A dog & canine forum. DogBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » DogBanter forum » Dog forums » Dog rescue
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

rescue/shelter VS. Breeder



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 14th 03, 03:47 PM
Kim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default rescue/shelter VS. Breeder

I am torn here, as I have posted earlier, We are looking for a dog/puppy to
bring home. I had previously decided that adopting a dog/puppy from a
shelter would be the best route, mainly because I feel so bad about them
being there in the first place...But...with all the stories I have heard
about the way dogs/puppies are treated at a breeders, aren't they the ones
we should feel sorry for? Most shelters now-days are non-kill, meaning dogs
can stay until they find a home or die a natural death. These puppies and
dogs at the breeder have no such luck. I know the point that anti-breeders
are trying to get across is that we should not help the mean people profit
from the way they treat the poor little things, but if I get a puppy out of
that situation, isn't the good outweighing the bad?
Any thoughts?

Kim


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 10/9/2003


  #2  
Old October 14th 03, 04:07 PM
Suja
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Kim wrote:

we should feel sorry for? Most shelters now-days are non-kill, meaning dogs
can stay until they find a home or die a natural death.


Not true at all. While there are no-kill shelters out there, I would
most definitely not say that "most" of the shelters are no-kill. If
they were, we wouldn't be killing 5-6 million pets each year. For just
one example of all the dogs (and pups) waiting for homes and will get
euthanized if one can't be found, try the 'Pet List' at
indyhusky.petfinder.com. I check this link regularly, and it isn't at
all unusual to find 'Godspeed' next to the name of a particular dog.
Many, many times, the dog that was PTS is less than 6 months old.

These puppies and
dogs at the breeder have no such luck. I know the point that anti-breeders
are trying to get across is that we should not help the mean people profit
from the way they treat the poor little things, but if I get a puppy out of
that situation, isn't the good outweighing the bad?


Look at it another way. Bad breeder out to make a buck has a litter of
6 that he needs to get rid of. People who are looking, are looking for
responsible breeders and choose not to buy these puppies. The pups are
getting older, not so cute any more, and the breeder is spending money
keeping them fed. At some point, he'll either give them away for free
or dump them in a shelter. Since there is no money in this breeding
thing, decides not to breed again. It may be a little tough on this
litter of puppies, but the poor mom who would otherwise be bred at every
cycle (twice a year) benefits. The unborn pups who would otherwise end
up in completely unscreened homes where they will have to put up with
whatever kind of treatment is meted out to them benefits. And the human
who was willing to make the life of his bitch miserable, produce puppies
with no regard for their health and well being just so he could make a
buck does not. To me, this situation is better than the one you had
previously outlined. And, you can extrapolate this to the large scale
breeders (puppy mills) as well.

If all the people with a good heart just stopped giving these people a
motive (money) to keep up with their shoddy breeding practices, the pet
overpopulation problem would be significantly reduced, and the lives of
the dog population in general would be better.

Suja

  #3  
Old October 14th 03, 04:07 PM
Suja
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Kim wrote:

we should feel sorry for? Most shelters now-days are non-kill, meaning dogs
can stay until they find a home or die a natural death.


Not true at all. While there are no-kill shelters out there, I would
most definitely not say that "most" of the shelters are no-kill. If
they were, we wouldn't be killing 5-6 million pets each year. For just
one example of all the dogs (and pups) waiting for homes and will get
euthanized if one can't be found, try the 'Pet List' at
indyhusky.petfinder.com. I check this link regularly, and it isn't at
all unusual to find 'Godspeed' next to the name of a particular dog.
Many, many times, the dog that was PTS is less than 6 months old.

These puppies and
dogs at the breeder have no such luck. I know the point that anti-breeders
are trying to get across is that we should not help the mean people profit
from the way they treat the poor little things, but if I get a puppy out of
that situation, isn't the good outweighing the bad?


Look at it another way. Bad breeder out to make a buck has a litter of
6 that he needs to get rid of. People who are looking, are looking for
responsible breeders and choose not to buy these puppies. The pups are
getting older, not so cute any more, and the breeder is spending money
keeping them fed. At some point, he'll either give them away for free
or dump them in a shelter. Since there is no money in this breeding
thing, decides not to breed again. It may be a little tough on this
litter of puppies, but the poor mom who would otherwise be bred at every
cycle (twice a year) benefits. The unborn pups who would otherwise end
up in completely unscreened homes where they will have to put up with
whatever kind of treatment is meted out to them benefits. And the human
who was willing to make the life of his bitch miserable, produce puppies
with no regard for their health and well being just so he could make a
buck does not. To me, this situation is better than the one you had
previously outlined. And, you can extrapolate this to the large scale
breeders (puppy mills) as well.

If all the people with a good heart just stopped giving these people a
motive (money) to keep up with their shoddy breeding practices, the pet
overpopulation problem would be significantly reduced, and the lives of
the dog population in general would be better.

Suja

  #4  
Old October 14th 03, 04:07 PM
Suja
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Kim wrote:

we should feel sorry for? Most shelters now-days are non-kill, meaning dogs
can stay until they find a home or die a natural death.


Not true at all. While there are no-kill shelters out there, I would
most definitely not say that "most" of the shelters are no-kill. If
they were, we wouldn't be killing 5-6 million pets each year. For just
one example of all the dogs (and pups) waiting for homes and will get
euthanized if one can't be found, try the 'Pet List' at
indyhusky.petfinder.com. I check this link regularly, and it isn't at
all unusual to find 'Godspeed' next to the name of a particular dog.
Many, many times, the dog that was PTS is less than 6 months old.

These puppies and
dogs at the breeder have no such luck. I know the point that anti-breeders
are trying to get across is that we should not help the mean people profit
from the way they treat the poor little things, but if I get a puppy out of
that situation, isn't the good outweighing the bad?


Look at it another way. Bad breeder out to make a buck has a litter of
6 that he needs to get rid of. People who are looking, are looking for
responsible breeders and choose not to buy these puppies. The pups are
getting older, not so cute any more, and the breeder is spending money
keeping them fed. At some point, he'll either give them away for free
or dump them in a shelter. Since there is no money in this breeding
thing, decides not to breed again. It may be a little tough on this
litter of puppies, but the poor mom who would otherwise be bred at every
cycle (twice a year) benefits. The unborn pups who would otherwise end
up in completely unscreened homes where they will have to put up with
whatever kind of treatment is meted out to them benefits. And the human
who was willing to make the life of his bitch miserable, produce puppies
with no regard for their health and well being just so he could make a
buck does not. To me, this situation is better than the one you had
previously outlined. And, you can extrapolate this to the large scale
breeders (puppy mills) as well.

If all the people with a good heart just stopped giving these people a
motive (money) to keep up with their shoddy breeding practices, the pet
overpopulation problem would be significantly reduced, and the lives of
the dog population in general would be better.

Suja

  #5  
Old October 14th 03, 05:54 PM
Sunflower
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kim" wrote in message
...
I am torn here, as I have posted earlier, We are looking for a dog/puppy

to
bring home. I had previously decided that adopting a dog/puppy from a
shelter would be the best route, mainly because I feel so bad about them
being there in the first place...But...with all the stories I have heard
about the way dogs/puppies are treated at a breeders, aren't they the ones
we should feel sorry for? Most shelters now-days are non-kill, meaning

dogs
can stay until they find a home or die a natural death. These puppies and
dogs at the breeder have no such luck. I know the point that anti-breeders
are trying to get across is that we should not help the mean people profit
from the way they treat the poor little things, but if I get a puppy out

of
that situation, isn't the good outweighing the bad?
Any thoughts?

Kim


Reinforcing the money motive is NOT the way to get back yard breeders to
stop. Don't buy from them. If you are interested in a specific breed, there
are usually rescue groups devoted to them that have dogs available, many of
them from puppy mills and that have the associated health problems to prove
it. And, unless you are looking for a specific high quality purebred for
showing, why the "need" for a purebred anyway? Shelter mutts can provide
just as good a family companionship as a purebred, and in the end, isn't it
far more important to add a family member to your home that works with your
own family dynamics rather than having a piece of paper that tells you who
the dog's parents were?

"No-kill" is a bit of a misnomer. All it means is that those particular
animals in that particular shelter won't be euthanized as long as they are
deemed "adoptible" which means that the rescue cannot take in other animals
while one is still occupying that space. What happens when a energetic lab
mix has been in caged in a no-kill for a year and becomes psychotic? He is
deemed "unadoptible" and euthanized. What happens to the perfectly healthy
and social golden mix found on the side of the road looking for help? Where
does that needy animal go in the year that the unadoptible dog was taking up
space in the no-kill? To the kill shelter or to be left abandoned by the
side of the road. No-kills are great for *some* animals, but overall, the
homeless pet population isn't as well served by them as the publicity would
have you believe. The better, smarter shelters may still euthanize so as to
be able to help a larger number of animals, but they are also out there
making spay/neuter a priority so as to really have an impact at the source
of the problem. The big problem is that they haven't learned how to make
cleaning up other people's messes sound pretty, and the no-kills receive all
of the publicity and funding.

Sunflower


  #6  
Old October 14th 03, 05:54 PM
Sunflower
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kim" wrote in message
...
I am torn here, as I have posted earlier, We are looking for a dog/puppy

to
bring home. I had previously decided that adopting a dog/puppy from a
shelter would be the best route, mainly because I feel so bad about them
being there in the first place...But...with all the stories I have heard
about the way dogs/puppies are treated at a breeders, aren't they the ones
we should feel sorry for? Most shelters now-days are non-kill, meaning

dogs
can stay until they find a home or die a natural death. These puppies and
dogs at the breeder have no such luck. I know the point that anti-breeders
are trying to get across is that we should not help the mean people profit
from the way they treat the poor little things, but if I get a puppy out

of
that situation, isn't the good outweighing the bad?
Any thoughts?

Kim


Reinforcing the money motive is NOT the way to get back yard breeders to
stop. Don't buy from them. If you are interested in a specific breed, there
are usually rescue groups devoted to them that have dogs available, many of
them from puppy mills and that have the associated health problems to prove
it. And, unless you are looking for a specific high quality purebred for
showing, why the "need" for a purebred anyway? Shelter mutts can provide
just as good a family companionship as a purebred, and in the end, isn't it
far more important to add a family member to your home that works with your
own family dynamics rather than having a piece of paper that tells you who
the dog's parents were?

"No-kill" is a bit of a misnomer. All it means is that those particular
animals in that particular shelter won't be euthanized as long as they are
deemed "adoptible" which means that the rescue cannot take in other animals
while one is still occupying that space. What happens when a energetic lab
mix has been in caged in a no-kill for a year and becomes psychotic? He is
deemed "unadoptible" and euthanized. What happens to the perfectly healthy
and social golden mix found on the side of the road looking for help? Where
does that needy animal go in the year that the unadoptible dog was taking up
space in the no-kill? To the kill shelter or to be left abandoned by the
side of the road. No-kills are great for *some* animals, but overall, the
homeless pet population isn't as well served by them as the publicity would
have you believe. The better, smarter shelters may still euthanize so as to
be able to help a larger number of animals, but they are also out there
making spay/neuter a priority so as to really have an impact at the source
of the problem. The big problem is that they haven't learned how to make
cleaning up other people's messes sound pretty, and the no-kills receive all
of the publicity and funding.

Sunflower


  #7  
Old October 14th 03, 05:54 PM
Sunflower
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kim" wrote in message
...
I am torn here, as I have posted earlier, We are looking for a dog/puppy

to
bring home. I had previously decided that adopting a dog/puppy from a
shelter would be the best route, mainly because I feel so bad about them
being there in the first place...But...with all the stories I have heard
about the way dogs/puppies are treated at a breeders, aren't they the ones
we should feel sorry for? Most shelters now-days are non-kill, meaning

dogs
can stay until they find a home or die a natural death. These puppies and
dogs at the breeder have no such luck. I know the point that anti-breeders
are trying to get across is that we should not help the mean people profit
from the way they treat the poor little things, but if I get a puppy out

of
that situation, isn't the good outweighing the bad?
Any thoughts?

Kim


Reinforcing the money motive is NOT the way to get back yard breeders to
stop. Don't buy from them. If you are interested in a specific breed, there
are usually rescue groups devoted to them that have dogs available, many of
them from puppy mills and that have the associated health problems to prove
it. And, unless you are looking for a specific high quality purebred for
showing, why the "need" for a purebred anyway? Shelter mutts can provide
just as good a family companionship as a purebred, and in the end, isn't it
far more important to add a family member to your home that works with your
own family dynamics rather than having a piece of paper that tells you who
the dog's parents were?

"No-kill" is a bit of a misnomer. All it means is that those particular
animals in that particular shelter won't be euthanized as long as they are
deemed "adoptible" which means that the rescue cannot take in other animals
while one is still occupying that space. What happens when a energetic lab
mix has been in caged in a no-kill for a year and becomes psychotic? He is
deemed "unadoptible" and euthanized. What happens to the perfectly healthy
and social golden mix found on the side of the road looking for help? Where
does that needy animal go in the year that the unadoptible dog was taking up
space in the no-kill? To the kill shelter or to be left abandoned by the
side of the road. No-kills are great for *some* animals, but overall, the
homeless pet population isn't as well served by them as the publicity would
have you believe. The better, smarter shelters may still euthanize so as to
be able to help a larger number of animals, but they are also out there
making spay/neuter a priority so as to really have an impact at the source
of the problem. The big problem is that they haven't learned how to make
cleaning up other people's messes sound pretty, and the no-kills receive all
of the publicity and funding.

Sunflower


  #8  
Old October 14th 03, 06:06 PM
montana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Sunflower" wrote:

in the end, isn't it
far more important to add a family member to your home that works with your
own family dynamics rather than having a piece of paper that tells you who
the dog's parents were?


I don't believe that's necessarily true. There's nothing wrong with
mutts or rescue dogs, but there are many reasons to get a dog from a
responsible breeder. I'm not talking about breeders who don't bother
with pesky things like genetic testing, I'm talking about breeders who
are breeding for the benefit of the breed. There's nothing wrong with
wanting a particular breed of dog. As for knowing who the parents (and
several generations back) goes, one good reason to know is to understand
whether the line has been tested for genetic problems and what the
outcome, over generations, has been.

There's nothing wrong with wanting a particular breed of dog and wanting
to find the healthiest, best representative of that breed.
  #9  
Old October 14th 03, 06:06 PM
montana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Sunflower" wrote:

in the end, isn't it
far more important to add a family member to your home that works with your
own family dynamics rather than having a piece of paper that tells you who
the dog's parents were?


I don't believe that's necessarily true. There's nothing wrong with
mutts or rescue dogs, but there are many reasons to get a dog from a
responsible breeder. I'm not talking about breeders who don't bother
with pesky things like genetic testing, I'm talking about breeders who
are breeding for the benefit of the breed. There's nothing wrong with
wanting a particular breed of dog. As for knowing who the parents (and
several generations back) goes, one good reason to know is to understand
whether the line has been tested for genetic problems and what the
outcome, over generations, has been.

There's nothing wrong with wanting a particular breed of dog and wanting
to find the healthiest, best representative of that breed.
  #10  
Old October 14th 03, 06:06 PM
montana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
"Sunflower" wrote:

in the end, isn't it
far more important to add a family member to your home that works with your
own family dynamics rather than having a piece of paper that tells you who
the dog's parents were?


I don't believe that's necessarily true. There's nothing wrong with
mutts or rescue dogs, but there are many reasons to get a dog from a
responsible breeder. I'm not talking about breeders who don't bother
with pesky things like genetic testing, I'm talking about breeders who
are breeding for the benefit of the breed. There's nothing wrong with
wanting a particular breed of dog. As for knowing who the parents (and
several generations back) goes, one good reason to know is to understand
whether the line has been tested for genetic problems and what the
outcome, over generations, has been.

There's nothing wrong with wanting a particular breed of dog and wanting
to find the healthiest, best representative of that breed.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How To Chose a Breeder C. L. Dog breeds 9 December 3rd 03 12:15 PM
Irish Setters for Sale Traditional Irish Setters Dog breeds 1 October 22nd 03 09:09 PM
Offended a Breeder Tara O. Dog breeds 50 August 19th 03 08:31 PM
portugese Water dogs info Anthony Dog breeds 2 July 19th 03 12:48 AM
Breeder Fees: What's Resonable/Ethical? Andrea Dog breeds 11 July 12th 03 08:29 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 (Unregistered)
Copyright 2004-2019 DogBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.