Hoping Someone Can Answer This For Me

[Dogsrawesome]

There is a show on TLC on foxtel Dogs 101

Some great info on breeds but i dont like the ad for it

Purebreds and designer purebeds. That just makes me go grrrrrrrrrrrrr

I watch that show its great

[Steve]

They are not breaching their codes of conduct and even if there are main registered dogs being used - proving it is another thing altogether, proving the dog didnt jump the fence and throw the leg over or that someone else who lives on the property isnt the breeder of the non registered ones is virtually impossible.

16 years ago I was involved in a rescue which was on a current affair program. She was bought under attention because she was selling non papered purebred and cross bred dogs to asian dealers who were exporting to Overseas pet shops and the people at the air port were saying they were going out too young.

She was ordered to clean up her kennels and didnt miss a day of operation and is still breeding with a different prefix the same way.

12 months ago there was a registered breeder on RSPCA animal rescue who was breeding cross bred as well as registered purebred dogs with more champions to her name than most others over a 30 plus year period.

The codes of ethics and fair trading laws allow anyone to breed as many as they want,sell to whom ever they want and the CCs only have a say in what they can and cant do with their registered dogs.

Think it through how could they tell anyone that they cant own a cross bred dog or an unpapered one as well as their registered dogs then how could they possibly have any control over what someone does with their own property which the CCs have no interest in or control over.

There is one who is a member here who openly discusses her cross breeding program but she breeds the purebreds and is an registered breeder while her partner breeds cross bred dogs - how do you stop her partner from doing what ever he wants with any dog he wants if he isnt a member? Are they the same dogs? Prove it and even if they are - then prove the member allowed it to happen.

Nothing new here - its a myth that's been pushed and every time it comes up people cant believe it.

After all registered breeders cant breed cross breds, they cant sell to pet shops and they have to test - wrong. They can do all of these things and still be ethical under their agreement to their codes of conduct and remain members.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Steve

[Steve]

However, this in my opinion is outside the normal behaviour for a registered breeder and I would call it rare. There are good an bad in everything and just as rescue has people who take donations as a rescue org and breed the dogs they rescue and pretend they were pregnant when they got them, sell them off already pregnant with the promise the new owner will get their money back soon when the litter is due,sell the puppies for multiple litters one "rescue bitch has" sell them as entire breeding pairs etc crap happens but I still think its a reasonably un common issue.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Steve

[mita]

I would call it rare.

I only know a big bunch of tibbie breeders & they'd be appalled at any deliberate cross-breeding to produce 'novelty' dogs for sale.

I'd have to get the smelling salts ready, before telling them of any case.

You know a lot more breeders, so it's good to hear your opinion it'd be rare across the bigger picture.

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

There was a registered breeder recently advertising in the rescue section.

Two working breeds mated, puppies being sold undesexed. Got deleted. Shame.

It may not be illegal but it is unethical and immoral.

[Tatzelwurm]

Dogsnsw has a committee to investigate transgressions of the rules. This breeder is not disobeying the rules. However, the committee does keep information on breeders. It is worth complaining to dogsnsw.

Disgusting for people to believe it is ok.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Dogsnsw has a committee to investigate transgressions of the rules. This breeder is not disobeying the rules. However, the committee does keep information on breeders. It is worth complaining to dogsnsw.

Disgusting for people to believe it is ok.

i hope you mean the people doing it and not the people answering this thread. no one here thinks it is ok to do

[Steve]

Ethics are a very personal issue. A human can justify almost anything if they want to.

A code of ethics is a basic minimum standard of behaviour for a group of people which they agree to abide by.

As we have seen for some what they actually agree to is all they consider and calling them un ethical gets you beaten up because they are within their code of ethics.

The whole dog world is a fascinating study and its difficult to try to pin point where the mythology surrounding purebred registered breeders started and how it has perpetuated.

People who have been within the group sometimes for decades will argue that their codes prevent them from doing certain activities.

New kids came in and give the code a tick and never really read it because they are exposed to thise who dont know what it says either and they have behaved and advocated certain behaviours because of convention.

The fact that people agree to a code of conduct without first being aware of what it is exactly that they are agreeing to as a base line minimum standard is concerning because if they dont know what they can do then it begs the question do they understand what they cant do.

The reality is the ONLY thing a registered purebred ANKC breeder can do which any other breeder cant do is register their puppies on a that stud registry and partici[pate in ANKC sanctioned events.

Like it or not there is nothing a registered purebred ANKC breeder cant do that any other member of our society cant do with any dogs which are not regsitered with that stud registr.

Mandatory codes for breeding and state POCTAA are all harder to comply with than any state Code of conduct which all breeders come under.

whether we want to admit it or not the commercial puppy farmers codes of conduct are more restrictive than any of the states CC codes.

How we got to a point where a large section of society has had the belief that registered purebred breeders are automatically doing one thing or another when they never were is a whole new topic.

[Steve]

There was a registered breeder recently advertising in the rescue section.

Two working breeds mated, puppies being sold undesexed. Got deleted. Shame.

It may not be illegal but it is unethical and immoral.

Yes it is according to our ethics and morals but not according to their agreed code of conduct and saying so about someone out loud gets you sued.

What we think doesnt count - its what they agree to which does.

[bulldogz4eva]

Is this an unusual practice?

As i only do rescue i would assume so

I would think anyone who shows a dog wouldnt be in the game of

breeding and selling x bred dogs and cats

Maybe i am wrong, but thought someone in here might know that answer

I expect it is unusual and would hope it would be but I think it goes on a bit more than people want to believe.

There is a x bred litter advertised on the net at the moment and the registered breeder of said litter has a picture of her ANKC registered dog as the parent of said litter.Not too smart I would think and if I can pick it up I am sure there are many others that have something to do with that breed that could also.

[Alyosha]

Sadly being a "Registered Breeder" doesn't necessarily mean you are "ethical".

Just like being a licensed driver doesn't necessarily make a responsible one.

The ANKC are not a regulatory body and have limited ability to limit the actions of members. With all the enforcement manpower, time and money thrown at road safety there are still a multitude of idiots out there. What chance is there against the tide of idiocy that humanity creates sometimes?

People need to take responsibilty for themselves and unfortunately some don't. It is just a shame when innocents like animals are caught up in it.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Sadly being a "Registered Breeder" doesn't necessarily mean you are "ethical".

Just like being a licensed driver doesn't necessarily make a responsible one.

The ANKC are not a regulatory body and have limited ability to limit the actions of members. With all the enforcement manpower, time and money thrown at road safety there are still a multitude of idiots out there. What chance is there against the tide of idiocy that humanity creates sometimes?

People need to take responsibilty for themselves and unfortunately some don't. It is just a shame when innocents like animals are caught up in it.

in all honesty this sh*ts me. if that is the case why do we say to new puppy buyers to go to a registered breeder...i might as well tell them to go look in the newspaper

if the ankc don't manage their members then what use are they...i think this is a cop out

[_PL_]

However, this in my opinion is outside the normal behaviour for a registered breeder and I would call it rare. There are good an bad in everything and just as rescue has people who take donations as a rescue org and breed the dogs they rescue and pretend they were pregnant when they got them, sell them off already pregnant with the promise the new owner will get their money back soon when the litter is due,sell the puppies for multiple litters one "rescue bitch has" sell them as entire breeding pairs etc crap happens but I still think its a reasonably un common issue.

Uncommon thankfully, but not good enough by far. Shame.

[Alyosha]

in all honesty this sh*ts me. if that is the case why do we say to new puppy buyers to go to a registered breeder...i might as well tell them to go look in the newspaper

if the ankc don't manage their members then what use are they...i think this is a cop out

Because they're not a regulatory body. They cannot act outside of their function. They're not copping out. People can't just create enforcement powers out of thin air. The ANKC is a co-ordinating body. Not a government empowered regulator of the public's activities.

"Australian National Kennel Council has developed co-operation between the 8 Controlling Bodies and made a large contribution towards improving dog showing, breeding and other canine activities in Australia"

See their website for full details of what they actually are:

http://www.ankc.org.au/default.aspx If you have a read of "history" it might make things a little clearer.

There isn't always someone else to blame or to take charge. Sometime we need to stand up and say - "that person is a jerk, I don't agree with what they are doing and will not participate, so I will promote others to hopefully do the same".

People in our society are quick to point a finger and say "someone" should fix that. Yet we are just as likely to turn around and complain about some other infringement of our privacy or civil liberties. Police state or not? Personal responsibilty or not? There are arguments for both, it's not an easy issue.

[D & D]

in all honesty this sh*ts me. if that is the case why do we say to new puppy buyers to go to a registered breeder...i might as well tell them to go look in the newspaper

if the ankc don't manage their members then what use are they...i think this is a cop out

Because they're not a regulatory body. They cannot act outside of their function. They're not copping out. People can't just create enforcement powers out of thin air. The ANKC is a co-ordinating body. Not a government empowered regulator of the public's activities.

"Australian National Kennel Council has developed co-operation between the 8 Controlling Bodies and made a large contribution towards improving dog showing, breeding and other canine activities in Australia"

See their website for full details of what they actually are:

http://www.ankc.org.au/default.aspx If you have a read of "history" it might make things a little clearer.

There isn't always someone else to blame or to take charge. Sometime we need to stand up and say - "that person is a jerk, I don't agree with what they are doing and will not participate, so I will promote others to hopefully do the same".

People in our society are quick to point a finger and say "someone" should fix that. Yet we are just as likely to turn around and complain about some other infringement of our privacy or civil liberties. Police state or not? Personal responsibilty or not? There are arguments for both, it's not an easy issue.

Thanks for saying it better than I could.

Jaxx's buddy, if you don't like the way things are run, what are you doing about it??? (Besides complaining on an internet forum)

[westielover]

Hmmm ... something like this Bartok? This was on the home page of a website which breeds pedigree small breeds .......

Pug cross babies, all female, will be available end of february, adorable pug looking babies, noses not too short, roly poly bundles of love and fun.

Coming up in February is a litter of chihuaha cross poodle puppies, these belong to XXX's niece. XXXX is happy to keep in contact with you if you are interested in looking at these puppies when they are born. (two puppies already reserved,)

AND the cat has kittens!!! part siamese tabby and tabby tortioseshell boys and girls will be available end of February. cost will be to cover 1st vaccination and microchipping.

Disgraceful!

Just out of curiosity, if this happened to be a DOL listed breeder, would they be banned from advertising on DOL?

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

in all honesty this sh*ts me. if that is the case why do we say to new puppy buyers to go to a registered breeder...i might as well tell them to go look in the newspaper

if the ankc don't manage their members then what use are they...i think this is a cop out

Because they're not a regulatory body. They cannot act outside of their function. They're not copping out. People can't just create enforcement powers out of thin air. The ANKC is a co-ordinating body. Not a government empowered regulator of the public's activities.

"Australian National Kennel Council has developed co-operation between the 8 Controlling Bodies and made a large contribution towards improving dog showing, breeding and other canine activities in Australia"

See their website for full details of what they actually are:

http://www.ankc.org.au/default.aspx If you have a read of "history" it might make things a little clearer.

There isn't always someone else to blame or to take charge. Sometime we need to stand up and say - "that person is a jerk, I don't agree with what they are doing and will not participate, so I will promote others to hopefully do the same".

People in our society are quick to point a finger and say "someone" should fix that. Yet we are just as likely to turn around and complain about some other infringement of our privacy or civil liberties. Police state or not? Personal responsibilty or not? There are arguments for both, it's not an easy issue.

Thanks for saying it better than I could.

Jaxx's buddy, if you don't like the way things are run, what are you doing about it??? (Besides complaining on an internet forum)

they can change their code of ethics and get rid of members who breech them

i am allowed to have an opinion and i will voice it. asking me how i contribute is a red herring (and none of your business)

Edited January 24, 2011 by Jaxx'sBuddy

[D & D]

From the ANKC code of ethics:

Breeding

11. A member shall breed primarily for the purpose of improving the quality and / or working ability of the breed in accordance with the breed standard, and not specifically for the pet or commercial market.

So, if a member is breeding cross-bred dogs, they are specifically for the pet market. (Unless there's another market for cross-breeds that I'm unaware of???)

That would make them in breech of the code of ethics, therefore reportable to their member body.

If you know of someone doing this, report them.

[Steve]

in all honesty this sh*ts me. if that is the case why do we say to new puppy buyers to go to a registered breeder...i might as well tell them to go look in the newspaper

if the ankc don't manage their members then what use are they...i think this is a cop out

Because they're not a regulatory body. They cannot act outside of their function. They're not copping out. People can't just create enforcement powers out of thin air. The ANKC is a co-ordinating body. Not a government empowered regulator of the public's activities.

"Australian National Kennel Council has developed co-operation between the 8 Controlling Bodies and made a large contribution towards improving dog showing, breeding and other canine activities in Australia"

See their website for full details of what they actually are:

http://www.ankc.org.au/default.aspx If you have a read of "history" it might make things a little clearer.

There isn't always someone else to blame or to take charge. Sometime we need to stand up and say - "that person is a jerk, I don't agree with what they are doing and will not participate, so I will promote others to hopefully do the same".

People in our society are quick to point a finger and say "someone" should fix that. Yet we are just as likely to turn around and complain about some other infringement of our privacy or civil liberties. Police state or not? Personal responsibilty or not? There are arguments for both, it's not an easy issue.

Why or how people believe that because someone belongs to a certain group they are automatically doing what THEY think is ethical and are surprised when they find that they are not is a separate issue.

The ANKC were set up to keep a bonefide stud registry and their only interest can be what someone does with the dogs on their registry and they are not able to- even if they want to dictate what someone can and cant do with any other thing in their life including their other dogs and to some degreee even their registered dogs.

You cant expect that people will learn the facts and not have a reaction to having the myths regarding what they believed exposed.

Because of the laws they couldnt do anything to change their codes to restrict people anyway - so how or why would they police it?

[Muttaburra]

I'd think that any registered breeder who also deliberately crossbred to make 'novelties' for sale, wouldn't be too bright about the purebreds they also bred.

Double whammy to their reputation.

Recently, the Guardian newspaper listed things that their 'inventor' lived to regret.

First on the list was an interview with the man in Melbourne who first crossed labs & poodles, hoping to get a better Guide Dog. The labradoodle.

He says he regrets doing it, because it led to some people discovering 'novelty' sells. And they started making all sorts of inappropriate crosses & selling the dogs at inflated prices. His quote: I'm on a pension & live in a little shoebox flat. If I'd gone into breeding oodles for a living, I'd be on easy street. But there was no way I'd do that. My conscience wouldn't let me.

Another quote: So many of them have problems. I believe one third of the dogs bred today are the poodle crosses. People say aren't you proud of yourself, & I say no. Not in the slightest. I've done so much harm to pure breeding and made these charlatans quite rich.'

Guardian Weekly 17.12.10

Full article here. Note they've put it in their Science section. ;)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/nov...ors-idea-regret