Oscars Law

[toy dog]

Still none of this makes any difference. You want only registered breeders to breed dogs - so do I - but there are a hell of a lot of people who also want people to breed designer dogs. There are also lots of people who dont want anyone to breed any dogs whO see the bigger picture much more clearly than many of us do.

no, what im saying is breeding should be done not for a humans own selfish bank account but for the welfare of the dogs they have. the animals rely on us to look after them and it is up to us to make sure they come into this world as healthy as we can by researching, now puppy farmers with 2-3-4 breeds in the one poor puppy are unable to do this because they know nothing about the dogs they are breeding and don't want to know all they want to know about is how fast they can sell when they'll be out the door and how much money they will get. the pedigree dog if bred correctly with care is a far superior choice for consumers and people wake up to this after being stung.

i've been told this too by a person in council, there is a market for these designer dogs so why not? there is a market for any puppies really, people just want a pet puppy so will end up going to a petshop or puppy farm until they learn how the dog was bred and how they are helping to keep thousands more dogs in prisons their whole life.

[toy dog]

I think there is an overlooked element in this VCAT puppy farm case. The VCAT has made the decision based on legal principles. That's what they have to do. The emotion side can't apply. Whether we believe it should or not is irrelevant. I feel for the Council in this case, it will be a regulatory nightmare for them. But they will need to deal with it through correct channels, not necessarily emotive ones.

That aside, doesn't Oscar's Law want to ban the sale of puppies online?? So how does it get promoted on this website, which promotes purebred dogs, and provides a service for advertising those dogs online?? I have pups advertised online at the moment? Does that make me an evil, commercial, profit driven puppy farmer???

I like the basic ideas behind things like Oscar's Law. But I think many of us have learned over time that it's not the basic idea that is concerning, but the other less promoted agendas involved in these things that sneak in under the radar.

PETA is a prime example. "Yay - let's promote anti cruelty etc etc". Then comes the less obvious agendas of anti-companion animals... and worse...

I am against commercial puppy farms. I have been in some really bad ones... been there, seen it, smelled it. Certainly don't support it. But I have said before and will say again - additional regulations are only as good as the regulatory enforcement infrastructure supporting them. Otherwise they only serve to regulate the honest people, who are not in the wrong to start with.

It's all well and good "insisting" that the Govt regulates the industry, runs education campaigns etc etc. Where does the money come from to do it? Economies are fragile enough at the moment...

EFS

yes i suggested this to them, that there are many registered breeders including myself who advertise online so they should change the wording to read, online puppy farms which is what they are meaning, click of the mouse and you've bought your designer dog online and it is delivered to you like a product no going out to the premises which makes it even easier for these farmers to operate and exploit their dogs. but what i suggested fell on deaf ears, they weren't listening at that stage as they found a few reg breeders doing the wrong thing and breeding crosses apparently so i was a badie i also got told not to promote purebred or registered breeders but i was offering my experience in breeding dogs and trying to tell the public about why it is not a good choice to buy a designer dog that could have hidden genetic problems. this was on facebook i got chucked off. and told to shut up.

personally i thought there was a lot of jealousy and i was getting too much attention so out the door i went.

[BJean]

lilli - WHY ARE YOU ON THIS FORUM? It is clear that you are not concerned with the welfare of dogs

Is it that you are just trying to upset everyone?

Nice to meet you too

Edited August 11, 2011 by lilli

[BJean]

i believe that when you look at society and the amount of dogs needing homes in rescue organisations and shelters and the are overflowing why have these intense breeding farms of our dogs when there are plenty waiting for homes and are being put down because there is not enough but still these farms are churning out thousands upon thousands of dogs (2000 for one farm so multiply that by 70-80 in Victoria alone).

I believe if you look at population growth in the last decade

Vs

the number of dogs in shelters

you would see that your hysterical assertions

are false.

im sorry but i don't believe it is "hysterics" as you say, i am one of many many people who don't want these puppy farms and im talking about actual residents in that area who dont' want it coupled with a large proportion of the public, what im talking about is NOT REGISTERED BREEDERS let us be clear on this, it is about DESIGNER DOG CROSS BREEDS being bred for profit in highly intensive breeding farms. i believe this is nothing to do with a hobby registered breeder is it????????? or is it?????

You claim dogs are dying and end up in pounds

because there is an oversupply of dogs / undersupply of homes.

This is incorrect.

It is hysterics when you use false emotive arguments as a means of persuasion.

[Kiara&Heidi]

When you say there is not an undersupply of homes are you taking into account that not everyone wants to own a dog? Are you claiming that it is necessary to have puppy farms and breeders who are not concerned with health or temperament of their dogs, just because statistically there are enough people to provide homes? You cannot seriously use statistics alone to address the issue of puppy farming.

[BJean]

When you say there is not an undersupply of homes are you taking into account that not everyone wants to own a dog? Are you claiming that it is necessary to have puppy farms and breeders who are not concerned with health or temperament of their dogs, just because statistically there are enough people to provide homes? You cannot seriously use statistics alone to address the issue of puppy farming.

what?

I am talking about the reasons why dogs end up in pounds.

It sounds like you need to learn more about what you are trying to go on about.

toy brought up statistics, false ones.

(the usual suspects that are dragged out when puppy farms are discussed)

toy asserted that there that pounds were overflowing, as there were not enough homes and too many dogs.

the overpopulation myth, is just that.

Before you talk about statistics, you need to understand where pound dogs come from and why pounds kill so many dogs each year or rather why they kill about the same this year as they did a decade ago.

if you want to link puppy farms up to dogs in pounds and correlate that in to your arguments, you need to explain why you believe this is so.

-

particularly when pound stats tell a different story.

Edited August 11, 2011 by lilli

[BJean]

it just sounds like to me that someone maybe in VCAT has a vested interest in these operations i was thinking that the other day, because time after time other councils didn't want farms in their shires and refuse to give the operators a licence so when it gets to VCAT they always over turn it - the farmers always get their licence in the end. it says that the shire in Ballan did not want any puppy farms and the residents don't want any puppy farms but still they are all forced to have this puppy farm.

my own shire where i currently live says there are no puppy farms in the region as well. but looking at that and reading it i thought i bet ya there are still farms here that are ofcourse not licenced so technically under the radar keeping it quiet.

yes it's called democracy.

You know where the citizens of a country agree to abide by a set of systems and regulations, buy their own land and then act accordingly.

Who cares what you want.

You want something different for the land in Ballan? -

Next time a big piece of land goes up for sale, buy it for yourself.

And be happy when you make your bank repayments that you prevented a puppy farm from being established.

according to your signature you don't even come from this country so do you know what is going on behind the scenes at all? and comments about me buying land and preventing puppy farms is uncalled for really, it is irrelevant.

You're really funny

My immigration movements are relevant, yet me telling you to go buy the Ballan land yourself, is uncalled for?

You dont think it is logical for someone to suggest that if you want to control the way a property is run - when the current owner already operates within the law - that you should buy the freehold title of the property yourself?

For your state of mind:

I am Australian, but I found freedom in Turkiye and Kazakhstan.

Edited August 11, 2011 by lilli

[Steve]

Still none of this makes any difference. You want only registered breeders to breed dogs - so do I - but there are a hell of a lot of people who also want people to breed designer dogs. There are also lots of people who dont want anyone to breed any dogs whO see the bigger picture much more clearly than many of us do.

no, what im saying is breeding should be done not for a humans own selfish bank account but for the welfare of the dogs they have. the animals rely on us to look after them and it is up to us to make sure they come into this world as healthy as we can by researching, now puppy farmers with 2-3-4 breeds in the one poor puppy are unable to do this because they know nothing about the dogs they are breeding and don't want to know all they want to know about is how fast they can sell when they'll be out the door and how much money they will get. the pedigree dog if bred correctly with care is a far superior choice for consumers and people wake up to this after being stung.

i've been told this too by a person in council, there is a market for these designer dogs so why not? there is a market for any puppies really, people just want a pet puppy so will end up going to a petshop or puppy farm until they learn how the dog was bred and how they are helping to keep thousands more dogs in prisons their whole life.

You still dont get it. You say people shouldnt breed dogs for profit but for the welfare of the dogs - but the push is that even if purebred breeders dont primarily breed for profit they dont care about the welfare of their dogs - ETA Pedigree dogs exposed. You say that the pedigree dog if bred with care is a far superior choice but you dont hear that the majority of people are not agreeing with you - they are saying that the designer dog if bred with care is a far superior animal - but you cant see we dont get to tell people what they can breed and whether they should make money from it. In Australia it is a legitimate business and federal law says you cant prevent someone from doing something you dont agree with just because you think they are manufacturing an inferior product - if this were the case since pedigree dogs exposed purebred breeders would be even more endangered than they are now.

They say they will breed puppies with their welfare as one of their goals - they have a development application which complies with the regulations and until they do compromise the welfare of their dogs all of this just makes it look like its a bunch of animal rights nutters.

The big picture is to push for breeders to be separated and for each group - designer dog breeders and purebred breeders to fight against each other so each help to bring in laws against each other because they know in Australia you cant have one law for one and not the other .

Its difficult for me to see that people cant understand that in this country you cant stop someone from doing the same as anyone else can in case they muck it up because one group doesnt approve of their motives.

Please dont speak to me of dogs kept in rotten conditions in commercial premises because Im one of the girls who have been up to my armpits cleaning up after breeders over the past several months who have had dogs kept in the most appalling conditions you could possibly imagine. Where we have had to put on masks and overalls to enter people's bedrooms where they keep their dogs sitting in 6 inches of shit and walking on the dead bodies the breeder cant be bothered to remove. But they are registered only have 10 fertile bitches and they dont breed for money and they are purebreds ? Kidding right? Some of these have been purebred breeders still to this day active in the show ring - who take a dog out on the week end which has had the honor of living in a crate in the loungeroom separate from the current breeding stock in the bedrooms and everyone cheers them on ! Take a good long look at those in this country who have been pinged for animal welfare issues and some of them have been judges and owners of purebred dogs who say they dont breed for profit and everyone can see it.

So do we say purebred breeders shouldnt breed dogs because some of them do the wrong thing? Do we watch PDE and say in case all purebred breeders muck it up we will stop everyone from breeding purebred dogs ?Maybe its better to take em on one bit at a time? Ban them breeding some breeds or outlaw some of their practices? Of course not so why cant you see we cant stop someone else in case they do the wrong thing or because we believe our puppies are superior when there is a ground swell telling the world the opposite.

Why cant you see that if you fight to prevent one breeder having rights that this will inevitably affect our rights. If we are going to protest against numbers, breeds or motivations and carry on in case they do the wrong thing and we win the very first thing that happens is that the laws have to treat us all equally. Mandatory codes and domestic animal laws apply to us all. In australia they have to at federal level which overides all others.

You are in bed with animal liberation and animal liberation want the breeding of all dogs stopped. Part of the plan is to divide us and have us fight each other to bring in laws which will affect us all.

Beating the hell out of someone who asks to be able to do something on their property with a desire to be out in the open and easily located and inspected etc makes no sense to me when the alternative is for breeders to hide away and keep their animals in cramped filthy conditions in bedrooms and sheds in fear if they ask permission and are prepared to do it all they are told that they will cop this.

I want them out in the open so we know who they are and where they are. I want all breeders regardless of what they breed or what their stated motivation is or how many they own or breed to be accountable for the welfare of their animals and thats not possible if we show everyone if they put their hand up we will make their lives hell.

If you continue to judge people in case they do something wrong then there isnt much point in sooking because they do it to you.

Before you all start moaning that I am supporting puppy mills, or designer dog breeding or that I am anti purebred breeders or anti show ring - all of which is stupid and nothing could be further from the truth - before you back a call to protest against this decision ask yourself whether or not that will help or hinder . I think it will hinder and make it more likely that more dogs will suffer and whilst you are more than welcome to disagree and continue on your path all I ask is that you think it through for the sake of the dogs. There is so much going on behind the scenes and I think animal rights are playing you like a fiddle.

[Kiara&Heidi]

Lilli, I am aware of the document I believe you are referring to, so do not assume I dont know what I'm talking about. Pound statistics showing reasons for euthanasia do not make puppy farming ethical. You are only considering one aspect of the problem.

I have worked in a pet shop (regrettably) and I have seen puppy farmers come in day after day with puppies from the same bitch in very close together litters. The puppy farmers were never concerned with the welfare of their dogs, and I will never forget when one of them came in and said "my main bichon is too sick so unfortunately I've had to breed with the poodle".

The puppies were often sick - some contracted parvo and some died. I was sick to death of people coming in day after day, people who were not considering a puppy but ended up walking out with one. People who had never had dogs before, but thought the Kelpie cross Koolies, or the rottie cross GSDs would be a good choice for their first dog. Working in the pet shop we were not allowed to turn people away.

Regardless of whether or not the dogs ended up in shelters, I feel I can safely say that 8 out of 10 homes that pups ended up in were unsuitable.

[WreckitWhippet]

Oscars law rears it's ugly head yet again....

[toy dog]

steve said

You say people shouldnt breed dogs for profit but for the welfare of the dogs

im not telling people what they should do or not do but its just common sense that most that do breed for profit alone with their little crosses im not talking about reg breeders im talking about DD puppy farms. they aint gonna spend money and reduce their profit margin on their dogs getting tests, vaccinations, vetting the dogs and reseaching bloodlines.

They say they will breed puppies with their welfare as one of their goals - they have a development application which complies with the regulations and until they do compromise the welfare of their dogs all of this just makes it look like its a bunch of animal rights nutters.

its not ALL animal rights people! it is the council, RSPCA and residents as well as others from outside from the public as well as those darn animal rights people.

Please dont speak to me of dogs kept in rotten conditions in commercial premises

and yes in my travels came across a few reg breeders like you who have hoarded alot of animals but others say farmer whisper behind their backs but turn a blind eye to the suffering of those animals. in the meantime reg breeders like this have the potential to ruin all of our reputations. i've rescued dogs from so called reg breeders who are not motivated by money who can't see what they are doing to the dogs.

You are in bed with animal liberation and animal liberation want the breeding of all dogs stopped. Part of the plan is to divide us and have us fight each other to bring in laws which will affect us all.

not in bed with no one, i am my own person. in the beginning before the animal people came in we were there. its just been a big media coverage now that they are there which is good it is creating awareness and educating people about puppy farms.

how do you know this is true, has anyone told you that? they plan to divide us have all groups fighting against each other. i don't think "they" know enough to do this - who are they? is it the government is it oscar law people? is it PETA, i can believe PETA they are against everything these days bit scary. AFAIK The government are trying to bung all breeders dosn't matter if cross bred DD or purebred in together because they don't know any better ignorance is bliss. who speaks the loudest isn't us unfortunately. but at the same time i got told that our interests are being protected so thats all we can hope for at the end of the day.

If you continue to judge people in case they do something wrong then there isnt much point in sooking because they do it to you.

its not so much as judging these people are known to locals and council from past experiences so building fancy houses and adhering to codes won't change people's personalities i don't believe. but we will see. VCAT have put it all through so protesting about it from my past experiences doesn't really change the authorities mind but i think they just want to create awareness and let them know people aren't happy about it. which i think is a good thing.

You're really funny

Lilli said

You dont think it is logical for someone to suggest that if you want to control the way a property is run

why don't you get on prisoners for profit website and tell them that then?????? im not trying to control anything. i am stating fact and what is happening and trying to create awareness.

toy brought up statistics, false ones.

(the usual suspects that are dragged out when puppy farms are discussed)

not statistics just stating fact and common sense, what is that supposed to mean the usual suspects. this is a forum i am talking about what i believe in and my feelings towards all this like everyone else on this forum you describe me like a criminal, this is a subject as i stated at the start is very close to my heart. I am an animal lover and also a registered breeder who has rescued and fostered animals, GASP oh gosh imagine that...ooooooooo

toy asserted that there that pounds were overflowing, as there were not enough homes and too many dogs.

the overpopulation myth, is just that.

i know you get your beliefs and statements from an article written by a person who is ALSO INVOLVED in oscar law and pet rescue, you stated this last time when we had a similar debate. You gave me a link with a person who i have met and used some of her articles. Its just one opinion of why they believe dogs are surrended - im not saying she is incorrect at all there are many opinions out there and there are many aspects as to why our shelters are full Lilli, why owners surrender animals however this is not what i am referring to i am talking about adding to the already overpopulation by breeding even more animals from people who take no responsibility in what they breed and now it is much worse as they have removed the amount of time to rehome animals, i see in some cases looking at rescue websites the volume of dogs wanting homes has increased two fold..its very sad. just stating what i am viewing.

So let me get this straight, it is just a myth that our shelters and rescues are full up and finding it hard to find homes then. no statistics were stated, blind freddy would be able to tell you with half a brain that we are full up and we don't need to be adding thousands more dogs in society finding homes and relying on the shelter/rescue organisations i don't remember it being this way in such a crisis 25-30-40 years ago either maybe you remember the past different to me or maybe you are again quoting that wonderful article you saw???? since people have worked out they don't need a pedigree like the past to make money off, they can put any dog to any dog and make money cross bred no history is more money these days so easy peasy then they shed all responsibility for these dogs if they are surrended who cares they aint gona take them back which leaves these dogs in limbo and dependant on the system to pick up the bill and the responsibility.

if all breeders BYB, farmers, reg breeders all looked after what they bred then how would that play out in the shelter/rescue system then, would it not reduce a significant amount of animals needing homes? i don't know just a radical thought there.........

Edited August 12, 2011 by toy dog

[Alyosha]

sorry - Lilli, do you ever come across Tazis or Taigans in Kazak?

Sorry again - just had to ask...

[Nic.B]

Dogs end up in pounds and shelters for all sorts of reasons.

Toy Dog has made some excellent points.

Just because we are euthing (IYO Lilli) the same number of dogs compared to years and years ago does not mean much, even if you have stats.

Rescue are very active and are doing a fantastic job in rehoming animals from all sources who have been dumped in recent years.

Many pounds and shelters are also working much more proactively in rehoming/reuniting abandoned pets. Compared to 50 or 60 years ago, or even 10 years ago, or even last year.

I am rehoming a stunning working breed male atm who was surrendered. Still chipped to Pets Paradise which is where this entire litter was sold off, classic age for surrender, 7 months, not so cute any more sadly. Well not as cute as he was when he was sitting in the Perspex box.

His Mum is on limited register, his Father on main register, Father is still in the ring. Half-blood brother (repeated mating) is apparently blitzing his field O/S.

I have all of the paperwork, most original, and yes I have chased up the breeders of Mum and Dad and spoken with them to let them know.

IME pound stats are so limited it is almost funny for you to suggest they are the be all and end all. I read through stats regularly.

Most pounds and shelters do not even hand in stats. It varies from state to state and from what I have learnt, stats are not compulsory to hand in at all. It is done on a voluntary basis at this stage.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Nic.B

[BJean]

i know you get your beliefs and statements from an article written by a person who is ALSO INVOLVED in oscar law and pet rescue, you stated this last time when we had a similar debate. You gave me a link with a person who i have met and used some of her articles. Its just one opinion of why they believe dogs are surrended - im not saying she is incorrect at all there are many opinions out there and there are many aspects as to why our shelters are full Lilli, why owners surrender animals however this is not what i am referring to i am talking about adding to the already overpopulation by breeding even more animals from people who take no responsibility in what they breed and now it is much worse as they have removed the amount of time to rehome animals, i see in some cases looking at rescue websites the volume of dogs wanting homes has increased two fold..its very sad. just stating what i am viewing.

really, one article?

Ohh you mean the one I posted in our last dance on Puppy farming ...

yes I remember the article.

I was posting on DOL about the overpopulation myth long before that article was penned.

and even more remarkable, quoting other sources and studies.

I dont have the inclination to do a search right now, but if you're adept you will find them.

So let me get this straight, it is just a myth that our shelters and rescues are full up and finding it hard to find homes then. no statistics were stated, blind freddy would be able to tell you with half a brain that we are full up and we don't need to be adding thousands more dogs in society finding homes and relying on the shelter/rescue organisations i don't remember it being this way in such a crisis 25-30-40 years ago either maybe you remember the past different to me or maybe you are again quoting that wonderful article you saw???? since people have worked out they don't need a pedigree like the past to make money off, they can put any dog to any dog and make money cross bred no history is more money these days so easy peasy then they shed all responsibility for these dogs if they are surrended who cares they aint gona take them back which leaves these dogs in limbo and dependant on the system to pick up the bill and the responsibility.

Unwanted is the problem, not overpopulation.

(For your state of mind, I penned that phrase long before the person you met wrote the article; there's a big world of ideas out there if you dare to look.)

if all breeders BYB, farmers, reg breeders all looked after what they bred then how would that play out in the shelter/rescue system then, would it not reduce a significant amount of animals needing homes? i don't know just a radical thought there.........

You're thoughts on your version of utopia really aren't that radical. They're predictable and erroneous, mostly because of the paradigms they're built from.

Edited August 12, 2011 by lilli

[BJean]

Dogs end up in pounds and shelters for all sorts of reasons.

Toy Dog has made some excellent points.

Just because we are euthing (IYO Lilli) the same number of dogs compared to years and years ago does not mean much, even if you have stats.

Rescue are very active and are doing a fantastic job in rehoming animals from all sources who have been dumped in recent years.

Many pounds and shelters are also working much more proactively in rehoming/reuniting abandoned pets. Compared to 50 or 60 years ago, or even 10 years ago, or even last year.

I am rehoming a stunning blue Cattle male atm who was surrendered. Still chipped to Pets Paradise which is where this entire litter was sold off, classic age for surrender, 7 months, not so cute any more sadly. Well not as cute as he was when he was sitting in the Perspex box.

His Mum is on limited register, his Father on main register, Father is still in the ring. Half-blood brother (repeated mating) is apparently blitzing his field O/S.

I have all of the paperwork, most original, and yes I have chased up the breeders of Mum and Dad and spoken with them to let them know.

IME pound stats are so limited it is almost funny for you to suggest they are the be all and end all. I read through stats regularly.

Most pounds and shelters do not even hand in stats. It varies from state to state and from what I have learnt, stats are not compulsory to hand in at all. It is done on a voluntary basis at this stage.

Why would you base your stats on the number of dogs euthd?

Edited August 12, 2011 by lilli

[BJean]

Lilli, I am aware of the document I believe you are referring to, so do not assume I dont know what I'm talking about. Pound statistics showing reasons for euthanasia do not make puppy farming ethical. You are only considering one aspect of the problem.

I have worked in a pet shop (regrettably) and I have seen puppy farmers come in day after day with puppies from the same bitch in very close together litters. The puppy farmers were never concerned with the welfare of their dogs, and I will never forget when one of them came in and said "my main bichon is too sick so unfortunately I've had to breed with the poodle".

The puppies were often sick - some contracted parvo and some died. I was sick to death of people coming in day after day, people who were not considering a puppy but ended up walking out with one. People who had never had dogs before, but thought the Kelpie cross Koolies, or the rottie cross GSDs would be a good choice for their first dog. Working in the pet shop we were not allowed to turn people away.

Regardless of whether or not the dogs ended up in shelters, I feel I can safely say that 8 out of 10 homes that pups ended up in were unsuitable.

oooh another one about 'the document'.

A quick Troy search:

www.ccac.net.au/files/Mandatory_Desexing_in_the_ACT_Cats.pdf

http://www.ccac.net.au/files/The_issue_of_unwanted_animals_UAM06Lawrie.pdf

http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/192781-rescue-here-is-our-chance-to-make-a-difference/page__st__30__p__4434350__hl__unwanted__fromsearch__1#entry4434350

If a pound dog is pts

does that mean it died due to oversupply?

Im just trying work out what you are protesting against wrt the OP quote, and how a pound dog pts equates to oversupply.

The Literature review posted by Mita

and the study carried out

both arrive at the same conclusion:

http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/documents/Biosec...eport-Part2.pdf

Centre For Cpmpanions Animals in the Communiy:

http://www.ccac.net.au/files/Mandatory_Des...he_ACT_Cats.pdf

Very few dogs are killed in Australia because there are more dogs available than there homes.

Dogs and puppies are euthanised in shelters most frequently because they are not suited to available homes, rather than because there are no homes available.

Dogs are not dying in pounds because of an 'oversupply' problem. dogs are being pts for other factors health, temperament, etc.

There is an oversupply of cats, but these cats are mostly unowned cats, and therefore are not impacted by legislation.

Dogs face an unwanted problem. Independent of supply.

So the OP quote is correct.

There is a PERCEIVED oversupply problem; dogs dont get pts in pounds because there is an advertised supply on the outside.

Nor do people dump their pet because there are too many;

dogs get pts in pounds because there is an unwanted problem.

Sheilaheel02, on 1st Apr 2010 - 04:06 PM, said:

If there is an undersupply of rehomable dogs, I must be deluded for losing sleep and weeping over the ones we consider deserving of rescue who are PTS weekly. I'll just tell myself that what we see day in day out is not actually reality, euth my 7 foster dogs at home, return others in kennels/care to the pound and head off to enjoy a much more relaxed and happy lifestyle with a sh*tload of spare cash in my back pocket.

An adult dog pts at a pound is pts as there was no AVAILABLE home durng that time frame.

That's not oversupply.

That's a funding and pound/shelter management issue.

That pound dogs are pts due to oversupply of dogs Australia is a MYTH.

Pound dogs are pts because there is an unwanted problem

and the ones that are healthy with no temperament problems - ie the rehomeable

get pts because of the way the pound/shelter is run.

in a no kill shelter that rehomeable unwanted dog would find a home.

But in most pounds/shelter that rehomeable dog has a timeline and if it cant be met, or the pound pen:dog quota is exceeded - the dog gets pts.

That's not oversupply.

http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/188842-rescue-self-perpetuating-a-band-aid-solution/page__hl__overpopulation__st__45

http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/157391-sites-to-shame/page__st__45__p__3360464__hl__overpopulation__fromsearch__1#entry3360464

http://www.dolforums.com.au/topic/157391-sites-to-shame/page__hl__overpopulation__st__45

Edited August 12, 2011 by lilli

[megan_]

The issue is that the regulations for breeding dogs and keeping puppies are really slack. I think the minimum exercise requirement is something like 15 mins a day? Easy to comply with and not good enough for the vast majority of dogs. I don't care about who is breeding PB bs DD, I care about the welfare of the animals.

The statistics that"prove" there is an undersupply of dogs are dodgy too. They don't take into account the fact that there are many merry-go-round home -swapping one dog for a new pup. They don't take into account the quality of the homes (I'm not talking about DOL standards either, just basic stuff like walking the dog. A recent survey in Melbourne showed that over 50% of respondents never, evervwalked their dogs). And what are we meant to do with these dogs while they wait for new homes- long term kenneling? the non-existent foster homes?

Back on topic :-). Because puppy farms are hard to define and because genuine breeders are worried they'll be unfairly impacted it seems the dog world - including the MDBA - seems to just want the whole thing to fade unto the background. The irony is that there is a great opportunity to step up and be the leader in all of this (including framing regs). This would also be great PR for whichever group led the change. The tide is turning and isn't going to stop. "normal" people now know about puppy farms.

The response from the dog world is not good enough. I have sleeping next to me my "Lucy", rescued from a puppy farm by the good people of the schnauzer club. The guy who abused her - never hit, but she suffered from severe sensory deprivation - was never charged. Not good enough.

[Nic.B]

The number of dogs euthed is most certainly cause for concern and something that needs to be addressed.

Regardless, the stats that show companion animals arriving at a shelter, reunited with owners, gone to rescue, adopted or euthed are still voluntary at this stage. There are many pounds and shelters who do not enter stats.

There is no doubt that the issue of unwanted/abandoned family pets entering shelters and pounds is at epidemic proportions.

IMO point of sale and responsibly homing companion animals is crucial, along with offering lifetime support.

I was lucky enough to speak with the family at length re the young boy in my earlier post.

They shared with me that he was definitely bought upon impulse. I didn’t help that the PP staff advised them if he wasn’t sold in the next few days “they did not know what would happen to him’. His price was reduced to a still ridiculously high figure, the vet attached to the PP then charged them $350 for a chip and C3.

Fast forward 6 months; they have to get rid of him as they can’t meet his needs. He was relegated to the backyard for displaying normal puppy behaviour with no basic training or stimulation. Passive neglect, a classic age for dumping, and due to such poor homing, risk factors that lead to dumping where through the roof. It was only a matter of time.

This dogs story is symbolic for so many.

Back to the Puppy Farm; If this is the same guy who’s puppy farm was shut down after hideous neglect and cruelty there is no way on this earth he should be given another opportunity.

[Steve]

The issue is that the regulations for breeding dogs and keeping puppies are really slack. I think the minimum exercise requirement is something like 15 mins a day? Easy to comply with and not good enough for the vast majority of dogs. I don't care about who is breeding PB bs DD, I care about the welfare of the animals.

The statistics that"prove" there is an undersupply of dogs are dodgy too. They don't take into account the fact that there are many merry-go-round home -swapping one dog for a new pup. They don't take into account the quality of the homes (I'm not talking about DOL standards either, just basic stuff like walking the dog. A recent survey in Melbourne showed that over 50% of respondents never, evervwalked their dogs). And what are we meant to do with these dogs while they wait for new homes- long term kenneling? the non-existent foster homes?

Back on topic :-). Because puppy farms are hard to define and because genuine breeders are worried they'll be unfairly impacted it seems the dog world - including the MDBA - seems to just want the whole thing to fade unto the background. The irony is that there is a great opportunity to step up and be the leader in all of this (including framing regs). This would also be great PR for whichever group led the change. The tide is turning and isn't going to stop. "normal" people now know about puppy farms.

The response from the dog world is not good enough. I have sleeping next to me my "Lucy", rescued from a puppy farm by the good people of the schnauzer club. The guy who abused her - never hit, but she suffered from severe sensory deprivation - was never charged. Not good enough.

Here we go again I cant answer for the dog world but I can answer for the MDBA and myself personally. The idea we want it to just fade into the background because we dont happen to agree with a proposed methodology is way off the mark.

There may be great opportunity to step up and be a leader but I dont dont believe that any part of the answer lies in following on behind animal lib and being led by propoganda.

I believe the answer lies in us all being exposed ,easy to find and therefore answerable. I believe that by doing what is being done that it is counterproductive, that more dogs will suffer and it will encourage more people to hide away rather than do what we asked of them - apply for a DA , follow mandatory codes and be exposed and accountable.

If you want to go along and knock yourself out and play that game because you think thats the way to the greater good thats your perogative I think its a waste of energy and counterproductive to the stated desired outcome.

Its getting pretty tiresome to have to constantly be accused of all manner of crap and rather disappointing to think that because we dont think marching in the street or on the steps of parliament house is the answer we become the bad guys and have to defend ourselves. Its become rather a joke and makes me wonder why I bother if everything we do to fight the thing is over looked and trampled on because we dont agree on the animal liberation plan.

[toy dog]

Why would you base your stats on the number of dogs euthd?

and why are you centering the discussion around the issue of why dogs end up in the shelter? we are talking about whether we should have puppy farms or not. whether a dog ends up in there because the owner cannot afford to look after it, can't deal with its personality, is moving house or going overseas there;s a million and one reasons why a dog ends up in the pound or shelters across the country.

there's no denying that our shelters and pounds regardless of the reasons why dogs end up in there in the first place have alot of dogs in there that they are trying to find homes for. i think we can all agree on that principle can't we? and whether they have to put them to sleep is also not the issue, they put them to sleep we've established that from not having enough room because of mismanagement, i get that, or because the dog is not suitable to be rehomed or a million and one reasons why there too.

showing that you can research something and look in the internet is commendable i can do that too but there is no denying the fact that we as a society being a throw away one not valuing our domestic pets (whether thats been the case for many years or not) don't need to be adding to the number of dogs needing homes good or bad by breeding up thousands in these intensive dog farming establishments.

if the pup or dog was looked after from the point of sale as Nic.B. pointed out the poor doggy nic.b is saving didn't have backup from the breeder who bred him. which if he had he would never have ended up being looked after in the system and adding to the numbers already in there. it brings a whole different other argument to the peice of petshops not knowing how to properly look after the breed in question so is unable to pass that onto the buyer, the buyer doesn't get the support to ask question and prevent the dog being cast off to welfare organisations. this is a very common story as i say, dogs and cats and our domestic animals are disposable and the culture in our society leans towards this especially when thousands upon thousands of dogs are bred in farms and not backed up and sold off to shops who have no idea the requirements that these poor puppies need but are passed off without the knowledge there and then discarded when it all gets a bit too hard.

a breeder who cares about what they are breeding, will backup and answer questions and find suitable homes so the dumpage rate is reduced drastically so is this all erroneous Lilli by your standards then?