[ SHOWGSD-L ] An excellent article, quite long, but please read.
- From: Stormy Hope <Stormy435@xxxxxxx>
- To: showgsd-list showgsd-list <showgsd-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 11:46:08 -0700
Why you shouldn't use the phrase "puppy mill". An excellent article,
long, but please read.
Stormy
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.ukcdogs. com/WebSite. nsf/Articles/ LegislativeUpdate06012009
<http://www.ukcdogs.com/WebSite.nsf/Articles/LegislativeUpdate06012009>
You can't really ban a word. In fact, an attempt to ban something often
backfires, particularly in the United States, where we don't like people
censoring our speech. So I'm not going to tell you not to say "puppy
mill". I'm
going to give you some very good reasons for not using that phrase.
I speak to a lot of dog clubs and frequently hear dog breeders
supporting
so-called "anti-puppy-mill" laws. When I ask these people to define
"puppy
mill," invariably the definitions given include:
* People who "overbreed" their dogs;
* People who don't take care of their dogs;
* People who have too many dogs;
* People who breed dogs "just for money"; and
* People who don't take health issues into account when breeding their
dogs.
Let's look at these definitions in turn. What is "overbreeding" ? In
the wild,
most canids can only reproduce once a year. Most domestic dogs can
have two
litters a year. When I first became a dog breeder, it was almost a
religious
belief that no female dog should be bred more than once a year. We
were told
that it was important to "rest" the uterus between litters. Today,
however,
thanks to advances in veterinary medicine, we know that an uterus is
actually
damaged by the elevated progesterone levels that occur in each heat
cycle,
whether the dog is pregnant or not. Veterinary reproduction specialists
recommend that dogs be bred on their second or third heat cycle, that
we do more
back-to-back breedings, and that we spay the dogs at around age six.
The "overbreeding" argument also treats reproduction as something that
female
dogs wouldn't do if they had a choice. Dogs aren't people - female
dogs actually
want to be bred when they're in heat and, with few exceptions, enjoy
raising
their puppies. It's not an unwelcome event for dogs.
People who don't take care of their dogs are already guilty of a crime
in all 50
states. There is n
owhere in the United States where it is legal to neglect or
abuse dogs. Sadly, a small minority of all dog breeders - commercial,
home and
hobby - commit neglect and abuse. Some of these do so out of
ignorance, some out
of laziness, and some out of meanness. All are already breaking the
law. It just
needs to be enforced.
One of our biggest problems now is that animal radicals insist that
every dog be
raised like a hothouse flower. One bill proposed this year would have
required
every kennel to be air conditioned. Many owners of working dogs prefer
that
their dogs be acclimated to hot weather so that they can work when the
temperature goes up. Likewise, sled dogs in the north often sleep
outdoors in
the snow. Dogs can live and thrive in a wide range of environments.
The Arctic
Circle, the jungles of Africa, and the deserts of Arabia have all
produced
breeds of dogs that can live happily in conditions that might not suit
all dogs.
It is important that we not let activists redefine the needs of dogs
to the
extent that we are forced to provide a brass bed and a down pillow for
every
animal in the kennel!
What is "too many" dogs? Most of our breeds were developed by wealthy
people who
kept large numbers of dogs. Hound breeders traditionally kept good-
sized packs,
and early show breeders did as well. Now that our sport includes more
mainstream
people - people with jobs or people who need jobs - it's hard for many
of us to
keep large numbers of dogs. There is no inherent link between numbers
of dogs
and neglect. People who have the resources to keep big kennels provide
a service
for all of us, particularly if they maintain a good number of useful
stud dogs.
Breeding dogs is expensive, and getting more so daily. It's just plain
silly to
pretend that none of us needs the money generated by puppy sales and
stud
services. Without that income, the vast majority of middle class
breeders could
not afford this sport. When our sport was solely in the hands of rich
people, it
was the norm to sneer at p
eople in "trade", and part of that attitude was handed
down to us with the culture of our sport. Today, however, the majority
of us in
the sport are "in trade", in the sense that we have to work to support
ourselves. Our dogs must, at least in part, support themselves or most
of us
would have to get out of the game.
We have among us a small but vociferous group of people who think that
breeders
only care about producing great hunting or show dogs, and nothing
about health.
In fact, I've never met a breeder who wasn't concerned about the
health of his
dogs and the health of his breed. Most health problems in dogs don't
have simple
solutions, so it is only natural that breeders are often going to
disagree about
how to address health problems. When there's no right answer to a
question, then
breeders who follow a different path than you might choose are not
necessarily
wrong or unconcerned. I know that many believe that commercial
breeders don't
care about health, but the fact is that their professional
organizations provide
some of the most sophisticated health seminars in the country for their
breeders.
Twenty years ago, animal activists created the phrase "puppy mill".
Back then,
it was only applied to commercial breeders, and then only to those who
were
breaking the law by neglecting their dogs. In a futile attempt to
placate
activists, many hobby breeders adopted the term "puppy mill" and used
it to
separate "them" from "us". It was a mistake then, and it's rapidly
becoming
fatal today. Every one of these so-called "anti-puppy-mill bills" has a
definition that could easily include breeders of hunting and show
dogs. Every
time you use that phrase, you're contributing to the idea that dog
breeders need
to be regulated out of existence.
The message we need to send to America is that purebred dogs are good,
not just
because they have pedigrees, but because of their predictability, and
that
people should shop at least as carefully for a puppy as they do for a
car. We
don't need to help t
he animal radicals spread their message by using their
favorite term: puppy mill.
============================================================================
POST is Copyrighted 2008. All material remains the property of the original
author and of GSD Communication, Inc. NO REPRODUCTIONS or FORWARDS of any kind
are permitted without prior permission of the original author AND of the
Showgsd-l Management. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
ALL PERSONS ARE ON NOTICE THAT THE FORWARDING, REPRODUCTION OR USE IN ANY
MANNER OF ANY MATERIAL WHICH APPEARS ON SHOWGSD-L WITHOUT THE EXPRESS
PERMISSION OF ALL PARTIES TO THE POST AND THE LIST MANAGEMENT IS EXPRESSLY
FORBIDDEN, AND IS A VIOLATION OF LAW. VIOLATORS OF THIS PROHIBITION WILL BE
PROSECUTED.
For assistance, please contact the List Management at admin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
VISIT OUR WEBSITE - http://showgsd.org
NATIONAL BLOG - http://gsdnational.blogspot.com/
============================================================================
Other related posts:
- » [ SHOWGSD-L ] An excellent article, quite long, but please read. - Stormy Hope
