Most puppy millers breed registered dogs unless they are doing the hottest specialty cross like a Chihuahua x anything, a Jack Russell x anything, or (most) ----doodles.
They will not take a puppy back, though they will (sometimes) replace it…
My own breeder mentor recently brought back a dog of her breeding from overseas… because it was the right thing to do.
[QUOTE=rugbygirl;8226438]
I don’t think registration should be a key variable in determining “good” versus “bad deserving shaming” breeders.[/QUOTE]
No, I don’t think it should be either, if a breeder can track and accurately record the health testing of generations of breeding dogs. But I’m not sure that is as easy as it sounds. The offspring of the dogs can be tracked by registering them, so even if sold and bred by another breeder, you can still trace the dog (and it’s health screenings) back through generations.
Registering them doesn’t make them better or worse. Tons of crappy registered dogs are produced by puppy mills. It might sound “better” but it means nothing…only that their parents were registered, no matter how good or bad they may have been.
But registering does allow them to be tracked more accurately, which is useful.
Interestingly, today I read a thread on my professional bulletin board (I am a RE appraiser). An appraiser started a thread about poor condition properties and the thread had nothing to do with animals; yet 2 out of the 10 appraisers who posted mentioned going into houses where people bred dogs and the houses were dirty , filled with caged dogs and stank so bad one had to leave and the other could barely finish inspection.
THOSE are the kinds of breeders the laws would identify and shut down. The "good " breeders who breed a limited amount in their houses and keep them at home nice condition or in tidy kennels which are clean would be fine.
License to breed, facilities to be inspected once a year for gross violations and cruel confinement, and mandatory spay neuter for all pet owners unless licensed to breed or showing or some other reason not to spay/neuter.
Imo this would protect good breeders while finally wiping out the bad ones. I agree there should be a venue for pet quality puppies priced so people could afford them which can be done without flooding the market or puppy mills.
How would one differentiate? Unless ALL breeders would be inspected! I do not want strangers tracking through my HOME especially when I have a litter of puppies!
You made a comment about TWO instances? I can tell you I have visited breeders across the country and have never been in a home that was like the ones you describe. But I am visiting responsible breeders!
Once again you bring up license to breed and inspections. There are already USDA inspections for high volume breeders! Why should I have to pay for a license to breed one of my dogs?
and it is not the pure bred dogs who make up the large population in the shelters !
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8228280]
Interestingly, today I read a thread on my professional bulletin board (I am a RE appraiser). An appraiser started a thread about poor condition properties and the thread had nothing to do with animals; yet 2 out of the 10 appraisers who posted mentioned going into houses where people bred dogs and the houses were dirty , filled with caged dogs and stank so bad one had to leave and the other could barely finish inspection.
THOSE are the kinds of breeders the laws would identify and shut down. The "good " breeders who breed a limited amount in their houses and keep them at home nice condition or in tidy kennels which are clean would be fine.
License to breed, facilities to be inspected once a year for gross violations and cruel confinement, and mandatory spay neuter for all pet owners unless licensed to breed or showing or some other reason not to spay/neuter.
Imo this would protect good breeders while finally wiping out the bad ones. I agree there should be a venue for pet quality puppies priced so people could afford them which can be done without flooding the market or puppy mills.[/QUOTE]
Requiring EVERY breeder in the country to get a license is unrealistic (not to mention unnecessary), and you would still have bad breeders; many of which would be unlicensed and operating illegally.
And what will be the fine for operating an illegal breeding kennel? Not much…so not enough to scare people away from doing it, especially if you knew that the chances of being inspected were extremely minimal, because it would take thousands of inspectors to actually do the job properly. And, realistically, it’s not worth every county to have a breeding kennel inspector on the tax rolls.
It’s just not realistic to try to license all breeders, nor would it prevent issues like you’ve described. I have no issue with large scale kennel licenses, and I actually would be willing to consider licensing for “dangerous dog breeds” rather than consider breed bans…but not for all breeders. Just not worth the effort.
Why is it not realistic? It could be if people cared enough about it…like any other law that did not exist and eventually got passed…idealistic I know but what we have now is not working.
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8228312]
Why is it not realistic? It could be if people cared enough about it…like any other law that did not exist and eventually got passed…idealistic I know but what we have now is not working.[/QUOTE]
you don’t listen much, do you…
What you want is communism. Good luck pushing that through.
Not that it worked then either…
And I am sure the appraisers found enough filthy houses without animals present…or those where the ignorant inhabitant just happened to have female critters with offspring.
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8228312]
Why is it not realistic? It could be if people cared enough about it…like any other law that did not exist and eventually got passed…idealistic I know but what we have now is not working.[/QUOTE]
Even if we all agreed on the concept, the logistics are immensely difficult. Standards, training, hiring of inspectors…tracking of breeders, licensing, inspecting…how often will this process be updated? The idea that we could ever capture all the breeders is ludicrous…especially considering that some of them might breed only once or twice and then not again for years, or be deliberately not submitting for a license, or that are too ignorant of “off the grid” to know they even need one.
How could you even find out about a breeder? Then there would be the whole process of “prosecuting” an illegal breeder. The paperwork to process and collect a small fine would hardly be worth it.
I thought it was telling that 2 out of 10 posts on a board having nothing to do with animals found filthy conditions present with breeding dogs inside homes. Alagirl chose to ridicule it. Says a lot about her . Then she makes an illogical jump to communism. Okay…
Going past that, yes I agree implementing laws would be difficult, but things have to change somehow. That is my idea if people have better ones put them forward!
You need a license to permanently house more than three dogs in my municipality. It’s a bylaw, which is a lot easier to propose and pass than sweeping regional or federal legislation. It’s easier to enforce if you run a registered business having to do with animals. If your breeding operation consists of three or more dogs, you SHOULD have a kennel license, but without a business licence, the municipality is unlikely to be aware of your “violation.”
You also need to license dogs here, which comes with some responsibilities under bylaw AND a slight financial incentive for fixing animals (cheaper license.) the fines for violation are pretty significant, but you need to be caught.
Compliance is sketchy, and enforcement is complaint based. I don’t know what the standards are to qualify for a kennel license, but we do have some. Crummy breeders just ignore it all. The fines are not obscene, but bylaw enforcement isn’t really a big “stick.” It’s also proven virtually impossible to create/enforce this type of bylaw in rural jurisdictions. I wouldn’t support it, smacks of overreach and impossible to enforce.
So, you could go that route Countrywood, lobby for kennel bylaws in your jurisdiction and help draft the standards. Barn/horse owners here have been lobbying for more specific humane-horsekeeping rules for about the last five years. There’s now a provincial guideline published with details on everything from water availability to trailer specifications. It’s something, our old horse welfare rules were grossly inadequate for justifying intervention in abuse cases.
Thanks for the insightful post. Rubygirl.
Good information and perspective
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8228368]
I thought it was telling that 2 out of 10 posts on a board having nothing to do with animals found filthy conditions present with breeding dogs inside homes. Alagirl chose to ridicule it. Says a lot about her . Then she makes an illogical jump to communism. Okay…
Going past that, yes I agree implementing laws would be difficult, but things have to change somehow. That is my idea if people have better ones put them forward![/QUOTE]
I wonder how many of those homes had children. More than had breeding dogs probably.
It’s also much easier to get people to agree to these types of rules when they have a shared perspective, so doing it regionally, even by municipality, is potentially a better approach.
People who live in the same city share the same climate, socioeconomic constraints, current events, veterinarians… While dogs are dogs, outside of some VERY general concepts in husbandry… There are a lot of arrangements that can be totally suitable to one place and totally abhorrent in another.
One noted an older man living in the house, a veteran, a few houses vacant REO properties , none of the posts mentioned kids. We have had posts on the board from appraisers entering properties where they noted signs of child neglect and everyone urged them to call child protective services (which they said they did)
[QUOTE=Countrywood;8228368]
I thought it was telling that 2 out of 10 posts on a board having nothing to do with animals found filthy conditions present with breeding dogs inside homes. Alagirl chose to ridicule it. Says a lot about her . Then she makes an illogical jump to communism. Okay…
Going past that, yes I agree implementing laws would be difficult, but things have to change somehow. That is my idea if people have better ones put them forward![/QUOTE]
Your personal attack says more about you.
You want to regulate breeding at a scale that involves a huge government apparatus.
You harbor no kindness toward people. You won’t be successful educating them into being more responsible with their animals.
[QUOTE=Alagirl;8228441]
You want to regulate breeding at a scale that involves a huge government apparatus.
You harbor no kindness toward people. You won’t be successful educating them into being more responsible with their animals.[/QUOTE]
Actually, she’s not proposing educating pet owners. She’s proposing forcing every dog and cat owner to spay/neuter unless they submit to licensing, home inspections, and can prove a good enough reason to breed. It’s the time honored “punish the innocent” approach. Hoarders, dog fighters, and all the garden variety irresponsible people simply ignore such constrictions and nothing changes.
My region of the country has virtually no public mental health care system at all and child protection caseworkers have active caseloads of over 300 neglected and abused children EACH. Good luck getting funding for legions of Pet Cops… that’s so far down the priority list as to be laughable.
[QUOTE=RackNRoll;8228504]
Actually, she’s not proposing educating pet owners. She’s proposing forcing every dog and cat owner to spay/neuter unless they submit to licensing, home inspections, and can prove a good enough reason to breed. It’s the time honored “punish the innocent” approach. Hoarders, dog fighters, and all the garden variety irresponsible people simply ignore such constrictions and nothing changes.
My region of the country has virtually no public mental health care system at all and child protection caseworkers have active caseloads of over 300 neglected and abused children EACH. Good luck getting funding for legions of Pet Cops… that’s so far down the priority list as to be laughable.[/QUOTE]
Well, yeah…
I was giving her the benefit…suspense of disbelieve I suppose.
But at the base is a lack of empathy for people…especially poor ones.
Which leads to situations like the one you stated…
I questioned whether to even respond but am curious how proposing ( as an idea) legislation to help animals mean I lack empathy for people especially poor ones? ??
Countrywood,
Irresponsible people are going to be irresponsible. Their first act of irresponsibility is going to be not licensing their animals period.
As far as ‘breeding animals = filthy conditions’, do not get me started on the clean-out of rental properties after certain types of tenants move out: it does not occur to most people to have a lifestyle where the garage is converted into your personal garbage dump -because who can afford garbage service- when you have 2 kids in diapers. For years.
They are not going to be on the radar as existing, let alone having to neuter their below the radar pets.
Once again you are punishing the innocent. Animals that are properly confined do not get accidentally bred. Animals that are identified and end up at shelters or make the round robin of several shelters/rescues can be traced back to their owners/breeders.
Pointing the finger at every pet owner when only some are problems is extreme, excessive, intrusive and unfair.
Forcing all pet owners to ‘pay’ for the wrongdoing or irresponsibility of some, and curtail or eliminate their good pet management and ownership by arbitrary rules is wrong.
long, long ago, when I was in school, one of my dogs did manage to escape and was picked up by animal control (thank heavens! traffic is deadly to loose dogs)
When I picked her up, I was shocked to learn that of all the dogs picked up in that sweep: mine was the ONLY one that had all shots and a rabies vaccination.
I have no idea if things are like that today, but it would not surprise me.
And some of the ‘owners’ refused to pay the fine to get their dogs back…cheaper to just find another give-away puppy.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
