Re: [PyrNet-L] Re: [Pyr-Net]:breeding question/showing

["kdbooth" <kdbooth@mindspring.com>]

Wow ... following this thread was pretty boring until this posting.

What if everyone thought this way?  Rescuing or not rescuing abandoned
animals won't change the ways of irresponsible owners or breeders.  How does
rejecting someone else's abandoned pet teach anyone a lesson?  Or rescuing
that abandoned pet, for that matter?  It doesn't.  It's about saving the
animal.  Also, just because someone has gone to the most reputable breeder
who breeds only the best doesn't automatically guarantee they'll be a
responsible owner.  "Quality" animals end up in shelters too.

I have two pyrs that I adopted through rescue.  Before deciding on rescue, I
looked into buying a brand spanking new pyr puppy from a breeder.  Starting
prices for "pet" quality pyrs were at $800.00.  So that means that before my
pyrs found a home with me, the previous owners went to breeders and shelled
out a pretty penny.  I don't know my female pyr's history but the male spent
his entire life chained to someone's back porch and was never properly
socialized.  I'd like to add that both of my pyrs were "intact" before being
rescued.  Obviously the previous owners felt no obligation to rescue an
abandoned animal.  Nor did they feel any qualms about contributing to the
problem.  The fact that neither were altered suggests that maybe the owners
thought they would eventually breed.  The bottom line is that if they had
not been rescued, they may have been euthanized.  How would that have
impacted the former owners and breeders? Not at all.  I didn't adopt rescue
pyrs with the intent of creating a safety net for anyone ... except the
pyrs.  Abandoned pets are not other people's messes to be swept under the
carpet and forgotten.  They're living creatures.

Kim



----- Original Message -----
From: <Kshoffman@aol.com>
To: <pyrnet-l@pyrnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2000 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: [PyrNet-L] Re: [Pyr-Net]:breeding question/showing


> In a message dated 03/11/2000 10:24:18 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> clhenke@juno.com writes:
>
> > The estimate of animals
> >  euthanized in this country is said to be around 6 million a year.
Surely
> >  you can understand why some of us consider the choice to breed as being
> >  of the utmost importance.  Pups should be brought into a world that
> >  cares, not destroys.
>
> But Cindy, those animals are not coming from responsible breeders, for the
> most part.  Would it be better for all the "good" breeders to stop
breeding
> dogs altogether and just let these other types take over?  Is that really
> going to solve the perceived problem of pet overpopulation?
>
> In my opinion, the crux of this societal issue is not really how many dogs
> are being produced, but a lack of commitment on too many owners and
breeders
> parts to take the responsibility of dog ownership and breeding as
seriously
> as we would like them to.
>
> If, as a consumer, a potential pet owner, I am in the market for a
purebred
> dog, the whole beauty of which should be predictability in looks and
> temperament and health, why shouldn't I be able to go to a responsible
> breeder (in good conscience) to get the best quality I possibly can and to
> increase my chances of getting precisely what it is I am looking for in a
> pet/companion/worker? Why should I feel obligated to bail a dog out of the
> pound or some other sorry situation simply because some idiot(s) allowed
it
> to get their in the first place?  Why should I or others like me serve as
yet
> another safety net for these types?  We just keep doing things, cleaning
up
> their messes, basically letting them "off the hook". Because of this, they
> will never change their ways.
>
> Why should I, as a breeder who attempts to the best of my ability to be
> accountable for every single puppy I bring into this world for life, feel
> guilty or in any way responsible about those dogs that have been discarded
> and are no longer wanted? It's not my fault they ended up in that
position.
> It has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with me or my activities or my
> actions. I didn't fail those dogs, their breeders and/or owners did. Why
> should an educated and well-researched and committed prospective purebred
dog
> owner have an obligation to such dogs or be held accountable for that?
>
> Adopting a rescue or taking on a rehome is a wonderful and noble thing,
for
> those who are inclined to go that route, but it is not something that
anyone
> should feel *obligated* to do.  As far as I'm concerned, those who truly
feel
> so strongly about the woes and ills and failures of our society in these
days
> where the word commitment sometimes means nothing to many should consider
> fostering discarded and unwanted children and stop getting so worked up
about
> dogs.
>
> JMO to which I am entitled.
>
> Kelley
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@pyrnet.org with
> unsubscribe pyrnet-l
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
>