BJean

lilli..... sorry dont understand your problem with my post..... after all thought you were posting to get other members thoughts..... don't expect you to agree but nothing wrong if someone has some ideas that may differ from your own. have a nice day I dont have a problem with your post. You defined an 'acceptable' breeder as: breeding with some puppies being pre-ordered and/or only running one litter at any one time which gives a stronger likelyhood of homeing all pups I was interested in the source, perhaps you had read it somewhere.

Is this fact? Where did you get your information?

Congratulations! You have no idea

So high up, that their head was up the proverbial?

Or in conjunction with them. Isnt the President of DogsNSW aiming to be the next CEO of the RSPCA? DogsViC are supporting the RSPCA's proposals for puppy farms ie a licensing system, desexing, inspections and more powers to the RSCPA, so "to protect their members" DogsVic are trying to come up with definitions of what a puppy farm is. I am so disheartened by DogsVic response, I've written letters to DogsVic about the RSPCA and I get the run around - My AGM items asking DogsVic their position on the RSPCA and what it means for their beeder members - the CEO rang me hours before the deadline to tell me that my submitted "discussion paper" was too detailed for inclusion as AGM items, my option was to reword the AGM Items or submit them the management committee for comment/feedback. Of course months pass and I have no feedback. They wont listen and there is no in. You cant change anything because they block you out and its like no other breeders care. DogsVic and the other CCs are sending us down the river and there is nothing we can do because it seems we just pay our fees and shutup. The alternative is to not be a member and not to breed dogs anymore, but then that is a win to the RSPCA. But then so is to be a member of Dogs Vic. So now DogsVic is trying to come up with a system to categorise puppy farms and 'excessive' puppies, litters, breedings. How would we view a breeder who shows regularly and successfully, breeds excessively, and uses the proceeds of their breeding to finance the importation of good specimens of the breed ? Look how they now paint as questionable and akin to scum of the earth, the cornerstone breeders who raised the standards of their breeds. There go all the breeders who ever made an impact and showed me what good breeders do for a breed. To breed for your breed is now something to be shameful of, anything more than three litters per year is 'excessive'. DogsVic are not protecting or standing up for their members rights against an RSPCA legislative push - DogsVic are prepping their members and paving the way for it. I believe it has got to the point where the CCs have never been before - a point where pedigree dog breeders desperately need a registry alternative because there is nothing else, because what is available will decimate their breed and numbers. The Hunting club in Vic has 1000s of members, many more than Dogs Vic .... why cant there be another representative body for pedigree dogs? I've heard the nay reasonings before (and been in agreement with them), but now I am in despair as I cant see how anything else can be done as the CCs are not run by those who give their life to dogs, but by 9-5 bureaucrat sycophants. I used to think there was hope for the CCs but not anymore. Not by DogsVic response. I want to do something to save my pedigree registry and organisation but there is nothing I can do, its being pushed towards a future that I find untenable and there's no means to change its course unless your part of the status quo and will tow the anti-breeder line. I think of ways to utilise dual citizenship and somewhere wrangle FCI pedigrees for my dogs, but I cant stand to abandonn a sinking ship. I cant stand to walk away and give up and I'm frustrated because I cant see options. I'm infuriated at the apathetic numbnut breeders who think what DogsVic are doing is just fine, I'm fed up with the DogsVic runaround, I want to hit (sorry balkan temper coming through) the vacuous and seemingly oblivious exhibitors who are content to sit on their arses doing nothing but whinge, those blonks will do nothing and just shuffle along and follow whatever organisation will give them their pedigree. I suppose if it doesn't seem to effect them directly and right now, then it's not a concern for them. Or maybe they derive pious self-satisfaction that they're doing the right thing. Who knows.

I think it's a combnation of big dog and camera angle??? I dont know, in all my pics of Kimba he looks the same. Kimba's a big dog, but not what I would call 'massive'. Though I tend to breed ASD on the upper limit of the standard - bcz that's the way I like them and think they should be Kimba is 31" at shoulder and weighs 66kg, his younger brother Yahsi was bigger, this is him at 12 months - 33", 67kgs. (I'm sure his owner wont mind, I think they both look beautful in this photo )

ta

Currently no, because imports are UKC registered. If they were imported from Europe and FCI registered, then there would be possibility of breed recognition. In the interim you can alway show a rough coat Anatolian!

Dogs Victoria (insert and therfore Dogs NSW, QLD and SA) are establishing criteria to determine whether a member's breeding practices are acceptable to the organisation. Motivation stems from the RSPCA legistlation against puppy farms - Dogs VIctoria supports the RSCPA legislation so it needs to come up with a system to categorise ANKC breeders. If we try to purge the organisation of puppy farmers without such measurable criteria we face a significant legal risk. Proposed Criteria: We are offended by large numbers of puppies so should we set a limit on the number of litters per year ? Would such a limit be fair across all breeds ? For example a limit of three litters could equate to 30 puppies for a Boxer breeder, but only 9 puppies for a French Bulldog breeder. Also, would we penalise 4 litters in one year if none had been produced in the previous year ? Or would we average the number over a given period, for example any three year period ? Should we limit the number of puppies ? Again fairness across all breeds has to be considered – a limit of 20 puppies might equate to 1 ½ litters of Great Danes but 7 litters of Pugs. We currently limit the number of litters a bitch can produce – should we limit the use of a stud dog ? Should we limit the number of breeds any one member can breed with ? Puppy farmers often have five or more breeds, and the breeds change with the market. How many breeds can a member effectively manage under an acceptable breeding program ? Would the number depend upon such factors as the size of the dog, or the size of the litters of that breed. What other factors would need to be considered ? Should a breeder be required to demonstrate the effectiveness of their program ? For example a specific number of titles ? How would we view a breeder who shows regularly and successfully, breeds excessively, and uses the proceeds of their breeding to finance the importation of good specimens of the breed ? How do we define the difference between commercial and hobby breeding ? Should the VCA conduct random inspections of members kennels and breeding? Reg 3.7.7.empowers to VCA to do so but what would the inspection be gauged against ? http://www.dogsvictoria.org.au/Content.asp...6&SubID=400

Are you a professional dog trainer Corvus? How many dogs have you trained / overseen?

imo the shortened version doesn't stray from the facts, it just highlights the intended outcome and the outcome that will be actuality for most current breeders. Any breeder who exports dogs over 6 months of age must be licensed and comply with a regulated Code of Practice (see 1 above) before being granted permission to export dogs or puppies. This should include the dog being desexed unless it is destined to be a breeding animal owned by a licensed breeder in the importing country. The shortened version is correct.

its almost 7pm! The Alps bottlo closes soon! got to rush and yes those poops are humungous too big and too controversial to show on tv ... night Souff

Okay I'll start at the beginning - what is the overall picture you want to show and why? What problem do you want your documentary to highlight? Yes but a documentary about what? Is your documentary about the conditions at some puppy farms or about the numbers of dogs unwanted that get pts? I read lots of broad terms getting bandied about - and yes I know you are just brainstorming atm - but do you not see the assumption even in this seemingly innocuous statement: highlight the hard work these wonderful people put in to 'picking up the pieces' that are a result of puppy farms, pet shops and indiscriminate breeding Do Rescue and the RSPCA really 'pick up the pieces' that are a result of puppy farms, pet shops and indiscriminate breeding? Are you sure about the cause and effect? Do you think it would be interesting, to ignore the pamphlets and slogans and actually source for yourself the reasons why puppies/dogs go from wanted to unwanted. If puppy farms (however you want to define them) disappeared tomorrow, do you think unwanted dogs / puppies would decrease? If not, then is your documentary about the conditions dogs are kept in (the issue with puppy farms) or the numbers of dogs/pups that are no longer wanted and sent to pounds / pts etc The two are not the same, nor can it be said that only puppy farm dogs end up in pounds or pts or have health problems. why do people give up their dogs? lack of care. too hard. too much money. too much legislation. ??? Who said puppy farm pups have their fate predetermined. How many dogs end up in pounds because its too much for the owner to look after, too much for the rescue to look after, too much for the rspca to look after (well RSPCA dogs dont end up in other pound their dogs end up in their dumpster) All the while, you will get the PC ad nauseum of how to look for a 'good' breeder how to source a good puppy from a wholesome establishment blah blah blah What about the human component?

Great, looks like you have your storyline all set, now you just need to conjure the screenplay. I can't quite tell if you are being rude and sarcastic or not, but if so then maybe you'd like to be a bit more civil. I very much value the points you are making and am considering them thoroughly, there is no need to be rude. Without going into the inverse relationship between civility and rudeness - If you cant quite tell if I'm being rude and sarcastic, then Im probably not. Ways to go about things and ideas Vs what it actually is that you want to portray, are quite different. Is this what you want to do: highlight the hard work these wonderful people put in to 'picking up the pieces' that are a result of puppy farms, pet shops and indiscriminate breeding If people are apt to switch off I hardly think they were 'on' in the first place. I get called lots of things, but "holier than thou" isn't one of them :D

That would be from the Puppy Farm Legistlation now being pushed by RSPCA, ALV and some Rescue: (no doubt some breeders will think its a good idea too) http://www.dolforums.com.au/index.php?showtopic=201021 3. Tightening of export provisions for sale of puppies overseas Puppy farmers can currently access lucrative overseas markets by selling unregistered purebred (without pedigree) or crossbred dogs to puppy wholesalers overseas, often for substantially more money than they would obtain in Australia. • The minimum age for export of puppies for commercial purposes should be raised to 6 months. • Exemptions should only be given on a case-by-case basis and only when the puppy is travelling to accompany the existing owner overseas (ie for non-commercial purposes). • Any breeder who exports dogs over 6 months of age must be licensed and comply with a regulated Code of Practice (see 1 above) before being granted permission to export dogs or puppies. This should include the dog being desexed unless it is destined to be a breeding animal owned by a licensed breeder in the importing country.

Great, looks like you have your storyline all set, now you just need to conjure the screenplay.

The new whip horse for dog pts in pounds is puppy farms. You have to decide whether you want to jump on the bandwagon and join the ALV and RSPCA touting puppy farms as the reason why so many dogs end up at the pounds or whether you want to determine your own information and opinion on the matter. Everyone wants a documentary to push their interest barrow - what question is your 'documentary' trying to answer? Is it at investigative doco or an infomercial? The moment you start considering what groups you want to promote and what groups you dont, you're already tainting the results for your own bias. Who knows, maybe the people you appraoch for input into why they gave up their dog, will tell you that they got their dog from a rescue or breeder. Not going to fit in with your puppy farm/ byb 'expose' (assumption) is it? But if you want to do an informercial on puppy farms, rescue and the PC line, then carry on - as to me this is what the doco sounds like it will be. Nothing wrong with that of course, but lets be clear about the impacts of how we select and choose information and its effects.

oh dont worry Stitch, once all breeders have our licenses and concreted production lines, we'll all be homogenised, regulated and authenticated and legitimate in the eyes of the uninformed

Yes puppy farms is the current legislative barrow atm and really we just cant get enough anti puppy farm material. Perhaps your doco can go hand in hand with the RSPCA puppy farm legislation - and then when that goes through maybe there will be no more puppy farms ... Personally I think an investigative documentary following pups into their new homes and why some pups end up pts, surrendered to the pound or rehomed; maybe interviewing people who no longer want their dogs, would be more confronting, insightful and original.

I dont pay for breeding access to the best male pups I've bred. It's not negotiable. If an owner wont allow me free breeding access to my best male pups (ie the one that go on Main Reg) then they have to consider another pup. I would pay for collection expenses but no stud fee. Health testing costs would be shared.

There is Beauceron coming from Czech but I dont know breeding plans atm. If you send me your email address I will fwd your details. L:)

Yes the website has gone pfft another Sarplaninac handed in at the pound in need of a savvy home: This one looks like a Leonberger x but that shouldn't come as a surprise

There are a few Sarplaninac owners on DOL, does anyone know who they are or indeed if it is them and they are reading this - can you please PM me the breeder of your Sarplaninac? Yes looking for ubiquitous Alex ta

Yes, but only for my ASD/KD. Why? because a lot of ASD/KD byb are unregistered for cultural/language reasons. The Australian byb have shiite dogs but some migrant bybs have very nice dogs and the reasons why they are byb are different to the average farmer who wants to have an ASD/KD litter to help pay for the dog's upkeep. A sound, upstanding ASD/KD that's the total package + unique bloodline well why would I breed with a lesser quality male just because the owner is a registered breeder/owner? what's the point if I know the resulting puppies wont be half as good as the byb turkish dog? As long as the dog's pedigree is registerable and the byb owner knows his dogs and what he's doing, then yes I would use the stud dog if it was the best dog for my bitch.

Proposals: 1. Regulation of breeders • All breeders should be required to obtain a government licence to breed dogs - whether they are breeding purebred, cross-bred or mixed-bred dogs, and whether they breed commercially or as a hobby. Breeders of what? Just dogs? What about cats, horses, guinea pigs, alpacas ... A government license to breed horses is not required, because the RSCPA aren't getting calls about neglected starving horses??? The RSPCA dont want any dogs to be bred. Or they want to oversee what dogs are bred and when. This is just the RSPCA wanting to stick their noses in and glean info about all the evil breedes out there. • Licensing needs to be conditional on compliance with a Code of Practice outlining enforceable minimum standards. We already have minimum standards, why dont the RSPCA sign a compliance code enforcing that they will actually DO what they are supposed to do. Start with microchips and council registrations. woops too hard, hey. The RSPCA's anti pedigree campaign didn't work as well as they hoped, so they found a new ticket to bury dogs and dog breeders with - puppy farms. oh no, noone can protest against new Laws that will stop that!!! • The licensing system could be similar to that used for car dealers, real estate agents and tradesman. Having a license will allow governments and the RSPCA to monitor compliance with regulations and will provide some assurance to consumers about legitimacy of the breeder. They wish. RSPCA are like an ogre wanting more and more. They want to know everything about breeders and where they are and what they own. 2. Regulation of sale • A reputable website for sale of companion animals could be established. Criteria for listing would include: providing the street address of kennels, compliance with the Code of Practice, provision of a licence number, provision of information about membership of any breed association and provision of an ABN or similar number. I'll give my address as long as the RSCPA board put up theirs. • State/Territory Legislation should incorporate mandatory minimum standards for pet shops with specific requirements in relation to stopping puppy farming being: o animals held for sale can only be obtained from government registered/licensed breeders or suppliers o full disclosure by the seller of the veterinary practitioner who assessed the animals prior to purchase including a veterinary certificate recording all vaccinations and other treatments o full disclosure by the seller of the breeder’s name and contact details o the sale of desexed dogs (and cats) only, unless selling to a licensed breeder o the ability to return a puppy for whatever reason within 14 days. This must include the provision of veterinary treatment or reimbursement of the cost of veterinary treatment for pre-existing illness or congenital disorders. • Consumer complaint procedures need to be in place and accessible so that buyers can feel confident of recourse during the sale process if necessary. What a wonderful set of requirements, would make you think that the equation of animal welfare is all to do with the breeder and naught to do with the owner. Of course the lemmings will think this is a wonderful plan .................. 3. Tightening of export provisions for sale of puppies overseas Puppy farmers can currently access lucrative overseas markets by selling unregistered purebred (without pedigree) or crossbred dogs to puppy wholesalers overseas, often for substantially more money than they would obtain in Australia. • The minimum age for export of puppies for commercial purposes should be raised to 6 months. • Exemptions should only be given on a case-by-case basis and only when the puppy is travelling to accompany the existing owner overseas (ie for non-commercial purposes). • Any breeder who exports dogs over 6 months of age must be licensed and comply with a regulated Code of Practice (see 1 above) before being granted permission to export dogs or puppies. This should include the dog being desexed unless it is destined to be a breeding animal owned by a licensed breeder in the importing country. RSPCA attempting to determine Federal AQIS protocol and what is required in other countries is just hilarious. What I find alarming is that people actually think this reads like a good EFFECTIVE idea. Honestly. 4. Tightening compliance with taxation laws • The Australian Taxation Office should target investigative efforts at illegal puppy farming operations. The ATO should be required to inform the relevant government authority of any positive identification of a puppy farm in order that the welfare of the animals can be assessed. gawd you'd think that puppies were bringing in as much black cash as the ATOs other favourite loots. Oh well a vacuous celebrity thinks its a good idea so it must have merit - Lets vote it in!!! 5. Amendments to animal welfare legislation State/Territory animal welfare legislation should be amended to incorporate provisions for: • Prohibition Orders to be obtained preventing further ownership of animals prior to conviction, to prevent puppy farmers from continuing their business while legal proceedings are underway • Defendants to be required to pay court bonds prior to any litigation appeals or appeals in relation to the forfeiture of animals. The bond amount should be based on the financial cost of caring for the dogs on a daily basis, acknowledging that during this period such this care is being provided by RSPCA or other rescue group and not by the defendant. Where a court bond is not paid, the owner would be required to surrender the animals for rehoming. How despicable that people read this and the light bulb lights up in their head and they think, yes this is a good idea. 6. Education • Raise community awareness about the scale and problems created by puppy farming in Australia. • Ensure wide availability of consistent information for consumers giving tips on questions to ask and responsible places to go when buying a puppy. The RSPCA has recently released the RSPCA Smart Puppy Buyers Guide to help consumers in this way (download from www.rspca.org.au). • Provide information to vets and pet supply stores to help them identify possible puppy farm operators. Indications of a puppy farm operator include consulting large numbers of puppies but rarely, if ever, treating adult dogs, breeders reluctant to entertain home visits by vets, the regular purchase of large volumes of food and/or other pet supplies. BAHAHAHA 7. Reporting suspicious activities • Formalise a reporting process for vets, pet supply stores or members of the community to notify the RSPCA or government authorities if they suspect one of their clients is running a puppy farm operation. oh yeah that will work. Sounds like McCarthyism and every other crud dogma that persecuted and squahsed the lives and rights of its citizens to me. Here fill out this form. Dob in your neighbours and your friend's friend. Have you all running scared but filled with glee, 'cause you're a goodie not a badie ... for now.