or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Natural Living › The Mindful Home › Pets › rescue vs breeder
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

rescue vs breeder - Page 3

Poll Results: Do you rescue or buy

 
  • 78% (67)
    rescue from shelter or rescue group
  • 14% (12)
    buy from a breeder
  • 7% (6)
    other-please explain
85 Total Votes  
post #41 of 89
I believe breeding of domestic pet animals is irresponsible on all levels.

Too me, there is no such thing as a responsible breeder of dogs, cats, guinea pigs, etc. Having kennel clubs "certifications" does not make an individual a repsonible breeder. Further, It makes me cringe when people say they used a repsonbile breeder only to go on to say they were taken to a pen of dogs and told to "pick any one you want" after seeing their ad in the local paper.

I believe it should be a crime to breed domestic pet animals punishable by fines and jail time. This would apply to those who get their dog pregnant and sell the puppies out of their backyard as well as those who claim to do it for the preservation of the breed. There is no need in this day in age for such thing with the number of available animals of any breed. Sheer volume dictates that there are enough "good" specimens of the breed to keep it going for many years.

For those who really believe they need to breed a dog, cat, hamster, whatever, they should have to be licensed and the amount of red tape and bureaucracy to become licensed should be staggering and the cost should be astronomical thus preventing masses of individuals to become licensed.

Local governments could save money – they would not need to house and then kill thousands of animals nor would they have to pay employees to do so.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamillet
We are getting way off topic here but...while I realize life in an orphange is less than optimal I do not think that children are dying daily in orphanages.

In the us there are not unwanted babies--they are daopted immediately, now children that are older are definitely searching for their forever homes.

I think it is really hard to compare the two different sets of overpopulatoin especially when in varies greatly from country to country.
I just have to add this even though I don't think its a fair comparison between animals and children.......

Sadly, yes children are dying daily in orphanages. Not by the hundreds but yes it does happen every day.

Sadly, there are unwanted babies born right here in the US and they are not adopted immediately.

Maggie
post #42 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
children do die everyday in orphanages
They are not overall adoptable babies that are euthanized b/c of unavailable homes. Thats one difference. Also, while I will not question your friends experience of having babies die before that adoption was made final I think this is rather rare. If children die while in orphanages it is most likely for medical reasons and I am going to have to ask for something to back up the statement that adoptable children are dying daily in orphanages. I do know that children and babies do die daily worldwide; these are not adoptable children (not taking away the tragedy of children and babies dying).

Quote:
As for infants--most people here are NOT talking about adopting a puppy, they're talking about adopting a grown dog who is in need of "rescue", but again, the 4 and 5 yrs olds under our own noses also in need of rescue just don't seem to carry the same level of importance, of sympathy
I am not sure what you are intending with this statement...
post #43 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by m9m9m9
I believe breeding of domestic pet animals is irresponsible on all levels.

Too me, there is no such thing as a responsible breeder of dogs, cats, guinea pigs, etc. Having kennel clubs "certifications" does not make an individual a repsonible breeder. Further, It makes me cringe when people say they used a repsonbile breeder only to go on to say they were taken to a pen of dogs and told to "pick any one you want" after seeing their ad in the local paper.

I believe it should be a crime to breed domestic pet animals punishable by fines and jail time. This would apply to those who get their dog pregnant and sell the puppies out of their backyard as well as those who claim to do it for the preservation of the breed. There is no need in this day in age for such thing with the number of available animals of any breed. Sheer volume dictates that there are enough "good" specimens of the breed to keep it going for many years.

For those who really believe they need to breed a dog, cat, hamster, whatever, they should have to be licensed and the amount of red tape and bureaucracy to become licensed should be staggering and the cost should be astronomical thus preventing masses of individuals to become licensed.

Local governments could save money – they would not need to house and then kill thousands of animals nor would they have to pay employees to do so.
Please don't feed the troll. Even if this person isn't deliberately trolling, there is no way to respond to her post without becoming ugly. And yelling at the computer. And raising your blood pressure. And having bad fantasies of dancing on her head. So let's let this one post just sit and die, please.
post #44 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by shannon0218
Actually, when facing the reasons YOU used for being against purposeful breeding of dogs and cats, I think it's an excellent comparison, that said, I think your reasons don't hold water.
You state that breeding dogs in a climate where there are too many dogs without good homes is irresponsible, how is it NOT irresponsible to look at orphanages with hundreds of children dying and think it's responsible to purposefully breed a human child. After all, every one of them that is produced on purpose takes a home away from a child already here (again, by your logic, not mine)

If it is so horrible to bring dogs into this world when there are dogs who have no home, please tell me exactly WHY you find it perfectly acceptable to bring a human into this world when there are so many without homes. Do you feel it is impossible to love an adopted child the way you can your own? What is it that makes it fine to leave a child to die in an orphanage but not fine to leave a screwed up dog to die in the pound?? Please, enlighten me.

I believe that overpopulation in animals and humans are very different with their own distinct sets of reasons and problems. My argument is about dogs, not people. To my knowledge no one is forcing parents to have children and then trying to find homes for them. And by your logic of equating people and dogs, you should be rushing out and adopting children AND dogs. But, you're making more dogs.

It's not my place to make reproduction decisions for people and their families. I CAN ask people to stop making more dogs. The dogs aren't making the choice for themselves, it's being imposed onto them.

Sorry, I didn't realize I was coming into breeder turf here on the pet forum. I'll leave it to you. I'm surprised to find it on a NFL site.
post #45 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekimballs
Please don't feed the troll. Even if this person isn't deliberately trolling, there is no way to respond to her post without becoming ugly. And yelling at the computer. And raising your blood pressure. And having bad fantasies of dancing on her head. So let's let this one post just sit and die, please.
Weird... why did you think I was a troll?

Not every post is meant to incite riot ~ I really do believe those things ~ and I don't need to argue them over and over. I stated what I believe and that's it.

AND

I am very open to the fact that others DO NOT believe these things and feel very differently and I am happy to read their opinions/ideas/beliefs.

Maggie
post #46 of 89
Thread Starter 
I started the thread b/c I was interested in th opinions of others here on MDC. I was curious as I saw many posts recommending that families seek out breeders rather than rescue and that was so different from my own opinion. I agree somewhat with what Maggie said. I wish people did have to go through some red tape so to speak in order to sell animals. I think that if folks had to apply for some kind of license and had certain requirements then maybe the # of byb would decrease...maybe. I think that we can all agree that we wish that backyard breeders were fewer in number!
post #47 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamillet
I started the thread b/c I was interested in th opinions of others here on MDC. I was curious as I saw many posts recommending that families seek out breeders rather than rescue and that was so different from my own opinion. I agree somewhat with what Maggie said. I wish people did have to go through some red tape so to speak in order to sell animals. I think that if folks had to apply for some kind of license and had certain requirements then maybe the # of byb would decrease...maybe. I think that we can all agree that we wish that backyard breeders were fewer in number!
Here's the fundamental problem with that reasoning: Backyard breeders and puppy mills make money. Some make LOTS of money. Good breeders make NO money, and many years are deep in the hole. So if you start charging to breed or making lots and lots of barriers, guess who can afford it? Yup, BYBs. And puppy mills, who ARE under legislation. USDA red tape is considerable, and many pay huge taxes and fines each year. But they can keep going indefinitely because their profit margin is so high. And who would have to stop? Good breeders.

There are countries in the world that rigidly control the production of purebred dogs. No dog may be bred except when the breed club approves the dog and its mate, and approval depends on a variety of things including pedigree, health, etc. You know what it's accomplished? They don't have "better" dogs than we do (except in some specific breeds; in most we have the edge), the system is political and corrupt, and in many cases leads to great cruelty (no bitch is allowed to have more than eight puppies in a single year--if you have a larger litter than that the bitch has to wait two years--so with a breeding life of only three or four years per bitch breeders feel pressured to bucket--yes, drown--any puppies over the eight). And there are still very badly bred dogs in those countries, still plenty of accidental breedings, etc.

As soon as you put breeding legislation into place, we lose freedoms. If we're controlling breedings, then the logical next step is to look at the "good" of the animals and forbid breeding any breed that may be aggressive, is unhealthy, or is physically deformed. So there go about two-thirds of the AKC breeds--anything with "bull" in it, anything acondroplastic (short-legged), anything brachycephalic (short-nosed), anything over 80 lb or under 15 lb, anything that must be c-sectioned.

So we do all this stuff, and you know who gets hurt every time? Good breeders. And you know who put those puppies and adult dogs into the shelters? OWNERS. Sometimes they're breeders who didn't realize that puppies don't automatically sell easily, but most of the time 100% of the problem is OWNERS.

Now if you want to require everyone buying a dog to take a six-week course and pay a thousand bucks in tax, that I'm all for. But somehow I think you might resent being distrusted, singled out, and forced to pay enormous amounts of money. It's a lot easier to do that to the breeder.
post #48 of 89
I completely agree with Maggie and I am soooo not a troll. I practically live here.
Breeding dogs and cats is a "pet" peeve of mine.
I'm not willing to debate it today. I just thought I'd show some support for the less popular opinion.
post #49 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boobs
I completely agree with Maggie and I am soooo not a troll. I practically live here.
Breeding dogs and cats is a "pet" peeve of mine.
I'm not willing to debate it today. I just thought I'd show some support for the less popular opinion.
OK, tell me why? If it is because you think that no dogs or cats should be owned by humans, then I can understand your opinion though I do not share it. If you think dogs and cats should in fact be owned by humans, then you de facto DO support breeders. Dogs don't come from outer space.
post #50 of 89
I'll tell you why, but I refuse to get into a debate. I just don't have the emotional energy today.
Pets are wonderful. I adore dogs and cats. Let's stick to dogs to keep it simple.
People are classist about their dogs. They want specific breeds. Then their purebred Lab goes and knocks up the neighbors German Sheppard. So then there are 4 or 5 puppies that nobody wants because they are mutts. People want Labs or German Sheppards. They don't want mixes. Unless of course it's a cute little YorkiePoo they can fit in their purse.
It's simple math. The more dogs you make, the fewer homes there are available to all the other dogs.
Breeders perpetuate this cycle.
To Neuter is Cuter! :
post #51 of 89
See, the only problem is that if there were NO breeders at all (especially good ones) we wouldn't have dogs who did search and rescue, dogs who helped police, dogs who save lives, dogs who offer protection, etc. Because ALL of these dogs need to have an excellent temperment and the right characteristics. The perfect combination of characteristics AND healthy genes will NOT be found in a shelter. I agree that somehow (I have no idea how) we need to get rid of backyard breeders and puppy mills. But, good breeders (who take their pups back if there is any problem) do NOT contribute to the over population.

I'm someone who volunteers at a rescue organization, and someone who purchased their GSD from a good breeder. Why? Because I wanted to pursue Schutzhund. And that's something for which I need a dog whose temperment, drive, and health has been improved steadily with each offspring. Not someone whose character, whose temperment, and whose health down the line will not pass the rigorous training and tests which Schutzhund demands.
post #52 of 89
I'll tell you why, but I refuse to get into a debate. I just don't have the emotional energy today.
Pets are wonderful. I adore dogs and cats. Let's stick to dogs to keep it simple.
People are classist about their dogs. They want specific breeds. Then their purebred Lab goes and knocks up the neighbors German Sheppard.

Except that it doesn't work that way if they got their Lab from a good breeder. Number one, their Lab would be behind a fenced yard. Number two, it would be spayed or neutered. If it was not spayed or neutered, and escaped from the yard, the Lab's breeder would come after the owner with a frying pan, confiscate all the puppies, slap the Lab's breeder with a claim for thousands of dollars for contract violations, and probably take the Lab back as well.

So then there are 4 or 5 puppies that nobody wants because they are mutts.

And this is the OWNER'S fault, not the breeder's. And again, not if the original dog is from a good breeder. The puppies would all be placed in good homes or kept until the end of their lives.

People want Labs or German Sheppards. They don't want mixes. Unless of course it's a cute little YorkiePoo they can fit in their purse.
It's simple math. The more dogs you make, the fewer homes there are available to all the other dogs.
Breeders perpetuate this cycle.

It's not simple math. There are different markets and different needs. I'm so far from flooding the market that it's not even funny. With every litter, I get five times as many inquiries as I could EVER fill. And I'm a very small breeder with a small reputation. The higher-profile breeders get fifty calls a week sometimes. The people looking for a show-bred Great Dane are not saying to themselves, "Well, if I can't find a nice dog from a breeder I'm going to go to the shelter tomorrow." They have very specific needs that simply cannot be filled by a shelter dog, and they're willing to pay six times as much to make sure those needs are filled. And I can pretty confidently say that these are *needs,* not just wants--it's young kids in the house, families that need mentoring through the dog's puppyhood, people who plan to show competitively, etc. I know people who have waited over a year for a show-bred Dane--these are not families who are going to go to a shelter.

And then you have Shannon and others who breed for the police. Is Shannon allowed to breed? How about those who breed for the military? How about service dogs or guide dogs? How about tracking/rescue dogs? What about hunting dogs--can we breed duck/quail/bird dogs? All of these are examples of needs that CANNOT be filled with shelter dogs--do you want all of these professions to disappear?


There's also the question of when you stop. When are we allowed to breed again? When there are no more dogs in shelters anywhere? What if all the left-over dogs are aggressive, can we breed then? What if there aren't any homeless dogs under two years old within three hours of me, can I breed then? Because that HAS happened; my local shelter now ships in puppies from other states. So is it OK that I have a litter?
post #53 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boobs
I'll tell you why, but I refuse to get into a debate. I just don't have the emotional energy today.
Pets are wonderful. I adore dogs and cats. Let's stick to dogs to keep it simple.
People are classist about their dogs. They want specific breeds. Then their purebred Lab goes and knocks up the neighbors German Sheppard. So then there are 4 or 5 puppies that nobody wants because they are mutts. People want Labs or German Sheppards. They don't want mixes. Unless of course it's a cute little YorkiePoo they can fit in their purse.
It's simple math. The more dogs you make, the fewer homes there are available to all the other dogs.
Breeders perpetuate this cycle.
To Neuter is Cuter! :
There is no such thing as a German Sheppard. If you're going to make an example of it, at least take a stab at spelling it right.

As for the comment that I should be going out adopting children, hun, How do you figure exactly--you see I did not comdemn the breeding of animals so why should it be me who is out adopting children. But, to show I do understand, we are strongly considering adopting our next child and yes, homeless children trump homeless dogs for me, every single day of every single week. I suppose it's really easy to condemn someone else if you refuse to see the wrong in what you do. I've found however that it's awful lonely at the top looking down at the rest of us. Give me a break, yep, it's heroic to care about homeless dogs but it's just silly to care about homeless kids!!

For those so VERY dead set against purebred dogs, I hope you never need the help of one. I am a SAR dog qualifier, and a service dog qualifier, I've been doing these things for 15 yrs, so far, in my career that has spanned 4 countries, I've seen exactly 3 shelter dogs that went on to actually become working service dogs--and I don't mean that weird guy down the street who thinks he has a working dog, I mean the folks like me and my team who are out there when you loose track of your kid, those of us who are out there with our genetically engineered animals that have been bred for the ability to work through the crappiest of crappy weather, the dogs that have been bred for their ability to track with a deep nose for miles and miles, the dogs that can pick off a scent from 500' away and find your 2 yr old hiding in the bush. Those nasty ass people who support these breeders that spend 40 hours a week training and working their dogs, spending unbelievable amounts of money so their dog can do a volunteer job and be available the very SECOND your child or your elderly parent needs us.

Honestly, if you really all think we're so very horrible, please don't phone for my team at 2:00 am during a blizzard, take our your shelter dog and find your kid yourself, k?
post #54 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
But, good breeders (who take their pups back if there is any problem) do NOT contribute to the over population.
They do. Anyone who breeds while there are more pets than available homes contributes to pet overpoopulation. period.
post #55 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamillet
They do. Anyone who breeds while there are more pets than available homes contributes to pet overpoopulation. period.
Odd though that while you think we're such a big part of the problem that you have no trouble at all picking our brains. Didn't the shelter have someone to answer all those questions for you?? Oh that's right...they didn't.
post #56 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamillet
They do. Anyone who breeds while there are more pets than available homes contributes to pet overpoopulation. period.
Can you please explain to me why this is so very black and white when the word pet is put in there but when we substitute it with child it's no longer a true statement?? Is it just because you rescue pets but not children and therefore it's just the way it is???
post #57 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Here's the fundamental problem with that reasoning: Backyard breeders and puppy mills make money. Some make LOTS of money. Good breeders make NO money, and many years are deep in the hole. So if you start charging to breed or making lots and lots of barriers, guess who can afford it? Yup, BYBs. And puppy mills, who ARE under legislation. USDA red tape is considerable, and many pay huge taxes and fines each year. But they can keep going indefinitely because their profit margin is so high. And who would have to stop? Good breeders.
So what kind of lesgislation are byb and puppymills under? How are they diffrentiated between breeders and the family that wants their dog to have pups? Are there regulations about who can breed and the quality of the environment? What about regulations about the health of the pet? I do not think that all breeding should stop. I am not in that camp; I understand that certain purebreeds are perform very specific jobs that are very needed. However, as I stated in my original post, its my opinion that if you are not needing something that specific that a rescue dog/pup can fill the need of the family pet. When someone sees that a purebreed whatever can sell for as much as 1500-2000 there are going to be idiots thinking that they can buy one for 200 (that they saw advertised in the paper), breed it with another one for 200 and sell the pups for 400.
post #58 of 89
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamamillet
They do. Anyone who breeds while there are more pets than available homes contributes to pet overpoopulation. period.
When it's a matter of contributing to overpopulation it applies to those who breed for profit or by accident. Those absolutely contribute to the population because those dogs are the ones which wind up at shelters, on the streets, etc. The dogs which go on to be SAR, protection, therapy, police, Schutzhund, tracking, etc. are doing a service to their country. They work ... pretty much just as any human would. They're out there searching for missing kids. They're out there searching for people lost in an avalanche. They're out there sniffing out drugs. They're out there protecting the police officer who is protecting a civilian. They're out there protecting their owners. They're out there being completely reliable, evenly tempered companion dogs who would never snap at a child. These are dogs who do not contribute to the over population. They're never abandoned, they're never bred for profit or "by accident", they're never roaming the streets alone, etc.

It's not so black and white. To stop all breeding means to stop producing high quality dogs who help people. It means to wind up with dogs who are inferior in terms of genes and temperment/character to carry out the tasks of protection, tracking, therapy, etc. I've had rescues and I've had purebreds. I volunteer with a GSD rescue organization and I train my own GSD (purchased from a breeder) for Schutzhund. There IS a difference between these types of dogs.
post #59 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Odd though that while you think we're such a big part of the problem that you have no trouble at all picking our brains. Didn't the shelter have someone to answer all those questions for you?? Oh that's right...they didn't.
Wow a bit harsh and defensive dont ya think? I never said that breeders were "such a big part of the problem". Never. There are other places I can ask my questions but had always felt comfortbale asking here.

Quote:
Can you please explain to me why this is so very black and white when the word pet is put in there but when we substitute it with child it's no longer a true statement?? Is it just because you rescue pets but not children and therefore it's just the way it is???
I do see it as black and white. ANd I do think that substituting child in there still makes a true statement. ANd for your information I work in foster care and have opened my home before as a foster parent. I fully acknowledge that having my son biologically added another person on the planet.
post #60 of 89
Thread Starter 
Quote:
To stop all breeding means to stop producing high quality dogs who help people.
I never said anywhere that all breeding needs to stop. In fact I clarified that in the post right before yours.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Pets
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Natural Living › The Mindful Home › Pets › rescue vs breeder