So Whats The Answer ?

[~Anne~]

pet shop pups do have issues with peeing in the right place it is a common problem.

Is it? I have never heard of it before and yet I work, read, live by animals every day.

Again, where is the evidence? Is it a real fact or a perception? I'd love to learn more about it this as it has obviously escaped my notice.

I don't know what the answer is, I don't think anyone does but certainly pet shop purchases take the lion share of surrender, we don't know about the pound as often there is no history which is why compulsary chipping really should be the first step.

Sorry, can you clarify your comments. I am confused.

I think you are saying that most surrenders to rescues are animals purchased from pet shops????

As a rescuer, who took in a high volume of surrenders, I can easily state that there was a very tiny percentage that came to me that were originally purchased from a pet shop. Most were purchased from registered and unregsitered breeders. That is only a tiny sample though, but it is obviously very different to any examples you are aware of it seems ;)

The biggest flaw in the statement is the idea of compulsory chipping. Pet shops, at least in NSW, have had mandatory chipping for something in the vicinity of 12 years now. Puppies purchased from pet shops are chipped. Why are Sydney pounds filled with dogs not chipped if they are coming from pet shops?

[mita]

I totally agree. In short - there simply does not appear to be any evidence to support a lot of claims made against pet shops.

It may be an abhorrent thought to many breeders, but is it possible that breeders could work with petshops? Rescues are now beginning to.

/quote]

There is evidence of what puppies need in order to best develop into companion dogs. And what's the critical age span, in weeks, during which that should be provided for. I've referred to that study & that age span many times on DOL.

There's also evidence of the critical influence of a well-socialised mother dog during those critical weeks.

Puppies in pet shops have had this critical period interrupted & have been separated from their mother.

Rescues that are working alongside selected petshops do not place puppies in the store adoption facility. It's usually dogs well beyond the critical age range for baseline socialisation.

In addition, the rescue dogs available for adoption are not being sold in a commercial model. It's an adoption model based on welfare. With new ownership not depending on simply handing over money. There's screening of potential owners, possible home checks, post-adoption support & trial periods, also security of return.

As to petshops working with breeders, it would best be as an agent. With instore information about breeds & responsible ownership etc. And referrals to breeders for direct contact with potential buyers. In that way, puppies have a stable period for the critical baseline early socialisation.

And also the breeders control the types of homes their dogs will go to. It allows, too, for pre- & post- adoption support, with trial periods.

Edited November 15, 2010 by mita

[~Anne~]

Mita, I am not talking about evidence that dogs needs socialisation. I am directly referring to pet shops creating dogs with issues because of a lack of socialisation, over an above or even equal to, any other source of dogs.

[Shazzapug]

As to petshops working with breeders, it would best be as an agent. With instore information about breeds & responsible ownership etc. And referrals to breeders for direct contact with potential buyers. In that way, puppies have a stable period for the critical baseline early socialisation.

And also the breeders control the types of homes their dogs will go to. It allows, too, for pre- & post- adoption support, with trial periods.

Thats the only way it would work....I cant see pet shop owners liking that though, they would be losing out on $'s.

[mita]

Mita, I am not talking about evidence that dogs needs socialisation. I am directly referring to pet shops creating dogs with issues because of a lack of socialisation, over an above or even equal to, any other source of dogs.

I'm talking about comparisons of puppies sold in petshops with the optimal situation and age range for early socialisation. The kind of socialisation that's been found to link with less behavioral issues later on. Less chance of dumping.

Petshop puppies would be just one of the situations where this optimal situation does not apply. For example, puppies from dogs kept in a 'farmed' environment (minimal human contact) also miss out in these optimal conditions. Even if they're kept with the mother dog throughout the critical period.

I've argued that the general public needs to know what constitutes the best basis for a puppy to be bred & raised, so it's most likely to develop well later as a companion dog. Puppies being sold in pet stores lose out in length of time, mother contact & continuity. And prospective buyers have no idea of what conditions they've been exposed to beforehand.

I've also argued that the relationship between a pet store & a breeder should only ever be as an agent & information centre. Prospective owners need to check for themselves how a puppy they're interested in has been raised. While breeders need to exercise the responsibility of placing their puppies carefully. So direct contact between a puppy buyer & an actual breeder is essential.

Edited November 15, 2010 by mita

[casowner]

As to petshops working with breeders, it would best be as an agent. With instore information about breeds & responsible ownership etc. And referrals to breeders for direct contact with potential buyers. In that way, puppies have a stable period for the critical baseline early socialisation.

And also the breeders control the types of homes their dogs will go to. It allows, too, for pre- & post- adoption support, with trial periods.

Thats the only way it would work....I cant see pet shop owners liking that though, they would be losing out on $'s.

That is not totally correct I have offered myself and I am sure other non puppy selling shops would too, but it makes it hard when there is always pet shop bashing going on. I would prefer $$ made on product sales resulting in puppy owners buying from reputable sources and making a long lasting business/customer relationship rather than a quick buck on a puppy sale.

There is much more to consider before any such scheme would work including defining ethical registered breeders from the non ethical ones also as the pet shops that would do this would be putting their business reputation into the hands of the breeders that they recommend. For example you recommend B Smith as a Breeder, your customer buys a pup from them, the pup has health issues or there are problems with paperwork (whatever). Now your customer could now partially blame you for your recommendation and you lose a customer but the breeder got a puppy sale. Businesses should be built on reputation and customer service and they rely on repeat customers moreso than a Breeder who may sell one puppy to a particular person in a lifetime, or if lucky maybe 2 or so but they don't rely on them to come back.

Pet Shops could be an invaluable way of getting Registered Breeders/pure bred dogs more visiblity in the Community but neither can have it both ways, they have to work together and with the history between the two that would be a big ask for either side.

Edited November 15, 2010 by casowner

[Shazzapug]

As to petshops working with breeders, it would best be as an agent. With instore information about breeds & responsible ownership etc. And referrals to breeders for direct contact with potential buyers. In that way, puppies have a stable period for the critical baseline early socialisation.

And also the breeders control the types of homes their dogs will go to. It allows, too, for pre- & post- adoption support, with trial periods.

Thats the only way it would work....I cant see pet shop owners liking that though, they would be losing out on $'s.

That is not totally correct I have offered myself and I am sure other non puppy selling shops would too, but it makes it hard when there is always pet shop bashing going on. I would prefer $$ made on product sales resulting in puppy owners buying from reputable sources and making a long lasting business/customer relationship rather than a quick buck on a puppy sale.

There is much more to consider before any such scheme would work including defining ethical registered breeders from the non ethical ones also as the pet shops that would do this would be putting their business reputation into the hands of the breeders that they recommend. For example you recommend B Smith as a Breeder, your customer buys a pup from them, the pup has health issues or there are problems with paperwork (whatever). Now your customer could now partially blame you for your recommendation and you lose a customer but the breeder got a puppy sale. Businesses should be built on reputation and customer service and they rely on repeat customers moreso than a Breeder who may sell one puppy to a particular person in a lifetime, or if lucky maybe 2 or so but they don't rely on them to come back.

Pet Shops could be an invaluable way of getting Registered Breeders/pure bred dogs more visiblity in the Community but neither can have it both ways, they have to work together and with the history between the two that would be a big ask for either side.

Isnt the Pet shop bashing only on the Pet shops that sell live animals? For non=animal petshops it could work straight away...customers could take flyers and cards etc home with them. But you would never get a non-ethical breeder admitting to being non-ethical and as you say it is the pet shops reputation on the line too.

I personally get a lot of repeat business as Pugs are like Potatoe Chips you cant just stop at one. ;)

[Steve]

Having an agreement with a [et shop where if someoen goes in to buy a specific breed that they send them to the breeder, then the breeder pays the pet shop $50 for spotters feees and send the buyer back to that shop to purchase their supplies - I would see that as a great partnership..

No matter what I am going to be the person selling the pup. I will speak with the buyer and screen them and ensure they are good to go.

I think we should reward the pet shops who are working with us and promote them and help then grow their businesses without the need for live animal sales

[Souff]

Having an agreement with a [et shop where if someoen goes in to buy a specific breed that they send them to the breeder, then the breeder pays the pet shop $50 for spotters feees and send the buyer back to that shop to purchase their supplies - I would see that as a great partnership..

No matter what I am going to be the person selling the pup. I will speak with the buyer and screen them and ensure they are good to go.

I think we should reward the pet shops who are working with us and promote them and help then grow their businesses without the need for live animal sales

Have not read the rest of this thread, but support the concept that you have written here. It makes good sense and works well in many other areas of commerce.

Souff

[WreckitWhippet]

We currently refer everyone that comes into work, looking for a puppy to DOL, unless we know someone with the breed that we can suggest they contact.

[casowner]

We currently refer everyone that comes into work, looking for a puppy to DOL, unless we know someone with the breed that we can suggest they contact.

I have always referred people onto SACA and DOL too.

The other major point to consider in the bigger picture is that there will always be people that want a cross breed - what about them? it is their right to do decide that they do not want a pure bred, regardless of what we believe. The media has done a very good job at assisting with this and the scare mongering has done a lot of damage to the pure bred community. So until all puppies are bred to the same standard and sold by the same standards regardless of breed it is a hard thing to change. You can minimise what many people see as the damage done by pet shops but what happens about the internet sales, bybers, newspapers etc etc who is monitoring that? And how can that be monitored? Anne raises a very vaild point if so many dogs and puppies are going into shelters not microchipped then they came from other sources.

Edited November 15, 2010 by casowner

[Nic.B]

I agree that pet shops are not the only issue that needs to be addressed. That is very clear. They certainly do contribute to the problem of unwanted animals though (we all have real life examples of that) and if they are serious that must be addressed.

Not just through impulse buying, also health and behavioral issues which stem from sourcing poorly bred puppies from unregulated, unreputable sources, and then holding puppies during their critical period offering no stimulation or socialisation what so ever in most cases. Despite this they deny there is an issue at all.

I have seen many pet shop chipped dogs and BYB’d dogs who have major health issues, heart problems, behavioral issues, patella problems are common.

No wonder peoples blood boils.

Pet supply stores who do not sell live animals (or perhaps refer customers onto reputable Registered Breeders/ Rescues) are worth their weight in gold.

I support mine greatly and spend a fortune there despite knowing that I could buy things at a cheaper price at other places. I value their knowledge, support and my good working relationship with them as a customer.

Impulse buying happens in more than pet shops, that doesn’t and should never discount their part in this though.

Similar to the ‘Desexing from Shelters’ debate, which I have experienced a 100 times. People claim that there is no evidence desexing all adopted animals from shelters lowers the number of dogs impounded.

Yet, it is a mute argument while most other sources continue to send out undesexed animals. How on earth would you expect to see an improvement in the number of unwanted animals coming into shelters, while most other sources continue to send out undesexed puppies?

You can take the higher ground though; If pounds and shelters do desex, at least they are not contributing to the problem of unwanted litters, accidental litters or worse, BYB’ing or the farming of animals.

The most frustrating part for me personally is that clearly there is an issue, yet everyone points the finger at everyone else and says there is no issue.

It is incredibly disheartening for those who meet unwanted family pets daily and then witness their demise, often through no fault of their own.

[conztruct]

Sorry - I'm not sure what the answer is because you essentially have two competing motives for the same outcome.

The people who are sucked in by impulse purchasing just want a dog, are usually very badly informed, has done no research and believes everything they are told because they simply don't know any better.

The suppliers?

1) BYB breeder, pet shop (profit motive) - will maintain a constant supply to prey on impulse purchasers, producing or getting their hands on whatever they can in order to make a sale and a profit. They will tell the consumer anything about health, size, fitness to make the sale including the cross they're trying to sell is pure, papers don't mean anything or they come with papers (a vaccination card) and they are very good at marketing.

2) Registered ethical breeder (quality, support) - breed for the improvement of the breed and usually for something to run on for themselves so there is a limited supply, they usually tell the consumer the truth including potential health problems so they are informed, they usually screen where their puppies go (let's face it - a lot of impulse purchasers provide an environment that a re breeder would never allow one of their puppies to go to) and as their priority is not making a profit do not see the need or aren't interested in marketing.

What is the solution? I'm sorry - I don't have much to offer except that our law-makers need to be lobbied to implement some rules where the experience and knowlegde of re breeders is recognised and reflected in legislation, so that BYB's and pet shops are charged some form of tax for the volume they move, are required to provide lifetime money-back guarantees, maybe puppies not from a re breeder have to pay a very inflated rate of registration. Who cares if it isn't fair - lots of people in commercial ventures experience protectism and dis-incentives that are supposed to reign in unscrupulous practices - why should the puppy industry be any different?

Rather than trying to turn our re breeders into marketing machines and not being able to fully focus on their dogs, I would favour dis-incentives to the commercial market in conjunction with actions (education!) which better inform the public about the traps of these impulse purchases.

I know when I got into dogs with mine I had no idea, no idea about pedigrees or purebred. I'd never had a dog as a pet so didn't know a thing. I was just lucky that my first exposure was at a dog show and I asked questions and then started doing a bit of research which enabled me to make a much more informed choice. Otherwise, I just would have been another one of the gullible people who think they're doing a great thing by taking a puppy home from a pet shop or from an ad in the paper that tells me I'm getting the latest in demand dog, with excellent health and will never have any problems.

[Sheridan]

Conztruct, why shouldn't pedigree dog breeders do marketing?

[Fleuri]

Having an agreement with a [et shop where if someoen goes in to buy a specific breed that they send them to the breeder, then the breeder pays the pet shop $50 for spotters feees and send the buyer back to that shop to purchase their supplies - I would see that as a great partnership..

No matter what I am going to be the person selling the pup. I will speak with the buyer and screen them and ensure they are good to go.

I think we should reward the pet shops who are working with us and promote them and help then grow their businesses without the need for live animal sales

I think this is a great idea pluse the potential buyer will become more educated and word of mouth works well too.

Only that those pet shops won't stop selling pups from BYB's and puppy farms because they can make hundreds of $ selling one of those dogs.

Today I saw 5 husky type dogs about the size of an adult mini schnauzer all in the same glass pen. It's so sad. They had Cockerspaniels (looked cross to me) for $1100.

[Rusky]

I think you are saying that most surrenders to rescues are animals purchased from pet shops

yes but by question and answer as there is no compulsary chipping here in WA.

I don't know what the answer is, I really don't. I think in the last thread I said something like you can't control people...So even though no one wants more laws I am sorry but they are needed. If a dog is chipped to Joe Blog in a compulsary chipping programme then they are responsible and they should collect the dog/puppy and be responsible for the welfare of that animal.

Good breeders take care of their dogs and their puppies future and if the rest don't then someone needs to make them responsible.I don't care if they are the pure breed community, the backyard crew or the farmers, they should all be equally responsible for their own breeding. I don't know if the pet shops are responsible for all the deaths but they give an outlet for sale much like gumtree and other online sales rooms.

You know I was told yesterday that one particular pound were euthanaising 90 dogs today, that is bloody shocking, so whoever is breeding them need to be making sure they are going to a place they are loved and cared for. I am honestly trying to keep emotion out of this thread but gee it is hard.

Poor bloody dogs and the ones I feel for the most...the cross breeds that aren't cute and fluffy, the poor staffy cross, kelpie cross, bully cross cos they get the last chance which is often no chance and they die in their thousands every year. I know "pure" dogs die but they do have a much better chance as there is often someone looking for that particular type of dog.

[moosmum]

This" Us Vs THEM" IMO is where we all get ourselves in strife.Every one trying to not just see things done ethicaly,but to "bring tha bastards down" I believe pet shops CAN be run ethicaly,and no doubt some are.So why persecute all pet shops?

I do think its quite posible to work with pet shops,and them to work with ethical breeders,if creative thought is is used.

conztruct,

I agree with your 1st sentence,but the generalizations in your examples are hardly fair in the way this is worded.

You lump Registered ,ethical breeders into one very positive basket,that seems to insinuate all registerd breeders fit in there too.They don't automaticaly and there are many pure breeders telling their " consumers" anything about health,size and fitness to make a sale.Many of whom are motivated by profit.

These are the people who have repeatedly given ammo' to those persecuting pure breeders.

Them you lump all BYBs in the same category as puppy farmers or pet shops as being purely profit motivated and with no ethics or on going care.Sorry,but just because you will not hear about them on dole,does not mean they are non exsistent.Maybe harder to find,but these divisive attitudes are helping no one.So often you see newbies to DOL being crucified before they have a chance to learn better,.Wouldn't it be better if we can assume if they are interested enough to come here,its because of a genuine desire to learn?

In your pragraph where you ask,What is the solution?

I find your solution very offensive.

Who cares? Every one except the registered,ethical breeders who you insinuate includes ALL of the registerd breeders!

When registerd breeders can claim no one in their ranks is profit motivated,that all stock is clear of genetic health problems,that all puppy buyers are provided with on going care and life time guarantees etc,and includes no puppy farmers then people might listen to these arguments.

Attitudes like this are what is turning people away in droves from pure breed dogs,and great informative sites like DOL.It is elitist, arrogant and damaging.

The puppy industry should be very different re:protectionism.Otherwise it becomes nothing more than that..An industry.

Sorry - I'm not sure what the answer is because you essentially have two competing motives for the same outcome.

The people who are sucked in by impulse purchasing just want a dog, are usually very badly informed, has done no research and believes everything they are told because they simply don't know any better.

The suppliers?

1) BYB breeder, pet shop (profit motive) - will maintain a constant supply to prey on impulse purchasers, producing or getting their hands on whatever they can in order to make a sale and a profit. They will tell the consumer anything about health, size, fitness to make the sale including the cross they're trying to sell is pure, papers don't mean anything or they come with papers (a vaccination card) and they are very good at marketing.

2) Registered ethical breeder (quality, support) - breed for the improvement of the breed and usually for something to run on for themselves so there is a limited supply, they usually tell the consumer the truth including potential health problems so they are informed, they usually screen where their puppies go (let's face it - a lot of impulse purchasers provide an environment that a re breeder would never allow one of their puppies to go to) and as their priority is not making a profit do not see the need or aren't interested in marketing.

What is the solution? I'm sorry - I don't have much to offer except that our law-makers need to be lobbied to implement some rules where the experience and knowlegde of re breeders is recognised and reflected in legislation, so that BYB's and pet shops are charged some form of tax for the volume they move, are required to provide lifetime money-back guarantees, maybe puppies not from a re breeder have to pay a very inflated rate of registration. Who cares if it isn't fair - lots of people in commercial ventures experience protectism and dis-incentives that are supposed to reign in unscrupulous practices - why should the puppy industry be any different?

Rather than trying to turn our re breeders into marketing machines and not being able to fully focus on their dogs, I would favour dis-incentives to the commercial market in conjunction with actions (education!) which better inform the public about the traps of these impulse purchases.

I know when I got into dogs with mine I had no idea, no idea about pedigrees or purebred. I'd never had a dog as a pet so didn't know a thing. I was just lucky that my first exposure was at a dog show and I asked questions and then started doing a bit of research which enabled me to make a much more informed choice. Otherwise, I just would have been another one of the gullible people who think they're doing a great thing by taking a puppy home from a pet shop or from an ad in the paper that tells me I'm getting the latest in demand dog, with excellent health and will never have any problems.

[conztruct]

This" Us Vs THEM" IMO is where we all get ourselves in strife.Every one trying to not just see things done ethicaly,but to "bring tha bastards down" I believe pet shops CAN be run ethicaly,and no doubt some are.So why persecute all pet shops?

I do think its quite posible to work with pet shops,and them to work with ethical breeders,if creative thought is is used.

conztruct,

I agree with your 1st sentence,but the generalizations in your examples are hardly fair in the way this is worded.

In response to your comments - of course, yes, they were generalisations and I'm very well aware that all registered breeders are not necessarily ethical, or that all pet shops are not necessarily unethical dodgy used-car type sales outlets. I did not cater for all the ifs, buts and maybes scenarios for the purpose of not having a post that went for pages upon pages.

My comments were based on my own experiences in looking for a dog as I spoke to many suppliers including pet shops, BYBs (even though I didn't know they were this at the time) and registered breeders.

As a relative newbie myself, I'm happy to be educated and am very open to constructive feedback. However, making assumptions about what I seem to be insinuating (especially when they are not correct) and then labelling me as elitist and arrogant is over-stepping the mark fairly significantly and getting very personal. Thank you very much for berating me and I'm sincerely glad that you've taken your frustration out on me which means that hopefully someone else will miss out on being a target.

I hope you have a lovely night :D

Edited November 15, 2010 by conztruct

[Souff]

As a relative newbie myself, I'm happy to be educated and am very open to constructive feedback. However, making assumptions about what I seem to be insinuating (especially when they are not correct) and then labelling me as elitist and arrogant is over-stepping the mark fairly significantly and getting very personal. Thank you very much for berating me and I'm sincerely glad that you've taken your frustration out on me which means that hopefully someone else will miss out on being a target.

I hope you have a lovely night :D

[Nic.B]

There are so many elements to pet surrender. God it is overwhelming at times

I am sorry if this is off topic as this thread is specifically about pet shops; Though the surrender rate rises dramatically at certain times of the year. Christmas/New Year is the worst (At HP this went on until March) to say it was a living nightmare is very much an understatement, school holidays, Easter.

It is simply not a coincidence as it happens year after year. Hundreds and hundreds of great family pets.

A campaign is desperately needed in early November educating people to make arrangements for their pets while they are making arrangements for their holiday instead of leaving it to the day before, and dumping the dogs and cat.

Perhaps people can consider boarding, having a house sitter, a neighbor or family member minding the animals (I have done that 100 times for friends and family), hire a pet service to feed and exercise twice a day or consider pet friendly accommodation. Or if you’re like me stay home as you are surrounded by animals.

Also other crucial education is to ensure chip details are up to date before you go away. I have seen so many dogs impounded where the details were out of date, the owners were away and not contactable. Some of these dogs only got out by the skin of their teeth, hours before pts when the owners returned and started looking.

This Christmas is probably a good time to begin a survey (If approved) I am not sure re reason for surrender, as many people are dishonest.

Call me skeptical though I find it hard to believe that there is a dramatic rise in surrenders during the holidays yet the same pathetic reasons for surrender are used. No one comes in and says “I am going on holidays and have made no arrangements for my pets”

The only time I have ever said something to someone surrendering their dog was when a guy came in with his dog, I found out as much a possible about the dog before taking her pic. He said “You will find a good home for her wont you” I was polite, though stated that pts was tomorrow, there were 20 other dogs on that list, so she would have to take her chances along with all of the others. He surrendered her, though to his credit he then came back 1 hour later and picked her up.

It is a great combination of things IMO that lead to the demise of family pets in pounds and shelters, all need to be addressed, and change is long overdue.