My SIL bought two goldendoodle puppies from an Amish breeder in Lancaster, PA, so basically a backyard breeder. They got them because her H is allergic to dogs. He wasn't allergic to the first, but he is allergic to the second, because, surprise, they're not actually hypoallergenic dogs. They still haven't had the first one spayed because "they might want to breed her".
I spend a significant portion of my free time volunteering at a local shelter, and thinking about it too long makes me seethe.
4 years ago when we adopted our first chi mix, our vet recommended a small breed rescue first. They turned us down out of hand because of @@@@@ small children in the home. So we checked with the humane society and they had a chi/pug mix litter and their rule for @@@@@ kids was age 5 (which we met). This time around we were looking at both (the rescue our vet recommended and the humane society) and the perfect pup popped up at the rescue. They called me first thing the day after we applied giddy because of our “glowing vet recommendation” and how we’d be the perfect fit for the dog we applied for.
Anyway, four years ago I was annoyed by their rules but I do get it. I think if they had let us get to the step of glowing vet recommendation they might have considered us. But then we wouldn’t have Melly who is the most perfect dog ever despite her one time bad choice to swallow an acorn whole.
I volunteered for a time at a local rescue, and I was surprised by how many of the dogs they adopted out got returned. Not for issues with the dog, but because of a move, divorce, owner illness, just deciding they didn't eat the dog, etc. So I get why they have strict requirements. Dogs who have been re-surrendered are harder to find homes for because people worry that there's something terribly wrong with them. I can't imagine how much harder it would be to not only have to find homes for re-surrenders because of major life changes, but also because the family/person wasn't vetted in the first place and had no business being a pet owner.
We foster dogs with a local rescue. We have rules in place for the reasons bolded. People see dogs that have been returned and get scared. And often it's for NO REASON other than someone is allergic or the dog is more work than they thought (like energy level, not even potty training or chewing, etc).
We do a home check (once), vet check (once), and then have an interview process. It seems like a lot, but everyone that has adopted one of our foster dogs has said they understand why it is that way.
All I know is we paid $175 for our current rescue and she’s had all her puppy shots at our fancy vet and it includes her spaying (because they know us and know we use the same vet they do they at letting the vet decide when to spay her since she is tiny, we just have to give them her rescue name to make sure we aren’t billed when the time comes).
No ones making money off that dog. Lol.
It is amazing how much money goes into the rescue dogs before they are able to be adopted. Hundreds of dollars. It's a *steal* paying for a rescue dog.
Huh. But is there any inherent reason that a labradoodle would be less healthy than a lab or a poodle? Or is it just that labradoodle breeders tend to be less responsible, and therefore less likely to perform genetic testing?
Anecdotally, my mutt, whose mom was feral and who does not resemble any particular breed, is by far the healthiest dog I've owned - in 7 years, she's never been to the vet for anything except routine care and a foot injury. I do suspect that dogs bred by several generations of natural selection are healthier than those bred for specific traits, but that would be a hard thing to collect data on.
Along with what cattledogkisses said, the stock these breeders are using haven't been bred for anything other than they're a lab or a poodle. No breeder that is breeding for purity would ever let their animals be used for this. Plus, in the US, you can't shake a stick and not attract a poorly bred lab. They're basically mutts at this point.
Anecdotally, I have a maltese/and we think chi mix pup who has already at just 1 yo had to have hip surgery for degenerative hip disease, and has luxating patellas on all her legs. She's adorable, so we're going to keep shelling out money for her, but omg she's a mess.
Mine is a schipperke/chi mix so in addition to the knee thing (which for her is actually pretty mild and always resolves within a few minutes she has a collapsing trachea so anytime she's with someone new I have to be all, "She's fine. No really, she just sounds like she's choking but she's not. No really, we don't have to bring her to the ER." Every damn time. Plus she's 14 now and the dementia is strong.
Post by basilosaurus on Oct 1, 2019 13:51:54 GMT -5
I get why some people want a breed for allergy reasons, like Obama. But what other reason do people have? I hear temperament. That's no guarantee. My parents paid for a dachshund. He was a real asshole. I get size. My mutt doubled what the vet anticipated, and it was a challenge as I'm mostly in rental apartments. She was great at chasing the JWs, though (their greatest risk was her rolling over on their toes for tummy rubs)
But I do struggle with why people go to any breeder, good or otherwise. Pay $2k for a dog or get one from the humane society for the $50 to cover the cost of their spay/neuter and care.
And fuck that above that dogs are property. I spent countless on my mutt because she was prone to expensive accidents (acorn swallowing kind) and because I've moved to a few countries, some of which require 6 month quarantine or aren't allowed at all. The lengths I went to..., this is not to claim an award but to say we go through hoops and expenses you don't do for property. If she were property, I'd put her on a curb with a free sign.
A $2500 surgery for being dumb enough to swallow an acorn (again, sorry eclaires, I'm trying to find the giggle in here after "property" and "responsible mutt breeder") is more than I'd spend on furniture ie property, but if I had it, I'd gladly spend it on my dog. And if I didn't have it, I'd still find a way. GTFO with "property."
If you view your dog as no more than furniture, you don't deserve it.
When we adopted our dog, we had a hard time qualifying with several rescue because we lived in an apartment and didn't have a fenced yard (or any yard, really).
We didn't use that to justify adopting from a backyard breeder, though. We ended up adopting a "designer breed" from a kill shelter in the rural Midwest. There are millions of dogs out there in rescues and shelters--including all the fancy mixes. There's really no justification for supporting backyard breeders.
Genetic testing isn't the only condition to be an ethical breeder. Someone who's breeding "bernadoodle" mixes is breeding mutts that aren't a real breed for profit, genetic testing or no.
Just curious - isn't all breeding for a profit? It's not like it is for humanitarian reasons.
What if the breeder had 2 price points - one for their cross-breed if it was spayed/neutered, and a much higher one if you don't agree to spay/neuter? I know of a breeder who has those 2 price points and you are practically buying a second dog if you don't contractually agree to spay/neuter. And if you don't go through their vet, they require the deposit of the difference in price.
I'm tired. Chuppathingy , is the perfect example of why we're never going to win the war against bad breeders. People want what they want when they want it. Instant gratification is a hard thing to combat. They will justify ever single decision because they have already gotten what they wanted. We can educate people until we're blue in the face, and they will still never understand why some rescues are so stringent.
I think a lot of the disconnect maybe down to a difference in word view of both animals and rescues. I love my dog. I cannot imagine a life without her. That said I still recognize that she is a piece of property and not a person. I also don’t see rescues as being different from breeders. Given the sheer volume of articles I’ve read in the last year, I believe Wapo had the first big one, I know rescues are often bulk buyers from puppy mills and then sell at a profit, or animal hoarders, or have them put down
Wait. Rescues who are actively working to REDUCE the pet overpopulation by adopting out spayed/neutered animals are no different than backyard breeders who are churning out puppies with no regard to whether they have someone to adopt said puppy, and don't care whether said adopter goes on to breed THAT puppy?
To address the: rescues are just getting their dogs from puppymills - I actually rescued a dog from one of those and he died from distemper. We protested the shit out of that "rescue" and eventually shut them down. Even with that experience, I know that a huge majority of rescues are not like that.
As for dog costs, the aforementioned mess of a dog came from the Humane Society. Her adoption fee was $500 because she was a teeny puppy and puppies rescue quicker than an older dog, or a dog who has medical issues. Her high fee is used to help the other dogs that aren't going to be scooped up immediately.
I think a lot of the disconnect maybe down to a difference in word view of both animals and rescues. I love my dog. I cannot imagine a life without her. That said I still recognize that she is a piece of property and not a person. I also don’t see rescues as being different from breeders. Given the sheer volume of articles I’ve read in the last year, I believe Wapo had the first big one, I know rescues are often bulk buyers from puppy mills and then sell at a profit, or animal hoarders, or have them put down
Wait. Rescues who are actively working to REDUCE the pet overpopulation by adopting out spayed/neutered animals are no different than backyard breeders who are churning out puppies with no regard to whether they have someone to adopt said puppy, and don't are whether said adopter goes on to breed THAT puppy?
There are definitely unscrupulous "rescues" out there. I once came across one Petfinder who I'm pretty sure was just a puppy mill breeding mixed breed puppies and masquerading as a rescue: they only had puppies, they charged a high adoption fee but did not spay/neuter or vaccinate the puppies, they would only meet potential adopters in a public place, and I found some reviews where several people said their puppies had had Parvo or other health problems immediately after adopting them.
And there are other rescues that buy puppy mill puppies in a misguided attempt to help them, which I think is what Chuppathingy was referring to. But I'm pretty confident that both these situations are in the small minority of rescues.
Genetic testing isn't the only condition to be an ethical breeder. Someone who's breeding "bernadoodle" mixes is breeding mutts that aren't a real breed for profit, genetic testing or no.
Just curious - isn't all breeding for a profit? It's not like it is for humanitarian reasons.
What if the breeder had 2 price points - one for their cross-breed if it was spayed/neutered, and a much higher one if you don't agree to spay/neuter? I know of a breeder who has those 2 price points and you are practically buying a second dog if you don't contractually agree to spay/neuter. And if you don't go through their vet, they require the deposit of the difference in price.
They're still breeding solely for profit, and wtf to them selling unaltered dogs.
Ethical breeders will breed for the purity/health of the breed and often show their dogs. Not just for how much a puppy is going to get them.
Just curious - isn't all breeding for a profit? It's not like it is for humanitarian reasons.
What if the breeder had 2 price points - one for their cross-breed if it was spayed/neutered, and a much higher one if you don't agree to spay/neuter? I know of a breeder who has those 2 price points and you are practically buying a second dog if you don't contractually agree to spay/neuter. And if you don't go through their vet, they require the deposit of the difference in price.
They're still breeding solely for profit, and wtf to them selling unaltered dogs.
Ethical breeders will breed for the purity/health of the breed and often show their dogs. Not just for how much a puppy is going to get them.
But they are also breeding for profit.
Also, what do you mean by wtf to them selling unaltered dogs? When they sell a dog as a puppy, it is 12-16 weeks old. My vet believes it is unethical to alter a dog before they are 6 months old. So WTF about selling altered dogs younger than 6 mo?
Just curious - isn't all breeding for a profit? It's not like it is for humanitarian reasons.
What if the breeder had 2 price points - one for their cross-breed if it was spayed/neutered, and a much higher one if you don't agree to spay/neuter? I know of a breeder who has those 2 price points and you are practically buying a second dog if you don't contractually agree to spay/neuter. And if you don't go through their vet, they require the deposit of the difference in price.
They're still breeding solely for profit, and wtf to them selling unaltered dogs.
Ethical breeders will breed for the purity/health of the breed and often show their dogs. Not just for how much a puppy is going to get them.
And they spend a lot more on testing, raising, and showing than they will ever make. There really is no profit for a show breeder.
They are true enthusiasts who do it for the love of their chosen breed/breeds, and they would never do anything like frankenbreeding..
ETA: The only reason a show breeder would sell an intact pup is if they were selling to a fellow breeder or show exhibitor, in which case they would be a co owner and would have a say in whether or not said pup was used in breeding (who, when, why, etc), and would only take their name off once the pup was spayed/neutered.
They're still breeding solely for profit, and wtf to them selling unaltered dogs.
Ethical breeders will breed for the purity/health of the breed and often show their dogs. Not just for how much a puppy is going to get them.
But they are also breeding for profit.
Also, what do you mean by wtf to them selling unaltered dogs? When they sell a dog as a puppy, it is 12-16 weeks old. My vet believes it is unethical to alter a dog before they are 6 months old. So WTF about selling altered dogs younger than 6 mo?
You said that people could buy dogs that they didn't have to alter. That was coming directly from your post.
And no, some of them aren't breeding for profit. They're breeding for the bloodline or show qualities.
I think a lot of the disconnect maybe down to a difference in word view of both animals and rescues. I love my dog. I cannot imagine a life without her. That said I still recognize that she is a piece of property and not a person. I also don’t see rescues as being different from breeders. Given the sheer volume of articles I’ve read in the last year, I believe Wapo had the first big one, I know rescues are often bulk buyers from puppy mills and then sell at a profit, or animal hoarders, or have them put down
I understand your position and I don’t think I’ll breeders are ethical or have the best interest of the animal in mind by any stretch of the imagination. My decision was the right one for me. If you were able to get a pet you love from an ethical rescue that’s wonderful. I hope you do win the war against bad breeders. There are plenty of them. I put a great deal of thought and care into choosing one. I also sincerely hope that rescues become much more strictly regulated so that they are actually rescuing animals and that they become more accessible as sources for people to get their pets.
The main problem here is that you are *actively* and *vocally* advocating that people buy a dog from a backyard breeder. You can justify it 8 ways from Sunday, but you are supporting the system that ends up with millions of animals chucked in a landfill. You, personally, are the reason those puppymills exist. That's the disconnect that most people cannot or do not want to face.
I bought from a breeder that produces a max of 3 litters, one per set of parents, per year and is the owners full time business. I had to go through an application and inspection process just like I would with a rescue, though it was far less ridiculous. There is a difference between breeders and puppy mills. And this doesn’t change the fact that rescues don’t have the moral high ground to stand on as a group here. Just like with breeders there are ethical ones and there are horrific abuse of ones.
ETA: I am not trying to advocate for either. I made my choice and I still feel it was the right one for my family and I am extremely happy with it. If you find your dog through a rescue, shelter, breeder, next-door neighbor, it does not matter to me. I am simply saying that I don’t think one is necessarily better than the other and in both cases you have to check out the individual. I had a great experience with my professional breeder and I’m sure many of the posters here I’ve had great experiences with the rescues. I did not find rescues to be a great experience. I’m sure many of the posters here I’ve had great experiences with their rescues. I found them too demanding and they would not give me a guarantee which is something I think one should get when obtaining a pet since it is property.
The main problem here is that you are *actively* and *vocally* advocating that people buy a dog from a backyard breeder. You can justify it 8 ways from Sunday, but you are supporting the system that ends up with millions of animals chucked in a landfill. You, personally, are the reason those puppymills exist. That's the disconnect that most people cannot or do not want to face.
I bought from a breeder that produces a max of 3 litters, one per set of parents, per year and is the owners full time business. I had to go through an application and inspection process just like I would with a rescue, though it was far less ridiculous. There is a difference between breeders and puppy mills. And this doesn’t change the fact that rescues don’t have the moral high ground to stand on as a group here. Just like with breeders there are ethical ones and there are horrific abuse of ones.
You had experience with ONE rescue, and then based your experience of rescues on a bunch of sensational articles that you read and that one rescue. You have created an entirely fictional justification because it fits your world view and makes you feel like a good person.
I think a lot of the disconnect maybe down to a difference in word view of both animals and rescues. I love my dog. I cannot imagine a life without her. That said I still recognize that she is a piece of property and not a person. I also don’t see rescues as being different from breeders. Given the sheer volume of articles I’ve read in the last year, I believe Wapo had the first big one, I know rescues are often bulk buyers from puppy mills and then sell at a profit, or animal hoarders, or have them put down
I understand your position and I don’t think I’ll breeders are ethical or have the best interest of the animal in mind by any stretch of the imagination. My decision was the right one for me. If you were able to get a pet you love from an ethical rescue that’s wonderful. I hope you do win the war against bad breeders. There are plenty of them. I put a great deal of thought and care into choosing one. I also sincerely hope that rescues become much more strictly regulated so that they are actually rescuing animals and that they become more accessible as sources for people to get their pets.
In 17 years of rescue - over my half my life - I have never in my circles of friends and associates purchased puppies period. We do not make "money" on puppies. There are some horrible bad apples but most rescues are genuinely good people who care about what they're doing (for free or out of their own pocket). Occasionally we are able to to put money back into the rescue because we got healthy puppies who required minimal intervention before adoption. 70% of my underaged puppies with the rescue come in directly from the shelter (who will euthanize because they're a health risk and they cannot hold them until they're legally able to adopt). 30% are private party surrenders - occasionally backyard breeders who got in over their heads, folks who were gifted a dog, bought it off of Craigslist and realized "oh shit, I can't handle this!", etc. My current foster puppy was an animal cruelty case and was brought in to the shelter as evidence and then shipped off to me once the DA signed off.
Would you like to see how much output I've put out in 2019 on my fosters? I've had 24 so far this year, we primarily foster puppies and kittens for our local animal shelter now. I am DRAMATICALLY different than a breeder who is pocketing profit.
I’m sorry you took this personally and I am not accusing you of anything. I am saying that it does happen, and the fact that it happens means that rescues as a group aren’t necessarily better than breeders. Both should be checked thoroughly before using either.
basilosaurus I’m convinced our glowing pet recommendation consisted of citing the following evidence:
1 - paid $2500 no questions asked for a dumbass chihuahua who swallowed an acorn whole.
2 - had an elderly dog who suffered from deafness, dementia, and anxiety - then had to be in diapers for over a year towards the end
3 - husband/father cried through the entire vet appointment of putting said elderly dog down at 15
I feel like they were like these people are crazy dog lovers and will do anything for their babies (pets). Which it’s clear we are. We love these fools.
I think a lot of the disconnect maybe down to a difference in word view of both animals and rescues. I love my dog. I cannot imagine a life without her. That said I still recognize that she is a piece of property and not a person. I also don’t see rescues as being different from breeders. Given the sheer volume of articles I’ve read in the last year, I believe Wapo had the first big one, I know rescues are often bulk buyers from puppy mills and then sell at a profit, or animal hoarders, or have them put down
Wait. Rescues who are actively working to REDUCE the pet overpopulation by adopting out spayed/neutered animals are no different than backyard breeders who are churning out puppies with no regard to whether they have someone to adopt said puppy, and don't care whether said adopter goes on to breed THAT puppy?
At this point to make it easier I’m just going to site a source. I am not lumping all rescues into this. I am saying on an individual level some rescues are rotten just like some breeders are rotten.
Also, what do you mean by wtf to them selling unaltered dogs? When they sell a dog as a puppy, it is 12-16 weeks old. My vet believes it is unethical to alter a dog before they are 6 months old. So WTF about selling altered dogs younger than 6 mo?
You said that people could buy dogs that they didn't have to alter. That was coming directly from your post.
And no, some of them aren't breeding for profit. They're breeding for the bloodline or show qualities.
Yes, i did. Because some vets recommend waiting until the animal is 6 months old before altering.
So... the breeder has a provision to penalize you if you want to buy an unaltered pet. The price is astronomical. It's basically a deterrent to get around the people who say they will neuter/alter and don't - it is expensive to go hunt those people don't if they don't follow through.
I bought from a breeder that produces a max of 3 litters, one per set of parents, per year and is the owners full time business. I had to go through an application and inspection process just like I would with a rescue, though it was far less ridiculous. There is a difference between breeders and puppy mills. And this doesn’t change the fact that rescues don’t have the moral high ground to stand on as a group here. Just like with breeders there are ethical ones and there are horrific abuse of ones.
You had experience with ONE rescue, and then based your experience of rescues on a bunch of sensational articles that you read and that one rescue. You have created an entirely fictional justification because it fits your world view and makes you feel like a good person.
This was a pretty standard set of rules I was given by several rescues I contacted. I’ve had several friends who had the same experience. Perhaps it’s just rescues in my area? And yes I’m absolutely making a choice that fits my worldview and my needs. It’s an animal. They are property. If I want one and I am able to care for it I should be able to get it when and how I want it.
You said that people could buy dogs that they didn't have to alter. That was coming directly from your post.
And no, some of them aren't breeding for profit. They're breeding for the bloodline or show qualities.
Yes, i did. Because some vets recommend waiting until the animal is 6 months old before altering.
So... the breeder has a provision to penalize you if you want to buy an unaltered pet. The price is astronomical. It's basically a deterrent to get around the people who say they will neuter/alter and don't - it is expensive to go hunt those people don't if they don't follow through.
Well you didn't put all the pertinent information into the post. It read like they were selling the dogs unaltered because they could.
You said that people could buy dogs that they didn't have to alter. That was coming directly from your post.
And no, some of them aren't breeding for profit. They're breeding for the bloodline or show qualities.
Yes, i did. Because some vets recommend waiting until the animal is 6 months old before altering.
So... the breeder has a provision to penalize you if you want to buy an unaltered pet. The price is astronomical. It's basically a deterrent to get around the people who say they will neuter/alter and don't - it is expensive to go hunt those people don't if they don't follow through.
Post by basilosaurus on Oct 1, 2019 14:57:43 GMT -5
eclaires,We love those fools like no one loves property.
I could spend paragraphs on what I did for mutt. Dumbass and accident prone. Also, the countries and expenses related. I'd have definitely left furniture on the road, even my mom's mid-century teak, if it had been a huge pain as the mutt. But I loved her.
I stand by saying if you view dog as property, you don't deserve her/him.
In 17 years of rescue - over my half my life - I have never in my circles of friends and associates purchased puppies period. We do not make "money" on puppies. There are some horrible bad apples but most rescues are genuinely good people who care about what they're doing (for free or out of their own pocket). Occasionally we are able to to put money back into the rescue because we got healthy puppies who required minimal intervention before adoption. 70% of my underaged puppies with the rescue come in directly from the shelter (who will euthanize because they're a health risk and they cannot hold them until they're legally able to adopt). 30% are private party surrenders - occasionally backyard breeders who got in over their heads, folks who were gifted a dog, bought it off of Craigslist and realized "oh shit, I can't handle this!", etc. My current foster puppy was an animal cruelty case and was brought in to the shelter as evidence and then shipped off to me once the DA signed off.
Would you like to see how much output I've put out in 2019 on my fosters? I've had 24 so far this year, we primarily foster puppies and kittens for our local animal shelter now. I am DRAMATICALLY different than a breeder who is pocketing profit.
I’m sorry you took this personally and I am not accusing you of anything. I am saying that it does happen, and the fact that it happens means that rescues as a group aren’t necessarily better than breeders. Both should be checked thoroughly before using either.
It does happen - just like fraud in welfare - but it is minimal compared to the 95% of solid rescues doing the right thing day in, day out, not making a profit. There are AMAZING breeders out there, however they are few and far between. I had the great luck of having a great breeder take me under her wing when I was fostering pregnant moms and newborn puppies in my home with no prior experience to pass on her 30+ years of knowledge when I needed it. Comparing the few shitty rescues to the greater number of crappy backyard breeders, casual oopsies, and puppy mills is not a fair comparison.
You had experience with ONE rescue, and then based your experience of rescues on a bunch of sensational articles that you read and that one rescue. You have created an entirely fictional justification because it fits your world view and makes you feel like a good person.
This was a pretty standard set of rules I was given by several rescues I contacted. I’ve had several friends who had the same experience. Perhaps it’s just rescues in my area? And yes I’m absolutely making a choice that fits my worldview and my needs. It’s an animal. They are property. If I want one and I am able to care for it I should be able to get it when and how I want it.
And no care given to the effect this has on animal population and health?
I can't imagine calling my dog property. She is a family member. That may make me crazy, but I plan my days around her needs and make sure she is taken care of just like anyone else in my family (bathroom breaks, vacation plans, vet visits, etc). She is far less needy than some in my family, but just as important.
Also, there are obviously bad rescues. It annoys the hell out of me that they exist, but it's true. But I would say most rescues are run for the love of animals. We are constantly pulling from high kill shelters in local states. We pull senior dogs all the way down to pregnant mamas. It's pretty rare for us to have puppies but if we have puppies we are also taking care of the mother.
And we spend THOUSANDS a year on our foster dogs. And that's not even covering any vet expenses they need. But everything else is on us to provide.
This was a pretty standard set of rules I was given by several rescues I contacted. I’ve had several friends who had the same experience. Perhaps it’s just rescues in my area? And yes I’m absolutely making a choice that fits my worldview and my needs. It’s an animal. They are property. If I want one and I am able to care for it I should be able to get it when and how I want it.
And no care given to the effect this has on animal population and health?
Of course I care. I take care of my dog like I take care of my child and she is extremely happy and healthy. I also had her spayed at six months. It doesn’t change that she is my property though.
And no care given to the effect this has on animal population and health?
Of course I care. I take care of my dog like I take care of my child and she is extremely happy and healthy. I also had her spayed at six months. It doesn’t change that she is my property though.
I wasn't talking about your dog. I was talking about the overall animal population and health. Because you know if one person has your attitude of "when and how I want it," more do. And unethical breeders like the one you went to (because no ethical breeder mixes breeds) only cares about getting your money. And we continue to have overpopulation and animals with genetic health issues.