Vulnerable Breed Competition Final | ​Crufts 2023

[Rozzie]

The Skye 

[Mairead]

Emma Hurst's Companion Animals Amendment (Puppy Farms) Bill has lapsed due to the election coming up, so I imagine there is time to read the bill and put your views to the new members of parliament. The vulnerable breeds angle might be worth mentioning, because once they're gone they're gone, and who knows when a particular breed might be found useful for studying human disease.

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2016/01/largest-dog-genetic-study-informs-human-diseases

(having trouble with the link but you can find it with the title)

"The study ... is a big step toward efficiently mapping genes responsible for complex diseases in dogs, most of which are very similar in humans, thereby accelerating our understanding of human genetic diseases. ...dogs share more than 350 diseases with humans ...".

They used almost all purebreds in this study.

If someone wants to quote this in a new topic, go ahead.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Mairead

[_PL_]

Sorry but what does it mean for a bill to have lapsed?  I'm not all that good with political terms.

 

[Diva]

All bills lapse when parliament is  dissolved or prorogued before an election. I think in NSW a private members bill just needs a notice of motion or similar to add it back to the new parliament’s business list.
 

Things don’t automatically get carried over from parliament to parliament, there is a bit of an approval process. The new parliament can decide not to accept it back, but then it could be reintroduced and start again. I’m more used to federal systems though so might have it wrong.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Diva

[Mairead]

My understanding from today's phone call to NSW parliament ( and wouldn't you know it the person who deals with tabled bills in the upper house is on leave this week - ideal time to go on leave I suppose) Emma Hurst needs to reintroduce the bill to parliament after the election, it hasn't been passed.

[tdierikx]

19 hours ago, Mairead said:

The vulnerable breeds angle might be worth mentioning, because once they're gone they're gone, and who knows when a particular breed might be found useful for studying human disease.

 

I wouldn't mention that to the AJP nutters... they are trying to stop all animal based research too.

 

Funnily enough, last year Emma Hurst had to have surgery for a chronic issue she had... and couldn't see the hypocrisy in having a surgery that had only been made bloody possible after extensive testing on animals before being applied to humans. The surgery she had was definitely something she needed, and we shouldn't begrudge her for having it... but still, animals suffered and/or died at some point to make her surgical treatment possible.

 

As for the Puppy Farm bill... I second the call for everyone who may end up affected (and that is pretty much anyone who owns or ever wants to breed a dog or cat) to read what is being proposed by AJP (and Greens).

 

Legislation that has lapsed that might be worth watching for reintroduction:-

 

Puppy Farm Bill (AJP) - https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=3885 - read the original animal numbers caps and litter numbers, ages to stop being used for breeding, insistence on mandatory desexing at point of sale, etc...

 

Animal Sentience Bill (Greens) - https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=3946 - even though most of us will not dispute that animals are sentient, the whole point of legislating it is a step toward implementing "personhood" rights onto animals, and essentially stopping anyone owning an animal, they want to implement "guardianship" instead.

 

Independent Office of Animal Welfare (Greens) - https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=3942 - might be worth noting that this is also referred to at Independent Office of Animal Protection, which actually has a whole different meaning than Welfare. Have a look at the committee suggestions to see how they want to stack it with animal rights nutters.

 

Aquatic Animal Recognition Bill (AJP) - https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=3836 - call to add crustaceans and cephalopods to definition of "animal" in legislation. Not in itself a bad thing, but could have unseen ramifications long term.

 

Increased Penalties Bill (AJP) - https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/Pages/bill-details.aspx?pk=3820 - focuses and build on her other legislation that simply calls for greater penalties for animal cruelty offences, but does not address the current misuse of the system by those tasked with policing current legislation... effectively incentivising RSPCA to get even more heavy-handed so they get a bigger share of fines imposed.

 

Also worth noting is that once legislation like the Puppy Farm Bill get passed, what will be classified as a "domestic animal business" will change drastically, and could have implications when applying for local government approvals to own more than the designated animal number quotas for each type of residential/regional/rural property - effectively allowing councils to reject applications from legitimate registered breeders (who currently have some exemptions to LGA caps on animals per property) - this is ALREADY happening in Victoria, and to some extent Queensland.

 

On a side note, Georgie Purcell - the newly elected Victorian upper house AJP member - owns at least 17 animals, including a donkey, sheep, goats, dogs, etc... way MORE than is supposedly allowed in her LGA animal cap quotas based on property size... but apparently because they are all "rescues", that should be allowed. Last time I checked, rescue animals didn't have any less requirements under animal welfare laws than any other animal. Important to note that she also fosters animals at times, so her numbers are fluid over that 17 animal number that she actually owns. Why should she be exempt from the legislation her party wants to impose upon the rest of us?

 

T.

[coneye]

Will say i've been totally ignorant of any move or lesgislation to ban / outlaw / get rid of dogs until i started reading it here , but has a general layman  i would agree straight away get rid of puppy farms , in my head it conjures up  images of poor little dogs being  locked    in cages  only brought out to  breed and have pups ,  wherass breeders  i have images of where i bought my pedigree dogs from , one a staffy  nice lady owned two  that she used to show , she was right into the scene and lived it   she was great to deal with and wanted to keep in touch to see how the pup done ,  but   had 2 litters  mine was from the last litter she was doing   she was keeping one herself to breed from , the other a shepard , lady lived on acrerage   , had kennels and probably 10 -15 of the happiest dogs  you could see they had kennels but predominatly  roamed free   most slept in the house , all had a dam which they spent there time swimming in , Actually   probably where i would want to live if i was a dog , she used to show but stopped because of time  but still used to breed them , why would you want to stop these people from breeding , , but heres the million dollar question at what stage does a breeder  stop becoming a breeder and become a puppy mill ,,  theres lots out there where the dogs  just live in the kennel , the bitch will have 4-5 litters ,  not a lot of excercise  yet still shown  , its a real hard one is'nt it , especielly when pups go for huge money

[Amazetl]

I’m not sure what the answer could be really but definitely there are dogs out there being bred in terrible circumstances and that needs to be stopped. It sounds like a real balance between stopping what needs to be stopped without also impeding on the good ones, sadly that’s what a lot of laws do, and those who are really the bad ones still often times go undetected. What is the solution to advocate for those who truly need it without just throwing out laws that don’t seem to really do a lot of good in the end?

[Diva]

One thing I am sure of, more regulation is not the answer. 
 

I see many ads on community notice boards, and sales sites i shouldn’t name on here, of haphazardly bred, unvaccinated, not microchipped puppies that no authority ever follows up - despite the many requirements on breeding and advertising.
 

So I don’t think the authorities actually care about the regulations except to weaponise them for political advantage - which means creating common enemies in the public imagination - people who can be labelled as breeders.
 

Those ‘ordinary’ folk breeding the staffy and working dog crosses that fill the pounds don’t consider themselves breeders, and the authorities don’t enforce the regulations with them because there is no political advantage in it, but that’s where the bulk of welfare issues and unwanted dogs arise. Not good telly like the occasional ‘raid’ though. Or the occasional pure breeds that end up in pounds, somehow seen as more awful and blame worthy  than the dozens of others around them. 
 

And while we are at it, let’s start holding owners responsible for dumping their dogs in pounds not the breeders  - for choosing badly out of ignorance or to get a ‘cheapie’ for the kids, for not training their dog, not housing it safely, and then dumping it and getting another ‘better’ dog. The owners chose and then discarded it, no one else. 

 

I know we can’t do that because there are legitimate and sad reasons that cause people to give up their pets, especially in hard economic times, and we don’t want to demonise those people.
 

But society is happy to demonise registered breeders and by some twist of illogic make it their fault, even when the dogs filling the pounds have little to do with them.

 

I’m not saying there is never cruelty or neglect amongst registered breeders, but all the regulatory effort seems to going to a very small part of the issue. 
 

Edited March 22, 2023 by Diva

[cannibalgoldfish]

" I see many ads on community notice boards, and sales sites i shouldn’t name on here, of haphazardly bred, unvaccinated, not microchipped puppies that no authority ever follows up - despite the many requirements on breeding and advertising." 

 

A guy I work with just sold a  litter of Jack Russell Terriers. Back yard bred. Before the birth he was worried about the Mum because she was very small. No screening, had no idea how many pups she was having, ect. Just "Oh I hope she is ok"  Mum had a C section and had 5 pups. 

 

He just sold the last of these pups. They were 9 weeks old. Apparently one pup was a girl and very small.... 

 

People get their knickers in a knot about Puppy Farms. This is what is happening in backyards every day. 

[Selkie]

17 hours ago, cannibalgoldfish said:

" I see many ads on community notice boards, and sales sites i shouldn’t name on here, of haphazardly bred, unvaccinated, not microchipped puppies that no authority ever follows up - despite the many requirements on breeding and advertising." 

 

A guy I work with just sold a  litter of Jack Russell Terriers. Back yard bred. Before the birth he was worried about the Mum because she was very small. No screening, had no idea how many pups she was having, ect. Just "Oh I hope she is ok"  Mum had a C section and had 5 pups. 

 

He just sold the last of these pups. They were 9 weeks old. Apparently one pup was a girl and very small.... 

 

People get their knickers in a knot about Puppy Farms. This is what is happening in backyards every day. 

 

While not minimising the issues with this... I'd still rather this than the puppy farms, I think.

[Diva]

1 hour ago, Selkie said:

 

While not minimising the issues with this... I'd still rather this than the puppy farms, I think.

It’s not an either one or the other choice. Pretty sure there is still both at the moment.
 

my point was that adding more regulation won’t reduce the number of unwanted dogs because by and large the people producing those dogs don’t pay any attention to the current regulations and the authorities seem to give them a free pass. So if that is the pretended policy intent, it will fail again. 

it won’t reduce large scale commercial breeding either, because they are price setters and will just pass the costs of compliance on to the buyer.  (But at least it’s not usually their dogs in the pounds.)

 

All more regulation will do is further impact the small scale responsible breeder who does try to abide by all the rules, but doesn’t breed on a commercial scale. 

And those are the breeders keeping the rare breeds alive. 
 

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Diva

[Mairead]

There are amendments to the bill.

Companion Animals Amendment (Puppy Farms) Bill 2022.

Micro breeders up to 5 fertile females, recreational breeders more than 5 and under 10, and "commercial animal breeding businesses". 

I am ready to ask questions at the polling place. Can you tell me ... I'm concerned about ... Can you put me in touch with someone who does know?

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Mairead

[tdierikx]

1 hour ago, Mairead said:

There are amendments to the bill.

Companion Animals Amendment (Puppy Farms) Bill 2022.

Micro breeders up to 5 fertile females, recreational breeders more than 5 and under 10, and "commercial animal breeding businesses". 

I am ready to ask questions at the polling place. Can you tell me ... I'm concerned about ... Can you put me in touch with someone who does know?

 

 

That amendment bill has now lapsed, so it must be re-introduced from the beginning once the new parliament starts - which looks like early May at this stage. Let's not forget that Labor have their own plans for a shake-up of all animal welfare legislation in NSW, which I'm tipping may look very similar to the legislation that is being proposed in Victoria.

 

For anyone interested, this is what is currently being proposed in Victoria... note the title it has been given - "Animal Care and Protection" - no mention of WELFARE there at all, which is telling... https://engage.vic.gov.au/new-animal-welfare-act-victoria - and if you are interested in reading the type and content of the submissions made to the consultation stage for that legislation, they can be found here... https://engage.vic.gov.au/project/new-animal-welfare-act-victoria/page/submissions-to-the-plan - note that Andy Meddick had posted submission guidelines for AJP members/supporters to submit which I've attached here...AJP Vic guide to new act submissions_guide.pdf - and if you read through the submissions made, there are 100+ that are based on that advice (to the point of a cut/paste of the document in many).

 

Now, it is important to understand that a MASSIVE amount of sway in how new legislation is formed and passed is given to what is called "community expectations" - so all those submissions will be duly read, the numbers for and against will be tallied, then the results will be published with lovely little charts and statistics showing the extrapolated findings. The fact that large numbers of individual submissions have been made based on the callout for AJP members/supporters to copy and send the above submission guidelines will not be insignificant - the sheer numbers WILL be counted and taken into consideration when presenting the end report - regardless they are all mirror images of the same document/submission. Gone are the days when we can be sitting back and relying on only our industry bodies to make such submissions on our behalf - if we truly want to affect how these things go, we ALL must be making individual submissions to these consultation processes as well as those our industry bodies are making on our behalf. We need to be heard as part of the "community" whose "expectations" will be counted.

 

T.

[Boronia]

This was on the Dandie page this morning

 

 

 

[asal]

On 13/03/2023 at 9:33 PM, Princess Fru Fru said:

Yes they are and are one of the many at risk terrier breeds not just in Australia but worldwide.

 

Aussie registration statistics have been sitting consistently around the 320 puppies registered per year since about 2000 onwards compared to the 1980s where the breed was averaging around 700 puppies per year.

 

Whilst the numbers aren’t high, the issue is with aging breeders. They majority of breeders are now 80+ years and few new blood is coming into the breed. Pat Connor of Tineetown passed last year I believe (one of the main Aussie breeders back in the day) and Michelle Cook of Atrigema passed earlier this year too.  Both Tineetown and Atrigema lines are extremely old and many Aussies will have dogs/b*tches from these kennels in their pedigrees.

 

Another issue will be if dear little Emma Hurst manages to get her shortsighted bill across the line. Fancy limiting breeds that whelp small litters to a maximum of only two litters per b*itch. If your breed only whelps litters that average between 1-3 puppies per litter this will seriously diminish the genetic pool and spell the end to many small breeds.

 

I fear the end of dogs is nigh.

 

 

exactly.   even when they brought  in the 5 or was it 6 litter rule I pointed out that in toy breeds this will seriously impact the gene pool especially the one to 2 or at beset 3 pups in a "litter" I had two excellent girls that only ever had one pup per  "litter" .  Then they brought in the one litter per year?   or if bred back to back have to leave empty for 3 seasons????????  these girls are a night mare to leave empty for a year let alone more as they gain so much weight between "litters".  then wont go in pup.

 

At the time I pointed out the big litter breeds could have 24 pups in 2 litters.

 

while the toy has 2!

 

I suggested a limit on number of puppies bred instead. gee that got howled down .  oddly it was most loud by the big litter breed owners.  

 

the whole thing has been a disaster for the dogs.  and the register.  before the bitches had their puppies while still young and desexed and rehomed by those who rehomed their ex breeding bitches.  I remember my vet commenting that whoever drew this up never liaised with dog reproductive vets.

He said dogs never evolved to go long periods between litters, that missing so many heats will increase the incidence of pyometra.

 

but all the peta propaganda of photos of starving bitches with lugs half way to the ground with puppies hanging off them was never countered with the thousands of ankc bitches looking a million dollars with their puppies. the ankc went along with the royals, never explain, never complain.   

 

well now its crunch time well and truly.

 

finally they have twigged the peta agenda of extinction is nearing its success date.

 

love the "Where have all the dogs gone"  Campaign.

 

is it too little too late?

only time will tell.

 

judging by the screams of lies, lies and more lies on darling Emma Hursts Fb page and the incredible venomous attacks on anyone sharing both the dogs nsw warnings and how to vote for the just completed election and Hugh Gents letter they sure are rattled.

 

I suspect they assign two people to attack . do wonder how they knew I had shared them as neither attacker is a friend on fb or friend of any of my friends. the most savage was  Ludovic Barbier his ignorance of even the basics of what he was carrying on was laughable but the nastiness was pretty overwhelming and certainly created immense fear .   after a while i realised that was probably the intend to make me afraid and delete my post.  His side kick was some one named Robin Robin 

 

so instead I kept asking questions.  as he went on and on about what a liar i am, how ignorant of am of the lies lies and more lies Hugh gents letter contains . that I am obviously all about animal exploitation with no care for their rights.  just so much coming from him.

 

 

finally he did say the intention is the elimination of anyone who breeds a litter.

 

I doubt Emma Hurst will be pleased with him.

 

interestingly he hasn't said another word after I told him that Emma will not be pleased with him for letting that cat out of the bag.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2023 by asal