Upcoming Paper On Puppy Mills

[sandgrubber]

Many dope dealers consider themselves businessmen. Does this make all businessmen dope dealers?

Puppy mill operators may call themselves commercial operators, and indeed, they may be commercial operators. That does not make all commercial operators puppy farms.

isn't commerical breeders and puppy farms the same thing, for me whether you choose to call them commercial enterprises - a nicer word than puppy mill or a puppy farm dont much matter, but basically for me they are both the same i.e. both breed for commercial gains or for $

Ground hog day again.

According to the agreed upon definition of a puppy farm by RSPCA Australia and all other groups who attended the round table meeting on puppy farmers

Puppy farmer does not equal commercial breeder. .

Puppy farmers can also be people who breed for other motivations including for the show ring.

[corvus]

The paper stipulated the study was on ex-breeding stock from large scale commercial breeding estabishments. The RSPCA's definition of a puppy farm doesn't enter into it.

[Steve]

The paper stipulated the study was on ex-breeding stock from large scale commercial breeding estabishments. The RSPCA's definition of a puppy farm doesn't enter into it.

Perhaps we are reading a different paper but I followed your link and it specifies quote.

This is the first large study comparing mill survivors to dogs raised in homes.

I cant see the word commercial in there nor can I see anything which relates to the motivations of those who were breeding these dogs.

Is there another part of the study which Ive missed?

If they continuously mention puppy mill dogs then why wouldnt the definition of what a puppy mill is be entered into it?

[sandgrubber]

The paper stipulated the study was on ex-breeding stock from large scale commercial breeding estabishments. The RSPCA's definition of a puppy farm doesn't enter into it.

Puppy farms, by in large, are large scale commercial breeding establishments. That does NOT mean ALL commercial breeding establishments are puppy farms, nor does it say that neglect is the only way a large breeder can be a commercial success. Nor does it say that small scale guarantees adequate care.

Wouldn't you expect the same results from small scale money-loosing operations IF they kept dogs in environments which provided little human interaction or other stimulation? The basic problem is that keeping a dog confined in a jail-like environment for several years produces an unhappy beast. Someone who keeps 8 dogs confined to a garage, does no walkies, and only tends the dogs' needs after they come home from work is going to end out with the same problems. There are people like this in the show circuit, and most would be considered failures from a commercial perspective.

Edited October 17, 2011 by sandgrubber

[corvus]

The paper stipulated the study was on ex-breeding stock from large scale commercial breeding estabishments. The RSPCA's definition of a puppy farm doesn't enter into it.

Puppy farms, by in large, are large scale commercial breeding establishments. That does NOT mean ALL commercial breeding establishments are puppy farms, nor does it say that neglect is the only way a large breeder can be a commercial success. Nor does it say that small scale guarantees adequate care.

From the introduction:

The commercial dog breeding industry is a major producer of purebred dogs in many countries around the

world. The owners of these facilities refer to themselves by different names, such as ‘professional breeding kennels,’ ‘high-volume breeders,’ and ‘large-scale breeders.’ In some countries (e.g., the UK and Australia) these breeding establishments are referred to as ‘puppy farms.’ In the USA,

the mass production aspect of these operations at some point gave rise to the term ‘puppy mill,’ which has come to be defined by many as ‘a commercial farming operation in which purebred dogs are raised in large numbers’ (Merriam-Webster, 2010). For the purposes of this report, high-volume puppy producing operations will be referred to as commercial breeding establishment(CBE).

I quote it for the sake of clarity so everybody knows exactly what the authors of the paper studied. When recruiting participants they asked for dogs that were ex-breeding stock from "commercial breeding establishments ("puppy mills")" and they considered the terms synonomous. It's not my definition or the RSPCA's definition. It's theirs.

ETA It's not really theirs, even. They seem to be following Merriam-Webster's definition.

Wouldn't you expect the same results from small scale money-loosing operations IF they kept dogs in environments which provided little human interaction or other stimulation? The basic problem is that keeping a dog confined in a jail-like environment for several years produces an unhappy beast. Someone who keeps 8 dogs confined to a garage, does no walkies, and only tends the dogs' needs after they come home from work is going to end out with the same problems. There are people like this in the show circuit, and most would be considered failures from a commercial perspective.

It's beside the point. I intended only to clarify facts before the discussion degenerated into a matter of semantics.

Edited October 17, 2011 by corvus

[corvus]

If anyone would like to read the paper in full, PM me. I've only skimmed it, but it seems like a pretty good read if you're into that kind of thing.