[starbuck8]

Yes, I would love to hear the supporting argument myself, from someone who claims to have such knowledge. We're all ears!

[sajjw]

Simple question.

Do any of you in opposition of breeding have children?

If so, step down from your soapbox. Why didn't you adopt a child before making another one? Though we in America do not slaughter unwanted children, some countries do. As well, There are millions of children in need of care in America that starve to death or die from improper medical attention.

So how can dogs be so much more important to you than other human beings?

If you do not have children, stay on your box. I am listening.

Thank you discardderek for making such a very good point. People are so sanctimonious and judgemental about breeding but don't think twice about whether they should rescue a child instead of bringing another into this already over populated world. In my opinion, if a person wants a puppy, they are going to buy a puppy particularly if one is not available at a rehoming centre which do tend to have older dogs. Reputable, responsible breeders should not be blamed for this -providing that, like me, they make a lifetime commitment to take responsibility for their pups. All the (carefully vetted) owners of my pups know that if they cannot keep them I will take them back. I offer support and advice at any time to them and I try to visit my pups (all ten who are spread all over England) as often as I can.

The people who I blame for the amount of dogs that are in rehoming centres/have to be put to sleep are the owners who take on a puppy but are not prepared to make a lifetime commitment to that dog. Over the past few years, I have had severe health problems which made caring for my dogs at times very difficult but I still did it so that they did not suffer and did not have to be sent away from the owner and home that they love. I am luckily much better now. One of other of my four dogs have had different behavioural problems over the years also but instead of giving up on them I have learnt how to use training, knowledge, patience and commitment to work through these different problems and overcome them. It makes me angry how so many people just cannot be bothered to train their dogs and then give them up for re-homing or worse when they develop a behavioural problem that is a consequence of the lack of training. Or they don't give them enough exercise or mental stimulation and then re home them when they wreck the house! That is far worse than a kind knowledgeable person letting two dogs of the same breed (both with a high standard both of temperament and physically) produce a litter that is raised perfectly and sold to carefully vetted families who will love and care for them all their lives.

Also, I was slated on this forum for making the point that if nobody bred dogs, certain breeds would die out. Er... this is actually a fact. In fifteen years, all the dogs in homes/rescue centres would be gone from old age and apart from the strays who would still breed where would the dogs be? OK it may well be a good idea for the government to ban breeding for a period in an attempt to cut down on the number of dogs in recue centres. I don't know how this would be policed but maybe it would help and maybe it's a stupid idea. Won't happen though. I do think that anyone breeding dogs should be inspected. Not just anybody should be allowed to breed. Only if they have the time, facilities, money and knowledge to do so responsibly. I do think that a person should be able to mention breeding on this forum if its relevant to what they are saying without being instantly labelled and condemned as "only one step up from a puppy farmer" by small minded 'experts'!!

[Alty]

People are so sanctimonious and judgemental about breeding but don't think twice about whether they should rescue a child instead of bringing another into this already over populated world.

Once again, this thread isn't about children, it's about dogs. If you want to discuss the over breeding of children, start a thread for that discussion, it will not be discussed here as it has nothing to do with the original question.

The people who I blame for the amount of dogs that are in rehoming centres/have to be put to sleep are the owners who take on a puppy but are not prepared to make a lifetime commitment to that dog

I blame them and the people who are recklessly breeding their dogs without the first clue about breeding and without a care for the dogs that are already alive and need a home.

It makes me angry how so many people just cannot be bothered to train their dogs and then give them up for re-homing or worse when they develop a behavioural problem that is a consequence of the lack of training. Or they don't give them enough exercise or mental stimulation and then re home them when they wreck the house!

Well, well, we actually agree on something!

That is far worse than a kind knowledgeable person letting two dogs of the same breed (both with a high standard both of temperament and physically) produce a litter that is raised perfectly and sold to carefully vetted families who will love and care for them all their lives.

You're assuming that all people who breed their dogs actually do this, the fact is, they don't. Most of the uneducated breeders out there do it for profit only. They don't care about the bloodlines of the dogs, or the overall health, or the health of the puppies. Most will never see the puppies again once they are sold.

Also, I was slated on this forum for making the point that if nobody bred dogs, certain breeds would die out. Er... this is actually a fact

Give me the name of a breed, I bet I can find one in a shelter or find a reputable licensed breeder.

I do think that a person should be able to mention breeding on this forum if its relevant to what they are saying without being instantly labelled and condemned as "only one step up from a puppy farmer" by small minded 'experts'!!

Stick around, read the questions we get every day by people who don't even have the sense to take a dog that is hemmoraghing to the vet. Read about the person who's dog gave birth to puppies with no skulls, their brains on the outside of their heads and the OP thinking this was caused by the males sperm, and wondering if she should try breeding them again. Read about the person who can't wait for the puppies to be born so she can sell them for $2000.00 a pop. Read all of this and then tell me I'm small minded.

I could post things that would make you physically ill, I've seen it all, in person, on video, you name it. So, if that make me mean, uncaring, "small minded" so be it. I couldn't care less about the people breeding these dogs, my job is to care about the dogs that don't have a voice, or a choice.

You don't have to like me, heck, you don't have to listen to me, I can't make you. But, if you choose to read my posts then you do have to give me the right to voice my opinion which I base of facts, not whimzy.

Good luck.

[linnealand]

sajjw, there's a term called "selective hearing," and I'm rather surprised at how much it applies to many of the things you post.

Did you read my last post in this thread? I must say, it doesn't sound like it. In fact, it sounds like you've chosen to ignore the parts that don't support whatever it is that you feel like believing. The problem with that is that good breeding is based on facts, not opinions.

Here's the post I wrote in response to your previous statements, which mirror those you just posted. I'm really waiting to hear your answers to my questions and the information I included there. The more time you put between answering those questions (which anyone who had taken all of the right steps would be able to respond to in seconds), the more I'm inclined to believe that you didn't consider some of the important elements that a truly knowledgeable, professional, reputable breeder would never overlook. Once again, don't forget to follow the links full of all of those Irish Setters in the UK. https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/dogs/d...-316801-6.html

I would love to know what arguments you have in favor of backyard breeding. Two of us have asked you and Derek the same thing, and we're still waiting to see that research and documented information. I happen to feel that your attitude, and Derek's, is what is really coming off as sanctimonious and judgmental. The only catch is that your opinions seem to come from a lack of information and a desire to keep yourself from the facts. I don't know how that benefits you, your dogs or your breeding practices.

By the way, breeding purebreds without being an expert in genetics is not doing any good to the breed you claim to love so dearly. It is common knowledge that many pedigree dogs are predisposed to certain undesirable genetic defects, and the only way to really avoid breeding from those carriers (or breeding from two great dogs that are simply inappropriate for each other) is to make genetic comparisons and have them genetically tested. You might think your dogs look healthy now, but that does not mean that they don't carry a genetically undesirable trait or two that will not even begin to show up until the dogs are older than standard breeding age. If you don't have all of that information, you most certainly run the risk of putting a whole lot of imperfect or unhealthy Irish Setters into the mix. If they continue to breed, you could be doing the kind of damage to that wonderful breed that I know you wouldn't have intended for it.

As an aside, I have no qualms with the truly exceptional breeders that are out there. In fact, after months of looking for the right one, I got my English Cocker Spaniel puppy from one. It took months for us to find a breeder that we really believed in, but we certainly did find her. Going this route this time was a very personal choice. Here's part of the story. When I was six years old, I survived an unprovoked and brutally violent attack by an Akita... in my face. It was the purebred, trained guard dog of family friends. I'm lucky that I survived, that I was not permanently disfigured, and that I was really able to outgrow the fear of dogs that I carried through much of my childhood. Although I have had many cats and a dog in my lifetime, this was going to be the first dog we would be training on our own. It was also going to be my partner's first dog. We put months and months of research into our decision. I literally emptied the library of every single book they have on dogs. When I wanted more information, I had books shipped to me from overseas. I wanted to know that I had all of the information I could get so that I would raise him the right way and do as many of the right things I could. Because we went to this breeder, we were there as our puppy's mom gave birth, and although the breeder doesn't live very close to our home, we spent a good amount of time with him every single week until he was ready to come home. We met his doggie mom, dad, grandparents, great grandparents, uncles and cousins. We knew that every test had been done beforehand, that his parents were chosen with the utmost care regarding health and disposition... basically, we did everything we could to reduce the bad risks and heighten the good ones. That was a personal choice. Few people see truly great (not just good, but great) breeders as anything but asset to the dog community. They're the ones who are doing everything they know can to keep current on studies, to care for the parents and the puppies in the best ways possible, and to put out the best dogs they can. It's a serious profession, not a cool thing to try on the side.

I would love to have been able to save a dog from a shelter, and I have kept rescued cats before, but we decided that, at least this time around, we wanted to go to a breeder. I have the utmost respect for people who do save the lives of good dogs who wind up in shelters because of the actions of the responsible people who brought them into this world, the irresponsible people who didn't invest enough energy into proper training, and the irresponsible people who didn't consider their pets to be a true, irreplaceable part of their families. I know I'm not the only one with a purebred from a breeder, and I don't think they believe that truly responsible breeding should be banned. I don't think anyone does.

The issue arises when inexperienced people go into breeding dogs without covering every controllable element in the best way possible. Encouraging most dogs to be fixed, especially if they are carriers of genetic medical issues or undesirable dispositions, because it helps to keep future dogs healthy. That's for the good of dogs in general.

I continue to wonder where you got this information about there being a shortage of Irish Setters in your area. I also continue to wonder who it was that decided that you and your dogs must be the ones to fix that problem. If you are a truly responsible breeder, you should be able to supply any of the information that's been asked in the blink of an eye. However, until you show that, my gut is telling me that you think you're doing the right thing, and you think you know all there is to know, but perhaps you really aren't and you really don't. I don't know you, and I'm not a mind reader, so if you want anyone to think otherwise, it wouldn't take much to convince any of us if you do, in fact, have the right information. Oh, and to my mind, you would also have to stop supporting absurd arguments (both Derek's and your own), stop undermining the significance of the backyard breeding epidemic, and stop producing totally outrageous presuppositions about breeds in danger of extinction while failing to provide any solid and reputable documentation to back up that information properly.

I would love to be proven wrong. I would love to know that you're the best breeder to ever grace the planet earth. Bless you a thousand times over if you can show us that's the case.

[starbuck8]

Linny, you have sure done your research as always. You made several very pertinent points of interest with the arguments that have been given, to support the epidemic of great proportions, concerning backyard breeders. Any reputable licensed breeder would be able to give a rebuttle concerning these arguments in short form.

[Alty]

I know I'm not the only one with a purebred from a breeder, and I don't think they believe that truly responsible breeding should be banned. I don't think anyone does.

Very true Linny. Our beagle Chewy is from a highly respected breeder who has been breeding beagles most of her life. Her parents were breeders, they taught her everything they know.

Will I breed my Chewy? No way. First, I don't have the time, or the money, and I don't wish to add any more dogs to an already overpopulated doggy world. I'll leave that to the legitimate, educated, licensed breeders, like the lady that gave us our Chewy.

We've had him for almost 4 months now, she still writes me once a week asking us how it's going, does he have all his shots, asking us to send the documentation when he gets neutered, and wanting pictures.

She does that with every puppy that she adopts out, and there have been many.

Loving dogs doesn't mean you should breed dogs.

Bravo Linny, had to spread the rep, but you know I agree! :)

[JudyKayTee]

Once again, this thread isn't about children, it's about dogs. If you want to discuss the over breeding of children, start a thread for that discussion, it will not be discussed here as it has nothing to do with the original question.

Are you aware that person responding is preaching about breeding dogs but has also posted concerning having more children because she doesn't want to "end up" with another boy? I find this strange. https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/pregna...ml#post1541843

My concern is that on another post she doesn't have family to distract her. https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/dogs/h...ml#post1565412

When posts do not agree I begin to think troll.

[Alty]

Good find Judy. Well, I guess someone is a bit to high on her horse. What happened to the world being overpopulated with children?

[JudyKayTee]

Good find Judy. Well, I guess someone is a bit to high on her horse. What happened to the world being overpopulated with children?

Doesn't matter, as long as they aren't kenneled - apparently.

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/dogs/l...ne-263203.html

[Alty]

LMAO, you, I saw that one, wanted to balance the reddie she gave you, but I had to spread the rep and I was mad that she had opened an old thread, a few of them actually, all about leaving your pups at home, some from 2006.

I highly doubt that this person is the responsible educated breeder she claims to be, but I'd love to be proven wrong. I do need proof though, sadly her word isn't enough for me.

[asking]

now add them all up. That's a grand total of 11,718,755 new dogs in 10 years. And just one mama dog kicks it off.

... remember, that's just the females. The males can make a whole lot more than that. The sky's the limit.

Just to kibitz here a little, I am in complete agreement about not breeding pets just because you can. I agree it's irresponsible and is sad how many animals are put down or taken for granted and neglected.

But I also wanted to comment on the implication that males are *separately* generating additional pups. Males are absolutely limited by the number of females, so the correct way to calculate how many pups is just to look at the females and take the male input as a given.

I'm guessing linnealand knows that, but others might get the wrong impression.

oh, and thumper, humping to make millions of babies isn't really the definition of "free will."

I love this!

[starbuck8]

Just to kibitz here a little, I am in complete agreement about not breeding pets just because you can. I agree it's irresponsible and is sad how many animals are put down or taken for granted and neglected.

But I also wanted to comment on the implication that males are *separately* generating additional pups. Males are absolutely limited by the number of females, so the correct way to calculate how many pups is just to look at the females and take the male input as a given.

I'm guessing linnealand knows that, but others might get the wrong impression.



I love this!

I'm sure that Linney thought of that part of it. She was just trying to point out that breeding one, never just stops at one. So many people just can't grasp it. They don't think that breeding just their litter will hurt anyone. So I believe Linney's reasons for making that a factor, was to point out how ridiculous the numbers can actually get, for the people that just don't realise. ;)

[asking]

They don't think that breeding just their litter will hurt anyone. So I believe Linney's reasons for making that a factor, was to point out how ridiculous the numbers can actually get, for the people that just don't realise. ;)

Got it.

I wish people understood more about population growth in general. Good for Linny for expounding on this.

Also, I would question the assumption that every last breed and sub-breed needs to be saved. So many are riddled with nasty genetic defects that leave them sick half their lives. That doesn't seem very humane to me. Why not get back to a more basic dog with hybrid vigor, intelligence and robust health? To me, ultra pure breeds that are not healthy are just another form of animal cruelty in the service of producing another marketable product.

Now I'm going to duck!

(I'm speaking as biologist who cares about animals. But I have never owned a dog.)

[Alty]

I do agree asking, that's why genetic testing is so imortant, so that these health traits aren't passed down.

The sad thing is that many of the older breeds are so inbred that they have nothing but health problems. The chances of finding two healthy genetically sound dogs is rare.

I also understand not wanting to let a breed die out, but you're right, if the breed is riddled with health defects then maybe the best thing to do is stop breeding that particular breed.

Did that make any sense? ;)

[asking]

Makes sense to me. Nobody is trying to save the Tay-Sachs "breed" in humans.

I'd advocate more outbreeding to enrich the gene pools of some breeds. The principle of "purity" can be taken too far. I think that's what has happened. Genetic testing is good, but it can only look for specific genes. Hybrid vigor fixes a multitude of genetic "sins."

[starbuck8]

E I E I O! :p Sorry asking, I'm being silly today! :D

[Alty]

E I E I O!! :p Sorry asking, I'm being silly today! :D

Today? :confused:

[linnealand]

Just to kibitz here a little, I am in complete agreement about not breeding pets just because you can. I agree it's irresponsible and is sad how many animals are put down or taken for granted and neglected.

But I also wanted to comment on the implication that males are *separately* generating additional pups. Males are absolutely limited by the number of females, so the correct way to calculate how many pups is just to look at the females and take the male input as a given.

I'm guessing linnealand knows that, but others might get the wrong impression.



I love this!

Yes, the calculation assumes that the females and the males aren't breeding with each other as each generation is produced.

I thought about the enormous multitude of factors that one would actually need to consider in order to calculate much more accurate numbers for the generations that can follow, and, quite frankly, there are so many of them that I decided that having to calculate those into this situation would, at least for me, mean not including the example at all. The calculation I provided also assumes that all of the dogs are fertile, that they have 5 puppies each (instead of 1 or 10), that all of them are mating and giving birth at relatively the same time, etc. on the flip side, it doesn't include the fact that a male with access to more females outside of this group could mate with all of them as well, and it only calculates one litter per dog. So, yes. There are, no doubt, a whole lot of factors that weren't included. On a deeply scientific level (and frankly, even on a theoretical one), the example is totally ridiculous. However, the pretty obvious reason I decided to include it anyway was to make a point that I think is worth considering. Dogs and humans don't have the same breeding rates. I think, as people, it can be a little too easy to forget just how different those rates can be.

I looked for another site that might have some more accurate numbers on exponential dog population growth. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find one. That's what the example is based on: exponential population growth. Even though those numbers can't be accurate (at least without the aid of a researcher and a lot more time that I have to spare), I would still include it again in a heartbeat. I hope it does is make a point, or that it does send a message, and that people who have never thought about the potential of exponential population growth take a minute to think about what it can be capable of doing.

p. s. I know you know what I mean, and you know I know what you mean. ;)

By the way, you don't need to have owned a dog to know that overbreeding can lead to tragic consequences. I completely agree with you. Breeders who overbreed certain characteristics, or who breed with the intention of making certain unnatural characteristics more extreme without considering the possible consequences are not responsible breeders in my book. (an example of this kind of breeding would be hyper-flat faces, as overbred in some breeds of dogs and cats, that lead to respiratory complications. That's definitely not a good thing. It's another big reason why more people should consider breeding to be as serious a science as it is.

[asking]

an example of this kind of breeding would be hyper-flat faces, as overbred in some breeds of dogs and cats, that lead to respiratory complications. that's definitely not a good thing. it's another big reason why more people should consider breeding to be as serious a science as it is.

You read my mind! The hyper flat faces are exactly what I was thinking of.

[linnealand]

I know just what you mean. Something else I can never get over are the breeding problems carried by English bulldogs. Their heads are so large that they require birth by cesarean section.

Overbreeding made the cover of Time in 1994. The article is dated, but the theme certainly still applies.
TIME Magazine Cover: The Dangers of Overbreeding Dogs - Dec. 12, 1994 - Dogs - Animals
A Terrible Beauty - TIME