Home › Forums › Open Discussion › Puppies for Sale Today? – Is this ok?
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 16, 2012 at 3:22 pm #748067
kootchmanMemberIt’s a shame… very pretty female bulldog. It’s a friend of my critter..who is going pre-vet in college. She is very disturbed by it. I am not “that” close to the parents..but I will mull over making an overture. As to there should be no breeding unless there are zero shelter animals.. I had breed specific requirements, and the shelter did not have Alapaha’s or Catahoulas. Some of us have a working companion intention for our dogs,
February 16, 2012 at 5:04 pm #748068
DBPMemberMy point is that for every puppy, kitten, dog, or cat that is sold by ANYONE who breeds, one in a shelter doesn’t find a home and is killed. —mehud
mehud, respectfully . . . where did you get that idea? Did you read it somewhere? Did someone tell you it? Or did you just determine it on your own?
There is NOT a 1:1 equivalency between shelter animals and breeder animals. Saying that EVERY bred dog means one more dog in a shelter is like saying that every new Prius sold means there’s one more old VW (that someone could be driving) rusting in a junkyard instead.
Let’s go back to chihuahuas for a sec. Think about it: chihuahuas are a very popular breed now, but apparently there are still some chihuahuas languishing in shelters. Why? Because of breeders? No way.
If you could get papered, well-mannered, and healthy chihuahuas at a shelter for practically nothing, don’t you think people would be snapping them up? If you could get such a deal from a shelter, why would people still be buying these dogs from breeders for $500-$1,000 bucks a pop? It just doesn’t figure.
Again, I disagree.
Respectfully but strongly.
February 16, 2012 at 8:53 pm #748069
mehud7ParticipantDBP-
http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation_estimates.html
This is just one link that I quickly found during my lunch break.
The Prius analogy doesn’t work for me. Priuses do not breed. It is also comparing a car to a living, breathing animal, which I believe is disrespectful, especially if the animal may be killed for lack of homes.
I guess I just feel that I am often fighting an uphill battle when it comes to pet overpopulation and breeders only add to it.
February 16, 2012 at 9:17 pm #748070
RainierMemberDBP, your analogy is disturbing and does a disservice to homeless pets. And yet it points out the focus of branding. My lamps are from Pottery Barn, my car is a Prius, my dog is a Pekingese from the bloodlines of Barkley, and my wife..well she’s a mutt. Because when you choose your mate and your friends, do you ask what their bloodlines are and for their papers and only then consider whether to love them? Cause I tell ya, there are few purebreds among us. Let’s remember that we are talking about lives, not stuff. To be clear, purebreds do in fact end up in shelters. At Petfinder.com alone, there are 317,152 pets needing homes, 25% of which are purebred, 100% of which deserve our love.
February 16, 2012 at 9:42 pm #748071
hammerheadParticipanthate to get off track but if animal can be saved i will do what I need/can do
Kootch I appreciate your willingness to “mull” it over. Again i can take the dog, and will take it under my rescue.
February 16, 2012 at 11:19 pm #748072
ceceriderMemberREPLY TO:” I don’t understand how this thread could have ended up pitting two good people (who both obviously care about animal welfare) against each other . . .”
The reason 2 good people get pitted against each other on this thread is called the Drama Triangle where one person is the victim, another the persecutor and the 3rd is the rescuer. These are the only 3 options in the triangle. Instead of being complex individuals, people must play one of these roles. On these faceless, anonymous forums it is easy to play the triangle and see posters as disembodied representatives of positions–scapegoats, villians, etc. It happens often on the WSB especially regarding animals. As an animal lover myself, I’m actually glad that mega -self-righteous animal defenders exist out there because they may get the job done when I’m too much of a wimp. And for me the animals are the bottom line. I can take a little roughing up in the public discussion, but I don’t actually appreciate being made the bad guy and the target of the blame game.. In the burmuda triangle of human relations there are only 3 positions and each position has to have a player or the game ends. that’s why well-meaning people get villified here because somebody has to be the victim in order for the rescuer to do their thing.
February 16, 2012 at 11:49 pm #748073
anonymeParticipantcecerider, that is an awesome observation. I’m blown away, sincerely. You’re absolutely right that this scenario plays out on the WSB any time there’s an issue that generates strong feelings in any direction. Thanks for the comment.
February 17, 2012 at 12:38 am #748074
kootchmanMemberI wanna see a Peeky Doo, a Chippy WaWA… or any of those other little appetizers …. cannot figure out why a breeder would try and make a canine look like an undernourished rat.
February 17, 2012 at 1:11 am #748075
DBPMembermehud (Post #53): The link you posted did not work as of 5:00 PM on February 16th. In any case, it looks like the link was about raw pet overpopulation estimates and not the link between ethical breeders and overpopulation.
I don’t dispute your claim that there is pet overpopulation. I do dispute your claim that this overpopulation is caused by legitimate dog breeders.
The Prius analogy doesn’t work for me. Priuses do not breed.
–Hm. Judging by my observations of Seattle parking lots, I’m not too sure that Priuses DON’T breed. But anyway, you understand how an analogy works in an argument, right? I’m not saying that cars are like pets EXCEPT in the respect that cars are a good way to demonstrate how human beings make choices. In that ONE way, cars are VERY MUCH like pets, whether you find this fact distasteful or not.
If a car buyer wants a Prius, she wants a Prius. You cannot ban Priuses and tell her to take a VW bug instead, simply because there are lots of bugs sitting around on car lots.
*********************************************************************************
Similarly, when many people make a choice to buy a dog, they make a choice to buy a certain breed of dog. If a healthy dog with papers is not available from a breeder, these folks won’t get a dog at all. For them, it’s not a choice between a breeder dog and a shelter dog. It’s a choice between a breeder dog and NO dog.
If you were to ban legitimate breeding, it wouldn’t necessarily lower the number of animals in shelters, see? In fact, I’d think it would very likely do the opposite. I think you’d actually see an increase in shelter dogs, because the illegitimate breeders would almost certainly step into the gap and breed even greater numbers of poorly socialized and unhealthy dogs. Which would then end up in shelters.
February 17, 2012 at 1:38 am #748076
DBPMemberRainier (#49) said:
When you choose your mate and your friends, do you ask what their bloodlines are and for their papers and only then consider whether to love them?
No, Rainier, I don’t. But then, who are you arguing with? Me? Or human nature?
The fact is that many people DO choose pets, friends, and even (gasp!) mates on the basis of pedigree, income, or other things that you and I might consider trivial. Should we therefore deny people the right to make those trivial choices?
Nuh-uh.
In this country, people are allowed to make all kinds of foolish choices, and I’m guessing you’ve made one or two yourself. Why just recently, even. ;-)
Now for example, I might say something like: “Oh I could NEVER love a woman with red hair.” And you might find that very “disturbing.” And you might find that “a disservice to red-haired people.” —But to what purpose would your anguish be? If you try to FORCE me to like women with red hair,* how exactly is that helping either me or them?
**********************************************************************************
* Now before people start hating, I just wanna say that I actually L-UH-UH-UH-VE** women with red hair. And every other color of hair.
But I’m being tricky again, see? I’m using an ANALOGY.
** Uh-UH-UH-UH-VE!!!
February 17, 2012 at 2:06 am #748077
roundthesoundParticipantI don’t believe one person who breeds dogs for profit is different than any other person breeding dogs for profit. Keep telling yourself you are better than a puppy mill because you have a better “product”.
February 17, 2012 at 4:00 pm #748078
anonymeParticipantPart of the problem is an obsession with facade and status. These are the same folks, regardless of actual income or social status, who MUST have a Louis Vuitton bag (or a knock-off). I’ve actually heard many people state that a “good” dog costs a lot of money. Good for what? If status is that important to you, just get a weird looking mutt and tell people it’s a very rare, exotic breed that cost thousands of dollars.
Unfortunately, many people are not concerned with facts. Pedigreed animals, even those from “responsible” breeders, tend to have more health issues than non-pedigreed animals, may be less intelligent, and tend to live shorter lives. And (this is just speculation) I’m guessing that people who adopt or rescue animals are more likely to be responsible about keeping that commitment, as opposed to someone who has simply made a “purchase”.
On the other hand, I also agree with DP that everyone likes a certain look or temperament in the companions they choose, whether they be human animals or others. I have nothing against preserving breeds, but I do think that there should be strict breeding limitations. (Of course, I have the same view of humans…)
February 17, 2012 at 6:15 pm #748079
JimmyGMemberTo answer the question in the title of this post, the answer is no.
Whether a backyard breeder, a so-called responsible breeder, or a pet store, the trafficking in household pets is wrong.
What roundthesound said @56 is true. Breeding for profit is just that. You may love that breed, believe in that breed, but the breeder is motivated by money.
February 17, 2012 at 11:02 pm #748080
hopeyParticipantHa! Hahaha! Ha! Profit? What profit? Every cent I make goes towards expenses for my business. Reproductive specialist veterinarians are expensive. Emergency illnesses and surgeries are expensive. Dog food and toys and equipment are expensive. Health testing, whether one-time or annual, is expensive. Stud service is very expensive! Puppy vet visits, vaccinations, microchips — all cost money. Temperament testing for puppy litters is expensive. The books and toys and supplies I provide for free to my puppy families cost money too. And time! Do I deserve to be compensated for the time my work takes? Apparently not, according to most of you.
Doing the right thing for my dogs — and my puppy owners — costs a lot. I don’t make a profit. I do this because I love the breed and I want to share the breed with other families who have a need for an allergy-friendly dog and/or a dog appropriate for training as a service companion. Those families can’t get that kind of dog from the shelter.
As cecerider said: “On these faceless, anonymous forums it is easy to play the triangle and see posters as disembodied representatives of positions–scapegoats, villians, etc.” I am your neighbor. You probably don’t even know that I live in your neighborhood, on your block, across the alley, or next door. I go to the same neighborhood events, the same restaurants, the same schools as you & your family. I know that all of you who are posting vilifying professional breeders would NEVER say such things to my face. The only one who ever has is “hammerhead”, who works in feral cat rescue — she asked me a polite question about my business, and as far as I can tell I answered that question to her satisfaction.
I am tired of being your collective whipping post. I am a real person, not a vague handwave of a category. I run a business and I run it in a professional fashion, but like MANY small business owners I do it for the love of it, not because I’m making money hand over fist.
There isn’t one person on this thread who has posted any verifiable citations to support their positions. Instead, the attackers are content to spew false rhetoric and stereotypes, and pat themselves on the back for feeling superior. I tried to post citations supporting my position, and was told that my statistics weren’t good enough because they didn’t come from the “right” source.
Why does it have to be so black and white, so judgmental? Why can’t there be room for all of us to coexist? I don’t enjoy tilting at windmills — and that’s what this is for me, at this point, since I am very clearly not going to change ANYONE’S mind or position — but I also can’t stand by while stereotypes and opinions are offered up as “facts.”
The fact is that breeding dogs on a small scale is NOT a money-making business. The only breeders making money are the puppy mills, and that’s largely in part because they don’t spend the money to take care of their dogs as beloved family members.
February 17, 2012 at 11:41 pm #748081
roundthesoundParticipantWe all can and do coexist Hopey. People who are allergic to peanuts don’t eat them, people allergic to dogs don’t need to own one. And why can’t dogs from a shelter be trained as service animals. Shelter dogs are there because of humans, not because they are bad dogs. And why don’t you call it a hobby instead of a business if is something you are not doing for profit? Last time I checked even small business owners want to make a profit, I don’t have a source to quote that is my opinion.
February 17, 2012 at 11:46 pm #748082
roundthesoundParticipantAnd i’m not shedding any tears for you because “stud service is very expensive!”
February 17, 2012 at 11:50 pm #748083
hopeyParticipant“People allergic to dogs don’t need to own one.”
This is exactly where you and I — and thousands of families in Seattle and across the country — disagree.
It’s not coexisting when one group of people feels free to vilify, denigrate, and otherwise negatively generalize about another group of people.
February 17, 2012 at 11:56 pm #748084
JanSParticipantroundthesound…I don’t know hopey, but…enough is enough. If you don’t want to use her services, then don’t. But don’t bad mouth her to the world. Enough is enough. If you disagre with her business, then don’t go there. Period. But..she is different than a puppy mill, for G-d’s sake. And why shouldn’t a person who is allergic to most dogs be able to have the love of a pet, and give back that love to a dog? Give me a good reason why not, if it’s possible. Are you saying that anyone who has ever adopted a non-allergen dog really shouldn’t have? This all has absolutely nothing to do with the person who was selling dogs out of a van, unlicensed.
February 18, 2012 at 12:27 am #748085
roundthesoundParticipantUmmm, explain to me why you need to own a dog? And I just don’t see the difference between selling puppies out of a truck or your home. Who even said this lady with the truck was running a puppy mill. Hopey villifies other breeders but because her dogs come with papers it’s okay for her to breed them? What did I say that got your panties in such a bunch? I believe i’m allowed to have an opinion just as people are allowed to breed dogs for whatever reason. I never said anything bad about any particular person, I dislike all breeders equally. And why do you have to give your love to a dog and not some other creature?
February 18, 2012 at 12:32 am #748086
datamuseParticipantI’m going to regret this, I’m sure, but…roundthesound, you didn’t touch on the service animal question.
February 18, 2012 at 12:55 am #748087
roundthesoundParticipantI also asked a service dog question, why can’t shelter dogs be trained, nobody answered that. I know there are other service animals available, such as monkeys and horses.
I also had a friends who’s family trained/bread service dogs, top-o-the-line labs, and they ended up having to keep one of the dogs because they couldn’t get it to stop barking everytime it saw a black person. So I don’t really buy this only pure breeds can be service dogs thing.
February 18, 2012 at 2:05 am #748088
GenHillOneParticipantI have a dream that it will someday be socially unacceptable to own a purebred as a family pet! Papers? bfd.
February 18, 2012 at 3:40 am #748089
JanSParticipantYet…look at all the attention given to the national dog shows on the telly…all purebred dogs…
purebred or mutt…they are still someone’s loved pet. An abuser, as we well know, can abuse a mutt just as well…
February 18, 2012 at 3:47 am #748090
JanSParticipantfor the record, round the sound…I have never had a dog. I’m more of a cat person…and guess what? He’s a purebred Abyssinian. Found abandoned 2.5 years ago…but I would love him just the same if he weren’t purebred..it has nothing to do with whether I’d love him or not.
Are you suggesting that no dogs should breed? Ever? And, who ever said that only purebreds can be service dogs? I don’t think that’s true…
You asked why anyone has to have a dog. That’s a question to ask of so many things…why do you have to have whatever in your life? Why a specific car? Why a specific phone? Having a pet is wonderful…I’m surmising you’ve never had one? Dogs, cats, are terrific companions. Maybe you should try it.
February 18, 2012 at 3:59 am #748091
datamuseParticipantWell, I can’t claim to know for sure either, roundthesound, but the reasoning I heard from a friend who is training his own service dog is that purebreds are more predictable in terms of temperament and suitability to work, even when you meet them as puppies. His previous dog was a purebred rescue who turned out to have hip problems; in buying from a breeder they have assurances that that won’t happen. Service dogs take a long time to train and putting that much effort into one that doesn’t work out, especially if you really can’t function day to day without one…
But I’m just relaying what I’ve heard from friends. Maybe Service Dog Academy will have an opinion.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.