This is a placeholder text
Group text
by zdog on 06 December 2012 - 17:12
by ziegenfarm on 06 December 2012 - 18:12
agree with prager. 50/50. when the buyer takes the dog, they also take on the
responsibility, but if they don't then it reverts back to the breeder.
pjp
responsibility, but if they don't then it reverts back to the breeder.
pjp
by joanro on 06 December 2012 - 19:12
Bob, regarding microchipping pups by the breeder: all my puppies are microchiped before they are registered (registered by me any more, as some owners don't bother to do it), the microchip is registered with AKC, all at no cost to the buyer. An example of how valuable this is, was proved to me last year. Animal control officer from another county called me concerning a dog they had in custody. The microchip led them to me. A person was there who they told me said they were the dog's owner....animal control wanted to confirm ownership. They asked me to tell them the dog's microchip number and say who the owner was. It checked out and the dog was handed over. This was for a dog sold four years prior. I asked how it was animal control ended up with the dog, they said someone left the yard gate open and the dog wandered out.
Now, if it wasn't for the microchip I had implanted in the dog as a puppy, who knows how the situation might have ended.
Not only is recovery possible through microchip, there are some "unscrupulous" people who could easily switch dogs when making any kind of claim...it's hard to ID a grown GSD from puppy pictures. Just sayin.
Now, if it wasn't for the microchip I had implanted in the dog as a puppy, who knows how the situation might have ended.
Not only is recovery possible through microchip, there are some "unscrupulous" people who could easily switch dogs when making any kind of claim...it's hard to ID a grown GSD from puppy pictures. Just sayin.
by melba on 06 December 2012 - 20:12
Joanro,
Same thing happened to me over the summer. Family left the dog with family who left a gate open. I actually picked the dog
up from AC and couldn't get in touch with the owner. He called like 5 days later asking if I knew where his dog was ha ha. Wasn't
going to let the boy sit in AC, period. It was an honest mistake, and it happens, but I sure as heck want to know about it.
I also register their microchips with AKC, and the additional info for the microchip I add their AKC # so I can easily be found.
Meliissa
Same thing happened to me over the summer. Family left the dog with family who left a gate open. I actually picked the dog
up from AC and couldn't get in touch with the owner. He called like 5 days later asking if I knew where his dog was ha ha. Wasn't
going to let the boy sit in AC, period. It was an honest mistake, and it happens, but I sure as heck want to know about it.
I also register their microchips with AKC, and the additional info for the microchip I add their AKC # so I can easily be found.
Meliissa
by Bhaugh on 08 December 2012 - 16:12
I think that it should be REQUIRED for a breeder to take back a dog esp if the dog ends up at the shelter. If breeders (or even the so called breeders) had to take back what they bred, perhaps they wouldnt be so carefree to breed without consideration to what happens to their dogs once they sell them. Or if the county they live in could set up a fine system. If they refuse to take the dog back, they receive a fine. How many byb's would continue to produce dogs when the ones they bred for profit came back, sick, with behavior issues, or ?.
Maybe my hard line comes from years of doing rescue. Since when should a breeder be given a choice. Personally Ive never had a breeder come forward and take back the dog. I've heard of breeders taking back only if they can flip them fast and make a profit with little regard to where the dog ended up usually back at the shelter.
Barb
Maybe my hard line comes from years of doing rescue. Since when should a breeder be given a choice. Personally Ive never had a breeder come forward and take back the dog. I've heard of breeders taking back only if they can flip them fast and make a profit with little regard to where the dog ended up usually back at the shelter.
Barb
by rtdmmcintyre on 08 December 2012 - 16:12
My dogs are micro chipped. My youngest gsd female has me as primary contact and the breeder as second contact. I did this my choice because of my high respect for the breeder. I also look at her as a friend and know how she feels about her dogs. My other gsd female about 14 months I am not on her contact information on her micro chip. I bought her as a young adult just a short time ago and I haven't gotten that information yet. When I do it will be set up the same. I think both the current owner and the breeder should be on there. Out of respect if nothing else.
by Prager on 08 December 2012 - 18:12
Bhaugh so you blame the breeders that they are not looking more carefully into their crystal ball in order to determine whom to sell a dog. Also please tell me how would you enforce that the breeder must take their dog back? What I see here is kettle calls the pot black. You can not stop breeders of any kind to stop breeding if there is a demand. The rescues are on top of the culprits of overpopulation of dogs.
1. With their good intentions rescues are encouraging people buy dogs because they are made to believer that if they do not want the dog then they can dump it on a rescue. I have witnessed this where people perpetually dumped and acquired dogs on many occasions. If the rescue would not exist this attitude would also stopped. I know that this is tough pill to swallow .
2. Rescues with their Nazi like control of people who want to adopt and their micro management and their holier then God attitude scare away most of the would be rescuers.
I would suggest that if someone dumps the dog and they are caught or if they dump the dog to a rescue or county dog pound then if the dog does not adopt they must participate in the dog's euthanasia.I think that would take care of the problem in a hurry.
Before someone start giving me hell I will say that I do take my dogs back and that I do on occasion and anonymously rescue dogs especially when they are in direct danger. However I turn unkindly away anybody who wants to"donate" me a dog. .
1. With their good intentions rescues are encouraging people buy dogs because they are made to believer that if they do not want the dog then they can dump it on a rescue. I have witnessed this where people perpetually dumped and acquired dogs on many occasions. If the rescue would not exist this attitude would also stopped. I know that this is tough pill to swallow .
2. Rescues with their Nazi like control of people who want to adopt and their micro management and their holier then God attitude scare away most of the would be rescuers.
I would suggest that if someone dumps the dog and they are caught or if they dump the dog to a rescue or county dog pound then if the dog does not adopt they must participate in the dog's euthanasia.I think that would take care of the problem in a hurry.
Before someone start giving me hell I will say that I do take my dogs back and that I do on occasion and anonymously rescue dogs especially when they are in direct danger. However I turn unkindly away anybody who wants to"donate" me a dog. .
by Bhaugh on 09 December 2012 - 03:12
"With their good intentions rescues are encouraging people buy dogs because they are made to believer that if they do not want the dog then they can dump it on a rescue"
Hmmm not sure how to even answer that. Seriously? Most rescues are full so people just dump them at the shelter advising the shelter that they found the dog so they wont be turned away.
Since I never took dogs from the public, only dogs from the shelter, most on their last day, that sentence doesn't even apply to me or most of my rescue friends. I find it hard to believe that with all the dogs you put out Prager none have ever ended up at the shelter.
I have always offered to take back any dog Ive had (and people do return them) so Im not sure why you think calling the kettle black applys.
Did I imply that breeders should stop breeding? No I dont think I did. I do believe that breeders should be responsible for what they breed and take back pups. That has been my motto since Ive been in dogs long before I got into rescue.
I think you have it wrong. Perhaps breeders wouldnt pump out dogs if they knew they would be required to take them back, totally screwed up untrained and in need of vetting.
If the shelter calls and the breeder wont come and get the dog, then they can be sent the bill to care for or euth the dog. When it starts cutting into profits, then perhaps breeders would have to rethink things.
Well I can honestly say this is the first time Ive heard that rescues are to blame.
Hmmm not sure how to even answer that. Seriously? Most rescues are full so people just dump them at the shelter advising the shelter that they found the dog so they wont be turned away.
Since I never took dogs from the public, only dogs from the shelter, most on their last day, that sentence doesn't even apply to me or most of my rescue friends. I find it hard to believe that with all the dogs you put out Prager none have ever ended up at the shelter.
I have always offered to take back any dog Ive had (and people do return them) so Im not sure why you think calling the kettle black applys.
Did I imply that breeders should stop breeding? No I dont think I did. I do believe that breeders should be responsible for what they breed and take back pups. That has been my motto since Ive been in dogs long before I got into rescue.
I think you have it wrong. Perhaps breeders wouldnt pump out dogs if they knew they would be required to take them back, totally screwed up untrained and in need of vetting.
If the shelter calls and the breeder wont come and get the dog, then they can be sent the bill to care for or euth the dog. When it starts cutting into profits, then perhaps breeders would have to rethink things.
Well I can honestly say this is the first time Ive heard that rescues are to blame.
by vonissk on 09 December 2012 - 14:12
Prager what a good post. I agree with you about the rescues. As in anything else, there are both good and bad but I personally think they run off more people then they adopt to.
I personally know a dog hoarder who is under the blanket of the law because she does have a 501 C but instead of calling herself a rescue she is a sanctuary--she doesn't think anyone can care for the dogs like she does so she never adopts any out--she keeps them in small pens 24/7, they are fed and watered and that's all that matters to the local AC or even SPCA--believe me I have tried. I've told her in the past that was no way for the dogs to live. She has purebred dogs out there including dutchies, GSDs, hounds and lots of pitties. Right there turns me off because IMO she's not helping the dogs.
Yes I do believe breeders should be responsible for what they do. But this thing of making them do this and that won't fly--I think there are other things that need to be addressed that might or might not make a difference in the amount of dogs being bred every year. I do agree they should be tatooed or chipped before they ever go to their new homes. I also feel the buyer has just as much responsibility to get the dog permanantly ID'd..............I got an email the other day from one of my puppy buyers. Now he has had the dog for almost 4 months--they will be 6 months the 28th--and he's asking about shots. On the medical sheet I send home, it says when the puppy should have its last 2 shots and then the rabies. I felt like wow I thought he had more sense than that. I feel I did my responsibility--I send him home with a nice healthy puppy and once he paid the money and walked out the door, it's his responsibility now. Just my 2 cents............
I personally know a dog hoarder who is under the blanket of the law because she does have a 501 C but instead of calling herself a rescue she is a sanctuary--she doesn't think anyone can care for the dogs like she does so she never adopts any out--she keeps them in small pens 24/7, they are fed and watered and that's all that matters to the local AC or even SPCA--believe me I have tried. I've told her in the past that was no way for the dogs to live. She has purebred dogs out there including dutchies, GSDs, hounds and lots of pitties. Right there turns me off because IMO she's not helping the dogs.
Yes I do believe breeders should be responsible for what they do. But this thing of making them do this and that won't fly--I think there are other things that need to be addressed that might or might not make a difference in the amount of dogs being bred every year. I do agree they should be tatooed or chipped before they ever go to their new homes. I also feel the buyer has just as much responsibility to get the dog permanantly ID'd..............I got an email the other day from one of my puppy buyers. Now he has had the dog for almost 4 months--they will be 6 months the 28th--and he's asking about shots. On the medical sheet I send home, it says when the puppy should have its last 2 shots and then the rabies. I felt like wow I thought he had more sense than that. I feel I did my responsibility--I send him home with a nice healthy puppy and once he paid the money and walked out the door, it's his responsibility now. Just my 2 cents............
by workingdogz on 09 December 2012 - 14:12
This is America, there is not much that can be 'forced' on anyone,
breeder or buyer. Breeders and buyers will always find loopholes
in contracts and guarantee's, it's just how it is.
Buyers need to do their research, and breeders need to screen
buyers, not just take the money and run. If purchasing a dog took
people as much time as applying for a loan did, there might be
less failures all around. But then again, maybe not. You will never
stop people from breeding dogs, there is simply too much money
in it for them not to. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with a
breeder making money, but, I do a have a problem with one that
relies on puppy production and sales to 'pay all the bills'. As soon
as the primary source income depends on the sale of an item,
be it living or non-living, well, ethics can and usually do become
more easily overlooked, as bills have to be paid right?
Unless they are a deadbeat 'breeder' that doesn't pay their bills
Buyers need to accept more responsibility for their purchase.
Have a problem with the dog? Seek out help. Break out that checkbook
and find a good trainer to help you! Do your research, accept the fact
it was YOU that purchased the pup, so therefore YOU should take
the lead and fix what can be fixed.
Many of the problems buyers have with puppies & dogs can be
prevented by purchasing from ethical and responsible breeders.
breeder or buyer. Breeders and buyers will always find loopholes
in contracts and guarantee's, it's just how it is.
Buyers need to do their research, and breeders need to screen
buyers, not just take the money and run. If purchasing a dog took
people as much time as applying for a loan did, there might be
less failures all around. But then again, maybe not. You will never
stop people from breeding dogs, there is simply too much money
in it for them not to. Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with a
breeder making money, but, I do a have a problem with one that
relies on puppy production and sales to 'pay all the bills'. As soon
as the primary source income depends on the sale of an item,
be it living or non-living, well, ethics can and usually do become
more easily overlooked, as bills have to be paid right?
Unless they are a deadbeat 'breeder' that doesn't pay their bills
Buyers need to accept more responsibility for their purchase.
Have a problem with the dog? Seek out help. Break out that checkbook
and find a good trainer to help you! Do your research, accept the fact
it was YOU that purchased the pup, so therefore YOU should take
the lead and fix what can be fixed.
Many of the problems buyers have with puppies & dogs can be
prevented by purchasing from ethical and responsible breeders.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top
