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

[Kshoffman@aol.com]

In a message dated 03/11/2000 8:33:29 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
kdbooth@mindspring.com writes:

> What if everyone thought this way?  Rescuing or not rescuing abandoned
>  animals won't change the ways of irresponsible owners or breeders.

First off, I want to make it perfectly clear that I paid my dues by working 
INTENSIVELY in rescue for about 3 years -- fielding phone calls, driving all 
over a three state area, keeping in contact with various shelters and HS 
organizations, bailing dogs out of shelters and dogs tied up to trees or dog 
houses in individuals backyards bearing their teeth at me, evaluating dogs, 
vetting dogs, counseling owners who were having problems with dogs in an 
attempt to prevent yet another rescue, fostering dogs, training dogs, 
grooming dogs, and so on --- to the tune of thousands of dollars donated out 
of my pocket and thousands of hours of my time donated as well.  I got bit a 
few times. I shed an awful lot of tears. I witnessed Great Pyrenees 
displaying dangerous out of control aggression that should NEVER be seen in 
this breed and sometimes even in puppies of only 6 months of age. I lived ate 
and breathed rescue during this time. Rescue of Great Pyrs was intricately 
woven into my day to day life.

So I know exactly how the system works and what types of people discard dogs, 
and what types of breeders more or less don't give a hoot about what happens 
to the puppies they produce once they shove that money from the sale of pups 
into their pockets and send the ignorant new owners on their merry way.  I am 
intimately familiar with all the various reasons why these people do the 
things they do, these irresponsible or uncommitted dog breeders and dog 
owners. In my area, we knew precisely where most of the rescued dogs were 
coming from.  We'd just keep bailing them out, they'd just keep churning them 
out.  Didn't change a thing, and I came to realize my time and effort and 
money could be much better spent in ways that might make *more* of a 
difference to the betterment and long-term welfare of the breed, like 
educating the public on the nuances of these special dogs, like providing an 
affordable quality option to potentially suitable pet owners, including 
providing a lifelong umbilical cord as far as following up on puppies to 
ensure a successful placement for life.

I'm afraid Terry is right in that many potentially good pet owners get 
"turned off" by the prices charged and the attitudes of a number of 
club-affiliated "show" breeders, and so naturally if these folks get turned 
off enough, they will go looking elsewhere and eventually hook up with these 
less than reputable breeders types who provide zilch screening, no breed 
education, and not a lick of ongoing support and follow-up, all of which 
often equates to failed placements -- then we have yet another dog in need of 
"rescue".

During my time working rescue, I got so sick and tired of having to put 
maladjusted, improperly raised, and/or poorly bred and wholly unplaceable 
dogs down that I just could not take it anymore.  Especially so being a 
breeder of some really nice, lovely, healthy, mentally and physically sound 
dogs who have just the most wonderful characters and dispositions and are the 
cherished and prized companions and members of some really wonderful families 
-- as couch potatoes, as working dogs, as show dogs, as therapy dogs.  Rescue 
just stopped making sense to me when I took a long hard look at what I was 
doing in trying to save all these rescue dogs, and then looking at the 
differences between them and my own dogs I was producing.  It was like "What 
is wrong with this picture?"  I had to begin to question why on earth I 
should recommend that anyone should get a rescue dog over a conscientiously 
bred dog from a dedicated and responsible breeder.

You're exactly right.  The way the system works now, it doesn't change a 
darned thing with regard to how people view commitment to animals and how 
they treat them. Perhaps if irresponsible breeders and owners had to be held 
accountable for their actions, had to suffer some consequences for their 
mistakes and/or lack of commitment, it would.  Perhaps if these types of 
breeders and owners didn't have the option to turn their no longer wanted or 
inconvenient animals over to shelters and rescue organizations in the first 
place, but instead had to bear the burden of either: a) going to the time, 
trouble, and expense of rehoming the dog themselves; or b) taking the dog to 
their vet and having it euthanized if they can't find a good suitable home 
for it, then they will think a bit harder and longer about getting a dog or 
breeding a litter the next time around.

The type of people that dump their so-called pets (or unwanted puppies out of 
a not so well planned litter) on shelters and rescue organizations (for 
whatever reason) in my experience find euthanasia a horrible and distasteful 
fate for their dog, which they should, because it IS a horrible and 
distasteful thing. As far as I can see, this is generally the whole reason 
such owners or breeders discard these animals, shove the responsibility off 
on others, instead of assuming what *should be* THEIR final responsibility to 
a dog they no longer want -- they can't even stomach the thought of 
euthanizing the dog -- out of sight, out of mind seems to prevail.  Perhaps 
they need to experience that horror.  Perhaps it needs to hit a little closer 
to home for them to realize they should never have acquired a dog or bred a 
litter in the first place.  Perhaps they need to suffer the consequences of 
their actions or misdeeds to learn a lesson.

As awful as the thought of a dog being put to death (because its owners or 
breeders failed it) is, the fact remains it is not an illegal or even 
necessarily an immoral thing. Dogs as a species are not on par with humans in 
my mind, and they don't necessarily deserve the same considerations and 
treatments across the board as such.  As much as I love the companionship of 
dogs, and as huge a portion of my life that is devoted to dogs and what they 
stand for, I am still able to recognize that dogs are not people.  This does 
not make me a cruel or insensitive person.  I admittedly would prefer the 
companionship of dogs to any number of humans I've met in life, but still, 
that does not elevate the dog to the same status of rights and privileges 
that human beings are presumably entitled to in our society.

Kelley