Steve

The issue - define the issue. Moosemum wants to be part of a group and do the opposite to what the group does. She wants the group to be less divisive of those who do not share the groups philosophy. That's pretty simple - Moosemum feels that she has to take sides and she does in order to determine whether she will or will not join the group and feel united .She either swings across and agrees that the way the group does things is adequate enough for her to join them or she is to determine its too far away from what she believes is the right thing to do. However, asking for the group to change in order to fit her philosphies will not now or ever happen. Im not saying that because for me it is black and white - I breed pedigreed purebred dogs because I believe its the best for the dogs and the people who will own them that someone who does it differently is wrong or unethical blah blah blah but they are not doing what I do and they are not breeding predictable dogs so how on earth would it be better to market us and our dogs as if there is no diffference ? If you join a group and agree to accept their codes then if you dont you are unethical according to their standards - so dont join. As a breeder Im not interested in what cross bred breeders do or in promoting cross bred mutts. Im happy to market what I believe in and what I know and what Im involved in and tell the world about all of the positive things they gain by having predictable dogs living with them.

So marketing what we do and our dogs has to be about promoting what is unique about our dogs and us but in order to get any of us to rise to the occasion and build our campfires closer to the trail and strutt our stuff we have to go back to being proud of what we do and being brave enough to say so. We have to stand up for what we know is right and not what we are told is right .

But you see all of us have to decide what we believe to be best for our dogs and the future of our breeds - or if we are interested enough we try to work out what is best for the future of all dogs.Sooner or later you have to choose sides because they are different in their base philosophies thats not to say what we have in common cant be cultivated and we cant stand united for the greater good of dogs in general but whether you breed purebred dogs or cross breed dogs are miles apart. I believe that I cant live with some dogs and some breeds because of knowing myself and my lifestyle, my family's needs as easily and relaxed as I want to experience the human dog relationship. I believe that part of being responsible is understanding these things and working out what you can live with and having both you and the dog living happily ever after even though I agree that some people can live with any dog of any breed or part thereof and adjust to it - I'd really rather not . I believe that if dogs are matched to people based on the predictability of what the human will prefer and predictability of how the dog will behave and need to be managed that there is less risk that people and dogs are miserable and that less will be dumped and less neglected. As a breeder it feels better for me that I can predict what genetic disorders i have to be aware of and test for and watch out for which I believe gives me a better chance of producing a family pet suited to particular lifestyles and needs, that lives a long healthy and happy life.That what I do can have a positive impact [if Im lucky] for generations to come. i prefer this method of breeding dogs than one which is based on luck. One of the tools I need to do the best possible job I can is to use the pedigree system as a tool and I dont want the people who are keeping the pedigree system to be too laid back about it and let any old dog in without good reason based on real science which still ensures we dont all end up with dogs which are less predictable. If someone else has another idea of what is best for the dogs Im O.K. with that , if others dont mind taking a dog as they would a lucky dip Im O.K. with that but the reality is the base philosophy and the methods we use as purebred pedigree breeders are so far removed from those who cross breed without sanction or those who are only concerned for the litter they are putting on the ground today it makes no sense to me for someone to want to be a part of the group I belong to as a breeder if they dont want to use the pedigree system and by allowing them to come in and just decide on their own what they want to breed it seems to me that would be like saying I place less importance on what I do and Im happy for what they do to be promoted as the same thing. Now none of that is to say I agree with all things that are done and all of the regulations etc but any group lets you know up front what they think as a collective and you take a look around and determine whether you agree enough to join them but you cant stand on the outside refusing to change how you think and feel and demand they change to suit you or or anyone else - it just doesn't work that way. You either get to stand alone, join or start another group but you cant stamp your feet because you want to do it your way but still be welcomed in as if you dont.

With their model for staff to dog ratio = where 1 litter equals 1 fertile animal. You could have literally over 100 animals per person on the premises at any one time. They also carry on about when a bitch can be mated, how many litters she should have and site "scientific research - when none exists and the paper they cite isn't a study , isnt peer reviewed and specifically says it shouldn't be used to draft legislation. You would need to vaccinate every puppy with kennel cough,every dog on your property every year for everything,you have to have a bitch examined by a vet prior to breeding and 6 weeks after she has puppies. Looks to me that the only people to gain are vets,over vaccination, over servicing and over regulation and if this is supposedly best practice to a point where it needs to be a law then why doesn't every dog owner and every breeder regardless of how many animals they have need to do this ?

No matter which group you belong to you believe your group is the best or you wouldn't belong to it. There isn't anything wrong with having the division unless of course you are not able to be a member of the group you want to be because your values and philosophies are different. Of course a realistic aggressive marketing plan can address the current perceived negative views. But the people who are being expected to provide that marketing strategy are not responsible for doing so. Its up to the breed clubs and individual breeders. Trouble is there are less breeders and less breed clubs who are working at promoting their breeds over organising shows. How can the knowledge we gain as pure bred breeders exist and be able to be utilised by anyone who isn't using a pedigree. The fact that we do use the pedigree system enables us to breed dogs differently with consideration for many generations to come to be able to breed consistently healthy happy predictable canines that breeders who don't use a pedigree system cant do. The pedigree enables the genetics and temperament and conformation and the closeness in relatedness of a mate to be assessed. The division is the focus for you and Im all for uniting on common grounds with everyone involved in the dog world but Im happy to remain divided by the fact that I breed pedigreed purebred dogs. Any marketing strategy has to be about whats different about the dogs we breed not whats the same as everyone else in my opinion.

http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/pets/domestic-animal-businesses/breeding-and-rearing-businesses/breeding-and-rearing-code-review

http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/pets/domestic-animal-businesses/breeding-and-rearing-businesses/breeding-and-rearing-code-review

But people do! If you get a wonky version or a bad deal or a lying salesman from an organisation most people will bad mouth the whole organisation and will not choose to use that organisation again. Instead of a valid accreditation system, you say caveat emptor to the extreme. When you choose a car to buy do you research without reference to accreditation systems like ANCAP, road tests by motoring organisations etc. etc. and would you deny any sort of similar accreditation for dog breeders? Imagine having to choose a car based ONLY on the advertisements of the car salespeople plus your own weighing of how well those salespeople "will live up to the truths they promote". Bear in mind that the average dog should last the family longer than the average car. Moosmum you are telling people to do their research first but are against a system that would provide a ratings system or quality control measurement that they can use to make comparisons. By doing so you are actually giving the advantage to the non-ethical and irresponsible breeder. I would prefer quality control - a way to measure levels of responsiblity and ethics. An accreditation system that gives the advantage to the ethical and responsible breeder. Please don't confuse membership or affiliation with accreditation. Part of the perceived problem is that the registering body cant and wont market each breed and they are not the ones best suited to do so. I also believe they have made some major marketing errors which have impacted poorly on the image on their breeders. But the marketing of registered purebred breeders hasn't been too bad - go to any website including some of the most anti breeder ones and you find recommendations for people to go to a registered breeder. Some state and local governments give exemptions and exclusions for purebred breeders over any other breeder and even though there have been anti breeder and anti purebred marketing campaigns with a push toward saving dogs and greeders blah blah blah registered purebred breeders are still the ones most often recommended to go to to get a puppy . The marketing has in fact been so successful as Anne - via our meeting with Clover Moore's people when we were discussing proposed legislation in NSW - would remember that those considering changing legislation make assumptions about what ANKC breeders can do under their code of ethics which a miles off the reality. Right now in Victoria there is a change on the table which will make it very difficult for anyone who is not Vicdogs or who own more than 10 fertile dogs to live happily ever after. The ANKC dont restrict where a breeder can advertise, or how they promote their kennel , their dogs or their breed. We can talk around in circles and determine how it came about that purebred breeders in the main try not to advertise at all let alone in places where "those other breeders" advertise but the initial impact is the marketing of anti puppy farm propoganda. "Good breeders dont mate their dogs unless they already have homes for them all and good breeders dont need to advertise" Heaven forbid if we advertise on Gumtree because we may be judged as being one of them. I know some purebred breeders who kill some of their litter or who sell their puppies to brokers or pet shops anonymously rather than be seen by loonies or their peers as being one of the bad ones who need to advertise their puppies anywhere other than dogz. We used to advertise our puppies in newspapers and other websites etc but then we got sucked in and stopped marketing in this way and letting people know where we were and how to find us. Right now the big deal is don't buy off a breeder who wont let you come to their home - doesn't matter how many people say how great the breeder and their dogs are or the variables of each breeder ,its an instant strike "they must have something to hide" if they are not comfortable with having open house for anyone considering the breed or their puppies. A 75 year old woman who lives alone with no neighbours couldnt possibly not want strangers at her home because she is frightened and feels vulnerable - it must be because she is one of them. Doesn't count that she has been breeding her breed for 50 years and she has nothing but great reports on her dogs and her ability to build relationships with her puppy buyers because another group's marketing has determined this is the only way to be sure she isnt a puppy farmer. Last 2 weeks it was school holidays, Im building new fencing so I have the sheep and the dogs in my house yard so they cant get out while the fences are down,fencers coming and going to collect materials etc. Ive got lambs dropping some have to be helped out, Ive got my youngest son home with a couple of his mates, Ive got two of my teenage grandkids staying for the holidays, Im working the MDBA awards and MDBA business from home, working my lavender farm mainly weeding this time of year but preparing the next acre for planting, manufacturing products for the farm gift shop and farm on line store, tending the plant nursery ,packing and posting items Ive sold, the usual attend meetings, shopping,paying bills,end of year business books, cooking, cleaning washing etc driving two to work and back twice a day, taking the 16 year old to footy training two nights a week and to the game one day on the week ends, oops almost forgot the two trips into Wagga to take one to the doctor - no appointments available at a closer doctor and to pick up the hay for the sheep. Im trying to work out when I will get time to go to the toilet and have a shower and I get a request from someone who is passing through to bring their 4 kids to visit while they were on holidays so they can meet me and my Maremmas. Of course this has to be a day and time which suits them because after all they are passing through and cant change their plans if it doesn't fit in with my plans. Now dont get me wrong Im not having a go at them for asking but when I said it wasnt possible as the timing wasnt right for me I felt like I was being seen to be one of the bad guys because I didnt shuffle my life to fit in with them so they could come and see my dogs and the conditions they live in and I worry that rather being seen to be in a position where it simply was bad timing for me that they felt I had something to hide. Its not ANKC or purebred breeder marketing or pressure that says Im a bad breeder if I dont let you come to my home but its powerful enough to manipulate what we do even if sometimes it makes no sense including us allowing our breeding programs and methods to be altered to keep their marketed ideas of best practice when in fact it has no basis in science whatever. We get caught up in it all and take up these ideas of what makes a good breeder and that impacts on our ability to market ourselves and our product. I think the OP was pretty much right on the money.

I agree with this 100%.

yeah I missed that bit - but I dont feel so bad because the people who sent it to me were really hot about it

You just beat me to it, with the link to the Snopes site. Yes, hoax. Whew

My link

No Poodle X Labradors are not cobberdogs now . Cobberdogs are the result of breeders who are attempting to develop a new breed by using several breeds of dogs to achieve a large group of dogs which will be able to be recognised as a breed in its own right with predictable characteristics. They did this by using a pedigree system. The stud book is still open and they have the ability to infuse the breed with dogs which have no relation to their stud stock to include in their breeding program but they don't. They dont because they have been testing for,watching for all diseases known to occur in any of the foundation breeds and eliminating them from the breeding program. They have been selecting for animals which have particular temperament and personality suitable for assistance work which will not shed and which wont require the level of grooming which is usually required for non shedding dogs. They have been testing for 27 different genetic diseases and havent seen any of them for 7 generations. Every time they go out and introduce a cross breed they have to start again with no real knowledge of what they may bring to the gene pool - no knowledge until it turns up - of what they will need to test for and work to eliminate into the future. There are hundreds of people world wide working toward being able to show this is a predictable recognisable breed and if they all decided tomorrow to chuck in a cross breed without having to justify why they wanted to do that it takes the work done back generations. Breed clubs of any breed are in the same position. As a registry if the ANKC listened to individuals or splinter groups and simply stuck in new things into the breed standard or added to or took away registration requirements just because someone wanted to have it done a different way it would be anarchy and it's why they only listen to the breed club. Surely you're not suggesting that breeders should be able to cross breed without a good story about why they want to, what they hope to achieve and how it will be managed or criteria to fit ? Any breed club can approach the ANKC and have permission granted for them to open their stud book ,I am aware of two breeds with open ANKC stud books right now. Currently in the UK every breed has had its stud book opened and dogs are able to be entered if they fit a certain criteria and that is probably the future for the ANKC too. The ANKC allow stud books to be open, they allow crossbreeding, they accept new breeds into their registry but they dont allow you as an individual breeder to simply decide that you will take a different breed here or there and put it in the mix without having to tell them why and how. This is why the code of ethics is worded the way it is and why purebred breeders are against cross breeding in their breed unless it is sanctioned and goes through the system. Now why the ANKC haven't come out and said this when it is being slammed for closed stud books is beyond me but for anyone including the RSPCA or a Uni professor could believe that it would work by just willy nilly allowing every body to chuck in the neighbours dog rather than having a system in place to ensure it doesnt do more harm than good and that we are still left with specific breeds rather than generic dogs makes no sense either. Fact is the ANKC stud books are closed but the system is in place to allow the stud books to be open for any breed at any time. They could simply say all of their stud books are open if the dogs being added fit the criteria - same thing just sounds different.

Maybe but not likely.

Coats which need grooming which is a bit silly for dogs supposed to be working under all weather conditions. Just saying.

http://www.news.com.au/national-news/victoria/victorians-private-phone-and-email-records-spied-on-by-councils-government-departments-and-other-organisations/story-fnii5sd6-1226672826414 VICTORIANS' private phone and email records are being spied on without warrants by non-police bodies such as Wyndham City Council, the RSPCA and even the state's taxi directorate. A telecommunications annual report reveals dozens of government departments including WorkSafe, the Department of Health and Ageing, Medicare and Australia Post accessed personal information to investigate the public. Last year 304,437 authorisations were granted, up 20 per cent on the 2010-2011 total of 251,733. While the content of phone calls and emails cannot be obtained without a warrant, communications data, also known as metadata, can. It includes the names and addresses of telephone users and lists of their calls, text messages and emails. Among those concerned are privacy advocates who have questioned why invasive powers were being exercised by some of the state's smallest organisations. The only Victorian council to access metadata, Wyndham got 11 authorisations last year, and 20 the year before. Two council officers are permitted to request metadata from telcos. It is understood that the council seized data from residents' mobile phones to chase minor matters such as unregistered pets and illegal rubbish dumping. Wyndham council declined to comment. Under federal surveillance laws, Telstra and other telcos have to hand over metadata when requested by authorised employees of government departments or agencies. The Attorney-General is told once a year which agencies access this type of information. WorkSafe spokesman Peter Flaherty said on rare occasions WorkSafe requested metadata to investigate occupational health and safety. "As the small number of requests suggests, it is used to further an investigation only when absolutely necessary," Mr Flaherty said. Executive director of the Human Rights Law Centre, Hugh De Kretser, said the current legislation set the bar far too low regarding which agencies could monitor private information. "When you broaden access to surveillance technology it brings obvious risks," he said. A joint parliamentary committee is looking at whether appropriate safeguards are in place for protecting human rights. Read more: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/national-news/victoria/victorians-private-phone-and-email-records-spied-on-by-councils-government-departments-and-other-organisations/story-fnii5sd6-1226672826414#ixzz2Xui5ratZ

Crisp insurance will help you You want public liability and volunteers insurance - you might want to consider directors and associates insurance too.

How is it possible for the government to sack the RSPCA Board? http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2013/06/27/382270_tasmania-news.html TASMANIAN union boss Kevin Harkins has told a parliamentary hearing the Government needs to sack the RSPCA board and start again. The Unions Tasmania secretary accepted an offer to provide testimony to the hearing prompted by the Government's $400,000 emergency bail-out of RSPCA Tasmania last year after he was criticised by RSPCA-hired investigator James O'Neill a week ago. Mr O'Neill, an industrial investigator hired to examine then-RSPCA chief executive Ben Sturges' conduct in the lead-up his sacking last year, told the same committee Mr Harkins had warned him to "be careful, everyone is watching" on two occasions last year. But Mr Harkins said while he did say that it was for good reasons, including that "Mr O'Neill had never carried out an investigation of this type and had no training in the area of investigation" and that he had "no faith any investigation carried out by Mr O'Neill could in any way be objective". Mr Harkins said criticism of the board itself should not be considered criticism of the RSPCA in general. The inquiry continues.

I dont believe they would deliberately tell lies and it may be about how the reporter wrote it too but either way from what I know about rabbits in my opinion the chances that someone is pinning them to a fence like that while they are still alive are remote. Reality is this sort of thing gets them more donations and why wouldn't they use it? they didn't make the claim the person who contacted them and alerted them to it did. They simply investigated it and say the rabbits were dead when they saw them.

Yep me too .I was there yesterday and it was happening then.

No supplement is going to deliver you miracle results because miracles don't exist. If your dog doesn't have a need for improvement of overall health then there isn't a need for a supplement. If your dog is in need of a bit of a boost then allow 8 weeks for that to occur. If it doesn't occur then try a different supplement and/or speak with your Vet. Very sensible words sas. And Rosetta as well who said: I learnt a lesson again this week. I ran a blood panel for each of my two oldest westies last week (I do them every 12 months for the older two). And they came back 'perfect' according to the vet who seemed very surprised for dogs who are almost 12 and almost 14. I feed Adelaide Dog raw formula, bulk it up with veg. In the mornings I feed chicken necks and wings. Once a week roughly they get homebrand mackeral and sardines; RMBs a couple of times a week and a little grain free dry as the emergency back-up. They also get some leftovers on occasions (roast chook, roast lamb and roast veg (with a little gravy! ) are favorites - no cooked bones of course) No preservatives, colours or flavours. My feeding routine is simple, cheap, human grade and straight forward (I can't manage anything complicated!. ). Everything comes from the supermarket or butcher except their crunchy lamb treats and the Adelaide Dog formula - and thats one detour on the way home from work every couple of weeks. Really I think a blood panel will tell you how well you are going and whether or not you need to do any supplementation. Yep I believe every dog owner especially those who own breeding dogs should have these done every year - can often pick up danger signs and lets you know if they are down with anything. Can show red lights for precursors to thing such as addisons disease etc too.

Two different issues this one is Victorian and its proposed changes to the codes and therefore doesnt need to go through parliament . Its basically what ever they determine to do they can do - after all they have now consulted with stake holders. The NSW one is different as it does involve licencing and will require a change to state law to be able to go ahead.

Historically the RSPCA were no where near what they are now in fact it was about stopping animals from suffering and that usually meant dead . Better to be dead than homeless and it was originally about getting stray dogs off the street. Simple answer is that state laws have given them the power but as they are a charity they have no requirements to have the type of accountability of a government department and no outside accountability. This is an eye opening too. koalas.pdf

Im not saying dont use it Im saying use it as a medicine not as part of the diet .Its been shown to do great stuff in dogs but in short doses. I dont have time to dig out any more studies but these are part of notes I have handy on my computer regarding this http://k9joy.com/dogarticles/dogfood01vitaminC.pdf Innes (1931) demonstrated that the dog wasindependent of a dietary supply of vitamin C. Puppies fed a diet devoid ofvitamin C for 147 to 154 days showed neither growth impairment nor lesions ofbones and teeth, although the same diet killed guinea pigs within 25 days withsevere signs of scurvy. Furthermore, the livers of dogs on the deficient dietcontained the vitamin in sufficient amounts to prevent the onset of scurvy inguinea pigs, indicating that the dog can synthesize vitamin C. Naismith (1958) showedthat this synthetic ability is present in puppies during the first weeks ofpostnatal life. Naismith and Pellet (1960) reported that theconcentration of vitamin C in the milk from bitches is approximately four timesthat of the blood. The comparative rates of liver synthesis of vitamin C indogs and cats appear to be lower than those in ruminants, rodents, and rabbits(Chatterjee et al., 1975). Dogs synthesized vitamin C in the liver at a rate of5 µg per mg of protein per hour while cows, rats and rabbits had rates of 68,39, and 23 µg per mg of protein per hour, respectively. Teare et al. (1980) reportedthat 600 mg of ascorbic acid twice daily only aggravated the skeletal diseaseinduced by overfeeding protein, energy and calcium to Labrador retrieverpuppies. A study atCornell University showed that vitamin C treated dogs actually had less vitaminC in their adrenal glands than did the control dogs that had not been fed anyextra. The more the vitamin was given in nutrition/medication, the faster thedogs seemed to expel it through the urine.

No that's not what I mean - in humans vitamin C is a necessity and as such if you add it in any form its a good thing. Any response from too much of it is short lived. Now call it what it what you want, a food, a supplement an additive etc Its about how its used in regard to the dog that matters. If you add vitamin C to the dog's diet it should be treated as a short term thing as you would if it were a medicine not as you do for humans as a supplement to their diet or as part of the diet because if you do the dog will stop manufacturing vitamin C and be totally reliant on its source of vitamin C on what you feed it and the studies required to allow us to know how much the dog needs to eat to be able to utilise the same amount it normally makes and utilises haven't been done. They don't even understand yet why after you give a dog vitamin C that the blood levels peak go down and then 9 hours later peak again. These products are being sold and marketed based on what humans need for inflammation and joint pain but that doesn't mean they should be used without question as to how the dog differs to humans.