Nsw Companion Animal Taskforce

[luvsdogs]

Well, I tried to provide comments and got a 'incorrect validation key' response. Will see if I can provide a response by email.

That happened to me a couple of times, you just have to persevere.

[Sheridan]

It wouldn't allow me to even complete the form itself properly.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

The consultation period is now closed for DLG I think, but it wouldn't hurt to call them if people still want to have a say - they have an email address too. I find that Government consultations, at least Federally, will often allow an extension - but you have to ask first

I think the main thing now will be to talk to local members tho'.

[Are You Serious Jo]

I gave up on the crap online form, I'll email instead.

[trifecta]

Well, I tried to provide comments and got a 'incorrect validation key' response. Will see if I can provide a response by email.

That happened to me a couple of times, you just have to persevere.

It happened to me three times & finally all my selections & comments were deleted

In the end I gave up & went to bed. I might send mine Express Post on Monday with a covering letter.

[Are You Serious Jo]

It wouldn't save mine so when it booted me for the code timeout I had to start again.

[Sheridan]

The consultation period is now closed for DLG I think, but it wouldn't hurt to call them if people still want to have a say - they have an email address too. I find that Government consultations, at least Federally, will often allow an extension - but you have to ask first

I think the main thing now will be to talk to local members tho'.

For those outside NSW there's no point in talking to local members but anyone in NSW should do it.

[inez]

Well this is Page 4 of the latest issue of Dogs NSW.

Pretty much sums up what happend to the lady I know. Notice it says even 'advertising a single puppy as being commercial'.

Council local environment plans (LEPS’s)

An increasing number of our members are encountering significant difficulties with their councils in regard to management of their dogs in consideration of local LEP’s.

Most of these plans are based on a NSW Government Standard Instrument which, through zoning and development controls, allows councils and other consent authorities to manage the ways in which land is used.

Unfortunately the Standard Instrument which is being gradually adopted by most councils, included our hobby in the category of ‘animal boarding or training establishment’ and is defined as meaning a place at which the commercial boarding, breeding, keeping, maintaining, receiving or training of animals or birds is carried on.

A key word in there is commercial and, although most of us know that we are not operating commercially, councils deem the whelping or advertising of a single puppy as being commercial.

In the Standard Instrument, such activities are not permitted at all in most residential zones or even in rural zones without having lodged a development application. This is totally unrealistic given that hobby dog breeding is a pastime enjoyed internationally and, most certainly, across all of our own local government areas, in both residential and rural allotments.

The particular council that has to date been giving members the most grief has recently advised one our members in the following terms.

• Council is currently in the process of examining the potential for changes to the current Local Environmental Plan, provisions for ‘animal boarding and training establishments’.

• *This project is at ‘research stage’ as Council is seeking to implement a process of prioritization of actions for control this is clear and accountable to the community.

• *More specifically, it is seeking to identify the threshold beyond which the keeping of animals requires development consent and is seeking to set minimum standards for the siting, design and operation of animal boarding establishments.

• The board of directors has successfully defended several members with regards to their immediate difficulties; however, sadly there are others who have not yet achieved anything like satisfactory outcomes.

• We will continue to do our best to work on your behalf to overcome the outrage many of our members are experiencing.

Tom Couchman

President, Dogs NSW.

Isnt it being said the Taskforce hasnt even released its findings? Let alone made law yet?

How much worse can it get then?

Edited May 12, 2013 by inez

[Ringo]

If they don't take notice of the interpretations of the NSW Land & Environment Court on this very subject and follow what they have said then it won't make any difference the legislation has been interpreted by a court who is allowed to set case law ie how they interpret the law is how the people who enforce it must also interpret it from that point onwards.

So if the changes don't reflect this above interpretation then they still won't hold up when push comes to shove in the NSWLEC over whether a development application is needed or not ie the council will lose.

Hope Dogs NSW are making submissions at the same time on the subject.

For those who are interested there is also a revue going on at the moment to the NSW Local Government Act as well & I hope Dogs NSW hae made a submission to this.

Now all that needs to happen is for the referendum later this with the federal election to pass and we recognise local government in the Australian Constitution and our worst level of government will become a real monster.

[inez]

Isnt this a similar mentality to what is happening to registered dog breeders?

http://www.farminguk.com/News/Farming-group-attacks-Charity-Commission-on-RSPCA-stance_24558.html

Very interesting, so attitude problems among those running this organisation are not just occurring in Australia

Edited May 13, 2013 by inez

[Sheridan]

If they don't take notice of the interpretations of the NSW Land & Environment Court on this very subject and follow what they have said then it won't make any difference the legislation has been interpreted by a court who is allowed to set case law ie how they interpret the law is how the people who enforce it must also interpret it from that point onwards.

So if the changes don't reflect this above interpretation then they still won't hold up when push comes to shove in the NSWLEC over whether a development application is needed or not ie the council will lose.

Hope Dogs NSW are making submissions at the same time on the subject.

For those who are interested there is also a revue going on at the moment to the NSW Local Government Act as well & I hope Dogs NSW hae made a submission to this.

Now all that needs to happen is for the referendum later this with the federal election to pass and we recognise local government in the Australian Constitution and our worst level of government will become a real monster.

Instead of saying 'I hope' a lot, have you actually asked Dogs NSW if they've made submissions to these?

[BlackJaq]

Yea the RSPCA are certainly starting to peddle the PETA ideals a bit too much for my liking and I bet they are having a lot of input in both the NSW and VIC legislations that are being reviewed now. Wonder how long it will be until they tart to denounce pet ownership as evil and request all animals to be released into "the wild" for us to watch but never interfere with...

[Ringo]

• Council is currently in the process of examining the potential for changes to the current Local Environmental Plan, provisions for ‘animal boarding and training establishments’.

• *This project is at ‘research stage’ as Council is seeking to implement a process of prioritization of actions for control this is clear and accountable to the community.

• *More specifically, it is seeking to identify the threshold beyond which the keeping of animals requires development consent and is seeking to set minimum standards for the siting, design and operation of animal boarding establishments.

• The board of directors has successfully defended several members with regards to their immediate difficulties; however, sadly there are others who have not yet achieved anything like satisfactory outcomes.

• We will continue to do our best to work on your behalf to overcome the outrage many of our members are experiencing.

Tom Couchman

President, Dogs NSW.

If this council is seeking to amend their LEP then as every council in NSW has the same LEP to work from now they will have to put a case to the NSW DLG and also NSW department of planning to convince them it should be changed because they have 'special circumstances' One of the reasons the new LEP was created was to make all of NSW come under the same planning structure, not the ad hoc procedure they had before hand. Perhaps they should be again referred to what the NSW LEC thinks, although on the surface this council seems to have some difficulty realising they don't actually make laws they are only a consent authority.

[Liath]

I have been reading the thread and one question I have keeps popping up. Average Joe wants a puppy, the guy next door staffie is pregnant accidently to the dog down the road. Average Joe had no idea about all these regulations about permits etc and buys puppy from next door.

How are they going to stop that? Would average Joe even care? If they can buy a puppy for $100-00 from next door why would they buy from a registered breeder for $1000? How is this all going to enforced? Backyard breeders will still be doing what they always do unless the average Joes knows exactly what the laws are and the council/rspca pounce on everyone who has a new puppy and start asking questions about where said puppy came from.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Liath

[Sheridan]

I have been reading the thread and one question I have keeps popping up. Average Joe wants a puppy, the guy next door staffie is pregnant accidently to the dog down the road. Average Joe had no idea about all these regulations about permits etc and buys puppy from next door.

How are they going to stop that? Would average Joe even care? If they can buy a puppy for $100-00 from next door why would they buy from a registered breeder for $1000? How is this all going to enforced? Backyard breeders will still be doing what they always do unless the average Joes knows exactly what the laws are and the council/rspca pounce on everyone who has a new puppy and start asking questions about where said puppy came from.

Average Joe who wants a puppy won't care. Guy next door won't care. Authorities will not police the newspapers, Facebook, signs at the local shops, they will not be policed at all.

The only people who will be policed are those doing the right thing already whether that's registered breeders or puppyfarmers.

[Steve]

Yep. Much better to plead ignorance and simply do as you want with your own property. Trouble is they know who we are and want to know more about who we are and where we live - make it all harder. pretty stupid really isnt it ?

If anyone has any doubts about what is going on there was one very telling paragraph - remember this wasn't written by Oscars Law or the RSPCA it was written within a proposal for more restrictions on breeders and in Victoria a breeding establishment is a person who has 3 fertile dogs and is not a Vicdogs member or someone who has 10 fertile animals. When we say they are trying to stop us breeding we are accused of being paranoid and scaremongering but Australia wide its getting harder and harder to breed a dog. Their words not mine.

Quote.

In any case, both the RSPCA and the activist group known as Oscar's law have run substantial media campaigns over the last 3 years- yet the problems identified in this RIS remain. These campaigns have had considerable mass media attention. The'Oscar's Law' campaign has had some very high profile celebrity support internationally and within Victoria. It has hosted simultaneous public rallies in several states of Australia, the most recent being on the 16th of September 2012 - that have attracted wide media attention. Despite this, neither campaign has been successful in reducing the number of breeding establishments, nor have they reduced the number of puppies purchased from breeding establishments or pet shops.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Steve

[dragonwoman]

Yep. Much better to plead ignorance and simply do as you want with your own property. Trouble is they know who we are and want to know more about who we are and where we live - make it all harder. pretty stupid really isnt it ?

If anyone has any doubts about what is going on there was one very telling paragraph - remember this wasn't written by Oscars Law or the RSPCA it was written within a proposal for more restrictions on breeders and in Victoria a breeding establishment is a person who has 3 fertile dogs and is not a Vicdogs member or someone who has 10 fertile animals. When we say they are trying to stop us breeding we are accused of being paranoid and scaremongering but Australia wide its getting harder and harder to breed a dog. Their words not mine.

In Victoria it is fertile BITCHES, not dogs, that go to form quota of 10 for DV members, 3 for all others, you can have as many dogs or non-fertile bitches as you like, depending on local govt limits of course

[Steve]

Definition of a Breeding Domestic Animal Business?

The definition of a breeding establishment has been changed, to maximize the number of breeders required to register with local councils and comply with the mandatory Code of Practice for the Operation of Breeding and Rearing Establishments. Registration enables councils to inspect businesses regularly, to ensure they meet the minimum standards for animal welfare outlined in the Code.

The new laws require registration as a breeding domestic animal business if you have three or more fertile dogs AND you sell dogs (whether you make a profit or not).

This will not affect the number of desexed animals an owner may have (as long as owners comply with any local council requirements regarding excess animal permits)

Exemptions

The exemption for this registration as a domestic animal business is if the breeder belongs to an applicable breeding organisation that requires its members to operate in accordance with a Code of Ethics. A list of current applicable organisations can be found at www.dpi.vic.gov.au/applicableorganisations

Breeders who belong to one of these organizations’ will be regarded as domestic animal businesses, and required to register with their local council, if they have 10 or more fertile dogs.

Dogs not bitches.

http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/pets/dog-care/new-regulations-for-dog-breeders

[dragonwoman]

Definition of a Breeding Domestic Animal Business?

The definition of a breeding establishment has been changed, to maximize the number of breeders required to register with local councils and comply with the mandatory Code of Practice for the Operation of Breeding and Rearing Establishments. Registration enables councils to inspect businesses regularly, to ensure they meet the minimum standards for animal welfare outlined in the Code.

The new laws require registration as a breeding domestic animal business if you have three or more fertile dogs AND you sell dogs (whether you make a profit or not).

This will not affect the number of desexed animals an owner may have (as long as owners comply with any local council requirements regarding excess animal permits)

Exemptions

The exemption for this registration as a domestic animal business is if the breeder belongs to an applicable breeding organisation that requires its members to operate in accordance with a Code of Ethics. A list of current applicable organisations can be found at www.dpi.vic.gov.au/applicableorganisations

Breeders who belong to one of these organizations’ will be regarded as domestic animal businesses, and required to register with their local council, if they have 10 or more fertile dogs.

Dogs not bitches.

http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/pets/dog-care/new-regulations-for-dog-breeders

I think you will find that has been clarified......................somewhere...................but at DPI seminar for DV members, it was quite clearly bitches they are talking about under current proposals (not talking about existing codes)..................even up to the point that entire bitches under 12 months don't count because they are below minimum breeding age.....................owners of entire older bitches were also advised to have veterinary opinion in writing that such bitches were not breedable (I'm dubious about that one, strange things do happen).......................some breeders don't desex older bitches (I do) and there has to be some provision which does not force breeders to offload older stock to make room for next generation..............heart of gold our govt has!!

[Steve]

O.K. But I just spent an entire week answering the proposals and I didn't turn that up - in fact the parts where they were calculating staff ratios male dogs were specifically included in allowable numbers. Not that this surprises me it was the most tacky unprofessional proposal Ive ever seen. if its changed or the intent is to change it to fertile bitches rather than fertile dogs I haven't seen it.

Edited to ad that no where was there anything about bitches under 12 months old and I only saw reference to dogs over 6 months.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Steve