C.c.c. Qld's New Breeder Accredited System

[Steve]

No accreditation scheme or anything else will make people ethical. Nothing. They are ethical because of who they are.

I dont think the idea of it is to make people ethical - I think its designed to enable them to make a statement that they are ethical according to what is required in that program.

[Wags]

Ive owned Bullmastiffs for 15 years. For the past few years i have been working,planning towards breeding and now this new system is in place. Personally i think its a good thing but i cant help wondering why with my chosen breed the Bullmastiff there is but 1 Qld Breeder who has gone out of their way to comply to the new regulations and be willing to do their part for the Bullmastiff breed. Why is it other breeders have not got on board with this system? Is it wrong or am i missing something???

I've only just seen this thread. I agree that the majority of Queensland breeders haven't taken up the accreditation scheme, but more are trickling in. The scheme is more than paying additional fees and begins with a self-assessment requirement to be effected by the breeder. It includes references and provision of information and site visits are part of the accreditation scheme. In fact it is very similar to the care industy's accreditation scheme for aged care which I worked in for some years. It does make the breeder 'accountable' which in my mind is a wonderful thing.

Dogs Queensland, with the introduction of our new General Manager, have instigated quite a few innovative systems which not only monitor Queensland registered breeders, but make them more accountable. A survey is sent to each new puppy registered owner. The receipt of the form is chased up and each form is coded to identify the breeder. The questions asked are extensive and aimed at ensuring that correct practices are maintained.

Dogs Queensland are also working with the State Government in regard to a breeder register for any (registered or unregistered) breeders. It will become law in Queensland that anyone who breeds any dog, whether on purpose or by accident, will be required to be registered, the puppies registered on the state register, microchipped and the breeders details placed on the microchip records. No puppy will be allowed to be sold, anywhere, without being microchipped and thereby registered. The backyard, puppy farmers and people who 'just want to have a litter, or have some puppies to raise' will lose anonimity and have to be accountable. There will also be requirements in regard to health check, care of the dogs and puppies etc. The RSPCA and dog fraternities are also involved in setting up systems and requirements. I'm guessing and hoping that breeders registered with Dogs Queensland will have their number incorporated into the State register as we don't need anymore paperwork if we can help it. It is intended that the state register is in operation by mid-2011.

With the introduction of the state register, the term 'registered breeder' will become quite confusing I should imagine and achieving accreditation will assist in establishing a difference. It is generally found that breeders emphasising 'purebred' are unregistered and their dogs are also in the main unregistered. The general public aren't aware of this in many cases and think they are getting a good quality dog which is questionable as is the dog's heritage and health. Council registration can also be referred to as 'registration', and again the general public doesn't necessarily know the difference. The number of times I have gone so far as describing ANKC registration papers to clarify this point.

While confusion in terms will continue, I personally believe that the instigation of a register for any and all dog breeders and the resultant puppies and restricting sales to registered puppies only by law is a fabulous innovation as is the accreditation scheme to keep breeders on their toes and accountable.

I'm hoping like mad that all states prick their ears up and take example of Dogs Queensland and the Qld State Government.

[WreckitWhippet]

It's all pie in the sky wags and will go the same way as every other brain wave. All fine and dandy in theory , no policing and no one there to enforce the new rules. Those who have always done the right thing will continue to do so and pay the extra $$ or simply walk away when it gets too much . The BYBer's and puppy farmers will continue on their merry way.

NSW ( as an example ) has had compulsary microchipping and life time rego for a decade now, yet it's rarely policed. What makes QLD think they have the answer and can do any better is beyond me.

[oakway]

The mail from Wags,

The very letters RSPCA makes me want to run a mile.

What we are trying to tell you, is that accredited does not make a breeder a better breeder. The public thinks that accredited means better,

in some cases this is not so.

[oakway]

If you want the the accreditation scheme to work, then let Dogs Queensland award this title to the breeders who have always done the right thing and produced puppies

for the betterment of the breed.

If the word accredited is to be used then let it be a standard of achievement to be work for and awarded. Not handed out because your mates have given you a reference and you paid the fee.

[Wags]

The mail from Wags,

The very letters RSPCA makes me want to run a mile.

What we are trying to tell you, is that accredited does not make a breeder a better breeder. The public thinks that accredited means better,

in some cases this is not so.

Frankly, I disagree. Those that are choosing to ignore standards or wrought the system are those who are most likely to be negative towards an accreditation scheme, because it creates transparency and accountability. Those that are wanting to do the right thing and willing to learn and improve are the ones receptive to being screened which is what an accreditation scheme is all about.

The State register will make breeders traceable and accountable - it may not be perfect, but it is more proactive than cynicism and negativity ;)

Edited January 31, 2011 by Wags

[oakway]

Listen here,I am getting mad, are you in any way suggesting that because I have have not applied for the word accreditation that I am unethical ?. Because I can produce records from around the world from the owners of BIS winners that will. When myself and other breeders of our chosen breed have busted our guts to improve the breed and do the right thing by all purchasers.

By the way I am may have not been living in this state when word accredid was intoduced.

I am not sure when the scheme came in.

Edited January 31, 2011 by oakway

[Wags]

I would like to thank everyone who has posted a reply to my question and it is clear by the responses where this system sits with everyone.

Thank you for your time.

I wouldnt take that much notice of what breeders who havent joined have to say.

Ask the ones who have and also understand that they will be promoting this to puppy buyers and regardless of what the breeders who dont or cant join have to say that may just make the difference.

If you are concerned about what other breeders might think of you if you do - forget that they will find numerous other things whether you're in or out.

Its nice to know the difference between me being ethical and unethical is simply $22. :rolleyes:

What a crock!!!!!!

Yes Jed - I agree that you can't make people change their ethics unless they choose to, however, there is nothing wrong in creating a system which highlights those with ethics in order to give the general public a measure. The focus on the (incorrect) fee as a means to accreditation means that the person doing so hasn't fully taken on board the requirements of accreditation, but hey, if they choose not to do so, it is their bag. The application is not the entire scheme - it is merely entry into it.

If the breeders of long standing who believe they're the ants pants are too high and mighty for screening, then perhaps they're a little afraid they might be nudged off their pedestals, instead of seeing it as confirmation of what they're claiming.

I can only repeat my previous quote.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Wags

[WreckitWhippet]

It's a system that offers nothing to the potential puppy buyer , "accredited" means jack all, when the ranks of the accredited breeders include those breeding dilutes and dilute to dilute ( in my own breed ) and placing everything on the main register.

Three and four litters at a time, with no regard as to the quality of the parents or the pups, prices triple and then some of what you'd pay for a quality puppy from an ethical breeder, who really cares about the future of the breed.

But hey, they managed to get a vet reference and a couple of people to say their all good. It's a joke

[Jed]

No accreditation scheme or anything else will make people ethical. Nothing. They are ethical because of who they are.

:rolleyes:

I dont think the idea of it is to make people ethical - I think its designed to enable them to make a statement that they are ethical according to what is required in that program.

Anyone can make a statement, it is doing it which seems to be a problem for some. If the CCCQ is only looking for people to make a statement, it is, imho a very hollow program, and probably not worthy of the better breeders.

Vets give references to pet shops too.

[oakway]

I would like to thank everyone who has posted a reply to my question and it is clear by the responses where this system sits with everyone.

Thank you for your time.

I wouldnt take that much notice of what breeders who havent joined have to say.

Ask the ones who have and also understand that they will be promoting this to puppy buyers and regardless of what the breeders who dont or cant join have to say that may just make the difference.

If you are concerned about what other breeders might think of you if you do - forget that they will find numerous other things whether you're in or out.

Its nice to know the difference between me being ethical and unethical is simply $22. :rolleyes:

What a crock!!!!!!

Yes Jed - I agree that you can't make people change their ethics unless they choose to, however, there is nothing wrong in creating a system which highlights those with ethics in order to give the general public a measure. The focus on the (incorrect) fee as a means to accreditation means that the person doing so hasn't fully taken on board the requirements of accreditation, but hey, if they choose not to do so, it is their bag. The application is not the entire scheme - it is merely entry into it.

If the breeders of long standing who believe they're the ants pants are too high and mighty for screening, then perhaps they're a little afraid they might be nudged off their pedestals, instead of seeing it as confirmation of what they're claiming.

I can only repeat my previous quote.

WHAT, two letters from puppy buyers and one from the vet, and pay the fee.

You know what that say's, the puppy purchaser ........... it says I had better give them a letter because if I don't and want another puppy off them they might not sell it to me.

The vet......gee they spend a lot of money here better give them the letter or they may go else where.

I repeat.

If you want the the accreditation scheme to work, then let Dogs Queensland award this title to the breeders who have always done the right thing and produced puppies

for the betterment of the breed.

If the word accredited is to be used then let it be a standard of achievement to be work for and awarded. Not handed out because your mates have given you a reference and you paid the fee.

oakway Posted 1st Feb 2011 - 08:29 AM

What is need is a scheme that awards breeders for doing the right thing in regards to the their chosen breed and the purchasers.

[Mystiqview]

Wags.

Do you work for Dogs Queensland or something? Sounds like a marketing press release.

What we are saying, is how can it be good when (CCC registered) puppy farmers are on there??

Currently there is a breeder who is having her 6th litter from one bitch. Three times mated to a Choc Merle (which is not in Australia's breed standard). All puppies from those litters are registered as Chocolate/White despite some being Choc Merle. Again flaunting breed standards in favour for the mighty dollar.

Other breeders advertising on their websites all the fabulous colours their dogs produce. Half NOT in Australia's breed standard.

If this scheme is so great.... how can these people be "accredited"??? They are not abiding by the existing CCC rules for 4 litters and abiding by their breed standards.

This is just one example. There are other breeders doing cosmetic surgery on their dogs to assist them to win. Breeding with dogs with unacceptable hip scores and other health issues.

As I said in my previous post.. The idea is great. The implementation is FLAWED.

[oakway]

Wags.

Do you work for Dogs Queensland or something? Sounds like a marketing press release.

I must admit I thought the same.

[Jed]

I would like to thank everyone who has posted a reply to my question and it is clear by the responses where this system sits with everyone.

Thank you for your time.

I wouldnt take that much notice of what breeders who havent joined have to say.

Ask the ones who have and also understand that they will be promoting this to puppy buyers and regardless of what the breeders who dont or cant join have to say that may just make the difference.

If you are concerned about what other breeders might think of you if you do - forget that they will find numerous other things whether you're in or out.

Its nice to know the difference between me being ethical and unethical is simply $22. :rolleyes:

What a crock!!!!!!

Yes Jed - I agree that you can't make people change their ethics unless they choose to, however, there is nothing wrong in creating a system which highlights those with ethics in order to give the general public a measure. The focus on the (incorrect) fee as a means to accreditation means that the person doing so hasn't fully taken on board the requirements of accreditation, but hey, if they choose not to do so, it is their bag. The application is not the entire scheme - it is merely entry into it.

If the breeders of long standing who believe they're the ants pants are too high and mighty for screening, then perhaps they're a little afraid they might be nudged off their pedestals, instead of seeing it as confirmation of what they're claiming.

I can only repeat my previous quote.

Wags. please don't put words into my mouth. I did not say, nor do I think that "breeders of long standing" (including me) believe they are the ants pants, and are afraid of being nudged off their pedestals etc ...... you said that, not me. I didn't even think it.

I do not see any point in being part of a scheme with someone who, according to the CCCQ is better than others, despite telling lies when purchasing dogs, selling a pup with a broken leg, selling pups full of hookworm, and refusing to refund the full purchase amount and auctioning pups on popular sites --- oh I could go on.

Registered pups are so difficult to acces (except in some popular breeds) that most of the public would happily buy from Bluebeard, if the pup looked ok, and will never ask, or care whether the breeder is a member of an Accredited Scheme or not.

The system almost works in UK, although a lot of very good breeders wont join, but it is less likely to work here because of differences in UKKC and Dogsqld.

And whilst the CCCQ may think it is a great idea to snuggle up with RSPCA instead of standing up for what their members want, they will find themselves standing alone as breeders walk away from their prefixes.

And I agree with Mysticview and Oakway. DO you work for Dogsqld?

[Sandra777]

The focus on the (incorrect) fee as a means to accreditation means that the person doing so hasn't fully taken on board the requirements of accreditation, but hey, if they choose not to do so, it is their bag. The application is not the entire scheme - it is merely entry into it.

And I repeat for the 1,200th time - what requirements??

I have read all the literature and no where is there any compulsion to prove the claims made either at the beginning or on an on-going basis. The whole thing is couched with mays and perhaps and we might want you to's.

A reference from a vet

References from two random puppy buyers

A reference from another breeder (not an accredited breeder or experienced breeder, just a breeder)

A promise to be a good person whether you intend to be or not or even have the knowledge to be or not.

And all of a sudden you're an accredited breeder.

Where is the requirement that you have been registered for more than 15 minutes?

Where is the requirement that you have contributed in some concrete way to your breed/sport?

Where is the requirement to PROVE you health test your dogs?

I know for a fact that at least one of the accredited breeders is an outrageous puppy farmer, they have obviously passed all the requirements, so why would anyone with any ethics want to align themselves with such a person?

[Wags]

I forgot to say in my prior post.

What if every breeder in Queensland becomes accredited ?.

That puts us all back on the same level. Oh well back to square one and a lot more money in Dogs Queensland pockets.

But thats really the whole point - if they felt it was needed why didn't they just make it a change to the COE for everyone?

Why did they set a system up which made it look like they allowed members who were rotten and why did they set a system up which sees puppies being regsitered by some who may not be doing the right thing

Why didnt they just tell them to bugger off , that we were all doing the right thing and if we dont they will chuck us out ?

Why did they play this game? It cant be for more money.

Time will tell but now its done sooner or later breeders will give in and pay the money tick the boxes or be seen to be lesser breeders.Would have been different if no one joined but looks to me like its a run away train.

Its a done deal and accredited breeders are being promoted over any others even though any one who can read can still see they dont have to do anything more than they do now. Whats more they can still sell to pet shops and still breed crossbred dogs and still breed hundreds of puppies each year.

Then they would all need to be transparent and screened regularly - something they seem to be dodging. You see, it's not just the application and it's components, it's the ongoing monitoring and screening which is designed to keep everyone on the straight and narrow. Those not keeping up with standards will be given the opportunity to change, and be more closely screened in the process. Those that refuse will then be dealt with accordingly.

Canine control councils presently only act on (some) complaints. This is an ongoing monitoring and screening independant of personal grudges and breeder jealousy as is sometimes the case in complaints being received by CCC to date.

If you've ever been involved with accreditation in the care industry, you will also know that it is taken very very seriously because passing accreditation means they can continue to operate. I see no reason why breeder accreditation should be treated any less seriously. It may well be feared by those who fully understand the process and who are not confident in maintaining it.

Personally I believe that every registered breeder ought to be under an accreditation scheme. I'm actually hoping that this is a prelude to the need for accreditation, but not until we've got the unregistered breeders monitorable and answerable. Indeed the State register may well be a pathway to more people taking their breeding seriously and becoming accredited. Wouldn't that be wonderful.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Wags

[Wags]

The focus on the (incorrect) fee as a means to accreditation means that the person doing so hasn't fully taken on board the requirements of accreditation, but hey, if they choose not to do so, it is their bag. The application is not the entire scheme - it is merely entry into it.

And I repeat for the 1,200th time - what requirements??

I have read all the literature and no where is there any compulsion to prove the claims made either at the beginning or on an on-going basis. The whole thing is couched with mays and perhaps and we might want you to's.

A reference from a vet

References from two random puppy buyers

A reference from another breeder (not an accredited breeder or experienced breeder, just a breeder)

A promise to be a good person whether you intend to be or not or even have the knowledge to be or not.

And all of a sudden you're an accredited breeder.

Where is the requirement that you have been registered for more than 15 minutes?

Where is the requirement that you have contributed in some concrete way to your breed/sport?

Where is the requirement to PROVE you health test your dogs?

I know for a fact that at least one of the accredited breeders is an outrageous puppy farmer, they have obviously passed all the requirements, so why would anyone with any ethics want to align themselves with such a person?

Sandra, I would suggest you re-read the paperwork more closely as it does outline the ongoing requirements.

[Wags]

The focus on the (incorrect) fee as a means to accreditation means that the person doing so hasn't fully taken on board the requirements of accreditation, but hey, if they choose not to do so, it is their bag. The application is not the entire scheme - it is merely entry into it.

And I repeat for the 1,200th time - what requirements??

I have read all the literature and no where is there any compulsion to prove the claims made either at the beginning or on an on-going basis. The whole thing is couched with mays and perhaps and we might want you to's.

A reference from a vet

References from two random puppy buyers

A reference from another breeder (not an accredited breeder or experienced breeder, just a breeder)

A promise to be a good person whether you intend to be or not or even have the knowledge to be or not.

And all of a sudden you're an accredited breeder.

Where is the requirement that you have been registered for more than 15 minutes?

Where is the requirement that you have contributed in some concrete way to your breed/sport?

Where is the requirement to PROVE you health test your dogs?

I know for a fact that at least one of the accredited breeders is an outrageous puppy farmer, they have obviously passed all the requirements, so why would anyone with any ethics want to align themselves with such a person?

Really, and you know this breeder and have visited the facilities personally, seen it all have you. It is this sort of claim that accreditation will discredit once and for all.

[Sandra777]

Sandra, I would suggest you re-read the paperwork more closely as it does outline the ongoing requirements.

WHERE, It is full of mights and maybes - we might drop in and have a cuppa and see if you're being a good person. I can't find anything that states you must do this that or the other, just "I promise I will" and "we might check up and maybe keep you to your promise"

And as for your other comment - Yes I do have proof of this person's unethical behaviour but you don't need to visit a property to identify an unethical puppy farmer, if you believe this to be so and are in some way related to the implementation of this scheme then doG help us all.

[oakway]

I forgot to say in my prior post.

What if every breeder in Queensland becomes accredited ?.

That puts us all back on the same level. Oh well back to square one and a lot more money in Dogs Queensland pockets.

But thats really the whole point - if they felt it was needed why didn't they just make it a change to the COE for everyone?

Why did they set a system up which made it look like they allowed members who were rotten and why did they set a system up which sees puppies being regsitered by some who may not be doing the right thing

Why didnt they just tell them to bugger off , that we were all doing the right thing and if we dont they will chuck us out ?

Why did they play this game? It cant be for more money.

Time will tell but now its done sooner or later breeders will give in and pay the money tick the boxes or be seen to be lesser breeders.Would have been different if no one joined but looks to me like its a run away train.

Its a done deal and accredited breeders are being promoted over any others even though any one who can read can still see they dont have to do anything more than they do now. Whats more they can still sell to pet shops and still breed crossbred dogs and still breed hundreds of puppies each year.

Then they would all need to be transparent and screened regularly - something they seem to be dodging. You see, it's not just the application and it's components, it's the ongoing monitoring and screening which is designed to keep everyone on the straight and narrow. Those not keeping up with standards will be given the opportunity to change, and be more closely screened in the process. Those that refuse will then be dealt with accordingly.

Canine control councils presently only act on (some) complaints. This is an ongoing monitoring and screening independant of personal grudges and breeder jealousy as is sometimes the case in complaints being received by CCC to date.

If you've ever been involved with accreditation in the care industry, you will also know that it is taken very very seriously because passing accreditation means they can continue to operate. I see no reason why breeder accreditation should be treated any less seriously. It may well be feared by those who fully understand the process and who are not confident in maintaining it.

Personally I believe that every registered breeder ought to be under an accreditation scheme. I'm actually hoping that this is a prelude to the need for accreditation, but not until we've got the unregistered breeders monitorable and answerable. Indeed the State register may well be a pathway to more people taking their breeding seriously and becoming accredited. Wouldn't that be wonderful.

Well that just about lets me out. After 40 odd years I am just about to give up. Sick to death of people that may have never bred a litter and wouldn't have a clue telling me what to do.

I don't need to be accredited I have satisfied client coming back with their friends and family for pups all the time (not that I breed enough to fill the orders). People that have dealt with me, and pass my name onto others as as good and ethical dealer. Who need acreditation. Also we are dealing with dogs not the aged care system.

From me who is about to go to the airport to collect a hopefully pregnant Whippet.

As you have have not said if you are employed by Dogs Queensland are you RSPCA ?.