oakway

Hmm, not always, as you know. And I am NOT having a go at you. I would never do that. Never None of these moves to licence/inspect/regulate/harrass/torment and annoy breeders will improve the lives of registered purebred dogs one iota. Steve (another thread) There are no hard stats. Why does federal law need to be changed to outlaw pets from pet shops? the opinion I got didn't think so. I don't give a rats what people breed, as long as the pups are as healthy as they can be, and the parents are kept as they should be kept. Which is NOT in those abortions called puppy farms. OodlieDoodlies which I think are a bit of a joke, and cross breds are all good with me. Not purebreds, but not their fault, and purebreds are not always what people want. 50 years in the future, if there are any dogs remaining - the citizens of the time will be appalled that the primitive people of the 20th and 21st century were so very backward that they thought it was satisfactory to keep such a social intelligent being as a dog, which had proved time and again, his worth to man, in squalid, disgusting conditions, where he suffered terribly and didn't develop his full potential. And that governments failed to take the necessary steps to free him from this cruelty. Unfortunately there are always too many people with different agendas involved in things of this type, and the altruistic ones who want only freedom and happiness for the dogs, are bulldozed, and the dogs continue to suffer. Why do I bother? Jed your right, but as you know we will always get a rogue amongst us, but with lists like this and the good people out there we soon sort the wheat from the chaff. I also wonder why I bother to.

I use this one http://www.lottobreakers.com.au/dogsoft/

No Asal that's not quite right. :D Why this is said is....because we have people getting Prefixes that really do not care about the quality dogs only the money they make from it. Also they do not health test. They also advertise as Registered Breeders. The average pet purchaser does not know the difference. It is the way at the moment, to distinguish some breeders from others. Also if you are showing and consistently producing winning stock it goes a long way to prove that you are genuine about breeding dogs. We breed to improve our stock and showing is the only way we can prove we are trying.

: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 Exactly Souff. When will these owners learn that Ethical Registered Breeder only have the dogs best interest at heart.

Yes it's quite true. Some countries have classification days where they get the visiting judges to help classify the dogs as being pure. These are dogs that have been collected from people who just don't want the dog anymore. As long as it is a pure bred it will be used as foundation breeding stock for that country.

It's not illegal to sell an animal in a pet shop, nor is it considered (by law) to be animal cruelty to sell to an 'uninformed impulse buyer'. PP don't care about the consequences later down the track, they are not obligated to provide any form of "warranty" or to take the dog back months (or even weeks) later. If the new owners go on to negect the animal it's not the pet stores problem. Correct. That is what we are up against. The only way top this is to stop puppy sales in pet shops. If we stop pet shop sales we will go a long way into stopping the designer dog trade and puppy farms.

I have not gone through the post on this matter since yesterday. I apologise if this has already been posted. I agree with what you wrote. And from today's Herald Sun a quote from the Shadow Treasurer in Victoria "Shadow Treasurer Kim Wells joined the protesters and said a coalition government would give the RSPCA the power to inspect breeding establishments." That means you and me as well - more regulation for those who comply with current legislation and more power to the RSPCA All of people that were at the rally should hang your heads in shame. We at Oakway are still in ecstatic mode as our Ch Oakway Centre stage was the dam of the Best of Breed winner at Melbourne Royal Yesterday also to top it off a repeat mating brother was reserve challenge dog. This is also what breeding dogs is all about. I sit and wonder how long I will have left breeding my beautiful Whippets thanks to your so called efforts of last Saturday. Am I angry....too right I am.

BOB Whippet Ch Nabihah Numero Oono Res CC dog Ch Nabihah Still The One. Thats all I know.

People stayed away because we could see what was happening. Unfortunately it's not going to end up the way you think it is and we the breeders will suffer as always. edited to add If you continue down this path you will not have a breeder to purchase off.

Have you read it fully. Are we talking about the same document the 117 page document. It has no bearing on the matter what what words were said by you or others we are perceived as the same. The animal libbers don't give give a dam, we are all the same to them including you. Are you a registered breeder with your local state body. By the way you speak I doubt it. If you are I apologise. But most breeders would run a mile from what has been presented. Most of us as registered breeders smell a rat. We have been caught before and do not wish to be caught again. This has just given them, the animal libbers the opportunity they were looking for.

No one here attended the rally to deprive ethical breeders from continuing their worthy breeding programs, for dog's sake, that's where my own dogs come from!! Unfortunately, yes I'm sure some people in attendance yesterday are extreme liberationists and disagree with all animal captivity, but that was NOT the aim of the rally, nor is it the aim of 'Oscar's Law'. I, for one, think that general good health, shelter, food, etc., of pets (including breeding animals) is a given, and yes, the current laws should be enforced to make everyone comply with these aspects. But, these alone, would not shut down all large scale breeding operations, and as far as I can tell, some registered breeders run large scale operations that I would consider to be puppy farms. I think 'puppy farming' mainly relates to the size of the operation (how many dogs) and the profits involved. However, a formal definition would be very hard to create, as it also relates to individual situations, as another poster touched on quite a few pages back. For eg. If the breeder or someone on their behalf (family, etc.) is at home 24/7, then the amount of dogs who would realistically get everything they need (exercise, socialisation, affection, etc.) might be higher. However, I'm sure some breeders work full-time, have other hobbies, manage families, etc., and there would be a lower number of dogs they could 'care for'. For this reason, I think even registered breeders should be open to inspections for an 'individual assessment' of some kind, and an inspection wouldn't make them 'look bad', as everyone would be under the same microscope (similar to being randomly audited for tax purposes, it doesn't mean you've done something wrong). As for stopping puppies being sold in pet shops, I don't think you'd find anyone on this whole forum who would disagree. pip 1981, I hear and understand what you are saying. Many registered breeders can run large kennels and still give their dogs all the necessary love and care needed. Many also run smaller kennels and I wouldn't want to be owned by them if I was a dog. Some people have have greater skills than others when it comes to managing dogs. As you have said this comes down to individuals and should be judges on it's merits. We must also allow for the dog owner that is just so over the top about their dogs they become ridiculous. Again, must be judged on their merits. We ALL must remember that it is NOT a crime to breed dogs in this country and sell them. What we are really saying is that it SHOULD be a crime as to way some of them are treated, actually it is a crime, but the authorities do nothing about it. As I have said target where the Duty of Care should come in with the Local Shires and Councils. Yes in closing down puppy farms Councils may lose a bit of money, but the local rates and taxes still apply. Let's face it what the Councils lose on the swings they will make up on the merry go round in some way.

Stay away from dog parks unless you are the only one there. So sorry this has happened to you and your dog. While people frequent dog parks this going to happen. My only suggestion is to try and use an area where only one dog can run at a time. Try to get a dog park that has lots of individual runs. (We wish). Its the only way it's going to work as I see it. There is NO way you would get me to use a dog park with communal dogs running together. Just to dangerous.

Whippet or Greyhound, I think would suit exactly.

yes there are already laws to be complied with, except that it is up to the council to act on them, not anyone else. the council, who is taking the money of registering the property as a domestic animal business. the council, who has nothing to gain by stopping it. the council who probably want to encourage 'business' in their area-they have to pay rates etc. the council, who don't even have educated animal people to conduct searches and ensure that everything is up to scratch! and this change that is being advocated is actually asking to stop the sale of animals, specifically puppies here, in pet shops, but i personally don't think that is the most effective way-it just pushes them furthur underground. for goodness sakes, the rspca is not out to get you. they did not organise the rally but they attended. they did not tell their staff they must or must not attend either. i attended of my own free will and volition. i agree that as an organisation the rspca should be altered and looked at-prosecuting and investigating should never be done by the same organisation. however, even though i don't get along personally with everyone i work with, i do believe that they aren't 'after' registered breeders, believe it or not, but many of these people that you are so happy to vilify as maniacs and power hungry beasts are just humans, who work everyday with animals because they love them and are just trying to do the right thing. they are often involved in the dog world just like you or me. also do not forget that the rspca in the various states are run by different people and to a different agenda/cause or code in each state. i for one would rather try to stamp out unethical beeding of companion animals for profit. 'oscar's law' is just a means to asking for that. nothing has been decided and it will have to be discussed and examined before anything went ahead. why on earth people think that they'll be stopped ethically breeding because of the size of a whelping box is a bit beyond me. nothing has been said about that. it is more about psychological enrichment and development, ensuring an animal's optimum physical and mental wellbeing. also included in sue's (the greens MLA) speech was intensive farming of animals such as pigs and chickens-there is NO way any self-respecting animal person could be ok with that situation? to allow battery hens and pig to be locked in such small pens is simply unethical and cruel- pigs are believed to be as smart as a 5 year old, smarter than many dogs and we woudn't accept it for canines. it was also mentioned that the sale of UNREGISTERED puppies overseas-their export- will be monitored or examined. so to me, it sounds like even though the purebred organisations aren't speaking up they are being considered... the truth is that we haven't enough legsialtion or penalities for animal cruelty in victoria or australia. we have plenty of legislation saying you can or can't do this, or they can do whatever they want-such as the dangerous dog amendment, but actually protecting animals? nup. most of the US has tougher penalties, something they did because of the clear, researched link between aniaml cruelty and serious crime. did you know that victoria was the first australian colony to have an animal welfare act, the Protection of Animals Act 1881-only thrity or so years after the us and britain. historically we are slow to act. all we want now is to try and rectify that. anyhoo, i've had enough of the argument. i'm not happy having to stand side by side with ALV but if i can be the moderate voice among those calling for change that i agree with, then i will. it is true, i am not a breeder, nor do i ever want to be a breeder-but we don't want to cancel our all breeders alltogether. i'm sure elements we regard as ethical, such as health testing your stock, will be included in any legislation that, at this time, is still a fantasy anyway. hullo? theres a lady facing over 80 years jail time for showing a debarked dog (or dogs, forget which)? 42 charges for every show they attended, thats what the rspca is wasting its time on. it was not illegially debarked, it was done by the owners vet to the legislation in place where that vet is. You beat me to it asal. If the RSPCA are not out to get us...let them drop all charges against Judy Guard.

It's quite simple, the word puppy farm is an emotive one and gets people's back's up. Puppy farmers get up all our noses too but......... Define puppy farmer?????????. It's definitely not the mating of a male and female dog dog together because that's what ethical registered breeders do to give you the beautiful pet's that you have with you. What we all complain about is the way these animals are kept/treated. The lack of or non existence of care. The lack of or non existence of shelter. The lack of or non existence of sanitary conditions. I could go on and and on. The sad thing is that we are all on the one side. Then up comes a situation like this and we are all tared with the one brush. Do you think the media visual and print care about registered breeders, all they care about is sales and ratings so we again get lumped together. The animal libbers have been waiting for a chance just like this and now it's been handed to them. The good and the bad have been mixed and the registered breeders will suffer. No wonder people are sitting at their computers looking into a class action against people that deprive registered breeders of their right to breed. Most local shires and council's have rules and regulation that could shut most of these puppy farms down overnight. Why not attack those that are not doing their jobs. We as registered breeders will be their in a flash to offer help. Because of people organising rallies and protests the governing bodies are placing ever tighter regulation on their registered breeders trying to show the public that we are doing our best. Little do the governing bodies realise that this is just what the animal libbers want. More rules and more regulations that make it almost impossible to continue breeding. Then what happens, we give up, because it's all just becoming to hard. All that is being done at the moment is that WE are ALL playing right into the hands of the animal libbers and most of you can't see it. I say, how dare any of you deprive me and fellow breeders of the right to breed, just because puppy farmers upset you, they upset us to you know. I say go to the cause of the problem and make the local councils and shires do their jobs. Stopping puppies being sold in pet shops will also go a long way in eradicating puppy farmers. NO outlet NO income.

We will all go down the gurgler because of their stupidity. Many of us live in other states, and why would we attend something that we believe will harm us. We have complained about farms and complained bitterly. Their are other people also working on the puppy farm situation not only you. Don't any of you dare take a holier than thou attitude with those that work so hard to eradicate puppy farmers. Never have any registered breeders said they don't support you in your efforts over puppy farms. What we don't support is that we as breeders are being included in all and sundry. Some of you have only scratched the surface, but some of us have dug deeper. Some of us have been through things like this before and been caught and we don't intend to get caught again. We can appreciate your feelings over puppy farms and will stand firm with you as our feelings are the same. It is some of you that have no appreciation for the way registered breeders feel about us being included. And included we have been. Have a thought for us as we can end up losing out big time.... Our dogs. Most registered breeders are the least of your worries. If we go, where do you get healthy, home reared, health tested puppies from ?. I am so angry that a group of people could cause me to lose the thing that I love...breeding a better dog than the litter before. Just because you have no foresight in the matter, and can't see that this will turned around and come back to bite us all.

Self explanatory I as a breeder do not believe the propaganda that is being spread around about this rally that registered breeders will be exempt. Ray Underwood held a government letter stating Queensland would be exempt from tail docking. Look how far that got us........... The person starting the rally has already lumped us in with puppy farmers. No distinction from ethical breeders from Puppy farmers As I said the animal libbers have been looking for a way to get rid of us and now we have been handed to them on a plate. The saddest part is that some our registered breeders believe what is being said.

We all know of the person who had a government piece of paper the said they would not stop the docking of tail's in Queensland........Yeah right...... Been there done that.

Very proud Oakway! As many have said all along if you are an ethical breeder and you aren't doing anything wrong, it shouldn't affect you. I for one don't believe it. The animal libber have been looking for a way to get rid of us and NOW it's been handed to them on a platter.

this was just announced Yes we were correct, they lumped ALL BREEDERS in with the likes of puppy farmers. You have just single handedly started the demise of registered breeders. I hope you are all proud of yourselves.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!. If you don't believe me just read what's below. I have bold ed the words. Sunday Sep 19 13:59 AEST Hundreds rally against Vic puppy farms 8 mins ago Hundreds of dog owners and their four-legged friends have attended a rally in Melbourne protesting against puppy farms. Hundreds rally against Vic puppy farms Sept 19, 2010 Several hundred dog lovers and their four-legged friends gathered on the steps of Victoria's Parliament on Sunday to try to shut down puppy farms. Rally organiser Debra Tranter wants the government to introduce Oscar's Law which calls on stricter regulations for dog breeders, heavier fines for cruelty to dogs and regular RSPCA inspections of puppy farms. "Codes of Practice for breeding establishments are absolutely pathetic," Ms Tranter said. "They are not stringent enough, are not being enforced by local councils and are sentencing thousands of dogs to a life of imprisonment, most in absolutely deplorable conditions." She said many people are unaware that they are supporting puppy farms when they buy a dog at pet stores, online or in newspapers. Shadow Treasurer Kim Wells joined the protesters and said a coalition government would give the RSPCA the power to inspect breeding establishments "The Brumby government has had 11 years to fix the problem and now this industry is out of control," Mr Wells told reporters. "If you are going to run a business you have to run it within the confines of the laws and at the moment they are not tough enough." He said a coalition government would increase fines from $1000 to up to $30 000 and shut down illegal puppy farms. "These actions will make sure those rogue traders are put out of business." Miles Heffernan from the Lort Smith Lost Dogs Home says up to 11,000 dogs and 9000 cats are brought in to the animal shelter each year. Around 28 per cent of the dogs are unable to be rehomed and are put down. He said it was up to local councils to keep a check on breeders but many only acted after complaints rather than regular inspections of facilities and conditions.

I purchased the Petsafe one with p+p it cost me $100.I am extremely happy with it,I had one dog who hid as soon as I as much as threatened to use it after the first time ,other doesn't bark as she did at anything that went past. I would say no use for a neighbours dog unless it was at your fence line.I'm thinking of taking it around to them so they can see how effective it is. Is there a human one....would be handy at times Yes there are hand held and fixed units. With the fixed one you can't just go and stick it outside and expect it work. They are to a degree directional. They must be placed where the the dog barks and in the direction of the bark. Their not much use if they are fixed down the back and the dog is barking half way up the lane way.

Most use Fido's free itch. I have never seen it damage a dogs coat in all the years it has been on the market. I have seen it used weekly for years, still with no damage to the coat. It's not a cheap product but it does work. Their will always be a few exceptions to the rule but on the whole I have seen it work the best. If I am preparing a long coat for the ring it may be bathed twice weekly or more. For this type of coat preparation the dogs would be flea treated and I would wash and condition and oil the coat with best products for the type of coat the dog has.

What about the new one at Wacol.

You said you purchased off reputable working line breeder. Was the breeder a registered breeder registered with their state controlling body such as Dog's Queensland, Dogs New South Wales etc. ?.

I wean babies onto Optimum and have never had a problem with it.