YOLO

The irony is that to have any control, via the Register, or a non-breeding contract, or guardianship, the other would-be breeder must themselves be regulated by the ANKC. But if they keep pushing people away, then that won't happen.

I didn't start this thread to bash breeders. But the way in which some dictate up front that all their puppies go on the LR, just seems illogical to me. Unless I'm missing something, limited register has only two effects: It prevents the owner from showing the dog It prevents another ANKC registered breeder from registering any offspring. And that's it, so what am I missing? The prospect of getting involved in dogs shows is daunting enough, why do they want ban new owners?? In regards to breeding, as I said it only effects another registered breeder (or somebody that wants to become one) An unregistered breeder (well-meaning amateur, backyard bodgy, or puppy farmer) will breed the dog regardless. As a breeder said above, they would know any existing ANKC Breeder and would have a discussion prior to selecting a puppy, so the blanket LR policy is largely irrelevant. Afterall, is the pinching of puppies between registered breeders really a huge problem? Which leaves the issue of new or prospective Registered Breeders. Surely this is an opportunity to engage with such people? Point out the responsibilities and challenges of becoming a registered breeder, and try to educate them? What's the worst that can happen? The Upfront Mandatory "LR ONLY" stance not only fails to engage, but pushes any wannabe breeder onto the backyard-breeder path.

My personal belief is that when feeding raw, it should only ever be human food. So yes I feed mine lamb offcuts, and chicken legs.

This is one of my questions. By all accounts the breeders in question are highly regarded, ethical, breeders looking to produce the most well-rounded dogs they can in accordance with standards. They are usually heavily involved in showing and/or trialling, and in many cases have gone to great lengths to introduce better bloodlines. And yet despite this they seem to be saying that they have no confidence in their pups?? And again, the lack of logic astounds me. If I am not an ANKC Registered Breeder, then your placing the dog on the LR doesn't effect me anyway. And sure, the majority of owners may not be interested in showing their dog, but that again just means its irrelevant. If anything shouldn't you be encouraging new participants. To be honest, my interest in dog-showing comes and goes. I'm never going to be a lifelong devotee, but with a suitable dog it is something I would like to at least look into.

Yeah, come visit Perth some time. Our pounds, shelters, and rescue organisations are full to overflowing, and the problem shows no sign of abating. And fact is that, whilst not ideal, we'd happily adopt a rescue dog in the current climate, but none are remotely suitable. All the descriptions read sadly the same "can't go to a home that has other dogs, cats, animals, or children" If one were to do a quick analysis of puppies being offered to sale, between here and on gumtree, majority are from moronic backyard operators, breeding whatever mongrels they could find. IF (and it's a huge if) the new legislation could curtail this, it would be a blessing. But I suspect that this will be just more rules applied only to responsible owners, and ignored by the others.

So the WA government has passed new legislation. It will require central registration of all dogs and Breeders. So the term "Registered Breeder" (already misappropriated by rando Internet Registrations) will now mean "Registered with the Government" Sadly this will mean that a "Registered Breeder" can sell whatever misbegotten pig-dogs they want, providing they comply with the rules. Also, part of this new system, will require the tracking of unsterilised bitches and their offspring. So I'm wondering if this becomes something akin to a "mongrel pedigree"?

I have been browsing some of the Breeders' ads, doing my research. And I'm a bit puzzled by the large number that say "all my Pups on the Limited Register, so no Breeding or Showing" It makes literally no sense to me, so I'm wondering what I'm missing? Let's say something unforeseen (or even fraudulent) happens, and in a Breeder's worst nightmare, one of their Dogs or Bitches ends up at a "Puppy Mill". What exactly is the LR going to achieve? The only possible effect it has is on another ANKC Registered Breeder, who are supposed to Breed responsibly and in accordance with the rules and codes of practice. A puppy farm, backyard breeder, or even just your average dill who lets their bitch get impregnated, isn't going to be stopped by the LR. And why the prohibition on Showing? Sure, most owners won't anyway, but shouldn't they be trying to encourage more people into Showing? I also wonder at the message it's sending. If dogs started out on a "non-breeding" register, but could be upgraded by winning shows, or being judged, then I think that would be fair enough? Or even if they said "Puppies will be placed on appropriate Register after evaluation" or some such? But saying ALL your pups go on the LR almost suggests that there's an inherent problem?

Asking cos I don't really understand how this works for a Dog, lol. I understand that it is somehow based on points. Is it 100 points to become "Australian Champion" and 1,000 points for Grand Champion? So say your dog is "the best" at the moment, and you win all the shows, how many would you need to win to get 100 points? And do you actually have to go national, cos I feel that would be pretty tough for people in WA. And what if your dog is "good" say top 5, but there is always one or 2 better, so they never quite win a show... Can you still rack up the points?

Recently, driving home along a relatively busy road, my passenger observed a council worker placing a dog into a plastic bag. Obviously a sad event, and not a particularly pleasant job. That afternoon there was a post on our community facebook page about a lost dog in that vicinity. Rather than scare the owner, I rang the Wanneroo Council Rangers to enquire. So, the next distressing thing is that if enquiring about a deceased pet, one has to speak to the "Waste Disposal" department. Yeah. They confirmed that, from the microchip, the poor boy was registered to the lady in question. But said they had been "unable to contact her." So I then had to inform this poor young lady, via messenger, that her boy was gone, and that his body had already been "taken care of". Obviously I didn't mention that the Wanneroo council dumps such animals in landfill. To me, there are just so many thing wrong with this story. Some arsehole hitting a dog and leaving it to die by the side of the road Council allocating the task to "Waste Disposal" Failure of the "microchip system" Council's incompassionate handling of remains.