Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I have heard alot of things about breeding, and I'm not really sure what I think about it. I HATE puppy mills, breeders who repeatedly use one female and irresponsible owners who don't neuter and watch out for their dogs . If someone says they are a breeder, what exactly does that mean? How does that all work? Please share your opinions (especially those of you who are breeders).

Feel free to contradict me in any way, Just keep it civil:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,525 Posts
Just like anything out there, I think there are good breeders and bad breeders. There are qualities that indicate good ones and bad ones. I don't have any problem with breeders who do medical testing and screening, have a clean, healthy environment in which to breed, are in it to better the breed instead of to make a few bucks and who respect and care for their breeding animals. There's a long list of what makes a good breeder, but those are a few.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,574 Posts
Since there are so many dogs in rescue, I feel that the amount of people that BREED dogs should be cut down by like...75% or so. Cutting out all the puppy mills, and people who breed dogs without any temperament and health screening or concern for the longevity and health of their pups as well as the lines they are breeding should just about do it. (can you say, run on sentence?)

If all that was left for "breeders" were people who health screened their dogs (not just vet check) the shelters wouldn't be full of lovely but homeless dogs. These people also screen their potential puppy buyers too. :) I think that is a good thing, though I know many will argue that point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,431 Posts
...you sure about starting this thread...?

I can hardly complain about responsible breeders when there are so many puppy mills and careless people who breed for no good reason. In MY perfect world though, breeding would be put on hold until there were no more adoptable dogs in the shelters.

...I would also have a pet unicorn....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,072 Posts
We need a GREAT many more GOOD breeders. Breeders who will ALWAYS take back their dogs, who screen owners for suitability, who require pet-quality dogs NOT be bred (whether they require s/n or just non-breeding contracts) who do health testing and prove their dogs in competition or by actual work. We need to STOP stigmatizing the good breeders - for example, go dig up the thread "Which of these breeders is responsible" and take a look at Hob Nob Border collies. Their dogs WORK. Their dogs are health tested for everything under the sun, and they screen owners. She appears to have a lot of dogs and litters but most of them are with co-owners. It's not JUST a numbers game.

Puppy mills are a definite problem, but numerically, I think BYBs are the bigger issue- the folks who breed 'just one litter' because they love their dog and don't think anything about potentially taking back those pups down the road and they don't think anything about requiring spay/neuter, so every pup in that litter is potentially going to produce 'just one litter', and there's also the equal problem of casual pet owners who allow accidental litters to happen. MSN may get some of these folks, but the worst offenders- people who have serial oops litters from dogs they allow to roam- they're not following leash laws, either! Enforce those and you'll eliminate the accidental litters. Educate buyers to the point that they are not willing to purchase dogs without a health guarantee and takeback clause and the 'just one litter' folks will find it MUCH harder to get rid of puppies.

I don't think commercial breeders will ever be eliminated entirely- there are ALWAYS going to be people who are not willing to be responsible and subject themselves to the screening that any responsible breeder is going to put them through! The worst abuses of dogs in poor conditions can be tackled under existing cruelty and care laws if there was more money for enforcement by GOVERNMENT bodies with proper oversight, not special interest groups. A reexamination of the AWA which separates animals kept for breeding/commercial purposes from laboratory animals or food animals is also a necessity, particularly when it comes to housing standards. Get dogs OFF wire, get them into enclosures that are sufficiently sized for them to run and play and write the regs in such a way that environmental enrichment is the default setting.

I would like to see AKC institute a program which would give breeders who did basic health testing (I'd call it hips, eyes, patellas, and thyroid, but even if it was just hips and eyes, that'd be fine- heck, even if it was just DOING the testing and not necessarily requiring a good result- but the information would be PRINTED on the registration certificate) a preferred status that went as a prefix on their offspring's name (like the UKC 'PR' program). Requiring health testing, period, for registration would be nice, but it'd just drive MORE traffic to the trash registries and cut revenue even more with AKC. AKC's not the be-all-and-end-all of dogs, but for the vast majority of breeds, it is the best of the options. I'd like to see the group realignment move forward and get the standard poodle back in the sporting group where it belongs, and see judges putting up more functional dogs. I'd like to see the no foreign substances rule (ie hairspray ;P) in the show ring enforced. These last two things though are frankly not as big of a deal as everything else - the number of dogs in the conformation ring is SO tiny compared to everything else that for all the screeching about things like Pedigree Dogs Exposed, the number of unhealthy dogs in the show ring is SO much tinier than the unhealthy dogs produced by people who just don't bother to educate themselves and health test.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,135 Posts
When done by a reputable breeder, I love it!

But...
I cannot stand BYBing... I despise Puppy Mills... but the sad truth is that it will never probably never stop.
There are not enough people in this world that value their pets lives the way they should.
Nessa
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,296 Posts
To paraphrase an old Woody Allen joke, I would never support a breeder who was willing to sell to me. Breeders tend to get a bad reputation because the good ones are necessarily elitist - they will only sell to someone who can demonstrate they can and will give their dog everything it needs, including training. Part of the reason I decided to adopt was that, without fail, the only breeders I found who were willing to sell to me were the ones whom I would never support in a million years.

BYBs are usually well-intentioned, but that does not excuse them for the incredible harm they cause. Besides the overpopulation, there is a very real problem with increasing incidence of genetic disorders within purebred dogs which BYBs tend to ignore. The top-line breeders take very expensive precautions (not breeding until dogs are 2+ years old, OFA screenings, pre-natal care, etc.) to try and reduce their incidence within their lines, which BYBs often ignore completely.

What we're left with is a situation where we need more good breeders to improve the health of the existing population of dogs, and a lot fewer breeders overall to help reduce that same population.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
I LOVE breeding ONLY when it is done by responcible people. and I hope to breed dogs myself one day

If the world was filled with good breeders we would no longer need shelters
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
To paraphrase an old Woody Allen joke, I would never support a breeder who was willing to sell to me. Breeders tend to get a bad reputation because the good ones are necessarily elitist - they will only sell to someone who can demonstrate they can and will give their dog everything it needs, including training. Part of the reason I decided to adopt was that, without fail, the only breeders I found who were willing to sell to me were the ones whom I would never support in a million years.

BYBs are usually well-intentioned, but that does not excuse them for the incredible harm they cause. Besides the overpopulation, there is a very real problem with increasing incidence of genetic disorders within purebred dogs which BYBs tend to ignore. The top-line breeders take very expensive precautions (not breeding until dogs are 2+ years old, OFA screenings, pre-natal care, etc.) to try and reduce their incidence within their lines, which BYBs often ignore completely.

What we're left with is a situation where we need more good breeders to improve the health of the existing population of dogs, and a lot fewer breeders overall to help reduce that same population.

Another well said post by George!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
894 Posts
BYBs are usually well-intentioned, but that does not excuse them for the incredible harm they cause. Besides the overpopulation, there is a very real problem with increasing incidence of genetic disorders within purebred dogs which BYBs tend to ignore. The top-line breeders take very expensive precautions (not breeding until dogs are 2+ years old, OFA screenings, pre-natal care, etc.) to try and reduce their incidence within their lines, which BYBs often ignore completely.
Something in the order of 90% of purebred dogs are bred by BYBs. Without them there would initially be no purebred pet ownership except for the wealthy and well connected. After every single available mutt was sucked up and sold for thousands of dollars to a pet dog starved public, there would soon be no pet dog ownership at all except for the wealthy and well connected.

As long as being a responsible breeder requires one have the wherewithal, both in finances and time, to breed and show dogs as a expensive hobby, the overwhelming percentage of the 3-4 million purebred puppies needed to maintain an acceptable pet dog population of 60-80 million will be bred by people attempting to make some level of profit, or unable to afford the cost of responsible hobby breeding.

The best thing that could happen in the area of dog breeding would be to find a breeding paradigm that was both responsible and profitable.

The closest thing I've seen to that is this:
http://www.goldendoodles.com/breeders.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
I would Say almost Half of the people who own dogs or what to own dogs Shouldn't!

Dogs should not be a supply and demand product.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,296 Posts
Something in the order of 90% of purebred dogs are bred by BYBs. Without them there would initially be no purebred pet ownership except for the wealthy and well connected. After every single available mutt was sucked up and sold for thousands of dollars to a pet dog starved public, there would soon be no pet dog ownership at all except for the wealthy and well connected.
I think we're a long, long, long ways away from every single available mutt being sucked up and sold to a dog-starved public.

...The best thing that could happen in the area of dog breeding would be to find a breeding paradigm that was both responsible and profitable
Responsible dog breeding is, by its very nature, an incredibly labor-intensive and expensive task. It reminds me of the engineer's lament: "Faster, cheaper, better: pick two."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,072 Posts
I disagree that 50% of dog owners shouldn't own them. I think that there's an unfortunate tendency online for dog ownership to be considered something akin to rocket science. A DECENT diet (I don't mean Iams, but I also don't think it's necessar yto feed food that is $5+ per pound), appropriate vet care, lots of love and time spent with the dog and a home for LIFE is not out of the reach of most people and (I think) DOES represent the majority of dog owners.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
894 Posts
I would Say almost Half of the people who own dogs or what to own dogs Shouldn't!

Dogs should not be a supply and demand product.
Whether 50% of people should or shouldn't own dogs is moot. They can and always will.

Whether the supply of dogs should or shouldn't be effected by demand and vice verse is also moot. It is.

Unless of course you want the government so say who can and can't have a dog and who can and can't breed them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
I have just personally seen far to many poor pet owners in my life thats were my numbers come from, no they are not fact obviously, more of an emotional move on my part.

between working as a groomer and training dogs I would say my negative and positive experiances with dog owners are 50/50

then I'll speak in your language

perhaps if dogs were more expencive do to high demand with low output (because all the hypothetical breeders are so awsome) people wont get a dog on the whim.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
894 Posts
I think we're a long, long, long ways away from every single available mutt being sucked up and sold to a dog-starved public.
The overall population of dogs in the US is somewhere between 60-80 million. There are 2-5 million in shelters.

Assuming an average life span on 10 years, you need 6-8 million puppies born each year to maintain that population.

Puppy Mills produce about a million pups, "reputable" breeders less than that. That leaves 4-6 million pups produced each year by BYS and oops litters.

Reducing the number of pups born by 10% (6-8 million) won't eliminate dogs in shelters, it will just reduce the number in shelters by 10%. I will also increase the value of purebred puppies increasing the incentive to breed puppies for profit.

Responsible dog breeding is, by its very nature, an incredibly labor-intensive and expensive task. It reminds me of the engineer's lament: "Faster, cheaper, better: pick two."
Which is why responsible breeders as currently defined will never be able to meet the demand for purebred puppies insuring the continued existence of BYB and for profit breeders. If we, through our breeding practices and preference, are going the insure the existence of BYBS and for profit breeders, we should support the best of those to the exclusion of the worst, instead of lumping them all in the category as puppy mills.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,765 Posts
I do think someone should have to make an effort to get a dog.....contacting a breeder and waiting for the litter to be born and grow up, etc.-----not have a sad-eyed puppy staring at you whenever you go to the petstore, or have an "oops" puppy foisted upon you when you go to visit relatives. Or have them constantly dumped on your property when you live in the rurals, or being asked 3 times a week "if you know anyone who wants little Fluffy". So slightly fewer dogs than there are now would be a good thing. All puppymills being shut down would be a very good thing.

But of course someone has to breed or there wouldn't be any dogs. And I don't believe that showing is necessary to be a responsible breeder. But health testing is definitely a must, the breeder being willing to take the dog back if anything happens is a must, and selling pet-quality pups on no-breed contracts is a big must. And of course humane living conditions for the breeding dogs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,296 Posts
Are 60-80 million actually owned as pets, or are we including strays/feral dogs? That seems way, way too high for pet ownership; for a population of 300 million, that's 1 dog for every 5 people. With an average houshold size of 2.59, that comes out to 50% of households owning a dog? That doesn't seem right at all.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
894 Posts
Are 60-80 million actually owned as pets, or are we including strays/feral dogs? That seems way, way too high for pet ownership; for a population of 300 million, that's 1 dog for every 5 people. With an average houshold size of 2.59, that comes out to 50% of households owning a dog? That doesn't seem right at all.
http://www.avma.org/reference/marketstats/ownership.asp

http://www.hsus.org/pets/issues_aff...p_statistics/us_pet_ownership_statistics.html

http://www.usaweekend.com/08_issues/080127/080127pets-census.html

I think my quote of 60-80 million pet dogs leaves a lot of room for error, including stray and feral dogs.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top