New Dog And Cat Laws In South Australia

[Steve]

Even if you have someone who is breeding huge amounts of puppies there is no need to keep breeding dogs in concrete pens.

If a breeding dog is vaccinated, rarely if ever leaves the property, and there are not dogs coming in exposing them to viruses and bugs which are not quarantined why cant we keep them in yard type situations ? Why is it O.K. if you own a couple of dogs for you to allow them to run in your yard pick up their poop , mow the lawn give em fun stuff to play with and run and play , lay around in the sun etc having their humans coming and going into their yard to pet them and play with them etc but the minute it becomes a dog which is used or even maybe used for breeding its automatically dirtier, more likely to get and give germs and needs sterilised and scrubbed non porous surfaces? Why is it we can keep dingoes in a yard type areas if they are breeding but not dogs? Bitches only need temperature controlled easy to clean more controlled areas for about 8 weeks a year and they dont need to be concrete cells there are many other alternatives which gives greater welfare but we are stuck in this holding pattern of what has become known as kennels and how we should be managing them. Not true.

[Pjrt]

Even if you have someone who is breeding huge amounts of puppies there is no need to keep breeding dogs in concrete pens.

If a breeding dog is vaccinated, rarely if ever leaves the property, and there are not dogs coming in exposing them to viruses and bugs which are not quarantined why cant we keep them in yard type situations ? Why is it O.K. if you own a couple of dogs for you to allow them to run in your yard pick up their poop , mow the lawn give em fun stuff to play with and run and play , lay around in the sun etc having their humans coming and going into their yard to pet them and play with them etc but the minute it becomes a dog which is used or even maybe used for breeding its automatically dirtier, more likely to get and give germs and needs sterilised and scrubbed non porous surfaces? Why is it we can keep dingoes in a yard type areas if they are breeding but not dogs? Bitches only need temperature controlled easy to clean more controlled areas for about 8 weeks a year and they dont need to be concrete cells there are many other alternatives which gives greater welfare but we are stuck in this holding pattern of what has become known as kennels and how we should be managing them. Not true.

This this and more of this ^

the whole 'kennel' concept is pretty modern in the big scheme of things. But The version we mostly think of today of concrete, steel and wire kennels and runs belongs in a bygone era. It just makes me shake my head that people who know little think that such a sterile environment is good for dogs/puppies health, both mental and physical.

[moosmum]

And this!

Steve

if all breeders were more like you - then maybe what you say would be fair.

But it doesn't really offer much to solve the problem of puppy farms supplying pet shops with puppies bred with no concern for their environment, their parents' environment or the future of the puppy - behaviour wise.

It is reassuring to read that most of these dogs would benefit from training - and councils do offer discounts for owners who get their dogs trained to a very basic level.

Making it harder for people to dump their dogs - is not going to solve problems into the future unless we change the laws about where you can take dogs - eg to the retirement village, or on the bus so that someone who can't stay in their current home and can't drive any more can still care for a dog. Maybe a lot less dogs would get dumped if they changed the laws about rental properties - ie that prospective tenants cannot be excluded if they have pets and they do not have to disclose up front if they do have pets.

I think if it was only about unwanted dogs in shelters that's one thing. But for me - it's about providing easy to measure and enforce ways to make sure that things like Oscar's law events do not happen. Or are easier to stop.

Personally - I'd like to see the rows of dog runs with breeding dogs and puppies that do not get nearly enough people time to be friendly - be banned. Maybe puppies removed from that kind of environment at 6 weeks do better - but they don't do as well as the ones that stay with their litter (not their breeder, their litter), until they're older. The stress on a puppy removed at 6 weeks is HUGE. And then you're depending on the training skill of a new owner. Who if they had a clue would not have bought a puppy from a pet shop or puppy farm in the first place.

The stress of a puppy removed from its litter at 8 weeks when it isn't properly weaned and has been in the constant company of its Mum and litter mates until the minute it goes home is liable to be much more stressed about going to a new home than a 6 week old one.

You win all puppies have to wait until they are 8 weeks to go home but based on what I have seen and what I know it is a stupid inclusion based on little more than assumption. All that is needed is to ensure all puppies are vaccinated before they go home and that there has been enough time between needle and home time for the vaccine to be activated. The main reason for this is that it is the only thing you can do to cme close to introdcing something that can be regulated and enforced. The breeder can then take into account the variables they are working with have the right to make informed decisions on what is best and puppies and families live happily ever after. You may be able to get close to all puppies being 8 weeks before they leave the property but you will never ever get near determining what a breeder does with those puppies between birth and 8 weeks .No amount of over regulation is going to make a breeder keep the pups with the litter for that long if it doesnt suit them. No amount of over regulation is going to make a breeder socialise a puppy with humans or other dogs if it doesnt suit them.

If you dont want breeders to keep dogs in blocks of kennels like boarding kennels and pounds then we had better stop telling them that this is what is required for best management, easy cleaning blah blah blah. No person who loves dogs , no person who wants to breed puppies humanely would want to keep their animals like that but in some places because of over regulation the breeders have no choice. Take a good look at codes and development application requirements then reconsider who is to blame for breeding dog to be kept in this way.

Legislation can be good in a lot of situations, but never when you are trying to legislate Responsibility.

As soon as you try to legislate responsibility, you take it away. It removes responsibility to excersise informed judgements. The environment a pup will be born into is fluid. The evironment that will be provided in its new home is fluid. The expectations are fluid and every thing about the pups is.

The 8 week rule as a "Recommendation" in the absense of responsible and informed judgement would be better.

Instead of laws that remove a responsibility to excersise informed judgements.

If breeders of all stripes, could be more accepting of the differing environments there are to work in and be more involved in teaching the value of what they do, Instead of focusing on what they won't, the expectations of buyers are lifted. What they understand of their own responsibility to acheive value increases.

Better practices are valued and driven by the expectations of the environment . Theres room for adaptation to the changing environment/s the word presents. The public won't support puppy farms if they understand that practice does not deliver the value they will come to expect.

You won't increase the communities expectations by sacrificing informed judgement. Its what should form those expectations adaptably into any new future.

Edited June 30, 2015 by moosmum

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

So are all the responsible breeders who think that a puppy should stay with the mother and litter until 8 weeks - wrong. Some of the small breed breeders argue for 12 weeks because that way they send out a more robust puppy...

I think there must be some way of pointing to a puppy farm with 300 bitches and 2 human staff and saying - that's wrong. I think it's wrong. Somewhere between 1 human and one bitch and that - there is a shade of grey... so you keep stepping towards where it's a bit more black - and outlaw that.

Is registering ten litters from one facility a year ok or wrong? Or having 10 different litters of puppies available all the time of various breeds - does that result in good conditions for the bitch, dog and puppies and then a well adjusted puppy going to a new owner? Always? Sometimes? Never? It depends?

What happens to these puppies if the breeder doesn't sell them all?

Would banning puppies in pet shops (or broker equivalents) work? A bit? What about banning puppies being sold at markets? Or anything that means that a browsing shopper - can see those big brown eyes and fall in *lurve* and buy a flea ridden bad mouthed bandy legged ball of white fluff?

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

could we agree on requiring the breeder to make sure all the puppies are micro-chipped before they can be rehomed... ?

[Steve]

could we agree on requiring the breeder to make sure all the puppies are micro-chipped before they can be rehomed... ?

Yep definitely but unless its enforced only the good guys will do it.Then again even if it is enforced there will still be lots that dont do it.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Steve

[Steve]

So are all the responsible breeders who think that a puppy should stay with the mother and litter until 8 weeks - wrong. Some of the small breed breeders argue for 12 weeks because that way they send out a more robust puppy...

I think there must be some way of pointing to a puppy farm with 300 bitches and 2 human staff and saying - that's wrong. I think it's wrong. Somewhere between 1 human and one bitch and that - there is a shade of grey... so you keep stepping towards where it's a bit more black - and outlaw that.

Is registering ten litters from one facility a year ok or wrong? Or having 10 different litters of puppies available all the time of various breeds - does that result in good conditions for the bitch, dog and puppies and then a well adjusted puppy going to a new owner? Always? Sometimes? Never? It depends?

What happens to these puppies if the breeder doesn't sell them all?

Would banning puppies in pet shops (or broker equivalents) work? A bit? What about banning puppies being sold at markets? Or anything that means that a browsing shopper - can see those big brown eyes and fall in *lurve* and buy a flea ridden bad mouthed bandy legged ball of white fluff?

No you misunderstand the point Im trying to make they are not wrong but that's what works for them, their breed, their puppies, their puppy buyers -so far - sometimes there are variables that make it O.K to let a puppy go home a earlier. If legislation says they have to be vaccinated by a vet and they have to be held for 5 days for immunity to cut in and a vet wont vaccinate them before 6 weeks of age then they dont go home till 7 weeks at the least anyway. There are many studies and loads of experienced breeders who argue 7 weeks is better than 8 weeks. The only person who can judge what is best for their puppies at any given time is the breeder and just because some may move em out sooner rather than later to get the money quicker or to save them work that doesn't justify the government taking away ALL breeder's ability to make the call. Breeders who would move them out for the wrong reasons are the ones who wont be doing the right thing by them for the last week anyway so there's an argument that it may be better for these puppies to be in new homes sooner rather than later.

Ill come back later to address the rest . Too much paperwork to do before bed.

Edited June 29, 2015 by Steve

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

sometimes there are variables that make it O.K to let a puppy go home a earlier.

yeah, I agree with that - that's why I was suggesting they get a vet note to say it's ok. Tho I know that some vets are in the "dodgy breeder" category too. So that's not a 100% guaranteed way of fixing the dodgy breeding practices either.

I think some changes would be better than leaving things as they are. Given that even when animal neglect and cruelty cases look really obvious from the outside - they get really hard to prove when people get to court with lawyers and I think a few changes would fix that.

[Steve]

I think there must be some way of pointing to a puppy farm with 300 bitches and 2 human staff and saying - that's wrong. I think it's wrong. Somewhere between 1 human and one bitch and that - there is a shade of grey... so you keep stepping towards where it's a bit more black - and outlaw that.

Well hang on - how many people are there who have 300 bitches and 2 humans to look after them? Is there so many people who do this kind of thing able to justify regulating breeders who don't do this in case one or two every ten years do ? In Victoria they have bought in staff to dog ratio which actually created a situation where its possible to have one staff per 120 plus dogs. The solution to a perceived problem has to be able to equal the proportionality of the real problem and so far we are told that there is an epidemic of people who need to be dealt with - so many that all other people who want to engage in a perfectly legal activity,regardless of their circumstances should be treated as potential criminals. Do you really think that someone who has 300 bitches and 2 staff will say here I am - come and get me because some new laws are made to tell them how to operate ?

How many breeders in SA currently have way to many bitches per people looking after them?

[Steve]

Is registering ten litters from one facility a year ok or wrong? Or having 10 different litters of puppies available all the time of various breeds - does that result in good conditions for the bitch, dog and puppies and then a well adjusted puppy going to a new owner? Always? Sometimes? Never? It depends?

No answer to this - Depends on the facility, depends on how its managed, depends on the breed - big difference between 10 chi and 10 great dane litters.This is where development applications come in - where everyone who wants to run a business from their property has to apply for approval and approval is dependent on all of these variables to enable the approval or lack of approval to be taken on a case by case basis.

Dog breeding is a legal activity and many breeders engage in this and make a profit. Some people will breed more than 10 litters a year and do a great job others - and I see them every day breed one litter now and then and muck it up royally. Some will breed a lot to have greater choices in their breeding program to ensure they are only breeding the healthiest and best possible and profits go back into their dogs. Some do it full time some part time - you cant compare the capabilities of someone who works full time and only has after work hours to look after their dogs and those who are with them all day every day. Some have them out in guardian homes etc. 20 years ago purebred breeders who bred dozens of litters per year were held in high regard .They had kennel hands and devoted their lives to trying to improve breeds and they did.

[Steve]

I know it seems that Im being difficult and of course there is no doubt that there are some rogues who breed dogs but before we go any further can we just stop a minute have a look at what has already occurred in other states and measure whether we think that has given us a solution.

Can we please really take a good look at what the problems are and how many do the wrong rather than the right thing.There are unintended consequences and its not always as it presented by those who have their own agendas.

It seems to me that if the goal in the Victoria regs was to prevent puppies from being bred in factory type conditions that this has really back fired.

If the goal was to ensure that no one in Victoria would breed dogs any more in sub standard conditions it would seem to me to be a huge fail. There are still reports of it happening and lots of moaning going on when people who get caught without the licences etc don't get the book thrown at them.

If the goal was to ensure that every puppy bred was sent home healthy, well sociliased and happy then thats a fail.

if the goal was to ensure that every puppy was microchipped before it left the breeders property - big fail.

[Pjrt]

I was employed for 3.5 years as a kennel hand in a very large breeding and show kennel back in the 80's, and at another short term in the 90's. Both kennels were well known esteemed show and breeding kennels. Both had multiple staff. They both had a few breeds, and both bred at least more than 10 litters a year. Their dogs were impeccably well cared for and bred amazing examples of their breeds. Dogs that are still remembered and held in high regard today, and are still present on contemporary pedigrees.

I was so lucky to get such an opportunity to see these things done properly from a fly on the wall perspective.

Edited June 30, 2015 by blinkblink

[Steve]

I think one person can easily manage 10 litters a year if that's all they do with some qualification on breed variances and set up. I'm not sure someone without help could manage 10 litters at once though - Id need a lot of convincing.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Do you really think that someone who has 300 bitches and 2 staff will say here I am - come and get me because some new laws are made to tell them how to operate ?

No. I think they're already known about but with the current rules - the RSPCA can't do anything about it. RSPCA can remove dogs that are dying but the ones that are just filthy - tend to stay... And the puppy mill doesn't get shut down until there have been multiple repeat offences. Dogs don't deserve that. And puppy buyers need to know where their puppies are coming from - and not to reward people like that with money.

I think there are a couple of places in Vic that would have 300+ dogs in their breeding program.

I'm not sure about the ones near Adelaide. I've seen pictures of what they do - and it's not how I think a companion animal should be bred. Ie it's not a very companionable environment.

[Steve]

Do you really think that someone who has 300 bitches and 2 staff will say here I am - come and get me because some new laws are made to tell them how to operate ?

No. I think they're already known about but with the current rules - the RSPCA can't do anything about it. RSPCA can remove dogs that are dying but the ones that are just filthy - tend to stay... And the puppy mill doesn't get shut down until there have been multiple repeat offences. Dogs don't deserve that. And puppy buyers need to know where their puppies are coming from - and not to reward people like that with money.

I think there are a couple of places in Vic that would have 300+ dogs in their breeding program.

I'm not sure about the ones near Adelaide. I've seen pictures of what they do - and it's not how I think a companion animal should be bred. Ie it's not a very companionable environment.

The RSPCA can only have people charged with animal cruelty if they are cruel according to the Prevention of Animal Cruelty laws - stricter codes and regs wont change that .Its still warning, fines and voluntary surrenders .They will never be able to just walk in and shut them down unless its really bad and even then it may be temporary. Imagine a restaurant that breaches health codes and its the same for a breeder that slips up on breeder codes .Smack on the wrist, clean up your act make sure you have the proper council approvals and off you go again.

Lots of puppy buyers dont care where their puppies come from, some actively seek out sources where they can simply hand over their money and take it home. Putting crazy unenforceable regs on breeders wont stop that - stop or restrict one source they will find another.

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

Putting crazy unenforceable regs on breeders wont stop that

That's why I was thinking to put crazy enforceable ones on.

[Steve]

Came in today in Victoria

2. Amended Breeding Code – commences 1 July 2015

The Ministerfor Agriculture has taken action to further improve the welfare of dogs andcats in breeding businesses.

The Code ofPractice for the Operation of Breeding and Rearing Businesses (2014) has beenamended to require breeders to obtain a veterinary health check for all femaledogs within 4 weeks prior to each mating cycle. In addition, the Code containsminor typographical corrections, and minor amendments to update the Code withrespect to Machinery of Government changes and the Primary IndustriesLegislation Amendment Act 2014.

The amendedcode commences today, 1 July 2015.

A copy ofthe amended Code can be viewed or downloaded from this page: http://www.depi.vic.gov.au/breedingcode

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

That might help with stuff that appears on Oscar's law website on a regular basis...

But how do you know when 4 weeks prior to a mating cycle is? They're not that predictable are they?

[Steve]

That might help with stuff that appears on Oscar's law website on a regular basis...

But how do you know when 4 weeks prior to a mating cycle is? They're not that predictable are they?

No you would probably have to get them to the vet as soon as they come on heat to catch it in the time frame you dont get to say 4 weeks before the mating that you have 4 weeks before you mate them or exactly when its all going to happen so I assume there will be more oops litters. This will see the big commercial guys spend more money on overservicing so the vets win - they wont care its an extra $20 they will put on their puppies but people who breed dogs who typically aren't doing it all legally wont take their girls to the vet before they mate them. Their prices will go up too to match the others even though they wont do it. Anyone who is Vicdogs and who has less than 10 fertile dogs doesn't have to do it either .makes one ask that if this is really something that is required to ensure the welfare of breeding dogs why all dogs don't have to be treated the same.

Big questions is how are they going to measure the results.Will vets give a report of how many they pass and how many they fail etc so we know whether we can justify making them rich and overservicing our dogs. Will they also be looking for things like there has been fluff over via pedigreed dogs exposed? They already have to have them checked every year. The only way they can enforce it or detect a breeder that opts out of the vet check is if they are already on the books and they come in and check their records. What stops them from taking Sally to the vet and mating nancy? Are they going to come in and scan every dog every pregnancy to ensure its the same dog ? What stops them from saying they bring a dog in that got mated somewhere else by someone else and only home after she is pregnant? Why not let 2 girls have a litter of 5 and say it was the only the one who was checked and she had 10? DNA tests? Close circuit TV spies? How silly it all is.

Its pretty mad stuff as breeders do not normally doing this unless its for progesterone treatments etc and at a time when the girls immune system is down most breeders would prefer to keep em away from a vet surgery . Just one more decision which is taken off us and we will all just hand it over because it might stop someone someone where mating a dog when she is in poor condition. how many bitches in poor condition at time of mating even fall pregnant?

Edited July 1, 2015 by Steve

[Mrs Rusty Bucket]

how many bitches in poor condition at time of mating even fall pregnant?

I dunno. How many past their breeding prime fall pregnant? How many way too young fall pregnant? And how many kept in filthy conditions manage to fall pregnant. Strays seem to have no problem...