Interested To Know

[dragonwoman]

Can anybody help with statistics showing where the "problem" dogs (the "too many dogs are bred" dogs)originated from? Are they products of

1. ANKC breeders

2. Purebred but unregistered breeders

3. Accidental/intentional matings of pet dogs

4. Designer dog breeders/puppy farms

5. Other?

I am sure I have seen figures but not sure where to find in a hurry

[Steve]

The truth of it is that dogs without owners come from everywhere.

Ive been breeding registered dogs now for around 40 years and I like to think I can bring down the risks by educating the buyer,screening them,providing the healthiest, best temperamented,well socialised and most predictable dogs possible, being there for them for a safety net to help and advise and take the dogs back for years into the future etc but sadly no matter what, no matter how much you put in and how hard you try a percentage of people who take home a puppy turn out to be people who dump their dogs.

You will see more coming from places which put out a higher percentage of puppies bred but in my opinion no matter where they come from and no matter what you do to try to cut down the risk factors some end up in homes which no longer wish to live with them - so because you see about 10% of all puppies born come from registered breeders I would expect about 10% of dogs which end up homeless are registered pure bred dogs. Some will end up in rescue, some in pounds, some will be rehomed by the owners and some returned to the breeder.

We see lots of us trying to define why one group or another may have a higher percentage of dis satisfied owners or problem dogs and the spin tells us pet shops put em out to anyone, that they are less well socialised and impulse buys etc so therefore there are more coming form pet shops but last time I looked the stats don't back that up.The marketing of purebred dogs tells us that what we do cuts back risk factors and Id like to think that what I do and knock myself out over has some impact on whether dogs and their owners will live happily ever after so I stay focused on what I think I can do for my dogs to keep them healthy and happy, in my breeding program, placement of puppies, and follow up to try to get it right so what I breed doesn't end up homeless. But if you do this long enough no matter what, no matter how hard you try and give sometimes owners let you down. Because one group has less owners than another I expect to see less numbers coming from that group but I believe the big picture is about where they go not where they come from.

The way society views dogs and how many see them as expendable and easily disposed of or replaced etc impacts as well as the day to day life changes that mean people cant keep their commitment and obligations to the dog, are all things none of us can predict and which see dogs not having a family to live with.

When you talk about problem dogs as in poor temperament and where do they come from thats about the breeding and selection more than where they go to live and therefore the group which is being more careful about what dog mates with what dog and looking at great temperaments and predictability in the present generation and for the future will produce less problem dogs.

The group that is most likely to breed problem dogs are in my opinion probably back yard breeders.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

Steve I think an estimate of 10 per cent for registered pure breeds is too high. A few of us who made responses to the NSW Companion Animals Taskforce specifically requested that they make a study into the sources of unwanted dogs. I am hoping that the proposals to introduce more rigour into the chipping databases will help someone to do that one day - until that happens, all anyone has got is estimates which can swing either way depending on the point people are trying to make.

DogsNSW did gather some figures to respond to the Companion Animals Taskforce Recommendations. If I recall correctly DogsNSW breeders registered about the equivalent of a third of the total numbers of dogs impounded each year in total. That is, all pure breed dogs registered, not just those who go on to be unwanted. That's why I think 10 per cent is too high, but I don't have better figures because we all need that study into where they are actually coming from.

I take your point that it varies geographically, but unwanted registered pure breeds would be no-where near 10 per cent where I am - most of them are jack/mini foxie crosses, working breed crosses and pigging breed crosses.

[tdierikx]

Walk into any pound in Sydney and take a look at the numbers of impounded dogs without microchips... this, and the fact that they are predominately mixed breeds, suggests that pedigreed purebreds are definitely NOT in pounds in any significant numbers at all.

I haven't seen a large number of the popular designer breeds in any of the pounds I visit either - ie. the usual pet shop fare...

My conclusion - purely based on anecdotal evidence (seen with my own eyes) - is that the majority of unclaimed impounded dogs are most likely originally sourced from BYB's.

T.

[SkySoaringMagpie]

My conclusion - purely based on anecdotal evidence (seen with my own eyes) - is that the majority of unclaimed impounded dogs are most likely originally sourced from BYB's.

Mine also, which is why I was very surprised at the NSW CA taskforce recommending an exemption from the licensing proposals for "accidental" litters. As a piece of policy, that seemed designed to ensure that we always have a supply of unwanted back yard bred dogs.

[Steve]

My conclusion - purely based on anecdotal evidence (seen with my own eyes) - is that the majority of unclaimed impounded dogs are most likely originally sourced from BYB's.

Mine also, which is why I was very surprised at the NSW CA taskforce recommending an exemption from the licensing proposals for "accidental" litters. As a piece of policy, that seemed designed to ensure that we always have a supply of unwanted back yard bred dogs.

True - my point about the 10% is that it would be in context to what is bred by which group - around here hands down it would be people who just let their dog do as it wants and kelpie crosses are everywhere - none chipped. But out here those who do let their working dogs get into each other dont have to chip as they have an exemption.

[mixeduppup]

I believe it depends on the area. In my area it's usually working dog breeders and hunting dog breeders as well as bybers. You rarely see puppy farm dogs or ANKC dogs around here that are in the pound or in rescue.

[Aphra]

No-one actually knows the breakdown of where pound dogs come from, there aren't even any reliable figures about how many pets end up in pounds.

The pounds I work with the population is mostly working dogs, poor, bloody staffs and bullbreed xs and large dogs probably bred for hunting. Small fluffies and designer breeds do turn up, but given how many are being churned out by puppy farms, if the common meme about people buying pet shop puppies on impulse and dumping them was true, you'd expect the pounds would be over-run with them, and they're not. Every so often you get a whole lot of little dogs turning up in a pound all at once, and I suspect you're seeing breeding stock getting dumped.

On anecdotal evidence, I'd surmise that pet shop puppies go home and probably stay home. Maybe rural pounds are different than more urban pounds.

If you have a look at the tables in this article, on the whole, it accords with my experience of the pound population. The dogs labelled mastiff x are not generally any kind of mastiff btw anything tan with a black muzzle gets labelled mastiff, even if it weighs 10 kilos.

http://www.savingpets.com.au/2013/09/every-dog-is-an-individual-every-dog-should-matter/

Here's a piece of research attempting to answer some of the questions.

http://www.smallanimaltalk.com/2013/09/interview-with-diana-chua-how-many.html

[mita]

My conclusion - purely based on anecdotal evidence (seen with my own eyes) - is that the majority of unclaimed impounded dogs are most likely originally sourced from BYB's.

Mine also, which is why I was very surprised at the NSW CA taskforce recommending an exemption from the licensing proposals for "accidental" litters. As a piece of policy, that seemed designed to ensure that we always have a supply of unwanted back yard bred dogs.

Yes. The licensing for responsible breeding from the Gold Coast City Council, doesn't cover 'accidental' backyard-type litters, either. They say their licensing supports planned/responsible breeding. In many cases it's preaching to the converted of what good breeders do, anyway.

All they say is that breeders should counsel new owners on benefits of getting the puppy desexed. So there's absolutely nothing about the 'ordinary' person who is not a licensed breeder, allowing their 'pets' (wherever they've got them from) to breed & why.

Couple years ago, the National Dog newspaper had a front page article. The AWL in SA & the Kennel Association in SA were combining to say that, based on the AWL's observations, a large number of dogs being 'dumped' fitted the commercially bred 'designed dogs'. And purebred dogs were not highly represented at all. Don't know if they based that on actual statistics. But they were confident enough to make that public statement.

Bit old (1991) but paper by Dick Murray to an Urban Animal Management Inc conference, has many of the questions that are still being asked. He drew on research & statistics current at that date... but laments there's no system for data collection that will throw light on where the dumped dog problem is coming from. His own 'take' is that careless pet ownership is the culprit, rather that excessive breeding capacity as a single factor.

He doesn't draw distinction between purebred & mixed breed sources. But he does draw interesting conclusions ... & there's reference to local research he did in the Townsville area sampling people who allowed their dogs to breed & why.

http://www.aiam.com.au/resources/files/proceedings/penrith1993/PUB_Pro93_DickMurray.pdf

Edited October 4, 2013 by mita

[RuralPug]

I have been saying for years that the proportion of ANKC pedigreed dogs impounded and not reclaimed is actually much less that you would expect as a group which supplies 10% of the total number of puppies bred. I'm not sure if this is due to the care generally taken by breeders when placing puppies or to the value placed on these puppies by owners. Probably both are factors.

My statement assumes that ANKC registered dogs are microchipped with their breeder's prefix in the name, the factor could be higher if purchasers have changed the name on the microchip registration. Certainly there are more non-pedigree apparent purebreds impounded than pedigreed based on microchip names.

Locally we actually have a large number of designer breeds (small fluffies with some maltese or some chihuahua in their ancestry are second only to staffy crosses and working dog crosses) impounded and unclaimed, although these are usually quickly rehomed either direct from the pounds or via rescue, because they are "popular". That would be a reflection of the large number of these crosses in the general community here, the majority of which I am sure are loved and well-cared for by their owners.

I have been told directly by a pet owning subhuman that it was cheaper to buy a new cute maltese x shih tzu puppy from the Melton area in Victoria, where BYBs abound and puppies are usually available with little or no waiting, than to pay the council fines to collect their unregistered, entire, microchipped 18 month old one from the pound. Therefore they surrender that dog to the animal welfare organisation which has the council contract to run the pound. That org will desex and vetwork the dog - which at times includes shaving under anaesthetic to removing matting - and quickly sell it to someone who will hopefully register it and take better care. Because the dog has been surrendered to them, the org will not take any cruelty actions re the matting. Sigh.

I do not understand why the council fines aren't followed up on once the dog has been surrendered. That scenario happens all too often, sometimes there are repeat offenders - gosh if these were parking fines rather than animal bylaws fines they would get a visit from the sheriff.

[Rebanne]

My statement assumes that ANKC registered dogs are microchipped with their breeder's prefix in the name, the factor could be higher if purchasers have changed the name on the microchip registration. Certainly there are more non-pedigree apparent purebreds impounded than pedigreed based on microchip names.

all my pedigreed dogs are chipped with their call name only. None with their full registered name which often has no direct connection with the call name cept for one.

[Christina]

I also posted a similar question re known pedigree pure breeds in pounds.

One problem seems to be that they guess the breed by look a like not pedigree so 15 poodles a year ( as an example ) may not actually be pure bred poodles.

There is no way of knowing as few will submit pedigree papers with the dog or if they did they would not be disclosed & given to new owner.

For other dogs I doubt that they ask where they got them from.

[RuralPug]

My statement assumes that ANKC registered dogs are microchipped with their breeder's prefix in the name, the factor could be higher if purchasers have changed the name on the microchip registration. Certainly there are more non-pedigree apparent purebreds impounded than pedigreed based on microchip names.

all my pedigreed dogs are chipped with their call name only. None with their full registered name which often has no direct connection with the call name cept for one.

Really? Then if one of the dogs you had bred escapes or strays and the contact details on the microchip were not up to date there would be no chance at all of you being notified that it had been impounded and you would have no chance to rescue it and save it from a possible PTS.

Not every pound or veterinary clinic contacts breed rescue or the state breed club when a purebred is running out of time, but some do, and that extra chance means that the breeder may have a say in where that dog of their breeding is placed next. Even if you just chipped your prefix followed by the call name it would serve the same purpose.

I always knew that the prefix could be removed by a future owner, but personally I felt that using the prefix as part of the name when microchipping showed a willingness on the part of that breeder to be responsible for all their breeding if any fell through the cracks and ended up in the pound system. Perhaps it is just something that hasn't occcured to some breeders?

Now you have me wondering how many ANKC breeders do not add their prefix to the chip details of their puppies?

[Steve]

Microchipping has been mandatory in NSW since the mid 90's and up until around 2 years ago loads of registered breeders were not chipping puppies. Now they have to have chip numbers to register them but I hear you can type any old chip number in and there is no way of checking whether its really the chip number for the rego papers or not because they have no access to the NSW companion animals chip registry - and even if they did sometimes it takes weeks for the vets to pass on details and for it all to be entered into the data base and most wouldn't be recorded for checking at time of registering the litter. Don't assume that because a dog isn't chipped you can know where or where not it came from.

[Rebanne]

My statement assumes that ANKC registered dogs are microchipped with their breeder's prefix in the name, the factor could be higher if purchasers have changed the name on the microchip registration. Certainly there are more non-pedigree apparent purebreds impounded than pedigreed based on microchip names.

all my pedigreed dogs are chipped with their call name only. None with their full registered name which often has no direct connection with the call name cept for one.

Really? Then if one of the dogs you had bred escapes or strays and the contact details on the microchip were not up to date there would be no chance at all of you being notified that it had been impounded and you would have no chance to rescue it and save it from a possible PTS.

Not every pound or veterinary clinic contacts breed rescue or the state breed club when a purebred is running out of time, but some do, and that extra chance means that the breeder may have a say in where that dog of their breeding is placed next. Even if you just chipped your prefix followed by the call name it would serve the same purpose.

I always knew that the prefix could be removed by a future owner, but personally I felt that using the prefix as part of the name when microchipping showed a willingness on the part of that breeder to be responsible for all their breeding if any fell through the cracks and ended up in the pound system. Perhaps it is just something that hasn't occcured to some breeders?

Now you have me wondering how many ANKC breeders do not add their prefix to the chip details of their puppies?

Owners change the details to what they want not what breeders want. I did ask them all to be put down as 2nd contact, which all did. But it could be anything by now. Just because their prefix is not part of their name does not mean I would not be willing to help, bit of an (wrong) assumption on your part. IME pounds wouldn't know how to track down a prefix or even recognise one. And in my breed they would be more puzzled by a lack of tattoo's then anything else.

[minimax]

Neither of my pedigree dogs have their prefix on their chip. One was chipped by me and one by the breeder. Although ones registered name is "missing in Boston" and I opted not to chip him in that because I thought it might cause some confusion if he was lost... :laugh:

[Her Majesty Dogmad]

Seemingly intelligent people can be very stupid - that's where a lot of dogs come from.

Someone I know moved to the country onto acreage. They "rescued" an unwanted Ridgeback cross - a desexed female.

The same people that gave them that dog are "breeders" - they breed their Ridgebacks with their Staffy and Mastiff crosses - not sure if it is generally for hunting.

From a litter, they had a male pup left so gave it to these people.

To my horror, they plan on "breeding" him when he's fully grown - to one of the dogs their friends own (also a crossbreed). They had no clue that he'd most likely roam because he's undesexed - they have unfenced acreage ....

I'm doing my best to deter them but am not sure i'll get through. As for their friends, they are one breeding bitch down as their Ridgeback was confined to a shed when she came on heat - so that none of the male dogs could get to her. She died in there.

Edited October 6, 2013 by dogmad

[RuralPug]

That does make sense Rebanne, as a greyhound breeder, tattoing does give you a permanent link to dogs you have bred.

I guess I just assumed that it was something that most ANKC breeders did, because I've come across it quite often. It is handy to track down breeders to give them the option of assisting in a rehome. Now I will have to start canvassing breeders to see how many do actually include their prefix in the original chipping details.

[minimax]

That does make sense Rebanne, as a greyhound breeder, tattoing does give you a permanent link to dogs you have bred.

I guess I just assumed that it was something that most ANKC breeders did, because I've come across it quite often. It is handy to track down breeders to give them the option of assisting in a rehome. Now I will have to start canvassing breeders to see how many do actually include their prefix in the original chipping details.

Is chipping by the breeder mandatory in all states though? I know in some states it is and has been for a long time, but in others it's quite a recent thing. When I got Max she wasn't even chipped (breeder in VIC), and she's only two. So a lot of the time the breeder probably has (or had) no say in what goes on the chip details.