Quote:
Originally Posted by Woogie Man  Maybe we agree more than I first thought but, boy, we sure do word things differently. What I got from the article was that BYBs were the biggest contributors to the pet over-population problem. The author then went on describing a BYB as someone that didn't breed to breed standard. She obviously was talking about pure bred dogs. My posts centered on the fact that pure breds are not, numerically speaking, the biggest problem in shelters. By the author's own definition of a BYB being one that didn't breed to standard (again, it must be a pure bred to be bred to a standard or not), I was stating that BYBs, by her definition, weren't the shelters' biggest problem. The HSUS link that was posted stated that pure breds make up about 25% of shelter dogs so my assertion was nothing more than that 25% of a problem is not the biggest part of a problem. Your definition of a BYB is much broader and mine is, too. Surely many of the mixed breeds in shelters are the result of deliberate or careless breedings and not just the result of strays. Maybe our initial disagreement is because I was responding using the author's definition of a BYB while you were thinking of it in the broader sense. Or maybe we just really disagree  IDK, but I hope that we can agree that we all are equally concerned about the welfare of all dogs. Ladyjane, I'm glad you satisfied your curiosity. I don't see how it's relevant to the discussion but I am open about who I am and you can read any of my older posts and see that. |
honestly, it's not that i don't think we should pick apart things and make sure we have our facts right. the reason i was trying to say that it wasn't important earlier is because i do think that a lot of us DO have similar beliefs and might just be arguing over technicality and missing the issue that the OP had intended to address.
i think that getting our facts straight is important, but i think what's even MORE important is that whenever someone is trying to bring attention to animal welfare, i really rather that we support them as oppose to tearing apart what they are saying and argue over the 'technicality' instead of the core issue that was intended. but perhaps we are all reading and interpreting the article differently and therefore we are all focusing on different things.