Steve

Yes thank you I knew it was three years and not one - dont know why I wrote one year but unless the finer details have been changed from when I last looked at it - which is entirely possible because its been a while one of our members had to go through issues when she applied for the licence. Will see if I can contact her over the next few days to follow up.

This is a pilot program on the gold coast - anyone who owns an entire dog is supposed to go to council and get approval to breed it and they inspect the property and give a yes or no. This has to be renewed every year. They also have to give their licence numbers in all ads. So we have one member who owns a CC champion bitch. She isnt ready to breed her yet and wont until she moves to a larger property but in order to keep her entire she has to get a breeders licence which they wont approve as her home has been ruled out for breeding. Then 12 months later we go and look at the local papers and not one of them had a breeders licence number with puppies advertised. When we went to the council to ask why the answer was that they had no ability or resources to police it. So the only people who are compliant are those that were doing the right thing anyway any one who has too many or who live in small housing allotments etc or who want to keep entire dogs simply dont register their dogs.Anyone breeding any old dog advertises them where they want anyway .Its only dummies like CC registered breeders who follow the law. What a surprise. Whats more they were pushing for this to be introduced within a heartbeat of this starting on the gold coast before anyone had any idea whether it would have a positive or negative impact .

Yeah, honestly, a lot of rescues and their followers recently have been nothing but ridiculous, and Facebook is just a haven for crazies. I'm glad I have pets but am not involved with rescue or breeding. It all just makes the whole dog world look nuts. You think it's just Facebook? The DOL rescue forum has been like that forever. My first taste of it was when I asked something in a thread about a rescue and was hysterically accused of demanding their secret pound contacts. This went on and on and on for ages, including by at least one of the people in this thread, despite the fact that I had never done so and didn't even know people apparently had 'secret contacts'. Look at the recent pug thread. I'd agree with that though if it has been like that forever I didn't notice it but it sure has been for a couple of years now.

She will have to go into the witness protection scheme. Wonder if they paid their yearly registration for the dog.

Bloody hell the dog world is a filthy place to hang out in.

People in this state have made decisions on how many dogs they will own based on a once only lifetime fee. Its not fair to ask them to now accept fees yearly which wasnt in the mix when they made that decision -stupid.

Then we get to the breeder stuff. No difference between a breeder who breeds one litter a year and one that breeds 100 They want AWL and RSPCA to have full access to the registry details They dont want any organisations members to be given any exemptions They want all of the guidelines made laws - these are the really stupid things such as having to feed every pup out of its own bowl , not putting a litter tray in the same room as a water bowl etc They want a licence for anyone who has a litter And they want everyone who wants to breed a dog to have a cert 11 in animal studies. So right now in NSW breeders can register their dogs once in their life time and they can breed a dog without a licence fee. they are out in the open because they do these things. Bring in yearly licence fees and all the rest of it and one of a couple of things will happen = small breeders will chuck it in because they cant afford it , breeders will breed more to get back their investment and again commercial breeders do it easier.Supply and demand hasnt been impacted so stop small breeders and more big breeders flourish. The rotten ones or the ones who decide to break the laws will dig in deep and be harder to spot. More dogs in big breeding establishment , more dogs in dodgy outback breeding sheds and no positive impact on dogs suffering or on impound numbers.

Well it would appear to me just from what I hear on the news that there are just as many dog attacks in Victoria as there are in NSW and they have a yearly registration. There is a constant barrage of reported raids and puppy farmer activity which come from Victoria and their licence /permit system has done nothing more than enable large scale commercial kennels to flourish and the impound and kill rates are around the same as they are in NSW. There is no evidence that yearly registrations leads to better rather than worse updating of data on the register. Many of the dogs which have life time registration in NSW have it because the person who sells them the dog has to change the details on the registry. That enables their council to follow up and ensure they have paid their rego .Many of them would have never registered their dogs unless that happened in fact where it still doesn't happen there are dogs on the chip register which are not registered with their council. If the person selling the dog cant be bothered the chip details are never changed and many of the dogs are never registered unless the seller's council comes after them and wants them to register the dogs. What a simple process it would be to write an automatic reminder to go out if a dog on the chip register isnt registered with council within the required time frame. Now the big moan is that when people move they don't update their details and the data on the registry shows that their dogs live in the same place. People who dont update this info are people who place no importance on the dog's details remaining current because they dont care if the dog is lost and they cant be located.There are penalties in place if they dont but they dont care. Right now every one can change the details on that council registry free of charge without fear that if they do that they will have to pay money every year to keep their dog and yet they risk a fine and losing their dog if they dont change the details so why would anyone come to the conclusion that these people will be more likely to update their details if they have to pay every year to re register their dogs? Right now there appears to be no benefit if the details are not changed but if this came in the reward for not changing the details is not paying the rego fee every year .That puts people who would ordinarily change the details but who dont have the desire or the means to pay to register their dogs every year potentially in the pool of people who dont change the details so the there is more data not updated rather than less. We are also told that if people have to pay to register their dogs each year that there will be less dog attacks. How ? We already know drop kicks who are irresponsible with their dogs have little respect for the law and are un likely to be compliant anyway - these people are less likely not more likely to change data and pay the yearly fees.

I hate them - Give me the creeps

So the question would appear to be - in those places where yearly regos are the law is there less dog attacks and is there less animals being bumped off? In areas where there is a breeder licencing/ permit scheme are there less large scale commercial breeding or puppy farmers? Are there less puppies being bred and less dogs being dumped ? One would think if they are presenting this as a solution that they would have the comparison figures to back up their position - anyone seen them?

That's how I feel some days about all the people who ring me up and chat for hours about the breed and go to some BYB or commercial kennel to get their puppy. Or who come to me to help them after they have bought their dog from someone where the breeder isn't available or who wont speak to them after they buy the dog. Not really the same either way I work for nothing anyway

http://www.dlg.nsw.gov.au/dlg/dlghome/documents/Information/Companion%20Animals%20Taskforce%20-%20Report%20to%20Ministers.pdf

You also have to remember that AWL has equal status with the RSPCA - if the shoe were on the other foot then it would be the same outcome.Some group charged with doing what is needed which is in fact the competition. Could be worse it may be that they had to investigate and clean up after themselves I guess.

yep

$40 for desexed animals or entire animals owned by a dogs NSW member $150 for an entire animal. I really cant see how yearly rego will change anything- the same people will register their dogs, the same people wont. For non members of Dogs N.S.W its $150. $350. for an Entire dog. Pensioners get registration reduced to $15. unless its an entire,in which case they pay the full $350. it used to vary from council to council,but sounds like thats no longer the case? It hasnt varied from council to council for years in NSW - its state wide law and costs are fixed. Nope here is the link- max you pay is $150 for an entire dog http://www.dlg.nsw.g...istermycatordog My grandfather as a pensioner paid 50c to register his dog/yr back in the early 1990's in Bankstown. Doubt yearly rego would be that cheap anymore even for pensioners if they brought it back in. Most recent registration was charged $350.! What shire? The fees are set at state level.

Why would they do that? That would be sensible. A large part of the problem is the divisions in the "dog world". I can't see an end to this sort of mentality (increasing legislation for dog ownership and breeding)until all groups are united under one umbrella organisation who can promote common,community goals,educated decisions, responsibility and research. As long as people prefer to point the finger at others... The term pi****** into the wind comes to mind. No amount of legislation is going to teach communities how to adapt dogs into the modern world. Only a community effort can do that. As it is,there is no "community" of dog enthusiasts. Just judgement and agendas. Crap you have 2 charities which get our taxpayer dollars to push for laws and police us.To advertise employ people and answer to no one. There is no way any organisation can compete with their PR machine and their budgets. most of what people have swallowed hook line and sinker about what is a good breeder etc is based on what they have been feeding them not science, not what is best for the dogs or the breeders and we dont have the money, the resources or the courage to mount a counter attack . Whats more my only agenda is advocating what is best for the dogs . What is best for dogs isn't ensuring people can no longer afford to keep them or running small breeders out of town regardless of who they are judging or what their agenda is.

This in itself is part of the problem though I dont want to moan about it too much because if it changes we will all suffer. But many people are Vicdogs members who dont own a purebred and who breed cross breeds and designer dogs. They join because it gives them the exemptions. Some in NSW do the same but no where near as many as Victoria as it is a lifetime rego and no permits or licences and the risk of that happening here are lessened more now there is a choice of groups they can belong to in order to get the exemptions. So commercial breeders get the same rego exemptions in NSW if they are members of the AAPDB as any Dogs NSW member or MDBA member. Reality is there are always un intended consequences and you cant just assume anything will simply be bought in and the rot will magically disappear without killing of the good stuff too. .

$40 for desexed animals or entire animals owned by a dogs NSW member $150 for an entire animal. I really cant see how yearly rego will change anything- the same people will register their dogs, the same people wont. For non members of Dogs N.S.W its $150. $350. for an Entire dog. Pensioners get registration reduced to $15. unless its an entire,in which case they pay the full $350. it used to vary from council to council,but sounds like thats no longer the case? It hasnt varied from council to council for years in NSW - its state wide law and costs are fixed.

If you start to put costs on which just appear out of the blue - yearly licence fees for anyone who breeds a litter and yearly registration fees when they have had life time for even pet dogs its a disaster waiting to happen. Then on top of it they want breeders inspected before they get a licence, inspected each year to be sure they are able to renew their licence and at any given time things can change. Prices can go up and compliance issues are created and altered and ramped up - they literally blow people who breed dogs as a hobby out of the water. What on earth are they thinking - this will see more dogs not claimed ,it will see dodgy breeders go under ground and encourage more bigger and bigger kennels, breeding more and more puppies to cover their expenses. How on earth do they think this will cut down kill rates? When will they work out that what is best for the owners is what is best for the dogs and remember to consider the humans involved in this and how what they push for impacts on their ability to care for the animals they see as family.

Now that's in the right direction. The stats back it up. Pigs do fly around your council area. :) NSW and Victoria both give exemptions for members of a governing body. In Victoria its Vicdogs and in NSW its Dogs NSW ,MDBA and AAPDB. So we pay a $40 fee for all of our dogs in NSW a once only fee for the life time of the dogs. For the rest of the world they pay $40 for a desexed dog once only and $120 for an entire dog once only. There are still more than 50% of all dogs not registered - they cant even catch people out once in the whole life time of a dog yet they think they will be able to do that every year. But how they get to an assumption that this will stop dogs being put in pounds is beyond me. In the current system people pay the $40 knowing that it a once only so if there dogs do end up picked up on the street and worst they get a fine for a dog at large if its renewed every year and you havent paid it every year then you cop bigger fines and you are more likely not to register them at al. What of al the people who have made a commitment to own a couple of dogs knowing they can afford a once only $40 but cant afford a yearly fee for every dog they own now what are they supposed to do with them? When ever they actually police the laws they have someone might give them and ounce of credibility.

Cant really see what the difference is if they bring it for a yearly fee and you stay for 12 months go away and then come back again surely it would cost you just as much if not more .you would be one of the few who cancelled it anyway.

Yep except most times by then the dog is part of the family and some conditions known to be heritable can also be impacted by the environment, lack of certain hormones when they are desexed, diet, injury etc.For a breeder to stipulate that someone has to give their family member back before they can be compensated really sucks and unlikely to happen - breeders who give that guarantee know this and in my opinion its not on. So anyone that is issuing a guarantee needs to be specific about what it is exactly they are guaranteeing and for how long and also have written the conditions under which they will accept responsibility and those things which will mean they wont accept responsibility. Will they require independent opinions ,vet reports etc , who will pay for these? If the dog is returned who will pay for transport costs.Who will pay for treatments and vet care and for how long and a multitude of other seemingly insignificant things which become full blown murder mystery material when it happens.

The ONLY way any breeder can guarantee that a dog wont develop any health issue and be given much credibility is if the specific health issue is a recessive disorder which they have been able to do a DNA test on or something that can be seen and guaranteed against. So for example I could guarantee that a dog wont get PRA because I've tested the parents and I know they couldn't produce a pup that could go blind from PRA. But I cant guarantee that a dog wont get HD no matter how much I've tested or scored etc. By law every pup that goes home has to be in a healthy condition and its reasonable for a breeder to be expected to refund or replace a pup that becomes ill within a few weeks of it going home if its something it may be incubating when it left the breeder or something which was caused by neglect from the breeder such as a heavy worm burden etc but in all honesty no breeder can guarantee much more and usually there will be circumstances beyond the breeder's control which may have impacted even if it appears to have a genetic base. HD may be caused because the dog is over weight, been allowed to have the wrong exercise etc. Unless these things are written up extremely carefully they create major brawls when something does go wrong. When you tell a puppy buyer I will guarantee that a pup wont get HD thats all they hear so when the dog does get HD and the breeder determines its because the dog has been over weight and wont honour the guarantee there is a battle looming. Reality is all you can guarantee is that the pup is well and healthy when it leaves the breeder to go home. As far as a contract for sale is concerned where breeders put conditions on the sale - once the dog is owned by someone else the previous owner doesn't get to tell them what they can and cant do with it - this is the law and no other piece of paper changes that.

Health guarantees are not the same as a sales contract.

From what I can gather some councils in Queensland don't want anyone fostering dogs even if that still only gives them two on their property at a time. This places dogs which have owners who have been affected by floods etc at huge risk. It places owners who are already in extreme stress in a position where they have to make decisions on what to do with their animals which I personally find disgraceful and the only real hope they have is for someone who doesnt live in one of these shires to come to the rescue and agree to care for them for a few months. Even that solution places the group thats helping them in a heavier financial burden and its harder to co ordinate when the people in the group who has taken them on has to travel more and work much harder at it all over longer distances. Simply put they don't want foster carers attached to a rescue group or not having dogs on their property they dont own. Its also a more expensive business to rescue dogs in some shires in Queensland as well as there are no exemptions on registration etc when they go from a pound to a rescue group waiting to find their new homes. Everyone and every animal caught up in this are desperate for help and funds. There's more probably not suited for a public forum yet until Ive completed some investigations and Im sure of what Im being told is correct but if anyone has a spot in their home or a spare couple of bucks thats one area it should be going.