It actually shouldn't be their livelihood. Maybe the showing/titling and whatever else comes with breeding show dogs could assist with living expenses. But the actual selling of the litters shouldn't net them much, if anything at all.
A reputable breeder is breeding to better the breed. As doodles are NOT breeds (they don't breed true) they cannot get better, therefore the breeders cannot be reputable. It's like an SAT if/then question.
So this is a serious question, but how on earth do purebloods better their breed? They are inbred for certain qualities. They may not be very closely inbred, but after so many hundred years of pure breeding practices they all most certainly are. Purebreds are known for serious health problems because of this. Why on earth would I want that in a family pet?
You are right that most dogs were mixed breeds at some point in time and it took many generations for them to breed true. But a) there are way too many dogs and breeds. To the point that millions are killed every year. So there is no longer a need to make a new breed. And b) the original poodle mixer (whom this article is about) learned that after over 30 years, labs and poodles are not going to breed true. So to continue to try to breed them with other breeds is just irresponsible. I mean, look at her page with the 3 sheepdog mixes (reg, mini and micro). Those dogs look nothing alike. And if those were the best she could get for her site? That's pretty sad.
As far as health issues with mixed vs pure breds, that's been discussed and proven a myth in this thread.
Okay...if we want to go the dictionary route. from the link you posted: The ASPCA defines responsible breeders as those who have focused their efforts on one or a select few breeds, and through breeding, historical research and ongoing study, mentoring relationships, club membership, showing, raising and training of these breeds have become experts in the breed’s health, heritable conditions, temperament, and behavior.
Look, whether you want to believe it or not, you bought from an unethical breeder. Obviously what's done is done at this point and you can't go back in time. But now that you know that, do better in the future. I think that's all posters in this thread are hoping for.
I disagree. At the time I purchased my dog I saw no animals kept in cages, none of the puppies were separated from their mothers before 12 weeks, no dogs were being killed when they couldn’t find homes for them. I saw no signs of it being a puppy mill. You are welcome to think my breeder was unethical. I saw no indication of that at the time. I don’t fault her for running a profitable business. Properly cared for dogs are expensive and she was definitely properly caring for them. I saw no indication that the parents were being forced to breed repeatedly. At the time I was told they breed one litter per mom per year, and on a full tour of this woman’s farm I saw no evidence to the contrary.
Puppy mills have a definition. I don’t believe she met it. She’s expanded her business but I still don’t have any reason to believe she would meet it based on my experience. www.animallaw.info/article/what-puppy-mill
So it was 12 weeks, but now it's 8? Pretty sure that 4 week difference is NOT because it's better for the puppies...
Oh ok, we've resorted to the "the dictionary says" defense.
The problem is that there are too many dogs and cats. That’s not my fault and I don’t think it’s my breeders fault. If we all agree on the need to fix the problem of millions of animals being euthanized every year, and I think that’s the one thing we do agree on, then it would be helpful to deal with the economic and legal reality that they are property and people can do what they want with their property. The most logical solution isn’t to argue about rescues vs breeders. The solution is to except that just like some breeders are flawed assholes, clearly there are some rescues that are too, and clearly neither is for everyone. The one good way to address that is arguing for serious regulation and licensing of both breeders and rescues and strict laws requiring anyone who is not licensed to breed to fix their animals under the penalty of law.
So this is a serious question, but how on earth do purebloods better their breed? They are inbred for certain qualities. They may not be very closely inbred, but after so many hundred years of pure breeding practices they all most certainly are. Purebreds are known for serious health problems because of this. Why on earth would I want that in a family pet?
You are right that most dogs were mixed breeds at some point in time and it took many generations for them to breed true. But a) there are way too many dogs and breeds. To the point that millions are killed every year. So there is no longer a need to make a new breed. And b) the original poodle mixer (whom this article is about) learned that after over 30 years, labs and poodles are not going to breed true. So to continue to try to breed them with other breeds is just irresponsible. I mean, look at her page with the 3 sheepdog mixes (reg, mini and micro). Those dogs look nothing alike. And if those were the best she could get for her site? That's pretty sad.
As far as health issues with mixed vs pure breds, that's been discussed and proven a myth in this thread.
I didn’t know that about purebreds. And yeah I can’t speak for what she’s doing now. Like I’ve said it’s been years and she didn’t have all those when I got my dog. But next time I’ll consider purebreds too knowing this, so thanks.
Post by cattledogkisses on Oct 1, 2019 19:50:28 GMT -5
How is a woman who is churning out 14+ litters of puppies every year not contributing to the pet overpopulation problem? People like her are absolutely the problem!
Chuppathingy is pinging something in my GBCN memory but I don’t know what. But I feel like she’s been weird or shown her ass before. Could be wrong.
I honestly cannot remember but who knows you could be right? I remember once asking a stupid question about how to be a good neighbor to an African-American couple next-door when my neighborhood was freaking out about break ins and admitting that I should absolutely take the advice of the WOC who were kind enough to post and told me to keep my mouth shut. And I did. I’m still grateful for the advice so that I didn’t end up being that white woman to my neighbors.
Oh ok, we've resorted to the "the dictionary says" defense.
The problem is that there are too many dogs and cats. That’s not my fault and I don’t think it’s my breeders fault.
You.financed.a.puppymill.operation. You are a contributing factor, but if you like to tell yourself these lies at night to help you sleep, then go for it.
The problem is that there are too many dogs and cats. That’s not my fault and I don’t think it’s my breeders fault.
You.financed.a.puppymill.operation. You are a contributing factor, but if you like to tell yourself these lies at night to help you sleep, then go for it.
That’s fine. I’ll accept this. It’s still irrelevant in hindsight. I had nothing to indicate at the time that that was what was going on. I still don’t have much to indicate that it is now, but assuming it is based on the 14 litters per year which is excessive, it still doesn’t change my mind. The problem is overpopulation, and it’s a very serious problem. I still fail to see how rescues, which are even less regulated than breeders to the beat of my knowledge are making a dent in that. So given that we both care about the overpopulation issue, what other than regulation of both and owners would you suggest?
I'm just going to say what we are all thinking in this thread.
A mix of a bernese mountain dog and a poodle makes no sense.
It's one of the silliest things ever and is really just for marketing.
Like. Why?
WHY.
Honestly I thought this to when I first heard of them. I think she runs like a complete dork and that’s kind of silly, but overall she is a beautiful dog.
So now not only are breeders superior to rescues, but rescues should just say forget about it because they’re not making a dent? Do you hear yourself Chuppathingy? You’re doing some serious mental gymnastics to justify your irresponsibility.
Post by wanderingback on Oct 1, 2019 20:03:21 GMT -5
Being on these boards for 13 years has taught me a lot about this issue. I never knew anything about backyard breeders or puppy mills before. I never knew there was something wrong with buying an animal from a pet store. Knowledge is power if you use it correctly!
You.financed.a.puppymill.operation. You are a contributing factor, but if you like to tell yourself these lies at night to help you sleep, then go for it.
That’s fine. I’ll accept this. It’s still irrelevant in hindsight. I had nothing to indicate at the time that that was what was going on.
Bullshit. The very fact that she was breeding "designer breeds" would have told you that, and you *knew* that yet chose to ignore it.
Rescues ARE regulated. The one I protested was taken down by the state for violations against regulations. Which is why I keep ignoring your questions because you are vastly uneducated, and yet want to make sweeping generalizations and present yourself as an expert.
Post by cattledogkisses on Oct 1, 2019 20:05:28 GMT -5
Rescues aren't breeding more dogs. Breeders are. I don't know how you can say that they're both contributing to pet overpopulation. That's just incorrect.
Being on these boards for 13 years has taught me a lot about this issue. I never knew anything about backyard breeders or puppy mills before. I never knew there was something wrong with buying an animal from a pet store. Knowledge is power if you use it correctly!
Yes! If you’re willing to open your mind. Unfortunately, too many people get defensive and just refuse to engage.
Okay...if we want to go the dictionary route. from the link you posted: The ASPCA defines responsible breeders as those who have focused their efforts on one or a select few breeds, and through breeding, historical research and ongoing study, mentoring relationships, club membership, showing, raising and training of these breeds have become experts in the breed’s health, heritable conditions, temperament, and behavior.
Your dealer does not meet this standard.
I've lost count of how many times she's been told "Reputable/ethical breeders don't breed mixes" in this thread. Doesn't seem to be sinking in.
I’ll probably hate myself for asking this but how are rescues that take in poor dogs that are either aging, abandoned or separated from their mothers due to traumatic events or whatever contributing to overpopulation. Both of my rescue pups had mothers who died and they were basically found and had to be nursed to health until they were old enough to be adopted. All the rescues and fosters were doing was saving puppies. I guess they should let them die so they don’t overpopulate and that’s equivalent to BREEDING on purpose? GTFOH with that.
Also my living, breathing babies aren’t property. My house didn’t miss me while I was in the hospital but my girls did. One is on top of me right now shoving her stupid face into mine for all the kisses she missed out on while closing her eyes in pure pleasure that I’m home and giving her her usual evening affection.
You.financed.a.puppymill.operation. You are a contributing factor, but if you like to tell yourself these lies at night to help you sleep, then go for it.
That’s fine. I’ll accept this. It’s still irrelevant in hindsight. I had nothing to indicate at the time that that was what was going on. I still don’t have much to indicate that it is now, but assuming it is based on the 14 litters per year which is excessive, it still doesn’t change my mind. The problem is overpopulation, and it’s a very serious problem. I still fail to see how rescues, which are even less regulated than breeders to the beat of my knowledge are making a dent in that. So given that we both care about the overpopulation issue, what other than regulation of both and owners would you suggest?
Ok, I’m fired up so I’m responding again. They way rescues are making a dent in overpopulation, is they’re spaying and neutering all dogs that they rescue. Hundreds of thousands of dogs per year. And they’re NOT breeding dogs. So big dent right there.
What can YOU do about overpopulation? Well. You can spay and neuter your pets, you can adopt not shop, you can educate others about rescues vs breeders and you can donate money and time to animal rescue if you’re so inclined.
So now not only are breeders superior to rescues, but rescues should just say forget about it because they’re not making a dent? Do you hear yourself Chuppathingy? You’re doing some serious mental gymnastics to justify your irresponsibility.
I am not saying breeders are superior. I would thank you for not putting words in my mouth. You’re also correct that I really don’t get it. I disagree with the rest of you. I think it is completely possible for both breeders and rescues to be problematic and that responsible pet selection comes down to deciding criteria and doing the best you can to make a careful, informed choice based on their needs and which dog seems the best fit for them. I think regulation would be sensible, if the overpopulation problem is something we ever want to discuss. Pets are property. That’s reality. People can do what they want with their property. Since there’s a demand people are going to keep building business models around breeding dogs and there’s nothing legally wrong with that. You can object morally but that’s ineffective without legal change. It’s not like I can go back in time and not get my dog. I made the best decision for me at the time, and we adore her. She’s our second child and I wouldn’t change anything knowing how awesome she is. I stand by that. And I stand by my repeated statement that at the time I got Samantha I had no reason or indication to believe that anything unethical was going on with my breeder. Beyond the fact that she’s increased the size of her operations I still don’t and it’s none of my concern.
That’s fine. I’ll accept this. It’s still irrelevant in hindsight. I had nothing to indicate at the time that that was what was going on. I still don’t have much to indicate that it is now, but assuming it is based on the 14 litters per year which is excessive, it still doesn’t change my mind. The problem is overpopulation, and it’s a very serious problem. I still fail to see how rescues, which are even less regulated than breeders to the beat of my knowledge are making a dent in that. So given that we both care about the overpopulation issue, what other than regulation of both and owners would you suggest?
Ok, I’m fired up so I’m responding again. They way rescues are making a dent in overpopulation, is they’re spaying and neutering all dogs that they rescue. Hundreds of thousands of dogs per year. And they’re NOT breeding dogs. So big dent right there.
What can YOU do about overpopulation? Well. You can spay and neuter your pets, you can adopt not shop, you can educate others about rescues vs breeders and you can donate money and time to animal rescue if you’re so inclined.
Sincerely, thank you. Rescues do take puppies, so while they’re not breeding they are benefiting from it because there is a demand in the market for puppies. How should that be addressed? This is something I kind of struggled with and I think the answer is some sort of serious legal penalty for not fixing your pet. That’s what led me to the licensed breeders only train of thought. I wanted a puppy because I know large dogs live shorter lives in general, and because in all honesty I was scared off by my brother having a bad experience with a rescue whom he adores but would hav ego be regimes if certain circumstances arise in the future.
Ok, I’m fired up so I’m responding again. They way rescues are making a dent in overpopulation, is they’re spaying and neutering all dogs that they rescue. Hundreds of thousands of dogs per year. And they’re NOT breeding dogs. So big dent right there.
What can YOU do about overpopulation? Well. You can spay and neuter your pets, you can adopt not shop, you can educate others about rescues vs breeders and you can donate money and time to animal rescue if you’re so inclined.
Sincerely, thank you. Rescues do take puppies, so while they’re not breeding they are benefiting from it because there is a demand in the market for puppies. How should that be addressed? This is something I kind of struggled with and I think the answer is some sort of serious legal penalty for not fixing your pet. That’s what led me to the licensed breeders only train of thought. I wanted a puppy because I know large dogs live shorter lives in general, because I wanted the dog to be able to grow with my child, and because in all honesty I was scared off by my brother having a bad experience with a rescue whom he adores but would have to be rehomed if my brother ever had children. Not saying the last one was a particularly good reason, but I understand why people would be scared of the potential psychological issues with rescue dogs. My brother’s dog was very carefully screened by his rescue and the issue with children didn’t come up until almost a year after they got him when the dog was first exposed to my daughter and our nephews. My brother opted to keep the dog because he is childless but no longer brings him to family things.
What do you mean, rescues are benefitting from taking puppies? They take puppies who might otherwise be euthanized, and pregnant moms who might be euthanized as well. The adoption fees that rescues charge usually don’t even come close to covering what they spend on each animal.
That’s fine. I’ll accept this. It’s still irrelevant in hindsight. I had nothing to indicate at the time that that was what was going on.
Bullshit. The very fact that she was breeding "designer breeds" would have told you that, and you *knew* that yet chose to ignore it.
Rescues ARE regulated. The one I protested was taken down by the state for violations against regulations. Which is why I keep ignoring your questions because you are vastly uneducated, and yet want to make sweeping generalizations and present yourself as an expert.
Sincerely, thank you. Rescues do take puppies, so while they’re not breeding they are benefiting from it because there is a demand in the market for puppies. How should that be addressed? This is something I kind of struggled with and I think the answer is some sort of serious legal penalty for not fixing your pet. That’s what led me to the licensed breeders only train of thought. I wanted a puppy because I know large dogs live shorter lives in general, because I wanted the dog to be able to grow with my child, and because in all honesty I was scared off by my brother having a bad experience with a rescue whom he adores but would have to be rehomed if my brother ever had children. Not saying the last one was a particularly good reason, but I understand why people would be scared of the potential psychological issues with rescue dogs. My brother’s dog was very carefully screened by his rescue and the issue with children didn’t come up until almost a year after they got him when the dog was first exposed to my daughter and our nephews. My brother opted to keep the dog because he is childless but no longer brings him to family things.
What do you mean, rescues are benefitting from taking puppies? They take puppies who might otherwise be euthanized, and pregnant moms who might be euthanized as well. The adoption fees that rescues charge usually don’t even come close to covering what they spend on each animal.
I mean that there is a demand for puppies that they are able to fill because people breed them. Yes they’re rescuing them from euthanasia in most cases but they are still providing them to the consumer public. If they’re losing money on it then that’s nice, but wouldn’t it be better to refuse to take the puppies. I would assume they have to purchase the puppies to get them away from the breeders. I doubt they are stealing them. And as long as they’re willing to take them it will encourage those breeders that they are having to purchase the puppies from. To be clear, I don’t think the puppies should be euthanized. I’m just saying that if they’re purchasing the puppies to rescue them legally, since they are generally property under the law, it would seem to me that this incentivized bad breeders to keep producing puppies.
What do you mean, rescues are benefitting from taking puppies? They take puppies who might otherwise be euthanized, and pregnant moms who might be euthanized as well. The adoption fees that rescues charge usually don’t even come close to covering what they spend on each animal.
I mean that there is a demand for puppies that they are able to fill because people breed them. Yes they’re rescuing them from euthanasia in most cases but they are still providing them to the consumer public. If they’re losing money on it then that’s nice, but wouldn’t it be better to refuse to take the puppies. I would assume they have to purchase the puppies to get them away from the breeders. I doubt they are stealing them. And as long as they’re willing to take them it will encourage those breeders that they are having to purchase the puppies from. To be clear, I don’t think the puppies should be euthanized. I’m just saying that if they’re purchasing the puppies to rescue them legally, since they are generally property under the law, it would seem to me that this incentivized bad breeders to keep producing puppies.
Oh my fucking god. They're not purchasing puppies. I highly suggest you stop spouting shit and go volunteer for an organization for a while.
Bullshit. The very fact that she was breeding "designer breeds" would have told you that, and you *knew* that yet chose to ignore it.
Rescues ARE regulated. The one I protested was taken down by the state for violations against regulations. Which is why I keep ignoring your questions because you are vastly uneducated, and yet want to make sweeping generalizations and present yourself as an expert.
I certainly don’t think all or the majority do this. I do think it happens more frequently than the rescue community would care to admit. And I think that’s because most of the rescue community are lovely people who care deeply about animals and don’t fathom the profit motive’s that can look behind that kind of operation.