Puppy-mill Turned Kennel?

[Erny]

and even more disturbing, even if the politicans were unaware how an innocent like judy could be so victamised. because of their mistake in making such folly law?

They don't want to believe it, let alone know about it. To do either would mean they'd have no plausible excuse to not involve themselves in one way or another on behalf of their constituent. I spoke to my local parliamentarian about this and as soon as I informed him what had happened his response was something along the lines of "oh, they must have found some reason for taking the dogs". The inference being that he didn't believe what I was saying; that there must be more to in than what I was saying. Bottom line was that he wasn't interested.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

and even more disturbing, even if the politicans were unaware how an innocent like judy could be so victamised. because of their mistake in making such folly law?

They don't want to believe it, let alone know about it. To do either would mean they'd have no plausible excuse to not involve themselves in one way or another on behalf of their constituent. I spoke to my local parliamentarian about this and as soon as I informed him what had happened his response was something along the lines of "oh, they must have found some reason for taking the dogs". The inference being that he didn't believe what I was saying; that there must be more to in than what I was saying. Bottom line was that he wasn't interested.

that is why organisation and lobbying is vital. this has been done in much more difficult areas and changes have happened.

its about starting and keeping moving and sending the same consistent message.

we need to come up with the solutions because the pollies advisors have no idea.

[Erny]

I might get a flaming from the publishing of my thoughts on this but I hark back to the poster who put up the suggestion about breeders not breeding. I don't think I like that idea but I see what the poster is getting at.

But why are the breeders having to even contemplate such drastic actions? Why should they? They have a 'Mother Body' who I thought should be the one working to ensure its Breeder members are not going to be so adversely affected by the laws that our politicians and orgs such as the like of RSPCA support, bring in and implement. ????

Should it not be the ANKC that the Members put the pressure on to do something to help them? Without Members, the ANKC is nothing.

Edited November 2, 2010 by Erny

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

are people voted into the ankc? if they are maybe people should be asking tough questions before they vote for them

[asal]

and even more disturbing, even if the politicans were unaware how an innocent like judy could be so victamised. because of their mistake in making such folly law?

They don't want to believe it, let alone know about it. To do either would mean they'd have no plausible excuse to not involve themselves in one way or another on behalf of their constituent. I spoke to my local parliamentarian about this and as soon as I informed him what had happened his response was something along the lines of "oh, they must have found some reason for taking the dogs". The inference being that he didn't believe what I was saying; that there must be more to in than what I was saying. Bottom line was that he wasn't interested.

yes the guilty unless proven innocent. n then we cant forget the where thers smoke theres fire i suppose

if you have an animal maybe these two automaticily then come into force, have been made its a law after, all n maybe they just forgot to tell the mug joe public?

Edited November 2, 2010 by asal

[Steve]

Yes but most days it feels like we are weeing into the wind. Unless the Canine Councils back up a call for more accountability it really is looking like a done deal and over time its bound to get worse rather than better because as they feel more power its more likely that people will feel more and more like they have no way of being able to defend themselves. Everything thats going on in the anti puppy farm is directed at more power and more laws for the RSPCA.There is no point in me saying what comes next because the point is what ever comes next has to be given accountability.

Of course the added ingredient in the mix is that people really do feel that their dogs are their family almost like they were children and until recently owning a dog was a pretty simple thing to do. Lots of people have much of their lives tied up with their animals and the people they have met through them so if someone - anyone comes in takes your pets you loose your animals, your mate, your companion but it pretty much ruins your life and your reputation as well. Its not like putting a yellow slip on a car and calling it unroadworthy because we want peopel to feel these animals are their family but dont understand how taking that family from them or living in fear that someone can take that from them impacts.Even if they come to look you over and they are nice to you and they find nothing wrong the simple fact that someone thinks they could - that they are feeling powerless is enough to cause many to be extremely stressed and live in fear.This is unacceptable and its not enough to keep telling us that no one has anything to fear if they are doing the right thing because while ever this is the situation people will live in fear knowing that its a possibility.Fact is that its a possibility anyway but as Australians we should have the right to feel that there is a process in place which will allow us to protest and be heard.They should know there is a process in place which will keep them transparent and accountable.

Flippantly Hugh Wirth can say the purebred breeders are worried they will come after us ha ha ha but thats not what this is about - its about absolute power which history tells us is corruptible and we would have to be morons to believe any system is infallible - its about accountability and it really is that simple.

[Natsu chan]

I think at this stage it would take more than just the CC fighting back it's gone too far. There are alot of people in the general public do actually believe all breeding is bad now but they can't or won't make the connection that no breeding means no pets. There is also an attitude that the RSPCA is incorruptible and completely incapable of being wrong. Most people just can't understand that there is no where to go if the RSPCA do the wrong thing...if they want to they can crush you and they know it.

You only have to listen to Hugh Wirth and how smug he is to realise that when this new law goes through on the first day rangers will be down at the VIC dog office demanding the addresses of everyone who holds a prefix. To him that's exactly what it's about. I don't know what the answer is, and I'm slowly starting to think that there isn't one.

[Erny]

... when this new law goes through on the first day rangers will be down at the VIC dog office demanding the addresses of everyone who holds a prefix.

Hasn't the RSPCA already done that, around the time of the Judy Guarde debacle/exploitation??

[Steve]

The answer is to choose the subject and stick to it. Dont get caught up in examples or what if's dont sound like a bigger redneck than you have to and dont deny that some people including some registered breeders are crook and need to be bounced.

The subject is either take away the power or make them accountable. Its the one thing that all Australians regardless of what they do , how many animals they own or any thing else that makes us different to each other has to agree with and Rescue will go down under the current system just as easily as anyone.

Edited November 2, 2010 by Steve

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

I think at this stage it would take more than just the CC fighting back it's gone too far. There are alot of people in the general public do actually believe all breeding is bad now but they can't or won't make the connection that no breeding means no pets. There is also an attitude that the RSPCA is incorruptible and completely incapable of being wrong. Most people just can't understand that there is no where to go if the RSPCA do the wrong thing...if they want to they can crush you and they know it.

You only have to listen to Hugh Wirth and how smug he is to realise that when this new law goes through on the first day rangers will be down at the VIC dog office demanding the addresses of everyone who holds a prefix. To him that's exactly what it's about. I don't know what the answer is, and I'm slowly starting to think that there isn't one.

thats why i suggested lobbying (there are professional lobbyists) getting the point across to the right people (not necessarily the pollies but definitely their advisors/chief of staff's)

looking at starting a campaign with electronic and print media....and getting those media contacts on side.

almost everyone has a pet and they dont understand the issues...remember all the pollies, their families, the journo's potentially have pets...they need to understand what is in the wind...we need to get them engaged in this issue and start a public discussion

[shortstep]

I might get a flaming from the publishing of my thoughts on this but I hark back to the poster who put up the suggestion about breeders not breeding. I don't think I like that idea but I see what the poster is getting at.

But why are the breeders having to even contemplate such drastic actions? Why should they? They have a 'Mother Body' who I thought should be the one working to ensure its Breeder members are not going to be so adversely affected by the laws that our politicians and orgs such as the like of RSPCA support, bring in and implement. ????

Should it not be the ANKC that the Members put the pressure on to do something to help them? Without Members, the ANKC is nothing.

I do not like the thought either but feel something drastic needs to be done and soon. What are other options?

As far as the ANKC taking action, that would be another issue that would be addressed if breeders stopped breeding. Again the outcome is not certain. But if everyone lets their prefix laps, which you then have 5 years to reinstate, for those 5 years you are not a breeder and you are not paying prefix dues. There would also be no pups registered. All loss of funds. ANKC would have to reorganize due to the loss of funds. Now more people are affected, ribbon supplies, dog shows connected such as motels and restaurants, agility trials and so forth would all be at risk. No dog at the Royals would attract more attention provided their several ANKC booths handing out information.

It would also demonstrate clearly where the ANKC needs to reorganize. Their role needs to be much more than just keeping records and insurance providers. Anyway it is just an idea, but truly we have reached the point where something has to be done.

As far as breeders being afraid of loosing their dogs, Steve is totally right. As much as those who want to bring an end to dog ownership might unfairly paint most dog breeders as a bunch of criminal dog abusers, we love our dogs. We would do anything, including not breed, if that is what it takes to keep our dogs home and safe. We should not be held emotional hostage.

Edited November 2, 2010 by shortstep

[Steve]

I might get a flaming from the publishing of my thoughts on this but I hark back to the poster who put up the suggestion about breeders not breeding. I don't think I like that idea but I see what the poster is getting at.

But why are the breeders having to even contemplate such drastic actions? Why should they? They have a 'Mother Body' who I thought should be the one working to ensure its Breeder members are not going to be so adversely affected by the laws that our politicians and orgs such as the like of RSPCA support, bring in and implement. ????

Should it not be the ANKC that the Members put the pressure on to do something to help them? Without Members, the ANKC is nothing.

I do not like the thought either but feel something drastic needs to be done and soon. What are other options?

As far as the ANKC taking action, that would be another issue that would be addressed if breeders stopped breeding. Again the outcome is not certain. But if everyone lets their prefix laps, which you then have 5 years to reinstate, for those 5 years you are not a breeder and you are not paying prefix dues. There would also be no pups registered. All loss of funds. ANKC would have to reorganize due to the loss of funds. Now more people are affected, ribbon supplies, dog shows connected such as motels and restaurants, agility trials and so forth would all be at risk. No dog at the Royals would attract more attention provided their several ANKC booths handing out information.

It would also demonstrate clearly where the ANKC needs to reorganize. Their role needs to be much more than just keeping records and insurance providers. Anyway it is just an idea, but truly we have reached the point where something has to be done.

As far as breeders being afraid of loosing their dogs, Steve is totally right. As much as those who want to bring an end to dog ownership might unfairly paint most dog breeders as a bunch of criminal dog abusers, we love our dogs. We would do anything, including not breed, if that is what it takes to keep our dogs home and safe. We should not be held emotional hostage.

Hold that thought I may just have an idea brewing.

You may be onto something shortstep so is Jaxx's buddy - Im not giving into them.

[shortstep]

I think at this stage it would take more than just the CC fighting back it's gone too far. There are alot of people in the general public do actually believe all breeding is bad now but they can't or won't make the connection that no breeding means no pets. There is also an attitude that the RSPCA is incorruptible and completely incapable of being wrong. Most people just can't understand that there is no where to go if the RSPCA do the wrong thing...if they want to they can crush you and they know it.

You only have to listen to Hugh Wirth and how smug he is to realise that when this new law goes through on the first day rangers will be down at the VIC dog office demanding the addresses of everyone who holds a prefix. To him that's exactly what it's about. I don't know what the answer is, and I'm slowly starting to think that there isn't one.

thats why i suggested lobbying (there are professional lobbyists) getting the point across to the right people (not necessarily the pollies but definitely their advisors/chief of staff's)

looking at starting a campaign with electronic and print media....and getting those media contacts on side.

almost everyone has a pet and they dont understand the issues...remember all the pollies, their families, the journo's potentially have pets...they need to understand what is in the wind...we need to get them engaged in this issue and start a public discussion

AKC in the US has a strong and active lobby effort.

Here is just a little of what htey are working on

http://www.akc.org/news/sections/legislative_alerts.cfm

[Erny]

I might get a flaming from the publishing of my thoughts on this but I hark back to the poster who put up the suggestion about breeders not breeding. I don't think I like that idea but I see what the poster is getting at.

But why are the breeders having to even contemplate such drastic actions? Why should they? They have a 'Mother Body' who I thought should be the one working to ensure its Breeder members are not going to be so adversely affected by the laws that our politicians and orgs such as the like of RSPCA support, bring in and implement. ????

Should it not be the ANKC that the Members put the pressure on to do something to help them? Without Members, the ANKC is nothing.

I do not like the thought either but feel something drastic needs to be done and soon. What are other options?

As far as the ANKC taking action, that would be another issue that would be addressed if breeders stopped breeding. Again the outcome is not certain. But if everyone lets their prefix laps, which you then have 5 years to reinstate, for those 5 years you are not a breeder and you are not paying prefix dues. There would also be no pups registered. All loss of funds. ANKC would have to reorganize due to the loss of funds. Now more people are affected, ribbon supplies, dog shows connected such as motels and restaurants, agility trials and so forth would all be at risk. No dog at the Royals would attract more attention provided their several ANKC booths handing out information.

It would also demonstrate clearly where the ANKC needs to reorganize. Their role needs to be much more than just keeping records and insurance providers. Anyway it is just an idea, but truly we have reached the point where something has to be done.

As far as breeders being afraid of loosing their dogs, Steve is totally right. As much as those who want to bring an end to dog ownership might unfairly paint most dog breeders as a bunch of criminal dog abusers, we love our dogs. We would do anything, including not breed, if that is what it takes to keep our dogs home and safe. We should not be held emotional hostage.

That's the whole idea. The ANKC (and by natural turn, the individual State bodies) need to understand that UNLESS they look after their Members, it is itself that is in dire straights. To have the ANKC become strong in defence of its Members (and it is about time this happened - both directly and also via State Bodies) AND have the Breeders standing as the individuals they are - standing United (as should have always been - not divided by bias or any other agenda, potential or realised), then the dog world might begin to straighten out.

I'll be interested in Steve's idea that is formulating.

[oakway]

The only way you will ever get your point across is to have a news paper and T V station backing you.

The media is about the only way to save our situation.

If you have a solid media backing with the dirt they will be able to rake up you won't lose.

You have to fight fire with fire.

Edited November 2, 2010 by oakway

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

The only way you will ever get your point across is to have a news paper and T V station backing you.

The media is about the only way to save our situation.

If you have a solid media backing with the dirt they will be able to rake up you won't lose.

You have to fight fire with fire.

a well measured effective campaign will have very little dirt

[asal]

I might get a flaming from the publishing of my thoughts on this but I hark back to the poster who put up the suggestion about breeders not breeding. I don't think I like that idea but I see what the poster is getting at.

But why are the breeders having to even contemplate such drastic actions? Why should they? They have a 'Mother Body' who I thought should be the one working to ensure its Breeder members are not going to be so adversely affected by the laws that our politicians and orgs such as the like of RSPCA support, bring in and implement. ????

Should it not be the ANKC that the Members put the pressure on to do something to help them? Without Members, the ANKC is nothing.

I do not like the thought either but feel something drastic needs to be done and soon. What are other options?

As far as the ANKC taking action, that would be another issue that would be addressed if breeders stopped breeding. Again the outcome is not certain. But if everyone lets their prefix laps, which you then have 5 years to reinstate, for those 5 years you are not a breeder and you are not paying prefix dues. There would also be no pups registered. All loss of funds. ANKC would have to reorganize due to the loss of funds. Now more people are affected, ribbon supplies, dog shows connected such as motels and restaurants, agility trials and so forth would all be at risk. No dog at the Royals would attract more attention provided their several ANKC booths handing out information.

It would also demonstrate clearly where the ANKC needs to reorganize. Their role needs to be much more than just keeping records and insurance providers. Anyway it is just an idea, but truly we have reached the point where something has to be done.

As far as breeders being afraid of loosing their dogs, Steve is totally right. As much as those who want to bring an end to dog ownership might unfairly paint most dog breeders as a bunch of criminal dog abusers, we love our dogs. We would do anything, including not breed, if that is what it takes to keep our dogs home and safe. We should not be held emotional hostage.

now i see where your comming from.

hey that is do able.

imagine it.

not a pedigree dog registered for even a year.

then let em explain where all the puppies are comming from

[oakway]

The only way you will ever get your point across is to have a news paper and T V station backing you.

The media is about the only way to save our situation.

If you have a solid media backing with the dirt they will be able to rake up you won't lose.

You have to fight fire with fire.

a well measured effective campaign will have very little dirt

Things have gone to far already, the way to get headlines and peoples attention is sensationalism.

You need hard hitting impact.

[asal]

but then there is another doable havnt had any luck getting off the ground and i did think i put the idea to some pretty cluey people on the dogs nsw committee.

and that was have all members on renewal pay the extra , think its 6 or 10 dollars to become rspca members. considering the membership is a few thousand people, if they all signed proxy forms at renewal so the board has them for rscpa meetings then people who actually know animals could be voted in. ok it puts a lot of power in the hands of the cc committee members but isnt that what members expect?

representation?

imagine it. worthless out of a job and people who actually do know what they are doing on the rspca board instead of solititors and peta reps?

is that such a bad thing?

but its never got off the ground.

even encouraging members to become members in their own right and get off all our collectives and vote could have the same result.

the rspca at the moment dont have the names and addressess of every cc member.. but they will soon.

as it stands now its only cc committee members that rspca can find out and cancel their membership as they have done in the past. interesting isnt it, anyone can be a member of the rspca. except anyone they discover is a committee member of a canine council?

remember the case of whoever had been a rspca member for many years then to the rspca.s horror he was elected chairman of the nsw cc..

his member ship was immediately cancelled.

yep not only unanswerable to anyone but pretty predjuiced too

Edited November 2, 2010 by asal

[asal]

put the same idea to many in other pet and animal oriented clubs and they just dont seem to get it.

the majority of people who are members and VOTE in the rspca are tree huggers with as much clue about animals and their well being as the idiot who once told me my horse was in agony because he was sweating????

considering it was 90 deg day and he was cantering, hot n sweaty is the norm but could i tell this idiot that all horses sweat when they are hot?????????

not on your nelly

as a lady who is a pet lover, has none but pays her donations and membership yearly told me, she had a newsletter asking her to sign up all her friends and family as it had been discovered that Peta intended infiltrating and taking over.

since they dont have peta's membership list whats the odds they havent a pretty good rollup and untracable.

lol

yet are we who are the ones they are after have any representation in an organisation we legally all have the right to join and vote????????????

Edited November 2, 2010 by asal