The Final Version Of The Document Legislating To End Puppy Farming - T

[Sheridan]

Unfortunately, Steve, everytime you post on this subject it really does sound like you're defending commercial breeders.

And Erny, I wasn't attempting to 'write it up'. Nor would I attempt to do so. Writing legislation is a specialist's job and I suspect no one in this thread has the necessary qualifications.

[Christina]

That number six is a bit troublesome. They can sell your dogs if they think the dogs would be at risk going back to you? Who makes that decision? and what if you win the court case do they go and get your dogs back if they have already on sold them?

I'm trying to wrap my head around all this as one day I would like to become a breeder eventually but I can't really make sense of it. Will I need to have concrete floors and the dogs in kennel runs away from the house and the like? How do breeders get the permission to breed on the average suburban block? It probably is all in the paper but I am missing it Can someone help me make sense of it?

--Lhok

Guess its too bad on the first point, you have no rights.

One day you won't be able to become a breeder with dogs in the comfort of your own home as family, if this lot gets passed.

You will be able to buy acreage, build kennels with concrete floors & breed dogs there as long as you comply & pay all the fees.

Tragic for the dogs.

I don't trust these specialist to write legislation.

Look what happened with children. Parents have very few right anymore.

[Christina]

--Lhok

dopey fingers, double post

Edited April 13, 2012 by Christina

[Whippetsmum]

I am already a Dogs NSW member, dogs resistered with council, the dogs see their vet more than I see my GP

I don't have any plans to breed my girl at this stage, and in reality probably won't ever. Still, I'd like to have the option.

More importantly, I would like to be able to choose my breed and not be damned to designer dogs. I don't want to have a life without dogs, but I can see that in my later life, I may have to choose to be dogless, as I could never have a DD,they will be the only dogs that can be bred, as it will be prohibitive for ethical family breeders, show breeders, non commercial entities to breed dogs. If this legislation gets up, and we can only buy from puppy mills, they wouldn't be dogs as we know it, the DNA would be there, but they would be hollow copies of what dogs should be- damaged by the way they are legally kept.

This legislaton seems to normalise battery farming of dogs, so long as you have a license and the money to build the pens, get their jabs etc. There are enough behaviural studies on animals that show long term clinical settings as proposed are damaging to the dogs wellbeing and behaviour. Imagine the behaviour problems with puppies reared in boxes for the first 6 weeks, penned in a petshop for a few more weeks and then trying to integrate into family homes- never hearing a vaccum or a TV, lawn mower, washing machine, they's be anxious in such foreign surrounds, destructive, not have a clue about people. If that's the only way dogs will be bred, the dumping and surrender rate will sky rocket, as the pups will never have been socialised at the most basic level, and buyers will not keep them. Dogs have been bred for centuries to be around people, the RSPCA wants to erase this. If you're not a puppy farmer, but have a litter, one minute the bitch is a family member the next she's turfed into the yard in a cold pen when she's most vulnerable- that's cruelty.

The legislation seems to make it OK to house dogs in concrete runs for their life, breeding, not being part of a family and not being able to do what dogs like to do, digging, laying in the sun, chewing things, running just because they want to, and not during an allocated exercise time- it's Ok as long as it's making money for someone, a pet shop, the people collecting license fees etc.

Animals in pet shops are stock/commodities, and I don't agree with that at all, I want it stopped (but not all dog breeding stopped)

I hate pet shops,I saw a van this week stuffed with cages full of pups in the car park. The pet shop girls were choosing who to literally load into their trolley- serioucly, a supemarket trolley they dumped the puppies they selected into the trolley and pushed them to their next cage.

1. How do we respond to this document, other than by the RSPCA link which I would worry would be censored, is it through local members, has anyone drafted a tenplate reponse that we could send to politicians individually?

2. Can anyone who can follow this document explain at what point this legislation would come into force, e.g. if I have one entire bitch, and she had a litter would it apply? If I had a show dog and a show bitch both entire, would I be subject to the housing requirements, or could my dogs remain as family members, sleeping on the lounge or in their comfy crates? I am concerned that my girl would by law have to be housed in a concrete pen outside if she had a litter, she (and I )would not cope with this at all. She is a dog, but a family dog, and I would like to think if we ever had pups, they would be home reared, not treated as battery animals which seems to be what this legislation is both trying to avoid, yet inadvertantly supporting.

[Tapua]

1. I am already a registered breeder.

2. I already microchip my pups as required.

3. Happy to have my rego number and bitches microchip info included in puppy's microchip info.

4. Not happy to be forced to display my rego number in advertisements. Anyone who buys a pup from me gets the pups paperwork which includes my rego number and if item 3 is passed I will be forever linked to any pup I bred via the microchip number.

5. Already comply with ANKC standards for breeding.

6. Needs very careful reading, very carefull.

Ditto - I am not afraid of any inspection or legislation I know I am doing the right thing by my dogs. Though the detail of no:6 is concerning. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to hide!!!!!!!

I do think they are making pure-bred dog breeding unfairly complicated but I doubt I need to change anything I am doing to comply. I have the appropriate kennels its just that my Labs spend much of their life on our lounge and the current litter, as all litter we whelp, are whelped in the lounge because that is where the niose,activitye and general temperament stimualtion occurs and I spend many broken sleep nights ensuring the dam and pups are safe, warm and comfortable - no legislation will change my whelping practices.

[Erny]

Unfortunately, Steve, everytime you post on this subject it really does sound like you're defending commercial breeders.

Steve has often written quite black and white that she does not support puppy farmers.

And Erny, I wasn't attempting to 'write it up'. Nor would I attempt to do so. Writing legislation is a specialist's job and I suspect no one in this thread has the necessary qualifications.

I wasn't suggesting you were doing so - I'm sorry that I've not written to make the point I was trying to make more clear. My point being that your interpretation of what a puppy farmer is, and for that matter, anyone else's interpretation of what a puppy farmer is, is moot. It is what the law interprets what a puppy farmer is that is going to be the one that counts. Steve has pretty much said this in her post above. I'm sorry I wasn't as clear as she has been.

ETA: Sheridan - Just for the sake of clarity, when you refer to "Commercial Breeders" are you referring to "Puppy Farmers"?

Edited April 14, 2012 by Erny

[Steve]

1. I am already a registered breeder.

2. I already microchip my pups as required.

3. Happy to have my rego number and bitches microchip info included in puppy's microchip info.

4. Not happy to be forced to display my rego number in advertisements. Anyone who buys a pup from me gets the pups paperwork which includes my rego number and if item 3 is passed I will be forever linked to any pup I bred via the microchip number.

5. Already comply with ANKC standards for breeding.

6. Needs very careful reading, very carefull.

Ditto - I am not afraid of any inspection or legislation I know I am doing the right thing by my dogs. Though the detail of no:6 is concerning. If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to hide!!!!!!!

I do think they are making pure-bred dog breeding unfairly complicated but I doubt I need to change anything I am doing to comply. I have the appropriate kennels its just that my Labs spend much of their life on our lounge and the current litter, as all litter we whelp, are whelped in the lounge because that is where the niose,activitye and general temperament stimualtion occurs and I spend many broken sleep nights ensuring the dam and pups are safe, warm and comfortable - no legislation will change my whelping practices.

Nor will it change mine - or anyone else's thats really the whole point and there are several things in mandatory codes - especially if I lived in Victoria that I wouldn't do either. That's because we believe that we have the right to decide what is best for our dogs based on our dogs, our breeds, our lifestyles and our properties.

I just want to be able to sit on my front porch with my dogs at my feet and enjoy their company and decide now and then to have a litter.

I want to be able to make my own choices based on what I think is best as to whether they need to see the vet or need to be vaccinated ,or medicated etc and allow them to behave like dogs. I want the right to make my choices based on what suits me and my dogs and not based on some across the board crap which isn't even based on science.

Even though none of this would affect me personally - except I don't like people just turning up to look me over or asking permission to be able to keep my dogs entire etc it would take me a minute to get my head around that - however I still don't believe that people should have to for go their basic rights ,give the government the right to make decisions on my dogs and be assumed a potential animal abuser just because they want to own an entire dog or sell a puppy.

[Natsu chan]

Is it me or does this bill actually require compulsory desexing of all cats and dog by 4 months? The way I read it if they aren't you must be a registered animal breeding business with the mandatory kennels or you are breaking the law and the RSPCA can come in and sieze your pets.

Is this right? So what happens to show people, agility people or people who have giant breeds or with vets who won't desex until dogs are 6 months old?

If this is the case then everyone needs to get on to the DPI website and say this is not okay. The bill is totally over the top anyway but that bit is really worrying for everyone.

[Lhok]

Is it me or does this bill actually require compulsory desexing of all cats and dog by 4 months? The way I read it if they aren't you must be a registered animal breeding business with the mandatory kennels or you are breaking the law and the RSPCA can come in and sieze your pets.

Is this right? So what happens to show people, agility people or people who have giant breeds or with vets who won't desex until dogs are 6 months old?

If this is the case then everyone needs to get on to the DPI website and say this is not okay. The bill is totally over the top anyway but that bit is really worrying for everyone.

I read it that you have to apply for a breeding licence to own an entire dog not sure what the go would be if the vets decided for health reasons that they won't desex your dog until after 6months.

--Lhok

[alpha bet]

Lhok, I was at the meeting and it was made pretty clear that under the proposed legislation you would be able to have entire dogs.

Up to two entire females (no comment on entire males) doesn't require any registration nor even being a member of a recognised dog association.

If you have 9 or less entire females you dont need registration provided you are a member of the ANKC member clubs.

If you have 10 or more entire females you need to apply for a specific licence.

This would mean the majority of ANKC breeders will not need to alter their breeding operations as there is no requirement to have dogs in concrete runs or pups raised in whelping rooms and pens.

One major issue tho is that to advertise a forthcoming litter of pups you have to have have the microchip number on the advert you cannot use your Vic Dog Member Number, however for the commercial breeders they can advertise using their Breeder Registration Number. As pups arent microchipped till 6-8 weeks this means that most of the ANKC breeders could not advertise even here on Dogzonline.

[Lhok]

Alpha_bet I understand what you are saying but this directly copied from the proposed paper that the RSPCA is pushing

RSPCA Australia believes that all people who wish to engage in breeding dogs should be required to register as a dog breeder with their local government. The application of this requirement should be broad and apply to any person who wishes to keep one or more entire dogs regardless of whether that person has a stated intention to engage in breeding.

So is it a case of saying one thing and doing another or have I completely misinterpreted what that is saying.

--Lhok

[alpha bet]

Alpha_bet I understand what you are saying but this directly copied from the proposed paper that the RSPCA is pushing

RSPCA Australia believes that all people who wish to engage in breeding dogs should be required to register as a dog breeder with their local government. The application of this requirement should be broad and apply to any person who wishes to keep one or more entire dogs regardless of whether that person has a stated intention to engage in breeding.

So is it a case of saying one thing and doing another or have I completely misinterpreted what that is saying.

--Lhok

The RSPCA are not the ones writing the legislation - they might like the idea of requiring all dog breeders to register but there are many factors that have to be taken into consideration that are way beyond the capacity or understanding of RSPCA .

The DPI is the one who will be writing the proposed legislation which will end up with the Minister for 'approval or refinement'. Their paper is the one you should be looking and commenting on and it is certainly not titled "to end puppy farms". The current one is Victorian but other states have similar.

The DPI Victoria is putting forth a paper

"Code of Practice" for the operation of Breeding and Rearing Establishments.

Edited April 15, 2012 by alpha bet

[Natsu chan]

Alpha Bet I really truely hope you are right but if you read the RSPCA site then go through the actual survey questions on the DPI there is a decided sinking feeling. One of the questions says that breeding animals are any entire animal 4 months or over. Another asks if small breeders (and that would be most ANKC breeders) who currently keep their small numbers as pets and whelp the bitches in the home should be allowed to continue to do so as under the new laws it would be illegal.

So the question is what's going on exactly.

I'm not questioning you just that it seems odd that you were all told one thing and yet the documents available to us now seem to say something different.

[The Spotted Devil]

Alpha Bet I really truely hope you are right but if you read the RSPCA site then go through the actual survey questions on the DPI there is a decided sinking feeling. One of the questions says that breeding animals are any entire animal 4 months or over. Another asks if small breeders (and that would be most ANKC breeders) who currently keep their small numbers as pets and whelp the bitches in the home should be allowed to continue to do so as under the new laws it would be illegal.

So the question is what's going on exactly.

I'm not questioning you just that it seems odd that you were all told one thing and yet the documents available to us now seem to say something different.

Natsu chan - under the current Act a "Domestic Animal Breeder" is someone who has 3 or more fertile female dogs AND sells dogs. However, you are exempt from this if you are a member of an applicable body (e.g. Dogs Victoria) unless you have MORE than 10 fertile females. It is a long process to change the Act (as opposed to Codes of Practice) and it is the Codes of Practice for a Breeding Domestic Animal Business in Victoria that are currently under review. The ability of a Dogs Vic member with less than 10 fertile females to whelp their bitches in the house is NOT under threat. The definition of 'fertile females' was discussed at the seminar and it was suggested that it was more clearly defined.

RSPCA is a stakeholder like everyone else - and they will put forward their ideal like every other stakeholder tends to.

[Steve]

Lhok, I was at the meeting and it was made pretty clear that under the proposed legislation you would be able to have entire dogs.

Up to two entire females (no comment on entire males) doesn't require any registration nor even being a member of a recognised dog association.

If you have 9 or less entire females you dont need registration provided you are a member of the ANKC member clubs.

If you have 10 or more entire females you need to apply for a specific licence.

This would mean the majority of ANKC breeders will not need to alter their breeding operations as there is no requirement to have dogs in concrete runs or pups raised in whelping rooms and pens.

One major issue tho is that to advertise a forthcoming litter of pups you have to have have the microchip number on the advert you cannot use your Vic Dog Member Number, however for the commercial breeders they can advertise using their Breeder Registration Number. As pups arent microchipped till 6-8 weeks this means that most of the ANKC breeders could not advertise even here on Dogzonline.

Two different things going on here. One is what is happening in Victoria which is the meeting that alpha Bet attended re laws which came in late last year and revision of mandatory code discussions which are happening right now and the other is the RSPCA paper which explains what they will be pushing Australia wide over the next few years to have introduced- that is what they believe will be the best strategy for legislation to end puppy farming.

The link in this thread is what the RSPCA have decided is simply the best strategy and is what they will be advocating for legislation . In this case [Victoria] the changes you see to microchip laws and the advertising laws are a direct result of them pushing these things but that doesn't mean everything they want they will get in every state. It certainly doesn't mean they will get what they want across the board.

[alpha bet]

Received a reply from the DPI (Victoria) regarding the microchip query I asked. Re not being able to advertise pups for sale without a microchip number which means at 8 weeks.

DPI have stated that it would be acceptable under the proposed legislation from ANKC breeders to advertise any forthcoming litter but not the individual pups until they are microchipped. Seems a bit of an odd way of wording this....

[Topoftheheap]

1. I am already a registered breeder.

2. I already microchip my pups as required.

3. Happy to have my rego number and bitches microchip info included in puppy's microchip info.

4. Not happy to be forced to display my rego number in advertisements. Anyone who buys a pup from me gets the pups paperwork which includes my rego number and if item 3 is passed I will be forever linked to any pup I bred via the microchip number.

5. Already comply with ANKC standards for breeding.

6. Needs very careful reading, very carefull.

I agree with all of these points. People who are not registered with the ANKC are not going to register with thier local government either.

I will add to your points

7. I already pay to have my dogs registered with the ANKC

8. I already pay to register my dogs with the local council (LGA), and they are registered as entire, and as by law, all dogs coming into my house are registered by the age of 6 months.

9. I already pay to have regular vet checks, DNA testing for inherited diseases, etc as outlined by the ANKC standards.

10. I have no issue with regular inspections of my property, and as a member of the ANKC, and by having my dogs registered with the LGA i have agreed to comply with any request for either of those organisations to do so.

Does this regulation mean that on top of what I already pay to register with the LGA and the ANKC, that I will now have to pay again to register as a 'breeder', even though I fall well below the 10 dog level? I also read the legislation to mean that I will have to pay for veterinary advice to determine:

- when a bitch has reached sexual maturity (despite the fact that I would NEVER breed a bitch on her first, or second, and sometimes, depending on the bitches cycle, not even her third, and complying with ANKC regulations )

- that a dog is healthy enough to breed (despite the fact that I already undertake DNA testing on ALL of the animals I intend to breed with, for all known inheritable diseases for my breed, with what testing is available, and despite some, act upon those tests and eliminate affected dogs from my breeding programs. I also have a relationship with my vet that means that they are already aware of each of my dogs health)

Some of the things in the document I believe are good, like a national database for microchipping - oh hang on, I already do that as well!!!! And the details are registered with Dogs NSW, and the ANKC, and the LGA. That would make all the pups traceable!!!! I also provide puppy buyers with registration certificates from the ANKC. I suppose the real issue with the document is that, while thier heart is in the right place, alot of the registration plans are already in place for those of us that do the right thing. They are just proposing ANOTHER body for pure breed breeders to PAY to join. I do not think, however, that those who are doing the wrong thing will care!!!! And those are the puppy farmers - after all if they cared they wouldn't treat thier dogs the way they do.

I don't know how they plan to enforce it (except for using the money that we as pure breed breeders will pay to join this new state, and national organisation) but to get EVERY dog breeder to join, including backyard breeders, mixed breed breeders, and designer dog breeders, is one dream, to enforce it is quite another!!!!

I think the RSPCA, should try and make nice with the ANKC, after all they already have one corner of the dog world that are already largely following these rules, maybe they could get together, and try and end puppy farming - something that should be stopped. The ANKC have already put in place rules towards maximum numbers of puppies per bitch, and this should extend to per breeder.

On the whole, this document is not very pure breed friendly, it will increase our costs greatly, and not make many improvements to those of us who already adhere to the ANKC code of ethics, and regulations, which if you think about it, will drive more and more of the general public away from pure breeds. Already too many do not understand why our dogs cost more than one from another source, they don't understand the time, testing, and costs associated with producing sound, happy pure breed pups, and extra costs relating to registration and veterinary expenses will push the cost per puppy up, leading to more cross-breeds, puppy farmed, and designer dogs bought. We, as a pure breed community, should stick together, and try to help the whole dog world face the problems of puppy farming, including dealing with those within our own organisation who DO NOT follow the rules. But at least those within our organisation are traceable, and can be held accountable, it is those who are out there who do not have a Code of Ethics, do not understand the slightest thing about dog breeding and the intricate genetic details, and do not even bother testing for inherited diseases, or do not even know the history of thier dogs to even begin to make an informed decision about breeding, or those who do it simply to make a dollar, and have no welfare for thier dogs - there the ones who should be targeted, and there's a wide range of them, puppy farmers or not, NOT pure breed breeders, which although the document does not directly target, it will have a substansial impact on us as a community. I understand that tackling puppy farming has become very 'fashionable' for politicians, and the like to try and address, but I believe this legislation will have little or no effect, and in some ways drives the population AWAY from breeders who are already registered with a LGA, state and national body, already follow a code of ethics, are traceable, and produce traceable pups, and take the health and soundness of thier dogs into consideration in the majority of cases.