Puppy Farmers Beat Appeal

[BlackJaq]

Do we breed children to turn a quick dollar?

I know people who do just that, actually. Fortunately the government has caught on and started making changes to the baby bonus.

I also find it to be a pretty big concern when people reckon they "make money" of breeding their dogs, pedigree or (usually) otherwise. In my experience this is usually found to be because of the substandard care and virtually complete lack of expenditure (except for the cheapest home brand dog food) in most of these cases.

If you have nearly no expense (i.e. in medical care etc), of course you are still making money, even if you only charge $300 per pup.

I also don't think that motive should matter, the dogs suffer no less because somebody needs the money. Other people manage to survive without starting up a puppy mill and nobody cares if a crack dealer needed the money, why should it matter for a puppy farmer?

And it sounds to me like these people are dairy farmers? So probably own a property and stock? Who was forcing them to not sell what they couldn't afford to keep? Probably not the nicest option for them, but better than what they ended up doing instead, surely?

[WreckitWhippet]

I'd like to know why the MDBA in their Codes of Conduct, have no restrictions on how often a bitch can be bred or how many times she can be bred. As far as I'm concerned a puppy farmer can have as few as a handful of dogs and breed them back to back until they drop dead. This is also an act of cruelty. I think the MDBA should review their codes of conduct.

what's the point of drawing a magical line in the sand ? some people think a back to back is wrong, others know that it can be done and is not detrimental to a bitch when they are in excellent health.

What should the magical number be ?

Lord knows the canine councils have already done it and it doesn't stop someone from breeding a litter from an unhealthy bitch.

[liverchips]

I'd like to know why the MDBA in their Codes of Conduct, have no restrictions on how often a bitch can be bred or how many times she can be bred. As far as I'm concerned a puppy farmer can have as few as a handful of dogs and breed them back to back until they drop dead. This is also an act of cruelty. I think the MDBA should review their codes of conduct.

what's the point of drawing a magical line in the sand ? some people think a back to back is wrong, others know that it can be done and is not detrimental to a bitch when they are in excellent health.

What should the magical number be ?

Lord knows the canine councils have already done it and it doesn't stop someone from breeding a litter from an unhealthy bitch.

Some very experienced breeders believe it's much better to breed a bitch more often while she is younger and then retiring her earlier as opposed to breeding a bitch less often and therefore breeding her when she is getting older and less fit. Problem is in the 'dog world' breeders can't be open and honest about certain issues with out being attacked by others who consider themselves the ethical experts.

[Pretty Miss Emma]

The "compensation" .... does anyone know where that goes? To the RSPCA? I hope so, anyhow!

Generally no it doesn't. It goes to the government unless there is a specified "costs" in which case it goes to whoever paid for legal/treatment/boarding/etc of the dogs (in cases of cruelty it would be the RSPCA). The courts rarely specify for "costs" to be paid and even when they do they are not even close to what the true amount that was spent is. When it is a "fine" that money goes to the government to get spent on whatever the government spends it on! So who knows in this case, I'm not sure what "compensation" would fall under.

But it is good to see that it is a decent amount in comparison to other cases, I know in Vic most cases only get about $1500-$3000 as a fine/costs/etc. So while I don't think it is a big enough blow to the hip pocket it's better than it could be and hopefully the amount doesn't decrease due to an appeal further down the track.

[Steve]

I'd like to know why the MDBA in their Codes of Conduct, have no restrictions on how often a bitch can be bred or how many times she can be bred. As far as I'm concerned a puppy farmer can have as few as a handful of dogs and breed them back to back until they drop dead. This is also an act of cruelty. I think the MDBA should review their codes of conduct.

what's the point of drawing a magical line in the sand ? some people think a back to back is wrong, others know that it can be done and is not detrimental to a bitch when they are in excellent health.

What should the magical number be ?

Lord knows the canine councils have already done it and it doesn't stop someone from breeding a litter from an unhealthy bitch.

Some very experienced breeders believe it's much better to breed a bitch more often while she is younger and then retiring her earlier as opposed to breeding a bitch less often and therefore breeding her when she is getting older and less fit. Problem is in the 'dog world' breeders can't be open and honest about certain issues with out being attacked by others who consider themselves the ethical experts.

No point anyway as all breeders have to comply with state legislation which controls how often they can breed. If you have suggestions to make to the MDBA - best you contact the MDBA .

[mita]

As far as I'm concerned a puppy farmer can have as few as a handful of dogs and breed them back to back until they drop dead. This is also an act of cruelty.

I agree with you that 'puppy farming' is a set of behaviours in breeding & keeping dogs, rather than just a matter of numbers.

Of course, the larger the number of dogs, the more dogs are affected. But even with a handful of dogs, they are affected, too.

The set of behaviours are a selection from these:

Lack of socialisation of dogs on the property.

Failure to socialise the puppies.

Subjecting the females to insupportable numbers of litters.

Likely large number of accidental littlers.

Poor nutrition and living conditions.

Inadequate veterinary attention.

Poor or no record keeping.

Because of the research on the critical place of socialisation for puppies & dogs as companion animals.....I'd even call it a form of puppy farming is the dogs are raised in pristine conditions, but with no socialisation. Also if a handful of dogs are kept in a backyard shed.

We need the law to reflect that breeding & raising puppies & keeping parent dogs is a different category from 'farm' animals. So there ought to be specific definitions of neglect & cruelty for dogs in respect to breeding.

Edited March 5, 2012 by mita

[BlackJaq]

We need the law to reflect that breeding & raising puppies & keeping parent dogs is a different category from 'farm' animals. So there ought to be specific definitions of neglect & cruelty for dogs in respect to breeding.

Very good point! I think this approach would help with a lot of problems that are not even directly connected to puppy farming, such as the general safety of the community.

Unfortunately I am afraid this approach might make too much sense for the likes of the law-makers and we will therefore wait for this to happen for a very long time.

Are there any politicians or politically active people on DOL?

[dog_fan]

Who would police those new laws?

[Steve]

I would say that breeding dogs is already seen as different to keeping farm animals. Its difficult to imagine the kinds of meddling and limitations placed on dog breeders being applied to breeders of farm animals.

I can just see the sheep and dairy farmers around here being happy about a government telling them how to manage when and how and how often they should breed their fertile animals.

[dog_fan]

I would say that breeding dogs is already seen as different to keeping farm animals. Its difficult to imagine the kinds of meddling and limitations placed on dog breeders being applied to breeders of farm animals.

I can just see the sheep and dairy farmers around here being happy about a government telling them how to manage when and how and how often they should breed their fertile animals.

That is a very good point. There does not appear to be many restrictions say on how many times a sow can be bred or how they can be housed even though pigs are very smart animals, some would say even smarter than dogs.

So I agree dogs are not remotely seen as farm animals.

[mita]

We need the law to reflect that breeding & raising puppies & keeping parent dogs is a different category from 'farm' animals. So there ought to be specific definitions of neglect & cruelty for dogs in respect to breeding.

Very good point! I think this approach would help with a lot of problems that are not even directly connected to puppy farming, such as the general safety of the community.

It needs a separate law that covers the breeding and sale of dogs. Like the UK has, but with a fresh approach to reflect Australian conditions (like differing State laws). What is currently in the ethical guidelines set out by DOGS Qld would be a good point of reference. And there's certainly research which would back the worth of many of those, re puppies & dogs being socialised as well as welfare generally.

The unique thing about breeding & sale of dogs is that it has a 'paw' across a number of current legal areas. Like animal welfare, dog management, consumer interests, land zoning etc. The dog management aspect picks up your point about community safety.

Currently puppy farming can thrive in Q'ld because it's possible to buy cheap, poor land that's designated for primary industries. Where the dogs then have the same status as livestock....which do not have the same developmental & welfare needs as companion animals.

Edited March 5, 2012 by mita

[BlackJaq]

Are there currently standards in place for things like space requirements and such?

I don't really know anything about legal animal welfare requirements regarding dogs, maybe somebody had a link handy?

[dog_fan]

We need the law to reflect that breeding & raising puppies & keeping parent dogs is a different category from 'farm' animals. So there ought to be specific definitions of neglect & cruelty for dogs in respect to breeding.

Very good point! I think this approach would help with a lot of problems that are not even directly connected to puppy farming, such as the general safety of the community.

It needs a separate law that covers the breeding and sale of dogs. Like the UK has, but with a fresh approach to reflect Australian conditions (like differing State laws). What is currently in the ethical guidelines set out by DOGS Qld would be a good point of reference. And there's certainly research which would back the worth of many of those, re puppies & dogs being socialised as well as welfare generally.

The unique thing about breeding & sale of dogs is that it has a 'paw' across a number of current legal areas. Like animal welfare, dog management, consumer interests, land zoning etc. The dog management aspect picks up your point about community safety.

Who would police those laws? Surely not the dogs whatever state as they don't police anything that the can now.

[Steve]

It really is quite a complex issue - people who own and breed few need to be punished for any animal cruelty crimes as well as anyone who breed hundreds - and whether they are good money managers isnt for me any part of it and anyone can say what their motivation is - though obviously those who breed hundreds impact more than just a few dogs and should be pinged per dog perhaps????

I live with my beagles at my feet and they live and sleep as part of the family. I have them whelping in my home and they are raised within the family setting with constant socialisation etc - my "kennel" is my loungeroom. I dont think that I should have to house them or manage them as a commercial kennel does but how can you allow me to do that and not someone who owns dogs and who lives in filth with them without caring for their basic needs adequately and neglecting them. Im also not convinced that current regs which seem to treat dogs as if they are in boarding kennels - where they usually only live for a few days and then go home is conducive to them being well accommodated and in their bests interests if they are stuck in concreted cubby houses or sheds all their lives either.

Its difficult to try to justify how anyone who does have to comply with such regs and have their animals housed this way for anything more than a day or two can do it knowing that it must be a horrible way for a dog to spend its life.

The current trend appears to be expect all breeders may own hundreds of dogs and therefore make them all have their dogs managed and living like they would need to if they were in mass production. I can almost see this as understandable but for the people who just want to own a couple of dogs and enjoy their company as members of their family that they also breed now and then doesn't seem to be the answer either.

[mita]

Who would police those laws? Surely not the dogs whatever state as they don't police anything that the can now.

What do you means by 'surely not the dogs'? Dogs policing laws??? Or do you mean Dogs.....the Kennel Associations?

Who usually implements & monitors laws? A Government Department whose Minister is charged with implementing laws that have been passed by Parliament. And who is answerable to Parliament for doing so.

I've pointed out that the many aspects that are related to the breeding & sale of dogs currently go across various departments' responsibilities. And are not specifically shaped to the needs of companion dogs.

In the meantime, we have consumer action. How companion dogs have been bred is of vital importance for those who buy them as pets.

There are consumer guidelines to find the best ways of obtaining quality & value. CHOICE (the Australian Consumers; Association) has some advice on obtaining a puppy or dog (on their website).....where they subtly point people to registered breeders and ethical rescue.

They've added welfare considerations as well as quality/value.

Those CHOICE guidelines would well be expanded to further help people know what are the best options.....& why (given that the 'why' has some sound scientific research behind it).

Consumer action can be helpful in cutting off as many 'customers' as possible, from those who use puppy farming behaviours.

Edited March 5, 2012 by mita

[Steve]

Are there currently standards in place for things like space requirements and such?

I don't really know anything about legal animal welfare requirements regarding dogs, maybe somebody had a link handy?

Yes there are - they come under prevention of cruelty to animals, mandatory codes etc but they are pretty disgraceful and I wouldn't want any animal I owned living that way.

Problems of course are we all own different breeds with different requirements , we all have different life styles and live in different environments etc.

in an ideal world we would all hope that breeders first and foremost are doing what they do because they love dogs but the reality is that some people don't love their dogs and even then there is no guarantee that loving them is going to equal not harming them or not neglecting them . Most parents who neglect or batter their children or their spouses love them too. So Id love to advocate for breeders to be able to decide whats best for their dogs on their property but Im not sure thats the answer either as Ive seen some stuff that is way outside what I would consider O.K. where the breeder thinks other wise.

As I said its complex.

[BlackJaq]

Maybe it would be easiest to improve legal minimum standards of care for any dogs (i.e. minimum space requirements calculated by actual size, rather than a general rule), so that if cases like this crop up there is an actual legal charge that can be brought forwards?

So if these hundreds of dogs were kept on too little space, that would be one charge for each dog.

If the law required a bed or bedding to be available to each dog, and these hundreds of dogs had none, this would be a separate charge for each dog again.

And so on, and so forth.

This is obviously not breeding specific, but might make a nice difference to some dogs, used for breeding or otherwise, in general, especially when such lare amounts of animals are kept by one or two persons without help?

Maybe there needs to be a companion animals department with a minister implemented, companion animals are, after-all, a large part of our society? This would then be the main department responsible for dog (and cat) -related issues?

How does one go about suggesting these things to the government? Surely a large community such as DOL should have the numbers to make some changes?

On a different note, I have to mention that I am German born and only moved to Oz in 2006, I am not a citizen, so cannot really expect or ask the government to make changes as per my opinions.

[mita]

Maybe it would be easiest to improve legal minimum standards of care for any dogs (i.e. minimum space requirements calculated by actual size, rather than a general rule), so that if cases like this crop up there is an actual legal charge that can be brought forwards?

So if these hundreds of dogs were kept on too little space, that would be one charge for each dog.

If the law required a bed or bedding to be available to each dog, and these hundreds of dogs had none, this would be a separate charge for each dog again.

And so on, and so forth....

On a different note, I have to mention that I am German born and only moved to Oz in 2006, I am not a citizen, so cannot really expect or ask the government to make changes as per my opinions.

So I looked up an English-language website from Berlin that covers pet ownership in Germany. :)

Sure enough, your practical approach is reflected there. In the section, Owning a Pet, they include saying that kennel owners & breeders have to demonstrate they have suitable premises & means in place to care for animals. Nicely put.

I was also interested to see that the 2 information links they give, include one to Animal Welfare Law & the other to the Ministry of Food, Agriculture & Consumer Protection. Now, in that Ministry, they've put a couple of aspects relating to dog breeding & sale of dogs, under the same governance. Here, matters relating to Consumer Affairs are separate.

As I can't read German, I couldn't get the details, tho'.

http://berlin.angloinfo.com/information/32/animals.asp

Edited March 5, 2012 by mita

[Souff]

I'd like to know why the MDBA in their Codes of Conduct, have no restrictions on how often a bitch can be bred or how many times she can be bred. As far as I'm concerned a puppy farmer can have as few as a handful of dogs and breed them back to back until they drop dead. This is also an act of cruelty. I think the MDBA should review their codes of conduct.

What business is the number of times a bitch can be bred of anyone but the breeder and the vet who KNOWS the bitch well?

Most breeders have had bitches who struggled to have one or two litters and then were retired ..... and then the same breeders can a bitch who is bred now and then and loves to be a mother, is an excellent whelper, bounces back into good shape and can be exhibited in the show ring because she is in top shape and given plenty of time between litters.

Souff was once pressured into retiring a bitch from breeding after she had a number of litters. She drove me crackers for the rest of her life because of false pregnancies and then, after she was spayed, because of her behaviour around puppies, pregnant bitches and other hormonal activity. NATURE DECREED THAT SHE WAS MEANT TO BE A MOTHER AND SHE WAS A BLOODY GOOD MOTHER!

My vets and I agreed later that we should have allowed her to carry on for as long as she was a good natural whelper and feeder. Breeding was what suited her best and she delivered beautifully healthy pups. Straight after lactation she would spring back into shape and there were never any conception problems.

Not all bitches are like her and the decision to continue to breed must be made on what is best for the individual bitch.

Never again will I listen to anyone who tells me a bitch should be retired from breeding simply because she has had a number of litters! People who pressure other breeders over this can go to hell - it is not always in the bitch's best interests.

Treat your bitches well, skip one or two seasons between litters and let them be in top shape when they breed.

Let them do what nature intended and give them every possible assistance.

Souff

[sandgrubber]

I'd like to know why the MDBA in their Codes of Conduct, have no restrictions on how often a bitch can be bred or how many times she can be bred. As far as I'm concerned a puppy farmer can have as few as a handful of dogs and breed them back to back until they drop dead. This is also an act of cruelty. I think the MDBA should review their codes of conduct.

What business is the number of times a bitch can be bred of anyone but the breeder and the vet who KNOWS the bitch well?

Most breeders have had bitches who struggled to have one or two litters and then were retired ..... and then the same breeders can a bitch who is bred now and then and loves to be a mother, is an excellent whelper, bounces back into good shape and can be exhibited in the show ring because she is in top shape and given plenty of time between litters.

Souff was once pressured into retiring a bitch from breeding after she had a number of litters. She drove me crackers for the rest of her life because of false pregnancies and then, after she was spayed, because of her behaviour around puppies, pregnant bitches and other hormonal activity. NATURE DECREED THAT SHE WAS MEANT TO BE A MOTHER AND SHE WAS A BLOODY GOOD MOTHER!

My vets and I agreed later that we should have allowed her to carry on for as long as she was a good natural whelper and feeder. Breeding was what suited her best and she delivered beautifully healthy pups. Straight after lactation she would spring back into shape and there were never any conception problems.

Not all bitches are like her and the decision to continue to breed must be made on what is best for the individual bitch.

Never again will I listen to anyone who tells me a bitch should be retired from breeding simply because she has had a number of litters! People who pressure other breeders over this can go to hell - it is not always in the bitch's best interests.

Treat your bitches well, skip one or two seasons between litters and let them be in top shape when they breed.

Let them do what nature intended and give them every possible assistance.

Agree 100%.

I can see forbidding double merle matings . . . it is cruel to knowingly cause the conception of pups fated to die blind and/or deaf. I can see limiting the number of litters a dog can sire in the interests of increasing genetic diversity.

But what's the harm in allowing a broody bitch to have a fourth, or fifth . . . or if she's healthy and able, seventh brood?