BJean

Yes I saw him on the ABC this morning but couldnt really understand what he was saying,. He said the problem withthe legislation before was that the councils had to prove a breeder was making a profit. Thats not how I saw it and the DPI website still has the old stuff on it which specifically says you dont need to make a profit but he's the boss. Anyway he said the new definition of a puppy farm was any place that ever bred a puppy and sold it . he also said that the numbers of fertile dogs came down to 3 rather than 10. That worried me because as far as I know in the legislation before the only ones who ever had a 10 fertile dogs thingy were Vic dogs registered breeders. So perhaps this is what they meant when they said there was currently about 50 registered puppy farms but they were expecting the numbers to jump to about 9000 when every one who now needs a permit gets one. I think someone should really look this legislation up and work out how its going to impact on registered breeders in that state and be sure about what they need to do to be legal. So who'd be a Dogs Vic. registered breeder? When the only registration that matters is council registration. Remember when there'd be giggles and scorn at the BYB breeder who proudly advertised themself as a Registered Breeder with Council. Haha I guess the times change. And I imagine, so will a lot of residences. Bye Bye Dogs Vic.

Yes, that must be it. Thanks for pointing it out to me. Cheers, Sylvia anytime.

This very much sums up where I'm coming from. I don't intend to comment on the particular case, because nobody knows, including the OP, what the truth of the situation is. I simply reacted to the idea that there is no obligation on a breeder to take back a dog they have bred. I don't accept that idea. Yes, people's situations change and sometimes there is a physical impediment to the original breeder actually taking the dog back into their home, however there are many other ways to be actively involved in ensuring a new home is found for the dog asap. In my experience in rescue, there are far too many breeders that are happy to take the dollars when the pups turn eight weeks, however eight months, two years, five years down the track, they can't help. Often, the dog is having to be rehomed because the choice of home wasn't suitable in the first place, responsibility for which lies squarely in the breeders' lap. When I end up with a dog being surrendered that has papers and I call the breeder to tell them a pup of theirs is in rescue, I get "So...??" Once, I was even told "oh, I couldn't possibly take the dog back, I've got two litters on the ground and haven't time or space!" As you can tell, I tend to have a fairly jaundiced view of some breeders. This is not the case at all. But I guess you are green to putting dogs/pups in homes and dont have the experience to know better.

what about the entire dogs who escape because of accidents like a fence down because a tree fell on it, or a tradie who was careless with a gate/s etc? Why should those owners be penalised? Not all people who keep their pets entire are irresponsible, nor would all entire pets be in the above catergories. Why should a tradie not be held accountable for something that is a result of his/her carelessness? Being careless is irresponsible isn't it? Just my 2 cents. =) No being careless is not being irresponsible; the rest of your 2 cents doesn't make sense.

Bjelkier I have sent you a PM re Poland thanks L:)

It doesn't matter that anything can happen. That's why you hire a professional, to counter outcome variance and to engage a professional response when the anything does happen. Also, international flights are not relevant: 1. Different crates 2. Young puppies are not involved

Impossible. As there would still be idiots playing the bigot.

Yes quick! This is the chance for those who have no idea about breeding to get involved and have a say!

Unless you know a person's motivations, you're only guessing what the basis for their actions is. How does a breeder clearly show they do not have their breeds best interest at heart? By not breeding as most breeders in your club do? By having a breeding ethos that is outside the paradigm of yourself and other breeders you know? Code Of Ethics is at the end of the day just what the people who have the most influence think. Generally 'code of ethics' to do with the above, centre around arbitrary numbers that someone thought up, and have nothing to do with individual dogs in a breed. Something along the lines of "this is what I think is best so you should do it too". Like minimum breeding age. Or maximum breeding age. Or how many times a bitch can be bred. If a breeder is not and does not want to be a member of a State Club and they are breeding and producing competitive dogs, they have my attention; as a potential breeder of interest. It says a lot more to me about a breeder's critical thinking, that they do things their way after forming their own opinion on certain matters. They might be wrong of course. But according to me more damage is done to a breed when we imagine that State Breed Clubs or any breed Clubs, are selfless entities and not propelled by politics of influential members. Ethics and 'Health and Welfare' have become a norty goading stick that breeders point at other breeders, with whom they dont agree with or cant relate to or are not familiar with their breeding paradigms.

oh you mean a Fixed Or Repaired Daily ??? Nah I have a Ford Explorer Ltd. Good for the dogs, bad for me. Heaps of fuel. NB: Ford Explorer Limited is better than the Territory. More interior space and is actually a 4WD that you can 4WD. I feel I can drive anywhere with the Ford Expl. Ltd (median strip, what's that?!) as long as the timing chain holds out and there's no fuel budget. Other than that, it will get you and your dogs to anywhere and back.

Do you mean the natural corded / dread lock mane or the bouffant hairdryer and hairspray coif? I don't know if it's just poufier, it looks a fair bit longer as well. But the ones in this youtube vid are good examples. http://www.youtube.c...feature=related Don't tell me they put hairspray and stuff in their hair? >.< The TM is one of those breeds where you have to sift through a lot of 'legendary crap' to get to the dog. The dogs in the you tube clip look like they have been well combed / groomed. Maybe they have hairspray I dont know. A lot of them were overweight or maybe just unfit. But then I am being picky and always try and imagine a dog moving in its natural environment. Most of these dogs I could not

Do you mean the natural corded / dread lock mane or the bouffant hairdryer and hairspray coif?

It all depends on how you define well run commercial enterprise. And as always I have no idea about how the little dogs close to the ground work, only my dogs. I do know that some of the best breeders keep many of my dogs, some in pens/cages and on chains - and my dogs aren't the type of dog you can mistreat or not handle, and then expect to get anywhere near the dogs let alone their puppies. On back to back breedings, cant see what is wrong with these either, if my dogs have been having litters long before the cows came home in this country then I hardly see why I should listen to anyone about what is 'best practise', other than those who know and have experience. The biggest problem with 'good intention' across the board standards, is that it is presented as 'best practise' when it is not. You want to individualise the dog, yet your result is to institutionalise. This is the current status quo in Vic.

I think if a young dog has the problems you have outlined above, then its system is not hardy and robust to begin with. The dog has a life of regular vet treatments and I really think you are pushing the proverbial uphill and trying to sustain something that inherently cannot sustain itself. I would love and care for the dog and do the best you can for it, but I would not put the dog through a pace maker operation and then intermittent battery changes, as each time that operation puts strain on a system that was born compromised. Instead of fighting the dog's situation with nature I think the dogs overall life would be better if you accepted its condition and let it live its life.

Which means there is no difference. The difference MEANS an ANKC pedigree, not the difference IS an ANKC pedigree. Read the sentence again. The initial reference was to do with morphology and physical capacity - so in the context of the OP discussion, ANKC pedigree has nothing to do with it and is no point of difference. I dont buy in to colour determining a new breed from the same genetic base, because an ANKC pedigree paper says it is so; the kangal retardation in Australia being a prime example. If White GSD and WSS are a separate breed then there is no need for an ANKC pedigree to determine one from the other.

Which means there is no difference. If breeding is so dangerous why do you do it? The above story relates to a breeder's ability to form relationship with the puppy home, and can hardly be depicted as an example of 'breeding bitch welfare'. More like dumb home occurrence - which is independent of dog/bitch or breeding ability.

what rebanne said: I would want the option written in for more then 2 puppies to go on main register if both parties agree and I would want to know what happens if there are only pet quality pups in the litter. Would you be allowed to main register the best female of the lot to breed from? It is a rare breed and while there may not be a show quality pup available there very well may be a pup suitable to continue the line. Working with dogs that have rare gene pools I'd actually forget the show scene and focus what the breed needs instead. A better option is to go your own way and import semen or a dog. You will also learn more about the breed as you will observe for yourself different traits and physical manifestations. I dont know anything about fauves or what they do, except that they are a brown colour and close to the ground But I do know that in rare breeds there is both positive and negative outcomes in esotericism, and generally it is better for the breed if breeders branch out on their own.

Generally if you are losing sleep over something then you are not happy with the situation. Stop listening to what others think, and start listening to what your own self thinks. On 'exploitation' woot woot seriously, I dont think White GSDs can be farmed / kept in cages and bred with success like the little dog. Yes someone can breed with one of your pups and you might detest their breeding practices, they might even have an unregistered litter, or few but apart from upsetting your own apple cart you cannot say that the dog was treated cruely or died a bad end because it was bred and you did not want it to be.

Lots of hysterical fears. And I do not base my decisions on these. Even if a home does breed with the bitch, it is unlikely they will leave her 'in the corner unassisted'. And bitches can die even under the watch of the most vigilant breeder and anyway GSDs are relatively hardy dogs aren't they? (Do they free whelp, I'm going to assume for the most part that they do). Well done if the bitch has six large litters! Good healthy genes being passed on there. Or maybe there is something wrong with the number six? Mastitis - another emergency there. Why would anything live in the first place only to risk colliding with such dire situations. If breeding dogs makes you feel so guilty that you question the trust of your friends, then maybe you should not breed? I dont mean to sound offensive or rude, but it reads as if breeding dogs may have started to take too much of an emotional toll on yourself. Or maybe I'm just reading more pathos and lament in your post than is intended. A breeder should not need to 'decide which is the more ethical decision to make'. That truth comes from within yourself, and is born from the knowledge and understanding you have of your own dogs and their requirements. Maybe you care too much for what society thinks and not enough for what you think.

What is the overpopulation issue? What is an ethical and responsible number of dogs to own? How many dogs does one person own to fit into this notion of ethical and responsible? What is a puppy farm? I am a puppy farm if I take my dogs and apply for a DA in Vic.

It is dog eat dog so to speak. APBTs are pretty much doomed, Staffy/AmStaff owners don't want their breed to go down that same route. I don't think it is fair to ban the APBT, but I can see the logic in protecting your own breed in the furtherance of self-interest. I agree vis-a-vis your second point, guardian breeds are def. next on the list. Especially in Victoria- The Kneejerk State. There is no logic in protecting your own breed if your own breed cannot be determined from the breed you want to be distanced from. The 'logic' is evidenced by fact that no one can determine an Amstaff from a APBT with accuracy. AmStaff breeders/owners seem to think their ANKC pedigree papers will shield them. They are mistaken. As always. How can you say your dog is different WHEN IT LOOKS THE SAME. Staffies yeah they look a bit different. but to most who dont own the breed or dogs, they look similar.

Australia has less people, but it doesn't mean Australia has less dogs. The demographics and landscape of Australia is vastly different to UK. Australia has a pet dog population + working dog population + stray/semi-stray dog population. Council and local laws would have an impact on reasons dogs are no longer wanted also (I dont know what the UK local laws / council rules are wrt: number of dogs that can be kept; fines; level of difficulty for owners to reclaim their dogs etc) In any case, I was trying to find information on the dog population in Australia, and UK, when I found this hysterical gem (people of Whyalla ... ) http://www.whyallavet.com.au/Environment/population.html Clinic policy: We are committed to providing a high standard of veterinary care to our patients whilst minimizing our impact on the planet. Our aim is to make a difference that lasts well beyond the lifespan of the current generation of staff at the veterinary clinic. Australia has too many dogs, cats and people. There is a crisis of unwanted cats and dogs in Australia and we urge all pet owners to have their cats and dogs desexed. We work with the RSPCA to make a difference and reduce the number bring destroyed. The overpopulation of pets is a mirror of the human population crisis in Australia. For our childrens sake, we must reduce our human population through birth control and reduced immigration.

I dont know much about Mals, but I will assume they are similar to Anatolians wrt general health and hardiness. If your puppy has Aspiration Pneumonia he will need antibiotics now to get him through - as well as warmth and feed. If the pups is physically normal then the pup should survive if it is given antibiotcs to stop infectin from fluid in the lungs, and if the if the puppy also has adequate hydration, energy and warmth. Puppy will need * clavulox or amoxicilin * glucose solution: 1 part glycogen powder (or sugar if it is all you can access) to 3 parts tepid water. Use dropper to administer, 1ML is plenty. *supplement feed: goats milk on its own or mixed with glucose solution is fine. Feeding method: bottle feed is no problem to do with a 500g puppy.

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.