Up For Some Breeder Bashing Today?

[shortstep]

http://endangeredowner.blogspot.com/2011/0...l-pasttime.html

Breeder Bashing: A National Pasttime

Breeder-bashing isn't a new concept. However, with our rights to breed dogs under constant attack from the animal rights terrorists, led by none other than The Humane Society of The United States (which is in no way, shape or form a "real humane society", but rather an extreme animal rights organization), one would think that dog breeders could find some common ground, stick together, and dispense with the superiority complexes. No such luck.

One would think that since dog breeding is being compared to drug-dealing, that we could learn to play nice. Visit one of those damnable online "dog forums" sometime and you will see what I mean. We seem to forget (or do we?), that many members of the pet buying public go to these message boards to 'learn'. What are we teaching them? Just for fun visit one of your breed's message boards. Or better yet, Google your kennel name, or your dogs' names. You may be shocked at what "fellow breed enthusiasts" have to say.

"I would NEVER do that, and any breeder that DOES is......"

Fill in the blank; "back-yard breeder" (or "BYB"), "puppymill" (a phrase coined by the animal rights terrorists to divide and conquer us...it's working, by the way), or a modification, such as "showmiller".

Simply put, if WE don't like a certain breeder, or said certain breeder does not DO what WE do, or WOULD DO, then they are less than human and should be banished to the deepest pits of hell. Nothing a dog breeder does is EVER good enough; everyone that owns dogs, or breeds, has their own "ideas" of "what a breeder should do or be". No topic is off limits, every action --or inaction-- is subject to being bashed by those that need to feel superior by being self-proclaimed experts while hiding behind a computer keyboard.

Newsflash: such "superior" beings are NOT helping when it comes to winning the war for our rights to breed and even OWN dogs. My advice, if one needs help improving self-esteem, read one of those self-help books, or see a shrink.

One topic pounced upon by breeder-bashers is "NO one should own more than--insert number here- dogs!" Really? Just who are you exactly to dictate to anyone how many dogs a person should have the right to own? Of course, this same sentiment does not apply to rescues or fosters because they are "doing good", any other poor schmuck that chooses to have 10, 5, 20 dogs are "evil greedy breeders that should be sent to the deepest pits of hell" .

Another topic: "Anyone who breeds MORE THAN ---fill-in the blank time again---litters per year is a ....." Interesting. So, according to the "experts" no one can be a good breeder if they breed 2,3, or whatever-arbitrary-number of litters per year? As long as the puppies they produce are healthy, are good specimens of their chosen breed (which is subjective to each individual), and they sell them to good homes, what business is it of ours? Can you say, "NUNYA".

And then there is the ever popular, "if a breeder is testing at such a young age, they must have something to be afraid of!" Really??? Isn't the entire point of health testing what we produce (and their parents) is to make sure that we are doing everything we can to make sure those animals are as healthy as possible and to make sure that our puppy buyers know what they can/can't expect? This seems to be a bashing point done by those that don't do ---for example---eye CERFS on young puppies in a breed where CERFing at a young age isn't the "norm".

We're damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Remember that saying about glass houses and stones.....

Before all you "breeding experts" run off to educate the public on what a "good" breeder is, don't do the rest of us any favors by preaching what your "beliefs" are as being "my way or it's wrong".

We dog breeders seem to forget that WE created the anti-breeder sentiment in this country by bashing those that we didn't agree with or by bashing those that did things differently than us. And look where we are now....the animal rights terrorists and the bunny-hugger followers have taken our "ideas" and are introducing them as legislation faster than a dandelion growing in summertime. Yes, WE DID THIS TO OURSELVES.

We created the "breeders are bad" sentiment by expecting all breeders to do as WE DO, or else they are "bad" if they do not. We have "taught" the public this; we have "created" the monster.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, be careful of throwing those stones; you never know where they will land. Or how they will come back to haunt you.

[sas]

What a load of BS.

Fill in the blank; "back-yard breeder" (or "BYB"), "puppymill" (a phrase coined by the animal rights terrorists to divide and conquer us...it's working, by the way), or a modification, such as "showmiller".

You made no friends here with that corker.

Edited February 28, 2011 by MEH

[shortstep]

What a load of BS.

LOL off to a good start.

Ok so please tell us exactly where the writer has gone wrong, what exacty do you disagree with?

[Steve]

I think its spot on.

[poodlefan]

We dog breeders seem to forget that WE created the anti-breeder sentiment in this country

I'd say it had a lot more to do with what some breeders created in their whelping boxes.

I fail to see why any breeder should have to stand shoulder to shoulder with unethical breeders. And you know what - they're still out there.

Edited February 28, 2011 by poodlefan

[megan_]

I agree with MEH.

This article could have been written by an ethical breeder, or it could have been written by a puppy farmer.

I'm not going to post links, but most of them have a *very* similar rant on their websites. You know the deal:

* purebred breeders hate us because we are competition and our dogs have hybrid vigour

* animal rights activists want to stop us and stop all puppies from being born

etc etc.

There IS such a thing as an unethical breeder, and they ARE the scum of the earth.

There is a new trend on dog forums too: If you ask a question, or hold someone to account then it is "breeder bashing".

If you want to reduce breeder bashing, then workign to get rid of the unethical ones is the right place to start. No need to bash the general public.

ETA:

This line says it all

Fill in the blank; "back-yard breeder" (or "BYB"), "puppymill" (a phrase coined by the animal rights terrorists to divide and conquer us...it's working, by the way), or a modification, such as "showmiller".

I read it as "we're all breeders, let's stick together". If I was a registered breeder, I wouldn't want to be associated with a BYB or puppy farmer.

Edited February 28, 2011 by megan_

[sas]

What a load of BS.

LOL off to a good start.

Ok so please tell us exactly where the writer has gone wrong, what exacty do you disagree with?

I've edited my response to state that.

[Christina]

There is much truth in there.

Thing is we have become a society that likes rules. We like being told what to do, how to do it, when to do it, how often to do it, not to do it.

There is no room left for individuality, being accentric, doing your own thing or sheer common sense.

We must have black & white rules for everything.

Everyone else must agree with our way of doing things.

We must all be the same kind of normal.

[oakway]

What has been written is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

:D :D

[megan_]

I think its spot on.

I am dissapointed in this.

Do you really agree with this?

As long as the puppies they produce are healthy, are good specimens of their chosen breed (which is subjective to each individual), and they sell them to good homes, what business is it of ours? Can you say, "NUNYA".

That is, the conditions that the mother lives in means nothing and is none of anyone's business? I find that abhorrant.

I'm not a breeder, but I don't believe that what makes a "good specimen" is subjective to each individual. That is why we have breed standards, dog shows and dog sports - to measure the mark of each dog. The statement above plays to much to the "I think my dog is so pretty so I'll breed it" crowd.

[shortstep]

I agree with MEH.

This article could have been written by an ethical breeder, or it could have been written by a puppy farmer.

I'm not going to post links, but most of them have a *very* similar rant on their websites. You know the deal:

* purebred breeders hate us because we are competition and our dogs have hybrid vigour

* animal rights activists want to stop us and stop all puppies from being born

etc etc.

There IS such a thing as an unethical breeder, and they ARE the scum of the earth.

There is a new trend on dog forums too: If you ask a question, or hold someone to account then it is "breeder bashing".

If you want to reduce breeder bashing, then workign to get rid of the unethical ones is the right place to start. No need to bash the general public.

ETA:

This line says it all

Fill in the blank; "back-yard breeder" (or "BYB"), "puppymill" (a phrase coined by the animal rights terrorists to divide and conquer us...it's working, by the way), or a modification, such as "showmiller".

I read it as "we're all breeders, let's stick together". If I was a registered breeder, I wouldn't want to be associated with a BYB or puppy farmer.

Megan this is exactly what it is all about.

Ok lets take some time and some examples and work through a few examples,

Someone breeds outside the ANKC or Kennel club, are they ethical or not?

Someone is breeding purebreds to cross breds, are they unethcial?

[megan_]

I don't equate ethical to registries, cross breeds or purebreeds (gasp).

Ethics are about how you treat your dogs, how you health test them, home them and provide lifelong support to your buyers.

[shortstep]

I don't equate ethical to registries, cross breeds or purebreeds (gasp).

Ethics are about how you treat your dogs, how you health test them, home them and provide lifelong support to your buyers.

Good answer! I agree.

Where did it say that breeders who abuse their dogs dogs are to be supported?

Please give an example of a group of breeders that you personally know for a fact do not ever health test, do not provide a good home nor ever support their buyers?

Edited February 28, 2011 by shortstep

[poodlefan]

Someone breeds outside the ANKC or Kennel club, are they ethical or not?

Someone is breeding purebreds to cross breds, are they unethcial?

Any sweeping generalisation is bound to be inaccurate.

I think the author has it completely arse about and has adopted a common, but erroneous view.

Who determines the quality of the breeder? The BUYERS. It's not breeders ripping each other apart that's pushing purebreds to the wall. Its breeders breeding unhealthy pups, working on the "more is more" approach to features and playing right into the hands and the agendas of the animal rights movement. Acknowledge that truth and we may start to get somewhere.

Anyone who isn't a breeder that questions the extremes of some breed standards is none too politely told they have no idea what they're talking about.

Usual story, if you're so close to an issue you can't see that there are problems then you are part of the problem. I could cite some breeds in particular but I don't need to. The BBC has already been there.

And we are judged on the lowest rank of our peers. Until the CC's start to enforce their own codes of conduct and a few hard truth's are acknowledged then the BUYERS will continue to judge us that way too.

[poodlefan]

Where did it say that breeders who abuse their dogs dogs are to be supported?

Please give an example of a group of breeders that you personally know for a fact do not ever health test, do not provide a good home nor ever support their buyers?

Commercial scale ones.

Edited February 28, 2011 by poodlefan

[sas]

I believe cross breeding as well as pure 'BYB's' and 'puppyfarmers' unethical.

I know a large group of Breeders Registered and Unregistered in my choosen breed that do no health testing and don't provide life time support and don't screen homes.....Ching Ching Ching!

[megan_]

Good answer! I agree.

Where did it say that breeders who abuse their dogs dogs are to be supported?

Please give an example of a group of breeders that you personally know for a fact do not ever health test, do not provide a good home nor ever support their buyers?

the quote that I posted in response to Julie's post outlines where it says dog abusers are okay. It implies that as long as someone breeds nice dogs and gives them good homes then everything else is "none of your business". So that leaves out the welfare of their dogs, follow-up support of homes etc.

Breeders that I know personally who don't health test, easy!

1. The puppy farm (Freedom Kennels) that I got my boy from (I didn't really know about puppy farms then).

2. The ex puppy farm breeding bitch that I got via breed rescue. The puppy farmer hadn't ever taken her to the vet, never mind actually health tested her. Poor mite didn't even have a name. You'll find out more about her in next week when she celebrates two years of freedom (I'm going to do a big post with lots of pics ).

3. Read the DOL puppy pages. I suggest starting with the rare blue stafford. I've rung up a few out of interest and most that I spoke to didn't do any health testing.

4. The registered toy poodle breeder who advertises on gum tree a lot selling her "really, really, really tiny" toy poodles (anyone say "teacup"?).

[oakway]

I took the original post to exclude dogs in hell holes.

Plenty of people around the world breed dogs for a living and the dogs not live in hell holes.

The British have been doing it for centuries. If they hadn't, we may not have the breeds we have today.

Do you really believe that they were wrong ?. Different maybe but not wrong.

[poodlefan]

I took the original post to exclude dogs in hell holes.

Plenty of people around the world breed dogs for a living and the dogs not live in hell holes.

The British have been doing it for centuries. If they hadn't, we may not have the breeds we have today.

Do you really believe that they were wrong ?. Different maybe but not wrong.

The British may have been doing it for centuries Oakway but not with profit as the motive. Most of the larger kennels were in private hands and funded out of the breeder's pocket, not from puppy sales.

The issue will never be about how many dogs you have to me but how well you care for each and every one of them.

[shortstep]

Someone breeds outside the ANKC or Kennel club, are they ethical or not?

Someone is breeding purebreds to cross breds, are they unethcial?

Any sweeping generalisation is bound to be inaccurate.

I think the author has it completely arse about and has adopted a common, but erroneous view.

Who determines the quality of the breeder? The BUYERS. It's not breeders ripping each other apart that's pushing purebreds to the wall. Its breeders breeding unhealthy pups, working on the "more is more" approach to features and playing right into the hands and the agendas of the animal rights movement. Acknowledge that truth and we may start to get somewhere.

Anyone who isn't a breeder that questions the extremes of some breed standards is none too politely told they have no idea what they're talking about.

Usual story, if you're so close to an issue you can't see that there are problems then you are part of the problem. I could cite some breeds in particular but I don't need to. The BBC has already been there.

And we are judged on the lowest rank of our peers. Until the CC's start to enforce their own codes of conduct and a few hard truth's are acknowledged then the BUYERS will continue to judge us that way too.

This is such a great topic to hash out as there are such strong feeling about it!

I agree with almost everything you have said and I think for the same reasons.

However I think one of the driving forces is the pitting of one group against the other, both outside or within the groups. We see it on here all the time. It starts witht he breeders. The animal rights groups pick up on this and use it. The end result right now is that purebred dogs are being actively taken down, all the purebred dog people do for the most part is blame the dog breeders who are ot just like them and in the end everyone will loose out.

We have to stop the cycle, stop the name calling, stop blaming other breeders and stop creating tension and driving division between groups of dogs breeders.

You know I have some pretty strong personal opinions on how I want to breed my dogs, but I do think for the most part I try not to say or imply that anyone doing otherwise is wrong or a bad breeder. I try to remember that in the bigger picture all dog breeders are important and all make their contribution. I have also found that I usually have the very best of conversations and communication with breeders who are very good at what they do even when it is very unlike what I do. I appreciate their skill and I believe they appreciate mine.

Different is not bad.