Educated a co-worker on pet stores

ORIGINAL: timsdat
You know the US is a really big country and we have much more pressing needs that dog inspectors and we really don't a unenployment problem here.

Well that was patronising, and yes for the record you do have an unemployment problem. Almost every western country does.

And as a last comment, to properly analyze a situation you must remove all emotion when examining it otherwise any results or observations you come up with be tainted because of that emotion.

Sorry, but I love dogs. I will always be passionate about their welfare, and no a passionate argument does not discount itself just because there is feeling behind it. Any well-expressed argument is valid. You don't agree, that's fine, but saying that my argument doesn't count just because I obviously feel strongly is a cheap shot, and pretty much indicates that that you have no counter argument.

By the the way demand does control supply. That is the way things work in this country.

Then, as I said, if you view dogs as a commodity, put them on the stock exchange.

Well that was patronising, and yes for the record you do have an unemployment problem. Almost every western country does.

 
Our unenplyment rate is currently 4.6%.  When taking into account job churn this is considered pretty much full enployment.
 

Sorry, but I love dogs. I will always be passionate about their welfare, and no a passionate argument does not discount itself just because there is feeling behind it. Any well-expressed argument is valid. You don't agree, that's fine, but saying that my argument doesn't count just because I obviously feel strongly is a cheap shot, and pretty much indicates that that you have no counter argument.

I love them too but if you don't remove the emotions you remove all hope of a finding workable resonable solutions fade.  Heck if you let emotions dictate the pit bull situation then all pits would be banned. 
 
I'm sorry that you don't like a objective analysis but so be it.
 
 
 

They need small dog puppies in Broward Co Fl. They are importing puppies there. Can you arrange a solution to meet that need.

here is what came up in a search for small dog puppies in my area on petfinder. i dont personally know all the rescues list, but i am sure many of them would be willing to arrange transport.

et.Breed=&et.Age=baby&et.Size=S&et.Sex=&location=29687>http://search.petfinder.com/search/search.cgi?pet.Animal=Dog&et.Breed=&et.Age=baby&et.Size=S&et.Sex=&location=29687

edit: added link.

ORIGINAL: timsdat

Well that was patronising, and yes for the record you do have an unemployment problem. Almost every western country does.

Our unenplyment rate is currently 4.6%. When taking into account job churn this is considered pretty much full enployment.

Sorry, but I love dogs. I will always be passionate about their welfare, and no a passionate argument does not discount itself just because there is feeling behind it. Any well-expressed argument is valid. You don't agree, that's fine, but saying that my argument doesn't count just because I obviously feel strongly is a cheap shot, and pretty much indicates that that you have no counter argument.

I love them too but if you don't remove the emotions you remove all hope of a finding workable resonable solutions fade. Heck if you let emotions dictate the pit bull situation then all pits would be banned.

I'm sorry that you don't like a objective analysis but so be it.

Sorry, but no. You have ZERO right to tell me what I do and do not like, thanks. And again, patronising...lovely.

If you remove emotions you get people who can't take into account the best interests of a living, breathing animal. You need to be able to empathise when it comes to a creature with feelings. Are you telling me that people who act as advocates for abused children should not be passionate about their jobs because it destroys credibility? And your pit bull example doesn't fly, since just as many passionate people advocate for them as against them.

"pretty much" full employment. OK. Pretty much is good enough, if you say so.

Sorry, but no. You have ZERO right to tell me what I do and do not like, thanks. And again, patronising...lovely.

If you remove emotions you get people who can't take into account the best interests of a living, breathing animal. You need to be able to empathise when it comes to a creature with feelings. Are you telling me that people who act as advocates for abused children should not be passionate about their jobs because it destroys credibility? And your pit bull example doesn't fly, since just as many passionate people advocate for them as against them.

 
When I say you I mean the collective use of you not You personally.
 
and yes I still believe that you can't use emotion in analysis. 
 
I have a friend that used to work for Family services and she had to quit because her emotions were getting in the was of objectivity.  It was affecting her job in a negative way. 
 
Also if state law didn't prohibit the banning of pits they would already be illegal in this county.  Every time there is a news story that fans the emotions for banning the breed.  The county AC director is dead set against them and there is a discussion of how they can get rid of these dogs in the county commissioners meetings every time there is another story printed of an attack.
 
 

Still trying to follow along, believe it or not! []

The numbers analysis was run to show that s/n decreases supply, but raises the question about a persistent demand, and how that will get supplied.

If I understand correctly, sham's analysis supports s/n as a way to reduce the overall market for dogs - that reducing supply also has the effect of reducing demand. Janet wondered how cheap import puppy supplies might influence that.

If I understand correctly, timsdat's in favor of not fighting market realities with expensive legislation and enforcement. Rather, dollars spent on voluntary s/n would have more of an impact on the overall market. Also, we'd be wise to focus energy on supplying demand with choices we like, to stave off the rise of cheap import puppies. timsdat, is your position that the system is basically sound, except for the special interest groups that muck it up? Or is there information in the analysis that would address the ability of puppy mills to mistreat animals, and sell unhealthy ones? Would you advocate for more states to have lemon laws like you've got in Florida? That sounds pretty helpful, but doesn't address the imports, right?

I'd like to see more lemon laws as well, although I *do* think they increase the cost of puppies, overall, and even the best breeding still has the chance of producing problems when it comes to polygenic conditions like hip dysplasia. One of the big test sof a breeder, IMO, is how they handle things when they produce a pet with a problem. (My preferred response that I like to see in a breeder? They'll replace the puppy when one is available after getting proof that the unhealthy pup is spayed or neutered, or refund the purchase price- buyer's choice. I don't think it's fair to require them to pay all the vet bills as long as they've done the appropriate health testing and done their best to produce a healthy dog. Sometimes stuff happens, and puppies aren't something that rolls off an assembly line with a 10 minute quality check on every random numbered one.) 

I think that if it becomes standard that to breed dogs, you do it responsibly (health test, prove in some venue outside of your own backyard- whether it's conformation, herding trials, whatever, but there's an objective titling criteria for your dogs- and I'd prefer show and performance titles, but let's just say a responsible breeder proves their dogs in SOMETHING, s/n of pet quality dogs, screen owners heavily, always take back dogs), we'd see a decrease in BYBs (because Jane Q Public is going to hold out for that responsibly bred puppy instead of buying the puppy from the lady who bred Fluffy to Muffin down the street because they're both just SO CUTE and they have papers. If Fluffy's mommy gets stuck with the puppies and gets flack for having been a crappy breeder from her friends, relatives, and neighbors (who, in the current BYB friendly climate, would probably ooh and ah over the puppies and not say much else), she probably won't do it again.). Without BYBs to provide breeding stock to other BYBs, that number should slowly decrease- some would still buy from puppy millls/commercial breeders, but with the public pressure not to breed anything un health tested or untitled, they would have trouble placing their puppies. At the same time, you might get more people breeding on a very small scale basis- people for whom breeding wasn't necessarily their be-all of dogdom, but they have a nice titled dog and they want a pup out of her so they find a reasonably compatible stud by contacting their breeder and anyone elsethey know in the breed (and they're titling, so they'll know people in their breed who also title their dogs.). I suspect that would spring up to supply the demand formerly filled by BYB puppies, while being a step up from the BYBs becaue they'd health test and screen. All of it? Nope. There's definately demand that SHOULD go unsupplied, but I don't think it's necessarily a majority.

Basically? I think things would balance out. I think the price of a puppy might go up some- but it might not- I think it would just take out the bottom 25% of the market, the BYBs who sell dogs in the paper for "$250, papers, m/f s/w 8weeks must go"

ORIGINAL: Ixas_girl

 



For example, why do so many people want to buy "purebreds", instead of the sweet mutts down at the shelter? Hmmm. Could it have something to do with status? There are status dogs that go through the rigorous breeding/homing process. For most people who are unwilling or unable ($1200+ for a mini-schnau!) to go through that process, but still desire a status animal, "other breeders" is where they go, not the shelter. Am I understanding this correctly?

I have one rescue and one purebred from a good breeder.

I have seen far more holier-than-thou attitudes amoung those with rescue dogs than those with purebreds.
 
Jack as a status dog?[sm=rotfl.gif] Yep, because nothing says sexy status symbol like cleaning up blood from broken open tails, dealing with ingested forign objects, and realizing with horror that the object your retriever is proudly carrying down the beach is a used diaper.

Thanks, but my dog is *not* a staus symbol, and to suggest so is insulting to both Jack and DH and I.  He is a living, breathing creature whom I would take a bullet for, and because we decided to go with a good breeder does not make him worth anything less than a shelter dog.

One of the arguments I see here is that there is a demand for puppymills, so they are serving a purpose and should be left alone.

You know, there is a huge demand for children in the sex industry, and the laws against it can be really hard to enforce, and those involved are filling a void in the market, so should that just be left along too?

One of the arguments I see here is that there is a demand for puppymills, so they are serving a purpose and should be left alone.

You know, there is a huge demand for children in the sex industry, and the laws against it can be really hard to enforce, and those involved are filling a void in the market, so should that just be left along too?

 
O come on comparing children to dogs.  Please.
 
Anyway there are laws on the books concerning the proper operation of commercial breeders at the Federal, State and Local levels.  If you know of someone who is violating the laws turn them in. 
 
By the way the definition of a puppymill I have heard is this.  "Anyone who has a breeding operation that I don't like the way they are doing it."
Do you agree????
 
 
 
 

Sally, was Jack an impulse purchase at a mall pet shop for you? If not, then why quote me, then claim insult, when I was referring to "those" buyers who support puppy mills by buying in pet shops? If you take the time to read the whole post of mine that you quoted from, you'll see I'm not making judgments, but asking questions. (For example, "I haven't said that papered purebred breeders are bad are wrong, I'm simply puzzling out pieces of the industry. What's bad about that?")

I thought, by nature of the title of the thread, and the fact that we have a sticky in this section, there was agreement that buying from pet stores supports bad breeding practices. But given how much indignation's been expressed over my speculating about pet shop consumers, and why they prefer purebreds to shelter dogs, it's become obvious that many posters here DO buy from pet shops, and their feelings have been hurt.

For those of you who buy from pet shops, that are offended at my wondering about your motivations, I am truly sorry. But, I believe Bradley has something he'd like you to see:

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000
perhaps you need to take a look at this web site..http://stoppuppymills.org/

maybe seeing the pictures many puppy mill dogs have to endure for their whole lives will be helpful?

ORIGINAL: DPU

But do always keep in mind the destiny of the pet shop dog that doesn't get sold.  They too deserving saving.

 
Do you mean someone should actually BUY these dogs in the name of some nobler cause?  Say it ain't so.

I think that if it becomes standard that to breed dogs, you do it responsibly (health test, prove in some venue outside of your own backyard- whether it's conformation, herding trials, whatever, but there's an objective titling criteria for your dogs- and I'd prefer show and performance titles, but let's just say a responsible breeder proves their dogs in SOMETHING,

 
You know the truth be told the majority of people just want a healthy dog that is somewhat behaved and looks like the breed they desire.  They really don't care about this and that.  There are those of us that are looking for more out of our pet and we know how and where to get these dogs and people that breed specifically for that.  Think about it some if the characteristics of certain breeds strongly ingrained in that dog could drive the average owner nuts.  While it is really cute to see a sheltie herding children from room to room it could get annoying to the average person.
 

ORIGINAL: Ixas_girl

Sally, was Jack an impulse purchase at a mall pet shop for you? If not, then why quote me, then claim insult, when I was referring to "those" buyers who support puppy mills by buying in pet shops? If you take the time to read the whole post of mine that you quoted from, you'll see I'm not making judgments, but asking questions. (For example, "I haven't said that papered purebred breeders are bad are wrong, I'm simply puzzling out pieces of the industry. What's bad about that?")

I thought, by nature of the title of the thread, and the fact that we have a sticky in this section, there was agreement that buying from pet stores supports bad breeding practices. But given how much indignation's been expressed over my speculating about pet shop consumers, and why they prefer purebreds to shelter dogs, it's become obvious that many posters here DO buy from pet shops, and their feelings have been hurt.

For those of you who buy from pet shops, that are offended at my wondering about your motivations, I am truly sorry. But, I believe Bradley has something he'd like you to see:

ORIGINAL: cyclefiend2000
perhaps you need to take a look at this web site..http://stoppuppymills.org/

maybe seeing the pictures many puppy mill dogs have to endure for their whole lives will be helpful?

Ixas_girl---"For example, why do so many people want to buy "purebreds", instead of the sweet mutts down at the shelter? Hmmm. Could it have something to do with status?"

"There are status dogs that go through the rigorous breeding/homing process."

"Did my exploration of statusizing, regarding reasons people might buy puppy mill/byb pups make you somehow feel accused of being selfish or status seeking?"


Gee, I wonder where I could have gotten that idea?  If that was NOT what you meant then your delivery could use some serious work.......

ORIGINAL: timsdat

One of the arguments I see here is that there is a demand for puppymills, so they are serving a purpose and should be left alone.

You know, there is a huge demand for children in the sex industry, and the laws against it can be really hard to enforce, and those involved are filling a void in the market, so should that just be left along too?

O come on comparing children to dogs.  Please.

Anyway there are laws on the books concerning the proper operation of commercial breeders at the Federal, State and Local levels.  If you know of someone who is violating the laws turn them in. 

By the way the definition of a puppymill I have heard is this.  "Anyone who has a breeding operation that I don't like the way they are doing it."
Do you agree????

I think its a perfectly valid comparison.  I realize that you are on this "Dogs are not people and therefore do not count" kick, but I do not agree with you, and you are just going to have to be OK with that.

And no, I do not agree.  There are plenty of individuals who breed dogs in a manner that I do not agree with and I do not consider them puppymills.