asal

NSW Canine Council. forget the year now. there was a drawing of a thermometer at the door with a red line going up to indicate how much money had been raised for the court costs. LOL depends on the pup n of course now the mindset if it cant win challeges enough to make champion, the breeder is unethical if they dont take the dog back and give a refund, on the advice of the rinside crowd thats why i have one back. soo how many can guarantee a 8 week pup wil still have scissor bite at 8 months? let alone not go out in size, type, whatever? i know from friends over the decades 1 in 4 is lucky to go on and grow into its puppy promise, n many's the ugly duckling that out swanned the baby swan. had one born just afte the new law, she looked a great kelpie, pity her ancestry wasnt kelpie. she was not going to be registered but when i went to cross her off gets told. no all pups must be registered now. but u can lr her. why on earth would i want the whole world to know this soo off type pup was bred by moi? i could hear the tongues wagging already. but was so annoyed by not being allowed to hide who bred her i main registered her and kept her as a pet. years later a judge spotted her and was in raptures??? like what the? the comment to me was you are looking at her one fault and ignoring all her virtues. so i bred a litter from her.. her son is STUNNING. soo although she would never have run a place at a show. she produced above and beyond my greatest expectations. breeding is weird n always will be.

your kidding arnt u? LR came in because the register was out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees after fighting Mrs Furber when she as an elected director asked to see the files. the excuse i was given was she was wasting staff time. dont know about you but I would have thought give her 3 staff full time and meals supplied while she read the files would have amounted to a fraction of the 800,000 n up they had to find money to cover. they offered life memberships for 500 and all sorts of things i forget now and of course the mandatory registration of every puppy born and as a sweetener to those like me who were horrified we had to paper pups we considered not of sufficent standard to have papers the ho so wonderfull LIMIT REGISTER. then they proceeded to do all in their power to limit how many pups a breeder can produce in the name of eliminating puppy farmers and again bemoning the ensueing drop in income.. so to compensate fees keep climbing and climbing geeu cant have it both ways. Thanks for that asal, that explains why the Miniature Poodle I bought as "Pet Only' in the late 1970's from a Registered Breeder who was also a sucessful Exhibitor came with a lovely parchment type "Pedigree" but nothing Official looking and the Schipperke I bought as a pet in the 1980's came on MR, which was nice for me as I went on to show (andtitle) her but decided against breeding as I had been lead to believe by the literature I had read that they were a "tailess breed" and couldn't see myself sending pups off to get tails docked at their base. PS. I think by the number of 'winks' BB is kidding. umm think your right, but hey maybe we all need reminding the other board directors sure can be bloody minded and not thinking of the best interests of members at times that case literally takes the cake doesnt it? i sure know i wasnt asked my opinon about wasting all that money in legal fees for what???????????? my belief was give her the key. what on earth made it worth wasting all that to prevent a fellow board member looking up whatever she might have wanted too. maybe im super dumb but i thought thats what they were elected to the board for. to oversee what went on and into the files?

your kidding arnt u? LR came in because the register was out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees after fighting Mrs Furber when she as an elected director asked to see the files. the excuse i was given was she was wasting staff time. dont know about you but I would have thought give her 3 staff full time and meals supplied while she read the files would have amounted to a fraction of the 800,000 n up they had to find money to cover. they offered life memberships for 500 and all sorts of things i forget now and of course the mandatory registration of every puppy born and as a sweetener to those like me who were horrified we had to paper pups we considered not of sufficent standard to have papers the ho so wonderfull LIMIT REGISTER. then they proceeded to do all in their power to limit how many pups a breeder can produce in the name of eliminating puppy farmers and again bemoning the ensueing drop in income.. so to compensate fees keep climbing and climbing geeu cant have it both ways.

sadly any mating has "the potential for disaster" no matter how unrelated those in the pedigree may be. maybe i should take a photo of one i saw recently. bottom jaw so small it looks like a canine shark. parents unrelated champions . genes do as they please. whats that saying? "man proposes, god disposes."

i know a few do that, no amend that, most i know do that, i also know two of em that now have no one or nowhere to go to get a pup from, when they lost the lines when their bitch in one case was desexed without their consent, (family argument) the other developed pymetra and the vet recommended she be desexed n none of their siblings were not already LR n desexed as part of the contract. burning all bridges can have its rammifications

hoo hes adorable, champion already. who needs a ribbon to assure you hes sssooooo cute. as for the "weak" dilution mind set. blue is a dilute, acting on black it comes out blue, acting on gold it comes out as, blue nose blue fawn coat, or blue nose blue fawn with blue tipping if it would have been a black tipped sable. chocolate is a dilute, acting on black it comes out chocolate, acting on gold it comes out either chocolate nose, gold coat, or chocolate nose gold with chocolate tipping if the dog is a sable insteadof the black normally expect. the frustating bit is approximately 1 in 4 can develop blue gene alopecia. although yes i know my vet does the hand rubbing when he see's any staffie n shar pei comming in the door regardless of colour skin problems seem rampant in many of them, one kennel in particular that he asks a new puppy buyer with dread in his voice, who bred it. told me almost 90 of theirs end up permanat clients. sooo skin problems are not just linked to colour with some. an remember 3 out of the 4 blues will NOT GET BLUE gene alopecia either. so its not all doom and gloom as well ive had 4 and they have had no problems with their skin, they just looked like they had been clipped along the back. no irritation or sores just short there, normal length everywhere else . my ones were chihuahua's, one guy i know has the cutest of all hes a blue and white particolour, white feet, big white collar and half tail and blaze on his face. so. loooon white hair and short blue hair. he looks like a mexican hairless except the body is definately chihuahua. n no he has no skin problems just looks weird.

I might be narrow minded but I am not naive enough to think that this has not and is not already happening...good grief!! Firstly I never called you narrow minded. Secondly at what point did I say I don't already think this is happening... that was my reason for stating ethical registered breeders in my posts. I agree with you that there are already dodgy breeders, I'm just saying that the people that are dodgy and not registered will just become registered. why on earth would they be that stupid? become registered and your traceable and the wolf pack of ethical's will be running rspca's lines hot putting in complaintsto get rid of em, at the very least embarrass the daylights out of em. been happening for years to those who have thought they were ethical discover they had annoyed someone in the club and discover the uniform at the door, so its sure going to happen to anyone else silly enough to join and be noticed surely? I know my family never bought a purebred dog ever, all came from petshops and all loved to bits all their lives. none of the cattledogs my dad had ever had a pedigree come with it, nor the german shepherds or my brothers border collie, it was only after i had my first job and wanted a registered pup that once came home with cc papers. n that was some 40 or more years ago now. AND im the only one stupid enough to have pedigree. n i come from a VERY BIG family. everyone else gets em from where? pet shops or signs on the edge of the road or word of mouth and not a pedigee in sight interesting that figure isnt it. 600,000 dogs a year n only 60,000 of em came from a registered breeder yet whos the bunnies being shot at? n whos the pretty stupid bunnies asking for more laws to shut down the breeders of the other 540,000 and getting eliminated instead? ethical they may think they are but smart enough to realise the law classes all breeders as unethical. n whos the only tracable ones? regd breeders. who show? registered breeders, who is facing 42 charges for showing a debarked doggie? only a registered breeder can end up in that net. n when will they finally figure the hunt includes if not totaly targets who? not too bright are they the ethicals after all

What a narrow minded view This is about animal welfare, including the health & responsibility for the puppies that are put out there. As a buyer I would prefer my puppy to come from someone who health tests, considers the genetics before breeding, provides advice & on going support if needed, raises their puppies well in good conditions no matter how many dogs they have or if they show. If its a show breeder who only breeds for themselves & to show, sells off the rest & keeps them in crap conditions I don't care if they aren't a puppy farm. I would not want a pup from them. Lucky the choice is not always from the 2 extremes. If someone has 2 litters a month, every month & over breeds the bitches obviously there is cause for concern, no matter what you class them as. actually its the likes of sharon that has sent the pedigree breeders down the road of destroying their own members, u fit their mould or else. and the canine councils are tending to go that way to be seen to be "doing the right thing" and the likes of sharon think they are safe from the witch hunt. soo when one of em is burned at the stake her once friends stand back in horror,, n let em burn. one less, one less, till theres no more. but its all for the "great good" n the ethicals still standing dont think they will be next. news for u. when you are next, your friends wont lift a finger in case attention turns to them. set the wheels in motion and they are rolling arnt they.. although the ethicals still think any they thought were ethical snared must have been unethical after all and hiding their evilness after all, so no chance of their mates lifting a finger to say, hey no this is wrong. judy guard surely has proven that? how much does it take for you "ethicals" to realise your way isnt the high way?

YOU hit the nail all right, education starts at school and thats were the generations need to be taught animal care and respect from kindi. all the laws in the world cant change human nature, some are the cruelst of all species n thats saying something, considering the thread on bitch fights, just look at the killer in america who has asked never to be released, although i did find his reasoning a little ironic, he took a guilty plea bargin to escape the death penalty then said if the other prisionrs dont kill him he will probably kill himself. if he didnt plea bargin the death penalty had been a cert? when people were closer to the land and livestock i think that training was much more widespread not millions of kids have never seen milk come from a cow, an egg come from a chook. still get this mental picture of a kid at sydney royal a few years ago, standing appalled watching a cow being milked and his loving mum, said see son thats where milk comes from. to a horrified squeal "THATS SOOO GROSS...." and he began throwing up

If every breeder did those things, the world would be a much better place. I in fact do almost all of these things and most of the breeders I know do too. However you do realize if all breeders only place their pups on desex agreement, then there are no new bloodlines for anyone, and that will quickly mean the end of dogs. So I do not think that to be an 'ethical' breeder, or 'for the world to be a better place', that all dog breeders should place all their pups on desex contract. I think that is a fatal idea for the future of dogs. Secondly and here is the one area I do differ with you. I do not believe that a bitch should only be bred once if you are doing your job as a breeder correctly. A quality bitch, especially one that throws a trait you are really after (such as consistent really good hips in a breed that does not have the best of hips for example) should not be limited to being used only once (edited grammer). Personally I would put that bitch to at least two different sires and keep at least one bitch pup or even a stud pup (If I really thought I had something special in the genetics) from each litter to possibly go forward with. In the end you may only use one of the combinations from the bitch, however you may use both and again diversify those breedings by using different sires with each. You need to be able to select and cull but not totally loose every line you work with in the process. Sometimes it is not until you see the grand pups that you really know what you have got. If you put all your eggs in one basket you will end up dumping baskets and changing baskets that you may never gain any control over what you are producing. Good breeders in my opinion never think they have a done deal, they are always looking to modify and refine their bloodlines. You can only do that when you have different dogs to select from. Again I would never put this sort of moral restriction on what I would call an 'ethical breeder. It is not in the best interest of future generations of the breed to deliberately inhibit diversity in the gene pool. Just my opinion. Totally agree, looking back 60 years, things have really changed and they have changed for the better. you made some good points but the last sentance in your other post sort of refudes the points before it. i am constantly amazed at the niavety of so many i read. 'HO i never breed mor than one/two litters. to breed more than one litter to the same sire is just puppy farmong" and so on. if those who say such things actually did some research just one mating can give thousands of possibilities of how each and ever pup could turn out. every pup is a new combination of the parents genes. read any genetics book, you need a minimum of 16 progeny to check for the existance or not of just one gene alone if you suspect the parents are carriers and any number of progeny under that number you darent think they are not carriers. sometimes there can be 100 and all clear, its happened. and here we are hoping the best genes of a coupe of hundred thousand possible combinations will match up and expect only the good ones will elect to be born of one?????????? litter. no hope no way. the best could be the first or the last of 100. I dont think there is a genetists in the world who would say number 6 will be the one to keep for example. yet dog breeders think they can actually do this with one or two litters? and have a ghost of a chance of genetic improvement at the same rate as some (obviously unethical) who actually breeds a few dozen and picks the best, and even worse lets other breeders access to a couple if not more of the best to use as well. doesnt happen anymore the way it used to back in the bad old days. more people then used to think helping each other was a good idea. unethical wasnt on the radar then. the picture painted is the picture of a rapidly shrinking genepool, or am standing at the wrong angle so the picture is out of alignment? Steve HELP!

its easy, some one somewhere decided solid colours are "better" for winning. n winning is where it counts in shows. for example, read the chihuahua standard, virtually anything goes and even says light colours acceptable but for decades no show breeder wortht their salt would keep to show a light coloured dog with light coloured nose's even though standard said light noses with light colours was permissable. not to those showing em.. i know i bought some stunners for a song because their breeders considered them not worth keeping. and so such colours can dissappear from a breed, as has with the bench kelpies well thats my take on it. anyone else disagree? frankly i love the black n tans, red n tans, silver n tans, blue and tans... yes i know many working kelpies even seen a cream n stunning n the sheep dont seem to find the colour range a problem either.. judges and show breeders are a totaly different kettle of fish.

lol then i can dob in the mastif on the corner and the two idiot staffies down the road eh? the charged their front fence so fast my horse in the first instance totaly freaked out and did three spins as i tried to stop her leaping onto the road and maybe hit by a car, n managed to avoid a broken nose when some part of her hit me in the melleee. as for the wretched staffies. she managed a 15 foot leap from a standing start they simply came from "nowwhere" to screaming in her face n hitting the fence with their full weight. thought i was a goner for sure. lucky the leap was down the footpath n not onto the road n get cleaned up by a passing car in either instance. (no i dont ride on the edge of the road anymore. after two motorists ran into the butt of my horse with the excuse " i didnt see you". horses tend to be hard to panel beat. broken bones are usually fatal) pity they are allowed access to the front fence when they are like that, these lot are on acagerage. suppose at least they were fenced in? so many owners just let em roam to have a go whenever they please. some days i wish i had a gun. i know the dangers my dogs have no access to the front fence for just that reason.

yes had the same thought. why bother with another additional ? "HOT" line? only thing i can see is its just like the govt depts another addition to office staff costings thats already catered for as you said.

Me too my first dog, Pickle was a toy poodle from Bel Ami kennels, was just like that when i bought him. 19 moths later he had recolour mixed em and was a stunning silver... they can do some weird things when the silver is in the mix well i think that was the spelling.

Nah! I don't believe most people think testing resolves all problems. I think testing for possible inherited problems would lead good breeders to change direction with their breeding program if they thought it necessary. However it seems testing is not very helpful with SM. From what I'm learning, it can crop up when there has been no evidence of problems in the ancestors. Is it a recessive gene? Good breeders want to breed healthy dogs. I doubt most ethical breeders would use breeding stock that have been proven to suffer from SM. The unethical ones wouldn't give a rats and there is no shortage of the unethical ones. The trick is knowing how and where to find the good breeders. I feel pretty sure that everyone knows testing is an investigative process, it's not curative and nothing is 100% predictable when breeding a living organism. maybe im injected with pollyanna virus.. but i really think and want to believe such people are greatly in the minority. unlike your words seem to imply to me, or am i misunderstanding?

even more damming is the special constables. they dont want trained in animal care. they want them ex police with prosecution experience, willing to undergo animal care course. so all that power in the hands of people who dont even have the knowledge to "form the opinion" to seize and destroy nor do they have to do any more than attend the course, they dont have to even listen let alone pass. when im dead and gone, remember THAT. these are the people with the power to destroy lives and the victums pets. anyway, im out of it. once youve been rolled even if they didnt get anything to destroy me in the courts,I have been smoked n therefore will always be labled, mad, hysterical forget all the other stuff u say to fob off the now tainted fools who KNOW whats waiting for the rest of u when its your turn.

think about it. for an organisation that supposedly cares for "alll creatures great and small" the most noticable thing about many working for it is the almost utter lack of even basic knowledge.... that shit of a tv show displays that in spades every week. if anyone on a station chased a sheep like those cretins did, and laughing their heads off as the sheep was going dangerously close to in shock, they would have been fired if an employee and in the dreadfully deep pits if a family member. how that sheep didnt die was no fault of that lot then the drama of the pony in the hole. grief the hole was in the side of a dam wall???? the very backhoe they lifted the pony out with could have simply opened the hole out from the side and walked the pony out. no where near as dramatic though. agonised for the poor pony though if it had slid out the sling a broken leg wouldnt have made the episode as thrilling, and the risk didnt need to have been taken

put the same idea to many in other pet and animal oriented clubs and they just dont seem to get it. the majority of people who are members and VOTE in the rspca are tree huggers with as much clue about animals and their well being as the idiot who once told me my horse was in agony because he was sweating???? considering it was 90 deg day and he was cantering, hot n sweaty is the norm but could i tell this idiot that all horses sweat when they are hot????????? not on your nelly as a lady who is a pet lover, has none but pays her donations and membership yearly told me, she had a newsletter asking her to sign up all her friends and family as it had been discovered that Peta intended infiltrating and taking over. since they dont have peta's membership list whats the odds they havent a pretty good rollup and untracable. lol yet are we who are the ones they are after have any representation in an organisation we legally all have the right to join and vote????????????

but then there is another doable havnt had any luck getting off the ground and i did think i put the idea to some pretty cluey people on the dogs nsw committee. and that was have all members on renewal pay the extra , think its 6 or 10 dollars to become rspca members. considering the membership is a few thousand people, if they all signed proxy forms at renewal so the board has them for rscpa meetings then people who actually know animals could be voted in. ok it puts a lot of power in the hands of the cc committee members but isnt that what members expect? representation? imagine it. worthless out of a job and people who actually do know what they are doing on the rspca board instead of solititors and peta reps? is that such a bad thing? but its never got off the ground. even encouraging members to become members in their own right and get off all our collectives and vote could have the same result. the rspca at the moment dont have the names and addressess of every cc member.. but they will soon. as it stands now its only cc committee members that rspca can find out and cancel their membership as they have done in the past. interesting isnt it, anyone can be a member of the rspca. except anyone they discover is a committee member of a canine council? remember the case of whoever had been a rspca member for many years then to the rspca.s horror he was elected chairman of the nsw cc.. his member ship was immediately cancelled. yep not only unanswerable to anyone but pretty predjuiced too

I do not like the thought either but feel something drastic needs to be done and soon. What are other options? As far as the ANKC taking action, that would be another issue that would be addressed if breeders stopped breeding. Again the outcome is not certain. But if everyone lets their prefix laps, which you then have 5 years to reinstate, for those 5 years you are not a breeder and you are not paying prefix dues. There would also be no pups registered. All loss of funds. ANKC would have to reorganize due to the loss of funds. Now more people are affected, ribbon supplies, dog shows connected such as motels and restaurants, agility trials and so forth would all be at risk. No dog at the Royals would attract more attention provided their several ANKC booths handing out information. It would also demonstrate clearly where the ANKC needs to reorganize. Their role needs to be much more than just keeping records and insurance providers. Anyway it is just an idea, but truly we have reached the point where something has to be done. As far as breeders being afraid of loosing their dogs, Steve is totally right. As much as those who want to bring an end to dog ownership might unfairly paint most dog breeders as a bunch of criminal dog abusers, we love our dogs. We would do anything, including not breed, if that is what it takes to keep our dogs home and safe. We should not be held emotional hostage. now i see where your comming from. hey that is do able. imagine it. not a pedigree dog registered for even a year. then let em explain where all the puppies are comming from

They don't want to believe it, let alone know about it. To do either would mean they'd have no plausible excuse to not involve themselves in one way or another on behalf of their constituent. I spoke to my local parliamentarian about this and as soon as I informed him what had happened his response was something along the lines of "oh, they must have found some reason for taking the dogs". The inference being that he didn't believe what I was saying; that there must be more to in than what I was saying. Bottom line was that he wasn't interested. yes the guilty unless proven innocent. n then we cant forget the where thers smoke theres fire i suppose if you have an animal maybe these two automaticily then come into force, have been made its a law after, all n maybe they just forgot to tell the mug joe public?

Desex her quickly before it gets worse and you may be fine. Desexing does help unfortunately it doesnt always work, i know a lady had to rehome her pup? yep wsnt even 12 months old. desexed n all and she wanted to KILL her origianl bitch. she was NO lady.

HERE HERE. and even more disturbing, even if the politicans were unaware how an innocent like judy could be so victamised. because of their mistake in making such folly law? WHY havent they revoked it? why havnt they intervened and thown it out of court? how can anyone justify that vet who put judy's rehomed dog down "because it wasnt properly socialised?" gee whizz folks that dog was a show dog, its breed standard is "aloof of strangers" or words to that effect. frankly id rather be seeing the vet in court for "wrongfull destruction of a perfectly healthy animal"

yes this is exactly my point. i dont want to be forced to be a vegetarian because some group reckons it bad to breed animals for meat (or profit) people really need to think of the long term consequences of some of the arguments put forward on this forum. AND THAT is the whole problem. they dont. as for ellez saying i was tarring ALL breeders? i said no such thing, i did say there are those who do and they tend to be the leaders of those who have been pushing the get rid of backyarders n unethical's without realising where making that into hate n now as it has become legislation is going to roll over ALL.

Assumption much asal!!!!! Sorry, but aside from the fact that I find it incredibly difficult to read your posts due to lack of punctuation and capital letters.....a lot of what you say is absolute crap based upon your own misconceptions and pre-conceived ideas of dog breeders. sweetie, just talk to your own vet. thats not assumptions, the rate of bitches who have never had a litter naturally is amazing and some are generations of such mums. one breeders bitches wont even feed their pups past day 10 so they are hand fed from then, thats not assumptions. has been breeding for decades that breed. imagine a newbie starting out with a bitch pup from such lines. they will be wreaks trying to understand why the pups are hungry. another friend out coonabarabran bred their bitch and discovered she couldnt deliver so had to drive 200 km to nearest vet. to learn 4 generations of ceasers behind her. does not look like assumptions to me anyway DARLING, I've been breeding purebred dogs for 24 years and I know for a FACT that I don't tolerate consistently problematic lines and I do not take over from mother nature without a VERY good reason. I would also suggest that very few breeders enjoy having to spend a lot of money on sections that could be avoided. I would also hazard a guess that asking some vets may not be a good idea because some of them LOVE recommending unneccessary sections because it is a lovely source of ready revenue. So, until you are a dog breeder and KNOW for a fact what goes on behind closed doors, you should probably just keep your assumptions to yourself because each and every time you put your fingers to your keyboard, you show yourself to be a nasty, spiteful person with a lot of opinion and very little real knowledge about certain issues. We all KNOW you've had your issues with the RSPCA but to be honest, you are sounding more and more like that organisation and the gardener every day and that is of great concern IMO. thanks, didnt realise it