Tapferhund Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Rogue puppy farms hit by: Peter Rolfe From: Sunday Herald Sun October 23, 2011 12:00AM Illegal puppy farms face huge fines. Herald Sun MASSIVE new fines, jail terms and unprecedented powers to shut down illegal puppy farms will be introduced in Victoria in a crackdown on animal cruelty. Premier Ted Baillieu will announce the toughest dog and cat laws in Australia today, with legislation to be introduced in State Parliament next week. "We are not going to tolerate cruelty to animals," he told the Sunday Herald Sun. The new legislation - to take effect this year - will include powers to seize the assets, property and profits of people operating illegal puppy farms, fines of up to $146,000, 10-year bans on people owning a pet if they are found guilty of animal cruelty and strict jail terms for unlawful breeders. RSPCA and council inspectors will also be given new policing and confiscation powers and a $1.6 million Animal Welfare Fund will be created through money raised by the sale of confiscated assets. Maximum penalties for illegal puppy farms will rise by more than $18,000 and penalties for operators who commit acts of cruelty will be doubled to $30,000. Individual breeders will also face penalties of up to $30,000 and 12 months' prison and fines of up to $60,000 and two years' jail for aggravated cruelty. Corporate businesses busted under the new regime will be slapped with fines between $73,300 and $146,688. Mr Baillieu said the laws had been drafted in response to puppy farms found in Victoria where dogs had been kept in cages, tied up for days and carcasses left to rot. He said the far-reaching action would send a clear message to dodgy operators that they faced massive fines, loss of assets and imprisonment as well as having farms shut down. "These are some of the strongest laws ever introduced to protect animals from abuse and neglect." The new laws build on a Coalition commitment to smash illegal puppy-breeding rings following several public protests in favour of harsher penalties. In another major shake-up, it will become compulsory for every dog and cat sold in Victoria to be implanted with a unique microchip number that must be quoted in advertisements and at points of sale. A new offence will be created to punish breeding houses not using the technology and fines will apply to any pet store, farm or individual caught selling a cat or dog without the chip, putting the onus on the seller rather than the buyer. Industry sources said the crackdown could lead to a shortage in puppy numbers and potentially push up the price of pets. The Government concedes the clampdown could raise puppy prices slightly at pet stores but believes the public will be happy paying a little extra if it means knowing that their dog has not be treated cruelly. Mr Baillieu, who has three pet dogs, said he was determined to make operators accountable for the welfare of animals in their care. "I have been touched by the passion in the community on this issue and the efforts of so many who have written to me," he said. "As a dog owner, I am appalled by images I have seen of abused and helpless animals." It is not known how many illegal puppy farms exist in Victoria but there are 64 approved breeding houses where an average of 45 dogs each breed a litter of six each year. Until now, RSPCA inspectors have had limited powers even when they have evidence of farms mistreating animals, with their only course of action to refer concerns to councils. I just wonder about the word "Illegal" ...as I doubt the greater majority of these horrible farms NOW in operation would not be legally registered businesses.........and therefore will be continuing as usual. If this is the case.....then nothing has changed...has it?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tapferhund Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 hmmm... not sure this is a great thing, he's missed the mark the premier of Victoria. how do they make the jump from illegal to legal, and mentioning petshops to get a pet, does he not read where petshops get their puppies from? once again no mention to the public at all where to buy a puppy, the better choice to source a pup from. once again advertising people going to petshops so contradicting themselves there already. in re: to advertising microchips - this is ridiculous, once again targetting anyone who breeds dogs not the ones they actually want to get rid off. how does this equate to getting rid of farms? if we had a system where it was compulsory to put breeder details on chip then i'd be more confident that we may have something, as many have already posted on here. this is a big scam from the government to try to get brownie points from the public for votes i wouldn't mind betting -giving them a false sense of doing something when actually they are doing nothing at all. EXACTLY! Well said toy dog...and its typically Govt thinking...stupid and cunning at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalinda Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 I see it as a positive....................one step closer to abolishing puppy farms legal or not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Rogue puppy farms hit by: Peter Rolfe From: Sunday Herald Sun October 23, 2011 12:00AM Illegal puppy farms face huge fines. Herald Sun MASSIVE new fines, jail terms and unprecedented powers to shut down illegal puppy farms will be introduced in Victoria in a crackdown on animal cruelty. Premier Ted Baillieu will announce the toughest dog and cat laws in Australia today, with legislation to be introduced in State Parliament next week. "We are not going to tolerate cruelty to animals," he told the Sunday Herald Sun. The new legislation - to take effect this year - will include powers to seize the assets, property and profits of people operating illegal puppy farms, fines of up to $146,000, 10-year bans on people owning a pet if they are found guilty of animal cruelty and strict jail terms for unlawful breeders. RSPCA and council inspectors will also be given new policing and confiscation powers and a $1.6 million Animal Welfare Fund will be created through money raised by the sale of confiscated assets. Maximum penalties for illegal puppy farms will rise by more than $18,000 and penalties for operators who commit acts of cruelty will be doubled to $30,000. Individual breeders will also face penalties of up to $30,000 and 12 months' prison and fines of up to $60,000 and two years' jail for aggravated cruelty. Corporate businesses busted under the new regime will be slapped with fines between $73,300 and $146,688. Mr Baillieu said the laws had been drafted in response to puppy farms found in Victoria where dogs had been kept in cages, tied up for days and carcasses left to rot. He said the far-reaching action would send a clear message to dodgy operators that they faced massive fines, loss of assets and imprisonment as well as having farms shut down. "These are some of the strongest laws ever introduced to protect animals from abuse and neglect." The new laws build on a Coalition commitment to smash illegal puppy-breeding rings following several public protests in favour of harsher penalties. In another major shake-up, it will become compulsory for every dog and cat sold in Victoria to be implanted with a unique microchip number that must be quoted in advertisements and at points of sale. A new offence will be created to punish breeding houses not using the technology and fines will apply to any pet store, farm or individual caught selling a cat or dog without the chip, putting the onus on the seller rather than the buyer. Industry sources said the crackdown could lead to a shortage in puppy numbers and potentially push up the price of pets. The Government concedes the clampdown could raise puppy prices slightly at pet stores but believes the public will be happy paying a little extra if it means knowing that their dog has not be treated cruelly. Mr Baillieu, who has three pet dogs, said he was determined to make operators accountable for the welfare of animals in their care. "I have been touched by the passion in the community on this issue and the efforts of so many who have written to me," he said. "As a dog owner, I am appalled by images I have seen of abused and helpless animals." It is not known how many illegal puppy farms exist in Victoria but there are 64 approved breeding houses where an average of 45 dogs each breed a litter of six each year. Until now, RSPCA inspectors have had limited powers even when they have evidence of farms mistreating animals, with their only course of action to refer concerns to councils. I just wonder about the word "Illegal" ...as I doubt the greater majority of these horrible farms NOW in operation would not be legally registered businesses.........and therefore will be continuing as usual. If this is the case.....then nothing has changed...has it?! Heaps has changed but not for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandgrubber Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 It might be a good time to put pressure on for some public consultation. Sounds like the legislation isn't yet cast in stone. Is there any chance of pushing to get microchips developed that include the breeder's identity . . . or creating a public registry so that both the breeder and the owner's names end up in the database and at least vets, ACOs and the RSPCA have the ability to look up chip numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortonplace Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) Think I'd reserve judgement until the details are published. Could be great. Could be hot air. Could be something that is going to cause a whole lot of trouble for ethical breeders as well as puppy mills. I agree. It also is only going to quash illegal puppy mills. I don't know what separates a legal puppy mill from an illegal mill, so the beauty will be in the legislation at hand. Agreed this is why a new facebook page is being created for purebred dog breeders. The aim is to show were not puppymillers.farmers and what the diffrence is between the type of breeders, lts called purebred dogbreeders go check it out and join if your a breerer and concerned p.s its under construction so just tick the ''like'' button if your intersted Edited October 23, 2011 by mortonplace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 So this also means a breeder cannot advertise their litter till they are at least 6 weeks old because that is when they are usually microchipped or does one have the vet put a set number aside, giving the breeder the numbers. Will be interesting to see how many ILLEGAL puppy farms are found and prosecuted in comparison to those which have been to date. Legal commercial breeders should be cheering - registered breeders,back yard breeders and small cross bred breeders who have not applied for a DA and have not obtained approval to breed dogs from their property should have a bit of sweat on their face. Its a given that Vicdogs are exempt from needing a domestic animal business licence if they dont have more than 10 fertile dogs but any one whether you are Vicdogs or not who has more than 2 dogs and uses one for breeding requires a DA from their council and without it they are the illegal ones. RSPCA now has the ability to enforce council by laws and operate outside of POCTA without outside accountablility. We certainly have moved into interesting times with those who are operating illegally without council approval having to make choices or risk all - here is hoping the epidemic of filthy illegal puppy farmers who are so abundant that we required laws which would radically affect all breeders in that state just give up and dont move interstate , or hide out better or become legal large scale commercial breeders. Lets hope that puppy farmers in other states dont see this as an opportunity to take up the slack and replace the markets for all of those illegal puppy farms which will no longer be able to breed and for the small breeders who feel its all too hard to have a litter of puppies now and then. In the mean time legal commercial breeders hit the jackpot. My advice to all Victorian breeders whether you breed one or lots is to check with your local council to see what YOU need to do to be operating legally in your shire. Dont assume you dont need to do anything if you are Vicdogs and have less than 10 fertile dogs. Do not assume that the definition of puppy farmer which is being used at government and RSPCA level is only petinent to those who breed commercially or that you are not compelled to be operating under a mandatory code which covers housing, vaccinations etc. if you breed dogs in Victoria and you dont have a vet vaccinate your dogs every year you are illegal - dont assume you will be exempt - you are not. BINGO.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 It might be a good time to put pressure on for some public consultation. Sounds like the legislation isn't yet cast in stone. Is there any chance of pushing to get microchips developed that include the breeder's identity . . . or creating a public registry so that both the breeder and the owner's names end up in the database and at least vets, ACOs and the RSPCA have the ability to look up chip numbers. There has already been a fairly lengthy period of consultation and its only a couple of days away. Cant see why it wont go thriugh because its not touching commercial breeders and only addresses llegal puppy farms - remembering what the definition is of puppy farms the government uses. The microchip thing has been presented over and over in fact we have put in at least half a dozen submissions on this. There is much there which affects privacy issues and some of the big money in the mix has a vested interest in keeping breeder names out under the argument that its a double shuffle - more red tape which they argue is not required and will result in people not transferring ownership,more admin for councils etc. You cant just go online and change your details from one owner to another it has to be done manually by each council. You have to remember that in NSW all of this has been mandatory for about 13 years and breeders have worked out numerous ways of getting around it and even one council to another has different requirements for who the chip is registered to and how you can change it from one owner to another or breeder to buyer. Its never, ever been policed ,one state registry isnt linked to any other and breeders moving puppies interstate especially to places where they dont even have a chip reader have long given up on chipping them at all. People selling to agents or re sellers have always sold them and the pet shop has chipped into the new owner name rather than have it in the breeder name, then pet shop and new owner same with agents such as those operating for overseas pet shops .Pup is usually chipped into the new owners name. The whole put the chip number in ads thing sounds good but much will depend on how its worded. Are they going to make it illegal for newspapers and such to accept an ad without chips or is it illegal for Victorian breeders to advertise without chips or both ? Who is going to sift through all of the ads to check whether a chip is correct and even if its not misakes such as typos are made all the time. Who will police it and investigate it ? Where is it necessary to have the chip numbers - on their own website, in the paper, on internet sites,on supermarket walls ? With mobile phone numbers how will they pick up who is in Victoria ? Are websites such as dogz going to have to ensure all Victorian breeders have chip numbers before they place an ad especially where in some states no one chips anything and its not mandatory. What about when a litter is advertised - which is usually the case are all of the chip numbers required ? What if a breeder advertises one pup with one chip number but sells another . Puppy farmers now are vaccinating one male and one female out of a a litter and photo copying them to go out with the rest of the litter - how hard is it going to be to chip one pup advertise it and sell the rest of the litter without a chip or use a chip from another pup and say oops typo? When they introduced mandatory requirements for licence numbers in ads on the gold coast 8 months later not one ad in their local paper had a licence number - but only those living in that shire had to have them and people from anywhere can advertise. When the shire was asked how come they werent ensuring their breeders were using the numbers the answer is - we cant police it. Think it through how much time will it take for someone to check which shire a breeder lives in to see whether they needed to have a licence number in the ad, Ths all assumes puppy farmers will sell via ads and the really rotten ones sell to agents who pick em up ,load em into a car boot and ship em out all over the place anyway. Pet shops keep saying they dont buy from puppy farmers - no one believes them but they say they buy from legal commercial breeders the real illegal puppy farmers dont advertise and dont sell to pet shops anyway. Ill be happy if it allows the RSPCA to shut down people who keep their dogs in rotten conditions but registered breeders need to know that on the whole they have been operating illegally and the government definition isnt about motivation or numbers .Its about substandard conditions which are set as standard by mandatory codes . Some are cheering because they think this is about stopping large scale commercial breeding which isnt operating under approvals from their councils and not following mandatory codes for breeding dogs but its also about any breeder regardless of how many they breed who do not have the necessary approvals from counicls and not operating under mandatory codes. RSPCA has permission to police council laws and mandatory codes and registered breeders need to ensure they are not doing anything illegal. This is an email conversation I had with a council official in Victoria and it is a heads up for all breeders including Vicdogs members who have had more than 5 dogs because if you do you are illegal and if you are not keeping them according to mandatory codes including vaccinating them by a vet every year ,complying with housing requirements etc you are keeping them in substandard conditions - life could get very messy. This is an email conversation I had with a council official in Victoria and if you have any doubts ring your councils and ask what you need to be doing to be legal. A council in Victoria I refer to your email requesting information on Council's requirements for dog breeding establishments. Firstly, I need to point out that it is largely dependent on zoning. In a residential zone, the most number of animals which can be kept for breeding is 5. In the rural living and farming zones, up to five animals can be kept for breeding without needing planning approval. For more than 5 animals, a planning permit will be required. An application should show how the breeding establishment will be organised and also be accompanied by plans showing any special buildings and runs which may be utilised as part of the breeding operation. Me. It seems that many Vic dogs members have been breaking planning laws for a long time then because they were of the belief that if they had less than 10 fertile dogs they didn't need to worry about permits.[of any kind] to breed their dogs. So what happens to the Vicdogs breeders who have [say] 9 in a residential zone ? Are they able to apply for a DA for more and assuming they can pass the criteria do what they are doing legally or is it no more than five in a residential zone no matter what? Them. Unfortunately, the planning controls absolutely limit the maximum number of dogs used for a breeding enterprise to 5 in the residential zone. In other zones, it is more a case of assessing the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area, which is a function of the intensity of use and the number of affected dwellings. So it stands to reason that a property in the farming zone would be the best chance for a large breeding proposal. With smaller enterprises, such as your suggestions of up to 10 dogs, there would be less impact, but the restriction to a max of 5 in the residential zones still applies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Are You Serious Jo Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 I see it as a positive....................one step closer to abolishing puppy farms legal or not! Can you explain how? It will see the end of many small kennels who breed and show, but create a huge market for legal puppy farmers. Hobby farmers don't have the funds that puppy farmers have so they won't be able to comply. Puppy farms won't ever be abolished, all this will do is ensure they have a greater market share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Souff Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) Wow, you are excited. Can you describe to me what a puppy farmer is? I love to read a description. Editing to say that question is open to anyone, not just to Cheekygal. Definition of a "Puppy Farmer" .... anyone? Edited October 24, 2011 by Souff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aphra Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 It's typical knee-jerk, please the public legislation. "Illegal" puppy farms already have legislation which could deal with them. Local councils have by-laws; the RSPCA has anti-cruelty legislation to work from; animal business have DPI legislation to follow. All of those organisations could have moved to deal with the problem that haven't for whatever reason. Remember the people crafting this legislation wrote the latest dog laws; in what world of fantasy do people expect this piece of law is going to be more subtle, more reasonable and more effective? As much as I deplore commercial dog breeders, if they are operating within the legislation, local and state, under what system are people proposing they be shut down? Just because we, as a special interest group, disapprove of what they do? I'm a vegetarian and I deplore the commercial breeding of cattle for slaughter, but under Australian law it's a perfectly legal industry. Under what grounds then, would a government be able to out-law legal businesses? And what government, hoping to get re-elected, is even going to try, since the follow-on effect from business generally would be so enormous. And Steve is quite right; legislation isn't interested in intent or purpose, so this is going to affect legitimate breeders and possibly rescue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tapferhund Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 It might be a good time to put pressure on for some public consultation. Sounds like the legislation isn't yet cast in stone. Is there any chance of pushing to get microchips developed that include the breeder's identity . . . or creating a public registry so that both the breeder and the owner's names end up in the database and at least vets, ACOs and the RSPCA have the ability to look up chip numbers. I agree with this.....and then breeders/puppy farms/pet shops should be forced to take responsibility for dogs no longer wanted by their buyers (owners). Then the pounds these dogs usually end up in could be eliminated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erny Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) ...Victoria is so progressive. Splutter *cough* gasps for air, rolls over throwing arms and legs in air. Edited October 24, 2011 by Erny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirty Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Victoria can't even manage the LEGAL puppy farms! How often are they inspected?? I personally think its crap and its just a publicity stunt. The funniest quote was one I saw on Fox news - "The price of pet shop puppies may rise slightly with the introduction of these new laws". WTF!!! How can they justify charging even more??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huskies4life88 Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Victoria can't even manage the LEGAL puppy farms! How often are they inspected?? I personally think its crap and its just a publicity stunt. The funniest quote was one I saw on Fox news - "The price of pet shop puppies may rise slightly with the introduction of these new laws". WTF!!! How can they justify charging even more??? oh pet shops will find a way...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shel Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 .....and then breeders/puppy farms/pet shops should be forced to take responsibility for dogs no longer wanted by their buyers (owners). Then the pounds these dogs usually end up in could be eliminated. When dealing with the kinds of bulk producers who have no qualms at all in killing discarded breeding dogs at the end of their ‘lifecycle’, why would we be driving to see abandoned dogs placed back in the hands of the farmers? At best, they'd be rehomed by the very same people who failed to place them in a suitable family in the first place; at worse they're back into the breeding system. No welfare focussed group would stand by while pets go back to the farms and shops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Souff Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 It might be a good time to put pressure on for some public consultation. Sounds like the legislation isn't yet cast in stone. Is there any chance of pushing to get microchips developed that include the breeder's identity . . . or creating a public registry so that both the breeder and the owner's names end up in the database and at least vets, ACOs and the RSPCA have the ability to look up chip numbers. I agree with this.....and then breeders/puppy farms/pet shops should be forced to take responsibility for dogs no longer wanted by their buyers (owners). Then the pounds these dogs usually end up in could be eliminated. Souff just bought some new clothes, all ready for summer. Next year, after I have had a few good times with the clothes, I am tired of them so can I have them sent back to the manufacturer? What about that car that I have been driving for a while now? I am soooo tired of it. Can I have it sent back to Mr Toyota's factory? Please? I really feel that it is time I got another Audi. I miss those nice circles. I can see some useful precedents being set if dog breeders must take back a dog that they sold as a pup, years after the sale. Souff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris the Rebel Wolf Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 I think this legislation is a step in the right direction. It's not a perfect step, and there is room for improvement, but it's a step. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WreckitWhippet Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 (edited) I think this legislation is a step in the right direction. It's not a perfect step, and there is room for improvement, but it's a step. It's another step towards the end of the ethical ANKC breeder and that's about it. The "legal" puppy farms that are operating with their councils DA approval and blessing will thrive, they have nothing to worry about. The smaller ANKC breeder, doing it from home, without DA approval are going to be in the firing line, no one in their right mind is going to want to continue to breed when you could face some serious penalties and have your animals seized. ohhh but wait.... those doing the right thing will have nothing to fear and that's the big guys, the puppy farmers and their massive approved sheds. Edited October 24, 2011 by Pav Lova Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldchow Posted October 24, 2011 Share Posted October 24, 2011 Thats it in a nutshell Pav Lova and it amazes me that there are those who can't see this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now