Puppy-mill Turned Kennel?

[Moselle]

Every two weeks for the past four years I've driven past this huge trailer-trash looking property, and they've had a big sign {like a church sign or roadworks sign} at the gate advertising a different breed of puppy and kitten every month or sooner.

Surely that alone rings alarm bells....and rather smacks of a puppy mill?

Sure, puppy mills are legal, but it certainly doesn't hurt for the RSPCA to be aware of their existence and to keep periodic checks on the welfare of the animals kept there.

Without marching into the premises, Heavy Paws, or anyone who cares about the welfare of dogs and cats, would have no idea if animals are sufferering there or not, particularly if the premises looks a bit 'feral'...so getting the RSPCA to check is a very sensible option.

If the owner has nothing to hide and the animals are kept in good conditions, have adequate food, water, shelter, vet care and exercise...then exactly what harm is done by them being checked out?

Honestly....I wonder if some of you are just posting to start yet another argument?

You've said it well. There is no real harm in alerting the RSPCA as to the possibility that things may not be up to par. I would have personally preferred to sight the place first but even without doing so does not merit being crucified as is happening around here! Gosh, sounds to me like there are a fair few people breeding large scale and keeping their dogs penned and resenting any approaches from the RSPCA.

[ellz]

I notice that the OP hasn't had a lot to say that's for sure.

It really only seems to be Moselle that isn't "getting it" at the moment.

There really isn't that much to get.

Without evidence of mistreatment or neglect, there are no grounds to call the RSPCA.

It is not illegal to own a large number of dogs.

It is not illegal to own a large number of dogs of more than one breed.

It is not illegal to breed puppies and kittens to sell.

It is not illegal to breed more than one breed of puppy or kitten to sell.

It is not illegal to put up a sign (where council regulations permit such things) to sell anything, INCLUDING puppies and kittens.

It is not illegal to have a messy front yard. If a person has a messy front yard, this is a council matter and not an RSPCA matter.

It IS illegal to harrass people. Reporting somebody to the RSPCA on a regular basis without PROOF of neglect or mistreatment IS vexatious.

Making assumptions about what is behind a person's fences or doors is really not a clever way of making friends or influencing people.

If you really ARE concerned, then before you make the call to the RSPCA, by all means go and take a look under legitimate circumstances and make yourself aware of the PRECISE issues, not those that you think are lurking there.

You are the one that is not getting it; how many times already have I stipulated that I would have approached these breeders BEFORE making any complaints? sheesh....

Maybe once, maximum twice, in amongst all your protestations about over breeding and too many dogs. It took you what....10 pages or so before you "got" what people were up in arms about.....and to be honest, I still don't think you DO "have it".

[ellz]

Every two weeks for the past four years I've driven past this huge trailer-trash looking property, and they've had a big sign {like a church sign or roadworks sign} at the gate advertising a different breed of puppy and kitten every month or sooner.

Surely that alone rings alarm bells....and rather smacks of a puppy mill?

Sure, puppy mills are legal, but it certainly doesn't hurt for the RSPCA to be aware of their existence and to keep periodic checks on the welfare of the animals kept there.

Without marching into the premises, Heavy Paws, or anyone who cares about the welfare of dogs and cats, would have no idea if animals are sufferering there or not, particularly if the premises looks a bit 'feral'...so getting the RSPCA to check is a very sensible option.

If the owner has nothing to hide and the animals are kept in good conditions, have adequate food, water, shelter, vet care and exercise...then exactly what harm is done by them being checked out?

Honestly....I wonder if some of you are just posting to start yet another argument?

You've said it well. There is no real harm in alerting the RSPCA as to the possibility that things may not be up to par. I would have personally preferred to sight the place first but even without doing so does not merit being crucified as is happening around here! Gosh, sounds to me like there are a fair few people breeding large scale and keeping their dogs penned and resenting any approaches from the RSPCA.

I rest my case.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

i think this is a strategic discussion which is getting drowned in personal experiences and views.

this calls for strategic thinking, people must think of the whole not the bits. i want to be able to own dogs of my choice, pedigreed dogs where i can stack the odds in my favour that i will get the temperament and size that i require. i dread if the day comes when we cant have the breed of our choice and we are forced to have either no dog (PETA) or cross bred dogs (RSPCA).

i mean really, if there are no entire dogs left where do people think the puppies will come from, the older dogs will dies off then what?

if it is a bad as being portrayed then a strategy must be developed and carried out and education of breeders needs to occur.

i think in times like this the MDBA will come into its own.

[asal]

n think about it, how many dog breeders even rate a bitch by her ability to self whelp AND raise her pups herself?

so few even give that a thought so many generations of ceasered pups that a vet on the payroll is a must for so many breeds now, is that really on the ethical radar?

used to be considered important to the early breeders but then there wasnt a vet at nearly every interesction like today.

but what about those out west of the divide??? any bitch sold that direction from such breeding is facing an uncertain future unless desexed.

detest the garden knome but that was one point it raised i agree with

Assumption much asal!!!!!

Sorry, but aside from the fact that I find it incredibly difficult to read your posts due to lack of punctuation and capital letters.....a lot of what you say is absolute crap based upon your own misconceptions and pre-conceived ideas of dog breeders.

sweetie, just talk to your own vet. thats not assumptions, the rate of bitches who have never had a litter naturally is amazing and some are generations of such mums.

one breeders bitches wont even feed their pups past day 10 so they are hand fed from then, thats not assumptions. has been breeding for decades that breed. imagine a newbie starting out with a bitch pup from such lines. they will be wreaks trying to understand why the pups are hungry.

another friend out coonabarabran bred their bitch and discovered she couldnt deliver so had to drive 200 km to nearest vet. to learn 4 generations of ceasers behind her. does not look like assumptions to me anyway

DARLING, I've been breeding purebred dogs for 24 years and I know for a FACT that I don't tolerate consistently problematic lines and I do not take over from mother nature without a VERY good reason. I would also suggest that very few breeders enjoy having to spend a lot of money on sections that could be avoided. I would also hazard a guess that asking some vets may not be a good idea because some of them LOVE recommending unneccessary sections because it is a lovely source of ready revenue.

So, until you are a dog breeder and KNOW for a fact what goes on behind closed doors, you should probably just keep your assumptions to yourself because each and every time you put your fingers to your keyboard, you show yourself to be a nasty, spiteful person with a lot of opinion and very little real knowledge about certain issues.

We all KNOW you've had your issues with the RSPCA but to be honest, you are sounding more and more like that organisation and the gardener every day and that is of great concern IMO.

thanks, didnt realise it

[ellz]

Every two weeks for the past four years I've driven past this huge trailer-trash looking property, and they've had a big sign {like a church sign or roadworks sign} at the gate advertising a different breed of puppy and kitten every month or sooner.

Surely that alone rings alarm bells....and rather smacks of a puppy mill?

And the problem with this is???? Aside from the fact that most here find it MORALLY reprehensible, it does not make it illegal.

Sure, puppy mills are legal, but it certainly doesn't hurt for the RSPCA to be aware of their existence and to keep periodic checks on the welfare of the animals kept there.

Do you honestly think that if they were doing anything wrong, or are as visible as implied that the RSPCA would NOT be aware of their existence already?

Without marching into the premises, Heavy Paws, or anyone who cares about the welfare of dogs and cats, would have no idea if animals are sufferering there or not, particularly if the premises looks a bit 'feral'...so getting the RSPCA to check is a very sensible option.

ASSUMPTION again. Wasting RSPCA time on a suspicion which is not only a waste of valuable resources but could potentially cause unneccessary distress to somebody who just MIGHT be doing absolutely nothing wrong. Simply having a sign outside your property or a property that isn't maintained in the manner in which you feel is satisfactory does NOT give grounds for a complaint unless you are sure there is something to complain about. If you're THAT keen to find something to dob them in for, then why not enquire about a puppy. That at least gives you legitimate grounds to be on their premises and seeing exactly what it is that you are speculating about.

If the owner has nothing to hide and the animals are kept in good conditions, have adequate food, water, shelter, vet care and exercise...then exactly what harm is done by them being checked out?

Have any of you who say it is fine to call the RSPCA on a whim or suspicion actually have ANY idea what it feels like to have the RSPCA land on your doorstep? Particularly after a complaint from somebody who has no idea what is happening behind closed gates? Well, I can tell you now....I have and it isn't nice. Even if you have done nothing wrong (which I hadn't and have in writing), the RSPCA arrive ready to find ANYTHING that they can ping you on and I mean ANYTHING!! Aside from the stress of having them there and wondering if everything you say and do will be used against you, they invariably arrive at times which are highly inconvenient.

It's not that there is anything to hide, but from past experience, even the most legitimate person has to be on their toes and accompany the inspector around each and every animal and each and every item that is animal-related. It is a COMPLETE pain in the behind and not something that I would wish upon anybody!

Honestly....I wonder if some of you are just posting to start yet another argument?

We weren't......were you?

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

i think i have reasoned after reading lots of posts that the issue with rspca involvement is that they believe breeders/pet owners are guilty until proven innocent.

the problem with this is it is very hard to prove you HAVE done something.

being guilty until proven innocent flies in the face of how our legal system works so therefore it makes it harder to defend yourself against any allegations because the normal legal rules don't quite apply.

Edited November 2, 2010 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

gremlins

Edited November 2, 2010 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[ellz]

i think i have reasoned after reading lots of posts that the issue with rspca involvement is that they believe breeders/pet owners are guilty until proven innocent.

the problem with this is it is very hard to prove you HAVEN'T done something.

being guilty until proven innocent flies in the face of how our legal system works so therefore it makes it harder to defend yourself against any allegations because the normal legal rules don't quite apply.

Exactly!

And because there is no legal comeback against their allegations and because they are not responsible to anybody, normal check and balances to ensure fairness and staying within legal guidelines simply doesn't apply.

Basically, if the RSPCA say you've done something, unless you have a lot of money for defence and a damned good argument, you're screwed.

[Steve]

n think about it, how many dog breeders even rate a bitch by her ability to self whelp AND raise her pups herself?

so few even give that a thought so many generations of ceasered pups that a vet on the payroll is a must for so many breeds now, is that really on the ethical radar?

used to be considered important to the early breeders but then there wasnt a vet at nearly every interesction like today.

but what about those out west of the divide??? any bitch sold that direction from such breeding is facing an uncertain future unless desexed.

detest the garden knome but that was one point it raised i agree with

Assumption much asal!!!!!

Sorry, but aside from the fact that I find it incredibly difficult to read your posts due to lack of punctuation and capital letters.....a lot of what you say is absolute crap based upon your own misconceptions and pre-conceived ideas of dog breeders.

sweetie, just talk to your own vet. thats not assumptions, the rate of bitches who have never had a litter naturally is amazing and some are generations of such mums.

one breeders bitches wont even feed their pups past day 10 so they are hand fed from then, thats not assumptions. has been breeding for decades that breed. imagine a newbie starting out with a bitch pup from such lines. they will be wreaks trying to understand why the pups are hungry.

another friend out coonabarabran bred their bitch and discovered she couldnt deliver so had to drive 200 km to nearest vet. to learn 4 generations of ceasers behind her. does not look like assumptions to me anyway

DARLING, I've been breeding purebred dogs for 24 years and I know for a FACT that I don't tolerate consistently problematic lines and I do not take over from mother nature without a VERY good reason. I would also suggest that very few breeders enjoy having to spend a lot of money on sections that could be avoided. I would also hazard a guess that asking some vets may not be a good idea because some of them LOVE recommending unneccessary sections because it is a lovely source of ready revenue.

So, until you are a dog breeder and KNOW for a fact what goes on behind closed doors, you should probably just keep your assumptions to yourself because each and every time you put your fingers to your keyboard, you show yourself to be a nasty, spiteful person with a lot of opinion and very little real knowledge about certain issues.

We all KNOW you've had your issues with the RSPCA but to be honest, you are sounding more and more like that organisation and the gardener every day and that is of great concern IMO.

Ellz - Asal is a breeder and in some breeds its true that problems have been allowed to occur and not selected against.

Some breeds have definitely suffered because things like whelping issues havent been seen to be something that should be taken into account.

[ellz]

n think about it, how many dog breeders even rate a bitch by her ability to self whelp AND raise her pups herself?

so few even give that a thought so many generations of ceasered pups that a vet on the payroll is a must for so many breeds now, is that really on the ethical radar?

used to be considered important to the early breeders but then there wasnt a vet at nearly every interesction like today.

but what about those out west of the divide??? any bitch sold that direction from such breeding is facing an uncertain future unless desexed.

detest the garden knome but that was one point it raised i agree with

Assumption much asal!!!!!

Sorry, but aside from the fact that I find it incredibly difficult to read your posts due to lack of punctuation and capital letters.....a lot of what you say is absolute crap based upon your own misconceptions and pre-conceived ideas of dog breeders.

sweetie, just talk to your own vet. thats not assumptions, the rate of bitches who have never had a litter naturally is amazing and some are generations of such mums.

one breeders bitches wont even feed their pups past day 10 so they are hand fed from then, thats not assumptions. has been breeding for decades that breed. imagine a newbie starting out with a bitch pup from such lines. they will be wreaks trying to understand why the pups are hungry.

another friend out coonabarabran bred their bitch and discovered she couldnt deliver so had to drive 200 km to nearest vet. to learn 4 generations of ceasers behind her. does not look like assumptions to me anyway

DARLING, I've been breeding purebred dogs for 24 years and I know for a FACT that I don't tolerate consistently problematic lines and I do not take over from mother nature without a VERY good reason. I would also suggest that very few breeders enjoy having to spend a lot of money on sections that could be avoided. I would also hazard a guess that asking some vets may not be a good idea because some of them LOVE recommending unneccessary sections because it is a lovely source of ready revenue.

So, until you are a dog breeder and KNOW for a fact what goes on behind closed doors, you should probably just keep your assumptions to yourself because each and every time you put your fingers to your keyboard, you show yourself to be a nasty, spiteful person with a lot of opinion and very little real knowledge about certain issues.

We all KNOW you've had your issues with the RSPCA but to be honest, you are sounding more and more like that organisation and the gardener every day and that is of great concern IMO.

Ellz - Asal is a breeder and in some breeds its true that problems have been allowed to occur and not selected against.

Some breeds have definitely suffered because things like whelping issues havent been seen to be something that should be taken into account.

But that is NOT the case with ALL breeds and ALL breeders as asal is saying Steve. I'll bet all of us can name at least one breed or breeder who doesn't give a toss, but that is not ALL breeders...you only need to read through many of the caesarian threads in the breeders forum..... And I stand by what I have said about vets as well. Many rub their hands together with glee at the possibility of performing a section, particularly an after hours one.

I'm sorry if it offends people, but asal seems to me to be a very bitter person with an axe to grind against dog breeders and if she is one herself, then that is even more scary.

[oakway]

OK, OK, for all you people out there that think it is wrong to breed for money.

Have I got news for you.

If you think it's wrong to breed for money go tell the farmer that supplies the meat you eat that it is wrong of them to do so.

All farmers of any consumable foods that it is wrong.

As far as I am aware nobody eats the dogs I sell.

What is wrong in breeding any animal and asking to be paid a fair price for it.

Breeders do a lot to fuel the economy, just think about it.

Veterinary fees,

Food bills

Petrol

Car purchases,

The myriad of dog associated paraphernalia

Registration fees,

Registration fees for Kennel Club

This list could go on and on.

Take all breeders out of the equation and where would you be.

We as breeders give a lot to wards the economy of the country even down to the over night accommodation that we may require to go to dog shows to prove that what we are breeding is good enough to win anywhere.

[ellz]

I'd love to make a profit out of breeding.

But these days, I'm hard pressed to satisfy RSPCA requirements for suitable housing for my dogs. They actually don't approve of breeding dogs sleeping on beds or couches, they prefer kennel runs of specific size....odd as it may seem. I'm sure my dogs would rather sleep on my bed or on the couch rather than on a trampoline bed in a pen somewhere....not that they have been consulted mind you.

So, whilst I only have one pen and one converted bay in a machinery shed, I'm limited in the numbers that I can keep. So therefore, I'm limited in what I breed and sell and bang goes my chance of a profit!

I've had my say, so unless somebody says something that stirs me from my stupour, I'll pack up my fife and soapbox and leave the floor to somebody else.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

OK, OK, for all you people out there that think it is wrong to breed for money.

Have I got news for you.

If you think it's wrong to breed for money go tell the farmer that supplies the meat you eat that it is wrong of them to do so.

All farmers of any consumable foods that it is wrong.

As far as I am aware nobody eats the dogs I sell.

What is wrong in breeding any animal and asking to be paid a fair price for it.

Breeders do a lot to fuel the economy, just think about it.

Veterinary fees,

Food bills

Petrol

Car purchases,

The myriad of dog associated paraphernalia

Registration fees,

Registration fees for Kennel Club

This list could go on and on.

Take all breeders out of the equation and where would you be.

We as breeders give a lot to wards the economy of the country even down to the over night accommodation that we may require to go to dog shows to prove that what we are breeding is good enough to win anywhere.

yes this is exactly my point. i dont want to be forced to be a vegetarian because some group reckons it bad to breed animals for meat (or profit)

people really need to think of the long term consequences of some of the arguments put forward on this forum.

Edited November 2, 2010 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[shortstep]

ANKC breeders are just a tiny drop in the huge bucket of dog breeders.

But they will be the only ones that are identifiable and being inspected by the RSPCA. (with the exception a some known puppy farms).

Personally I think all ANKC breeders across the country should stop breeding, in protest.

The RSPCA would then have no ANKC breeders to inspect. The public upon finding your web site or listing on DOL or contacting you from word of mouth, will learn that you (and all the ANKC breeders) have stopped breeding in protest. No ANKC puppies of any breed are for sale in Australia and it is clear why. It really is no problem for ANKC breeders to stop, at least for 4-5 years.

All the horror stories then posted on DOL every day about poorly bred dogs, bad breeders, people who buy sick pups would have nothing to do with ANKC breeders.

But it would beg the question, why is this still happening, where is the RSPCA and their inspectors?

The over 1 million pups still being born each year (in real puppy farms, by real uneducated and often real uncaring BYB and also those being sold in pet shops) will still be there. The responsibility for finding and inspecting these breeders and the blame for their continued existence will lay directly at the RSPCA feet.

Sometimes I think people need to get what they wish for.

[oakway]

ANKC breeders are just a tiny drop in the huge bucket of dog breeders.

But they will be the only ones that are identifiable and being inspected by the RSPCA. (with the exception a some known puppy farms).

Personally I think all ANKC breeders across the country should stop breeding, in protest.

The RSPCA would then have no ANKC breeders to inspect. The public upon finding your web site or listing on DOL or contacting you from word of mouth, will learn that you (and all the ANKC breeders) have stopped breeding in protest. No ANKC puppies of any breed are for sale in Australia and it is clear why. It really is no problem for ANKC breeders to stop, at least for 4-5 years.

All the horror stories then posted on DOL every day about poorly bred dogs, bad breeders, people who buy sick pups would have nothing to do with ANKC breeders.

But it would beg the question, why is this still happening, where is the RSPCA and their inspectors?

The over 1 million pups still being born each year (in real puppy farms, by real uneducated and often real uncaring BYB and also those being sold in pet shops) will still be there. The responsibility for finding and inspecting these breeders and the blame for their continued existence will lay directly at the RSPCA feet.

Sometimes I think people need to get what they wish for.

Quite right shortstep...... people............be careful what you wish for...........

[Steve]

Most of us who didnt live it would be aware of the fact that pre ombudsman and pre anti corruption legislation some pretty crook things went on. If a cop comes to my door now my apprehension at opening the door to him is different to that my Dad felt if a cop came to his door.

There are things now which are designed to enable ordinary people to report incidences and behaviour which may be corrupt to various places and feel that the people they are complaining about or the treatment they have recieved or the behaviour they have witnessed is un just or corrupt.

No doubt about it there will still be incidences when a cop colludes,loads the witness, plants false evidence,falsifies notebook and occurance pad entries,takes a bribe or protection money, shouts a magistrate a beer etc and there is also no doubt that many people who go through the system feel they dont have a voice and that justice is blind BUT I promise you that peopel at least feel now they have someone other than the people who are policing them to go to to have their complaints heard and the entire police culture has changed and its more difficult for a rotten cop to get away with that for as long as they used to.

When you have one private agency who is not accountable to any outside independent commission against corruption, or ombudsman which has police powers of a special warranted constable but is not restricted in some of the things a cop is - such as collusion etc and the entire process and system allows even the possibility that there may be something crook without checks to ensure its not surely to God people can see the potential.

When someone can enter your property,take your animals saying what they like without the ability for you to have a witness, a second opinion, where they have their own "expert witnesses" their own vets , their own prosecutors the ability to bump your dogs off "they were suffering too much to let them live" yet they can keep a burned cat alive and suffering for 12 months of burns recovery without it being considered suffering too much - cremate the evidence without you or your vet being consulted or an independent being able to give an opinion - where even consulting with your own vet is considered a potential conflict of interest all in the name of enforcing the laws including seizing your animals, not telling you where they are being taken or for how long putting them under a general and maybe returning them to you BECAUSE YOU TOOK THEM TO A DOG SHOW - even if there is never ever ever ever anyone who exaggerates a little or who gets it wrong even once there is still no way for the owners to feel they can do what they can if a cop busts them using undue force etc.

So until there is an independent method of checks being able to be kept on the system Im not backing it. That would be the case whether it was animal related issues or any other.

I live in Australia and I believe that every person who lives here should be able to feel they have someone to complain to if they feel they have been treated unfairly which doesnt include the courts and I believe that everyone has the right to be treated as innocent until provenm other wise. that the onus is onthe accuser to prove guilt not the accused to prove innocence.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Most of us who didnt live it would be aware of the fact that pre ombudsman and pre anti corruption legislation some pretty crook things went on. If a cop comes to my door now my apprehension at opening the door to him is different to that my Dad felt if a cop came to his door.

There are things now which are designed to enable ordinary people to report incidences and behaviour which may be corrupt to various places and feel that the people they are complaining about or the treatment they have recieved or the behaviour they have witnessed is un just or corrupt.

No doubt about it there will still be incidences when a cop colludes,loads the witness, plants false evidence,falsifies notebook and occurance pad entries,takes a bribe or protection money, shouts a magistrate a beer etc and there is also no doubt that many people who go through the system feel they dont have a voice and that justice is blind BUT I promise you that peopel at least feel now they have someone other than the people who are policing them to go to to have their complaints heard and the entire police culture has changed and its more difficult for a rotten cop to get away with that for as long as they used to.

When you have one private agency who is not accountable to any outside independent commission against corruption, or ombudsman which has police powers of a special warranted constable but is not restricted in some of the things a cop is - such as collusion etc and the entire process and system allows even the possibility that there may be something crook without checks to ensure its not surely to God people can see the potential.

When someone can enter your property,take your animals saying what they like without the ability for you to have a witness, a second opinion, where they have their own "expert witnesses" their own vets , their own prosecutors the ability to bump your dogs off "they were suffering too much to let them live" yet they can keep a burned cat alive and suffering for 12 months of burns recovery without it being considered suffering too much - cremate the evidence without you or your vet being consulted or an independent being able to give an opinion - where even consulting with your own vet is considered a potential conflict of interest all in the name of enforcing the laws including seizing your animals, not telling you where they are being taken or for how long putting them under a general and maybe returning them to you BECAUSE YOU TOOK THEM TO A DOG SHOW - even if there is never ever ever ever anyone who exaggerates a little or who gets it wrong even once there is still no way for the owners to feel they can do what they can if a cop busts them using undue force etc.

So until there is an independent method of checks being able to be kept on the system Im not backing it. That would be the case whether it was animal related issues or any other.

I live in Australia and I believe that every person who lives here should be able to feel they have someone to complain to if they feel they have been treated unfairly which doesnt include the courts and I believe that everyone has the right to be treated as innocent until provenm other wise. that the onus is onthe accuser to prove guilt not the accused to prove innocence.

exactly. steve it is very scary what os going on.

is the mdba trying to influence the system?

[asal]

OK, OK, for all you people out there that think it is wrong to breed for money.

Have I got news for you.

If you think it's wrong to breed for money go tell the farmer that supplies the meat you eat that it is wrong of them to do so.

All farmers of any consumable foods that it is wrong.

As far as I am aware nobody eats the dogs I sell.

What is wrong in breeding any animal and asking to be paid a fair price for it.

Breeders do a lot to fuel the economy, just think about it.

Veterinary fees,

Food bills

Petrol

Car purchases,

The myriad of dog associated paraphernalia

Registration fees,

Registration fees for Kennel Club

This list could go on and on.

Take all breeders out of the equation and where would you be.

We as breeders give a lot to wards the economy of the country even down to the over night accommodation that we may require to go to dog shows to prove that what we are breeding is good enough to win anywhere.

yes this is exactly my point. i dont want to be forced to be a vegetarian because some group reckons it bad to breed animals for meat (or profit)

people really need to think of the long term consequences of some of the arguments put forward on this forum.

AND THAT is the whole problem. they dont.

as for ellez saying i was tarring ALL breeders? i said no such thing, i did say there are those who do and they tend to be the leaders of those who have been pushing the get rid of backyarders n unethical's without realising where making that into hate n now as it has become legislation is going to roll over ALL.

[asal]

Most of us who didnt live it would be aware of the fact that pre ombudsman and pre anti corruption legislation some pretty crook things went on. If a cop comes to my door now my apprehension at opening the door to him is different to that my Dad felt if a cop came to his door.

There are things now which are designed to enable ordinary people to report incidences and behaviour which may be corrupt to various places and feel that the people they are complaining about or the treatment they have recieved or the behaviour they have witnessed is un just or corrupt.

No doubt about it there will still be incidences when a cop colludes,loads the witness, plants false evidence,falsifies notebook and occurance pad entries,takes a bribe or protection money, shouts a magistrate a beer etc and there is also no doubt that many people who go through the system feel they dont have a voice and that justice is blind BUT I promise you that peopel at least feel now they have someone other than the people who are policing them to go to to have their complaints heard and the entire police culture has changed and its more difficult for a rotten cop to get away with that for as long as they used to.

When you have one private agency who is not accountable to any outside independent commission against corruption, or ombudsman which has police powers of a special warranted constable but is not restricted in some of the things a cop is - such as collusion etc and the entire process and system allows even the possibility that there may be something crook without checks to ensure its not surely to God people can see the potential.

When someone can enter your property,take your animals saying what they like without the ability for you to have a witness, a second opinion, where they have their own "expert witnesses" their own vets , their own prosecutors the ability to bump your dogs off "they were suffering too much to let them live" yet they can keep a burned cat alive and suffering for 12 months of burns recovery without it being considered suffering too much - cremate the evidence without you or your vet being consulted or an independent being able to give an opinion - where even consulting with your own vet is considered a potential conflict of interest all in the name of enforcing the laws including seizing your animals, not telling you where they are being taken or for how long putting them under a general and maybe returning them to you BECAUSE YOU TOOK THEM TO A DOG SHOW - even if there is never ever ever ever anyone who exaggerates a little or who gets it wrong even once there is still no way for the owners to feel they can do what they can if a cop busts them using undue force etc.

So until there is an independent method of checks being able to be kept on the system Im not backing it. That would be the case whether it was animal related issues or any other.

I live in Australia and I believe that every person who lives here should be able to feel they have someone to complain to if they feel they have been treated unfairly which doesnt include the courts and I believe that everyone has the right to be treated as innocent until provenm other wise. that the onus is onthe accuser to prove guilt not the accused to prove innocence.

HERE HERE.

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?

WHY havent they revoked it?

why havnt they intervened and thown it out of court?

how can anyone justify that vet who put judy's rehomed dog down "because it wasnt properly socialised?"

gee whizz folks that dog was a show dog, its breed standard is "aloof of strangers" or words to that effect.

frankly id rather be seeing the vet in court for "wrongfull destruction of a perfectly healthy animal"

Edited November 2, 2010 by asal