Puppy Farmers

[Wags]

Time and time again, we see reference to someone being a puppy farmer, whether registered breeder or not. The definition seems to be lacking and I just wondered ....... what defines a puppy farmer? Is there standard criteria, or is it merely a term to defame someone you don't like or who is a threat to you????

[mini girl]

When a "breeder" is doing this more for profit and money than anything else and at the expense of the mothers and fathers too and churning out litters of pups in not good conditions - selling bulk to petshops - all these things I would think make a puppy mill or puppy farm - money over the improvement of the dog and the socialisation and health of the pups. Money, money money - all they really think of. Guess there are some loving breeders of a dog they have as a pet and think - lets have some puppies!!! but I guess even though its not the way to do it - it would be 100% better than a puppy farm.

[Wags]

Components making up the definition of a puppy farmer as I see it:

Non-discerning breeding programmes

• Simply putting dogs together for the sake of a litter or numerous litters, regardless of whether the dogs are registered, unregistered or mixed breed, with no direction involved other than the production of a litter/litters, or, with no directional purpose other than to cash in on a trend or in the hope of producing another ch based only on the number of chs in the pedigree
  
• New families not appropriately screened or provided with appropriate documentation, history and advice on responsible puppy care
  
• Little, if at all, after sale responsibility taken by the breeder
  

Care and Health Practices

• Inadequate, if any, health checking and meeting of care needs of breeding dogs
  
• Inadequate, if any, consideration or planning given to the mother’s health and care needs in regard to pregnancies, whelping, or nursing – or the strain constant litters may be putting on her health and wellbeing.
  
• Inadequate, if any, health checking and meeting of care needs of puppies
  
• Proper care, worming, inoculation needs, microchipping and socialisation not effected with puppies
  

Environment

• Keeping dogs or puppies in confined spaces, whether clean and tidy or otherwise, including cages, crates and small yards with no or little access to natural surfaces and space to exercise adequately, and/or involving them in stimulating activities
  

Target Market & Selling Practices

• Selling puppies cheaply through dependable avenues of pet shops, some web sites or publications or even direct to the public and directed solely at the pet market – a no brainer
  
• As the aim of a registered breeder is to ‘improve the breed’ and ‘assist other breeders to do the same’, one could interpret the sale of ‘limited registration’ only puppies, directed at the pet puppy market, except for the odd puppy kept or sold on main, but only to a select few breeders, if at all – it could be argued that registered breeders selling on limited registration only could be placed in this category, whether done to ‘protect exclusivity of lines’ or not.
  

Transparency of the breeder and breeder’s practices

• Anonimity is required and given to breeders providing puppies to pet shops. This effectively means there is no right of come back for anyone buying their puppies, or repercussions to the breeder in regard to the health or quality of their puppies, whether mixed breed or supposedly purebred.
  
• Lack of transparency in any breeder, registered or otherwise, effectively reduces the need for responsible breeding practices, and increases unaccountability.
  

Not all puppies born are show or breeding quality, and there’s nothing wrong with breeding for the pet market only, provided the ethics, principles, aims and direction of the breeding programme contain all the necessary components to continue to improve the breed, and assist other breeders to do the same. In using the term ‘breeder’ here, I refer to the genuine breeder, not the fly by nights who soon discover that the whole idea is not as lucrative as they thought it might be.

Frankly, I don’t see how any person could be labeled a ‘puppy farmer’ unless guilty of, say 90% of the above, else we’d have a lot of registered and reputable breeders who could well qualify for the label ‘puppy farmer’. The breeder's ethics, practices and transparency would surely be the basis for defining a breeder correctly as a puppy farmer. Perhaps instead of using the term indiscrimanently, no matter how much public cloak and dagger is involved, the claimant ought to ensure that facts, not fiction, are checked personally.

There are breeders who no doubt do come under this category, but before passing unfounded defamatory gossip on openly, or privately, be sure you have it right, and whether you yourself just might fall into the same category - and therefore live in a glass house subject to similar stone throwing.