Boston Bans the sell of puppies
 

Boston has joined the list of growing cities to ban the sell of puppies, kittens and rabbits in pet stores. This is another victory. Making animal abuse a felony and now banning the sell of animals in pet stores.

Now if we can just regulate the sell of animals over the Internet and outlaw the sell of fur coats (even fake fur coats), would definitely make my year.

Puppy-Mill Dogs Banned From Boston Pet Stores

fantastic
 

Wow, I don't know much about pet stores selling puppies, and I would hope many buy from breeders, but I would rather meet the breeder in person. There was a expose on television of terrible puppy mills that sell to these stores.
We had such a store here where I live, and the store had to close when they were force to admit over 30% of the dogs they sold died within a month! How awful. Our Petco has adoption days, and I hope they still continue to do this.

I think overall and with many second thoughts this might be a good thing. But I wonder where folks will actually source purebred puppies from? I think that the internet is notoriously hard to police and for sure I don't want the ability to both advertise interview and meet future puppy owners over this medium barred.

"..outlaw the sell of fake fur coats.."????? OMG!! Give me a break! I guess I can expect some jack booted soldiers to come invading my home....I have throws on several of my chairs that are REPLICAS (FAKE!!) of calf skin throws....they are warm and so pretty on my leather furniture, and are great to throw across your legs during the winter, in front of the fireplace....
Maybe I need to go buy all the fake fur throws I can get my hands on.....they are FAKE....never came from an animal of any kind, the closest animal these fake fur throws has enjoyed, has been my babies curling up in them, all around my lap and on my legs. I just had a horrible thought....I have REAL LEATHER furniture!!! OMG!!! I guess I am going to have to figure out where I can hide my leather furniture when the gestapo shows up.....

I do need to add that I agree with banning the sale of puppy mill dogs in pet stores.....and I will not shop in stores that have "pets" on display....

lol Judy you are too funny lol

I literally fled Massacusetts years ago to save my dogs from seizure. It's the most bitter experience I've ever had and I'll never get over it, don't want to.
If you look me up you'll find I'm a very reputable Yorkshire Terrier breeder. I moved 200 miles away from my Massachusetts home, back to my native place, thinking I'd never be able to sell another Yorkie pup from here.
That was so totally wrong as it has come as a shock to me to have many people driving here from the Boston area to purchase a well bred Yorkie puppy. Some have come from as far as Philadelphia for my pups. Some are even veterinarians.
How is this helping anyone or anything?

Well, for goodness sake, open your eyes, you reputable breeder that actively shows your dogs,, and breeds quality, healthy babies....YOU are exactly what those jack booted enforcers want to get rid of! The plan is to get rid of all reputable breeders and healthy puppies from respected breeders/lines, to drive people to buy inferior quality puppies from cages in woods or out of the trunk of cars parked in flea markets, side of the road, etc. (obviously that is the plan because people selling dogs at yard sales, on the street, out of car trunks, etc are NOT governed or policed, just REPUTABLE breeders, selling respectfully bred and healthy dogs, are busted from on line web sites ....then THOSE usually sick, poor quality puppies will die off , or end up in rescue centers and the dog pound, and the next thing you know, the ultimate goal of outlawing the lawful sell of quality, healthy, pedigreed dogs will be driven completely under ground, peddled at the flea markets and at the side of the road....
You just go ahead and run, you quality, respected, reputable breeder you, and take your gorgeous, well bred, genetically matched for best outcome show dogs with you........leave the sell of these babies to the people that are the least equipped to be doing it, so they will eventually all die out and there will be NO MORE purebred quality babies for sale....just sick, sidewalk spawned, ill conceived accidents that have so many genetic disorders they will not survive.....THIS is the "successful, self limiting breeding program" devised by the government......and it is only about 10-15 more years at best, to be the norm......

There is something called the law of unintended consequences... And so I wonder what if every single large or small city bans the sale of puppies in pet stores - will that actually affect puppy mill breeders? Will it affect USDA licensed breeders? How will those folks respond?

Don't get me wrong - I want out of business those puppy mills - but I also know that the many small in home good breeders have no ability to match the demand for puppies.

Oh yes I know the rhetoric from PETA and also many rescue folks. They seem to think that as long as there are dogs in a shelter nobody should breed. In fact some members of PETA believe that breeding pure bred dogs breeding any dogs is just nonsense that they want to stamp out. Is the problem of dogs in a shelter due to breeders - how about the owners who surrender these dogs willy nilly for reasons that basically indicate they have never should have owned a dog in the first place?

I think as always we humans are very short sighted and have little ability to forecast what impact their collective decisions might have. History abounds with examples of same.

sorry for the rant, but
 

This whole movement to stop everyone from selling puppies cuts to my core somehow. Now Boston has jumped on the bandwagon of banning pet stores selling pets? This is getting close to home. Massachusetts was already generally miserable for breeders when I left. Never mind, I think the movement is a runaway train now.

:eek::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::mad:
Unfortunately, I think you are absolutely correct....I have essentially slowed to a crawl with my breeding program, in preparation for a complete exit in a year or so.... and I have reserved some of my babies to keep here with me, so I have healthy, well bred dogs that will last into my old age, as I just can not ever imagine not having a yorkie or several around me, until I die! I certainly will not have money to spend on sick, unhealthy dogs, so I have my own healthy lines/offspring, that will out last me....something for you to maybe consider magicgenie, as well as other reputable breeders that want to end their golden years with their own healthy dogs...hopefully, I am talking another 12-15 years....how ever long it is, I am covered with healthy dogs! I LOVE it when a plan comes together!

There is nothing in the ordinance to prevent buyers from seeking out breeders like yourself. By the way, advocacy for the humane treatment of animals in Boston started over 100 years ago so this is certainly nothing new. Prohibiting the sales of puppies in pet stores or parking lots within the city seems like a positive decision to condemn the abhorrent treatment of animals used for breeding in puppy mills. I realize for some the humane and compassionate treatment of animals takes a back seat to profits but it shouldn't be tolerated by civilized society. I think reputable breeders need to continue to set themselves apart from the practices found in puppy mills.

I don't think reputable breeders breed to 'meet the demand". IMO the "meeting the demand" breeding is what is causing more and more neglected and/or abused...and homeless animals in this country.

As to the owners who surrender dogs willy nilly......they are coming from breeders who breed to "meet the demand".

That last line ten times over!! Instead of the knee jerk response that someone is taking their right to breed away; if they would band together to help point out the bad eggs, the problem would be solved. IMHO

The reason I mention fur coats is because animals are being skinned alive so people can wear them as a fashion accessory. As for fake furs, unless you know what to look for, fake furs are dogs,cats and other furry creatures skinned alive. I was speaking to the "faux furs" that people think are fake but in actuality are really just skinned dogs, cats and rabbits or other small animals.

I love all animals and not just domestic animals. Bringing intentional harm to an animal because some people want to look good is unacceptable. With so many synthetic fibers out there, there is no reason to wear clothing made from animals.

So yes, I am for banning real fur and "faux furs".

If anyone is interested in purchasing "faux fur" throws or blankets, just look at the label....if it says it is "machine washable", it does not contain any murdered animals....it is exactly as advertised, "faux" fur! EXAMPLE:
".......Fake fur, also called fun fur or faux fur, is any material made of synthetic fibers designed to resemble fur, normally as part of a piece of clothing. It was first introduced in 1929 and has been commercially available since the 1950s, but its increasing popularity has been credited to its promotion by animal rightsand animal welfare organizations which claim that it is an animal-friendly alternative to traditional fur clothing.
Fake fur is not an animal-use product.
Fake fur is a fabric and therefore is relatively easy to sew with.
Fake fur does not require or encourage the breeding of animals in factory farms like real fur.
Fake fur does not require cold storage to prevent deterioration and is impervious to moths.
A 1979 study commissioned by the Fund for Animals argued that the energy consumption for the production of one coat made out of fake fur was 120 MBtu, compared to 433 MBtu for trapped animals and 7,965 MBtu for animals raised in fur farms.
Disadvantages[edit]Fake fur is not a natural material.
Fake fur is made from several materials including blends of acrylic and modacrylic polymers derived from coal, air, water, petroleum and limestone. These materials can take a long time to break down, possibly anywhere from 500 to 1,000 years.
Fake furs are not able to keep snow from melting and re-freezing on the fiber filaments; this is very important, especially in hiking, mountain climbing, skiing and other outdoor activities which are done in extreme conditions.
Today’s technology gives faux fur the qualities and techniques as real fur. Hannah Weiland, founder of Shrimps, a London-based faux fur company, says, “I love working with faux fur because it doesn't molt and it feels just as soft. If the faux kind feels as good, why use the real kind?” Weiland is not the only designer taking advantage of faux fur qualities. Additionally, Stella McCartney, a designer with a reputation for ethical and sustainable fashion, incorporates faux fur throughout her collections with tagged patches reading “Fur Free Fur.” In 2014, Hugo Boss pledged to become fur-free publicly in their 2014 Sustainability Report, relaying the message that animal cruelty is never fashionable.

Channeled Mink Luxury Faux Fur Throw(FRONTGATE)

Designed in Paris, our Luxury Faux Fur Throw is densely woven of highly prized Japanese fibers with a feather-soft touch. With incredibly natural colorations and deep, soft pile that replicates the sheen of real fur, these throws add a dash of sophisticated elegance to your home. (I have numerous of these in my home....I enjoy using one, my son has one, I keep them on the foot of each bed during winter instead of heavy blankets, and my dogs love to snuggle into them so I got some less expensive ones for them! I even got a couple that look like cow hide from Pier One, to throw over several leather chairs in my study!)

Part of our Luxury Faux Fur Collection that includes coordinating throws and pillows
Makes an elegant gift for holidays or housewarmings; gift box available
Saves energy by keeping you warm while relaxing with a good book or lounging in a chair
Recreates the look of real fur without harming any animals
Fur is densely woven to 700 grams per square meter of 85% acrylic/15% polyester
Channeled seam construction
Easy-care, machine-washable convenience
Machine wash cold, gentle cycle; line dry
If anyone is really interested in faux fur accessories, just read the label....if it says it is machine washable, or if it contains actual percentages of acrylic/polyester, dead give away it is indeed faux fur.....

FAUX is the French word for FAKE, which I take to mean a simulant, or synthetic. Never mind. I'm too busy for this today.

I had a good laugh out loud when I read this. haha...

Then I got curious, why someone might think that faux fur is still real fur. So I did a quick Google search and this article popped up which I thought was quite surprising...
https://www.thedodo.com/real-faux-fu...523379462.html

Not sure how often real fur is actually being sold as faux fur. Regardless, it's troubling to know...

My comments did not say reputable breeders breed to meet the demand in fact contrary to your statement. I simply said we can not meet the demand for puppies if (inference here0 there is a large decrease in puppies. I was musing upon the *law of unintended conseqences*.

Sure get rid of puppy mills but surely it is best to do that at the source of the problem. Sic the puppy mill itself. Instead we have these laws coming into effect at the retail level not the producer level....

Owners who surrender dogs willy nilly really are not only coming from commercial USDA licensed facilities and or puppy mills - they do also come very sadly from responsible breeders.

I am simply saying the answer to the problem is much more complex than a black n white solution. Block retail sales at pet stores - and if there is as much profit in it as you think the commercial breeders will find another outlet..... So that outlet will be something we have not thought of - the darkweb - back to newspaper adverts - pet expo sales - gosh I donot know - but anything underground is defacto harder to regulate. :aimeeyork

I have posted some numbers before and of course they are all soft numbers! But there is anywhere from 75million to 80 million dogs in the USA in homes. Baring surrenders to shelters et al a very conservative number of say 5% of dogs will die from disease or old age. THat is anywhere from 3.75 million to 4 million dogs a year that consumers might want to replace. This of course ignores the new entrants to the field of dog ownership and or those older folks that say this is my last pooch. I have yet to see any stats on those percentages.

In home responsible breeders can not just based on their numbers of same possibly fulfill that new demand. So the demand is there and anyone in business knows market forces will move to fullfill that demand.

IMO there needs to be a grass root sea change of potential and current dog owners to actually sign up for ownership of their dog for that dogs lifetime. And yes sometimes there will be regrettable circumstances that occasion the need for a dog surrender to a shelter but if we stop before it starts irresponsible dog ownership then a whole lot fewer folks will purchase a dog be it through a rescue or a dog breeder or a puppy mill or a USDA licensed commercial breeder.
Surely as I have read that a significant proportion of dogs surrendered are from actual owners and not from breeders dumping a litter at a shelter that would go a hell of a long way to reducing dogs in shelters...

Wow, now I've just looked it up too and it's really quite sickening that anyone is out there selling real fur as fake, or faux.
Now I have to go back and figure out how that problem is connected to puppies being sold in pet stores.
Basically, some people won't rest until there are no puppies available anywhere. I need to make peace with that as I won't be the one suffering over it.

I knew exactly what you meant. My thoughts on demand are that I don't give a darn about demand.

I don't think anyone is trying to stop ALL breeding and quite frankly it is disturbing to me that every time someone makes a suggestion or a law is passed that will limit the bad breeders, people start carrying on that we don't want ANY dogs. That to me is ridiculous...there will never be a shortage of dogs. What we need is for breeders to stop selling to every Joe Blow who has money in hand AND to support legislation that will stop this. I DO know there are breeders who don't sell to just anyone.......sadly there are MORE that don't do it. These are LIVE beings and to just breed for money and give to anyone regardless of what kind of life they will give that dog is horrible.

Nobody in this thread suggested that we don't want any dogs at all being bred. Although PETA has in the past posited this position. To question and muse upon consequences is a inborn trait of humans.

What besides breeders not selling to every tom dick or harry is also shelters not placing dogs with whom-ever. What we need is an educated and committe buying public who don't show up to adopt a dog when they are not prepared for the commitment of dog ownership/ That can only come with a continual education of the public and discerning dog placement from all sources that dogs come from!

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

There you go.... blame the shelters who have NOTHING to do with breeding!

I agree about education, and I believe that the people who bring these animals into the world and make money off of them owe it to them to educate the person buying...and NOT selling to the uneducable.

Actually it was said.

shelters have everthing to do with the placement of dogs. It is their responsibilty to place dogs in homes.

Dog Owner's Guide:Minimizing owner surrenders

From this study linked above:

Introduction

Several years ago, the Humane Society of the US initiated a “voluntary breeding moratorium” to urge dog breeders to stop producing puppies until all dogs in shelters were adopted to new homes.

“Until there are none, adopt one,” the slogan said.

Thoughtful and caring dog breeders were put on the defensive, pet stores were vilified, and all commercial kennels were lumped together as “puppy mills” no matter how they provided for their animals.

A new study that examined the reasons dogs — about two million each year — are surrendered to animal shelters has shed new light on the problem. The main reasons dogs are surrendered is that owners fail to obedience train or have unrealistic expectations of their pet; the dogs at highest risk of surrender are those acquired at low or no cost, especially those that do not visit a veterinarian regularly.

Gary Patronek VMD, PhD, one of the principle investigators on the study, presented the results at the NAIA Purebred Rescue Symposium last March. The work was published in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association on August 1, and is corroborated in another study reported in the August 15 issue of the Journal.

Patronek and his Purdue University colleagues concluded that dog owners who pay more than $100 for a dog, take him to a veterinarian more than once a year, and participate in obedience classes are more likely to provide a long-term home for the animal.

Veterinary care and obedience classes may reinforce the bonding of pet and owner, the researchers wrote “. . . by allowing the owner to experience and appreciate the positive aspects of pet ownership such as companionship, affection, entertainment, and security without overreacting to or being distracted by disruptive or unwanted behavior.”

Their conclusions challenge the assertions of activists that breeders directly and indirectly produce an “overpopulation” of pets and provide testimony for early intervention through education, a solution that breeders, breed clubs, kennel clubs, and the American Kennel Club have promoted for years.

And another extract from the article:

The numbers

The research was done at the Humane Society of St. Joseph, Mishawaka, Indiana. The team compiled separate information for dogs and cats; they interviewed 380 people who surrendered their dogs for adoption and 905 owners who kept their animals. The control group was chosen from a random sample of dog-owning St. Joseph County residents.
Fifty-four percent of the dogs surrendered were six months to three years old and 15 percent were less than six months old. (The study included only acquired dogs, not surrendered litters.)
Fifty-one percent of dogs surrendered had been purchased for less than $100 from a breeder or private owner. Nearly nine percent from these private sources cost more than $100 ; 2.5 percent came from pet stores; and 3.9 percent from litters produced in the home.
Nearly 20 percent of the surrendered dogs came from a shelter, and about the same number were acquired as strays.
Nearly 41 percent of the surrendered dogs were obtained free from the previous owner.
Behavior problems occurring daily that contributed to surrender were:
barking, 41 percent
chewing24 percent
hyperactivity, 45 percent
housetraining accidents, 21 percent
aggression to other pets, less than eight percent
aggression to people, less than nine percent.

20% of dogs re surrended from a shelter tells me there is a lot lacking in shelter placement

Oh, so you think shelters should pick up the mess made by breeders.

I am not going to argue....I know what a waste of time it is.

Sad state of affairs for the poor animals in this world...more blaming than doing.

As to your highlighted sentence....WHERE DID THEY COME FROM ORIGINALLY?

I rest my case. I have seen this type of rhetoric over and over ad nauseum and I say that until breeders are controlled we will continue to have problems. Reputable breeders SHOULD be on the bandwagon to help but no...so many just worry about their bottom line. $$$$$$$$$

sick. of. it.

Gemy, you breed and you are against early spay/neuter ... yet you blame shelters for our over population of dogs ? I don't think there is much more I could say to you.

Yet again Linda you put words in my mouth I did not say! I was merely pointing out the fact that shelters have a responsibility to place correctly and with judgement the right dog into a home. A 20% surrender rate of dogs from previous shelters tells me that they need to improve.