# Is it wrong to buy dogs instead of adopting?



## Husky Lover (Jan 17, 2011)

Someone at work started going off at me after I told her that I purchase all of my pets instead of adopting. I mean, it's great to adopt, but I like my pets to be raised by me from puppyhood. It's just not the same as taking a dog in that is already several years old. What do you think?


----------



## GottaLuvMutts (Jun 1, 2009)

I'll leave it to others to answer the question, but I just wanted to point out that it is often possible to obtain puppies through shelters/rescues. If I look up my favorite breed on petfinder right now, I can find ~5 litters in need of homes within ~100 miles.


----------



## lil_fuzzy (Aug 16, 2010)

You can adopt puppies, not just adult dogs. I have two dogs, one was adopted at 12 months old, and the other at 2.5 months old.

Personally I have issues with breeding dogs when there are so many dogs that need adopting, but I am kind of conflicted about it because with dogs you need to preserve the breeds as well, it's not like with cats where getting a purebred is just a bit pointless, because you are still just getting a cat. It will act like a cat. With dogs it's the whole lifestyle choice as well.

I don't think I will ever get a dog from a breeder, I will always get them from shelters or rescues.

What do you mean by 'purchase'? From a proper breeder, from backyard breeders, or from pet stores?


----------



## Husky Lover (Jan 17, 2011)

lil_fuzzy said:


> What do you mean by 'purchase'? From a proper breeder, from backyard breeders, or from pet stores?


Well, I got some from proper breeders, but I got my pom from the Amish, they had an ad in the newspaper.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

I only go two of my dogs from breeders... al the others are from shelter of rescue. Josie, the very cute puppy below is from a shelter & she is one of the best tempered pups around just as good or better then any dog from a breeder, in fact that's how I have found it was with all my rescues.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I think it's wrong to buy from puppymills (like the ones the Amish run) or from any other breeder who keeps their dogs in sub-optimal conditions. By supporting them with your money, you're telling them you agree with their cruelty.

I don't think it's wrong to buy from responsible breeders who truly care about their dogs and about dogs in general, and who only breed healthy and tempermentally sound dogs. I probably never will buy a dog from a breeder (I would personally feel guilty for not rescuing), but I don't think it's wrong to do so.

There are some good reasons to buy from a responsible breeder instead of from a shelter, but "because I want a puppy" doesn't really fly. There are tons of puppies in shelters (in most of the US anyway). Huskies are well-represented. There was just a litter at the local Humane Society, in fact.


----------



## PiperPuppy (Nov 28, 2010)

I was at our shelter yesterday and they have three beautiful Lab puppies! I mean tiny, like 10 weeks.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Labs are _especially_ well represented in shelters.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

I have a strong view on this. Hallie is a tragic puppy mill case, she was a dying puppy when I got her and it took her months and months to be a normal pup. I didn't pay 100's like you probably did for your pom, Hallie was a 'clearance' puppy because she wasn't supposed to make it. When you bought your pom you enabled that mill to keep churning out puppies, killing puppies, and destroying dog's lives. More than likely, when your pom gets older, he'll have to face genetic issues due to interbreeding. Hallie's only 3 and has already been diagnosed to have 1 hereditary disorder. That's why you should adopt. By buying your pom you supporting the senseless over breeding of dogs that will never get to go to a park, walk on a leash, play with a toy, etc. I have videos of Hallie's mill that would make anyone think twice about buying. Every week I go to the shelter to walk dogs that won't get adopted, many are puppies. There are plenty of puppies that will be euthanized because of lack of homes.]

That said, there are good breeders. A good breeder has homes for the puppies before they're even born, their parents are health tested, and the breeders are often active in the show ring or dog sports. They don't advertise in newspapers or advertise that the puppies have 'papers'. Those breeders make no profit from the puppies, in the long run they cost more than what the breeder gets from them.


----------



## osdbmom (Feb 15, 2011)

I get a lot of heat about this as well. Zoey is our first dog, and really, bc of my severe allergies/asthma, I dont hang out with "dog people" and bc we have always thought we could never have any animals bc of me, I just have had no information about them....dont hang out with people who have animals, dont read up on it, dont watch animal planet, etc. My siblings have always had puppies given to them by friends. Prior to getting our dog, I had never even heard the phrases "puppy mill" or "rescue". So Zoey was "bought". Although, she is a wonderful dog and has brought our family so much happiness after some very hard times, I would like to rescue our next dog. 
I mean, I can see both sides of the argument, but sharing information with someone (like, have you heard of this great local rescue?) and beating them over the head, making them feel rotten after the fact of bringing home a dog and loving it are two different things. We were so happy to finally have a dog, and bammo! as soon as we brought her home we started being yelled at, by neighbors, random people, even employees at petsmart, and I cant say that really was very nice.


----------



## bartleby (Aug 18, 2010)

I've done both. My first four dogs were all rescues. My current two are purchased. I think it's fine for someone to buy from a responsible breeder instead of adopting.

First, we aren't going to have any responsible breeders if nobody buys from them. They'll stop breeding because they're responsible and won't just keep churning out puppies for which there's no market.

Second, not everyone is equipped to deal with a rescue dog. I currently live with an elderly person who is scared of dogs. I wanted a large dog. Where I live, almost all the large dogs in rescue are pitbulls. That just wasn't going to work. Even if I did manage to convince my elderly relative that pibbles aren't the slavering man eaters that the media claims, the fact is that pibbles can be bouncy enthusiastic lugs. Having your elderly relative flattened by a dog intent on kisses isn't much better than having your elderly relative flattened by a dog intent on mischief. 

If I was going to get a large dog, I needed a cute dog with fur like a teddy bear (so as to look sweet and harmless) and a calm temperament. Having been down the rescue route before, I was acutely conscious of vet care costs for an ill bred animal. I did not want to play the genetic lottery at this stage of my life. I got exactly what I wanted by going to a breeder. My elderly relative adores my cute fuzzy pups, and I'm finding their trainability to be amazing.


----------



## BmoreBruno (Jan 19, 2011)

Husky Lover said:


> Well, I got some from proper breeders, but I got my pom from the Amish, they had an ad in the newspaper.


I assume no Amish people are reading this forum so let's not worry about offending anyone... I only recently heard about adopting dogs from Amish farms. Are these generally puppy mills? How would you be able to tell the difference? 

I have a co-worker that adopted a dog from the Amish. She wanted to go through a lab rescue but couldn't get approved because she and her husband work full time and were trying to start a family. Anyway, she got this lab from the Amish and always brings it to doggy daycare or gets a dog walker and they had a baby and still own and love the dog so too bad they had to go through a puppy mill (if we're going to assume that's what Amish people are doing).

My point is, it is more difficult to adopt a dog than it is to buy one so as much as I wish BYBs and puppy mills didn't exist, I can't blame people for going to them if they tried to go down the adoption route and failed. The reason I adopted my dog is because I could care less if my dog is a pure breed so I'd rather help out a little fellow in need.


----------



## TStafford (Dec 23, 2009)

I really hate when people nut up on someone else for getting their dog from a breeder. That is one of the main reasons I will NEVER get a dog from shelter or rescue group. I'm not going to get a dog from them when atleast one person from every group around here (most are owned by the same person) has said something bad about my dog where I could hear them.

Adopting a dog that doesn't have a home is great and all, but if you want to go to a breeder (a good breeder) that is fine too.


----------



## Elana55 (Jan 7, 2008)

I have had both. I am currently working with the first dog I am going to test etc. for breeding (female GSD.. she is 8 months old). I compete in AKC obedience and I am doing other things such as tracking and (perhaps) herding. Because I deal with reputable breeders I have a better chance of getting a dog with certain traits that I value. 

That being said, one of the best dogs I ever had I got free from someone who was going to shoot her. She was a year and a half old Labrador mix named Sheba. Sheba would have laid her life down for me. Another good one was a golden/lab cross named Rass who was colored like a Gordon Setter. 

That being said, I am now a GSD person. That is my breed. If I stop competing and no longer want to breed dogs.. just have pets.. I would probably take a look at a rescue again. The issue I have had with rescues and some shelters is being turned down for dogs because I am single (own my own house) and because I go to work M-F (someone needs to make the money for the house and the dog food). One rescue offered to let me have a dog ($350) but I had to provide Day Care ($3200 a year). 

I know that is not the case for every shelter or every rescue out there.


----------



## sandydj (Sep 27, 2010)

People are definitely going to have different opinions on this ( GOOD breeder vs rescue) ..but I think you will uniformly be told not to buy from back yard breeders or puppy mills ( Amish = puppy mills..some of the worse in the country) . 

As for good breeders ..well , my PERSONAL opinion is that unless you want/need a dog for show , specific breed related sport , or a specific working dog ..it is a NICE kind hearted thing to do to check the shelter or breed specific rescues for puppies first. 

If you only want a good pet quality puppy , the shelters and breed rescues have PLENTY. 

But , that is just my opinion. I am passionate about animal rescue ..so it is a biased one. My dad and wife ran a GSD rescue the whole of my youth into my teen years. Beleive me when I tell you jaw dropping beautiful perfect to breed standard GSD purebred PUPPIES were in and right out , all the time. Plenty of people will buy a dog from a breeder , breed it even though they were not suppose to , then these pure bred GSDs wound up in my family's care. 

For my family , unless I decide to get into showing pure breeds or something , we are happier rescuing wonderful dogs from rescues or shelters.

If you do decide to go with a breeder , do your homework and make sure it is a good breeder. A good breeder will have both parents or at least the mom on the premises , and they will be grilling you to see if you are going to be a good home for their prized puppies , they will want you to sign a contract , it will say they want the dog back if you can't keep it , and there will be a very good health guarantee with your puppy. 

^ you won't get any of that from the Amish. I won;t even buy shoo fly pie from them anymore after seeing how they treat a lot of their animals , not just dogs. 

So , good breeder , shelter , or rescue?? There is no wrong answer out of those three. Personal choice . 

Amish , back yard breeder , guy in the paper selling his mixed breed dogs , store from or pet store puppies , an ebay ad or craigslist puppy, the latest designer dog craze...ALL of these are wrong answers  

Good luck! What breed were you thinking about? Forgive me if you mentioned it in your original post.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I do want to state that not ALL Amish breeders are mills. Are many? Of course. But there are Amish breeders out there that do take good care of their stock, their dogs aren't kept in deplorable conditions, etc.

I wouldn't buy from them simply because there will be no health testing done (due to their beliefs).


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Husky Lover said:


> Someone at work started going off at me after I told her that I purchase all of my pets instead of adopting. I mean, it's great to adopt, but I like my pets to be raised by me from puppyhood. It's just not the same as taking a dog in that is already several years old. What do you think?


I think it's important to get a dog/puppy that fits your life and that you'll want for its whole life, not one that you got out of guilt or worrying about what other people think but that might not be right for you. Whether it is from a breeder or a shelter is irrelevant in my opinion, as long as (as others have said) you're not getting a puppy from a pet store/puppy mill/poor breeder.


----------



## BmoreBruno (Jan 19, 2011)

sandydj said:


> ^ you won't get any of that from the Amish. I won;t even buy shoo fly pie from them anymore after seeing how they treat a lot of their animals , not just dogs.


Can people say more about this? I am completely unaware of how the Amish treat dogs/animals and possibly others haven't heard of this either and we could use some education about it.

Thanks!


----------



## tirluc (Aug 29, 2006)

i lived in an Amish area for about 5 yrs.....they, just like everyone else, ran the gamut of how they take care of their animals.....i had seen some that their horses looked like they were on their last legs and shouldn't even be working and i saw plenty that were the opposite (watched one Amish man in the winter, after stopping at the store, have his wife and kids go in while he tended to the horse....this entailed a brush/rub down all over, a blanket being put on to keep him warm while they waited, cleaning the packed snow out of his feet, giving him water and a bit of feed, and by the time he got done, his family was done w/ the shopping.....loaded up and off they went.....the horse was in great body weight, glossy coat even for winter, and seemed perfectly content, even rubbing his face on the man) went to a few of the farms and they were all in different conditions---from well tended to deplorable......i've listened to people say they would never sell a puppy (or whatever) to a Mong, a black, a Mexican, a Chinese, a (well, you get the idea) all for the same reason---"these people don't take good care of their animals" i don't think race or colour has a thing to do w/ it....it's all in how they are taught to begin w/....teach a child to hate and be cruel and that is what you'll get.....and sometimes a bad apple falls from a good tree no matter what we want to do....

like mentioned above, i wouldn't buy a pup from the Amish for the simple fact that they don't test....but that holds true for anyone else that breeds....


----------



## lauren17 (Apr 14, 2009)

I think adopting a dog from a shelter is great and there are so many dogs that need homes out there, however rescue dogs are not for everyone. People want dogs for different reasons and sometimes that requires getting a dog from a breeder. I personally prefer to go the breeder route. I like getting dogs as puppies and I want to know what my puppy will be like when it is full grown. By getting a dog through a good breeder you know that the dogs are healthy and don't have any genetic disorders that could show up later in life. Yes there are lots of puppies in shelters but you usually know nothing about these puppies, many times you don't even know for sure what breed(s) they are or what the parents temperament/health is. Of course I don't think its right to get a dog from a byb or puppy mill but I don't understand how it can be a bad thing to get a dog from a reputable breeder. 

That said, one of my dogs was a rescue and he's one of the greatest dogs I've ever met. He's got the best disposition and is just an all around great dog. I have nothing against adopting dogs from shelters and I will probably have more rescue dogs at some point.


----------



## MrsBoats (May 20, 2010)

I've mentioned before I was heavily involved with Rottweiler rescue before I got Lars. I was the RI volunteer coordinator for a New England based Rottweiler rescue group. With that being said....in my opinion - no, it is not wrong to get a dog from a Code of Ethics breeder. If you are unable to do that...by all means, go to a shelter or legit rescue organization. With Rottweilers, I would say to someone interested in adopting - go to a legit rescue group who temperament tests and fosters the dogs for no less than two weeks in approved foster homes. They will match the dog to your level of rottweiler expertise.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I don't think it's 'wrong' obviously... I have 5 dogs I purchased from breeders.

Now, I do think a lot of people overlook shelter dogs though. There's great dogs in shelters. Depending on the area they might even have puppies. We got in tons of puppies. We also got in tons of dogs that would be great sports dogs for the level most people want in sports (ie: not needing a national champ). 

Also, I don't understand the idea that getting an adult is bad... I have 5 dogs, 2 of which I got as adults. I love them just the same as the other 3 we raised from puppies. I do think there are some perks to getting puppies but all in all I think it's easier to get an adult and know what you're getting. Puppies even from reputable breeders are a bit of a crapshoot. Adults are more set in stone personality wise.


----------



## Labmom4 (Feb 1, 2011)

BmoreBruno said:


> Can people say more about this? I am completely unaware of how the Amish treat dogs/animals and possibly others haven't heard of this either and we could use some education about it.
> 
> Thanks!


Same here. I'd never heard about this.


----------



## 123fraggle (Feb 20, 2009)

I can honestly say that I am still torn between rescuing our next dog or purchasing. We currently have 2 rescues, a BC and a Tibetan Terrier. We also have 2 Border Collie/Jack Russell mixes that we purchased from a breeder who we knew personally and who did health checks on both parents (hips and a regular health check, didn't check eyes). The price pretty much covered their first sets of shots. I would say that we put in about the same amount of energy training with both sets of dogs. The rescues had some issues that had to be worked, and the puppies had to have a lot of initial work to prevent the same issues as the rescues. Therefore adults and puppies IMO are about the same amount of work.

I would like to get another Tibetan Terrier, I have fallen in love with this breed and their looks and Joie de Vive. I also look at our local rescues web page daily and see some really nice dogs with lots of potential sitting there for months without getting adopted.
I am not getting a new dog for awhile and I am sure fate will set me on the right path.


----------



## Rinchan (Jan 4, 2011)

I don't think there is anything wrong with buying a dog from a good breeder. I actually think it is important to support good breeders so that they do continue to breed. Also, if you want a more uncommon breed, a breeder may be the way to go. I've been looking for bearded collies and petfinder does not come up with many results. And the ones I do see, do not look like beardies. (Haven't looked in a while so this may have changed)

Also if you want a guaranteed healthy dog, a good breeder who genetic tests and does many other tests would be the way to go.


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

All of our cats have been rescues as kittens off the street and all of our dogs have been purchased by breeders, this will likly continue to be our trend. I am much more fussy with what I want in a dog while a cat just is required to be a mouser in our house and most cats can do that unless they are physically deformed.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Rinchan said:


> Also if you want a guaranteed healthy dog, a good breeder who genetic tests and does many other tests would be the way to go.


There is really no such thing as a guaranteed healthy dog. Even for the best breeders crap happens. I have had both mixes and purebred, well bred dogs end up with debilitating hereditary diseases. 

Honestly I think the best bet would be an adult dog with a pedigree that is clear of health issues. Something that is already 2 years old and clear of health problems.


----------



## upendi'smommy (Nov 12, 2008)

I don't see anything wrong with going to a breeder, I also don't agree with what some have seemed to have said in this thread. 'No matter where you live, no matter your breed of choice you can find a dog/puppy of that breed in a shelter or rescue near you'. I got Cara from a breeder, I knew what I wanted in a dog and an australian shepherd was it. In my area aussies are HARD to find, they do not turn up in our local shelters or rescue groups. I watched our local groups for close on to two years and in that time not one aussie came through. If I lived in a another part of the country this may not be the case, but here that's what it is. They just aren't common here (as in there is only one other aussie in my town), not all breeds can easily be found everywhere. I hope that made sense.

I have nothing wrong with mixed breeds and I have nothing against rescuing/adopting, however I don't think it's the right option for everyone everytime.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> Also, I don't understand the idea that getting an adult is bad... I have 5 dogs, 2 of which I got as adults. I love them just the same as the other 3 we raised from puppies. I do think there are some perks to getting puppies but all in all I think it's easier to get an adult and know what you're getting. Puppies even from reputable breeders are a bit of a crapshoot. Adults are more set in stone personality wise.


Agreed. Squash is the first young puppy I've had in my life, even when I was a kid we got our family dog as an older (6 mos) puppy. The dogs I've gotten as adults or older puppies have all been fantastic dogs.


----------



## Charis (Jul 12, 2009)

I'm a fan of rescuing. All three of our dogs are rescues. (well Dawson - sort of)
I could see myself buying from a breeder - only one that tested, reputable and sought to better the breed with each litter of puppies - I don't see anything wrong buying from a reputable breeder and I personally don't want to pay hundreds of dollars for a dog that isn't health tested, carefully planned and watched over like a hawk.


----------



## Husky Lover (Jan 17, 2011)

BmoreBruno said:


> Can people say more about this? I am completely unaware of how the Amish treat dogs/animals and possibly others haven't heard of this either and we could use some education about it.
> 
> Thanks!


Well, I got my Pomeranian from the Amish. Actually, they may have been Mennonites. Anyway, I didn't see any cruelty to be honest. They gave all the basic shots a puppy should have and kept the litter indoors in a pen. The house smelled bad though, but that's a difference issue...


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Husky Lover said:


> Someone at work started going off at me after I told her that I purchase all of my pets instead of adopting. I mean, it's great to adopt, but I like my pets to be raised by me from puppyhood. It's just not the same as taking a dog in that is already several years old. What do you think?


I think it is great to buy from a good breeder, and nothing wrong with wanting to start with a puppy. Also nothing wrong with buying a dog from a rescue or shelter. I do think that it's a shame when people are brainwashed by the Animal Rights extremists into believing that all breeders are evil. But there's a lot of that going around. Sandy in OK


----------



## hulkamaniac (Feb 11, 2009)

Honestly, I have never ever understood the appeal of getting a puppy in the first place. I guess most people are just more patient than I am. My sister's puppy annoys the crap out of me. Mouthy. Misbehaved. Very cute. Probably the only thing that keeps it alive. I will never adopt, buy, take in as a stray, etc... a puppy. Way too much of a pain.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Husky Lover said:


> Well, I got my Pomeranian from the Amish. Actually, they may have been Mennonites. Anyway, I didn't see any cruelty to be honest. They gave all the basic shots a puppy should have and kept the litter indoors in a pen. The house smelled bad though, but that's a difference issue...


Of course they treat the puppies well. That's their money. Nobody is going to buy a sick or dirty puppy. BUT. . .how did they treat their breeding dogs? Did you see inside the barns (that's where most puppymills keep their breeders)? That's where the cruelty is. Unless you don't care how your dog's parents were treated.


----------



## BrittanieJo (Sep 23, 2010)

We have done both and been breeders ourselves when I was very young. Our oldest dobe was a great stud dog (is that still an okay term to use?) who was a champion himself and my parents showed before I was born. After I was born they didn't have time to keep showing so Max happily retired at age 7 and became a wonderful daddy dog for two years and then had to be neutered which almost killed him, but he had some severe testicular problems in his old age (injury not health). So we've never had the litters just been on the boy side and taken the pick of the litter who we never bred. My parents only bred with one other family of female dogs who were also great dogs and they did I believe 3 litters in the two years between the 3 females they had? Something like that. All puppies spoken for before being bred/born. I hope that makes us good breeders, though to be honest I couldn't tel lyou the specifics Iwas an infant. 

We have also bought from an accidental litter from people who bred labs but happened to be babysitting a male dog when their female went into heat WAY young. Poor thing almost died and they had to get rid of the pups much earlier than they would have liked and were mixed dogs. We paid 20 dollars for Squirt who lived 16 years but I don't feel that was supporting back yard breeding as these people were responsible breeders who simply had an ooops with a dog who was barely a year old. The 20 simply went for Squirts shots which they took care of and my mom forced them to take the money they weren't asking for it. Best 20 dollars we ever spent we say, Squirt was wonderful! 

All that being said...I think it's your personal choice. I would never buy from a breeder again in my opinion, or ever breed dogs again (my parents feel the same) because there are so many dogs who need homes. I know I will always be able to find exactly what dog I need at that moment in my life at any rescue or shelter. Aggie is what I would consider a rescue since she was dumped in my front yard and had I not taken her in would not have survived as she was very young. She is a good puppy and I think will be a wonderful dog in a few years when I've done MY part in training her. I would love to end irresponsible breeding but things happen and those animals deserve homes just as much as any other dog. You do what you feel works best in your life. If that's buying purebred or adopting, or going for the mutt wandering the street it's one less homeless animal in a loving home, regardless of how they got there.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Somebody find me an Alaskan Klee Kai puppy in rescue and I'll apply for it.  It's hard enough to find adults in rescue... I've only seen one on Petfinder in the past year, and it was a chi/AKK mix. There are usually just older dogs on the national site and every one I've seen (there have not been many) has been snapped up quickly. I've never even seen a pap in rescue around here; they are not a big puppymill breed in my area. I know there are many purebred dogs in shelters/rescues, and many puppies as well, but with some breeds, you are not going to find a rescue dog. 

I commend people who rescue dogs. However, I don't regret for one second buying my dogs from good breeders instead of rescuing. I wanted specific breeds. I wanted a health guarantee, I wanted to know my dogs' lines, I wanted a good idea of what size and temperament and look my dogs would have as adults. I have those things thanks to good breeders, and I would hate to see responsible breeders disappear. I wouldn't mind seeing BYBs disappear, and I'd _love_ to see puppy mills disappear, but I want good breeders to stick around and preserve all of the wonderful breeds that exist. I like Crystal's breeder's philosophy (she said this in a recent e-mail to me):



> "To me...if a dog is not worthy of a championship then why reproduce it. The world is not short of pets. I think the purpose of breeding is to be protecting the species from morphing ..to maintain its genetics, health, purpose and integrity. Pets are a by-product. By breeding the best to the best to always be improving or maintaining the breed. It sometimes is heart breaking, sometimes back breaking and sometimes bank breaking but that is all part of it."


The only thing I'd add is that for working breeds, trials or just plain doing their job day-to-day could stand in for a championship.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Pawzk9 said:


> I think it is great to buy from a good breeder, and nothing wrong with wanting to start with a puppy. Also nothing wrong with buying a dog from a rescue or shelter. I do think that it's a shame when people are brainwashed by the Animal Rights extremists into believing that all breeders are evil. But there's a lot of that going around. Sandy in OK


I think this pretty much sums it up.
ETA: There was a "rescue" (if you can call it that) in town a few years back that my mom worked with, for about a week. They were *NOT* above stealing dogs and adopting them out in the name of the Almighty Dollar. A vet I know said the leader of this disgusting group stole an older yellow lab out of her backyard and wanted to have her euthanized because she was old, and therefore suffering. Luckily, the vet knew the dog and had a brain and was able to call them out. Rescue doesn't always equal "real Rescue".



Crantastic said:


> Somebody find me an Alaskan Klee Kai puppy in rescue and I'll apply for it.  It's hard enough to find adults in rescue... I've only seen one on Petfinder in the past year, and it was a chi/AKK mix. There are usually just older dogs on the national site and every one I've seen (there have not been many) has been snapped up quickly. I've never even seen a pap in rescue around here; they are not a big puppymill breed in my area. I know there are many purebred dogs in shelters/rescues, and many puppies as well, but with some breeds, you are not going to find a rescue dog.
> 
> I commend people who rescue dogs. However, I don't regret for one second buying my dogs from good breeders instead of rescuing. I wanted specific breeds. I wanted a health guarantee, I wanted to know my dogs' lines, I wanted a good idea of what size and temperament and look my dogs would have as adults. I have those things thanks to good breeders, and I would hate to see responsible breeders disappear. I wouldn't mind seeing BYBs disappear, and I'd _love_ to see puppy mills disappear, but I want good breeders to stick around and preserve all of the wonderful breeds that exist. I like Crystal's breeder's philosophy (she said this in a recent e-mail to me):
> 
> ...


Agreed. If I were searching for another pap puppy, I would probably be more interested in championships and stuff than I would if I were searching for a BC, kwim?


----------



## malamutelove (Dec 6, 2010)

I usually like to adopt dogs. However I wanted a pure bred malamaute; so I bought her. I found if I go to a rescue Id come home with 50 dogs haha. So thats my reasoning. lol


----------



## GypsyJazmine (Nov 27, 2009)

I have both breeder bought & rescue dogs & I see no problem with either as long as the place they are coming from is reputable.
When I chose my breed I knew they were an extreme dog & wanted to get a good, temperamentally sound dog of the breed...So, I went with a reputable breeder to learn the breed...After I got a couple good, sound dogs under my belt I started rescuing.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Of course they treat the puppies well. That's their money. Nobody is going to buy a sick or dirty puppy. BUT. . .how did they treat their breeding dogs? Did you see inside the barns (that's where most puppymills keep their breeders)? That's where the cruelty is. Unless you don't care how your dog's parents were treated.


Well, the fact is, unless you saw the place where Husky Lover's Pom came from, you can't say for sure what the situation was like. You are making a generalization based on the breeder's religion, and the AR's dramatic image of Amish puppy mills. The fact is, if you want healthy puppies, you are more likely to get better production from healthy, well-cared-for adults. That doesn't mean that there aren't neglectful situations. But it is more financially rewarding to keep animals well fed, clean and healthy than it is to keep them starving and filthy. Even if you view them as livestock instead of pets. Not a place I'd be buying a pup from - not what I am looking for. But the fact is, the type of breeders considered "ethical" don't produce enough puppies to meet the wants of people who want puppies. And they (and a lot of rescues) have such draconian rules for who gets their dogs that a lot of people end up with less savory sources. And to the ARs the "ethical" breeders are just a little down the list. All breeders are puppy millers by definition. I have bought puppies who were born in a barn. It's not uncommon when you are working with herding breeds.



Hallie said:


> That said, there are good breeders. A good breeder has homes for the puppies before they're even born, their parents are health tested, and the breeders are often active in the show ring or dog sports. They don't advertise in newspapers or advertise that the puppies have 'papers'. Those breeders make no profit from the puppies, in the long run they cost more than what the breeder gets from them.


It's ideal to have homes for the pups before they are born, and some breeders have long waiting lists. Then again, sometimes you have homes for an average sized litter of 6 or 7, but maybe not for a litter of 10 or 12. Maybe someone who has been on your waiting list for a couple of years found another litter or had a family crisis and had to drop off . I know good breeders who advertise in newspapers, and then screen carefully. After all, why should people looking for a pup who don't have the inside track only have access to inferior pups? I certainly want puppy buyers to know that my dogs do, indeed, have papers, and that I expect them to be registered. As to breeders making no profit? Well, breeding is expensive. Campaigning is expensive. Health clearances are expensive. But, if a breeder is producing good pups, has a good reputation and, therefore a lot of demand and can make a profit, I say "good for them." I am a painter. I love painting. But I expect to make something for my work. I am a dog trainer, and I love training dogs. But having a profitable, self-supporting business is important to me. I'm not sure why we expect breeders to put their heart and soul, years of work and research into a program and then demand that the only way they can do it right is to go in the hole.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I have seen puppymills/commercial breeders (there are no Amish in this area so never an Amish mill). I am not relying on anyone else's perception of them. Some of them care for the dogs and some don't. I'm told it's more cost-effective to not care properly for the breeding dogs, just breed them until they die and then replace them with unsold puppies. That the only reason for caring for the dogs is out of the goodness of your heart (usually said with rolled eyes). And even the puppymill dogs who are well-fed, clean, and healthy do not receive proper care, unless you think that living in a 4 x 4 wire-bottomed cage, never being let out, with no enrichment is a good life for a dog. Mass-producing live creatures cannot be done humanely. 

Really the only reason Amish mills may be any worse than other mills is because the Amish don't use electricity, so no heat/air conditioning. Although I've noticed that most non-Amish mills don't use heat or AC anyway. And, the Amish don't keep housepets so my assumption is that any Amish selling small-breed puppies are doing so entirely for profit (and I'm told that some of them ridicule the buyers behind their backs for paying good money for a worthless little dog). If they were selling farm dog puppies, it may not be a mill situation, just a farm dog that got pregnant.

I have no objection to dogs being born in barns. But if you ever saw 600 dogs in small cages crammed into a dark, cold, dirty barn, you'd know what I was talking about. The mills do that so that passersby don't know that they mass-breed. Then they can sell the pups out of their kitchens, passing the pampered housepets off as the puppies' parents.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I have seen puppymills/commercial breeders (there are no Amish in this area so never an Amish mill). I am not relying on anyone else's perception of them. Some of them care for the dogs and some don't. I'm told it's more cost-effective to not care properly for the breeding dogs, just breed them until they die and then replace them with unsold puppies. That the only reason for caring for the dogs is out of the goodness of your heart (usually said with rolled eyes). And even the puppymill dogs who are well-fed, clean, and healthy do not receive proper care, unless you think that living in a 4 x 4 wire-bottomed cage, never being let out, with no enrichment is a good life for a dog. Mass-producing live creatures cannot be done humanely.
> 
> Really the only reason Amish mills may be any worse than other mills is because the Amish don't use electricity, so no heat/air conditioning. Although I've noticed that most non-Amish mills don't use heat or AC anyway. And, the Amish don't keep housepets so my assumption is that any Amish selling small-breed puppies are doing so entirely for profit (and I'm told that some of them ridicule the buyers behind their backs for paying good money for a worthless little dog). If they were selling farm dog puppies, it may not be a mill situation, just a farm dog that got pregnant.
> 
> I have no objection to dogs being born in barns. But if you ever saw 600 dogs in small cages crammed into a dark, cold, dirty barn, you'd know what I was talking about. The mills do that so that passersby don't know that they mass-breed. Then they can sell the pups out of their kitchens, passing the pampered housepets off as the puppies' parents.


So, basically, you have no knowledge of the type of operation the Pom puppy came from.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Pawzk9 said:


> So, basically, you have no knowledge of the type of operation the Pom puppy came from.


No, of course not. I never said I did. I was only pointing out to the OP that the likelihood that the Pom came from a less-than-stellar breeder is quite high. And that you can't always go by the front the breeders put on. Soooo many people say "oh I know my dog came from a good breeder because he's AKC registered and had his first shots and the breeders were so nice!". Yeah. None of those mean anything. But most people don't know what to look for in a breeder.


----------



## PiperPuppy (Nov 28, 2010)

The very first dog I owned (I was a teenager) was rescued from "The Pound" and cost me $25. Awesome Dog!!! Loved this dog to death.

I just recently purchased a Boston Terrier from a breeder. I really wanted a Boston, and I also wanted the experience of raising a puppy. Although Piper is perfect, cute, and I couldn't imagine being without her, I would not buy from a breeder again. Mainly because I don't plan to show or compete with any dog and I don't want another baby.

I have fallen for so many shelter dogs. Every time I go in, I meet one I could totally love and live with forever!! I have vowed that the next dog I get will be from our local shelter, and will be at least one year old. Puppy hood is a magical time... once. I don't want to do it again! LOL!


----------



## Sighthounds4me (Nov 7, 2010)

I have not read all the replies, but I can speak from my perspective.

My Borzoi are from a breeder. My Greyhound is an ex-racer (I do not consider her a "rescue." She is adopted, but not rescued. I visited the kennel she raced out of - believe me, Naples was treated well!). When we decided to get a Borzoi, we applied with rescue. We waited, approved to adopt, for over six months. There were only a few dogs that came in, and none were cat-safe (we had a cat then).

So, the director referred us to a breeder not far from us. Long story short, we ended up with Cooper first, then his litter-brother Manero.

We are also on a waiting list for a Deerhound. Again, as we are primarily interested in a companion (not sure yet if I want to show), we have tried rescue. There have been no available rescues for YEARS. So, if I want this breed, there is only one way to go - a responsible breeder. That is the case for many breeds. And I don't think I should need to "settle" for a breed or mix that I don't really want, when I could get what I want, and what is right for my home and lifestyle.

However, because one acquires dogs from a breeder does not mean that they do not support rescue. I know many people, responsible breeders and purchasers alike, who financially support breed rescue and/or foster. I myself have fostered for Greyhound adoption and Borzoi rescue. And I plan to continue in the future. I also do home visits for placement of dogs.

Personally, I get really cranky about this whole swing in thinking. I get so tired of those who judge people like me for purchasing from a breeder, rather than rescuing. And I get _especially_ upset when the judgment is coming from someone who not only does not know me, but does not know what I have done/continue to do for rescue. Nothin' like a sweeping judgment based on one aspect of who I am!

Oh, and let's not forget that not only do I support rescue, I fight against puppymills, as well. I have protested stores, and worked to create legislation. I have hosted tables at pet expos to educate people. So, not only am I a proponent of responsible breeding and rescue, I work to stop those who abuse and neglect dogs for money.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Sighthounds4me said:


> I have not read all the replies, but I can speak from my perspective.
> 
> My Borzoi are from a breeder. My Greyhound is an ex-racer *(I do not consider her a "rescue." She is adopted, but not rescued. I visited the kennel she raced out of - believe me, Naples was treated well!).* When we decided to get a Borzoi, we applied with rescue. We waited, approved to adopt, for over six months. There were only a few dogs that came in, and none were cat-safe (we had a cat then).
> 
> ...


You make tons of great points, and I pretty much share your sentiments  The bolded part I especially like, because bringing home an adult dog doesn't always mean you've "rescued" said dog.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

LazyGRanch713 said:


> You make tons of great points, and I pretty much share your sentiments  The bolded part I especially like, because bringing home an adult dog doesn't always mean you've "rescued" said dog.


True. . .I kind of prefer "second-hand". But then again, if a dog needed a new home and nobody took the dog, what would have happened? What would have happened to Naples (above example) if she was retired from racing and nobody took her home? A lot of times it could technically still be called rescuing, so won't quibble if that's the word someone wants to use. The entire fact that the dog needed a new home means something wasn't right. The dog's life may not have been in danger, but if he didn't need "rescuing" he could have just stayed with his old home.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Willowy said:


> True. . .I kind of prefer "second-hand". But then again, if a dog needed a new home and nobody took the dog, what would have happened? What would have happened to Naples (above example) if she was retired from racing and nobody took her home? A lot of times it could technically still be called rescuing, so won't quibble if that's the word someone wants to use. The entire fact that the dog needed a new home means something wasn't right. The dog's life may not have been in danger, but if he didn't need "rescuing" he could have just stayed with his old home.


When I hear "rescued", I think of "rescued" (as in from a bad situation). Auz's breeder occasionally has retired dogs for sale; if they aren't sold they are kept. I wouldn't consider that "rescue" at all. 
If a dog is in a shelter with a time limit, and is pulled or adopted, that IMO is a rescue.


----------



## Sighthounds4me (Nov 7, 2010)

In her case, she would have been kept at the kennel till a home could be found. Her owner/kennel owner did not and does not kill dogs simply because they not good racers on the track. They have an extensive network of adoption groups to take their retirees.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Sighthounds4me said:


> In her case, she would have been kept at the kennel till a home could be found. Her owner/kennel owner did not and does not kill dogs simply because they not good racers on the track. They have an extensive network of adoption groups to take their retirees.


I'm just saying, if that network of adoption groups didn't exist (the way it used to be), the kennel would have no choice but to either kill the dogs or keep them at the kennel forever (expensive!). So I would still say that rescue would be a not-inaccurate term. For retired breeding dogs (from a good breeder), the situation may be similar or may not, depending on the size of their breeding operation.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Willowy said:


> ... if that network of adoption groups didn't exist ...


But it does exist, why argue semantics over a hypothetical situation?


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

I think people need to be a careful when painting people with such a wide brush. Not all Amish are puppymillers. Not all Amish are good either. Just like any group of people there are good and not so good. I think anyone who does mass production breeding whether they are Amish or English (what Amish call us non Amish) are bad. I think people who go to these types of breeders for their own convenience and don't care about the breeding parents are just as cruel and heartless as the breeders themselves. 

Now, If you insist on getting a pup from a breeder and not a rescue/shelter then at least get one from a code of Ethics breeder. That means the breeder breeds pups to the "standard" and not to the fads like Teacup or Giant or Mini or anything else. They do ALL of the health testing possible for that breed on both parents, grandparents etc.... They will take any pup back if things do not work out (not that they will give a refund necessarily but will give a home to their pup) Good breeders puppies do NOT end up in shelters and they should always have a place to go back to. Good breeders might seem a bit intrusive to some but they care about their dogs, and the pups they produce. THIS is the kind of person people should get their pups from if they insist on going to a breeder rather then a rescue. IMO

Oh and Shelters often have pups as young as 8 weeks. That is the same age any decent breeder would first allow the pups to go out and many good breeders wait until 10 or even 12 weeks before pups are placed. The best dog I ever owned was a rescue that I took in when she was a year old. I was never so close to any other dog as I was to her. Raising from pups isn't the only way to have that bond. Just food for thought.


----------



## Sighthounds4me (Nov 7, 2010)

sassafras said:


> But it does exist, why argue semantics over a hypothetical situation?


Exactly. We are going to have to agree to disagree, Willowy. To push it as far as you want to is going to accomplish nothing.

Besides, I never said "rescue" is an inacurate term. I simply stated my opinion.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Willowy said:


> True. . .I kind of prefer "second-hand". But then again, if a dog needed a new home and nobody took the dog, what would have happened? What would have happened to Naples (above example) if she was retired from racing and nobody took her home? A lot of times it could technically still be called rescuing, so won't quibble if that's the word someone wants to use. The entire fact that the dog needed a new home means something wasn't right. The dog's life may not have been in danger, but if he didn't need "rescuing" he could have just stayed with his old home.


Sometimes breeders will have returned dogs, retired dogs, or possibly in situations like this, the kennel may have a dog who needs a new home. Possibly, if nobody took that dog, the breeder/kennel would continue to keep the dog until the right home came along. Certainly realizing that the ideal situaion for that dog that they aren't going to be using for the intended purpose would be a home of his own, where he'd be valued for who he is. But it doesn't mean the dog is in a dire situation. Just like if you don't bring home a dog who is in a rescue, that rescue isn't going to kill the dog, they're going to keep him and continue to look for a good home.



Willowy said:


> I'm just saying, if that network of adoption groups didn't exist (the way it used to be), the kennel would have no choice but to either kill the dogs or keep them at the kennel forever (expensive!). So I would still say that rescue would be a not-inaccurate term. For retired breeding dogs (from a good breeder), the situation may be similar or may not, depending on the size of their breeding operation.


Well, but the system does exist. Also, long before rescue was an every day word, breeders took back their pups, retired dogs, had dogs who washed out from their breeding/show program and found them good homes.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Inga said:


> I think people need to be a careful when painting people with such a wide brush. Not all Amish are puppymillers. Not all Amish are good either. Just like any group of people there are good and not so good. I think anyone who does mass production breeding whether they are Amish or English (what Amish call us non Amish) are bad. I think people who go to these types of breeders for their own convenience and don't care about the breeding parents are just as cruel and heartless as the breeders themselves.
> 
> Now, If you insist on getting a pup from a breeder and not a rescue/shelter then at least get one from a code of Ethics breeder. That means the breeder breeds pups to the "standard" and not to the fads like Teacup or Giant or Mini or anything else. They do ALL of the health testing possible for that breed on both parents, grandparents etc.... They will take any pup back if things do not work out (not that they will give a refund necessarily but will give a home to their pup) Good breeders puppies do NOT end up in shelters and they should always have a place to go back to. Good breeders might seem a bit intrusive to some but they care about their dogs, and the pups they produce. THIS is the kind of person people should get their pups from if they insist on going to a breeder rather then a rescue. IMO
> 
> Oh and Shelters often have pups as young as 8 weeks. That is the same age any decent breeder would first allow the pups to go out and many good breeders wait until 10 or even 12 weeks before pups are placed. The best dog I ever owned was a rescue that I took in when she was a year old. I was never so close to any other dog as I was to her. Raising from pups isn't the only way to have that bond. Just food for thought.


Excellent post, Inga  
BTW, I adopted Tag out of a rescue organization; best dog in the universe came to me at 9 weeks old!!



Willowy said:


> I'm just saying, if that network of adoption groups didn't exist (the way it used to be), the kennel would have no choice but to either kill the dogs or keep them at the kennel forever (expensive!). So I would still say that rescue would be a not-inaccurate term. For retired breeding dogs (from a good breeder), the situation may be similar or may not, depending on the size of their breeding operation.


And some breeders don't care about that expense.


----------



## PiperPuppy (Nov 28, 2010)

Sighthounds4me said:


> In her case, she would have been kept at the kennel till a home could be found. Her owner/kennel owner did not and does not kill dogs simply because they not good racers on the track. They have an extensive network of adoption groups to take their retirees.


That is nice to hear! And that is the way it _should_ be.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

Pawzk9 said:


> Well, the fact is, unless you saw the place where Husky Lover's Pom came from, you can't say for sure what the situation was like. You are making a generalization based on the breeder's religion, and the AR's dramatic image of Amish puppy mills. The fact is, if you want healthy puppies, you are more likely to get better production from healthy, well-cared-for adults. That doesn't mean that there aren't neglectful situations. But it is more financially rewarding to keep animals well fed, clean and healthy than it is to keep them starving and filthy. Even if you view them as livestock instead of pets. Not a place I'd be buying a pup from - not what I am looking for. But the fact is, the type of breeders considered "ethical" don't produce enough puppies to meet the wants of people who want puppies. And they (and a lot of rescues) have such draconian rules for who gets their dogs that a lot of people end up with less savory sources. And to the ARs the "ethical" breeders are just a little down the list. All breeders are puppy millers by definition. I have bought puppies who were born in a barn. It's not uncommon when you are working with herding breeds.
> 
> 
> 
> It's ideal to have homes for the pups before they are born, and some breeders have long waiting lists. Then again, sometimes you have homes for an average sized litter of 6 or 7, but maybe not for a litter of 10 or 12. Maybe someone who has been on your waiting list for a couple of years found another litter or had a family crisis and had to drop off . I know good breeders who advertise in newspapers, and then screen carefully. After all, why should people looking for a pup who don't have the inside track only have access to inferior pups? I certainly want puppy buyers to know that my dogs do, indeed, have papers, and that I expect them to be registered. As to breeders making no profit? Well, breeding is expensive. Campaigning is expensive. Health clearances are expensive. But, if a breeder is producing good pups, has a good reputation and, therefore a lot of demand and can make a profit, I say "good for them." I am a painter. I love painting. But I expect to make something for my work. I am a dog trainer, and I love training dogs. But having a profitable, self-supporting business is important to me. I'm not sure why we expect breeders to put their heart and soul, years of work and research into a program and then demand that the only way they can do it right is to go in the hole.


I suppose it comes down to a difference of opinion. If there were a large demand for the pups no advertising (newspapers) would be necessary once the the puppies are born. Of course when the bitch is bred advertising is needed, otherwise no one would know she's expected to have pups. IMO good breeders wouldn't need to advertise "8 week old GSD puppies".


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Hallie said:


> I suppose it comes down to a difference of opinion. If there were a large demand for the pups no advertising (newspapers) would be necessary once the the puppies are born. Of course when the bitch is bred advertising is needed, otherwise no one would know she's expected to have pups. IMO good breeders wouldn't need to advertise "8 week old GSD puppies".


So then, you're realkly not in favor of people who don't get breed publications or have connections in a breed getting access to well bred puppies?


----------



## JiveDadson (Feb 22, 2010)

It is your money to do with as you please. Buy from reputable breeders who treat their animals well, and who leave them with their mom for 8 weeks, etc.. My advice is to limit the topics of conversation with that particular co-worker to the weather. Avoid religion, politics, and dogs. And everything else except the weather.

Me? I have never bought a dog. Dexter and Zoot adopted me. They just showed up in my yard a year ago, begging for fried chicken.


----------



## zimandtakandgrrandmimi (May 8, 2008)

for me..in reality the first factor in whether i will rescue or buy....is breed. 

i have a list of different types of dogs that i want to own..

Wolfdog..absolutely a rescue. for obvious reasons. it's kind of a no brainer.

Chong Qing Dog...breeder. Find me a Chong Qing Dog in rescue and yeah...but that's just not happening. there is only ONE breeder i know of outside of China...and they are in eastern europe. the Chong Qing population on this continent is...miniscule. more so than even breeds like Klee Kai. 

American Pit Bull Terrier. I will foster _any_ pibble that you throw at me. Literally. But because i want to show, work and compete with APBT..and go beyond that with the breed...i will buy APBT from a breeder. Im also down with failed pibble fosters too lol. 

just to cite a few examples. it's situational with me. i think if you go to a good breeder...then going to a breeder is fine. there's nothing wrong with it. On the flipside, if need allows or calls for it..rescue. both can be admirable...situationally. both can also be suspect...situationally.

just depends.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

Pawzk9 said:


> So then, you're realkly not in favor of people who don't get breed publications or have connections in a breed getting access to well bred puppies?


No it's simply unusual to see newspaper adds for puppies who's parents have been health tested, the breeders know about the breed, etc. Also, I never said I wasn't in favor of someone getting access to _well bred_ puppies. I do have a problem with someone who's getting a lab puppy who's parents have never been health tested and has never had hip scans. That puppy is more than likely to end up with early hip displaysia. I'm sure you can't argue that that puppy wouldn't have led a longer happier life without hip displaysia. If the parent's parents and so forth had been health tested and screened the incidence of diseases that shorten the puppy's life is so much smaller. Again, it's simply unlikely for a breeder who's invested 1000's into her breed to advertise her puppies in a newspaper.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Hallie said:


> No it's simply unusual to see newspaper adds for puppies who's parents have been health tested, the breeders know about the breed, etc. Also, I never said I wasn't in favor of someone getting access to _well bred_ puppies. I do have a problem with someone who's getting a lab puppy who's parents have never been health tested and has never had hip scans. That puppy is more than likely to end up with early hip displaysia. I'm sure you can't argue that that puppy wouldn't have led a longer happier life without hip displaysia. If the parent's parents and so forth had been health tested and screened the incidence of diseases that shorten the puppy's life is so much smaller. Again, it's simply unlikely for a breeder who's invested 1000's into her breed to advertise her puppies in a newspaper.


I think unless you have called these breeders and ask specific questions, you are making a lot of assumptions. I haven't bred in years. I know back in the day, pretty much every breeder who bred my breed around here had ads in the paper. Some put ads in just so people would have a knowledgable source to talk to. They health tested, they researched pedigrees, they showed their dogs and they put ads in the classifieds. It may be that because of this AR belief that no "good" breeder needs to make money or advertise, the practice has largely slacked off. Also ads cost a lot more than they used to, and the internet provides better ways to look for puppies (and no, I'm not talking about high volume sale websites. But frequently on my breed and sports lists, people will mention that they have a litter coming, or may have a puppy or two available. Then again, I have access to a lot more information about my breed than someone just starting out. If I were looking for health testing and hip xrays (not scans) I sure wouldn't be going with a rescue. (though I have gone with rescues, usually not when I was specifically looking for a dog for a purpose.)


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Pawzk9 said:


> *I think unless you have called these breeders and ask specific questions, you are making a lot of assumptions.* I haven't bred in years. I know back in the day, pretty much every breeder who bred my breed around here had ads in the paper. Some put ads in just so people would have a knowledgable source to talk to. They health tested, they researched pedigrees, they showed their dogs and they put ads in the classifieds. *It may be that because of this AR belief that no "good" breeder needs to make money or advertise, the practice has largely slacked off.* Also ads cost a lot more than they used to, and the internet provides better ways to look for puppies (and no, I'm not talking about high volume sale websites. But frequently on my breed and sports lists, people will mention that they have a litter coming, or may have a puppy or two available. Then again, I have access to a lot more information about my breed than someone just starting out. If I were looking for health testing and hip xrays (not scans) I sure wouldn't be going with a rescue. (though I have gone with rescues, usually not when I was specifically looking for a dog for a purpose.)


Some good observations there, and as well I have noticed this kind of thought - about 'good' breeders not needing to advertise - take hold. Those that are pushing this bandwagon as truth are very short sighted. It makes no sense to cut off good breeders from the average buyer by attempting to deride efforts breeders make to advertise.

Can someone explain to me how that helps stop uneducated buyers from going to 'easier' outlets, like puppymills, for pups? I believe pushing this belief does the opposite.

I watch our Kijiji ads through Alberta every day. We have breeders of Canada's highest ranked dogs in some breeds that advertise on Kijij and other free ad sites - puppies and adult dogs at times. They do not put in the details of the testing they do, but if you google the phone numbers you can often find their website with brags to the titles and testing they put on their dogs.

Of course there are also many, many others advertising that do not health test. 

SOB


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

Maybe it's a regional thing, but all that's in our newspapers are bybs. The breeders I've spoken to told me they would never advertise in a newspaper, they also told me I'd be on their waiting list for possibly over a year for a pet puppy. Those are simply my opinions, I'm not assuming that its like that in your area too, or all around the world, but its certainly like that around here. I see great breeders advertising their adult dogs on kijiji etc but not usually puppies unless it's an add advertising the mom has just been bred. Almost all breeders advertise on their websites and on breed websites. Not saying that any breeder who advertises in a paper is a horrific byb, you're making that assumption. I already stated if they health test etc, then they are more than likely a reputable breeder regardless of where they advertise. But again, this is almost never the case around here. Also, most people who do their research wont reach for a newspaper. Perhaps that is an assumption, but IMO if you've done research you've more than likely talked to several breeders of that breed from the breed circle (clubs, online, etc) and you have probably found a breeder you like through that not the newspaper.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Hallie said:


> Maybe it's a regional thing, but all that's in our newspapers are bybs. The breeders I've spoken to told me they would never advertise in a newspaper, they also told me I'd be on their waiting list for possibly over a year for a pet puppy. Those are simply my opinions, I'm not assuming that its like that in your area too, or all around the world, but its certainly like that around here. I see great breeders advertising their adult dogs on kijiji etc but not usually puppies unless it's an add advertising the mom has just been bred. Almost all breeders advertise on their websites and on breed websites. Not saying that any breeder who advertises in a paper is a horrific byb, you're making that assumption. I already stated if they health test etc, then they are more than likely a reputable breeder regardless of where they advertise. But again, this is almost never the case around here. Also, most people who do their research wont reach for a newspaper. Perhaps that is an assumption, but IMO if you've done research you've more than likely talked to several breeders of that breed from the breed circle (clubs, online, etc) and you have probably found a breeder you like through that not the newspaper.


So, you have checked out all the newspaper advertisers, so you know, personally, that they are all "BYBs*? By the way, I haven't bred much but every litter I have bred has been bred in my back yard, since my dogs live in my house. I generally try not to use terms like puppy mills or backyard breeders, as I feel those terma were originated with animal rights, and are frequently used to encompass both breeders who do things right and breeders who don't, and everyone in-between. It's also used frequently among breeders (who should know better) to attrack anyone who doesn't do things their way, or doesn't breed to the standards they have, or is the "competition.". It's easy to dislike someone if you have a category to put them in. That way you don't have to look at then as individuals who may do some things right and some things wrong, but frequently have good intentions and care for their animals. There are large scale and small scale breeders who are constantly striving to improve their breeding stock and preserve their breed. There are breeders (large and small scale) who do a pretty good job of producing healthy puppies but may not have expectations of becoming a top player in their breed in any way. There are breeders large and small scale who are less careful, and there are some who are just horrendous. I'd rather address them in terms of what I know of them (not rumors) than put them in a category which is likely not that descriptive except as a hate term. I know to H$U$ and PeTA, and their ilk, if you breed often you are a puppy mill. If you breed ocasionally you are a BYB. All the research and health testing you want to do doesn't matter, because, in their paradigm, breeding animals is immoral amd exploitiive. I'm simply not going to help them in their war against domestic animals and the people who help us have them.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

> Also, most people who do their research wont reach for a newspaper. Perhaps that is an assumption, but IMO if you've done research you've more than likely talked to several breeders of that breed from the breed circle (clubs, online, etc) and you have probably found a breeder you like through that not the newspaper.


I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from in your heart, but I have to ask, how many people that are purchasing puppys do you think have done enough research that they even know HOW to get involved in a breed circle? I have studied a few breeds and chatted with their breeders for years, and STILL would not be welcome as anything but an outsider in those breed circles, and still would not be allowed purchase of a pup from some of the lines I would consider the best to purchase from.

Then even once IN the breed circle there is a whole lotta sortin' the wheat from the chaff to be done amongst even those breeders, and how many are going to put the effort into doing that? (I do not subscribe to the idea that that arena is the only place that a good breeder can be found, BTW).

Even after that, is it only those people that do this research that deserve to find a good pup? Are all the ones that have done less research just to fall at the wayside then . . . and we shouldn't care where they get a pup from? 

I think this kind of ideology is why puppymills are thriving - and by that term I'm talking about breeders who keep their dogs in horrid conditions. Caring breeders are being driven out . . . and that is not a good thing.

That is why I asked what good does it do to make breeders feel like they are in the wrong for advertising and why anyone would want to spread that message?

SOB


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

If you want a puppy from a breeder, that's great but IMO, it's best to research and try to get the healthiest, best bred pup you can find. A good amount of the time, that means spending more money. If you don't want to spend more money at the outset, head to a reputable rescue organization or a good shelter as opposed to a puppy mill. 
I have had four puppies in my life. The first was a 9 week old from a humane society, second was a 10 week old from a hobby breeder, third was a 9 week old from a reputable breeder and the last was a bit of an older pup, almost five months old, from a reputable breeder. I've also purchased adult dogs from shelters, rescues and breeders.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

InkedMarie said:


> If you want a puppy from a breeder, that's great but IMO, it's best to research and try to get the healthiest, best bred pup you can find. A good amount of the time, that means spending more money. If you don't want to spend more money at the outset, head to a reputable rescue organization or a good shelter as opposed to a puppy mill.
> I have had four puppies in my life. The first was a 9 week old from a humane society, second was a 10 week old from a hobby breeder, third was a 9 week old from a reputable breeder and the last was a bit of an older pup, almost five months old, from a reputable breeder. I've also purchased adult dogs from shelters, rescues and breeders.


I think that no matter where you get your dog, the purchase price is going to be the least of your expenses. Honestly, the fact that one would even have to ASK the question which is the subject of this thread is very telling about how deep ARs has been able to insinuate themselves into the public consciousness. There was a time when being a dog breeder was an honorable and much loved profession. Some of us, as little kids, actually wanted to grow up to be a breeder. (breeding was too hard for me, so I settled for dog trainer instead).


----------



## Loki Love (May 23, 2010)

spanielorbust said:


> That is why I asked what good does it do to make breeders feel like they are in the wrong for advertising and why anyone would want to spread that message?
> 
> SOB


In my opinion - a good breeder has most pups accounted for before the bitch is even pregnant or in the early stages of pregnancy. There is never a need to advertise. If not all the pups have been accounted for before they hit the ground, word of mouth is usually the way it goes. Why breed if you can't guarantee homes to begin with?

My breeder has yet to advertise a litter of pups.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

Pawzk9 said:


> I think that no matter where you get your dog, the purchase price is going to be the least of your expenses. Honestly, the fact that one would even have to ASK the question which is the subject of this thread is very telling about how deep ARs has been able to insinuate themselves into the public consciousness. There was a time when being a dog breeder was an honorable and much loved profession. Some of us, as little kids, actually wanted to grow up to be a breeder. (breeding was too hard for me, so I settled for dog trainer instead).


For ME, you're right but I know alotta people, both IRL and online, who would never pay what I paid for Boone and what we would have paid for a Clumber, had we gotten one. If the OP is someone who is like these people, and they aren't going to spend at the outset, then I'm directing them to go to a shelter or rescue, over the Amish


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

InkedMarie said:


> For ME, you're right but I know alotta people, both IRL and online, who would never pay what I paid for Boone and what we would have paid for a Clumber, had we gotten one. If the OP is someone who is like these people, and they aren't going to spend at the outset, then I'm directing them to go to a shelter or rescue, over the Amish


Uncommon breeds do cost more. I'm guessing you really don't see many PBGVs or Clumbers in shelters or rescues? On Petfinder all the PBGVs look like terrier mixes, and most of the Clumbers look like bassett mixes (there are a couple of purebreds.) one looked like a field spaniel and one had prick ears.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Loki Love said:


> In my opinion - a good breeder has most pups accounted for before the bitch is even pregnant or in the early stages of pregnancy. There is never a need to advertise. If not all the pups have been accounted for before they hit the ground, word of mouth is usually the way it goes. Why breed if you can't guarantee homes to begin with?
> 
> My breeder has yet to advertise a litter of pups.


So you are of the opinion, too, Lokilove that those who do not do their research should be left out in the cold. Too bad for those that don't . . . they should know better and if they do then they'll know how to get to the right source and support the right people? . . . or am I somehow missing something?

Let's chastise breeders who do choose to advertise and class them, by that point, as automatically 'not good' . . . so that those uninformed people who don't even know to research have no way of finding the great breeders . . . . and then . . . .

. . . . well . . . OOPS . . . . those uninformed and naive people just went to a puppymill that does advertise, the petstore, or the Walmart parking lot . . . . 

. . . . . and the message you are sending out has nothing to do with that, of course!


I'm not trying to be feisty here . . . I just don't get this type of thinking. The wrong end of the snake is being hit by a stick.

FIRST we have to teach people that there are all sorts of breeders, and that they need to make a decision on what they consider a good breeder. Then we need to show them how to find a good breeder of a well raised pup AND give good breeders the ability and confidence to openly connect and communicate with these people . . . and that has not been done yet. In fact far from it. It is actively being discouraged by this kind of rhetoric.

This blog post by Christie Keith, "Finding a Nice Puppy Should Not Be This Hard" is a good one on this topic.

http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2009/01/22/finding-a-nice-puppy-should-not-be-this-hard/

_We’ve let the quest for a good breeder and a good family pet become an insider’s game, where you have to be able to decipher codes, know the secret handshake, and keep Sauron from finding the freaking ring before you get a nice puppy. And even then, half the dog fancy and the entire rescue community will be ready to jump down your throat for all the ten thousand ways you could have done it better. 

And that’s not good for dogs. Because there are plenty of people who could give dogs good, loving homes out there who are going to outlets that sell puppies from high volume commercial breeders. They’re buying puppies meant to live as members of their families but have never in their short lives been a part of one, because they’re being raised like livestock. 

Most of those people are not doing it because they’re stupid or careless or impatient; most of them are doing it because the alternatives are invisible to them. 

*One reason breeders are so hard to find is pretty easy to figure out: fear. Fear of aggressive anti-breeding activists in their local animal control and shelter. Fear of mandatory spay/neuter laws.* Fear of breed bans, limit laws, and even sting operations. This whole bizarre idea that we should register and license people who breed a litter or two a year or less… why? It’s no more a business than an occasional garage sale is, and all it does is create a database of people who have intact animals. In the current climate, can anyone really fail to understand why no one who breeds or shows is likely to go along with that? 

But that’s not the only reason. *Breeders have also allowed themselves to be made to feel ashamed of breeding dogs,* of being devoted to their breeds. They’ve been convinced that they have to rationalize and explain what they do, have to point out they do rescue and donate to shelters and really care about dogs in order to… what? Justify bringing a carefully bred puppy into the world and placing him or her into a loving home?_​
SOB


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Hallie said:


> Maybe it's a regional thing, but all that's in our newspapers are bybs. The breeders I've spoken to told me they would never advertise in a newspaper, they also told me I'd be on their waiting list for possibly over a year for a pet puppy. Those are simply my opinions, I'm not assuming that its like that in your area too, or all around the world, but its certainly like that around here. I see great breeders advertising their adult dogs on kijiji etc but not usually puppies unless it's an add advertising the mom has just been bred. Almost all breeders advertise on their websites and on breed websites. Not saying that any breeder who advertises in a paper is a horrific byb, you're making that assumption. I already stated if they health test etc, then they are more than likely a reputable breeder regardless of where they advertise. But again, this is almost never the case around here. *Also, most people who do their research wont reach for a newspaper. Perhaps that is an assumption, but IMO if you've done research you've more than likely talked to several breeders of that breed from the breed circle (clubs, online, etc) and you have probably found a breeder you like through that not the newspaper.*


Depending on the breed, getting invited into the "Circle" can be harder than it sounds. Much harder.



spanielorbust said:


> I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from in your heart, but I have to ask, how many people that are purchasing puppys do you think have done enough research that they even know HOW to get involved in a breed circle? I have studied a few breeds and chatted with their breeders for years, and STILL would not be welcome as anything but an outsider in those breed circles, and still would not be allowed purchase of a pup from some of the lines I would consider the best to purchase from.
> 
> *Then even once IN the breed circle there is a whole lotta sortin' the wheat from the chaff to be done amongst even those breeders, and how many are going to put the effort into doing that? (I do not subscribe to the idea that that arena is the only place that a good breeder can be found, BTW).*
> 
> ...


There are a lot of knife-in-yer-back political circles, one breeder will talk trash about the next to look good. 
And God help you if you're looking into a breed with a split! :O


----------



## Sighthounds4me (Nov 7, 2010)

spanielorbust said:


> I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from in your heart, but I have to ask, how many people that are purchasing puppys do you think have done enough research that they even know HOW to get involved in a breed circle? I have studied a few breeds and chatted with their breeders for years, and STILL would not be welcome as anything but an outsider in those breed circles, and still would not be allowed purchase of a pup from some of the lines I would consider the best to purchase from.
> 
> Then even once IN the breed circle there is a whole lotta sortin' the wheat from the chaff to be done amongst even those breeders, and how many are going to put the effort into doing that? (I do not subscribe to the idea that that arena is the only place that a good breeder can be found, BTW).
> 
> ...


I do agree with this. We have been going through a lot of BS with our Borzois' breeder. Once, we felt welcome in the breed. Now, I feel like we are worse than dog crap on the bottom of their shoe.

While we did not spend years finding the *right* breeder, and years slaving in the mines, we have spent time in obscurity. There are people who know us, though. But we are unlikely to ever breed a litter (not enough time/money to do it "right").

But yes, the purebred dog world has its share of elitists who feel newcomers have nothing to offer, until they have spent years being beaten down. And it is just that mentality that makes me understand more and more why people go to commercial breeders/pet stores and breeders who are questionable, at best. In fact, I said something along that line to DH just yesterday.

As for advertising... Breed/general purebred dog publications are used by many. And this is advertising, even if it is within the fancy. But that is never questioned. However, I do know of reputable, responsible breeders who advertise in newspapers. One that comes to mind is among the "elite" in the Afghan Hound world, and has placed many dogs that way. he still screens carefully, and will turn down someone if they are not up to his standards. But the fact is, he advertises in newspapers.


----------



## Loki Love (May 23, 2010)

spanielorbust said:


> So you are of the opinion, too, Lokilove that those who do not do their research should be left out in the cold. Too bad for those that don't . . . they should know better and if they do then they'll know how to get to the right source and support the right people? . . . or am I somehow missing something?


Research includes going to dog shows, talking to people, getting involved with the local breed club. That's hardly being left out in the cold.



spanielorbust said:


> Let's chastise breeders who do choose to advertise and class them, by that point, as automatically 'not good' . . . so that those uninformed people who don't even know to research have no way of finding the great breeders . . . . and then . . . .
> 
> . . . . well . . . OOPS . . . . those uninformed and naive people just went to a puppymill that does advertise, the petstore, or the Walmart parking lot . . . .
> 
> . . . . . and the message you are sending out has nothing to do with that, of course!


There is a lot of information out there on BYB and puppymills - anyone who does a bit of research will get that. Are some breeders better than others? Absolutely. Does that excuse anyone from going to a pet store? Nope.

Finding a reputable breeder isn't that hard if you have the time and patience. Most people don't given we live in a society that is more and more 'instant gratification' oriented, in my opinion. The information is there - most people don't bother putting in the time to look for it.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Research includes going to dog shows, talking to people, getting involved with the local breed club. That's hardly being left out in the cold.

*I hate to say it, but I've been snubbed by papillon people at dog shows, AND by breed club members (when I sent them my information, pictures of my home/yard, lengthy descriptions of my current pets because I was dying to foster). It absolutely sucks, but there are breed snobs in any venue. If someone who is brand new to a breed gets snubbed like this, I can totally understand why they just give up, because it's extremely disheartening. I just wish more people would opt for the shelter dog/rescue dog route than a pet store, but then again there are some rescues out there that are (IMHO) insane. $1200 "adoption fee" for an adult dog because she's in full coat/a "rare" color? Come on. (Mini rant over lol).*

There is a lot of information out there on BYB and puppymills - anyone who does a bit of research will get that. Are some breeders better than others? Absolutely. Does that excuse anyone from going to a pet store? Nope.

Finding a reputable breeder isn't that hard if you have the time and patience. Most people don't given we live in a society that is more and more 'instant gratification' oriented, in my opinion. The information is there - most people don't bother putting in the time to look for it.

*I agree the instant gratification in our society is way more than it should be. And I'll agree that a lot of people buy breeds on a whim ("that dog won westminster....my aunt had a dog that looked like that and she was the best dog ever....border collies are the most intelligent dog ever so they'll be easy to have around", etc. I don't know if the fault lies with society, the people who are searching for a dog, or the "higher ups" in the breed who look down on people who want to get in on the breed. I know in working border collies, it's a very closed-door society in a lot of ways because they want to preserve the breed and not have every Tom, **** and Harry getting one because they like black and white dogs. I honestly think the fault lies a bit with all 3, personally.
ETA: LOL it bleeped out the name between Tom and Harry! *


----------



## Loki Love (May 23, 2010)

LazyGRanch713 said:


> *I hate to say it, but I've been snubbed by papillon people at dog shows, AND by breed club members (when I sent them my information, pictures of my home/yard, lengthy descriptions of my current pets because I was dying to foster). It absolutely sucks, but there are breed snobs in any venue. If someone who is brand new to a breed gets snubbed like this, I can totally understand why they just give up, because it's extremely disheartening. I just wish more people would opt for the shelter dog/rescue dog route than a pet store, but then again there are some rescues out there that are (IMHO) insane. $1200 "adoption fee" for an adult dog because she's in full coat/a "rare" color? Come on. (Mini rant over lol).*


And that truly does suck that there are people representing breeds that give an impression like that. I wonder if they know the disservice they are actually doing for that breed they cherish and work so hard at maintaining when in fact they end up driving people away (and quite likely into the waiting arms of BYB and puppymillers).


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Loki Love said:


> Research includes going to dog shows, talking to people, getting involved with the local breed club. That's hardly being left out in the cold..


That very much depends on where you live. Tell my friends and family in Fort Vermilion (Northern Alberta) to find themselves a breeder of all but the most popular breeds at a dog show that is within a 5 hour drive (if there are even dog show venues there). How about those I know in Yellowknife? There are many places in Northern Canada that are in that position where clubs and shows are practically non-existent.

http://www.angelfire.com/bc2/CKCShowDogs/clubs.html



Loki Love said:


> There is a lot of information out there on BYB and puppymills - anyone who does a bit of research will get that. Are some breeders better than others? Absolutely. Does that excuse anyone from going to a pet store? Nope..


You are making the assumtion that people actually know that getting a pup is often a minefield and that they SHOULD research before getting a pup. Since when has this been common knowledge? I know it seems like common sense, but I also come from a time when the commonly accepted and advised way you got a pup was through your neighbor or through the newspaper ads, as dog shows and clubs were not to be found by any of the common people, and nor did they welcome anyone but those that had a good amount of wealth. Many people are still in that frame of mind. 



Loki Love said:


> Finding a reputable breeder isn't that hard if you have the time and patience.


I vehemenently disagree. I live in Alberta. There is not a single breeder of Cavaliers in my full province that is doing the health testing recommended for that breed (for that matter, not in B.C.,Saskatchewan, nor Manitoba either). My province is the size of Texas. In regards to Cockers, I have yet to find a single one I would support . . . and in fact not a one of Papillons or Tibetan Spaniels either despite being a long time on lists with breeders of these breeds and going to more than a few shows.



Loki Love said:


> Most people don't given we live in a society that is more and more 'instant gratification' oriented, in my opinion. The information is there - most people don't bother putting in the time to look for it.


That is part of my point. We know this, yet we want to disparage breeders that understand this as well and want to reach out and advertise. I can't see that being a wise plan.

SOB


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Loki Love said:


> Research includes going to dog shows, talking to people, getting involved with the local breed club. That's hardly being left out in the cold.


It's NOT easy. I've been treated badly by plenty of "dog people". I tried to get involved with the local kennel club when Penny was a pup. It's not an inclusive group at all. They don't want me at THEIR dog shows. They don't want to talk to me. They don't want me involved with THEIR breed club. They don't want to answer any questions. If I ever did want to buy a purebred from a "good" breeder, it would not be a walk in the park to find a breeder I would be comfortable supporting who would actually be helpful and non-snotty.


----------



## Loki Love (May 23, 2010)

spanielorbust said:


> That very much depends on where you live. Tell my friends and family in Fort Vermilion (Northern Alberta) to find themselves a breeder of all but the most popular breeds at a dog show that is within a 5 hour drive. How about those I know in Yellowknife? There is NO local breed club.


Ok - so you suggest we give a green light to those who live in remote areas to support BYBs? I guess I don't understand your point here. It seems your supporting my theory of the instant gratification society - 5 hours drive isn't a big deal to some people who love a breed and want to support reputable breeders. 




spanielorbust said:


> You are making the assumtion that people believe they SHOULD research before getting a pup. Since when has this been common knowledge? I know it seems like common sense, but I also come from a time when the way you got a pup was through your neighbor or through the newspaper ads, as dog shows and clubs were not to be found by any of the common people, and nor did they welcome anyone but those that had a good amount of wealth. Many people are still in that frame of mind.


Education is key. Forums like this is key. There are resources and information available now that weren't there years ago (even for those people living in remote areas - imagine!) 




spanielorbust said:


> I vehemenently disagree. I live in Alberta. There is not a single breeder of Cavaliers in my full province that is doing the health testing recommended for that breed. My province is the size of Texas. In regards to Cockers, I have yet to find a single one I would support . . . and in fact not a one of Papillons or Tibetan Spaniels either despite being a long time on lists with breeders of these breeds and going to more than a few shows.


So you have a choice - you go with a breed that has local breeders that you deem as reputable/ethical OR you expand your line of thinking and look into breeders outside your province, maybe even into the States. It's not that uncommon.



Willowy said:


> It's NOT easy. I've been treated badly by plenty of "dog people". I tried to get involved with the local kennel club when Penny was a pup. It's not an inclusive group at all. They don't want me at THEIR dog shows. They don't want to talk to me. They don't want me involved with THEIR breed club. They don't want to answer any questions. If I ever did want to buy a purebred from a "good" breeder, it would not be a walk in the park to find a breeder I would be comfortable supporting who would actually be helpful and non-snotty.


It's unfortunate that was your experience and I'm sorry you had to go through with it. This has never been my experience with my own local club and I do find it incredibly sad that some local clubs treat others that way.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Loki Love said:


> And that truly does suck that there are people representing breeds that give an impression like that. I wonder if they know the disservice they are actually doing for that breed they cherish and work so hard at maintaining when in fact they end up driving people away (and quite likely into the waiting arms of BYB and puppymillers).


Exactly. I won't lie that I get annoyed a bit when I hear the same questions OVER AND OVER (is that a pomeranian, is that a sheltie, etc...) but shoot--half of these people have never seen or HEARD of a papillon, and if I'm the first one they meet that has them, I don't want to give off the snotty impression. I tell them the good AND the bad (smart, cute, funny, biddable, also possessive, barky, etc) and the like. One person at a show with papillons was OH SO happy to talk to a papillon owner until he saw Dude...then he acted like me AND my dog were scum of the earth. Too bad, what's done is done...Dude isn't show bred. But he was darned happy to be at the show and IMO did a lot more service to the breed than this mans show dogs, who were attacking the X-pen at every dog that walked past and snarking at people. 
Mom told me she emailed a few breeders (not exactly "in the area") that were quite haughty, when she was looking for a breeder (before we got Dude). Had these breeders not been such sticks-in-the-mud, we might not have wound up at a non-show kennel that didn't do much in the way of health testing.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Loki Love said:


> Ok - so you suggest we give a green light to those who live in remote areas to support BYBs? I guess I don't understand your point here. It seems your supporting my theory of the instant gratification society - 5 hours drive isn't a big deal to some people who love a breed and want to support reputable breeders. .


Wow. Interesting leap there. So, if I suggest that breeders should be fine with advertising you make the leap to suggest that those I'm supporting are BYBs. 

No. What I am suggesting is that you are using the label BYB according to a criteria that you have created from your very own and very insular idea of what is right created from your experiences and location.



Loki Love said:


> Education is key. Forums like this is key. There are resources and information available now that weren't there years ago (even for those people living in remote areas - imagine!)
> . . .
> So you have a choice - you go with a breed that has local breeders that you deem as reputable/ethical OR you expand your line of thinking and look into breeders outside your province, maybe even into the States. It's not that uncommon..


I think maybe you need to expand YOUR line of thinking as I completely disagree.  

There is no way I support the dissemination of the idea that people should be "importing" dogs from a distance, from breeders they cannot know, because others believe that it is important to only buy from club involved purebred dog breeders. 

I actually find that idea foolish - ludicrous in fact as I am absolutely sure that the average dog shopper would laugh at the suggestion that they should overlook dogs bred locally for imports. I would also imagine that that is also how commercial breeders, that advertise on the internet, get many sales for the smaller easier to ship dogs. I thought that was something we didn't want to promote?

You are promoting a club involved purebred breeding tradition. That is your perogative, but that does not make it the one right way for everywhere. That breeding tradition is NOT the tradition of many parts of our world.

I would not for a second tell someone from Yellowknife to forego the sled dog bred up there, for a purebred Siberian from somewhere far away. (My sled dog, from Yellowknife, has just turned 18 BTW).

I would not for a second tell someone from Africa to purchase a Saluki from a club involved breeder either when desert bred Salukis abound there.

That is because each and every person lives by a different circumstance, and by traditions here, we should be supporting, hopefully rescue first, and then our own best breeders. The criteria for that can be varied, depending on what they are looking for. 

SOB


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Willowy said:


> It's NOT easy. I've been treated badly by plenty of "dog people". I tried to get involved with the local kennel club when Penny was a pup. It's not an inclusive group at all. They don't want me at THEIR dog shows. They don't want to talk to me. They don't want me involved with THEIR breed club. They don't want to answer any questions. If I ever did want to buy a purebred from a "good" breeder, it would not be a walk in the park to find a breeder I would be comfortable supporting who would actually be helpful and non-snotty.


Same here. I emailed a kennel club ages ago, I wanted to get Auz into comnformation handling classes for FUN, for the socialization (he was a puppy), and because I was honestly curious what handling classes were like. I flat out said I had no desire to compete, and (I assume) what did me in is because Auz is a "banana back" (aka a german bred dog, not something you see much of in the american show ring). I don't think they wanted "non show dogs" at their precious friggin' club, IMO who gives a flip.



spanielorbust said:


> Wow. Interesting leap there. So, if I suggest that breeders should be fine with advertising you make the leap to suggest that those I'm supporting are BYBs.
> 
> No. What I am suggesting is that you are using the label BYB according to a criteria that you have created from your very own and very insular idea of what is right created from your experiences and location.
> 
> ...


Very good points. (And 18! What a milestone!)


----------



## Loki Love (May 23, 2010)

spanielorbust said:


> There is no way I support the dissemination of the idea that people should be "importing" dogs from a distance, from breeders they cannot know, because others believe that it is important to only buy from club involved purebred dog breeders.


And yet many people do this. Just because it's not for you - doesn't mean it's a viable option for many of us.



spanielorbust said:


> I would not for a second tell someone from Yellowknife to forego the sled dog bred up there, for a purebred Siberian from somewhere far away. (My sled dog, from Yellowknife, has just turned 18 BTW).


Sled dogs are bred for a working purpose - I have no issue with that (as long as proper health testing is done). Also - my Great Dane just turned 2 - I didn't realize we were celebrating birthdays? I'm not sure how that is relevant - no offense 


End of the day - I'm tired of hearing justifications as to why people buy from less than reputable sources. The information and resources are there - whether or not someone chooses to use them is entirely up to them - but don't come to me claiming they couldn't know. I just don't buy it anymore.


----------



## Hallie (Nov 9, 2008)

It's up to you. If you want to take your chances on getting a puppy that's from parents who have not been health tested then be my guest. I for one, will never pay 100's for a puppy that was bred by simply putting two dogs of the same breed together to make puppies with no thought to the genetics, temperament, and overall health of the parents. Why pay 100's for that kind of puppy when there's tons that will be euthanized at the end of the day. Those are the puppies that need homes and there are plenty of them. Go volunteer in a shelter like mine (75% euth rate) and maybe you'll understand why I believe that breeders should be reputable and health test. So I guess it would've been perfectly fine to buy Hallie for the $400 she was originally and allow the breeder to crank more puppies out and kill many in the process, just because she's a local puppy? Um, no sorry. If you're dedicated you'll go outside of your local bubble, if not then go to a shelter. Otherwise you aren't contributing a thing to the breed but more genetically defective puppies.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Yes, try to get involved in border collies... Oh man, I've honestly given up. I'll just get myself a rescue thankyouverymuch. But I see why people go to bad breeders. The thought has often crossed my mind too and I'm not a 'newbie' to all this either. I know many people who have had the same experience.

Anyways, my papillon's breeder advertises. I don't see the problem. I was lucky getting into papillons... My first 4 dogs' have a very old school kind of breeder. Probably would be labelled a BYB by some for her lack of contracts but whatever. I was able to get a dog and get involved in the breed easily. My second breeder was also pretty welcoming and helpful. But it's not always like that as I've found trying to get involved in another breed.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Laurelin said:


> Yes, try to get involved in border collies... Oh man, I've honestly given up. I'll just get myself a rescue thankyouverymuch. But I see why people go to bad breeders. The thought has often crossed my mind too and I'm not a 'newbie' to all this either. I know many people who have had the same experience.
> 
> Anyways, my papillon's breeder advertises. I don't see the problem. I was lucky getting into papillons... My first 4 dogs' have a very old school kind of breeder. Probably would be labelled a BYB by some for her lack of contracts but whatever. I was able to get a dog and get involved in the breed easily. My second breeder was also pretty welcoming and helpful. But it's not always like that as I've found trying to get involved in another breed.


I'm honestly wondering if the key to the BC world is rescue first, buy second. 95% of people I've talked to (that have working litters) say "first time owner, go the rescue route". I've no idea if this is true or not, but it's just something I've picked up on. If I don't go rescue (BC's), I'm pretty sure I know where I'm going for a pup. But for the hard-core working dogs only world, I think it's a damned shame that you can't get into the world even if your interest lies in preserving the (dying) world of herding.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I just read an article that said that pretty much everything in the dog fancy is dying. Registrations are down, participation is down, etc. That most people consider buying a well-bred purebred to be like buying a Lamborghini to drive your kids to school. I don't know if all that is true (about the registration numbers), but if people in the hobby aren't welcoming, it's no wonder.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I just read an article that said that pretty much everything in the dog fancy is dying. Registrations are down, participation is down, etc. That most people consider buying a well-bred purebred to be like buying a Lamborghini to drive your kids to school. I don't know if all that is true (about the registration numbers), but if people in the hobby aren't welcoming, it's no wonder.


Actually I believe AKC said last year, entries were up. I am not sure about registrations. 

As for people in the hobby (in my case conformation) not being welcoming, I can agree with that, I have dealt with that first hand. But I can say if it wasn't for those people, I wouldn't be where I am today, cause I would have never met my mentor who has taught me everything she knows (well not everything because I am still learning from her). It's because of those people that pushed me away, (the breeders, the first two trainers I went to, etc), that I found somebody who could see the potential in me and wanted to take part in training me. It's their lost as I put it. 

I know that is not the case for everybody, but for someone who was as determined as I was to get into this I think it could ring true.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I think entries were up because of the mixed-breed program. Or the article made allusions to that effect.

A person should not have to be especially determined to get "into" the hobby. Not if anyone wants it to survive. Some people just don't go where they're not wanted.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

Also the grand championship program. 

I was just sharing my story, no need to argue about it.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Willowy said:


> I think entries were up because of the mixed-breed program. Or the article made allusions to that effect.


IMO, the mixed breed program is in order *to* get the entries up, not the other way around, kwim?


----------



## PuppyContest (Feb 20, 2011)

It's certainly not wrong to pay for a puppy. Contributing to the livelihood of breeder helps the breeder and the breed. If you want a great pet I'm sure you could find a puppy to adopt and raise.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

tallmom11 said:


> From what I have seen\read it's not that the Amish aren't good people, it's that they believe literally in the Biblical idea that man rules over animals and they treat dogs the same as they would treat chickens or any other animal. Therefore, they do not give them any affection, keep them in pens (one on top of the other, wire floors)and just breed like crazy. I am sure it would be simple to google lots of articles. Oprah also did a puppymill show about it a while back, and a lot of episodes of "Animal Cops-philadelphia" on animal planet deal with this.


Umn, I'm not believing, particularly, anything AR Oprah says. And Animal Cops? Really? Talk about propoganda. Sandy in OK



Loki Love said:


> And yet many people do this. Just because it's not for you - doesn't mean it's a viable option for many of us.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If I had a medium sized dog who made it to 18, I'd definitely be celebrating that birthday everywhere I could. I haven't had one get beyond 15.5 myself, though the line I have now has several relatives who have made it to 16 or 17. (which was a consideration) Congrats to SOB and her (his? I've been wrong before) sled dog. I do think that speaks volumes about someone who is breeding healthy dogs. So, yeah. Relevant.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> There is never a need to advertise.


What a load of horse pucky! How do you think NEW breeders are supposed to find homes for puppies!? Nobody knows who they are!

Heck, I've been in GSDs for a decade and am still considered "new"! When we hopefully have our first litter, I'll be advertising, and I won't feel bad about it. People can't come to a good breeder for a puppy if they don't know where they are.


----------



## Loki Love (May 23, 2010)

Xeph said:


> What a load of horse pucky! How do you think NEW breeders are supposed to find homes for puppies!? Nobody knows who they are!
> 
> Heck, I've been in GSDs for a decade and am still considered "new"! When we hopefully have our first litter, I'll be advertising, and I won't feel bad about it. People can't come to a good breeder for a puppy if they don't know where they are.


Kudos to you then.

But why would you bring new life to this world without already having most homes set up for potential pups? That is responsible breeding, in my opinion. Or are you referring to advertising that your bitch is pregnant (when the time comes)?


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

Xeph said:


> What a load of horse pucky! How do you think NEW breeders are supposed to find homes for puppies!? Nobody knows who they are!
> 
> Heck, I've been in GSDs for a decade and am still considered "new"! When we hopefully have our first litter, I'll be advertising, and I won't feel bad about it. People can't come to a good breeder for a puppy if they don't know where they are.


Our pbgv was from their first litter. The only place they advertised was the breed club's breeder referral page. I would hope you'd have some homes lined up before the bitch is pregnant., since the number of pups isn't a guarantee, you could have unhappy people because you don't have enough dogs and you can have a couple "left over". My newest pup was one of four. They were keeping one themselves and had one other buyer lined up. The other buyer fell through, then we came around and now they have two boys left, age 7mos. (the mother had one other litter and only had two pups)


----------



## hilaryaustin (Feb 17, 2011)

in my case I have purchased a dog in cage because I want to adopt and change the life of that dog. His first life was being trapped on the cage and after I took him home he does not live in the cage anymore but he lives together with me in the house. It is also quite the same were in you purchase a dog in some shops because you know you can add or give a better home for those hopeful animals.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I have never known a breeder that takes reservations for 100% of their litters to be honest. I really don't get the mentality that they MUST either. If the breeder is responsible and able to keep any 'extra' pups till a good home is found, then what is the problem? Mia was held onto by her breeder for 16 weeks till I came along. I know other breeders both in real life and online that keep pups or puppies till they're several months old. 

Also, why should someone need to spend years and years getting into the dog show world to get a PET dog? I'm not saying you shouldn't research but some of what people are required to do is well beyond research. Most people aren't going to sell their soul for a pet. Not saying all breeders require that but many seemingly do. 

I don't understand the idea that breeders should NEVER advertise and NEVER sell to the general public. If they don't then someone else will take the place and that someone will not likely be worth a darn. We should be encouraging breeders who genuinely care. And putting out ads online or in the paper or whatever source has absolutely nothing to do with that. An ad says nothing for the quality of a breeder or a breeder's dogs. It's simply an ad. Why do people read so much into it?


----------



## sandydj (Sep 27, 2010)

Regarding the Amish , sure I bet there are Amish people who are very good to their dogs. I too have seen them treat their good animals well , because their animals are an integral part of helping them function on a day to day basis.

However , after 27 year period of living in Quarryville PA , Lancaster County I can assure you that the Amish who are advertising pure breed dogs like Pomeranians are not breeding them under conditions or standards that most people who are members to this forum would consider acceptable.

I have seen Amish selling whoops litters and intentional of good working dogs , and yes they do care about their working animals in particular , and yes the conditions were fine. I would have been less concerned initially , if the OP had said an Amish family has a litter of BCs for sale or something like that..it would make sense for them to have a functioning farm dog that is well cared for have a litter ( they don't spay or neuter in general) .

However , according to their strict biblical lifestyle , they don't do strictly house pets like Poms. They are breeding them to make money , and they standards for breeding commodity animals is usually not up to snuff with the opinions on "good breeders" held by the people on this forum.

Yes , it is a stereotype , yes some Amish are better to their animals than others just like all other populations of people . But if I am on a DOG forum , and someone says they are looking to get a non working breed lap dog from the Amish it is only responsible to raise a red flag about that. 

I mean , if she OP had said she was looking to get Poms from a source description that sounded like a BYBer , everyone would have been all over her not to buy from that source..without SEEING the breeder themselves. But the minute a hint of non pc ness or generalization based on race or religion popped up , it was about " if you haven't SEEN the breeder how do you know , how can you make a generalization , etc etc" 

Well , every time someone describes what SOUNDS like a BYB or designer dog situation , the experienced members here give advice to stay away without they themselves SEEING the breeder or knowing first hand about the breeder. Fair is fair , if it SOUNDS like a bad situation , members here give advice accordingly without seeing first hand what the poster is looking at. It is a forum. That is how it rolls. 

You should not let your desire to not generalize based on race or religion cloud advice given to an unexperienced person looking to buy a dog. Amish are responsible for a LOT of bad breeding and puppy mill situations. To hear it is a dog like a Pomeranian makes it even more probable their breeding standards are not up to what members here would NORMALLY steer someone towards. 

Again , if one of their working breed or functional dogs had a whoops litter or even an intentional litter because they are from such good stock? Sure , maybe the dogs are treated well out of respect for the service they give the family. But a lap dog breed who doesn't pull its weight on the farm? I would bet my last dime it is a business to them and the dogs are merely treated like commodities at best..or maybe a lot worse. It does not make them bad people..it is their religion not to humanize or personalize dogs the way most of us here do. So it just makes the different than us in their general way of life and their view towards breeding dogs for money and mass advertised sale. 

I have Amish friends. I spent 27 years there...Quarryville PA. My brother and family still live there and I grew up working a few summers for Amish people who do hire English people to do things they are not allowed to do based on their religion. They have sets of beliefs that they are entitled to and that I respect..but I would not fund those beliefs anymore than I would fund a pet store , BYB , designer breeder , etc etc.

I stand by my original advice to the OP that "Pomeranians" from the Amish is probably a puppy mill situation , or at the very best BYBing. 

And yeah , we all have to give advice without actually SEEING any of these breeders people here are regularly steered against , because it is a forum that spans an entire country and countries.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sandydj said:


> I mean , if she OP had said she was looking to get Poms from a source description that sounded like a BYBer , everyone would have been all over her not to buy from that source..without SEEING the breeder themselves. But the minute a hint of non pc ness or generalization based on race or religion popped up , it was about " if you haven't SEEN the breeder how do you know , how can you make a generalization , etc etc"
> 
> Well , every time someone describes what SOUNDS like a BYB or designer dog situation , the experienced members here give advice to stay away without they themselves SEEING the breeder or knowing first hand about the breeder. Fair is fair , if it SOUNDS like a bad situation , members here give advice accordingly without seeing first hand what the poster is looking at. It is a forum. That is how it rolls.
> 
> ...


Honestly? While I would say that certain situations raised red flags for me, and suggest really checking the situation out before purchasing a puppy, but no matter what someone's race or religion, I'm not going to categorize them as a puppy miller without knowing that for a fact. In fact, since I don't use AR terms like "Puppy Mill" and "Backyard Breeder" if the conditions warranted it, I would simply refer to them as neglectful or substandard.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> Or are you referring to advertising that your bitch is pregnant (when the time comes)?


BOTH! Of course we'll be working to have homes lined up first, but without advertising, not many people outside of the show circuit would know (read, Average Joe)! And to be honest, while I'd like dogs we sell to be trained and titled, I WOULDN'T sell to many in the GSD fancy that have been in for awhile (not many of the big names anyway).

I don't want dogs I bred to be living outside in kennels, only coming out when it's time for a show. If it's between selling them to a kennel situation where they'll become a finished champion and holding down a couch with a house full of kids, I'm choosing the latter!

But I can't choose the latter if they don't know I exist.

Heck, I have business cards now (to hand out at shows)...that's most definitely advertising. I try to keep my website up to date for advertising purposes too, but the only people that generally see it are other fanciers (through the e-mail lists). The only way I can get AJ to know I'm around is to hand him a business card, or put an ad in the paper, etc.

I don't think where I advertise should matter, as long as I'm doing the proper screening for the homes.


----------



## Meshkenet (Oct 2, 2009)

Pawzk9 said:


> Honestly? While I would say that certain situations raised red flags for me, and suggest really checking the situation out before purchasing a puppy, but no matter what someone's race or religion, I'm not going to categorize them as a puppy miller without knowing that for a fact. In fact, since I don't use AR terms like "Puppy Mill" and "Backyard Breeder" if the conditions warranted it, I would simply refer to them as neglectful or substandard.


I've just finished reading this thread, and one thing bugs me a bit. Why do you keep saying "animal rights" and "AR" as if they are dirty words?


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

Meshkenet said:


> I've just finished reading this thread, and one thing bugs me a bit. Why do you keep saying "animal rights" and "AR" as if they are dirty words?


Thank you that has been bothering me too, sounds like a broken record. 

Also as to advertising, I have a website that is getting updated, I have word of mouth, and I am on both the breeder referral lists, do I advertise in the local paper? no but that is my choice, and I do need to make new business cards. Even though I advertise very little, I still get at least one inquiry per week, specially for bulldogs. I don't add them to my list though, as I don't believe in making a list well in advance. 

I don't have lists made for upcomming litters as I don't know if they will take yet, I want to know they are pregnant, and I want to know what I have. I have 12 weeks to make a list, I don't need to make a list in advance. And the people that don't get a puppy from me, I send them off to someone who also has puppies. I only have so many puppies, I can't please everybody. Yes I love for my puppies to go to show homes, but you are not going to find all show homes, so once I figure out which pups are show quality I reserve them, and the others get pet picks. I never sell sight unseen, people have to come to my house once the pups are old enough, they meet the dam (as I generally don't have the sire), and they do go through our questionnaire, it isn't as lengthy and ridiculous as some I have heard, just the info we need to hear, we also get to see how they interact with the puppies, and it generally turns into a nice evening. If it doesn't work out, we give them a call and turn them onto someone else. 

I keep puppies till they find homes, I find nothing wrong with that, as that is what a responsible breeder does. The longer they stay with me, the more time I have to evaluate them.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Pawzk9 said:


> Honestly? While I would say that certain situations raised red flags for me, and suggest really checking the situation out before purchasing a puppy, but no matter what someone's race or religion, I'm not going to categorize them as a puppy miller without knowing that for a fact. In fact, since I don't use AR terms like "Puppy Mill" and "Backyard Breeder" if the conditions warranted it, I would simply refer to them as neglectful or substandard.


I am not sure why you think "puppymill" is an AR term. It's quite accurate. A mill is a place where goods are mass-produced. A place where puppies are mass-produced would logically be a puppy mill. No matter what the conditions are. 

And some show breeders refer to everyone who breeds and doesn't show as a "backyard breeder". It's not an AR term; it's a snotty show breeder term. I have no particular beef with BYBs as long as they're responsible and treat their dogs well.

Lancaster County, PA has one of the highest densities of commercial breeders (by definition, commercial breeder = a place where puppies are mass-produced = a puppymill) in the US. Most of Lancaster County's population is Amish. Conclusions can be drawn.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Meshkenet said:


> I've just finished reading this thread, and one thing bugs me a bit. Why do you keep saying "animal rights" and "AR" as if they are dirty words?


Because their stated goal is the end of domestic animal ownership/use. And that is not acceptable to me. The thing is, if you pay attention to legislation being backed by H$U$ around the country, there are many "puppy mill" bills being introduced based on how many intact female dogs a person owns (whether or not they are breeding them, whether or not they are co-owned and live elsewhere) and sometimes those numbers are quite low. Or how many puppies/dogs a year a person sells (which could include rescues). Or how many litters a year (some breeds which generally produce 2-3 puppies per litter could have several litters and still produce fewer dogs that a couple of litters of 10-12 a piece). The fact is, a person shouldn't be considered a "puppy mill" because of how many dogs they own/breed. I know some people who have a lot of dogs who are wonderfully cared for, and some people who are unable to care for a single dog. I know breeders who breed a lot of dogs who breed and place carefully, heath test, are there for their pups and their pup buyers, and smaller breeders who do not. PeTA and H$U$ (and other AR organizations) have stated upfront that they consider ALL breeding to be unethical. So, if we have any common sense at all, we should know they aren't just after neglectful or substandard breeders. So they make these bills up to hurt the hobby breeders (who are most likely to do things right) and claim they are aimed at puppy mills, based on things which have nothing to do with how the dogs are cared for, or how much care is put into breeding. They specifically name them Puppy Mill bills, use that specific language, and the uninformed public is fine with it, because after all, nobody likes puppy mills, and the horrific vision of filthy little cages has been so insinuated into the public's consciousness, when in fact, while those places do exist, most breeders don't breed that way or keep their dogs that way. Also, there are already laws which can be enforced to shut down truly substandard facilities. So, yeah, I support animal welfare and humane treatment of animals. I spend an awful lot of time working to be sure that dogs, at least, are treated well and learn enough to stay in their homes (not just paying lip service to the idea). But I know that's not really the Animal Rights goal. And their actual goal (elimination of pets, livestock, any domesticated or kept animals) is a filthy idea to me.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Pawzk9 said:


> Because their stated goal is the end of domestic animal ownership


Maybe PETA. But few people take PETA seriously, and they have never tried to pass themselves off as anything other than crazy AR nuts. HSUS has NEVER stated that is their goal (unless you'd like to point it out, please?). They have also never stated that all breeding is unethical (again, if I'm wrong, please show me). Spreading misinformation makes you no better than they are.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

Actually Wayne Pacelle has stated that is his goal. Wayne has stated numerous times that his goal is "One generation and out". 

HSUS has been up to their necks in legal trouble, but nobody can touch them because of the amount of high paid lawyers they have on payroll.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Meshkenet said:


> I've just finished reading this thread, and one thing bugs me a bit. Why do you keep saying "animal rights" and "AR" as if they are dirty words?


http://www.furcommission.com/debate/
ETA: I feel strongly FOR Animal WELFARE, but am totally against Animal Rights. The life of a child should outweigh the life of a bug, imo.



ChaosIsAWeim said:


> Actually Wayne Pacelle has stated that is his goal. Wayne has stated numerous times that his goal is "One generation and out".
> 
> HSUS has been up to their necks in legal trouble, but nobody can touch them because of the amount of high paid lawyers they have on payroll.


Very true (and very unnerving).


----------



## Meshkenet (Oct 2, 2009)

Pawzk9 said:


> Because their stated goal is the end of domestic animal ownership/use. And that is not acceptable to me. The thing is, if you pay attention to legislation being backed by H$U$ around the country, there are many "puppy mill" bills being introduced based on how many intact female dogs a person owns (whether or not they are breeding them, whether or not they are co-owned and live elsewhere) and sometimes those numbers are quite low. Or how many puppies/dogs a year a person sells (which could include rescues). Or how many litters a year (some breeds which generally produce 2-3 puppies per litter could have several litters and still produce fewer dogs that a couple of litters of 10-12 a piece). The fact is, a person shouldn't be considered a "puppy mill" because of how many dogs they own/breed. I know some people who have a lot of dogs who are wonderfully cared for, and some people who are unable to care for a single dog. I know breeders who breed a lot of dogs who breed and place carefully, heath test, are there for their pups and their pup buyers, and smaller breeders who do not. PeTA and H$U$ (and other AR organizations) have stated upfront that they consider ALL breeding to be unethical. So, if we have any common sense at all, we should know they aren't just after neglectful or substandard breeders. So they make these bills up to hurt the hobby breeders (who are most likely to do things right) and claim they are aimed at puppy mills, based on things which have nothing to do with how the dogs are cared for, or how much care is put into breeding. They specifically name them Puppy Mill bills, use that specific language, and the uninformed public is fine with it, because after all, nobody likes puppy mills, and the horrific vision of filthy little cages has been so insinuated into the public's consciousness, when in fact, while those places do exist, most breeders don't breed that way or keep their dogs that way. Also, there are already laws which can be enforced to shut down truly substandard facilities. So, yeah, I support animal welfare and humane treatment of animals. I spend an awful lot of time working to be sure that dogs, at least, are treated well and learn enough to stay in their homes (not just paying lip service to the idea). But I know that's not really the Animal Rights goal. And their actual goal (elimination of pets, livestock, any domesticated or kept animals) is a filthy idea to me.


Very few people believe PETA to truly be about animal rights, in the sense that they tend to pose actions which are radically different from what they pretend to be about (for example, the number of pets euthanized by PETA); as for the US Humane society, I am not that familiar with them not being from the USA myself.

But those are only 2 organizations within the hundreds that exist in the world, and they don't represent the majority of people who spend their time, energy and money working towards better lives for animals. Many people on this forum are members of refuges, foster animals, try to make people more aware of animal mistreatment, etc. I am not aware of anyone on DF being a member of PETA.

Animal rights means exactly what it says: 
Definition of ANIMAL RIGHTS:_ rights (as to fair and humane treatment) regarded as belonging fundamentally to all animals (Meriam-Websters online)._

If you want to talk about the failings of PETA or the US HS, feel free; but throwing every one who cares abourt animals and works toward obtaining better conditions for living beings into the same boat only makes you come out as prejudeced and condescending.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

HSUS was getting indicted from withholding donated money for the Katrina animals, don't know how that went.

Also there is a difference between animal rights, and animal welfare, which I am all for the latter.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Willowy said:


> Maybe PETA. But few people take PETA seriously, and they have never tried to pass themselves off as anything other than crazy AR nuts..


Excuse me? Do you have some statistics to back up who does and how many?

In regards to 'they have never tried to pass themselves off . . . " that is not true. I have watched this insidious group and the propoganda they send out since my sister joined up with them 30 years ago so please don't try to pass that line off. (She stopped supporting them only 6 years ago).

I have worked in schools and watched PETA disseminated information come through to our school kids.

My neice, now 18, joined PETA and became a vegan at the age of 13, and the brochure that introduced them to her was obtained in her classroom. She is now seriously ill with digestive problems and food allergies - maybe it would have happened anyway, but I watched her faint dead away numerous times as we all begged her to change her diet, so I have a feeling that contributed. I don't like the influence AR propoganda has had on the young generation. I am another that is all for animal welfare, but not animal rights, and I do know fully what both terms mean.

So please do not pretend that because in your experience PETA is not taken seriously by those you know, that that is not the case for the rest of us.

SOB


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

I do take PETA seriously, only because they are quickly becoming the next ALF. I don't take their propaganda seriously, as it is misguided and just downright stupid, but I do take their actions seriously. I know their propaganda gets heard by many, and people believe them, so somebody has to be taking them seriously.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

What I meant was, of course some people take PETA seriously. But they know what they're doing and make a conscious choice to go that direction. They don't think they're joining some reasonable animal welfare organization, they know that PETA is against all use of animals. They don't pretend to be something they're not (as some claim that HSUS does).

As for Wayne Pacelle and his alleged statements, can someone give me a link to something he said that's NOT from 20-30 years ago? Because I can't find anything, and I can't take something he said before I was born seriously. My parents said/did lots of stuff before I was born that they certainly wouldn't do now .


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Willowy said:


> I am not sure why you think "puppymill" is an AR term. It's quite accurate. A mill is a place where goods are mass-produced. A place where puppies are mass-produced would logically be a puppy mill. No matter what the conditions are.


So, no matter how clean, well kept, socialized and cared for the dogs are, if they have "X" number of breeding dogs they are a puppy mill? Who defines "mass produced?"

http://www.canismajor.com/dog/puppymil.html



Willowy said:


> Maybe PETA. But few people take PETA seriously, and they have never tried to pass themselves off as anything other than crazy AR nuts. HSUS has NEVER stated that is their goal (unless you'd like to point it out, please?). They have also never stated that all breeding is unethical (again, if I'm wrong, please show me). Spreading misinformation makes you no better than they are.


With PeTA, they have, of course, tried to pass themselves off as a legitimate organization (that's how they get money). The nuttiness just shines through. H$U$ is absolutely the same, philosophy wise, with many people crossing over from positions in PeTA (and even ALF) to work for H$U$. It's just slightly better at hiding its agenda. Still, if you open your eyes, it's not that hard to see what they really are.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

> What I meant was, of course some people take PETA seriously. But they know what they're doing and make a conscious choice to go that direction. They don't think they're joining some reasonable animal welfare organization, they know that PETA is against all use of animals.


Again, I don't think that you get it. My sister did not know this, my niece did not know this, and nor does the 16 year old friend of one of my sons that is a member believe it. They all believe or believed PETA was a reasonable welfare organization, and don't want to hear otherwise, as do and did many of the teachers that I worked with., as they wanted to justify the fact that they sided with SOME of the propoganda put out by this organization.

SOB


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Pawzk9 said:


> So, no matter how clean, well kept, socialized and cared for the dogs are, if they have "X" number of breeding dogs they are a puppy mill? Who defines "mass produced?"


Yes, technically. I suppose "mass produced" can be defined the way the dictionary defines it: "to produce in quantity".



> H$U$ is absolutely the same, philosophy wise, with many people crossing over from positions in PeTA (and even ALF) to work for H$U$. It's just slightly better at hiding its agenda. Still, if you open your eyes, it's not that hard to see what they really are.


Ah, yes, the whole "if you don't agree with me, you're obviously blind and just can't see what they're trying to do!". But no facts to back it up. Nice.



spanielorbust said:


> Again, I don't think that you get it. My sister did not know this, my niece did not know this, and nor does the 16 year old friend of one of my sons that is a member believe it. They all believe or believed PETA was a reasonable welfare organization, and don't want to hear otherwise, as do and did many of the teachers that I worked with., as they wanted to justify the fact that they sided with SOME of the propoganda put out by this organization.


I would assume that anybody who becomes vegan is against the use of all animals. It's kind of the definition of vegan.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Willowy said:


> I would assume that anybody who becomes vegan is against the use of all animals. It's kind of the definition of vegan.


Cart before the horse here. My niece became a vegan BECAUSE of PETA. She thought their message, that she was introduced to at too young an age, was reasonable . This also does not address the rest of those that I mentioned.

PETA takes in multi millions in donations yearly . . . . but yeah . . . I'm sure those all come in from people who know fully what the organization is about and are making a concious choice to go in that direction (sarc clearly on).

SOB


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Meshkenet said:


> But those are only 2 organizations within the hundreds that exist in the world, and they don't represent the majority of people who spend their time, energy and money working towards better lives for animals. Many people on this forum are members of refuges, foster animals, try to make people more aware of animal mistreatment, etc. I am not aware of anyone on DF being a member of PETA.
> 
> Animal rights means exactly what it says:
> Definition of ANIMAL RIGHTS:_ rights (as to fair and humane treatment) regarded as belonging fundamentally to all animals (Meriam-Websters online)._
> ...


Actually, I'd consider that to be a pretty good definition of Animal Welfare (of which I am adamantly in favor.) If that was all AR was, I wouldn't be the least bit concerned. It's not. And its over-all philosophy is pretty much the same across organizational lines.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

spanielorbust said:


> Cart before the horse here. My niece became a vegan BECAUSE of PETA. She thought their message, that she was introduced to at too young an age, was reasonable . This also does not address the rest of those that I mentioned.


Um, yes, 13-year-olds do a lot of dumb things. They become anorexic because their friends said they were fat. They do drugs or smoke because their friends say that doing so is cool. They also have peculiar eating habits. My brother, at that age, ate nothing but macaroni-and-cheese and chicken nuggets. No accounting for what a kid that age is thinking.

And I don't know what you mean by addressing the rest. If they were people of proper decision-making age, they made the choice to support PETA and become vegan. Vegans by definition are against human use of animals. I don't see how they can claim that they were misled.



Pawzk9 said:


> Actually, I'd consider that to be a pretty good definition of Animal Welfare (of which I am adamantly in favor.) If that was all AR was, I wouldn't be the least bit concerned. It's not. And its over-all philosophy is pretty much the same across organizational lines.


Then maybe a new word to describe nutjobs like PETA is in order. Because that IS the definition of "animal rights" (the one Meshkenet quoted), and I think a lot of people get confused. Because I'm all for that as well.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Willowy said:


> Yes, technically. I suppose "mass produced" can be defined the way the dictionary defines it: "to produce in quantity".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What sort of facts would you like? They are readily available. Would you read them if they were provided? 
Lotsa good stuff at the Center for Consumer Freedom.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Willowy, to play this back, this was what I responded to.



> But few people take PETA seriously, and they have never tried to pass themselves off as anything other than crazy AR nuts.


You then suggested that those that take PETA seriously know what they are doing. Well, when I know people that pass out PETA information and send in donations, that is what I call taking PETA seriously.

Many, many that disseminate PETA articles and send in their donations are not vegan.

So, no, often those that support PETA do NOT know what PETA is fully about and do not know what they are doing or supporting, when they do so.



> No accounting for what a kid that age is thinking.


Yes, there is accounting for, when a child comes home and declares that PETA is right so she is becoming a vegan.



> If they were people of proper decision-making age, they made the choice to support PETA and become vegan.


You've jumped to some kind of conclusion that I'm speaking about vegans . . . as if only vegans are PETA supporters. See above, as this conclusion was in error.

SOB


----------



## sandydj (Sep 27, 2010)

I did not even consider radical groups like PETA in forming my opinion. I do not agree with PETA or ALF or any of those extreme groups.. nor did I consult Oprah.

Puppy mills , commercial mass breeding , dogs that go to pet stores , store fronts , designer breeders , BYBs... these are all categories( and the common terms used for them) that most responsible breeders , rescue organizations , humane societies , ASPCA shelters , and dog lovers in general campaign against. 

Implying any of those terms are only used by or somehow invented by extreme groups like PETA , ALF , would be saying that most of the good people here that I see consistently giving advice against buying dogs from such sources are supporters of those groups. 

It isn't a just PETA thing.. and you don't have to value a dog or bug more than a child to be passionate about animal's rights and responsible sound dog breeding. I am passionate about rescue work , and I believe in a dog's right to a good life , and I only respect responsible breeders..

However , if the shit hit the fan my kids come first , I don't like the way PETA operates nor do I subscribe to a heck of a lot of all their beliefs and what they preach. I despise groups like ALF. 

But I beleive that animals do have certain rights ( among them , not living in deplorable mill conditions ) ..so i guess I'm one of the AR people


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Pawzk9 said:


> What sort of facts would you like? They are readily available. Would you read them if they were provided?
> Lotsa good stuff at the Center for Consumer Freedom.


I would read good factual information from reliable sources. I consider CCF to be no better than PETA. Everything I've read from them is hysterical alarmist propaganda with their own spin added liberally. So much so that it's hard to determine what the actual news is they're trying to report vs their own editorialism.

Factual---people are making allegations that HSUS is against all breeding. . .if this were true, presumably this info would be easy to find on HSUS' website (instead of articles on "how to find a good breeder") or from some other first-hand source. 

Reliable---If Wayne Pacelle made recent statements about ending the keeping of domesticated animals, I'm sure this info could be found from a mainstream news source.


----------



## MusherChic (Nov 6, 2010)

> I do want to state that not ALL Amish breeders are mills. Are many? Of course. But there are Amish breeders out there that do take good care of their stock, their dogs aren't kept in deplorable conditions, etc.


Ditto, Xeph.  I personally know an Amish family (Their kids are my best friends.....they aren't as "Amish" as they used to be though...) and they have a farm and a kennel of sled dogs and all of their animals are very well taken care of. I think that some Amish having poorly taken care of animals is just another case of "bad apples". Some do it right and some don't just like every other kind of breeder/dog sport/etc.

Anyways, I have both rescues and dogs from breeders. For my sled dogs I buy from other sled dog breeders and my pets have all been adopted. I am not against adopting nor buying from breeders. 
I think some people are one sided because they feel that its not fair to go and buy a dog from a breeder when there are dogs in the shelter. Some people don't want to/can't deal with the problems that some shelter dogs can have and some want to raise their dogs from pups, like the OP said (there are lots of puppies in shelters though as the result of BYBs and accidental breedings...). When you buy from a _reputable_ breeder then you can see the parents and their temperament and you can kind of get an idea of what the puppy is going to be like when it grows up where as if you get a pup from a shelter you have no idea what/who they came from nor how they were raised/handled from birth to 8 weeks.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

spanielorbust said:


> Again, I don't think that you get it. My sister did not know this, my niece did not know this, and nor does the 16 year old friend of one of my sons that is a member believe it. They all believe or believed PETA was a reasonable welfare organization, and don't want to hear otherwise, as do and did many of the teachers that I worked with., as they wanted to justify the fact that they sided with SOME of the propoganda put out by this organization.
> 
> SOB


As a teen, I heard about PETA and People for the ETHICAL treatment of animals and wanted to hop on board. I told my mom and she (literally) laughed out loud. I just heard about an organization that believed in treating animals ethically and wanted to hop on board. It sounds so good in words, but the beliefs and actions...no thanks.


----------



## MusherChic (Nov 6, 2010)

> You make tons of great points, and I pretty much share your sentiments The bolded part I especially like, because bringing home an adult dog doesn't always mean you've "rescued" said dog.


Ditto on this too. Buying from a breeder doesn't always mean getting a puppy either. I haven't had a puppy in the house since my German Shepherd who is almost 5yrs old. Since then I have gotten 5 adult dogs from breeders ( 2 were technically rescues from a shelter but one of those rescues came from an extremely good and reputable breeder in Alaska and was given up by the girl who bought her from the breeder because she didn't have time for her. The other one I don't know a whole lot about. The same girl had the 2nd dog too and didn't have time for either of them so they went as a package deal to other mushers....in this case, me. lol). In the sled dog world I think more adult dogs are sold buy breeders than puppies because with and adult , you know how they run and they have been trained. 
Neither of the dogs I bought HAD to go, I needed some more athletes and some friends had some dogs they thought wold work for me. If I hadn't taken them then they would have been given to another musher or kept.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

MusherChic said:


> Ditto, Xeph.  I personally know an Amish family (Their kids are my best friends.....they aren't as "Amish" as they used to be though...) and they have a farm and a kennel of sled dogs and all of their animals are very well taken care of. I think that some Amish having poorly taken care of animals is just another case of "bad apples". Some do it right and some don't just like every other kind of breeder/dog sport/etc.
> 
> Anyways, I have both rescues and dogs from breeders. For my sled dogs I buy from other sled dog breeders and my pets have all been adopted. I am not against adopting nor buying from breeders.
> I think some people are one sided because they feel that its not fair to go and buy a dog from a breeder when there are dogs in the shelter. Some people don't want to/can't deal with the problems that some shelter dogs can have and some want to raise their dogs from pups, like the OP said (there are lots of puppies in shelters though as the result of BYBs and accidental breedings...). *When you buy from a reputable breeder then you can see the parents and their temperament and you can kind of get an idea of what the puppy is going to be like when it grows up* where as if you get a pup from a shelter you have no idea what/who they came from nor how they were raised/handled from birth to 8 weeks.


The only problem is, if a breeder REALLY researches bloodlines and the best stud available happens to be across the country (for AI), you're probably not going to meet the father. Some people think that if you can meet *both* parents on the premises, you're dealing with a less-than-stellar breeder that said "male, female...they're both nice, both working/show/sport dogs...good enough", kwim?


----------



## brandiw (Jan 20, 2010)

Pawzk9 said:


> What sort of facts would you like? They are readily available. Would you read them if they were provided?
> Lotsa good stuff at the Center for Consumer Freedom.


I'm no supporter of PETA or HSUS, but honestly, the Center for Consumer Freedom is as biased one way as PETA and HSUS are the other way. It is hardly a credible, unbiased source.

Anyway, as to the original topic, I personally don't buy dogs, but I have no problem with people buying dogs from reputable breeders. I do have a problem with people buying dogs from puppymills, and I do think it is morally wrong, particularly because the parents are typically kept in poor conditions, the parents aren't screened for hereditary issues that they may pass to the puppies, and because puppymills help add to the glut of excess dogs in shelters.


----------



## MusherChic (Nov 6, 2010)

> It's NOT easy. I've been treated badly by plenty of "dog people". I tried to get involved with the local kennel club when Penny was a pup. It's not an inclusive group at all. They don't want me at THEIR dog shows. They don't want to talk to me. They don't want me involved with THEIR breed club. They don't want to answer any questions. If I ever did want to buy a purebred from a "good" breeder, it would not be a walk in the park to find a breeder I would be comfortable supporting who would actually be helpful and non-snotty.


You should all get into dog mushing! lol  All mushers I know are so nice and helpful. When I was new to this sport all everybody wanted to do was help me get started. I even got some excellent sled dogs from a breeder for free because she wanted to help. If you show interest in the sport everybody is so welcoming and friendly. If the only reason you want one of our sled dogs is because you saw Snow Dogs on TV and think you can become a musher overnight then you bet we will educate you until we're blue in the face. lol
spanielorbust,
Sheesh where have I been?? I didn't know you had a sled dog!!! Do you have any pictures in another thread??



> The only problem is, if a breeder REALLY researches bloodlines and the best stud available happens to be across the country (for AI), you're probably not going to meet the father. Some people think that if you can meet *both* parents on the premises, you're dealing with a less-than-stellar breeder that said "male, female...they're both nice, both working/show/sport dogs...good enough", kwim?


Yes that is true.....didn't even think of that. 
Quick question but you keep saying "kwim" after your posts.....what does that mean??


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

You should all get into dog mushing! lol  All mushers I know are so nice and helpful. When I was new to this sport all everybody wanted to do was help me get started. I even got some excellent sled dogs from a breeder for free because she wanted to help. If you show interest in the sport everybody is so welcoming and friendly. If the only reason you want one of our sled dogs is because you saw Snow Dogs on TV and think you can become a musher overnight then you bet we will educate you until we're blue in the face. lol

*Everyone I've ran into (in agility) has been super nice, too  I met a handful of SUPER people at a conformation show, a handful of super people at ab obedience trial, too. It's such a shame to see people so blood and guts into dog sports that they can't even be civil.*

spanielorbust,
Sheesh where have I been?? I didn't know you had a sled dog!!! Do you have any pictures in another thread??


Yes that is true.....didn't even think of that. 
Quick question but you keep saying "kwim" after your posts.....what does that mean??

*It means "Know what I mean?" (It's my pathetic attempt to showing that I'm not trying to argue with anyone).*



MusherChic said:


> Ditto on this too. Buying from a breeder doesn't always mean getting a puppy either. I haven't had a puppy in the house since my German Shepherd who is almost 5yrs old. Since then I have gotten 5 adult dogs from breeders ( 2 were technically rescues from a shelter but one of those rescues came from an extremely good and reputable breeder in Alaska and was given up by the girl who bought her from the breeder because she didn't have time for her. The other one I don't know a whole lot about. The same girl had the 2nd dog too and didn't have time for either of them so they went as a package deal to other mushers....in this case, me. lol). In the sled dog world I think more adult dogs are sold buy breeders than puppies because with and adult , you know how they run and they have been trained.
> Neither of the dogs I bought HAD to go, I needed some more athletes and some friends had some dogs they thought wold work for me. If I hadn't taken them then they would have been given to another musher or kept.


Before I got Auz, I had my eye (wishfully) on a GORGEOUS bi-colored GSD male. He was 5 years old, retired show dog. The owner would have been happy to rehome him to me, but (at that point) I couldn't take him (plus, he wasn't cat tested). Had I taken him, he wouldn't have been any more of a "rescue" than Auz was. I deal with JQP a lot, and a lot of them seem to have this "thing" with the word "rescue", even if the dog wasn't rescued from anything. I think (for some people, and certainly not all cases) saying "I rescued" is to make them feel better about what they've got, even if the dog wasn't in a dire circumstance. (The retired racing thread comes to mind...not _all_ retired greyhounds were in situations desperately in need of someone to save them. And the "rescue" I posted about earlier that stole dogs from back yards and the like....those dogs were FAR from "rescued".)


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

sandydj said:


> I did not even consider radical groups like PETA in forming my opinion. I do not agree with PETA or ALF or any of those extreme groups.. nor did I consult Oprah.
> 
> Puppy mills , commercial mass breeding , dogs that go to pet stores , store fronts , designer breeders , BYBs... these are all categories( and the common terms used for them) that most responsible breeders , rescue organizations , humane societies , ASPCA shelters , and dog lovers in general campaign against.
> 
> ...


The fact is, the terms were popularized by the animal rights groups. And animal rights groups are not for welfare but for elimination. A lot of good people drink the kool-aid without realizing what they are supporting. I believe that animals have a right to be treated humanely. I do not believe they have the right to be treated as legal human beings. Therefore I am not one of the AR people. But I am certainly an AW people.



LazyGRanch713 said:


> As a teen, I heard about PETA and People for the ETHICAL treatment of animals and wanted to hop on board. I told my mom and she (literally) laughed out loud. I just heard about an organization that believed in treating animals ethically and wanted to hop on board. It sounds so good in words, but the beliefs and actions...no thanks.


There was a time when I almost sent my money to PeTA. After all, who could possibly be against the "ethical" treatment of animals?



brandiw said:


> I'm no supporter of PETA or HSUS, but honestly, the Center for Consumer Freedom is as biased one way as PETA and HSUS are the other way. It is hardly a credible, unbiased source.
> 
> Anyway, as to the original topic, I personally don't buy dogs, but I have no problem with people buying dogs from reputable breeders. I do have a problem with people buying dogs from puppymills, and I do think it is morally wrong, particularly because the parents are typically kept in poor conditions, the parents aren't screened for hereditary issues that they may pass to the puppies, and because puppymills help add to the glut of excess dogs in shelters.


Well, sometimes you need a strong voice on the other side. At any rate they've certainly outed that slimeball Wayne on a number of his unsavory activities.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

> Animal rights means exactly what it says:
> Definition of ANIMAL RIGHTS: rights (as to fair and humane treatment) regarded as belonging fundamentally to all animals (Meriam-Websters online).


 It's more than that to people like PETA... they believe animals are equal to humans, and that anything you wouldn't do to a human (own them, eat them, or control their breeding or influence their lives in any way) you cannot do to an animal. Many extreme ARs have said right out that their goal for pets is extinction, since they see human-modified animals as miserable freaks who would be better off dead.

Then there are those who admit they would rather save a smart dog than a mentally handicapped child, because all things being equal, the dog's life is of superior value. I mean, really, these peoples' opinions are not secret.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Whenever I read those things, the quotes are all so old. Have Ingrid Newkirk and Wayne Pacelle been absolutely silent for the last 20 years? They must have said _something_ wacky in the new millennium. Unless they changed their minds or have been tied up in the basement or their PR people won't let them speak in public or something.


----------



## Pawzk9 (Jan 3, 2011)

Pai said:


> It's more than that to people like PETA... they believe animals are equal to humans, and that anything you wouldn't do to a human (own them, eat them, or control their breeding or influence their lives in any way) you cannot do to an animal. Many extreme ARs have said right out that their goal for pets is extinction, since they see human-modified animals as miserable freaks who would be better off dead.
> 
> Then there are those who admit they would rather save a smart dog than a mentally handicapped child, because all things being equal, the dog's life is of superior value. I mean, really, these peoples' opinions are not secret.


A more accurate dictionary definition, I think:
  
–plural noun 
the rights of animals, claimed on ethical grounds, to the same humane treatment and protection from exploitation and abuse that are accorded to humans.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin: 
1975–80
Dictionary.com Unabridged
Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2011.


----------



## LazyGRanch713 (Jul 22, 2009)

Pai said:


> It's more than that to people like PETA... they believe animals are equal to humans, and that anything you wouldn't do to a human (own them, eat them, or *control their breeding or influence their lives in any way*) you cannot do to an animal. Many extreme ARs have said right out that their goal for pets is extinction, since they see human-modified animals as miserable freaks who would be better off dead.
> 
> Then there are those who admit they would rather save a smart dog than a mentally handicapped child, because all things being equal, the dog's life is of superior value. I mean, really, these peoples' opinions are not secret.


It's really odd, because you would think AR people would be for very "responsible" breeding with health clearances, breeding only a litter a year (or two years), etc, for that ethical treatment, but in reality it's the opposite...


----------



## MusherChic (Nov 6, 2010)

> Before I got Auz, I had my eye (wishfully) on a GORGEOUS bi-colored GSD male. He was 5 years old, retired show dog. The owner would have been happy to rehome him to me, but (at that point) I couldn't take him (plus, he wasn't cat tested). Had I taken him, he wouldn't have been any more of a "rescue" than Auz was. I deal with JQP a lot, and a lot of them seem to have this "thing" with the word "rescue", even if the dog wasn't rescued from anything. I think (for some people, and certainly not all cases) saying "I rescued" is to make them feel better about what they've got, even if the dog wasn't in a dire circumstance. (*The retired racing thread comes to mind...not all retired greyhounds were in situations desperately in need of someone to save them.* And the "rescue" I posted about earlier that stole dogs from back yards and the like....those dogs were FAR from "rescued".)


Yeah I know what you mean. lol  My 2 that came from the shelter didn't really need rescuing (If I hand't taken them somebody else most certainly would have. They had only been there 2 or 3 days. The one who came from the breeder in Alaska, if he was selling her himself she could have gone for at least $500) but because they were in the shelter they are "rescues'. 
About the bold...it seems like if anyone says they have a retired racing GH, people automatically think or say "How bad was he when you got it? How bad was the situation?" cause it seems whenever GH racing is mentioned people automatically think "abuse". :eyeroll:



> As a teen, I heard about PETA and People for the ETHICAL treatment of animals and wanted to hop on board. I told my mom and she (literally) laughed out loud. I just heard about an organization that believed in treating animals ethically and wanted to hop on board. It sounds so good in words, but the beliefs and actions...no thanks.


I thought the same thing when I first heard about PETA a long time ago. I thought "Hey great they want to save the animals!" but then I researched and talked to people and I wanted nothing to do with them. Especially now that I run and race dogs. 
Some of the stuff they do is just nuts. It says right on their website (I believe it does...) that arson is ok when it comes to saving an animal. :O Mushers have come home to find all of their dogs loose and fighting with each other because somebody came and let them all off their tethers. I had the same thing happen to me last summer. I came home and found a few of my dogs mysteriously off their tethers. No collar or hardware was broken they were just unclipped from the chain. They are my calmest dogs when it comes to being on a tether too. 
Now I am not saying that these were in fact PETA or AR people ( I have no way to tell obviously....it could have been a pesky neighbor) but because of PETA's and AR's reputation, I wouldn't be surprised. 
They would be an ok group of people if they thought logically and didn't trespass on other people's property and do such radical things. I'm all for the ethical treatment of animals but when you start calling me an animal abuser because I let my dog do what it LOVES or when you start telling me that I am going to die if I eat one more egg then you are quickly going to loose my respect.


----------



## Pai (Apr 23, 2008)

Willowy said:


> Whenever I read those things, the quotes are all so old. Have Ingrid Newkirk and Wayne Pacelle been absolutely silent for the last 20 years? They must have said _something_ wacky in the new millennium. Unless they changed their minds or have been tied up in the basement or their PR people won't let them speak in public or something.


You know, if any of those people came forward and expressed that they'd had a change of view and opinion and showed the tangible results of that change, I'd actually be willing to believe them. If someone high-profile regretted being a radical in their past, they would come out and say so, not continue to be silent when people quote them saying such things without correcting them with some kind of public statement. These are, after all, people who have plenty of resources to do so.

Also, I'm sure that being quite so free-lipped about certain opinions when you have a PR machine and millions of dollars at stake is not wise, even if they felt more free to express themselves in the past. The fact that HSUS, for example, has hired known AR radicals (like John Goodwin and Michael W. Fox) and put them into positions of authority is all I need to know about where their leadership's sympathy still lies.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

I dunno. By that logic, every dog trainer or child raising advice person who wrote a book encouraging certain methods and changed methods later in life would have to publish a retraction, so that people won't go on quoting their old statements or using their old methods. That kind of thing doesn't really happen, no matter how high-profile someone is.

And, who decides what constitutes "animal rights" or what makes someone an extremist? I can find you a lot of people who truly believe that making a statement such as "animals have a right to be treated humanely" makes you an AR extremist.


----------



## Yvonne (Aug 6, 2010)

I lived among the Amish in PA 99.9 of them breed dogs in puppy mill capacity. That said, I know a gsd breeder/shower in sv that is Amish and even shows in acceptable clothing for her religion and gets rides to the shows to title her dogs and they work very well. 

Most the Amish I observed treated animals and English which is what they term everyone very poorly. It seemed if you were not their brothern and in good standing you are a lesser and they are superior not that it will keep them from trying to make money off of you. Heck they have no issues with disowning loved ones and shunning them unless they toe what they think the person should live.


----------



## Meshkenet (Oct 2, 2009)

Saying that everyone who tries to better the lives of animals is an AR extremist is just as prejudiced as saying that all Muslims are terrorists. Because of a minority of people, the fight to obtain humane life conditions for animals in civilized countries has been tarnished.

I see myself as someone who works towards animal rights: I volunteer for my local shelter to inform people about pet adoption, I try to inform people of the weaknesses of our natinal anti-cruelty laws, etc. I don't condone arson, destruction of property of any kind or any other violent action. Does that mean I am not doing my part for animal rights, or that I should define what I do in another way? Basically, it's just playing with semantics.


----------



## spanielorbust (Jan 3, 2009)

Meshkenet said:


> *Saying that everyone who tries to better the lives of animals is an AR extremist* is just as prejudiced as saying that all Muslims are terrorists..


Not one post on this thread has said or even remotely implied that everyone who tries to better the lives of animals is an AR extremist, so why would you post that it has been said? 

Most people who have posted on this thread *are* intent on bettering the lives of animals.

I am one, and I *do not *believe in Animal Rights and say so emphatically because of the importance, to me, of this concept. I do believe in Animal Welfare.

I DO believe the goals of *Animal Rights *groups - *are extremist*. I support the goals of Animal Welfare.

No playing with semantics there. There is a very important difference in the meanings of those terms.

My sister joined PETA, and rallied with PETA, but I met many of her friends that were part of the ALF. Do not even try to put those of us that believe in Animal Welfare goals in the same camp with these Animal Rights people - suggesting semantics is the difference here - as it does not fly.

The terminologies show very important divisions in belief systems.

SOB


----------



## Rinchan (Jan 4, 2011)

If animals were to have the same rights as humans, and were to be treated with the same respect as humans. Then if a dog or a cat were to kill a bird or a rodent, would we then have to put that animal on trial for murder?

I am for animal welfare. I think they should be treated humanly by humans. The animal rights movement scares me.

And if PETA really believes that animals should be equal to humans, then why do they have kennels full of dogs and cats, most of which they kill? If they had done the same to people, finding people walking on the street, capturing them and locking them in cages, they would be arrested. So how can they preach that animals and humans should have the same rights when the do not practice this at all themselves? And isn't it a bit hypocritical that they bitch and moan about people killing animals to eat when they themselves kill millions of animals a year to be put in a freezer to be incinerated?

Well I've already posted the Penn and Teller PETA video in another thread, so I won't post it again here. But if you haven't seen it look it up and see how crazy PETA can be.


----------

