For All The Unethical (But Responsible) Dog Owners ...

[Little Gifts]

I still see council fees as incentives and if you want to own a dog and be responsible then you pay the fee relevant to your situation. If you don't want to register your dog because you don't like the cost then you take a risk of it ever being picked up (like being uninsured) and having to pay through the nose then. If you don't like the fee structure then appeal to your council on whatever grounds you think are relevant. Your choice. I pay $32 a year x 2 for my desexed girls so $19.20 is a bargain. I'm sure we are also getting very similar council animal services for that money too.

[denali]

$192 over 10 years is only $19.20 a year, very cheap rego

$52 over 10 years is only $5.20 per year, even cheaper rego.

either one is cheap, stop whinging and pay it

I'd love either. Its $40 per dog here, and then extra because i have more than 2 and need a permit. Each year.

[Steve]

I still see council fees as incentives and if you want to own a dog and be responsible then you pay the fee relevant to your situation. If you don't want to register your dog because you don't like the cost then you take a risk of it ever being picked up (like being uninsured) and having to pay through the nose then. If you don't like the fee structure then appeal to your council on whatever grounds you think are relevant. Your choice. I pay $32 a year x 2 for my desexed girls so $19.20 is a bargain. I'm sure we are also getting very similar council animal services for that money too.

Do the incentives reach their goal?

When microchipping laws were introduced its was supposed to be about identification - well if you want an incentive for everyone to microchip having no registration fees would seem to make more sense.

[_PL_]

Because that's your choice. You have a choice here, it's not Norway. Others have a choice too. And charging extra is a mere encouragement to desex because it costs all rate payers (even the ones with no pets) money for every single unwanted dog that gets impounded, fed, then euthanised and disposed of.

This does nothing to reduce the amount of dogs in rescue… as long as there on dogs on this planet there will be dogs in rescue. Why? Because people, for the most part exploit animals for dollars and think of animals as disposable items. Change that and we just might have a chance…..Higher registration fees for undesexed animals is nothing more than revenue raising.

True it doesn't effectively prevent the poor buggers ending up on death row. Apparently (going by the dogs and cats impounded), mandatory microchipping isn't even able to be enforced so there's a lot of animals running around with barely a vaccine in them.

But a registered dog is much cheaper to get out of the pound than an unregistered one.

If you don't want to pay rego and can't or won't make arrangements to pay higher fees to get out your unregistered dog out, it's cheaper to get a new dog and leave the other - yes that happens a lot particularly in poor socio economic areas. (And at holiday time when boarding is costly) There are free and discount desexing programs for low income families; lowering the price of rego, lowering reclaim fees and preventing more litters. Pity the offer isn't taken up by the ones who really should.

Revenue raising, probably, but then someone still has to pay for the cleanup facilities so where is the revenue going to come from? Fee and ratepayers also pay for things like rangers to catch strays and nice parks for us to walk our dogs in. A decent owner pays what they need to as just another of the many expenses of having a pet but are within their rights to have a grumble about it.

[Little Gifts]

I still see council fees as incentives and if you want to own a dog and be responsible then you pay the fee relevant to your situation. If you don't want to register your dog because you don't like the cost then you take a risk of it ever being picked up (like being uninsured) and having to pay through the nose then. If you don't like the fee structure then appeal to your council on whatever grounds you think are relevant. Your choice. I pay $32 a year x 2 for my desexed girls so $19.20 is a bargain. I'm sure we are also getting very similar council animal services for that money too.

Do the incentives reach their goal?

When microchipping laws were introduced its was supposed to be about identification - well if you want an incentive for everyone to microchip having no registration fees would seem to make more sense.

No but I'm not sure they know what else to do as they are confined to their own local government legislation so they are trying to lead people in a certain 'take some responsibility' direction. Some people who get a dog will be happy to take advantage of discounted desex rates and registration fees and some people will continue to not give a toss. But unfortunately we are moving into a world where we have so many rules because common sense seems to have left the building and people need to be protected from their own stupidity. I wish it wasn't so. I'm sure when I was first an adult and registering my own pet the only other tick box was working dog (and they didn't have to pay anything). Now we have a tiered fee structure!

In my original post in this thread I talked about educating people on a range of pet owning matters that might actually help people become more responsible pet buyers and owners in the first place. I wish education is what the RSPCA would spend some of their millions on.

[_PL_]

So many lazy, selfish dog owners in here Do your research and I think you'll find that in the wild, pet dogs don't desex themselves.

It might be inconvenient to lose a dog to pyo but at least you aren't subjecting it to unnecessary surgery. Dogs should be allowed to live wonderful, natural lives where they die of vaccine-preventable diseases or cancer of the reproductive organs, none of this irresponsible preventative medicine nonsense.

Threads like this make me think that perhaps compulsory desexing of certain humans might not be a bad idea.

:laugh: I totally love you Maddy.

Hitler is dead, but his morbid ideologies wrt dissidents seems to live for ever...

Eta: ...that might be actually the real cause why it is so hard to change things for the better....

Godwin's Law!! :rofl:

[Willem]

I still see council fees as incentives and if you want to own a dog and be responsible then you pay the fee relevant to your situation. If you don't want to register your dog because you don't like the cost then you take a risk of it ever being picked up (like being uninsured) and having to pay through the nose then. If you don't like the fee structure then appeal to your council on whatever grounds you think are relevant. Your choice. I pay $32 a year x 2 for my desexed girls so $19.20 is a bargain. I'm sure we are also getting very similar council animal services for that money too.

Do the incentives reach their goal?

When microchipping laws were introduced its was supposed to be about identification - well if you want an incentive for everyone to microchip having no registration fees would seem to make more sense.

...as I suggested before: if eye / iris scanning would work also for dog eyes it would be much cheaper and easier to handle; no special scanners required, no microchips...just scan the dog's eyes and send it off to the database...

Eta: ...internet search shows that it seems to work and is already in use for horses and cattle...

Edited May 12, 2016 by Willem

[Willem]

So many lazy, selfish dog owners in here Do your research and I think you'll find that in the wild, pet dogs don't desex themselves.

It might be inconvenient to lose a dog to pyo but at least you aren't subjecting it to unnecessary surgery. Dogs should be allowed to live wonderful, natural lives where they die of vaccine-preventable diseases or cancer of the reproductive organs, none of this irresponsible preventative medicine nonsense.

Threads like this make me think that perhaps compulsory desexing of certain humans might not be a bad idea.

:laugh: I totally love you Maddy.

Hitler is dead, but his morbid ideologies wrt dissidents seems to live for ever...

Eta: ...that might be actually the real cause why it is so hard to change things for the better....

Godwin's Law!! :rofl:

..yeah, pretty funny...not...you should work for Trump...he will appreciate your ideas he can implement then for Mexicans and Muslims once he is in charge....

[Willem]

Microchipping was not mandatory in SA for many years - I think that may have changed or is in the process of being changed.

http://www.rspca.org.au/campaigns/responsible-pet-owner/micro-chipping

...compulsory everywhere except SA and NT.

[_PL_]

So many lazy, selfish dog owners in here Do your research and I think you'll find that in the wild, pet dogs don't desex themselves.

It might be inconvenient to lose a dog to pyo but at least you aren't subjecting it to unnecessary surgery. Dogs should be allowed to live wonderful, natural lives where they die of vaccine-preventable diseases or cancer of the reproductive organs, none of this irresponsible preventative medicine nonsense.

Threads like this make me think that perhaps compulsory desexing of certain humans might not be a bad idea.

:laugh: I totally love you Maddy.

Hitler is dead, but his morbid ideologies wrt dissidents seems to live for ever...

Eta: ...that might be actually the real cause why it is so hard to change things for the better....

Godwin's Law!! :rofl:

..yeah, pretty funny...not...you should work for Trump...he will appreciate your ideas he can implement then for Mexicans and Muslims once he is in charge....

Oh god it just keeps getting better!

[Willem]

Well I have to wade in on this one as I am faced with this issue at the moment. My council have the following on their website:

Animal Registration

Microchip Your Pet

The Companion Animals Act 1998 makes it compulsory to microchip all puppies and kittens by 12 weeks of age and registered by 6 months of age. Any dogs or cats who change owners need to be microchipped and registered. Microchipped animals are registered on the NSW Companion Animals Register. Owner information needs to be kept up to date. Contact Council if you need to change any details.

How Much Does Registration Cost?

Lifetime registration on the NSW Companion Animals Register is available from Blue Mountains City Council. This is a one off payment and the animal is registered for life, anywhere in New South Wales.

Current Registration Fees:

• $192 for undesexed dog or cat

• $52 for a dog or cat owned by a registered breeder that is kept for breeding purposes

• $52 for a desexed dog or cat

• $21 for a desexed dog or cat owned by a pensioner

• FREE for an Assitance Animal or Working Dog

http://www.bmcc.nsw....alregistration/

$192 for an undesexed dog or cat......What do I get for it?.....I get that its to do with stopping unwanted litters but it doesn't stop this.......Doesn't stop it.....Puppy mills, pet shop owners don't have to outlay this cost, they keep breeding, only the pet owner has to pay. Yes it encourages pet owners to desex but it seems to me that this is simply revenue raising. What if I want to show my male dog with unlimited registration paper? I cant show a male dog that has been desexed (not sure about a bitch).

Responsible pet owners are paying for the irresponsible ones. The fee structure doesn't seem to do anything for the issue of unwanted dogs and cats.

It seems to me the puppies aren't the problem. Even in cases where a pregnant girl or a young litter comes into rescue they are in high demand by rescue groups to take and their puppies are more easily sold for a higher price.

It doesn't take much energy for anyone to sell puppies to new owners who present as people who will look after their dog and be responsible for it.

Its the owners who have life changing situations, who cant stand the dog because it doesn't match their expectations, or basically people who see them as they see everything else - easily replaceable.

Until the real stats are available we all just guess as to where they come from and who could be held more responsible. No matter how hard a breeder or a rescue tries to screen em, educate them, or support them the final onus for responsibility of looking after a dog is on the owner .

Like Willem I don't believe there should be a system that rewards people for desexing their dogs over other responsible behaviours . How many desexed dogs are dumped?

All of the studies including the one via the ACT where desexing is mandatory show that it doesn't change one little dot the numbers dumped - it does change the numbers of desexed dogs dumped.

A government should not take the place of educated decisions made between an owner and their vet and all responsible behaviours should be rewarded .

I am aware that the registration fee applies for life even if an animal changes hands but seriously Steve, this statement does not pass the sniff test.

We are not required to register our dogs until they are 6 months of age. Are you telling me you register them at 8 weeks before they go to their new homes as breeding dogs?

And, what you are doing is circumventing the very system you support. Not all of these animals would be kept by their new owners for breeding purposes. How could you possibly know that?

So in essence you say you support it but you don't.

No puppies are not the issue. No one will dump a puppy now will they? Wait till they get older and the human decides it too hard or not pretty enough or doesn't fit well with the kid…..umpteen different reasons that humans find to justify a dog being disposable. An example is my Jess girl, owners bought her advertised as a rotti, no papers and wasn't even close to a rotti. Once they realized that (12 months) they say they are taking her to the pound.

Charging higher registration rates for undesexed dogs is not going to change the situation. The responsible owners pay the higher prices and the irresponsible ones find ways around that system.

I personally have other issues with desexing a male dog also.

Just because we are not required to register our dogs until they are 6 months of age doesn't mean we are not able to register them at 1 day of age. They are breeding dogs and all have Dogs NSW papers and MDBA papers they are mine when I register them and I have 14 days to transfer the new owner details. They usually go home between 9 and 12 weeks but often don't go until they are much older after they have done their preliminary training. I'm not circumventing the system - the dogs are microchipped, registered in the new owner's name and the rego is paid which I recoup from the new owner. the council gets their money. Not sure where Ive ever been seen to be supporting a system which charges a higher fee to people who choose not to desex their dogs unless they have paid membership and prefix charges to an approved body .

Edited to ad in NSW you have to register your dog by 6 months of age .Dogs NSW require someone to be a member for 18 months before they get a prefix so if we assume that someone owns a breeding dog and intends to go through this with DOgs NSW and follow the NSW law they would be charged the higher rate. at the dog's 6 month age. When their prefixes are approved there is no refund .

we got our dog from a BYB...but she came microchipped and with the first puppy shot. All our contact details were sent to the council and if we wouldn't have registered her officially after 6 month (we did it a few month later so as we just forgot it) we would have been hit with a hefty fine (up to AU$ 2,200 - I was told when I asked about the procedures that they send out an reminder first). So it seems that also a lot of the so called BYB do the right thing.

[Simply Grand]

I think one thing being missed here is the "in between" group of pet owners that are NOT irresponsible uncaring people that don't bother picking up their pets when they escape and get impounded or breed willy nilly for money or don't care that their pets roam BUT are also not "crazy animal people" enough to learn all about pet health and management and breeding and be on forums.

The average family who has a pet that they care for just fine. Like my family growing up. We had cats and small animals and they were fed and safely houses and came inside and were played with cared for and given regular vet attention, but my parents weren't "animal" people who researched all the options. Our cats were desexed because "that's what you do". When chipping and rego became requirements we did them because "that's what you do". Had those things not been either encouraged or required I doubt my parents would have thought about going off and researching the best options or building enclosures or keeping inside our male cats. They wouldn't have wanted kittens so had we had a female get pregnant they probably would have looked at the options but because it was "just what you do" all out cats were desexed by 6 months and we never produced more cats that would need homes.

I think that is the aim of the rules and the encouragement around desexing and I think if we are considering stats about the effectiveness of the program's we would have to take all this "in between" owners into account as well.

[Steve]

we got our dog from a BYB...but she came microchipped and with the first puppy shot. All our contact details were sent to the council and if we wouldn't have registered her officially after 6 month (we did it a few month later so as we just forgot it) we would have been hit with a hefty fine (up to AU$ 2,200 - I was told when I asked about the procedures that they send out an reminder first). So it seems that also a lot of the so called BYB do the right thing.

There are so many variables that its impossible right now to be able to pin the tag of worst offender for dogs turning up in pounds on any group.

Farmers [working dog breeders] who don't have to register their dogs and sell puppies un vaccinated and not chipped are in high numbers around rural communities .Working Dog Rescue is never short of dogs to help and you see everywhere you look on supermarket notice boards and facebook local selling sites advertising puppies for $50 each around here. they don't have a problem getting rid of the pups but people who take working dog puppies free or for a couple of bucks without knowing what their characteristics are would be high risk of not chipping, not vaccinating and not keeping them if they are too hard to manage.

In another shire close by the rangers tell me their biggest problem is the hunting dog breeders and owners.

Some BYB will chip others won't .the only dogs you can be sure will have a chip are those which have a registered pedigree because the pedigrees are not issued without them .That doesn't mean to say that registered breeders register all of their puppies or that all registered breeders chip all of their puppies.

Edited to add all pet shop puppies are chipped as well in NSW.

Edited May 12, 2016 by Steve

[corrie]

I once had a pure bred dog who we did not plan to have desexed. At 9 months she came into season and one day when I came home she was missing. I found her outside a motel mating with three dogs, one of whom was the motel's guard dog and was actually on a chain.

That is poor management on your part. If an owner is educated and responsible there will be no issues in managing entire dogs. Desexing is purely for the benefit of people who cannot adequately manage bitches in season. I am not sure how a phantom pregnancy could be distressing for you??

yeah, ...and that (poor management of other dog owners) is one of the reasons why I have to pay nearly 4 times more when I registered my dog :) ...a bitch doesn't come into heat over night, there are obvious signs!!!...it puzzles me that some dog owners use their incompetence regarding handling entire dogs to justify de-sexing!...what's next?...amputating 2 legs if the dog is too fast?

So now people with desexed dogs are incompetent? Not sure why I even opened this topic as I really don't enjoy your high and mighty posting style.

[Willem]

we got our dog from a BYB...but she came microchipped and with the first puppy shot. All our contact details were sent to the council and if we wouldn't have registered her officially after 6 month (we did it a few month later so as we just forgot it) we would have been hit with a hefty fine (up to AU$ 2,200 - I was told when I asked about the procedures that they send out an reminder first). So it seems that also a lot of the so called BYB do the right thing.

There are so many variables that its impossible right now to be able to pin the tag of worst offender for dogs turning up in pounds on any group.

Farmers [working dog breeders] who don't have to register their dogs and sell puppies un vaccinated and not chipped are in high numbers around rural communities .Working Dog Rescue is never short of dogs to help and you see everywhere you look on supermarket notice boards and facebook local selling sites advertising puppies for $50 each around here. they don't have a problem getting rid of the pups but people who take working dog puppies free or for a couple of bucks without knowing what their characteristics are would be high risk of not chipping, not vaccinating and not keeping them if they are too hard to manage.

In another shire close by the rangers tell me their biggest problem is the hunting dog breeders and owners.

Some BYB will chip others won't .the only dogs you can be sure will have a chip are those which have a registered pedigree because the pedigrees are not issued without them .That doesn't mean to say that registered breeders register all of their puppies or that all registered breeders chip all of their puppies.

the more I read about this topic the more I'm convinced that the biggest problem is just the lack of decent management of the problem via the councils and / or associated authorities. We have 4.2 mill dogs in Australia, approx. 1-1.5% of them are received by pounds every year - promoting de-sexing of the other 99% is definitely not the silver bullet.

Obviously there will be always some dogs in pounds, but how many are too many?...I think this is the first question that needs to be answered, what are the target figures?...0.5%?...0.25%?...

The next thing would be to investigate the history of the dogs in the pounds. Once you know where the majority is coming from you can start thinking about solutions. And there won't be a solution that doesn't involve stricter controlling and check-ups on all these puppy sales over gumtree, newspaper etc.. Add cheaper and easier forms of registration procedures using iris scanning, make it mandatory and enforce it and we won't have the same discussion in 2 years again.

[Steve]

Can we play the ball and not the man - we get more value out of a discussion if the topic is debated without personally attacking someone who has a left field opinion.

If you all think he is wrong debate the issue and try and turn him around,prove him wrong if you are sure he is and give him a chance to defend his position and try and turn you around and see who reading this can be educated on both view points.

At this rate all thats going to happen is the thread will be shut down.

[Willem]

I once had a pure bred dog who we did not plan to have desexed. At 9 months she came into season and one day when I came home she was missing. I found her outside a motel mating with three dogs, one of whom was the motel's guard dog and was actually on a chain.

That is poor management on your part. If an owner is educated and responsible there will be no issues in managing entire dogs. Desexing is purely for the benefit of people who cannot adequately manage bitches in season. I am not sure how a phantom pregnancy could be distressing for you??

yeah, ...and that (poor management of other dog owners) is one of the reasons why I have to pay nearly 4 times more when I registered my dog :) ...a bitch doesn't come into heat over night, there are obvious signs!!!...it puzzles me that some dog owners use their incompetence regarding handling entire dogs to justify de-sexing!...what's next?...amputating 2 legs if the dog is too fast?

So now people with desexed dogs are incompetent? Not sure why I even opened this topic as I really don't enjoy your high and mighty posting style.

take your time and read again what I wrote and then tell me please where I made the generalizing assumption that people with de-sexed dogs are incompetent. Thanks for your help in advance.

[Steve]

the more I read about this topic the more I'm convinced that the biggest problem is just the lack of decent management of the problem via the councils and / or associated authorities. We have 4.2 mill dogs in Australia, approx. 1-1.5% of them are received by pounds every year - promoting de-sexing of the other 99% is definitely not the silver bullet.

Obviously there will be always some dogs in pounds, but how many are too many?...I think this is the first question that needs to be answered, what are the target figures?...0.5%?...0.25%?...

The next thing would be to investigate the history of the dogs in the pounds. Once you know where the majority is coming from you can start thinking about solutions. And there won't be a solution that doesn't involve stricter controlling and check-ups on all these puppy sales over gumtree, newspaper etc.. Add cheaper and easier forms of registration procedures using iris scanning, make it mandatory and enforce it and we won't have the same discussion in 2 years again.

But hang on a minute even though you say we need better research and figures to show us possible solutions you have also decided that you know what solutions will be required . No amount of cheaper easier, new systems will work any better than any we already have if the unbiased data is not collected and options discussed and considered that are innovative. We need to define the problems, then identify the possible solutions not juts carry on as always with each person shouting about what they believe is the solution.

[Willem]

the more I read about this topic the more I'm convinced that the biggest problem is just the lack of decent management of the problem via the councils and / or associated authorities. We have 4.2 mill dogs in Australia, approx. 1-1.5% of them are received by pounds every year - promoting de-sexing of the other 99% is definitely not the silver bullet.

Obviously there will be always some dogs in pounds, but how many are too many?...I think this is the first question that needs to be answered, what are the target figures?...0.5%?...0.25%?...

The next thing would be to investigate the history of the dogs in the pounds. Once you know where the majority is coming from you can start thinking about solutions. And there won't be a solution that doesn't involve stricter controlling and check-ups on all these puppy sales over gumtree, newspaper etc.. Add cheaper and easier forms of registration procedures using iris scanning, make it mandatory and enforce it and we won't have the same discussion in 2 years again.

But hang on a minute even though you say we need better research and figures to show us possible solutions you have also decided that you know what solutions will be required . No amount of cheaper easier, new systems will work any better than any we already have if the unbiased data is not collected and options discussed and considered that are innovative. We need to define the problems, then identify the possible solutions not juts carry on as always with each person shouting about what they believe is the solution.

you right, sorry...sometimes I jump to conclusions...

[Steve]

Identify the problem - some dogs are not microchipped. Why ? How do we fix it or at least reduce the problem?

If puppy buyers are educated not to buy a puppy that isn't microchipped then unless the pup is microchipped the breeder is going to have a harder time selling them. If puppy buyers in NSW dont know by now that before a puppy leaves the breeder or the pet shop that they have to be chipped its way way passed time where we looked at why they dont know and fix it so they do. How do we set up an incentive program for puppy buyers who ensure their puppies are microchipped before they take them home. The breeder already has several incentive not to -save money stay hidden etc. There are already penalties in place if they get caught allowing the pups to leave their property without a chip so unless we are going to see major turnaround and see the laws being enforced the problem of dogs not being microchipped remains constant.

So all of the great advice [sic] handed out to people who buy puppies , what to look for , what to ask the breeder blah blah blah , there is no emphasis on the breeder having to microchip and what to do if they find a breeder who doesn't.

If a breeder in NSW doesn't chip puppies before they go home perhaps part of the solution is looking at educating the buyer , empowering the buyer to make a quick complaint and providing them with an incentive for purchasing a pup that was chipped before they got it would see more dogs being microchipped according to state law prior to sale.

Edited May 12, 2016 by Steve