"Cruelty by Breeders"

    • Puppy
    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat


    I appeciate your dedication to rescue - that's great !!  But when you talk about breeding dogs to meet a demand (which I've heard countless breeders say that responsible breeders don't do), and to be a tool for human use (hunting dogs), then how does that differ from anyone else's desired "use" of dogs?  How many hunting dogs are dumped in shelters at the end of the hunting season, or are discarded when they can no longer serve their purpose?  I've talked to rescues in states where hunting is more prolific, and have been told that typical hunting dogs are much more prevalent in the shelters than typical companion dogs (and yes, I know hunting dogs are companions too). 

     
    How do you know these dogs can work?  Working dogs (hunting/herding/etc) cannot just be PICKED from a shelter.  You would never know if the dog has instinct or not. 
     
    ORIGINAL: GoldNAuss

    How much money to you think they put out over those 32 years, Dog? Do you know how much it costs to enter dog shows? How much equipment costs? A vehicle? Gasoline to travel to shows? Training classes? Health evaluations?

    Most show breeders are lucky to break even on a litter. If you would like proof, I will be glad to copy and paste an example litter here for you.

    The only "breeders" that make money are the ones who sell their puppies in the paper for $300. They don't health test, show, or put out any kind of money  on their adults, so  there is no overhead for them to earn back.

     
    And Kudos to that.  Gosh.  That is being in the hole more than anything.  Sheesh health testing alone can be more than $1000...  That doesnt count vet bills, dog food, show entries, etc.  Yeah...  no money at all.
     
     
    • Silver
    ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

    Now...  Bash me all you like.  I bet my dogs are better groomed, better cared for, better trained, and in better health..  Point being that most pet owners are very ignorant on the whole pet care thing.  Then again, I bet they feel they dont need to be knowledgeable.  Considering there arent any good breeders... 

    Then again, you have people like PETA letting dogs loose and saying that dogs cannot be caged by fences, humans, or crates...  So...  I think I will stick with my good breeders instead of the so called animal activists that have never done any great thing with one of their dogs in their entire lifetime.

    I own a rescue dog, I am a member of my humane society.  I do all health testing, I actually DO things with my dogs.  I breed a litter or two a year (if that) and I sell to RESPECTABLE people.  I sell pets on spay/neuter and in NO way do I make money from selling dogs.  I take back any pups that cant be kept and I find them new homes.  If you keep all the dogs you breed or take in, you wouldnt be a good breeder or good pet owner.  Get the whole "Placing a dog is bad thing" out of your head.  I screen puppy buyers and do a lot more than your average shelter.  50% or more of pits in shelters are adopted out to dog fighters...  I wonder why?

    Is bringing more dogs into this world good?  Well I will tell you.  I am protecting my breed.  I am breeding for the better of my breed, and for the better of the future of it.  I am not breeding for me or for pet buyers.  Sure, we need to rescue and sure there are dogs that need to be placed.  But here is the problem.  Follow me here... 

    Dogs being bred are not the problem.  GOOD breeders arent the problem.  Your problem lies with irresponsible pet owners.  Those types that dont know what they are doing...  The buy a pup from a pet store and breed it to another dog or... leave it out and it gets bred.  Those people that get a dog and then realize they cant handle it.  Those people that feed their dog junk, keep them tied outside, and let them do whatever they want when they are still intact.  Those people that let their intact dogs roam the streets and get pregnant.  Puppymills are problems, byb are problems, but bad pet owners are the worst.  GOOD breeders didnt cause overpopulation.  I am not selling a dog to Jo NoBody, I am selling a dog to Sue Somebody that I will be keeping in touch with for years and if that dog I sold is ever not wanted, I will take it back.  You wont find MY dog in a shelter. 

    So, stop pointing fingers.  Bob Barker even admitted to having good breeder AND he bought a dog from a breeder.  This "breeder are bad" thing is getting old.

    Bash me at all ends, but try to find one TRUTHFUL reason I should believe in bad breeders.  Not an opinion, not a myth, but a fact.  I havent found one yet. 

    For the record I respect everyone's opinion and I will never openly attack anyone.  I am stating my OWN opinion with some questions to help YOU evaluate yourself.  If you feel the need to bash me, take your pieces.  I am usually a very nice person and I am a pet owner (owned by her dogs).  I am sorry if I am rude, but I am tired of this.  I dont believe in animal activists, nor do I believe that all breeders are bad.  Please dont think I am pointing fingers at anyone and saying anyone is a bad pet owner.  I am saying what I have found to be fact.  But...  most of ;people dont really care when they want to flame.

    Take care.

    Pat 

     
    It's interesting that you would object to blanket condemnation of breeders, and then give blanket condemnation of animal activists.  For years I've tried to find two things - the illusive responsible breeder, and the illusive Peta person(s) that has been convicted of releasing dogs from crates at dog shows.  Also, animal activists include those doing rescue, and I sure hope you aren't condemning rescue. 
     
    I think the point being made was that there is no such thing as responsible breeding as long as homeless dogs are dying for lack of homes.  I realize that not everyone wants a shelter dog, but as long as society allows itself to produce dependent animals without also guaranteeing them lifetime homes, then I think it's up to society to make sure that homeless animals have priority to homes before unborn animals.  Therefore breeding more into an overpopulated dog world is not a responsible thing to do.
     
    I also disagree with your condemnation of the pet owning public who is ignorant of pet care.  You know who chose those people to care for the dogs?  Breeders did.  I see so many breeders try to disconnect themselves from what happens to their dogs once they are sold.  If a breeder can't screen people well enough to ascertain that the home is a good one, then they shouldn't be breeding at all.  So if a pet owner is an idiot, it's the breeder that chose that idiot for their dog - and what does that make the breeder?  Certainly not responsible.
     
    • Silver
    ORIGINAL: GoldNAuss

    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

    ORIGINAL: mrv

    Oh  I see,,,, like Dess's breeder who donates the cost of a puppy to rescue for each litter produced... lets see that is 7 litters in 32 years.  The breeder who has the dew claws of every puppy produced so she can do DNA tracking of inherited diseases, and does all health tests, doesnt breed until after 3 years old, corresponds will all puppy buyers and knows the death date of all but one puppy she has produced....Oh yeah  you are right there are only irresponsible breeders.... and I haven't even started a list for Nora's breeders who have been training other folks for better than 30 years as well as screening extensively and retrieving any puppy poorly placed... 


    Seven litters?  What do they sell for?  Maybe $1000 a piece?  That's $7000 in 32 years?  I spend more than that on rescue in one year.  There are few shepherd rescues here, and the ones we have are totally overwhelmed.  Dedication to the breed shouldn't be just about producing more, it should be about taking care of the ones that are already here.


    How much money to you think they put out over those 32 years, Dog? Do you know how much it costs to enter dog shows? How much equipment costs? A vehicle? Gasoline to travel to shows? Training classes? Health evaluations?

    Most show breeders are lucky to break even on a litter. If you would like proof, I will be glad to copy and paste an example litter here for you.

    The only "breeders" that make money are the ones who sell their puppies in the paper for $300. They don't health test, show, or put out any kind of money  on their adults, so  there is no overhead for them to earn back.

     
    What does that have to do with the claim that the breeder donates the cost of a puppy out of each litter to rescue?  Whether they profit wasn't the point.  The cost of one puppy donated to rescue is certainly better than nothing, but when talking about a breed as prolific as shepherds, it's only a drop in the bucket for what rescue actually needs.
    • Puppy
      Stud dog OFA and Elbows 507.51
      ASCA Lease agreement 12.00
      AKC Lease notification 15.00
      Lease fee from owner 500.00
      Shipping 286.46
      Progesterone testing and AI 174.30
      Ultrasound and exam 84.00
      44lb Nutro High Energy 44.90
      Entry Fees ASCA Shows (per lease agreement)81.00
      Pre-whelp x-ray 88.80
      Emergency Whelp supplies 117.08
      Tail docking/dew claw removal 142.45
      Vaccinations: DPv 35.50
      Worming 18.48
      Total________________________ 2106.98

      [align=left]This figure *DOES NOT* include  everything I mentioned, either. It does not take into account show expenses to achieve championships on the sire and dam of the litter. It does not include the initial cost of the mother (though it takes into account the father, who was leased to breed this litter), and the dam most likely cost in the neighborhood of $1,500.00.[align=left] [align=left]It doesn't take into account their show and grooming equipment that enabled them to finish their dogs championships, or the training classes that helped them earn performance titles. [align=left] [align=left]It also does not include the cost of an emergency c-section. One was not needed for this litter, but they are frequently needed. [align=left] [align=left]What is our new figure now? $2000.00 + the $1500.00 for the dam + $1500.00 for finishing the dogs championship (taking into account grooming supplies.... I'm being *very* generous here. It costs much more than that most of the time). We're at at least $5,000.00. The breed in question here, Aussies, have an average litter of 6. So you sell the puppies for $800 a piece, minus the one you kept....[align=left] [align=left]Our grand total made off the litter is $4,000.00. Then you subtract off the litter expenses (4,000-5,000) and you end up $1,000.00 in the hole. [align=left] [align=left]Welcome to the  world of responsible breeding! So much for making money.
    • Silver
    ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat


    I appeciate your dedication to rescue - that's great !!  But when you talk about breeding dogs to meet a demand (which I've heard countless breeders say that responsible breeders don't do), and to be a tool for human use (hunting dogs), then how does that differ from anyone else's desired "use" of dogs?  How many hunting dogs are dumped in shelters at the end of the hunting season, or are discarded when they can no longer serve their purpose?  I've talked to rescues in states where hunting is more prolific, and have been told that typical hunting dogs are much more prevalent in the shelters than typical companion dogs (and yes, I know hunting dogs are companions too). 


    How do you know these dogs can work?  Working dogs (hunting/herding/etc) cannot just be PICKED from a shelter.  You would never know if the dog has instinct or not. 

     
    I'm talking about all the hunting dogs discarded, not suggesting that they be adopted in order to hunt.  I think many of them can't perform as required, but that's just more evidence that dogs are commodities that are abandoned when they are no longer suitable.  Why would you support breeding more to end up in shelters?
    • Silver
    ORIGINAL: GoldNAuss
      [align=left] [align=left]Our grand total made off the litter is $4,000.00. Then you subtract off the litter expenses (4,000-5,000) and you end up $1,000.00 in the hole. [align=left] [align=left]Welcome to the  world of responsible breeding! So much for making money.



     
    That's all great if it convinces someone not to breed, but let's not let anyone think that it's an altruistic endeavor.  So, the responsible breeder described by Shadomoon donates the cost of one puppy to rescue.  Did you include that in your costs too?
    • Puppy
    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

    It's interesting that you would object to blanket condemnation of breeders, and then give blanket condemnation of animal activists.  For years I've tried to find two things - the illusive responsible breeder, and the illusive Peta person(s) that has been convicted of releasing dogs from crates at dog shows.  Also, animal activists include those doing rescue, and I sure hope you aren't condemning rescue. 

    I think the point being made was that there is no such thing as responsible breeding as long as homeless dogs are dying for lack of homes.  I realize that not everyone wants a shelter dog, but as long as society allows itself to produce dependent animals without also guaranteeing them lifetime homes, then I think it's up to society to make sure that homeless animals have priority to homes before unborn animals.  Therefore breeding more into an overpopulated dog world is not a responsible thing to do.

    I also disagree with your condemnation of the pet owning public who is ignorant of pet care.  You know who chose those people to care for the dogs?  Breeders did.  I see so many breeders try to disconnect themselves from what happens to their dogs once they are sold.  If a breeder can't screen people well enough to ascertain that the home is a good one, then they shouldn't be breeding at all.  So if a pet owner is an idiot, it's the breeder that chose that idiot for their dog - and what does that make the breeder?  Certainly not responsible.


     
    No, I have found a HUGE difference in animal activists and Animal Preservation.  The humane society I donate to claims to be NOT an Animal Activist organization, but an Animal ;Preservation organization.  The difference being the educated and non-educated.
     
    As far as selling to bad owners, you apparently have never looked at a good breeder's contract.  It usually states that the dog should be fed high quality dog food, housed indoors, states about crate training, etc.  If a breeder stops caring about the animal they bred, they arent a good breeder.  GOOD breeders are few and far between.  These are the GOOD people, the GOOD pet owners, the KNOWLEGDEABLE breeders...  I dont think most of you have met them...  Or you wouldnt be talking like you do. 
     
    If we stopped breeding, then we would defeat the purpose.  HUMANS bred dogs, instead of letting nature do it.  Yes humans caused overpopulation, but GOOD breeders are trying to control it.  Sorry, the reasoning you present is off to me.  Again, there are responsible breeders, always will be.  There arent responsible pet owners everywhere. 
     
    I assume you are a dog owner...  wanna answer my questions?
     
    As far as Peta people being arrested for letting dogs out, read the AKC reviews and then read some more into the Peta site and then look for anti peta sites.  Believe me, you will find plenty.  I have!
     
    Really I understand what you are saying though.  But it is unrealistic.  Without intact dogs there would be no breeding.  Without breeding there would no dogs...  Breeding dogs isnt just for pets.  People want dogs for working, for dog sports, for therepy, for services, and you cant always have a rescued dog doing this.
     
    For one more thing to consider.  You say people (GOOD BREEDERS) shouldnt breed dogs.  Did you know we have an overpopulation problem with humans?  How many people are living on the street or are starving to death...  Does that mean people should stop breeding too?  First things first.  Humans stop over breeding, then dog people will stop breeding their dogs...  How about that? 
     
    What about cows?  What about sheep?  There are excess of these too... Of course we eat them, but still, overpopulation...  People in third world countries will eat dogs...  I know, how horrible, but tell them to stop breeding dogs and they will look at you like you would look at them if they told you to stop breeding cows for meat. 
     
    There is overpopulation everywhere, it will never be fixed, and never end because no matter what, humans are suppose to be the top species and they are not perfect.  If you stop breeding dogs, they will die out.  Face that fact, they will.  If you spay/neuter EVERY dog, they will die out.  I, for one, will not allow that to happen.  Yes, there is overpopulation.  But start trying to stop puppymills and backyard breeders, not the good breeders.  Of course, it is easier to blame everyone than a select few.  Then again, we all are responsible.  But no one will blame themselves will they.  "But I didnt breed a dog or keep a dog intact or..."  Sure... You didnt.  But you didnt make yourself better than anyone.  You are still human, your race started this breeding, so it is still your fault.  I bet someone in your family has a dog intact.  I bet, at one point, you may have too.  I bet most of you have never done anything with your dogs.  You arent helping, you arent inspiring people to be better pet owners.  Support spay/neuter of PETS.  But there are those of us that want to better our breed and our breed's future.  There are those of us that are GOOD breeders.  If you want to point fingers at us, three are pointing at you.  What are you doing to stop the BAD breeding?  Seems like you are just blaming the GOOD breeders...  While the others get around the laws and are selling more pups everyday.  I havent seen a good public education by those that support total spay/neuter.  In fact, the best Public Education Seminar was done by a dog breeder and handler.  Makes some people wonder.
     
    No pointing fingers by me.  I believe in good pet owners, good rescues, good people, and good breeders.  I dont believe in the crap that there is no more good breeders when I know there are.  Sorry. 
     
     
     
     
    • Puppy
    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

    ORIGINAL: GoldNAuss
      [align=left] [align=left]Our grand total made off the litter is $4,000.00. Then you subtract off the litter expenses (4,000-5,000) and you end up $1,000.00 in the hole. [align=left] [align=left]Welcome to the  world of responsible breeding! So much for making money.





    That's all great if it convinces someone not to breed, but let's not let anyone think that it's an altruistic endeavor.  So, the responsible breeder described by Shadomoon donates the cost of one puppy to rescue.  Did you include that in your costs too?

     
    Never said they donate to shelters.  I said I do.  My mentor is a member of our breed rescue.  She donates more than $1000 a year to it. 
     
    You dont have to donate to shelters.  My questions were about pet owners...  Not about breeders.  Since I am a breeder (damn proud of it!) I posted my answers. 
     
    Since a breeder is already going in the whole with each litter, no it isnt a good "job" or hobby.  Breeders breed to better there breed, not to make cash. 
     
    Wanna make money, be a porn star.  Easy way to make money.  Wanna go in the hole, be a good dog breeder, easy way to need to hold two jobs. 
    • Puppy
    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

    ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat


    I appeciate your dedication to rescue - that's great !!  But when you talk about breeding dogs to meet a demand (which I've heard countless breeders say that responsible breeders don't do), and to be a tool for human use (hunting dogs), then how does that differ from anyone else's desired "use" of dogs?  How many hunting dogs are dumped in shelters at the end of the hunting season, or are discarded when they can no longer serve their purpose?  I've talked to rescues in states where hunting is more prolific, and have been told that typical hunting dogs are much more prevalent in the shelters than typical companion dogs (and yes, I know hunting dogs are companions too). 


    How do you know these dogs can work?  Working dogs (hunting/herding/etc) cannot just be PICKED from a shelter.  You would never know if the dog has instinct or not. 


    I'm talking about all the hunting dogs discarded, not suggesting that they be adopted in order to hunt.  I think many of them can't perform as required, but that's just more evidence that dogs are commodities that are abandoned when they are no longer suitable.  Why would you support breeding more to end up in shelters?

     
    Question?  Why would someone pay $700-$800 for a hunting dog and get rid of it after one season.  Does that make sense?  Never seen it done.  All the hunters around here have 1-2 hunting dogs.  Most are way over 7 and still out there.
     
    Irrational.
    • Gold Top Dog
    Just a word of caution here.....while we are all passionate in our beliefs, lets keep in mind that nothing we say here will change anothers thinking.  Lets please keep this thread civil and non-attacking.
    • Silver
    ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

    It's interesting that you would object to blanket condemnation of breeders, and then give blanket condemnation of animal activists.  For years I've tried to find two things - the illusive responsible breeder, and the illusive Peta person(s) that has been convicted of releasing dogs from crates at dog shows.  Also, animal activists include those doing rescue, and I sure hope you aren't condemning rescue. 

    I think the point being made was that there is no such thing as responsible breeding as long as homeless dogs are dying for lack of homes.  I realize that not everyone wants a shelter dog, but as long as society allows itself to produce dependent animals without also guaranteeing them lifetime homes, then I think it's up to society to make sure that homeless animals have priority to homes before unborn animals.  Therefore breeding more into an overpopulated dog world is not a responsible thing to do.

    I also disagree with your condemnation of the pet owning public who is ignorant of pet care.  You know who chose those people to care for the dogs?  Breeders did.  I see so many breeders try to disconnect themselves from what happens to their dogs once they are sold.  If a breeder can't screen people well enough to ascertain that the home is a good one, then they shouldn't be breeding at all.  So if a pet owner is an idiot, it's the breeder that chose that idiot for their dog - and what does that make the breeder?  Certainly not responsible.



    No, I have found a HUGE difference in animal activists and Animal Preservation.  The humane society I donate to claims to be NOT an Animal Activist organization, but an Animal ;Preservation organization.  The difference being the educated and non-educated. 

     
    All they are doing is a little PR spin to get the support of the people who fall for the anti-AR rhetoric and anti-AR paranoia.  They are active in animal welfare, so they are animal activists, and so are you if you're active in rescue.  If you have an issue with animal rights, fine, but at least get the terms right.

    As far as selling to bad owners, you apparently have never looked at a good breeder's contract.  It usually states that the dog should be fed high quality dog food, housed indoors, states about crate training, etc.  If a breeder stops caring about the animal they bred, they arent a good breeder.  GOOD breeders are few and far between.  These are the GOOD people, the GOOD pet owners, the KNOWLEGDEABLE breeders...  I dont think most of you have met them...  Or you wouldnt be talking like you do. 

     
    And that has what to do with breeders selling to bad pet owners?  I still contend that the blame should not be primarily on the pet owner who is an idiot, it should be on the breeder that chose that idiot to sell his/her dogs to.

    If we stopped breeding, then we would defeat the purpose.  HUMANS bred dogs, instead of letting nature do it.  Yes humans caused overpopulation, but GOOD breeders are trying to control it.  Sorry, the reasoning you present is off to me.  Again, there are responsible breeders, always will be.  There arent responsible pet owners everywhere. 

     
    You're right, there aren't responsible pet owners everywhere, there also aren't responsible breeders everywhere.  The AKC Gazette did an article several years back saying that they estimated 10% of the breeders that registered with them could qualify as being responsible, and their criteria for that was that the breeders had bred more than one litter, and competed with their dogs.  Now if even they say it's only 10% with so few criteria, how many are there really who follow all the other standard criteria for responsible breeding?  How do YOU define a responsible breeder?

    I assume you are a dog owner...  wanna answer my questions?

     
    Not particularly.  I didn't even see why you felt you had to post your own information.  It really didn't prove much at all, and certainly nothing that applied to the discussion at hand.  I've done rescue for 20+ years.  My dogs have the run of the house, can sleep on the bed as they desire, have a large back yard that is tightly fenced, are fed Solid Gold (love their bagels), have an in-house vet tech and groomer, and have been obedience trained with positive reinforcement.  I do not take vacations - I rescue dogs.  They do not all have all their teeth, because some of them are puppymill rescues, but the teeth they have left are well cared for by the vet tech.

    As far as Peta people being arrested for letting dogs out, read the AKC reviews and then read some more into the Peta site and then look for anti peta sites.  Believe me, you will find plenty.  I have!

     
    I have read it all, and there is no proof, no arrests, no convictions, and no common sense.  What dog show is going to let easily identified Peta people in, and if they aren't easily identifiable, then how does anyone know they are Peta people?  The anti-Peta sites are a joke.  They are primarily put up by those who are trying to protect animal industries and have a vested interest in fighting those that are trying to protect the animals from abuse.  I am not a Peta supporter, but I recognize nonsense when I see it.

    Really I understand what you are saying though.  But it is unrealistic.  Without intact dogs there would be no breeding.  Without breeding there would no dogs...  Breeding dogs isnt just for pets.  People want dogs for working, for dog sports, for therepy, for services, and you cant always have a rescued dog doing this.

     
    You're right, without breeding there would be no dogs, but that doesn't excuse letting homeless animals die while producing more to fill up homes.  We need to save the ones that are here before considering bringing more into the world.  At minimum, we should restrict all but responsible breeding (yet to be defined) in order to give homeless dogs a better chance.

    For one more thing to consider.  You say people (GOOD BREEDERS) shouldnt breed dogs.  Did you know we have an overpopulation problem with humans?  How many people are living on the street or are starving to death...  Does that mean people should stop breeding too?  First things first.  Humans stop over breeding, then dog people will stop breeding their dogs...  How about that? 

     
    When society is euthanizing people by the millions because they are homeless, that argument might be worth considering.  But since that's not happening, it's a non-issue.

    What about cows?  What about sheep?  There are excess of these too... Of course we eat them, but still, overpopulation...  People in third world countries will eat dogs...  I know, how horrible, but tell them to stop breeding dogs and they will look at you like you would look at them if they told you to stop breeding cows for meat. 

     
    There is no overpopulation of cows and sheep - farmers and ranchers breed what they need to go to market.  Cows and sheep are bred to die.  Are you suggesting that dogs should be bred to die?  I have no idea what you are getting at about third world countries eating dogs.  What does that have to do with shelter animals dying in the U.S.?

    There is overpopulation everywhere, it will never be fixed, and never end because no matter what, humans are suppose to be the top species and they are not perfect.  If you stop breeding dogs, they will die out.  Face that fact, they will.  If you spay/neuter EVERY dog, they will die out.  I, for one, will not allow that to happen.  Yes, there is overpopulation.  But start trying to stop puppymills and backyard breeders, not the good breeders.  Of course, it is easier to blame everyone than a select few.  Then again, we all are responsible.  But no one will blame themselves will they.  "But I didnt breed a dog or keep a dog intact or..."  Sure... You didnt.  But you didnt make yourself better than anyone.  You are still human, your race started this breeding, so it is still your fault.  I bet someone in your family has a dog intact.  I bet, at one point, you may have too.  I bet most of you have never done anything with your dogs.  You arent helping, you arent inspiring people to be better pet owners.  Support spay/neuter of PETS.  But there are those of us that want to better our breed and our breed's future.  There are those of us that are GOOD breeders.  If you want to point fingers at us, three are pointing at you.  What are you doing to stop the BAD breeding?  Seems like you are just blaming the GOOD breeders...  While the others get around the laws and are selling more pups everyday.  I havent seen a good public education by those that support total spay/neuter.  In fact, the best Public Education Seminar was done by a dog breeder and handler.  Makes some people wonder.

     
    What I blame the good breeders for is not doing more to solve the overpopulation problem and not doing more to police their own by trying to eliminate the bad breeders.  What am I doing?  I'm rescuing what was produced by breeders, and placed badly by breeders, and not protected for their lifetime by breeders.  I've also been doing education for 20+ years to try to stop people from breeding that don't have a clue how to do it properly. 

    No pointing fingers by me.  I believe in good pet owners, good rescues, good people, and good breeders.  I dont believe in the crap that there is no more good breeders when I know there are.  Sorry. 

     
    I believe in needles in haystacks too, and I'll keep looking for it, but so far I've been very disappointed.  I wasn't all that interested about your dog care prowess, but I am interested in how you define responsible breeding.  Can we at least come to an agreement on that?




    • Silver
    ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

    ORIGINAL: GoldNAuss
      [align=left] [align=left]Our grand total made off the litter is $4,000.00. Then you subtract off the litter expenses (4,000-5,000) and you end up $1,000.00 in the hole. [align=left] [align=left]Welcome to the  world of responsible breeding! So much for making money.






    That's all great if it convinces someone not to breed, but let's not let anyone think that it's an altruistic endeavor.  So, the responsible breeder described by Shadomoon donates the cost of one puppy to rescue.  Did you include that in your costs too?


    Never said they donate to shelters.  I said I do.  My mentor is a member of our breed rescue.  She donates more than $1000 a year to it. 

    You dont have to donate to shelters.  My questions were about pet owners...  Not about breeders.  Since I am a breeder (damn proud of it!) I posted my answers. 

    Since a breeder is already going in the whole with each litter, no it isnt a good "job" or hobby.  Breeders breed to better there breed, not to make cash. 

    Wanna make money, be a porn star.  Easy way to make money.  Wanna go in the hole, be a good dog breeder, easy way to need to hold two jobs. 

     
    I'm sorry, I confused you with someone else who wrote the following:
    quote:

    ORIGINAL: mrv

    Oh  I see,,,, like Dess's breeder who donates the cost of a puppy to rescue for each litter produced... lets see that is 7 litters in 32 years.  The breeder who has the dew claws of every puppy produced so she can do DNA tracking of inherited diseases, and does all health tests, doesnt breed until after 3 years old, corresponds will all puppy buyers and knows the death date of all but one puppy she has produced....Oh yeah  you are right there are only irresponsible breeders.... and I haven't even started a list for Nora's breeders who have been training other folks for better than 30 years as well as screening extensively and retrieving any puppy poorly placed... 
    • Silver
    ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

    ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

    ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat


    I appeciate your dedication to rescue - that's great !!  But when you talk about breeding dogs to meet a demand (which I've heard countless breeders say that responsible breeders don't do), and to be a tool for human use (hunting dogs), then how does that differ from anyone else's desired "use" of dogs?  How many hunting dogs are dumped in shelters at the end of the hunting season, or are discarded when they can no longer serve their purpose?  I've talked to rescues in states where hunting is more prolific, and have been told that typical hunting dogs are much more prevalent in the shelters than typical companion dogs (and yes, I know hunting dogs are companions too). 


    How do you know these dogs can work?  Working dogs (hunting/herding/etc) cannot just be PICKED from a shelter.  You would never know if the dog has instinct or not. 


    I'm talking about all the hunting dogs discarded, not suggesting that they be adopted in order to hunt.  I think many of them can't perform as required, but that's just more evidence that dogs are commodities that are abandoned when they are no longer suitable.  Why would you support breeding more to end up in shelters?


    Question?  Why would someone pay $700-$800 for a hunting dog and get rid of it after one season.  Does that make sense?  Never seen it done.  All the hunters around here have 1-2 hunting dogs.  Most are way over 7 and still out there.

    Irrational.

     
    Not if the dog didn't perform as required.  All I know is that it's commonly seen by a rescue/shelter worker in Tennessee who I've had many discussions with.  Also, what sense would it make for someone to pay $1000+ for a pet shop puppy and then dump it on rescue 3 days later?  I've had that happen.  I've had many that cost that much that were turned into rescue after 4 months.  If you mean people that would do that are irrational, then I'd agree.
    • Puppy
    I dont agree with Peta and never will.  However, in the matter of cat and mouse, it is always the same thing.  Agree to disagree.
     
    What I find disgusting is that people bash good breeders and I had to said up for us/them.  I dont respect that.  Yes there are problems, but we all are the problem.
     
    BTW, they are kill people for overpopulation.  China, India, Korea, etc.  They do kill and limit the amount of times a person can be "bred."  Usually female children are the bulk of this because males are thought to be better in this countries.  So...  they are doing this.
     
    And no I dont think dogs should be bred for meat or anything of that matter and yes there are huge overpopulation problems with sheep/cows due to the production of keeping these as pets.  The matter with it is the fact that farms take up too much land, land that could be used for technology.  I dont agree with this, it was just pointed out in another thread.
     
    I actually agree with a lot of what you said DogAdvocat.  However, this is the one point I am making:
    Someone has to keep breeding.  STOP puppymills/byb from breeding.  STOP bad breeders from breeding.  But allow the good breeders to breed.  Someone will need to.
     
    I am anti-Peta, anti-activist, I am a dog protector.  I believe in protecting the dog as a species.  I believe in stoping overpopulation by stopping the senseless breeding of pet quality animals.  There are dogs being bred for a purpose.  Showing is a purpose.  We are protecting structure so that future dogs have less structural issues.  We are also doing genetic screening to protect from future genetic issues. 
     
    I need to find that court case on this guy that got arrested for releasing dogs at a show.  He admitted to being from Peta.  I know they had a big write up about it.
     
    Breeders that sell to bad owners arent good breeders at all.  I require a lot more in my contracts then most.  I chase away more puppy buyers and I advise to rescue more than buy a pup.  I am not looking to make money.
     
    I believe I defined responsible breeding as I take it.  Just by the way I have responded and asked questions.  That makes me feel that there are less than that 10% of good breeders.  But they are still there.  I just dont want people to bash them for this overpopulation.  When these people seem to be doing more to help stop it than ANY other animal person I have seen.
     
    Senseless breeding isnt needed.  But good breeding is.  I feel a lot of people should not even own dogs.  Too many people are not good enough pet owners in my eyes.  But the problem is, we are human and we have free will.  No one will ever change anyone else's opinion if they dont want their opinion changed.  Take that as you want.  No law that anyone can pass will stop the senseless breeding of dogs.  There will never be a solution to pet overpopulation.  It will always be a bunch of people fighting over opinions of right and wrong.  There is nothing anyone can do about it.  Because as long as there is humans, there will be stupid things going on that no one can stop.  Breeding has been going on for centuries and there has always been an overpopulation.  But I dont think the problem is because of breeding...  The problem is, there isnt enough good pet homes out there. 
     
    Agree to disagree. 
     
    Sadly I have ill feelings towards Peta because of members that DID try to release dogs at shows that I know of.  I know this, and I know it happened to dear friends of mine.  They admitted to being Peta members.  I dont believe that Peta has done one thing good for the world.  However, I do believe that those wishing to protect the dog, have done so many great things.
     
    Kudos to you for taking great care of your dogs and doing things that you need to do.  Now attend a dog show, dog park, etc and host a seminar and teach the world.  Dont bash the good breeders, but stop the bad.  Only then will people start to learn something.  Until then, I leave it up to the good breeders to help educate the world.
     
    • Gold Top Dog
    Excuse me,,,, check the registration stats on belgians produced,,, we are small enough to be considered a "rare" breed.   Although our resources are stretched on occassion (even frequently) the club networks work very hard to get the job done.  Most breeders work really hard to get the placements right the first time. 
     
    The majority of animals ending up in shelters get there due to irresponsibility.  The offense taken at painting all breeders with the same brush is a natural reaction.