http://www.bva.co.uk/public/documents/breeding_Advisory_Council_standard_for_breeders.pdf

We domestic dog owners/breeders who breed as part of our hobby involvement with showing or working dogs may as well just give up if this became required in all it's parts.

The more I read it the worse it gets, these people have obviously no practical experience of breeding in a domestic setting.

Just for starters:  On the one hand they want pregnant and whelped bitches and pups separated from other dogs, and on the other hand they expect pups from 3 weeks to socialise with other dogs of various breeds!!!

6.>>>dogs must be weighed every 3 months and weight recorded. Erm, how do I get a 35 kilo dog onto household scales? Or am I supposed to take them all the vets for weighing (more money for the vet), or should I buy (at great expense) scales that I can get the dogs onto?

It all beggars belief.

Also, if I kept my male out of sight when my bitch is in season he is far worse. He screams the place down, tears himself to bits, doesn't eat......geez, they have no idea.

It's scary isn't it?

The Standard applies to all types of dogs and all types of breeder whether the puppy is pedigree or cross-bred, the way in which it is bred and how it is treated in the first weeks of its life. The Standard includes 53 separate items and each item contains guidance notes. It sets out how all dogs should be bred to provide good standards of health and welfare for both parents and the puppies. It is aimed at everyone who breeds a dog, whether occasionally or frequently, as a business or as a hobby.

A DAC spokesman said: "There is nothing in the Standard which it is impractical to comply with fully if breeding is done responsibly, however many puppies are produced. It is written in language which is clear but not too technical, and includes both the minimum standards which the Council considers essential to good practice and advice on how to achieve them. It is backed by some examples of standard operating procedures that can be applied to licensed breeding or domestic breeding premises."

Once mine get too big for kitchen scales I then weigh myself + dog and subtract my weight, works fine till one of the dogs waiting their turn puts their front paws on the scales behind you and cocks up the figures.

Most seems like common sense. Can't see the need to have several breeds coming to my home, not friendly enough with other dog owners to invite them round to my home, time for this should be at puppy classes and when out and about being socialised either carried if unvaccinated or during short walks once covered by vacs.

If it's to be rules then so many points I would find difficult or nor wish to comply with.

3. Recording details of why and who PTS one of your dogs, I have only ever had the bill, it's upsetting enough.

4. bitches close to whelping or lactating not to mix with other dogs, excuse me they live together, my house layout means they have to meet simply to go to toilet.

6. Dogs must be weighed every 3 months????  These days past when they outgrow scales as babies, and odd vet visit for an operation/medication I don't need to weigh them.

8. Free access to more than one room?  How many rooms I wish to allow my dogs in is surely up to me, and may be dependent on many things other than preference.

9.  So traditional wooden kennels are not allowed? And must be kept at 10'C to 26'C.  Mien are quite happy to sleep out in temperatures well below 10'C and have no need for heating at all.  They would be very uncomfortable well below 26'C.  Ditto whelping box temperatures, I kep to about 75'F for the first few days and gradually reduce to around 70'F as the pups and bitch get distressed any warmer, though they have a heat mat.

I could go on and on,

5 meals a day for pups (4 suit mine much better), 8 weeks going to new homes (mine are fine from 7, generally over 7 1/2 weeks).  I don't take healthy pups for vet checks, other than listening to hearts (not a breed issue) I am quite capable of gauging a pup is healthy.  I have  no wish to take my dogs to the vets unless they are ill, why do they need annual checks (oh yes Vet incomes).  But then I can't remember last time I went to the doctor, and only get called up for routine womens MOT every 5 years.

There are so many of the requirements that I would find unacceptable, in breeding stock choice.  COI above 12.5% banned, sorry Inka that's you out as yours is 13.7% (even though both your grandfathers are imports from separate continents).

Sorry Jozi your hip score at 14 is higher than the current mean of 13 (though was OK when you were scored), and daughter Lexi at 15 yours is also too high by this standard, though of course functionally normal. 

Both bitches have produced champion offspring, with better scores, though one daughter of Lexi's conceived abroad scored 20, but has produced better scoring offspring, and her sister was scored below mean and produced low scoring offspring.

As for waiting to use stud dogs at two years???

Not so sure that they know much about timings of having litters!!

When I read it, i think it seems to be aimed at breeders who have commercial kennels more than people who keep dogs in their home.
Do you have to adhere to what they say , what happens if you don't?

...  All potential breeding stock must be examined by a veterinary
surgeon prior to mating and certified free from any inherited defect
apparent on physical examination

Oh I just LOVE this bit!

Someone tell me, why is it that we get so many people (BYBs) coming on this forum and telling us that their vet has passed their dog/bitch fit to breed, when they haven't done any of the required tests.    I've lost count of the number of people who have told me that dear Fluffy with the weepy eyes and hopping gait has been passed fit by the vet to breed, and the Staffy owners the same, never mind that they are as bandy as John Wayne in the back end! (the staffy, not the owner)

I had to educate my vet about Copper Toxicosis testing.  I also pointed out, the last time I was there, that a whole litter of 3 week old puppies with parvo would have me asking why the Bitch was being allowed anywhere near other dogs at that stage.

As always with extra regulations, it will be the conscientious breeder who will comply and bear the brunt of extra charges, BYBs, PFs and the rest will just sidestep the new rules or claim ignorance.

> When I read it, i think it seems to be aimed at breeders who have commercial kennels more than people who keep dogs in their home.
>

The Standard applies to all types of dogs and all types of breeder whether the puppy is pedigree or cross-bred, the way in which it is bred and how it is treated in the first weeks of its life. The Standard includes 53 separate items and each item contains guidance notes. It sets out how all dogs should be bred to provide good standards of health and welfare for both parents and the puppies. It is aimed at everyone who breeds a dog, whether occasionally or frequently, as a business or as a hobby.

Don't worry, even if this comes about no one could possibly enforce it.  No one can enforce even the laws we have at the moment, so how in heck is anyone going to see to that lot?

Didn't we discuss this a few months ago? I know I've read it before and talked to my husband about it, such as the part about male dogs not being able to SEE bitches in season.

Bitches must not be transported later than 49 days after mating and for 48 hours after whelping unless to a veterinary surgeon for treatment.

My girls go out in the car every day for excersise...even when in whelp...I have a ramp for them and they would be very fed up if I told them they could not go out ! Much better I walk them in rarely used fields than pounding round the towns pavements with all the germs lurking. My garden though adequate is not big enough to take a dog for a walk in !!!

17. All dogs must be examined daily by staff. (I wish)!

Dog beds: we have them but most of mine prefer the floor.

Who should provide the genetic counselling for breeder & purchaser mentioned in section 16?

Not enforceable.

> Not enforceable.

but if brought in any failure on a breeders part could be used as a stick to beat us with should anyone wish, so needs to be taken very seriously, an dwe need to ensure sensibel things are made mandatory, and leave out the silliness/variables.

It is such a mish mash of sound, sensible stuff, totally silly stuff, and things that are simply not practical in a home enviroment and could be of no benefit to the bitch or pups anyway.  One of the biggest drawbacks is no difference is made between the needs of different sizes/breeds.  I understand legislation has to be 1 size fits all, but it should not be detrimental  to some.

Ok so, some of it seems a bit extreme though I am sure if people worded their concerns in a sensible manner, some of it could be tweaked...

Instead of thinking 'oh no I can't possibly do that', try thinking 'How much will THIS screw up the plans of puppy farmers and make their business none-viable'.. I do think thats what we should be focussing on, as most of the annoyances for responsible breeders are just that.. annoyances - for commercial breeders they are not annoyances, if actually enforced, they are 'put you out of business' stuff.

Surely thats a good thing?

if actually enforced, they are 'put you out of business' stuff.

Ahh but there's the rub.  

At the moment the laws we have aren't being enforced and lets face it, if they were enforced some PFs and commercial breeders would be put out of business, the rest would find life difficult - the whole point here is that the laws aren't enforced because the will isn't there.

What makes you think this will change?

I feel that this is just another stick to beat the more easily found show breeder and the rest will escape notice :(

I would love to be proved wrong, but I don't think there's any danger of that :( :(

and worse still it would lump those of us who can't or won't be able/willing to adhere to all the requirements (they aren't suggestions) as being bad breeders and no better than puppy farmers.

The breeder must have a veterinary health plan for their dogs as agreed with their veterinary surgeon. As a minimum this must include an annual examination by the veterinary surgeon, vaccination, and regular treatment for external and internal parasites. All veterinary treatment must be recorded.

This is bizarre and flies in the face of modern thought which is that annual vaccination is probably unnecessary and perhaps titre tests are the way forward.... the thought of our pets having to go annually to the vets for a 'health plan' is ridiculous.. er... that would be 'your dog is remarkably healthy, see you next year, that'll be £50 please' comes to mind....

I would like to see evidence of enforcement of the existing laws and requirements before they start tinkering with any more rules - otherwise it just smacks of "lets be seen to be doing something" regardless of whether the new rules/laws are useful or workable.

A lot of it is treating dogs like livestock.  Which they are not.  Mine are members of the family!

In some breeds, including mine the co-efficient mentioned is hard to achieve as acknowledged by a KC rep when they were demonstrating the software.
Who writes this stuff. My dogs, luckily rarely have to be taken to the vet bar the odd skin problem and swallowing a pebble in fact I sometimes think my vet may assume I have transferred to another vet. Apart from early jabs and pregnancy we do try and stay away!
Most of it is what we do and is pure common sense and most of us showing is a hobby in which we aim to breed better specimens and well socialised pups.
I weed out bad buyers and put people off having one until i am sure they have passed the test.
I keep my oldies until they pass away as part of the family. So much of this sounds like another money spinner for vets who are already finding all sorts of ways to money spin via the insurance companies.
his stuff sounds like it is right for commercial breeders,

as for hip scores, the lower they go the more impossible it is to have less than 'average' scores, so there needs to be a minimus... so that when the average hip score reaches a certain number then dogs need to be within a certain percentage...

as for most vets making decisions about whether or not to breed from a dog, it's laughable, what do they know about every breed - each trait and requirement and temperament???? it's something some junior school pupils put together one wet lunch break.....

Also people like me give up their normal lives for the love of their dogs. My dogs are not that bothered whether they have their own specific bed! as long as we are around most of the time which we are and they have a comfortable house to live in which they do. Surely this is for puppy farmers only. People that come to my house can see how much love and devotion I have for my dogs and my breed and have sometimes been elsewhere or previously and comment on the difference between that and my situation. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr to these people paid a lot of money to write a report no doubt and a bit like other animal related issues, can't see the middle ground.

exactly but they want this applied to all breeders

I have just got a new vaccination book and it's pages of health checks for pup, 6month old and then annual as well as space for 2 lots of jabs... is this the way they're pushing that everyone HAS to take their dog to the vet annual for some form of health check?  My dogs go when they're poorly......  I can understand health tests for poor dogs who are kept in puppy farms and I can can understand that reputable family breeders are at first glance similar to back yard breeders, but there must be some means to treat at least puppy farmers differently, so if you have over ?? number of dogs and you employ 'staff' and are council registered then you may have to go through more hoops.... if only the 'requirements' were realistic.... I can't see it stopping poor breeders, but I can see it stopping decent breeders from breeding :-(

> I can't see it stopping poor breeders, but I can see it stopping decent breeders from breeding :-(

That is certainly the experience in the USA.

It does seem that governments would simply like to see a regulated dog breeding industry,

They don't want/aren't interested in small scale hobby related/domestic breeders as these are intrinsically impossible to fit into one size fits all rules.

Regulation would be about controlling/eliminating the worst puppy farms, but they are quite happy for pups to be bred in a clinical commercial setting as a consumer product, and would seem to prefer that professional/commercial scenario, easy to set standard rules and also assess for tax.

They often refer to the 'dog Breeding Industry', and that is how they see it, no room for passionate amateur hobbyists.

I know that my house would not fit into what they want.  I only had a living room and kitchen downstairs but have a seperate serving area for the dogs food within the kitchen.  My dogs are in a nice sized kitchen for the day whilst I'm at work.  I'm sorry but I would not leave them free range of the living area where there are live cables etc.

My vets don't have a clue on any health tests but are willing to listen to what I have to tell them and have in the past taken documentation. 

As someone else has said we are always calling people who breed from their dogs because the vets have said they are healthy enough without ever having any health tests. 

I would love to know how they would ensure that their rulings are followed.  The GP who just have a pups from their dog for the experience are not going to do all the health tests. 

Also I know some stunning dogs in my breed with fantastic temperaments and good health tests who are just slightly above the breed average.  Surely it would be better saying that no dog over say mid 20's which is supposedly still a healthy hip can be used?  I think this ruling will be a detriment to many breeds who have pretty low hipscores.

This piece of work is a nightmare but posting to pick up on penny's comments about annual vet check / vaccinations.

My vet and I were chatting the other week and he told me to process insurance claims they were being asked to provide verification of annual health check, vaccinations, dental check and weight check. If anything omitted claims being questioned.

Not just picking on your post Brainless but I can only see one post when replying so...

3/ Recording details of PTS - if its your own dog and  you are having it PTS and you know in advance (and your vet knows too) that this is necessary I don't really think its any harder (and yes, I have had dogs PTS), you know in advance so you mention it to the vet in advance and its done with the min. of fuss. I think it would be fairly rare to have to discuss that sort of thing at the horrid moment and if vets are aware they need to record these details it should be easily sorted out.

4/ I think thats one that does need re-wording to take into account domestic situations, the guidelines, having read them fairly thoroughly now, do seem to be written with a much heavier bias on making puppy farming impossible really. I think wording things so that introducing NEW dogs when you have a bitch close to whelping or who is feeding pups is not recommended/not allowed, and also introducing dogs who are not resident, and then for the rest just recommending that contact is limited and closely supervised would do!

6. Dogs must be weighed - sorry, how is this a problem? Your vet charges for you to weigh your dog? Change bloody vets then. Mine (and my last two vets) has the scales in the waiting room and you are free to weigh your dog with no charge day in day out if you like! Alternatively if you have suitable scales and can pick up your dog, weigh yourself, then pick up the dog and weigh both and then subtract one from the other.

8. Dogs must have free access to more than one room - this is obviously to prevent people locking a dog in a small room and not letting it be a part of the household, rather than about dictating where your dogs can and cannot go. It could be better worded to allow for dogs being left alone,  visitors coming over etc where you may well change which parts of the house a dog has access to.

9. Where does it say wooden kennels are not allowed? It doesn't say that - it says they are undesirable, and should be treated with safe paint or varnish. Whats wrong with that exactly? You WANT wooden kennels that are chewed up, soak up wee and faeces and hold onto infectious  material?
I do agree that the temperature guidelines are less sensible and that could be better thought out for those with spitz types or otherwise heavy, weather proof/cold proof coats.

Honestly, having read it thoroughly I think its bloody good IF it can be enforced - I actually doubt it can.

There is I think only one point I massively disagree with and thats the breed average scores thing - certain things like hips and elbows are NOT purely genetic and to not breed from an animal who is slightly over the average and potentially that could be due to environmental causes not genetic ones, is unecessarily narrowing the gene pool.

Theres a few points where they need input from reputable breeders who breed from home, as some things are not clear or are not practical (again I agree that an experienced breeder knows if their breed tends to need four meals or five).. They do say that a vet can certify that a pup is ok to go home prior to 8 weeks, and whilst I don't agree that its wise to be taking pups to a vet, theres nothing stopping you from having a vet out to visit you!

YOUR dogs (and again I don't mean you specifically Brainless, I mean all of us) might not need annual vet checks, some of mine haven't seen a vet in years - but come on, if for the sake of a days annoyance and a consult fee once a year ALL dogs that are bred from had to see a vet, wouldn't that be a good thing? The vaccination thing ought to be changed, most vets do now use a vaccine protocol that involves a different vaccine each year on a three year cycle, so you see the vet every year, but don't get the same jab each year.. I think it ought to include titer testing as well really.

IF this can be enforced, as I say I do have my doubts - then I personally welcome it. I realise I don't breed now, but I might and I don't see anything massively unreasonable for a 'hobby' breeder to achieve.

Some things might cost more in money or time but then, this isn't a money making venture and its for our own personal benefit... if it brings puppy farmers and irresponsible breeders to their knees do you REALLY care that you might have to change the way you do things a little bit, or it might  cost you a few more quid?

As I understand it, these are recommendations, not set in stone, and before anything becomes law there will be public consultation and the opportunity to put your views forwards.

The Dog Advisory Council panel actually has 5 out of 12 members who are or were breeders - the others are vets, veterinary behaviourists and one pet dog owner. I really do think it would be better to re-read this looking at how certain areas can be re-written to not penalise great breeders whilst still killing commercial ones, rather than being all doom and gloom and purely thinking how ti will affect you personally,  negatively.

I do fully agree that if great, reputable breeders are NOT involved and do not get involved in a positive way, there is every chance that real enforcement won't happen, and reputable breeders will be the token gestures who get penalised, but its your input and involvement that can stop that - being negative about it on here can't!

Whilst I would like to see puppy farmers bought to book, I think if this panel includes the people you say, the first draft is written very oddly when it comes to the points about "domestic" breeders. Why does a dog need to be weighed when my own eyes and hands can tell my dog is in good condition and if you can do it at home and record it, who is going to check it?
Why just breeding stock for this anyway. Most dogs are not breed from and I'm not sure if this is written with health of all dogs in mind or those kept in numbers.
I'm a groomer and I see more "cruelty" almost every day with pet dogs who are overweight and coats left in bad condition. Not enough always for RSPCA cases but if they were my dogs I'd feel terrible. Most breeders, the group in the middle, are show people looking to improve their line and know how to keep a dog in good condition so are much better owners with that in mind. Some dogs must feel so uncomfortable but nothing done about that.
Also in my pet shop I have met so many one off pet breeders who have thought it a good idea to have a litter from their bitch because she is so pretty or has a great temperament - mention health tests and conformation and a blank stare appears and you know they will carry on. Oh and then there are the ones that walk in with a puppy in their arms which I can see is unbelievably young because the pet breeder found it was too much like hard work and wanted rid.
Re-write this document absolutely with a commercial breeder in mind and I'd be fully in favour as there is a chance that it would be enforceable and fair.

> As I understand it, these are recommendations, not set in stone,

No if enacted these would. not be recommendations but requirements.  This draft is not being put up for us breeders to tweak but to politicians who know diddly squat about breeding ethically.

As for the not objecting to being put out by having to change the  way i do things, why should I or anyone else breeding ethically be dictated to on details.  No my vet doesn't charge for weighing, but neither do I feel it necessary to weigh my dogs unless needed for treatment reasons.  Also if I decide I do not wish to vaccinate my dogs beyond their first booster (as very many people have done for decades) that's my choice.

Re the introduction of NEW dogs, I have been in the position of taking beck a dog I bred days before his sister was due to whelp, I have  also boarded a bitch I bred when the owner could make no other arrangements at short notice (going into hospital).  My Kennel is wooden (it;s some of the girls bedroom, yet they are not kennelled as such), and is treated with wood treatment, not painted/impervious (wood needs to breathe), though I have used Bitumen paint on the floors.  Never had a problem with disease, why would I?

These are all decisions I should have a right to make for me and my dogs without undue interference.

As you say if these suggested rules were only for Commercial breeders, who are setting up a business with purpose built facilities fair enough.  Such all encompassing rigid rules for all situations is not only unworkable but undesirable as so often one has to go with the flow.

For example my policy used to be to bring the pups into the kitchen with the other dogs at two weeks.  On one occasion I needed to bring the litter (born early September when we had very warm weather) down to the kitchen and keep the door open as they were distressed with overheating at 10 days old (with the whelping box sides solid keeping out drafts I could reduce the general temperature (I do have a thermometer on the side of the box.

More recently one of my bitches is much more possessive re her pups and the other dogs and I only moved her subsequent litters in with others having access at three weeks.

My pups demand more space and outside play by 4 weeks, even in adverse weather, I have pictures of my 'O' litter of 5 week old pups playing in the snow, do you think they were happy being contained indoors, no way, so outside they had to be allowed.  Of course I had to ensure they were dry and warm when they decided to come in.

I have a dog run attached to the kennel across the door goes a board and pups stay in the run at first so the other dogs do not have to have them around them all the time and can choose to interact or not (some older grumpy grannies like pups less).  This time around I had the pups loose by 5 weeks, the other dogs were happy, probably as Mum had no intentions of weaning early so they did not pester the others.

There is no benefit to me or my dogs and their puppies to have some of these rules applied, just inconvenience, and that is enough to put good people off breeding, exactly the ones that should be able to continue without interference

So the welfare of dogs in general is not your concern, stuff them you only care about your own?

If I understand the way laws are generally formed correctly (and I am pretty certain I do), this IS a recommendation, a proposal, it will then go through various stages of consultation during which interested parties/groups (of which hobby breeders are one) can have their say.

Then it has to be supported by various government ministers and if it is, becomes a bill, and then its discussed and reviewed again by both the House of Commons and the  House of Lords - again you can have some input here by contacting various MP's and Lords and asking them for their support or to put forwards various amendments.

For example, these are the submissions of evidence by the interested parties/groups in the Dog Control and Welfare inquiry. http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmenvfru/writev/dogcontrol/dog.pdf  You can read mine here  http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmenvfru/writev/dogcontrol/dog59.htm if you like rather than scrolling through that entire document.

I do agree that it is pretty bad that it has come to a point where those of us who ARE sensible, reputable, etc HAVE to jump through stupid hoops so that the irresponsible can be dealt with, but thats the world we live in. If you take your argument and apply it to driving a car - 'I drive perfectly safely and have never caused or had an accident, so why do I need a licence, and insurance... '

We unfortunately DO need legislation that covers breeding dogs - unfortunately we cannot just make puppy farming illegal, we have to push irresponsible commercial breeders out by making it impossible for them to do whilst making a profit, and if you (again, you, generic good breeder) want to make sure as best you can that the legislation is reasonable for hobby breeders, you will have to get involved wherever possible to ensure the law formed is the law that does the job properly.

It is not a case of being selfish and only caring about your own dogs. This will do nothing to stop actual puppy farmers. There is plenty of legislation out there already, it needs to be implemented. The true puppy farmers, not necessarily the commercial breeders, are outside of the law anyway. They register with nobody and obey no rules. Commercial breeders will have a fancy set up and will be able to tick all the boxes as most of it seems geared towards kennels rather than home environment. How anyone will be able to prove or disprove that the kenneled dogs exercise twice daily I don't know along with many of the socialisation issues we know they don't do but will lie about. Far harder for the normal hobby breeder to lie and get past an inspection. If you haven'y got a separate kennel out of sight and sound of your male you haven't, as simple as that! same with having 2 exercise areas for pregnant/whelped bitches and so on, we will all fail. the paperwork side doesn't bother me at all it is do-able but all my "breeders rights" have been taken away. How often I vaccinate, co-effs, even the age I can mate my bitch (in my breed it is before 2, but I also finish at 5). only 1 caesar (that happens to be all I have ever had but again explain why not 2 if it was a stuck pup only?). and so on is something for me to decide on according to my breed and knowledge gained over the years. There seems to be scant regard for breed in any of this and "one size does not fit all" I would even fail with regards to the level of obedience expected! As with the AB scheme the quality of the puppies produced does not even get a mention. The carefully thought out and planned pedigree, knowing your pups will look like the breed, which is what a buyer paying a lot of money expects.As with the AB scheme much of this is a paper exercise (look at the long winded contract!). It is a shame so much time is spent with these committees when a simple act of parliament making it illegal to sell puppies to dealers or petshops would solve the puppy farmer problem at a stroke.

We unfortunately DO need legislation that covers breeding dogs - unfortunately we cannot just make puppy farming illegal, we have to push irresponsible commercial breeders out by making it impossible for them to do whilst making a profit, and if you (again, you, generic good breeder) want to make sure as best you can that the legislation is reasonable for hobby breeders, you will have to get involved wherever possible to ensure the law formed is the law that does the job properly.

WE ALREADY HAVE LAWS REGARDING DOG BREEDING - THEY ARE NOT BEING ENFORCED!

Since the above is true, what part of the new laws do you think will actually be effective? 

It's the same old, same old.   New laws instead of a will to enforce the existing laws on the people who need it!

If this goes into effect, you will be left with no concientious breeders, only commercial breeders who have the cash to comply with all the regulations.   It doesn't take much of a search to find commercial breeders who breed large volumes of puppies, have a pet vet, flash website, marvellous buildings/kennels and even buy in very well bred, health tested stock to breed from - using show breeders to supply their breeding stock.  Usually producing crossbred puppies at stupid prices, with 'hybrid vigour'  (we need a puking smiley)  

Of course they don't spend out on any unnecessary activities, like showing, working, spending time with the dogs and pups etc.   That would eat into their profits - and they do make a profit, otherwise they would be out of business.  But hey ho - it won't matter, because they can show the work within the law.

> If I understand the way laws are generally formed correctly (and I am pretty certain I do), this IS a recommendation, a proposal, it will then go through various stages of consultation during which interested parties/groups (of which hobby breeders are one) can have their say.
>
>

As I understand it this is going to legislators not out for consulation, this is the draft being put forward to legislators who know nothing about small scale dog breeding. 

They will look at it think Oh that's a good idea, won't even realise if it's unworkable for law abiding concientious peeps, those who can afford it (commercial setups) will comply, others will ignore as they do now, and some of us will have to give up breeding, as we can't, or won't be willing to comply with some ellements.

Some of the DAC members may be breeders but some breeders are certainly not your aveerage breeders, in the average home, same as some of the top wealthier exhibitors cannot be compared to your average exhibitor scraping together the enrty fee for the next show.

>This piece of work is a nightmare but posting to pick up on penny's comments about annual vet check / vaccinations.

>My vet and I were chatting the other week and he told me to process insurance claims they were being asked to provide verification of annual health check, vaccinations, dental check and weight check. If anything omitted claims being questioned.

This depends on your insurance.  Ours (Direct Line) has paid out for everything we've claimed for, regardless of the fact that our dogs have not been vaccinated for many years as far as this practice knows.

I do realise the laws we have are not properly enforced, I think I have said that previously..

But what do we do? Give up and say 'Oh well theres nothing I can do so I'll do nothing at all'.

As far as I understand it, this WILL end up similar to the links I provided previously on the Dog Control and Welfare stuff, where interested parties are consulted but this is in its VERY early stages, whereas the Dog Control and Welfare thing is much further along in the process.

There will then be plenty of opportunity, IF you look out for it and take the time to get involved (and it took me a fair while to read through the guff to respond to the Dog Control and Welfare inquiry, several days and then quite a few hours to write my response), to raise questions such as, how will this be enforced, how can we ensure it IS enforced, why will this be enforced when xyz ISN'T already enforced...

The problem we currently have particularly with puppy farmers is that responsibility is left with Local Authorities to check and enforce the rules - if THAT can be changed and I think it should, then theres a good chance we will have laws that are actually enforced.

The actual LAW we have on breeding dogs currently is very very thin or non existant, hence the inquiry in to dog control and welfare which touches on breeding too.

But you DO need to actively look for and keep an eye on the status of these things and seek your opportunity to have your say - you won';t get someone knocking on the door or phoning you to ask your opinion,  you WILL need to go out of your way and make the effort... if we can't be bothered then we will all likely end up with more law that is worthless, unenforced, and impractical.

I dont think people are being selfish when they scoff at some of the ideas given.

It is just that many, if not most of the recommendations are unenforceable.

Access to more than one room.....?
All dogs are weighed.....?

Vets certify the dogs as fit...?

All can be seen to being done on a scheduled visit and then pop the poor beggars back in the sheds for every other day of their lives.
Remember that these massive breeding operations, where hundreds of bitches live in hose down stalls with feed hoppers have licences and have TAME vets who certify these places.
Unenforcable in almost every case other than the poor saps who fly above the radar and do everything else right in the first place.

But what do we do? Give up and say 'Oh well theres nothing I can do so I'll do nothing at all'.

No!  There's a lot that could have been done if the will was there...

To start with they could try actually enforcing the present laws and requirements.   That would make a huge difference straight away - to the commercial breeders.

The actual LAW we have on breeding dogs currently is very very thin or non existant, hence the inquiry in to dog control and welfare which touches on breeding too.

Not thin and not non existant - just ignored by puppy farmers, commercial breeders and councils alike :(

Breeding of Dogs Act 1973

and to be used in conjunction with

Breeding and Sale of Dogs Welfare Act 1999

The fact that this has never been enforced properly tells me that the present exercise is NOTHING to do with animal welfare.

The problem we currently have particularly with puppy farmers is that responsibility is left with Local Authorities to check and enforce the rules - if THAT can be changed and I think it should, then theres a good chance we will have laws that are actually enforced.

Then all that is needed is legislation to ensure that councils do enforce the regulations and make it an offence to not do so, with penalties for the council.  
Just who do you think will be left to check and enforce the new rules?   It will most likely be the same local councils who currently do nothing.

>>The actual LAW we have on breeding dogs currently is very very thin or non existant, hence the inquiry in to dog control and welfare which touches on breeding too.
>Not thin and not non existant - just ignored by puppy farmers, commercial breeders and councils alike

If you think about it, at the moment no law (other than the general AWA) applies to the vast majority of dog breeders; the ones who have one or two bitches and have the occasional litter.