Jaxx'sBuddy

maybe so but to bash other breeders who are on the accredited list does not do anyone any favours. it looks really bad to people, joe public, when they hear that breeders are running down other breeders on the accredited list. wouldn't it be better to take this up with CCCQ rather than on a public forum?

Actually I think the problem will lie with Joe Public who believe accredited = good and end up finding out this is not always automatically true. I see very bad things ahead for the dog world with the very organisations which should be leading the way in defending our hobby folding up at the first sign of an animal rights nutter. yes this is absolutely the issue eta if some breeders feel that this system will not achieve what it set out to do, is there anything that they can do to change the system or advocate for the system to be made better?

There are breeders already accredited who have ethics and standards that would draw the mobs baying for blood here, yet you say if Dogs Qld says they are ok then that's ok I don't think that's what JB is saying at all and I'm not sure why the point that's being made (by Steve and by JB) is being ignored. I think JB and Steve are talking from the pov of the fact that this Accreditation Scheme IS in. Not that they are saying it should be in .... that it IS in. And the fact that it is in leaves breeders with a decision to make, and they need to be aware that the result of that decision will be judged by the government and the public, not necessarily by DOL people who get to read the back ground to it all (although that in itself is not an impossibility). that's it in a nutshell erny, thank you.

OK So given that some of those already accredited are ''bad'' - if everyone who wishes to continue as CCCQ breeders can and does become accredited it will be a case of everyone being accredited regardless if they're good or bad. The acceptance that accreditation = good is simply bizarre to me, especially given the apparent emphasis on self-testing/self-grading which seems so common in many of these accreditation schemes. Must be a cultural thing sandra i am really not trying to be difficult, i understand what you and oakway are saying BUT if the regulatory body has deemed that if a person or company has passed their accreditation standards then who is anyone outside of that system to say that there are "bad" people or companies in it? clearly, the regulatory body thinks and says that they have all reached a set standard. i am not saying any accreditation scheme or system is good or bad, just that when they are in place there are implications for all people or businesses in that particular sector and that they need to make a decision on how they are going to manage the new situation. i think it is too late to do much once an accreditation scheme is in place and people are willingly joining it Some people will flock to anything they think may make them look good or better than their peers, others may just suck it and see, others disagree with it for reasons stated here over and over. Who are you to say who is correct. There are breeders already accredited who have ethics and standards that would draw the mobs baying for blood here, yet you say if Dogs Qld says they are ok then that's ok i give up. that is not what i am saying, seriously you all have the problem not me.

OK So given that some of those already accredited are ''bad'' - if everyone who wishes to continue as CCCQ breeders can and does become accredited it will be a case of everyone being accredited regardless if they're good or bad. The acceptance that accreditation = good is simply bizarre to me, especially given the apparent emphasis on self-testing/self-grading which seems so common in many of these accreditation schemes. Must be a cultural thing sandra i am really not trying to be difficult, i understand what you and oakway are saying BUT if the regulatory body has deemed that if a person or company has passed their accreditation standards then who is anyone outside of that system to say that there are "bad" people or companies in it? clearly, the regulatory body thinks and says that they have all reached a set standard. i am not saying any accreditation scheme or system is good or bad, just that when they are in place there are implications for all people or businesses in that particular sector and that they need to make a decision on how they are going to manage the new situation. i think it is too late to do much once an accreditation scheme is in place and people are willingly joining it

txs yg, i think jaxx was a little over whelmed at the last meet so hopefully she will be more like her usual self this meet :rolleyes:

So what you are saying is accreditation achieves nothing because everyone who is in the ''business'', good or bad, eventually becomes accredited. no that is not what i am saying. i am saying that in my experience people or businesses decide they will meet the accreditation requirements and join the scheme or some decide it's not the direction they want to go and they leave the sector. eta to be clear, if they meet the accreditation requirements then they are deemed to be ok by the governing body

mita i have seen accreditation schemes happen in several sectors both here and overseas and usually what ends up happening in my experience is all individuals (or in some cases, companies) join the scheme. they may not do it immediately but they eventually join the scheme or leave the sector

erny i am confused too. seems to me there are a lot of CCCQ members happy with the scheme and joining. some breeders on dol don't want to join for their own reasons. fair enough but there will be ramifications for the breeders that don't become accredited and you don't need to be a breeder to see what will happen in the future. i will watch with interest on how this scheme plays itself out.

apology for what, having an opinion :D :D:rofl:;)

i will try to get there.

mine get bones twice every week and that keeps the plaque off the teeth

i agree this is a great tactic to use. level the playing field again

totally disagree, comments about an organisation do not automatically include their members or employee's. I disaprove of a lot of things the RSPCA does but that does not include the vast majority of the people connected with them. you can disagree all you want but as a MDBA member i can hold this as my opinion. i am sure there are other members who feel the same way i do. eta. there are a lot of people in this thread arguing against the accredited breeder scheme because THEY think some breeders on it are unethical, but by who's standards? certainly not the CCCQ's. so those people are having a go at the CCCQ and the breeders in the accredited breeder scheme even the breeders who they deem aren't dodgy. so in a public forum where anyone can get the results if they google, you are all saying that the system should not be trusted. so a puppy buyer reads this and then goes to a pet shop or a byb because who can they trust? any negative comments against ANY member of an organisation affects ALL members, which includes ALL CCCQ members and ALL MDBA members

..... who are you referring to in that potentially collective statement, Stonebridge? Am I "just not worth it"? Is that what you are meaning? Why dont you "read" my post properly Erny. And then get back to me. Ok - not a direct answer so I'm only presuming you are talking about Julie. But I see nothing in this thread from Julie that warrants such a disparaging comment - which is probably why I wasn't entirely sure who you were running down. ETA: The comments in this thread have a nasty feel to them again . Are you breeders? Totally agree Erny. People need to understand that by making disparaging remarks towards the MDBA is also making those disparaging remarks towards the 1000+ MDBA members, some of which are members of this forum.

a miniature boxer with a docked tail eta she is a Boston Terrier

heartworm not sure of anything else eta gorgeous pups

No one is intimating that cheating doesn't occur, but it certainly isn't as common as a lot of people like to think and for someone like yourself who doesn't even participate to make sweeping comments about a sport (or 'sport' as you like to refer to it) based on what you read on an internet forum and hear from friends is pretty poor form. what is poor form is not acknowledging that a problem exists and therefore not enabling the issue to be fixed. the reason people may choose not to become involved with this sport may have nothing to do with rude people. in fact i have found people showing their dogs at shows to be very pleasant. i am suggesting there may be another reason apart from the people and that is the cheating that occurs, regardless how common or not this may be. it is especially difficult when the altered dogs win and young people see that the sport may not have a level playing field.

What sort of cheating are you referring to JB? How many instances of cheating have you personally seen or experienced at a dog show? i have seen dogs that were dyed which is not allowed and dogs which were powdered again not allowed and i have friends who show and i read this forum so whether i see it personally or not it happens. So apart from seeing a couple a dogs that may have been dyed and another couple with powder in their coats you have no actual experience of cheating at all and all the authoritative posts you make regarding breeders and showing are gleaned from a few visits to dog shows, gossip from your 'friends that show' and reading posts on this forum. Actually JB you would probably fit in at a dog show very well because repeating gossip and putting forward opinions based on nothing more than anecdotal evidence is another occupation frequently enjoyed by the sorts of people I mentioned in my previous post. come on, read the show ring sub forum here. are you telling us all that there is no cheating happening in the show ring? i don't need to have crashed my car to know it hurts.

What sort of cheating are you referring to JB? How many instances of cheating have you personally seen or experienced at a dog show? i have seen dogs that were dyed which is not allowed and dogs which were powdered again not allowed and i have friends who show and i read this forum so whether i see it personally or not it happens. good grief there was even a thread about neutered bitches being shown in non-neutered classes. this cheating either happens or there are a lot of liars around eta the people at the shows were really nice BUT the young people i took would not partake because of the cheating Please be careful with your statements, some breeds like mine (Westies) are dry cleaned using powder, you are not suppose to wash them too often, there for we 'dry' clean them using powder. so therefore we are not cheating, it is our method of cleaning our dogs. However I make sure this is done at home, and generally 90-95% out of the coat before arriving at the show... and when I am taking out the rest make sure it is out of the way of other exhibitors. no problems, i will be clearer in future and say that what i saw was not a westie. i am being very careful not to name breeds as i do not want to contribute to the problem but i am astounded that people in this thread are intimating that cheating does not happen.

well maybe people need to be more careful with what the write. if it is a lie then best they don't post. otherwise what else is anyone to think apart from it being truthful. in any event there are more than a few people commenting on cheating so one may assume it happens and it is not stopped.

What sort of cheating are you referring to JB? How many instances of cheating have you personally seen or experienced at a dog show? i have seen dogs that were dyed which is not allowed and dogs which were powdered again not allowed and i have friends who show and i read this forum so whether i see it personally or not it happens. good grief there was even a thread about neutered bitches being shown in non-neutered classes. this cheating either happens or there are a lot of liars around eta the people at the shows were really nice BUT the young people i took would not partake because of the cheating

Well JB, in that case all forms of competition will die out because wherever there is competition there will always be rudeness and bitchiness, cats, horses, ballroom dancing, whatever, I think someone even mentioned chess in a previous post. Let's face it most people compete to win and there are certain personality types who can't handle losing, instead of looking at themselves and asking 'how can I improve my performance?', they blame anything and everything except themselves and vent their disappointment and frustration on others. In a sport like dog showing where there are a large number of competitors and comparatively few awards, losers will always greatly outnumber winners and obviously there will be instances of bad sportsmanship. I find your question quite difficult to answer Megz, probably because I've been involved for a very long time and I'm completely at home in a dog showing environment. To be honest I don't notice much rudeness at dog shows, but if I do see some disenchanted exhibitor having a whinge I just treat it as part of the entertainment offered on the day . It's usually the same people, most of the other exhibitors know who they are and their rantings are largely ignored except by their cronies who are just as bad as they are, really they're a bit of a joke. My advice to newbies would be to go to the show, take your dogs in the ring and enjoy your day out win or lose. Mix with people you like and ignore the rest and if someone makes a nasty comment laugh it off, don't take it seriously. However I do agree with a previous poster who commented that some people just aren't cut out for it, if you're hypersensitive, take things to heart and are easily upset, competitive sport is best avoided. other sports won't die out because cheats are penalised, something which does not appears to happen in the show world.

yes i have a look that makes all children behave. my daughter is grown now and will gleefully tell tales of what that look does even to strange children who are behaving badly in public....and i never utter a word it is a gift ;) ;) ;) I too have always done 'the look'.. and it worked very well. Now they are much taller than me and adults.. I get " MUm! are you doing the look??' together with laughter .. I would get in trouble working in a school when a child did or was about to do something NAUGHTY and I'd be on auto and go ARGHH! (like I do with the dogs to stop them in their tracks.. ) I dont see anything wrong with it? ;) but apparantly..... you are meant to quietly ASK the dear little child to leave the rock there and please don't throw it at Johnny again because... ;) .... :rofl: me too monah a good oi or aargh!!! goes a long way. my daughter says to me now "are you giving me the look?" i have friends with twins and they always want me to look after them cause they go home in a good mood and really well behaved....and the kids always want to visit me.... kids feel so much safer when they know the boundaries. i feel sorry for kids that don't have them how on earth do they know what to rebel against This is so true of both kids and dogs. BOTH are looking to the Pack Leader for cues and directives. Without this they are confused and frightened. i totally agree. both my dogs and my kids know the boundaries

I feel this way, too. It's kind of like: "Make sure you buy from a registered breeder – oh and make sure that breeder meets with the approval of x% of the dogzonline forum … " it is very frustrating