Pet Store Puppy

JackieG

Chuffy

 

In addition, many hamsters, mice, rats, guinea pigs, rabbits etc. tend to live in cages anyway and I would not describe this as horrific, provided there is enouch space and they are kept clean and fed well. But a cage is not a life for a cat or a dog. 

Not to get into any kind of argument but.......none of the above mentioned animals live in cages in their natural environment.  I do agree that because of humans long association with dogs as pets it is seen as much more inhumane to cage them than the smaller mammals and birds for that matter.  I personally can't stand the idea of caging a bird but I know that many people own them and treat them like members of the family.  Just a personal thing for me.

I understand your point, but it's impossible or very difficult to keep some animals WITHOUT caging them.  We even "cage" our dogs as puppies, for their safety and our sanity. A cage is not AUTOMATICALLY a cruel and horrible thing.

In addition, animals in their natural environment might not be caged, but they are not neutered or given food or health care either.  They might be FREE, but that includes the freedom to starve, be eaten by predators or die from disease. 

This is getting a bit close to the whole PETA thing about how humans shouldn't have animals as pets, so I'm ducking out for now...

I'm done too, don't know why I keep looking at this thread. It makes my head hurt!

Your points are entirely valid and correct.

Now I am really and truly done and outta' here.

mudpuppy

Well everyone, the system does not stop at the sale of the pup.  It continues with the vet care, products, and services provided throughout the life of the pet shop puppy.

this is just stupid....

Well said.

The issue isn't that it's wrong to spend money on dogs. The issue is that it's wrong to give money to people who commercially produce puppies in what amount to puppy factories. This isn't that hard to understand, if one is willing to devote a neuron or two to understanding.

As to the question of whether those involved in the pet industry are denouncing puppy mills, good grief. It happens all the time. Even the commentators for the televised Westminster Show discuss responsible breeding and rescue. My local breed club takes out ads in the newspaper outlining how to identify a responsible breeders and maintains a web site that has a breeder referral link..... . My dog training club welcomes people who have purchased puppies from any source, but we also gently advise people looking to add a new puppy to their lives about how do to that responsibly. I know veterinarians who will recommend good breeders to client looking for new puppies. I know groomers who can recommend responsible breeders. The claim that those involved in the " pet industry" don't denounce puppy mills??? I refer you to Mudpuppy's detailed analysis above.

 And I don't think that many people could argue that in most cases petstores are bad for reptiles

 I assume you meant to leave out the "don't" ?  Reptiles suffer even more than most in pet stores. God, if you could see the parasite ridden babies, the adults with withered limbs from metabolic bone disease, the ones with mouth rot that no one bothers to treat....Trust me, I've worked in them for the sole reason of trying to educate people and taking care of the herps. I eventually go "let go" for "educating " people too much about them and their proper (ie not store) care....and therefore not selling much....

buster the show dog

I refer you to Mudpuppy's detailed analysis above.

Lets see, you can claim the Pet Industry is involved heavily and is very serious in eliminating the few but far too many unethical breeders who supply puppies to pet shops, but the proof is in the pudding.  My observation says very little is done and it is proven by the still existence of the few but far too many unethical breeders who supply puppies to pet shops.  Where's the proof or is it a face-value thing again?

My friend, Lee, had a Ball Python Constrictor named Sulphur. He fed him mice and rats that he could buy at Petco in Plano. The pet supply stores in Frisco wouldn't sell live rodents as food items. In Frisco, you're supposed to buy frozen mice that you nuke to warm up. Some snakes don't go for mice-icles. They know the difference between living and dead prey, somehow. I don't know the way out of that dilemma. To feed the snake properly, you should feed it live prey. Sulphur was a sweetheart at 5.5 feet long and as big around as my forearm. Just don't get in the way at dinnertime. Snakes don't see well and they can accidently strike you if you handfeed them. So, you put the prey in the feeding box then lower the snake by the tail. Anyway, I guess different people draw lines in different places.

Chuffy

I understand your point, but it's impossible or very difficult to keep some animals WITHOUT caging them.  We even "cage" our dogs as puppies, for their safety and our sanity. A cage is not AUTOMATICALLY a cruel and horrible thing.

In addition, animals in their natural environment might not be caged, but they are not neutered or given food or health care either.  They might be FREE, but that includes the freedom to starve, be eaten by predators or die from disease. 

This is getting a bit close to the whole PETA thing about how humans shouldn't have animals as pets, so I'm ducking out for now...

 I haven't seen any Animal Rights sort of opinions being posted at all. I was perhaps playing a bit of a devil's advocate when I brought up the issue of commercial breeding and impluse purchases of non-canine animals. I have found it a bit hypocritical for people to be so opposed to shopping where puppies are sold due to where they come from but have no issues with stores that sell other sorts of pets. I stated I do shop where pets are sold, including ferrets (an animal which I own and the commercial pet industry has been rather bad for, maybe more so than dogs). I actually don't think boycotting stores which sell animals does much to stop the commercial pet industry in dogs or any pet. Not purchasing pets from petstores is a personal ethics question but IMO there will always be a market for petstore animals. We have gone from multiple puppy selling petstores in my area to just one BUT that one does a booming business and none of their puppies are priced under $1000. 

 FWIW If the Animal Rights Movement continues to gain political power, we will see a day where we won't have a choice - the only people who will be able to afford to continue breeding purebred dogs will be commercial breeders.

whtsthfrequency

 I assume you meant to leave out the "don't" ?  Reptiles suffer even more than most in pet stores. God, if you could see the parasite ridden babies, the adults with withered limbs from metabolic bone disease, the ones with mouth rot that no one bothers to treat....Trust me, I've worked in them for the sole reason of trying to educate people and taking care of the herps. I eventually go "let go" for "educating " people too much about them and their proper (ie not store) care....and therefore not selling much....

Other animals, like reptiles and fish, suffer even more greatly than dogs and cats do in petstores.  At least the dogs and cats make it out of the store alive.

We have gone from multiple puppy selling petstores in my area to just one BUT that one does a booming business and none of their puppies are priced under $1000. 

 Really?  We have new puppy stores popping up all over around here.  Not only that, but the puppies in these stores are under the care of one of the most well-respected, prominent veterinarians in the area.  I wonder why he is not spreading the word about puppy mills.

DPU

buster the show dog

I refer you to Mudpuppy's detailed analysis above.

Lets see, you can claim the Pet Industry is involved heavily and is very serious in eliminating the few but far too many unethical breeders who supply puppies to pet shops, but the proof is in the pudding.  My observation says very little is done and it is proven by the still existence of the few but far too many unethical breeders who supply puppies to pet shops.  Where's the proof or is it a face-value thing again?

First and foremost it is not a "few" of the breeders who supply pet stores who are irresponsible. It is ALL of them. Not one breeder who mass produces puppies and then disposes of them through a third party broker screens potential buyers and eliminates buyers who are unsuited to own the particular dog for sale, or to own dogs in general. Not one breeder who mass produces puppies and then disposes of them through a third party broker has any idea if they are perpetuating genetic problems because they have no idea where their puppies end up or whether they ever express genetic problems. Not one breeder who mass produces puppies and then disposes of them through a third party broker is able to take back puppies that are placed in bad homes or in good homes that experience a true emergency that requires rehoming the dog. These are not the only things that constitute irresponsible breeding, but they are three things that are true of ALL people who commercially produce puppies in puppy factories and then sell them through a third party.

As for the rest of your post, you asked if people in the pet industry advocate for eliminating puppy mills. I answered that question, and gave several examples that I have personally witnessed or been involved in personally. You are now claiming those efforts don't exist because they haven't been as effective as we would like. That's an illogical conclusion. The efforts aren't 100 % effective, any more than anti-smoking campaigns, or campaigns against drunk driving are 100 % effective. But the fact that the efforts aren't 100 % effective doesn't mean they don't exist. Part of the reason the efforts aren't more effective is because people like you undermine them by claiming that it is perfectly fine to contribute to the puppy factory industry, because only a "few" of these puppy factories are unethical. Thanks a bunch.

jenns

Other animals, like reptiles and fish, suffer even more greatly than dogs and cats do in petstores.  At least the dogs and cats make it out of the store alive.

Interesting that this came up because I never thought of it until I actually saw it.  At the foster dog showing at Petsmart I was getting some air with one of the dog and there was this big truck in front of the the stores.  The name of the company did not give me a clue as to what it was, but there was something like "animal transport" in the title.  So one of the drivers was in the store while the other was standing by the truck. I asked the guy what was in the truck and he said dogs cats and other small animals.  I asked if he would open the truck so I can see and he told me I don't want to see whats in the truck.  At this time the other guy came out of the store with a dolly piled with dark plastic bags, all sizes.  Then the guy told me their business is to pick up the remains of pets. 

buster the show dog

DPU

buster the show dog

I refer you to Mudpuppy's detailed analysis above.

Lets see, you can claim the Pet Industry is involved heavily and is very serious in eliminating the few but far too many unethical breeders who supply puppies to pet shops, but the proof is in the pudding.  My observation says very little is done and it is proven by the still existence of the few but far too many unethical breeders who supply puppies to pet shops.  Where's the proof or is it a face-value thing again?

First and foremost it is not a "few" of the breeders who supply pet stores who are irresponsible. It is ALL of them. Not one breeder who mass produces puppies and then disposes of them through a third party broker screens potential buyers and eliminates buyers who are unsuited to own the particular dog for sale, or to own dogs in general. Not one breeder who mass produces puppies and then disposes of them through a third party broker has any idea if they are perpetuating genetic problems because they have no idea where their puppies end up or whether they ever express genetic problems. Not one breeder who mass produces puppies and then disposes of them through a third party broker is able to take back puppies that are placed in bad homes or in good homes that experience a true emergency that requires rehoming the dog. These are not the only things that constitute irresponsible breeding, but they are three things that are true of ALL people who commercially produce puppies in puppy factories and then sell them through a third party.

Lets see, I have actually purchased a pet shop dog so I have the exposure to the process and have had actual communications.  My proof is the wonderful dogs that I have/had in my home, Bruiser, Nessie, Pepperdine....and I experienced no genetic problems at all....and in the process I was satisfied with how the dogs came into this world.  I don't believe every breeder who supplies pet stores are irresponsible and my experience supports that.   Where's your proof for "All". 

DPU

Well everyone, the system does not stop at the sale of the pup.  It continues with the vet care, products, and services provided throughout the life of the pet shop puppy.

All the more reason NOT to shop at stores that sell dogs.

Maybe b/c most people have better things to do with their time than go around "denouncing" everyone else. Say I have some extra time on my hands....I could go around picketing against pet stores, or I could go to the animal shelter and spend time with a neglected dog.  I could spend money making a commercial trying to convince people they are wrong, or I could take in a foster cat and get it the right vet care with that money.  For me, that's not a hard decision at all.

What exactly are you looking for?  I have seen commercials supporting rescue/SPCA and denouncing puppy mills, news segments about puppy mills and animal hoarders, segments during televised dog shows showcases respectable breeders...

I'm not into AKC conformation and never will be, for many reasons, but one is precisely what you're getting at here.  Yes, it's just a registry, not indicative of quality or reputable breeding practices.  The AKC not only does not denounce puppy millers but makes a good deal of money off of them.  But the AKC is not the end-all and be-all of purebred dogs.  Don't assume that AKC dogs and good breeders go hand in hand.  I was just chatting on the phone today with a breeder and we were joking about how much we can't stand the AKC ring.  Nikon will be doing conformation but it will be UKC, WDA, and UScA.  The only AKC things I do with my dogs is rally, and that's only because the UKC doesn't have it as a sport.

I sincerely doubt a pet shop dog would ever get put up at Westminster, let alone get pointed towards a championship.   If someone was going to put that much effort into conformation, they would not be buying dogs at the local pet shop!

DPU

  I don't believe every breeder who supplies pet stores are irresponsible and my experience supports that.   Where's your proof for "All".  

There is no "proof" because this is not a factual analysis.  Everyone has a different interpretation of what they consider reputable breeding. Your criteria are much more loose than most people here.  Personally, I don't see any breeder who brokers dogs and/or does not screen buyers themselves as being reputable.  Ergo, in my opinion, no breeder supplying a pet store is reputable.  A reputable breeder cares for the welfare of their dogs.  How can they care if they don't know what's happening to their dogs?  Missing out on crucial socialization period to be caged in front of a glass window is not what I consider looking out for the best interests of the dog.

Liesje

Everyone has a different interpretation of what they consider reputable breeding. Your criteria are much more loose than most people here.  Personally, I don't see any breeder who brokers dogs and/or does not screen buyers themselves as being reputable. 

You are correct, everyone has a different interpretation of what is consider the best way to bring a puppy into the world.  Your opinion includes an elevation of your criteria over others, ERGO putting you into a different crowd.  The priority of the criteria between your crowd and my crowd may be different but probably balance out in the best interest of the dog.  You need to recognize what crowd you are in because you surely have no power of persuasion over a different crowd.  Thats one of the biggest mistake of those with opposing arguements is that their only power to change the few and far too many unethical breeders is from within their own circle.

DPU

Lets see, I have actually purchased a pet shop dog so I have the exposure to the process and have had actual communications.  My proof is the wonderful dogs that I have/had in my home, Bruiser, Nessie, Pepperdine....and I experienced no genetic problems at all....and in the process I was satisfied with how the dogs came into this world.  I don't believe every breeder who supplies pet stores are irresponsible and my experience supports that.   Where's your proof for "All". 

I don't doubt that the dogs you have that originated from puppy factories are wonderful. Some puppies produced in puppy factories turn out just fine. But, if you purchased your dogs through a second hand broker, then you would have had no way to inform the breeder if a genetic or potentially genetic problem like bloat or deafness, or early onset cancer or orthopedic problems or PRA or seizures afflicted your dogs. The breeder of your dogs would have no way of knowing whether your dogs lived long happy lives, or lived lives of misery chained in a back yard, or died prematurely due to an inherited condition, and hence would have had no information upon which to base further breeding decisions. No one is denying that it's possible to get a nice puppy from a puppy factory. But whether you were satisfied or not with the individual dogs you bought isn't the issue. The issue is were these dogs brought into the world and placed in homes in a responsible manner. The answer is no. The producer of your dogs had no concern about what kind of home they ended up in because the producer of your puppies handed them over to a third party, no strings attached regarding placement. The producer of your dogs had no concern about their future health because s/he had no intention of basing any future breeding decisions on the well being of the dogs that you acquired. That is irresponsible breeding and that is what happens when dogs are mass produced and then disposed of through brokers.