Puppy Mills -USDA licensed - Stats&Facts

[gemy]

In another thread, Woogie Man posted some stats about the number of dogs owned in the US, died, and number of purchases, number of euthansias etc.

There is somewhere around according to those stats 7+ million dogs purchased/acquire each year, and somewhere around 6+ million deaths.

Imagine if you would that we outlawed and enforced no puppy mills, no USDA licensed dog breeders. How would the hobby/show breeders supply that market? For at some point fairly early the shelters would be cleared of all pets resident there, if buyers couldn't buy from USDA licensed breeders, or pet stores. What then, how would the market be supplied?

Let me say that like the US, Canada also has under the purview of the Dept of Agriculture, the responsibility over commercial dog breeding. Does this NOT strike folks as the wrong dept to put this under??? Dogs are not livestock, destined for our food table, or plants or legumes, again destined for our food table. Dogs and cats are PETS, destined to live happily, in a family home (for the most part). Here-in is a dilemma inborn with commercial breeders, who raise dogs, in sheds/barns, with little human interaction, and certainly no training appropriate to the future environment that puppy will eventually live in. And then what commercial breeder does all the health and genetic tests prior to breeding that pair. What commercial breeder follows their progeny to see if health problems crop up in those puppies? The dept of Agriculture is ill suited to oversee, the breeding of a living animal, that is not destined to be consumed in the next 2-3 yrs, but is meant to be a healthy and loving companion for many years. That is the INNATE problem we have with dog breeding. Where it is overseen from!

If the Dept of Agriculture wants to keep the overseeing of dog breeding on a commercial basis. Then here is what they should do: demand purebred breed appropriate health tests prior to breeding dam n sire; mandatory puppy testing and follow up. The automatic retirement of breeding dams/sires with genetic problems or a history of same in their litters.

All puppies must be socialized to a home environment. This includes human socialization, sounds and smells of a home, including washing machine noise, vacuuming etc.

Sound radical? Huh well that is the minimum of what reputable breeders do, who are NOT USDA licensed.

Food for thought....that our dogs are being governed under The Dept of Food and Agriculture.

[Nancy1999]

I don't want to do away with USDA breeders, I believe they fill need, but I do want to do away with puppy mills. I think some people call every commercial breeder a puppy mill, but I believe it's possible to be a large-scale breeder and raise the dogs humanely. I would like to see the USDA have more authority to enforce laws already in place, and I would like every breeder who breeds above a certain number of litters a year, to have some type of license, and be inspected. I'm not sure what that number should be, I believe there has been talk of 10 or so litters and that seems reasonable. I think we need input from good breeders because I would hate to do anything that hurts them and has no impact on the bad breeders. First we need to address the problem of really inhumane kennel conditions, for millions of dogs. The second problem is people breeding who aren't held accountable for the health of their dogs offspring. This is more of a problem with small backyard breeders. These breeders generally treat the breeding dogs well, but the offspring often has a most difficult life, due to poor placement or people not being able to afford proper health treatment for genetic problems.

[gemy]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I don't want to do away with USDA breeders, I believe they fill need, but I do want to do away with puppy mills. I think some people call every commercial breeder a puppy mill, but I believe it's possible to be a large-scale breeder and raise the dogs humanely. I would like to see the USDA have more authority to enforce laws already in place, and I would like every breeder who breeds above a certain number of litters a year, to have some type of license, and be inspected. I'm not sure what that number should be, I believe there has been talk of 10 or so litters and that seems reasonable. I think we need input from good breeders because I would hate to do anything that hurts them and has no impact on the bad breeders. First we need to address the problem of really inhumane kennel conditions, for millions of dogs. The second problem is people breeding who aren't held accountable for the health of their dogs offspring. This is more of a problem with small backyard breeders. These breeders generally treat the breeding dogs well, but the offspring often has a most difficult life, due to poor placement or people not being able to afford proper health treatment for genetic problems.

Thanks for your response. But what are your thoughts on the Dept of Agriculture overseeing large scale breeding?

And what is humane? What should commercial breeders do differently?

Until we divorce the breeding of dogs and cats, separate from the breeding of livestock destined to the consumption table, how could we ever get HUMANE breeding of our pets from large commercial breeders?

The mindset of breeders of consumption animals, the mindset of farmers is and necessarily so very divorced from the mindset of the breeder of high quality health pups, that are destined and borne to be loved and cared for over many years.

[megansmomma]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I don't want to do away with USDA breeders, I believe they fill need, but I do want to do away with puppy mills. I think some people call every commercial breeder a puppy mill, but I believe it's possible to be a large-scale breeder and raise the dogs humanely. I would like to see the USDA have more authority to enforce laws already in place, and I would like every breeder who breeds above a certain number of litters a year, to have some type of license, and be inspected. I'm not sure what that number should be, I believe there has been talk of 10 or so litters and that seems reasonable. I think we need input from good breeders because I would hate to do anything that hurts them and has no impact on the bad breeders. First we need to address the problem of really inhumane kennel conditions, for millions of dogs. The second problem is people breeding who aren't held accountable for the health of their dogs offspring. This is more of a problem with small backyard breeders. These breeders generally treat the breeding dogs well, but the offspring often has a most difficult life, due to poor placement or people not being able to afford proper health treatment for genetic problems.

If we could address the above and make breeders accountable for their actions there would be far less irresponsible breeding going on in this country. There would be placement of puppies into homes for the right reasons and not just the money that is made from sales. Maybe they would think twice if there was a way to find the breeder and hold them accountable when their puppies are grown and in shelters. There is no accountability for all of the puppies born in this country. If all puppies where chipped there was ability to go back to the breeder who produced originally sold that puppy there would be thought that goes into the breeding for greed.

[Woogie Man]

Gail, I see the problem that you do, but really don't see an alternative. Companion animals are property, whether we think of them that way or not. And, as bad as it is, someone has to watch out for their interests. I would think that if they were taken out of the Agriculture department's purview, that we would just have to put some other incompetent agency in charge.

The USDA, along with the AKC, help start up puppy mills after WWII. At that time, animals were thought of differently and it was a way for farmers to make income. Though there were surely cruelties back then, I don't think anyone foresaw the scale of what some of these operations would become.

You mention the stats I posted. Anyone can surmise what they want from statistics, but a couple of things are striking to me.

First is the number of animals euthanized per year. There is a rough correlation between that number and the estimated number of dogs produced by 'puppy mills'. So, it's obvious that we don't 'need' them. But that doesn't really tell the story.

My opinion is that, regardless of where a dog comes from, it winds up in a shelter due to, for the most part, owner surrender. People just seem to regard animals as disposable and discard them when they become inconvenient. And the problem is compounded when these same people get another animal after getting rid of the one they already had. In my gut, I really think that irresponsible pet ownership is what is driving these statistics (euthanasia rates, puppy mills, BYBs, etc.). I feel that more effort should be made to educate people about responsible pet ownership. Until that is accomplished, we are going to forever be dealing with the problems we see today.

If thoughtless owner surrenders and dumb impulse purchases could be largely eliminated, there would be much less demand for dogs in the first place. It would probably cut the demand by nearly half. With less demand, many puppy mills would just simply go out of business...the same with small-scale 'greeders' and various other jackass breeders. While there would still be a demand greater than could be supplied by reputable breeders, there would simply be no place for the worst of the worst.

There are hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on animal welfare causes. I don't see enough of that money being spent on attacking the root cause of over-population and the inevitable high euthanasia rates that accompany that, however, and that is what i would like to see changed.

[gemy]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

Gail, I see the problem that you do, but really don't see an alternative. Companion animals are property, whether we think of them that way or not. And, as bad as it is, someone has to watch out for their interests. I would think that if they were taken out of the Agriculture department's purview, that we would just have to put some other incompetent agency in charge.

The USDA, along with the AKC, help start up puppy mills after WWII. At that time, animals were thought of differently and it was a way for farmers to make income. Though there were surely cruelties back then, I don't think anyone foresaw the scale of what some of these operations would become.

You mention the stats I posted. Anyone can surmise what they want from statistics, but a couple of things are striking to me.

First is the number of animals euthanized per year. There is a rough correlation between that number and the estimated number of dogs produced by 'puppy mills'. So, it's obvious that we don't 'need' them. But that doesn't really tell the story.

My opinion is that, regardless of where a dog comes from, it winds up in a shelter due to, for the most part, owner surrender. People just seem to regard animals as disposable and discard them when they become inconvenient. And the problem is compounded when these same people get another animal after getting rid of the one they already had. In my gut, I really think that irresponsible pet ownership is what is driving these statistics (euthanasia rates, puppy mills, BYBs, etc.). I feel that more effort should be made to educate people about responsible pet ownership. Until that is accomplished, we are going to forever be dealing with the problems we see today.

If thoughtless owner surrenders and dumb impulse purchases could be largely eliminated, there would be much less demand for dogs in the first place. It would probably cut the demand by nearly half. With less demand, many puppy mills would just simply go out of business...the same with small-scale 'greeders' and various other jackass breeders. While there would still be a demand greater than could be supplied by reputable breeders, there would simply be no place for the worst of the worst.

There are hundreds of millions of dollars being spent on animal welfare causes. I don't see enough of that money being spent on attacking the root cause of over-population and the inevitable high euthanasia rates that accompany that, however, and that is what i would like to see changed.

Awh yes property ownership. Maybe we can create a licensing agency, where all would be pet owners, must take a course, and be issued a license to own a pet. Like a drivers license. Then for infractions they can be fined, charged, and ultimately denied the "right" to own a dog or a cat. For example if you surrendered a dog to a shelter that goes on your record, and you are disallowed from adoption for a set period of time.

I still feel one of the ways to limit large scale breeders is to legislate proper health screenings, tests, and mandatory microchipping of all puppies, dams/sires. Then identification of health problems, can be traced back to the original USDA breeder. Hit their pocketbook! Make it less profitable and make them "pay" for their poor breeding practices.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by gemy

Awh yes property ownership. Maybe we can create a licensing agency, where all would be pet owners, must take a course, and be issued a license to own a pet. Like a drivers license. Then for infractions they can be fined, charged, and ultimately denied the "right" to own a dog or a cat. For example if you surrendered a dog to a shelter that goes on your record, and you are disallowed from adoption for a set period of time.

I still feel one of the ways to limit large scale breeders is to legislate proper health screenings, tests, and mandatory microchipping of all puppies, dams/sires. Then identification of health problems, can be traced back to the original USDA breeder. Hit their pocketbook! Make it less profitable and make them "pay" for their poor breeding practices.

I also want to remind people that USDA breeders are not necessarily the worst of the worst. At least they are licensed and inspected. Those large volume breeders who sell directly to the public, or over the Internet need no kennel licenses or inspections. The Internet has created a huge problem in that many people see nothing wrong with buying a dog from the nice lady they met on the web. Very few people think it's important to see the kennel conditions in person.

I think breeders should be held accountable for the dogs they produce, and it's their responsibility to monitor buyers and take back any dog that needs to be rehomed. I agree a dog license where people need to pass a test would be a great idea. I doubt if that would ever go over here, people hate big government, and the idea that the government can tell them what to do with their property.

[Woogie Man]

I think that the more rules you make, the more it drives people underground to do things off the radar. And, while I agree that breeders should screen owners, how can a breeder be held legally responsible for a puppy over its entire lifetime? Aside from what one may feel is ethical, how can the original owner of property (the breeder) be held responsible for that property, beyond a health guarantee, once it has been transferred over to another owner? That would have constitutionalists howling over the right and responsibility of private ownership.

I really see two issues here....one being animal cruelty and the other being pet over-population. Animal cruelty can exist anywhere....at a home or a puppy mill and anywhere in between. Pet over-population is more complex, but I will continue to believe it's being driven by the consumer. Simply put, if there was less of a demand, there would be less of a supply. Also, if pet buyers, on the whole, demanded more from breeders they would soon get it. That's an educational process, along with responsible pet ownership.

The problem today is that millions of pets are dying needlessly and millions more are being produced to replace them and it's a cycle that repeats itself over and over. People are fed up with this and donate hundreds of millions of dollars to combat it but much of that money is squandered by those that are entrusted to find solutions. Often these professional fund raisers only promote their own agenda and don't really serve the cause they give lip service to.

So what's the solution? I don't think we can sign off on a piece of legislation and have the problem magically disappear. I also don't think we can count on an ideal solution, but we can do some good. Too much money and too much personal good will are being spent for it to be acceptable for things to remain the same.

There is the national Animal Welfare Act and all states have animal cruelty laws. Enforcement of existing laws must be toughened up before we go off writing new ones. And people have to be made more aware of just what it means to be a responsible pet owner. If these things were accomplished, maybe then we could work more towards the ideal.

On a side note, I was at our local Humane Society this morning dropping off 2 cats to be spayed. (I have 'inherited' 22 cats and kittens from a neglectful neighbor that has been letting them breed indiscriminately and not trying to find homes for the offspring. I'm working with the Humane Society to get them all spayed and neutered. I have resigned myself to feeding them all and they live here for the most part. i know if I just dropped them off at the shelter, most would be put down.) What I wanted to point out is that today I was #21 and wasn't the last in line. This shelter does s/n 5 days a week and this was a typical day. In this area at least, people are responding to the s/n campaigns which brings me back to where are all these animals in shelters coming from? It reinforces my belief that it is primarily owner surrender from irresponsible owners.

[gemy]

The CKC has instituted a Responsible Pet Ownership Day, yearly. The focus appears in main to be directed at, owners keeping their dogs leashed, trained, and friendly to strangers. Also some training on how to "meet" a strange dog.

I would think that owner surrenders have to be a large contributor to shelters. I do hope that education can provide a viable answer. But I don't think it can be the only answer.
We have had a city here in Ontario, ban the sale of dogs and cats at Pet stores, and that may also be another venue.

[Woogie Man]

I'd like to see a responsible pet ownership campaign on the scale of the s/n campaign. I feel we have to make a dent in the most obvious problems or there will be little chance of success in other areas. I applaud all efforts to make life better for pets and owners, but the big gorilla in the room is, to me, the number of owner surrenders. It's an ongoing trend that frustrates all other efforts.

[ilovemypap]

I hate how people place commercial breeders and puppy mills in the same category. I know a breeder that treats the dogs better than many family pets are treated by others. They are also well loved and the puppies are spoiled. A major reason for over population, is the people who get a dog or cat, then want to get rid of it because they "are moving". If I had an animal and was moving, I would make sure I could take it with me. Those people just drive me crazy. They need to come up with a better way to crack down on the mills.

[kjcmsw]

Originally Posted by ilovemypap

I hate how people place commercial breeders and puppy mills in the same category. I know a breeder that treats the dogs better than many family pets are treated by others. They are also well loved and the puppies are spoiled. A major reason for over population, is the people who get a dog or cat, then want to get rid of it because they "are moving". If I had an animal and was moving, I would make sure I could take it with me. Those people just drive me crazy. They need to come up with a better way to crack down on the mills.

I agree -- if I move, so do my dogs. If they aren't welcome someplace, then I consider I'm not welcome either; however, that being said, I do understand that sometimes life circumstances does not give everyone that choice. I'm probably too naive but in such cases I (want) to believe that people who surrender their dogs due to a forced move are broken hearted and it was a last resort, but sadly reality is beginning to set in as I've come to find many a people do consider dogs disposable and that's a tragedy.
I think educating people is the answer (how to do so is the question) and that education needs to start at home, by example...I remember (as a child) when we were relocating and waiting for our house to be done we had to rent a house temporarily and I overheard the landlord saying he didn't allow dogs and my father telling the landlord the dogs were part of the family. When one is raised to respect all living creatures they will become less of a disposable "item". The way the world is quickly becoming respect for people and animals have fallen by the wayside. I'm disillusioned. If parents can't teach their children to respect themselves how can they ever teach the next generation to respect another living soul?