"Cruelty by Breeders"

ORIGINAL: mrv

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.

 
 
I agree here.  I had a litter of 6 puppies, 6 aussie pups.  Yes I had homes lined up before breeding, but if you were a breeder you know that it is better to help out those people if they wanted a pup sooner or to suggest a rescue.  They always fall thru.  I have 10 homes, 5 of which got pups from aussie breeders, 3 from their rescues, 1 from ARPH, and 1 is waiting on a foster from ARPH.  All because instead of me pushing for them to wait for my litter, I directed them elsewhere.  I am left with two puppies.  I have had over 20+  people wanting pups from me.  I screen buyers and I have turned a lot of people down.  My contract states the dog should be fed high quality dog food, kept indoors, taken to at least one obedience class (structured obedience class), should be kept away from certain drugs (dog drugs) due to health concerns with these drugs in the breed, etc.  I check references, vets, and neighborhoods.  I like to think I am not an idiot breeder that will place with just about anyone.
 
I have never seen a Belgian in a shelter.  So that must mean the breeders are doing their jobs.  I also dont agree they are aggressive.  (this was brought up in another group)
 
 

ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

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.

 
Thing is, I don't agree with them either, so technically we agree.  But what I won't do is sit back and watch people tell lies about them without speaking up.  They do enough questionable things without having to be accused of things they haven't done.  And they've done some good things too.  You don't have to support someone to recognize that they do both good and bad, probably like most people.

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.

 
When I find a good breeder, I'll probably agree with you.  I'm still searching.  I think we have a better chance of agreeing on this if I knew what you considered to be responsible breeding. 

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.

 
Sorry, but I live in the United States, and I think that it makes mores sense to solve our problems before we try to solve the problems in other countries.  In this county, homeless people are not being euthanized in shelters, so again, your analogy doesn't work.

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 can't address what I didn't see.  And I don't understand what you're saying.  If the cows/sheep are pets, then they are being cared for and are not overpopulated, right?  If they are being bred for meat then again there is no overpopulation because the farmer has control of how many are bred and how many die.  If you want to address this from a vegan standpoint where you object to them being bred at all, then I would think that would be a topic for another forum.

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.

 
Are you reading what I'm writing, because on this we do agree.  Of course just saying it should be stopped doesn't address how that's going to happen.  The problem as I see it is that a cross section of breeders, whether good or bad, are fighting legislation and regulations that would stop bad breeding and puppymills because they are afraid of the slippery slope that might someday affect them.  So again, what are responsible breeders doing to stop PMs, BYBs, and bad breeders (redundant)?  What are responsible breeders doing to clean up their own industry?  I noticed, for instance that you register with the AKC.  Why do you support them when they also support puppymillers and commercial breeders?  As a responsible breeder, why aren't you demanding that the AKC only register quality dogs instead of all the PMs and BYBs, and bad breeders dogs?

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 am an animal activist and a dog protector, and I am anti-AKC, and anti-Peta.  I believe in protecting the dog as an individual that has a personality and is purposely bred to be dependant on humans, but then humans don't live up to their part of the bargain, all too frequently.  I do not believe that showing is a sufficient reason to be bred.  I DO believe that preserving and improving the breed is a reason to be bred with the proviso that the uppy (and it's mother) has guaranteed lifetime care.

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.

 
Arrest isn't sufficient, conviction is.  But you also have to prove that he really was instructed by Peta to release dogs.  There are over zealous kids that will take it into their head to do all kinds of things, and they don't have to be members of Peta to do it.  It's just like the breeder who showed his dogs at Westminster and was then busted for operating one of the worst of puppymills - I wouldn't dream of blaming that on Westminster, show breeders, or even the AKC, though I think they should have known earlier.  If Peta were putting out advisories to their members telling them to let dogs out of cages at shows, you'd have a point.  But I'd also like to ask you what kind of breeder or handler leaves his/her dogs unattended anyplace in public?  A cage could easily be opened by a spectator wanting to see the dog closer, or a rival breeder that was unhappy with the way the judging went, or a child that was left unattended by parents.  I would certainly not leave my dogs alone - which is another reason why the claims just don't make sense.

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.

 
So if breeders who sell to bad owners aren't good breeders, and you've already said that most of the owners out there are ignorant, and certainly wouldn't be able to pass your little test in the prior post, then doesn't that say something about the scarcity of good breeders?

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.

 
I missed your definition of responsible breeding - do you have a link to that?  You don't want good breeders to be bashed for the overpopulation, but are those good breeders helping to stop the bad breeders?  Are they boycotting the AKC as long as it registers puppymill dogs?  Are they proposing legislation to restrict bad breeders?  You see, you think that they are doing more to stop it than any other animal person you've seen, but the people I see out on the front lines fighting to save shelter animals and to stop the bad breeding, aren't breeders (of any sort).  There are always a few exceptions to any rule, but what I see is breeders fighting to keep the status quo.  And frankly, that doesn't help me to think of them as responsible.

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. 

 
But if you know there's not enough good pet homes out there, then why fill them up with new puppies instead of taking care of the dogs already here?  One thing I find disturbing about these types of forums is how often I see people announcing that they are getting a new puppy, or just got one.  In comparison, probably less than 10% say they adopted an older dog.  There is a "puppy" mentality in this country that is promoted and capitalized on by breeders.  And that too does nothing to help the older dogs that are homeless.

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.

 
Peta has a spay/neuter van that assists with altering dogs and cats in poorer neighborhoods.  Does the AKC have that?  I'd call that one point on Peta's side of the paper.  Peta's undercover videos have exposed cruelty that was prosecuted on a factory pig farm.  Peta's undercover video exposed the beating of Sissy the El Paso zoo elephant by her handler/trainers, and because of that, Sissy is now enjoying her life at a Tennessee sanctuary where she has a huge amount of area to roam with other elephants in peace.  Peta has a program where it's employees build and distribute doghouses and hay to people in their area who insist on keeping their dogs outside, and the dogs have no shelter.  So yes, they have done things to help the world.  I still don't support them, but I just wanted to help you out to think of something helpful they've done.

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.

 
I've attended many dog shows.  I like the concession stands for getting dog supplies.  How do you think me attending a dog show is going to help homeless dogs?  I actually got permission to set up a booth at a dog show, where I showcased pictures of the dogs that my group had for adoption.  We had spay/neuter information and a donation jar.  By the end of the day, we'd gotten many complaints by breeder/ handlers that we didn't belong there, and there was less than a dollar in the donation jar.  We had purposely brought no live animals, so the complaint wasn't about that, and we had no literature that was anti-breeding.  If you think I should go to a dog show for the education - I got a lot of education that day.  I've been teaching the world, for over 20 years.  What you didn't include was the education that can be had at the local shelter - why is that?  It's a great place to both receive and give education.  I don't see many breeders there.  Occasionally I see breeders who are doing breed rescue, but they rarely pay any attention to anything but the ONE animal they came for.

ORIGINAL: mrv

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.

 
What are belgian breeders doing to force irresponsible breeders to be as responsible as belgian breeders are?  Are they fighting every proposed legislation while proposing none of their own?

ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

When I find a good breeder, I'll probably agree with you.  I'm still searching.  I think we have a better chance of agreeing on this if I knew what you considered to be responsible breeding. 

 
Really?  Wow you dont look very hard do you? []  Hmm...  How about Shelly Hollen, the goddess herself?  Self-proclaimed expert, annoying as hell, but smarter than your average activist.  Look her up and email her.  I am sure you will get an educated ear full.  How about...  Dr. Huntchinson?  The male Dr. Hutchinson.  The best repo vet in the US.  I'm sure he would LOVE to educate you.  Pat Hastings.  OH everyone LOVES Pat.  She is enough to make most people go crazy with, but she knows what she is doing.  Have you tried these people?  If not, try them.  I'm sure YOU will learn something.

Sorry, but I live in the United States, and I think that it makes mores sense to solve our problems before we try to solve the problems in other countries.  In this county, homeless people are not being euthanized in shelters, so again, your analogy doesn't work.

 
So they dont matter?  I know that isnt what you meant, but they are still your species.  I think you should care alittle bit.  I mean, it could be us in a few years...

Are you reading what I'm writing, because on this we do agree.  Of course just saying it should be stopped doesn't address how that's going to happen.  The problem as I see it is that a cross section of breeders, whether good or bad, are fighting legislation and regulations that would stop bad breeding and puppymills because they are afraid of the slippery slope that might someday affect them.  So again, what are responsible breeders doing to stop PMs, BYBs, and bad breeders (redundant)?  What are responsible breeders doing to clean up their own industry?  I noticed, for instance that you register with the AKC.  Why do you support them when they also support puppymillers and commercial breeders?  As a responsible breeder, why aren't you demanding that the AKC only register quality dogs instead of all the PMs and BYBs, and bad breeders dogs?

 
This makes me wonder if you fall AKC news.  They are trying to stop this.  New laws for AKC are in the making.  Guess if you dont care about AKC, you wouldnt follow it.  They are trying to stop mass porduction of puppymill bred dogs into AKC.  They are changing laws for pet stores and helping to prevent this.  I wont boycott AKC because they arent the problem.  The problem is the puppymills, not the registry.  A registry is just a registry.  People make it up.  Blame the people.  (not sure if you can since they are trying to fix it, but hell go for it)  I also show UKC and ASCA.  Dig up on those a bit.

So if breeders who sell to bad owners aren't good breeders, and you've already said that most of the owners out there are ignorant, and certainly wouldn't be able to pass your little test in the prior post, then doesn't that say something about the scarcity of good breeders?

 
Sadly, it is true here.  There are good owners, but those are usually performance people or people that actually DO things with their dogs.  You know, stupid AKC stuff.  I already said there was a lacking of good breeders.  But, then again, the lacking of good homes isnt anyone's fault.  I have helped turn "eh" homes into good homes with education.  I wonder what others have done...

I missed your definition of responsible breeding - do you have a link to that?  You don't want good breeders to be bashed for the overpopulation, but are those good breeders helping to stop the bad breeders?  Are they boycotting the AKC as long as it registers puppymill dogs?  Are they proposing legislation to restrict bad breeders?  You see, you think that they are doing more to stop it than any other animal person you've seen, but the people I see out on the front lines fighting to save shelter animals and to stop the bad breeding, aren't breeders (of any sort).  There are always a few exceptions to any rule, but what I see is breeders fighting to keep the status quo.  And frankly, that doesn't help me to think of them as responsible.

 
You must not have been a writer or a big reader in high school/college.  The context clues really scream here...  No reason to boycott AKC.  Umm what are good breeders doing to stop puppymills?  Public education, trying to pass rational bills, (that excludes the bill in CA, sorry), flaming these puppymills (wow this has helped, really!), reporting puppymills (did you know in places they are against the law?), helping with rescues, etc.  Hmm I see them helping...  Need names of these seminar workers...  Try the people I listed above.  Sure they can give you names!

I've attended many dog shows.  I like the concession stands for getting dog supplies.  How do you think me attending a dog show is going to help homeless dogs?  I actually got permission to set up a booth at a dog show, where I showcased pictures of the dogs that my group had for adoption.  We had spay/neuter information and a donation jar.  By the end of the day, we'd gotten many complaints by breeder/ handlers that we didn't belong there, and there was less than a dollar in the donation jar.  We had purposely brought no live animals, so the complaint wasn't about that, and we had no literature that was anti-breeding.  If you think I should go to a dog show for the education - I got a lot of education that day.  I've been teaching the world, for over 20 years.  What you didn't include was the education that can be had at the local shelter - why is that?  It's a great place to both receive and give education.  I don't see many breeders there.  Occasionally I see breeders who are doing breed rescue, but they rarely pay any attention to anything but the ONE animal they came for.

 
Not shocked.  Then again, I am sure there were rational people and irrational people.  I'm not sure I want to write more to that...

So lets see.  Not enough good homes...  Not enough good breeders...  Not enough homes period...  My opinion is this.  I have a litter of pups, 20+ homes apply.  3 homes are selected.  Out of 20+ homes.  Why are only 3 selected?  Well...  I feel that the other lot could be better with a rescue, another breeder, more research, not a dog at all, or are not, in my opinion, ready for a dog.  These could be GREAT homes.  Sure the dog will be fed Kibbles N Bits and sleep on the bed and have free roam of the house.  Sure...  Happy dog!  I mean, the American dream...  However I dont want a dog I bred being the alpha of the house, being fed crap food, and have to worry about it getting fat and sick from it.  Sure it is a good home, like most American pet homes, but it isnt a home I want my dog in.  So there are good homes, yes, but they are excellent homes.  Enough people email/call about puppies, but that doesnt mean it is a home I want my dog in.  That person is better off getting an email/call back from me, telling them about good food, training, and crates.  They are better off looking for their perfect pet at a shelter where there are dogs that need them as long as they are educated enough to feed good food and train.  (most shelters offer training)  I want experienced homes.  But I set my bar higher than most breeders.  Some dont give a crap about where their dogs go.  I like to think I am being responsible because I do care.  But when I sit here and read what all you "animal activists" have to say, I have to wonder sometimes. 
 
Heres a plan.  For DogAdvocat and I.  When you find a good responsible breeder and I find a good responsible Animal Activist, we will debate this further.  Until then, I will stick by my breeders/responsible pet owners/performance people, and you can stick by your animal activists.  Because this is a debate that has never ended.  Why should it now?
 
Again, agree to disagree? 

Since about 90% of the dogs at the dog park are rescues, the majority of us agreed that there really are no "responsible breeders" today.

I understand the sentiment but you need to consider facts, not feelings in this matter.  Look at the community of dogs with low litter registrations:  Harriers, Salukis, Otterhounds, Pharaoh Hounds, Deerhounds, IWs, Ibizans....the list goes on.  There's a reason there are low litter registrations and it's not because there are "no responsible breeders."  It's because there are responsible breeders out there.  Breeders that don't breed every heat or every other heat.  Breeders that are carefully selecting and approving potential homes.  Breeders that would rather not have a litter than place a pup in an inappropriate home.

Yes, they're out there.  You just need to look for them.  And then when you find them you'll also find some of the best loved dogs and the happiest owners in those lines as well.

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.

You've never been around the appalachian at the end of deer season then.  Rather than spend the money to house, feed and vet the deer dogs, some of the less honorable hunters will dump their dogs.

ORIGINAL SHADOMOON
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.

I agree with so much of what you've posted, but I wanted to tell you that people are irrational and stupid. Dumping hunting dogs doesn't happen around here much either---but it does in some states where hunters don't want to carry a poor performing dog for another year to try again. (The hunting dog message boards I visit clog up at certain times of the year as rescues coordinate pulling dogs and shipping them to fosters in other states.[])
 
Bottom line: people who see dogs as tools don't keep them if they aren't needed anymore.
 
I know three dogs off the top of my head with titles in hunting or performance (obedience and agility) who were returned to their breeders because the owners were no longer going to hunt with them or compete in those events. I am talking about healthy, well-behaved, good-tempered dogs with astounding pedigrees who cost a great deal of money to own and train.
 
These dogs came from three excellent breeders who kept track of their dogs and were clear they would take the dogs back at any time. That's why the fate of a dog depends so much on the breeder screening the homes, checking up on the dogs and making it clear that they will take the dog back at any time.
 
I love the contracts I have seen with a financial penalty built in if you relinquish the dog to anyone but the original breeder. LOVE them. Nothing like signing a piece of paper that says you owe $5,000 if you give up the dog. Of course having the breeder check in with you every few months doesn't hurt either.[]
 
[sm=2cents.gif]

ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat


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.

Society may not be overtly euthanizing people by the millions, but millions of children are warehoused in orphanages in third world countries, much as we warehouse unwanted pets. Millions of people die on the streets much as homeless dogs and cats die for lack of shelter. Millions of people live short miserable lives because of lack of resources, and epidemics of contagious diseases combined with non-existent health care and sanitation, directly attributable to human over population. Not to mention energy depletion, habitat destruction, deterioration of farm land.... all attributable to over population by humans. So, do you advocate mandatory sterilization of all North Americans, since we are by far the major over-consumer, until all parentless children are adopted and all homeless people are sheltered, and everyone has access to basic levels of health care? Or, do you think that the overpopulation problem is complex enough that mandatory sterilization is a poor solution?

As to your question about what constitutes a responsible breeder here are my criteria:
- really screens breeding animals for common health problems in the breed - not just lip service, but shells out the bucks for the x-rays, baer tests, eye checks, and DNA tests, and removes dogs that fail the tests from breeding.
- microchips all puppies before they leave to new homes and registers the microchip in the BREEDERs name. Reclaims any dog of any age that ends up in any shelter for any reason.
- is actively involved in showing breeding animals. For dogs bred primarily as companion dogs, either the parents of each litter have earned a CH, CD or agility title, or the breeder has over the years trained/handled at least a dozen dogs to these titles. This doesn't guarantee that the dog is breeding quality, but it does teach the breeder a lot about the dog that they don't learn by just keeping it in the back yard, and it would eliminate all the folks selling "real cute" puppies from cardboard boxes in the grocery store parking lot, and it would eliminate all the commercial breeders. For working hunting and stock dogs some other criteria besides titles would have to be devised, but some sort of rigorous evidence of the dog's ability would have to be provided.
- contributes 15 % of the money taken in - not net profit - on the sale of puppies to rescue and/or research on screening for health problems within the breed.

There are lots of other things that could be listed, but the breeder that manages to meet the above criteria is very unlikely to be mass producing puppies that end up in shelters.

ORIGINAL: buster the show dog




As to your question about what constitutes a responsible breeder here are my criteria:
- really screens breeding animals for common health problems in the breed - not just lip service, but shells out the bucks for the x-rays, baer tests, eye checks, and DNA tests, and removes dogs that fail the tests from breeding.

How do you explain the fact that many dogs have health problems that are well known  for that breed.  For  instance, Golden Retrievers have a 60+ % rate of getting cancer. Bulldogs and Pugs have breathing problems Bull Mastiffs have a host of problems including :bloat, eye problems, cardiac problems, hip dysplasia etc..etc...Why do people continue to breed an animal that is disease prone?  I believe in the UK, they have recently banned about 20+ breeds because of these problems.

ORIGINAL: Bobsk8


How do you explain the fact that many dogs have health problems that are well known  for that breed.  For  instance, Golden Retrievers have a 60+ % rate of getting cancer. Bulldogs and Pugs have breathing problems Bull Mastiffs have a host of problems including :bloat, eye problems, cardiac problems, hip dysplasia etc..etc...Why do people continue to breed an animal that is disease prone?  I believe in the UK, they have recently banned about 20+ breeds because of these problems.

Because not everyone is a responsible breeder. For example, the commercial breeders who would be exempt by your beloved mandatory spay/neuter law don't screen for health problems. Your solution seems to be to ban all dog breeding because some breeders irresponsible. I think a better approach would be to work to identify the most egregiously poor breeders and eliminate them, without infringing on the rights of others to have the type of pet they prefer.

Furthermore, there are health problems that simply don't show up until the dog is older, and hence those problems are difficult to remove. PRA, cancer, bloat, hypothyroidism, seizures often don't occur until dogs are well past the breeding age. So, it's impossible to know at the time of breeding whether a golden will develop cancer six years later or not. People are prone to heart disease, cancer, and a variety of autoimmune problems. Shall we stop breeding because we aren't all healthy?

 

Look at the community of dogs with low litter registrations:  Harriers, Salukis, Otterhounds, Pharaoh Hounds, Deerhounds, IWs, Ibizans....the list goes on.  There's a reason there are low litter registrations and it's not because there are "no responsible breeders."  It's because there are responsible breeders out there. 

Yes, they're out there.  You just need to look for them.  And then when you find them you'll also find some of the best loved dogs and the happiest owners in those lines as well.

There are obvioulsy some irresponsible Pharaoh Hound Breeders out there. I've already seen one of those dogs up on Petfinder in my local area. And I've also seen a poster board posted on a road sign, not far from my house, offering pharaoh puppies for sale. Most people don't even know what the breed is and already we are seeing them for sale posted on the side of the road.

ORIGINAL: Bobsk8

ORIGINAL: buster the show dog




As to your question about what constitutes a responsible breeder here are my criteria:
- really screens breeding animals for common health problems in the breed - not just lip service, but shells out the bucks for the x-rays, baer tests, eye checks, and DNA tests, and removes dogs that fail the tests from breeding.

How do you explain the fact that many dogs have health problems that are well known  for that breed.  For  instance, Golden Retrievers have a 60+ % rate of getting cancer. Bulldogs and Pugs have breathing problems Bull Mastiffs have a host of problems including :bloat, eye problems, cardiac problems, hip dysplasia etc..etc...Why do people continue to breed an animal that is disease prone?  I believe in the UK, they have recently banned about 20+ breeds because of these problems.

 
 
This isnt entirely true.  Not 60+% of goldens.  Where do you get your numbers for this?  I would LOVE to know.  Do you know anything about aussies?
 
EVERYTHING has health problems.  YOUR dog probably has more genetic issues behind it than mine.  Do you know any of them? 
 
Again, pointing fingers. 
 
As for the comment on bad Pharaoh hound breeders.  There are bad breeders everywhere, but that also means there isnt a great pet owner.  Cant blame the breeder entirely when a pet owner can lie.  Not all breeders are so exclusive about picking homes.  But we would love to blame them huh?
 

ORIGINAL: Shadomoon

ORIGINAL: DogAdvocat

When I find a good breeder, I'll probably agree with you.  I'm still searching.  I think we have a better chance of agreeing on this if I knew what you considered to be responsible breeding. 

Really?  Wow you dont look very hard do you? []  Hmm...  How about Shelly Hollen, the goddess herself?  Self-proclaimed expert, annoying as hell, but smarter than your average activist.  Look her up and email her.  I am sure you will get an educated ear full.  How about...  Dr. Huntchinson?  The male Dr. Hutchinson.  The best repo vet in the US.  I'm sure he would LOVE to educate you.  Pat Hastings.  OH everyone LOVES Pat.  She is enough to make most people go crazy with, but she knows what she is doing.  Have you tried these people?  If not, try them.  I'm sure YOU will learn something.

 
Why should I have to look very hard?  Not only do I have no interest in supporting more breeding with my money, but I shouldn't have to go to the "best repo vet" or any "self-proclaimed expert" to find a responsible breeder.  If they're that rare, then my point has been made.

Sorry, but I live in the United States, and I think that it makes mores sense to solve our problems before we try to solve the problems in other countries.  In this county, homeless people are not being euthanized in shelters, so again, your analogy doesn't work.

So they dont matter?  I know that isnt what you meant, but they are still your species.  I think you should care alittle bit.  I mean, it could be us in a few years...

 
Sure they matter, as do the dogs that are being beaten in Korea so the adrenalin will tenderize their flesh for eating, as do the dogs in the Phillipines who are sold in the street markets where they use tin cans as muzzles and tie their paws behind their backs to keep them immobilized.  But the point remains, we can do something about the problems in this country, so why are you trying to deflect the focus to countries where we can do nothing?

Are you reading what I'm writing, because on this we do agree.  Of course just saying it should be stopped doesn't address how that's going to happen.  The problem as I see it is that a cross section of breeders, whether good or bad, are fighting legislation and regulations that would stop bad breeding and puppymills because they are afraid of the slippery slope that might someday affect them.  So again, what are responsible breeders doing to stop PMs, BYBs, and bad breeders (redundant)?  What are responsible breeders doing to clean up their own industry?  I noticed, for instance that you register with the AKC.  Why do you support them when they also support puppymillers and commercial breeders?  As a responsible breeder, why aren't you demanding that the AKC only register quality dogs instead of all the PMs and BYBs, and bad breeders dogs?

This makes me wonder if you fall AKC news.  They are trying to stop this.  New laws for AKC are in the making.  Guess if you dont care about AKC, you wouldnt follow it.  They are trying to stop mass porduction of puppymill bred dogs into AKC.  They are changing laws for pet stores and helping to prevent this.  I wont boycott AKC because they arent the problem.  The problem is the puppymills, not the registry.  A registry is just a registry.  People make it up.  Blame the people.  (not sure if you can since they are trying to fix it, but hell go for it)  I also show UKC and ASCA.  Dig up on those a bit.
 
It would be very simple for the AKC to stop puppymilled dogs, or at least their support for them - all they need to do is limit the number of litters that can be registered by any one breeder or kennel.  A red flag should be raised when a kennel is registering hundreds/thousands.  And I don't buy the idea that they are ONLY a registry at all - if they were, they wouldn't be lobbying the assembly in California.  They wouldn't be mustering the breeders to fight laws.

So if breeders who sell to bad owners aren't good breeders, and you've already said that most of the owners out there are ignorant, and certainly wouldn't be able to pass your little test in the prior post, then doesn't that say something about the scarcity of good breeders?

Sadly, it is true here.  There are good owners, but those are usually performance people or people that actually DO things with their dogs.  You know, stupid AKC stuff.  I already said there was a lacking of good breeders.  But, then again, the lacking of good homes isnt anyone's fault.  I have helped turn "eh" homes into good homes with education.  I wonder what others have done...

Actually, the lacking of good homes is the fault of those breeding too many dogs for those good homes.  The fact that there is a lack means that there are too many dogs.  Why breed so many that it causes a lack? 

I missed your definition of responsible breeding - do you have a link to that?  You don't want good breeders to be bashed for the overpopulation, but are those good breeders helping to stop the bad breeders?  Are they boycotting the AKC as long as it registers puppymill dogs?  Are they proposing legislation to restrict bad breeders?  You see, you think that they are doing more to stop it than any other animal person you've seen, but the people I see out on the front lines fighting to save shelter animals and to stop the bad breeding, aren't breeders (of any sort).  There are always a few exceptions to any rule, but what I see is breeders fighting to keep the status quo.  And frankly, that doesn't help me to think of them as responsible.

You must not have been a writer or a big reader in high school/college.  The context clues really scream here... 

 
I've noticed that when people are losing an argument, they often result to criticism of writing styles, spelling errors, or typos.  I've also found that people that tend to do that are ripe for criticism about their own writing errors, if someone cares enough to point them out.  Personally, I don't care about things like that - it does nothing to advance the cause of the dogs in trouble.
 

No reason to boycott AKC.  Umm what are good breeders doing to stop puppymills?  Public education, trying to pass rational bills, (that excludes the bill in CA, sorry), flaming these puppymills (wow this has helped, really!), reporting puppymills (did you know in places they are against the law?), helping with rescues, etc.  Hmm I see them helping...  Need names of these seminar workers...  Try the people I listed above.  Sure they can give you names!

Public education is not shutting down puppymills.  It's going to take legislation to do that.  What "rational" bills have breeders proposed?

I've attended many dog shows.  I like the concession stands for getting dog supplies.  How do you think me attending a dog show is going to help homeless dogs?  I actually got permission to set up a booth at a dog show, where I showcased pictures of the dogs that my group had for adoption.  We had spay/neuter information and a donation jar.  By the end of the day, we'd gotten many complaints by breeder/ handlers that we didn't belong there, and there was less than a dollar in the donation jar.  We had purposely brought no live animals, so the complaint wasn't about that, and we had no literature that was anti-breeding.  If you think I should go to a dog show for the education - I got a lot of education that day.  I've been teaching the world, for over 20 years.  What you didn't include was the education that can be had at the local shelter - why is that?  It's a great place to both receive and give education.  I don't see many breeders there.  Occasionally I see breeders who are doing breed rescue, but they rarely pay any attention to anything but the ONE animal they came for.

Not shocked.  Then again, I am sure there were rational people and irrational people.  I'm not sure I want to write more to that...

 
I have no idea what you mean by the above.

So lets see.  Not enough good homes...  Not enough good breeders...  Not enough homes period...  My opinion is this.  I have a litter of pups, 20+ homes apply.  3 homes are selected.  Out of 20+ homes.  Why are only 3 selected?  Well...  I feel that the other lot could be better with a rescue, another breeder, more research, not a dog at all, or are not, in my opinion, ready for a dog.  These could be GREAT homes.  Sure the dog will be fed Kibbles N Bits and sleep on the bed and have free roam of the house.  Sure...  Happy dog!  I mean, the American dream...  However I dont want a dog I bred being the alpha of the house, being fed crap food, and have to worry about it getting fat and sick from it.  Sure it is a good home, like most American pet homes, but it isnt a home I want my dog in.  So there are good homes, yes, but they are excellent homes.  Enough people email/call about puppies, but that doesnt mean it is a home I want my dog in.  That person is better off getting an email/call back from me, telling them about good food, training, and crates.  They are better off looking for their perfect pet at a shelter where there are dogs that need them as long as they are educated enough to feed good food and train.  (most shelters offer training)  I want experienced homes.  But I set my bar higher than most breeders.  Some dont give a crap about where their dogs go.  I like to think I am being responsible because I do care.  But when I sit here and read what all you "animal activists" have to say, I have to wonder sometimes. 

 
Funny, but from what I've heard from breeders claiming to be responsible is that they don't even begin a breeding until they have lined up homes for the puppies.  You have a litter and then look for homes?  And you wonder why I think it's so hard to find a responsible breeder?  Breeders can't even agree on the definition and criteria of responsible breeding.

Heres a plan.  For DogAdvocat and I.  When you find a good responsible breeder and I find a good responsible Animal Activist, we will debate this further.  Until then, I will stick by my breeders/responsible pet owners/performance people, and you can stick by your animal activists.  Because this is a debate that has never ended.  Why should it now?

 
I notice that you still haven't given your definition of responsible breeding - is there a reason for that?

Again, agree to disagree? 

 
If you are saying you no longer interested in discussing it, that's your choice.

ORIGINAL: Xerxes

Since about 90% of the dogs at the dog park are rescues, the majority of us agreed that there really are no "responsible breeders" today.

I understand the sentiment but you need to consider facts, not feelings in this matter.  Look at the community of dogs with low litter registrations:  Harriers, Salukis, Otterhounds, Pharaoh Hounds, Deerhounds, IWs, Ibizans....the list goes on.  There's a reason there are low litter registrations and it's not because there are "no responsible breeders."  It's because there are responsible breeders out there.  Breeders that don't breed every heat or every other heat.  Breeders that are carefully selecting and approving potential homes.  Breeders that would rather not have a litter than place a pup in an inappropriate home.

Yes, they're out there.  You just need to look for them.  And then when you find them you'll also find some of the best loved dogs and the happiest owners in those lines as well.

 
Couldn't low litter registrations also be attributed to the fact that those breeds aren't as popular, and therefore as easy to sell, as the more popular breeds?  The average person knows what a Cocker Spaniel looks like, but wouldn't know a Harrier if it was standing right in front of them.
 
Also, the question remains, shouldn't being a responsible breeder include working to regulate all breeders to be just as responsible as these breeders are?

Dog Advocat.  Since I dont want to sit here and address everything like before because it seems you are blinded by your own opinion, which is really what makes a human just what they are.  So no insult there, okay?
 
Writing styles and reading styles, as I wrote before, and the fact I said is screamed context clues.  I am NOT insulting your ability to read and write.  I am suggestioning you arent understanding enough.  So, may I ask, what is your view on a responsible breeder?
 
Should they:
Have titled dogs
Compete with their dogs
Donate to shelters
Help with overpopulation by helping shelters
Breed only a set number of litters
Breed to better the breed
etc?
 
Or... In your eyes is a responsible breeder a person that doesnt breed at all?  Because in YOU context clues, this is what I am getting.  I am a writer, I can read between lines.  Your arguement with this doesnt seem plausible because you dont support both ends.  You see one side, but you need to see both.  A responsible breeder isnt the problem, nor is the responsible pet owner or the responsible rescue group, or responsible organization.  The problem lies with the OTHER people.  I see from both ends.  You, however, are again blinded by your own opinion.  I dont want to argue, there is no point.  I am trying to help in my ways, and I am.  I know what I am doing and how to do it.  I am not a bad person, I am not the type to push my views on others.  In an arguement, if you want it to stay civil, both sides must agree to look at both ends.  I havent seen you even consider certain facts, or opinions of other people.  This creates ill feelings and senseless fighting.  You arent educating this way.  Again, not to be rude or harsh, I call it how it is and I do apologize if I do hurt feelings here.  Give everyone alittle credit.  I am not coming in here going "I am right and you are wrong."  I am coming in here and saying, "I see what you are saying and I agree but I also disagree."  If you cant do that, then how can you educate people?
 
Now, AKC can limit what it does and never did I say the people that run it are great people.  And as for responsible breeders, you dont have to look that hard.  I could give you a list but you would deny it and look past it.  You have shown you dont want to learn anything.  So it falls on deaf ears.  Contact the people I listed, then talk to me about trying to learn something.
 
So far I have learned that people that are so called "Animal Actvists" are nothing more than ignorant anti-breeding adults that lack hobbies and have no basic understanding of dogs, dog sports, and people skills.  There are people in this forum that are trying to educate both ways.  I am seeing things in a different light from them and that alters my opinion slightly.  But...  I will never consider myself an animal actvist as long as the ones that do act like they are God.  If all breeders acting like they are the best thing in the world, I would probably not support them either.  I have been to more dog shows than I can count.  I NEVER see an Animal Activist there.  I see breeders, BREEDERS, trying to help with overpopulation and public education.  I have been to Seminars, Humane Societies, and talked with different rescues.  I havent seen an Animal Activist educating the public.  I have seen Breeders, performance dog trainers, and AKC reps (wow that was amazing) trying to educate the public.  Please, give me a good instance that there has been an Animal Activist (you know, the ones not in AKC, anti-breeder, etc) that has educated and helped the public?  Why is it that people know the names of Pat Hastings, George Alston, and other show people, but not Animal Activists?  Are these people not Animal Activists themselves?  Donating time and money to rescues and research.  I am trying to see a good Activist in the mess of the bad.  Can you PLEASE help me here?  I am really trying to be proved wrong and change my view a bit more.  There is no sarcasm here.
 
Consider my side of the debate, find me a good Animal Activist that is both knowledgeable in breeding, competition, performance, training, grooming, and health concerns and maybe it will help put me on your side.  I am not learning anything here except that people will bash people for no reason at all.  Keep everything Civil.  If you dont want to list me names here, send me a PM.  PM me to debate further if you dont want to here.  PM me if you think I am stepping over the line.  PM and help me learn why you are right and I am wrong.  Or we can agree to disagree, leave each other at that, and go back to educating on our on front.  You will find I dont give in unless proven wrong.  I have yet to be proven wrong.   I am opening that up to anyone, but I am hard to prove wrong.  Only for the fact, I will consult others and I will gain facts from both ends. 
 
Again, I do not ever intend to be rude.  I am more stoical than anything.  Best to let nothing ever be personal because people are always wrong.