Jaxx'sBuddy

I dont think parts of Australia do? I think some states/councils still allow unlimited dogs per house? nope most councils have a limit of 2 dogs then a permit for the third. council applications for more dogs. no idea why this is news.

and how will you judge that? I looked at it because I wanted to know why cryptorchidism made the news :D me too

if people don't like what's happened at a boarding kennel, who can they complain to apart from the kennel owners assuming the issues aren't enough to call in the rspca?

i also teach "gentle". when the pup is being calm and gentle i say the word and praise the dog. the dog then associates the word gentle with calm behaviour.

No I dont think it should happen Oakway. I dont know about the legalities of this though. I cant remember DogsQld asking the breeders if they would like this to happen. They just said it would. I cant remember DogsQld asking us about the Accredited Breeder system and letting us put forward submissions. They have just done it to appease the know it alls out there. Dracdog I dont know why I am bothering replying to you. Except to say this. You have no idea. Dont tell me what to do and how to do it when you simply DO NOT HAVE ANY IDEA. any person is entitled to an opinion

i agree but the rspca do have to sign off on the campaign so they have final say. eta snap ssm

thanks to all for the Boston Terrier information, this thread has been very informative for me

Not registering every pup in a litter is "legally" wrong. thank you i didn't know that eta they say they are not registering every litter, is this wrong even if they register every pup in every litter they register?

if the pure bred dogs aren't registered then they are not doing anything "legally" wrong. ANKC registered breeders can breed cross bred dogs as long as they do not use ANKC registered dogs. i am not sure what they have done "legally" wrong

There is a Boston Terrier Club in Qld, If you want I'll look up the number and let you know thank you for that i will have a look

to my knowledge, there are no breed clubs in australia for my breed, the Boston Terrier

my dog got pudgy and to strip the weight off her i fed raw meat and lots of grated carrot...she felt full but not with fatty food. if she got a bone, her meals were cut down to compensate. she lost the weight easily. why did she get fat.........because i am used to big dogs and i was feeding her too much now she gets a lot less per day than she used to eta and she has a lovely waist now

dog coats or jammy's

victorian law on police entering property link http://www.legalaid.vic.gov.au/1881.htm Searches of private property The police usually need a search warrant to enter and search private property – for example, your home. However, the police may go into private property without a search warrant when: * you let them in * they have a reasonable belief that a serious offence will be or has been committed and they need to go into the house to arrest someone * they need to stop a ‘breach of the peace’ – for example, a fight * there has been a breach of an intervention order (see ‘Intervention orders’, link below) * they are chasing someone who has escaped from prison or police custody * they have a warrant to arrest someone * they have a reasonable belief that illegal drugs are on the property. The police can also search your home without your knowledge if they reasonably suspect that a terrorist act will be or has been committed. See ‘Terrorism laws’ (link below).

The police may enter to issue a warrant. Plenty vs Dillon (High Court, Australia 1991) reinforced Semaynes case - as quite a few court cases over the years have. And there is a sign, which, if attached to the entry gate, legally prevents entry, citing Plenty vs Dillon case as the reason. I have forgotten exactly what it says. That information was provided to assist owners of bull breed dogs who were faced with illegal entry by council officers, not to argue about whether police could enter or not. seriously this is NOT correct. the police can enter a property without a warrant if they have sufficient reason to believe someone is in danger and (i think) if they believe a crime is being committed it is nonsense to suggest a sign would keep them out of a drug lab Seriously, Jaxxs Buddy, can you provide references for your belief? There are results of many court cases which prove what I wrote. Before you call my a liar again, you might like to do your own search? And I don't recall saying anything about a drug lab? Troy asked members to keep on topic. Where does a drug lab figure in this story? i can. i will ask my friends in the police force, in several states and federally to provide them i was on topic thank you also i did not call you a liar i said that the information you posted was not correct

indeed.

The police may enter to issue a warrant. Plenty vs Dillon (High Court, Australia 1991) reinforced Semaynes case - as quite a few court cases over the years have. And there is a sign, which, if attached to the entry gate, legally prevents entry, citing Plenty vs Dillon case as the reason. I have forgotten exactly what it says. That information was provided to assist owners of bull breed dogs who were faced with illegal entry by council officers, not to argue about whether police could enter or not. seriously this is NOT correct. the police can enter a property without a warrant if they have sufficient reason to believe someone is in danger and (i think) if they believe a crime is being committed it is nonsense to suggest a sign would keep them out of a drug lab

Funny that. Twice this month they remained outside the premises until invited in and the dogs secured. Perhaps all Policeman, and everyone else, should have the same common sense. the police will take any measures if it is a matter that is serious, obviously yours was not. i have no idea where you get your facts from

I believe this is correct. People have a legal right to access your front door. This means you are responsible if your dog bites someone who, having entered your property, is going to or coming from the front door. It was established on this very website, nearly six years ago by Jed, that a person/s can be restricted from entering your property, by having a sign clearly displaying: ACCESS DENIED. Then anyone wanting to enter your property has to take alternative steps. Trespass is a French term meaning "a path through" No trespass means no path through. Access denied means 'No! You cannot open the gate and walk up to the front door' ETA: It wouldn't hurt to have a lock on the gate as well. :rolleyes: ;) :rofl: :rofl: this is completely wrong....the police can enter ANY property if they have cause to do so.

He's only a small dog - you won't have trouble finding one. A plastic airline style crate or a small metal one would be my recommendations. If you can set it up somewhere permanently so much the better. Feed him in there and encourage him to sleep there at least some of the time. When strange dogs visit my DA dog goes into the crate. If the big younger dogs are playing, my old boy seeks it out as a refuge. Mind you, I'm one of those dog tragics who regard crates as just another kind of living room furniture. they're not??????

maybe you need one of these

looks like my plans have changed for today so i won't make it this month

i am not sure about that as each council is different. i think the Gawler/Lewiston area might be a bit different because there are lots of breeders there. i think most suburban councils have a three dog limit (2 easily with the third needing an application) i think you would need to check each council area.

north adelaide and prospect have heaps of off leash and leashed dog parks..see here http://cityofadelaide.com.au/recreation/pa...eash-areas.html and here http://www.prospect.sa.gov.au/webdata/reso...s/dog_leash.pdf

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? then it should have been put in the breeders forum, put it here and anyone can comment