pet connection

113 Comments »

1. The kindest thing I can say about Oprah on this issue is that she may be very dumb. She went to a breeder’s facility to walk around the DOZENS of WHITE Golden Retriever puppies and take her pick, eventually choosing three. Maybe she did not know that responsible breeders do not normally have dozens of puppies available (especially not WHITE GRs), buyers are not normally allowed to choose their pup (but rather the breeder matches the right puppy personality to the right owner) and normally they do not sell three pups to one buyer.
   Her doing a show on puppy mills is certainly interesting.

   Comment by slt — April 2, 2008 @ 7:47 am

2. Gina, I think you might be over-analysing that statement. It does in fact make a distinction between puppy mills and breeders. She doesn’t appear to be saying that she did a bad thing in the past by buying from breeders.

   And I can well imagine that after being exposed to so much of the horror of puppy mills, she might now feel a strong inclination that, the next time she adds a dog to her household, it should be one of the unfortunates that are rescuable without feeding the evil people who who create them, rather than another pup who’ll be just fine, regardless of whether it’s with her or someone else. She’s had the fun and satisfaction of puppies from breeders several times now; maybe it’s time for her to have the fun and satisfaction of a shelter rescue.

   (This defense of Oprah subject to revision or revocation, depending on what she says on the subject on Friday’s show.)

   Comment by Lis — April 2, 2008 @ 7:58 am

3. Um, if SLT is accurate in describing how Oprah got her goldens, maybe I want to withdraw my defense pending evidence that she’s learned something since.

   Comment by Lis — April 2, 2008 @ 8:11 am

4. Anyone interested can check it out and decide for themselves:
   http://www.oprah.com/tows/slid....._201.jhtml

   This is a multipage slideshow about getting the pups. There is also a link at the bottom to a video of her getting the pups titled “Who can resist those puppy eyes?”

   Comment by slt — April 2, 2008 @ 8:26 am

5. We’ll just have to watch … which I always do anyway. I love her. :)

   Comment by Gina Spadafori — April 2, 2008 @ 8:33 am

6. Wasn’t she a breeder herself? I clearly remember a show that they filmed at her house in Connecticut where there were lots of golden retrievers and in that same show she gave one the pups she bred to a little boy.
   that show hit me wrong at the time as she lived in a high rise with her cockers in chicago….
   I always kind of wondered about that, and they way she called them her dogs, when clearly they lived with caretakers…
   Still I am glad she is doing a puppy mill show…

   Comment by nancy freedman-smith — April 2, 2008 @ 8:33 am

7. I dunno - I may come out closer to “go to the pound” than you do Gina. When it comes to dogs (and most things) I am against coercion and for persuassion. Oprah is doing the right thing to persuade, and if she’s saying that a lot of dog breeders are in it for ego and money she is not wrong about that, is she? Each to their own, of course, but let’s not throw out the truth just because it smells bad. Ugly is ugly even if it’s family.

   If all you want a dog for is to do general dog stuff (i.e. a companion, a little agility, some frisbee, romantic walks on the beach, etc.) then a pound/shelter dog will do as well as a dog from a fancy breeder. That’s 100% true. Now if you want a bird dog for hunting, that’s something different. If you course rabbits or coyotes, that’s something different. If you herd sheep that’s something different. But if you just want a pet for kitchen and garden, and to greet you at home? Most shelter dogs do that job very fine. I know — I’ve had quite a few that fit that mold. I know you have too :)

   P.

   Comment by PBurns — April 2, 2008 @ 9:01 am

8. (Will not recite again the reasons why, even though I wanted “just a pet”, a shelter dog was not a practical choice for me, who is after all the person I was getting the pet for.)

   Comment by Lis — April 2, 2008 @ 9:07 am

9. Patrick, you’re absolutely right. As usual. :)

   “Ugly is ugly even if it’s family.”

   You been talking to my brother?

   Comment by Gina Spadafori — April 2, 2008 @ 9:22 am

10. Oprah always strikes me as being superficial and under-informed on a lot of issues which is why I almost never watch her show. I’ll watch this one, though.

    I think the message shouldn’t be about avoiding breeders - gee, the ones I know won’t even talk to you without a personal reference and they care about their dogs for life - but to urge people to not buy dogs at pet shops, fleamarkets, over the internet etc. It would also be helpful to point out that all these weird little mixes, the so-called ‘hybrids’ (LOL) are overpriced, of uncertain ancestry and husbandry and are readily available at the SPCA.

    Ethical breeders lose money, they don’t make money.

    Mutts are great, dogs are dogs but why would anyone pay hundreds of dollars for a thoughtlessly bred mutt if they just want a pet?

    Turning people off the whole retail thing would be much more effective than tarring all breeders with the same brush and would also sidestep the AR agenda.

    Comment by Caveat — April 2, 2008 @ 9:55 am

11. Let’s just hope she’s not another Ellen DeG who is a complete idiot when it comes to getting dogs and her appropriateness for them. The last dust up is only the beginning. She actually thought she could handle a Border Collie! Ugh.

    And that speaks against Patrick’s comment, “If all you want a dog for is to do general dog stuff (i.e. a companion, a little agility, some frisbee, romantic walks on the beach, etc.) then a pound/shelter dog will do as well as a dog from a fancy breeder. That’s 100% true.”

    That’s not 100% true. That’s not true at all. People who are likely to go above and beyond with their dogs are more capable of remolding a shelter dog than the “all you want” owner.

    How can you possibly be so critical of the poor ideas and poor practices of shelters and then think that the dogs that go through them aren’t harmed by that contact?

    What is true is that many dogs at shelters have been given a great disservice by their former owners and by the shelter experience. Poor training, poor socialization, and extended exposure to people who believe in things like temperament tests. Those are realities that shelter adopters might very well have to deal with.

    Above average owners can repair and polish damaged goods. Risky middle of the road owners are, IMO, better served by getting a higher quality dog to start with that comes socialized and with every benefit from a hand-holding breeder instead of a judgmental and overburdened shelter.

    Comment by Christopher — April 2, 2008 @ 1:09 pm

12. Not only is slt right on how she got the 3 golden retrievers, but Oprah been very public about hiring people to care for her dogs.

    Must be nice….

    I’m not sure which is better though, having someone to take care of the day to day care, OR being the person paid to do it.

    Comment by Kathleen Weaver — April 2, 2008 @ 2:04 pm

13. Gina-

    Since you are the syndicated pet column person, maybe Oprah’s folks would let you have a preview of the Friday “documentary”. That way you might be able to review it and provide some appropriate comments to them before it is aired….

    Comment by glock — April 2, 2008 @ 2:15 pm

14. “Sophie gave me 13 years of unconditional love. She was a true love in my life,”

    Looks like another kick in the ribs for Steadman. Poor guy. Maybe Oprah will let him sleep at the foot of the bed now.

    Comment by Larry — April 2, 2008 @ 2:24 pm

15. Oprah has the help change the sheets every day (she likes the feel of fresh bedding) so maybe Steadman can sleep there, for now.

    Comment by Colorado Transplant — April 2, 2008 @ 2:52 pm

16. Well, you know it’s virtually dogma with some segments of the rescue community that all breeders are all bad, all the time. You’ve read the expression: “don’t buy while shelter dogs die”? And who always gets blamed for “overpopulation” ? Who is the leading supporters of the various MSN initiatives?

    Oprah is just following the lead of her advisors. They know that the “in” thing is to promote shelters and to bash breeders.

    Comment by EmilyS — April 2, 2008 @ 3:29 pm

17. Nancy was right… there was a show where she had people write in as to why they wanted a puppy and the winners would get one of the puppies from her two dogs. Which besides being littermates, I am sure never had any health clearances. You want to know WHERE she got those Goldens??
    http://www.geocities.com/Area5.....ahPups.htm

    Comment by Ginger — April 2, 2008 @ 3:48 pm

18. Oprah, unfortunately, is seldom aware of canine issues. She had the “rescue” that buys puppy milled dogs on her show, and was saying how great they are. that is not actually rescue. That is buying puppy milled dogs and contributing to millers. That “rescue” now brings in 1/2 million. Very few “rescues” will bring in huge profits. Additionally, she knows nothing about animal rights, but as stated by Emily—they told her what to say. And if she ever DID get a pound dog, I guarantee it won’t be a run of the mill male juvenile pitbull mix with bad habits. She doesn’t have TIME for a dog. What she should do, is make the pitch for the dogs that are being rehabilitated from MV. Now that would be some progress.

    Comment by S Kennedy — April 2, 2008 @ 4:19 pm

19. I’m sorry… but who cares WHY Oprah is doing this show? The important thing is that she’s doing it and shedding light on a HUGE problem! Even if she doesn’t care about the cause, even if her dogs were puppy mills dogs- focus on the positive side that she is exposing this horrible business, hopefully weakening their business and strengthening the adoptions of shelter dogs and/or responsible breeders.

    Comment by LM — April 2, 2008 @ 5:27 pm

20. I am happy that Oprah is doing a show on puppy mills—her following is large and it may at long last sink in. However, as a rescuer, I have to say that one does not “adopt” a dog from a breeder. One buys a dog. Adoption is (in my view) saved for the babies who are in rescue or in shelters. I don’t have much of an argument with hobby breeders although I think often their dogs aren’t so much better off that puppy mill dogs other than they get better health care and fewer breedings. But many, if not most, are breeding more to improve the breed than cash in on the pups. I hope that Oprah’s show will open the doors and windows so that the general public finally gets what a puppy mill operation looks like and understands 100% that pet store dogs are puppy mill dogs.

    Comment by Cathy B — April 2, 2008 @ 5:28 pm

21. I’m glad she’d doing a puppy-mill show, too. Delighted, in fact. After all, I’ve been writing about puppy mills for more than 20 years, going back to the days of Bob Baker leading the investigations for the HSUS.

    Anything to shed the light on these dark corners is very important, because the only thing that will end the commercial puppy trade is people deciding to stop buying from pet stores and internet sites.

    That said, I have spent my life encouraging people to do their research before taking on a pet, and the same in caring for one, whether it’s health care, feeding or training.

    Simple sound-bite solutions to complex issues are not what we’re about here.

    Disagree with us? Love it. But bring something to the table that shows you’ve done a little more thinking that merely reading a brochure handed out by PETA or the National Animal Interest Alliance and spouting off the speaking points.

    We can work together towards solutions, and they’re closer than we think. But you gotta open your mind and think to get there.

    Comment by Gina Spadafori — April 2, 2008 @ 7:26 pm

22. No where in her statement does Oprah bash breeders, she just says she will only ever adopt from a shelter in the future.

    I feel the same way, I only rescue. I would never buy a puppy with all the unwanted dogs out there already.

    I’m not passing judgement on reputable breeders or the people that buy from breeders and neither did Oprah with her quoted statement above. Perhaps you could provide a relevant quote where she does bash breeders before you go saying something like this?

    Comment by Becky — April 3, 2008 @ 7:19 am

23. i love Oprah, but I sometimes she reacts to an idea rather an acts upon it in a good way. I like many of her special programs, can’t say that I am goint to like this one. I do think that puppy mills must be shown for what they are and destroyed.

    Comment by tesha — April 3, 2008 @ 12:51 pm

24. Oprah is big on current causes, that being the spaying and neutering of ALL dogs. What do you want to bet that that is the topic of her show and not puppy mills.
    I breed Saint Bernards most of which are sold before they are ever born. I breed a litter every couple of years, my puppies are hand raised by me for the two months after their birth. Puppy mills are not the same, they are baby factories nothing more, nothing less.

    Comment by Lynnie — April 3, 2008 @ 2:04 pm

25. I wonder if she’ll ever talk about the practice of US shelters importing puppies from foreign countries to help fill the demand? Probably not, since PETA and HSUS are unlikely to want that information out there to the average American.

    Comment by Susan — April 3, 2008 @ 2:44 pm

26. I found a bulletin board discussion of her show tomorrow. I haven’t made it through all 33 (so far!) pages yet, but I’ve already found several posters emphasizing the difference between puppy mills and Responsible Breeders:

    http://www.oprah.com/community.....p;tstart=0

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 3, 2008 @ 2:57 pm

27. I just found out that Wayne Pacelle is supposed to be her guest on the show.

    Hoo boy, here we go.

    Lynne, I think you will be proved right, since Mr Mandatory Spay/Neuter is all about AR, not animal welfare.

    I keep wondering how that investigation in Louisiana is going regarding the conduct of H$U$ during Katrina. I heard some serious horror stories from people who were on the front lines about what was going on at Gonzales.

    Comment by Caveat — April 3, 2008 @ 3:31 pm

28. Ah yes - the obligatory statement by one of The Big Two.

    Gee - I wonder if the invitation went out to Ingrid, as well . . . . . . .

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 3, 2008 @ 3:39 pm

29. Can’t wait to have this show on the air!! Good Job Oprah!!!!!!!!!!

    Comment by Sabina — April 3, 2008 @ 4:59 pm

30. The real tragedy here is that most people are so self absorbed today they don’t have a clue about puppy mills or don’t care to hear about it because it upsets them too much. Also, if it’s for sale, they’ll buy it with no remorse.

    There needs to be more education about puppy mills and the overall welfare of animals at the community level, schools, in civic discussion, government, local news and so forth.

    I hope Oprah does the thousands of dying and soon-to-die females justice. They deserve it.

    Comment by Donna D — April 3, 2008 @ 8:37 pm

31. Hi I would like to say to Oprah , please visit a show breeders home / or a reputable breeders home.. things are different than where youwent when the breeder truly understands what showing and breeding quality means.. You are more than welcome to come to my home and see my small kennel and breeding program.. and I am sure there are enough other breeders would tell you the same… Tersa

    Comment by Tersa Lyn Haynes — April 4, 2008 @ 11:58 am

32. You all need to unbunch your panties - I just watched the show and she was careful to point out that not all breeders are the same. Before you start judging her, watch the damn show first. Then you can make all the ASSumptions you want to.

    Comment by Lorie — April 4, 2008 @ 2:40 pm

33. Puppy mill expose is not new. However it tends to confuse people into thinking that every single dog born a milled dog,is junk. And that is not the case. Not every single mill dog is bad. Of course they may have a higher % that have problems if they do not care about their line. But there is no guarantee that even home bred pups or show dogs will turn out great, health-wise. So when people keep protesting milled dogs, they should realize that mandated altering is PAVING the way for MORE milled dogs. It’s simple. And I am not quoting anyone. It’s not that difficult to figure out. If all hobby breeders are out, and all milled dogs are out, just what dogs are left? Third world strays? Peta would be in HEAVEN—because the No Birth Nation a la Peta would be here.

    Comment by S Kennedy — April 4, 2008 @ 2:41 pm

34. Oprah’s show didn’t present the milled dogs as “junk”; on the contrary, it emphasized that even the dogs who have spend their lives confined to mills, can be rehabilitated and become good pets.

    They also, while pushing shelters and rescues as the first choice for getting a dog, also talked about responsible breeders, and some of what distinguishes a responsible breeder from a miller.

    Nor did they push mandatory spay/neuter; Oprah and her guests urged viewers to choose to speuter their own pets.

    Comment by Lis — April 4, 2008 @ 2:51 pm

35. Have you ever seen the poem about the “Rainbow Bridge”,? It has been very comforting to me over the years……………And your Sophie is at the Bridge waiting. Running free and healthy. My dogs are there too playing with her and making her feel at “home”.

    Log on to the Rainbow Bridge website and you will see the poem and read for yourself.
    Carol

    Comment by Carol Jorczak — April 4, 2008 @ 4:16 pm

36. Oprah did not bash breeders. Even Wayne, the president of HSUS, said to adopt from a shelter, rescue group, or responsible breeder. She even gave the AKC an opportunity to release a statement on the show, and they did. Personally, I am 100% against breeding dogs, when there are so many in shelters that need loving homes and so many that end up being put down. It’s heartbreaking. But Oprah chose to take the safe route with the show in saying that if you MUST have a certain kind of dog, at least visit the breeder. I think that was smart. I commend her.

    Comment by Carie — April 4, 2008 @ 4:38 pm

37. If you’re a responsible breeder, go for it. If you’re a responsible breeder, word of mouth will ensure a steady flow of customers. Why all the worry? Consumers consume.

    My brother and his wife are all gaga over their breeder for the past 13 years. They bought four dogs over the years with a good result. Shelter dogs aren’t good enough for them, they live in Scarsdale, NY. That’s just their mentality and probably the mentality of millions across the country. It’s designer.

    Call me crazy…I just don’t get it why anyone would want to impregnate an animal and put them through all that pain, time after time, anyway. But that’s me.

    With the puppy mills, torture and brutality go hand in hand. Those people are not human. How could it be legal? There has to be more pressure exactly like the campaign against the Trader Joe’s food retailer to stop selling eggs from hens confined to battery cages. The sale of any “live” stock, has to be strictly regulated. Write your elected officials and tell them so; they’re supposed to work for us!!!

    P.S. Since somebody mentioned Third World strays…check out the plight of the dogs in Ecuador. They are considered a nuisance and used as pinetas…go to the website for Stray from the Heart and read about the plight of Amigo Fiel Shelter.

    Comment by Donna D — April 4, 2008 @ 8:27 pm

38. Donna D - Responsible Breeders aren’t in it for the “customers”. But that’s the ONLY reason the puppy mills and commercial breeders are in it.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 4, 2008 @ 8:57 pm

39. Then what’s all the whining about that I’m reading here from the “responsible” breeders? If they’re not in it to make a living, then what’s all the fuss about?

    The average person can tell the difference between good practices and the disgusting pupply mills.

    Comment by Donna D — April 4, 2008 @ 10:14 pm

40. Then what’s all the whining about that I’m reading here from the “responsible” breeders? If they’re not in it to make a living, then what’s all the fuss about?

    Because they’re passionately, obsessively dedicated to the preservation and improvement of their chosen breeds. No responsible breeder does or can or seeks to make a living from their breeding programs. It’s an expensive avocation and a sacred trust.

    Comment by Christie Keith — April 4, 2008 @ 11:26 pm

41. If you’re a responsible breeder, go for it. If you’re a responsible breeder, word of mouth will ensure a steady flow of customers.

    I don’t think you understand. Responsible hobby breeders don’t have any trouble finding people who want their puppies. The obstacles they face are punitive regulation and legislation that, masquerading as efforts to help shelter pets, instead crush and destroy breeding programs that have been developed over many generations.

    Comment by Christie Keith — April 4, 2008 @ 11:28 pm

42. Personally, I am 100% against breeding dogs, when there are so many in shelters that need loving homes and so many that end up being put down. It’s heartbreaking. But Oprah chose to take the safe route with the show in saying that if you MUST have a certain kind of dog, at least visit the breeder. I think that was smart. I commend her.

    Comment by Carie — April 4, 2008 @ 4:38 pm

    The dogs (and cats) that come from responsible breeders aren’t the ones crowding the shelters. And not everyone who wants “a dog” can provide a home for any dog, randomly selected. The different breeds exist because people need and want different things from dogs. My Chinese Crested is a great walking companion, but not a great candidate for cattle herding; the border collie I loved as a kid would be bouncing off the walls now and likely chewing everything in sight, out of sheer boredom and pent-up physical energy.

    Responsible breeders breed for love of the breed, and for love of their dogs. They breed few litters, breed only the best of their dogs, breed each bitch who is bred at all only a few times, they have homes lined up for all the puppies before they breed, they take the dog back at any time if the buyer can no longer keep it for any reason. There’d be very few dogs in shelters if everyone got their dogs from responsible breeders.

    Puppy millers breed for the market, solely for the money, and as Oprah’s show amply illustrated, don’t care anything about what their poor overbred victims are suffering.

    Shelters are cleaning up the mess made by puppy millers, backyard breeders, and people who just didn’t get around to fixing their pets in time. And, as was pointed out somewhere, not sure now if it was this comment thread or the other one, many of them could be doing a much better job than they’re currently doing. (Space can be a powerful reason for any individual shelter to feel it needs to euthanize animals; communities as a whole, though, can achieve a No Kill solution with good leadership.)

    Comment by Lis — April 5, 2008 @ 3:49 am

43. Donna D wrote:

    The average person can tell the difference between good practices and the disgusting pupply mills.

    Donna, the unfortunate truth is that “the average person” usually CANNOT tell the difference between a puppy from a good breeder and a puppy from a mill. This is because the average puppy buyer does NOT do the work to educate themselves as to the characteristics a particular breed SHOULD have. This sort of education is hard work; one needs to (at a minimum) read and understand the standard of the breed. The standard is a blueprint; it tells you the function & temperment of a breed, the size it should be, and all the characteristics that make a dog a recognizable example of that breed, such as color and hair type, body & head type, etc. Many breeds have a history going back thousands of years, yet are recognizable because the breed founders wrote a standard. The way a reputable breeder KNOWS that his or her dogs meet the standard is that they show them; in other words, the dogs they produce are JUDGED. When a person wanting a pet dog seeks a puppy of a particular breed, he or she probably has seen a picture in a book or on TV. Most often, beautiful purebred dogs in books or on TV were bred by show breeders, because these dogs LOOK THE WAY THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO. It is the picture of the dog in the book or on TV that the average puppy buyer has in mind when they set out to buy a pup: a beautiful Golden retriever or Cocker Spaniel or Dalmation. But the puppy mill breeder does not give a damn about the breed standard; he or she knows that the average puppy buyer has the ideal picture in mind and little idea of what sort of puppy will actually grow up to look & act like the breed it’s supposed to represent. Let me give you an example from my own breed, the Pomeranian. Adult Poms, as stated in the breed standard, should weigh between 3 and 7 pounds, with the ideal being 5 pounds. They have average litters of two puppies, certainly not a money-making proposition. Therefore, the puppy mill owners breed Poms of 20 to 30 pounds, because these easily have litters of six to eight pups. Puppy mill owners bank on the average puppy buyer NOT recognizing that the Pom pup in the pet store will grow up to be 30 pounds (I have heard of one pet store Pom that grew up to weigh 57 pounds). The average puppy buyer in the pet store has that beautiful picture lodged in their mind of the five-pound champion Pom. They neglect the fact that the eight-week-old Pom pup that the pet store sales clerk has handed them is ALREADY five pounds. Afterall, it looks small to them, and seems mighty cute. But when it grows up to be 30 pounds and has the uncertain looks & temperment that is the usual result of having been produced by a puppy mill, the average puppy buyer often ends up dumping in a pound or rescue. Or, if they love the dog, they may pay thousands of dollars at the vet, correcting such problems as bad stifles or heart problems, or other things bad breeders don’t give a fig about.

    The truth is: prospective puppy buyers need to do a lot of HARD work researching a particular breed before setting out to buy one. They need to educate themselves as to what the adult dog should look & act like, what a PUPPY should look & act like, and what problems may be inherent in the breed. Smart puppy buyers attend a few dog shows and talk to the breeders there. They don’t buy on impulse; they visit a number of breeders and look at as many puppies as they can before selecting one. THEY STAY OUT OF PET STORES!!!!! They don’t buy puppies listed in the local bargain-hunters guide. They DO call the national breed club (every breed has one) or the American Kennel Club and ask for a list of reputable breeders in the area. The AKC and national breed clubs also have lists of rescue organizations for particular breeds, if one has their heart set on a rescue.

    Unfortuately, MOST puppy buyers are NOT smart; they are impulsive and lazy. They DON’T do the necessary research; they just stop into the nearest Pet Express and buy whatever is in the cage labeled with the breed they want. This is what keeps puppy mills in business; they bank on the stupidity of the average puppy buyer.

    Comment by Miss_Marbles — April 5, 2008 @ 5:35 am

44. The real point of this story was to let people know that as Americans who see what cruelty is taking place in our country, it is up to us to turn off the spigot:
    -don’t support puppy mills by buying dogs at pet stores, flea markets or on-line, and be wary of newspaper ads. Be informed.
    -spay & neuter your pets, essential.
    -if the above two are done, there will still be a “lid for every pot”: well bred dogs, albeit expensive, for those who insist upon a certain type and hopefully a smaller number of shelter dogs made available by the owners change in circumstances and fewer unplanned litters.

    Oprah & company did a great job considering the scope of this problem and the time available.

    Comment by Maureen — April 5, 2008 @ 6:17 am

45. Comment by Lis — April 5, 2008 @ 3:49 am

    “Shelters are cleaning up the mess made by puppy millers, backyard breeders, and people who just didn’t get around to fixing their pets in time.”

    The other essential point - albeit a bit more subtle - is that those dogs you saw being euthanized on Oprah’s shows were NOT puppies. Those had been OWNED dogs. The significance here is that it is not *puppies* who mostly get euthanized. By and large, the puppies get adopted. Then later, the “human/animal bond” breaks down for some reason, and the - often young, rowdy adolescent - dog is returned to the shelter, possibly to die.

    Again, this doesn’t generally happen with dogs from Responsible Breeders, because first of all, Responsible Breeders take their dogs back if the home doesn’t work out. But also, Responsible Breeders function as an ongoing resource when the new owners come to “bumps in the road” - and they help the owners learn what to do to work with their dogs through the crazy times, so that the dog can remain in the home.

    Happily, a lot of shelters and rescues are starting to take a page from this book and offer ongoing counseling services and call-in “hotlines” and so on in addition to training classes for new owners. You see, saving dogs’ lives is not just about GETTING dogs into new homes. It’s also about KEEPING them there. Something BYBs and puppy mills don’t give a whit about, but that Responsible Breeders have been doing for a long, long time, and shelters and rescues are beginning to learn how to do more effectively.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 5, 2008 @ 6:46 am

46. Miss Marbles: if we can get people to avoid pet stores and sight unseen internet purchases we’ll have taken a huge step in the right direction. If you have a pet store in your area that selling puppies - go after them. Picket, boycott, hand out information on where the puppies likely come from. But please no threats or violence.

    You won’t eliminate the “I’d like my dog to have one litter cause she’s such a good dog” breeding, but even this is better than puppy millers because the dogs are being raised with a family and won’t have terrible physical and emotional problems from being raised in a caged environment. If you want to reduce the well-meaning but clueless ‘backyard’ breeder then promoting spay/neuter is the way to go.

    Shelters also need to do a better job at promoting their animals and get off their ‘you must be perfect to adopt from us’ position. The best thing I’ve seen good shelters do in the last few years is to categorize animals by personality and demeanor and help to match families (and individuals) to a animal that’s right for them.

    I think Oprah’s show is a watershed event. Hundred of thousands of people have had their eyes opened with graphic images of the horrible conditions that exist at puppy mills. I’m hoping that this show will help to motivate citizens who live in states like PA to raise hell with their state legislatures to ban these millers outright.

    Comment by 2CatMom — April 5, 2008 @ 7:27 am

47. I wish Oprah would interview a USDA inspector, & get the story straight. The horrid conditions are at less then 5% kennels , I’m all for shutting them down. These people operate under the radar.USDA regulations are very strict. Has anyone ever visited a USDA kennel ? USDA can show up at anytime. A USDA licensed kennel must be kept clean & employ a full time vet. Check out USDA regulations on kennels & you’ll see their requirements. Does anyone disinfect their pets dishes every 2 weeks ? I’d be the first to turn someone in for keeping animals in substandard conditions. I want thousands of caring individuals to quit trying to close down all kennels because of the actions of a few. Also try cleaning up some of the shelters around the country. The can’t remodel or rebuild because HSUS won’t part with the $154 mil they con out of caring people. As far as dogs in shelters people buy on impulse & would love a cute puppy. The true problem lies with the average pet owner that dumps their dogs at shelters because they don’t take the time to housebreak & train their pets !

    Comment by janelle yates — April 5, 2008 @ 12:28 pm

48. Janelle, my impression - from Gina’s response to you on another thread (being site owner, she gets to know things about the posters the rest of us don’t) is that you - yourself - are a USDA breeder. Which means that you are okay with the idea of puppies being raised in cages as a cash crop, being sold as soon as they are legally able to turn a profit for you?

    So Janelle - how many USDA breeders do you know who take puppy buyers’ calls any time if puppy and owners are having problems adjusting to one another, and will take back a puppy for life if the new home doesn’t work out? (Rhetorical question here, as I’m sure the USDA breeders will say whatever they think they need to say to “look good”).

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 5, 2008 @ 1:33 pm

49. Other Pat,
    I read what Gina wrote it wasn’t directed to me. I don’t have a website & I’m not a USDA breeder. You need to realize not all breeders are created equal. Some don’t care except for the money they make. Sure some see dogs as a cash crop others are very devoted to their dogs & the puppies they raise. Yes, their are a few that are out to put the screws to people & their are others that spend $$$$$$$ to improve their kennel & their dogs. There are USDA breeders that will help you anytime you have questions about training & the health of your dog. Research & references are important regardless of which breeder you meet. My point is breeders aren’t the only reason for dogs in shelters, I blame dog owners that don’t research the breed , the breeder, & the ones that don’t take the time to train their dogs. I do work in rescue & I’m more then happy to take the retired dogs from breeders. How can you get their retired dogs , if you do nothing but bash them ? I’d rather work with them to get their retired dogs into homes so they can enjoy the good life !

    Comment by janelle yates — April 5, 2008 @ 4:47 pm

50. The dogs who live on USDA puppy farms spend their lives in cages. That’s pretty close to everything I need to know to form my opinions about USDA breeders.

    I hope for the day where there will be NO retired USDA breeder dogs to save because there will be no more USDA breeders raising dogs as cash crops.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 5, 2008 @ 5:40 pm

51. Shelters are cleaning up the mess made by puppy millers, backyard breeders, and people who just didn’t get around to fixing their pets in time.

    Not really. Yours is just a twist on the AR line that breeders are to blame for animals in shelters.

    Look, over half the animals in California shelters are cats, and most of them are feral cats and the offspring of feral cats. The are not the product of any breeder.

    As far as dogs, yes, there are oops litters that get relinquished at shelters. There’s a high demand for baby puppies at shelters, most of them get adopted out quickly.

    The bigger problem for dogs at shelters is the harder to place adult dogs. Regardless of whether these dogs came from a pet store/commercial breeder, backyard breeder, hobby breeder, shelter, or whatever, breeders are not to blame for these dogs. The problem is that pet owners for a variety of reasons relinquish the dog they had once provided a home for.

    We are not going to make progress as long as “blame the breeder” lies keep getting spread… regardless of what kind of breeder is being blamed. A study “Exploring the Cat and Dog Surplus Problem” listed the top 10 reasons that dogs are relinquished to shelters as

    1. Moving
    2. Landlord issues
    3. Cost of pet maintenance
    4. No time for pet
    5. Inadequate facilities
    6. Too many pets in home
    7. Pet illness(es)
    8. Personal problems
    9. Biting
    10. No homes for littermates

    Of course, “moving” these days often means people facing foreclosures of their homes. Newsflash: breeders did not create the subprime mortgage mess.

    Comment by LauraS — April 5, 2008 @ 6:07 pm

52. Personally, I am 100% against breeding dogs, when there are so many in shelters that need loving homes and so many that end up being put down.

    OK, so that must mean you are 100% against
    - guide dogs for the blind
    - service dogs for the disabled
    - search-and-rescue dogs that find missing people
    - police dogs that apprehend rapists and murderers
    - detection dogs that find explosives, mines, or other contraband
    - livestock herding dogs
    - livestock guardian dogs
    - many other working dogs

    It must also mean you are 100% dogs as pets.

    Oh no, you say, many fine pets can be found at shelters. We agree on that.

    But guess what, the only reason ANY of the dogs at shelters make suitable pets is because of selective breeding by breeders. It makes no difference whether that nice pet from the shelter came from an oops mixed breeding, a puppymill, a backyard breeder, or whatever. They are still the product of selective breeding, even if a few generations removed.

    NO DOG would have a temperament that’s suitable for human companionship if not for breeders. NOT ONE.

    Eliminate breeders and selection for good temperaments stops. Good temperament is not “fixed” in the genetics of dogs. Temperament degenerates without on-going selective breeding. This is a fact.

    Eliminate breeders and over time we eliminate the domestic dog. PETA would like that.

    Comment by LauraS — April 5, 2008 @ 6:19 pm

53. Comment by LauraS

    Laura, did you read anything I wrote after the bit you quoted? Because it certainly sounds like you didn’t. Let me refresh your memmory:

    Shelters are cleaning up the mess made by puppy millers, backyard breeders, and people who just didn’t get around to fixing their pets in time. And, as was pointed out somewhere, not sure now if it was this comment thread or the other one, many of them could be doing a much better job than they’re currently doing. (Space can be a powerful reason for any individual shelter to feel it needs to euthanize animals; communities as a whole, though, can achieve a No Kill solution with good leadership.)

    In the first sentence, I’m talking about where the dogs in shelters come from. (Specifically, the dogs—not talking about the cats. Cats are, oddly enough, a different species with some different considerations applying.) And you know what? That is where they come from. Repsonsible breeders’ dogs rarely wind up in shelters; even if the placement goes wrong, they have a safety net.

    In the rest of it, I’m talking about the failures of the shelters. Who, if more of them were doing the things the better-run shelters do, would not “need to euthanize for space.” Because there are enough homes for the dogs in shelters, if more shelters were applying the policies and using the tools that have been proved to work.

    But shelters, whether well-run or poorly-run, didn’t create the subprime mortgage mess, either. And whether they’re doing a good job or a bad job of placing the dogs they receive, they didn’t create those dogs, either. (Or the cats, either, but cats are a separate problem because of the large numbers of ferals.)

    No matter how much it frosts your butt, I’m not going to stop laying blame on people who produce unhealthy, unsocialized puppies as if they were manufactured consumer goods, and selling them to anyone with a credit card without any concern whatsoever for whether the buyer knows what they’re getting into, and then isn’t available to give the buyer advice or assistance, or in extreme cases, to take the pup back and find it a more suitable home. Puppy buyers with the best intentions but no education on how to find the right dog, wind up having to euthanize a pet they’ve come to love because of its health problems, or surrendering to a shelter a dog they hoped to love but don’t, because it’s an unsocialized mess and possibly genetically of uncertain temperament, and they had no backup in the form of a good breeder in learning how to rehabilitate their pet.

    Good breeders don’t produce dogs like that. Heck, the better BYBs don’t produce such unsocialized dogs! And good breeders don’t sell to people who shouldn’t have dogs at all, while pet stores and millers and most BYBs think a credit card is sufficient screening.

    And people who don’t get their pets neutered in time, wind up having litters they didn’t intend and don’t know how to cope with. In some cases, it’s because they hoped to cash in, but a lot of the time it’s lack of knowledge and/or what they think is an innocent desire for “just one litter.” Responsible breeders require spay/neuter, and educate pet buyers; pet stores and puppy millers don’t. For the people who didn’t get their pets from responsible breeders, education and voluntary spay/neuter programs are a lot more effective than ranting.

    Sorry, but I’m not buying your theory that in blaming puppy millers, I’m somehow blmaing all breeders, or excusing shelters for the fact that they’re not doing the job they could be doing.

    Comment by Lis — April 5, 2008 @ 6:49 pm

54. Lis, I reread what you wrote. You are still blaming breeders for the mess in shelters. I don’t care if you single out puppymillers or any other kind of “bad” breeder. They are not to blame.

    This strikes me as yet another example of trying to deflect the blame onto somebody else that is so common in society today.

    Look, the people who relinquish their dogs to shelters — the dog owners themselves — are the ones who are responsible when their dogs end up there. Mitigating circumstances can include landlords who won’t provide rental housing to people with pets, people who lose their homes due to foreclosure, those who lose their jobs and can no longer afford to keep a pet, those with serious illnesses, etc. Neither puppymillers nor any other breeders are to blame.

    I don’t doubt that the puppy buyer screening and support that responsible hobby breeders provide reduces the number of dogs who end up in shelters. It’s a *good* thing to do. This doesn’t mean that breeders who fail to do these things are the ones to blame when a dog ends up in a shelter.

    Likewise, we can all empty our bank accounts tomorrow and donate to our local animal shelters and save lots of dogs. That too is a *good* thing to do. If we choose not to do so, we are not to blame if the dogs are not saved.

    These puppy buyers were presumably adults when they made their purchase decisions, were they not? As adults, they are responsible for their own actions.

    Comment by LauraS — April 5, 2008 @ 10:51 pm

55. 2CatMom wrote:

    Miss Marbles: if we can get people to avoid pet stores and sight unseen internet purchases we’ll have taken a huge step in the right direction. If you have a pet store in your area that selling puppies - go after them. Picket, boycott, hand out information on where the puppies likely come from. But please no threats or violence.

    Thanks for the suggestions, 2CatMom. For all of the some 45 years I’ve been “in dogs”, I’ve been highly vocal against puppy mills. I believe I’ve disuaded a goodly number of people from buying a pup in a pet store or online. But the TRUE fight for me at this point is way beyond stopping mills, it’s stopping the extinction of purebreds, and of pets in general, that is now the main agenda of animal rightist groups such as HSUS and Peta. These groups do not know how they shot themselves in the foot when they alienated responsible breeders. What a powerful force they could have had behind them had they continued to persue animal WELFARE, not animal RIGHTS. But in painting all breeders with the same brush, they have increasingly made good breeders believe they are in the fight of their lives: to continue to have the RIGHT to breed dogs at all. Many breeders have spent lifetimes (and great fortunes) doing their part to preserve and hopefully improve the breed they love. Every year, I go $25,000 to $30,000 in the hole breeding, maintaining, vetting and showing my dogs. If I did not have a stressful full-time job in the high tech sector, I would not be able to afford the PRIVILEDGE of breeding dogs. Now Peta and HSUS and Doris Day and a host of other tiny-minded fanatical groups are using their huge fortunes to try to legislate away the right to breed. This, of course, means that the rights of pet OWNERS are being legislated away. After all, if we are to have pets, SOMEONE has to breed them.

    What kind of country has this become, when animal control officers can go door-to-door searching for unneutered pets, when citizens are encouraged to rat out other citizens who might own an intact dog or cat? People need to WAKE UP and defeat the wave of manadatory spay/neuter legislation sweeping the country, before New Age Nazism makes it impossible to own a pet. Look at the mandatory spay/neuter law Los Angelos passed, which exempts “professional breeders”. Excuse me, but what is a PROFESSIONAL breeder? One who makes money at it? That would sure leave out most of the hobbyist breeders I know! Sounds like LA would have no problem with allowing the “professional” breeders who supply pet stores.

    Sure, we ALL detest puppy mills!!! We all can do a great deal to encourage the government to enforce the anti-cruelty laws already on the books. We can spread the word to prospective puppy buyers: stay out of pet stores; stay away from “puppyfinder.com”. We can do our part to rescue dogs in trouble. I breed and I also rescue. But I also belong to the strong and growing organization in my state that fights for the rights of dog owners, and in fact, along with other members of that organization, I will be at the State House next week lobbying for those rights.

    Along with countless other serious dog fanciers, I would have been a force for HSUS had they not attacked my rights as a responsible dog owner & breeder (I NEVER would have supported the nutjobs at Peta for ANY reason). To me, at this point in history, defeating animal-rights fanatics is the REAL fight.

    Comment by Miss_Marbles — April 6, 2008 @ 4:59 am

56. Lis, I reread what you wrote. You are still blaming breeders for the mess in shelters. I don’t care if you single out puppymillers or any other kind of “bad” breeder. They are not to blame.

    So, you agree with the Animal Rights crowds: “A breeder is a breeder is a breeder.”

    Sorry, but I don’t.

    Lots of people who would be good dog owners for an appropriate dog get no guidance at all from pet stores and internet puppy brokers on choosing an appropriate dog, or in getting over the early hurdles of dog ownership if they’re first-time dog owners. And the dogs that they buy from these sources are more than averagely likely to be real problems, healthwise and behaviorwise.

    My dog has settled in nicely to an evironment where I share a wall with a rather crotchety neighbor. But she’s a suitable dog for this setting, not my first dog by any means, and I have her breeder as well as a network of dog-experienced friends to call on when I do have a problem. If you don’t see how that would affect the likelihood of her ever being given up to a shelter for most if not all of the reasons on your list, even before we get to the fact of her breeder providing a backup home for her if I couldn’t keep her, well, sorry, but you’re not thinking things through.

    Nobody is born knowing what the care of any dog requires, and nobody is born knowing the specifc requirements of every one of the wide range of breeds that now exist. You seem to want to assign equal or even greater moral weight to mistakes made from lack of knowledge, as to the knowing decision to treat dogs and cats as consumer goods, and sell anyone whatever “model” they think they want and can pay for. And also, apparently, assign greater moral significance to that lack of knowledge than to shelters that actively resist no-kill or even reduced-kill policies because it’s so important to make the Bad Owners understand what they’re doinng…

    Comment by Lis — April 6, 2008 @ 6:17 am

57. Actually, if you follow the link highlighted by her name, you’ll see that you and LauraS are probably in essential agreement on these questions. Which is why I am also a bit puzzled by her seeming insistence on blaming the owners who don’t know any better than to relinquish their animals to the shelters.

    Sure - I’d love it if everyone “acted like a grownup” and fully accepted lifelong responsibility for the lives they’ve invited into their homes. But if a person honestly didn’t understand that they had options other than relinquishment, blaming them is only likely to make them feel defensive. And isn’t that part of what Winograd is saying?

    Don’t blame the owners. They’re not the ones who are supposed to know this stuff. The *shelters* are. That’s why they’re shelters. And that’s why part of what they’re supposed to do is help people learn the ways they can KEEP their pets rather than coming down on them like a ton of bricks when they think their only choice is to give them up.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 6, 2008 @ 6:33 am

58. Oh, my yes, that’s fascinating. Thank you for pointing me there, Pat.

    I’m particularly struck by her prominently featuring Redemption, and getting upset with me for not blaming the Bad Owners.

    Comment by Lis — April 6, 2008 @ 7:19 am

59. Lis answered my post with the puzzling comment:

    So, you agree with the Animal Rights crowds: “A breeder is a breeder is a breeder.”

    You are either making no attempt to understand what I’ve written or are being deliberately inflammatory.

    The AR crowd blames ALL breeders for animals being killed in shelters. I blame NO breeders for this. How many different ways do I have to write it for it to sink in?

    We don’t disagree that responsible breeders provide a valuable service in screening and advising puppy buyers. I’ve already said that.

    What I don’t buy is the reverse, that breeders who don’t do these things are to blame when dogs end up in shelters. I just don’t buy the notion that pet owners are absolved of responsibility because of their ignorance, and therefore we can use that to turn breeders into villains. I know it’s terribly un-PC to say it these days, but I believe that adults are responsible for their own actions.

    I don’t disagree with much of what you wrote, that people aren’t born knowing how to be responsible pet owners, and that this education can make a big difference in pet retention rates.

    I’m not going to cast blame on somebody, in this case breeders, because many pet owners are ignorant.

    Comment by LauraS — April 6, 2008 @ 7:50 am

60. What’s more important - casting blame, or looking for solutions?

    The problem is that when you start casting blame on people, they tend to become defensive and unreceptive to learning. That’s just human nature.

    Now determining *cause* is important, because that helps point the way to a solution. But determing cause is not quite the same thing as casting blame. And I think it’s important to keep the two clear and separate from one another.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 6, 2008 @ 8:19 am

61. Lis answered my post with the puzzling comment:

    So, you agree with the Animal Rights crowds: “A breeder is a breeder is a breeder.”

    You are either making no attempt to understand what I’ve written or are being deliberately inflammatory.

    The AR crowd blames ALL breeders for animals being killed in shelters. I blame NO breeders for this. How many different ways do I have to write it for it to sink in?

    You’re saying that any criticism of any breeder—including the worst of the puppy millers—is criticism of “breeders” generically. It’s not.

    Your position is the mirror image of the Animal Rights position—that all breeders are guilty, because “a breeder is a breeder is a breeder.” You’re saying that any criticism of puppy millers is disallowed because it’s cricism of “breeders”—that a breeder is a breeder is a breeder, and we can’t criticize or condemn any of them, even the worst.

    I disagree. I can criticize puppy millers who exploit and abuse their breeding dogs, who care nothing for the health of the dogs they breed or the puppies they give birth to, who sell to whoever has the price to buy without any concern for the well-being of the pup.

    People who do that are not concerned about the dogs. They are abusing the dogs They are not part of the same community as the people who breed carefully and responsibly, and place each puppy with loving care and take lifetime responsibility for the dogs they produce.

    I can, in fact, criticize one without criticizing the other. In fact, it’s almost mandatory, if you care about the dogs.

    We don’t disagree that responsible breeders provide a valuable service in screening and advising puppy buyers. I’ve already said that.

    What I don’t buy is the reverse, that breeders who don’t do these things are to blame when dogs end up in shelters. I just don’t buy the notion that pet owners are absolved of responsibility because of their ignorance, and therefore we can use that to turn breeders into villains. I know it’s terribly un-PC to say it these days, but I believe that adults are responsible for their own actions.

    Everyone is responsiblle for their own actions, apparently, except the people making big bucks from the brutal and heartless exploitation of dogs and cats in puppy mills and kitten mills. They are excused from bearing the moral weight of both the immediate and the predictable consequences of their actions, because their customers lack knowledge, and the customers’ lack of knowledge shifts all moral responsibility to them. It’s all on the Bad Owners.

    Laura, have you read Redemption, which is so prominently featured on your website?

    Comment by Lis — April 6, 2008 @ 8:32 am

62. Ah, html tags, broken variety.:(

    Comment by Lis — April 6, 2008 @ 8:33 am

63. Lis, I can delete if you want to repost with the code fixed, I’m a little confused about what you’re saying myself. Let me know.

    Comment by Christie Keith — April 6, 2008 @ 8:48 am

64. I think the italics were supposed to continue through the end of the paragraph ending in the word “actions”. When I read it that way, it makes more sense.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 6, 2008 @ 8:56 am

65. Okay, I made the change TOP suggested and now it makes sense. Lis, please let me know if that was wrong. :)

    Christie

    Comment by Christie Keith — April 6, 2008 @ 9:03 am

66. You got it right. Thanks!

    Comment by Lis — April 6, 2008 @ 9:14 am

67. My pleasure!

    Comment by Christie Keith — April 6, 2008 @ 9:29 am

68. Okay,

    my vicodin is working well enough this morning for me to dip a little toe into this thread.

    I seriously doubt that anyone here approves of puppy-mill breeding operations. (I think they a hideous and the stuff of nightmares) Are these businesses to blame for the actual numbers of dogs in shelters? Hard to say. Certainly dogs originating from these places are less likely to have any proper socialization and are more likely to have health issues and they are definitely the source for the bulk of the rescues I and my fellow breed rescuers here in Cali are dealing with.

    But puppy mills would not exist if the demand for the dogs was not there. By and large, petstores and puppy-mills and web-mills don’t advertise. People seek them out looking for a purebred whatever. And even with Oprah expose, alot of folks will still rationalize that this puppy, from this store or website isn’t from a puppy -mill because they want the dog and they want it now.

    So yes, we have to keep hammering home that puppy-mills, pet stores are not the place to get puppies.

    But by and large responsible breeders don’t do a good job of advertising and so John Q. Public does not get exposed to our message. They see the pet stores with readily available product or the newspaper or internet ads that offer instant gratification. Or they see PETAs commercials blaming everyone who brings even one puppy into the world for any and all animal suffering.

    Breed clubs and even individual breeders need to have a presence felt on the internet, on all the “insta-puppy” websites, in the back of magazines and in the papers. Unfortunately unlike the commercial breeders, we don’t have the money to blanket the media.

    And we don’t have the $$ that the big AR organizations do.

    But we do need to stretch and do what we can. I am working on this with my club right now.

    The only way to ultimately shut down bad breeding operations is to get the public to stop buying. No profit, they move on to something else. There is now a wealth of information available to any puppy buyer. There are tons of resources open to any owner having difficulty with a pet.

    So I am not giving pet stores and puppy-mills a pass, but I do think that the public in general needs to take responsibility for the animals they purchase or adopt and see them as lives in their care, as opposed to something disposable to be dumped at the first sign of inconvenience.

    I used to simply accept rescues, I will still take any dog of my breed that is in need. But if the surrendering party is dumping the dog due to callousness, or because they can’t be bothered to train or care for their pet or because it was an impulse buy, (sometimes circumstances or tragedy make giving up a pet inevitable, I don’t assign blame in these cases) then they do get a piece of my mind. Because I know when the mood strikes, they’ll do it again because there are no consequences for them, heaven forbid that they be made to feel guilty or uncomfortable! So if they get brought to task, maybe it will make them hesitate the next time.

    Comment by JenniferJ — April 6, 2008 @ 9:37 am

69. Taking them to task MIGHT mean they’ll think twice before dumping their next pet. On the other hand, it might just cause them to find a shelter with an anonymous dropbox, or a remote roadside somewhere “out in the country”. As positive trainers will tell you, punishment as a consequence has no guarantee of resulting in your preferred outcome.

    In general, *most* people want to do the right thing. But they don’t always know how. So what if starting now and going forward - we could envision a world where EVERY person who takes on a pet is ensured that they will always have a place to come to with their questions, problems and concerns. That they will find support when they feel like they’re in over their heads, and never be made to feel like their questions are stupid or obvious or inconsequential. That if they feel like they can no longer keep their pet, that first of all, their support system explores that question with them to find out if there is some way to keep the pet in the home. And if it’s just not going to work out, that then the pet will have a safe place to return to.

    This kind of thing takes a lot of work, and it’s not likely to be worth it for the commercial puppy producer. But if this level of support becomes the expected norm, then the only ones that will find it worthwhile will be the Responsible Breeders, the rescues, and the shelters - if we can get them all onboard with providing this level of support.

    And instead of looking BACKWARDS at “Who can we punish and assign the blame to?”, we can look FORWARD to “How can we help every pet find their forever home, and ensure their care if things go wrong?”

    This will take care of the *majority* of pet owners who really DO want to do right by their pets, but just might not always know how.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 6, 2008 @ 9:58 am

70. But puppy mills would not exist if the demand for the dogs was not there. By and large, petstores and puppy-mills and web-mills don’t advertise. People seek them out looking for a purebred whatever.

    Oh, please. The pet stores are in malls and other high-profile, high-traffic places. And people start their search for anything these days on the web, and the mills know how to boost their web presence. And lull smart people who aren’t knowledgable about dog breeding.

    I used to simply accept rescues, I will still take any dog of my breed that is in need. But if the surrendering party is dumping the dog due to callousness, or because they can’t be bothered to train or care for their pet or because it was an impulse buy, (sometimes circumstances or tragedy make giving up a pet inevitable, I don’t assign blame in these cases) then they do get a piece of my mind. Because I know when the mood strikes, they’ll do it again because there are no consequences for them, heaven forbid that they be made to feel guilty or uncomfortable! So if they get brought to task, maybe it will make them hesitate the next time.

    Or make them dump it in some less safe place.

    What do you do when someone is surrendering a pet because of behavior problems that are solvable, but which they do not know how to solve? Do you lecture, or offer advice and assistance?

    Comment by Lis — April 6, 2008 @ 10:30 am

71. We can agree on the need for support for pet owners. It’s why I make time to chat with anyone my veterinarian or the shelter refers to me for assistance.

    And yes, most folks do want to do the right thing. Unfortunately, the minority who do not want to learn are also the ones who become serial dumpers. They may go through two or three puppies or dogs in a year. every rescue and shelter sees them. I do not yell at people, but I do let them know that the out of control teenager they are “getting rid of” may not find the perfect home, or that the sick 9 or 10 year old that has become inconvienent to them may very well not be adopted.

    If the next dog winds up in a shelter, chances are we will get a call from the shelter to come get him or her.

    If there is any chance of helping someone keep a pet, we try to facilitate that. If it does not work then at least the dog has us for a safety net and the people have received information that may prevent a similar outcome with their next dog.

    But there are people who will not take responsiility for their decisions.
    Rescues and shelters are viewed the same way they view trash cans and the dogs are just disposable. It is akin to the “dogs are commodities” mindset of the puppy-millers. And for the pet stores it is a match made in heaven.

    making pet stores and puppy-mills socially unacceptable places to find a pet is important. Unfortunately the ARs are making buying any pet taboo. We walk a fine line and I can certainly understand when people become concerned that in our desire to see puppy-mills dissapear, we might also harm the future of responsible breeding. It is why responsible breeders of show, working, hunting, performance assistance dogs etc.. must become better at self promotion.

    I think that what some people are trying to get across here (and I if I’m wrong, let me know) is that puppy-mills and pet stores and the presence of dogs in rescues and shelters are all symptoms of the disposable -instant gratification society that exists in this country. And so while mills can certainly be blamed for the misery they put their animals through, their continued thriving existence will depend on the buying publics willingness to turn a blind eye to all the information and evidence out there about the origins of “that puppy in the window.”

    Comment by JenniferJ — April 6, 2008 @ 10:49 am

72. Speaking of resources for helping at risk pets and pet owners, this is a site I direct a lot of folks to

    “Can we help you keep your pet?”

    http://www.nokillnow.com/canwe.....ourpet.htm

    part of http://www.wonderpuppy.net

    I do have to say, one of the most frustrating reasons dogs come into rescue is people who love their pet and have spent a fortune on him or her at the vet because they have unfortunately purchased a puppy from a pet store or puppy mill and it does have significant health problems. Helping people find affordable health care can help keep many pets in homes. I spend a fair amount of time doing just that. Unfortunately with the economic down turn and people struggling to keep their homes, we are getting dogs in because people do not feel they can afford to keep the dog due to the vet bills they have already paid and their concern for future medical cost. They are frankly afraid to keep the dog.

    Please understand that ire I expressed for some of the owners turning dogs over to rescue is reserved for the specific individuals who refuse any assistance, can afford pet care, and simply are truly disposing of their animal out of convienence. I do not chastise people who are having to make the choice between their pet and their children or who have lost the ability to care for their pets. Our group has fostered and found temporary foster care for dogs until owners can find a place to live that will accept pets. Or found a new home for the dog if they cannot.

    Comment by JenniferJ — April 6, 2008 @ 11:47 am

73. Although I get angry at many individual pet owners, too (and believe me, not just pet owners!), what I’m really resistant to is the “sound bite” of blaming irresponsible pet owners as if they, as a class, are responsible for shelter deaths.

    There will always be irresponsible jerks. Always. Our animal control system needs to be based on the premise that some people will dump their pets and there’s nothing we can do to prevent that. We can only provide a safety net for those animals as part of the cost of living in a civilized and humane world.

    There will also always be people who will need to find shelter and rehoming for their animals due to changes in their life over which they have little or no control.

    We should invest in programs that reduce the numbers of unwanted pets, help people who are struggling with problems with their pets — be they housing, behavior, or veterinary problems — without using it as an opportunity to punish them for what we perceive as their failure to do right by their pet.

    I have seen it so often, dozens of times, that people who at one point in their struggle would have welcomed some assistance, but by the time they actually come looking for it, they’ve become so defensive that all they want is someone to basically give them permission to surrender or, if it’s a veterinary problem, euthanize the pet. They’ve already reached the end of their rope, and are no longer looking for solutions. They just want the problem to be over, and they’ve built a wall that can rarely be breached by someone trying to solve the problem any other way.

    That is a problem we CAN solve, but we have to stop the “no loving pet owner ever skimps on paying high vet bills, if you love your pet you will never break faith and find that pet a new home, if you love your pet blah blah blah.” Those types of messages, which I have seen everywhere including in the comments section here — in fact, over the years, I’ve probably made some of them myself — are absolutely detrimental to the process of helping animals.

    We have to stop doling out punishment and “a lesson” when what’s needed is assistance. Sometimes that assistance is simply this: Yes, we can take your dog.

    Other times, it’s information on HOW to keep the dog. How to find housing, how to housebreak a dog, how to deal with chewing, whatever. And sometimes it’s making sure local animal services are perceived in the community as a helpful and useful resource and not a place of punishment, apathy, or other negative experiences for the pet owning population they are supposed to serve.

    Comment by Christie Keith — April 6, 2008 @ 12:05 pm

74. Quite incredibly, Lis wrote to me:

    “You’re saying that any criticism of any breeder—including the worst of the puppy millers—is criticism of “breeders” generically. It’s not.

    Your position is the mirror image of the Animal Rights position—that all breeders are guilty, because “a breeder is a breeder is a breeder.” You’re saying that any criticism of puppy millers is disallowed because it’s cricism of “breeders”—that a breeder is a breeder is a breeder, and we can’t criticize or condemn any of them, even the worst.

    Lis, I do not understand why you are so determined to “win” this debate that you continue to distort what I write. Perhaps corrosive effect of “the silly season” in politics has rubbed off. This is not some misunderstanding. You are being totally disingenuous. You are welcome to disagree with me. You are not welcome to totally fabricate beliefs and statements for me.

    No, I do not believe that all criticism of puppymillers is forbidden. I never said anything of the sort.

    I am saying that I disagree with your assertion that puppymillers, or other breeders, are to blame for the mess in shelters.

    Comment by LauraS — April 6, 2008 @ 12:19 pm

75. The OTHER Pat wrote:

    What’s more important - casting blame, or looking for solutions?

    Hurray! Somebody gets it! Let’s stop trying to find a villain, and work together toward solutions.

    Comment by LauraS — April 6, 2008 @ 12:23 pm

76. Lis wrote:

    Laura, have you read Redemption, which is so prominently featured on your website?

    Lis, I’ve read Redemption, twice. I convinced my husband to read it. We feature it on our website. I’ve strongly recommended it to others, many times. I purchased 20 copies of Redemption and had them mailed to news reporters who had written favorably about AB 1634.

    Lis, if you think the take home message in Redemption is to blame the puppymillers for the mess in shelters, then wow, we sure read it differently.

    Redemption is about getting past the nonconstructive blame game, and implementing a proven shelter reform program to address the problems in animal shelters.

    Comment by LauraS — April 6, 2008 @ 12:35 pm

77. Thank you Christie,

    I’m afraid I am having trouble articulating my thoughts today. Your comments here are excellent.

    I have a friend who took over rescue in a busy and difficult area, she is feeling burned out, not because of the dogs, but because she gets nailed to the wall by the rescue community in her area for not being anti-breeder and because she spoke out against AZ’s copycat MSN proposal. Then she gets nailed by the people on the show dog list for griping about AKC’s policies toward puppy-mills.

    I have told her to log on here!

    It is easy to become angry and disenchanted with pet owners sometimes. But the amount of money that this nation spends on pet care, the on-line uproar over the pet food recall and the fact that so many people do step up to adopt and help out pets in need demonstrates that most people are caring and responsible.

    On Thursday, I placed a little dog whom I did not think would be easy to re-home. But the couple who took her feel lucky to have her, warts and all.

    Had her first home had access to the right resources, she might have never needed to be re-homed at all. So let’s all do what we can to help get the word out that help is available and catch people before they hit the end of their rope.

    (but I am still going to make little voodoo dolls for the few real “stinkers”!)

    Comment by JenniferJ — April 6, 2008 @ 1:15 pm

78. Debate is good; lots of clarification going on, lots of opinion, everyone has one, right? The only ones who aren’t losing sleep right now are the bad guys.
    They need to be removed from the equation.

    Comment by Donna D — April 6, 2008 @ 9:44 pm

79. I lived in Pa which is known as the puppy mill capitol of the East Coast. The Amish and mennonite are responsible for Pa’s dirty little secrets yet the USDA continues to give out these puppy mill permits to them on a constant basis not caring that many of these very ill puppies end up not selling and are taken out back behind the barns and either shot in the head or drowned. We marched, drew attention to this crisis and I emailed Oprah about doing a segment on her show about this tradigy but she never answered not once. Now She’s hopping on the band wagon, EXCUSE ME!!!! Where were you Oprah when I wrote you years ago about sick, dieng and very ill animals whom are crammed into a 6x6x6 inch cage never touching the ground and there feet are so split opened they can no longer stand on the ground? Where were you when Linda Blair came out to march with us, Ricky Rocket and other celebs that really cared, not for headlines or ratings but because they cared. I lived amoung these people and they treat these animals so horribly and need to be shut down, but whom will do that? You? Oprah? The USDA? Who is the voices for these animals? Out of 60 dogs we rescued in one day, some were blind, others couldn’t stand on solid ground, the feces on there fur was so think it was like 3 other layers of fur when actually it was feces, their urine was so stong it burnt our eyes when handling these dogs. All have health problems from breathing problems to eye sight, to lung infections and the list goes on and on. The Amish and mennonite are making millions each year pumping out sick and diseased puppies. They will sell you a puppy, cash only, why? because when the puppy dies 3 weeks later and you go back with your heart broken and your kids in tears and ask for your money back, the amish say,, what money? We don’t know what your talking about. Lets talk pet shops. If you see a pet shop having numberious puppies for sale this is a red flag, these are puppy mill products and came in through the dark of night covered in feces and urine. They wash them up and put some smell good on them and stick fluffy in the windown. Fluffy has MVP which is typical, Mitral Valve Prolaspe and can be fatal but you would know that. You buy fluffy so cute and adorable and with in weeks fluffy dies. This again is typical. Pa has a billboard when coming into Pa from the turnpike that says about the amishes dirty little secrets warning prople of the puppy mills. Missouri is the number 1 capital in the US for puppy mills. I have personally seen some of these mills, there is what’s called a class 1,2 and 3 permit. The class 3 permits allow an amish or mennonite mill to house as many as 500 females and 500 males, breedings producing as many as 5-8 in a typical litter, do the math. These puppies are not allowed out of the cages nor is mom and dad, these cages are stacked one on top the other with more them one mom and pups in a cage, hardly room to turn around in, the dog on top goes potty on the ones under them and so on till the bottom dogs and new borns are literally drowning in these mixture.I hope this posting opens some eyes that the amish and mennonites are not this wonderful religious sect of people but rather monsters that hide in the cloak of animal abusers and brokers. Oh yeah more more thing, some of the animals are farmed out to brokers such as out of NY and Chicage to be used in fight rings as bait dogs being torn apart alive. So I say to Oprah, where have you been with this issue that I personally wrote you about YEARS ago begging for your help? Do some home work on kill shelters to such as aspca and the human league whom is less then human. Try investing your efforts into a NO KILL SHELTER or turning the shelters that do kill into no kill shelters. last year Here in West Palm Beach County they euthanized 18,000 animals. They just passed a law requiring ALL pet owners MUST have there animals spayed and neutered or they face fines. I hope all county’s in every state adopt this policy. Not every sperm deserves a name, animal or human.

    Comment by Chrissy — April 6, 2008 @ 10:42 pm

80. The ONLY crime these puppies and dogs/ cats and kittens did was being born. I hope the word spreads and some day these mills will be a memory. I’ll never live to see it but I hope some one will for the sake of each animal that is dieing right now in a cage filled with feces and urine , alone, scared and so ill, protecting her babies with her last dieing breath.

    Comment by Chrissy — April 6, 2008 @ 10:53 pm

81. Lis, if you think the take home message in Redemption is to blame the puppymillers for the mess in shelters, then wow, we sure read it differently.

    Redemption is about getting past the nonconstructive blame game, and implementing a proven shelter reform program to address the problems in animal shelters.

    Which makes it, um, interesting, that you’re so stuck on blaming the Bad Owners, rather than fixing the problems in the shelter system and helping to address the problems that make people feel they either can’t adopt a pet in the first place, or have to surrender the pet they have. And so opposed to any suggestion that puppy mill practices have anything to do with creating some of those problems.

    Dogs and cats are not toys or knick-knacks, and manufacturing and selling them as if they were contributes significantly to the problem. And the people who choose to do that are morally culpable for their choices.

    Comment by Lis — April 7, 2008 @ 4:11 am

82. Lis, I bet you have to do the HTML tags separately for each paragraph maybe?

    Anyway, I agree that the posts LauraS has written create the impression that she’s blaming the Bad Owners. If she wants to correct that impression, it would be nice to see her do so.

    If she wants to stand by her position, then I doubt anything anyone says will get her to budge. Just a heads up.

    Comment by The OTHER Pat — April 7, 2008 @ 5:56 am

83. Oooh, yes, and I did it again, didn’t I? Can we get another repair job, with the second paragraph as well as the first in italics? And I promise to try to remember next time?

    And yeah, it’s probably past time to stop arguing with LauraS.

    Comment by Lis — April 7, 2008 @ 6:03 am

84. Lis-

    Sorry about the posting confusion yesterday. Went back through discussions and realized you are in northeast. Mea culpa! Some of us in another breed (rescue) group have been monitoring pet stores in Sacramento area— and trying to figure out strategy to deal with them (along with the puppy brokers and less than honest internet advertisers in the area).

    Comment by glock — April 7, 2008 @ 6:57 am

85. Ah! I see. I was a bit mystified.:)

    Comment by Lis — April 7, 2008 @ 7:20 am

86. I wrote:

    Redemption is about getting past the nonconstructive blame game, and implementing a proven shelter reform program to address the problems in animal shelters.

    To which Lis responded:

    Which makes it, um, interesting, that you’re so stuck on blaming the Bad Owners, rather than fixing the problems in the shelter system and helping to address the problems that make people feel they either can’t adopt a pet in the first place, or have to surrender the pet they have. Shelters are cleaning up the mess made by puppy millers, backyard breeders, and people who just didn’t get around to fixing their pets in time.

    Lis, no where did I say that I don’t want to fix the problems in shelters. I never said that. Is it truly impossible for you to carry on a conversation without making distortions like that?

    I said that the pet owners who relinquish their pets to shelters are responsible for their pet ending up in a shelter, not puppymills or other breeders. Pointing out this simple fact is not the same as “getting stuck on blaming Bad Owners” nor is it the same as saying that we shouldn’t reform the shelter system.

    In “Redemption”, Winograd also points out that there are many irresponsible owners, that there will always be irresponsible owners, and that we need to get past the blame game and reform our shelter system. I’m saying the same things.

    If you think “Redemption” was about blaming puppymills or other breeders for the mess in shelters, then we read a different book.

    The bay guys in “Redemption” are the organizations that are standing in the way of shelter reform — PETA, HSUS, and other defenders of the status quo.

    Comment by LauraS — April 7, 2008 @ 8:27 am

87. I agree with Lis about breeders. I got my two German Shepherds from a very great breeder that had all the pups a home before they were even born, and yes I did get to choose which puppy I wanted, and she had only two litters there from two females. She was always sending us photos of the pups and we got to visit them and the parents at 5 weeks old and she was very good about teaching us all we had to know and even offered a rebate in training classes if we took the dogs to training. If all dogs came from breeders as this, there would be less dogs in shelters. I aplaud Oprah for the show she had, it was hard to watch but I am glad she did it. Puppy mills should be against the law and should be stopped!! and definitely more no kill shelters would be nice. I do get my cats from shelters.

    Comment by Danielle — April 9, 2008 @ 5:24 am

88. When someone says they are trying to conceive a child, few ask, “WHY?, when so many children all over need homes?”

    Blood lines matter, and there is a big difference between breeders continuing good blood lines and puppy millers. I rescue animals and occasionally a pedigree animal has come my way. Though a friend teased my Siamese cat by calling him Ratface (his full name was Rambo, Shazam, Whitney, D’Artangion and/or TGFC - Trouble in a Gray Fur Coat), he really was one of the most special and smart cats of all the wonderful cats I’ve helped in the last 20 years. I get why people want their own children with their own ancestral bloodlines carrying their ethnicity, and I grasp why people want certain breeds of dogs (more so vis a vis dogs than cats).

    That said, some seeking to adopt do choose the neediest ones too … which animals have so much heart and soul. I love senior animals for their spirit, nobility and courage …. though understand that everyone doesn’t feel the same way. We are not yet where John Lennon was when he wrote, “and the world will be as one.” It’s coming, but we also have to take things as they are, while working to make them otherwise. Consider horses. An American icon, now being shipped to Mexico and Canada because we have outlawed slaughtering them in the U.S. How would the mantra of “spay neuter” help those wonderful creatures? People purchase and adopt when so inclined and sadly also relinquish when so inclined or more often face financial hardship and have to surrender their animals (except for Senator Kent M. Williams of NC who brought his pregnant GSD to the shelter for probable euthanasia though he is now back pedaling, saying he told them to call him if she didn’t get adopted!).

    I wish there was more taking animal clients sequentially instead of private shelters triaging them with an eye on their value to the public. How then is one different from a pet shop? Of course, survival matters, even for non-profits. But at what price? What is the message being sent to the public if a private shelter destroys a life to make room for say kittens or more adoptable animals? If the shelter is a taxpayer funded lower budgeted shelter, it’s understandable, but if it is a private, well-enough funded one, I invite them to at least speak with callers about the possibility of finding a home for their unwanted animals. Family and friends are good prospects, but don’t just ask everyone you know if they want your old cat or dog, but develop a marketing flyer showing off the animal with a good narrative and one or more clear pictures. The internet and advertising can also generate good homes too provided careful screening including a home visit, vet and landlord reference checks, are done. .

    Once a private organization accepts an animal though, it is incumbent upon them to model good behavior for the public, and work to market the animal to those mensh adopters seeking to do mitzvahs. I cannot take all the animals about which I am called, but I work with people to empower them to find responsible adopters for their animals or I direct them to the open-admission shelters where their animals have the best chance. Bringing a cat or dog to a shelter is not the same as registering a child in school. One can go out of ones district.

    A friend and rescue colleague who lobbied for one of the major organizations once said: (1) at home (“backyard”) breeders are not the problem or source of most of the dumped animals, and (2) for all the money sent to the mega organizations, she remarked, “I’m not saying they do not do a lot of good, but not enough considering their multi-million dollar annual budgets.” (Tax returns for charities can be viewed on Guidestar. It’s free to join.)

    I am a mom and pop small mainly cat placement agency, and I was recently interviewed for a CNN piece on whether such agencies are getting more animals due to the economic turndown and foreclosures. (uh, yes). The producer asked what I wanted under my name and I said, “Founder — name of my organization adding, “Could you put, ‘Send Money’ after that please?”

    The gift-giving public has to recognize that money from the big organizations trickles down only indirectly to the cat or dog in a shelter at risk of being put down. Often what saves those animals are small animal placement rescue organizations taking animals out of overflowing taxpayer funded shelters. Many of my animal welfare colleagues go threadbare saving animals’ lives. Help us, or form your own organization or foundation and help animals directly.

    Find organizations who walk their talk in your zip code by searching on Petfinder’s website. Huge organizations crank out brochures and mailings, but in years of visiting cats in alleys, I’ve yet to ever see a cat eating or reading one of their brochures. Stop sending all your money to them, thinking you are helping the cat or dog about to die in the next five minutes at your local shelter. If your local shelter is managed by a good humane society, then of course, help them. But be sure you get some bang for that buck. I find a lot of animals on the street, but very few dollars. I hate to hear of hundreds of dollars going long distance to groups who cannot possibly help local animals very much, even if inclined to do so.

    I’m helping now who took in a cat belonging to an elderly woman who went into a nursing home. She cannot keep the cat.” For $118 I can use the local spay-neuter clinic and have the male cat vetted up to make him more appealing to another group since my group is full, but I wish someone else would contribute that $118 before I go to my retirement account yet again. The cat is black, has been on the street, and is unaltered so I know if taken to the pound, he probably won’t be adopted or picked up by a rescue group. If I or another group takes this cat there is a good chance he will be in a foster home until the fall when kitten season is over and people are returning from summer holidays when adoptions fall off precipitously.

    Similarly, another case I’m working now is a pit bull someone found, which dog slept with her, but because of breed restrictions in that jurisdiction a humane officer took the dog away. She knows she cannot have that dog, but would like to see that female dog she found and took pity on — which dog was walking along a rural road and which dog recently had pups — not have to die. It’s almost impossible. Once out (if possible — pray everyone — please pray!) the dog will need to be sterilized and receive vet care, probably for a minimum of $200.

    That reminds me we need to look at breed ban legislation. The same way drivers and gun owners are licensed, we can make bully breeds safer and the public safer from them, and protect them from being fought by such legislation as is currently being worked on in the U.S. Congress which would make watching dog fights illegal.

    What saves animals’ lives can be reduced to the lowest common denominator: helping callers before their animals wind up in shelters. People lose jobs, get divorced and have to move in with family or to no-pets rentals, have allergic babies … all sorts of things. Peter Drucker (management expert) said charities need to stop imagining that a magic bullet exists which will put them (us) out of business.

    People will always need help, and it’s our job to be their animals’ keepers sometimes. Let’s buck up and stop whining about the challenge. It just takes time and money, but — wait — all the money seems to be flowing into mega organizations. One of the large ones has a budget of over $100 million but spends maybe seven percent of that budget on companion animals, yet its donors are mostly those people with companion animals naively thinking they are helping animals in their local community in donating. (uh, no — or not much — definitely not enough and not commensurate with the amazing budget of over $100 million annually).

    Here are some more ideas: If someone feeds stray cats, offer to help with neutering, trapping or transportation. If feral cat management is not legal, work to inform your legislators and change that law. Start or join a “friends of the shelter” egroup (as I have) for a nearby shelter with an abysmal euthanasia rate. I paid for (through my non-profit org.) two Kuranda beds for that shelters’ 50 runs and next week will be deliver about a 100 donated hospital blankets to them. You too can do such things! Volunteer at your local municipal shelter and find out what’s really going on: groom, walk and pet animals there, and be an adoption facilitator, guiding the public through the adoption process, and thanking them for coming in to adopt and not buying an animal. Then let that first-hand experience inform how to spend your volunteer hours and donor dollars.

    See which are the organizations pulling out the animals, and support those financially. Call organizations and talk with the ones who invite you to leave a message and who actually call you back! I have had callers asked me to say something, disbelieving I was an actual person and not a recorded message.

    Bill and Melinda Gates are quite busy, but before giving money to any cause, they get involved and find out what needs to be done, as they did in Washington, DC to help improve education. A charity learns what is expected of it in return for a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and sometimes their foundation supplies executives to implement programs too. You — everyone here — can do similarly though on a smaller scale than the Gates.

    Oprah also didn’t just send money to South Africa to educate young women, but became involved. If you want to help animals (really help them) please don’t leave your bequest to organizations where it’s a drop in the bucket compared to the good that even a relatively modest sum such as ten thousand dollars from your estate could do for a local mom and pop animal charity. If you have big money to donate, subscribe to a wonderful publication called Animal People which annually published the salaries of the larger organizations’ executives, and tries
    to counsel readers on which are the more effective organizations. There is a lot to good organizations. It more than looking at management or fundrasing costs (anyone can cook the books and label blatent fundraising mailings “educating the public.”)

    It’s late. I just posted this on the Oprah site and though I would share it here as well.

    - Joanna Harkin, Wash DC

    Comment by Joanna Harkin — April 9, 2008 @ 8:50 pm

89. I have seen one puppy mill. The one puppy mill i did see they were kept in small 2 foot by 4 foot cages attached to a building up off the ground, Now that is wrong a dog should atleast be allowed to have their feet touch the ground room to run and play. Would you want to be kept in a 2x4 foot cage for the rest of your life. You would go nuts !! Amagine what those dogs are going through. I am a breeder i only have 8 dogs. My dogs have plenty room to run and play. Plenty fresh food and water. They are played with and cared for by me and my husband and 4 children. I have saved 1 of my dogs from a puppy miller. When i got her she hid her head in my sofa for 3 days. I felt so sory for her for what she had been through. She didnt know what it was to be a dog. She did not know what it was like for a human to show her affection. I treat my dogs with love and affection like i said, I am a breeder and please dont put puppy millers and breeders in the same category there is a big difference..

    Comment by Betty — June 1, 2008 @ 7:50 am

90. It doesn’t matter if you are a responsible breeder…you are causing the problem if you are breeding. We already have too many animals in the world without homes. The more you breed, the more animals we have…which obviously means that more animals in shelter will have to be euthanized. I have been working in the field of humane education and animal welfare for many years. I BEG YOU TO SEE THE PROBLEM WHEN YOU ARE BREEDING DOGS!! Besides, you are breeding them for money, right? Would you still do it if you didn’t make money off of it? In that case, you see them as a “money making object” as well. All pets need to be spayed and neutered and breeders need to stop breeding.

    Comment by KP — June 24, 2008 @ 9:24 am

91. >Besides, you are breeding them for money, right? Would you still do it if you didn’t make money off of it?

    Um … reputable, ethical breeders don’t make money. And they are not putting pets in your shelter. Do us all a favor and educate yourself. You’ll find plenty of resources here if you stick around and open your mind to some facts instead of parroting what you’ve been told.

    Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 24, 2008 @ 9:38 am

92. Despite my millions made from dog breeding, I do ask potential buyers if they have considered a rescue dog in their search for a family pet. The answer almost always comes back as NO for various reasons: They want a purebred dog of the specific breed I have, they want a dog that comes with a health & temperament guarantee, they want a dog whose lineage they can research regarding health & temperament issues… So by selling these buyers what they are looking for, I am not causing a shelter dog to be killed. The people who believe that killing is a way to manage shelter populations are the ones causing shelter dogs to be killed.

    Comment by slt — June 24, 2008 @ 9:48 am

93. Thanks for a more gracious answer. I’m really getting tired of dealing with drop-ins who don’t read anything, know less, post something inflammatory and then move on.

    Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 24, 2008 @ 10:01 am

94. I did read every single post & all I can say is WOW… all of this over someone’s bad assumption of a well put together TV program. I didn’t feel like anyone but puppy mills were bashed in that episode. WHY NOT SHED LIGHT ON SUCH A PROBLEM? Do YOU (breeders claiming to be responsible) want everyone buying puppies from those sources? I sure don’t.

    I do believe you should spay or neuter your pet.

    The only reason I see fit for breeding is for service animals, though there are mixed breed service animals out there as well.

    The one arguement with the list for the person who said they were 100% against breeding dogs. Is that what you breed your dogs for? I respect you if so, but if it’s because you feel your dog is special - I don’t at all. To me it seemed as if you were trying to twist ever word.

    The “responsible breeders” don’t like the “blame the breeders” but they sure do blame everyone else under the sun.

    I gather a lot of you think that dogs from “responsible breeders” don’t end up in shelters, but that’s not true - what are you doing wrong? You didn’t take them there, but you sure did contribute to it. There’s no getting around that.

    You are contributing to the number of animals being put down. You can not argue that. It’s plain and simple.

    I’m not saying you are a bad person, but it is, what it is. If you think animals being killed is bad, then what you are doing is linked to that.

    I have a huge heart for animals and try to make people aware of the better options they have for finding a pet.

    I can’t go without mentioning this quote:

    “When someone says they are trying to conceive a child, few ask, “WHY?, when so many children all over need homes?”

    You say bloodlines matter. Are you keeping these puppies yourself? You might feel differently if Mom’s starteded getting knocked up just to sell their babies because they thought their bloodline was something special. Or if these kids were killed because there were just too many. Why is that not acceptable, but doing that to animals is?

    Again, I see nothing wrong with Oprah letting a good portion of television viewers know about what happens at puppymills and shelters.

    Comment by Takara — June 24, 2008 @ 8:41 pm

95. Comment by Takara — June 24, 2008 @ 8:41 pm

    Responsible breeders require buyers to sign a contract which states, in part, that the dog will never in its lifetime be surrendered to a shelter and that the breeder will assist in rehoming the dog (if the need arises) or take the dog back. We don’t want any dog we’ve produced to ever end up in a shelter and make every reasonable effort to prevent that from happening.
    This is one of the many reasons I don’t support puppy mills or dog brokers - they do not stand behind the dogs they produce for the lifetime of the dogs. I am glad Oprah did a show to help educate people about puppy mills and where pet store puppies actually come from. And as was stated in that show, I also support the public going to a shelter or a responsible breeder when they are looking for a pet.

    Comment by slt — June 25, 2008 @ 4:07 am

96. I did read every single post & all I can say is WOW… all of this over someone’s bad assumption of a well put together TV program. I didn’t feel like anyone but puppy mills were bashed in that episode. WHY NOT SHED LIGHT ON SUCH A PROBLEM? Do YOU (breeders claiming to be responsible) want everyone buying puppies from those sources? I sure don’t.

    Had you actually read every single post, you’d have noticed that the initial post was based on some of the pre-airing promos, and in fact once the show aired, people here were generally happy with it.

    If you had read anything else here at all, you could not possibly entertain the idea that Gina or Christie or any of the regulars here doesn’t want people strongly discouraged from buying from pet stores & puppy mills. They’ve done quite a lot of that discouraging thsemselves.

    I do believe you should spay or neuter your pet.

    So do Gina and Christie and most regulars here.

    The only reason I see fit for breeding is for service animals, though there are mixed breed service animals out there as well.

    Every dog in existence has to be born somehow. Those mixed-breed dogs were the product of breeding, too—accidental, “just one litter,” BYBs and puppy mills producing “desginer dogs.” Would you rather that people get their pets from BYBers, puppy millers, “just one litter” breeders, and people too careless to get their bitch to the vet for spaying before she went into heat and bred with the neighbor dog?

    Or might it possibly be better for people to get their pets from responsible breeders who screen homes for appropriateness, match the dog for temperament to the home and the family, send the pups to their new homes either already spayed/neutered or on a spay/neuter contract, and a return clause requiring that the dog be returned to breeder if at any point in the dog’s life the new owner cannot keep it?

    The one arguement with the list for the person who said they were 100% against breeding dogs. Is that what you breed your dogs for? I respect you if so, but if it’s because you feel your dog is special - I don’t at all. To me it seemed as if you were trying to twist ever word.

    Considering how eloquent Christie and Gina have been against the “but my dog is SPECIAL!” argument for breeding pets, this is absolutely conclusive proof (as if we needed any more) that you have read not one word on this site except this one post. It’s you who are working hard to twist words.

    The “responsible breeders” don’t like the “blame the breeders” but they sure do blame everyone else under the sun.

    Um. Puppy millers, BYBs, “just one litter” folks, people whose pets breed accidentally because the owners are too careless to either get them speutered or to manage them properly, and people who think that killing shelter animals “for space” is a good idea actually are to blame for quite a bit.

    This is, however, hardly “everyone under the sun.” It excluces most people, actually.

    I gather a lot of you think that dogs from “responsible breeders” don’t end up in shelters, but that’s not true - what are you doing wrong? You didn’t take them there, but you sure did contribute to it. There’s no getting around that.

    You are contributing to the number of animals being put down. You can not argue that. It’s plain and simple.

    Responsible breeders breed few litters—one or two a year, or fewer. They breed when they have enough homes lined up to be sure of placing every puppy that they’re not keeping. They screen potential buyers, so that the puppies are going to good, responsible homes who will be good for a dog of that breed. (I could find half a dozen responsible Chinese Crested breeders willing to put me on their waiting list if I were looking for another dog right now, but probably no responsible border collie breeders willing to do so, for instance.) They evaluate temperaments, and try to match the individual puppy to the right home. They’re available for the life of the dog for questions and advice. And they sell on contracts that contain those aforementioned speuter and return clauses, so that the pups don’t wind up producing more pups, and they don’t wind up in shelters, either. They always have a home to go back to. And if a dog from a responsible breeder does wind up in a shelter, and the shelter picks up the phone and calls, the breeder will reclaim the dog, so that that dog is safe and not a burden on the shelter system.

    Most responsible breeders are involved in breed rescue, as well.

    And yes, no system is perfect, and sometimes life sucks. Sometimes a puppy buyer breaks off contact with the breeder, and the breeder has no idea what happens to the pup after that point. Sometimes a dog may be dumped in a shelter that doesn’t figure out where the dog came from, or does, but doesn’t bother to call the breeder. And sometimes they do call the breeder, and the breeder has died, or become very sick and is in a nursing home and no longer able to take back the animal.

    But those are exeptions. Responsible breeders aren’t a significant source of dogs (or cats) in shelters. They’re barely even a trivial source.

    You say bloodlines matter. Are you keeping these puppies yourself? You might feel differently if Mom’s starteded getting knocked up just to sell their babies because they thought their bloodline was something special. Or if these kids were killed because there were just too many. Why is that not acceptable, but doing that to animals is?

    I don’t know. Why do kill shelters feel it is acceptable to kill “excess” animals that are healthy and adoptable?

    Because responsible breeders are not killing “extra” puppies, and they’re not a significant source of dogs winding up in shelters.

    Let me tell you something that happened to an acquaintance of mine. She’s a responsible breeder, and about four years ago, she placed a puppy in a show home. For the first few months everything was great, the dog was showing and winning—and then the owner moved, and dropped out of sight. Did not provide his new contact information. Dog was no longer being shown.

    She started looking for the man and for the dog. Mainly for the dog. Calling shelters, reading online ads, everywhere that a purebred dog might show up. Aftter three years, she found him. By this time, he was in the care of a woman who had gone looking for a pet, and when she saw the dog and the conditions he was living in, even though he was not at all what she’d hoped for, she couldn’t leave him there. She was nursing him back to health while looking for a permanent home for him. She was delighted when she and my acquaintance determined that this was in fact the vanished former show dog. The breeder bought back the dog from his rescuer, and took him home, and continued his rehabilitation. (He was four years old now, and had been in five homes by the time the breeder found him. And he’d been used as a breeder in every one except the last, where she found him.) When he was healthy enough, she took him in for his neuter operation, after full physical exam and pre-anesthesia blood work.

    And despite precautions, he had a massive reaction to the anesthesia, and died on the operating table. She was an emotional wreck, after that. “I killed him by having him neutered!” It nearly killed her.

    That’s what a responsible breeder does, when a placement does go wrong.

    I can’t help having the feeling that when you talk about “responsible” breeders, you’re really thinking of the “nicer” kind of BYBs.

    (Her contract, btw, says that she will buy the dog back, because she feels that’s an additional protection against human fallibility and greed. She doesn’t rely on people being willing to just give the dog back if they can’t keep it.)

    Again, I see nothing wrong with Oprah letting a good portion of television viewers know about what happens at puppymills and shelters.

    Again, had you bothered to read all the comments and discussion, as you claim you did, you’d have noticed that, once the show aired, people here were pretty pleased with it.

    Comment by Lis — June 25, 2008 @ 5:29 am

97. Again, I did read ever single post. I don’t know why you are arguing with me about that.
    The pre-airing promos weren’t bad either though.

    Good job guys (Gina, Christie, & regulars), I pat you on the the back for discouraging people from buying from pet stores & puppy mills. And for believing that you should spay or nueter your pet. Feel better?

    “”Every dog in existence has to be born somehow. Those mixed-breed dogs were the product of breeding, too—accidental, “just one litter,” BYBs and puppy mills producing “desginer dogs.” Would you rather that people get their pets from BYBers, puppy millers, “just one litter” breeders, and people too careless to get their bitch to the vet for spaying before she went into heat and bred with the neighbor dog?

    Or might it possibly be better for people to get their pets from responsible breeders who screen homes for appropriateness, match the dog for temperament to the home and the family, send the pups to their new homes either already spayed/neutered or on a spay/neuter contract, and a return clause requiring that the dog be returned to breeder if at any point in the dog’s life the new owner cannot keep it?”“

    No, I think they should go to a rescue or shelter first. Not a breeder, not a puppy mill, nor a pet shop. I’m pretty sure I had already made that clear.

    “”Considering how eloquent Christie and Gina have been against the “but my dog is SPECIAL!” argument for breeding pets, this is absolutely conclusive proof (as if we needed any more) that you have read not one word on this site except this one post. It’s you who are working hard to twist words.”“

    I stumbled upon this site last night. Read quite a bit, but okay! Is there a specific amount of time I need to read this site before I post something? Or is just required that I agree with you?

    “”But those are exeptions. Responsible breeders aren’t a significant source of dogs (or cats) in shelters. They’re barely even a trivial source.”“

    GUESS WHAT!? I agree with that statement, but still think you are still contributing to it.

    You say bloodlines matter. Are you keeping these puppies yourself? You might feel differently if Mom’s starteded getting knocked up just to sell their babies because they thought their bloodline was something special. Or if these kids were killed because there were just too many. Why is that not acceptable, but doing that to animals is?

    I don’t know. Why do kill shelters feel it is acceptable to kill “excess” animals that are healthy and adoptable?

    “”I can’t help having the feeling that when you talk about “responsible” breeders, you’re really thinking of the “nicer” kind of BYBs.”“

    Nice or not, I don’t think it’s appropriate. Do I think you are a bad person? No, I don’t know you. But I think it’s a bad decisison. Sad story, I hate those type of stories.

    “”Again, had you bothered to read all the comments and discussion, as you claim you did, you’d have noticed that, once the show aired, people here were pretty pleased with it.”“

    MY oh my. I DID READ IT. I just don’t agree with everything you think.

    Comment by Takara — June 25, 2008 @ 7:08 am

98. I apologize the paragraph that starts with bloodlines and the sentence after that were not suppose to be in there, that was a copy paste error. D’oh!

    Comment by Takara — June 25, 2008 @ 7:11 am

99. Takara, this is what I really like about my work. We’re actually moving away from the “you’re an idiot, no YOU’RE an idiot” and towards some understanding and common ground.

    Lis is perfectly capable of speaking for herself, heaven knows, but I can guarandamnteeya she wasn’t endorsing backyard breeders, “nice” or not. Nor do the staff here at Pet Connection.

    Most of the ethical, reputable breeders I know — which is to say, those breeders *I* consider to be reputable and ethical, an admittedly small number — try very hard to encourage people to consider a shelter or rescue dog first. When I was running Sheltie rescue here in NorCal, I would often get people who were referred to us by a handful of breeders who urged them check out a rescue dog instead of buying a puppy.

    But we can say “people need to go to the shelter first” until we’re blue in the face, be in complete agreement and it will still be true that if you want a particular kind of dog, particular a healthy, temperamentally sound small one, you will likely end up going someplace other than a shelter or rescue group.

    What about the people who are happy to take what is in the shelter? They often go elsewhere, too. That’s because the shelter industry is so angry, resentful, mistrusting and in desperate need of reform that they turn down good homes every day, through policies that are all about making themselves feel superior, not about placing pets.

    My stand: Rescue, shelter, yay! But I do not accept “until there are none, adopt one” because that glib bit of nonsense will guarantee the extinction of many, many rare heritage breeds worth preserving, and lay waste to the gene pool of countless others.

    Puppy millers, rot in hell.

    Back-yard breeders, neuter your four-legged ATM machines. Even the “nicest” of you are producing puppies (purebreds and “hybrids”) with congenital defects and temperament problems because you’re too clueless or careless to know or care about screening for defects and the importance of properly socializing puppies. Done right, breeding is a money-losing enterprise. This is as it should be. It’s not a business; it’s about preservation of hundreds of breeds, most of them rare. It should be a labor of love and commitment, and for reputable breeders, it is.

    Responsible, ethical breeders are the salvation and continuation of breeds I feel are worth preserving, and I am NOT throwing them overboard to fix an “overpopulation” problem that isn’t there.

    Shelters DON’T need to kill for population control. They need to pull their heads out of their collective morally superior asses, quit pandering to zealot animal-rights folks who really want an end to all domestic animals, “pets” included, and work towards community-wide no-kill solutions with the majority of us.

    Americans love animals and want to help. So quit blaming the people who aren’t problem and work with everyone willing to be part of the solution.

    Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 25, 2008 @ 7:23 am

100. Comment by Takara — June 24, 2008 @ 8:41 pm

     “I gather a lot of you think that dogs from ‘responsible breeders’ don’t end up in shelters, but that’s not true - what are you doing wrong? You didn’t take them there, but you sure did contribute to it. There’s no getting around that.

     “You are contributing to the number of animals being put down. You can not argue that. It’s plain and simple.”

     Oh, but I CAN argue that. You seem to be willfully missing an essential point:

     The “Responsible” in “Responsible Breeder” means that breeder ACCEPTS RESPONSIBILITY for that dog FOR THE DOG’S ENTIRE LIFE. A dog from a Responsible Breeder is OBLIGATED to be returned to that breeder if the original owner is no longer able to keep him/her. If the OWNER fails to live up to the obligation of the contract, and if the OWNER turns the dog over to a shelter or rescue, then a Responsible Breeder will - if made aware of the situation - RECLAIM that dog, thereby removing that dog from the shelter population and - incidentally - making space at that shelter available for another truly needy animal.

     How can any thinking person describe that scenario as “contributing to the number of animals being put down”?

     Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 25, 2008 @ 8:16 am

101. Pat’s point is an interesting one. I constantly hear people ripping into breeders because there are “purebreds” in the shelters.

     Yes, there ARE purebreds in the shelters. They come from back-yard breeders and puppy-mills. From people and businesses whose interest in the puppy and the puppy buyer ends when the check clears or the Visa computer blinks “Approved.”

     As I’ve mentioned before, I did Sheltie rescue for three years, taking in, fostering and placing about 30 dogs a year personally, with more in our foster home network. We went to look at every Sheltie in the four-county area that makes up the Sacramento metropolitan area. Every time there was a Sheltie in a shelter, we pulled that dog.

     In those three years, there was ONE DOG — yes, ONE — whose conformation didn’t scream backyard breeder/puppy mill. His type was so obvious to the local show people that we called the suspected breeder, who indeed recognized him and immediately took him back. (She had no idea how he’d ended up in the shelter, since her contract stated that he was to be returned to her. His owner’s phone? Disconnected. His owners? Moved.)

     Now, these BYB/puppy-mill Shelties we pulled … mostly nice dogs, mostly lovely pets despite being four inches taller than the maximum height allowed, or small as a Pomeranian with a domed head and prick ears, etc., etc., etc. . And “purebred” if you accept that puppy-mills do anything they darn well feel like to get “papers” on a dog, including making up “registries” with important-sounding names. We placed the dogs into good homes, of course after neutering, etc.

     But someone who tells me that because the “purebreds” of backyard breeders and puppy-millers end up in shelters that all breeders are responsible? Not buying it.

     And if one well-bred dog does end up slipping through the net because a pet-owner doesn’t honor a contract? Call the breeder, whose name is probably still on the microchip. They are there for their dogs for life.

     Look, I know if I got hit by a bus on the way home, the woman who bred my nearly 12-year-old flat-coated retriever, would in a day be on her way to California from Texas.

     Not to attend my funeral, but to PICK UP HER DOG.

     Do you see the difference here? Do you see what we keep hammering on the fact that it’s not true that “a breeder is a breeder is a breeder and all are scum”? I’m sorry if you’re only seeing the other kind, but that’s because the responsible ones aren’t putting dogs in your shelter.

     Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 25, 2008 @ 10:03 am

102. Yes, there are purebreds in shelters, and in many areas, most of them are pitbulls.

     Instead of passing laws to forcibly remove my dogs’ gonads, let’s pass laws liberalizing limit laws, giving landlords incentives to rent to people with pets, and stop letting towns and counties get away with “outlawing” pitbulls and other breeds, and other public policies that stigmatize them.

     Those three things would do more to ease up the numbers entering shelters than any stupid misguided campaign against dog breeding ever will.

     As to cats, apparently feral cats don’t follow mandatory spay/neuter laws, so the huge burden of the offspring of unowned cats won’t be reduced by laws that target me and my dogs. So let’s incentivize TNR programs, instead of PENALIZING them as many areas do, and work to support organizations like Alley Cat Allies to get the population of unowned cats under control.

     By continuing to parrot nonsense soundbites about “every dog you breed means another shelter dog dies,” which is demonstrably untrue, how about focusing our efforts on practical measures that will work, and have worked, to end shelter deaths?

     The only reason not to do that is because it doesn’t “teach bad pet owners a lesson.” Which apparently some people just can’t let go of.

     Comment by Christie Keith — June 25, 2008 @ 10:28 am

103. Comment by Christie Keith — June 25, 2008 @ 10:28 am

     “Instead of passing laws to forcibly remove my dogs’ gonads, let’s pass laws liberalizing limit laws, giving landlords incentives to rent to people with pets”

     A friend of mine is about to take in her first foster. The poor dog is another victim of the foreclosure crisis. The place the owners found to rent WILL accept dogs - but only with the payment of a HUGE ‘pet damage security deposit” (in addition to the regular security deposit they have to pay along with first and last month’s rent to get into this rental). They just don’t have the money to cover it all, so they’re turning the dog (a sweet mixed breed) over to rescue. At least they aren’t just leaving their pet behind in an empty home as so many others have done. Still, if they weren’t being penalized for having a pet, they might not have had to give him up.

     There are so many reasons dogs find their way into shelters these days. We need to be looking at finding remedies for all these causes, not expending energy and resources going after Responsible Breeders who aren’t even part of the problem.

     Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 25, 2008 @ 11:01 am

104. MY oh my. I DID READ IT. I just don’t agree with everything you think.

     You ascribe to us opinions, ideas, and positions that no one here hold, things which we have expressed the exact opposite in the course of this comment thread and in other closely related discussions. If you’ve read this entire comment thread, and are still ascribing these things to us, one is forced to suspect that you are doing so deliberately—or else that you just can’t wrap your mind around information that contradicts your preconceptions.

     “”But those are exeptions. Responsible breeders aren’t a significant source of dogs (or cats) in shelters. They’re barely even a trivial source.”“

     GUESS WHAT!? I agree with that statement, but still think you are still contributing to it.

     So, apparently you feel that even one dog from a responsible breeder due to the owner breaking the contract or the breeder having died, invalidates the whole idea of responsible breeding and means it needs to end.

     How many “failures” on the part of the shelter system does it take, in your mind, to completely invalidate the idea of shelters, or the way they operate? Is four million a year enough?

     (And no, I certainly wasn’t defending BYBs. I was speculating that Takara’s notions of “responsible breeders” being responsible for shelter deaths would kinda in a cross-eyed way make sense if she was mistaking the upper tier of BYBs for “responsible breeders.”)

     Comment by Lis — June 25, 2008 @ 1:03 pm

105. “The “Responsible” in “Responsible Breeder” means that breeder ACCEPTS RESPONSIBILITY for that dog FOR THE DOG’S ENTIRE LIFE. A dog from a Responsible Breeder is OBLIGATED to be returned to that breeder if the original owner is no longer able to keep him/her. If the OWNER fails to live up to the obligation of the contract, and if the OWNER turns the dog over to a shelter or rescue, then a Responsible Breeder will - if made aware of the situation - RECLAIM that dog, thereby removing that dog from the shelter population and - incidentally - making space at that shelter available for another truly needy animal.”

     That’s a respectable thing you do & I assumed that all of you did that if you claim to be responsible. It is the right thing to do if you are to allow your animal to reproduce. I know I’m not telling any of you anything you didn’t already know, but letting you know it is something I agree on.

     I respect all of your opinions even though I still feel differently about certain things.

     I guess you can’t help but get defensive when I say how I feel since it includes some of you. Why did I ever think it was a good idea to post such a thing on here? Not sure, but I tend to stand up for what I believe in. I do everything I can think of to try to help in my community and state to try to make this a more humane place for animals.

     Comment by Takara — June 25, 2008 @ 5:10 pm

106. Comment by Takara — June 25, 2008 @ 5:10 pm

     “I guess you can’t help but get defensive when I say how I feel since it includes some of you. “

     And which of us would that be? (Take care before you answer lest you betray some unfouded assumptions . . . . . )

     Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 25, 2008 @ 8:24 pm

107. “And which of us would that be? (Take care before you answer lest you betray some unfouded assumptions . . . . . )”

     Breeders, Puppy Mills, & Pet Shops.
     I’m not saying that anyone here is one of the above. If you were defensive and were not one of those things, so be it. But that’s obviously what I was refering to.

     But if I was wrong, I apologize. It’s not like I was the only in this one to make a very inaccurate assumption by any means.

     I feel like maybe you thought I was trying to offend someone.

     Comment by Takara — June 26, 2008 @ 5:25 am

108. “And which of us would that be? (Take care before you answer lest you betray some unfouded assumptions . . . . . )”

     Breeders, Puppy Mills, & Pet Shops.
     I’m not saying that anyone here is one of the above. If you were defensive and were not one of those things, so be it. But that’s obviously what I was refering to.

     If you’ve read anything on the site at all, you know that puppy millers and pet shops wouldn’t feel especially welcome here. So, evidence that you’ve read anything here except this one post, and skimmed the comments, remains lacking.

     Then there’s the “a breeder is a breeder is a breeder” assumption: the belief that if one responsibly bred dog anywhere, ever, wound up in a shelter, that invalidates the whole idea of “responsbible breeding” and means that “responsible breeders” are exactly the same as people engaging in the mass production of puppies with an utter disregard for their fate.

     And finally, there’s the assumption that the only people who would care about responsible breeders and their ability to responsibly breed dogs of the breeds we love—are breeders. That mere pet lovers couldn’t possibly care less about whether or not responsible breeders are able to continue breeding.

     This is a mistaken assumption.

     As is the assumption that disputing your ideologically-driven nonsense comes from “defensiveness.”

     Comment by Lis — June 26, 2008 @ 5:48 am

109. You’re sure not getting it, Takara. All breeders are not the same. Please feel free to read any other thread in this blog and learn something. Here’s a nice place to start. (Although note that since that post was put up, AB 1634 has changed dramatically and is now in the California State Senate, facing a vote. Search for 1634 to get the latest on that.)

     Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 26, 2008 @ 6:59 am

110. I think I’ve lost track. I’m a breeder. Am I bad?

     Comment by slt — June 26, 2008 @ 7:09 am

111. You are. You’re evil. Evil, I say!

     And I’m not a breeder, so not only am I not evil, but I also should feel no need to defend the idea of Responsible Breeders and Responsible Breeding.

     There - Takara - have I got that right now?

     Comment by The OTHER Pat — June 26, 2008 @ 7:21 am

112. I believe for the most part I understand your theory. I think I understand why you think that. There’s something of course that’s not putting me on the same page or else we’d agree. All you can do now is accept that’s the way I feel.

     slt - I don’t know.

     OTHER Pat - I think you should relax a bit.

     Pet Connection - Seems like a site with good intentions.

     Animals are up there with Politics & Religion to me, things I feel strongly about. I went wrong by acting if any of my opinions were fact, when what all of us think are just a point of view. I like to think mine is right and you like to think yours is right.

     I don’t get it, I am making wrongful assumptions, I speak/type ideologically-driven nonsense, I lie when I say I’ve read all of the comments here and a bit of this website, & I am expending energy & resources by giving my opinion (when everyone else here is as well). I’m sure I missed something, so you can fill in the blanks amoungst yourselves. But I again disagree.

     Have fun!

     Comment by Takara — June 26, 2008 @ 7:18 pm

113. Animals are up there with Politics & Religion to me, things I feel strongly about. I went wrong by acting if any of my opinions were fact, when what all of us think are just a point of view. I like to think mine is right and you like to think yours is right.

     What you’re telling us, Takara, is that you feel no need to investigate the facts of something before forming your opinions on it—that there is no objective reality, only self-indulgent “opinion.”

     That’s not the case, and it’s not how everyone else operates.

     I don’t get it, I am making wrongful assumptions, I speak/type ideologically-driven nonsense,

     You’re not basing or even attempting to base your opinions in facts. You’re deciding what the facts must be based on what you feel, rather than the other way around. That’s being ruled by ideology.

     I lie when I say I’ve read all of the comments here and a bit of this website,

     We know this because you ascribe opinions and positions to us which you would know that we do not hold, had you actually read all the comments or any significant portion of the rest of the website. That you continue to ascribe those positions to us means that either you are lying about having read all the comments, or you are simply completely unable to absorb information that contradicts your preconceived ideas. Which takes us back to the “ruled by ideology” thing.

     & I am expending energy & resources by giving my opinion (when everyone else here is as well). I’m sure I missed something, so you can fill in the blanks amoungst yourselves. But I again disagree.

     The reason what you’re doing is a waste of time and energy is because you’re not processing any information at all. You’re trying to contradict ideas based in facts and experiences, with Virtuous Ideas of what you think should be reality—that Breeding is Bad, that the Only Deserving Dog is a Shelter Dog, that neutering every single dog and cat in existence will somehow not result in the extinction of dogs and cats.

     Saying “I disagree” with smug certainty but no facts, won’t cause anyone here to take you or your ideas seriously.

     Comment by Lis — June 26, 2008 @ 8:01 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Syndication

• Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed
• Subscribe to the Comments RSS

Recent Comments

• Vickie Carr on: Images, imagination and genetics
• Gina Spadafori on: How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• Joy on: How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• JenniferJ on: Inside PETA's freezer: Oops! They did it again!
• retrieverman on: How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• retrieverman on: How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• Evelyn on: How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• Gina Spadafori on: How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• Evelyn on: How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• YesBiscuit! on: It's bunny day!

Categories

• 2007 food recall
• administration
• animal charities
• animals: pets
  • behavior
  • medical
  • news
• animals:general
• Books
• contest
• Disasters
• dogcars.com
• dogmobiles
• Dr. Marty Becker
• feral cats
• Foreclosure pets
• GoodMorningAmerica
• GPE
• Gratuitous blogging
• Ketamine Recall
• Life
• Media
• No Christmas Puppies
• No Kill
• Pet-lover life
• pit bulls
• polls
• products
• puppy mills
• Syndicatedcolumn
• The blogroll
• The Dr. Oz Show
• The Making of a Therapy Dog
• Ultimatebooks
• Uncategorized
• Westminster
• Why is anyone still listening to PETA?
• Worth a click

Recent Posts

• Images, imagination and genetics
• It’s bunny day!
• Countdown to puppy breath
• Veterinarians, new cool stuff … and rabbits!
• Where do your pets sleep? Mine get to choose
• How about we save money and NOT kill the cats?
• More accolades for the dog-friendly Honda Element
• Lots of good news on the legislative front
• Is the unexamined chicken worth keeping?
• Keep pets secure before and after a move

• Pet Connection Team

  • Each post is the opinion of the person who wrote it (click for our biographies).

• Search

• Read more from the Pet Connection team

  • -Dr. Marty Becker
  • -Gina Spadafori
  • Christie Keith
  • David Greene
  • Dr. Narda Robinson
  • Dr. Tony Johnson
  • Keith Turner
  • Kim Campbell Thornton
  • Liz Palika
  • Mikkel Becker Shannon
  • Phyllis DeGioia
  • Susan and Dr. Rolan Tripp

• Worth reading

  • A Dog’s Life
  • Alltop: Pets
  • Ark Animals
  • BadRap
  • Best In Flock
  • Did A Cat Shit In Here?
  • Disapproving Rabbits
  • Dog Art Today
  • Dog Star Daily
  • Dogged
  • Dogster
  • DrawTheDog
  • Food Politics
  • Frogdog Blog
  • Fugly Horse of The Day
  • Full Cry: A Hound Blog
  • Fully Vetted
  • Guinea Pig Connection
  • ICanHasCheezburger
  • KC Dog Blog
  • Land of PureGold
  • Lassie Get Help
  • Nathan Winograd
  • Ohmidog!
  • Patricia McConnell
  • Pawcurious
  • Pet Health and Nutrition
  • Pete the Vet
  • Petfinder blog
  • PetHobbyist.com
  • PetSitUSA
  • Philly Dawg
  • Raised By Wolves
  • Sarah Andrew’s RockAndRacehorses
  • Smartdogs
  • Speaking For Spot
  • Terrierman’s Daily Dose
  • The Cat’s Meow
  • The No Kill Nation
  • Vet Blog @ Dogster
  • Vet On The Edge
  • VMDiva
  • Winn Feline Health
  • YesBiscuit!
  • Your Pet’s Best Friend

• Archives

  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009