Steve

Reputable just means they are well thought of .So I suppose the pet shop could claim they only used them because they [the pet shop] thought well of them. I suppose what I think of them or what someone else thinks of them wasnt qualified.Could be thousands of other puppy buyers who got puppies from them in the past too I suppose. If all they said was reputable its going to be hard to show false advertising

Some people are prepared to take the risk and not care about where it came from or how its bred -or even how much money they have to pay for it - they just want a puppy ,they don't want to have to go out of their way much or be questioned or have to wait. Supply and demand as always. The people who will buy a puppy from a pet shop are not the same consumers that will buy form a registered breeder. Different target market. So do we know what the puppy in the story died from? Was the pup sick from the minute they took it home?

If a breeder has any suspicion that the pup isnt quite right she is doing absolutely the right thing by holding onto the pup until she is sure its O.K. to travel or if its something that will require a vet etc .Far as Im concerned in this regard its all good. Small breed pups often don't have their testicles where they should be at 7 or 8 weeks so its not like its something the breeder should have known to inform you of when the puppy was younger. If the breeder was told you would be desexing the pup they will be surprised if you now say you would prefer to not have the pup and there is still a chance that the second testicle will come down anyway at this age - unless its something that the breeder commonly sees because its in her lines. If you prefer not to have a pup with a testicle problem you can now say thanks anyway but because it has a testicle missing I would prefer not to take it but the breeder has informed you - could have sent it home and said nothing and they have held the pup to be sure its good to go when it goes. All sounds pretty good to me.

Yep - agreed

You cant blame vets if they know what is the science of the species and give the tick to things animal rights activists have told us is bad for them. The chances that someone would take a bitch to a vet if they thought she wouldn't cut the grade is minimal.It would be a waste of time and money. So if there are bitches at high risk of not passing the breeder is either going to opt out of the vet check and breed her anyway or bump her off and breed another one. Where are all of these breeders who breed their girls when they are in poor condition to justify all of a sudden everyone having to do something they dont think is best practice for their girls? If in fact there is a need for girls to be vet checked by a vet so close to mating then how come its not something all people must do who want to have a litter?

No need to have it at all - its over servicing and changes nothing except sends the bad guys further under ground. If for some reason the bitch needs to see a vet in the middle of the year its O.K. because they only need it once a year just let her suffer till she comes on heat. Its already a criminal offence to not give vet treatments and you will be lucky for a vet to pick up 1 out of 500 that is a fail for breeding 2 weeks before they are due to be mated. Every one they fail its a loss of a thousand bucks in vaccinations and microchips might even get a C section.

that natural trait is genetic - breeders select for a dog that is more or less naturally inclined to seek out human company depending on what work they will be doing. Dogs that want to be with you and are on you are more suitable for training in therapy and assistance work. Its actually something some puppy buyers want to look for when they select one puppy over the other in a litter and one of the things I tst for when placing a pup.

The Ministerfor Agriculture, on behalf of the Government, is offering financial support tonon-government, not-for-profit organisations that improve the welfare ofanimals. The $1.6million Animal Welfare Fund was developed in recognition of the excellentcompanion animal welfare services being delivered across Victoria by manynot-for-profit organisations. These grants recognise that companion animalsplay a significant role in the lives of Victorians. Eligibleorganisations can apply for a small grant (up to $10,000 GST free) or a largegrant ($10,000- $50,000 GST inclusive). The2015/2016 Grant Round (Round 4) will focus on services, systems orinfrastructure which improve the efficiency and effectiveness of foster careand rescue groups, therefore the Minister strongly encourages theseorganisations to apply for grant funding. Funding willnot be restricted to foster care networks and rescue groups, consideration willalso be given to applications covering the following areas: 1. Providing community education programs on responsibleownership of animals, including consideration of ethics, sentience and duty ofcare; 2. Providing animal relief services and use of facilities tothe community during an emergency; 3. Providing improvement in the rates of reuniting companionanimals to their owners and re-homing of companion animals; 4. Providing facilities to promote dog exercising in parks andsocialisation classes for dogs. Projectsmust relate to at least one of the following types of companion animals kept aspets: cats, dogs, horses, rabbits, reptiles, caged birds, guinea pigs, ferrets,rats or mice. Onlineapplications for Round 4 grant funding in 2015/2016 open today (1 July 2015),and close 31 July 2015 at 11:59pm. Informationabout the Program, including online applications, FAQs and examples of projectsthat could be eligible for funding, can be accessed from this link: http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/pets/community-and-education/animal-welfare-fund-Aaa-grants-program Happy to help with submissions for MDBA members who qualify to apply.

I dunno. How many past their breeding prime fall pregnant? How many way too young fall pregnant? And how many kept in filthy conditions manage to fall pregnant. Strays seem to have no problem... They already have to have them checked and cleared for breeding every year so what is a check within 4 weeks of mating going to do that isn't already in place and regulated by the code ? They are already restricted on how old, how young how many litters and how will a vet know if when they go home they will live in filthy conditions? The science tells us that a bitch in poor condition is far less likely to come on heat, fall pregnant. If you try to breed them back to back every season they will for a couple if they are in good nick but then take a break all on their own.

As its not parvo - vinegar is the best shot for cleaning. Kills bacteria and most bugs

How horrible for you and your family. The breeder cant just say "I think its lepto" - they need a diagnosis - could be lots of things and they all require different treatment - different types of antibiotics assuming its bacterial or parasitic and not viral and there is different potential outcomes and side effects. What has happened can happen to any breeder and it doesn't automatically mean they are filthy or really terrible. Things like this can be spread by contaminated puddles etc and sometimes the pup doesn't show symptoms until it goes home BUT I agree there are enough red lights here to decide to go to another breeder to get your new puppy and one at a time is best . He has to refund your money - full stop and its a cheap and quick process to go to fair trading if he doesn't play nicely. However, try to keep it as nice as you can because he could opt to pay you back a couple of dollars a week.

No you would probably have to get them to the vet as soon as they come on heat to catch it in the time frame you dont get to say 4 weeks before the mating that you have 4 weeks before you mate them or exactly when its all going to happen so I assume there will be more oops litters. This will see the big commercial guys spend more money on overservicing so the vets win - they wont care its an extra $20 they will put on their puppies but people who breed dogs who typically aren't doing it all legally wont take their girls to the vet before they mate them. Their prices will go up too to match the others even though they wont do it. Anyone who is Vicdogs and who has less than 10 fertile dogs doesn't have to do it either .makes one ask that if this is really something that is required to ensure the welfare of breeding dogs why all dogs don't have to be treated the same. Big questions is how are they going to measure the results.Will vets give a report of how many they pass and how many they fail etc so we know whether we can justify making them rich and overservicing our dogs. Will they also be looking for things like there has been fluff over via pedigreed dogs exposed? They already have to have them checked every year. The only way they can enforce it or detect a breeder that opts out of the vet check is if they are already on the books and they come in and check their records. What stops them from taking Sally to the vet and mating nancy? Are they going to come in and scan every dog every pregnancy to ensure its the same dog ? What stops them from saying they bring a dog in that got mated somewhere else by someone else and only home after she is pregnant? Why not let 2 girls have a litter of 5 and say it was the only the one who was checked and she had 10? DNA tests? Close circuit TV spies? How silly it all is. Its pretty mad stuff as breeders do not normally doing this unless its for progesterone treatments etc and at a time when the girls immune system is down most breeders would prefer to keep em away from a vet surgery . Just one more decision which is taken off us and we will all just hand it over because it might stop someone someone where mating a dog when she is in poor condition. how many bitches in poor condition at time of mating even fall pregnant?

Came in today in Victoria 2. Amended Breeding Code – commences 1 July 2015 The Ministerfor Agriculture has taken action to further improve the welfare of dogs andcats in breeding businesses. The Code ofPractice for the Operation of Breeding and Rearing Businesses (2014) has beenamended to require breeders to obtain a veterinary health check for all femaledogs within 4 weeks prior to each mating cycle. In addition, the Code containsminor typographical corrections, and minor amendments to update the Code withrespect to Machinery of Government changes and the Primary IndustriesLegislation Amendment Act 2014. The amendedcode commences today, 1 July 2015. A copy ofthe amended Code can be viewed or downloaded from this page: http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/breedingcode

No. I think they're already known about but with the current rules - the RSPCA can't do anything about it. RSPCA can remove dogs that are dying but the ones that are just filthy - tend to stay... And the puppy mill doesn't get shut down until there have been multiple repeat offences. Dogs don't deserve that. And puppy buyers need to know where their puppies are coming from - and not to reward people like that with money. I think there are a couple of places in Vic that would have 300+ dogs in their breeding program. I'm not sure about the ones near Adelaide. I've seen pictures of what they do - and it's not how I think a companion animal should be bred. Ie it's not a very companionable environment. The RSPCA can only have people charged with animal cruelty if they are cruel according to the Prevention of Animal Cruelty laws - stricter codes and regs wont change that .Its still warning, fines and voluntary surrenders .They will never be able to just walk in and shut them down unless its really bad and even then it may be temporary. Imagine a restaurant that breaches health codes and its the same for a breeder that slips up on breeder codes .Smack on the wrist, clean up your act make sure you have the proper council approvals and off you go again. Lots of puppy buyers dont care where their puppies come from, some actively seek out sources where they can simply hand over their money and take it home. Putting crazy unenforceable regs on breeders wont stop that - stop or restrict one source they will find another.

I think one person can easily manage 10 litters a year if that's all they do with some qualification on breed variances and set up. I'm not sure someone without help could manage 10 litters at once though - Id need a lot of convincing.

I know it seems that Im being difficult and of course there is no doubt that there are some rogues who breed dogs but before we go any further can we just stop a minute have a look at what has already occurred in other states and measure whether we think that has given us a solution. Can we please really take a good look at what the problems are and how many do the wrong rather than the right thing.There are unintended consequences and its not always as it presented by those who have their own agendas. It seems to me that if the goal in the Victoria regs was to prevent puppies from being bred in factory type conditions that this has really back fired. If the goal was to ensure that no one in Victoria would breed dogs any more in sub standard conditions it would seem to me to be a huge fail. There are still reports of it happening and lots of moaning going on when people who get caught without the licences etc don't get the book thrown at them. If the goal was to ensure that every puppy bred was sent home healthy, well sociliased and happy then thats a fail. if the goal was to ensure that every puppy was microchipped before it left the breeders property - big fail.

No answer to this - Depends on the facility, depends on how its managed, depends on the breed - big difference between 10 chi and 10 great dane litters.This is where development applications come in - where everyone who wants to run a business from their property has to apply for approval and approval is dependent on all of these variables to enable the approval or lack of approval to be taken on a case by case basis. Dog breeding is a legal activity and many breeders engage in this and make a profit. Some people will breed more than 10 litters a year and do a great job others - and I see them every day breed one litter now and then and muck it up royally. Some will breed a lot to have greater choices in their breeding program to ensure they are only breeding the healthiest and best possible and profits go back into their dogs. Some do it full time some part time - you cant compare the capabilities of someone who works full time and only has after work hours to look after their dogs and those who are with them all day every day. Some have them out in guardian homes etc. 20 years ago purebred breeders who bred dozens of litters per year were held in high regard .They had kennel hands and devoted their lives to trying to improve breeds and they did.

Well hang on - how many people are there who have 300 bitches and 2 humans to look after them? Is there so many people who do this kind of thing able to justify regulating breeders who don't do this in case one or two every ten years do ? In Victoria they have bought in staff to dog ratio which actually created a situation where its possible to have one staff per 120 plus dogs. The solution to a perceived problem has to be able to equal the proportionality of the real problem and so far we are told that there is an epidemic of people who need to be dealt with - so many that all other people who want to engage in a perfectly legal activity,regardless of their circumstances should be treated as potential criminals. Do you really think that someone who has 300 bitches and 2 staff will say here I am - come and get me because some new laws are made to tell them how to operate ? How many breeders in SA currently have way to many bitches per people looking after them?

No you misunderstand the point Im trying to make they are not wrong but that's what works for them, their breed, their puppies, their puppy buyers -so far - sometimes there are variables that make it O.K to let a puppy go home a earlier. If legislation says they have to be vaccinated by a vet and they have to be held for 5 days for immunity to cut in and a vet wont vaccinate them before 6 weeks of age then they dont go home till 7 weeks at the least anyway. There are many studies and loads of experienced breeders who argue 7 weeks is better than 8 weeks. The only person who can judge what is best for their puppies at any given time is the breeder and just because some may move em out sooner rather than later to get the money quicker or to save them work that doesn't justify the government taking away ALL breeder's ability to make the call. Breeders who would move them out for the wrong reasons are the ones who wont be doing the right thing by them for the last week anyway so there's an argument that it may be better for these puppies to be in new homes sooner rather than later. Ill come back later to address the rest . Too much paperwork to do before bed.

Yep definitely but unless its enforced only the good guys will do it.Then again even if it is enforced there will still be lots that dont do it.

Even if you have someone who is breeding huge amounts of puppies there is no need to keep breeding dogs in concrete pens. If a breeding dog is vaccinated, rarely if ever leaves the property, and there are not dogs coming in exposing them to viruses and bugs which are not quarantined why cant we keep them in yard type situations ? Why is it O.K. if you own a couple of dogs for you to allow them to run in your yard pick up their poop , mow the lawn give em fun stuff to play with and run and play , lay around in the sun etc having their humans coming and going into their yard to pet them and play with them etc but the minute it becomes a dog which is used or even maybe used for breeding its automatically dirtier, more likely to get and give germs and needs sterilised and scrubbed non porous surfaces? Why is it we can keep dingoes in a yard type areas if they are breeding but not dogs? Bitches only need temperature controlled easy to clean more controlled areas for about 8 weeks a year and they dont need to be concrete cells there are many other alternatives which gives greater welfare but we are stuck in this holding pattern of what has become known as kennels and how we should be managing them. Not true.

By the way Im not looking to making it harder for people to dump dogs. In fact if I had my way there would be hundreds more small rescue groups who could act as advisers and work at prevention and accept dogs before they go to God or the pound. If anyone is interested in starting up such services where they could help dogs but also make a good living doing so Im eager to help. I would like to see rangers give dogs a free ride home when they are picked up - with no fines the first one or two times. I would like to see breeders, rangers and rescue and trainers,groomers, vets, pet stores all working together to identify problems unique to local areas to come up with solutions for the individual issues they face. i would like to see good breeders more rewarded and encouraged,I would like to see hundreds more small hobby breeders and small business breeders eager to learn and get it right. Where they are not spoken of or treated as pond scum based on what some hoarder or criminal might do somewhere or sometime into the future.

The stress of a puppy removed from its litter at 8 weeks when it isn't properly weaned and has been in the constant company of its Mum and litter mates until the minute it goes home is liable to be much more stressed about going to a new home than a 6 week old one. You win all puppies have to wait until they are 8 weeks to go home but based on what I have seen and what I know it is a stupid inclusion based on little more than assumption. All that is needed is to ensure all puppies are vaccinated before they go home and that there has been enough time between needle and home time for the vaccine to be activated. The main reason for this is that it is the only thing you can do to cme close to introdcing something that can be regulated and enforced. The breeder can then take into account the variables they are working with have the right to make informed decisions on what is best and puppies and families live happily ever after. You may be able to get close to all puppies being 8 weeks before they leave the property but you will never ever get near determining what a breeder does with those puppies between birth and 8 weeks .No amount of over regulation is going to make a breeder keep the pups with the litter for that long if it doesnt suit them. No amount of over regulation is going to make a breeder socialise a puppy with humans or other dogs if it doesnt suit them. If you dont want breeders to keep dogs in blocks of kennels like boarding kennels and pounds then we had better stop telling them that this is what is required for best management, easy cleaning blah blah blah. No person who loves dogs , no person who wants to breed puppies humanely would want to keep their animals like that but in some places because of over regulation the breeders have no choice. Take a good look at codes and development application requirements then reconsider who is to blame for breeding dog to be kept in this way.

Yep agree and while we concentrate on the welfare of breeding dogs to try to ensure they have only the best quality of life and while we try to put things in place to prevent dogs being dumped - its time to stop focusing on what we are fed and told and led by zealots relating to causes and possible solutions and rethink using facts not sensationalism, propaganda and mythology. You wont get that unless you start to see breeders as having something to offer rather than needing to be controlled and legislated.