Article about BYB! Must read!

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by megansmomma

HUH?

Solves the problem, doesnt it?

[QuickSilver]

I care very much about pet overpopulation in this country. I volunteer at a shelter and most of my charitable contributions go to animal welfare.

That being said, I think the original article is way off base. First, I believe it is factually incorrect. From what I understand, puppy mills are by far the largest producers of pure bred animals today. Second, it's a huge logical leap to claim that mostly BYB dogs end up in the pound. As WoogieMan pointed out, this overlooks mixed breed dogs entirely, and that's not even the only hole. Finally, its accusatory tone is going to turn off people who otherwise might want to help.

Honestly, to me, it seems like the attitude in the article is shared by some people in this thread. What good does it do to get offended and accuse people of nefarious acts simply because you're not getting the number of replies you think your thread "deserves"? If people are that bad, then the problem will never be solved, so there's no need to expend any energy on it.

Alternatively, if you are not getting the results you want, be it nationally, or on an online forum, maybe it's time to reconsider your approach.

I don't believe breeding responsibly has anything to do with breeding to a standard of physical appearance. You should:

- breed for health. Frankly, this should be more important than appearance.
- ensure all your pups go to good homes.
- follow up with your buyers.
- *****sell ALL of your pet-quality dogs under a spay/neuter contract.

I can't claim to be an expert, but I'd like to see a conversation about how to make these kinds of things happen.

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I care very much about pet overpopulation in this country. I volunteer at a shelter and most of my charitable contributions go to animal welfare.

That being said, I think the original article is way off base. First, I believe it is factually incorrect. From what I understand, puppy mills are by far the largest producers of pure bred animals today. Second, it's a huge logical leap to claim that mostly BYB dogs end up in the pound. As WoogieMan pointed out, this overlooks mixed breed dogs entirely, and that's not even the only hole. Finally, its accusatory tone is going to turn off people who otherwise might want to help.

Honestly, to me, it seems like the attitude in the article is shared by some people in this thread. What good does it do to get offended and accuse people of nefarious acts simply because you're not getting the number of replies you think your thread "deserves"? If people are that bad, then the problem will never be solved, so there's no need to expend any energy on it.

Alternatively, if you are not getting the results you want, be it nationally, or on an online forum, maybe it's time to reconsider your approach.

I don't believe breeding responsibly has anything to do with breeding to a standard of physical appearance. You should:

- breed for health. Frankly, this should be more important than appearance.
- ensure all your pups go to good homes.
- follow up with your buyers.
- *****sell ALL of your pet-quality dogs under a spay/neuter contract.

I can't claim to be an expert, but I'd like to see a conversation about how to make these kinds of things happen.

Also a "come back home" clause so that if unforseen things happen and the buyer cant keep the dog, the dog goes back to the breeder only.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by yorkiekist

Solves the problem, doesnt it?

Not really! I have seen people with a ton of money dump their yorkies without a blink of the eye; and then see others sell their personal belongings, beg, borrow and steal to provide for their sick yorkies.
Money has nothing to do with it.
It all has to do with standard of care in my opinion.
The very first thing I look for when someone applies for one of my fosters, is a good vet history. Now, please let us not get into a discussion about first time owners....I am talking about people who have had pets. I want to know exactly HOW they cared for their pets. I do not ask the vet office what they think of the person...I ask details about what level of care was given.
Either people get it or they don't. Has nothing to do with income.

[QuickSilver]

Yes, very good point. Thanks for bringing that up.

[hartygirl]

Originally Posted by yorkiekist

Well, while your at it, why not make legislation say that you have to have a certain income to even own a dog. That will solve just about everything. Why not start at $100,000 income per year to own 1 dog. Mandatory s/n. To be a breeder of one litter per year, you have to have an income of $200,000 per year. That would weed out just about all the bybers and alot of the families. No more need for dog breeding. Atrician will take care of the millions put to sleep and shazam, an almost dog free society! I think I should call my Senator about this!!

Well, if that is what you want than go ahead. It isn't a half bad idea really. I think you might be on to something! Too bad that is not the way I feel, but thanks for trying to put words in my mouth!

I'm glad you feel the way you do, I admire your passion for this breed. I'm sad to hear you refer to dogs as "crappy" in your previous post. This makes me a little weary about the position you take with this topic.

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

Not really! I have seen people with a ton of money dump their yorkies without a blink of the eye; and then see others sell their personal belongings, beg, borrow and steal to provide for their sick yorkies.
Money has nothing to do with it.
It all has to do with standard of care in my opinion.
The very first thing I look for when someone applies for one of my fosters, is a good vet history. Now, please let us not get into a discussion about first time owners....I am talking about people who have had pets. I want to know exactly HOW they cared for their pets. I do not ask the vet office what they think of the person...I ask details about what level of care was given.
Either people get it or they don't. Has nothing to do with income.

I think yorkiekist is making the point that you could simply make it impossible for anyone to own a dog, but that doesn't mean dogs would be better off. Here's another solution: make it illegal to breed dogs, period, offenders to be punished by death. Eventually all the dogs in the country will die of old age, and no dog will ever be mistreated again.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I think yorkiekist is making the point that you could simply make it impossible for anyone to own a dog, but that doesn't mean dogs would be better off. Here's another solution: make it illegal to breed dogs, period, offenders to be punished by death. Eventually all the dogs in the country will die of old age, and no dog will ever be mistreated again.

Honestly, I would rather see that than the horrors I see now. What we do to animals in this country is beyond inhumane.
I am all about putting people in cages and hosing them down with water, throwing their food out for them to fight over, letting them stay in their own filth and all of the other horrors that the animals are subjected to.
Everyone is horrified about the octomom and yet they keep breeding dogs as if it is no big deal where they end up.
Oh please...don't get me started about what I think should happen to people who use dogs to make money.

[hartygirl]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I care very much about pet overpopulation in this country. I volunteer at a shelter and most of my charitable contributions go to animal welfare.

That being said, I think the original article is way off base. First, I believe it is factually incorrect. From what I understand, puppy mills are by far the largest producers of pure bred animals today. Second, it's a huge logical leap to claim that mostly BYB dogs end up in the pound. As WoogieMan pointed out, this overlooks mixed breed dogs entirely, and that's not even the only hole. Finally, its accusatory tone is going to turn off people who otherwise might want to help.

Honestly, to me, it seems like the attitude in the article is shared by some people in this thread. What good does it do to get offended and accuse people of nefarious acts simply because you're not getting the number of replies you think your thread "deserves"? If people are that bad, then the problem will never be solved, so there's no need to expend any energy on it.

Alternatively, if you are not getting the results you want, be it nationally, or on an online forum, maybe it's time to reconsider your approach.

I don't believe breeding responsibly has anything to do with breeding to a standard of physical appearance. You should:

- breed for health. Frankly, this should be more important than appearance.
- ensure all your pups go to good homes.
- follow up with your buyers.
- *****sell ALL of your pet-quality dogs under a spay/neuter contract.

I can't claim to be an expert, but I'd like to see a conversation about how to make these kinds of things happen.

Excellent post. This is what new laws should made up of, among other things.
WE NEED NEW LAWS! No animals should suffer.

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

I think yorkiekist is making the point that you could simply make it impossible for anyone to own a dog, but that doesn't mean dogs would be better off. Here's another solution: make it illegal to breed dogs, period, offenders to be punished by death. Eventually all the dogs in the country will die of old age, and no dog will ever be mistreated again.

Thank you!! Great solution by the way!!

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by QuickSilver

Yes, very good point. Thanks for bringing that up.

You mean these points that you can find all over the internet about what a reputable breeder is? That is exactly WHY people are trying to pass these laws....yet the people who are all about money don't want those laws. Heaven forbid they should have to clean up their acts and lose any of the money they make off the poor dogs.
I agree it will be hard to pass laws that will not hurt the good breeders BUT that is not an excuse to bury our heads in the sand and allow the problems to continue.

--------
Finding A Reputable Breeder

[yorkiekist]

Originally Posted by hartygirl

Well, if that is what you want than go ahead. It isn't a half bad idea really. I think you might be on to something! Too bad that is not the way I feel, but thanks for trying to put words in my mouth!

I'm glad you feel the way you do, I admire your passion for this breed. I'm sad to hear you refer to dogs as "crappy" in your previous post. This makes me a little weary about the position you take with this topic.

The meaning crappy refers to being unhealthy. Sorry, I should have explained it better.

[QuickSilver]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

You mean these points that you can find all over the internet about what a reputable breeder is? That is exactly WHY people are trying to pass these laws....yet the people who are all about money don't want those laws. Heaven forbid they should have to clean up their acts and lose any of the money they make off the poor dogs.
I agree it will be hard to pass laws that will not hurt the good breeders BUT that is not an excuse to bury our heads in the sand and allow the problems to continue.

--------
Finding A Reputable Breeder

Sorry, are we fighting? I didn't claim to have discovered how to produce gold from lead. I was responding to the original article, which said that good breeding is all about physical appearances, and tail docking, of all things.

Also, I've seen posts from reputable breeders here who don't sell all their pups under s/n contracts, which surprised me.

[yorkiepuppie]

i think that there are many interesting ideas being brought up in this thread. but i guess we never defined what we call a BYBer

i feel that when the original post was posted; the main idea was that people should not breed irresponisbily and contribute to the pet overpopulation problem. but i think people are focusing on different parts of the article that was posted.

the way i define a BYBer is basically a 'irresponsible pet owner' is that correct? i think that if we can agree on a definition of that, it might be easier to discuss this and avoid arguments that's not necessary?

i think that BYB are people who should not be breeding their dogs, and probably shouldn't own dogs because they misunderstand the point of having a pet...dogs are not little money making machines...

[kwaymon]

Great Post!
When I bought Tucker, my entire family wanted me to breed him with my sister's female. They thought that just because I happened to have a male and she happened to have a female that we should automatically breed. After all we did pay lots of money for them, right? And we could get our mney back, right? And then everyone in the family could have a cute little yorkie right? WRONG! I was so against it and when I went ahead with his neuter, I think some of the famiyl were upset. Well, guess what? Even though Tucker is a very cute and very sweet little dog, he has very bad teeth and I just found out that he has luxating patella. Also, now that my sister's dog has grown up, she is showing signs of aggression. So, guess what kind of dogs we would have produced? So, great post! I hope that anyone who is considering breeding their pets will seriously reconsider. Otherwise, I'm afraid that this breed that we all love and cherish is going to disappear.