Victorian Gov To Introduce New Breeding Laws

[Rebanne]

Only 1 entire female to breed... as opposed to THREE fertile female cats??? Has anyone advised the people drawing this up that cats can well outbreed dogs?

T.

As a pedigree cat breeder I find that offensive.

Firstly, average litter size of 4 for cats. Secondly, maximum of 1 litter a year. And thirdly, all my kittens are desexed before they go to their new homes.

It's the ferals, and cats at large whose kittens are the ones which majority end up in pounds and shelters!

I still don't see why cat people can have 3 cats and dog people can only have one dog.

[Steve]

Only 1 entire female to breed... as opposed to THREE fertile female cats??? Has anyone advised the people drawing this up that cats can well outbreed dogs?

T.

As a pedigree cat breeder I find that offensive.

Firstly, average litter size of 4 for cats. Secondly, maximum of 1 litter a year. And thirdly, all my kittens are desexed before they go to their new homes.

It's the ferals, and cats at large whose kittens are the ones which majority end up in pounds and shelters!

I still don't see why cat people can have 3 cats and dog people can only have one dog.

Its most likely that its a glimmer of common sense that they should have applied to dogs. Cats dont take up much space and are small, etc where it might be a pug or a Great Dane so therefore keep it to one in case its a Dane.

but seriously how would anyone know they make up the rules as they go along.

[Kirislin]

Will the MDBA be consulted or can they put forward their opinions/suggestions/advice to the Gov on all this?

[tdierikx]

Only 1 entire female to breed... as opposed to THREE fertile female cats??? Has anyone advised the people drawing this up that cats can well outbreed dogs?

T.

As a pedigree cat breeder I find that offensive.

Firstly, average litter size of 4 for cats. Secondly, maximum of 1 litter a year. And thirdly, all my kittens are desexed before they go to their new homes.

It's the ferals, and cats at large whose kittens are the ones which majority end up in pounds and shelters!

I certainly didn't mean it to be offensive... was just a little shocked at the difference is all.

There is no mention of purebreds with regards to the new rules... just the numbers of animals allowed... and those with standard issue moggies that allow them to roam about the streets at will would be allowed 3 times the number of entire females than those who own just one dog (whatever the breed or mix).

T.

[Steve]

Will the MDBA be consulted or can they put forward their opinions/suggestions/advice to the Gov on all this?

We are presenting our submission to all MPs but none of our members own more than 10 dogs, none of our members can or do sell puppies to pet shops, and every one of our Victorian Members is a Vicdogs member.

Its Vicdogs who have the exemptions and stand to loose for their members. The MDBA doesnt have them and didnt want them because we could see the poo starting to hit the fan. In the main its not our fight.

We are very concerned about the loss of a person's human rights across the board as described in Hansard and Im personally amazed that there isn't a bigger outcry over it.

[asal]

Will the MDBA be consulted or can they put forward their opinions/suggestions/advice to the Gov on all this?

We are presenting our submission to all MPs but none of our members own more than 10 dogs, none of our members can or do sell puppies to pet shops, and every one of our Victorian Members is a Vicdogs member.

Its Vicdogs who have the exemptions and stand to loose for their members. The MDBA doesnt have them and didnt want them because we could see the poo starting to hit the fan. In the main its not our fight.

We are very concerned about the loss of a person's human rights across the board as described in Hansard and Im personally amazed that there isn't a bigger outcry over it.

People have been trained animal rights precede human rights since the 70's.

a murderer is innocent until proven guilty as is a pedophile , as is a domestic violence case and any other that does not involve an animal.

admit you have been investigated by a complaint to council or an animal welfare officer and the landslide response "is where there is smoke there's fire." No one who does not wish to be guilty until proven innocent would dare speak up. That shows a very successful AR campaign surely?

For example this press release "http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-15/rspca-calls-for-tasmanian-abattoir-to-close-over-cruelty-claims/7935546?WT.tsrc=Facebook_Organic"

yet its ok for a special constable to have cattle chased through a 12 to 14 foot wide gate and shoot at them as they run through, then chase down the ones, the first shot didn't kill, and call it Euthanasia?

with no charges laid even though this man shot over 70 by this method? There are photos of this being done on a utube video so its in the public domain.

I well remember when I first heard about the need to eliminate puppy farmers and backyarders in the 70's, when I asked how do you intend to define one, the reply was as airy fairy as todays ones.

this writer sums up the problems pretty well too.

http://leemakennels.com/blog/dogs-and-politics/why-i-dont-want-oscars-law/

I expect the legislators never get the chance to read either the above or the below articles.

http://leemakennels.com/blog/dog-breeding/clean-and-kennelled-the-future-of-dog-breeding/

The days are not too far distance when those who own an animal of any kind may be finding themselves lobbying for anti-discrimination laws for animal owners, think I'm joking, think again.

Edited October 17, 2016 by asal

[Steve]

At the end of the day Victoria has a minister for Primary industries who is more interested in animal right s than animal welfare who takes her direction and advice from radicals.

The obvious presumption from reading the bill that they worked from was that dog breeders are what AR have portrayed us as.

They [ with OL and other ratbags ] gave dog breeders who owned more than 10 dogs no choice but to house them in the way they have because The government decreed that unless they did they were cruel.

Now over night it has been decided that everyone that houses a dog the way they have to house a dog to own them if they want more than half a dozen is committing an act of cruelty - great set up from AR who should never had as much input into the code that they did in the first place if anyone is being cruel by following their current laws and codes why did they make us do it - why didn't we fight harder against it and I hate to say I told you so but I told you so.

Any one who has a single litter of puppies is considered to be a potential criminal and just in case they are they must lose their rights and any old time they like they can call something else cruel.

They will not stop here .this wont work - everyone who has involvement in or knowledge of what came before, what has happened in other places who knows what its really like to own and live with breeding dogs knows its not going to work and its going to take them back to trying to find those who really do abuse their animals living in haystacks. You have a government who obviously believe that everyone other than those who own an entire dogs have a monopoly on caring for their animals and ensuring they live quality lives.

Where does it stop - does it stop? Victoria already has a CRUELTY offence for taking a debarked dog to a dog show - even though it has been debarked by a vet .Just in that one alone they made taking it to a dog show a cruelty offence and dog owners let them do it.

Bit by bit take away dog owners rights.

Vicdogs have played their tune and been spineless every single step of the way and arrogantly thought that they were untouchable .

Next month another huge campaign will start run by RSCPA , the AVA and other radical groups to educate the public about why they shouldn't buy brachy head dogs .The CC's and the MDBA have been warned its coming so the CC response is to tell their breed clubs nothing to worry about because their members will be the ones they recommend buying a puppy from. Again going along like lambs to their own slaughter and taking their members with them. Do they need MORE evidence that dog showing and breed standards and conformation issues have been under attack ? Do they really think this is only going to affect BYB? You know the BYB that they are now saying do LESS damage to a breed than show people. Few care more than they are frightened to stand up and fight .

Will nothing wake dog breeders up? Will nothing stir them enough to over ride the fear they have of being targeted - not sure many have realised it yet but there really isn't much left to lose. Where are the leaders calling their members to action rather than telling them to settle and trust them to sort it out? The AR nutters know we wont unite because they planned it that way and as long as we are divided and cant fight for what we have in common - our rights no dog breeder will have any.

Edited October 17, 2016 by Steve

[moosmum]

At the end of the day Victoria has a minister for Primary industries who is more interested in animal right s than animal welfare who takes her direction and advice from radicals.

The obvious presumption from reading the bill that they worked from was that dog breeders are what AR have portrayed us as.

They [ with OL and other ratbags ] gave dog breeders who owned more than 10 dogs no choice but to house them in the way they have because The government decreed that unless they did they were cruel.

Now over night it has been decided that everyone that houses a dog the way they have to house a dog to own them if they want more than half a dozen is committing an act of cruelty - great set up from AR who should never had as much input into the code that they did in the first place if anyone is being cruel by following their current laws and codes why did they make us do it - why didn't we fight harder against it and I hate to say I told you so but I told you so.

Any one who has a single litter of puppies is considered to be a potential criminal and just in case they are they must lose their rights and any old time they like they can call something else cruel.

They will not stop here .this wont work - everyone who has involvement in or knowledge of what came before, what has happened in other places who knows what its really like to own and live with breeding dogs knows its not going to work and its going to take them back to trying to find those who really do abuse their animals living in haystacks. You have a government who obviously believe that everyone other than those who own an entire dogs have a monopoly on caring for their animals and ensuring they live quality lives.

Where does it stop - does it stop? Victoria already has a CRUELTY offence for taking a debarked dog to a dog show - even though it has been debarked by a vet .Just in that one alone they made taking it to a dog show a cruelty offence and dog owners let them do it.

Bit by bit take away dog owners rights.

Vicdogs have played their tune and been spineless every single step of the way and arrogantly thought that they were untouchable .

Next month another huge campaign will start run by RSCPA , the AVA and other radical groups to educate the public about why they shouldn't buy brachy head dogs .The CC's and the MDBA have been warned its coming so the CC response is to tell their breed clubs nothing to worry about because their members will be the ones they recommend buying a puppy from. Again going along like lambs to their own slaughter and taking their members with them. Do they need MORE evidence that dog showing and breed standards and conformation issues have been under attack ? Do they really think this is only going to affect BYB? You know the BYB that they are now saying do LESS damage to a breed than show people. Few care more than they are frightened to stand up and fight .

Will nothing wake dog breeders up? Will nothing stir them enough to over ride the fear they have of being targeted - not sure many have realised it yet but there really isn't much left to lose. Where are the leaders calling their members to action rather than telling them to settle and trust them to sort it out? The AR nutters know we wont unite because they planned it that way and as long as we are divided and cant fight for what we have in common - our rights no dog breeder will have any.

A call to action by leaders of Orgs. will see those orgs the focus of the very groups they want to combat. It would be drawing a bullseye on those orgs.

You wanted exclusivity? This is what it looks like. It excludes. Every thing. Except what the mark of your exclusivity is... The pedigree and its standard. Fat lot of good that will do with out a dog.

It doesn't teach values, It de-values anything out side of that mark of exclusivity.

Pedigrees and Standards are NOT going to be the future of dogs. They will be death of Dogs IF they keep insisting on an exclusive membership that MUST rely only on pedigrees and their attendant Standards to indicate value, or 'exclusive' membership.

A.R. did not cause this divide. Exclusivity does. It divides. Your space, my space. Nothing in common.

The only stuff people CAN agree on is the lowest common denominator. Who can or will hold their hand up to defend that?

Edited October 19, 2016 by moosmum

[Lablover]

Will the Federal and State Government canine breeding programs have exemptions? Do they already in ACT?

[moosmum]

Will the Federal and State Government canine breeding programs have exemptions? Do they already in ACT?

'Exemptions' are not not going to save anyone. They are temporary at best.

Exemptions don't prevent people doing the wrong thing.

If you promote a standardized environment as the only 'correct' method of breeding and raising dogs, any one taking advantage of exemption will not be doing the the right thing. Sooner or later it will be noticed. You have changed the expectation.

Only being held to COMMON expectation reduces the incidence of failure.

There is nothing common to our expectations ATM > Our expectation depend on what 'group' you are aligned with. Those aren't favorable to groups you aren't aligned with. So outsiders won't look for the benefits of a group that doesn't do anything for them personaly, they will hold that group responsible for its lowest common denominator.

If you won't be part of what people share in common, you won't meet common expectations.

The K.Cs are not aligned with 'dog breeders' and owners. They are aligned with Pedigrees.

The Difference of K.Cs could be accepted as part of diversity in practice.

But if they won't practice an acceptance of diversity themselves, They threaten diversity, and its acceptance.. They will be rejected or destroy their own purpose.

This process gains momentum and theres not much time left. Expectations are almost destroyed.

Edited October 18, 2016 by moosmum

[Linda K]

This bit from Hansard is particularly interesting

Furthermore, the bill creates the opportunity for rescue groups, community foster care networks and other organisations to apply for an exemption from the prohibition on unregulated sales of animals from public venues including car boot sales, markets and car parks provided for under 96 of

the act

. The government recognises that there may be some circumstances in which the sale of animals in a public venue would be acceptable such as adoption days

What a great idea - lets have multiple animals from all sorts of sources all brought to the same spot for a car boot sale.

And then this from Labors website about this policy

"Thanks to the Labor Government, there will be fewer homeless pets and more Victorians safe in the knowledge that their new dog or cat has been bred responsibly".

Um how exactly??????? Oh yes my shelter pet that has been trucked across the border from a rural pound, or from a alley has certainly been responsibly bred, and of course it has a health guarantee with it and is as free from genetic issues as the purebreds that now no longer will be easily able to be found

Hansard makes it patently obvious if there was any doubt just whose rights are being even further strengthened

Consider this bit

A foster carer may apply to their local council for registration.

This is a voluntary process

. Those individuals that choose to register will be provided with a reduced registration rate for the animals in their care and access to pet shops to help improve rehoming of dogs or cats over the age of 6 months

. The reduced rate for animals in foster care will reduce costs to foster carers for the first twelve months that the animal is in

their care

[Steve]

What about if you own a fertile dog and have a DAB you cant own a pet shop or a rescue shelter.

[asal]

spotted this

as my hubby is a primary producer we have a $10 million liability policy, u never know when stock will get out onto public roads or someones child will play chicken with a harvester or chaff cutter, . they are not cheap

"

To give people an idea of what might be required to obtain a DAB Domestic Animal Business permit to breed just one litter; this is the link to the application for the City of Ballarat. It requires an insurance policy with a $10 million liability clause.

http://www.ballarat.vic.gov.au/media/2316972/domestic_animal_business_application_form.pdf "

Edited October 18, 2016 by asal

[Papillon Kisses]

So they make you get $10mil public liability insurance just to lodge an application that they still can reject. Do they get back to you within the cooling off period (14 days) so you can cancel it and get your money back if they reject your application? Yeah I doubt it too.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Papillon Kisses

[The Spotted Devil]

I am still waiting for my council to call me back re their DAB requirements. Yes, other councils want $300 plus a year, ABN, $10 million public liability and there are zoning restrictions.

I am having a face to face meeting tomorrow with an advisor to an MP (parliament is sitting). I will fight tooth and nail for this.

Edited October 18, 2016 by The Spotted Devil

[The Spotted Devil]

#thesearemykennels

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1608307996130904&id=100008551569765

[Lhok]

what happens to the dogs in the people's care if they aren't approved? Will the councils force them to be desexed?

--Lhok

[Lablover]

Will the Federal and State Government canine breeding programs have exemptions? Do they already in ACT?

'Exemptions' are not not going to save anyone. They are temporary at best.

Exemptions don't prevent people doing the wrong thing.

If you promote a standardized environment as the only 'correct' method of breeding and raising dogs, any one taking advantage of exemption will not be doing the the right thing. Sooner or later it will be noticed. You have changed the expectation.

Only being held to COMMON expectation reduces the incidence of failure.

There is nothing common to our expectations ATM > Our expectation depend on what 'group' you are aligned with. Those aren't favorable to groups you aren't aligned with. So outsiders won't look for the benefits of a group that doesn't do anything for them personaly, they will hold that group responsible for its lowest common denominator.

If you won't be part of what people share in common, you won't meet common expectations.

The K.Cs are not aligned with 'dog breeders' and owners. They are aligned with Pedigrees.

The Difference of K.Cs could be accepted as part of diversity in practice.

But if they won't practice an acceptance of diversity themselves, they will be rejected or destroy their own purpose.

This process gains momentum and theres not much time left. Expectations are almost destroyed.

Police, Guide dogs for the visually disabled, Customs breeding centre?

Meeting at Bulla tomorrow night will be interesting.

[Steve]

I am still waiting for my council to call me back re their DAB requirements. Yes, other councils want $300 plus a year, ABN, $10 million public liability and there are zoning restrictions.

I am having a face to face meeting tomorrow with an advisor to an MP (parliament is sitting). I will fight tooth and nail for this.

Surely if this is a state based law and code the requirements for a DAB should be the same regardless of which council it is any where in the state.

[moosmum]

Will the Federal and State Government canine breeding programs have exemptions? Do they already in ACT?

'Exemptions' are not not going to save anyone. They are temporary at best.

Exemptions don't prevent people doing the wrong thing.

If you promote a standardized environment as the only 'correct' method of breeding and raising dogs, any one taking advantage of exemption will not be doing the the right thing. Sooner or later it will be noticed. You have changed the expectation.

Only being held to COMMON expectation reduces the incidence of failure.

There is nothing common to our expectations ATM > Our expectation depend on what 'group' you are aligned with. Those aren't favorable to groups you aren't aligned with. So outsiders won't look for the benefits of a group that doesn't do anything for them personaly, they will hold that group responsible for its lowest common denominator.

If you won't be part of what people share in common, you won't meet common expectations.

The K.Cs are not aligned with 'dog breeders' and owners. They are aligned with Pedigrees.

The Difference of K.Cs could be accepted as part of diversity in practice.

But if they won't practice an acceptance of diversity themselves, they will be rejected or destroy their own purpose.

This process gains momentum and theres not much time left. Expectations are almost destroyed.

Police, Guide dogs for the visually disabled, Customs breeding centre?

Meeting at Bulla tomorrow night will be interesting.

If you legislate things be done a certain way to be correct, then yes. Its an environmental 'Standard'.

If everyone must do things this way, then they will come to expect that is the only way they should be done.

You have created a common expectation. EVERY ONE will be held to that expectation, eventualy. Its accepted as a condition of keeping dogs.

Edited October 18, 2016 by moosmum