Jump to content

C.c.c. Qld's New Breeder Accredited System


Recommended Posts

I understood this forum was for PUREBREED breeders to discuss matters of concern? Yet I see mostly discussions on cross bred dogs, and social interaction.

Is it?

When I joined back in 2004 I wasn't asked if I was a breeder, let alone if I was a breeder of pure breeds. I thought that was why breeders had their own forum on DOL at which the others of us are not allowed to join in .... or is it that we can join in but not start? Sorry - I'm not sure because I usually don't venture there. I tend to stay here in General and Training and Health.

I do think that precluding everyone other than those who breed pure breed dogs from DOL would make for a pretty narrow-minded mode of conversation as it would cut a lot of good ideas, experiences and help to others out, but I didn't know that me not being a breeder precluded me (or others) from being a member of DOL nor in partaking in any conversations.

The banner at the top of the page says

Australia's Pure Breed Dog Community

So one would assume this forum is as advertised.

I believe that includes all owners of pure breed dogs, not breeders only, because it fails to specifically mention breeders. Nowhere is the preclusion of non breeders mentioned. It is interesting that those who are pushing for dogsqld members to pay up are from other states, and most of them do not appear to be breeders. I would have thought the matter would be for discussion amongst affected breeders only?

Well clearly you thought wrong :laugh: . Any old body gets to have an opinion and say what they think as long as they dont breach forum rules. Heck even if its in the breeder's forum any old breeder gets to say what ever they think. Shock and horror sometimes even people who are not registered breeders get to play in that forum.

If you want to keep it a discussion where only queensland purebred registered breeders are able to have an opinion maybe you could speak with their Controlling body and tell them to start their own forum and dont let the nosy people who are not from their org have a say. But guess what ? You just might find that some of the people you and some others think are not members of the CCCQ actually are. :) You may even find that some people you think are not even registered purebred breeders actually are that too. ;)

For the record this subject affects every one who will ever consider buying a purebred puppy from any registered breeder ever again and one of the best things about this forum is that all people who love dogs get to have an input and say what they think.

Edited by Steve
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 288
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i give up. that is not what i am saying, seriously you all have the problem not me.

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.

:D :) ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
i give up. that is not what i am saying, seriously you all have the problem not me.

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.

:D :) ;)

Me too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Accreditation does not turn everyone into the most brilliantly perfect practitioner that ever walked the earth.

It simply requires evidence that a person meets basic standards of behaviour, for whatever's required to carry out that work. And set out in guidelines for behaviour.

Each person still has to be judged by whoever uses their services... on how good they think they are.

Joe Public does this all the time, as they shop around for people like doctors & vets. They may come across some they don't think are particularly good.

But they don't then say that doctors & vets shouldn't be accredited. They either move on to find another, or, if the problem is serious, they may also lodge a complaint.

In fact, because they are accredited... complaints can be directed to the body that manages the accreditation. Where a complaint can be investigated, to see if guidelines for behaviour have been contravened. And a variety of actions taken.

Like, there may be found no substance in the complaint, or there may be counselling, or reprimands. In very serious examples, accreditation can be removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I so appreciate this thread and everyone’s thoughts and feelings and do not entirely disagree with anyone’s viewpoint here. I am a Dogs Qld member and want to share what may be a slightly different perspective. When I first heard of the ABS my thoughts kinda went like this......please note I am not making comment on my approval or disapproval, nor did or do I have any knowledge on what others were thinking . just what I thought might have been.

DogsQ opened the scheme to all with fairly minimal requirements. They probably did this as they did not want a backlash from their members who had being doing what they do which had been acceptable to the organisation with little repercussions for breaches of the COE over a long period of time. The good, the bad and the ugly were all invited on board. This was possibly seen as a “balanced” approach – trying to meet the needs of current members/breeders/local & Sate govts/RSPCA/PETA/the general public etc.

I thought....... once they have a system in place it will provide a new platform, a starting place for policing/enforcing/correcting the organisations failures in the past. As with lots of things Accreditiation will become more difficult to obtain, the benchmark is raised over time. Let’s not alienate current members but have a system in place that new breeders will be required to meet.

I also thought that DogsQ could now talk up their concerns and demonstrate a pro-active approach regarding unethical breeding practices (which really only became concerning to them (read damming) as outside agencies and the general public began or were perceived to be applying pressure.

I live within the Brisbane City Council confines. Ten or more years ago I was saying that in the future owning a dog in the city will be made very difficult and breeding a dog in the city could be impossible. I am a registered breeder and we are aware this can now mean many things. I am a registered breeder with DogsQ and my local council – have been and held a permit for 14 years and bred 4 litters during that time.

I meet all the requirements plus of the ABS and cannot find in anything I’ve read a single thing that will cause harm to the dogs I love and breed, the new owners who I screen thoroughly or the purebred dog community as a whole. As the system is in place I saw an opportunity for all registered breeders to carry some real weight with the organisation, something our membership alone has not provided us with before. I make this remark as from what I have read here and seen many people have raised issues with CCCQ in the past and DQ and nothing had been done.

DogsQ need their member’s support for the ABS so that they can meet their own agenda. If all ethical breeders join as Accredited Breeders WE GET TO LOBBY AS A GROUP (they need us) AND WE RAISE THE BENCHMARK within our current and future group.

And then I thought.........being an ethical breeder and Accredited Breeder with DogsQ may just carry some weight when my Council makes it even more difficult for us city folk to retain the breeding permit I wish too. It may be one of those rare times when the symbiotic relationship of DQ and Govt may benefit myself and others to continue that which we hold a passion for, a love of and a right to – own and breed the purebred dog ethically.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Pillow, and welcome to the forum.

I see your point of view.

I do have a couple of queries, if you wouldn't mind taking time to answer.

As the system is in place I saw an opportunity for all registered breeders to carry some real weight with the organisation, something our membership alone has not provided us with before. I make this remark as from what I have read here and seen many people have raised issues with CCCQ in the past and DQ and nothing had been done.

Why do you think registered breeders will carry some real weight now, when they have never carried any before? What is there to make the CCCQ suddenly amenable to members suggestions?

DogsQ need their member’s support for the ABS so that they can meet their own agenda.

Do you know what their agenda is?

If all ethical breeders join as Accredited Breeders WE GET TO LOBBY AS A GROUP (they need us) AND WE RAISE THE BENCHMARK within our current and future group.

Do you think AB would lobby as a group? Is there any reason why you think DQ would be more inclined to listen than they have been in the past?

Is there anything that you would like the lobby group would ask DQ for?

And then I thought.........being an ethical breeder and Accredited Breeder with DogsQ may just carry some weight when my Council makes it even more difficult for us city folk to retain the breeding permit I wish too. It may be rone of those rare times when the symbiotic relationship of DQ and Govt may benefit myself and others to continue that which we hold a passion for, a love of and a right to – own and breed the purebred dog

I hope you are right. Mark Sheppard seems to be able to talk to government/councils, so who knows where it all may lead? It seems rather a shame that DQ has not been open with their agenda, which rather causes one to wonder if there is one.

I personally feel DQ has done this to appease AR in the wake of the Bateson report. Before AR comes knocking on the door. However, I think the ANKC as a whole should be saying to AR "we do it right, every time. Here is our coe, and if you don't like it, jam it" - and they should then go to the media and complain.

In fact, they should have been talking to the media since PDE There is very little in the ABS which is not in the coe anyhow, and ethical breeders are exceeding the coe anyhow. It takes my annual fees to over $100, and expects me to advertise with the CCCQ. I don't advertise, I have no need, so I would be paying another $100 for a service I don't need

But if they wanted an ABS, they were between a rock and a hard place regarding framing it.

Personally, I think breeding purebred dogs is going to become impossible, and I see only draconian results from the ABS. But I am open to education, ;)

But I take on board what you said about taking all members on board and hoping for improvement from some.

Edited by Jed
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

You are entirely correct, Steve. Most of the static advertising comes from registered breeders, the site advertises as "Austalia's Pure Breed Dog Community" which it patently is not, as 90% of the users do not appear to have purebred dogs, nor do they favour pure breed dogs.

Consequently there is nothing for pure breed dog owners.

No doubt one of the state registration authorities would be prepared to provide an appropriate forum. Perhaps DogsQld, with voting rights for members looming, some candidates will want to attract votes.

Thank you for that information.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Sheppard seems to be able to talk to government/councils, so who knows where it all may lead?

I saw some examples of Mark Sheppard's communications, during the DogsQ negotiations about the status of Amstaffs. Apart from what he wrote, how he wrote was exceptionally good for negotiating with the authorities.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You are entirely correct, Steve. Most of the static advertising comes from registered breeders, the site advertises as "Austalia's Pure Breed Dog Community" which it patently is not, as 90% of the users do not appear to have purebred dogs, nor do they favour pure breed dogs.

Consequently there is nothing for pure breed dog owners.

No doubt one of the state registration authorities would be prepared to provide an appropriate forum. Perhaps DogsQld, with voting rights for members looming, some candidates will want to attract votes.

Thank you for that information.

How did you arrive at your statistic of 90%?

Who has been involved in this thread who doesnt own a purebred dog?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can absolutely guarantee all Dogs Qld members (and forum participants) that the DQ Breeder Accreditation scheme is very highly regarded by both State and Local Governments. It is seen by them as yet another example of Dogs Queensland taking the initiative in regards to the "unresolved" question of dog breeding. More importantly the DQ BA scheme is seen as another means of setting responsible Dogs Queensland member breeders apart for BYB and puppy farmers. The Breeder Accrediatation scheme is still in it's infancy so it will evolve over time. Ultimately it will be the puppy buyers who will drive this evolution - remember that every purchaser of a pedigreed, registered puppy in Qld receives a questionarre/feedback form from DQ about their experience with the breeder of their new puppy. So please don't underestimate the value of the recently introduced DQ BA scheme - embrace it as a means to an end - as an Accreditted DQ member breeder I certainly support the scheme.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can absolutely guarantee all Dogs Qld members (and forum participants) that the DQ Breeder Accreditation scheme is very highly regarded by both State and Local Governments. It is seen by them as yet another example of Dogs Queensland taking the initiative in regards to the "unresolved" question of dog breeding. More importantly the DQ BA scheme is seen as another means of setting responsible Dogs Queensland member breeders apart for BYB and puppy farmers. The Breeder Accrediatation scheme is still in it's infancy so it will evolve over time. Ultimately it will be the puppy buyers who will drive this evolution - remember that every purchaser of a pedigreed, registered puppy in Qld receives a questionarre/feedback form from DQ about their experience with the breeder of their new puppy. So please don't underestimate the value of the recently introduced DQ BA scheme - embrace it as a means to an end - as an Accredited DQ member breeder I certainly support the scheme.

Ummmmm, errrrrrrrrr, don't slap my writs, but why are people that are puppy farmers accredited breeders ?.

The problem some of us breeders are having with the scheme is, that we have no desire to stand along side of these so called "accredited" breeders.

We say it should be earned not paid for and you of all people should under stand that. :)

It's not the pure bred pups that go out the front door, it's the ones that go out the back door.

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can absolutely guarantee all Dogs Qld members (and forum participants) that the DQ Breeder Accreditation scheme is very highly regarded by both State and Local Governments. It is seen by them as yet another example of Dogs Queensland taking the initiative in regards to the "unresolved" question of dog breeding. More importantly the DQ BA scheme is seen as another means of setting responsible Dogs Queensland member breeders apart for BYB and puppy farmers. The Breeder Accrediatation scheme is still in it's infancy so it will evolve over time. Ultimately it will be the puppy buyers who will drive this evolution - remember that every purchaser of a pedigreed, registered puppy in Qld receives a questionarre/feedback form from DQ about their experience with the breeder of their new puppy. So please don't underestimate the value of the recently introduced DQ BA scheme - embrace it as a means to an end - as an Accredited DQ member breeder I certainly support the scheme.

Ummmmm, errrrrrrrrr, don't slap my writs, but why are people that are puppy farmers accredited breeders ?.

The problem some of us breeders are having with the scheme is, that we have no desire to stand along side of these so called "accredited" breeders.

We say it should be earned not paid for and you of all people should under stand that. :love:

It's not the pure bred pups that go out the front door, it's the ones that go out the back door.

Cheers.

But Oakway none of that breaches the code of conduct and you cant keep on about bad breeders in that scheme because they have proven to be able to get in and stay in - its slanderous to continue to bring these sort of comments on breeders who have joined this scheme. If someone were saying the things that have been said here about registered breeders who are not in that group all hell would be yelling. Cant you see that by this being said here that it makes people who are reading think that the rest who are not accredited must be even worse than these comments have said about the breeders who have joined.

If they are not following the code of conduct report them so they are removed but telling people you wont join because the group the CC has set up and is promoting everywhere as being superior is not doing anyone any good. The animal rights,government and RSPCA and even the CC is simply of the opinion that you wont join because you cant. It is being spoken of as progress and a good thing because it was one of the recommendations of the Bateson report.We all know it was meant to be about a different country with a different system but its done - its not going away. Puppy buyers are going to deliberately go after these breeders to buy a puppy and everyone is going to promote them over any other registered purebred breeder - like it or not.

It is not logical for you to hold onto that reason for not joining. If you are right and puppy farmers are within this group clearly they are able to be in either group including the one you are in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course they are in the same group as we all are. There is no option - if you want to register your pups. However, to have an ABS where the members are not checked out is shocking and those breeders who choose to join have chosen bad company.

CCCQ should have told the gov that all it's breeders were AOK. But as usual, it's too difficult to stand up for the members. They like the money, but like to sit back, have a cigar and a scotch and take the line of least trouble --- for them.

Things will change with democracy.

Edited by Jed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oakway - I thought that my contribution to this discussion would have been sufficient to convince you of the benefits of the scheme.

Whilst the scheme is still new there is benefit to be had by allowing all DQ member breeders the opportunity of becoming accreditted.

What it does right now is elicit a clear undertaking from all those applying for acceptance that they will abide by certain conditions.

That comes at some degree of risk because if an accreditted breeder is then found to be operating outside of the conditions then they become very visible. Additionally - the scheme will evolve over time, newer, less experienced breeders will join whilst others may drop off.

And during this evolution the scheme may well change where more stringent requirements are put in place. The need to "pay" as you so eloquently describe it - is $22.00 for a 3 year period - all that covers is the Administration costs. The REAL cost is the undertaking that applicants will abide by (and embrace) the objects and purposes of the scheme. I too agree with Steve - you need to be very careful when you cast allegations around recklessly. If you have absolute proof that fellow member breeders are doing the wrong thing, or are in breach of rules then "put it up". But if your opinions are driven just by gut feel or rumour then that is a flawed premise. At the very least your inference has so far been that some DQ accreditted breeders are less than moral in their breeding practices - but until you name names with hard evidence to back up your claims then your statements place EVERY DQ accreditted breeder under a cloud of suspicion. Could I therefore recommend that if you TRULY believe you are a breeder of such good standing (such that you are able to outperform all others within your breed in Queensland) then you SHOULD apply for accreditation. As I've suggested previously it will ultimately be the puppy buying public who will decide whether a breeder is worthy of accreditation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oakway - I thought that my contribution to this discussion would have been sufficient to convince you of the benefits of the scheme.

Whilst the scheme is still new there is benefit to be had by allowing all DQ member breeders the opportunity of becoming accreditted.

What it does right now is elicit a clear undertaking from all those applying for acceptance that they will abide by certain conditions.

That comes at some degree of risk because if an accreditted breeder is then found to be operating outside of the conditions then they become very visible. Additionally - the scheme will evolve over time, newer, less experienced breeders will join whilst others may drop off.

And during this evolution the scheme may well change where more stringent requirements are put in place. The need to "pay" as you so eloquently describe it - is $22.00 for a 3 year period - all that covers is the Administration costs. The REAL cost is the undertaking that applicants will abide by (and embrace) the objects and purposes of the scheme. I too agree with Steve - you need to be very careful when you cast allegations around recklessly. If you have absolute proof that fellow member breeders are doing the wrong thing, or are in breach of rules then "put it up". But if your opinions are driven just by gut feel or rumour then that is a flawed premise. At the very least your inference has so far been that some DQ accreditted breeders are less than moral in their breeding practices - but until you name names with hard evidence to back up your claims then your statements place EVERY DQ accreditted breeder under a cloud of suspicion. Could I therefore recommend that if you TRULY believe you are a breeder of such good standing (such that you are able to outperform all others within your breed in Queensland) then you SHOULD apply for accreditation. As I've suggested previously it will ultimately be the puppy buying public who will decide whether a breeder is worthy of accreditation.

Blackdog

I could name a breeder right now who has discredited herself within one of my breeds. But where is that going to lead me? DogsQld were party to this ANKC Rule being broken.This is not casting any allegation around recklessly. But what you seem to be saying is that they are suppose to abide by the rules NOW. Oh I get it. What happened before doesnt matter?

If you have read this whole thread then you would of seen my concerns.

DogsQld have themselves to blame for this whole crooked scheme they have introduced. Because DogsQld have no backbone to enforce the rules. Oh they have when they want to of course. OK so this case happened a few years ago now. "So what" people might say. Some of us have long memorys. Some of us are sick and tired of being abused at shows. Well why should I want to become a member when I know this is all smoke and mirrors and you only have to pay your money, sign a few forms and be a member. If they let someone in who they know helped break the rules and they themselves(DogsQld) were guilty of not giving a damn(and I have documented evidence of this) they why should I stand beside DogsQld and those who can call themselves accredited. They shouldnt of even be allowed in.

But hey if you are saying we should all unite and join, then heck why dont we all.

I personally dont believe DogsQld truly has the members as their main concern. Yep big allegation. But until they convince me otherwise those are my thoughts. If they did they would not of put this upon us without proper membership consultation.

They would not of sent us this ballot(yes I know a different subject) asking us to respond in such a short time. How come members never even received a ballot paper?

why wasnt this sent out with February or Marchs' journals.

Its our damn money they are playing with isnt it?

I paid $190.00 for our memberships this year. Why shouldnt I moan about paying more when I receive not much in return. And my membership HAD to be paid before the end of November.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought....... once they have a system in place it will provide a new platform, a starting place for policing/enforcing/correcting the organisations failures in the past.

I think you are right on taget.

Just look at many of the the breeding programs going on in the FCI in Europe. Breed wardens inspecting parents and pups in the home of the breeder to make sure they meet the the breeder is meeting all the rules and laws. COI of litters controlled. (even saw some outrossing being done that seems to be mostly driven by animal rights and the kennel club (not the bred club) to address very high COI's.) contolling and limiting the number of litters a stud dog can have, which by the way is leading to a lot of diffculty finding any available studs as most breeders want to keep the few stud services the dog will be allowed to have to themselves. Maditory reporting of vet care into a database which is reviewed but the panel that makes all the decsions for that breed, of whihc there is on breeder and the rest are animal rights, lawyers, vets, scientiest and so forth. Pretty much the kennel club breeder is becoming a governement regulated and controlled activity where the breeder has less and less personal freedom bu taking away their right to make many decsions.

BTW I cannot find the same things going on for the breed clubs outside the kennel clubs in these countires, which are mostly working dog registries, like service dogs, police dogs herding dog and so forth, but perhaps it is affecting them too/. Nor can I fInd it affecting cross breeders, but again it is hard to track down. I am assuming that they are exempt?? because they either do not breed for show ring or they are not breeding purebreds?? Just a guess.

Edited by shortstep
Link to post
Share on other sites

What I envisage will happen, of course we can all see it..

is that DogsQld will go out to bat for those who have paid their money to become accredited and those who havent paid their money, (because they already believe themselves to be ethical and dont need to have a piece of paper to back it up,)

will be left in the changing rooms. They will also be in need of support because they are a "DogsQld member" and have a right to be heard but they wont receive half as much help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can absolutely guarantee all Dogs Qld members (and forum participants) that the DQ Breeder Accreditation scheme is very highly regarded by both State and Local Governments. It is seen by them as yet another example of Dogs Queensland taking the initiative in regards to the "unresolved" question of dog breeding. More importantly the DQ BA scheme is seen as another means of setting responsible Dogs Queensland member breeders apart for BYB and puppy farmers. The Breeder Accrediatation scheme is still in it's infancy so it will evolve over time. Ultimately it will be the puppy buyers who will drive this evolution - remember that every purchaser of a pedigreed, registered puppy in Qld receives a questionarre/feedback form from DQ about their experience with the breeder of their new puppy. So please don't underestimate the value of the recently introduced DQ BA scheme - embrace it as a means to an end - as an Accreditted DQ member breeder I certainly support the scheme.
Oakway - I thought that my contribution to this discussion would have been sufficient to convince you of the benefits of the scheme.Whilst the scheme is still new there is benefit to be had by allowing all DQ member breeders the opportunity of becoming accreditted.

What it does right now is elicit a clear undertaking from all those applying for acceptance that they will abide by certain conditions.

That comes at some degree of risk because if an accreditted breeder is then found to be operating outside of the conditions then they become very visible. Additionally - the scheme will evolve over time, newer, less experienced breeders will join whilst others may drop off.

And during this evolution the scheme may well change where more stringent requirements are put in place. The need to "pay" as you so eloquently describe it - is $22.00 for a 3 year period - all that covers is the Administration costs. The REAL cost is the undertaking that applicants will abide by (and embrace) the objects and purposes of the scheme. I too agree with Steve - you need to be very careful when you cast allegations around recklessly. If you have absolute proof that fellow member breeders are doing the wrong thing, or are in breach of rules then "put it up". But if your opinions are driven just by gut feel or rumour then that is a flawed premise. At the very least your inference has so far been that some DQ accreditted breeders are less than moral in their breeding practices - but until you name names with hard evidence to back up your claims then your statements place EVERY DQ accreditted breeder under a cloud of suspicion. Could I therefore recommend that if you TRULY believe you are a breeder of such good standing (such that you are able to outperform all others within your breed in Queensland) then you SHOULD apply for accreditation. As I've suggested previously it will ultimately be the puppy buying public who will decide whether a breeder is worthy of accreditation.

Blackdog

You have contributed twice to this thread. The first time clearly pushing your thoughts as to why we would all benefit in joining the ABS. The second time clearly pushing your view that your contribution to this thread has been one of great information.

You said -embrace it as a means to an end- an end to what? BYB and Puppy faming. Seriously.

Perhaps your efforts may be more welcomed if you could explain to us exactly what the agendas are that DogsQld have.

We are all dying to know

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, I am getting to the stage that I really don't care anymore.

After what has happened in the Qld Dog world in last week leaves me wondering about so much along with so many others.

If we came up with stone cold evidence, you are asking for, the way the law is these days, we could be the ones that are in deep doo doo.

People have stated on this forum that they have come up with the evidence and nothing has been done about it.

Now that is not going to encourage others to do the same. Well it's not going to encourage me. I have stuck my neck out once to often over the years.

Someone else can stick theirs out this time.

Maybe someone that has a future in the dog world, not me as I am on the downward side of breeding.

At the moment I just don't care anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...