Question - Out of Curiosity.....

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by ladyjane

I can tell you that YHR has never used money donated to care for pups to pass ANY laws against breeders or ANY laws at ALL.

I don't know ANY rescue that has done that and I do know a lot.

I think before you make such claims, you need to get a list of rescue groups and then go to www.guidestar.org and take a look at their 990s to see how much they use to "feed the machine that's pumping out rescue dogs".

Not thinking you are very well informed about what rescues *really* do. We never have a profit...EVER...we bust our backsides to get the veterinary bills paid for the pups that have been abandoned and/or neglected and/or abused. I can tell you that our members often lay out thousands of dollars and then hope to recoup it. We have a very dedicated group that does everything we can to help as many pups as we can.

You are right about reputable breeders not being the problem, but don't blame rescues for what the disreputable breeders are doing.

Commercial breeders HATE rescues, and send out lots of propaganda involving them. They would rather see dogs PTS, and have less dogs available for adoption. Unfortunately, lots of the propaganda put out by commercial breeders, is unknowingly accepted by small breeders and others, as fact.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

Commercial breeders HATE rescues, and send out lots of propaganda involving them. They would rather see dogs PTS, and have less dogs available for adoption. Unfortunately, lots of the propaganda put out by commercial breeders, is unknowingly accepted by small breeders and others, as fact.

They hate rescues because it is their mess that rescues are cleaning up. Or...shall I say...TRYING to clean up. Never ending mess.

[YorkieShadow]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

In my opinion when someone helps a breeder find homes from their used up dogs then they are brokers. A breeder should never have more dogs then they can find homes for or else they should have to keep them and not keep having more puppies to make $$$$. These are living creatures and are not product that goes on sale when it is used up...GREEDERS NEED TO STOP WITH THE VOLUME OF DOGS THEY ARE PRODUCING!

It is heartbreaking for sure but the problem will continue when these greeders get more room for the next patch of dogs. We cannot save them all and unless people start demanding changes in the law then no matter what anyone does this will go on and we will continue to euthanize millions of animals.

EXACTLY where do you think all these rescue/shelter dogs are coming from mills/ BYB who no longer want their over used old dogs. some come from people who cant afford their vet bills or they have lost their jobs, it sucks but it happens.. things change and when it does these dogs need homes.
No its not right but I for one will NEVER turn down a homeless dog. if it comes to me I will get it vet care needed out of my own pocket and I will find the best home I can find for that dog. that dog cant help that its breeder/owner used it for $ I will not leave them to suffer. sure I cant help the ones in other states. but I can and will help the ones in my area. I will not leave them on the street to die.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by YorkieShadow

EXACTLY where do you think all these rescue/shelter dogs are coming from mills/ BYB who no longer want their over used old dogs. some come from people who cant afford their vet bills or they have lost their jobs, it sucks but it happens.. things change and when it does these dogs need homes.
No its not right but I for one will NEVER turn down a homeless dog. if it comes to me I will get it vet care needed out of my own pocket and I will find the best home I can find for that dog. that dog cant help that its breeder/owner used it for $ I will not leave them to suffer. sure I cant help the ones in other states. but I can and will help the ones in my area. I will not leave them on the street to die.

I know exactly where these dogs come from and I stand by my comment...if you want to continue to help these greeders that is your choice but you cannot complain when it keeps these greeders in business and just makes room for more dogs. The cycle continues. Let the dogs go into shelters/rescues and stop the greeders from making any $$$ off of these dogs.

Breeders should pay the cost of shelters and rescues for their dogs. I am 100% sure if they had to pay the milllions of dollars in fines we would see many/if not all of these greeders shut down.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by straightsilk

This subject is not complicated. Spay and neuter should be FREE. .

Why should it be free...owning a dog is a privilage not a right...

Make the breeders do their job and let them pay..they are the ones making $$$ off of selling dogs. Make them pay for all of it...maybe, just maybe people would stop the mass breeding that is going on.

[Cha Cha]

Originally Posted by livingdustmops

I know exactly where these dogs come from and I stand by my comment...if you want to continue to help these greeders that is your choice but you cannot complain when it keeps these greeders in business and just makes room for more dogs. The cycle continues. Let the dogs go into shelters/rescues and stop the greeders from making any $$$ off of these dogs.

Breeders should pay the cost of shelters and rescues for their dogs. I am 100% sure if they had to pay the milllions of dollars in fines we would see many/if not all of these greeders shut down.

I do not understand this mentality. Why should the breeder pay the shelters and rescues? When I take in a dog whether I pay for it or bring it in for free, it becomes MY responsibilty. No one forced me to take the dog, but for whatever reason I cannot keep it, it then becomes the responsibility of the breeder? Why? I understand breeders taking their dogs back, and I commend those that do, but making them pay for circumstances of the person that took their dog to begin with does not make any sense. Imposing a fine at the end of the problem is not fixing the problem. The problem needs to be fixed before it ever gets to that point.

Personally, I am on the fence about imposing regulations, fines, laws etc. I don't want my government in my life any more than they already are, Let's face it...you cannot fix stupid, and it is the stupid people that ruins it for everyone else, and I am pretty sure they are not here reading up on how to fix the problems. Imposing laws, regulations, fees, etc., will only make it harder on the honest ones already out there. Owning a pet is already becoming a status symbol for the wealthy. It saddens me to think that one day my grandkids may not be able to have the dog of their choice because of all the laws, taxes, fines, regulations imposed to do so at every level from breeder, shelter, rescue, etc., and that doesn't include the vet care necessary to keep a pet. EVERYONE has a part in the responsibility. It does not rest with one group.

[pinkii726]

I will never buy another dog, I am with you on that one. I have two purebreds and I have some guilt about them but I still love them A LOT. I have a MUTTSKY too =) FROM the pound, and my cats were ALL rescue's! =)

Everyone in my family calls me the "Catnip Dealer" because my cats have so many catnip toys.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Cha Cha

[/COLOR]



I do not understand this mentality. Why should the breeder pay the shelters and rescues? When I take in a dog whether I pay for it or bring it in for free, it becomes MY responsibilty. No one forced me to take the dog, but for whatever reason I cannot keep it, it then becomes the responsibility of the breeder? Why? I understand breeders taking their dogs back, and I commend those that do, but making them pay for circumstances of the person that took their dog to begin with does not make any sense. Imposing a fine at the end of the problem is not fixing the problem. The problem needs to be fixed before it ever gets to that point.

Personally, I am on the fence about imposing regulations, fines, laws etc. I don't want my government in my life any more than they already are, Let's face it...you cannot fix stupid, and it is the stupid people that ruins it for everyone else, and I am pretty sure they are not here reading up on how to fix the problems. Imposing laws, regulations, fees, etc., will only make it harder on the honest ones already out there. Owning a pet is already becoming a status symbol for the wealthy. It saddens me to think that one day my grandkids may not be able to have the dog of their choice because of all the laws, taxes, fines, regulations imposed to do so at every level from breeder, shelter, rescue, etc., and that doesn't include the vet care necessary to keep a pet. EVERYONE has a part in the responsibility. It does not rest with one group.

Because a responsilbe, reputable breeder always keeps track of her pups. They do thorough screening, sell with a stringent contract and within the contract it states, said pup will not be rehomed and or put in a shelter. It states we will make the decision on where that pup is to be rehomed and will take it back.....

I believe every breeder should take on that responsibility, we brought them into the world.........a fee should be imposed if we aren't doing our job.

[livingdustmops]

I believe a breeder should always take an animal back and find it another home. They profited from the sale of that dog. We haven't been able to fix the problem and lets see, if at a minimum 5 million pets are euthanized every year then the last 5 years 25 million animals have died because of overpopulation. How can this country look itself in the eyes and allow volume greeders and people just pumping dogs out to continue. How many of these greeders just say "hit the paypal button" and the dog is yours....they don't care who gets the dog as long as they made their $$$.

Reputable breeders take their dogs back.

The government is already involved...through the taxes we all have to pay to support the city/county shelters. Many of these breeders are breaking the law but nothing happens because everyone buys into "its a sad situation" or "it is my right to breed"...

When I was a kid we didn't have the mass volume greeders that we have now and this is what I want to see stopped. I think your children and grandchildren could still have pets if they wanted..we did without petstores or mills.

I have suggested in other threads that all animals must be micro-chipped and if the dog/cat ends up in rescue then the breeder pays a fine. Now maybe it is setup with the 1st 3 don't count but after that they pay..

If you have a better idea I am open..I am just sick that nothing changes and animals continue to die.

Originally Posted by Cha Cha

[/COLOR]



I do not understand this mentality. Why should the breeder pay the shelters and rescues? When I take in a dog whether I pay for it or bring it in for free, it becomes MY responsibilty. No one forced me to take the dog, but for whatever reason I cannot keep it, it then becomes the responsibility of the breeder? Why? I understand breeders taking their dogs back, and I commend those that do, but making them pay for circumstances of the person that took their dog to begin with does not make any sense. Imposing a fine at the end of the problem is not fixing the problem. The problem needs to be fixed before it ever gets to that point.

Personally, I am on the fence about imposing regulations, fines, laws etc. I don't want my government in my life any more than they already are, Let's face it...you cannot fix stupid, and it is the stupid people that ruins it for everyone else, and I am pretty sure they are not here reading up on how to fix the problems. Imposing laws, regulations, fees, etc., will only make it harder on the honest ones already out there. Owning a pet is already becoming a status symbol for the wealthy. It saddens me to think that one day my grandkids may not be able to have the dog of their choice because of all the laws, taxes, fines, regulations imposed to do so at every level from breeder, shelter, rescue, etc., and that doesn't include the vet care necessary to keep a pet. EVERYONE has a part in the responsibility. It does not rest with one group.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Because a responsilbe, reputable breeder always keeps track of her pups. They do thorough screening, sell with a stringent contract and within the contract it states, said pup will not be rehomed and or put in a shelter. It states we will make the decision on where that pup is to be rehomed and will take it back.....

I believe every breeder should take on that responsibility, we brought them into the world.........a fee should be imposed if we aren't doing our job.

[Cha Cha]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

Because a responsilbe, reputable breeder always keeps track of her pups. They do thorough screening, sell with a stringent contract and within the contract it states, said pup will not be rehomed and or put in a shelter. It states we will make the decision on where that pup is to be rehomed and will take it back.....

I believe every breeder should take on that responsibility, we brought them into the world.........a fee should be imposed if we aren't doing our job.

If you have contracts that states such, that is great, I commend you for that! That IS how it should be. Imposing that is another story. How many law suits could you go through before you simply could not enforce that contract any longer due to the cost involved? Again, if my dog that I purchase and agree to care for by making the purchase, ends up in a shelter and I am the one that defaults on that contract, you are saying that you pay the fee? Doesn't make any sense. What if I purchase one of your dogs, and I lose contact with you over the years? I move, or I get sick and my relatives know nothing about a contract and your dog changes hands and eventually ends up in a shelter? You pay a fine? That's rediculous. Also, a microchip only identifies the current owner at the time of microchipping. (or does it give the life history of the dog). What if the dog changes hands (against the contract) and never has the number changed at a registery? How do you trace that? I know that rescues deal primarly with pure bred dogs of their chosen breed. What about the mutts? The dumped dogs. Our shelter has very few pure bred dogs. Who pays for their being there? How do you identify thier "breeder?" Obviously the person bringing it in is not going to own up to ownership.

Ok, so some of you are also imposing mandatory microchipping so their dogs can be traced. Honestly? Do you know what will happen to dogs if you make mandatory microchipping a law, and you also impose stiff fines if the microchipped dog ends up in a shelter? People will take them to the country, shoot them, and cut out that microchip so it cannot be traced to avoid paying any fees. Sounds drastic? Yes it does, but then again, people dump their dogs in the country to starve and fend for themselves anyways.

[Cha Cha]

Originally Posted by pinkii726

I will never buy another dog, I am with you on that one. I have two purebreds and I have some guilt about them but I still love them A LOT. I have a MUTTSKY too =) FROM the pound, and my cats were ALL rescue's! =)

Everyone in my family calls me the "Catnip Dealer" because my cats have so many catnip toys.

Did you pay an adoption fee?

[YorkieShadow]

Originally Posted by Cha Cha

If you have contracts that states such, that is great, I commend you for that! That IS how it should be. Imposing that is another story. How many law suits could you go through before you simply could not enforce that contract any longer due to the cost involved? Again, if my dog that I purchase and agree to care for by making the purchase, ends up in a shelter and I am the one that defaults on that contract, you are saying that you pay the fee? Doesn't make any sense. What if I purchase one of your dogs, and I lose contact with you over the years? I move, or I get sick and my relatives know nothing about a contract and your dog changes hands and eventually ends up in a shelter? You pay a fine? That's rediculous. Also, a microchip only identifies the current owner at the time of microchipping. (or does it give the life history of the dog). What if the dog changes hands (against the contract) and never has the number changed at a registery? How do you trace that? I know that rescues deal primarly with pure bred dogs of their chosen breed. What about the mutts? The dumped dogs. Our shelter has very few pure bred dogs. Who pays for their being there? How do you identify thier "breeder?" Obviously the person bringing it in is not going to own up to ownership.

Ok, so some of you are also imposing mandatory microchipping so their dogs can be traced. Honestly? Do you know what will happen to dogs if you make mandatory microchipping a law, and you also impose stiff fines if the microchipped dog ends up in a shelter? People will take them to the country, shoot them, and cut out that microchip so it cannot be traced to avoid paying any fees. Sounds drastic? Yes it does, but then again, people dump their dogs in the country to starve and fend for themselves anyways.

[livingdustmops]

I will let Mary respond to her contracts...

All chips can be updated with the new name etc...mandatory to do. If I sell my dog to someone else and it ends up in shelter with only my name on...I pay the fine...It was my fault for not updating the information...just like cars.

You are incorrect about rescues. There are breed only rescues and there are rescues that handle the mutts (your words) and every animal would have a chip that has the breeder/owner record on file.

Look, now of us have answers but clearly you are only shooting down idea's without thinking how we can change what is going on in this word.

Trust me, if breeders/owners were dumping over 5 MILLLION animals in the countryside to get out of the fines...they would be discovered ....and then could be charged with animal cruelty.

If you have watched any of the video's on puppymills and volume breeders you would understand why one system isn't perfect but we have no system right now.

Originally Posted by Cha Cha

If you have contracts that states such, that is great, I commend you for that! That IS how it should be. Imposing that is another story. How many law suits could you go through before you simply could not enforce that contract any longer due to the cost involved? Again, if my dog that I purchase and agree to care for by making the purchase, ends up in a shelter and I am the one that defaults on that contract, you are saying that you pay the fee? Doesn't make any sense. What if I purchase one of your dogs, and I lose contact with you over the years? I move, or I get sick and my relatives know nothing about a contract and your dog changes hands and eventually ends up in a shelter? You pay a fine? That's rediculous. Also, a microchip only identifies the current owner at the time of microchipping. (or does it give the life history of the dog). What if the dog changes hands (against the contract) and never has the number changed at a registery? How do you trace that? I know that rescues deal primarly with pure bred dogs of their chosen breed. What about the mutts? The dumped dogs. Our shelter has very few pure bred dogs. Who pays for their being there? How do you identify thier "breeder?" Obviously the person bringing it in is not going to own up to ownership.

Ok, so some of you are also imposing mandatory microchipping so their dogs can be traced. Honestly? Do you know what will happen to dogs if you make mandatory microchipping a law, and you also impose stiff fines if the microchipped dog ends up in a shelter? People will take them to the country, shoot them, and cut out that microchip so it cannot be traced to avoid paying any fees. Sounds drastic? Yes it does, but then again, people dump their dogs in the country to starve and fend for themselves anyways.

[livingdustmops]

Originally Posted by YorkieShadow

I just don't get you...what suggestions do you have?