[tcasby]

Originally Posted by RBark

It is beyond me to understand how the popularity of breeding mixes has contributed to decreased dogs in shelters.

I'm sure that if shelters initated the same propaganda that BYB mutt breeders are doing, there would be a lot more adoptions. But then, that'd be lying, which is not good.

And are we talking about Richmond CA? The reason the Richmond SPCA is doing well (according to you) is becuase the community loves dogs?

I've been to Richmond. I've worked there. I'd barely rank the community there above Oakland. Perhaps they just simply don't care who they adopt to. But I've been to the Richmond SPCA, and from talking with the people there, I have to call you on the 2 years with no kill claim.

Richmond VA foo

Richmond has been a no kill city since 2006

"In January 2002, the Richmond SPCA adopted a bold vision for its future. We transformed the shelter into a no-kill facility, pledging to become a no-kill city by 2008 through an emphasis on education, adoption, pet-retention, Trap-Neuter-Return (TNR) and spay/neuter programs. The successes achieved in five years are overwhelming. In January 2007, we proudly reported that no healthy, homeless animal died in the City of Richmond in 2006, two years earlier than we originally pledged. "

http://www.richmondspca.org/site/New...ge=NewsArticle

[Lorina]

However, if you look further into the site, you'll see that the Richmond SPCA is not an "Open Admittance" shelter.

It's pretty darn easy to not euthanize for space if you only take in what you know you can adopt out.

[tcasby]

Originally Posted by Lorina

However, if you look further into the site, you'll see that the Richmond SPCA is not an "Open Admittance" shelter.

It's pretty darn easy to not euthanize for space if you only take in what you know you can adopt out.

Note the no kill status applies to Richmond City, including the City Pound, AC, and the other facilities.

The Richmond SPCA has been no-kill since 1992.

Originally Posted by Dakota Spirit

I'd be interested to know how much time you spent in a shelter environment, because the statements you make about them have little to no merit. The elevation of kill ratio in any given place has absolutely nothing to do with apathy. Richmond likely has a far lesser population of stray dogs then say, my area does. I live in an area with one of the highest stray populations in the state.

Not only that, but you continue to call overpopulation a breed specific problem when again, if you've spent ANY time in a shelter - you'd know this was far from the truth. I also fail to see how the popularity of doodles has aided in the management of overpopulation. That doesn't make any sense at all.

Working at a specific shelters tell you nothing about the overall picture.
Working at your shelter tells you little about NE shelters which are importing dogs from hi kill redneck shelters to meet their clients demands.
The best available source of the overall shelter situation is petfinders.
and that is the source of my overpopulation data.

[animal-luver]

i love my peekapoo
there really nice and playful
i luv there fur

[Lorina]

I worked at a Northeast shelter. We had no need to import any dogs from anywhere else. On rare occassions, we'd take in some dogs from other shelters if they got swamped, for instance, if a nearby shelter had dozens of dogs come in from a puppymill or hoarder cruelty case, and our shelter happned to be not as crowded at the time.

The animals listed on Petfinder is the tiniest tip of an enormous iceburg. Most shelters and rescues I've worked with only list a fraction of their available pets on it. My dog was in the shelter/rescue system (first picked up as a stray in NYC, then placed with a Pekingese rescue because he needed more time to recover from his eye surgery) for over two months before he was listed on Petfinder.

Many shelters don't list their dogs at all. Some only list a few. Most are understaffed, and have no time to take photos and update Petfinder listings. Our local SPCA currently has five dogs listed on Petfinder. I can guarantee you if I walked through their door today, I'd find a boatload more than five dogs. Probably closer to 30 or 40, of varying breeds and sizes. They also have four cats listed, but likely have at least sixty cats up for adoption.

[tcasby]

Originally Posted by Lorina

I worked at a Northeast shelter. We had no need to import any dogs from anywhere else. On rare occassions, we'd take in some dogs from other shelters if they got swamped, for instance, if a nearby shelter had dozens of dogs come in from a puppymill or hoarder cruelty case, and our shelter happned to be not as crowded at the time.

The animals listed on Petfinder is the tiniest tip of an enormous iceburg. Most shelters and rescues I've worked with only list a fraction of their available pets on it. My dog was in the shelter/rescue system (first picked up as a stray in NYC, then placed with a Pekingese rescue because he needed more time to recover from his eye surgery) for over two months before he was listed on Petfinder.

Many shelters don't list their dogs at all. Some only list a few. Most are understaffed, and have no time to take photos and update Petfinder listings. Our local SPCA currently has five dogs listed on Petfinder. I can guarantee you if I walked through their door today, I'd find a boatload more than five dogs. Probably closer to 30 or 40, of varying breeds and sizes. They also have four cats listed, but likely have at least sixty cats up for adoption.

Many dogs in facilities are in a state not yet ready for adoption. Some are strays waiting for claim period. Some of being nursed back to reasonable health. Some are still be evaluated for adoption.

Petfinders is representative sample of the of the relative population in shelters and rescues by breed and type. If you know a more accurate data sources please let me know. If Petfinders lists 30 pekepoos and 20,000 lab mixes, it is reasonable to assume that is the ratio found in shelters.

But again, if you have a better source, I will be happy to use it.

BTW: What NE shelter did you work in?

[RBark]

Originally Posted by tcasby

Many dogs in facilities are in a state not yet ready for adoption. Some are strays waiting for claim period. Some of being nursed back to reasonable health. Some are still be evaluated for adoption.

Petfinders is representative sample of the of the relative population in shelters and rescues by breed and type. If you know a more accurate data sources please let me know. If Petfinders lists 30 pekepoos and 20,000 lab mixes, it is reasonable to assume that is the ratio found in shelters.

But again, if you have a better source, I will be happy to use it.

BTW: What NE shelter did you work in?

The Dublin SPCA Has 9 dogs listed and 28 cats. When I was there last weekend there was at least 20 available for adoption.

Incidentally, all 9 of the dogs were big dogs. I didn't see any of the small dogs that were at the shelter.

And I also know for certain that it's not because the other dogs are not ready for adoption - the dogs that are not ready are out in the back of the place, the chart will show "currently in training, not available for adoption" and I am not counting those.

Not to mention, I don't see the City Shelter listed on Petfinder. The SPCA is right next to the city shelter, and none of the animals available there is listed. From what I understand, the SPCA takes in the most adoptable pets from the city shelter for adoption, although the city shelter also has a ton of pets for adoption as well.

It's easy to proclaim to be no-kill when you only taken in the most adoptable. The no-kill shelters here in CA and Colorado are overflowing because they don't turn down animals unless they are full. Which is, really, dumb because they get in a bunch of sick cats, adopt the good ones out, and the cycle keeps going until the place is full of sick cats and they can't adopt out good cats.

I'd bet anything that the shelters in Richmond are just shipping out the animals to other places outside the city under the guise they are "full".

[Lorina]

I too would like to know what happens to the animals they don't accept.

If they only euthanize for health or behavioral reasons, well, my guy would've gotten the Big Blue Syringe. His eye hanging out of his socket would have been a health problem. Ditto for the Aussie pup my friend is fostering who has mange and a secondary bacterial infection on his legs from being forced to stand in his own waste matter for months. And one of the Aussies she adopted who had "kennel crazies" from being kept in a small pen in a no kill shelter for months. He was slated to be euthed for behavioral problems. This "aggressive, uncontrolable" dog passed his CGC with flying colors.

I prefer to not give out the exact shelter I worked at, since it's very close to my home, and I like to keep a tiny bit of privacy online.

[RonE]

Originally Posted by animal-luver

i love my peekapoo
there really nice and playful
i luv there fur

I hope I'm not the only one revelling in the surreality of this thread.

[Lorina]

*snarf* Ron, if there was one more syllable in the last line, that'd be a haiku!

[RBark]

Originally Posted by RonE

I hope I'm not the only one revelling in the surreality of this thread.

You're not. I was a little bit bewildered when I saw it.

[Wimble Woof]

I really dont see the point you are trying to make in all honesty.
Yes, its not only mixed breeds ending up in shelters I agree. However the vast majority of purebred, mutts, so called hybrids (which is not possible seeing as though both parents are DOGS) and so on in shelters ARE the results of POOR BREEDING ETHICS from somewhere.
This is the point many of us are trying to get across to you, now if you insist on remaining completely ignorant of the reality of the situation and would rather spend countless hours on petfinder making some stats for your open ended arguement FINE. Until YOU realize the thing we are trying to prove a point on is Ethical breeders WILL NOT allow their dogs to end up in shelters. ETHICAL breeders WILL take back ANY pup at any time. They do not intentionally mix breeds, call them some rediculous name such as a mashup of 2 pre established breed names and charge just as much if not more for these pups as a high quality PROVEN example of the breed (whether they be proven for work or show)

Do I see anything wrong with "poo's" and "doodles"??? NO, they are, I must admit, friggen adorable, but you know what so are many of the "ooops" litter poos and doodles that you can find on places like petfinder and in classifieds that DO NOT have the cutesy names that there to sucker in those who do not know any better.
I have a HUGE problem with ANYONE producing ANY dogs that are not sound genetically, and make proposterous claims on thier "breed" (pure or other wise)
One day, you will understand what we are talking about, there is no doubt about it. I'm sure at some point a good amount of us did not know the "TRUTH" behind what was really happening in the world.

So you have one shelter for your stats and basis of your arguement that is no kill... Good for them. There are STILL FAR TOO MANY dogs that are dying for no reason in other situations. One or 1000 NO kill shelthers are not enough to prove its alright to breed for the sake of breeding. To meet supply vs demand. If these poo and doodle breeders were at all reputable (most of them) they would point potential puppy buyers to resuces, any breeder I have talked to has pointed me there... and they also would be ACTIVELY involved in some form of rescue.
Find me some stats with websites that show me X amount of designer dog breeders or unethical breeders who are looking out for what they are bringing in, since you seem to have the time to do such a thing, I dont.
And after you have some good solid reasons why anyone should breed anything watch this http://www.brightlion.com/InHope/InHope_en.aspx
If this doesnt tug on your heart strings and make you want to rethink your standings then nothing will.
You clearly just dont get it

[Dakota Spirit]

Originally Posted by tcasby

The Richmond SPCA has been no-kill since 1992.

Working at a specific shelters tell you nothing about the overall picture.
Working at your shelter tells you little about NE shelters which are importing dogs from hi kill redneck shelters to meet their clients demands.
The best available source of the overall shelter situation is petfinders.
and that is the source of my overpopulation data.

Good point, making general claims based on the Richmond shelter (or any other one place) doesn't make much sense either.

I also wasn't making any statements based on the one place I've been with. I was only using them as an example to counter your argument regarding the kill rate being linked to an area's level of apathy.

One other point regarding Petfinder - some shelters only list the dogs that REALLY need extra exposure. Generally, the little poodle mixes do not. Some do, but most are snatched up pretty quickly. Dogs like Lab Mixes, they have a higher chance of hanging around for awhile. I won't deny that there are a lot of Lab mixes out there - but it's possible a shelter lists them when they don't list their other dogs because they need more help getting adopted.

[RBark]

Originally Posted by Dakota Spirit

Good point, making general claims based on the Richmond shelter (or any other one place) doesn't make much sense either.

I also wasn't making any statements based on the one place I've been with. I was only using them as an example to counter your argument regarding the kill rate being linked to an area's level of apathy.

One other point regarding Petfinder - some shelters only list the dogs that REALLY need extra exposure. Generally, the little poodle mixes do not. Some do, but most are snatched up pretty quickly. Dogs like Lab Mixes, they have a higher chance of hanging around for awhile. I won't deny that there are a lot of Lab mixes out there - but it's possible a shelter lists them when they don't list their other dogs because they need more help getting adopted.

That's pretty much what's going on at the Dublin SPCA.

http://search.petfinder.com/shelterS...&zip=&preview=

As you can see, all the dogs are pit bull and lab mixes. Shepherds are also fairly common around here which is why they are listed.

But I know for a fact that there are many smaller dogs there as well. They do appear to get adopted fairly quickly relative to the bigger dogs (and for obvious reasons). Here in Dublin the vast majority of people live in townhouse and apartments, so small dogs are ideal. Even those that live in homes tend to be smaller due to their ease of management.

The ones with bigger dogs usually are the men, and given that adult men tend to be married (whipped) and younger men tend not to be approved or have the financial means to have a dog, it gives a very slim selection for the bigger dogs. So they do need more help.

It would appear to me that this would be the case in any large city (i.e. where a SPCA would be.)

To verify this, I decided to check the Oakland SPCA. If there is any city I would think big dogs would be popular, it would be Oakland. There's a lot more of the type of people who want big mean looking dogs to show off in Oakland than a more upper-middle class city like Dublin (Where I live).

Yet, even there, it's only Pit bulls, Shepherds, and Labs that are listed. And I know for certain that there are many small dogs available there. Even in a crappy city like Oakland, smaller dogs are easily adoptable relative to the bigger dogs. That doesn't mean they go like hotcakes, the smaller dogs do stay there for a good while, just not as long as the bigger ones.

So given that, and that those two SPCA are probably only dwarfed by LA and SF SPCA, I think that the statistics are very skewed.

[Curbside Prophet]

Originally Posted by tcasby

The primary purpose for which most people acquire dogs is as a pet and a companion. Hybrids as a group excel in that role, while not in any way constraining the ability of purebred breeders to improve their breed.

Excels? Again, you make it sound as if hybrids breed true. What purpose would a buyer need a 'pet' that *may* be what it's suppose to be, or it may not be. If I go to my dentist to have a cavity filled, I don't want him to tell me it may be filled or it may not. If I buy cookies at the super market and the package shows that there are chocolate chips in the cookies, how do you think I will feel if the cookies have no chocolate chips. What do you think I'm likely to do with those cookies without chocolate chips?

The only thing hybrid breeders excel at is fooling their buyers.

Most dogs intentionally bred are bred for profit.

Absolutely, and hybrid breeders are NOT excluded from this group, but proceed to tell me how NO hybrid breeder is in this group. I could use a good joke today.

If dogs were not bred for profit, there would be no non profit hobby breeders. There would be no purebreds at all.

I don't know what to call this argument other than asinine. How our breeds of today came to be, illustrates precisely how breeders benefit in the craft. The history of dogs being sold as a commodity for profit has only been recent. Before this time the dog's function was its profit, with the exception of a few tailored breeds. Now the tables are turned...since the dog's function is lost, breeders have to find other ways to profit from the animal. And hybrid breeders do this exceptionally well.

So they take two purebreds, breed them, and poof, a new dog "breed" is born...to do what? How am I to know when a hybrid dog alarm barks, that's what it was bred to do? How am I to know this active hybrid dog should have been a couch potato? The answer is you don't, and can't because you've chosen a breeder who's breeding for "companionable". Well, you just sold me a dog that's not my definition of companionable, so what am I suppose to do with this dog? Errr....but it is the bestest companion dog around! It's cute, we'll say it's non-shedding, great for allergy sufferers, what else can we make-up as a selling point? It has an "original" name. Plus look at those puppies, how can you resist?

The fact that someone breeds for profit does not excuse them from a high ethical standards, health testing requirements, etc. The fact that many, even most, commercial breeders do not maintain those standards is not a reflection on the ones that do.

It does exclude them if their purpose is not definable by behavior. Hybrid breeders do not know what behavior their animals will have. The only way to purify the dog's behavior is to develop a new breed, with pure blood. Hybrid breeders don't do that, and I'm sorry that is as unethical as unethical can get. Show me a hybrid breeder who's paying for genetic understanding, and I'll show you a breeder who's trying to purify a breed and exclude themselves from breeding hybrids. This practice of purifying animals *IS* what's made our dogs of today. Hybrid breeders have no other purpose than to produce mutts for profit...there can be no other purpose if they aren't attempting to purify the animal.

If breeding for profit is their practice (it is), fine. The ignorant will buy into the propaganda you spew. But those who know a bit about genetics and behavior will not be fooled, and if I can say something to convince an ignorant person otherwise...that's my small contribution to dogdom.

The breeding of hybrids has zero, absolutely zero, negative impact on the overall welfare of dogs, and likely has a positive impact.

Wait, didn't your research find 30 known peekapoos on petfinder? Are you calling these animals zero? You should be ashamed at how you're blinded.

People are as likely to choose a hybrid over a pet store purebred or BYB purebred as they are to choose one over a rescue dog. The simple truth is for every puppy purchased from a reputable breeder, many many more will be acquired from some other source. Some from purebred BYBs, some from pet stores, some from oops litters, some from oops litters dropped of at a shelter.

Again ignorance should not justify breeding practices.

Not only is this inevitable, it is necessary if dog ownership is to remain viable in the US. Given this inevitability, hybrids make an excellent alternative.

I beg to differ. Ignorance is not necessary for dog ownership to remain, and my dog is a prime example of that. How silly of you and insulting to suggest hybrids are necessary for conscientious dog ownership to exist. You're so far out of touch with reality that I don't even know how to argue with you or why. I enjoy a good argument, but this is ridiculous.

As I have demonstrated repeatedly with the data I provided, they are very unlikely to end up in shelters.

Yes, because hybrid breeders are NOT as horrible as other breeders. They are an exclusive group, right? The purest breeders on Earth, right?

It's funny because Hitler had the same view of his people...that was until he ran into the Allied forces.

BTW: Hi-kill shelters exist not because of dog overpopulation, but because of the apathy of the community they reside in. Richmond has not euthanize a healthy, adoptable dog in 2 years.

No, they exist because of the ignorance in dog ownership. They exist because no one wants used dogs, they want cute puppies. They exist because euthanasia is a cost effective means to the problem. They exist for the same reason you pay taxes for vector control. Dogs without owners are a health risk, and an economic dead end. So please don't insult me for having a kill-shelter in my community. I can't make up for the ignorance in dog ownership alone. But excuse me if my arguments try.

Your arguments are of the nature of those apposed to Gay marriage or stem cell research. They emanate from your overall belief system, not from a pragmatic look at the actual state dog welfare.

I think I'm going to vomit. I guess ignorance is bliss because this is the most disturbing thing I've read all day.

[borzoimom]

I am sorry- maybe its just me- but I thought this thread was on why a thread was closed- that being answered- then now its turned into a debate that was on the other thread. And in suggestions/feedback not the section it should be in. OP- I do not think ( maybe I am wrong) this is the place for this debate to be. I have many comments to make in this area but trying to stay with only answering " why was the thread deleted". After reading the replies you gave, I do now painfully see why.