One breeder produces between 100-200 puppies a year???? - Page 6

Pedigree Database

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

Premium classified

This is a placeholder text
Group text

by Christopher Smith on 05 February 2009 - 01:02

What I think good breeders need to do, to get rid of the bad, is to treat it like it’s a business. They need to make a better product, make it more accessible and sell it cheaper. I know it would be hard for a few years. There would be a big spike in the number in unwanted dogs. But the bad breeders would no longer be making a profit and they would get out of the business. The consumer would learn what a good dog is and the image of the GSD would be polished a bit. Basically what I’m saying is to flood the market with good dogs and drive the bad guys out of business.

 

But with the type legislation that you are supporting you are giving the extremist another toehold into legislating the dog world. And once these types of laws become normal it becomes easier and easier to make more laws. You are opening the door. And what did they teach you in school about opening doors without knowing what’s on the other side? One day it will be you that is sitting in the defendant’s chair.


wuzzup

by wuzzup on 05 February 2009 - 02:02

Some people think forced tracking, prong collars, agitation for aggression, E collars, choking a dog out to release the grip, crating all day waiting for you turn, do it or die, is cruel do you want your sport restricted next .Well that's where your heading with all your legislation .

Mystere

by Mystere on 05 February 2009 - 03:02

Christopher, The odd thing is that the bad breeders are charging as much, if not more, than the good breeders. Check out what Mark & Michele Scraberry, Sue & Gabor Szlasi (sorry Sue, DiCero & Szlasi), Kandi, Molly,Claudia Romard et al charge for a puppy and compare it to one of the breeders referenced or named outright on this forum today. Mark et al often charge considerably less than $2500 for an 8 week old pup, albeit RESPONSIBLY checking out where this pup they bred is going; whether it will be a good and responsible home; whether the dog would be a family member, or a piece of training equipment; whether the pup would end up seeing its potential acheived, or a cog in a commercial breeding operation. The puppies are notmere commodities. So, I don't see where your clients were saving money, except for the ones buying a $500 pup from the newspaper. To each his own. Sorry, but I have to forego passing on your suggestion. It is not a matter of supporting the proposed legislation ( I hope to convince him that certain portions MUST be changed or eliminated). It is acknowledging that something must be done to address the mass-breeders, their actions and impact.

by AIR on 05 February 2009 - 04:02

There is absolutely no way someone can properly socialize litters when there are that many on the ground, and no one can ever tell me otherwise, because I know this. I would fully support breeder legislation. If you do not want to follow the rules when it comes to your dogs, what are you trying to hide?

by Christopher Smith on 05 February 2009 - 05:02

Nia my clients are buying dogs from bad breeders (some on this board) for $500+/-. They are buying dogs with major faults from good breeders for $1000+/-.

BTW, Breeders I see the dogs you think you hide in pet homes.

CrysBuck25

by CrysBuck25 on 05 February 2009 - 05:02

Wazzup,  sadly, you're right about the implied cruelty in the SchH training.  And there are no doubt many who see it as inhumane.  But, there are a good many in these animals rights groups (PETA and others) who think even training a dog is cruel.  Keeping pets, don't you know, is slavery, and should be outlawed.  These proposed laws (and I didn't know about the one in Washington) are only the tools of people whose only joy in life is inflicting suffering on other people.

What's the proposed criminal thing in Washington?  What craziness is my neighboring state trying to engage in?

Sorry, I know there are those of you out there that think these laws will stop puppy mills ,but a lot of these people aren't really anchored by anything, so if they get raided, who cares?  Dogs are easy enough to get, and so they'll just start somewhere else, with new dogs.  Should they end up in jail, which isn't all that likely, they'll just do it when they get out.  Fees to drop dogs off at shelters, while good in theory, isn't going to help, since a lot of people simply dump their unwanted dogs in the country, and there's no way to know who the dog belongs to.  My mother in law had a dog that was dumped in her yard, loved the dog its entire life, and was there when her life ended in old age.  But someone couldn't commit to the time and love the dog needed, and didn't take it to the pound, instead preferring to dump her.  And we had no fees on our shelter.  Abandoning a dog is illegal, but it happens all the time.

When my GSD needed a new home, because my situation wasn't right for him, I found him a great temporary foster home while I searched for a new permanent home for him.  All in all, it took me the better part of a year to find the right place, but he was worth every minute of that time.  I would never, ever dump a dog, and the shelter isn't an option either.  It's an owner's responsibility, not the state's, to do the right thing by their dogs. 

Enforce the laws we already have; don't make more.  Most laws on the books already are unConstitutional, and we don't need more of that.  End of story.

Crys


Mystere

by Mystere on 06 February 2009 - 01:02

QUOTE:BTW, Breeders I see the dogs you think you hide in pet homes. Chris, This really gave me a giggle. Thanks!

by Christopher Smith on 06 February 2009 - 08:02

I just signed one up today. A German line GSD with a white leg and tail tip. This dog is from one of the most well known show breeders in the US. He "only" cost $1100 plus shipping. No papers. But he is a sweet puppy and should make them a wonderful pet.

Mystere

by Mystere on 06 February 2009 - 18:02

Christorpher,


From the price, it looks like they at least gave a discount for the "coloring issues "(?).     Arguably, not much of one, but less than the usual $2500-3500.    This in one of those instances when it would be nice to know the pedigree, so breeders (and consumers) could make intelligent and informed decisions about breeding partners.  As with blues, livers, pandas, the more information available about the pedigrees, the more informed the decisions. 

btw--I was viewing a website for livers and blues in which the owner decided that "chocolate" was a better name for the color and named the puppies chocolate-related names.  That breeder was breeding for the color.





 


Contact information  Disclaimer  Privacy Statement  Copyright Information  Terms of Service  Cookie policy  ↑ Back to top