There seems to be some confusion here....?

Question

All of what I've seen about puppy-mills and petstores being supplied by puppy mills has been Animal Rights propiganda, or deffinantly looks like it. That said, does that mean that the deplorable conditions we've seen as puppy mills are not indeed the standard for commercial breeders?

From what I understand, and I'm new to this so correct me if I'm wrong, PETA animal rights actovists types are, as a rule, full of crap, so that would make the idea of petstore pups being from puppymills full of it, too.

Now, yes, there are pictures and clips, but there are horrible conditions out there, and that's a fact. Thing is, does photographing them and documenting them automatically make that the norm?

Sorry if I've ticked anyone off, but both sides of the issue are looking bogus. AR for obvious reasons, and purists because they really don't want any dogs running around without propper papers.

I never said that I didn't think that puppymills existed, but my thought on it is, "Are puppymills really as common as the AR groups and media want us to beleive?"

Reputable breeders have a fairly obvious reason to dislike the commercial breeders, and that's the competition. Now I'm not saying breeders are bad, I'm just saying that it's a business like any other. There is money involved, and more money asked for less common breeds. Supply and demand, and commercial breeders flood the market.

As for the media getting involved, that's a bit of a "duh" there. Ratings and sales, that's all any kind of media cares about. Better stories meals more people watching/reading/buying. Face, we are a civilization run by money and greed. It's everywhere.

I'm not sure what the AR groups have to gain, though. Maybe they're just crazy?

Answer 1

You're asking for opinions, so here's mine:

I'm the President and Founder of an animal rescue group in Tennessee. I've been rescuing animals, mostly dogs, for more years that I like to remember. I'm an animal cruelty officer, and worked cruelty cases of all kind, to include pit bull fighting rings, cock fighting rings, and especially puppy mills.

I differenciate from rescuer to rescuer, as in my opinion, some are true rescuers, others are what I call Humaniacs. Peta belongs to the latter one in my book.

I must admitt that in the first puppy mill case that I worked on, where I rescued over 500 toy breed dogs, I was motivated by the hatred I had towards the miller herself. Then reality hit, and realized that I didn't get anything accomplished by having that mill closed down, as the miller moved away, deeper far into the woods, with the animals getting even less care than they did before.

I'm not very well known, nor accepted among the rescuers I call humaniacs because of my way of thinking, and dealing with the problem.
They don't LIKE nor ACCEPT the fact that puppy mills are legal in this country, just as pigs mills, cat mills, chicken mills, and so on.
These mills operate under the FDA statutes. For those who have a problem with these statutes, need to work on changing them, instead of bringing mills cases to court, only to lose the "battle" in the same room.

I don't like to condition in which the dogs are kept in a mill, nor do I approve of any of the methods use in them, especially because , as we all know, millers are just driven by greed, however, it doesn't make it illegal.

Everytime I watched a story on TV about a puppy mill bust, I wonder why these so called rescue groups think they are better than the miller??? Just to mention one of the latter cases in Tennessee, the dogs were all seized, illegally, from this person house, because, the reason that was given, they were kept in small cages, too many in one cage, and the cages were stack from floor to ceiling. Okay......they sized the dogs, and the cages they were in, they moved them to an abandoned building, due to the large number, no other space was available, and the dogs were kept in the cages they came in with, and were stack from floor to ceiling...........what in the hell made this rescue better than the miller, beside the fact that the miller had running water, and electricity in her house, where the building had none????????
In another case, the dogs were put on cement floor at a local animal control facility, in the middle of a icy winter, were several of the dogs froze to death, the rest were given away to anyone who would take them, at each corner of the town, because of no space nor money to properly care for them.
To me that's a horror story on top of a horror story.

After my first case, I took a different approach to the situation: who cares about going after the miller?? He/she will continue to do this, even if they have to move further and further into the woods, they like the lifestyle, it's a legal way to make money. So what do I care about?? I care about improving the lives of these poor creatures in the legal hands of the greedy people. I care about the dogs. I want them to have veterinary care. Tha'ts what I've been working on for the past 6 years.

While millers know they are into a legal business, they also know that humaniacs can cause them a lot of trouble, so they hide, and they hide good, keeping the dogs from having any sociolization, any medical care, a human touch. When one gets sick, they either let it die, or they try to do the vetting themselves, because if they dare to take it to a real vet, they may get in trouble with the humaniacs. For the same reason, they breed dogs with genetics defects, mange, and all sorts of chronic diseases. They break a dog's pelvic bone to avoid C-sections.

I work with two of the largest mills in this state. I have the vet making weekly visit to them, for check ups, shots, and any other medical needs they might have.
I provide them with disenfectants for cleaning. I take those who are no longer needed for breeding, those with generic defects, and fore those needing C-sections, they get emergency surgery done by a vet, and spayed at the same time.

Humaniacs say I help the millers, I'm telling you, I help the dogs. My concience is at peace.
The millers will carry on with their business with me or without me. The dogs are getting help because of me. That's what I care about.

To conclude: I'm a rescuer, I work to improve the lives of those whom are less fortunate. I don't associate myself with any of the humaniacs, nor organization like Peta (couple of years ago they were having a TV commercial were in one half of the screen there was a WWII concentration camp, and on the other there was a chicken mill, on the bottom of the screen it said that there was no difference between the two.........don't tell me that!! My Grandfather was a prisoner of war, and stayed 7 years into a concentration camp. He had to watch during the time they were making soap out of the only brother he had. To his death, at age 69, my Grandfather had nightmares about it every single night. I heard him for years, crying and screaming in his sleep. Peta: don't tell me that a concentration camp and a chicken mill are the same! I hate you for it! ) I save lives.

Yes, there are puppy mills, and the conditions shown on Tv are about the same in most mills.
Those belonging to AR need to work on making it illegal, until then, I'll help the animals.

Answer 2

renodogmom nailed this. I can't think of any better way to put it. In fact, the only reason I'm posting is this....

maguire:
"but I argue that by perpetuating the IDEA that purebreds are the superior type of dog, ["show-quality purebred breeders"] create a culture of disregard for our society's non-purebred homeless animals."

This is a massive generalization. As a "show quality purebred breeder" I am -- and have always been -- of the opinion that if you simply want an excellent companion, you should adopt a dog from a shelter/group. But if you are looking for a specific breed for a specific reason, you should go to a responsible breeder. I know many, MANY "show quality purebred breeders" who would tell you the same.

How is this blanket generalization any different than "All Humane Groups are extremist AR-wackos"?

Yeah, I love my purebreds. But I also love the Boxer mix in the obedience class I teach. And the Dachshund mix that my friend adopted. And the 4 newborn Siberian mixes I'm fostering. I didn't kick them to the curb when they were born just because they obviously weren't purebred.

You know, I just love dogs. And I'm not the only ethical breeder who feels this way.

I just don't get where such a glaring misconception might have come from. One snooty Maltese breeder? Seriously. I want to know.

Answer 3

There definitely are disreputable breeders, but I do not beleive it to be the norm for all breeders.

I am of the opinion that the PETA folks are just a little wacky, but their hearts are in the right place. They are just a bit misinformed.

It is as it always has been, the few bad folks get all the attention and ruin it for eveyone else. Because puppy mills are so horrendous you see news about them all the time. Nobody sees stories about small breeders who raise their animals like family members because that won't sell newspapers or make anyone turn on the news.

Answer 4

I understand your view point. I think what needs to be noted is that breeding for profit is just that. The profit is the driving goal, the animals are not consider anything but a product in a production line. Backyard breeding/puppy mill is a means to provide a product to the highest bidder. The creature is used to produce until it can no longer provide. If you have had a child, can you imagine producing one after another, because you are fertile? The tourchure of the body is cruel. Alot of times this breeding is with a relative. A way to regulate is registration with papers from the gene pool. If one backyard breeder/puppy mill can be stopped it is worth it. The pet industry needs to be monitored.

Answer 5

Re: are there acceptable commercial breeders?

Well, although I have lots of problems with the concept of commercial breeding, it is a fact that there ARE commerical breeders who do not fall within the puppymill stereotype. They have clean facilities, the dogs are fed decent food and recieve proper vet care. As with any other commerical animal breeder that cares about thier livestock, boths as animals and as valuable commodities. But still, to them the dogs/puppies are just that, commodities for sale. Livestock.

PeTA would have people believe that ALL breeders are evil. We who are dedicated to raising quality purebreds tend to look at the commercial breeders as evil, but really I think the day is coming when we are going to need them on our side. Or PeTA and their ilk will crush us.

Answer 6

I completly agree with renodogmom on this one.

I do think that some of the PETA members are defiantly extremists, but I think that they are trying to help animals. I really prefer the ASPCA because they are not so wacky, but that is just my personal opinion. I know in my area there are lots of puppymills because I have seen them firsthand, but there are people that have a kennel that breed dogs, but I do not consider them mills as long as the dogs receive proper care and attention. I just feel sorry for the dogs that have to suffer and the people that buy them that do not understand the problems that come with bad breeding.

Answer 7

You're falling victim to a fallacy here. Instead of judging the truth/merit of an argument or issue by who is doing the arguing, judge it on the quality of research that is available.

Do some research about puppy mills, and come to a conclusion on your own. Just because animal rights activists say it is true doesn't mean that it necessarily is (at least to that extent), but it doesn't mean that it isn't true either.

LOKI: Have you not noticed the breeders on these boards who exclaim that purebred is the ONLY way to go, because all mutts are worthless crap? I am sure that there are many breeders who love all dogs, but maguire's statement about the idealization of purebreds to the detriment of mutts is supported on these boards.

Answer 8

Basically, your argument is:
Animal Rights Activists are against Puppymills
Animal Rights Activists are full of crap
Therefore: people who dislike puppy mills are either Animal Activists and/or full of crap.

While it is true Animal Rights Activists of the most radical kind (PETA is used as an example) are against Puppy Mills, They are NOT the only people against Puppy Mills.

Many, many responsible breeders, trainers, dog sport competitors, etc. are also very much against Puppy Mills. Most people in the "Dog Fancy" are against puppy mills, from my years of experience training and competing in dog sports and teaching basic dog manners classes. It is mostly the "pet owning community" that doesn't always understand about puppy mills.

All PETA people aren't full of crap, but some are, I agree. And PETA isn't one of the most radical Animal Rights groups out there, there are lots of groups worse.

Actually, most people that compete in Dog Sports are Anti-Peta, because sometimes PETA people believe you shouldn't and can't "own" dogs and it is cruel to train them to compete in dog sports. They go to dog shows and competition and turn the dogs loose to run away or run into the street and get hit by cars.

There are very few Animal Rights people in the actual "Dog Fancy". There are people who are very dedicated to "Animal Welfare", who volunteer at animal shelters, who work to help other people train their dogs so they don't end up in shelters, who foster dogs and contribute to spay/neuter programs. But those aren't by definition, Animal Rights people.

They are, however, enlightened and educated about dogs and what is happening in the overpopulated dog world.

Dogs are not produce. They are living creatures with some some thoughts and feelings.

The economic fact is: if puppies are properly bred and raised, with an eye to health and temperament and improvement of the breed, it is not usually a profit making venture.

In order for it to be a profitable venture, corners must be cut. Those corners all lie in providing the things for dogs that cost money: good shelter, repairs, good food, breeding only once every 2 years, and only 2-3 litters for the entire life of the female. It also hurts the bottom line to provide even the most basic veterinary care, so the breeding dogs are usually not given any.

That is a puppy mill by most people's definition.

Answer 9

If you don't trust PETA then you will find lots of other groups that have personally witnessed it.

20/20 did a story on it and found the same results.

http://www.smallpawsrescue.org are just a group of people who resuce auction dogs and they can account to it.

http://www.prisonersofgreed.org is actually hearts united for animals a rescue group that put up that site.

There are plenty of people on dogster that have saved puppymill dogs and can account for it.

Don't know what you think of the ASPCA but they can account for it.

The list goes on.

I believe it.

Answer 10

There are 3 sides to every story. Thank god I'm not the only one who has a moderate view about animal ownership! I support neither PETA or owner rights extremism, but an honest dedication to animal welfare.

Are puppy mills and PETA-documented breeders the norm? No, but they are a huge cruelty issue. Are show-quality purebred breeders the norm? No! They take great care of THEIR dogs, but I argue that by perpetuating the IDEA that purebreds are the superior type of dog, they create a culture of disregard for our society's non-purebred homeless animals. Backyard breeders are the norm as far as dog breeders. They are largely responsible for breed health issues and contribute greatly to the overpopulation problem.

As far as I'm concerned, most types of breeding are unfair to our nation's animal population - whether for cruelty, supporting purebred breeding instead of adoption, or perpetuation of overpopulation. Many people on this board detest my opinions about this issue, (esp. the purebred issue) but I'm sticking to them!

EDIT: Loki_wolf - if you either turn on your email function or email me, I'd be more than happy to both expound upon my opinions and hear yours. I've gotten into a rather heated conversation with whippetwmn in the past about this, and have found that doing so within the post/comment format of this board is quite tedoius.

To quickly address your comments - I don't believe my opinions are glaring misconceptions, but rather thoughful but unpopular assertions.

I am not saying that breeders intentionally harm the homeless animal population. Far from that - they are genuinely concerned about animal welfare. What I am saying is that by breeding and advocating purebreds, show-breeders are swaying public opinion towards buying a purebred puppy rather than adopting an adult mutt. Intentional or not. I'm not saying that purebreds or mutts are better animals, and I'm not even saying that breeders have a concious bias towards one or the other. I am saying their actions cause a bias within society.

As far as whether this is a generalization, I don't think so. The idea that members of AR organizations are wackos is due to a few extreme and polarizing actions becoming representative of a whole spectra of people. Some AR activists release lab animals, steal pets, harrass meat eaters, etc, while others take a more tactful approach, writing their senators, donating to animal lobbying causes, and living the humane life they believe every person should be living. There is a range of ACTIONS, thus there should be a range of resulting opinions about their actions.

Responsible show-quality dog breeders, by definition, breed wonderful dogs. There is no range in this ACTION, thus no range in resulting opinion. (Remember, I'm talking about only responsible breeders, not BYB) Because breeding and promoting purebred dogs hurts the chances for homeless animal adoption, (or so I argue) dog breeders cause this effect. A causes B, B causes C, so A causes C.

OK, that wan't so quick. Email me.

EDIT - Whippetwmn - Well, while I still think you are being extreme in your generalizations, I'm glad to hear that you can appreciate my convictions as a moderate AR advocate. Still wish you'd admit that responsible and moral animal rights causes are not the PETA nightmares you're making them out to be!

Don't worry . . . I have every confindence that your dogs will be safe from extremists. Every non-PETA person, including the vast majority of AR advocates, would riot in the streets if their animals were legislated away from them!

Save our shared love of animals, our moral tenacity belies finding any common ground in this matter. Nonetheless, isn't our love of dogs what really matters? :)

Answer 11

I agree that the PETA people take it too far. They come off like they're the IRA or PLO or something. I'm all for treating animals humanely but the propoganda these people are putting out is simply not representative of the industry as a whole.