I think it should be put to the goverment to ban PUPPY FARMING, why are these people allowed to get away with this. A while ago i met a woman who i often see walking my ddb's, she has become very interested in the breed and asked me if i would be having any litters,  after replying no, i gave her some good breeders to contact. The next time i saw her she said she had tried the breeders but had no luck. SHE THEN SAID she had seen some advertised in the LOOT in Manchester and she was going to see them the following day, i told her to be very carefull as IMO good breeders don't advertise in the Loot and because they are an expensive breed there are some people just trying to make a quick buck. She ignored my advise and has come back with a very dodgy looking puppy. I asked her why she had bought this puppy as it looked more like a boxer than a ddb and she replied that she bought the dog just to get it away from the place. She said that on arrival to the breeders house he then took them to a big lock up, and she said there must of been at least 20 different breeds of dogs all locked up in small pens. The litter that she picked hers from were only six weeks and had no mother with them, and one of the puppies only had one eye. I find this really upsetting . I have asked her for the mans address so that i can report him, but she dare not give me it as she is frightened he will think it is her, but don't worry i am working on it, hook or by crook i will get it. Why should these pigs get away with this!!!!!!. I have told the lady that she should of left the pup because she has just given that horrible man more money, but at least it as gone to a good home.

Before you can ban puppy farming Claudia you first have to define exactly what you mean by puppy farming. That is by no means an easy task. We all have our own ideas as to what exactly constitutes a puppy farmer but there are degrees and one person may thing a person is puppy farming when another may think the same breeder is just the right side of the divide. A Labrador breeder a short while ago had 270 dogs, most if not all were KC registered, at least some health tested that I know about. Was she a puppy farmer? And if so, on what grounds would you make that decision? If numbers of dogs then comes the question, "How many dogs constitute a puppy farmer?" Would the number be the same for a person keeping the dogs in a small council house as for example, the Queen in her purpose built, expense no object, kennel block? What about the Guide Dogs for the Blind who register possibly more puppies in a quarter than any other single affix?

As I said definition is difficult. (Rather like a bill to ban hunting)

Regards, John

There is no legal definition for what is termed as a 'puppy farmer' but a person is generally considered to be a puppy farmer and puppy farming by welfare organisations if, they are breeding indescriminately and selling the puppies to a third party and not selling the puppies directly to the new puppy owner.
This covers a wide range of breeders both licenced and unlicenced who may have a few bitches or may have hundreds but they have one thing in common they will be selling puppies to dealers and wholesalers who may themselves have a pet shop licence to enable them to sell the puppies onto the general public or sell on again to another pet shop or to export.
I think more effort should be made in campaigning to get the sale of puppies banned from pet shops and third parties, if the outlets that sold the puppies were closed down then the puppy farmers would not have a market for their puppies. The largest concentration of puppy farmers are in S & W wales and Eire, if the puppy farmers did not have the dealers to sell their puppies to then the bottom would fall out of their market, as they would not have a large enough market locally of people to sell their puppies to on a weekly basis.
So you see it has nothing to do with where the breeder is located or how many bitches or litters produced it all relates to what that breeder does with the puppies when they reach the age to sell.  

Hi John :-)

I tend to think the term puppy farmer is not a great use of terminology, I tend to think better wording such as unethical breeding etc.

If you think one person can have one litter, not care about the breeding pair, raise then with little care, sell to any Tom, Dick or Harry to me in my eyes they are as bad as someone breeding loads of litters with out any care. They however don't fit well under a puppy farming heading but are no better in my eyes.

To a certain extent I agree with you Blue. This is another facit of irrisponsible breeding as a greater whole. The trouble with adding this into the definition of puppy farming would then, to me, depend on intent. Most breeders could look to a puppy buyer who had them fooled. Years ago the almost standard way of finding a puppy was to look in the local paper. There was no internet and few people showed apart from the big kennels so we had no choice. These days advertising in those same papers seems to be frowned upon. Things change so fast that common practise today can be a sign of possible puppy farming tomorrow.

Regards, John

I agree with John, the definition is very difficult, however there are rules about the number of breeding bitches that can be kept before the breeder has to be licenced and operate within the limits of the licence and of course there are laws preventing the ill treatment of animals which may apply to this case so it is certainly worth persuading her to report what she has seen to the relevant council or the RSPCA.

John and Isabell, what do you see as dog farming? and as for the person with 270 labs, well i do see that as dog farming. Why have that many if it is only a hobby, they must be in it for the penny's imo.

The point is not what John or I see as puppy farming the fact is my criteria may not be the same as John's, yours or the next dozen posters so I don't think there is any scope for having a "puppy farming" law but as I say there are ways of protecting dogs from suffering using the existing laws.

I agree, to me that person is farming dogs. But then, I thought so when I saw she had registered over 70 puppies in just one quarter of the BRS quite a few years before it came out just how many dogs this person actually had.

As Isabel says, we all have our own ideas on the exact point where responsible breeding ends and puppy farming starts. The important thing would be where the government would place the dividing line if they brought out a law.

It could be said that deliberately breeding crossbreeds is wrong. But if that is the case then there could be no Patterdale Terriers, Lucas Terriers, Plummer Terriers or even PJR's and what about the GDFTB's Lab/Golden crosses?

Is it breeding without health testing? In some breeds literally the whole breed is never hip scored and an even greater number of breeds are never eye tested!

Is it purely down to numbers? The largest number of dogs registered to one affix in the BRS is Guidewell affix, the affix of the Guide Dogs for the Blind!

Conditions that the puppies are kept under must play a part in our minds but how bad must it be before it is too bad? Some of the best breeders are not that house proud but their dogs want for nothing.

Do you see where I'm coming from? It is a nebulous thing which we know when we see it but could never define adequately for it to be law.

Regards, John

I think it is easy to say who is not a puppy farmer, you give a good description on another thread giving the ideal, John, and in a more simple way I think you could say anyone breeding within their breed club code of ethics and KC rules is ethical but I believe it becomes very difficult to say how far short of that it should become a matter for the law.

The ruling relating to the numbers of breeding bitches a breeder could breed from before required to be licenced by the local council has been obsolete since 1999, when the breeding and sale of dogs (welfare) act 1999 came into existance. Then it changed to the numbers of litters produced in a 12 month period.  As soon as a breeder produces 5 litters in a 12 month period they need a dog breeders licence. In effect a breeder can keep a 100 breeding bitches and if they only produced 4 litters in a 12 month period they would not be required to apply for a licence.
The essence is on proof, that is why I said in my first reply message to collate and keep the ads because that would be the evidence that the Council would require to apply to the Court for a warrant to search the premises. In all these instances the Council will not act unless they have justifiable reason to do so. The only way this can happen is to give it to them as they will not go out and seek it themselves.

It should not be too difficult to find a contact telephone number for this person if they are advertising in the Manchester edition of LOOT. As they have a ddb and various other breeds then I suspect they are regular users of LOOT and possibly other free ad papers too. You will need to scan the papers regulary over a period of months maybe, keep copies of the ads and if you find there are 5 litters advertised over a 12 month period then you have the evidence to submit to the local Council Environmental Health department covering the area that the breeder is advertising. You can find out the location by the ads, even if a mobile is used by arranging a viewing with the breeder to see the pups. 
This person maynot be breeding all of the litters, thay may be buying in litters too. Either way they would need a dog breeders licence if breeding at least 5 litters in a 12 month period or a pet shop licence if buying in puppies to resell.

Unfortunately (witout wanting to cause huge debate) banning hunting with dogs and docking is far more important.

In *your* opinion, not in everyones ;) Personally, I think that puppy farmers cause far more misery and heartache to both dogs and owners than either docking or hunting

I was being sarcastic - they are obviously the Governments priorities, but certainly not mine :)

Ahh ..apologies :D :D Use the smilies darn it, can't tell who is being sarky otherwise :D :D ;)

You've achieved the impossible - have just sorted and dusted my cupboard and desk in an endeavour to find my list of emoticons (they dont seem to be on the site any more)! :D :o :(
Personally, a close second to banning puppy farmers would come banning fireworks...Oh to be Queen ;)

Yeah, you would make a good Tony Blair :p :p :p :p

Please all as i am saying is that we should, as dog lovers, be doing somthing about this. I do understand that it is hard to define who is a puppy farmer, but maybe people need to be made more aware of the people that they are buying from, and surly there must be lots of health problems in these dogs. The lady who baught the ddb pup, well i wish you could see it. i don't believe for one minuite that it is a full ddb, and she was charged £900 for this dog that looks like a dodgy boxer, and it doesn't look very healthy. I just think this is very sad and wants stopping.

Claudia,  I dont think anyone on this board would disagree with you - puppy farming is bad.  However,  to define it is not possible.  It would simply not work to bring in a lw to stop commercial breeding of dogs - because this would mean that everyone who makes even the smallest profit from a litter would be effected.  What most of us would llike to see done is a) the existing legislation to be enforced more thoroughly by the Local Authorities to bring the worst of the farms/mills up to regulatory levels and b) to ban the sale of dogs through pet shops etc.  This would effectively  cut off the puppy farms main outlets, so reducing the profitability, and might make the puppy farmers move on to something else (chicken, perhaps!)
bye
Gwen

And do remember that when we, in our small way, try to discourage people from breeding for the wrong reasons, we are accused of being rude and offensive etc. :(

Well said Fillis.  I'm happy to help those with a genuine interest in their chosen breeds but will not help or encourage those who are looking for the easy option, or with the "why shouldn't I have a litter, because I want to!" attitude, however well meaning they may be! :p

Trouble is, when I do just that I'm accused of being "Abrasive" by a guest and in need of manners by a member and hostile by another (Who on another post appears to have spent all day arguing in a VERY forceful manner!) Makes me wonder why I bother at all.

Regards, John

You bother John, because you care!!

Like all of us who try to discourage people from breeding without having done their homework, or who are breeding for the sake of it, if we are able to deter one person then maybe its worth it.

xx

I think there is a difference between being rude and abrasive and being forceful ...IMHO :)

Often it's in the interpretation, and the size of the chip on the reader's shoulder. ;) :)

The definition of a puppy farmer?

Anyone who breeds more litters than you do!

:p :p :p

Whoosh!!!!!!!!!

I don't think so dear ;)

Oh, Sorry Melodysk :) I had not realised you were intending to be <<rude and abrasive and being forceful ...IMHO >>

:p