Just curious....Have any of you purchased a dog from a pet store?

See that is also part of the problem.  Aggressive advocates call the breeders and the store owners scum while they let the vets and trainers off scott free.  This thread is saying let the puppies stay in the shop and despite their fate the breeders and owners will go out of busy.  But if the puppies gets pass the Petshop its ok to accept their business and line their pockets.  Where the ethics now?

Aggressive advocates call the breeders and the store owners scum while they let the vets and trainers off scott free.

 
Wait a minute.  Which folks in that list are working toward the dog's healthy life?  I guarantee you that it's not likely the "breeder" who sold to the store.  Nor the store owner who bought the pups to make a profit off them and their mothers' lives.

nope, but close enough, berserker came from one of those horrendous BYB's. this one was defintily not the worst of them, but still bad. my dog was a flea and worm ridden almost 5 week old pup when we got him, but since recovering from that over 3 years ago he has not had any issues health-wise and only one behavior issue-nail cutting, which has nothing to do with parentage. he is a mix, mostly brittany with some beagle and gordon.

ORIGINAL: miranadobe

Wait a minute.  Which folks in that list are working toward the dog's healthy life?  I guarantee you that it's not likely the "breeder" who sold to the store.  Nor the store owner who bought the pups to make a profit off them and their mothers' lives.

 
I thought the point of the thread was to control the uneducated consumer by advocating boycotting Petshops, thus putting them out of business and then the breeder.  There was no talk about reforming the industry and lobbying the DOA to set better standards.  Stop the purchasing of pups, put the store out of business, stop the breeders…but in between the shutting down, the pups die.  So if everyone is willing to let the pups die to shut the stores and breeders, then why should vets, behaviorist, and trainers receive income from those dogs that were meant to be sacrificed in the first place.  How come we are not talking about reform instead of puppies dieing?

How come we are not talking about reform instead of puppies dieing?

 
The floor is open to your suggestions on reform (of I presume the puppymill industry).  The Dept of Agriculture is a government-run org - do you know the last time your state reps voted for huge funding increases to the Dept of Ag for, say, a hundred trained investigators to inspect and manage the KNOWN puppymills, as well as all the suspected ones, and those that go unseen.  Their end-results (the puppies) are the most manageable interface to the largest population - the public.  The work continues to go on to try to control puppy mills, through government channels, rescue and ACO investigations, and individuals doing whatever they can to stop it.  But not creating an outlet for their business is a straightforward way to dry it up.

ORIGINAL: miranadobe

How come we are not talking about reform instead of puppies dieing?

The floor is open to your suggestions on reform (of I presume the puppymill industry).  The Dept of Agriculture is a government-run org - do you know the last time your state reps voted for huge funding increases to the Dept of Ag for, say, a hundred trained investigators to inspect and manage the KNOWN puppymills, as well as all the suspected ones, and those that go unseen.  Their end-results (the puppies) are the most manageable interface to the largest population - the public.  The work continues to go on to try to control puppy mills, through government channels, rescue and ACO investigations, and individuals doing whatever they can to stop it.  But not creating an outlet for their business is a straightforward way to dry it up.

 
You are back to killing puppies.  What is the new outlet for public purchases?  I can find out what my state and fed reps did.  I can write, and I can communicate to government officials for reform.

What is the new outlet for public purchases?

dogs in shelters, from reputable breeders, etc.[8|]
 

ORIGINAL: miranadobe

What is the new outlet for public purchases?

dogs in shelters, from reputable breeders, etc.[8|]

 
This has been discussed before that reputable breeders do not make their dogs accessible to the general public and the general public won't tolerate the screening.  Shelters take the place of a business?  Come on!  What I think what bothers most is the store's living condition and where the pups come from.  As I said in my post I got 3 dogs from a Petshop with AKC registration, a family history, and they turned out to be very healthy.  Do you know if DOA has jurisdiction of the stores themselves?  Is that where reform should be?   

I have never and will never buy a puppy from a petstore.  Many of those pet store puppies will end up in the shelter anyway, and I'd rather save them from there than keep the store in business.

DPU, I don't really understand vets refusing business from people who own pet store puppies.  The deed is done, right?  Vets saying they won't treat the dog is only hurting the dog, not the breeder or pet store owner/manager.  People refusing to buy pet store dogs hurts the dogs, but potentially saves many other dogs that would be bred and put in that condition if the store was making money off of it. 

I think the dogs/puppies in shelters deserve a good life and to be saved just as much as any pet store puppy does, anyway.  What happens to THOSE dogs when you decide to buy your pet store puppy instead?

Anyway, back on topic.  My dad bought a beagle/lab mix puppy from Petland 4ish years ago.  She's now 4 years old, has had severe eye ulcers that won't go away and stay away, and is now getting a potentially malignant tumor removed Tuesday.  Her temperament is nice, yeah, but so is the temperament of our current foster that needs a home, and lots of other dogs.

Of our 5 dogs, 3 are from the county pound, 1 is from the local shelter, and one is a dog from a reputable breeder we are still in contact with (she's almost 11 now).

A long time ago my mom bought a mutt from a fairly crappy petstore and he did have some health issues. He cost her 20 dollars. Ha. This was some years ago. He had hip problems and chronic ear infections, severe skin allergies. But he lived to be just over fifteen years. Overall he was a great dog, but I was about seven or eight at that time, so I was too young to know whether petstores were good or bad and my mom still isn't the type of person to think about things like that.

ORIGINAL: kenna

I have never and will never buy a puppy from a petstore.  Many of those pet store puppies will end up in the shelter anyway, and I'd rather save them from there than keep the store in business.

Most likely I will never either but sometimes I can't control my heart.

DPU, I don't really understand vets refusing business from people who own pet store puppies.  The deed is done, right?  Vets saying they won't treat the dog is only hurting the dog, not the breeder or pet store owner/manager.  People refusing to buy pet store dogs hurts the dogs, but potentially saves many other dogs that would be bred and put in that condition if the store was making money off of it.

 

By advocating boycotting the Petshop you have sentenced the puppy to dealth.  If the puppy is purchased, you condemn the buyer but then the vet is the hero.  I see an inconsistency.

I think the dogs/puppies in shelters deserve a good life and to be saved just as much as any pet store puppy does, anyway.  What happens to THOSE dogs when you decide to buy your pet store puppy instead?

I have 3 dogs I own and I foster up to the 3 for the humane society.

Anyway, back on topic.  My dad bought a beagle/lab mix puppy from Petland 4ish years ago.  She's now 4 years old, has had severe eye ulcers that won't go away and stay away, and is now getting a potentially malignant tumor removed Tuesday.  Her temperament is nice, yeah, but so is the temperament of our current foster that needs a home, and lots of other dogs.

You are on topic because the OP asked who has done this HORRIBLE thing and the discussions along the line of purchases or advocating boycotting is On Topic.  I defer to the rwbeagles judgement.

Of our 5 dogs, 3 are from the county pound, 1 is from the local shelter, and one is a dog from a reputable breeder we are still in contact with (she's almost 11 now).

You are a responsible dog owner.

My parents have two dogs from pet stores that they bought when I was a teenager. They knew nothing about dogs and would never do it again. Both dogs have been plagued by health problems and I have spent so much time feeling sick about what their parents and littermates probably suffered through. I could never, ever buy from a pet store; when Louise was spayed I was desperate to find a t-shirt that covered her tummy because she kept getting to her stitches with her back feet and after not having any luck at all the normal stores I go to, I went to a store that sold puppies. I just started crying and had to leave.

This has been discussed before that reputable breeders do not make their dogs accessible to the general public and the general public won't tolerate the screening. Shelters take the place of a business? Come on! What I think what bothers most is the store's living condition and where the pups come from. As I said in my post I got 3 dogs from a Petshop with AKC registration, a family history, and they turned out to be very healthy. Do you know if DOA has jurisdiction of the stores themselves? Is that where reform should be?

 
This implies to me that you'd like to see stores be able to sell dogs, but not from puppymills, (and make sure their living conditions inside the store are better.)  Again, this sees the animal as a commodity, and business economics require profit to sustain itself.  The highest dollar profit comes from selling the cheapest commodity at the highest price.... hence, buy cheap pups, sell for $800+. Personally, I don't see a life as something I'll pick up at Wal-Mart or any other storefront simply for the convenience, or because I "can't tolerate the screening".
 
Yes, DOA absolutely has some level of jurisdiction over the sale of animals to varying degrees depending on your state.  As a matter of fact, here's a bill that was proposed in your state... [linkhttp://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2005/IN/IN1084.1.html]http://www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2005/IN/IN1084.1.html[/link] 
 
 

ORIGINAL: DPU


By advocating boycotting the Petshop you have sentenced the puppy to dealth. If the puppy is purchased, you condemn the buyer but then the vet is the hero. I see an inconsistency.

By buying from pet stores, you have sentenced dogs to lifetimes of forcible breeding in inhumane conditions and often death. You support an industry that is absolutely atrocious. No one is saying the puppies in pet stores don't deserve good homes - they absolutely do. In fact, these dogs deserve so much better than what they have that we don't want any dogs to be brought into that situation or be forced to produce more puppies to replace them. By purchasing them, you ensure that many more dogs will suffer. I think this is a case where larger ethical issues must be taken into account; how do you help the greatest number of dogs?

There is an alternative - when pet stores are closed down, the puppies sometimes go to rescues. That is a real goal to work towards that benefits the animals. At the same time, animals will die. I work with a feral colony and I know that animals will die, not because we euthanize them, but because we were unable to provide care in particular situations due to a limited amount of money, time and volunteers. If we tried to save every cat in the city, every cat people wanted to abandon to us, or even every cat in the colonies, our organization would not have any resources left and then we couldn't help anyone at all. When you look at the actual resources rescues have, you quickly realize that having a goal of saving every animal will cripple your organization, financially and emotionally (unless you have a rescue with limitless resources, of course). You prioritize. Who can you help? How can you help? How will your plan affect future need? How do you allocate your resources to provide a high standard of care to the greatest (but always limited) number of animals you can accommodate? How do we minimize suffering and death? Often these decisions come down to bookkeeping and volunteer coordination. In a general sense, I think people who are concerned about animals can learn a great deal from how rescue organizations function in order to gain a greater understanding of the reality of animal welfare in a broader and more realistic sense.

A vet is ethically obligated to treat animals that need care without regard for the origin of that animal. To deny care would be inhumane in my eyes, just as it would be unethical and inhumane for a doctor to deny a patient care because her cancer came from sun exposure or smoking or her car accident involved alcohol. Yes, veterinarians "profit" off of pet store puppies, but so do dog food producers, pooper scooper companies, pet sitters, etc. It makes absolutely no sense to say that services should not be provided to dogs from pet stores - these service providers have nothing to do with the source of the problem. Vets, trainers, groomers, etc. often educate people about exactly why pet store puppies are to be avoided and I have yet to meet one that has any interest in sustaining puppymills and pet shops. It makes as much sense as saying those of us in rescue benefit from the fact that there are homeless pets; I would give up all the rescue work I do, all the wonderful people I've met, the interesting conversations, the other opportunities it has led to, etc. if it meant that there were no homeless pets. I wish there were no rescue organizations needed. Let's focus on where the true responsibility lies - puppymills and pet stores.

There needs to be more public education, activism and consumer responsibility when it comes to pet stores. Yes, a lot of responsible breeders are not the most welcoming to first time dog owners. A lot of rescues have some very restrictive standards that exclude a lot of really wonderful people from being able to adopt. Changes in certain aspects of breeder and rescue practice may invite more people to turn to those sources when looking for a dog. But the absence of these changes does not absolve people of moral responsibility when it comes to pet ownership, which to me includes not supporting an industry that practices animal cruelty. I completely understand why people fall in love with a puppy in a pet shop and want to take it home - who hasn't? - but I think it is important to talk about this as a mass ethical issue rather than one of individual desire. People shouldn't feel bad about buying from a pet store because anyone on the internet tells them they're a horrible person - we know most of them aren't horrible people at all. People should have the facts to make informed choices not only in terms of individual ownership, but of their place and options in the larger picture, and I think we should have a cultural environment (and, ideally, a legal system) that recognizes and disapproves of abusive industries and practices.

The best thing normal animal-lovers can do is get involved in small, well-managed projects to learn about what is happening in this field, narrow your focus of specialization, see a project through from beginning to end - whether that's political activism, rescue, legislative reform, etc. I think having communities of like-minded people working together is so much more valuable and educational than talking about "well, my dog this, my dog that." It is just overwhelming when you are unfocused and lost and feel like one tiny person who can't make a difference to anyone but that one dog you bring home. Work with the SPCA, local rescues, try to learn as much as possible about organizational structure. Get on boards.

this may have already been adressed, but after reading some of this i am wondering what one would think should happen to the uppies? if no one should buy them, should they sit there? i know, i know, to put money in the hands of those people would just create more puppies, everytime this discussion comes up thats all that is said. i want to know what is supposed to be done about the already existing puppies? obviously the pet store wont give them away anymore than they would dog food and toys....and most big pets stores dont end up shut down....so?
 
i don't think i would be capable myself, of looking one of the pups in the face and saying "sorry cutie pie, you are to be made an example of, you are staying in there for the betterment of breeding practices." i guess it is a good thing i dont go to pet stores.[&o]