Interesting Read..

[Steve]

Of course thats horrible Nic but that isnt here and it isnt something that is happening here.If it were there are people who can investigate it and do something about it.

But just take a look at this which is used to slam one breeder .Which supposedly happened 8years ago - so much for us trying to educate breeders and trying to turn them around if they are to be branded and judged for supposedly previous sins almost a decade later ! There is not one breeder among us who has not made some mistakes or who operated one way years ago before we had the science.

That the breeder had puppies with one bitch every 5 months. Now if a bitch has puppies today in order for her to have puppies in 5 months she would have to come on heat again when her puppies are 10 weeks old .

That gives us 10 weeks break + 2 weeks before she ovulates and 9 weeks of pregnancy .Which would give her puppies in just over 5 months. Now Im sorry when the breeder says this is crap its pretty bloody hard not to agree with her and believe her when she says she was set up. Based on the breed politics which were alive and well at that time in that particular breed and the factthat the prisoners for profit website says that other breeders of this breed are against her - thats pretty believeable too.

I have never seen nor heard of a bitch coming on heat when her puppies are only 10 weeks old.

But apart from that this is a judgement and used as evidence of the breeder being cruel but the science and experts qualified in canine reproduction dont agree that mating a bitch on every season when she is young is cruel anyway.

That breeder has been raided by rednecks inspected more than most due to vexatious complaints by RSPCA and council and has never been found lacking yet her name is used to demonstrate cruel breeders for things she is accused of doing in 2002.

Since then mandatory codes have been introduced and you cant have more than 2 litters from a bitch in 18 months in that state but back then it was not an issue and it is a very controversial issue still as it is against the research and science for the best management of breeding bitches. Before it became part of the code of ethics for CCs and state mandatory codes most breeders bred their bitches young and often. It is now in the codes due to pressure from people who decided what is best for a bitch and what is cruel simply because they have chosen that as one of the things they say . We have to have the ability to choose what we do with our girls taken from us because some one somewhere might mate a bitch when she isnt in good condition. Suppose its probaly a waste of time to say research shows if she isnt in pretty good nick she either wont mate or doesnt get pregnant either.

Who should decide what is cruel but worse do we get to hear what is considered cruel before they rip us to bits or do they just make it up as they go along ?

The mandatory code for breeding dogs in Victoria is

quote

Materials should be selected for ease of maintenance and cleaning, durability and non-toxicity. Floors of animal housing areas of catteries and kennels must be made of an impervious material to assist cleaning and drainage. Wood, brick, dirt or grass floors are not acceptable except in exercise areas.

The internal surfaces of the external walls of catteries and kennels must be constructed of impervious solid, washable materials optimally curved at the wall/floor junctions to facilitate cleaning and disinfection.

Kennel and cattery floors must be sloped to enable wastes and water to run off. A collection drain must be provided to take away water after cleaning. Pens maybe separated by either solid partitions, galvanised chain wire or weld mesh wire dividers. All kennels must be provided with a weatherproof sleeping area containing raised beds constructed of a material other than concrete, such as wood or plastic.

So when the cameras come in and film dogs on impervious material to assist cleaning and drainage which is not brick, dirt or grass who is cruel those who gave them no choice but to do that on them for doing that?

And

3.8 Minimum Pen Sizes

(a) Dogs (Table 1)

Under no circumstances can more than two dogs be housed in the one pen. The minimum pen sizes are for one adult dog (older than 16 weeks) or one bitch and a litter up to eight weeks of age.

One third of the area of each pen must be weatherproof and include raised sleeping quarters. Individual sleeping quarters must be provided when two adult dogs are housed in the one pen. The identification number of each dog housed in each pen must be clearly displayed on the pen.

Poor dogs and you understand this is for all breeders and not just large scale commercial breeders .None of us including commercial breeders want to keep their breeding dogs that way but whenthe cameras were on the Bulleys place if the place wasnt the way it was they would have been in strife with council and RSPCA - yet its used to show how cruel they are .

Edited September 23, 2011 by Steve

[sandgrubber]

Regarding the Amish puppy farm discussed in Nic's link

June 11, 2010 4:35 PM

New Pa. Law Putting Puppy Mills out of Business

By CBSNews (AP) Daniel Peachey's breeding dogs used to stand on wire flooring all day, cooped up in cages that provided no regular access to the outdoors.

No more. Peachey recently spent more than $20,000 on upgrades at his Stone Mountain Kennel, outside of State College, to meet stringent new health and safety standards that state officials say have gone a long way toward ending Pennsylvania's reputation as the puppy mill capital of the East.

While breeders like Peachey have found themselves shelling out tens of thousands of dollars to comply with the strictest kennel law in the nation, scores of substandard commercial kennels have opted to close instead - freeing a minimum of 14,000 dogs from bleak surroundings where they typically received little attention or care.

The state Bureau of Dog Law Enforcement is wagging its tail about the results, declaring Friday in its annual report to the Legislature that Pennsylvania has become a "model state" for its oversight of commercial breeders.

"I think if people care about their dogs and want to remain in business, they are doing what's needed to comply with the law," Jessie Smith, the state's top dog-law enforcer, told The Associated Press this week during a tour of Peachey's kennel.

Pennsylvania had long been known as a breeding ground for puppy mills when Gov. Ed Rendell signed off on an overhaul of the dog law in 2008. The legislation was a response to appalling conditions in many large commercial breeding kennels, where dogs spent most of their working lives inside cramped wire cages, stacked one atop the other, and got little grooming, veterinary care or exercise.

Key provisions that went into effect in October required large-scale breeders to double cage sizes, eliminate wire flooring, and provide unfettered access to the outdoors. The new law also banned cage stacking, instituted twice-a-year vet checks, and mandated new ventilation and cleanliness standards.

Many breeders have closed voluntarily rather than comply. The number of commercial kennels in Pennsylvania plummeted from 303 at the beginning of 2009 to 111 today - a reduction of almost two-thirds - although a few of them are expected to reopen after making renovations, while other kennels got rid of enough dogs so that they are no longer classified as commercial operations.

Thousands of former breeding dogs have been relinquished to shelters and placed in homes as pets. Dogs have also been sold or transferred to other kennel owners in and out of state.

"It's much more difficult now to run a puppy mill in Pennsylvania," said Sarah Speed, Pennsylvania state director of The Humane Society of the United States. "I think the puppy mill business in Pennsylvania is absolutely on its way out."

Peachey, 43, an Amishman who lives with his wife and seven children on a three-acre spread in Belleville, said he thought long and hard about whether he wanted to remain in the business of breeding and selling Yorkshire and Boston terriers, Maltese, and "morkies" (a trendy Yorkie-Maltese mix).

He had always run a clean kennel, meeting and sometimes exceeding existing standards and taking good care of his dogs, according to state dog warden Melissa Bair, who has inspected the facility for years.

But even Peachey's operation required substantial upgrades to comply with the new regulations, including outdoor runs and new indoor enclosures.

In the end, it was a matter of economics.

Peachey, who had paid more than $50,000 for a new kennel building in 2003, thought it made more sense to spend another $20,000 to bring the kennel up to code than to abandon it and lose his original investment.

"I really didn't think I had a choice," he said.

There's an interesting review of US puppy mill laws at law.psu.edu/_file/aglaw/PA_Dog_Law_Noemi_Lopez.pdf The author is strongly anti-puppy mill, but her work is solidly researched and provides some interesting perspective.

Edited September 23, 2011 by sandgrubber

[BJean]

Not to long ago I stumbled upon a puppy farm in the US I think (internet) It is said to be state of the art (which is why I am using it as an example) but god it was a shocking life for those dogs. I will try to find it for you.

ETA Found it; http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=7187712&page=2

Sadly the part where he puts the dog in a running wheel (like a mouse) wont work for me.

What are other peoples thoughts on this? Is this acceptable? Is this considered state of the art for you? Do you belive the dogs have good quality of life in a set up like this? Really interested in your thoughts and opinions.

Maybe your campaign is stalling so much because you take on overseas issues and try to apply them to aust.

I could show you lots of shocking pictures from all over the place to do with lots of things

but the relevance to Australia and legislation within Australia

is about nought.

[Steve]

There's an interesting review of US puppy mill laws at law.psu.edu/_file/aglaw/PA_Dog_Law_Noemi_Lopez.pdf The author is strongly anti-puppy mill, but her work is solidly researched and provides some interesting perspective.

Intersting that their definition of a puppy mill is specific that its breeders who recieve pedigree papers from the AKC .

a puppy mill is any location that breeds a lot of dogs,18 which receive pedigree papers from the American Kennel Club19 (AKC).20

Also their laws appear to leave a very large chunk of breeders out of the loop

The new law defines a “kennel” as any establishment “in or through which at least 26 dogs are kept or transferred in a calendar year, or a boarding kennel.64 A “commercial kennel” is a kennel that breeds or whelps dogs and sells or transfers any dogs to a dealer or pet shop kennel or that sells or transfers more than 60 dogs per calendar year.65

and that the laws they are bringing in re kennel conditions, etc now we already have.

[BJean]

Floors of animal housing areas of catteries and kennels must be made of an impervious material to assist cleaning and drainage. Wood, brick, dirt or grass floors are not acceptable except in exercise areas.

The internal surfaces of the external walls of catteries and kennels must be constructed of impervious solid, washable materials optimally curved at the wall/floor junctions to facilitate cleaning and disinfection.

Kennel and cattery floors must be sloped to enable wastes and water to run off. A collection drain must be provided to take away water after cleaning. Pens maybe separated by either solid partitions, galvanised chain wire or weld mesh wire dividers. All kennels must be provided with a weatherproof sleeping area containing raised beds constructed of a material other than concrete, such as wood or plastic.

So when the cameras come in and film dogs on impervious material to assist cleaning and drainage which is not brick, dirt or grass who is cruel those who gave them no choice but to do that on them for doing that?

Under no circumstances can more than two dogs be housed in the one pen. The minimum pen sizes are for one adult dog (older than 16 weeks) or one bitch and a litter up to eight weeks of age.

One third of the area of each pen must be weatherproof and include raised sleeping quarters. Individual sleeping quarters must be provided when two adult dogs are housed in the one pen. The identification number of each dog housed in each pen must be clearly displayed on the pen.

Poor dogs and you understand this is for all breeders and not just large scale commercial breeders .None of us including commercial breeders want to keep their breeding dogs that way but when the cameras were on the Bulleys place if the place wasnt the way they would have been in strife with council and RSPCA - yet its used to show how cruel they are.

Nic and Oscar Law's supporters:

you want me to support these conditions for my dogs?

I say you are cruel and ignorant to my dogs' needs.

I will never support what you purport because I dont support a 'cause'

I look after my dogs and given the above, I believe you dont know much about that.

[Nic.B]

Hey Steve & Sundgrubber

I used this news story from the US as on paper it all looks good and they state they are "state of the art". Yes they comply with most things. It is not until you see the actual footage that you can see how inhumane it is to keep dogs this way and how wrong breeding dogs this way is imoral and unethical. The females and males remain in their cages for their entire lives and the puppies have a really crap start to life with a stressed out and unhappy Mum to begin with.

Then they are very poorly rehomed.

If the RSPCA or any council or ranger or AWL inspector or the police went into that terrible joint they would be powerless to act "as they comply to the law"

That is simply not good enough for these animals nor for many animal lovers and advocates.

[Nic.B]

Not to long ago I stumbled upon a puppy farm in the US I think (internet) It is said to be state of the art (which is why I am using it as an example) but god it was a shocking life for those dogs. I will try to find it for you.

ETA Found it; http://abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=7187712&page=2

Sadly the part where he puts the dog in a running wheel (like a mouse) wont work for me.

What are other peoples thoughts on this? Is this acceptable? Is this considered state of the art for you? Do you belive the dogs have good quality of life in a set up like this? Really interested in your thoughts and opinions.

Maybe your campaign is stalling so much because you take on overseas issues and try to apply them to aust.

I could show you lots of shocking pictures from all over the place to do with lots of things

but the relevance to Australia and legislation within Australia

is about nought.

I clearly stated that the story was from the US Lilli and also stated it was an example. Perhaps you need to read back a bit.

We are over 30 years behind the US and UK. So anyone in AUST with any sense or intellegence will sit up and listen to the huge issues they have already faced and are addressing O/S.

[BJean]

I clearly stated that the story was from the US Lilli and also stated it was an example. Perhaps you need to read back a bit.

We are over 30 years behind the US and UK. So anyone in AUST with any sense or intellegence will sit up and listen to the huge issues they have already faced and are addressing O/S.

Personally I dont look towards the US for many things,

Horse Transport immediately comes to mind.

I hardly call UK and US trailblazers. But if you consider them worthy,

good for you that you feel 30 years behind; I have a different world perspective.

Edited September 25, 2011 by lilli

[Steve]

Not to long ago I stumbled upon a puppy farm in the US I think (internet) It is said to be state of the art (which is why I am using it as an example) but god it was a shocking life for those dogs. I will try to find it for you.

ETA Found it; http://abcnews.go.co...=7187712&page=2

Sadly the part where he puts the dog in a running wheel (like a mouse) wont work for me.

What are other peoples thoughts on this? Is this acceptable? Is this considered state of the art for you? Do you belive the dogs have good quality of life in a set up like this? Really interested in your thoughts and opinions.

Maybe your campaign is stalling so much because you take on overseas issues and try to apply them to aust.

I could show you lots of shocking pictures from all over the place to do with lots of things

but the relevance to Australia and legislation within Australia

is about nought.

I clearly stated that the story was from the US Lilli and also stated it was an example. Perhaps you need to read back a bit.

We are over 30 years behind the US and UK. So anyone in AUST with any sense or intellegence will sit up and listen to the huge issues they have already faced and are addressing O/S.

That is correct we are about that behind and around about the mid nineties animal rights in the US did exactly what is going on now here .I dont see that as a very successful outcome and if we are going to allow animal rights here do what they did over there we will go backwards not forwards Then take a better look and re assess the situation with different eyes. What they have just made law we have here already.

[sandgrubber]

We are over 30 years behind the US and UK. So anyone in AUST with any sense or intellegence will sit up and listen to the huge issues they have already faced and are addressing O/S.

It's more complicated than that.

Several US states still permit very large, extremely capitalistic puppy farms, some of whom breed AKC registered dogs. They are working to regulate, but recent measures don't go much further than requiring veterinary care, modest standards of care, and not keeping dogs in stacked wire cages with wire bottoms. The level of abuse is clear in that recent advances have outlawed practices such as DIY ceasarian sections and debarking operations. Recent laws in PA only apply to establishments with 50+ dogs.

There are other states that forbid selling live animals in petstores and some counties in California have mandatory desexing for all except breeders who have registered (and paid) to keep unaltered animals . . . so it's not uniform.

[Steve]

If we are going to use the USA as an example.

Exactly what is happening now here was carried out by animal rights loonies eg PETA over there and they have had 20 plus years to show how those tactics and methodology have helped prevent dog suffering.

They haven’t and they are every bit as responsible for that as anyone else. Just as they will be here if it gets worse or we don’t ensure its stopped. Because the more they push the more breeders go underground or get bigger and bigger. The small scale responsible ones walk away. If their goal is to stop large scale breeders the end result will be exactly the opposite.

What is going on here is counterproductive.

And in the states limiting dog numbers whether they are pets or used for breeding has been proven to be unconstitutional anyway.

They also have different trade laws and federal laws which govern property, equality and free trade which will always win out in Australia over any proposed laws which will limit a person's ability to free enjoyment of his property, limit a persons ability to trade freely and ensure that people have equality and that one group cant be more disadvatgaed than any other.

The aim is to take away property status - but think it through and consider what that means to you and your dogs - if you dont own them.

http://www.naiaonline.org/pdfs/petfriendlyguide.pdf

Quote

Beginning in the early 1990’s, activist groups convinced some

municipalities that breeder licensing and other restrictions would reduce

the number of pets entering shelters and raise funds needed to cope with

overpopulation. They claimed that breeders were the source of shelter

problems, and they used the media very effectively to promote anti-breeder

sentiment and anti-breeder ordinances. They euthanized dogs and cats on television to showcase the issue of overpopulation and inflamed the public against breeders who they said were to blame.

Much of the information used to sell these ordinances was not true.

Today, most of the counties that adopted such provisions have long since discarded them because they did not work. These laws alienated the most responsible dog breeders in the community, but had no affect on the irresponsible ones they were intended to reach. They created a wedge between animal control and citizens who formerly supported them. They drove responsible breeders underground, and they didn’t raise funds or address the real source of surplus shelter dogs and cats. They were failures by every objective measure.

[sandgrubber]

The document Steve refers to states:

"In reality, unenforceable ordinances unite responsible pet owners, irresponsible pet owners and non pet owners in their opposi- tion to animal control."

Unfortunately, I don't think this is true. I live in a California county that has breeder registration (which requires an annual letter from the vet and $70 for each dog) and mandatory spey/neuter for dogs not covered by non-neutered certificates. The program has been in place for a few decades. It includes very generous subsidies for spay/neuter for those with lower incomes. (It'll cost me $40 to do either a spay or neuter).

The document is correct about some things . . . most people just don't bother to register their dogs, and there's little money for enforcement. [Also no upsurgence in rabies]. People are so upset about other things (like high unemployment, high foreclosure rates, vicious humans, drugs . . . and on and on) that there's no, underline no, visible opposition to animal control. We have the usual problems with dogs that bark all night, occasional vicious dogs attacking other dogs or people, and wandering dogs that get killed by cars and/or become a nuisance. These dogs tend to end up in shelters, which make an effort to return them to their families or rehome them, but many/most get pts. Sure, people are upset when they get a $200 fine for not registering their animals. But they are alone in their upset, not part of any organised resistance.

Edited September 25, 2011 by sandgrubber

[Steve]

The document Steve refers to states:

"In reality, unenforceable ordinances unite responsible pet owners, irresponsible pet owners and non pet owners in their opposi- tion to animal control."

Unfortunately, I don't think this is true. I live in a California county that has breeder registration (which requires an annual letter from the vet and $70 for each dog) and mandatory spey/neuter for dogs not covered by non-neutered certificates. The program has been in place for a few decades. It includes very generous subsidies for spay/neuter for those with lower incomes. (It'll cost me $40 to do either a spay or neuter).

Well this is certainly true here . I am now defending the rights of people I have a basic difference in philosophy with of what is and is not responsible.

In my ideal world there would be no one breeding with a primary goal of making money ,there would be no one breeding designer dogs, there would be no one selling animals to pet shops etc there would be no one breeding puppies detined to suffer because the breeder decided on any goal which wasnt in the best interests of the dogs and the majority of the breeders who have entered into this debate feel the same.We have a quasi police force with no outside accountability which in at least one state clearly has a bias against those who they are charged with investigating and their website shows they are capable of bending the facts in order to make their point. I am defending the rights of all pet owners and all breeders all Australians and Im more aware than most that there are some who need to be locked up. Everyone underline everyone can see that the laws we currently have in place are not enforced.

We still have approx only 30% of all dogs whch are registered ,we still have people who cant walk the streets with their own dogs and their kids in fear of being rushed by off leash dogs, we still have dog attacks and dogs dumped in pounds un microchipped . We see no underline no work being done by anyone of a preventative nature and no enforcement .We have people who moan and complain about breeders who dont follow mandatory codes or their own ideas of what is best beating a drum about breeders breaking laws and howling for more laws who are of the opinion they are the only ones who do have the right to break the law and disregard people's rights.

What hypocricy - a breeder in Victoria has no choice but to vaccinate their dogs by a vet every year but if they decide its not in their dog's best interest to do this - they breach the codes and have their dogs seized and "rescued" by people who dont have to have their dogs vaccinated by a vet every year ,but its O.K. to break and enter, steal property, trespass, stalk ,terrorise and do all else that they do.

Edited September 25, 2011 by Steve

[Steve]

And you know what the biggest joke of all is - we aim to teach dog breeders more about dog breeding .When we were compiling our Canine immunology course we went to some of the best canine immunologists in the world

and a professor of Science Education set the course and a world reknowned human and canine immunologist made our DVD'S which go out with it but the state government make laws which make any education we give breeders a complete waste of time and energy .

Now you really dont have to have been breeding long to work out PARVO is a breeders worst nightmare and that puppies are the most suseptible and if we are going to vaccinate puppies against anything in this country this is it . The others in the C3 which we vaccinate against are low risk in comparison and one hasnt been documented in a domestic dog in over 30 years but .........Take a look at the mandatory code for breeding dogs in Victoria for the sale of puppies

Ready ????

3.3 Sale of Puppies and Kittens

The proprietor must ensure that all dogs and cats sold must have a current vaccination certificate signed by a veterinarian stating that the animal has been vaccinated in accordance with the instructions of the manufacturers of the vaccine administered. Puppies and kittens must be vaccinated at least fourteen days prior to sale to cover the following:

Puppies

• canine distemper
• infectious canine hepatitis

[sandgrubber]

3.3 Sale of Puppies and Kittens

. . . Puppies and kittens must be vaccinated at least fourteen days prior to sale to cover the following:

Puppies

• canine distemper
• infectious canine hepatitis

That is equally as stupid as the recent Vic legislation setting forward a visual standard for forbidden breeds. Sadly, I don't see dog people uniting in opposition to either stupid piece of legislation. . . or the NSW regs that in effect make it illegal to use the back bedroom as a whelping room. There were some rallies about the Vic BSL. Some people wrote letters. But it's four days before Victoria's draconian laws come into effect and try finding any coverage of any organised resistance. There was a stir when the laws were announced. But it has gone quiet.

Did anyone even notice the Vic law about puppy vaccinations? You'd think no one would object to adding parvo to the lists, and it would have been reasonably easy to do.

[Steve]

3.3 Sale of Puppies and Kittens

. . . Puppies and kittens must be vaccinated at least fourteen days prior to sale to cover the following:

Puppies

• canine distemper
• infectious canine hepatitis

That is equally as stupid as the recent Vic legislation setting forward a visual standard for forbidden breeds. Sadly, I don't see dog people uniting in opposition to either stupid piece of legislation. . . or the NSW regs that in effect make it illegal to use the back bedroom as a whelping room. There were some rallies about the Vic BSL. Some people wrote letters. But it's four days before Victoria's draconian laws come into effect and try finding any coverage of any organised resistance. There was a stir when the laws were announced. But it has gone quiet.

Did anyone even notice the Vic law about puppy vaccinations? You'd think no one would object to adding parvo to the lists, and it would have been reasonably easy to do.

At a guess Id say it was over looked because surely no one would object to having puppies vaccinated against Parvo before they go to new homes but it clearly demonstrates the problems when people who dont breed dogs and know bugger all about it are involved doesnt it ?

The other thing that fascinates me is that they appear to have accepted that cats have a unique need for their reproductive systems to remain healthy and the code allows young breedings and no more than 2 litters per year yet with dogs its completly different and their unique reproductive systems are never taken into account .

Edited September 26, 2011 by Steve

[goldchow]

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?

[sandgrubber]

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?

A group with a collective IQ of 87? This is in the Cockburn Council's fire regs . . .which I believe are similar to those in many WA councils. Basically says if you own 5 acres or more you must have a bare earth firebreak of 3 m around your house, barn, etc. The shire is extremely sandy. The fire crews say they can't use the fire breaks as access because vehicles bog in the sand. The result is often a ~3m strip on one side of a fence, a ~ 3m strip on the other side, and a nice clump of grass and weeds and eventually bushes growing around the fence . . . so as to provide fuel to allow any fire to cross the firebreak. To really make these things trafficable, you have to strip and apply roadbase, which, of course, no one does.

(2) As to land, which is greater than 2032m2 in area, shall have a trafficable firebreak three (3) metres in width cleared to mineral earth subject to the following requirements: (a) immediately inside all external boundaries of the land; and

(b) immediately surrounding buildings (if any) situated on the land; and © immediately surrounding all fuel dumps and ramps (if any) on the land;

and (d) in any event, clear the firebreaks to the satisfaction of the local

government or an authorised person.

[Nic.B]

We are over 30 years behind the US and UK. So anyone in AUST with any sense or intellegence will sit up and listen to the huge issues they have already faced and are addressing O/S.

It's more complicated than that.

Several US states still permit very large, extremely capitalistic puppy farms, some of whom breed AKC registered dogs. They are working to regulate, but recent measures don't go much further than requiring veterinary care, modest standards of care, and not keeping dogs in stacked wire cages with wire bottoms. The level of abuse is clear in that recent advances have outlawed practices such as DIY ceasarian sections and debarking operations. Recent laws in PA only apply to establishments with 50+ dogs.

There are other states that forbid selling live animals in petstores and some counties in California have mandatory desexing for all except breeders who have registered (and paid) to keep unaltered animals . . . so it's not uniform.

Yes I agree Sundgrubber. We have the same issues with pounds and shelters in Aust, nothing is uniform (even pounds and shelters in the same states).

It can be very frustrating.

At the recent summit in QLD there were lots of guest speakers from the US and UK who have had great success in lowering euth rates in pounds and shelters.

There is some really proactive work being done which is very effective and just basic common sense. Things like working hard in reuniting people with lost pets (before they are impounded) waiving fees or allowing people to add impounding fees to their council rates.

There is also a lot of education in the community, desexing family pets is also a priority to prevent unwanted/unplanned litters.

Training is also highly promoted and encouraged, some pounds and shelters offer this free of charge.

We are very lucky to be able to offer a month of free training for adopted pets at HP. Adopters are always thrilled with the training offer and we heavily promote it. We also offer basic training techniques and tricks when we do an intro with a family and do our best to identify any issues.

I agree there are many different aspects to resolving the issue of unwanted animals. I have always said that pounds and shelters can also work very differently to reduce euth rates. Councils can also do a hell of a lot more.

Chipping details desperately need an overhaul, perhaps then we can find out where these dogs are coming from. We would also have a better chance of reuniting them with their owners.

ETA

Edited September 26, 2011 by Nic.B

[Nic.B]

I clearly stated that the story was from the US Lilli and also stated it was an example. Perhaps you need to read back a bit.

We are over 30 years behind the US and UK. So anyone in AUST with any sense or intellegence will sit up and listen to the huge issues they have already faced and are addressing O/S.

Personally I dont look towards the US for many things,

Horse Transport immediately comes to mind.

I hardly call UK and US trailblazers. But if you consider them worthy,

good for you that you feel 30 years behind; I have a different world perspective.

Well I have no idea why you are not well aware of this fact Lilli, as they are clearly ahead of us (sadly) in most areas.

Dont get me started on horse transport and slaughter. I have spent more time with horses than dogs I believe.

This is a dog forum though so I will not go there.