asal

bit of a worry, wonder if that will be the next new law to come in? banning that? prostituting a fur kid?

maybe i shouldnt have replied, in my heart this is a person who sees what they want to see, not what u say, below is the reply i put, but should i just give up and delet it? may i use the word "cretin" there is a solution. the accountablilty drive is the solution. legislation must be enacted to make the perperatators accountable the victums a place of appeal just like every other law enforment institution. its called democracy, and its dying in its arse because of things like you just said put it to bed? yep. wait till the likes of redhead looks in your direction and your screaming soundlessly for someone,,,,,anyone to intercede in your behalf. until this becomes law you too can end up, guilty without trial as stated by someone on dogzonline. this is how hitler little by little and bit by bit slid the german nation into the nighmare no one wants to believe could happen. democracy died. should we all standy by and let it continue here? the law that ensared Judy guard should never have been passed. You can show a debarked dog. its not illegal if is debarked in vic i born in vic, but this iditic law passed by cretins makes it illegal if it was done anywhere else but victoria that is insanity surely maybe electing politians who dont bother or worry that a law is unjust or unequal isnt the problem of the voting public. maybe like the pope they are infalible and we should accept without question when the greater good is more important than any mere collateral damage that does occur? somehow the guy who served the 12 years for the murder he didnt commit might not feel his collateral damage was for the greater good, n didnt i read somewhere is being compensated to the tune of hundreds if not million compensation? at least the animal legislation prevents any such compensation payouts as unlike the innocent murderer there is no avenue of appeal.

you raised a good point, what really frustrates me is the assumption that for example blue gene alopecia for example = skin allergies, automatically? alopecia means...............hairless every man who has gone bald has..................... alopecia i have had three dogs with blue gene alopecia. none, not one, of them, ever developed any allergies whatsoever. they were long coat dogs with short soft coat along their back and speed stripe down the top of the tail. gee they clip bedlington terriors because nature doesnt get the top short enough, still feathered underneath the tail. they may not be able to be shown, but health wise, fine healty doggies. the stringy incident proved that totaly beyond doubt for example even if it cost me bulk monetary and emotional wise. allergy is a different ball game.

in a attempt to help get the word out i cross posted it to a number of forums i know this reply i think takes the cake. this is the mentality we are up against, dog help us "This issue frustrates the heck out of me... And the solution is what??? Could I suggest personal responsibility? Sandy I know you aren't listening because when you get on your evangelical "trips" you can't comprehend that screaming about the problem is all well and good, but not having a solution means nothing is ever going to change. You continually ignore the fact that if it wasn't for the puppy farms, if it wasn't for irresponsible horse owners starving or neglecting their horses we wouldn't need an RSPCA. It's reason for existence, and its ability to abuse its power WOULDN'T EXIST! Frankly I'm tired of this... move on please. Problems without solutions are just a waste of time & life is too short... It is so negative- how about discussing the positive things going on? Like the way in which the AHSA is dealing with genetic defects? You know... things like SCID & LFS & CA... now these are problems that people have developed or are developing solutions for. These are animal welfare issues too... and it is great that it is the breed sorting out its own problems. Now that IS an issue. Regards," sort of makes me wonder if he even read what you are asking for doesnt it? also many have commented the link to your peitions not opening, http://www.mdba.net.au/index.php?option=co...n&Itemid=58

well done steve. bravo.

someone else made the comparison in a thread, forget which one about little by little before anyone realised democracy was gone. in the case of the rspca, theres precious little democracy, until and unless the petition gets going and succes in the accountability drive, we cant wait and hope for the politicans to figure it out for themselves. they are the cretins that made judys nightmare possible and then reality. surely they are elected to use their brains not take orders from the rspca or explore what it actually means in regard to potential victums like judy? surely. why should a dog born n debarked in vic can be shown no problem yet done elsewhere is a crimal offence? didnt the dual rail system debacle lesson get learned after all?

Well that begs the question - why arent the breeders out there for the breeders. How long do they have to wait before they work out that their CCs are not going to do it for them and do something ? I find this completely ironic. Not that long ago, there were a number of DOLers who wanted to do something for purebreds - promotions at shows, brochures, etc - and it died a death because the majority of breeders on this forum dismissed it as unnecessary. yes i get quite confused as there are a few double standards/mixed messages from breeders No. I see no point in breeders being keen to see a hastily organised 'promotion' of purebreed dogs to go ahead when many good breeders cannot currently fill demand for their pups. And it certainly wouldn't do anything positive to address this topic "How do we counteract the bad press for purebred dogs?" A tent full of people at the Royal show shows self interest, it doesn't counteract bad press. Yes. But who is 'we'? trouble is. every breeder who self grooms emself thinking they are the "ethical" ones dont think they need to do a thing. the world knows they are ethical, they know they are ethical. its only the riff raff puppy farmers giving breeders a bad name, so why should you get out of your comfort zone and work on good press? bit of shame soo and i mean VERY few realise pillary one and you pillary all. far as joe public knows if you breed dogs your a puppy farmer. and so the press is out there and its the bad stuff, and its being passed on by the very people who should be realising the ones they want destroyed are a MINORITY yet they are spreading the paint and its sticking to all. yes there does need to be good PR done. but knowing how the papers like to get a good story and the truth isnt on the radar. i well remember Wynn Eason working her heart out for publicity for the Cavy Club and pedigree Cavies, (guinea pigs for you not in the lingo know) they had a field day poking fun at her and conning her into putting em into custumes , flower pots and all manner of stuipid poses, but Wyn gladly put up with the snide cracks and implied lunacy on the grounds that any publicity for the fancy Cavies is good publicity. how many have her fortitude is the problem. i know one name springs to mind if he were ever interested, and thats Dr Harry's brother, now that guy is a wag. met him years ago and he had me in stitches. yep hes the hansome one, he told me so, so i can take it on good account cant I?

Discrimination is pretty rife throughout our various Victorian dog laws. Eg. Dog #1 in Public Place - Microchipped and Council Reg'd. Not actually wearing Council Rego Tag on collar. Ka Ching! $240.00 Fine to that dog owner, thank you very much. Dog #2 in Public Place - Microchipped and Council Reg'd. Not actually wearing Council Rego Tag on collar. But has been shown at Dogs Victoria Sanctioned event in last 12 months. That's ok then. No fine to that dog owner. Off Topic I know (sorry Steve) but it reveals even more of the stupidity, futility and discrimination created by our ill thought out laws. And this one did NOT go through without mention. There were objections. But the Labor Govt pushed it through regardless. And ashamedly, the Liberal/National Parties asserted the laws were flawed but in the same breath and sentence announced to Parliament they would not oppose them. So we have a Government creating stupid, cruddy and faulty laws and we have a Coalition knowing they are stupid, cruddy and faulty laws but giving them a green light anyway. God help us . probably how hitler got his through and the jews into ghettos then the concentration camps...little by little and bit by bit........... scary isnt it

the point being, age box? ticked. shows dogs. ticked. attack mode activated. no they arent out the eliminate show breeders? course not n of course if they had been debarked in vic, she would still be happy and maybe her rehomed one still alive. have my doubts about how much they like dogs that vet who launced the attack

yep, cant reveal my source but seems it was linked to the poxy and special meeting to turf someone mentioned in previous posts fiasco. within hours of losing the shove to eliminate the director failing , the resignations arrived. who thinks is just coincidence? not this liddle black duck i remember when mrs furber won her case there were some runners then too. aint politics interesting, be it state, federal and now we discover our own dear canine registeries?

you forget. they took every single one of them debarked or not was my understanding. No they only took the debarked ones. makes you laugh doesn't it ( well not really ) but the dogs were apparently in such danger that they needed to be seized immediately, yet they left dogs on the property. The debarked one's must have been the one's without food, shelter and water You beat me to it! That is exactly what I thought upon reading that only the debarked dogs were seized! UNBLOODYBELIEVABLE! They seized the dogs which had been debarked to allow them to be examined by their expert witness.They shaved their necks and gave them a general to look down their throats. Strange because all of the documentation was available to show who had done the job, where and how. Makes no sense to me but Im not them and they must have had reason for doing it this way. its called "padding the bill" wasnt an interstate vet called for their "expert" opinion? made u wonder a bit, none in victoria good enough? isnt even worthless a vet? i recall they flew in a vet via private plane for the Ruth Downey ripoff think it was 1,400 or 1,800 applied for to cover the cost? think the magistrate refused to add it to the almost 300,000 in legal fees they asked for anyway. and she wasnt even tried before a jury, just one lone magistrate

Fair enough - but is that to say that the RSPCA had no choice other than to seize Judy's dogs? Genuine question. No digs. they make choices not to every day. for example i know of a case the charges were failure to provide food and a second charge, failure to provide water. the person pleaded guilty to the first charge and the rspca decided to go with that and didnt press for the second charge. both were legal charges, they chose not to proceed. their poor liddle hands arent tied after all?? aw shucks when i asked at the time why was the second charge dropped. to be told, "we have proven our point". i still have the photos of the animals in question standing round a broken drain pipe licking the dripping morning dew, their only souce of water n they had proved their point? a conviction was what they wanted and once achieved they didnt follow the letter of the law then so why try that excuse now with regard to Judy?

yes thats correct

you forget. they took every single one of them debarked or not was my understanding.

That's terrible! Imagine all the people out there who are ignorant of the fact that a blue Stafford genetically cannot have a black nose (which I myself was not that long ago), being given the same answer as you got!! Maybe you could reply to Caroline with a link to the Dog Coat Colour Gentics website, directing her to the page specifically about nose colour and see how she replies to that! I might do some enquiring myself with the ANKC and see what they have to say. Does anyone think though, that if it was brought to their attention, they would actually do anything about it like change the Standard to exclude the blue colour? If they did it would put the BFB (breeding for blue) people out of business wonder if the desperate owners had them tattooed? only way i see it could be. i sure know of some that have a falsie teste inserted, my friend worked for the vet who did em sooo it happens

its odd that the dumpers are not the one being targeted for education before they buy. its breeders being blamed for the number of dogs being dumped or surrendered. making less dogs available for purchase, isnt going to weed out the dump or surrender mentality people, they need to be educated or disuaded from getting one in the first place. how is making it harder to actually find a dog going to address the throw away mentality? that doesnt seem to be on the radar yet?

try nsw. ive seen some doozies like an entire litter of long coats registered as smoothcoats.?? trotted down to ask whats going on here to be told its all my fault didnt put what coat they were beside the names in the name boxes?? like since when were we supposed to write what coat they are there?? sure aint in the destructions last i looked n there sure isnt a coat column, what i did put was the breed in the breed box and longcoat in brackets beside it which ive always done. except now the puppys names section is on the back of the form.. so what did the girl do? turn the page and hey cant remember what was on the front. so gets told have to pay a fine for every single one of them. since the last time they messed up and fined me then discovered i wasnt in the wrong. the best u can get is a credit slip from em doesnt matter that you paid cash 60 seconds even before they discover your not at fault... no refunds,,, credits only. so this time i wasnt paying up. ended up with two girls at me full voice. so did the biscuit and answered back same volume, out come supervisor asking me not to abuse her staff. bit hard to keep a straight face in the light of that pair were doing a pretty good job of abuse from where i stood. so nice lady asks whats the problem, they tells her it all my fault. didnt put the coat length against the puppys names. n nice lady sayse thats right its your fault. without that THE COMPUTER automatically puts the mums coat length...... grief.. the computer is doing the decisions, not the humans??? and i says but i did put the coat... she asks where... turns the page and there it is in capital letters. the look on her face....PRICELESS... worth all the angst. her conclusion... even funnier... when i asked why wouldnt they back down? she said. they are Y generation, they never back down.. so at least had a good laugh on the way home for a change.

Maybe :D thanks, needed the laugh.

whats wrong with our society now? laws to tie in knots people like Judy Guard and soo many others, Ruth Downey included to learn they are criminals with no avenue of appeal thats the normal and expected right of the murderer of any homo sapien. yet because their charges are in relation to animals they are guilty first. a woman or couple can churn out children by the score n docs do a dreadful job protecting the resulting children which are abused and their abusers are innocent until proven guilty? why are they? children are just as helpless as any dog, cat or pet of whatever species. there is something seriously wrong here? or is it just me being mad, hysterical or even perhaps raving?

And how does the regular puppy buyer know to do this?? None of my friends even know of 'registered' or 'papers' 'limited' or 'main register'. It's not common knowledge so for a Joe Blow puppy buyer to go the extra length to sus out the background of the breeder is not the norm either. I agree with Clyde. Maybe, as part of the "purchase from ethical registered breeders rather from pet [etc] shop campaign" (so to speak) there could be an educational piece prepared on "What to look for in a puppy Breeder", and then advertise it - joint advertisement financed by contributions made by all registered breeders??? One of those items might be "Sight the Breeder's Current [xxx] Certificate" (insert name of certificate/paper/card which verifies breeder's prefix currency and registration with relevant State Body. ??? Just a thought, although probably wrong thread. although even doing that, is not going to guarantee such can or cannot, happen, days or weeks later.. Can be financial when the puppies are being inspected, but they arent ready yet,, weeks go and..... forget the renewal and bingo expired... simple as that. thats what worries me, something as simple as overdue and unethical with all its implications is so quickly up on the board. those who do not see that guilty until proven innocent is so against every persons human rights is anything but what our so called justice system is supposed to work on. why does being a dog breeder or owner strip you of something that is or was supposed to be EVERYONE in australia's right? :D

SORRY was not having a go at you. it was so many others who assumed the worst. I know how it feels same as you. and an hour seems like a day and a day feels like a week and a week?? feels like a year when you have a question and waiting on the answer. so no i wasnt dissappointed in you. it isnt you deciding to not have replied made the breeder in question possibly unethical, its the other breeders suggesting it that i felt sad about, its other breeders screaming for eliminating puppy farmers without realising that such laws will not have a clue there is any difference and go for all. there were pretty few saying, hang on theres usually a reasonable explaination wasnt there.. sad indictment of other breeders opinions of their fellows dont you think? although I am pleased i wasnt the only one who called for calm. you had a worry, more replies to the extent of those would have been less distressing for both you and your puppies breeder dont you think? you really needed reassurance, not advice to go take em to court i suspect, would that be right?

So would I. There is no way I would let a stranger into my home to determine whether or not I am a good dog owner. edit for clarity - ofcourse if I've built up a bond with a breeder over a period of time with the purposes of buying a pup they wouldnt be a stranger (but they'd know me well enough by then not to need to do a home check I would think) but if eg they lived interstate and made a request on a forum for any tom dick or harry to come through my home, I probably would no longer be interested in buying a pup from them anyway I wouldnt...I would think of the puppy being bred or puppy farmed to replace the sold one and I just couldnt do it. :D never thought of it that way.. so even puppy buyers are feeling guilty before proven innocent? weid, n not nice either way you look at it?

Hi Emileigh, i hope all goes well with your purchase..this is also my first pedigree puppy and i'm so glad to have her, she means the world to me, its like having a new baby that won't let you sleep lol. She is still currently getting use to her surrounding so the barking at night is very much new to me at the moment waking up every 30mins to her howling or barking. I hope to keep everyone updated on receiving my papers. Well i have the parents pedigree papers (copy). But fingers cross i will get mine also and i will make sure that i get it or else i will be taking it further... Its not right what these breeders are doing and hope that there will be new laws with purchasing puppies on pedigrees. Sounds lovely, can't wait until we get our little princess. Having so much trouble thinking up a name for her registration though. I am just not creative enough - and prehaps a bit fussy! Glad to hear that you are happy with your new family member regardless of the breeders incompetence and the lack of sleep. It really is like having a new baby. I am not looking foward to toilet training, I haven't had a puppy in 9 years so may be a bit out of practice and am sure I will be waking up to puddles around the house often . Best of luck with everything, I hope the papers come through soon. btw your pup looks beautiful, so wrinkly :D maybe that needs to be a new law too. no breeder can remain a member if they dont reply to a puppy buyer query within 24 hours? may as well make it all law, talk about guilty until proven innocent these days anyway, eh? I thought there was a good reason but not impressed how many automatically thought the worst of the breeder AS USUAL. cant wait for the day when there will be NO phone numbers of breeders because they all got jack of being guilty first.

As pet shops currently are, maybe this is so. Obviously there would need to be changes. Where is the evidence for this calim though? The question is certainly relevant, but if you look at the sources of dogs in pounds where stats are compiled, pet shops are not top of the list you will find. My view is that we just keep repeating a mantra without actually looking for evidence. The evidence when it is sought out, seems to point us in different directions as the AWL study showed that Steve refers to in this thread. It is a bit like the desexing debate of animals in welfare situations. After researching this thoroughly, I really can't find any evidecne that shows desexing programs stops animals ending up in shelters or prevents them being abused. In fact, several studies show that the numbers coming in to shelters did not change even after intensive desexing campaigns. Obviously, this is another area of discussion, but as a rescuer, I have spent several years repeating the same thing as everyone else "desexed dogs are safe, desexed dogs stop dogs ending up in pounds" without questioing anything. Is the same thing happening with pet shops? Should we start to view the situation in a different light as some in the rescue arena now are? Can pet shops become our allies when it comes to promoting the purebred dog? Is this a better way of dealing with the pet shop issue? I could be following a completely wrong train of thought, but I think we all need to go back to basics and look at companion animals, welfare and breeding in a fresh and bare bones light. ok havent read the rest of the thread, but when i was a kid, petshops were just about the only place u found a pup unless there was a roadside sign. and they grew up great dogs. its the attitude of people today thats the problem, the throwaway society is just that. the place to start is kindergarten. its a fact, educate them before they are 7 and you DO have them for life. where do u think all the greenie teachings started? i know my child came home spouting greenie from kindi. we need to start pet education early,

I'm really sorry to hear this. I'd be starting with a letter to DOGS NSW outlining your scenario, emphasising that YOU RELIED ON ADVICE FROM DOGS NSW THAT THE BREEDER WAS A MEMBER and purchased accordingly. I'd be asking them to intercede with the member on your behalf. I hope that produces some results. yes good idea. I hope to see you have your puppies papers soon.