Steve

The ANKC is the only australian member of the FCI (only one allowed per country) and a contract partner is an organisation that is on probation to become a member with the FCI. Either way a condition of membership is that you ABIDE by FCI rules. Can you point top these regs ?

How wonderful - a new kid ! There is no such thing as the right or wrong reason to breed dogs and it will depend on who you are speaking with as to what THEY think are the only reasons you should have to give it a go. Breeding dogs is really about knowing what you would like to get out of it and what the risk factors are and what you are prepared to compromise on in order to get what you would like your outcome to be. We offer a course and lots of support if you are serious about wanting to breed dogs which will walk you through the ethics and what you need to know so you dont muck it up for either you or the dogs. http://www.mdba.net.au/product_info.php?cP...;products_id=48

Nothing anyone does is going to stop development applications if they have what is necessary to get them through.There is nothing what ever anyone can do about that. No amount of letter writing or beating our chests to say stop them being able to get their approvals is going to make any difference except make you feel that you are doing something.The councils will smile and say thank you and throw them in the bin. No development application is going to dictate when he can or cant feed , or water, wean, socialize or anything else because all of that is covered in the codes and POCTA and has nothing what ever to do with a development application. If , when he gets the DA approved and is operating outside of the POCTA laws or codes for breeding dogs in that state then you can complain and they will be investigated. In Victoria unless its POCTAA the RSPCA can not police or enforce breaches of codes for breeding dogs. These are state codes and laws and energy would be better placed in addressing this so when someone is operating so poorly something can be done about it. None of this however has anything to do with development applications. Therefore if you cant do anything in the current framework to stop the DA's and all your protesting does is chase them underground - rather than launching attacks on puppy farmers who are applying for development applications petition the agencies who should enforce the laws when they break them. I'm with you 100 percent - we don't want puppy farmers and in an ideal world they would go away and never come back but having good intentions doesn't mean you shouldn't consider the unintended consequences of what the game plan is and personally I think its time to sit back a minute and reconsider the strategy.

This puppy farm wasn't knocked back at all. Ive done considerable research into this case and nothing that any one other than their neighbours had to say could be taken into account. Submissions which spoke of the impact of puppy farms in general were simply put under the table and nothing in them was or ever is taken into consideration. The submission was removed voluntarily and may be back any time they tidy it up or they may simply do what ever it was they wanted to do and hope they dont get caught. If you want them to apply and comply with regulations so they are easily seen and an eye can be kept on them to ensure they are following best practice etc then let them apply and allow the councils to do their job and ensure they will be following the rules as far as necessary infra structure is concerned.Its naive for anyone to consider that anything they have to say to a DA via people or groups who don't even live in the shire is going to be given any credence and every DA is taken on its own merits according to the law. The neighbours in this case were concerned about noise and the submission didn't cover what they would do to ensure the noise issues for the neighbours was covered.They elected to pull it until they do. Based on the fact that NOTHING AL, VIC DOGS or the RSPCA, Deathrow pets etc has to say can be taken into account and the adverse side affect is making anyone watching want to avoid getting this kind of attention and potentially deciding against applying for a DA rather than doing the right thing - Im sorry- I think you're fighting this with the wrong weapons and the negative consequences far out weigh the thrill of the delusion that anyone had any influence on whether someone gets approved or not. You may see this as a victory for those who are against puppy farms but infact its a loss for anyone who is encouraging them to comply with laws and be easy to monitor and find. I don't know what kind of country areas you are thinking of but around here and in every other country area Ive lived in hiding a couple of hundred dogs is dead easy if thats what s someone wants to do.

Why not?

Tuesday evening after the meeting with the RSPCA. We are meeting at the Forrest Apartments 30 National Circuit Forrest at 5pm onwards. My mobile is deleted Hope to see you there. Julie

O.K. We are meeting at the Forest Apartments 30 National Circuit Forrest. They are open for drinks at 5pm and a meal too. My mobile number is 0427015152 Hope to see you there. Julie

Its not whether I have an issue with my breed's age - its that I want to have some decisions left to the individual breeder. Good grief no matings until 2 years, no more than one litter per year and no litters after 6. No taking a pregnant bitch to a dog show. Why? Where is the science? Then look at this. From their website http://www.dogsvictoria.org.au/assets/pdf/...ssion-paper.pdf Breeding for the improvement of the breed Each member of the VCA is bound by the VCA Code of Practice. We are aware that some members have adopted breeding practices that are contrary to the Code of Practice, and that are not in accordance with the Objectives / Statement of Purposes of the VCA. Breeding practices that are ‘not what we are about’. If we continue to ignore these members and their objectionable breeding, can we continue to claim to be a responsible organisation that should be accepted as an authority on dogs ? Two practices that members find most objectionable are as follows: 1. A member who breeds on a scale that does not fit with “primarily for the purpose of improving the quality and / or working ability”. We refer to this member as a puppy farmer. 2. A member who registers ‘phantom bitches’ to circumvent Clause 20.1.14 of the Code of Practice. The third litter within 18 months from a bitch is registered against the phantom bitch so as to avoid prosecution under that Clause. Puppy farming We cannot regulate to control puppy farming until we first establish the criteria for what we consider to be acceptable breeding practices. We agree that breeding should be planned, therefore can we document an example / guide? If so we can then expect a breeder to document their plan, and produce it on demand ? We are offended by large numbers of puppies – so should we set a limit on the number of litters per year ? Would such a limit be fair across all breeds ? For example a limit of three litters could equate to 30 puppies for a Boxer breeder, but only 9 puppies for a French Bulldog breeder. Also, would we penalise 4 litters in one year if none had been produced in the previous year ? Or would we average the number over a given period, for example any three year period ? Should we limit the number of puppies ? Again fairness across all breeds has to be considered – a limit of 20 puppies might equate to 1 ½ litters of Great Danes but 7 litters of Pugs. We currently limit the number of litters a bitch can produce – should we limit the use of a stud dog ? Should we limit the number of breeds any one member can breed with ? Puppy farmers often have five or more breeds, and the breeds change with the market. How many breeds can a member effectively manage under an acceptable breeding program ? Would the number depend upon such factors as the size of the dog, or the size of the litters of that breed. What other factors would need to be considered ? Should a breeder be required to demonstrate the effectiveness of their program ? For example a specific number of titles ? How would we view a breeder who shows regularly and successfully, breeds excessively, and uses the proceeds of their breeding to finance the importation of good specimens of the breed ? How do we define the difference between commercial and hobby breeding ? Phantom bitches How do we address this problem ? Should we require all breeding stock to be DNA profiled ? Should we require all puppies to be microchipped prior to registration ? If DNA profiling was required, when would it be done ? What form of positive identification would be required ? How would the profiles be recorded and stored ? Should the VCA conduct random inspections of members kennels and breeding ? Reg 3.7.7. empowers to VCA to do so but what would the inspection be gauged against ? The solution ? Clearly the organisation has to establish criteria against which a member can be assessed to determine whether their breeding practices are acceptable to the organisation. Part of such criteria must clearly identify the difference between hobby and commercial breeding. If we try to purge the organisation of puppy farmers without such measurable criteria we face a significant legal risk. Establishing such a criteria will be difficult, but can we afford not to ? Your thoughts and comments would be greatly appreciated. Lionel Bleakley 25 May 2010

Knowing what your goal is for the litter, for you and the breed and what you will and will not be prepared to compromise on in order to get there. Write it up sort of like a business plan - sounds corny,and I know its only a hobby but it's a great tool and you will be surprised at how it all comes together.

Not unless you are Victorian member.

Awesome Yes please.

What do non VCA members do? Pray they don't take it to the ANKC and make it national.

None of it makes any sense some would be 20, some 22 and some 24 months? Why can you breed a Weimaraner at 12 months but can't breed a Viszla till 2 years? And why can you breed a St Bernard at 18 months, but cant breed a Maremma until 2 years yet a Bernese Mt Dog is 20 months!? Someone has said making them wait is better for them but no one really knows who said that and there isn't a scrap of science to back any of it up. Half of the breed club committees who don't have a clue on breeding want to play power games and pretend they aren't straight up bullies and all I hear is how this will stop back yard breeders - what about the dogs? What about treating breeders as if they have enough concern for the welfare of their dogs to make informed decisions based on what they have in their own back yard? I just don't get why everyone isn't jumping up and down and shouting blue bloody murder about whats going on in Victoria. If I were living in Victoria I would resign my membership and use another address in NSW and join here. All that will be left breeding registered dogs is a handful of died in the woods show breeders who have lots of champions, few litters and own one or two dogs - and then they will come for them via pedigreed dogs exposed platform. But rather than see the big picture and everyone tell them to leave it as it stands all these goody two shows "Im better than anyone else" breeders will give it a tick and feel very important while they are doing it. None of it has anything to do with the dogs its all egos and PR.

The problem is that it takes away the right to decide from the breeder. There is no science in any of this - its based on what people who rarely breed think it should be. Some breeds may need to wait until testing is done but thats covered in the code anyway. These arent GUIDELINES they are proposing.

The code of conduct says every live puppy and every litter is registered. It is against the law for a breeder to put puppies out without chips.

Bumping this anyone else coming?

Just bumping this - at the moment it looks like the best place will be the place where we are staying but Ill let you know. Anyone else interested?

Specifically what health issues - in order.

I think its really interesting.I commend you for your knowledge of your breed. If you had to choose - in order - what would you say were the biggest challenges within your breed- from a breeding perspective.

Ellz - when you get a minute could you write us an article on this?

What if you have dogs you are sure don't have eye problems? With American Cockers you can never BE sure without testing. There is no such thing. Supposedly clear bloodlines have broken. The breed is one fraught with heartbreak. Thats interesting what is the mode of inheritance ?

So I guess the big question is - if Vicdogs felt it necessary to write a letter to try to prevent someone being able to keep 50 dogs who was not a CC member would they also do the same if it were one of their members who was applying for a DA for 50 dogs? Based on this article - it would appear that they would. What magical number does Vicdogs have in mind which would make them feel it wasn't necessary to try to prevent someone from applying for a DA to keep dogs? Is it O.K. to apply for a DA for 20 dogs? Or would they prefer their members and anyone else to keep their dogs hidden without approvals? At the end of the day its up to the council and whether or not the DA complies with their regs anyway and general submissions against DAs which are about puppy farms in general make no difference.

What if you have dogs you are sure don't have eye problems?

oh bulltish Steve. They dont bother with the law because theyre money hungry see their animals as cash machines. Their previous behaviour gets them in trouble not some premonition of evildoing. When you keep dogs like shit on one property, then want to go open another and you're NOT a registered breeder what do you think is going on? If a registered breeder wants to apply to create a 50+ dog property and abides by council regulations about kennel properties and waste/draininage then there will be no problem. Unless they too start keeping dogs in their own filth or chained to wrecked cars. There seems to be a short sighted worry that registered breeders will suffer from this. If your animals are well socialised, well kept and healthy then what do you have to worry about? Dogs cost money, if you cannot or will not afford to give them decent living then you shouldnt have them. The issue never was the number, but simply the conditions they will be kept in and their treatment be it 5 or 500. O.K. If what you say is true then they would never have gotten their development application approved anyway and the only letter I saw was one written by AL and that didn't discuss this specific DA .It looked to me to be about puppy farms in general. do you think them withdrawing this DA means they will stop breeding? What you or I think is bullshit isn't really counted because anyone who is watching what has happened and who may have been considering the merits of the RSPCA wish to have all breeders licensed and out in the open, easy to find and nicely compliant is not going to be likely to want to take the risk.

Danes was 18 months, now 24months. Im ok with that. Sway- Do you mind explaining to me why you think it should be moved back ? Im not having a go - Im just trying to understand where you are coming from?