News Link regarding Victoria (Aust) proposed plan to limit sale of puppies
If not unsuitable, I thought this news link might be of interest about the state of Victoria in Australia.
"Victoria pushes ahead with plan to restrict sales of puppies and kittens."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-13/victoria-restricts-to-limit-sales-of-puppies-and-kittens/7730306?WT.tsrc=Facebook
"Victoria pushes ahead with plan to restrict sales of puppies and kittens."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-13/victoria-restricts-to-limit-sales-of-puppies-and-kittens/7730306?WT.tsrc=Facebook
Comments
because at first this sounds like a step into the right direction. But many times laws and regulations look better on paper than in reality.
As often the case, in my view this targets only half of the problem (or maybe even the wrong end). It may even force some of the regular stores to give up - which I personally don't consider bad for the animals.
In this case looking through the glasses of the store owners I am sorry for them, because some of them may lose their business over that regulation.
IF the regulation would really solve the problem of the puppy overpopulation and uncontrolled breeding, I would still consider that decision absolutely justified for the sake of animal's wellbeing.
But sadly I am convinced that it will not solve this problem. Because experience has shown lots of times before that making certain things illegal often only pushes that market into even more shady corners without really stopping it, often causing quite the opposite and making it even more profitable for those involved.
Also don't think that this can stop "impulse purchases", because there will still be sources available.
I have my doubts that such a regulation can stop people from just breeding pups for money, who did not give a rat's behind about animal wellbeing and regulations before.
I understand that legislation has to start somewhere. But sometimes to me it feels like politicians are just not looking deeply enough into the real problem when making laws and regulations.
So, we'll see, if this regulation really IS the good idea that is seems to be at first glance.
My suggestions for New Policies:
- Full Genetic Tests results on both sire and dam need to be submitted prior to litter registry.All Breeders are to be screened, licensed, and abide by an outlined strict guide of regulations.
- Females will require 3 heat cycles prior to breeding or minimal of 20 months old before breeding.
- Females will require at least 1 1/2 year pause between litters.
- No female will be allowed to be bred more than 4 times for natural litters a 2 times for c-sections.
- DNA certificates on sire and dam will be required before a litter is registered.
All Breeders receive unannounced annual visits to ensure regulations
are being adhered to and all animals are properly cared for.
All Breeders who are "selling" animals will
actually be registered as a business and claiming taxes on the sale and
income of their puppies just like pet stores do. (Something almost every
breeder tries their best to come up with excuses as to why they don't report their income.)
All Breeders must microchip their dogs and puppies so their information
will permanently be affiliated with the dogs they produce. This way all
stray dogs or dogs forfeited to a shelter could be tracked back to the
breeder who at that time would be responsible for the dog. This could also be a required process conducted by Veterinarians during every puppy's first set of vaccinations.
All Breeders will be required to conduct strict contracts on the sale of
their puppies which dictates that under any circumstance that the puppy
they sell should ever require to be rehomed that it be returned to the
breeder who will take full responsibility for finding it an alternative
and permanent home.
All rescue shelter and pounds be provided a listing of local licensed breeders. Breeders of the particular breed that was rendered would be called and expected to take
on the responsibilities of sheltering the dog and finding an appropriate home if the dog had no trace evidence of the original breeder.
All mixed breeds (mutts) would be required to be neutered or spayed.
having an "accidental" breeding would receive a fine by the state.
These are just a few of the changes I would be in favor for. Many would not agree with me but again this is just my opinion. However, I'm more than confident it would greatly reduce the amount of puppymills that exist and it would greatly reduce the volume of dogs at shelters and pounds. This would also ensure breeders were producing healthier and better bred puppies.
The intent should be to create new policies that will work but national registries as well as veterinarians (for mandated microchipping) would need to change their policies.
"It's not just a Dog, it's a Bull Terrier!"
www.bulliesofnc.com
To become a DOGS NSW Registered Breeder, here's what to do:
1. Become a financial member of DOGS NSW and achieve a minimum period of twelve months continuous Membership
2. Become the registered owner of a female purebred dog/s you wish to breed with, so that your name appears as the owner on the Certificate of Registration & Pedigree (Main Register)
3. Ensure that the Sire (Father) that you have chosen to mate to your bitch is owned either by a financial member of DOGS NSW or an interstate Controlling Body.
4. Apply for a Breeder Prefix which will identify all dogs bred by you and becomes the first word before the names of all puppies to be registered. For example, the Prefix ‘LOGIC’ then pups name ‘GOLD NUGGET’ the full registered name of the puppy would then be ‘LOGIC GOLD NUGGET’. Indicate your 8 choices on the Prefix Application form. [Breeders Prefix is also sometimes referred to as your Kennel Name]
5. If you only include 2 or 3, and those rejected by the ANKC National Prefix Register, then you will be required to submit another form.
As soon as your Prefix Application is accepted by Dogs NSW you will be enrolled in the Dogs NSW Online Members Education Prefix Program which must be undertaken over a minimum period of six months.
When you join DOGS NSW you sign to agree and abide by its Constitution and Regulations. This includes Part I/1A: The Register & Registration and Part XIII: Code of Ethics. It is mandatory that you make yourself familiar with both of these Regulations.
6. During the period you are studying the MEPP course material, your Breeders Prefix application will be sent to the ANKC National Prefix Register for approval of your kennel name, this name will only be available and ready for use after you undertake the MEPP Examination and an inspection of your premises has been conducted and clearance given by the Inspector.
Caution: Under no circumstances are you authorised to breed a litter prior to registration of your Prefix and should you do so whilst a Member of Dogs NSW, firstly the litter would not be registered and, in all likelihood, you would face a Judicial Inquiry.
Recommended reading
Note: once you become a member of DOGS NSW, in accordance with the Regulations you may only breed with pedigree dogs on the Main Register of the ANKC Database, you must register all puppies in a litter and provide the Certificates of Registration & Pedigree to all new owners.
As a Dogs NSW Registered Breeder, under no circumstances are you permitted to sell any puppies 'without papers’ or breed any dogs that are not registered on the Main Register of the ANKC National Database.
All identified breaches of the Regulations are reported to the Disputes Assessment Panel for investigation and appropriate action.
Sadly every registry I've ever seen (including AKC) focuses more on profitable gain than they do the welfare and improvement of dogs being produced and registered through their Kennel Club. Could you imagine the impact it would have if the following items were added to every Litter Registration application:
- Disqualifications:
This would surely prevent the unethical breeding practices from occurring and force the development of healthier and better quality puppies produced. In the even other registries didn't follow suit it would quickly be known where people would go in seeking the best quality puppies. Puppy value from registries would drop significantly due to the negative reputation they'd earn with the public.
Puppies purchased from a breeder that utilized Kennel Club with these regulations would not be allowed to register their puppy until the following records were provided at the time of registration:
To me, these type of implementations would not be hard to initiate.
"It's not just a Dog, it's a Bull Terrier!"
www.bulliesofnc.com
Targeting the Kennel Clubs and Registries would be a good idea in my view, because in many countries those are merely a bunch of lobbyists seeking their own benefits.
And even more many set standards that are clearly looking for appearance prior to health. This has nothing to do with the wellbeing of the breeds or individuals.
A very drastic example is the Rhodesian Ridgeback. One of the characteristic features of this breed - if sources such as this BBC documentary are telling the truth - is a clear genetic failure (with health consequences) that ridiculously enough has been defined as a standard for the breed.
http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/pedigree-dogs-exposed/
No regulation that just aims to make things as hard as possible or even impossible for people who want to follow the rules - as the one drafted in this article - will change anything.
This is often just to “comfort the masses” - give critics some regulations that sound good at first, but bring nothing but harm and especially no improvement at all for the individuals they are allegedly protecting.
Regulations have to be well thought through to work at least for part of the affected group that is dedicated to sticking to the rules.
I agree that requiring more documentation and setting - REASONABLE - limits could do something already: At least it would probably discourage a lot of backyard breeding of people who are just thinking of it as a hobby or making some additional money, but don’t want to bother with a lot of paperwork and costs.
Even this, however, in my opinion will not at all target the problem of the puppy overpopulation and “impulse purchases”.
Because like I said before, there will always remain sources to turn to and no regulation can eliminate that. So, limiting the availabily always can only be ONE step of an entire strategy. It can’t solve the problem alone. Look at the problems with drugs.
Making it illegal does only push it into some kind of black market, in which those who do not care about legal or illegal can then make even more profit, because the sources have been artificially shortened by the attempt to regulate their availability.
Back to puppies: The ones hit most by those regulations in the end are all those reputable and honest breeders, who would do anything for the sake of the breed, pay money, do testing, make sure the paperwork is in place - all things people like Steve are already doing.
And those regulations only put more pressure on it.
While the people who did not care before, will also not care once the regulations are effective.
In my personal opinion one more very, very, very important milestone is often missing in such equations - and so it is, looking at the problem of puppy overpopulation.
And that variable is: THE BUYER.
I am very convinced that, if ideally nobody would any longer buy from dubious sources, all regulations would be dispensable. Because there would just no longer be a market for those people.
This is why I think that the EDUCATED buyer is the vital - but sadly in today’s reality also the weakest part in this equation.
It is funny, because looking at people paying the same prices or even more to backyard breeders and puppy mills than they would pay when buying a puppy from a reputable breeder clearly shows that the problem is not their ambition to find a good bargain in their new pet.
I think the huge problem is simply a lack of knowledge, combined with internet platforms, such as puppyfinder, which make it easy to find and buy a pet. They also make it easy to sell pets all over the states.
I am convinced that if buyers were better educated about the risks and disadvantages of buying from questionable sources, a lot more of them would seek reputable breeders to buy a puppy from.
Although we were lucky with our current little monster, I would also probably not make the same purchase again.
I would not want to miss her today, don’t get me wrong.
We do not even have any problems at all. All health issues so far within the last three years were minor and easy to handle and keep under control.
But I do not only contribute this to the “genetic material” of my dog, because she clearly has her flaws.
It’s the experience with the last very sick dog before and researching, reading and talking to other owners a lot, which lead to the knowledge that helps keeping her immune system on track today and quickly react to any issues before they get any chance to escalate.
I am convinced that even though we were looking for documentation, pedigree and stuff, that’s not the entire story with our breeder. And the most money saving end after all is always the one skipping health and genetic testing in the lifestock. Sadly, that’s exactly what causes sick puppies.
So, I really like the way the breeder handled everything back then. He was very helpful and answered all of our questions, provided images of the puppy’s parents etc. But from what I know today, I am still convinced that he is probably not really a professional breeder.
Knocking on wood with fingers crossed that we were lucky with the health of our dog.
But even though everything is ok, I really wish that Kennel Clubs, for example, would come forward a lot more, maybe team up with animal protection organizations and vets and make the benefits of buying from reputable sources A LOT MORE popular among average people. So, less people would think they do the right thing or even “save” a poor puppy when they buy it without tests, documents and any guarantees or knowledge about their health or roots.
It’s probably an illusion to hope that this end of the story will ever get the appropriate attention. Which is why sadly people will keep buying from questionable sources and people who don’t care much about the life of an individual and regulations will keep following their questionable business.
The result being: No matter which regulation is in place, it will always only put more pressure on those, who are already trying to do all the best for the breed. And eventually it will not really do much for the intended protection of animals.
Sorry for that “black” point of view. I can’t help it.
I agree that most registries
are focused on profitable gain. I understand that they need to be financially
viable, but there’s a fine line between using money for good cause, and
building cash just to look strong. After all, what’s the money for? If they were
serious, they could start a rebate scheme for those complying, or commence a
program that manages the things that a good breeder should aspire to. An
official Canine/Animal Breeder Stamp of Approval like an ISO 9001 International
Standard or something similar could be something that could help. The
eligibility criteria could include these things you mention below;
ID # (Tax File Number)
Bloodline Prefix Name
Certificate #
Certificate #
Microchip #
#
Health Test Certificate #
Health Test Certificate #
Age. No less than 18 months old. No older than 7 years old
total. No more than 4 litters
Records are not on File. Microchip, DNA, Genetic Health Tests
The Gold
Standard certification should apply to every litter, and once the breeder has a
proven recorded history with the registered body, they can apply for the Breeder’s
(ISO) stamp of approval. Would this ever get off the ground? I can see that
some breeders and Rescue groups are passionate about these very issues, but is
there a momentum of influence to make something happen? I am aware of enough
managers in business to know that many who can assist in this process will
simply do just enough or be obstructive to keep their jobs secure. Self-interest,
like those willing to sell their pups prematurely and without recourse, usually
takes precedence. If the Canine Association/s leadership around the world were
steadfast in their views and had some sway with government bodies, things could
change.
Filtering
buyers is a tricky one because unsophisticated people are innocent in nature
and may not have thought about the short and long term issues. I can see that
generally there is more education out there that tries to ask the question
about suitability, but what is the “standard” when grading a prospect for a puppy?
What lengths do breeders go to in this regard? Are they expected to simply ask
the question about location, environment, family situation and so on, or is
other proof required? A photo, an in-home visit, a reference? I think many new buyers
look for convenience and unfortunately, the swindlers are good at what they do.
The average individual who wants a BT may go straight to the classifieds
instead of doing further research, and as we so often read in this forum, that
research may lead them to “plausible” sites with insincere information. What
are the penalties, if any? Shameful behaviour may or may not be illegal.
But all of
this covers pure bred dogs and leaves the majority of the canine issue
unattended. Local councils and government ministries have more say in the
control of the average owner and their dogs. I guess focusing on BT’s is a
small but positive step on the road to holistic improvement, and little steps
will help maintain some integrity in the breed.
"It's not just a Dog, it's a Bull Terrier!"
www.bulliesofnc.com