Online Puppy Sales

[Are You Serious Jo]

Some are, I'm not a registered breeder now and won't ever be again because of the new laws, but I still take the opportunity to educate anyone who mentions dogs and puppy farms and registered breeders. But there was so much damage done by PDE, that is all people talk about now and the rspca support that doco from what I've seen.

[mita]

I've had a look at the site and reviewed the content regarding 'what is a puppy farm/factory' and how to recognise one. Nowhere does it imply that normal breeders are mixed into this group, namely what you would expect to see regarding one of these places, i.e. dogs living in filth, dogs with medical problems, dogs exhibiting behavioural problems (twirling, agression, pacing, fear of humans, etc) dogs with atrocious coat and body conditions, dogs living in confined spaces and are either packed in with other dogs preventing the ability to move or are in too small a space for their size.

You're correct, they're the conditions which characterise puppy-farming. I'd add, even on a small scale, when a few dogs are kept, extremely poorly, in a backyard.

I was pleased to see that the RSPCA Qld anti-puppy farming material has also picked up on the Qld research re the critical need for early socialisation of puppies, destined to live alongside people. Without that being hardwired, there's likelihood of behavioral difficulties later on. (With the extent of socialisation of the mother dog, also having effects.)

The high incidence of unplanned litters emerged as another 'flag' of puppy-farming style.

Registered breeders in Qld don't have a lot to fear. The same research showed they were the ones who performed extremely well on both these key aspects. Unregistered breeders did not perform well...& especially badly re lack of control of litters.

Edited November 30, 2010 by mita

[WreckitWhippet]

I've had a look at the site and reviewed the content regarding 'what is a puppy farm/factory' and how to recognise one. Nowhere does it imply that normal breeders are mixed into this group, namely what you would expect to see regarding one of these places, i.e. dogs living in filth, dogs with medical problems, dogs exhibiting behavioural problems (twirling, agression, pacing, fear of humans, etc) dogs with atrocious coat and body conditions, dogs living in confined spaces and are either packed in with other dogs preventing the ability to move or are in too small a space for their size.

You're correct, they're the conditions which characterise puppy-farming. I'd add, even on a small scale, when a few dogs are kept, extremely poorly, in a backyard.

I was pleased to see that the RSPCA Qld anti-puppy farming material has also picked up on the Qld research re the critical need for early socialisation of puppies, destined to live alongside people. Without that being hardwired, there's likelihood of behavioral difficulties later on. (With the extent of socialisation of the mother dog, also having effects.)

The high incidence of unplanned litters emerged as another 'flag' of puppy-farming style.

Registered breeders in Qld don't have a lot to fear. The same research showed they were the ones who performed extremely well on both these key aspects. Unregistered breeders did not perform well...& especially badly re lack of control of litters.

Mita you seem to think that the ethical registered breeders of QLD will have nothing to fear from the RSPCA.

I think they are all in for a whole lot of heartache and a license just makes you a sitting duck.

[Are You Serious Jo]

It's more of either it won't affect me or it will never happen, guess what, it is happening to those people who thought they were safe. Pretty soon the only way to prevent the rspca madness is to only buy those wind up toy dogs, unless of course the rspca bring in a law to say having them is cruel because real dogs might get scared After all, they seemed to find enough inspectors to make TV shows and prosecute little old ladies on technicalities. Maybe I should ask for those particular inspectors next time I'm told they don't have inspectors available to investigate genuine cruelty cases.

[mita]

Mita you seem to think that the ethical registered breeders of QLD will have nothing to fear from the RSPCA.

I think they are all in for a whole lot of heartache and a license just makes you a sitting duck.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this, RSG. I've set my case on facts.

The pilot licensing program in the Gold Coast area is moderate but has some teeth & was a cooperative production. All stakeholders are fine with it, in practice.

RSPCA Qld's anti-puppy farming marterial picks up the same rationale & methods. Not surprising, the RSPCA was in the planning group...so was Dogs Qld. So I support it.

The RSPCA Qld material also picks up the Qld research that nailed 2 of the essential features which 'flag' puppy-farming. Lack of socialisation and uncontrolled breeding. Registered breeders in Qld came out exceptionally well in not displaying these.

So the RSPCA Qld material points out that registered breeders have a code of ethics to guide what they do. In reality, tho', some may not follow them. The biggest pity is that Dogs Qld doesn't pick up on this & do some Public Relations. The strength is in their hand...so use it.

People in Qld tend to know what puppy farms are, as opposed to 'normal' breeding. Raids & seizures are publicised. I've been involved with some poor little mites rescued from one of the worst. The geography in this state lends itself to 'farmers' setting up in poor agricultural land, away from ready scrutiny. Appalling conditions. Yielding huge hauls of horribly distressed & psychologically and physically damaged dogs and puppies.

This is light years away from the regular registered breeder who follows the excellent ethical guidelines set out by Dogs Qld.

Edited November 30, 2010 by mita

[Are You Serious Jo]

Mita, you aren't saying anything new, the same posts, QLD are brilliant and no one has any complaints, well there are plenty of QLDers who are worried about what is happening. You are a good example of the head in the sand attitude, Victoria and NSW are in crisis, QLD will follow. You can support the rspca as much as you like, but the fact is what they propose will pave the way for puppy farms to thrive.

[Moselle]

Okay. Much better we do nothing then.

I know where you're coming from TA. It is such a confusing topic, so many comments are made, I honestly don't know what to think. A few posters on DOL are saying that puppy farmers are not going to be affected, only the registered breeders will be affected, I can't see why. I do recall comments made here about laws being too stringent pertaining to anyone having 3 or more breeding bitches, planning permits required, etc etc which I sympathise with BUT I don't see how puppy millers won't be affected? I would certainly hope so.

[Moselle]

In the big picture those ads are going to do more harm than good, so I can't see it as a good thing considering we know the new laws proposed.

yep, new laws to give them powers where it comes to local plannig, where previously it was the domain of council

they'll be able to walk and and shut down every breeder that has a litter on their loungeroom floorSpikes, nothing has changed but it's always been policy of the RSPCA to seize first and ask questions later when it suits them.

Surely that isn't going to be the case; what is so wrong with a breeder having 3 breeding bitches and keeping them as part of the family and living in the house? Is this a scare tactic?

[Souff]

OK

I just went to Petlink and clicked on the RSPCA ad and watched through each of the sections.

The 19th century industrial revolution theme that they have used sort of made me feel I was looking at old photos of an old Birmingham factory .... as a viewer I did not really connect it with the dogs, even though there were some cute pups sitting here and there. It didn't make me think that the 2 things were connected. I was more thinking that some of the big machinery would start clanging away. The relativity of the two things just wasn't there for me.

On one of the pages it is stated that puppy farmers ask for a deposit when you buy a puppy from them.

Well ..... I don't know of ANY REPUTABLE BREEDER who will hold a pup or any other animal for a stranger for 6 weeks or so, without asking for a holding deposit.

When you commit to a major purchase in many areas of life, you are asked to make a deposit. Wedding outfits, landscaping, cars on order .... all sorts of things.

Often such deposits are "substantial deposits".

A seller of a pup who asks for a substantial deposit cannot be described as a puppy farmer but that is what the RSPCA has stated here. Sigh.

If I was looking for a pup and went to Petlink to see what was advertised there, I would look at this ad, maybe not the whole way through, and then go to the list of people advertising to see what was for sale.

Would it deter me from buying from those advertisers, if they had the type of pup I was looking for?

Probably not.

Souff

Edited November 30, 2010 by Souff

[WreckitWhippet]

Okay. Much better we do nothing then.

I know where you're coming from TA. It is such a confusing topic, so many comments are made, I honestly don't know what to think. A few posters on DOL are saying that puppy farmers are not going to be affected, only the registered breeders will be affected, I can't see why. I do recall comments made here about laws being too stringent pertaining to anyone having 3 or more breeding bitches, planning permits required, etc etc which I sympathise with BUT I don't see how puppy millers won't be affected? I would certainly hope so.

The puppy farms won't be impacted upon because they either exist in locations where they are not policed and fly under the radar or they already have council approval for their massive sheds and the dogs that go along with it.

The average suburban ANKC dog breeder, doesn't have rows of DA approved kennels, there's a good chance that the majority wouldn't have a block sufficient to build and have such kennels approved either.

The only breeders that will survive this, are the puppy farmers, the back yard breeders and the registered breeders that are foruntate to live in acreage that has exisitng kennels and are DA approved.

What the RSPCA wants, would see me wiped out.

[Natsu chan]

No it's not, the council planning laws will make it illegal to whelp bitches indoors. Most puppy farmers have big set ups out in the country in large sheds that are erected per council planning, a lot of registered breeders have a handful of dogs who live as pets in their homes. The laws being pushed will allow the RSPCA to come in seize anyones pets without laying charges or ever needing too. They will be able to seize breeders dogs based on the fact that they are not following planning laws by whelping bitches in kennels outside, currently councils don't bother with policing this and most people aren't even aware of the existence of the law because the councils when asked tell them they only have to comply with the animal welfare laws which simply isn't true.

The RSPCA will get the powers to go in and police council planning and environment laws and seize animals based on those as well as welfare. So if someone is caught with a litter inside not out in the kennels they will be in trouble. The same goes for annual vaccination that is law too, the RSPCA will be able to seize animals just because they haven't had an annual vaccination. This is in spite of the fact that the AVA is saying they shouldn't be vaccinated annually.

It's horribly confusing even for people in the know never mind the rest of us! The laws themselves are badly written and confusing to begin with without even going into what's actually wrong with making things like vaccination timetables law.

[Souff]

Surely that isn't going to be the case; what is so wrong with a breeder having 3 breeding bitches and keeping them as part of the family and living in the house? Is this a scare tactic?

Gosh, I hope those three bitches don't all have litters at the same time, AND sleep in crates! Particularly in a utility room, such as a laundry or garage. And I hope they dont let the puppies get anywhere near those crates!

Wonderful stuff for activists to photograph and use as propaganda as a puppy farm.

A good photo tells a story, or so we are told.

Souff

[Are You Serious Jo]

Okay. Much better we do nothing then.

I know where you're coming from TA. It is such a confusing topic, so many comments are made, I honestly don't know what to think. A few posters on DOL are saying that puppy farmers are not going to be affected, only the registered breeders will be affected, I can't see why. I do recall comments made here about laws being too stringent pertaining to anyone having 3 or more breeding bitches, planning permits required, etc etc which I sympathise with BUT I don't see how puppy millers won't be affected? I would certainly hope so.

The puppy farms won't be impacted upon because they either exist in locations where they are not policed and fly under the radar or they already have council approval for their massive sheds and the dogs that go along with it.

The average suburban ANKC dog breeder, doesn't have rows of DA approved kennels, there's a good chance that the majority wouldn't have a block sufficient to build and have such kennels approved either.

The only breeders that will survive this, are the puppy farmers, the back yard breeders and the registered breeders that are foruntate to live in acreage that has exisitng kennels and are DA approved.

What the RSPCA wants, would see me wiped out.

Read this Moselle. Imagine you have someone on a suburban block, they have three bitches and breed and show a small number of dogs. They have to register as a breeder. Now breeders have to follow certain guidelines which include council planning laws and have to build kennels and have dogs houses a certain distance from the neighbours etc. Some places it can't be done because blocks are too small. So they stop breeding, no choice.

So we go onto breeders who live on a bigger block, same rules apply, they register as a breeder, now have to build kennels etc, they have the room, but they don't have the $15,000 or so to do so as they can only manage to cover costs at best. So they stop breeding, they have no choice.

On to puppy farmers, they typically live on large blocks, so room no issue. They make good money because they don't have the costs that registered breeders do, so they make a LOT of profit. $15,000 to them can be raised quickly and kennels built, voila, they comply with the council by laws and are registered and approved by the rspca. They keep breeding because they now literally have a license to do so, and since the registered breeders are gone they make even more money because no competition.

If you don't understand this I give up, and that is why I think registered dog breeders are doomed, even when it is spelled out clearly no one believes us.

[Parkeyre]

DOL's at it again..

[Moselle]

DOL's at it again..

What do you mean PE??

[WreckitWhippet]

Jo, you have forgotten about the registered breeder who can afford the acres and the kennels, which we could make happen if we needed to but would walk away because raising pups in kennels away from the house, is not how we would choose to do so.

We do not feel it's the best way to bring up a puppy and meet its early and ongoing needs.

I take great pride in raising the pups in the home and sending out happy well adjusted babies, that leave home and tackle the world without a second thought. I truly do not think I could achieve this and provide puppy buyers with the social and outgoing creatures that I do now, if I didn't have them in the house, being raised alongside the other dogs and my family.

I have 5 bitches and two dogs, for some that's reached the magical line in the sand that would see me shut down.

[Souff]

DOL's at it again..

What do you mean PE??

DOLers are again pointing out the flaws in the RSPCA's work. Some would rather we didnt do that.

Souff

[Parkeyre]

DOL's at it again..

What do you mean PE??

DOLers are again pointing out the flaws in the RSPCA's work. Some would rather we didnt do that.

Souff

Souff; you don't need to answer posts for me on my behalf, anyone would tihnk you like seeing your sig.

I meant that as soon as The Ark posted something good, she got shut down.

[Moselle]

Okay. Much better we do nothing then.

I know where you're coming from TA. It is such a confusing topic, so many comments are made, I honestly don't know what to think. A few posters on DOL are saying that puppy farmers are not going to be affected, only the registered breeders will be affected, I can't see why. I do recall comments made here about laws being too stringent pertaining to anyone having 3 or more breeding bitches, planning permits required, etc etc which I sympathise with BUT I don't see how puppy millers won't be affected? I would certainly hope so.

The puppy farms won't be impacted upon because they either exist in locations where they are not policed and fly under the radar or they already have council approval for their massive sheds and the dogs that go along with it.

The average suburban ANKC dog breeder, doesn't have rows of DA approved kennels, there's a good chance that the majority wouldn't have a block sufficient to build and have such kennels approved either.

The only breeders that will survive this, are the puppy farmers, the back yard breeders and the registered breeders that are foruntate to live in acreage that has exisitng kennels and are DA approved.

What the RSPCA wants, would see me wiped out.

Read this Moselle. Imagine you have someone on a suburban block, they have three bitches and breed and show a small number of dogs. They have to register as a breeder. Now breeders have to follow certain guidelines which include council planning laws and have to build kennels and have dogs houses a certain distance from the neighbours etc. Some places it can't be done because blocks are too small. So they stop breeding, no choice.

So we go onto breeders who live on a bigger block, same rules apply, they register as a breeder, now have to build kennels etc, they have the room, but they don't have the $15,000 or so to do so as they can only manage to cover costs at best. So they stop breeding, they have no choice.

On to puppy farmers, they typically live on large blocks, so room no issue. They make good money because they don't have the costs that registered breeders do, so they make a LOT of profit. $15,000 to them can be raised quickly and kennels built, voila, they comply with the council by laws and are registered and approved by the rspca. They keep breeding because they now literally have a license to do so, and since the registered breeders are gone they make even more money because no competition.

If you don't understand this I give up, and that is why I think registered dog breeders are doomed, even when it is spelled out clearly no one believes us.

Thanks for that explanation. Just one minor thing.....in suburbia, isn't there a rule that people are not allowed to own more than a couple of dogs anyway? I was under the impression that councils did not allow more than a certain number of dogs anyway, even with a permit Is it going to be harder to keep the number of dogs under wraps given that Dogs Vic will disclose such info???

I know that in Gippsland, there is a breeder that breeds LARGE SCALE and I mean HUMONGOUS....to the tune of 600 dogs, kept in small cages.....surely they WILL be affected and esp. under the LIberal party.....the code of practice goes to say that they stand to be fined around $30,000 which is vastly more than the current fine. I just shudder with the thought that such factories exist!

[Souff]

DOL's at it again..

What do you mean PE??

DOLers are again pointing out the flaws in the RSPCA's work. Some would rather we didnt do that.

Souff

Souff; you don't need to answer posts for me on my behalf, anyone would tihnk you like seeing your sig.

I meant that as soon as The Ark posted something good, she got shut down.

All rightie then!