So Whats The Answer ?

[Shmurps]

I cannot support the of selling puppies and kittens in pet shops, never have and never will.

It was only today when I was speaking with a lady who bought to poodle crosses from a pet store.

She bought them because she felt sorry for them. They are male siblings, they were covered in fleas and full of worms.

They are 16 weeks old and and showing signs of odd behavior. They are constantly liking each others private parts.

They were sold once and returned.

[Jed]

Spikes Puppy

Maybe. But I'd rather see the pure breeds in pet stores- at the very least they will be more predictable and theoretically less people will make the wrong choice.

If the purebreds in pet shops came from dodgy beginnings, (including dodgy registered breeders) and most of them do - there is every possiblity that they could have health and behavioural issues, which would then be blamed on the entire breed, not the source.

But of course, they do now, and the public does think that

*sigh*

[SpikesPuppy]

Spikes Puppy

Maybe. But I'd rather see the pure breeds in pet stores- at the very least they will be more predictable and theoretically less people will make the wrong choice.

If the purebreds in pet shops came from dodgy beginnings, (including dodgy registered breeders) and most of them do - there is every possiblity that they could have health and behavioural issues, which would then be blamed on the entire breed, not the source.

But of course, they do now, and the public does think that

*sigh*

Indeed.

Maybe if pet shops weren't so dodgy? Going back to the possibility of having all pet stores and staff licensed to Sell pets (licensed restaurant, childcare centers etc), and any staff member selling a live animal must have a minimum qualification??

As I said, I don't think that banning animals in stores is the right thing to do, but I do believe it can be regulated in a way that makes it better for the animals and their future owners. Of coursethat offers no certainty but it would mean someone they would answer to if they did the wrong thing. Such a system would increase the cost of running a pet store that sold livestock, which would in turn hopefully deter people from opening a new store, or it would encourage people to open a store that only sells non live products (no live animal fees, no need for trained staff etc).

Push the live animal stores out slowly, don't attack all guns blazing.

[Steve]

Government can ban the sale of pups from pet shops.

steve

So far we have been told that they source their puppies from puppy farms - they say they dont and Im not seeing any evidence to prove they are - Keeping in mind the definition of a puppy farm is someone who breeds dogs in sub standard conditions - though based on history and human nature I have no doubt that some do. Buying sick puny puppies is not good for business anyway.

Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

First - We need information on how much a pet shop makes out of a puppy sale - if its just the puppy we are looking at. Not what the buyer also buys to go with the puppy.

3 times purchase price for shops in busy shopping centres. 2 times purchase price in smaller centres. Small independent stores double the purchase price. If the pup has been there too long, price will reduce. Sllight difference between pure and x bred dogs, but that is the rule of thumb

Don't believe me? ir's easy to find out. Same way you would find out what any store pays for anything. You will find I am correct.

None of this is important, if RSPCA continues to push to ban puppy farms, the gov MAY ban the sale of pups from pet shops. Only way to do it. Without pet shops, half or more than half of puppy farms trade would disappear and if they were unprofitable, they would close. They are businesses, NOT dog lovers

Nothing will happen because the government will not grasp the nettle and ban the sales of pups in pet shops. Neither will the RSPCA push for it.

Are you saying that the only way pet shops can source their puppies is by buying from someone who keeps their dogs in substandard conditions? The RSPCA is not pushing to ban commercial breeders more than they are any other breeder. Law changes which have been promised to curb people breeding in sub standard conditions dont mention pet shops. Government can do anything but in this country before they do they will need to consider federal laws and facts and not emotive animal rights led propoganda which is so easy to refute.Way before they ban them they will introduce more laws to regulate them and take away the element of anonymity of the breeder in my opinion.

Either way other people can carry on if they like about more laws and chant "ban the sales of pets in pet shops" but Im not backing any law changes and Im looking for

alternatives for the purposes of this discussion.

In response to the piece I have bolded (above). That is not what I said, please re-read my post.

Headlines - all over Australia. RSPCA & Biosecurity Qld raid Kingaroy puppy farm - two hundred and something dogs seized. People on this forum fostered some of the dogs.

Ruth Schloss was a supplier to pet shops. Whether you consider this operation "substandard conditions" is your call.

I'm not chanting anything. My belief is that the sale of pups from pet shops should be banned for a whole lot of reasons which have already been discussed in this thread.. You asked for information, I gave it to you.

I have re read your post several times and I wasnt quite sure what you meant so I asked and as instructed I have re read your post again and I am still unsure of what you meant - you said Quote Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

Given that the agreed definition of a puppy farmer is someone who breeds their puppies in substandard conditions it still reads to me that you are saying that the only way pet shops can keep a constant supply of puppies is to purchase puppies from those who are puppy farmers or people who keep their dogs in sub standard conditions. If we are each using a different definition of what a puppy farm is then the whole meaning of the post will be changed for me and many who have read what you have written and why I asked the question.

[AmandaJ]

Government can ban the sale of pups from pet shops.

steve

So far we have been told that they source their puppies from puppy farms - they say they dont and Im not seeing any evidence to prove they are - Keeping in mind the definition of a puppy farm is someone who breeds dogs in sub standard conditions - though based on history and human nature I have no doubt that some do. Buying sick puny puppies is not good for business anyway.

Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

First - We need information on how much a pet shop makes out of a puppy sale - if its just the puppy we are looking at. Not what the buyer also buys to go with the puppy.

3 times purchase price for shops in busy shopping centres. 2 times purchase price in smaller centres. Small independent stores double the purchase price. If the pup has been there too long, price will reduce. Sllight difference between pure and x bred dogs, but that is the rule of thumb

Don't believe me? ir's easy to find out. Same way you would find out what any store pays for anything. You will find I am correct.

None of this is important, if RSPCA continues to push to ban puppy farms, the gov MAY ban the sale of pups from pet shops. Only way to do it. Without pet shops, half or more than half of puppy farms trade would disappear and if they were unprofitable, they would close. They are businesses, NOT dog lovers

Nothing will happen because the government will not grasp the nettle and ban the sales of pups in pet shops. Neither will the RSPCA push for it.

Are you saying that the only way pet shops can source their puppies is by buying from someone who keeps their dogs in substandard conditions? The RSPCA is not pushing to ban commercial breeders more than they are any other breeder. Law changes which have been promised to curb people breeding in sub standard conditions dont mention pet shops. Government can do anything but in this country before they do they will need to consider federal laws and facts and not emotive animal rights led propoganda which is so easy to refute.Way before they ban them they will introduce more laws to regulate them and take away the element of anonymity of the breeder in my opinion.

Either way other people can carry on if they like about more laws and chant "ban the sales of pets in pet shops" but Im not backing any law changes and Im looking for

alternatives for the purposes of this discussion.

In response to the piece I have bolded (above). That is not what I said, please re-read my post.

Headlines - all over Australia. RSPCA & Biosecurity Qld raid Kingaroy puppy farm - two hundred and something dogs seized. People on this forum fostered some of the dogs.

Ruth Schloss was a supplier to pet shops. Whether you consider this operation "substandard conditions" is your call.

I'm not chanting anything. My belief is that the sale of pups from pet shops should be banned for a whole lot of reasons which have already been discussed in this thread.. You asked for information, I gave it to you.

I have re read your post several times and I wasnt quite sure what you meant so I asked and as instructed I have re read your post again and I am still unsure of what you meant - you said Quote Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

Given that the agreed definition of a puppy farmer is someone who breeds their puppies in substandard conditions it still reads to me that you are saying that the only way pet shops can keep a constant supply of puppies is to purchase puppies from those who are puppy farmers or people who keep their dogs in sub standard conditions. If we are each using a different definition of what a puppy farm is then the whole meaning of the post will be changed for me and many who have read what you have written and why I asked the question.

"Steve" - you know me and I am by far the last person to support any type of mass production of pet animals - however - you really need to distinguish between large breeding facilities which abide by all codes of ethics and mass produced puppies for profit - there is a difference - I have yet to see a facility of good care - however - you do need to be able to verbalize the distinguishing features to the public...if you continue to only criticize large facilities you will only alienate those facilities further when the aim is to educate and improve. Provide a descriptive form which shows the difference between large sentient animal care housing and sub standard care which equates as opposed to puppy farms. Sorry - terminology needs to be addressed..

[Steve]

Government can ban the sale of pups from pet shops.

steve

So far we have been told that they source their puppies from puppy farms - they say they dont and Im not seeing any evidence to prove they are - Keeping in mind the definition of a puppy farm is someone who breeds dogs in sub standard conditions - though based on history and human nature I have no doubt that some do. Buying sick puny puppies is not good for business anyway.

Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

First - We need information on how much a pet shop makes out of a puppy sale - if its just the puppy we are looking at. Not what the buyer also buys to go with the puppy.

3 times purchase price for shops in busy shopping centres. 2 times purchase price in smaller centres. Small independent stores double the purchase price. If the pup has been there too long, price will reduce. Sllight difference between pure and x bred dogs, but that is the rule of thumb

Don't believe me? ir's easy to find out. Same way you would find out what any store pays for anything. You will find I am correct.

None of this is important, if RSPCA continues to push to ban puppy farms, the gov MAY ban the sale of pups from pet shops. Only way to do it. Without pet shops, half or more than half of puppy farms trade would disappear and if they were unprofitable, they would close. They are businesses, NOT dog lovers

Nothing will happen because the government will not grasp the nettle and ban the sales of pups in pet shops. Neither will the RSPCA push for it.

Are you saying that the only way pet shops can source their puppies is by buying from someone who keeps their dogs in substandard conditions? The RSPCA is not pushing to ban commercial breeders more than they are any other breeder. Law changes which have been promised to curb people breeding in sub standard conditions dont mention pet shops. Government can do anything but in this country before they do they will need to consider federal laws and facts and not emotive animal rights led propoganda which is so easy to refute.Way before they ban them they will introduce more laws to regulate them and take away the element of anonymity of the breeder in my opinion.

Either way other people can carry on if they like about more laws and chant "ban the sales of pets in pet shops" but Im not backing any law changes and Im looking for

alternatives for the purposes of this discussion.

In response to the piece I have bolded (above). That is not what I said, please re-read my post.

Headlines - all over Australia. RSPCA & Biosecurity Qld raid Kingaroy puppy farm - two hundred and something dogs seized. People on this forum fostered some of the dogs.

Ruth Schloss was a supplier to pet shops. Whether you consider this operation "substandard conditions" is your call.

I'm not chanting anything. My belief is that the sale of pups from pet shops should be banned for a whole lot of reasons which have already been discussed in this thread.. You asked for information, I gave it to you.

I have re read your post several times and I wasnt quite sure what you meant so I asked and as instructed I have re read your post again and I am still unsure of what you meant - you said Quote Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

Given that the agreed definition of a puppy farmer is someone who breeds their puppies in substandard conditions it still reads to me that you are saying that the only way pet shops can keep a constant supply of puppies is to purchase puppies from those who are puppy farmers or people who keep their dogs in sub standard conditions. If we are each using a different definition of what a puppy farm is then the whole meaning of the post will be changed for me and many who have read what you have written and why I asked the question.

"Steve" - you know me and I am by far the last person to support any type of mass production of pet animals - however - you really need to distinguish between large breeding facilities which abide by all codes of ethics and mass produced puppies for profit - there is a difference - I have yet to see a facility of good care - however - you do need to be able to verbalize the distinguishing features to the public...if you continue to only criticize large facilities you will only alienate those facilities further when the aim is to educate and improve. Provide a descriptive form which shows the difference between large sentient animal care housing and sub standard care which equates as opposed to puppy farms. Sorry - terminology needs to be addressed..

Yes that's what I said.

[Jed]

Government can ban the sale of pups from pet shops.

steve

So far we have been told that they source their puppies from puppy farms - they say they dont and Im not seeing any evidence to prove they are - Keeping in mind the definition of a puppy farm is someone who breeds dogs in sub standard conditions - though based on history and human nature I have no doubt that some do. Buying sick puny puppies is not good for business anyway.

Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

First - We need information on how much a pet shop makes out of a puppy sale - if its just the puppy we are looking at. Not what the buyer also buys to go with the puppy.

3 times purchase price for shops in busy shopping centres. 2 times purchase price in smaller centres. Small independent stores double the purchase price. If the pup has been there too long, price will reduce. Sllight difference between pure and x bred dogs, but that is the rule of thumb

Don't believe me? ir's easy to find out. Same way you would find out what any store pays for anything. You will find I am correct.

None of this is important, if RSPCA continues to push to ban puppy farms, the gov MAY ban the sale of pups from pet shops. Only way to do it. Without pet shops, half or more than half of puppy farms trade would disappear and if they were unprofitable, they would close. They are businesses, NOT dog lovers

Nothing will happen because the government will not grasp the nettle and ban the sales of pups in pet shops. Neither will the RSPCA push for it.

Are you saying that the only way pet shops can source their puppies is by buying from someone who keeps their dogs in substandard conditions? The RSPCA is not pushing to ban commercial breeders more than they are any other breeder. Law changes which have been promised to curb people breeding in sub standard conditions dont mention pet shops. Government can do anything but in this country before they do they will need to consider federal laws and facts and not emotive animal rights led propoganda which is so easy to refute.Way before they ban them they will introduce more laws to regulate them and take away the element of anonymity of the breeder in my opinion.

Either way other people can carry on if they like about more laws and chant "ban the sales of pets in pet shops" but Im not backing any law changes and Im looking for

alternatives for the purposes of this discussion.

In response to the piece I have bolded (above). That is not what I said, please re-read my post.

Headlines - all over Australia. RSPCA & Biosecurity Qld raid Kingaroy puppy farm - two hundred and something dogs seized. People on this forum fostered some of the dogs.

Ruth Schloss was a supplier to pet shops. Whether you consider this operation "substandard conditions" is your call.

I'm not chanting anything. My belief is that the sale of pups from pet shops should be banned for a whole lot of reasons which have already been discussed in this thread.. You asked for information, I gave it to you.

[/b]Given that the agreed definition of a puppy farmer is someone who breeds their puppies in substandard conditions it still reads to me that you are saying that the only way pet shops can keep a constant supply of puppies is to purchase puppies from those who are puppy farmers or people who keep their dogs in sub standard conditions. If we are each using a different definition of what a puppy farm is then the whole meaning of the post will be changed for me and many who have read what you have written and why I asked the question.

I have re read your post several times and I wasnt quite sure what you meant so I asked and as instructed I have re read your post again and I am still unsure of what you meant - you said Quote Large shops source from puppy farms. That is the only way they can keep an constant supply of pups.

My definition of a puppy farm is an agricultural establishment for the breeding of puppies. Where very large quantities of puppies are kept, and by the fact that large numbers are kept, they are kept in sub standard conditions. Pet shops source puppy farms for a CONSTANT supply of pups.

My presumption is that if you are keeping a puppy farm, you are keeping and raising the pups in substandard conditions, simply because it is a Puppy Farm.

If you are buying from byb, with one litter at a time, they do not supply enough at once. You need x pups on x date, and you need a constant supply, not any supply.

If you have a grocery store, you need a constant supply of sugar, not a man who comes in now and again with 8 kg of sugar which you can buy. You need a supplier who has 10 tonnes of sugar to fulfill your customers' regular requirements as decent size pet shops need a puppy farmers

Apparently, the difficult word is "constant". "A supply" is not a "constant supply". Constant is happening week after week, month after month, reliably. A shop which has no stock is not successful.

And MOSTLY, ill pups would not be sold to pet shops by puppy farms.

Mrs Schloss was breeding 800+ pups per year? 200+ bitches were removed by RSPCA. 200 bitches were not removed. If each bitch successfull reared 2 pups annuall, that is 800 pups.. Quite a few of her pups were ill at pos yet they were still taken.

There are hundreds of puppy farms around Australia. pet shops in major shoppng venues sell 20 odd pups per week. Multiply that by the number of pet shops selling pups, and there is no where they could source the quantity of pups required except from puppy farms.

Puppy barns sell 50 odd pups per week. I very much doubt that those pups could be sourced except from puppy farms.

Ban the sale of pups in pet shops, and you halve or more than halve the profit of puppy farms. So numerous puppy farms close.

JMHO

RSPCA cannot, I believe, close puppy farms without closing registered breeders. Stopping pet shops selling pups fnancially cripples puppy farms. It might cripple some registerd breeders who are supplying pet shops too, so what? Another dodgy breeder gone, good riddance.

That is my solution to the problem. Others may not agree with it, that is their right.

If that was adopted and the original suggestion I made about 6 years ago that ALL pups be chipped with the address of the new owner with the breeder as the second contact, I do think dumpage rates would be significantly reduced The microchipping idea was that if the owner took the dog to the pound, or would not collet him from the pound, the breeder would be contacted, and given a short period of time (3 days?) to collect the dog. Breeder could either collect the dog, get someone else to collect it, or organise euthanasia.

There would be no penalty for the breeder. It wasn't the breeder who sent it to the pound.

If the breeder refused to collect the dog, or euthanse it, then penalties would apply.

Reputable breeders would be only too pleased to collect the dog and rehome it.

Lots of work to set it up. The pound industry, and profit making abilities would reduce drastically. Employees could be removed from animal care, and put to contacting breeders.

The numbers would be huge in the beginning. Puppy farms and "accidental" litter breeders would not be pleased if numerous full grown dogs were returned to them. I think in the 3rd year 60% of the puppy farms would close.

The basic reason why 60% of dogs end up in the pound is because the person assessing the puppy enquiry got it wrong. 40% of dogs probably would end up there no matter what .... perhaps that figure is too high. If breeders who basically dumped the pups on people who were too slow to say "no" and got an out of control feral dog back in a year or 6 months, how keen would they be to repeat the exercise.

It will never work - too easy. Pounds which are makng a living out of the dogs would fight it tooth and nail. PIAA would fight it tooth and nail.

Reconcile yourselves to draconial legislation. :D

"it's only a matter of time" as the song goes.

Edited November 17, 2010 by Jed

[Steve]

This "solution" would require law changes and the purpose of the discussion is to talk through solutions without looking at those which would require law changes.

[SpikesPuppy]

This "solution" would require law changes and the purpose of the discussion is to talk through solutions without looking at those which would require law changes.

Then it's down to educate, educate, educate.

Take out full page adverts in popular newspapers outlining the things to look for when purchasing a puppy... From any source. Stop saying puppy farms and pet stores are bad- that does not work. Especially when for every bad pet store there is an equally bad registered breeder somewhere doing the dodgy on someone.

Remove the focus from pure vs mongrel and focus purely on responsible and ethical breeding, housing, rearing. And if someone can find a pet store that is ableto provide the relevant info, health papers, the more power to them.

[espinay2]

The canine councils should get together with the pet stores and have a stand with their breed brochures on it.

I like this idea. Companies do this sort of thing to market their products all the time. Those free standing cardboard displays with information and brochures - get these out there into vet clinics and pets stores etc and you have some great advertising on how to choose a dog and where to go to get one. The important thing is to make sure the information is replenished regularly.

[raz]

Or at the very least, as in child care centers now, all staff must have minimum qualifications to process a puppy sale.

Just going back through this thread, this suggestion is a standout for me. No more 15 year olds on a pitiful salary coming out with the spiel thrown at them by the boss. A decent wage would have to be paid cutting into profit margins so pet shop owner would either have to employ a qualified person or not sell puppies and kittens. Pet shops arent being told they CANT sell puppies and kittens which is restriction of trade but it might be a way to put a lot of them off.

I think this one is really worth thinking about.

[~Anne~]

Jed:

Pounds which are makng a living out of the dogs would fight it tooth and nail.

Can you clarify this statement?

[Jed]

It is self evident. Some pounds are paid $x by councils to take dogs. If all the $x is not spent on the dog, the pound makes a profit. SOME pound euth in preference to rehoming because it is more profitable. And if the ongoing blood and bone rumour is correct, they make even more profit from that. I have no proof of the latter claim - but a rumour which persists for years in "reliable" circles may be worth checking.

That's the short answer, because I am not intersted in this discussion. I only answered Steve's question, she didn't know the profit margin of pet shops.

Further investigation into the financials of some pounds will prove I am correct.

Whether pounds are making a profit and whether they will fight is peripheral to the discussion and unimportant anyway.

[~Anne~]

I am assuming you are only referring to Queensland Pounds then?

NSW pounds are run, generally by local Government, and are funded as such by same. The pounds in NSW that are outsourced, and not run by local Goverment directly, are only a very small percentage. I am not 100% sure, but to my knowledge, they are not paid per dog impounded but are provided with an operating budget based on projections.

Whilst you may have only made the statement in answer to Steve's question, I would argue that it is unimportant. Your statement has far reaching implications. It is an accusation really that pounds 'somewhere' act improprerly for profit. This would have implications for anyone looking at companion animal issues and current legislation.

I can only wonder as to the suggestion of 'blood and bone'. Perhaps you, or someone else, might care to elaborate?

[Steve]

I am assuming you are only referring to Queensland Pounds then?

NSW pounds are run, generally by local Government, and are funded as such by same. The pounds in NSW that are outsourced, and not run by local Goverment directly, are only a very small percentage. I am not 100% sure, but to my knowledge, they are not paid per dog impounded but are provided with an operating budget based on projections.

Whilst you may have only made the statement in answer to Steve's question, I would argue that it is unimportant. Your statement has far reaching implications. It is an accusation really that pounds 'somewhere' act improprerly for profit. This would have implications for anyone looking at companion animal issues and current legislation.

I can only wonder as to the suggestion of 'blood and bone'. Perhaps you, or someone else, might care to elaborate?

Isnt Renbury pound a for profit pound? Pounds in Victoria are owned by LDH and RSPCA too and they are paid a per animal fee.

Edited November 17, 2010 by Steve

[~Anne~]

Transpet are also a boarding facility and a business, so I assume that profit would certianly be an interest. That doesn't mean that the impound or holding facility, for the 4 Councils, is based on a 'per dog' fee. I have no idea how the system is set up between Transpet and the Councils though.

Perhaps that is another thing we can ask someone to elaborate on?

Also, Renbury is only one pound in NSW. I have no idea about the other states.

Edited November 17, 2010 by ~Anne~

[moosmum]

I hope I can say this as well as i'd like with out doing a book here.

I see pet shops s a symptom,not the cause.

Yes,I have a LOT of problems with most establishments selling live animals.Not all.

I don't see the solution to be banning the sale of live animals out right.There are much worse conditions puppies and kittens can be sold from.Pet shops are at least very open to public scrutiny on a daily basis.They have controlls,regulations etc.

As to the source of their pups,yep,some come from puppy farms,but I know of many people out here in the sticks who breed once a year and sell directly to pet shops.

Pet shops are catering to highly lucrative market,in a very public way.

If you ban sale of live pets,where are their customers going to turn,bearing in mind they want a pup and they want it now?

They will turn directly tro the puppy mills,backyard breeders and free internet sites,etc.All very hard to police and regulate,all easier to hide .

These places will be much harder ti influence in any way, less easy to get to accept responsible change.

Attention will turn even more to regulating these places and the result will be that in the end,the only ones able to breed dogs will be those willing to accept thatany dog breeding operation at all be run according to such strict standards and regulations that only mass breeders,or farm style operations,can afford to breed at all.

We will end up with dogs bred purely on a comercial basis,sold to those requiring a revokable at any time licence to own dogs.

Fewer dogs kept at all,fewer people exposed to dogs or with any real meaningful knowledge,and a continuing cycle of decline.

There will not be universaly accepted solutions through legislation,there will always be those seeking to enforce more to bring about the change they see as essential.

I firmly believe changing perceptions on pet ownership is the only way to go.Maybe slower,but far more effective and less damaging in the long run.

We must 1st stop the divisions we see all the time and allow and encourage people to take pride in their pets and WANT to learn more,no matter the origins or breeding.

It would take an essay to say what I'd like more effectively,but I'd be happy to write one.

Edited November 17, 2010 by moosmum

[Steve]

I hope I can say this as well as i'd like with out doing a book here.

I see pet shops s a symptom,not the cause.

Yes,I have a LOT of problems with most establishments selling live animals.Not all.

I don't see the solution to be banning the sale of live animals out right.There are much worse conditions puppies and kittens can be sold from.Pet shops are at least very open to public scrutiny on a daily basis.They have controlls,regulations etc.

As to the source of their pups,yep,some come from puppy farms,but I know of many people out here in the sticks who breed once a year and sell directly to pet shops.

Pet shops are catering to highly lucrative market,in a very public way.

If you ban sale of live pets,where are their customers going to turn,bearing in mind they want a pup and they want it now?

They will turn directly tro the puppy mills,backyard breeders and free internet sites,etc.All very hard to police and regulate,all easier to hide .

These places will be much harder ti influence in any way, less easy to get to accept responsible change.

Attention will turn even more to regulating these places and the result will be that in the end,the only ones able to breed dogs will be those willing to accept thatany dog breeding operation at all be run according to such strict standards and regulations that only mass breeders,or farm style operations,can afford to breed at all.

We will end up with dogs bred purely on a comercial basis,sold to those requiring a revokable at any time licence to own dogs.

Fewer dogs kept at all,fewer people exposed to dogs or with any real meaningful knowledge,and a continuing cycle of decline.

There will not be universaly accepted solutions through legislation,there will always be those seeking to enforce more to bring about the change they see as essential.

I firmly believe changing perceptions on pet ownership is the only way to go.Maybe slower,but far more effective and less damaging in the long run.

We must 1st stop the divisions we see all the time and allow and encourage people to take pride in their pets and WANT to learn more,no matter the origins or breeding.

It would take an essay to say what I'd like more effectively,but I'd be happy to write one.

That will do !