"Pedigree dogs exposed"

Pwca

 Actually, that figure includes cats- and in most shelters, cats outnumber dogs. So it's >10000 per day- still high, but down greatly from where it was in the past.

 So if you don't think dogs should be bred for looks at all, does that mean no one who doesn't own their own home should have a dog? Or should only get adult dogs? Because size is part of look, and a significant number of folks I know who have chosen the dog they have now is because they're operating under apartment weight limits.

Are you speaking to me?  Cause I don't believe that I said that dogs shouldn't be bred for looks.  I just said I don't like breeders in general, but I don't believe I made any specifics on that statement.

Starting to really agree with you, AgileGSD... 

AgileGSD

jennypage

I saw this show and it broke my heart.  I guess if there is a chance that any dogs are going to be in pain and tortured like this, then why continue breeding that particular breed?  I don't know, I feel like breeding is pretty much archaic at this point anyway.  Why are we purposefully reproducing dogs when there are millions of dogs who are euthenized daily?  Why don't we concentrate on homing all the animals that need it before any more dogs are bred?  It just doesn't make any sense to me.

You seem to have a heavily AR influenced opinion about the situation.

(emphasis added by me)

Pwca

This is not necessarily an untrue statement. When did the mark of a good breeder become "I only breed every every few years". I'm not saying good breeders should be breeding JUST to supply pets, but it seems like in the past, it was acceptable for people to breed 'expenses' litters from the same health tested dogs they bred at a different time- it was a way for people to prove their own stud dogs and see what they rpoduced, even if they ended up NOT keeping anything, and it funded, at least a little, the expenses of showing (or trialling or whatever). 

The problem is that millions of animals die yearly in shelters. Regardless of why, a good chunk are healthy, adoptable animals. I am a huge pusher for adoption over buying a dog, huge. I definitely understand why people still breed, and I think reputable breeders are necessary. But I disagree that reputable breeders should be producing puppies just to produce puppies. I think that's irresponsible when there are so many dogs dying each year.

jennypage

My first priority is the animals, and I wish that was everyones first priority.

I get that and I feel the same.  But limiting people's choices doesn't mean that an adopted/rescued dog won't end up in a shelter.  Many people just shouldn't own dogs. 

  It's a complicated problem, with no one perfect solution.  We may not all agree on the true problem or the solution but our disagreements provide good food for thought.

tenna

Pwca

This is not necessarily an untrue statement. When did the mark of a good breeder become "I only breed every every few years". I'm not saying good breeders should be breeding JUST to supply pets, but it seems like in the past, it was acceptable for people to breed 'expenses' litters from the same health tested dogs they bred at a different time- it was a way for people to prove their own stud dogs and see what they rpoduced, even if they ended up NOT keeping anything, and it funded, at least a little, the expenses of showing (or trialling or whatever). 

The problem is that millions of animals die yearly in shelters. Regardless of why, a good chunk are healthy, adoptable animals. I am a huge pusher for adoption over buying a dog, huge. I definitely understand why people still breed, and I think reputable breeders are necessary. But I disagree that reputable breeders should be producing puppies just to produce puppies. I think that's irresponsible when there are so many dogs dying each year.

This is essentially what I was trying to say, but you said it much more eloquently than I did.

DougB

My brothers, who all have multiple pets, don't want to rescue dogs because they view it as taking on someone elses problems. Lots of people want specific breeds of dogs for their own reasons. Like it or not, it's their decision to make. And the day somebody tells me I have to adopt a rescue or do without a dog is the day I stop having pets.

I find this sad and I find it a problem. I think it's very sad people refuse to adopt because they feel they are "taking on someone's problems." What a sad outlook on (potentially) saving a dog's life! I agree, some dogs in shelters have problems, but a vast majority wind up there through no fault of their own, or their issues are easily remedied by a competent owner. And for most breeds, there are breed rescues.

I am not saying every single person needs to adopt, or that no one should breed dogs. What I am saying is that MORE people need to adopt - dogs dying in shelters is not any one part of the population's issue - it's a group issue that I think everyone needs to be aware of and should contribute to. I apologize if I sound preachy (to you specifically), I guess I'm just frustrated at how uncaring some people sound in this thread about the fact dogs are dying in shelters every year.

I think people who have the view that only shelter dogs have issues, and they are another person's problems is sad, and it needs to change. How are we going to remedy the problem of 'pet overpopulation' if people feel shelter animals are just a problem?

JackieG

jennypage

My first priority is the animals, and I wish that was everyones first priority.

 

I get that and I feel the same.  But limiting people's choices doesn't mean that an adopted/rescued dog won't end up in a shelter.  Many people just shouldn't own dogs. 

  It's a complicated problem, with no one perfect solution.  We may not all agree on the true problem or the solution but our disagreements provide good food for thought.

 You're absolutely right, the problem lies with the bad owners, which is why I feel we have a responsibility to fix that problem.  It's not the dogs fault, it's the humans fault.  You know? 

I also agree that theres not one perfect solution.  But I want to do what I can to help. 

jennypage

Ok you're right, I exaggerated.  I checked, and there are between 3-4 million dogs put down in shelters per year.  I divided 3.5 million with 365 and it came out to just under 10,000.  So approximately 10,000 shelter dogs PER DAY are put down.  Although I realize it is not millions, like I said, it is still a number that is ridiculous and horrible.

It's enough. The fact is, enough animals are needlessly dying in shelters that it is unfortunate, sad, and change needs to happen. It doesn't matter if one healthy adoptable animal a day gets euthanized for space, because it's time is up, or because no one wants it, or if it's ten thousand. And though I understand we are dog people, I think we should have compassion for the fact that most of those animals are in fact cats, and that society still views them as disposable. And remember, there are shelters that take in numbers of animals into the five-digit range yearly and are euthanizing 80-90% of them. Even if it's "mostly cats" that is still a HUGE number of dogs.

tenna

jennypage

Ok you're right, I exaggerated.  I checked, and there are between 3-4 million dogs put down in shelters per year.  I divided 3.5 million with 365 and it came out to just under 10,000.  So approximately 10,000 shelter dogs PER DAY are put down.  Although I realize it is not millions, like I said, it is still a number that is ridiculous and horrible.

It's enough. The fact is, enough animals are needlessly dying in shelters that it is unfortunate, sad, and change needs to happen. It doesn't matter if one healthy adoptable animal a day gets euthanized for space, because it's time is up, or because no one wants it, or if it's ten thousand. And though I understand we are dog people, I think we should have compassion for the fact that most of those animals are in fact cats, and that society still views them as disposable. And remember, there are shelters take in numbers of animals into the five-digit range yearly and are euthanizing 80-90% of them. Even if it's "mostly cats" that is still a HUGE number of dogs.

I am just as worried about cats being put down as I am dogs, and I agree with you wholeheartedly.  It's HORRIBLE and it needs to change.

tenna

 

I find this sad and I find it a problem. I think it's very sad people refuse to adopt because they feel they are "taking on someone's problems." What a sad outlook on (potentially) saving a dog's life! I agree, some dogs in shelters have problems, but a vast majority wind up there through no fault of their own, or their issues are easily remedied by a competent owner. And for most breeds, there are breed rescues.

tenna

 And remember, there are shelters that take in numbers of animals into the five-digit range yearly and are euthanizing 80-90% of them.

Yeah, one of those shelters is called PETA...

JackieG

 It's a complicated problem, with no one perfect solution.

There is a solution, unfortunately most people are more concerned about having "choices"  rather than the animals who are losing their lives.

JackieG

I don't find it sad and I understand exactly why some people choose not to adopt or rescue a purebred dog.  It's a personal choice.  To imply that people are heartless and uncaring because they choose not to adopt is presumptious at best, IMO. 

I think you misunderstood what I said. What I said was I think it is sad people choose not adopt for the reason they feel adopting a shelter dog would be taking on someone else's problem. Not that they choose to buy a dog from a breeder because of valid options (wanting a show dog, performance dog, wanting health tests, etc.) I am not saying people are heartless or uncaring because they choose to buy a dog, I said that some people have sounded uncaring in this thread while talking about breeding and talking about shelter dogs.

BlackLabbie

Yeah, one of those shelters is called PETA...

Right, but it's more than just PETA. I met with a representative of a shelter near me who takes in over 16,000 animals yearly at their multiple locations (they are a county-wide agency, I believe) and they euthanize boat loads of animals every year. I want to say it was somewhere in the 80% range.

 Well, here's the elephant in the room - what about all the "no kill" shelters that house questionable animals for eons and thus have no room for some really great dogs, who then end up in open admission shelters just like the ones you describe, that are euthanizing "boat loads."

 Why are we importing dogs from Puerto Rico to save them when dogs in West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are dying by the "boat loads?"

We no longer "need" these dogs for the jobs they were once created to do.