Little Rascals Pets Ltd

Little Rascals Pets Ltd. Brant Broughton, Lincs

This is unbelievable, Little Rascals imported from the Republic of Ireland 399 puppies between December 2014 and October 2015.  Yet N Kesteven Council who are responsible for issuing Little Rascals their pet shop licence under the Pet Animals Act 1951 have not placed extra conditions on their standard licence conditions to take account the importation or selling of puppies from the premises.  The Council appeared to be oblivious to what I made reference to when questioned on this important issue. 

A Council spokesperson advised me that it is the responsibility of APAH (imports) and Trading Standards, then added the transporters of puppies are checked at the border!  Wrong it is only APAH and Trading Standards responsibility to the delivery point, the puppies’ arrival at Little Rascals.  The border checks of vehicles leaving the Republic of Ireland by ferry are spot checks only; there is no static border control.  Trading Standards does not check each and every consignment of puppies entering their destination in the UK as animal welfare has a low priority and the low risk factor of rabies from the Republic of Ireland does not make it cost effective to do so.

Under the pet shop licence conditions from the point of arrival of imported puppies at their destination (Little Rascals) it  is the Councils responsibility to ensure that every consignment of puppies details are entered into the Animals Register by the licence holder (Little Rascals) as part of the pet shop licence conditions.  The puppies’ details, where the licence holder purchased the puppies from and sold to must be entered.   The Register is open for inspection by Council officials by request and should be inspected as routine at the time of the pet shop licence renewal once a year. 

When I questioned a spokesperson at N Kesteven Council about this they could not confirm this occurred and the details of imported puppies were listed in the Animal Register, stating yet again that it was it was Trading Standards responsibility.    If this is the case then N Kesteven Council has no traceability of any of these 399 puppies once they had entered or left Little Rascals premises?  If so it is unacceptable for the following reasons.

A pet shop licence enables Little Rascals to sell puppies to both individual purchasers and to other dealers and pet shops. Without the puppies details entered into the Animal Register the Council does not know what has happened to the 399 puppies that were imported into Little Rascals over this 10 month period in question.  The same applies to APAH and Trading Standards.  So where did these puppies go, were they all sold during the 10 month period or soon after?  Were they sold to purchasers who visited Little Rascals premises, were they sold to other dealers or pet shops?  The Council were not able to clarify even though they renewed Little Rascals pet shop licence only last week. 

Why hasn’t the Council realized that Little Rascals was importing puppies into their premises over the past year and possibly longer and adjusted or added extra conditions to Little Rascals pet shop licence conditions to accommodate imported puppies to ensure they were entered in the Animals Register which is part of the licence conditions? 

Just looking at N Kesteven web site under their pet shop licence conditions proves that they have not taken this into account it refers to ‘stocking densities’ it states ‘puppies up to 12 weeks of age’.  Imported puppies cannot be imported and sold until over 15 weeks of age as they cannot have their rabies vaccination until 12 weeks of age then must wait for 22 days before transportation.  Why hasn’t N Kesteven Council noted that their pet shop licence conditions are not applicable to cover the criteria for imported puppies sold on their licensed premises?  

This is a massive loophole that is being exploited by puppy traders.  It can allow the unscrupulous to bring underage puppies into the UK and sell them under the nose of the Council by not stating their correct age.  No one is physically checking the puppies against their paperwork when they arrive at the ferry leaving the ROI or arriving at their destination in the UK. Too much trust is placed on all involved in the puppy trade to be honest unfortunately due to the high profits and quick turnover puppy trading has become an exceedingly lucrative business that are prepared to exploit the EU Legislation Balai Directive and compromise animal welfare.

If anyone reading the above in the last year has seen Little Rascals advertising for sale puppies over 15 weeks of age or purchased a puppy with a Passport from these premises or know of other premises such as dealers of pet shops that have been supplied with puppies by Little Rascals Pets Ltd I would like to hear from you please email puppyalert@btinternet.com

On Little Rascals web site they refer to their business of selling puppies as dog breeders of pedigree and designer cross breed puppies.  This is true they are but what they fail to announce alongside licensed dog breeder to keep about 200 dogs on their premises and are a licensed pet shop in addition to the puppies they breed they ‘buy in’ and import puppies to resell under their Pet Shop Licence. 

The Council is exceedingly irresponsible by not ensuring that they are fully aware of the activities of dogs breeders and pet shop licence holders within their area, it is too easy to tick boxes each year and automatically renew a licence, rather than to ensure that animal welfare is not being compromised by allowing premises to have too many dogs and puppies on the premises unaccounted for, Little Rascals is one such example there are many others.      

Consignments of puppies imported into Little Rascals Pets Ltd from the Republic of Ireland.

02.12.2014 = 59 puppies

04.12.2014 = 14 puppies

05.12.2015 = 33 puppies

05.03.2015 = 47 puppies

05.03.2015 = 03 puppies

31.03.2015 = 11 puppies

02.05.2015 = 33 puppies

02.05.2015 = 17 puppies

23.05.2015 = 28 puppies

18.06.2015 = 39 puppies

18.06.2015 = 08 puppies

30.07.2015 = 42 puppies

09.09.2015 = 41 puppies

10.10.2015 = 24 puppies

TOTAL = 399 puppies from 2^nd December 2014 to 10^th October 2015. 

 

 

Dogs4Us

In the recent week Dogs4 Us were highlighted by the media, Manchester Evening News who wrote about  Manchester United footballers who in recent years purchased puppies from the Dogs4Us pet store.   Manchester Evening News should not be proud of highlighting celebs and footballers buying puppies from a pet shop, it only shows a lack of knowledge and awareness by the footballers and celebs in the correct way to purchasing a puppy.  

Pet shops and dealers in puppies are not the ideal way to purchase a puppy because it is not possible to see the puppy interacting with the dam or to speak personally with the breeder.  It is very important to ask the breeder about health screening (that reputable breeders undertake) in conjunction with the Kennel Club and BVA screening schemes for known hereditary conditions in pedigree breeds of dogs and the prospective purchaser to view the premises where the puppies were born. This is not possible when buying puppies from pet shops and dealers, a very valid reason why they should be avoided.

Having looked at Dogs4Us web site it appears they cannot make their mind up as to whether they purchase from licensed or unlicensed breeders as the contradict themselves.  But regardless of this, if a pet shops source of puppies is from Wales, it is unlikely to make any difference, due to the poor conditions found in both licensed and unlicensed premises, something that has been highlighted through the media and campaigning groups, the connection between irresponsible commercial dog breeding, dealers and pet shops.  If Southern Ireland is the source then as yet there is no requirement for the licensing for dog breeders so I will leave that to your imagination as to the conditions and the plight of the dogs and the puppies they produce.  N Ireland like S Ireland have some exceedingly large commercial dog breeders who have hundreds of dogs in agriculture sheds (just like Beili Bedwi and many others in Carmarthenshire,Wales) selling all their puppies to dealers and pet shops.  A commodity on a conveyor belt system of mass produced puppies from weary dams and sires who are used repeatedly  to serve the needs of the buying public. This is the sickening puppy trade.

If Manchester Evening News had any concern for animal welfare it would not be highlighting celebs and footballers cuddling their puppies purchased from a pet shop but would engage an undercover investigator to trace the source of where the pet shops and dealers buy their puppies from.  They may get a rude awaking to the reality of the pet shop puppy and the plight of the breeding dogs instead of glitz and glamour of celebs holding puppies and cute puppies displayed inside glass fronted cages in pet superstores, it would be dark sheds, stench, deprivation and suffering. This is not what the public sees (unless anti puppy farm groups highlight through the media) and it certainly will not be what the dealers and pet shops want the public to know when they charge massive over inflated prices for a cute puppy.  The public are getting duped and it is time they realised it.

Maybe publicly Dogs4Us may like to explain what does their vet actually check when  the vet examins the puppies, when they say 'good physical condition' and '6 month guarentee'?  The vet can only give a very basic health check such as heart, eyes and ears of the puppy.  The 6 month guarantee is meaningless because anyone purchasing a puppy from a seller who is in the business of selling puppies is covered by the Sale of Goods Act 1979 the same as it they had  purchased any other commodity such as TV, car of washing machine.

What is the 7 day settling in period they offer?  The consumer has the right to return, replace or repair under the Sale of Goods Act 1979,  therefore what are they offering other than what is the consumers right under consumer law with or without their guarentee?

If the purchaser does not receive details of health screening of the dam and sire of the puppy because they have not been screened under the BVA, KC schemes.

The purchasers does not receive a pedigree or registration document that can be authenticated providing the puppy purchaser the assurance that the puppy they purchased was bred by the named person on the paperwork.  This means they also cannot always check where the puppy was bred and by whom therefore they only have the sellers word that the puppy they are purchasing was not bred on a puppy farm.

What is a puppy farm? There is no legal definition of a puppy farm.  A puppy farm can only be described   by an individuals interpretation of what they envisage a puppy farm to be. A puppy farm as far as my own interpretation is that it is a dog breeding establishment that breeds for commercial gain and sells puppies to dealers and pet shops, they maybe licensed or not licensed it does not make an difference, they are mass producing puppies for the puppy trade. 

Dogs4Us on their site say 'a very small percentage of people in the UK are trying to discredit our good name by linking us with puppy farms.  This is utter nonsense and does not represent what Dogs4Us is about'.  Then maybe Dogs4Us need to explain when they buy in and resell puppies where they actually do purchase their puppies from that can offer them a constant supply of puppies 365 days of the year if it is not the puppy farmer/commercial dog breeder?


        

Beili Bedw Planning Decision

Going away I missed the site inspection on 30th August and the decision made by the Councillors on the planning committee of Carmarthenshire County Council for the retrospective planning application for the change of use of an agriculture shed as dog breeding kennels at Beili Bedw, Llanllwni, Pencader, Carmarthenshire, SA39 9DP.
There was no surprise to hear that all but two of the Councillors followed the Head of Planning recommendation for approval.   Here is a link to the minutes of the planning meeting

Having read the minutes it is very easy to spot where the fault lies and why a situation such as this has developed. Firstly, there has been no attempt since 1994 (planning permission for 9 dogs) by the owner of the farm to to apply for planning permission for dog breeding even though he had increased the numbers of dogs on the premises to 196 (number licensed for).  Neither has there been any question asked by licensing, they have just allowed the numbers of dogs to increase and at times more than the figure given on the licence.

The application last year to increase the size of this agriculture shed which did not require planning permission due to the application stating for agriculture use for sheep and agriculture implements but this shed was very quickly adapted and fitted out with panels and automatic feeding and drinking vessels for dog breeding.  One surely has to question whether this was the intention all along.  Fortunately, it was noted and planning enforcement were advised but they lacked the will to enforce legislation and chose to request the owner to submit a planning application, not content with one application another planning application for the original barn was sneaked in too for change of use.

It is stated in the minutes that the applicant accepted that the failure to obtain planning consent was an error on his part as he believed the licence to be sufficient. The words of a farmer, a business person, with a wife working for the local authority, it is difficult to take this explanation and excuse for none compliance seriously.

So what is the situation now, sadly very little different than before for the dogs.  However for highlighting the premises through the media and the operation of dog breeding on this massive scale at least enlightened the public of their involvement in batttery dog farming, breeding of dogs and producing puppies on a conveyor belt system to supply to dealers.  The irresponsibility of Councils in allowing premises to grow to this size  knowing that they have inadequate staff to maintain a high level of animal welfare. In the last inspection report animal welfare concerns were noted but that was a matter for licensing , of course that may have to wait until the next yearly inspection as it is unlikely that any attention has been given in the mean time, just another case filed away.

But more eyes have been opened and the people of Wales are beginning to be aware of this and other clandestine operations involving dog breeding in Wales, the supply of puppies to dealers and pet shops.  Not all believe that this type of diversification is justifiable.  Puppy Alert was responsible a number of years ago for halting the grant funded scheme through Farming Connect to provide farmers with grants for kennelling to go into dog breeding. Thankfully the scheme was halted after only two grants were given oddly enough to two farmers already involved in dog breeding, which should never have been considered as diversification.

With so many more eyes watching and listening, we will be aware and ready if it is thought justifiable to oppose a planning application or a renewal of a dog breeding licence.  Attention will be paid to the renewal of these premises licence.  Hopefully new legislation which is yet to reach the statute book may discourage some breeders when they have to employ staff,  these premises will need at least eight full time members of staff and more with whelping bitches and puppies.


     

Councils Failings

Councils are responsible for licensing dog breeders, dealers and pet shops premises, yet many dog breeders operate commercially and licensed but do not have planning permission, whilst many others operate unlicensed and without planning permission.  This is particularly noticeable in Wales. 

When licences are granted some Councils fail to ensure that dog breeders, dealers and pet shops adhere to their licence conditions, even when matters of concern relating to animal welfare are drawn to their attention. Failure to use their power of enforcement and allowing dog breeders to continue to operate, leaves dogs and puppies to suffer in poor conditions.  Many Councils are lacking in controlling the numbers of dogs allowed for dog breeding on the premises, this results in many dogs living in inadequate conditions to rear and raise their puppies, which again causes suffering.  Premises are allowed to operate, often with just a husband and wife team, without Councils ensuring that extra staff are employed to care for the dogs as well as raising  litters of puppies which is often an impossible task when the number of dogs far exceed the numbers of hands available particularly at whelping time.

Some Councils even fail to ensure that dog breeders, dealers and pet shops comply with current legislation such Breeding and Sale of Dogs (welfare) Act 1999, Animal Welfare Act and the Pet Animals Act 1951 (amended 1991).

Dog Breeding Licences

Have read with interest the Blog by Safe Pets UK on the subject of dog breeding licences and the numbers of dogs a person should be allowed to be licensed for.  They asked, shouldn't there be a ceiling on the number of dogs a person can be licensed for, and the suggested figure was 50 breeding bitches.  Why the figure of  50 should be redeemed acceptable I cannot imagine, as a person with 50 breeding bitches would still be considered a commercial breeder, possibly selling puppies to dealers and pets shops as they do now.  If commercial dog breeding is to be better regulated as it must, then the main purpose behind the owning of a large number of dogs for breeding must be banned.  Most breeders (but not all) that own a large number of dogs for breeding do so to to supply puppies to dealers and pet shops.  Therefore us, as campaigners must persistently provide Governments with good, factual, sound evidence that animal welfare is seriously compromised by allowing the puppy trade to continue.

A statement written by the blogger of Safe Pets UK blog said the following and I quote:

'We are just finishing  Freedom of Information enquiries regarding the issue of dog breeding licences by various councils around the country.  It has long been thought that the majority of the puppy farmers are in Carmarthenshire and Ceredigion, Wales and thousands of sick, fearful and aggressive puppies are sold from there all over the UK.  Our study aims to prove for the first time that the problem in those areas is real.   End of quote

My goodness, 'Our study aims to prove for the first time that the problem in those areas is real' this information is not news and to say it is the first time is incorrect, those of us that have campaigned for years as far back as 1991 with Puppy Watch and in recent times the Dogs Trust, RSPCA, Puppy Love Campaigns, Hope UK, Spec, Animal Aid, Nature Watch, the  Kennel Club, Puppy Farming Aware and Puppy Alert have all sang from the same hymn sheet and saying that Wales is the centre of the puppy farming supply trade of irresponsibly bred puppies followed by Eire.  Puppy Alert and Puppy Love Campaigns have for years received information under FOI confirming this fact and have written about it often.  But unfortunately whilst Governments and MPs, AMs place their heads in the sand and quote the Breeding and Sale of Dogs (Welfare) Act 1999, the Pet Animals Act 1951/91 and Animal Welfare Act as being adequate to control the excesses of dog breeding and the selling of puppies from pet shops, rather than accepting the visual and factual evidence supplied by campaigning groups both large and small as proof nothing will change.

We all have a voice  including Safe Pets UK who hopefully will continue to highlight the puppy trade.  We must all work with one aim in mind to prevent the sale of puppies from dealers and pet shops thus reducing the need for large commercial breeding establishments to operate. 

Updates

Another day has passed and the waiting continues.  Carmarthenshire planning department are still waiting for further information relating to the retrospective/change of use planning application for Beili Bedw.  In the meantime 196 dogs languish in these barns, remember the premises, with just the owner (wife works for the Authority) to look after 1,000 sheep as well as 196 dogs and litters of puppies.
What is the thinking behind Carmarthenshire licensing department  when they have re-issued a dog breeders licence each year for these premises when they know there is only one person responsible for so many dogs?  Common sense appears to be none existent.  Many breeding bitches will be expecting puppies, others rearing a litter and some puppies requiring weaning.  Without the everyday basic tasks of feeding, watering and cleaning of the dogs living and sleeping quarters.  Where can the time be found to check the health condition of every dog, grooming and exercise, there is not any time and for this reason animal welfare has to be seriously compromised.
When all the relevant information is received by the planning department what will their decision be?  Will they take account of the 900 plus objections to this planning, change of use application or will they (because the licensing department have already licensed the premises) be swayed by this irresponsible decision and accept that one person can care for 196 dogs, litters puppies and 1,000 sheep by giving planning permission too?  We all wait in anticipation and fear for the welfare of the breeding bitches and their puppies confined in this large battery dog farm. Carmarthenshire County Council have as yet not shown that animal welfare takes a high priority, can we really expect this to change?  I certainly hope so, these premises are one step to far and if agreed will set a precedent for even more battery dog farms (as if there are not enough with large numbers of dogs already) operating in Wales. I despair of the lack of integrity of those who are responsible for making decisions that allow premises such as this to exist.