Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
This is what a "High Quality" USDA approved puppy mill looks like. sure it's clean, the dogs are all fed and have clean water, and the dogs themselves are up to date on vet care.

But that still dosn't change the fact that the dogs live their lives in cages, are not tempement tested, or tested for hereditary health problems, are not excercized nearly enough, an are kept in small wire cages.

This is the kind of stuff that DOSN'T make the news. why? because it's legal, and the US government supports it.


UPDATE!! OK FOr some Strange REason The Video I had originaly put up is Gone! It was called "Blue Ribbon Kennel" Can Someone Tell me WHY it got changed?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
823 Posts
It is so sad that THAT is considered top quality. My BF told me I should be a Dog Law Enforcement officer (because I get so fired up about all that stuff). I told him no way because I would have to let stuff like that happen. Totally legal and the government agencies in charge seem proud of operations like that one. Food, water, and shelter are not enough. So sad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
962 Posts
They are not raised like people dogs to be, but like chickens, to be eaten! No socialization what so ever, from one cage to another until they reach the cage in the Local pet store. The people that run the mills are totally heartless, right down to the people that inspect the mills and the pet shop owner, and do not forget the idiots that keep buying these dogs keeping the market going. There should be puppy mill stocks sold in the stock market, that would be one of the safest buys!

Unfortunately as much as it pains me to know this is going on, it will not change in my life time, money and greed and not heart, rules:mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,140 Posts
MO is a huge, huge puppy mill state.

But then thats how the government/USDA wants dogs to be kept.

The # requirement to be considered a "commercial breeder" is getting less in less in some states. In some its 5, 4, or only 3 breeding dogs. Then you have to keep your dogs in cages for starters. They appear to want to turn breeders into those types of facilities. Why is beyond me. It is not better for the dogs IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,574 Posts
Very sad to see those very social beings deprived of what they want most... attention. All so that people can justify getting their cute little puppies at the most convenient places without any effort. Just go to the mall and buy your cute puppy. Who cares if the mother will spend the bane of her existence in a chicken coup. Shameful!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,204 Posts
I do have to say though that is the cleanest, well kept puppy mill that I've seen to date. I always have to look at the bright side to everything, so if we can't end Puppy mills completely, I'd at least be happier if they were all kept like that. No dog should be kept in a cage with no human contact. It's not a life any dog or cat should live. Until Puppy Mills are illegal, I'd love to see every mill kept like that one.

The Boxers broke my heart though. Gah.. Poor things..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,765 Posts
I've been to a place like that, she breeds Bassetts and Huskies. A lot better than most puppymills but still sad :( . I wonder what they do with the retired breeders? And how many litters they make a bitch have?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I just hate that out government supports this. The only rule I would like to see enforced for breeders is madatory health checks that are relevent to the breed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
OK FOr some Strange REason The Video I had originaly put up is Gone! It was called "Blue Ribbon Kennel" Can Someone Tell me WHY it got changed?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
572 Posts
MoonStr80 - they must be kept in cages or kennel runs because this is a USDA requirement. You cannot be licensed and keep dogs on your couch. They must be in a kennel enclosure with hard surfaces that are easily sanitized. Not directed @ anyone here in particular, but I think it's laughable that on one hand, most would support the increased legislation to over regulate all breeders, when that same legislation makes kenneling dogs mandatory. They are merely abiding by USDA and possibly state regulations. As someone else mentioned, you need only have a handful of bitches, under 5 in many states, to be considered commercial, and therefore license worthy. Most breeders who sell to pet stores fall under their state licensing requirements & also, of course, must be licensed by USDA. Most pet owners here would fail miserably if their property was state or USDA inspected, yet we're dragging a breeder into the mud for a profession that is 100% legal and ethical when done correctly. If you crate your dog, you've no right to pass judgement on a breeder that kennels. You know, people see these kennel enclosures and think the dog spends their life in those runs 24/7. Well in most cases, they don't. I have been looking at kennel property for about 2 years, and not one has been without at least one or more spacious exercise yards. Dogs in commercial breeding facilities spend several hours in their ex yards while the kennels are being cleaned & maintained, and of course, for exercise. Most kennels I have been looking at are state licensed facilities, a few have been USDA because the owner sold thru brokers. All had exercise runs that were either in use when I visited or showed signs of frequent use.
I hate to see someone's business smeared through the mud because another disagrees with it. If you don't agree with buying dogs from stores, then don't. But it becomes another matter when you bring someone's legal business into the spotlight for the sole purpose of criticising it. The OP knows nothing of their dogs or what they're producing but they MUST be bad because they sell to stores. There are innumerable good breeders selling throught stores but their pups don't make the news, only the bad ones. The best dog I've ever owned was a pet store dog. I know people who bought a Cavalier from a broker and are showing this male. He is probably one of the msot outstanding examples of the breed I've seen. That's beside the point. Since when is it ok to smear someone's good name because you have an ideological disagreement? This is not illegal, nor should it be. It shows a lack of kennel management knowledge when people with a pet dog or two and have no ideas how kennels are to operate for sanitation and mental health of the dogs point out breeders such as this and accuse them of being a puppy mill. What is wrong with producing healthy, sound pups and making a profit off the litter? Why do people believe corners are cut doing this? It boggles my mind and peeves me to see this. Sorry, but that is JMHO.

OK FOr some Strange REason The Video I had originaly put up is Gone! It was called "Blue Ribbon Kennel" Can Someone Tell me WHY it got changed?
Maybe because they don't want their business smeared on an internet forum by someone who has absolutely no dealing with them and knows nothing of them? If someone did this to my website to criticize, I'd probably take it down as well. It's a matter of not wanting your good name smeared when you've done nothing to deserve the smearing.

I remember a few years back on a breeder forum I post on someone had the idea to post pics of their kennels so pet people browsing the site could see finally, how clean their facilities were, how healthy and well cared for their dogs were. Another poster knocked the idea down due to the fact that she believed the entire forum would be called puppy mills simply because they kenneled their dogs. Irregardless of what they produced, what their ethics were, or how state of the art their kennels were. She was spot on with her comment. It's sort of like people who eat meat but think farming animals is cruel, when we can just get meat from our grocery store :rolleyes: There are many people who want breeders to have well bred pups constantly available for pets but don't want to imagine that to do such it means that must be the breeder's profession. They want us to have pups of top notch breeding, titled parents, but want show quality at pet price and pick of the litter. lol. Face it. Hobby breeders are breeding for themselves. I am rolling my eyes with pet pup inquiries because my next litter is MINE ALL MINE :D That and the ones I'm not keeping are going to other breeders. I have no time for pet inquiries for this one, and I think with most small hobby breeders, this is also the case. The litters are bred for ourselves, everyone else has to take backseat, pet people are waaaay back on the list of priorities. And my pups have too much drive for some pet people so I really have a narow view of which pet home gets a pup. Most are turned down, despite many being good matches for a less drivey Beagle. So the commercial breeders DO fill a need for people who want purebred pups or even designer pups. They are selling pups that the hobby people are not selling them because the pups were bred for themselves and often go to their breeder friends & contacts. Not everyone wants a shelter dog, and working/show breeders are sometimes breeding dogs not for the average family. I see nothing wrong w/ commercial breeding so long as the dogs are well cared for & the breeder is advancing their knowledge to improve their stock. This is a little known fact but commercial breeders attend breeder education seminars on a regular basis and generally have a better knowledge of their profession than many hobby or show breeders .....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,131 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
well I was going to quote but there is just too much to quote lol

YOu are right when you say I do not know enough about the USDA kennels, But that doesn't change the fact that I still don't like what I see.

you do seem to know more about the USDA so I want your opinions (this is not a bashing attempt I am honistly inquiring)

do they have any requirements that stop the breeding of a certain line of dogs if a bad hereditary problem comes up?

do they have any temperment testing

what are their standards in regard to a breeding quality dog?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
572 Posts
you do seem to know more about the USDA so I want your opinions (this is not a bashing attempt I am honistly inquiring)

do they have any requirements that stop the breeding of a certain line of dogs if a bad hereditary problem comes up?

do they have any temperment testing

what are their standards in regard to a breeding quality dog?

There are three seperate entities that inspect dog kennels of any size. State, USDA, and AKC (for 4 litters per year, even if co owned). The latter is checking for husbandry conditions but mainly recordkeeping practices.

The questions you're brought up are all ethical ones, and no, USDA has no bearing on this, although, of course, if they see an intact dog with a visible congenital or genetic defect, this is marked as a violation. I'd probably get a few violations myself, maybe even would have dogs confiscated because I have a 3 in ill health, including one old neutered male with spinal problems who walks like a cripple and two intact non breeding dogs who have a pronounced limp. One has a bad hunting injury to the leg, the other has spinal problems. That is a mark for violation. Anything in a USDA breeder's kennel that isn't the picture of health, will be written up and possibly confiscated. How many of us who don't even breed have old dogs or ones that aren't the easiest keepers and don't always look their best? If a breeder had one like that, they'd be facing confiscation. USDA inspects breeders with an iron fist.

As to dogs who produce health problems, most of the ones I know of are actually laying on the couch of a show breeder who home raises a handful of housepet dogs and breeds once every year or less. I can name dogs in the Top 5 of my breed who are notorious for producing conditions or are sired by well known dogs that pass on disc disease, epilepsy on a regular basis. Don't get me wrong, I don't lump all show breeders into this category and show myself, AND am endebted to show breeders in my breed for not just the advice, breeding stock, but the invaluable moral support they've given me. This isn't a jab @ show breeders. But the fact is that they are not innocent in sometimes knowingly breeding dogs who produce serious problems. You can't call unhealthy purebreds a commercial breeder problem. It's an ethics problem. I know breeders who breed for the pet market and their dogs are much higher quality than you'd think. In fact, I know many pet breeders placing more emphasis on helth/temperament because this is their livliehood - they want customers to be happy. They would not be breeding sick dogs or ones that produced problems that might tarnish their reputation or cause problems for them down the road. Sick, ill, poorly kept dogs do not breed well. Any smart commercial breeder keeps his dogs physically and mentally happy. Let me tell you, the slightest things prevent a bitch from coming in heat, so were these dogs really mistreated ... no pups. I had a GSD from a pet store that you'd never believe came from one. I had offers to buy her from serious working people, she had worked with sheep and was "too intense", and was a natural protection dog. If I ever get another GSD, I am looking up her USDA licensed breeder and begging him to sell me one of his pups.

As for health testing breeding stock, I believe OFA and the like is a farce. That being said, I do sometimes use them if I suspect a problem and have utilized both OFA and DNA testing on a dog who came from a bloodline that produced MLS. On that note, MLS is a non issue in field/commercially bred lines. It is a show breeder problem. Anyhow, no, I don't believe OFA is of much value. Most genetic defects show some sign or can be diagnosed by a competent Vet. As for me, I have culled dogs on suspicion of problems and have even diagnosed murmurs with my bare hands. Where was the need for OFA? My pups are incredably healthy, hardy, genetically sound. If OFA or similar screenings actually worked, mitrial valve disease could have been bred out of Cavaliers, GSDs would not be plagued by HD after having been OFA tested for some 40 years now, etc. I think DNA tests are more valuable as they identify carriers and prevent affecteds from cropping up. Genetic disease is not so simple as breeding two unaffected dogs and expecting a litter of unaffected pups. Polygenetic issues are the bane of any breeder's existance and occur in the best of bloodlines. There are no tests for polygenetic problems, however, so OFA'ing just means your dog is not affected, which amounts to little in a long term breeding program. It's the recessives and polygenetics that kill a breeding program, and the best breeders have dogs that produce problems. No one is calling for their dogs to be inspected, tho.
Another thing - my breed, field and show, is, for the most part, untested. We have most show breeders utilizing MLS DNA tests, but different than OFA. Yet, save for two problems (disc disease, epilepsy) that have no screening test anyway, Beagles remain healthy and hardy. It's a bad joke, but I always say the atomic bomb could go off, and there would be roaches and Beagles, they are that tough and hardy. Yet little to no OFA testing in my bloodlines and breeding stock.

On that note, what would you base as a standard for a breeding quality dog? This is so subjective it can vary drastically even among two breeders who are both breeding for the show ring but have dramatically different interpretations of the standard and different taste in looks. With working dogs, the structure and function of the dog can vary from kennel to kennel. In my breed a good field breeder will be breeding for the country their hounds run in, so my quality is another's junk and vice versa. I hardly think show standards alone make a quality dog, the best producer I own will never set foot in the show ring, nor will she be trialed again. She's not titled or OFA'd. She's my own interpretation of quality in the breed. What if my inspector thought she didn't fit the Standard well enough for his taste? Should I cull her? Another breeder I know breeding for dual purpose as well is keeping back dogs I'd cull, and culling dogs I'd KILL for :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
I'm not going to read all that non sense all I have to say Puppy Mill is a disgusting breeding operation. I know the years of recovering those dogs receive when they're save. They never seen sky, grass, floors, sun. Once they are out they're afraid of everything. Lets lock you up in a solitude prison w/o any human contact the only thing you eat is garbage unhealthy food.

Man I sure lost a whole respect for you! It takes lot of knowing about someone opinion on PM and this has really show how much you really feel about the topic
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
572 Posts
I'm not going to read all that non sense all I have to say Puppy Mill is a disgusting breeding operation. I know the years of recovering those dogs receive when they're save. They never seen sky, grass, floors, sun. Once they are out they're afraid of everything. Lets lock you up in a solitude prison w/o any human contact the only thing you eat is garbage unhealthy food.

Man I sure lost a whole respect for you! It takes lot of knowing about someone opinion on PM and this has really show how much you really feel about the topic


How do you know THESE dogs are unsocialized, have had no human contact, never touched grass, etc? I have seen the dogs coming out of baaaad operations that were in horrible physical/mental shape and know breeders personally who raise dogs like this and their dogs are butt waggin' happy animals who have exercise time for several hours per day. Breeders like this are doing this as a profession. They are with their dogs literally 24/7, there is always something to be done in teh kennel. AND they have hired kennel help who are cleaning, socializing dogs on a daily basis or at least several times a week. They are not unaccustomed to the human touch. You are giving me examples of animal abusing operations and making the blanket statement that ALL commercial breeders are somehow dog abusers. The legislation PETA is pushing down their throats is forcing them to raise dogs in such a manner, all dogs need to be in a marked run or cage, no dog can be out of it's designated area or big fat violation. Actually if the USDA reguations were slacked we'd see even better conditions, because breeders could use wood platforms for runs, have several dogs in an exercise run at one time, eliminating the need for cages. I don't like to see an entire category of breeder smeared on the basis of propoganda. I am not stupid, I know there are abusive ones, but this husbandry practice is required by USDA and is not determintal to the dogs in and of itself.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,421 Posts
I'd like to you to prove! If you can guarantee a healthy fit puppy comes out of Puppy Mill and it's butt is waggin greets .. Only human contact they get are grab by their throats, shoving a pipe down their throats to stop them from barking. I think USDA is bunch of shit IMO
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top