Piaa Press Release On Puppy Farms

[Aussienot]

I pass along without comment the Pet Industry Association of Australia's press release on Puppy Farms.

7 April 2011

Update on Puppy Farm Issue

The puppy farm issue affects every participant in the pet industry whether you are in retail, grooming, boarding or related services. The wild claims made by some animal activist groups might be wrong, or might be motivated by an ideological desire to shut down pet retailing, but they do hurt the image of our industry.

The PIAA has for the past four months been working on a policy in response to community concerns about puppy farms.

Activists are making two accusations about our industry:

• We buy dogs from puppy farms that are cruel and unregulated
  
• By offering dogs at retail, we are creating the problem of unwanted pets that are being euthanased in great numbers.
  

Both claims are wildly exaggerated.

As part of our policy development process we have been doing some modelling on the numbers of unwanted dogs and their fate. PIAA modelling shows the true numbers of dogs euthanised due to no room for adoption is a fraction of that claimed by activists.

• About 450,000 dogs are sold in Australia each year1
  
• Pet stores account for less than 15 per cent of total dog sales, about 67,500 dogs.2
  
• Breeders, through newspaper, internet and word of mouth sales, are responsible for the remaining 85% of sales, about 382,500 dogs.
  

So pet stores can only be a minor contributor to the problem of unwanted dogs.

1 Australian Companion Animal Council (2010). “Contribution of the pet care industry to the Australian Economy”

2 Australian Veterinary Association (2007). Sale of Pets through Pet Shops

PIAA believes that while pet stores are a minor part of the cause, they are a major potential player in the solution. Pet retail stores represent a professional and well managed resource for any policy response to the problem of unwanted pets. Professionally operated pet retail stores provide informed advice in matching pets with owners. Pet retail stores demonstrate a duty of care to both the pets and potential owners – so the right animal is selected for the conditions in which a family lives.

We have Australia Veterinary Association data that shows a pet selected following good advice from a pet shop is less likely to end up in a pound than an animal sourced elsewhere. We are developing a solid platform to rebuff activist claims and demonstrate the role pet shops can play in responsible pet ownership, from breeder through to pet owner. During this process we have sought the views of various PIAA members, RSPCA Australia, the Australian Veterinary Association, the Animal Welfare League, the Australian Association of Pet Dog Breeders and the Australian National Kennel Council.

As we have worked with stakeholders in good faith to develop a policy that deals with the issues raised, it is particularly unhelpful when an organization with significant credibility and public funding, like the RSPCA continues to campaign against the pet industry.

The RSPCA will argue that their campaign is aimed at cruel puppy factories, and they do not necessarily have a problem with PIAA pet retailers. But when the RSPCA endorses posters with headlines stating “puppy factories are the suppliers of the cute puppy that you see in the pet shop window” it is hard not to believe elements in the RSPCA are joining the radicals who want to shut down our industry.

We aim to form several ad hoc policy committees within our membership to help finalise our policy response in the next two months.

I will keep you informed of progress.

Roger B Perkins

Chief Executive

[animalia]

In my view they (pet shops) are still a contributor to the problem, even if puppy sales in pet shops are less than that of other sources.

[supercharged]

"Registered Breeders" are not responsible for the remaining 85% -------registered are lumped in with all those wonderful BYB we come accross week after week.....sigh:(

[Austerra]

Funny how ANKC registrations for last year were approx 66,000, as supercharged says anyone "breeding" dogs seem to be lumped together.

http://www.ankc.org.au/National-Registration-Statistics.aspx

[Austerra]

quote: Professionally operated pet retail stores provide informed advice in matching pets with owners. Pet retail stores demonstrate a duty of care to both the pets and potential owners – so the right animal is selected for the conditions in which a family lives.

HAH!!! Maybe when they all start employing people with decent experience, especially in breed specifics such as temperament, grooming and hereditary problems particular to the breed of dog they are selling, and encourage purchasers to go away and research if the breed is going to be suitable for them (for possibly the next 15 yrs) before allowing the impulse purchase to continue then there may be some headway made in pet retailers selling responsibly. But it all still comes down to indiscriminate breeding for profit.

[Maddy]

Selling puppy farm puppies has finally had a negative impact on their image now that the public knows pet shop puppies don't come from some magical puppy box of loveliness?

My heart bleeds for the PIAA

[Danois]

Whoops - did not see this thread when I started mine.

My comment was: What is a worry is that they are lumping all breeders together and not distinguishing between ANKC registered breeders and puppy farms/ BYBs to claim that pet shops only contribute to less than 15% of sales of dogs so are only a minor contributor to the unwanted dog situation...

[Maddy]

Whoops - did not see this thread when I started mine.

My comment was: What is a worry is that they are lumping all breeders together and not distinguishing between ANKC registered breeders and puppy farms/ BYBs to claim that pet shops only contribute to less than 15% of sales of dogs so are only a minor contributor to the unwanted dog situation...

I guess it's in their best interest to paint themselves as being a lesser contributor while putting all other sources into one group (despite the huge difference between a puppy farm and a breeder) and saying, "There you go, it's their fault, not ours."

Edited to add..

What should be included (but never will be) is that virtually all of their dogs come from puppy farms or BYBs and so if a group is going to be lumped with another, it should be them with their suppliers.

So..

Puppies bred/sold through registered breeders.. 66,000 (according to Austerra)

Puppies bred/sold in puppy farms and BYBs (through pet shops and private sale) .. 384,000

Their number looks considerably less innocuous now.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Hardy's Angel

[~Anne~]

"Registered Breeders" are not responsible for the remaining 85% -------registered are lumped in with all those wonderful BYB we come accross week after week.....sigh:(

It doesn't say registered breeders........ it says 'breeders'.

[~Anne~]

Whoops - did not see this thread when I started mine.

My comment was: What is a worry is that they are lumping all breeders together and not distinguishing between ANKC registered breeders and puppy farms/ BYBs to claim that pet shops only contribute to less than 15% of sales of dogs so are only a minor contributor to the unwanted dog situation...

I guess it's in their best interest to paint themselves as being a lesser contributor while putting all other sources into one group (despite the huge difference between a puppy farm and a breeder) and saying, "There you go, it's their fault, not ours."

Edited to add..

What should be included (but never will be) is that virtually all of their dogs come from puppy farms or BYBs and so if a group is going to be lumped with another, it should be them with their suppliers.

So..

Puppies bred/sold through registered breeders.. 66,000 (according to Austerra)

Puppies bred/sold in puppy farms and BYBs (through pet shops and private sale) .. 384,000

Their number looks considerably less innocuous now.

The fact of it is though, regardless of what we think of them, is that they are selling limited numbers and that the greater majority of dogs are not being sold by them (and as we know, not by registered breeders either) and yet the focus and money is spent on battling pet shops.

Wouldn't it be more logical to focus on where the damage is being done?

Pet shops have sold animals for as long as I can remember and we haven't always had the issues we have now. We have unwanted dogs in the numbers we have because of society attitudes and because of unlimited and unrestricted breeding of dogs.

[Danois]

So Pet Stores sell more puppies a year (67,500) than registered breeders (66,000)?

That puts a different light on it too.

[Maddy]

Whoops - did not see this thread when I started mine.

My comment was: What is a worry is that they are lumping all breeders together and not distinguishing between ANKC registered breeders and puppy farms/ BYBs to claim that pet shops only contribute to less than 15% of sales of dogs so are only a minor contributor to the unwanted dog situation...

I guess it's in their best interest to paint themselves as being a lesser contributor while putting all other sources into one group (despite the huge difference between a puppy farm and a breeder) and saying, "There you go, it's their fault, not ours."

Edited to add..

What should be included (but never will be) is that virtually all of their dogs come from puppy farms or BYBs and so if a group is going to be lumped with another, it should be them with their suppliers.

So..

Puppies bred/sold through registered breeders.. 66,000 (according to Austerra)

Puppies bred/sold in puppy farms and BYBs (through pet shops and private sale) .. 384,000

Their number looks considerably less innocuous now.

The fact of it is though, regardless of what we think of them, is that they are selling limited numbers and that the greater majority of dogs are not being sold by them (and as we know, not by registered breeders either) and yet the focus and money is spent on battling pet shops.

Wouldn't it be more logical to focus on where the damage is being done?

Pet shops have sold animals for as long as I can remember and we haven't always had the issues we have now. We have unwanted dogs in the numbers we have because of society attitudes and because of unlimited and unrestricted breeding of dogs.

I'm not suggesting they do sell more than they've admitted to, just pointing out that when you lump groups of suppliers together, you can make any party look guilty.

Fact of the matter is, pet shops are supporting puppy farms by buying their "products". If pet shops weren't buying, puppy farmers and BYBers would lose a considerable amount of business (and a very easy way to offload product without the public ever having to see how the dogs are raised and cared for).

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

I'd really love to show them some great examples of responsible sales they made from their petshops.

2 weeks ago, PAWS took on two dogs, both purchased from petshops on a whim. there is nothing unusual about these two stories. However, this is just one rescue group and one that takes surrenders as well as dogs from pounds.

Person 1 allowed her 5 yr old son to "insist" she bought him a pet shop puppy. She is actually someone that probably shouldn't ever have a dog. She is obsessed that the dog smelt, really bad. So bad, that if her son touched the dog, she made him get changed. Finally, it was time to get rid of the dog - well, I suppose they had had the dog for 2 long years at this stage. Reason? Needing to move into rental and i quote "not prepared to replace the floorboards in a short term rental home due to the smell that the dog would leave behind". The dog had been examined and tested by a vet, to no avail, no cause for the smell could be found. The dog was on a good diet and regular baths, not walked. Dog still smelt. Our rescue vet, staff and foster carers have been unable to smell anything abnormal. Go figure.

Person 2 was 78 at the time of purchase, only lonely for about 2-3 hours a week but that's what the puppy's job was, to keep her company at those times. Puppy was kept only in the kitchen, barely walked and 18 months later was no more use. person decided it was time to move into a retirement village. Luckily for this puppy, an overloaded rescue took the poor little thing on. She's now living a happy home life with a number of other dogs, awaiting a permanent home.

And this is just 2 dogs in one rescue group in one week. Not sure where the other dogs rescued the same week came from (via the pound), but I'd like to put money on it that some were ex pet shop purchases. they are often not microchipped so you don't know.

petshops do get their stock from back yard breeders who are also lowlifes.

I did talk to another lady trying to rehome her little dog last night, due to a change in personal circumstances. She's heartbroken and had rescued this dog from a sad situation. She's doubly sad because before she got this one at Christmas, she'd had to euthanase a 6 month old maltese/shihtzu that she bought from a back yard breeder in Sydney's east.

Puppy cost $600. She only had the puppy for 3 months before it died. It had a major spinal defect and as it grew, it couldn't walk properly and was in pain. Moronic money hungry breeder didn't want to know of course and I wonder how many more people out there are buying poor little badly bred puppies that die in agony a few months later.

It is a disgusting industry that needs regulation. It is an industry causing rescuers to be simply overloaded and overwhelmed.

Please, if you read this, never buy a puppy online, in a petshop or from a back yard breeder. They are in it for the money so imagine what happens when the breeding cycle goes wrong, a dog needs vet treatment and so on. Demand = supply.

[supercharged]

"Registered Breeders" are not responsible for the remaining 85% -------registered are lumped in with all those wonderful BYB we come accross week after week.....sigh:(

It doesn't say registered breeders........ it says 'breeders'.

Hence the inverted commas.....

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

And because petshops get away with selling crossbreeds for ridiculous amounts of money, morons start breeding their undesexed pet shop puppies when they come into season and start selling them for a profit - it does happen, believe me, I've seen the results! Two pet shop puppies made a litter of pups with 4 different breeds in them. No wonder rescuers have trouble identifying dogs these days, not uncommon to have more than 2 breed mixes in one dog ....

Latest thing in our local petshop is to list dogs as 3/4 This Breed and 1/4 That Breed. And they sell Staffies with Kelpies or Sharpei crosses - not a great mix idea but don't let that stop you making money. It makes me sick to the core.

[Steve]

Master Dog Breeders and Associates

Response to PIAA press release dated 7/4/11

Our members take responsibility for the placement of their puppies in homes which are best suited to their breed traits and characteristics.They provide support and guidance to their puppy buyers and act as a safety net into the future if the family can no longer keep the dog and help to find a new home for it.

All MDBA breeder and rescue members are able to provide puppy and dog buyers free membership to the MDBA.

This enables us to track their long term outcomes.

As a result we categorically state without any reservation that MDBA breeder members do not contribute to the problem of unwanted dogs.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Steve

[shortstep]

Whoops - did not see this thread when I started mine.

My comment was: What is a worry is that they are lumping all breeders together and not distinguishing between ANKC registered breeders and puppy farms/ BYBs to claim that pet shops only contribute to less than 15% of sales of dogs so are only a minor contributor to the unwanted dog situation...

I guess it's in their best interest to paint themselves as being a lesser contributor while putting all other sources into one group (despite the huge difference between a puppy farm and a breeder) and saying, "There you go, it's their fault, not ours."

Edited to add..

What should be included (but never will be) is that virtually all of their dogs come from puppy farms or BYBs and so if a group is going to be lumped with another, it should be them with their suppliers.

So..

Puppies bred/sold through registered breeders.. 66,000 (according to Austerra)

Puppies bred/sold in puppy farms and BYBs (through pet shops and private sale) .. 384,000

Their number looks considerably less innocuous now.

Firstly, I support restricting the sale of dogs and cats in pet shops.

However, I fail to see how you can seperate out ANKC breeders from either BYB or puppy farmers (BTW those terms need defining if they are to really mean anything).

As far as I know there is no rule in ANKC that bans 'BYB' from membership in ANKC, is there?

Is there a rule that says no ANKC member may be a 'puppy farmer' ?

I do not hink that saying 'ANKC breeders' automatically excludes them from being a BYB or puppy farmer.

Perhaps more to the point,

Do any of the state bodies of ANKC have a rule that their members can not sell their dogs/pups to pet shops or place their dogs via pet shops?

How about MDBA, WKC, Labradoodle Breeders, any group of dog breeders, do any have a rule that prevents their members for selling to or though pet shops?

Seems to me the best way to disassociate yourself from pet shops is to have a rule that members of your group/club/registry may not sell to or through pet shops.

Perhaps our efforts are better spent telling our member organizations we do want our members selling to or through pet shops.

Edited April 7, 2011 by shortstep

[Steve]

Whoops - did not see this thread when I started mine.

My comment was: What is a worry is that they are lumping all breeders together and not distinguishing between ANKC registered breeders and puppy farms/ BYBs to claim that pet shops only contribute to less than 15% of sales of dogs so are only a minor contributor to the unwanted dog situation...

I guess it's in their best interest to paint themselves as being a lesser contributor while putting all other sources into one group (despite the huge difference between a puppy farm and a breeder) and saying, "There you go, it's their fault, not ours."

Edited to add..

What should be included (but never will be) is that virtually all of their dogs come from puppy farms or BYBs and so if a group is going to be lumped with another, it should be them with their suppliers.

So..

Puppies bred/sold through registered breeders.. 66,000 (according to Austerra)

Puppies bred/sold in puppy farms and BYBs (through pet shops and private sale) .. 384,000

Their number looks considerably less innocuous now.

Firstly, I support restricting the sale of dogs and cats in pet shops.

However, I fail to see how you can seperate out ANKC breeders from either BYB or puppy farmers (BTW those terms need defining if they are to really mean anything).

As far as I know there is no rule in ANKC that bans 'BYB' from membership in ANKC, is there?

Is there a rule that says no ANKC member may be a 'puppy farmer' ?

I do not hink that saying 'ANKC breeders' automatically excludes them from being a BYB or puppy farmer.

Perhaps more to the point,

Do any of the state bodies of ANKC have a rule that their members can not sell their dogs/pups to pet shops or place their dogs via pet shops?

How about MDBA, WKC, Labradoodle Breeders, any group of dog breeders, do any have a rule that prevents their members for selling to or though pet shops?

Seems to me the best way to disassociate yourself from pet shops is to have a rule that members of your group/club/registry may not sell to or through pet shops.

Perhaps our efforts are better spent telling our member organizations we do want our members selling to or through pet shops.

MDBA Breeders code of conduct.

9.I will never knowingly sell any puppy/adult dog to laboratories, pet shops or dealers in dogs or to person's known to sell stock to any of the above. I shall not provide any stud services to such persons (a dealer is defined as any person who regularly buys stock for sale at a profit).

[Guest DBT]

I'm fairly sure that Dogs SA members sign off that they are not to sell puppies to pet shops. Can someone clarify this.

[Steve]

Whoops - did not see this thread when I started mine.

My comment was: What is a worry is that they are lumping all breeders together and not distinguishing between ANKC registered breeders and puppy farms/ BYBs to claim that pet shops only contribute to less than 15% of sales of dogs so are only a minor contributor to the unwanted dog situation...

I guess it's in their best interest to paint themselves as being a lesser contributor while putting all other sources into one group (despite the huge difference between a puppy farm and a breeder) and saying, "There you go, it's their fault, not ours."

Edited to add..

What should be included (but never will be) is that virtually all of their dogs come from puppy farms or BYBs and so if a group is going to be lumped with another, it should be them with their suppliers.

So..

Puppies bred/sold through registered breeders.. 66,000 (according to Austerra)

Puppies bred/sold in puppy farms and BYBs (through pet shops and private sale) .. 384,000

Their number looks considerably less innocuous now.

Firstly, I support restricting the sale of dogs and cats in pet shops.

However, I fail to see how you can seperate out ANKC breeders from either BYB or puppy farmers (BTW those terms need defining if they are to really mean anything).

As far as I know there is no rule in ANKC that bans 'BYB' from membership in ANKC, is there?

Is there a rule that says no ANKC member may be a 'puppy farmer' ?

I do not hink that saying 'ANKC breeders' automatically excludes them from being a BYB or puppy farmer.

Perhaps more to the point,

Do any of the state bodies of ANKC have a rule that their members can not sell their dogs/pups to pet shops or place their dogs via pet shops?

How about MDBA, WKC, Labradoodle Breeders, any group of dog breeders, do any have a rule that prevents their members for selling to or though pet shops?

Seems to me the best way to disassociate yourself from pet shops is to have a rule that members of your group/club/registry may not sell to or through pet shops.

Perhaps our efforts are better spent telling our member organizations we do want our members selling to or through pet shops.

Even if someone could - and they can if they take a minute to do some research - prove that some registered breeders are BYB or puppy farmers that still doesnt say that they are the main players in the unwanted dog problem. Statistically purebred registered breeders only breed about 9% of dogs sold throughout Australia - that in itself is evidence enough for me to suggest as a group they can hardly be held accountable for the other couple of hundred thousand that end up unwanted. even if every single one of the 30,000 odd they breed each year ended up as unwanted they still could not be held out to dry as a primary causal factor.

The problem now, always has been and always will be is that there is not enough data to prove or disprove any defence or theory other than the numbers we actually breed and sell. Based on current figures both registered breeders and pet shops are in the clear because what they sell is only a drop in the ocean to numbers cited for unwanted dogs.

Until such time as they are able to gather accurate statistics no one can say where the unwanted masses originate from.