[cremebrulee]

why is it, dog rescues, always say, never ever buy a dog from a pet store, b/c those dogs are from puppy mills, and yet, rescues obtain a lot of their dogs from Puppy mills.
and why aren't states doing something in this day and age to shut down puppy mills.
Thanks so much

[Aredhel]

Originally Posted by cremebrulee

why is it, dog rescues, always say, never ever buy a dog from a pet store, b/c those dogs are from puppy mills, and yet, rescues obtain a lot of their dogs from Puppy mills.

That's one of the problems I have with the "rescue, don't buy from a breeder!" mantra that's so popular now. Granted it's not the poor dog's fault that it came from a puppy mill, but as long as foolish people can buy purebred dogs or the current fashionable mutt-cross-of-the-day inexpensively from puppy mills and then turn around and dump them at the pound or with a breed rescue when the dogs become a problem, puppy mills will flourish. GOOD breeders (whom I will concede are a minority) do a lot of health screening on their stock, and carefully screen prospective buyers as well; their dogs are not cheap and cannot be obtained as impulse buys.

and why aren't states doing something in this day and age to shut down puppy mills.
Thanks so much

What would you have the states do that they are not already doing?

The problem is that there are plenty of foolish buyers out there, which results in plenty of greedy, unethical "breeders" who are happy to cater to that market. Puppy mills go away when no one wants their product.

[cremebrulee]

Originally Posted by Aredhel

That's one of the problems I have with the "rescue, don't buy from a breeder!" mantra that's so popular now. Granted it's not the poor dog's fault that it came from a puppy mill, but as long as foolish people can buy purebred dogs or the current fashionable mutt-cross-of-the-day inexpensively from puppy mills and then turn around and dump them at the pound or with a breed rescue when the dogs become a problem, puppy mills will flourish. GOOD breeders (whom I will concede are a minority) do a lot of health screening on their stock, and carefully screen prospective buyers as well; their dogs are not cheap and cannot be obtained as impulse buys.



What would you have the states do that they are not already doing?

The problem is that there are plenty of foolish buyers out there, which results in plenty of greedy, unethical "breeders" who are happy to cater to that market. Puppy mills go away when no one wants their product.

Thank you for your reply, however, rescues, claim that puppy mills are inappropriate, that dogs never get out of their cages, and in poor health and if they can no longer breed, they are taken out back and shot....and I could go on and on...in this day and age, why aren't they shut down?

If a puppy mill has say 3 separate offenses, why can't the states shut them down for cruelty?

What I would have them do is screen every single dog breeder and make certain the dogs are healthy and thriving...

the states aren't doing anything....it's the rescues that go in and take the dogs from these puppy mills....
I mean, in my area, there are puppy mills known, about an hour's drive away, and yet, they don't close them down, why?

I just don't get it....we humans sit there and watch this happening and don't do a darn thing about it.

[Aredhel]

Originally Posted by cremebrulee

What I would have them do is screen every single dog breeder and make certain the dogs are healthy and thriving...

The state doesn't have the manpower or the funds to screen "every single dog breeder." (And how would they find them if they did? You don't have to be registered with the state to breed dogs. Anyone with a backyard and an intact b*tch can breed.) They do screen the larger commercial kennels, but the standards those places have to meet to stay in business are pretty low. Basically, they are livestock breeding standards, but dogs aren't livestock, and good, well-socialized puppies need a lot more care and attention than they can get in one of those setups.

the states aren't doing anything....it's the rescues that go in and take the dogs from these puppy mills....

No, most rescues actually get their dogs from owner surrenders or from the pound.

I mean, in my area, there are puppy mills known, about an hour's drive away, and yet, they don't close them down, why?

Can the state PROVE in a court of law that the operation in question is violating animal cruelty statutes? If they can't (or if the state's animal cruelly laws are fairly lax), they can't shut the operation down.

Buyers, on the other hand, could shut these operations down very quickly if they just wouldn't purchase puppies from them. The puppy mill IS trying to make a profit, after all; if the profit disappears, so does the puppy mill.

I just don't get it....we humans sit there and watch this happening and don't do a darn thing about it.

Because most people simply don't give a sh*t. They want a cute puppy, they want it NOW, and they don't want to put any effort into researching the purchase. As long as these things hold true, it's going to be very hard to shut down puppy mills.

[Aredhel]

Oh, and these days the worst puppy mills AREN'T selling to pet stores; those few stores that still sell puppies are getting from commercial breeding operations like the Hunte Corporation which DO meet the (very minimal) standards required to be registered as a USDA-approved breeder (although they are definately not breeding good dogs!). No, the worst puppy millers are selling their wares online to naive purchasers, posing as reputable breeders. They can have very impressive online storefronts, and look very reputable, as long as the buyer doesn't do any real investigation. And too many buyers don't. That's another reason shutting puppy mills down is hard: anyone can sell stuff online these days, and good luck keeping up with them.

[leorah]

One significant problem with puppy mills and reputable breeders is that they usually breed to AKC standards. This means that in almost all cases the stud books are closed, allowing no outcrossing. As a result, all dogs from a particular breed share common ancestors. In many breeds such as standard poodles, dalmations, and cavalier King Charles spaniels, among others, inherited genetic diseases have become a serious issue for the dogs--causing suffering, pain and premature death--and financial stress and heartbreak for owners. Despite the most diligent efforts it is often difficult for even good breeders to ensure enough genetic diversity to eliminate even relatively minor issues such as hip dysplasia, let alone cardiomyopathy, epilepsy, PRA and other illnesses. What happens to the puppies that don't meet the breed or health standards? They may, if they are lucky, go to a rescue. (For many years I was an officer and volunteer for a multi-state breed specific rescue and we routinely took dogs from many so-called reputable breeders that would have otherwise been euthanized.) Supporting puppy mills and breeders serves to perpetuate a system that very often does not work in the best interest of the dogs it purports to care so much about.

[cremebrulee]

Originally Posted by Aredhel

Oh, and these days the worst puppy mills AREN'T selling to pet stores; those few stores that still sell puppies are getting from commercial breeding operations like the Hunte Corporation which DO meet the (very minimal) standards required to be registered as a USDA-approved breeder (although they are definately not breeding good dogs!). No, the worst puppy millers are selling their wares online to naive purchasers, posing as reputable breeders. They can have very impressive online storefronts, and look very reputable, as long as the buyer doesn't do any real investigation. And too many buyers don't. That's another reason shutting puppy mills down is hard: anyone can sell stuff online these days, and good luck keeping up with them.

so then, wouldn't it be easy to just change the laws, you say they are very low standards...well then, there might be an answer, not fully 100% full proof but would certainly be a start.

There are so many regulations in our country, that is just is beyond my comprehension that something can't be done...and BTW, I also understand, that we couldn't possibly find all the backyard breeders, however, to raise the standards, and regulations would also improve living conditions for these poor fur babies.

The online sellers, well, I admit, I don't know? Meaning, there probably is no answer, unless someone has a problem, then that seller should be investigated....but to just leave the situation where it is, is to me, inhuman. a lot of these dogs are suffering beyond comprehension and in this day and age, it should not be.

I'm not saying there is a solution, I'm saying as human beings, who care, we've got to do more....and more...it isn't going to happen all at once, but every little bit we can do, is a step in the right direction...

I know where the puppy mills are in my area, and so does the state...inspections should be by surprise, on any given day....and if these inspections do not result in change, then severe fines or closure would be the answer.

[Aredhel]

Originally Posted by leorah

One significant problem with puppy mills and reputable breeders is that they usually breed to AKC standards.

Puppy mills are in no way breeding to AKC standards. That's one of their problems; they don't care about the physical structure, genetic soundness, or temperament of their breeding stock, only that the resulting puppies are registerable. (They don't care about properly socializing the puppies, either.)

This means that in almost all cases the stud books are closed, allowing no outcrossing. As a result, all dogs from a particular breed share common ancestors. In many breeds such as standard poodles, dalmations, and cavalier King Charles spaniels, among others, inherited genetic diseases have become a serious issue for the dogs--causing suffering, pain and premature death--and financial stress and heartbreak for owners. Despite the most diligent efforts it is often difficult for even good breeders to ensure enough genetic diversity to eliminate even relatively minor issues such as hip dysplasia, let alone cardiomyopathy, epilepsy, PRA and other illnesses.

I agree that completely closed stud books, which allow no way to introduce new genes into the existing gene pool of a breed, is a problem that breed clubs are going to have to address sooner or later (hopefully sooner). This is one area where the dog fancy could learn a lot from livestock breeders, where use of an appendix registry for controlled outcrossing is common.

Supporting puppy mills and breeders serves to perpetuate a system that very often does not work in the best interest of the dogs it purports to care so much about.

And here's where I have a bone to pick. ALL DOGS COME FROM BREEDERS!!! ALL OF THEM, WITHOUT EXCEPTION!!! Dogs aren't produced by spontaneous generation. Anyone who owns a dog is ultimately supporting a breeder. The only choice to be made is what sort of breeder is being supported. The "don't buy from a breeder, rescue!" mantra, while well-meaning, ultimately results in supporting the worst breeders (those who allow their dogs to mate randomly without any regard to temperament or physical health of the animals, those who don't do any screening of either their breeding stock or their customers) at the expense of dog breeders who do care about those things and do their best to produce physically sound, temperamentally sound, and well socialized puppies.

Originally Posted by cremebrulee

so then, wouldn't it be easy to just change the laws, you say they are very low standards...well then, there might be an answer, not fully 100% full proof but would certainly be a start.

No, because the current standards involve things that can be accurately measured and documented: cage size, food provided, immunizations given, etc. That's not where the commercial puppy mills like Hunte fall down. Where they fail is that their breeding stock isn't of breeding quality (especially when it comes to temperament) and they don't socialize the resulting puppies adequately. Good luck writing enforceable laws to correct those deficiencies.

The other mills, which don't meet basic standards of animal welfare, CAN be shut down on animal cruelty charges. The problem there is that before an abusive mill can be shut down, the authorities have to first hear about it AND then document the unsatisfactory conditions in enough detail that the resulting animal seizures will hold up in a court of law. That's harder to do than it appears.

There are so many regulations in our country, that is just is beyond my comprehension that something can't be done...and BTW, I also understand, that we couldn't possibly find all the backyard breeders, however, to raise the standards, and regulations would also improve living conditions for these poor fur babies.

We can't protect human children from child abuse. Why would you think it would be possible to protect "fur babies" from animal abuse?

The most valuable single step taken to shut down puppy mills, IMHO, is making it illegal for pet stores to sell dogs and cats. Many municipalities have done that, and as a result the two largest chain pet stores (PetSmart and Petco) no longer sell puppies and kittens.

know where the puppy mills are in my area, and so does the state...inspections should be by surprise, on any given day....and if these inspections do not result in change, then severe fines or closure would be the answer.

Bear in mind that if you give the state the power to come onto those properties to carry out random inspections, you are also giving the state the power to come onto YOUR property to carry out random inspections. Are you sure you want that? I guarantee you that there are people out there who disapprove of the way you are keeping your current animals, and they would love nothing more than to have the power of the state to enforce their idea of "proper animal welfare."

[cremebrulee]

Aredhel Puppy mills are in no way breeding to AKC standards. That's one of their problems; they don't care about the physical structure, genetic soundness, or temperament of their breeding stock, only that the resulting puppies are registerable. (They don't care about properly socializing the puppies, either.)

and that is wrong, but I would like to share with you what else is wrong...everything today, has a price tag on it, and to heck with doing what is right.
I am a boomer baby, and back then, they were giving away, for free, what you today call, designer dogs. We called them muts...which meant, they were a mixture of several different breeds. Today, designer dog breeders will charge you 3,000 or more for a puppy and that is wrong.

I agree that completely closed stud books, which allow no way to introduce new genes into the existing gene pool of a breed, is a problem that breed clubs are going to have to address sooner or later (hopefully sooner). This is one area where the dog fancy could learn a lot from livestock breeders, where use of an appendix registry for controlled outcrossing is common.

you talk about introducing new gene pools into breeds those mutts I described in the paragraph above made wonderful pets, they were just as smart as any other critter...and made wonderful companion pets. I'm not talking dog show quality here...I'm talking lets figure out something we can do for the betterment of the dogs to start shutting down dog mills...

And here's where I have a bone to pick. ALL DOGS COME FROM BREEDERS!!! ALL OF THEM, WITHOUT EXCEPTION!!! Dogs aren't produced by spontaneous generation. Anyone who owns a dog is ultimately supporting a breeder. The only choice to be made is what sort of breeder is being supported. The "don't buy from a breeder, rescue!" mantra, while well-meaning, ultimately results in supporting the worst breeders (those who allow their dogs to mate randomly without any regard to temperament or physical health of the animals, those who don't do any screening of either their breeding stock or their customers) at the expense of dog breeders who do care about those things and do their best to produce physically sound, temperamentally sound, and well socialized puppies.

Maybe so, however, again, the prices some reputable breeders charge is outrageous...literally...

No, because the current standards involve things that can be accurately measured and documented: cage size, food provided, immunizations given, etc. That's not where the commercial puppy mills like Hunte fall down. Where they fail is that their breeding stock isn't of breeding quality (especially when it comes to temperament) and they don't socialize the resulting puppies adequately. Good luck writing enforceable laws to correct those deficiencies.

well, I say yes, b/c those current standards can be changed, nothing is impossible and it really stresses me out that you would be so adamant about doing nothing more???? That is what I am unable to conceive?

The other mills, which don't meet basic standards of animal welfare, CAN be shut down on animal cruelty charges. The problem there is that before an abusive mill can be shut down, the authorities have to first hear about it AND then document the unsatisfactory conditions in enough detail that the resulting animal seizures will hold up in a court of law. That's harder to do than it appears.

well, in all these years, if I know where the puppy mills are, you can't tell me, if the rescues can get in and are given these horribly abused dogs, why can't they be shut down? I mean, rescues go in and take dogs these puppy mill people do not want...

We can't protect human children from child abuse. Why would you think it would be possible to protect "fur babies" from animal abuse?

You have a point in one way and in another I don't see the connection...you would think it would be easier to protect dogs? Especially when you get pictures and proof?

The most valuable single step taken to shut down puppy mills, IMHO, is making it illegal for pet stores to sell dogs and cats. Many municipalities have done that, and as a result the two largest chain pet stores (PetSmart and Petco) no longer sell puppies and kittens.

But has it really helped....they are forever posting pictures on FB of dogs that have been abused, shot, ears hacked off...???????

Bear in mind that if you give the state the power to come onto those properties to carry out random inspections, you are also giving the state the power to come onto YOUR property to carry out random inspections. Are you sure you want that? I guarantee you that there are people out there who disapprove of the way you are keeping your current animals, and they would love nothing more than to have the power of the state to enforce their idea of "proper animal welfare."

Well, I used to work in the food business, many years ago, and the state would then perform several random inspections several times a year....and that is no different, still doesn't give the state the right to come on my property, unless there is a report of abuse given to authorities, and that is where it has to start, don't you think?

Please note, I may come off rather curt or like I'm trying to be argumentative, but I'm not...just can't believe what some of these critters have to put up with all their lives and even worse, that we humans don't do more to stop it....I'm sorry, but I just can't take, (we can't) for an answer...there has to be more we can do....

[Aredhel]

Originally Posted by cremebrulee

and that is wrong, but I would like to share with you what else is wrong...everything today, has a price tag on it, and to heck with doing what is right.
I am a boomer baby, and back then, they were giving away, for free, what you today call, designer dogs. We called them muts...which meant, they were a mixture of several different breeds. Today, designer dog breeders will charge you 3,000 or more for a puppy and that is wrong.

Why is it wrong? If the designer dog breeder is doing it right, he will be using dogs and b*itches that are of breeding quality in his program, and those animals are not cheap to acquire. Then he will be doing extensive health screening (especially for hidden genetic defects) on his breeding stock before producing a single litter, as well as putting in the necessary time to properly socialize each litter after it is born. Do you think the resulting quality puppies will be cheap?

(If he's not doing it right, he's taking advantage of the ignorant public's opinion that "designer dogs," because they are crossbreds, are inherently better than purebreds, and using lousy breeding stock because it's cheaper. Unfortunately, this does describe most breeders of "designer dogs.")

And you might want to look at the what the pound euthanasia rates were during your childhood, when randomly-bred puppies were being given away for free right and left, before you get too nostalgic for those times. Today, the emphasis on spay/neuter has all but emptied out the pounds in many communities; some areas are now actually importing dogs from the south (where spay/neuter hasn't caught on to the same degree as up north) for adoption.

you talk about introducing new gene pools into breeds those mutts I described in the paragraph above made wonderful pets, they were just as smart as any other critter...and made wonderful companion pets.

Some do. Some don't. A lot of the problems people are always discussing in the Dog subforum on CD are ultimately due to inherited temperament problems, which could potentially have been avoided by more care in selecting breeding stock. Temperament is HIGHLY heritable, but its importance is often neglected by more casual breeders.

And remember, not all dogs are just pets. There's still a need for working animals, and good working dogs generally don't come from random matings.

I'm not talking dog show quality here...I'm talking lets figure out something we can do for the betterment of the dogs to start shutting down dog mills...

We already have taken big steps to shut down mills. What you don't seem to want to accept is that there are limits to what laws can accomplish.

well, I say yes, b/c those current standards can be changed, nothing is impossible and it really stresses me out that you would be so adamant about doing nothing more???? That is what I am unable to conceive?

So how are you going to write enforceable laws requiring commercial breeding operations to only use animals of sound temperament in their breeding operations (bearing in mind that what constitutes a desirable temperament varies from breed to breed)? How are you going to enforce laws requiring that they do proper health testing (especially genetic screening) on all their stock (again, bearing in mind that the particular types of screens needed vary between breeds)? How are you going to enforce laws demanding a certain amount of socialization of the puppies (as opposed to laws which ban shipping puppies below a certain age)? Laws that cannot be enforced are useless.

well, in all these years, if I know where the puppy mills are, you can't tell me, if the rescues can get in and are given these horribly abused dogs, why can't they be shut down?

Because they aren't violating the animal cruelty statutes in your particular state? You can lobby to make your state's laws stronger, if your state's laws are particularly lax. That would be helpful.

I mean, rescues go in and take dogs these puppy mill people do not want...

Key words being "do not want." Of course the puppy mill owners are happy to give away economically worthless dogs, and they're happy to allow rescues run by bleeding hearts to do the sad work of trying to rehome those dogs. Try taking their breeding stock away - that's a whole different story. They WILL fight back in court, and unless the state can make an animal cruelty charge stick, the mill will win. it's not against the law to breed dogs (even crappy dogs) for sale.

You have a point in one way and in another I don't see the connection...you would think it would be easier to protect dogs? Especially when you get pictures and proof?

You have to get the proof first. And it takes a lot of proof to win a conviction in court.

But has it really helped....they are forever posting pictures on FB of dogs that have been abused, shot, ears hacked off...???????

And they forever will be, because stupid, cruel people will always be with us. We can punish then after the fact, but stopping their cruelty in the first place is all but impossible.

Well, I used to work in the food business, many years ago, and the state would then perform several random inspections several times a year....and that is no different, still doesn't give the state the right to come on my property, unless there is a report of abuse given to authorities, and that is where it has to start, don't you think?

That's how things work now; the state can investigate reports of abuse. But they can't shut down a breeding operation (commercial or otherwise) unless they can prove abuse in court. (Which is how it should be.) Some states have tougher animal cruelty laws than others; toughening up the laxer ones is an achievable goal. But it won't completely solve the problem, as abusive small-scale breeders will slip through the cracks.