I'm perplexed

[BoStoNmAdNeSs]

There is a large operation where dozens and dozens (if not hundreds) of puppies come out of every year. Year in, year out. There are supposed purebreds, but the owners are also spitting out so many cross-bred pups of that breed (with multiple other breeds) that my head is spinning.

Tell me, how is that happening? What scenario would be acceptable to any governing body, the RSPCA, anyone to let this production line continue..?

[Pjrt]

Because of shit like this for a start....... government turn to industry bodies like the Pet Industry Association of Australia  for advice when drafting legislation......

check out the retail and breeding directors. Between them they own the countries biggest commercial dog breeding and retail puppy point of sale .....and all the other ‘respected’ companies there. 

https://piaa.net.au/about/

 

And most of these big shiny commercial puppy breeding facilities are council approved, and hold all the licenses they need, and operate within animal welfare guidelines. So the RSPCA can do little about it

 

And.....money talks 

 

 

[Pjrt]

I implore anyone operating in the animal industry who is disgusted by and decries puppy farming, to take a long hard look at themselves if they support PIAA in any capacity. They are this countries biggest fans of puppy farming! 

[Pjrt]

Also there really is nothing to stop ANKC registered breeders from breeding non pedigree purebreds and mixed breeds as long as they don’t try to pass them off as ANKC registered 

[BoStoNmAdNeSs]

This particular person has removed themselves from registration with the ANKC.

Delivers dirty puppies from a large van, multiple cages with many other pups into city locations.

When a puppy farm is brought down and the authorities finally catch up with them - pictures emerge of squalid conditions and dogs in terrible condition and health. People and members of forums such as this post their comments as to the 'horror' as to what they are seeing and feeling. They say things like "if only we knew...we would have acted or helped or attempted to do something".

 

 

[Pjrt]

Are the city locations retail outlets? If so, see if the retail outlets hold and membership with any pet industry associations. Pose as a puppy buyer and see if you can get names of individuals or names they operate under. Are the puppies the correct age and have vet work according to state legislation and animal welfare acts etc etc. Find out as much as you can. Information is power. 

The RSPCA can only act on existing law. Lobby to tighten laws. 

[BoStoNmAdNeSs]

not retail

[Pjrt]

6 hours ago, BoStoNmAdNeSs said:

This particular person has removed themselves from registration with the ANKC.

Delivers dirty puppies from a large van, multiple cages with many other pups into city locations.

When a puppy farm is brought down and the authorities finally catch up with them - pictures emerge of squalid conditions and dogs in terrible condition and health. People and members of forums such as this post their comments as to the 'horror' as to what they are seeing and feeling. They say things like "if only we knew...we would have acted or helped or attempted to do something".

 

 

So how can you act on what you know? I applaud you for recognising what you see, but how do you act on it? Maybe go into the council office that covers the area where this breeder is located & have a chat about what you know & whether the breeding  operation aligns with council policies, whether roadside sales of pets is allowed under local or state laws etc. 

unfortunately if they meet all the local government criteria, and cannot be seen to be breaking any animal welfare laws, one can you do? You can sort of start to see why many of these operations are busted through covert surveillance! 

 

As an aside, I like to look at the reasons why we have what can be perceived as less than desirable commercial dog breeding facilities. 

A couple of decades ago there was a strange shift in attitudes regarding dog breeding. When the first few of the really horrible cases of puppy farm busts hit the media, there was naturally an outcry, and the cogs began turning in the “war against puppy farms” . In the race to legislate them out of existence, all that happened was pedigree breeders sort of shot themselves in the foot, where it became positively taboo to actually breed dogs! Breeders eyes suspiciously breeders who appeared to breed volume as well as or in favour of showing and ‘hobby’ breeding. The phrase “oh I only breed when I want something for myself” became the cry of the respectable pedigree breeder. 

At around the same time, breeders of all colours where marginalised to city fringes & rural areas, further from their market and further from scrutiny by the masses. 

Add to this the law makers busily deciding what constitutes a puppy farm and how & where dog breeding facilities should be run, basically making it legal to run large scale commercial dog breeding facilities. For whatever reason, pedigree breeders thought they’d be exempt or able to side step these laws, but in fact, to law makers, dogs are dogs, no matter their parentage, where they come from or who breeds them. 

The owners of commercial breeding facilities can quite legally say that they are registered breeders, licensed breeders, breed papered dogs etc, because it’s true. It’s just a different version of all of those things than what the ANKC system offers. 

Morally & ethically, we all know that large scale facilities with 100’s of breeding dogs is never best practice for dogs but it can all be legal these days

Theres a whole new generation of puppy buyers coming through now who are going to find it ever increasingly difficult to decipher what class of registered licensed breeder they are dealing with. 

These people have grown up online. When I go online around pet sites, all the advertising that pops up is from designer dog puppy farms. Never once have I seen an ad from an ANKC breeder.

If ANKC breeders want to claw this back, they have to breed dogs, in volume, and not see it as some sort of offensive thing to have a few quality dogs breeding for the pet market. The current supply & demand has to be met somewhere, and while fewer and fewer pedigree dogs are being bred, it’s not rocket science that the market turns to where there is supply. Easy to access, in their faces, supply.

Edited October 12, 2019 by Scratch

[asal]

On 12/10/2019 at 9:16 AM, Scratch said:

Are the city locations retail outlets? If so, see if the retail outlets hold and membership with any pet industry associations. Pose as a puppy buyer and see if you can get names of individuals or names they operate under. Are the puppies the correct age and have vet work according to state legislation and animal welfare acts etc etc. Find out as much as you can. Information is power. 

The RSPCA can only act on existing law. Lobby to tighten laws. 

Have you forgotten the SA border collies? clean kennels, clean dogs but they still took ten because they would not look the inspector in the eye?

 

then get a court order to seize all the rest on the grounds the dogs could potentially be dangerous if they will not look into the inspectors eyes.

 

When the laws are already in place that all an inspector needs to do is "form the opinion" what more do they need?

 

they dont even have to have any degrees like a vet with BvSc after their name to form these life changing (in the case of these dogs life ending) opinions about the animals. In the case of the border collies they were granted court orders to kill all ten and seize and kill all the others on the grounds they may fear bite in the future.................none of the ten had bitten anyone..........

 

 

They have totally unlimited powers already considering this fiasco unfolded without appeal for the doomed dogs.  only massive public outcry stopped the deaths of all ten, but 6 are dead and the other four in limbo still, haven't seen any updates...

 

n the only way the owner of the others saved them was quickly giving all the others to rescues before the killers could get there in time to seize them, remember that........and the rspca refused to hand the remained 4 survivors over to the rescues who proved they achieved what rspca did not even attempt.

 

this is the link to the thread if you didn't notice it before 

 

Complete with videos of the "potentially" dangerous dogs before they were seized

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 12, 2019 by asal

[moosmum]

On 12/10/2019 at 4:00 PM, Scratch said:

So how can you act on what you know? I applaud you for recognising what you see, but how do you act on it? Maybe go into the council office that covers the area where this breeder is located & have a chat about what you know & whether the breeding  operation aligns with council policies, whether roadside sales of pets is allowed under local or state laws etc. 

unfortunately if they meet all the local government criteria, and cannot be seen to be breaking any animal welfare laws, one can you do? You can sort of start to see why many of these operations are busted through covert surveillance! 

 

As an aside, I like to look at the reasons why we have what can be perceived as less than desirable commercial dog breeding facilities. 

A couple of decades ago there was a strange shift in attitudes regarding dog breeding. When the first few of the really horrible cases of puppy farm busts hit the media, there was naturally an outcry, and the cogs began turning in the “war against puppy farms” . In the race to legislate them out of existence, all that happened was pedigree breeders sort of shot themselves in the foot, where it became positively taboo to actually breed dogs! Breeders eyes suspiciously breeders who appeared to breed volume as well as or in favour of showing and ‘hobby’ breeding. The phrase “oh I only breed when I want something for myself” became the cry of the respectable pedigree breeder. 

At around the same time, breeders of all colours where marginalised to city fringes & rural areas, further from their market and further from scrutiny by the masses. 

Add to this the law makers busily deciding what constitutes a puppy farm and how & where dog breeding facilities should be run, basically making it legal to run large scale commercial dog breeding facilities. For whatever reason, pedigree breeders thought they’d be exempt or able to side step these laws, but in fact, to law makers, dogs are dogs, no matter their parentage, where they come from or who breeds them. 

The owners of commercial breeding facilities can quite legally say that they are registered breeders, licensed breeders, breed papered dogs etc, because it’s true. It’s just a different version of all of those things than what the ANKC system offers. 

Morally & ethically, we all know that large scale facilities with 100’s of breeding dogs is never best practice for dogs but it can all be legal these days

Theres a whole new generation of puppy buyers coming through now who are going to find it ever increasingly difficult to decipher what class of registered licensed breeder they are dealing with. 

These people have grown up online. When I go online around pet sites, all the advertising that pops up is from designer dog puppy farms. Never once have I seen an ad from an ANKC breeder.

If ANKC breeders want to claw this back, they have to breed dogs, in volume, and not see it as some sort of offensive thing to have a few quality dogs breeding for the pet market. The current supply & demand has to be met somewhere, and while fewer and fewer pedigree dogs are being bred, it’s not rocket science that the market turns to where there is supply. Easy to access, in their faces, supply.

Add to this the new  affordability of spey and neuter at a time when 'Back yard breeding' came into focus and attack from ANKC . More people opting for the ease and peace of mind afforded, while those who didn't were discredited as irresponsible, regardless of weather there was a plan or purpose behind a mating.

Irresponsibility of breeders in the headlines, be they pedigree (P.D.E) Puppy farms, Backyard breeders. Poor breeding practices were the focus, but  No longer  based on individual practices and results, but on the environment producing them. BYB , puppy farm or ANKC.  Because ANKC drew the distiction.  Based on environment, not value delivered .The environment is seen to be the value.

 

It was no longer about what a person does to ensure value to the dogs and their market, or how effective or ineffective that was proving. 

 

Rather than discussion of responsible breeding practices and the purpose of  producing  dogs that should add value to their species and the people who own them,

It became about which environments met the most stringent conditions. Not individuals  who  respond well, but what environments ensure they do so.

 

ANKC hamstrung their membership, adding that a breeders goal should not  be  profit to avoid being tarred with the puppy farm brush, though it was already in their mission statement that the purpose of breeding was improvement. Keep the environments distinct and separate so ANKC is untainted.

Again, not by practices of irresponsible individuals. But by environments seen to support irresponsible practices .

All of them will.

As long as people breed dogs,  and people buy dogs without understanding the practices that maximise the potential value of ownership in any environment.

That misunderstanding will increase, while environments are held to account.

And  the responsibility of breeders operating to provide recognisable value to  broad and diverse environments of domestic dogs are discredited and diminished.Based on environment.

 

All we are left to work with is which  environment best enforces conditions and limitations that disallow other possibility.  Disallow response. 

The longer this continues, the more support it gains because that is the expectation we are promoting- That environments have responsibility. An individual is only responsible for choosing the right one. 

 

A Commercial environment will win out, because as we keep defining the conditions of  'responsible breeder' environment, it

a) becomes more costly to meet or provide those conditions.

b)  Doing so carries an expectation of regulation. Because response-ability requires familiarity, recognition and acceptance of those conditions.  Only those meeting them could find  'value' in doing so. Its no longer an open and transparent environment influenced by demand, or open to evolutionary influence.  

because of those we have 

c) 'Domestic Dogs' are removed from their environment of humanity  Its no longer  shaped by humanity and their needs, demands or responses to it.. Its shaped by an alternate environment designed to suppress recognition of a dogs value, in favour of the environment/conditions  that must be in place before any can can be recognised.

It demands the environment respond and support a species, instead of environment accepting based on what responds to and supports it. Wrong  way around. Bass akward thinking that will have the opposite effect to the desired outcome. It won't improve dogs or their environment, it will reduce both.

 

You can't blame the buyers,  the breeders or even the legislators while claiming the environment a dog comes from  decides its  value potential.There is no response-ability in that . 

 

If laws are being broken, there are grounds to remove this puppy farm. If not, people now unfamiliar with the realities of canine husbandry will will trust the regulation of an industry removed from familiarity and recognition.

 

Public society has been deemed too irresponsible to breed dogs. So that ability of response is being removed to  corporate bodies. Their regulation will be decided by the demands of a society unfamiliar with the practicalities of meeting them, but with expectations dependent on whats demonstrably available.

 

Edited October 13, 2019 by moosmum

[asal]

Yes, have a bad feeling your right, barring a miracle it is the end of individual breeders, they are being regulated out of existance and the call for 'responsible breeder"  "

ANKC hamstrung their membership, adding that a breeders goal should not  be  profit to avoid being tarred with the puppy farm brush" eliminates on the basis of wealthy enough to afford to meet this demand.

 

weird it is not equally a sin for the corporate puppy farms?  

 

very double standard isn't it

[sandgrubber]

So glad I'm in NZ.  I don't understand why Oz is so stupid about dog matters. 

[moosmum]

According to organisation as organism theory all countries face similar futures while the Pedigree fraternity refuse to 'recognise' non pedigree dogs or breeders.

 

That amounts to a refusal to recognise environment and the result is to reduce environment. How, or how quickly depends on the culture that instruction is operating on. Australias attitude to dogs historically was more; keep them out of the house, they are for work, not pets. If pets, they are animals 1st. If you choose to keep them as 'pets' thats fine, so long as  others aren't forced to treat them as any more than animals.

 

So its been faster here than some other places. Some worse. I think our only hope now is to wake up other countries in hopes they can end this and provide a better example of what actually works. There is not much time though,  the process increases fast after so much time shaping society to one that will support these moves .Incidentally, we see the same sort of things happening with the polarisation of politics.

 

Organisation as Organism works, but is more 'culture' as organism. It has huge implications.

[asal]

I do fail to understand why the AR movement has such strong influence with politics, they do not make it a secret the end of domestic animals is their end aim.

by the same token all medical science proves the positive benefits of pets, both in mental health and now the recognition that many pets can recognise when their owners have health issues and alert them, now there are even medical alert dogs for diabetes and ptsd just to name two.

considering the high incidence of ptsd, pets have a huge positive influence, and keep people out of hospitals, so falling into line with AR the politicians are actually contributing to the increase in mental health cases needing medical intervention, which surely is a serious issue.

 

Although seeing the increasing obvious bias of politics to treating this nation as just a cog in what they see themselves as a global economy, the removal of tariffs was just the start........despite the fact that much of the imports are coming from countries who actively support and subsidise their industries which has ment the elimination of much of austrlias industries, then the gap is bad as bad for the farming sector, every other nation and I am meaning America, Europe and so many others support their farmers with strong subsidisies and do not hesitate to export for less than the cost of production, a scenario that is destroying the pig farmers of Australia, Scot Morrison has just signed off on the import of American beef, again another subsidised product as is their grain farmers, gee they even pay them a years full income for NOT planting a crop, believe it or not. the really scary bit is there are states in America that have known foot and mouth and BSE been identified so these australian politicians with their "we are a global economy member" mentality are also allowing the import of diseases this nation is free of, witness the destruction of the australian prawn industry because they allowed the importation of frozen uncooked prawns from nations with white spot on the argument they are being imported for consumption. Totally ignoring the fact that once sold there is no control over what the buyer chooses to do with their cheap purchase..........sooo a small percentage used them for fishing and now it reached australias prawn farms which have been destroyed.......

 

same disaster with the fruit and vegetable industry now infected by pathogens and virus's that were not here until our generous politicians opened the quarantine gates to their globalisation vision.........

 

Latest news is sniffer dogs have been dispatched to the top end as there is fears that swine fever has reached Australia.

 

the day is almost here when we are truly global, sharing all the pests and diseases this nation was once safe from, well once accomplished no need for one government department, quarantine.

 

pity we couldn't eliminate the present crop of pollies.  None of the nations they want to copy will sell even a postage stamp of land to a non resident. as for who on earth came up with the passing of selling irrigation water to non land owners to trade on a water share market , meaning our farmers in this massive drought have to buy the irrigation water for their stock and crops from this market instead of directly from the government? as a result the dairy farmers and irrigation farmers are going to the wall, what the government once charged $60,000 for the new structure means they have to pay from $120,000 to $1.2 million just for the same water , except the profits between what our government sold it for  and what the water is finally sold to those who need it is going to the the private sector not the governments coffers? I understand Good ole Barnaby Joyce was a prime mover in this debacle

 

as professor Sumner Miller used to ask. "why is this so?"

 

In the meantime as the dairy farmers continue to go broke and the irrigation farmers also, their farms are being sold as I type, the land is being snapped up by our politicians true masters.... the multi overseas corporations............

 

Even Dubai is buying up big, as for China apparently they were no 5 in land owned here, now in just the last 12 months the portfolion is ten times the acerage and now number 2.

 

the pollies in victoria and nsw have asked the federal government for permission to sell the Snowy mountain scheme... once they succeed even less water australian owned

 

 

 

 

Edited October 13, 2019 by asal

[moosmum]

One thing.... I do NOT think lobbying to tighten laws is the answer- just takes us further down this road.

Rather, I think promoting the benefits of dogs bred in  family/human/ home environments. Selected for how well they fit into and respond to the environments they are bred for. Selected for success and value to the environments they are bred in. And stop making it harder, for anyone. Just teach people that that if you want a companion/guardian for the farm to follow your kids around but leave the animals alone and get on with the sheep dogs , search for dogs  doing just that, and bred because they are doing it effectively and happily because they were bred for that job..

A show dog? 

Predictable type pedigree as a pet/companion? 

Sport dog?

Working dog? 

Ditto. Look for parent dogs successfully demonstrating  those response abilities to purpose.

 

 If you want a dog that will happily wait all day, maybe with a canine companion and some toys, for you give it some attention when you get home and not be a bother when you are otherwise occupied, then a puppy farmed  dog might actually be the ticket. But with responsibility for breeding ALL dogs for a genuine purpose and selecting based on success at that purpose, We demonstrate and promote higher expectations than puppy farm accessories. 

We create a demand,  for more, than that.

 

Puppy farmed dogs will be selected from stock that do well in confined areas with limited exposure to stimulus out side their living space. Might well suit modern dog owners, who have little time to spend with their pets. No so much those wanting a working dog, sports dog, service dog or any variation involving more than a companion for the home or lap.

Edited October 14, 2019 by moosmum

[moosmum]

10 hours ago, asal said:

I do fail to understand why the AR movement has such strong influence with politics, they do not make it a secret the end of domestic animals is their end aim.

Because they play on the emotions of people. Ignore the science that doesn't re-enforce their message and double down where it does. 

They find and display the worst examples of abuse,  then call for laws to ban those environments where they have taken place. Like Greyhound racing. Live exports, etc. Yes, there are abuses. And yes we should end them. But I don't see that cancelling the environments where they have taken place is the answer. It always has unforseen effects. Especially when its so easy to manufacture abuse for a camera, if your narrative calls for that.

 

A.R has such strong influence because people support banning things, rather than improving them because improvement is never fast enough to keep pace with expectation. It will always lag behind. In evolutionary terms, Demonstration of better, followed by Expectation to imitate that demonstration, then response to the new expectations that have been set.

I've seen support for A.R agendas here. Who doesn't want to end  abuse?  It comes back to the same thing. Ban the environment instead of improving the responses to match expectation.

Improvement is slower for sure. But works. Because it doesn't destroy diversity but adds to it. A ban is an attack on environments. Its irresponsible, because it does not require familiarity, recognition and response. Just get rid of it, and no need to think of it. It won't 'bother' you again. But it will cause other problems. The loss of environments cascades. We going to ban them all? Or start being responsible, by helping to fix what we can, where we can. So it works better for more people. Providing solutions for the cause.  

 

Edited October 14, 2019 by moosmum

[Pjrt]

Oh I agree. I personally wouldn’t lobby for tighter laws. I was more just suggesting things that the OP might think to do. We have plenty of laws, guidelines, etc that  are poorly enforced as it is. Perhaps I should say lobby  for better enforcement, in as far as that particular aspect of all of this goes. 

 

I had another crazy idea years ago. And that was to cap the purchase price of dogs. Say $300 for example. So no dog bred in any environment could be worth significantly more money than another. Would that change anything? I’d love you to pull that crazy idea apart for me! 

[Diva]

On 11/10/2019 at 9:43 PM, BoStoNmAdNeSs said:

There is a large operation where dozens and dozens (if not hundreds) of puppies come out of every year. Year in, year out. There are supposed purebreds, but the owners are also spitting out so many cross-bred pups of that breed (with multiple other breeds) that my head is spinning.

Tell me, how is that happening? What scenario would be acceptable to any governing body, the RSPCA, anyone to let this production line continue..?

From a regulatory point of view governments would rather deal with a few big commercial breeders than many small hobby breeders. Compliance is easier and cheaper to police and companies speak the same language as regulators, no pesky emotional responses to deal with.  I don’t think they’d have any problem with the scenario if the necessary development  approvals have been obtained. 

 

As long as the standards they impose are met - and that is easier for big companies  than individuals - what do you think regulators would object to? They don’t consider volume or cross breeding as issues, if the boxes have been ticked. 

[moosmum]

3 hours ago, Scratch said:

Oh I agree. I personally wouldn’t lobby for tighter laws. I was more just suggesting things that the OP might think to do. We have plenty of laws, guidelines, etc that  are poorly enforced as it is. Perhaps I should say lobby  for better enforcement, in as far as that particular aspect of all of this goes. 

 

I had another crazy idea years ago. And that was to cap the purchase price of dogs. Say $300 for example. So no dog bred in any environment could be worth significantly more money than another. Would that change anything? I’d love you to pull that crazy idea apart for me! 

Not sure how it would improve things. You might see something I don't?

 

It would increase costs of production for some breeds, and mean more profit for others, but not based on Demand. And I see no problem with getting rewarded for meeting demand ( tho' I don't mean volume demand)

 

A breeder who sees a market for a breed not currently in Australia, who imports at great cost, has a lot of suitable buyers lined up, should be able to recoup costs. Same for a breeder who spends a fortune searching out and testing dogs to eliminate disease or defects. Or to 'work' in conditions or for a purpose not commonly bred for.

 

Reward for going beyond expectations should be incentivised. Positive reinforcement.   If people are willing to pay more for a dog bred away from cosmetic extremes, ( and not being torn apart for doing it!)  that should influence whats winning conformation shows, eventually. There should be more reward to breeding for a specific purpose, well planned and researched, than for a dog bred with no planning, research or goal in mind.

 

For our so called 'superior intelligence',  it seems our learning methods aren't much different to other animals. Recognition of patterns. If i do this there are benefits and rewards. If I try to do this there is punishment. This, gives neither.

We push positive training for dogs. For all our so called 'superior intelligence' it seems we  learn best as any animal does.

 

[BoStoNmAdNeSs]

Pups (the vast numbers I am talking about) being neutered before going to their new owners...at 7 to 8 weeks of age.

Where is the compliance, accountability, outrage?

Been happening for up to 20 years.