Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklynn  The difference is "show breeders" are improving the breed as in researching, health testing, involved in genetic research, researching pedigrees, continuing to preserve the breed and not just supplying a pet demand. That is the difference [IMG]file:///C:/Users/DONNA%27%7E1/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif[/IMG]Please don't take offense [IMG]file:///C:/Users/DONNA%27%7E1/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif[/IMG]
Donna |
No offense at all, Donna.
But here comes the question: If great show breeders are primarily concerned with preserving the breed, are they doing that by breeding in mass? Presumably, they are only keeping the dogs that meet their showing goals. The rest are placed in homes. Now, presumably again, those dogs are placed on spay and neuter contracts because those dogs weren't fit for showing and therefore, not fit for breeding. So how is that improving the breed if the lineage stops there? Or are they selling these dogs to other breeders as "good enough" to breed? And if these "good enough" dogs are breeding, how are they controlling the progeny to make sure the lines stay strong? Limited registrations haven’t helped; the unscrupulous breeder just goes and registers with an alternate registry and keeps going.
I'm going to pull a number out of the air here; since I can't seem to find a good answer to what percentage of pups from a show breeder are show- worthy. If 1 out of every 25 pups is championable (is that a word?) , what about the other 24? Granted, it's more likely that these pups are well vetted and less likely to have health problems than the mill dogs, but that's still 24 dogs brought in to an already over populated pet world. I'm not saying that these high volume show breeders are the cause of the overpopulation problem, but surely they are adding to it every bit as much as the byb'er.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy1999 Some pet owners do not think a dog should ever be in a "cage". Others think it's okay for part of the day, and some people seem to think 24/7 is fine. Joey goes in his cage on his own for large parts of the day. I do not think we should crucify any breeder just because she keeps her dogs in cages/crates. I've read threads where breeders allowed their pet dogs to have babies, and because they were pets, the female didn't really want to spend time with their babies, they wanted to be with the human, not the babies. I read threads where pet owners bred a female and another female in the house killed the puppies.
Is there really an ideal breeding condition? While I can picture some "idyllic" situations, there are always flaws in it. Reading the training forum, you will see some people don't even believe in crate training. I read of pet owners who keep dogs in a crate all day, and it drives me nuts. Many pet owners leave their dogs alone up to 12 hours a day, this is another thing I personally have a problem with. I actually think many breeders spend much more one on one time with their dogs, then many pet owners. |
There is a huge difference between a dog that chooses to go in to a cage on its own, and one that is forced to stay in a cage/crate/xpen/kennel because it’s owner is too busy or has too many dogs to properly supervise it. I also won’t disagree that many breeders spend more one on one time than some many pet owners. But I don’t care how many kennel helpers you can afford to pay; the dog still loses out on the day to day bonding and interaction that is the reason this species, above all others, is so loved when it’s kenneled versus raised in a good home situation. So if it’s bad for the owner to do it, why is it ok for the breeder? If they truly love the dogs, why deprive them of something it needs to reach it’s full potential? It just seems hypocritical that these same breeders would point fingers at the mills and BYB’ers and say they are bad for the way they treat their dogs, while doing essentially the same thing themselves, just in better conditions.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that a high volume show breeder producing more dogs isn’t going to put the BYB’er or mills out of business. It’s not going to improve the overall health of the breed nor preserve the traits of the Yorkie as long as everyone is over breeding. I just see a lot of excusing A,B and C because someone does X,Y and Z.
ETA: Not sure why Brooklyn's quote came out so strange. I've been having lots of issues with quoting lately