asal

how many have heard the saying "you never stop learning till your dead" theres an awful lot of apparently still breathing dead around arnt there????

really need to go do contructive stuff like housework this is looking pretty much like the desexed champ dont it, done n dusted

YEA the genes that count are the ones with CH in front of the names, u know thats a guarantee its perfect, u know nnnnnn any puppy that has blue papers is guaranteed to become a CH toooooooooooo save us nope

SURELY NOT......................... UUUUGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH

ummm come to think of it? at least missed out on getting my face slapped i suppose

yes its a bit late, even the directors of the canine coucnils have rolled over and gone with the flow, n last i looked every single one of em were registered breeders and u would have thought they just might have done their homework, n even if they hadnt, their own vets would have told the the awful truth? most of those ive sat with at shows, treat their flossies like any good fur parent would,. my favourite memory is the tear streaked owner of her recently desexed chamion bitch, explaining why she had to be "done". the neighbours x bred got to her...... shes ruined.....can never be used for purebreeding now shes been contaminated. im sitting there wondering? "are u mad" asked, "why do u think that" to be told "how will i know which puppies she had in future that didnt throw back to the x bred? they always throw back u know" since the dog in question had not even had one litter before this disaster this was a disaster in a few counts, line lost for starters soooooo i carefuly chose my words, really i did. sooo i askes, "if your husband died and you remarried, do you really think any child you had was actually a child by your first husband?" she did the biscuit. stormed off and banned me from EVER, EVER, her gracing her doorstep. this is the mentality of some of our ho so ethical breeders. ??????????? Just what percentage i dont really want to know genetic's? only puppy farmers would talk that rubbish! best of luck, i didnt achive much besides indignant fury

gee steve your game, trying to educate the masses? dont think they are going to like being reminded fur babies arent human

yep i will never stop offering that drink. silly, u just jump em and hold em under the water till u think they swallowed enough, isnt that whats peta doing to the sheep industry, cease museling by 2010 or you cant sell the wool? doent seem to be a problem with em that unless the sheep are born bare breeched a full breeched unmulsed sheep faces being eaten alive by maggots? they didnt get the nickname maggot taxies, by accident but hey its for the GREATER GOOD. n sure one fast way to eliminate full breeched sheep from the gene pool. suffering???? what u say???? they are "sufering" for the GREATER GOOD. SO THEY CAN DIE CONTENT cant they?

AWESOME THANKS SO MUCH

Yes, it is all designed to deter people from breeding dogs. Oscars Law included. We have been branded as lunatics touting conspiracy theories, but we are not. We are thinking people who know that there will be not much other than mutts and generic brown dogs in the future, and probably riddled with inherited diseases that will all be blamed back on to those "terrible dog breeders". Politicians will run with the issue that will sell well on the telly to a believing public. Add plenty of emotion to it and voila, it is a vote winner! They are not interested in the future of good dogs. Well, they might be when they find that they can no longer buy a cocker spaniel, a corgi, or some of the breeds with lesser numbers. Then we dog breeders who still have a couple of specimens of a particular breed can go public, get a high profile person alongside, and raise funds for the endangered species ....... just like the animal libbers are doing right now for their cause. Wonder how much money they collected at the rally ...... Souff I believe Oscars Law was used by animal libbers to try and stop the breeding of ALL dogs. The pet owning public fell for it. With no thought to the fact that they were actually depriving themselves of the very dogs they thought they came to protect. If there are NO breeders of dogs where will YOU get your next dog ?. talking to the organiser of this rally for a long time, no that is not true at all! they target farms and it was about FARMS. registered breeders are not mentioned in all of this. :rolleyes: read prisoner for profit website and you will see what im talking about. prisoners for profit That may have been the original intentions but we are all aware it did not end up that way. ok so where is the evidence then, is there something in the background thats going on that most of us are not aware off???? just asking an question??? ETA: do you mean RSPCA turned it into something else, probably stating the obvious, dn't mean to sound dumb. wasnt the law about prosecuting those who debarked or tail docked supposed to to stop puppy farmers? yet its Judy Guard facing 42 charges for exhibiting? how many puppy farmers exhibit? but hey she's facing what is it? in excess of 84 years in jail? nnnnn if i recall correctly all this came about because she rehomed one of her dogs to a pet home. n the vet the new owner took it too for a check up spotted it was debarked - learned it had been shown----- n the wheels rolled into motion. so! how is this animal loving, sooooo caring vet, reward the whistle blowing pooch? did i not see a post that because said pooch didnt adore said vet on sight, get declared to be unsocalised and pay with its life being terminated?????? anyone know this doggies name? maybe its name should be the one attached to the new law so desperately needed, the appeal process that still 20 years after powers to seize were enacted, forgot the one for an avenue for appeal?? call it after this little dog and maybe in concunction with the names of some of ruth downeys cows. weird isnt it. the right of reprieve is available for a murderer, but not for our animals that fall into the control of the rspca?

Do you think that is the argument? Don't you think it matters who I let into my home and what they are looking for? btw to inspect you need guidelines right? So if you have an idea about what is an acceptable and unacceptable argument do you have an idea about how to define what a breeders home (nay facility) should look like? and what is okay and not okay to do with my dogs? ie: how I keep them, where they sleep, conditions etc? Also are the dogs inspected? see above come back with a definition for me. + what jdavis said: Would you want the person doing the inspection to belong to an organisation that already thinks you are doing the wrong thing? If it was an independent government organisation doing the inspection it wouldn't be an issue, but the RSPCA have already made their views on breeders clear. The health department sends an inspector to check your bakery you have a way to appeal their decisions. The RSPCA decided you are doing the wrong thing they take your dogs, charge you an arm and a leg, if they get their way you have to pay their kennel fees upfront, and then they injure and kill your dogs and you have no recourse. Would you want that? Imagine someone who doesn't like you has unstoppable power over you, would you give them the ammo to use? of course you would if you dont your "unethical" remember the ones who think they are so ethical are too dumb to realise, not matter how precious and ethical they (think they) are its not going to protect them . to the likes of donnelly, your scum i can remember my mum setting us kids up for our vaccinations. no way she was going to be embarrassed by her kids kicking and screaming they dont want a bloody great needle shoved into them. so what does she do? do you want to get sick? muggins says 'NO" "well this needle will stop you being sick and maybe ending up in hospital." do you want to risk ending up in hospital? muggins say "no" so will u be good and let the nice nurse/doctor give u the needle? n all her little muggins chorus "yes" so there we stand shaking in our boots, not a single one wants that jab, but we'd been primed. we all stood like lambs to the slaugher. ok still get my shots... but its in the butt. no agonised arms for me anymore. well i want the butt shot.....i want accountabality before i stand still for any more "shots" anywere, any way before any power surged mongrel enteres my home again n the only way that can be prevented is? no animals you dont have any other options as it stands now

Well it soon will not be a problem for you, the large scale breeding facilities will be inspected and any small breeders that are still around. Now if you are buying a puppy from an inspected and approved large scale breeding facility, I am not sure if you as the buyer will be able to visit the mum and pups. Play with them, temperament test the litter and have weekly updates and discussions about the pups as they grow with their breeder like you might have done in the past with a home breeders. Which BTW would have given you ample time to scrutinize how the pups and dogs were managed in the breeders home. But I am sure the staff member on duty that day at the facility will be able to answer any questions you have. You will also know that the large scale breeding facility has passed inspection and is approved to breed and sell puppies. So it seems you will have ample opportunity to get a pup from an inspected source. For the greater good. I'm not all that interested in made up hypotheticals...... I was hoping for an answer to the questions posed intersting thinking? so when was the last time Harvey Normans owner had his home inspected, Dick Smith for that matter? or do u mean if a dog owner actually wished their home not to be raided. do not keep your dogs at home? rent a shop? warehouse? industrial area? for the purpose? seems a sensible idea. so if your home is not to be expected to be " transparent, open to scrutiny and open to inspection." you dont keep any or sell anyliving organisms . ie dogs, cats or any other form of animal life? i had already come to that conclusion

ooops forgot, the other despicable crime is like to give newbies a start and let em have main registration so they can hopefully become members and contribute to the future of their chosen breed. as we now know.. ethical breeders dont do that..... only pets on limit now was told recently if i promise to never sell on main register again, n did so, that all will be forgiven... except that conversation took place before i got the warning call all bets are off again.

go back to my rock n wait to see who of the precious ends up here begging for help down the track........lol....you too will have become a witch how sad

what makes me a puppy farmer? i do not show. it is even then the new unwritten law. you must show or you are a puppy farmer. why worry about adding anything else it aint necessary surely thats enough? phil burgess didnt show, she was a puppy farmer, yet decades later the very people who pillaried her were heard boasting they had found an elfreda to add to their kennel. odd it was a good dog when they owned it but not when its breeder did?

you dont get it do u? the knight in shining armour believes i am a puppy farmer. to be destroyed at all costs AND if as u say "it could still happen" why do u need more legislation then? its already useable, to search n seize ?

you dont get it do u? the knight in shining armour believes i am a puppy farmer. to be destroyed at all costs

ok? you are asking the government to enact more and more powers for WHO to close down puppy farms? the department of agriculture? the veterinary association of australia? the relevant canine councils? the police? somehow i suspct the answer to every single one of em is a no? soooo who is going to roll over the bad guys that u have in mind unless it is the rspca already rolling when they choose too?

the relavance is the fact a perfectly healthy dog was taken, no i repeat NO AVENUE OF APPEAL FOR HIS RETURN BEFORE BEING SACRIFICED to a conviction at any cost to the dog. that was 1999. NOTHING HAS BEEN PUT IN PLACE SINCE yet you say the RSPCA do not have enough powers of seizure? in 1999 all an inspector has to do IS "FORM THE OPINION" THE DOG NEEDS URGENT VETERINARY CARE AND SIEZE IT. nothing has changed. if they could seize a perfectly healthy dog in 1999 and ignore a decades of experience vet. where is the powers they lack that need beefing up?? yet you and they are seeking MORE power in the name of "protecting" the dogs? there was no "protection" for my dog. what makes u think they need more power? they have it. they just dont use it, unless it suits them at the time. n when you say "hey this place is dreadful do something" get told they cant, they "dont have the power" well they sure did when it was a favor for a friend

What a surpise..NOT! i mean that is just stupidity, these people dont' know what they are talking about, the farm gets inspected by councillors they've all visited the premises and the dogs as far as everyone is concerned are being looked after, well cared for and they are following all legislation. so legislation and more of it will do nothing to help shut down these farms like the one i am talking about. they even invite school groups in there and the schools support them as a good puppy farm and the councillors see nothing wrong with them....there are many photos to prove this is not correct. meanwhile workers have said that all these bad things happens to the dogs behind closed doors. many have witnessed on the open day. so how is legislation going to help the poor little doggies on this farm being bred to buggery. :D n what do u think goes on behind the cosed doors of the RSPCA? no employee can say, they have to sign a non disclosure contract? why? how many of you remember seeing the headlines that live dogs were being thrown into the incinerators? only someone risking huge fines went to the press. its not only puppy farmers that need to be held accountable its the dogs of war too

a 1.2 kg blue fawn long coat chihuahua, who had the misfortune to belong to me. i was the target, the dog was the pawn. he failed his brief, he was supposed to have let them find something chargable wrong with him. because to again quote the letter. "Thank you for your letter of 30 April 2001 regarding the seizure of your dog 'stringy' by the RSPCA. this whole incident has clearly been distressing for you. However, it would seem that the appearance of you dog breeding establishment and several of you animals attracted the attention of at least one other breeder who was concerned about the reputation of the industry, the conduct of your business and the welfare of some of your dogs. the RSPCA is obliged to investigate genuine complaints regarding animal welfare and to pursue what they belive to be the most reasonable course of action given the circumstances" in other words a 'fellow breeder' wanted a conviction and automatic disqualification from the cc. the rspca did their best to comply. i had already been inspected by a committee member of the cc before the dogs of war were set loose and passed inspection. so when that didnt work the big guns were sent. that was 1999, the sender was heard only recently boasting they had not given up. the dogs of war have been set loose again. soo im waiting for em all over again. I had to write to the minister for agriculture for two years to get that reply. at NO TIME DID THE RSPCA ITSELF EVER DELCARE THE NATURE OF THE COMPLAINT that had them arrive at my door. soo you annoy the wrong person and u too will be on the hit list. how sure are u all u havnt offended someone with friends in VERY HIGH places as i ws advised by Alan Candlish when he tried to find out what the complaint had been two weeks before string was taken. I knew something serious was afoot when the inspector wouldnt even tell me what the complaint was.. u cant fix what u dont know is broke can u or are u confident your psychic?

Mal Davis believes it is this that started the machine rolling There are no words of faith that can be associated with this NSW-RSPCA inspectorate only despicable. From the President of the NSW RSPCA Andrew Wozniak’s control of that organisation, to his multi-million dollar legal feed from that organisation, by assignment of prosecution briefs (only his firms is on the preferred list) the coffers of his legal firm have swelled for over a decade, making “Smythe Wozniak Solicitors” an unaccountable money tree. A public funded organisation, this NSW-RSPCA is involved with legal hijacking of fees and expenses that include a flying Vet who charges for a private aircraft to and from court appearances. Not to mention the massive fees the legal eagles are charging. The “TRUTH RIDER” returns for the cattle Consideration must also be given to the NSW RSPCA footing the bill if, after they have bankrupted a farmer seeking legal costs is still below the memorandum of fees for Smythe Wozniak Solicitors. Without prejudice we considered a scenario based on facts. We discovered hundreds of thousands of dollars being paid from the NSW-RSPCA account in legal fees, nothing to do with the Smythe Wozniak Solicitors submitted court fees to a magistrate. Not wishing to depart from their out of pocket expenses, lavish costs, could we be seeing this original account passing to the NSW-RSPCA boardroom for payment, then the underpayment fall retrieved as original cost is taken by the NSW-RSPCA. Then “All The Presidents Men” get their money every time they strike. Maybe Mr Andrew Wozniak can backtrack 10 years of accounts paid documentation to disprove this theory. Why did the government, back in 2004, not look into the concerns of Green’s Senator Lee RHIANNON who brought to the attention of NSW state parliament, her concerns that were prevalent then as they are now, still with most of the same players? During the Downey court case there was a publication that shows court room juggling by the $4,000 a day (over 4 weeks) RSPCA Senior Council choosing to attack Ruth’s vet, suggesting she lacked experience and this was obtained in court from RSPCA Director and Vet Wright who claimed $4,500 fees and was never called.

footnote to the ruth downey case. last week both she and the writer of the Ruth Downey inquisition, were served with a defamation by the firm of solitors representing the rspca. what next? this is the document i think is what the defamation is about in naming the solicitor firm and questioning isnt there a conflict of interest? http://sosnews.org/pdf/The-Ruth-Downey-Inquisition.pdf

and the minister for agricultures response? "Stringy has now been returned and has now undergone a proper diagnostic work up, you have not been charged with any offences, and as a gesture of good will the RSPCA has removed kennel charges from your bill. I do not feel that the RSPCA has acted outside the law or unreasonably in this matter. If you conduct your business as outlined in the Cod of Practice for dog breeding establishments you will have nothing to fear from further visits from RSPCA inspectors. thank your for expressing your concerns." if seized for a normal appearance of blue gene alopecia, ignoring the dogs vet and not having even bent any of the said Code of Practice let alone broken any gets a perfectly healthy animal seized i for one will have every cause to "fear from further visits"

:D While ever people like yourself have this attitude the great divide between animal activists and good dog breeders will continue to widen. The dogs rights are paramount in the minds of good breeders. And good breeders also have rights and these rights need to be respected otherwise you will find yourself living in a world of crook breeders and the dogs will be worse off. The good breeders will be gone - in part because their rights were trashed by over enthusiastic people who have not looked at the bigger picture. A bit of balance and respect please. Souff so aussie3 where was stringy's rights?????? dissappeared a happy healthy little dog. reclaimed 13 days later stuck full of holes and two punched out n stitched back up?, torn trachea n pnemonia????? welllllll where were his rights? his vet said he was nothing wrong with him, return him......... why was a fully qualified vet ignored....why was him writing down his opinion before the dog was seized more important than his opinion the day he rang them? even more chilling, the vet was head of vic rscpa before hughly worthlesss.....so if he cant get a dog out of an rspca jail..... who can?