Sa Puppy Farm Exposed

[casowner]

The most disgusting part of this I believe is the woman managing it is a registered breeder

SA Puppy Farm

ANIMAL activists are demanding tough new laws to ensure better breeding conditions for puppies.

THE stench hits us as we step out of the car.

The smell of dog faeces hangs in the hot, still air.

That’s the first assault on the senses.

The second is the cacophony of barking.

We’ve arrived at a cluster of buildings barely visible from the road, at the end of a long, dirt track through a paddock.

There’s a rundown homestead with a fenced yard, enclosing an open-sided shelter over fenced pens.

Several dogs of varying breeds and sizes are barking at the gate.

Most of the noise, however, is coming from the pens across a clearing from the house, a haphazard collection of enclosures and corrugated iron shelters that tumbles off into the distance, disappearing into a clump of trees.

Various breeds of mostly small dogs, having announced our presence, lose interest and snuffle about in their bare, dirt floored pens.

We’ve arrived unannounced at a property set in the hard-scrabble farming country of the South Australian Mallee district, acting on a claim from the animal activist group Oscar’s Law.

Its founder, Victorian nurse Debra Tranter, has been on a 20-year crusade to end what she describes as the “factory farming” of puppies for the pet shop trade and internet sales.

Along with other animal welfare groups like Animals Australia, Tranter has helped to make the term “puppy farm” synonymous with ill treatment of animals; of bitches treated as breeding machines, housed in squalid, confined spaces with little or no interaction with humans, producing poorly socialised pups with congenital and behavioural problems to feed our apparently insatiable appetite for cute, fluffy, “designer” dogs.

The Oscar’s Law website contains harrowing photographs and footage captured from Victorian breeding kennels, of dogs cowering in filthy pens; of litters of pups with their mothers, confined in cages that line the walls of a huge, windowless shed. These images, we are told, are of legal businesses.

Equally affecting is the story of the dog for whom the campaign is named.

Oscar is a tiny, curly-haired creature that Tranter rescued from a breeding kennel in rural Victoria.

He was seriously underweight, with severe ear and mouth infections.

His fur was so matted he had to be anaesthetised so that a vet could shave him.

Tranter also had him desexed, in the belief that that would end his life as a puppy farm stud dog.

After the surgery, while Oscar recovered, police raided Tranter’s home, arrested her and returned the dog to his owner.

She was eventually able to buy him from the breeder, and he now lives with her.

PUPPY FARMS

When she first raised the issue, 20 years ago, people were incredulous.

“When I mentioned puppy farms, factory farming dogs, everyone believed it was a hoax,” she says.

“It wasn’t true, we couldn’t possibly do that to dogs. We do it to chickens and pigs, we wouldn’t do it to dogs.”

Late last year, Oscar’s Law staged the latest in a series of protests − in Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney − to demand reforms to the legal regime under which commercial dog breeders are permitted to operate.

Politicians, it seems, are listening.

In South Australia, State Parliament has convened a Select Committee Inquiry into Cats and Dogs as Companion Animals, which is currently hearing submissions from the pet industry, animal welfare organisations and other interested parties, as well as members of the public, and will present its recommendations in the middle of the year.

In Victoria, the legislation has been tightened and public comment is currently being sought on a revised and strengthened code of practice for the operation of breeding and rearing establishments.

“State governments are actually starting to put puppy farming on the agenda and saying well, we’d better have a look at this,” says Tranter.

“Because they are getting lots of emails and letters. It’s the first time in 20 years that I’ve known the issue to be on the political agenda. So at least people are talking about it and people are starting to listen.”

The Animal Welfare Act of SA governs the treatment of all animals, from privately owned pets to commercial breeding and rearing establishments such as poultry farms and beef cattle producers.

Most commercial enterprises are governed by codes of practice which are attached to the act.

There is no code, however, that governs the commercial breeding of companion animals.

Such establishments operate under licences issued by local councils which fall under the Dog and Cat Management Board.

Shatha Hamade, who was the RSPCA’s legal counsel in SA until she left late last year to join Animals Australia, based in Victoria, said that while the provisions of the Animal Welfare Act are commendable, and penalties for breaches are appropriate, without a specific code of practice it’s difficult to get convictions against licensed commercial dog breeders.

“It’s like prosecuting a farmer,” says Hamade.

“If a magistrate is of the opinion that this person has their livelihood out of this, this is their job, they would be hesitant to shut them down completely.

"So the RSPCA can hold them to account in terms of welfare but ultimately it’s the council who makes the decision about whether or not to revoke their licence.”

According to Tranter, there are up to 100 dogs being kept at the property SA Weekend visited in the SA Mallee, about 2½-hours drive from Adelaide.

When we call en route to check the location, she tells us activists had made a covert visit the night before, and had photographed the animals in pens at the back of the house.

NOT FOR SALE

When a young man emerges from the house and comes to the gate, we give him the name of the woman who, according to Tranter, is running the kennels, breeding dogs for the pet shop trade in partnership with a former pet shop owner, Robert Stone.

Ten minutes later the woman appears, hair damp from the shower, and regards us balefully from the doorstep.

After a short exchange, we are admitted to the house and offered coffee.

Although she talks to us at length about her experiences in the pet business - she too was a former pet shop owner, and is a registered breeder of pedigree dogs - she is adamant that she does not want to be named in this story.

While we talk, her French bulldogs curl up beside us on the sofa and at our feet.

They are calm, affectionate animals, obviously loved and indulged.

There are four breeding bitches, three desexed females and a breeding male. One of the females has just had pups.

But what of the dogs out the back?

They are not hers, she tells us. She is merely caring for them for their owner.

They are not being used to breed puppies for the pet shop trade, she says.

Her offsider has already told us there are “around 50” dogs.

Why are they there, I ask?

“The owner would explain that to you,” she says.

“He’s got dogs here that he did breed from, but they’re all slowly being re-homed or whatever ... ”

The dogs were not for sale.

“They’re given away,” she says, and it was “definitely not” a business.

Over the course of the next 40 minutes, she tells us her story - of a pet shop franchise gone bad, of litigation against the franchisor, of financial hardship, creditors, mental illness.

As she talks, she chain smokes with shaking hands.

“I’m unemployed, we get to live here for free to take care of the house and make sure the animals are fed,” she says.

She won’t allow us to see for ourselves the condition of the pens at the back.

The owner - not Robert Stone, she says - would be horrified.

“Look, he will…honestly, we’re going to get kicked out,” she says.

“That’s the issue. We are now going to have to find somewhere else to live. He is going to go off his dial.”

The photographs sent by Tranter show dogs of various - mostly small - breeds, among them what appear to be poodles, silky terriers and at least one pug.

But is it a “puppy farm”? We can’t tell.

Apart from the great drifts of dog droppings underfoot, it’s difficult to discern much about the condition of the animals.

ANIMAL WELFARE

In the past year, the RSPCA (SA) has completed 34 prosecutions for cruelty to animals.

In 2011-12, there were 55. Most were for cruelty to companion animals, and most of those were dogs.

Simon Richards, chief inspector of the RSPCA (SA) said that although “we had a few reports”, none of the prosecutions involved commercial breeders of companion animals.

“There were three of backyard people who were breeding dogs in their houses, potentially for profit,” he says.

“I’ve been out to an establishment that was described as a puppy farm, but wasn’t.

"And we get a number of reports like that, where puppy farms are reported but they’re actually not.

"They were breeding there, but it didn’t fit within the RSPCA’s definition of what a puppy farm is, and it met all the requirements of the Animal Welfare Act.”

The fact that there were no prosecutions suggests not that there is not an issue with inappropriate breeding establishments, says Richards, simply that, of the reports received, only those three small scale breeders, presumably operating without a licence, were in breach of the Act.

“I’m not going to say that there aren’t puppy farms in SA,” he says.

“All I can say is we haven’t received a report that we’ve attended to that is a puppy farm.”

Based on the reports received by the RSPCA, Richards believes that backyard breeders - those operating without a commercial licence - are a significant part of the problem of inappropriate care and management of breeding dogs.

“You’ve only got to look online, (or at) the amount of calls that we get, to members of the public who go to buy a puppy from a backyard breeder and report problems in terms of the living conditions or conditions of the dogs themselves to indicate that it’s as significant a problem as puppy farms are,” he said.

Apart from the care and condition of the animals, the RSPCA is also concerned about the oversupply of dogs to the market: the breeding of puppies to suit consumer taste - for example the so-called “designer dogs” - what Richards calls “the commodification of animals”.

While some of the more than 14,000 dogs euthanased by the RSPCA in 2011-12 would have been killed for medical or behavioural reasons, it is still a shocking figure.

Add those taken in by Animal Welfare League shelters, local government pounds and privately run shelters and the numbers are much higher.

One estimate, from the Pet Industry Association (PIAA) of Australia, is that more than 44,000 dogs are euthanased because no homes can be found for them.

According to the PIAA, 450,000 dogs are sold nationally each year.

Of these, only 15 per cent - or 67,500 - are bought in pet shops.

Late last year, the PIAA launched a new policy of accreditation for breeders and retailers in response to community concerns - and campaigns by the RSPCA and organisations like Oscar’s Law - about puppy farms and unwanted pets.

Its “dogs lifetime guarantee on traceability and re-homing” includes a scheme for approved breeders to comply with prescribed codes of ethical operation, subject to an independent annual audit by a vet.

They would be required to microchip animals with their breeder details before sale to accredited pet shops.

If the dog were to be abandoned or sent to a shelter or pound, the theory is that it would be traced back to both pet shop and breeder for rehoming, at the PIAA’s expense.

The policy was rolled out in NSW late last year, and will be launched in South Australia in the next two to three months.

DESIGNER PETS

At a prominently located pet shop in the city - one of eight SA pet shops listed on the PIAA’s database - a “Frenchie x pugalier” male puppy is displayed in a glass cabinet with a price tag of $1195.

Advertised as wormed and vaccinated and 12 weeks old, it’s the offspring of a French bulldog sire and a pugalier bitch (ie a pug crossed with a cavalier king charles spaniel).

The owner of the shop, a 30-year veteran of the retail pet business, declines to speak to us on the record, but outlines her strict policies on the management and care of live pets.

There are cooling off periods for buyers, free vet checks and a returns policy for pets found to be unsuitable or defective.

There is no profit to be made from the sale of pets, she says.

The money is in the food, toys and pet paraphernalia that retailers hope will be bought by new owners on regular return visits.

The frenchie cross pup had been sourced from a broker in Victoria, she said, as were almost all of the pups she sold in the shop.

She didn’t buy from the woman in the Mallee we had visited, and only vaguely recalled hearing her name, or Robert Stone’s.

Stone had called SA Weekend the day after our visit to the Mallee property to lodge a complaint with the editor.

As predicted, he had “gone off his dial”, accusing us of trespassing and loudly protesting that he was running a lawful business.

He declined to allow us to visit the kennels, but eventually agreed to an interview.

The property was owned by his father, and he had been running it as a breeding establishment for about 3½ years, under the licence which came with the property, and which was renewed annually with the local council.

He had around 55 dogs: “I’ll take a guess. Normally, it’s about one male to every three bitches,” he said.

His females were rested for a season between litters and all his pups were sold in SA pet shops, which he declined to name, but added that we had already visited one of them.

When I tell him that the owner of the shop denied sourcing pups from his kennels, and knew him only vaguely, he said: “Well, that’s news to me.”

He knew we had visited the shop, he said, because the owner had called the property to tell the caretaker that SA Weekend had been in, asking questions.

The reason for all the subterfuge, he said, was misunderstandings by the general public and the actions of animal activists.

“Basically anyone at all that breeds, they don’t like,” he says.

“For us, for any breeder, whether they’re legitimate, whether they’re licensed, whether they’re a pedigree breeder, it’s like yelling shark to people in the water. It invokes fear.”

The terrible smell at his kennels was only to be expected.

“When you’ve got dogs you’re going to have smell,” he says.

And, yes, of course the runs were cleaned of faeces.

“It’s picked up daily, it’s hosed out daily, we rest runs, we use chemicals. If I don’t clean properly I have ill animals,” he adds. “If I have ill animals I have vet bills. That can ruin me. If I over-breed my animals, I get sick animals, I get smaller litter sizes.

"If you (are) a businessman that wants to make the maximum amount of money, you do the right thing by the animals. It’s common sense and it’s decency.

"And that’s why I got upset the other day and flew off the handle. Because we’re so used to being accused.

"Whether you’re a good operator or a poor operator there’s a blanket thrown over the whole industry.”

He gives me the contact details for his vet, and before we part, makes the following observation: “Look, I owned a hotel. I sold cigarettes to people who could die from cancer, I sold chicken schnitzels to fat people, I sold alcohol to alcoholics and I took money off problem gamblers, and I never copped any grief. Sell a cute little puppy dog to somebody and you’re evil.”

Stone’s vet, Trevor Baker, who’s a partner in a practice based at Blake’s Crossing in the northern suburbs, confirms that he sees Stone’s animals regularly - up to twice weekly - and had visited the property several times, most recently a few days before we spoke, to do multiple vaccinations of breeding bitches.

“I’ve got no issue with it,” says Baker when asked about the conditions.

“They’ve got big pens out there, most are bigger than most people’s backyards.

"When I’ve been there, they’ve always been clean, (the dogs) are all chewing on bones.

"They all seem quite happy ... as a breeding establishment, it’s fine as far as the animals’ welfare is concerned.”

Most of the females had only a litter a year, which was the breed standard, he said, and when they reached the end of their breeding life, at about four or five, they were desexed.

“We desex quite a few of their mature dogs,” he says.

“They don’t bring in four-year-old dogs to have them euthanased so they obviously re-home them somewhere.”

He only occasionally saw genetic abnormalities from inappropriate crosses.

“Most so-called designer dogs are maltese crosses, which suit the majority of people because they’re small, fluffy and low-maintenance, good-temperament puppies. We don’t see a whole heap of genetic defects,” he says.

The pet shop owner believes that people should have a choice about acquiring a pet, rather than being “bullied” into adopting an unwanted dog. At the time of writing, the frenchie cross pup’s price had been reduced to $850.

Shortly after SA Weekend’s visit to his property, Stone removed his dogs, according to local police. Stone declined to comment.

Edited March 14, 2013 by behluka

[korbin13]

Am I missing something? I can't seem to find where they were raided, it looks to me like a journalist visited the property and wrote a story?

[BlackJaq]

There was no mention of any raid anywhere?

[casowner]

Edited title, this is one of the first exposed puppy farms in SA for a while and hopefully it will be pressured to close

[BlackJaq]

Well it says the guy has removed hi dogs so I assume he has moved them to an unknown location to continue with business as usual

Edited March 14, 2013 by BlackJaq

[WreckitWhippet]

It's about time someone actually pressed charges against these AR loonies for trespass..

[BlackJaq]

It's about time someone actually pressed charges against these AR loonies for trespass..

I kind of have to agree with this. The guy was apparently registered and following all guidelines. There were no charges or convictions. A private property is that, private property. I would go ballistic if I found anybody trespassing on my property for whatever reason. I would probably hit the roof if somebody came to my property while I was not home and harassed the occupants of my house to try and get dirt on me.

[casowner]

I would too and they took photos at night when people were home and I absolutely think that is wrong but I am also disgusted at the conditions of these dogs were living in or are they acceptable to people? I don't care if it is a give away kelpie cross pup or in this case pups worth several thousands of dollars these are filthy. What about disease control these dogs are on dirt

[WreckitWhippet]

I'm not going to attempt to defend the conditions these dogs were supposedly kept in, however if people want action taken, then they should have reported them to the local council and the RSPCA.

[BlackJaq]

I have not seen any photos and the writer of the article did not even get to see the pens and has therefore been unable to describe them. I do not like to judge things I have not actually seen. Anybody can make up whatever they like about anybody's property.

Of course I do not condone the mass production of companion animals and keeping breeding animals in filthy conditions but I have not seen what conditions are like at that property

[casowner]

Pictures

I thought I linked the photo's, I so need sleep sorry :laugh:

Again I absolutely do not agree with tresspassing

[BlackJaq]

Ew yes, those pens are pretty dirty and bare dirt would definitely be hard to clean/disinfect.

Does SA have breeding establishment requirements like some other states do now where you need all concrete easy-to-clean pens and such to conduct a breeding business? If so a report made to the proper authorities surely would have been in order...

[Alyosha]

An "article" comprised of a whole lot of regurgitated waffle and no actual facts. And it really needs to actually get to a point somewhere...?

I can't find any photos in there, but if there are some I would beg the question - how does anyone know conclusively where those photos came from??

Tranter's illegal tactics are atrocious and need to be brought to bear more often.

[Alyosha]

Sorry - see the photos now. Still no confirmation of where they come from. Yes they're not nice. But they're not evidence either. And if they're farming puppies, where are the puppies?

Edited March 14, 2013 by Alyosha

[casowner]

An "article" comprised of a whole lot of regurgitated waffle and no actual facts. And it really needs to actually get to a point somewhere...?

I can't find any photos in there, but if there are some I would beg the question - how does anyone know conclusively where those photos came from??

Tranter's illegal tactics are atrocious and need to be brought to bear more often.

I know whose these dogs are and yes they would be that property, she has admitted it.

Edited to add there has been a "rumour" in the Pet Industry about this woman for a long time but no one knew the absolute fact that it was happening. There were a lot of dogs there and RSPCA etc have been told and the dogs were removed, the guy that owns the set up has owned 3 pet shops, the woman has owned several also.

Edited March 14, 2013 by behluka

[Ker]

Those photos...well, the pens are a LOT cleaner and bigger, and the dogs healthier looking, than the now defunct Freedom Kennels was. And FK was deemed "ok".

[Steve]

The woman who is the registered breeder says its not her that is breeding the ones out the back and the registered dogs which she admits to as a registered breeder are all on the couch and living a great life . Happy healthy and well socialised. No one other than the vet and criminals saw the pens and the vet says all is well and not an issue in regard to animal welfare yet its O.K. to publish names and make accusations? You wouldn't treat an accused pedophile like that.

So why is it written as if the registered breeder is the bad guy anyway ? What is it exactly that a registered breeder is accused of doing?

Im not interested in taking any notice of photos which come from people creeping around at night breaking the law there is no way Id believe anything that comes from anything they say or show.

And No this isnt me defending a puppy farmer, or commercial breeder or anyone else in particular - its about defending the fact that dog breeders all dog breeders have rights.

and its not O.K. for people who think they have some thing to show to trespass and publish private correspondence and break the law.

If they really thought they were treating their dogs poorly or that they were living in sub standard conditions or had evidence obtained legally and they wanted to help the dogs why didn't they contact the RSPCA to investigate?

[megan_]

A vet saying dogs were okay means nothing - one of the most notorious breeders in Vic was a vet.

Yes - they should go to the RSPCA and the council. However, we all know that often that means nothing is done until AR goes to the media.

I feel sorry for poor little Oscar. These days he is carted around to festivals to drum up publicity, subjected to huge crowds etc. Not many dogs could cope with that life - never mind one who was never socialised properly.

[Steve]

A vet or anyone for that matter saying that all is well is more credible than animal rights.

If nothing is done via the RSPCA or the council then nothing needs to be done.They are the authority charged with ensuring laws and welfare issues are

being dealt with .

People shouldn't just automatically loose their rights because animal rights want to be judge jury and executioner.

If these conditions are that bad that they believe they need to expose them then they are going to be the same for those responsible for policing the laws to see in light of day by knocking on the front door as what they are by someone creeping around at night.

Yeah Yeah I get it - expose them when you can and make a big deal of it so the public know whats going on,then they wont buy from pet shops but there is time to do that when ever if ever they go through court and they are actually found to be guilty of something.

Edited to add the outcome for these dogs is that they are now removed without anyone in authority seeing them , or how they lived or being able to examine them or doing anything to help them if that was needed.

Edited March 14, 2013 by Steve

[Christina]

This is part of the story in SA Magazine Lift Out I posted about here a few days ago.

The whole article was some kind of jumbled thing that made no sense but did registered breeders no favours & seemed to support mass, council approved breeding & sales through pet shops with conditions.

Haven't seen the photos but if its bad of course it should be closed.

Goodness knows what stupid recommendations may come out of it all at the end of the day.