Question - Out of Curiosity.....

[lil fu fu girl]

Originally Posted by orlnurse

I responded to your post the other day about adopting. I said that I couldn't afford another dog, but since my response all I've done is obsess about getting a sister for Max. I've been looking on petfinder.com and other rescue websites, but nothing in my area. Mostly males. With Max's personality, I think he would welcome a sister easier than he would a brother. I checked out my budget and I probably could afford another one. Oh boy.....

LOL .....watch out...... you have been biten by the "The More the Merrier bug"!
It is very contagious, and once you have it, it never goes away!

Good for you for going with adoption. There are some very dedicated rescues in the U.S.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Cha Cha

LOL that was a little random, but my point is that depending on the kinds of regulations you want to impose on mills, it could potentially hit the small breeder the hardest because of sheer numbers involved. Registeries are going to support the mills because that is where their volume in terms of numbers comes from. Numbers is money!! I realize that many small breeders are not in it for the money but the betterment of the breed, but you can only lose money (I mean really lose money) for so long before it becomes not worthy of your money and less enjoyable. So, again, I am not here to argue with you fine ladies, just trying to make you understand what you are saying when you start to talk about imposing regulations and fines and how it could potentially come back to bite you in the badonkadonk!

ETA: And I am sorry I didn't reference the corvette instead of the Ford! What was I thinking we are not even Ford people! A corvette much better fits the Yorkie persona!

Morning -

Yes, ask V, a corvette is a much better fit for the Yorkie and herself...

You know I was thinking about what you said about the small breeder and you know Mary who (in theory) believes in making breeders pay fines is a very small breeder (she only has 1 or 2 litters) per years so I really think it will impact the volume breeders more ....as it should. As a child we only had small breeders and we certainly didn't have the over population of pets that we do now. Just a thought.

[red98vett]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

Morning -

Yes, ask V, a corvette is a much better fit for the Yorkie and herself...

You know I was thinking about what you said about the small breeder and you know Mary who (in theory) believes in making breeders pay fines is a very small breeder (she only has 1 or 2 litters) per years so I really think it will impact the volume breeders more ....as it should. As a child we only had small breeders and we certainly didn't have the over population of pets that we do now. Just a thought.

haha - I will ALWAYS be a corvette lover and really miss mine (had to sell it to pay medical bills when my husband was diagnosed) - but ya - there's nothing like driving a vette - problem is.... I still drive like I have one I have to really watch myself

[celstu1]

I would rescue in a heartbeat if I could, but they always have some reason or another why I don't qualify to rescue a dog. Ive tried 3 rescues in the past for different breeds and it's either, you don't have a fenced in yard (live in a condo), or you work full time or you have 'other pets' at home. Some reason or another. I would buy from a reputable breeder from now on, but rescue seems almost impossible for me as long as I keep working and living in a condo. (even though my 2 boys are happy and well taken care now)

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by red98vett

haha - I will ALWAYS be a corvette lover and really miss mine (had to sell it to pay medical bills when my husband was diagnosed) - but ya - there's nothing like driving a vette - problem is.... I still drive like I have one I have to really watch myself

Ummm it really does look silly that you gun your pinto... oh I am sorry it is a gremlin...

[Cha Cha]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

Morning -

Yes, ask V, a corvette is a much better fit for the Yorkie and herself...

You know I was thinking about what you said about the small breeder and you know Mary who (in theory) believes in making breeders pay fines is a very small breeder (she only has 1 or 2 litters) per years so I really think it will impact the volume breeders more ....as it should. As a child we only had small breeders and we certainly didn't have the over population of pets that we do now. Just a thought.

Really? Ok, what if you have to pay a $1500.00 (or more) licensing fee just to be licensed to "breed" dogs of any nature? What if that license has to be renewed every year with a $300 or $400 renewal fee. Sounds steep? To a small breeder it certainly does, but to a mill that is a drop in the bucket. There could be facility licensing, breeder licensing, litter tracking fees, inspection fees. Heck, You may have to be inspected before you are even allowed to breed your dog. Maybe your house is not deemed fit for raising dogs, and you are denied because of these new rules and regulations. How can you impose a law or regulation on a mill that is not going to be in effect for a "reputable" breeder as well?

Some of you that raise very nice quality Yorkies get a good price for them (as you should) or maybe you are financially in a position to put up that fee personally for your hobby business, may not have a problem with those fees. I will give you that. But again, what about the other small breeders that breed for the betterment of their breed, but their breed doesn't bring in the "Yorkie" prices. Remember, the fees will not be based on the popularity of the breed, it will be a one fee fits all. Many reputable, or even quality hobby breeders will simply be put out of business, or decide that the rewards are not worth the hassel.

And, I will say it again. These kinds of fees will raise the prices of puppies to where it becomes a status symbol to have a dog. Because even people who may be able to afford one will opt out because of the cost involved.

To go after mills without imposing on the rights of everyone else who doesn't need uncle sam checking up on them you have to go after where it hurts. Put limits on their numbers and where they are allowed to disperse ther puppies. (Petstores)

I wanted to add.....someone said that they didn't have puppy mills growing up. I live in Kansas, I am 40 years old, and I have always known of puppy mills only when I was a kid they were called kennels.

[Cha Cha]

I also want to clarify. Someone else said earlier that I oppose all the ideas and said that everything mentioned will only hurt the small breeders, not the mills.. I am in total support of small reputable and quality hobby breeders. I completely agree that something needs to be done to stop puppy mills. But think of it like this. Think of all the things you do in your life already that requires a fee, a license, a renewal to your government. (I am not anti-government I just feel like they already get enough of my money) Any fees or regulations imposed will go to ..... guess where..... our government. It will not be someone's personal profitable business, that you choose to support, to keep and track these regulations and fees it will be your government.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by Cha Cha

Really? Ok, what if you have to pay a $1500.00 (or more) licensing fee just to be licensed to "breed" dogs of any nature? What if that license has to be renewed every year with a $300 or $400 renewal fee. Sounds steep? To a small breeder it certainly does, but to a mill that is a drop in the bucket. There could be facility licensing, breeder licensing, litter tracking fees, inspection fees. Heck, You may have to be inspected before you are even allowed to breed your dog. Maybe your house is not deemed fit for raising dogs, and you are denied because of these new rules and regulations. How can you impose a law or regulation on a mill that is not going to be in effect for a "reputable" breeder as well?

Some of you that raise very nice quality Yorkies get a good price for them (as you should) or maybe you are financially in a position to put up that fee personally for your hobby business, may not have a problem with those fees. I will give you that. But again, what about the other small breeders that breed for the betterment of their breed, but their breed doesn't bring in the "Yorkie" prices. Remember, the fees will not be based on the popularity of the breed, it will be a one fee fits all. Many reputable, or even quality hobby breeders will simply be put out of business, or decide that the rewards are not worth the hassel.

And, I will say it again. These kinds of fees will raise the prices of puppies to where it becomes a status symbol to have a dog. Because even people who may be able to afford one will opt out because of the cost involved.

To go after mills without imposing on the rights of everyone else who doesn't need uncle sam checking up on them you have to go after where it hurts. Put limits on their numbers and where they are allowed to disperse ther puppies. (Petstores)

I wanted to add.....someone said that they didn't have puppy mills growing up. I live in Kansas, I am 40 years old, and I have always known of puppy mills only when I was a kid they were called kennels.

Your arguments are the types of arguments, commercial breeders use to scare home breeders. If you read the laws being passed, these sorts of things only impact breeders who have lots of litters per year, if a breeder is having over 20 litters a year, is it really a small breeder? We do have to be diligent in protecting the small breeder, but small breeders have to be careful to not to be misled by the propaganda put out by commercial breeders.

I'm sure large kennels and puppy mills have been around for a long time, but it not until lately that the majority of the population is learning about the inhumane conditions of some.

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by celstu1

I would rescue in a heartbeat if I could, but they always have some reason or another why I don't qualify to rescue a dog. Ive tried 3 rescues in the past for different breeds and it's either, you don't have a fenced in yard (live in a condo), or you work full time or you have 'other pets' at home. Some reason or another. I would buy from a reputable breeder from now on, but rescue seems almost impossible for me as long as I keep working and living in a condo. (even though my 2 boys are happy and well taken care now)

I'm sorry, I'm sure this is very frustrating and discouraging. I feel like this can be the Catch-22 of rescues, even though I totally support rescue work. If it's any consolation, I would not qualify for a rescue yorkie either, because I don't have a yard, even though I am a great mommy to Thor if I do say so myself. A delicate balance has to be struck, because people less patient than yourself will then say, "what's the point of rescue, I'm just going to get a dog wherever I can."

WRT regulations: Cha Cha, it seems like you are bringing up fixed cost fees to argue against the variable-cost fines livingdustmops is proposing. When I came on this site a year ago, I felt much as you do, that we don't want simply owning a dog to be out of reach for the average person. Unfortunately, I've seen a lot more now of what the average person can do to their innocent dog, and I think whatever we do, it has to be different than what's done now. Our pets are not only powerless, but speechless. If no one chooses to bring their suffering to light, then it goes unnoticed. I'm starting to think that owning a dog is NOT a right, and if it got a lot harder to own a dog, but our shelters were empty, I think I could live with that.

livingdustmops, I have been turning over your idea in my mind, and it's very interesting. The one flaw I think is that BYBs will essentially be exempt. Very large scale breeders will be forced to comply, and good breeders will comply. But breeders who sell "under the table" won't chip their dogs, and the buyers won't care. I also wonder about brokers selling over the internet. Thoughts?

[jp4m2]

After seeing this thread I started wondering myself, why are so many pets in shelters ?.....After trying to do some research I found very little information was available in regards to this problem. There was one study done by The Regional Shelter Relinquishment Study sponsored by the National Council on
Pet Population Study and Policy (NCPPSP)……..Here are some stats they found……..even though it's a little dated....

Top 10 Reasons for Relinquishment*
Dogs:
1. Moving (7%)
2. Landlord not allowing pet (6%)
3. Too many animals in household (4%)
4. Cost of pet maintenance (5%)
5. Owner having personal problems (4%)
6. Inadequate facilities (4%)
7. No homes available for litter mates (3%)
8. Having no time for pet (4%)
9. Pet illness(es) (4%)
10. Biting (3%)


Characteristics of Pets Being Relinquished
In addition to the reasons for relinquishment, the study collected data on the pets being relinquished. According to the study:
• The majority of the surrendered dogs (47.7%) and cats (40.3%) were between 5 months and 3 years of age.
• The majority of dogs (37.1%) and cats (30.2) had been owned from 7 months to 1 year.
• Approximately half of the pets (42.8% of dogs; 50.8% of cats) surrendered were not neutered. Many of the pets relinquished (33% of dogs; 46.9% of cats) had not been to a veterinarian.
• Animals acquired from friends were relinquished in higher numbers (31.4% of dogs; 33.2% of cats) than from any other source.
• Close to equal numbers of male and female dogs and cats were surrendered.
• Most dogs (96%) had not received any obedience training.


The survey also revealed :

......on average, 42.5 percent of pets that entered animal shelters were submitted by animal control authorities and nearly 30 percent were surrendered by their owners. The remainder was relinquished by other sources…..

In addition, the majority of respondents--62 percent--were under 30 years of age and 52 percent had at least finished high school…….

Findings included that 30% of dogs and 6% of relinquished cats were purebred. Most animals were between 5 months and 3 years of age. Twenty-seven percent of dogs and 36.5% of cats were reported to live outdoors always or almost always....

……..Dogs were at increased risk of relinquishment if they were obtained at no cost or if their purchase cost was less than $100………. dogs obtained at no cost and with little effort are at increased risk of relinquishment. This might reflect a lack of value to the owner or a lower level
of attachment or commitment.....

Mixed-breed animals were at increased risk of relinquishment. Dogs
who came from an animal shelter, friend, or pet shop or who had been a stray were at increased risk of relinquishment compared with dogs who entered households as gifts. ………

Of the 71 reasons for relinquishment recorded in the study, 24 were classified as behavioral. Behavioral reasons accounted for 27% of the single-reason canine relinquishment's……

…… Significantly more people relinquishing dogs and cats felt that a female dog or cat would be better off if she had one litter before being spayed…….


I was very surprised that 62% of the surrenders are from young people. If moving is the number one reason for relinquishment I would venture to guess it's the younger pet owners doing so.

Also I found the "31% of relinquished dogs acquired from friends" a sad statistic. These dumped pets could have been prevented if neutering or spaying had been done ....It's just a sad situation ........

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by celstu1

I would rescue in a heartbeat if I could, but they always have some reason or another why I don't qualify to rescue a dog. Ive tried 3 rescues in the past for different breeds and it's either, you don't have a fenced in yard (live in a condo), or you work full time or you have 'other pets' at home. Some reason or another. I would buy from a reputable breeder from now on, but rescue seems almost impossible for me as long as I keep working and living in a condo. (even though my 2 boys are happy and well taken care now)

Working and living in a condo are not reasons for rescues to turn someone down.

It all depends on the dog you are looking to adopt.

If you applied for a dog that was a "runner", then the rescue might be looking for a secure yard.

If you applied for a dog that does not socialize with other dogs well, the rescue might be looking for an only dog home.

If you applied for a dog that the rescue felt would not do well for long periods alone, then job might be a problem

A thorough and careful rescue will weigh everything when adopting. A pup should be kept long enough to do a thorough evaluation of its needs and then a home found that is a good fit for the pup.

If we turned down every home that had people who work. other pets, and/or no fenced in yard, we would not be adopting many

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I'm sorry, I'm sure this is very frustrating and discouraging. I feel like this can be the Catch-22 of rescues, even though I totally support rescue work. If it's any consolation, I would not qualify for a rescue yorkie either, because I don't have a yard, even though I am a great mommy to Thor if I do say so myself. A delicate balance has to be struck, because people less patient than yourself will then say, "what's the point of rescue, I'm just going to get a dog wherever I can."

?

As I said above, lack of a fenced in yard is not a reason to be turned down for a rescue!

[celstu1]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

Working and living in a condo are not reasons for rescues to turn someone down.

It all depends on the dog you are looking to adopt.

If you applied for a dog that was a "runner", then the rescue might be looking for a secure yard.

If you applied for a dog that does not socialize with other dogs well, the rescue might be looking for an only dog home.

If you applied for a dog that the rescue felt would not do well for long periods alone, then job might be a problem

A thorough and careful rescue will weigh everything when adopting. A pup should be kept long enough to do a thorough evaluation of its needs and then a home found that is a good fit for the pup.

If we turned down every home that had people who work. other pets, and/or no fenced in yard, we would not be adopting many

You are right and I appreciate the custom home for the custom pup... however, I tried Yorkie, Rottie and Dobie rescues. I was never told as to WHY the dog would not fit in my home. I wish they would have told me something like "This dog is a runner" or "this dog is not social with other dogs" or "This dog has severe separation anxiety"... something. I was JUST told I worked full time and had no fenced in yard. At the time I tried to rescue I had no other dogs. After 3 attempts to rescue I finally went out and bought my dogs from a local breeder. The rescues made ME feel like I was inadequate, not good enough to take care of a dog. Also maybe rescues can suggest alternative pups they have for adoption for someone who IS a good home and a good person so they don't give up hope on rescuing and just go buy their own pup. That is eventually what I did... bought my own pups.

[celstu1]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

As I said above, lack of a fenced in yard is not a reason to be turned down for a rescue!

Ladyjane, I admire rescues and the work they do, I am not meaning to sound unappreciative of any rescue at all. I think you need to LISTEN to what others are saying. It is a COMMON occurrence that people are getting turned down for not having a fenced in yard, for working full time, for having other pets, or having children. Maybe YOUR rescue does not work like that, but other rescues in other places DO. I've heard it and read it on here time and time again. I, always, tell anyone I know looking for a dog to try a rescue first. I most definitely support them, they just didn't work out for me and others for the reasons stated above. 3 - 4 people on this thread alone have mentioned they were turned down for those reasons stated above. This does happen. I think you need to understand that too.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by celstu1

Ladyjane, I admire rescues and the work they do, I am not meaning to sound unappreciative of any rescue at all. I think you need to LISTEN to what others are saying. It is a COMMON occurrence that people are getting turned down for not having a fenced in yard, for working full time, for having other pets, or having children. Maybe YOUR rescue does not work like that, but other rescues in other places DO. I've heard it and read it on here time and time again. I, always, tell anyone I know looking for a dog to try a rescue first. I most definitely support them, they just didn't work out for me and others for the reasons stated above. 3 - 4 people on this thread alone have mentioned they were turned down for those reasons stated above. This does happen. I think you need to understand that too.

First of all, it is a COMMON occurence for people to be turned down. That is not something we love, but it happens. Sadly, the majority of applications rescues get are not as great as people might think they are. It is a whole picture...not just a fence...or a stay at home owner. I have seen GREAT apps turn into nightmares once a vet check or home visit is done. Call a vet and find out that the FIRST time they saw someone's 14 year old pup was when they brought it in to be euthanized (YES that actually happened to me....and I DID tell the person because I thought that SURELY she had used another vet. Oh ...no....but she begged me for days on end to let her adopt my foster.....said she had learned her lesson. Well, so sorry, but my pups are not experiments. I have no problem saying no, heck no. Maybe she did learn her lesson....I told her to go to a shelter and find a pup. THere are SO many in need of homes. Not going to get one that I have spent my time rehabbing. I will not gamble with the life of a pup...ever. ) Do we miss some great homes? Probably....but rather that than to send a pup to the wrong one.

I do hear what people are saying and I also know that when people say it they often refer to rescues as if to say ALL rescues follow the same guidelines. I also know that they often times guess why they were not approved for a pup because many rescues do not give the reason why they are not approved. There is good reason for that.....once a person knows they were turned down for a particular reason, they will hide that from the next group.

The groups I know and work closely with do pretty much the same thing that we do.

What a lot of people do not understand is that rescues are not in the business of placing pups in homes just to make the people happy. Their goal is to place a pup in the home that best fits that pup.....the goal is to STOP the cycle of recycled pups! Of course if it fits the pup, it will fit the home and everyone is happy. Are we perfect? No, but we do our level best to be perfect and we will take back any pup for any reason. Now, in saying that, if we were turning them over to just anyone to make people happy, do you think we could offer that guarantee? Of course not....the numbers would be mind boggling. That is WHY there are so many homeless pups....because byb's and mills do NOT screen carefully the way that rescues do.

What I tell people who are turned down is to go to a shelter if they want a pup. The rules are less stringent in most.

Anyone telling me that they were forced to BUY from a breeder is just saying that for effect because there are so many ways to get one rather than pad the pockets of bad breeders. I don't buy that attempt to try to make rescues guilty.