Are You Serious Jo

I am compelled to ask you something.....are you dense or still not ready to build a bridge and accept the fact that I do not appreciate hunters Just get over it RJ. OOh yea, I wrote that post BUT I have also added MULTIPLE times that that is the only complaint that my hubby makes so therefore I do consider myself blessed overall. AMEN, lol. Where did I mention hunting My post is about your first post and my confusion over how you made a thread about something then halfway through when you didn't get the replies you wanted you changed your story? It was a big enough deal to make a thread about, to help you a bit I've bolded the bits that stood out to everyone. You even said you thought he'd leave you over it, I'm not making this up, you said it no one else did :)

So I'm guessing aliens posted this without your knowledge? Why write it if it isn't true?

That's pretty funny, a "friend" called to let you know what was in your thread :) I know a psychologist (through uni, same school) who truly believes that all people who have tattoos and piercings are screaming out for attention and are very insecure, have to wonder how this affects her counsel to them, she already has formed an opinion of their personality before she has even met them

Compromise is not the same as someone telling you you are "not allowed" to do something to the point where he nags you over little bits of hair and you said he'd leave over it, doesn't sound petty to me. Did you read your own posts, not sure we are referring to the same thread here

Stories, your opinion on women was well documented and you have repeated it here in this thread So now your OH "not allowing" you to do something is a compromise, not what you said at the start, you even made a thread about it. Here is a tip about forums, if you post something, expect that people will reply, and sometimes you won't like what you hear.

Sorry, heathen was my version of your description of stomach turning. You have actually said women who hunt turn your stomach, and can't remember the exact wording of the way you described people who kill their own meat. It is just a very outdated view of women, so I was wondering if it was correlated with your OH saying you are not allowed to do something, which to me also seems to be an outdated concept. But have to go out now and take my tertiary educated ass down to feed the critters we are raising for the freezer

You said your husband doesn't allow you to do something, you started the thread asking for comments, don't be surprised when you get them. You used the words not allowed, this means he dictates to you, thus controlling your actions. You even said he'd leave if you didn't do what he said. Your own words.

Then why do you think that women who hunt are all rednecks, and those who chose to grown and kill their own meat are heathens? Those ideas are pretty dated. That combined with what you have posted sounds like you allow the men in your life to control you.

You come across as a 1950's style housewife, is your whole family like that, don't any women get a say?

Well he is controlling what you do with your dogs, so I'd say he is controlling.

If they ran around fast enough you couldn't count them either!

You are lucky he allows you to have dogs at all moselle

He'd leave you over that? I'm the one that has to be practical when it comes to animals, my OH would keep all 4 of these dumped kittens we have right now, so I don't have an issue with him and pets. Your OH sounds more like your dad moselle.

NSW there is no limit, and in many places you can apply to have more adult dogs so you you meet the three bitches quite easily. That farmer will just use his money to build kennels instead. He'll then be untouchable. Yes, I did forget to include the breeder who can afford kennels, but refuse to breed like that. I would never let a bitch whelp in kennels.

I know where you're coming from TA. It is such a confusing topic, so many comments are made, I honestly don't know what to think. A few posters on DOL are saying that puppy farmers are not going to be affected, only the registered breeders will be affected, I can't see why. I do recall comments made here about laws being too stringent pertaining to anyone having 3 or more breeding bitches, planning permits required, etc etc which I sympathise with BUT I don't see how puppy millers won't be affected? I would certainly hope so. The puppy farms won't be impacted upon because they either exist in locations where they are not policed and fly under the radar or they already have council approval for their massive sheds and the dogs that go along with it. The average suburban ANKC dog breeder, doesn't have rows of DA approved kennels, there's a good chance that the majority wouldn't have a block sufficient to build and have such kennels approved either. The only breeders that will survive this, are the puppy farmers, the back yard breeders and the registered breeders that are foruntate to live in acreage that has exisitng kennels and are DA approved. What the RSPCA wants, would see me wiped out. Read this Moselle. Imagine you have someone on a suburban block, they have three bitches and breed and show a small number of dogs. They have to register as a breeder. Now breeders have to follow certain guidelines which include council planning laws and have to build kennels and have dogs houses a certain distance from the neighbours etc. Some places it can't be done because blocks are too small. So they stop breeding, no choice. So we go onto breeders who live on a bigger block, same rules apply, they register as a breeder, now have to build kennels etc, they have the room, but they don't have the $15,000 or so to do so as they can only manage to cover costs at best. So they stop breeding, they have no choice. On to puppy farmers, they typically live on large blocks, so room no issue. They make good money because they don't have the costs that registered breeders do, so they make a LOT of profit. $15,000 to them can be raised quickly and kennels built, voila, they comply with the council by laws and are registered and approved by the rspca. They keep breeding because they now literally have a license to do so, and since the registered breeders are gone they make even more money because no competition. If you don't understand this I give up, and that is why I think registered dog breeders are doomed, even when it is spelled out clearly no one believes us.

Mita, you aren't saying anything new, the same posts, QLD are brilliant and no one has any complaints, well there are plenty of QLDers who are worried about what is happening. You are a good example of the head in the sand attitude, Victoria and NSW are in crisis, QLD will follow. You can support the rspca as much as you like, but the fact is what they propose will pave the way for puppy farms to thrive.

It's more of either it won't affect me or it will never happen, guess what, it is happening to those people who thought they were safe. Pretty soon the only way to prevent the rspca madness is to only buy those wind up toy dogs, unless of course the rspca bring in a law to say having them is cruel because real dogs might get scared After all, they seemed to find enough inspectors to make TV shows and prosecute little old ladies on technicalities. Maybe I should ask for those particular inspectors next time I'm told they don't have inspectors available to investigate genuine cruelty cases.

Some are, I'm not a registered breeder now and won't ever be again because of the new laws, but I still take the opportunity to educate anyone who mentions dogs and puppy farms and registered breeders. But there was so much damage done by PDE, that is all people talk about now and the rspca support that doco from what I've seen.

If the rspca wasn't trying to gain even more power and license ALL breeders it would be fine, but look outside of that ad and think about the consequences of really tight restrictions on all breeders. That is what is will kill off registered breeders, not what you said was on the website. Look at consequences and chains of actions and think about it, I've spelled it out above.

In the big picture those ads are going to do more harm than good, so I can't see it as a good thing considering we know the new laws proposed.

Don't worry, I am pretty annoyed that the canine councils are not doing anything. I don't understand why they aren't being far more proactive either. Registered breeders are being forced out of existence by making it too hard for them to continue. Hobbyists can't compete with big business, they just don't have the money.

Here's how it goes... rspca ad - puppy farms are bad, close them down puppy buyer/general public - yes, I agree how can we close them? rspca - give us more power to do so and we will puppy buyer/general public - ok, I'll support your new laws rspca gets their proposal through, which includes licensing of breeders result - large scale breeders with money upgrade, sell even more pups and now have a license to do so, registered breeders give up, can't afford to comply with new laws which can only be followed by those with money, i.e. those who make big bucks from puppies So in effect, those ads are contributing to the extinction of registered breeders and the new era of puppy super farms.

What some purebreds have is presence, and all the animals I've seen with it have been well bred. The attitude plus confirmation give it presence and that is the animal that really captures your attention for the right reasons.

What an opportunity to get it started right :rolleyes: I'd break it down into each component then gather info on each one. Find the best of each, eg temperament testing, then release protocols and vet work, foster carers and then rehoming. Shmoo has some good threads I think.

I think you are right Adrian, instead of really taking charge they want to pass the buck by just giving the rspca more power. Trouble is to the general public it looks like they are actually addressing welfare issues, and there are a lot less of us who know the truth so they aren't worried about us as a demographic. It will take a hell of a politician to actually do something because it will be enormously expensive to take back policing of animal laws.