around at the same time. When we helped the flood victims it was out of donations specifically for the floods and our general funds. When we helped huntinghound we didnt use money which had been donated for specifically anything else etc. Every cent donated for Jed goes to Jed or is used to cover vet expenses etc for her dogs. With our chartered clubs they have to keep two accounts as we do. One which the public donate and fundraising which is only ever used to help people and another which they pay administrative expenses out of which is derived by other means such as membership fees etc.For example we used member fees recently to pay for our legal fees so we could set up the chartered clubs and we use member fees or funds which have been donated specifically for that purpose [usually by one of the board of directors] to pay for insurances, websites [usually a free webmaster - thanks Shane] etc. And no one is paid wages. Some people are specific when they donate- "use this for sally" but some say "use this for Sally and any change put it into a general account" . For future reference you need to send anyone you think may need help to the pacers website and advise them look at the list of what will make them eligible to get some help and to fill out the form to request assistance or you can do it for them and that will start the process. Here

<H2 class=sectiontitle>http://www.dognewsaustralia.com.au/ A VET'S VIEW - HEART FAILURE</H2>By Dr Rebekah Day I am still amazed at the number of heart patients that pass through our surgery every week. It is one of the most common ailments afflicting our older generation, but thankfully, I am seeing fewer and fewer congenital complaints. Personally, I view this trend as a testament to conscientious breeding by enlightened registered breeders.

I think that ANKC could be run better, have bigger goals and do more for the members, however I do not think that are the grass roots of the problem. That belongs to the animal rights groups, they have started and keep pushing any issue then can that will make trouble or help lead to the end of ownership of dogs. We as registered breeders are just one group of dog owners that are in the way of animal rights groups reaching their goal. Well why aren't the controlling bodies pushing back. They are the ones we pay our membership too. They are supposed to be the governing bodies that should be protecting our rights as members. Not us fighting to protect them. Because they think they are seen to be better than and above everyone else who breeds dogs. A bit slow especially after pedigreed dogs exposed to see that actually we are the ones they are going after as much as anyone.there's more but not suitable for a public forum. When 2000 people rally for law changes it gets more attention than one spokesperson from one group saying what the group thinks. Both sides of politics saw it as an opportunity to gain votes for no other reason than its in the public eye. Who is going to oppose new laws to cut out puppy farmers? They even have the group who represent commercial breeders saying they want to stop puppy framers. Problem is the puppy farmers have been told they arent considered puppy farmers when the rest of the world still sees them as puppy farmers and no one is really wanting to be seen to be against new laws because after all if we are doing it all right - what do we have to be afraid of - right. Give the RSPCA more powers without more accountability to be a quasi police force - what ever would we have to protest about? Almost 3000 people sign a petition to stop the sale of pets in pet shops - thats at least a couple of million who havent agreed but no one thinks of it like that. About 1% of people who breed dogs really do need to be locked up and stopped from owning dogs and that leaves tens of thousands of us who dont but they want laws bought in which will affect all of the good guys more than the very ones they are supposedly going after. No one is likely to put packets of poo in people's letter boxes who attended a rally to stop puppy farmers - wonder who would be brave enough to stand on the steps of parliment house and demand laws to remove RSPCA's power rather than give them more?

Thank you. Here's part of the problem. There isnt enough of us and we are not breeding enough dogs.There is no way I could breed enough puppies which would go anywhere near addressing the demand for them. I dont keep a waiting list because when I did I had up to 100 on the list. I dont even take names now unless they already have one of my dogs and its rare that at least some out of every litter dont go out to someone who already owns one of my dogs which Ive bred over the past 35 years. Some are now on their 4th dog which I have bred - last litter I only had one out of 8 which didnt go to a previous puppy buyer. I know that people have waited up to 2 years to get one of my puppies. People still want purebred dogs just as much as they ever did and promoting them is a great idea but who will breed them if we raise the demand when every day less and less are being bred?

that might be so for breeders already there, but for new members many seem to think it is the money factor. i tend to think it is the DD factor taking over the popularity contest. I cant imagine why anything that happens with Designer dogs should impact on us at all. They are not our competition and when they become more popular it doesnt mean our dogs are less popular. People who would prefer purebred dogs will still want purebred dogs. Why do we have to spend energy on bagging out DD breeders and DD dogs? All we need to do is to do the right thing by the dogs we breed and the people we sell our puppies to. Promote why purebred dogs suit us and some people more than other dogs do and stop pretending that as a group we are automatically differernt and superior because we can register our pedigrees on an ANKC registry.We should be wearing our prefixes as if they are a designer brand and standing proud of what we do and the dogs we breed rather than joining forces with animal lib and focusing on what they say is needing to be changed.

Its pretty hard to list the criteria past a certain point.The object for any rescue group is to assess the dog and its needs - therefore the assumption is that every dog needs to be found a home based on criteria which best suits the dog . What suits one would not suit another. Guide dogs can list a set of criteria because every dog they foster out is a pup and they know where it comes from and its history - you dont have that luxury with rescue and if a dog is assessed to need 10 feet high chain link to keep him in there isnt much point in placing him in a home which says they have good fencing when still isnt what is needed to keep every one - including the dog happy.

When we did our survey a couple of weeks ago the vast majority of breeders said that over regulation would be or was the main reason they walked away. It will be the reason I stop.

Yes agreed but show casing our dogs isnt the same as promoting us. Even the fact that the CCs are now introducing accredited breeder schemes which do nothing more than tell us someone who is accredited is doing what we all should be doing anyway undermines and brings down what a registered breeder is and what websites like Oscar law have been telling everyone we have already been doing. Being an accredited breeder with Dogs NSW when it comes in is not going to help any dogs and it certainly isnt going to help our image - in fact it brings it down. But we will all race off and pay the extra money and feel nice and snuggly in our superiority - use it to put down breeders who have decided not to pay the extra money and thats not going to fool anyone looking at making new laws. Ill post this again. Which part of this is going to make any difference to what a registered breeder has already been assumed to be doing? So does mean anyone who doesnt pay the extra money is assumed NOT to be doing these things? Come in suckers. Part XIII (A). Dogs NSW Voluntary Accredited Breeder Scheme (effective 1 January 2011). To qualify as an Accredited Breeder a member would agree to the following and pay such annual fees and complete and sign an Application in such form as the Directors may from time to time require :- CONDITIONS OF MEMBERSHIP OF VOLUNTARY ACCREDITED BREEDERS SCHEME i) pre-mating disease testing of prospective parents Note: “Disease testing” means; a) testing for health conditions which are notified by the Breed Club, ANKC or DOGS NSW as relevant to the breed, and for which scientifically validated, reliable, readily available and cost effective screening procedures are available. b) DNA tests for hereditary diseases that are available in the relevant breed. ii) subject to veterinary advice, no mating where tests indicate inadvisable iii) microchip puppies prior to sale iv) puppy microchip numbers to be included in Application to Register Litter (unless Veterinary advice to the contrary) v) presale veterinary checks on puppies with written report by veterinary surgeon vi) copies of parent test results and puppy vet check results to be made available to prospective purchasers vii) prospective purchasers can, prior to purchase, view puppies with mother where litter was born and raised (Note 1) viii) provide detailed information for puppy care and welfare to purchasers (Note 2) ix) to observe proper standards of management with regard to the housing, health, exercising and socialising of all dogs on the premises managed by the registered breeder, including establishing minimum staffing levels appropriate to the numbers of dogs involved (Note 3) x) inspection of kennels and records when requested by DOGS NSW xi) non compliance may result in deregistration or suspension from scheme (Note 5) xii) scheme to be varied and/or upgraded from time to time as circumstances and conditions, in the opinion of the Directors, require. Accredited breeders will be required to agree to and abide by variations and/or alterations to the Rules of the Scheme from time to time to maintain their Accreditation. Notes: 1) This rule will not apply to a litter after the pups have been weaned where the mother and pups will be residing in separate premises. 2) All relevant documentation connected with the puppy including, inter alia, advice on feeding and care, registration documents (if already issued), details of vaccinations etc are handed over to the purchaser at the time of sale. When an appropriate contract is available this should be signed by both parties. If registration documents are not available at time of sale breeder must comply with Dogs NSW Regulations Part I – Register & Registration, clauses 13.9 to 13.11 inclusive. 3) It is strongly recommended that Accredited Breeders follow the guidelines contained in the NSW Animal Welfare Code of Practice “Breeding dogs and Cats”. 4) Accolades to Accredited Breeders under this scheme are based solely on high welfare standards. 5) Complaints received in respect of an accredited Breeder/s will be referred to the Dogs NSW Judiciary Investigative Panel and be dealt with under the Inquiry Rules and regulations.

Anything that can be done to show healthy purebred dogs is a great thing as that demonstrates to the public what great dogs we breed and that they arent all falling to bits but promoting purebreds isnt going to prevent laws coming in which will affect purebred breeders and how they house and keep their dogs. How and where they advertise them etc. Registered breeders are leaving in droves and according to our research the biggest reason for this is over regulation of their hobby.Its time we told the truth,stopped just going along with teh propoganda in order to feel superior and accepted that just because we can register our pups on a pedigree data base owned by the ANKC and compete in shows that isnt an instant tick and when we think we are immune because we are superior we are in fact every bit as much a target as anyone who breeds dogs - regardless of how they breed them. There will be no law changes in this country to stop commercial dog breeding - some may make it a bit harder but there will always be some breeders who breed lots and lots of dogs for nothing more than money. Sales of live animals in pet shops will not be stopped until such time as there is valid and real research to prove what we think is true and that is years away. So rather than running with animal lib and supporting a rally for more laws and stopping sales of puppies in pet shops - using up all of this energy on trying to stop commercial breeding which will effectively stop us breeding before it stops them there are many other things that should be happening and its time we stood up for ourselves and took back some control for the sake of our dogs.

Yep I usuallay take them off but because of what happened to Vadar I was paranoid about doing anything that might even remotely stress him and left them on. Its no big deal if you have them removed when he is desexed.

This type of thinking is COUNTERPRODUCTIVE. It does nothing to help the dogs. It does nothing to help the breeders of good dogs. It does nothing to help a member of the public find those who are breeding good dogs. It was a total load of crap and still is a total load of crap. This is exactly why I believe that instead of people talking about banning sites that advertisers of puppies use, FLOOD THOSE SITES with ads from REGISTERED BREEDERS and breed clubs of every type!!! Encourage Rescue places to advertise their dogs on those sites!!! Put the facts on those sites!!! Let the public make up their own mind and make their own choices. They will. The dog world can sit back and blame fascism and Hitler and Stalin and co now. Those claims are a joke. Much of this type of thinking came from the purebred dog world itself, trying to promote themselves as an elite bunch - better than the rest so they dont need to advertise "out there". They would have been far better off, long term, to float their boat of purebred dogs in the mass of advertising that confronts the public when they are looking to buy a dog. They would then have had a far wider opportunity to promote a better product and to educate the general public at the same time as to WHY the pedigrees of purebred dogs need to be registered - that pedigrees are the family history of dogs and that registered breeders are responsible for the future of dogs. Well, the chooks are now coming home to roost ..... so much for elitism. Souff Yep. ;)

just getting back to this, had a conversation with others some time ago, and apparently there was a couple going around in Victoria reg breeder to reg breeder homes, and asking to take the puppy/dog for walk outside their homes, and trying to nab the dogs. dont' know if they were ever successful. they apparently came to my parents home and asked my mother if they could take the little dog we had for sale outside to give it a walk, mum said, yes i will walk her for you so you could see. mum thought it was a bit odd but we never give over dogs fully in someone's arms ever. the couple said to mum they'll be back with the money, they never returned they disappeared, i said did anyone get a description of this couple? pretty scaring stuff thats there's people out there wanting to nab dogs like that and they could end up anywhere on a farm being bred to buggery or anything. I have had a litter of puppies stolen from my home. But what of single women who live in the boonies? What of people with children who dont want strangers coming into their homes? how many regsitered breeders live hundreds of kilometres from the areas where they sell their puppies? I just sold a pup to Perth and that made it impossible for me to have the new owner visit even if I wanted them to. How many reputable registered breeders sell puppies via their website? How many reputable registered breeders dont want to have their homes as open houses for anyone who wants to come and look at them ? Yet we give a tick to it on animal rights and animal welfare propoganda. Why? edited to add then there is a push for it to be made law and we are all too frightened to say - bugger off. We just agree because if we dont we are seen as the bad guys.

i dont' know what to say to that except :D why don't they bring in hitler.....they might as well. getting to be a communist country with all the laws, bans and what you can have and what you can't. people making laws that benefit themselves it sounds like ;) without getting background knowledge....just point fingers. many years ago in the 80's when i was still at school there was a paper going around, fascism will come to Australia watch out. think it is already here! we all scoffed at that. Yes this is true - its taken years to get us to where we are now. Someone said - reputable breeders dont advertise in newspapers or some websites. Now anyone who is worried about being seen to be reputable is too frightened to advertise in a newspaper or on some websites. Would reputable breeders have chosen not to advertise in newspapers and websites if this idea hadnt have been circulated and put on welfare and animal rights websites around the world? Do you know that because some breeders want to be seen to be reputable and not advertise their pups in newspapers and some websites where they may be able to sell their puppies sometimes now hand them over to dealers so no one can see they didnt have orders when they bred their bitch? Do you know that some breeders sell puppies to pet shops without papers rather than be SEEN to be other than reputable? Do you know that some breeders who are concerned about not being seen to be reputable have their puppies put down if they cant find them homes? Then when you dont advertise in newspapers or some websites you take a bow and say this proves you are reputable. Why didnt we say thats a load of crap when it first started? Because by saying its a load of crap we are worried about looking like we are the ones who are not reputable so we all just shut up and go along with the myth.

Working bred maremmas make great pets - we have champs who work all week with goats and run around a show ring all weekend and excel at both.

Seems to me there are two different issues here. I think some rescue groups go way overboard in their criteria for what they determine is a good home but you cannot have rescue groups who rehome any dog to anyone with any question mark over it's temperament. You cant seriously think that because it LOOKED like A FLATTIE that it was a flattie and therefore wouldnt bite someone? Im sorry I think the group did the right thing and if they had known it was a potential problem and rehomed it to you just because you say so I wouldnt support them if you you got it home and it bit your child or if you tried your heart out and still was no good. This isnt just about you - rescue groups have to consider not just what happens in your case to their group but how what they do will impact on recue in general. However, I do agree that some have policies on who can take home a dog and what their lifestyles and homes should be like which are pretty stupid.

ok up until this post i was wondering what your angle was. i get it now. i still think someone is going to have to shoot me again i am sorry to say, put me out of misery. this is really doing my head in good. yes they have neglected to mention about mandatory desexing in oscar's law..... souff, you are saying me and oscar law people like as though i am part of that group, i am not, i am not part of any group, i just support closing of farms and banning sales in petshops, all the other stuff, sounds like hidden agendas, bills put forward by RSPCA and oscar law people may or may not be partnered with them don't know, i hope not.......it all sounds deeply political to me and really the reason why i say its doing my head in is because i despise politics......kennel clubs that get political absolutely despise it, it can get like that at work places too i am of the mind that i don't need it, don't want to play in it, Dogsvic are having a forum on puppy farmers in october so it will be interesting to go along and just see what will be said, they are asking what is the best way to tackle this issue, they are asking for input from their members. like DogsQLD are obviously doing, they do name and shame breeders who don't follow the code of ethics they do publish names in the gazette every month i see, and also fine the breeders in some cases or suspend their membership just depends, it seems to be different for each member. i.e. if a breeder breeds a bitch before 12 mths of age or has more litters than they are supposed to according to the rules. also i heard down the line that breeders who have bred alot of litters are being questioned why they are having so many litters. breeders that i've known for many many years. again, it is within the toy group i am speaking about not any other group. i have no idea what is going on with other groups and other breeders of these other groups. dogsvic did say in one monthly gazette that they do have a dialogue with government departments so maybe RSPCA are pushing for their stuff and dogsvic are counteracting it. so dogsvic are trying to address this situation of farmers within our ranks i see. but its a very hard issue to address i feel.....who is a farmer who isn't.....who's ethical and who isn't? how do you categorise a farmer thats reg with the ANKC? RSPCA are trying to address puppy farms and also Backyard breeders in the one hit but the problem i have with their bill and what i have read is they are trying to get through to govt by grouping reg breeders in with backyarders and farms. i think RSPCA should just concentrate on backyarders and farms and let the state controlling bodies deal with their own members RSPCA from what i have read so far have no idea about pedigree dogs but they think they know because UK put out a negative doco on them. so how would you guys address the issue of farmers within our ranks, what is the best way to deal with them? well you would understand this one asal, with our breed, they have a molera some chis? well we all got into discussion at a show one day and apparently one breeder sold a puppy with a molera, young puppy to a person who took it to a vet, and you know what the stupid vet said, put it down dogs should not have a hole in their head, so the poor pup was put down! so you can get idiot vets. i've had timid chihuahuas.....just the genes its nothing we've done to the animal all our dogs get treated the same, all end up with different personalities just like humans. but inexperienced people might see it as the dogs been hit or abused. think its important to recommend your own vets for new owners to go to rather than just randomly picking a vet that might turn out to be an idiot. The issue has already been dealt with at that level. Everyone who will be involved in making laws already knows how they will do it and what THEIR definition of a puppy farmer is.What your definition or any one else's definition isnt counted except that because most think its someone who breeds lots of dogs commercially we rally for laws which will stop people breeding dogs on farms in high numbers and we snuggle up with animal lib to do that. Do you really think animal lib and RSPCA dont know this ? The defininition of a puppy farmer is someone who breeds puppies in substandard conditions. Substandard is defined by anyone who is breeding dogs who isnt doing so according to mandatory codes for breeeding establishments [via the DPI] and anyone who isnt according to planning laws applicable in your shire. The fact is that every person in this country who breeds dogs is already under Prevention of Cruelty to Animals,state companion animals laws, mandatory codes for breeding establishments,and council planning laws. This has nothing what ever to do with whether they are breeding purebred or cross bred dogs, whether they are breeding one or 1000 dogs. So when they bring in laws which affect commercial puppy farmers those laws will affect everyone who owns a fertile bitch. So far in Victoria breeders have a bit of a blank bit there because state companion animals laws say if you own less than 5 fertile bitches you dont have to worry about laws which tell you what floors you have to have, where you put your poo, how often you clean up, how your dogs can sleep.It also says you dont need a government permit to run a domestic animal business if you are ANKC and have less than 10 fertile bitches but more than 5 and the planning laws cut in anyway for you to be able to breed dogs on your premises. Any one can be an ANKC member and being an ANKC member doesnt stop you breeding non registered dogs as long as you arent doing that with registered dogs. In NSW its anyone who ever breeds a litter.In Queensland they have a pilot program running on the gold coast which they think is the answer and RSPCA want bought in Australia wide and it is anyone who owns an entire dog they come under the laws. $379 for a licence and an inspection of your home before you get approval to keep an entire dog. In Victoria you break the law if you dont vaccinate your dogs every year , in NSW you break the law if you dont get a note from your vet to get you out of vaccinating every year. In NSW they have laws and guidelines - when I asked them when the guidelines cut in - answer - when there is a complaint. These guidelines tell me I have to feed my puppies as Im weaning them in individual bowls, they tell me I cant keep my cats water bowl in the same room as the cats feed bowl! 100% of what is going on here is a desire for the RSPCA to have more police powers Australia wide. That is they can come in seize your dogs,and any paperwork you may have which might prove your case,say anything they want about you and your dogs without you having the right to a second opinion, kill your dogs and destroy the evidence, charge you a massive bond to be able to retain ownership while its coming to court and leave you with no where to go to have them answer to anything you might say in your defence. There are many many things working against purebred breeders including the one that's been hovering to stop us breeding some of our breeds and being answerable to another agency which will over rule the ANKC and all other groups on welfare issues as has been recommended in the Bateman report and snuggling up to animal liberation and calling for the RSPCA to have more power to police more laws without adequate answerability is folly. Whats more I promise you that any minute private rescue will be under this gun too.

Naw, she was chucked out of DogsQld years ago. O.K. Ill take your word for it - makes you wonder why she was screaming about bloodlines etc as much.

Toy Dogs said. that is true what you have typed extra and we all know this but that info i cut and pasted is designed for the general public.....if you tell them all that people are going to get confused. what would you guys say under "what is the difference between a ANKC breeder and a puppy factory?" I mean we can all say what we really feel and i do agree with the point that many of us dont want people coming to our homes sizing up our dogs then taking them away when we aren't home or telling someone unscrupulous, (my worry all the time) but how is that going to help the cause? O.K. I know its true and you say you know its true too. Do you think Oscar's Law knew? Do you think people who were rallying for new laws which will eventually wipe us out and leave commercial puppy farmers sitting pretty with more dogs not less suffering? This stuff has been circulated world wide to hoodwink people - not just the public but government too - to a point where new people coming into purebred dogs believe it, How is this going to help the cause? The cause SHOULD be whats best for dogs not whats best to distribute crap so registered breeders get to feel superior. Its propoganda distributed by the ANKC to better their cause and most of their members believe it too. Its destroyed the ability for us to become educated on real canine husbandry issues as canine Councils have bowed to pressure from animal rights and people who have no experience with breeding in order to gain superiority. The only two differences you or anyone can be sure of between a registered breeder and any other breeder is that a registered breeder can register their puppies on a stud registry owned by ANKC and they can compete in shows which are held by affiliates of the ANKC. This crap of of we are doing it right we will be safe blah blah blah and pretending the laws wont affect us MORE than it will puppy farmers is the biggest scam of the millenium and we have fallen into it hook line and sinker. Just as many registered breeders sell puppies to pet shops and export pet shops as puppy farmers,and anything else you can say about puppy farmers a registered breeder could be doing the same as or worse than any example you can give. The poodle farmer in Queensland was a registered breeder, the one on RSPCA rescue from Newcastle area who had over 300 dogs was and still is a registered breeder. They both had heaps of champs under their belt though. When you chant wipe out rotten breeders its us they are going after as well as any other. Cross bred dogs arent likely to be debarked and at a dog show are the? Do you think some cross bred breeder is going to be the first arrested for breeding affected dogs recklessly?