"Pedigree dogs exposed"

jenns

By breeding that dog, the breeder has now created an animal that needs a home. If the breeder didn't breed, there would be no dog needing a home. 

If the irresponsible owner, BYB, or puppy miller hadn't bred their dogs, there would be no dogs needing homes, either.  The difference is the responsible/ethical breeders have homes who seek the kinds of dogs they breed, and they support the dogs in those homes for life, plus a plethora of other differences that have already been highlighted in this, and many, threads.

jenns

And people don't accept that buying a dog from a breeder means a dog in resues dies, because they don't WANT to accept it, because they don't want to stop buying or breeding purebreds. 

jenns

And people don't accept that buying a dog from a breeder means a dog in resues dies, because they don't WANT to accept it, because they don't want to stop buying or breeding purebreds. 

Guess I'll just go on being a sinner because a world with no dogs, and that is exactly what would happen if everyone stopped breeding, sounds far more bleak to me than our current world.

jenns

I'm sorry but this is completely non-sensical.  A breeder dog has a right to a good home?   By breeding that dog, the breeder has now created an animal that needs a home. If the breeder didn't breed, there would be no dog needing a home.  And people don't accept that buying a dog from a breeder means a dog in resues dies, because they don't WANT to accept it, because they don't want to stop buying or breeding purebreds.  You don't have to be associated with AR to believe that, when faced with a choice of saving a life or creating a new one, that the former is the kinder thing to do.

Your implication here is that the only solution is to eliminate all dogs, or require that all dogs go into rescue so they can be homed by qualified people. Yes, the breeder dog has a home.  What is wrong with that.  The dog has a home.  You don't have to worry about it.  It has a home. People buying purebred dogs are not in the market for rescue dogs.  If they can not buy what they want from a breeder, they do not head to a rescue.  They wait till they can get what they want from a breeder. The rescue makes the choice to kill the animal.

  "Kind" is not part of the decision.  How is it kind to force a person to take an animal they don't want.  The real unkindness happens when the dog or cat is not rehomed due to a procedure or requirement of the rescue.  That kills animals.  According to HSUS, about 30% of animals in rescue are purebred.  Obviously, if non purebreds were eliminated, rescues could home all their dogs. And realistically, the good breeders have the dogs sold before they hit the ground. 

jenns

Ok, let me ask you something.  Do you feel that taking a stand against dog fighting or child abuse is based on emotionlism?   Well of course it is, our emotions guide our morals.  Without them, everyone would be out for themselves and we would all be like robots.  There would be no bad or good in our society. 

Morals are important, but should not be based on emotions.  Otherwise people who enjoy cruelty would have the moral high ground.  Emotions are unpredictable, and would let everybody decide what is moral to them.  Morals should be based on species survival and should be rational, Emotions are innate, morals are taught. Child abuse is contra survival.  Animal abuse is a lead in to child abuse and other kinds of behavior that are cruel and  contra survival.  Basing morals on emotions leads to things like AR, that are irrational but make somebody happy.  Hopefully, our moral sense is in charge of our emotions and not the other way around.  If our morals were driven by emotions, there is a strong chance that child abuse and dog fighting would still be legal as they are both highly charged emotional events

This has become a waste of time.  You argue based on emotion, not facts,  TV sounds like the logical action to take.

jenns

  And people don't accept that buying a dog from a breeder means a dog in resues dies, because they don't WANT to accept it, because they don't want to stop buying or breeding purebreds.

No, several people have already told you the same thing: we would NOT have gotten ANY dog if not the dog from the breeder.  If I had not purchased Nikon, I would not have a third dog right now.  I am not and was not interested in ANY other dogs and that includes dogs from other litters and/or other breeders.

So basically based on your logic I could say a shelter dog died because I have three dogs and you only have two.  You never adopted a third one so one died.  I currently have 6 pets - 4 are shelter/rescue animals, only 1 was purchased from a breeder.  I volunteered at the animal shelter before I moved too far away to get there before it closes and now I volunteer with breed rescue by pulling dogs from local shelters, providing transportation, helping with vet and boarding costs, and doing home checks (unfortunately we have laws here about how many animals one household can keep and I'm at my limit).  So how many shelter animals have *you* saved and how are *you* helping them?  What are you actually doing?

Or it just only works one way, to fit your agenda....? 

DougB

How is it kind to force a person to take an animal they don't want.

For the hundredth time, it should not be about what people WANT.

DougB

Morals should be based on species survival

No, morals should be based on preventing harm and suffering to others. Yes, the whole concept of morality evolved out of species survival, but I think we differ on our opinion of what constitutes animal abuse.  Breeding animals into distorted shapes and selling them is abuse in my opinion.

DougB

Child abuse is contra survival.  Animal abuse is a lead in to child abuse and other kinds of behavior that are cruel and  contra survival. 

So animal abuse is only wrong because it has the potentional to harm people?

miranadobe

If the irresponsible owner, BYB, or puppy miller hadn't bred their dogs, there would be no dogs needing homes, either.  The difference is the responsible/ethical breeders have homes who seek the kinds of dogs they breed, and they support the dogs in those homes for life, plus a plethora of other differences that have already been highlighted in this, and many, threads.

So if the byb's and puppy mills stopped breeding, then where would all the people who want dogs but do not want shelter dogs go to get their dogs? I would imagine that there would not be nearly enough responsible breeders to supply the entire dog-wanting population.  My point here is, as long as the responsible breeders exist, so will the puppy mills and byb's.  You want to educate people away from these bad breeders and towards the good ones, yet the good ones are few and far between.  Thus creates the market for the bad ones, futhering the cycle of abuse.

jenns

So if the byb's and puppy mills stopped breeding, then where would all the people who want dogs but do not want shelter dogs go to get their dogs? I would imagine that there would not be nearly enough responsible breeders to supply the entire dog-wanting population.  My point here is, as long as the responsible breeders exist, so will the puppy mills and byb's.  You want to educate people away from these bad breeders and towards the good ones, yet the good ones are few and far between.  Thus creates the market for the bad ones, futhering the cycle of abuse.

And yet somehow this is not the fault of irresponsible people who don't do their research, often don't care about health or temperament, and are buying on impulse?

IMO these buyers don't deserve a shelter animal either.

BYBs and mills exist because people still spend thousands on unhealthy dogs with questionable temperaments because taking time to do their research is just too much of an inconvenience.  Great breeders have existed since the dawn of their breeds, but we didn't always have this overpopulation problem, and many other countries don't have it either.

jenns

For the hundredth time, it should not be about what people WANT.

 Most people here have dogs because they WANT them.  It is not right to put dogs in homes that do not match them.  I went through rescue looking for a dog  and could not find what I wanted in a rescue.  It would be worse to get a dog that didn't suit me and then end up rehoming it.  The BEST thing anyone can do is be educated and make smart decisions about their next pet so that less and less dogs enter the shelter system to begin with.  Everyone who is responsible and making sure their animals (whether rescued, bred, or bought) are not ending up in shelters then they're helping. 

 No one ever seems to make any note of the progress that has been made.  You can simply look at the numbers and see how far we've come.  There is no logical reason to ban breeding.  The shelter problem is NOT worse than it's ever been, euths have been steadily declining and by a LOT.  

It gets silly, you can compare what each and every one of us has chosen to do to help homeless animals and I'm sure there's someone that does more.  Does that mean the others don't care?  And why focus on animals when children are dying?  See, it gets ridiculous.  You can always tell someone to do more but in reality we all do as much as we want.  You could do more.  You could have more rescue dogs.  It's just silly to tell people that are HELPING that they aren't doing enough and they don't care.  I know a lot of the people here are involved in either breed rescue or general rescue.  

buying a dog from a breeder means a dog in resues dies

The reason the dog dies is the same reason it ended up in the shelter in the first place -- because someone left it there. For every dog in the shelter, there's an owner who couldn't/wouldn't take care of it. Responsibility belongs and ends there. 

Every so often a dog ends up in the shelter through no fault of its owner. S**t happens to good people, and that's when it's wonderful that someone is ready to step up and help out by adopting. I did. She's been a problem child for me ever since I rescued her, but I'd do it again without a moment's hesitation. I also own a purebred dog, a bullmastiff, as it happens, for equally good reasons, and I stand by my decision both to adopt and buy from a breeder.

That said, most of the mixes in the shelter aren't there because disaster befell their owners. They're there because someone wasn't responsible. Two dogs were given the opportunity to breed that shouldn't have bred. The puppy went to someone who shouldn't have had a dog. And so on, until there it is, in the shelter. It's awful for the dogs, it should never have happened, but blaming everyone else for failing to adopt those dogs is barking up the wrong tree, pun intended. By your logic, you are responsible for every dog in every shelter because you didn't adopt that dog. For every child you didn't adopt, you're responsible for one child in foster care. Do you really accept that level of responsibility?

jenns

miranadobe

If the irresponsible owner, BYB, or puppy miller hadn't bred their dogs, there would be no dogs needing homes, either.  The difference is the responsible/ethical breeders have homes who seek the kinds of dogs they breed, and they support the dogs in those homes for life, plus a plethora of other differences that have already been highlighted in this, and many, threads.

So if the byb's and puppy mills stopped breeding, then where would all the people who want dogs but do not want shelter dogs go to get their dogs? I would imagine that there would not be nearly enough responsible breeders to supply the entire dog-wanting population.  My point here is, as long as the responsible breeders exist, so will the puppy mills and byb's.  You want to educate people away from these bad breeders and towards the good ones, yet the good ones are few and far between.  Thus creates the market for the bad ones, futhering the cycle of abuse.

The solution I agree with most is based partly in educating owners (right down to children, especially) about ethical/responsible breeding practices, and then regulating/policing every puppy miller out of existence.  But currently most areas don't have the funds/resources to maintain leash laws, so how we get the funding for policing puppy mills is a tough subject.

jenns

BEVOLASVEGAS

I can say is that, after reading some of the AR bs here, I can see why people are turned off by shelter dogs.  It has nothing to do with the dogs themselves, & everything to do with people who are hellbent on making a purebred fancier feel guilty for not "doing their part & saving a shelter dog." 

And you put "doing their part & saving a shelter dog" in quotes as if it's some stupid, horrible thing.  

You are sooo preaching to the choir with this one.  As in palm-to-head-slappingly so.  I'd dare say that Amanda's fostering, training, rehabilitation, fundraising, educational outreach, etc, etc, etc has done more than most toward "doing their part & saving a shelter dog."

miranadobe

The solution I agree with most is based partly in educating owners (right down to children, especially) about ethical/responsible breeding practices

And again, what are they going to use this information for?  You want millions of people to now go to the responsible breeders? There are not nearly enough responsible breeders in existence.  Each of these breeders would have waiting lists thousands of people long.  Heck, they already have waiting lists! 

and then regulating/policing every puppy miller out of existence.

But not all unethical breeders are puppy mills.  It's been stated several times throughout this thread that a good portion of show breeders are unethical, and several here agree than any breeder creating dogs with extreme features is unethical.  Based on the criteria many of you are using to define responsible breeders, I'd say 99% of non-puppy mill bereders are not responsible.  How do you regulate this? 

I will admit I've only skimmed this thread, but will read it in full later. I have a purebred dog. I researched for 2 YEARS before settling on the breed and the breeder. If my breeder broke even on the litter, I would be shocked. Between the health testing, showing, vet care, premium food, etc that goes into her dogs, let alone her breeding bitch I cannot imagine how much money she loses. She's very involved in the breed and a very ethical/responsible breeder. Could I have found a dog in the shelter that would have been a good match, sure, but my heart wanted a flat coated retriever and my SO really liked the idea of having that contact with a breeder. Should I have not gotten what I truly wanted? Also, chances are we may not even GET approved for a shelter/rescue dog b/c we don't have a fenced in yard and we both have full time jobs. I'm hoping this is not the case, because I would like to adopt our next dog. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

I wish there were some magical solution to stop all BYB and unethical breeders. While I will eventually adopt, I still would have gotten a flat coated retriever from a breeder. These dogs do come up in rescue from time to time, but it's difficult and I had my heart set on a pup. My breeder has a waiting list for her puppies and if for any reason we can no longer care for Ari, she MUST be contacted and she would take her back in a heartbeat.

jenns

 How do you regulate this? 

 

You educate yourself!!

jenns

DougB

How is it kind to force a person to take an animal they don't want.

 

For the hundredth time, it should not be about what people WANT.

If it's not about WANT then why aren't you out adopting more animals from shelters so they don't die?  Because you only WANT two dogs, right?

 Really we have to look at things realistically.  BYBs aren't going anywhere, at least fast.  And really (unpopular opinion I'm sure) it's not the major concern at this point.  We can at least hope to further regulate mills (hopefully out of existence imo).  We can educate people on how to get a dog they can live with, educate them on the responsibility dogs require, and educate BYBs to be a little bit better.  Morals are impossible to legislate and really it shouldn't be illegal for your neighbor to breed their two mutts even if a lot of us here disagree with it.  What we should be trying to do is talk the neighbors with the mutts into doing health tests and writing up contracts and ways to keep their puppies out of the shelter.  And also we need to keep low cost spays and neuters available especially in some areas where there are overpopulation problems.  Combine that with some revamping the shelter system, stopping the import of 'rescue dogs' from other countries and a lot of the problem will be gone.

 People will continue to buy dogs and people will continue to buy dogs that are from 'bad' sources.  There's no stopping that.