raz Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 And how many rescuers really think that raz???? Come on - you know better than that surely! dont ask me Tris - ask the OP. She felt strongly enough about it to start a thread and my first reaction was - I'm not sure why you're surprised because it's been a constant on this forum since I joined. Doesnt worry me though. I live in a free country and will exercise my right to buy a dog from wherever I want which is from breeders of my choice. I couldnt give a crap if some rescuer or animal rights' numpty wants to try to guilt me or tell me I cant buy from a breeder because I'll kill a dog. That's just ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gayle. Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 People do think that though. I remember a conversation with my sons ex girlfriend when I was arranging the arrival of a pedigree dog from interstate. She told me I should go to a pound to get a dog because I'd save a life. I said I didn't want one of those dogs though, I wanted an Australian Shepherd with a pedigree. She insinuated that by getting the dog I wanted, I'd be condemning another dog to death. But I would never have gone to the pound for a dog because I only wanted what I wanted and not just any dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megan_ Posted December 21, 2011 Share Posted December 21, 2011 PETA are hardly rescue though, why lump rescue with them. Their kill rates in their US shelters are over apparently over 90%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vickie Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 ETA not to mention that most rescuers, with any kind of knowledge, recognise that PETA are radical whackjobs whose eventual goal is that no-one has a pet. Ain't that the truth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebelsquest Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 wish you would actually learn to spell dobermann properly. This got me googling - found this interesting snippet - "After WWII, there was a very strong anti-German sentiment in the world, and very particularly in the USA and UK. Many people shunned anything which was overtly German, and the double "n" at the end of the name was/is a very strong Germanic statement. The second "n" was dropped, and it was almost as if there was a sigh of relief and it was OK to have a Dobe. A lot of Americans and Canadians who are into European dogs use the double "n" now - we are 60 years away from that era, and it's no longer politically offensive or sensitive. However, most of us are now used to the single letter, and use it - as does the AKC. lois" Reference here On the ANKC website, they spell it with a double n. http://www.ankc.org.au/Breeds.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kavik Posted December 22, 2011 Author Share Posted December 22, 2011 I got upset because the video was posted on FB by someone who supports rescue but who I didn't expect to have that opinion. And then had people agree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dame Aussie Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 (edited) I have 2 dogs, one is a rescue and one is a purebred dog from a breeder, and I have been criticised for buying the dog with a pedigree. I just ignore it. I have never, and will never dunp a dog, therefore I see no reason why I should feel guilty for buying a dog from a registered ethical breeder. ETA: That video is ridiculous. Edited December 22, 2011 by Aussie3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aphra Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Certainly some of the guilt trips like an ad I saw today make me less likely to support rescue in general if that is what they think and certainly less likely to get a dog from a pound. You're free to do as you wish about where you buy your dogs, and other people are free to have their own opinions about that. If you throw up your hands and say, "well, I won't support rescue because some rescuers don't support registered breeders" because of a couple of people's opionions, you're being about as illogical as they are. There are thousands of rescuers who all have lots of different opinions about things; if you think rescue on the whole is a worthwhile endeavour, then it doesn't make much sense to turn your back on it because you disagree with some people does it? And if you don't think rescue is worthwhile what do you care what some rescuers think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OSoSwift Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Hmmmmm interesting, I have always spelt it with the double n. I always thought single 'n', but then I don't think I've even seen one in the flesh so my opinion doesn't hold much weight The older members of my family always used 'Alsation' rather than GSD too. The registered Name in Australia is Dobermann The registered name in the US is Doberman Pinscher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anniek Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 mmmmmm interesting just maybe ...... the crazy sighthound people have similar opinions knowledge and experiences, because they tend to be more responsible owners / breeders / rescuers because of the type of dogs they own / breed / rescue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacqui835 Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Lol I never said I thought the sight hound owners were crazy, on these forums they just tend to be my strongest and most vocal non-supporters. I have not met any sight-hound owners in real life that I didn't think were lovely. In this thread for example, I started by saying that I was annoyed that people assumed that if you hadn't bought a dog from a responsible breeder, you would have rescued one because I knew in my case I never would have - I would have just kept waiting for the right dog to come along (I'd already waited 3 years). I said that there were particular reasons I wanted a dog and certain things I wanted them to be capable of, and whilst there's still risk no matter what you do, if the breeder is selectively breeding for particular traits and has been doing this for generations, they're more like to crop up in the puppies. Of course at this point, because my dog is not pure, certain people started attacking cross-breeds again and it just frustrates me because I personally believe you can be an ethical and responsible breeder whether you breed pure or cross - just because most examples of cross-breeding in dogs seem to be unethical, cross breeding itself does not equal unethical (eg. and no-one would even try to say that in any other domesticated species other than the dog). I do not promote cross-breeding, but I don't believe all breeders who cross should be demonised - again, they're not with any other species so why are dogs so different? Anyway, this whole topic is very worrying. In my opinion, anyone or organisation that attacks breeders is directly threatening the future of dogs as pets and should the day ever come that we can no longer have dogs as pets, well humans will be so much poorer for it. I don't think my dog hates his current situation either - based on my experiences it is impossible for me to accept that dogs don't want to be humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bozzieUD Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 (edited) There was quite an interesting exchange a few weeks ago on the DogsVic site with a particular rescue group that was told it could not bring its adoptable dogs to the BigDay Out for Dogs run by DogsVic (for a number of reasons, apparently). Anyway, in the enshewing chaos and abuse, a letter was posted by the head of the rescue group which effectively accused Dogs Vic members and registered breeders of using dodgey vets, being puppy farmers, not vaccinating puppies or taking appropriate care of litters and animals in our care (etc etc). There was a heap of abuse aimed at registered breeders and DogsVic by the supporters of this group - there was even a post asking if it was true that Dogs Vic was selling unwanted dogs for scientific experiments! So I have to say, while I generally do support the work of rescue groups (noting members of our breed club have been involved in breed rescues and its part of the Club's mission) I was pretty much revolted by the abuse laid on by this group, there was certainly a feeling of PETA to it all.... Hi Lappiemum, I don't suppose you or anyone else kept a copy of that facebook exchange? One of the worst comments and I quote: "For the safety of my 'mutts' I won't be attending the Big Day Out. God knows what those 'Genetically Modified Dogs', the so called Purebred Dogs, might have that could contaminate them. ...." Actually came from the secretary of the local obedience dog club! ( an affiliate of Dogs Vic!) As an Ex 10 yr member (of that club) I have already registered my concern, but without any proof nothing can be done. I know one thing , while she still holds that position I wont be entering any trials there. God knows what I would say if I bumped into her! Edited December 22, 2011 by Ozshep-Bracken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bozzieUD Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 (edited) There was quite an interesting exchange a few weeks ago on the DogsVic site with a particular rescue group that was told it could not bring its adoptable dogs to the BigDay Out for Dogs run by DogsVic (for a number of reasons, apparently). Anyway, in the enshewing chaos and abuse, a letter was posted by the head of the rescue group which effectively accused Dogs Vic members and registered breeders of using dodgey vets, being puppy farmers, not vaccinating puppies or taking appropriate care of litters and animals in our care (etc etc). There was a heap of abuse aimed at registered breeders and DogsVic by the supporters of this group - there was even a post asking if it was true that Dogs Vic was selling unwanted dogs for scientific experiments! So I have to say, while I generally do support the work of rescue groups (noting members of our breed club have been involved in breed rescues and its part of the Club's mission) I was pretty much revolted by the abuse laid on by this group, there was certainly a feeling of PETA to it all.... Yup, what a saga that was, it put me completely off the rescue group, which was one I had previously supported. when I post such things on my fb, and I do quite often, I always say either adopt a dog from a rescue org/shelter and or buy from a registered and ethical breeder, just don't from pet shops and BYB's.. I don't think my posts are offending anyone, well apart from those that have bought from pet shops... Jules, I don't think that is offensive at all, as you are not saying a shelter/rescue dog is the only way to go. The current one I have seen doing the rounds on FB is "don't buy while shelter dogs die" and the comments following are stating that getting a dog from a breeder is in fact "killing" a shelter dog. That kind of comment is unfair, untrue and unwarranted. Edited December 22, 2011 by Ozshep-Bracken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pheebs Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I personally believe you can be an ethical and responsible breeder whether you breed pure or cross If you truly believe that then perhaps you need to reacquaint yourself with the ethos of this forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebelsquest Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Lol I never said I thought the sight hound owners were crazy, on these forums they just tend to be my strongest and most vocal non-supporters. I have not met any sight-hound owners in real life that I didn't think were lovely. In this thread for example, I started by saying that I was annoyed that people assumed that if you hadn't bought a dog from a responsible breeder, you would have rescued one because I knew in my case I never would have - I would have just kept waiting for the right dog to come along (I'd already waited 3 years). I said that there were particular reasons I wanted a dog and certain things I wanted them to be capable of, and whilst there's still risk no matter what you do, if the breeder is selectively breeding for particular traits and has been doing this for generations, they're more like to crop up in the puppies. Of course at this point, because my dog is not pure, certain people started attacking cross-breeds again and it just frustrates me because I personally believe you can be an ethical and responsible breeder whether you breed pure or cross - just because most examples of cross-breeding in dogs seem to be unethical, cross breeding itself does not equal unethical (eg. and no-one would even try to say that in any other domesticated species other than the dog). I do not promote cross-breeding, but I don't believe all breeders who cross should be demonised - again, they're not with any other species so why are dogs so different? Anyway, this whole topic is very worrying. In my opinion, anyone or organisation that attacks breeders is directly threatening the future of dogs as pets and should the day ever come that we can no longer have dogs as pets, well humans will be so much poorer for it. I don't think my dog hates his current situation either - based on my experiences it is impossible for me to accept that dogs don't want to be humans. Oh that's what happened? I suggest you read back over this thread, because that is certainly not what I read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuzzycuddles Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I personally believe you can be an ethical and responsible breeder whether you breed pure or cross If you truly believe that then perhaps you need to reacquaint yourself with the ethos of this forum I agree This is a pure breed dog forum, the only ethical reason to breed is for the betterment of your chosen breed IMO not to add to an already overpopulated world with more cross breeds that will likely end up dumped as they don't meet the expectations of their new owners. I understand you chose to buy from a non registered/ pedigree breeder and that's fine but ethical breeding is a lot more than how you treat your dogs/ raise puppies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I personally believe you can be an ethical and responsible breeder whether you breed pure or cross If you truly believe that then perhaps you need to reacquaint yourself with the ethos of this forum I agree This is a pure breed dog forum, the only ethical reason to breed is for the betterment of your chosen breed IMO not to add to an already overpopulated world with more cross breeds that will likely end up dumped as they don't meet the expectations of their new owners. I understand you chose to buy from a non registered/ pedigree breeder and that's fine but ethical breeding is a lot more than how you treat your dogs/ raise puppies. I dont beleive peopel who breed cross breds are breeders - they just breed dogs - anyone can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greytmate Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 Jacqui if you don't want me to respond to what you write, please don't quote me and then write a whole lot of garbage directed at my posts. This is your choice to come out and argue with me. Cross breeding in the way that your dog's breeder is doing is unethical. And you are a fool for believing it has allowed you to be discerning in your choice of pups. All it has done is randomised the traits in the offspring. Your comments about health testing in pet rescue dog, comparing it to genetic testing of breeding stock, shows that you really have no idea why health tests are done at all. If you did a lot more reading and a lot less arguing with me, you might find your experience here more enjoyable. You might learn things from the huge number of ethical dog breeders sharing their information, and have fewer problems with an increasing number of non-supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuzzycuddles Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 I personally believe you can be an ethical and responsible breeder whether you breed pure or cross If you truly believe that then perhaps you need to reacquaint yourself with the ethos of this forum I agree This is a pure breed dog forum, the only ethical reason to breed is for the betterment of your chosen breed IMO not to add to an already overpopulated world with more cross breeds that will likely end up dumped as they don't meet the expectations of their new owners. I understand you chose to buy from a non registered/ pedigree breeder and that's fine but ethical breeding is a lot more than how you treat your dogs/ raise puppies. I dont beleive peopel who breed cross breds are breeders - they just breed dogs - anyone can do that. Well they breed which would make them breeders just not good ones. We call back yard breeders breeders afterall I do wish we could seperate ethical registered breeders as it's so common to hear oh well my breeder said this when really it's just someone who happened to have a male and a female dog and no real knowledge or experience Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gone Posted December 22, 2011 Share Posted December 22, 2011 new name suggestion " Muttley Maters " :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now