"Cruelty by Breeders"

Why shut down the BYBs?  There's no reason to shut them down, all that's needed is to bring them into compliance with the same procedures that responsible breeders already do. 

 
Ok, you know DogAdvocat, you contradict yourself so much and so often, I'm just confused now.  First you complain about how there are "no responsible breeders", then later on end up back pedaling admitting they do exist, but they're so scarce "You can't find them".  The real truth is that you just don't WANT to find them.
 
On top of that, as you complain about how there are no responsible breeders and yadda yadda yadda, dogs and cats in shelters, overpopulatio, insert more emotional rhetoric here...you say the above!  WTHeck!?  That doesn't make sense!
 
Then you say that first breeders are too loose, and in the next breath they're too strict!  Which one is it?!

I just got to reading this thread today, very thought provoking! What many dog "advocates" seem to forget is that we live in a free society. Almost all legislation affects only those that obey the law already! If tomorrow all the "ethical" breeders payed the breeder fees, or spayed and nuetered their dogs, then what? J.Q. Public's dog's would still be having "accidental" breedings, the puppy millers would go underground to states without the legislation, and then the only puppies readily available would be poorly bred! Here in the Panhandle of Texas the average Joe cannot believe that someone would think to tell them what they can or cannot do with their own property! My husband and I are considered weird because we don't breed our Border Collies to make some bucks, since we have some good dogs. It's an instant gratification society. If J.Q. wants a Labrador pup for his kids, he wants it now! If an ethical breeder trys to educate him, they are snobs. Then if the poorly bred, unsocialized pup he does buy bites one of his own poorly raised children, he screams bloody murder about "breeders". No matter how hard the breeders try, or how hard the rescuers try, there will always be those people who consider a dog as disposable property. They will buy the current fad breed, they will  "forget" to sterilize, they will get tired of it when it grows up. Our next door neighbor has had 13 dogs in 7 years, and had 2 mixed breed litters. The dogs have been poisened, run over, and dumped, most never seeing their second birthday. They are never given veterinary care, and the females are never spayed. I rescued one of the girls, whelped her litter, and found good homes for them all, and they had a new pup before this ltter was weaned. I was tickled when they finally fenced their yard, BUT it was to keep the dog out! They didn't want him messing in the yard where the four kids play. Now the point of this is, how do we educate the children of this family? To them, dogs are just easily replaceable "toys". They in turn will teach this attitude to their children. Can we have a state run society that looks at some families and says"Sorry, No dog for you!!"? Is there an answer to this problem of over population, I really don't think so.

Almost all legislation affects only those that obey the law already! If tomorrow all the "ethical" breeders payed the breeder fees, or spayed and nuetered their dogs, then what? J.Q. Public's dog's would still be having "accidental" breedings, the puppy millers would go underground to states without the legislation, and then the only puppies readily available would be poorly bred!

 
Thanks for bringing a fresh perspective to this debate.  I think you hit the nail on the head.

Dstull - Huge Kudos!  You are soo~ right on that.
 
Xeph - I agree very much with what you said.
 
Ron2 - Wow.  Agreed.
 
Just had to comment.  []  Sometimes people think they are standing alone.  A pat on the back from me.

[blockquote]
[blockquote]

[blockquote]Have a question. Shadomoon mentioned the name Hutchinson....is that a veterinarian?  If so, could he be from Ohio?
[/blockquote]


Yes he is from Ohio and yes he is a Vet.  All around vet, specialist in reproduction, othropedics, and something else I cant remember.  He use to breed/show dogs. 

Thanks for answering. I kind of thought it might be. My dog Bubblegum had her pups thru his clinic...she was probably born thru his clinic herself. 
 
dstull, I agree with you 100%.   Many people just don't feel their dogs are a part of their family, and their children grow up with the same attitude.
 
Reading this thread for days, I am feeling hopeless on this whole issue.  People have been trying to educate against puppy mills and pet stores for years now. The Hunte Corp. is getting bigger and bigger. There is more and more BYBs. Shows on TV talking against Puppy Mills.   Where is it getting us?  [/blockquote][/blockquote]

Dyan you are right.   I see lots of things on the web about puppymills and bybs and...  it seems the lot of them are written by breeders.  Breeders pushing for spay/neuter of pets.  Breeders pushing to stop puppymills...  Breeders trying to CALMLY educate byb.  Breeders...  But if there arent good breeders left (the original topic) then how can this breeders be doing this?  Does that mean that bad breeders are doing all this work?
 
Of course there ARE animal activists and others doing their part, but they often include these good breeders into their ignorant reasoning. 
 
These "permits" that some states are suggesting would get us no where...  why?  Because no matter what, pet stores are businesses and they make money for the state.  Pet stores get their animals from mills.  The permits are a lot of money, but mills can afford it with the mass production of their animals.  No state wants to lose money, and animal sales produce money, which boasts economy.  Instead of fighting that there are good breeders, we should be fighting against puppymills.  But, of course, it would get us no where considering that business makes money, and money gets a state or country out of dept.  In a perfect world, we wouldnt be where we are today.

ORIGINAL: mrv

me being the devil's advocate:  how is mandatory spay neuter not the same type of restriction and regulation of personal property?

 
Assuming you're referring to my comment about not being able to restrict the sale of personal property, I think the difference is that it is legal to mandate what you do with that personal property.  Let's go back to cars, for instance.  No one can tell car dealsers that they can no longer sell cars, but they can be told that they have to supply the cars with pollution controls and safety devices.  No one can tell an individual that they can't own a car (though not everyone can legally drive one), but car owners can be told that they have to license the car, they have to smog it, they have to obey rules of the road, they can't park it in specific areas, etc.

ORIGINAL: mrv

Regarding millers with CHs in pedigrees.

Because millers lie and use agents who go through the purchase process and then sell the dog again (in conflict with the contract).  I am aware of one situation in which this occurred and the puppy purchaser contacted the breeder and reported the puppy was dead.
I know of individuals and clubs who have spent years and thousands to enforce a contract, get a dog back or buy up a breeding population.  And with a court order find that same miller back in business despite the settlement that was developed.

 
Thereby disproving that responsibly bred dogs don't end up in situations like that.  I agree that all that is true, but it would be so simply solved if breeders would just alter their puppies before sale.

ORIGINAL: Shadomoon
If you cant stand breeders, why go to shows?  You can order stuff online you know?  Find your local feed store, I bet they have stuff....  Or go to a performance show instead of one filled with "sensless breeders."  I mean, I see rescue things going on at shows all the time, no one ever complained.  Hell, in UKC you can show mutts in juniors.  They have BIG rescue things there.  So again, why did you get negative reviews?  I told people at the humane society I breed dogs, and even the ones against breeding dont "kick me out" or do anything like that.  In fact, most are really nice people and we all know we share different opinions.  Nothing negative.

 
Oh this is choice !!!  If I didn't attend the shows, you'd say that I should do so for an education. 
 
Of course I can order things online, but why shouldn't I see what I'm buying for myself instead of depending on a catalog description? 
 
You keep asking about the negative reviews - I've told you what happened.  You're not going to believe my opinion on why they did it, so why ask?  As for the humane society not kicking you out, I guess they're more tolerant than the breeders were at the show I described.  I know of some humane societies and shelters that won't deal with breeders at all, which I think is a big mistake because they are discouraging those breeders who do breed rescue - but I certainly advise they alter the dogs before release - for breeder and public alike.

ORIGINAL: ron2

What possible sense does it make to try to educate 12 puppy buyers instead of regulating 1 breeder that would sell to them?

The same reason that you educate the public against the misuse of drugs and alcohol. Education wins over prohibition.

 
And how's that working for us?  Ready to just educate instead of having drunk driving laws?  How many people do you think give up cocaine because of education?  I don't know what the latest statistics are on the drug war, but it seems to me that we're not doing too good - and there's lots of education out there.
 

If people quit buying from mills and byb's, they go out of business, just like icehouses have largely gone by the wayside since many refigerators have an icemaker. When the market demand is gone, so is the industry.

 
Your analogy is poor because refrigerators were in existence before the icemaking industry folded.  So what is it that is offered as a better product than byb/pm dogs?  Since responsible breeders don't breed to meet a demand, then the only way to make it happen is to "create" more responsible breeders - in other words, require those byb's to be more responsible.
 

A good owner negates the need for a breeder to take back a dog. Sometimes, a good owner doesn't always stay the same. They may have been earnest at the start, well enough to pass a breeder's interview, and actually meant what they said. Some years down the road, they changed. So, penalizing the breeder doesn't accomplish anything. A dog breeder doesn't necessarily have the powers of Johnny in "The Dead Zone." But I have seen my share of questionable breeders who bred without enough owners lined up, if at all. And they are at the Home Depot parking lot selling their animals to whomever. Technically, they could be fined for vending without a license. But the police are busy trying to control the meth problem. It's funny how the byb's do it on the weekends during the mobile adoption from the local shelter. You can buy a pup from a pick-up with no health tests for $200 or $300 or walk over to the mobile kennel and get a pup with general health check, first shots, adoption, and spay/neuter at an area supporting vet for the grand total of $44.

 
Is that the meth problem that should be handled by education????  I'm not totally sure of your point here, but I do think that breeders can have a lot of control over picking potential homes just as rescue does.  When a rescue can have a 99% success rate in the homes they choose, why can't breeders do the same?  IMO, responsible breeders do.

I haven't had to purchase a pet, yet. They're everywhere, just walk out the door. In my town, there are no curbs. So an attempt to operate a curb painting business would be an abject failure. If the demand is not there, neither is the industry. And that takes education. Good breeders are doing their part but they can't stop a determined buyer from going somewhere else less reputable. Education and a change of mind can stop that, though.

 
Except that what I think you're suggesting is that education will reduce the demand.  Does that mean it will convince people that they really don't want a dog at all?  Or does it mean that it will teach people to go to a responsible breeder?  Somehow I really doubt that the former will ever happen.  Look how many people are turned down by responsible breeders or by rescue, and will then just go out and find someone that will sell/adopt them a dog.  The only way to stop that is to stop giving them that alternative.  And as to the latter, if we teach people to go to a responsible breeder, then how are the responsible breeders going to keep up, especially when you consider that part of being responsible is not breeding to meet a demand.

ORIGINAL: ron2

But, if your (generic) goal was to stop smoking for health reasons, then what do you do about the hard-core smokers who have heard all the education and still won't quit? I know people that still break off the filters of the cigarettes before smoking them.

You're talking about an addiction. IMHO, a different ball of wax. I've heard from some addicts in interviews that it was easier to kick heroin than cigarettes, partly because cigarettes are still legal.

That being said, it amounts to a sense of personal responsibility. Amongst owners as much as breeders. Though I do agree that any breeder should provide health certs. But how do we enforce that? Would you pay 20 cents a gallon more for gas to provide a state income to regulate and police breeders and have a response team anytime some is found selling dogs at the Home Depot parking lot without health certs? Otherwise, they'll just cross the highway to the Lowe's parking lot.

 
Well the first thing I'd do would be to legislate against selling live animals in parking lots.

ORIGINAL: Xeph

Why shut down the BYBs?  There's no reason to shut them down, all that's needed is to bring them into compliance with the same procedures that responsible breeders already do. 

Ok, you know DogAdvocat, you contradict yourself so much and so often, I'm just confused now.  First you complain about how there are "no responsible breeders", then later on end up back pedaling admitting they do exist, but they're so scarce "You can't find them".  The real truth is that you just don't WANT to find them.

On top of that, as you complain about how there are no responsible breeders and yadda yadda yadda, dogs and cats in shelters, overpopulatio, insert more emotional rhetoric here...you say the above!  WTHeck!?  That doesn't make sense!

Then you say that first breeders are too loose, and in the next breath they're too strict!  Which one is it?!

 
Though theoretically I believe that it's impossible to responsibly breed while homeless animals are dying for lack of homes, I do believe in the CONCEPT of responsible breeding.  I have stated over and over what I think a responsible breeder should be doing in regards to how they run their breeding programs.  And what I'm saying is that it's not necessary to shut BYBs (irresponsible breeders) down because all that's needed is that they be brought into compliance and do the same thing that responsible breeders are doing.  If part of breeding responsibly is to do health screening before breeding, then BYBs should be required to do just that - and if they don't, then they shouldn't be breeding.
 
To me it should be the same way as with the construction industry.  There are rules to follow, licenses to get which include passing tests, and those that cannot follow those rules are forced out of the business.  Before contractors were regulated, I certainly would not have said that all those that weren't consummate craftsmen should be extinct - but instead I would have been for bringing the substandard contractors "up to code" by installing regulations that they had to meet or exceed - making them equal with the consummat craftsmen.
 
This is all I'm saying about breeders - there is no need to get rid of anyone if they would comply to a "code of responsible breeding".  And it is my belief that if they did, there would be a whole lot less dogs in the shelters, hopefully few enough to consider us a no-kill society.

ORIGINAL: dstull

I just got to reading this thread today, very thought provoking! What many dog "advocates" seem to forget is that we live in a free society. Almost all legislation affects only those that obey the law already! If tomorrow all the "ethical" breeders payed the breeder fees, or spayed and nuetered their dogs, then what? J.Q. Public's dog's would still be having "accidental" breedings, the puppy millers would go underground to states without the legislation, and then the only puppies readily available would be poorly bred! Here in the Panhandle of Texas the average Joe cannot believe that someone would think to tell them what they can or cannot do with their own property! My husband and I are considered weird because we don't breed our Border Collies to make some bucks, since we have some good dogs. It's an instant gratification society. If J.Q. wants a Labrador pup for his kids, he wants it now! If an ethical breeder trys to educate him, they are snobs. Then if the poorly bred, unsocialized pup he does buy bites one of his own poorly raised children, he screams bloody murder about "breeders". No matter how hard the breeders try, or how hard the rescuers try, there will always be those people who consider a dog as disposable property. They will buy the current fad breed, they will  "forget" to sterilize, they will get tired of it when it grows up. Our next door neighbor has had 13 dogs in 7 years, and had 2 mixed breed litters. The dogs have been poisened, run over, and dumped, most never seeing their second birthday. They are never given veterinary care, and the females are never spayed. I rescued one of the girls, whelped her litter, and found good homes for them all, and they had a new pup before this ltter was weaned. I was tickled when they finally fenced their yard, BUT it was to keep the dog out! They didn't want him messing in the yard where the four kids play. Now the point of this is, how do we educate the children of this family? To them, dogs are just easily replaceable "toys". They in turn will teach this attitude to their children. Can we have a state run society that looks at some families and says"Sorry, No dog for you!!"? Is there an answer to this problem of over population, I really don't think so.

 
When JQ Public can't control him/herself, then law is needed, first and foremost to let JQ know what is acceptable.  Right now, your neighbor probably has no clue what he is doing is wrong, because legally it isn't wrong.  But a law would tell him what was acceptable and what wasn't.  Of course he can break the law, but then he could break a lot of laws, including driving on the wrong side of the street, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws.

You keep asking about the negative reviews - I've told you what happened. You're not going to believe my opinion on why they did it, so why ask?

 
Maybe it is because of all the other negative comments the show people have heard from rescues not associated breed clubs.  The show community is not very large and word gets around very quickly.  A lot of the severely negative comments about breeding from rescue people supporting the Ca bill kind of reinforces the belief that these rescuers don't really care too much for breeding.
 

"And how's that working for us?  Ready to just educate instead of having drunk driving laws?  How many people do you think give up cocaine because of education?  I don't know what the latest statistics are on the drug war, but it seems to me that we're not doing too good - and there's lots of education out there."
 
It worked fine for me. I've never tried cocaine. But your statement doesn't prove that education about s/n won't be as ineffective as you think drug education has been. That is, your statement is purely for debating purposes, rather than establishing an actual rate of change based on education.

"Your analogy is poor because refrigerators were in existence before the icemaking industry folded."
 
No, the point remains that when the demand is gone, industry is gone. Yes, there were refigerators and icehouses, together.
  
"When a rescue can have a 99% success rate in the homes they choose, why can't breeders do the same?  IMO, responsible breeders do."
 
I'm not sure where you get the stat of 99 % success with a rescue but I would like to see that number for both rescues and breeders, so I don't really have a disagreement there.


"Or does it mean that it will teach people to go to a responsible breeder? "
 
Here's hoping that it does teach that.
 
"Look how many people are turned down by responsible breeders or by rescue, and will then just go out and find someone that will sell/adopt them a dog."
 
Others and I have stated the same thing. Education could help them to not only find responsible breeders but to determine if they should actually have a dog. It could turn out that maybe they shouldn't. Many times, life has taught me that there is a difference between what I want and what I get. Other people should grow up, as well, and face the fact that they don't always get what they want, and sometimes, they shouldn't have what they want.
 
"And as to the latter, if we teach people to go to a responsible breeder, then how are the responsible breeders going to keep up, especially when you consider that part of being responsible is not breeding to meet a demand."
 
You mean people would have to wait in order to get a quality dog instead of instant gratification? That's not so bad. My mom taught me that good things are worth waiting for and anything worthwhile isn't free. And you don't always get what you want, just because you want it. She would also say," if you don't like that, well, tough. Get used to it. Now, quit crying and clean your room or I will give you something to cry about." Point being, with ethical breeding and education, yes, there might be a huge demand for dogs and no way to fill it immediately, in a theoretical future. And that wouldn't be a bad thing, IMHO. In the meantime, the shelters and rescues are, as always, overflowing. And if erson couldn't wait for a breeder, they can adopt from a shelter. If that's not good enough, they can do without. (More of my upbringing.) I'd like to have a Lamborghini Countache. And with my current savings and financial status, I can keep on wanting that for quite sometime.