Surely the public awareness, and thus effectiveness, of this educational leaflet goes hand in hand with the public awareness of the Dog Advisory Council?

I dont think i would be controversial say "who are they"?
Do many members of the general public know??

Genuine question.

....this is way too long and unnecessarily detailed and most puppy buyers will have given up after the first few pages !! - the puppy information pack suffers form the same fault - neither will be used if they are not more user friendly.

it could all be reduced to one main statement

Only buy from breeders who are members of a recognised quality assurance scheme

Now if the DAC got together with the Kc and made the present ABS as watertight' as possible and included all the 'stuff' that's on this New Puppy Buyers guide as mandatory requirements of membership then just think how easy and CLEAR a message that would be for puppy buyers to understand - make such a scheme a byword for quality and promote it with car stickers, posters and badges and there would be no need for an over complicated over prescriptive website.

And can I ask - were any breeders involved in the compilation of the Puppy Information Pack ? - It smacks of something put together with no real concept of the realities involved

Thanks very much Bijou, for taking the time to look at and comment on the site. Even though your comments are critical, they are certainly really useful in improving the site.

On the length: There was much discussion in DAC about whether the site was too long, but in the end the view prevailed that anyone who has not bought a dog or lived with dogs needs quite a lot of information. If we get the site right we hope we can persuade people to spend fifteen minutes on advice for a decision that will influence the next ten to fifteen years of their lives.
But trying to find a way to an easier to use site is something that I am very conscious of. I'm already discussing an option route through a shorter site, and as you will have seen, the current site is already available in topic based "chunks".

On the Assured Breeders Scheme. First, simply telling people to use the ABS will not help them understand what responsibilities they take on when they buy a dog: and the entire first half of the site is devoted to this.

Also, remember that the Assured Breeders Scheme at the moment covers only a very few percent of the puppies that are born in Britain. Many puppy buyers simply aren't interested in pedigree dogs, and they need to be able to recognise good and bad breeders as well. Our web site hopes to include the 70% or so of dogs that are outside the Kennel Club registered population. We would like to drive up the quality of all breeders rather than leaving many out in the cold. And whilst ABS is the best scheme we have, there is still work to be done on policing. The Dog Advisory Council and the Kennel Club certainly talk to each other about this and other matters, but we (Dog Advisory Council) have only limited influence over KC actions: and KC organise ABS.

Finally on who supplied information for the site and the print outs (I'm guessing that you are referring to the health and socialisation printouts as a puppy pack). The Advisory Council has a blend of membership including members who are there solely as dog owners and breeders (and including one breeder who has acted as health co-ordinator for eight breed clubs), and members who are there primarily for their veterinary or genetic expertise, their expertise in aspects of law as it applies to dogs, in rehoming and the canine charities or in dog behaviour. We also circulated the site around an expert panel on dog breeding for comment before releasing.

You may feel that we are setting the bar too high: but you will note that many of the suggested requirements operate on a "three strikes and you're out" principle. We don't suggest looking elsewhere until you have seen three negatives in these areas, although for some other requirements we suggest that you walk away immediately if they are not supplied.

If you are talking about the AWF/RSPCA puppy contract, then our input into this was less direct. We recommend it, but would be willing to look at and perhaps endorse other contracts, if they reach appropriate standards.

I am afraid I lost interest (and the advice lost credibility) when it asked if the breeder only allows pups to leave at 8 weeks or older.

Many many professionals (in all areas) believe that 7 weeks is the optimum time.

So I read no further.

Years and years and years ago it used to be said that ideally pups should be 10 to 12 weeks old before leaving the mother. Various reasons were given for this.

Would be interesting to know when it changed and what the reason for the changed advice was.

Here it is common for pups to be sold when 6 weeks old and a lot of them appear to be a bit younger than that.

I tend to agree with Bijou that a simpler system linked to a nationally recognised and agreed standard for those breeding would be the ideal situation. The only negative point (for me) is the involvement of the RSPCA as a 'patron' organisation of the Advisory Council. As someone who works 24/7 in dog welfare (running a rescue) nothing would put me off more than the involvement of the appalling RSPCA.

Mick

If you bear in mind most people haven't heard of the dog advisory council, how will you get people to read your leaflet in the first place?

but by telling them to ONLY buy from this one section of 'assured' breeders you leave the questioning as to their 'readiness' for a puppy to experienced ethical breeders - after all if I as a breeder am undertaking to take back or help rehome any dog I've bred ( and this should be a scheme requirement ) I'm going to be REALLY careful to place my pups with people who know what they are taking on - and this has the added bonus of being breed specific - someone who may well be suitable and 'prepared' for an easy going breed may be a disaster as the owner of a high drive reactive one - experienced breeders will know their breeds inside out and know the questions to ask.

well then open up the scheme to all ( both pedigree and cross breeders )and make the high standards the same for all those that apply to join - at the moment very few breeders of cross breeds do ANY testing or issue contracts etc ( and to be honest breeders of working dogs lag behind on this too ! ) by making an assurance scheme open to all this would raise the bar across all sectors of dog breeding.

Work with the KC on amending their present existing scheme and make it accessible for all - then employ a good advertising agency to 'market' it - at present puppy buyers are confused about what makes a good breeder and how to find one - make it EASY for them instead of constantly over egging the pudding and expecting them to wade through pages and pages of 'advice' !