A few years ago I was invited by DEFRA to take part in a survey on "How to deal with the spiralling problems with Dogs and Dog Owners". As part of the survey they were looking at the Horrific amounts of abandoned Dogs and The Dangerous Dogs Act. I could fill this topic with known statistics but in general: There were 113,000 dogs taken in by the RSPCA in one year, 7,285 were euthanized. One question in the survey was "How would I deal with the problem". My answer (In Brief) was as follows.

Anyone that wishes to breed (open to all) must first obtain a license.
Anyone wishing to purchase a Dog must first obtain a license.
Any bitch that is sold / purchased must be spayed, unless purchased by a licensed breeder.
Every dog must be micro-chipped
Change of ownership only via a governing body
All new owners must attend puppy classes
Offenders will be prosecuted
The Licensed Breeder must inform the local authority of all sales and must not sell to non license holders

I suggested that all Veterinary Surgeries become the local governing body as most would already have the facilities to oversee but are answerable to a central body. Obviously there would be many other issues as well as abuse, but we keep hearing about "Something must be done" but nothing ever is and we have to start somewhere.

Apart from any other consideration WHO is going to police this (pleeease don't suggest the R$PSA) and how is the cost of policing going to be funded?

Well I will be interested in others replies but could not agree with some of your points.
The first is spaying. Not all agree on health grounds that early spaying is a good thing. It seems in your scenario it is compulsory to spay a bitch but dogs can be left entire?
Your final answer was prosecuting  which there seems to be a lot of this in this world we live in.
Really not sure how you could force people to training classes although  don't disagree in principle this is a good idea.
Don't think you would stop people selling to "non licence holders". The licence idea was in place and ignored by many . I guess you are suggesting prosecuting those that have a litter, so they are here on the ground, and do not have a licence. What about accidental matings but then in this perfect world they would not take place other than in a licenced breeders camp.
To be frank I don't think there is a way. I agree that microchipping which will be compulsory at least can track down one time owners but without another very expensive body and please don't suggest involving vets or the RSPCA acting like the police probably impossible to eradicate one of life's problems.
I agree educating people that it is not "good for a bitch" to have a litter automatically might do the trick but where do you take big brother in this country?
The number of dogs put down is of course very sad but a big part of the reason for that is the throwaway society we live in .
People will still want to buy puppies but not nescessarily keep them for the long term

I am also not a great lover of the RSPCA but I would suggest as mentioned first port of call Veterinary Surgeries and either answerable to a new body or even The Kennel Club. Funding could easily be covered by Licencing Cost.

Anyone that wishes to breed (open to all) must first obtain a license.

I really fail to see how that could improve anything much -after all, the great majority of puppy farms are licensed, and the overwhelming majority of GOOD breeders are not. And we already have lots of back yard breeders churning out more pups than they are allowed to without a license, and nothing happens to them.

As I mentioned there would obviously be many issues to consider. I am not implying that I have the answers but something has to be done and we have to start somewhere. The problem truly is spiralling out of control with only some sort of radical big brother tactics being able to sort it.

They need to look at what is being done in the countries that do not have this kind of issue (Nordic countries).
In those countries, dogs do not generally get neutered/spayed either and somehow people manage not to produce all these "accidental litters".
I don't like the sound of most you have written as I don't think it will work and will just mean responsible people pay and others don't.

1. put all the money that would be spent on policing on educating the public, I truly think this is where the long term solution lies.
In the end, if there is no market for the badly bred puppies, they soon stop to be produced and people do not have the "accidents" if those accidents don't make them money&they are left with unsold puppies.
2. Stop puppy farms, e.g. no licensing is given to these outlets who take no responsibility of what they have produced & do not care where they sell to.
Outlets producing thousands  of puppies a year could be stopped by laws...
3. every puppy must be microchipped by the breeder (so they can be chased back to where they came from)
4. Stop the importing of the puppies for sale, again laws could be made and policed so this can not happen as easily as it does.

If you had the power to change two things in the 'world of dogs', what would it be and why?

> 2. Stop puppy farms, e.g. no licensing is given to these outlets who take no responsibility of what they have produced & do not care where they sell to.
> Outlets producing thousands  of puppies a year could be stopped by laws...

I think that is the most important thing. you can educate a lot of the bybs as a lot of them love their pets and want to do the best by them. It is the farms churning out thousands that cannot be educated and will never have the welfare of the dogs as a major interest. Just the profits

They need to look at what is being done in the countries that do not have this kind of issue (Nordic countries).
In those countries, dogs do not generally get neutered/spayed either and somehow people manage not to produce all these "accidental litters".

And no puppy farms and virtually no back yard breeders!

Maybe a start would be to only allow anyone to breed if not doing so for profit and/or as a business. I recently queried breeding licenses with my local council. My council is one of these that requires anyone with more than 2 bitches where "puppies are produced with the purpose of selling" to be licensed -not the more common and more lenient "no more than 4 litters per year" rule. I explained I show, spend a LOT of money on entry fees etc (and can easily prove this), and breed normally at most one litter a year for a pup to keep, the very most it would ever be would be 2 litters in the one year. (I will, for the first time ever, have had 2 litters this year, only because I HAD to mate a second bitch in order for her not to be too old for a first litter.) Their reply was that somebody like me would be classed as a hobby breeder, not needing a license, because the purpose of breeding is not just to sell. Yes we have to sell some pups as obviously can't keep them all, but the purpose is never just to sell.

Ban puppy farms.
Scrap the pet passport scheme, not popular but it's because of this that puppies are flooding the market from Europe.
Ban the advertising of pets for sale and breeding on sites such as Gumtree, FB etc.

SKV,

I would not want to see the KC in charge of monitoring. The KC is in need of reform- too much of an old boys club and stuck in a different era.

Scrap the pet passport scheme, not popular but it's because of this that puppies are flooding the market from Europe.

It would mean a huge disservice to many, many breeds that now rely on being able to go abroad for matings, importing new blood etc -not to mention showing. However as somebody mentioned, let it become illegal to import pups to sell on, any dog imported to be kept by the importer.

I agree to a degree but even Breed Clubs are a little like that. For example, I have written to the Newfoundland Club as I wished to "Join In" so to speak but they will not allow me to join unless someone else nominates me. I do not know anyone in the Breed Club so I am unable to join. Daft in my eyes.

A lot of breed clubs will allow your vet to sign your membership application if you do not know a member -worth asking about?

>Scrap the pet passport scheme, not popular but it's because of this that puppies are flooding the market from Europe.

I wouldn't scrap the Pet Passport scheme, but I would reintroduce the titre test and 6 month wait before entry to the UK. That would immediately stop the importation of puppies while still allowing adult animals to travel overseas for matings etc; and would also highlight the surprisingly high failure rate of the rabie svaccine which is now unregulated and therefore ignored, putting our rabies-free status at serious risk.

I think a lot of pups are being purchased from Europe as they do not have breeding restrictions applied. My wife and I have thought about breeding ourselves in a couple of years or so. If that was a road we decided to go down then I may do the same. The problem with having an endorsed dog is that if two years down the line you decide to breed the breeder can just say NO. That would then be another two years before I could do it, so why take the chance. The main problem with this is that anyone can do it weather they are intending to health check or not. It would not be so relevant if the endorsements read "Restrictions will be lifted on proof of required health checks". but this is not the case, it often also reads "If I find you suitable", so if they do not like you then they will probably not lift the endorsements and you then have another back street breeder.

I wouldn't scrap the Pet Passport scheme, but I would reintroduce the titre test and 6 month wait before entry to the UK.

Yes that is a very good point. The resale value of almost adult pups is so much less than for younger ones and it is official that numbers imported have increased by many hundred percent since the rules were relaxed.

It would not be so relevant if the endorsements read "Restrictions will be lifted on proof of required health checks". but this is not the case, it often also reads "If I find you suitable", so if they do not like you then they will probably not lift the endorsements and you then have another back street breeder.

Well first off, why would you buy a pup off somebody who did not like you and what type of breeder would SELL one to somebody they did not like and trust? In the great majority of cases, it all comes down to finding the right breeder. It's always the right breeder first, not the right pup. Then you prove yourself and the dog by showing and/or working as well as doing the health tests, and there should be no problem. With the number of people starting out to breed after 5 minutes in a breed, with so may badly bred pups about etc etc, it's not so strange that most of us are very cautious. I would not be happy to lift the endorsements on a dog or bitch I've bred if I'd heard nothing from the owner in the meantime, for instance -I want to have seen the dog, know that the temperament and looks are correct, not just the health, and the owner should be involved in the breed, not just sit at home with a pet -if for no other reasons than that they need to be better known in order to sell the pups, and they need experience to be able to advice and help their puppy buyers.

I have someone in my recent litter ( who has had the breed before ) and was clear that they may want to breed this time. Puppies are endorsed and she knows that I will be expecting her to health test with good results, and be of good type and temperament. Also that I will advise her on a suitable dog to tie in with the pedigree.
Then I will lift endorsement. I can't see anything wrong with that because the same goes for my own puppy in effect. The only difference is that I do have some clue about the breed and can make those decisions before going ahead with a mating. This person would no nothing without my help.
She was in complete agreement from the start of discussions about her having a puppy. Having said that I was really please she came along to ring craft last night and is now considering dabbling in showing as well. A long road ahead of her and much to discover but she is showing her interest in the breed club etc etc so I know it was the right thing to let her have a puppy.

I do not disagree with you. My main point is that some breeders actually state things like "If I think you are suitable". I personally would like to think that I would be deemed suitable. I have already attempted to join the relevant clubs, our first show is 26th July already booked. I would actually carryout more tests than what the average breeder does. I have given our breeder two updates already. (within six weeks) However, there is nothing to stop our breeder from saying NO and it could be two years down the road before I would be aware. So in many cases where it may be stated "If I think you are suitable" then it would be far easier to pop over to france and purchase one with no restrictions thus not having to be concerned with endorsements.

So in many cases where it may be stated "If I think you are suitable" then it would be far easier to pop over to france and purchase one with no restrictions thus not having to be concerned with endorsements.

I take your point (and it certainly sounds like you are doing everything right!) but nothing is 100% black and white. BECAUSE you want to breed and are coming from abroad (hence more likely to breed, as few would import otherwise), there is nothing to say a breeder abroad will agree to sell to you at all. I imported from Belgium in March, and I most certainly had to prove myself to the breeder before he agreed to selling me a dog. He told me afterwards he checked up on me carefully, asking around other breeders home and abroad and checking on the internet that my dogs were doing well at shows etc. So in that sense the dog might as well have been endorsed. And anybody who ISN'T careful with who they sell to could of course turn out to be irresponsible.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Scrap the pet passport scheme

If we did that, Large Munsterlander gene pool would be tighter than it is now and so would Selkirk Rex!!!!!

I like all of your points SKV, and would like to see many of those things enforced, for a long, long, time I've agreed that just anyone should not be able to breed, that due to this happening the dog is in danger of health problems and shortening of life, in some breeds that is apparent already.  :-(

But, on thinking things through..... we have problems why the government etc, will not enforce such tight breeding and owning rules for dogs, firstly dogs are not food (in this country) so will never come under tight restrictions,

Secondly those needed and used as working dogs (show dogs are not used by any governing body, let's be honest) will be sourced from good breeders, so why should they care what is going on out there with the pet dog?

Thirdly, the reasoning behind dog breeding going through the roof, (when once upon a time it was always left to those with an interest in dogs) comes down to money, people breed (BYB's in this inst. Won't get into puppy farmers at this point) today to supplement their income, how many times I've heard that reason, they're not interested in dogs, just what they can make out of the dog, wages do not cover the cost of living today and the 'I want it now' pushes people to find other ways of bringing in money, once finished dogs are dispensable, hence one of the reasons rescue and the RSPCA come in, and I dare say the government is happy that people are making a living legally, so.........why stop it?

More jobs and better wages for many will stop an interest immediately in most dog breeding, getting to the source of why, will stop it.

Why do people want a dog as a pet? Also needs getting to the bottom of, people get dogs when they live in areas completely unsuitable for a dogs needs, they work full time with nothing in place to cover for a dog, don't wish to walk them, care for them or know how to train or treat them, people are not stupid (well mostly) deep down they must know a dog needs care so why do they get them?..................... Are people lonely, missing something that they think a dog can replace?  And then soon realise it doesn't? Again, the root of why needs to be addressed.

As I'm sorry, but I don't think outside the world of dogs, and yes, I am sure we will all continue to shout our outcry at what is going on, but outside of people with a real interest are they valued enough for the reasons above, for what we would like to change to actually happen, it would probably come under invading human rights. **rolleyes** the whole idea of the dog needs a complete makeover.

I wish I had the answer of how to make dogs once again valued and not something to use for a need or a bit of money and then thrown away, guess the dog needs a good PR company, nothing IMO will change unless that is put right first.

Allowing bad breeders/puppy farms easy outlets for their 'product' is the biggest and easiest issue to solve IMO and would go such a long way to making it a less lucrative 'living'.  So, pet shops should be prohibited from selling puppies (biggest PF outlet). Secondly, selling of puppies on the free ad sites should be banned outright. Again, the BYB has such an easy route to buyers. Take that away and see how many continue when they can't sell the pups.

I despair of education, simply because I know several people - who definitely DO know better - who have bought puppies from pet shops. Don't ask me what
comes over them, but one is an agility person who has bought more than one from the same pet shop, whose stock comes (has been proved) from Puppy Farms in Wales. One of the dogs had such a bad temperament issue it was eventually PTS. Still she went back to the same place and bought again!  So if people who should and do know better can be 'drawn in' to buying from a pet shop. The average (especially new) puppy buyer will certainly be. This perpetuates the trade.
I also agree to banning the import of puppies from other countries, including Ireland, where the PF trade has truly set up home.

Puppies in pet shops are IMO also a huge welfare issue, and I can't understand why this hasn't yet been banned.

So if people who should and do know better can be 'drawn in' to buying from a pet shop. The average (especially new) puppy buyer will certainly be.

I think the main draw for the average buyer wanting to get a pup from a  petshop is that it is easy as going to Argos and buying a new telly. NO QUESTIONS ASKED. In fact less than buying a TV as you don't even have to fill in a form for the license. 9 times out of 10 when I get an e-mail enquiring about puppies or kittens, if I start even tentatively ask questions, the person never replies again -because they don't want to be "interrogated" as people have put it.

I'm sure you are right.

I think it would also start to have a positive impact on the overstretched rescue centres, even just the fact that eventually less dogs would be being produced (well quite quickly I think). I wonder what % of hand-ins were originally bought from Gumtree or Pet shops, it would be interesting to know.

Then there is the other side of the 'welfare' issue of pet shops and free ads, how many go to totally unsuitable homes/people/situations.

Thirdly, the reasoning behind dog breeding going through the roof, (when once upon a time it was always left to those with an interest in dogs) comes down to money, people breed (BYB's in this inst. Won't get into puppy farmers at this point) today to supplement their income, how many times I've heard that reason, they're not interested in dogs, just what they can make out of the dog, wages do not cover the cost of living today and the 'I want it now' pushes people to find other ways of bringing in money, once finished dogs are dispensable, hence one of the reasons rescue and the RSPCA come in, and I dare say the government is happy that people are making a living legally, so.........why stop it?

Have been thinking of the problem of people breeding just for money, especially the BYBs,  who I think, probably are currently contributing more puppies than the puppy farmers,  if my local area is any guide.   Yes, it is easy money, if you care nothing for the 'product' and spend nothing on their care, but the attraction for most of these people is that they can do it all 'cash in hand'  and bypass the taxman.

I hear so often of sick puppies lately, bought from BYBS, and usually a mixed toy breed or Bulldog or Frenchie -anything that can be sold for a very high return.    Only today I've been informed of another tiny toy puppy sold at 8 weeks old with blood in it's poo, and the breeder's reply was that this always happens when they are wormed!   The breeder told the new owners to only feed 3x a day!    

I have begin to advise reporting the breeder to the TAXMAN.   Since this is the only way that these greeders will ever think twice about their activities.  

Responsible breeders have to pay their taxes, so at the very least, the easy money breeders should also have to do so.