goldchow

Speaking of providing an approximate cost that a puppy buyer of a particular breed could expect to pay I think this could be a very good idea. This of course would need to vary, some litters cost more than others at times for a number of reasons. I note in my own breed there have been many ads for chow puppies on Gumtree and the Trading Post from unregistered breeders, no papers, no health checks and the asking price from $3,000 to $5,000. There has been a 'rare' fawn being advertised for $4,000 in NSW recently, fawn is not a rare colour which could be another plus to Troys idea of showing what the usual colours of each breed are. Registered breeders that I know of my breed generally ask half or abit more than what is being advertised elsewhere no matter what colour, with papers and after sale support so there is a very big difference.

You have put that very well Inez and exactly my thoughts, its not going to make any difference to those this Task Force is supposedly targeting. I like many others with dogs live in a regional area and I don't believe these people have any idea how huge this problem is, the countless puppies being sold on the local radio stations Garage Sale, the puppies being sold at local flea markets, under 6 weeks, the woman who regularly drives down from somewhere up central Qld with something like 80 pups of varying crosses in a van, delivering pups on the way to those who have contacted her somehow. None of these people have advertised, none of these pups are chipped and the buyers are, as you say completely ignorant that this isn't a good way to purchase a puppy. Education instead of legislation would go a long way further than these Task Force ideas.

For many pensioners the show scene is their only social outing and for many, having a litter of pups every so often means the difference between eating paying the power bill. Many of these people live on bread & duck under the table so they can feed their dogs a decent diet. That number of dogs in a rental situation though is pushing it, she's lucky to have got away with it as long as she has.

Excellent nomination Pauline & Pete, you're doing great stuff and its great its being recognsed, well done.

Yes the Murray River Curly Coated Retriever is a breed, has been around for somthing like 60 years, not recognised and have no wish to be recognised by the ANKC at this point in time. We have three Aussie Bulldogs as regular clients and have to say they are really lovely natured dogs, they have papers with something like six or seven generations behind them and the breeder is an honest up front fellow who keeps his dogs properly housed and in beautiful condition. Agree with Clyde and Steve.

Agree with Dasha, always reluctant myself to sedate my breed and have spoken to my vet who is very experienced in this procedure. He assures me it is well nigh impossible to achieve correct positioning for scores without sedation because it is not the most comfortable postion and can be stressfull for the patient.

Personally I don't agree with licences for anyone breeding dogs or any other animal but I do think they need to be registered with their local council and be subject to random inspections by their state controlling body and/or suitably educated ACO/Environmental officer. With a commercial boarding/breeding kennel, before amalgamtion the relevant officer would arrive unexpectedly every so often, wander around, check the place out, was happy to go through a foot bath last time he was here, never had a problem with that. QCCC does not police their members and seem keen to hand this responsibility over to 'an approved organization' expected to be the RSPCA. I would have a huge problem with any animal welfare organization made responsible for such inspections. Change of government has saved the day there for abit :)

Erny your spontaneous and heartfelt speech had many with tears in their eyes, ourselves included. You are a very special person to many and we all from our hearts also wish you all the very best on your continued recovery.

Thanks for posting those pics Puppy Sniffer, I think Pauline was abit overcome but certainly a very worthy winner, she and Pete are doing amazing stuff with their breeding and training. I thought it all went very well and as Nancy said earlier the strong positive vibes throughout the room full of like minded people is really something very special. We receive so much positive input from all over the country from those who have attended that it really makes all the effort of putting it all together so worthwhile. Its a real buzz for us also to be able to put names to faces and to meet up and touch base again with so many of our members. Everything went so well, great winners, wonderful audience (of which the MC was particularly complimentary, his first experience with doggie people)excellent service by the Chifley at Lennons staff and lovely meal. Congratulations again to all the winners, and to all those who were nominated. As soon as the photographer, who really was a cutie sends the photos through these will be added to Awards website www.mdbaawards.net.au. Planning already underway for Canberra same time next year.

I agree Anne, she has explained it very well, made several things clearer for me and agree that there should have been more made of those breeds who passed scrutiny.

"Despite the best efforts of Dogs Queensland, it is unlikely that some of these breeders can avoid being caught up in any future Queensland Government Puppy Farm strategy. It may be a good time for these breeders to consider their breeding strategies and be mindful that compliance with State Government imposed regulations may be inevitable" This statement is unbelievable, it would seem to be warning its own members to be careful not to be seen to breed 'too many dogs' Why on earth shouldn't our ANKC members be able to breed as many dogs as they like providing they are abiding by all care and concerns relating to their dogs health and welfare. Isn't that why we joined the ANKC? Commercial breeders & puppy farms have successfully stepped into the gap created by the very fact that ANKC registered breeders haven't been allowed to be more productive because they have been so hog tied with council and local law restrictions, endless regulations brought in by those who have never bred a litter in their lives, animal rights concerns and State controls who instead of supporting and protecting their members seem to be now actually selling them out. With this attitude why wouldn't ANKC breeders walk, the hobby of breeding good dogs is now a bureaucratic minefield.

According to the ANKC website just on 2,000 registered breeders jumped ship in the last 12 months, we now have a grand total of 4.800 and something ANKC registered breeders Australia wide. By all means check for yourself. I suspect the numbers of those opting out of breeding purebred dogs will increase, whether they have anything to worry about or not, in the next 12 months, soon there will be no need for state controls and ANKC, the RSPCA will have taken over, just as was predicted by those who openly stated they were actively working with the RSPCA to that end 3 years ago. Kiwiland is looking good.

Showdog I agree with what you say. I have a minority breed which I,m watching disappear because of this idea that everyone needs to desex anything sold to a pet home or tie puppy buyers up into very limiting contracts, perhaps designed to cut down on the competiton in the show ring or for whatever reason. With the more popular breeds its obviously more complicated and I don't know what the answer would be if I was in that position. I sold a puppy to first time show owners, lovely home and yes they were very successful in the showring, began breeding for the dollar, did a fair bit towards mucking things up and yes I was told a few times it was my fault because I sold them the dog however many people finished up with good quality pets which nowadays is almost unheard of within my breed. The dog had a great home, BBQ chicked for lunch every Sunday, lived in the house etc and overall I didn't feel these people had done anything so bad after all. After 30 years in the dog world and always striving to do the right thing by the dogs, mine and everybody elses, I know that you are damned if you do and dmaned if you don't no matter what so I gave up worrying about what others might think long ago. :D

I fully support Lilli on her comments. I never insist that any dog I sell has to be desexed and most are sold on main register unless they have a glaring fault that should not be bred with in which case it goes on LR and desexing after 12 months is advised. New owners are rigourously screened and part of the deal is that they must maintain contact, like Lilli I believe this is a decison for the owner and if they have proved to be responsible owners why should they be made to have their dog desexed. I can see many breeds being desexed out of existence with this idea that everything has to be desexed, okay for pounds, rescues etc but I think breeders need to think very carefully about how their actions are affecting the future of their breed overall

Unfortunately I do have major problems with the accountability of the RSPCA who are not accountable to anyone but themselves which can be breeding grounds for corruption, conflict of interest and the 'Guilty until proven Innocent' system they use. Mark Townend is but a small fish in a big pond and eventually even he has to do as he's told. Apart from that I can't see anything in this paper which will achieve its supposed objective of dealing with so called puppy farmers but I can see negative impacts on registered purebred dog breeders. I note that Dogs Queensland is considering applying for accreditation, it would seem to me that they would be the logical choice to handle all this new information rather than an outsider with little to no practical knowledge of the breeding and keeping of dogs, even if it meant employing appropriate staff or is this a too simplistic view?

Most Definitely. Finally getting to read the link you provided. Some of the things that really scream at me so far are Page 12: Some of the information about registered breeders (e.g breeder ID, name of registered breeder and town/suburb of address where dogs are bred) would be made publicly available. What sort of information does this actually mean, general whereabouts or address as such? This is scary stuff when many of us make it a practise not to publicise we have a litter on the ground until the puppies have actually been sold. I also believe this was one such point the RSPCA had on their agenda at the Roundtable discussion and which, correct me if I'm wrong the AAPDB, DogsNsw, MDBA and ANKC voted against, specifically for security reasons. Page 12 again: Breeders would continue to be subject to the microchipping requirements under the Animal Management (Cats & Dogs)Act 2008). However these requirements would be enhanced to provide for recording and retrieval of breeding information that would assist Biosecurity Queensland and the RSPCA Qld to target their enforcement activities and in fine print down the bottom of the page The RSPCA Qld has expressed willingness to develop, host and maintain the register. Negotiations between the Queensland Government and the RSPCA Qld are ongoing with a view to the RSPCA Qld providinf this service. If no organization was prescribed the chief executive of DEEDI would be obliged to keep the register Of course they have, Paul McGreevey & the RSPCA are doing a great job of taking over the control of the purebred dogs they have publicly denounced which we initially witnessed at the Breeding Better Dogs Seminar in Melbourne several years ago.

Sadly Wags those I refer to have many more that 10 fertile bitches and they don't advertise nor do they give out 'papers'

In support of what Steve has stated above those who are believed to be puppy farmers certainly won't be putting their hands up to be registered with anyone, and I would be very surprised if they chipped any or some of their puppies. Indications are that more and more people breeding dogs are 'going underground' making any regulation or supervision impossible unless they can be found somewhere way out in the wide open spaces. These people will find their way around any rules and regulations brought in to keep doing what they are doing and the general public will continue to buy. The only ones that this new legislation will affect is registered purbred breeders.

Personaly I shudder at the idea of more rules & regulations, breeding my dogs was once the love of my life, which I thoroughly enjoyed but am a heartbeat from walking away due to the over regulated nightmare it has become. We have more than enough rules and regulations to deal with those keeping their dogs in appalling conditions, the improvement I would like to see is local councils being appropriately educated and being far more proactive in supervising and enforcing the Animal Care Act to those who have permits and those who do not. The problem lies therein that everyone has a different idea of what constituents a puppy farm, and I agree that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the number of dogs being kept on a property. Even the RSPCA at their Round table discussion stated their definition of a puppy farm was 'One person who bred a litter of pups in substandard conditions'. Compulsory microchipping has been in NSW for many years, many dogs are still coming into pounds & rescue in that state not chipped and has proved that it is a logistic nightmare to enforce. I see many very young puppies being sold at local flea markets, how can this be enforced/supervised, particularly in regional areas I would be totally against the RSPCA being the organization to police any regulations involving registered purebred breeders and certainly not without them being accountable to a completely independent authority, (not a head of a government department either) a huge conflict of interest comes to mind.

Thats it in a nutshell Pav Lova and it amazes me that there are those who can't see this

Yes that part is abit of a joke

The email address is [email protected] I have already emailled them and suggest you do too, this person obviously has no concept of the heartbreak this legislation is/will cause and Quickasyoucan, I totally agree

He's the editor of Dog News Australia, its not online, you have to purchase the newspaper at the newsagent.

As mentioned in our front cover story the benefits of the Dog Vic initiative of the Am Staff ID card have become very significant in the past month. With the Queensland government looking at following Victorian legislation I am sure DogsQld members would welcome the same opportunity of protection by their State control. The move by DogsVic is to be applauded and unlike many times in the past, was actually ahead of the legislation. The amount of confusion over identifying breeds by law enforcement officers, council rangers and even the media is unbelievable,and to be able to produce a card, proving that your dog is not a target for them should provide great relief for the responsible American Staffordshire Terrier owners. Dog attacks are a tragedy all around. It should be pointed out that the majority of them that cause real damage are by crossbreds with unpredictable characteristics. There are those out there in the community indiscriminately cross breeding large and dangerous dogs, then not looking after them,effectively unleashing them on the public. These people should feel the full weight of the law that have been devised to combat them. Unfortunately many of these crosses, to the uneducated, can appear of similar type to the American Staffordshire, and this is where the ID card will be so valuable. I was extremely pleased to read the ANKC report in this edition requesting that the RSPCA practice what it preaches in regards to health testing dogs that are rehomed into the community. Families offering a home to surrendered dogs should have the same rights as those afforded to purchasers of ANKC registered dogs, and deserve a healthy dog John Bryson

In other words this couldn't have been written up by anyone who breeds dogs, the parvo bit is one no self respecting breeder would 'forget' to include, so who is writing this stuff?