Steve

Before I give an answer Id like a time line. How long after the pup went home was it diagnosed with demodex ? How long after vaccination? Was there any other meds given such as heartworm meds, what diet was the pup on when it went home?

Thanks guys - Obviously for everyone's sake its going to be better if we can find someone who lives reasonably close who will look after the dog for a couple of weeks while dog friendly accommodation is organised.Its hard to believe there isnt someone in that area who couldnt put their hand up as its a well populated area but if we cant find someone pretty quickly we are going to have to consider transporting the dog futher out. At a guess we will also be able to use some people to help with a bit of house cleaning and the basics that come with moving too if we can stir some into action to give a hand.

O.K. Openarms is in a bit of a spot and needs some help.This is pretty urgent. We are looking for a foster carer in the Werrington area and if we cant find one there we will need to look further out. Bully is fully house trained, walks well on lead and is good with other dogs and just a big soft gentle sooky boy despite his 49 kilo size. He is vaccinated, desexed, microchipped, registered and wormed. He is not good with cats or rabbits though. We will cover all expenses and if anyone has a spare buck or two to throw in to give a hand Bank account is MDBA Pacers - Commonwealth Bank BSB 062600 account 10488688. my email is [email protected] Phone is 0269276707 Julie

Troy - Dogzonline has decided to stay on board with us as our principal sponsor and Judi from PRO K9 has also signed up as a general sponsor for the 4th Annual Awards again too. The presentation evening is being held in Melbourne in March Next Year around the 20th but we have to confirm exact dates yet depending on the venue selected. Its now very obvious that the awards have taken on a life of their own and we've learned a lot as we have moved through the growing process. Several thing's have changed a little this year. We have more categories and the judging will be tweaked a little to try to eliminate the advantages received if someone is better able to write a nomination than someone else who is nominating. The sponsor and advertising options have also been updated and some of the previous systems have been revamped to allow businesses to have more opportunities to take advantage of the marketing and branding possibilities. Based on what is already coming together for the next awards evening its going to be even bigger and better than any of us ever guessed it would be when we decided to give it a go. Quite a large part of the preliminary promotions for the awards in March next year will be a week long celebration of responsible pet ownership.The awards evening will be the finishing touch - the climax to this week of celebration. This will cover all of Australia and give every single person the opportunity to be involved and have a bit of fun with us as we place a focus on all the great pet owners of Australia and what they are doing to make a difference to the animals they live with and love. This week isnt just about dogs but also any pets and its shaping up to be a lot of fun. Proceeds from this week long list of activities will go to MDBA Pacers and other rescue groups will have the opportunity to apply for some as well. Obviously this is all going to take a lot to pull together and make the most of the chance to place focus on the positive things that happen in our day to day lives to ensure our dogs and other pets have quality lives - to use this to promote responsible pet ownership and to say thank you to those who are doing it right so we are going to need all the help and support you guys are able to give. The new categories are Master Breeder of the Year: To be eligible for nomination for this category, the nominee must be a financial member of the MDBA and be nominated by a puppy buyer. This award is not about the success of the breeder's dogs in dog related events or the amount of litters they breed. This is about standards of service, support and ethics provided to their puppy buyers. Master Responsible Pet Owner of the Year: To be eligible to be nominated in this category, the nominee must be a financial member of the MDBA. Master Puppy Buyer of the Year: Must be nominated by the person who bred their dog and that person must be an MDBA breeder member. Master Rescuer of the Year: Must be nominated by someone who has adopted one of their dogs, or by someone who is a foster carer attached to them. This award is not about how many dogs they have rescued but about their standards of service, support and ethics to their clients and foster carers. Open to Australian residents. Breeder of the Year: Must be a registered breeder with a certified canine registry and be nominated by a puppy buyer. The nomination is not about the success of the breeder's dogs, or how many they breed. This is about service, standards and ethics provided to their puppy buyers. Responsible Pet Owner of the Year: Must be an Australian Resident. Best Canine Rescuer of the Year: Must be nominated by someone who has one of their dogs or by someone who is a foster carer attached to the group. Open to Australian residents and this is about service, standards and ethics they have shown to their clients and foster carers. Best Canine Foster Carer of the Year: To be eligible for nomination for this category the nominee must be nominated by a rescue group/service. This award is not about how many dogs a foster carer has fostered but about their standards of service and dedication. Open to Australian residents. Pet Sitter / Walker of the Year: To be eligible to be nominated for this category, the nominee must be nominated by a client for excellence in standards of service. Open to Australian residents. Most Supportive Vet of the Year: To be eligible for nomination in this category the nominee must be nominated by a client. Open to Australian residents. Best Canine Groomer of the Year: Must be nominated by a client. This award is about standards in service. Open to Australian residents. Best Dog Trainer of the Year: Must be nominated by a client. This award is not about awards dogs that have been trained by the nominee have achieved but about the trainer's dedication and standards in service. Open to Australian residents. Best MDBA Student of the Year: Must be a Current student of the Master Dog Breeders Academy and nominated by a faculty member of the MDBA. Best Dog Related Website of the Year: Must be nominated by an Australian resident. Excellence in Contribution and/or Leadership in Canine Affairs: Must be located in Australia. Boarding Kennel of the Year: Must be nominated by a client. Must be located in Australia. Pet Transport Service of the Year: Must be nominated by a client and branches or based in Australia. Best Vet Nurse of the Year: Must be located in Australia and nominated by a client or a vet. Best Vet Surgery / Clinic of the Year: Must be located in Australia. Best Dog Supply Retail Outlet: Must be nominated by a client or customer .Must be located in Australia. (Must not sell live animals) Best Dog Photographer / Artist: Must be nominated by a client or customer. Must be based in Australia. Best Dog Insurance Provider of the Year: Must be nominated by a client or customer. Must be based in Australia. Best Dog Friendly Tourist destination: Must be nominated by a dog owner who is a client /visitor. Must be located in Australia. Best Dog Related Publication of the Year Best Dog Related Product of the Year Best Canine Specialist Service Provider of the Year: Must trade in Australia. MDBA Pacers award for outstanding service: Best Dog Related Service Provider of the Year: Must be nominated by a client or customer. Must be based in Australia. Best Contribution to Canine Science and or Research: Must be based in Australia. Best Youth Participation in Canine Affairs: Must be aged between 14 - 18 years old as of 01/01/2010. Must be an Australian resident. Best Junior in Canine Helpfulness or Kindness: Must be aged between 8 - 14 years old as of 01/01/2010. Must be an Australian resident.

Yep but they all have to see what role they play too and in order to clearly see what potential consequeces there may be for what anyone THINKS is the answer they need to listen and learn from the other. Woofandhoof I also believe its time for action and I know what I do for 18 hours a day everyday for exactly that reason.

Most of it, actually. I didn't actually say "your limited life experiences blinded you" - I said I thought you needed to see places with more than 2 dogs before you criticised. Now, what are the laws you would like to see enacted? Thanks for your concern but I have seen plenty of places with more than two dogs. You just made that assumption and I couldn't be bothered to correct you. I have many ideas for what I think should happen - but I will undoubtedly get flamed for any comments I make and will be accused of being brainwashed by PETA. You have a vested interest as a breeder - you don't want anything to get in the way of that. I have no hidden agenda - yes I love having pets as part of my family but if left with the options of "my right to own an animal" or to "end the suffering and misery and senseless killing" I would pick the later every time. And I make no apologies for that. "end the suffering and misery and senseless killing" Straight out of the PETA manual on how to end pet ownership. They kill 95+% of dogs that come into their care to end their suffering. They even had a mobile killing squad ending dog's suffering. PETA, R$PCA, HSUS, Animal Liberation, they are all after one thing ending pet ownership, to end their suffering. I am not advocating PTS or the end of pet ownership - I love my dogs too much and the fact that they don't leave when the front door is open would indicate to me they are happy being where they are. And I don't really know much about PETA other than they sound extreme. I think all breeders and pet owners should be made to take responsibility for their animals and meeting all of their needs. Don't know how to implement it but I'm sure improvements could be made in small steps. Why that is so bad, I have no idea. And if this scares you so much then maybe you have something to hide. Just because we can't stop child abuse - does that mean we abolish the laws because they can't always be enforced? At least when someone is caught doing the wrong thing there are avenues in place for them to be punished accordingly. I can't work out why people I would assume are dog lovers are not hell bent on improving the quality of all dogs lives, no matter what it takes. I believe my dogs are happy where they are too but if I leave the door open there is always a chance they will take a hike for a day or two because they are beagles and no matter how much training or how happy they are they are still likely to put their noses down and check out whats on the other side of the door.Ive allowed that behaviour to be acceptable rather than try and control it. I manage my whole life around that fact. I have a $55,000 fence around 2 and a half acres of my property which has a concrete footing under every square inch of it and two entrance gates which act like an air lock to ensure they are happy and so is my family. I dont walk them around the block and I dont take them to puppy training school but Ive lived with them for almost 40 years and couldnt imagine living without them or why anyone would ever consider having any other breed.I love to watch them running and playing in their pack and I waste time enjoying seeing them so happy just being able to do what the breed is meant to do without a lead around their necks.They come for walks around the other 30 acres and get to scent rabbits and roos and search for treasures whcih werent there last time they had the wind in their ears. They suit me and living with them the way I do having half a dozen or so is better for them and me than having two.

The sort of puppy you would come home with would have less chance of being suitable than one from a registered reputable breeder who has also done their homework. Badly bred pups with unsound minds and bodies are dime a dozen, many of them end up in the pound. Yep, the type of breeders I mentioned are not thick on the ground, neither are the pups they produce that are in great demand. That is not the issue that was being discussed. The issue was that if I want a pup I can have one with that day from any number of sources - paper, internet, petshop, posters at the dog park. That doesn't sound like under supply to me. No where did I say that there was an oversupply of well-bred, pedigree puppies from ethical, honest breeders - I am talking about puppies in general. Isn't that what the show was about - puppy mills and mass breeding? Not ethical registered breeders. You are implying that nature is the be all and end all. If you can point me to some research that shows that puppies from the same litter all turn out to be unsound of mind and body no matter what type of home they are raised in, I would love to read this. More likely they end up in the pound because they were purchased on a whim and the hard work wasn't put into raising them properly. Maybe a small minority of dogs are born "bad", but mostly they are products of the environment in which they are raised. Recently the MDBA attended a seminar in Melbourne - at Monash University on building better dogs and 100% of the professors McGreevy, Bennett and Goddard said that temperament is heritable and that breeders should select for temperament which is what breeders who know their stuff already know and there is miles and miles and miles of research to back that up. The fact of the matter is that responsible dog ownership starts before you get the dog. Some people at certain times of their lives can live with any dog but not all of us can do that. Knowing your lifestyle and the expected management issues relating to the dog when it is an adult is the only way someone can be remotely sure its going to be a good experience living with the dog. I know that I would be unhappy having to live with some breeds and that I would make them pretty miserable too so for me having a purebred dog which is bred for temperament and for which I can reasonably predict what I need to do to live wih it without neglecting it is a huge consideration. If you have someone breeding the dog who understands this and is selecting for temperament and predictible management issues, who tries to choose homes which match that because of what they learn about the owner's lifestyle and who is still around and prepared to take the dog back if something goes wrong then you dont get dogs in pounds. People who live with two dogs which are high maintenance,need grooming or lots of training and exercise cant get that someone else can live with 6 which have been chosen to suit a lifestyle different to their own. I couldnt breed enough puppies of my breed to fill the orders I have for them.I dont take a waiting list because when I did I had over a hundred on it waiting for a puppy. I had a litter which went home just before christmas and every one of the 8 puppies excluding the one I kept went to people who have already got one of my puppies and who wait for up to 2 years for me to breed a litter to have a new puppy. You may be able to buy a pup whenever you want one from anywhere but if you want a pup which is bred for its predictibility and which comes with a breeder safety net there is - across the board a shortage of them. One puppy farmer breeds in one year 10 times what I will breed in a lifetime and no amount of desexing pets, stopping pet shop sales etc is going to stop that.People who buy puppies because they think puppies are all the same and training and puppy school,treating them like humans etc is whats needed to live with them happily ever after is part of the problem because its simply not true - no amount of training or management will make a dog easy to live with if it requires management which you cant give.Try living with a high drive kelpie if your lifestyle screams pug or vice versa.

Me too. But if we cant speak about what we each feel are solutions and think through possible adverse consequences we wont get it right. This forum is a great place for sorting through the issues and seeing things from the wider or different perspective but that means we each have to begin by assuming we all have the same goal - to stop dogs suffering.

If people want to desex their pets, that's great - if they feel it is the best thing for their pet and their circumstance. Emotional black mail should not be used to push people into making a decision about their pet (s). The cold hard facts are that over 250000 companion animals are PTS every year because their aren't enough good homes but people just keep producing puppies and kittens. If it stops people thinking that they'll have a litter to "calm their dog down", "let their children experience the wonders of life" or just because "she's such a nice dog" then that's good enough for me. People need to know and accept that if they bring more kittens and puppies into the world then they are responsible for them. I don't see it as emotional blackmail - dog savvy people that choose not to desex their pet but keep them contained and don't add to the unwanted pet population probably wouldn't feel "emotionally blackmailed" as they do the right thing. I have heard people suggest that people dropping their pet off to an animal shelter should be made to watch them be PTS - is that emotional black mail or making them accept the consequences of their actions? If we don't do anything because we might make the poor humans feel bad then what hope is there? Yes the overpopulation myth has been done to death and nope I dont buy it. If you want to equate unwanted with overpopulation that's your business, may even be a good strategy; fact is dogs end up pts not because there are too many but because they are not wanted - similar yet different. No time to find for you the old threads and data on this- there's some in rescue and general. I dont feel emotionally black mailed when I read crap like: The 10 top reasons to have your pet spayed or neutered were just killed in a shelter - bcz I know its not true; but others might. I think there's enough valid reasons for pet owners to desex their without adding misinformation about 'pet overpopulation' which is another agenda altogether. The issue of unwanted pets is a complex problem and to imagine that it can be solved by mass desexing of pets is simplistic at best. So produce less dogs and cats, which then puts a higher price on an animals life (supply and demand) and maybe people would truly want one before they spent big bucks buying one. That is what over supply means - they are too readily available which means that people treat them as disposable commodities. Whoops, didn't put enough training and socialisation into that one - off to the pound with you so I can get another one But your right - the solutionis to deny that too many animals die needlessly every day despite rescue busting their gut. And I'm glad you don't feel emotionally blackmailed - I never said that was the intention............you're the one who said that that is how it would make people feel If 57% of dogs were put down to temperament and 37% were put down for health reasons, what was the reason for the other 6%?? Why were they not rehomable - you stated that every dog that was rehomable was. And since temperament is most likely to have been due to the way the dogs were raised as pups - ie lack of socialisation and training - then the majority were in fact PTS due to the stupidity and apathy of humans. No massive problem has a simple solution - but desexing is at least a start............as opposed to denying that there is a problem. If there were an oversupply then pounds would be full of puppies ,rescue wouldnt take pregnant dogs out of pounds and whelp and raise thousands of puppies each year because they know they will find homes for them all more easily than they will adult dogs. Some rescue groups specialise in this. I personally know one rescue who homed over 250 puppies last year which she whelped from pregnant bitches coming from pounds without any help form another person other than her daughter. Thats more in one year than I, as a breeder will home in 30 plus years. Stop for a minute and take a breath because when we focus on one thing which we have decided is the answer to the problem it doesnt allow us to consider unintended consequences and part of the problem to date is that we havent all sat at the same table and worked it through learned from each other, looked at possible unintended consequences and worked together.For the sake of the dogs.Puppy farmers sell puppies to pet shops - ban the sale of live animals in pets shops - that wont stop them but at least its a start. The start of what? There are too many unwanted adult dogs - make everyone desex their pets - that wont stop people dumping pet dogs but its a start.The start of what? Less people breeding more dogs without care for what they breed or what happens after they leave to go to their new homes. When we went in and spoke with Clover Moore's people re the sale of puppies in pet shops I was amazed at how much they didnt know, how many assumptions they had made and if people who are being held as experts had of sat down with purebred breeders 12 years ago when they began fighting us to promote the idea of gathering health data they would know that what they think about purebred breeding in this country isnt what they think it is and there wouldnt be a gaping hole a mile wide in their method of gathering research data for health prevalence and we would have been able to use it to stop dogs suffering.We could have - should have been able to work together rather than one party thinking they have the solution and treating the other like the enemy. Take a look at the RSPCA puppy farm paper - do know how much better that could have been and how little oppostion to it there woud have been if they had sat at the table with purebred breeders BEFORE they started ? Before they made their decisions on what was best for dogs without all of teh necessary information? You are looking at the kill rates and so are we but in doing so we cant just presume what we think we know and decide on what we think will be the answer because unless we respect each other and work together and be open enough to learning what we think the solution may aggrevate the problem. You have assumed that if we desex all pets that less will be available so therefore they will be higher priced and therefore more highly regarded. In fact less will not be available, they may be higher priced but that just makes it a more lucrative pastime for those who want more money and people who decide they cant live with an animal dont care how much they paid for it when they get to a point of dumping it.People who get dogs for free can value their dogs way over another who paid thousands for them and again desexing pets doesnt stop the mass suffering of animals in puppy farms.

I know that Paul McGreevy has commented on his research regarding F1 crosses but I was unaware that Pauline Bennet was in any way endorsing crosses, it's been stated about a million times that she is a registered breeder of purebred animals, surely if she were in favour of breeding crosses she would already be doing so??? No one can control how information is used, seminars are held to present the information, if the public decide that F1 crosses are the bees knees it's because they haven't been told otherwise. The gardener hasn't been on our screens for many years now, of course the promotion of crosses has resulted in an explosion of people breeding them - that's what promotion is - maybe the purebreed world should give it a go At the end of the day it's all just words on a forum, maybe I'll believe it when I see it on tv I said Pauline Bennett pushes for reform with the CC codes of conduct to enable breeders to breed puppies soley for the pet market. I didnt say she was promoting DD breeding she is promoting breeding only for the pet market whether that is DD or purebred its still a promotion of breeding lots of dogs for profit - isnt it? At the end of the day it may be just words on a forum for some but not for all of us. The question is whats the best thing for the dogs - what can we do to prevent dogs suffering. Promoting purebred or designer dogs isnt the answer and nor is jumping up and down and focusing on pet shops.Puppy farmers will breed whatever sells and they dont give a rats if they have to sell them selves rather than a pet shop.

Woofandhood I am aware of what universities provide and I didn't say the academics were endorsing puppy farming I said they were endorsing designer dog breeding of F1 crosses. This was a seminar called Breeding Better Dogs and 250 people in that room went there to learn from the speakers on how best to do that and Id say several thousand have heard the tapes on the net since then so telling me what Universities provide wont change the fact that whether it was intended or otherwise the result is that there is a public perception that what was said had weight.Kate Scoffield was introduced as an expert.Her vet and genetics credentials were publicized and used to give weight to what she had to say and what she does.Pauline Bennett pushes for changes with the CCs to allow registered breeders to breed solely for the pet market. Ive no doubt that there was no intention on behalf of the organisers or most of the speakers or the uni to promote puppy farming but thats the whole point. Its about public perception and unintended consequences. The point is that pets have always been sold in pet shops in this country but people breeding dogs in such high numbers for profit is a recent event. Breeding cross bred dogs was once not a good idea because they were mutts and they were hard to get rid of and if a pet shop took them it was usually for free. If the demand for first cross dogs hadn't been generated then there would be no one going like mad on the supply end. Im not saying that any of the players anticipated the consequences but in reality they have all played a part including the RSPCA. Pet buyers want F1 cross dogs because they have been told they are more predictable than purebreds, they are more healthy than purebreds and they are status symbols. There was a demand generated and within a couple of years ACA breeders Kennels were showcased in magazines and national TV and Don Burke said they were the best puppy breeding set up he had ever seen and so much better than the way purebred dog breeders keep and house their dogs. Breeding dogs for profit was promoted as being a legitimate method of making money and farmers who were suffering drought conditions followed the lead. The RSPCA dont anticipate that their new suggestions for controlling mass breeding will mean more people breeding in higher numbers and less people breeding fewer numbers.They don't anticipate that their anti purebred promos simply mean there is a higher demand for designer dogs and that they are a part of what they are trying to prevent. Mcgreevy doesn't mean to generate demand for designer dogs but thats exactly what is going on. Animal welfare groups calling for tougher screening of buyers and purebred breeders having limited supply means buying from someone who will just sell you a pup without jumping through hoops becomes appealing to those who want a puppy too.You can talk about changing social conditions like how there are less puppies being bred in suburbia due to changing lifestyles and council restrictions - including bans on debarking which also generates more supply for farm bred dogs. Then add in the internet and simplify the sale process too and its a runaway train. Pet shops play a minor role and blaming them and focusing anti puppy farm battles around them is not going to work. 6 puppy farmers breeding 1000 puppies each a year is as many as 50,000 registered breeders throughout Australia breed each year. :cry:

yes Id agree with this. In my opinion people who are pushing designer dog F1 crosses are much more responsible for people seeing dogs as a lucrative method of making money than pet shops. The RSPCA are pushing for addresses of breeders to be published and for buyers to visit the place dogs are bred which is what the guy from Banksia was on about too Taking away his ability to sell to a pet shop wont hurt him.he will still breed 10 times more puppies in one year than most purebred breeders breed in their whole life and have a nice shiny shed set up as a pet shop and ship them out all over the country via agents and exports. Don Burke was backed up by McGreevy and Company's paper telling us about how first cross dogs are healthier than purebred and more predictable. Monash uni gave the floor to a puppy farmer to tell us how to suck eggs and backed her up with Mc Greevy and Bennett. The interest in designer dogs has been generated and nurtured by people with their own agenda and they are as much to blame if not more than PIIA

Is the MDBA going to be contacting the 7 30 report to offer up an alternative view on the issues? The MDBA has already spoken to someone via the 7.30 report.

I was thinking about this. I'm not sure about other states, but in NSW all pups are meant to be microchipped before sale, and I'm sure most 'professional' breeders will stay on the right side of this law. However, do the chips actually have to have any details recorded against them? Aren't puppy buyers given rego forms/advice, not change of ownership? I've heard of lots of dogs that are found in pounds to have chips but no details. In NSW pet shops have an exemption with the micro - chipping laws. A breeder is required to chip the pup at time of sale or 12 weeks which ever comes first but when they sell them to a pet shop thats not required as the pet shop holds them and chips them into the new owners name. The stats I saw and I cant remember where in NSW show that most dogs which come in are not chipped so someone is breeding them - lots of them and not chipping them at point of sale. Its been law in NSW now since around 1996 so if majority are coming in with no chips it is logical that they are not being sold via pet shops in NSW. If everyone was to be legally made to chip into the breeders name or the person who whelped the litter [ such as rescue] at 6 weeks and then changed over to new owner at point of sale then it would be a simple case to see who is breeding them and where they are coming from. But its never been policed so regardless of the fine print it wont help unless they pull their fingers out and ensure the laws they have are followed. The point is if the stats are right and only about 10 percent of dogs in pounds are chipped then assuming pet shops are chipping into the new owners name its not them so when Steve Austin says this he can pretty well prove it = if we all agree that pet shops are more likely to be following chip laws than most anyone else. Therefore - let it go because they will continue to use it to make out we are all a bunch of rednecks and go after puppy farms and battery style dog farming first.

Well for what its worth here's what I think.I think we should just stick to the issue - Its unacceptable for dogs to be battery farmed. Then lets talk about why - use the science and the facts.Forget about comments like the dogs look so sad because thats not going to take us anywhere.One will see sadness another will tell us how they have been bred for soft temperaments blah blah blah. If we want to address pet shop issues or euthanasia rates then deal with them separately because when we get caught with them altogether we open ourselves up to them discrediting what we say and when they get us on one it makes the whole issue seem fanatical. Personally, I think this is where Clover Moore failed and after sitting through 45 mins of being lectured by a puppy farmer on how to build better dogs [vomit] I reckon its time we changed tactics.

We have rescued several lots of puppy farm dogs. Some are so severely traumatised they bear their scars forever. Most can be rehabilitated with the right experienced carers, but it can be a long process, and some dogs are not for the faint hearted. Having said that, the rewards in seeing progress with these dogs is phenomenal. My own bitch will still spin when very stressed by a storm, five years after rescue. Yes I know but what is so upsetting is that its now being made legitimate via people you wouldnt expect to support it and portraying that Banksia park kennel as something to be held up as doing the right thing by dogs.Even uni lecturers are touting a commercial puppy farmer as an expert on breeding dogs and allow her 45 mins in a seminar on building better dogs! Steve Austin saying they only get dogs from registered breeders and people registered as breeding businesses is supposed to make it O.K? Not for me.

I have to say that attending that seminar at Monash Uni and hearing what was said via Pauline Bennett, Paul McGreevy and Kate Scoffield has had a profound effect on me and seeing dogs kept in these conditions now makes me emotional and brings me to tears because of the suffering and I dont think there is any stopping it.I get why Starting a group to legitimise it all is being touted as a good thing because the theory is that we cant stop it so try to clean it up but it saddens me so much.I dont know how anyone who says they love dogs could condone it let alone particpate in it.

The argument comes from the fact that most dogs dumped ARE NOT microchipped and as chipping pets in NSW occurs when dogs are sold by law the theory is that because dogs which come in are not then they werent sourced via a pet shop. Ive already spoken to someone re the 7.30 report putting purebred breeders views in. Steve Austin said they only buy puppies from purebred registered breeders or breeders who are registered as a breeding business. To any registered breeder who is reading this and sells puppies to pet shops - you are one of the reasons the MDBA was started 6 years ago because I know the Canine Councils cant stop you and it makes me want to vomit if I have to swim in the same filthy pond you swim in. Thats not because Im saying there's anything wrong with pet shops its because of the mind set of someone who can treat dogs as stock and send them off to market without a care. You can also bring them in and have them sign up with Kate Scoffields new commercial puppy farmers group in order to try to give them legitimacy but Im with animal liberation - They are all as bad as each other

Steve Austin said they ONLY buy puppies from registered purebred breeders or people who are registered as a breeding business. That makes us all feel better. Not.

The concept of anyone having that many dogs is just mind blowing. As Ive said before atending that seminar at Monash Uni where a commercial farmer was given the opportunity to explain what a breeder of that size does it completely changed my mindset on puppy farming. Until then the term had been used in the main to talk about a breeder who didnt show or compete in some dog related activity, or about a breeder someone else didnt like or about a breeder who had more than one or two litters a year. But when you know some people are actually owning up to 1000 dogs and pumping out puppies in the thousands and still try to say the dogs are well looked after, that they are well socialised and loved makes me want to cry. I dont believe the system presented by the RSPCA is the answer but its time we, as dog lovers really took a step back and ask how we ever got to a point in this country where breeding dogs for nothing more than profit became a legitimate way of earning a living and tried to look at the current system to work out what we can do to protect the dogs but also to protect the rights of the owners even if we dont agree [ and I dont] with the way they go about making a living.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/03/29/2858606.htm The RSPCA wants tougher enforcement of laws governing the sale of dogs and cats in the ACT. CEO Michael Linke says thousands of animals are offered for sale in classifieds and on the internet each year in Canberra. He says 5,000 animals were listed in the classifieds of one local publication in 2009. Mr Linke says many breeders are unlicensed and are selling animals that are not desexed or microchipped. "Seventy-three per cent of dogs sold through classified advertising were not desexed at the point of sale," he said. "So there's a tremendous number of dogs out there continuing to breed. "It's just making a mockery of the laws in place in Canberra where we have compulsory microchipping, compulsory desexing and licences available for breeders." Mr Linke says the Government needs to send a message to the community that it is serious about enforcing those laws. "The laws are good, we're got some of the strongest animal welfare laws in Australia ... but there is no policing, there is no follow-up," he said.

http://www.wptv.com/mostpopular/story/Man-...HisUYPlMCA.cspx PALM BAY, Fla. -- Authorities say a Brevard County man reportedly attacked a veterinarian after learning his dog died during surgery. Police say 60-year-old Samuel Winstead dropped his pet schnauzer "BB" off at the animal hospital so Dr. Jason Frydelund could remove some benign fatty tissue from the animals chest. Reports state that Frydelund said the operation went well and the dog came out of anesthesia. The staff called Winstead to tell him his dog was ready to be picked up, but minutes later, the vet believes the animal suddenly suffered a stroke and died. A second call was made to the owner. "Apparently, he dropped his dog off for routine surgery, but the schnauzer died," said Yvonne Martinez, spokeswoman for the Palm Bay Police Department. "They called him to come get the dog and he just lost it. That's when he pulled out a knife and started to choke the doctor and pushed a nurse." Witnesses told police that Winstead came to pick up the animal, but pulled a utility knife and started to choke the doctor. He eventually stopped and left but reportedly threatened to come back and kill the doctor. Police responded to the clinic and stopped Winstead's car a short time later. He was charged with aggravated assault and battery. Winstead posted his $30,000 bond and is to appear in court on Sunday.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/sunday-...f-1225846369955 HUNDREDS of dogs seized from a puppy farm last year have been voluntarily surrendered by a couple facing animal cruelty charges. While 244 dogs were seized in a raid on a puppy farm at Wondai, in the South Burnett area, some have since given birth to 170 pups. It has created the biggest fostering exercise in the state RSPCA's history. Before Ruth and Ken Schloss last week agreed to surrender the 244 original dogs, and the pups, they could not be desexed or adopted out. The agreement now gives the go-ahead for the RSPCA to start the process of finding new homes for all the dogs that include a variety of breeds. "Special needs" foster homes have been found for 317 out of 414 dogs and newborn pups, but the RSPCA still needs to find foster homes for 97 young dogs, while adoption is being organised. Care of the animals has been costing almost $5000 a day, at an estimated cost of $12 a dog each day, with foster parents being provided with dog food and any necessary veterinary treatment. The 244 dogs were seized from the breeders after a three-day operation in September by Biosecurity Queensland. On Tuesday, Ruth and Ken Schloss were charged in Murgon Magistrates Court with animal cruelty and breaching their duty of care to the dogs. Ruth Schloss also was charged with failure to comply with an animal welfare direction by Biosecurity Queensland. The case will be mentioned in Toowoomba Magistrates Court on April 9. Before the dogs were sent to foster homes, careful security checks had to be made to ensure there was no chance of any of them getting pregnant. Some of the seized dogs initially had ear, eye and other problems. RSPCA Fairfield shelter manager Nanda Ten Grotenhuis said veterinary behaviourists were consulted before the dogs were fostered out. Foster families had to undergo training and those who already had their own dogs had to bring them to the shelter to see how they would react to the dogs being fostered. Ms Ten Grotenhuis said while mother dogs and their litters initially were fostered out together for the first six weeks, they then had to be brought back to the shelter, weaned, separated and re-fostered. Different foster homes then needed to be found for the mother and each pup in a litter. One staffordshire bull terrier from Wondai had 11 pups. Biosecurity Queensland has contributed to the cost of care of the Wondai dogs and new pups. Anyone who wants to foster a dog should contact the RSPCA at www.rspcaqld.org.au.

Yeah looks to me that she just got rid of her oldies which were past their breeding prime.

Raffle tickets are on there way. Julie