# Burnaby is considering banning animal sales in pet shops!!!! City Hall meeting Monday



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

So some idjiots who have nothing better to do with their lives are trying to convince Burnaby City Hall to ban the sale of puppies, kittens, & other animals including sw fish and corals. I guess these yahoos think that shutting down legitimate tax-paying, employee-hiring businesses is a good idea and that we can just get all our animals/pets from Craigslist.

Monday, Nov. 25 at 7pm is when the meeting will take place. I hope to go but I'm hoping that we get a lot of support from the pet-keeping and reefing community. 

Fro all those who don't think this affects them, guess what? J&L Aquatics is IN Burnaby!!! So is King Eds. A ban on reef fish and corals will be very, very bad for the reefing community.

Hope to see you all there.

Anthony


----------



## Dawna (Jul 29, 2013)

Supporting  and signed petition wooooo


----------



## jhj0112 (Jul 30, 2013)

what?? banning on SW fishes and corals?!?!?! wow!! I just can't believe it.. that's just stupid( best word I can come up with, not breaking site rules)... I'm shocked..


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

Yeah, let's just throw out the baby with the bathwater. Banning puppy and kitten *mills*, licensing pets and ensuring that animals sold in stores are from licensed, reputable, inspected breeders and are treated humanely is reasonable. Banning all pet sales? Totally moronic.

Sounds like Burnaby has been drinking the same fruity kool-aid as Mayor "Moonbeam" in Vancouver. Good luck to all you Burnabyites at the meeting.


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

I didn't realize fish would be included in the ban. It is unfortunate but i am for the ban if it means shops like pet habitat can quit selling their puppy mill dogs and deceiving customers into thinking they come from some non-existant championship family line. I know many of us on here are disgusted when you see shops sell unhealthy fish. What about unhealthy cats, dogs, birds, etc? Maybe there shouldn't be a ban but instead there should be stricter regulations on where these stores can get their animals from? It just boils my blood when i see all the dogs at pet habitat with their ears cropped and tails docked, knowing they came from a cruel factory, and then being sold at RIDICULOUS prices.


----------



## DBam (Aug 9, 2010)

Nicole said:


> I didn't realize fish would be included in the ban. It is unfortunate but i am for the ban if it means shops like pet habitat can quit selling their puppy mill dogs and deceiving customers into thinking they come from some non-existant championship family line. I know many of us on here are disgusted when you see shops sell unhealthy fish. What about unhealthy cats, dogs, birds, etc? Maybe there shouldn't be a ban but instead there should be stricter regulations on where these stores can get their animals from? It just boils my blood when i see all the dogs at pet habitat with their ears cropped and tails docked, knowing they came from a cruel factory, and then being sold at RIDICULOUS prices.


Pet stores get complaints about animal treatment all the time. A good store is worried to have dog poo in plain sight, unremoved for even a minute. That means constantly monitoring them for doodoo duty, or for any other signs they might be in the slightest discomfort. We all know, or should know Pet Habitat is a greasy, greasy store. Unfortunately I don't think they get the same negative airtime that our own sponsors get around here.

I urge you and anybody else considering supporting this motion to think about what this would do to your hobby. If you're disgusted with Pet Habitat, phone in a complaint; make it hard for them to do what they do. Don't tie the hands of the LFS's that you depend on for selection and competition.


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

Yes, that's why I suggested stricter regulations instead of banning all animals. I also don't support dirty fishing methods. But because there are stores that don't care, I can see why some people are pushing for a ban. The ban is an extreme measure and I'd be surprised if it passed, but it may lead to better regulations. I would assume that the people for the ban are concerned about the mistreatment of animals. Unfortunately that affects any good pet owners too.
I don't know if calling Pet Habitat will do any good. CBC news exposed them but they're still somehow running. A lot of pet owners don't do their research unfortunately .



DBam said:


> Pet stores get complaints about animal treatment all the time. A good store is worried to have dog poo in plain sight, unremoved for even a minute. That means constantly monitoring them for doodoo duty, or for any other signs they might be in the slightest discomfort. We all know, or should know Pet Habitat is a greasy, greasy store. Unfortunately I don't think they get the same negative airtime that our own sponsors get around here.
> 
> I urge you and anybody else considering supporting this motion to think about what this would do to your hobby. If you're disgusted with Pet Habitat, phone in a complaint; make it hard for them to do what they do. Don't tie the hands of the LFS's that you depend on for selection and competition.


----------



## Momobobo (Sep 28, 2010)

How could anyone agree with this. At the very least they are still letting us keep them...for now (-_-)"


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

The problem with a knee jerk ban rather than proper enforcement is that it just forces the crappy abusive practices underground where they are harder to prosecute. Look at all the 'Kyoot PuppieZ for sAlE CHEAP!" ads on Craigslist and Kijiji. You can't tell me that most of those aren't puppy mills. Same thing with breed bans. Rather than dealing with the root issue of &(@@ owners and their own lack of enforcement on licensing and training, they take the media-friendly band-aid solution route, and it makes me sick. Consumers take a big part of the rap here for staying willfully uneducated about poor practices and for supporting the mills, but it's the animals paying the price. 

As somebody who's been extensively involved in animal rescue, I wouldn't purchase a puppy or kitten from any pet store, period. I would also be very, very hesitant to purchase a dog even from a certified breeder. Many of the dogs and cats bred by registered breeders have been overbred to the point of deformity and abuse, IMO, just to get the "look" that's in currently in fashion and never mind the poor animal. Give me a good rescue mutt any day.

We need specific laws and penalties at the federal or provincial level dealing with animal abuse, and sufficient teeth to back them up at the municipal level.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

Also, once a ban is in place in a fairly major city, like Burnaby, that makes it far easier to expand the ban to other places and also to other types of animals.


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

Hey, maybe they'll extend it to ban those people who take up two parking spaces! I could support that.


----------



## DBam (Aug 9, 2010)

Anthony's right. Post-sec institutions have to go through miles of red tape to keep anything higher than invertebrates. It's all in the name of animal rights, and though I believe in their rights, I'm not for the wackjobs that want animals treated better than people. 

Unless people take responsibility, it will come down to extremists slowly instituting their agenda and people will start living by "this is why we can't have nice things". 

I doubt I'll be able to make the hearing, maybe if my wife is out there that day she'll feel compelled to go. Hopefully some people who represent the interests of the aquatic hobbyist community and LFS's will be there to defend us. Hopefully Nicole doesn't go and undermine the majority of aquarists, or instead decides to buy her marine fish from clean sources, or at least does homework on how they're caught if it deeply matters to her. That whole dirty fishing issue is something the aquatic community can address (right here on BCA even) without asking municipalities to make laws banning all sales outright. Please don't take offense Nicole, but I think that's the way to see the right kind of change. People need to be educated. Taking away all marine fish sales in Burnaby would probably annoy more than a couple of people, nor does it directly address the issue. Grant marketed net caught fish, and has posts on here describing differences in stores between net and cyanide caught fish. Maybe the new IPU will continue this. However, if you ban all marine sales, they won't be able to even offer you that.


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

> I'm not for the wackjobs that want animals treated better than people.


If you mean some of the far-out extremists at PETA, no argument. But enforcing basic care and responsibility isn't "treating animals better than people", nor are the two mutually exclusive. Ignorant whackjobs who abuse animals are far more likely to abuse other humans, IME, and both should be prevented at all costs.

I hope that the new ownership at IPU continues the practice of education around dirty fishing and horrible practices like dyed fish. The more people who are aware of it, the more people will know to ask questions when buying their fish, and hopefully be able to make better choices. I do fully support sale or trade bans on endangered or at-risk species of any description, and believe any store caught dealing in those species should be fined severely.

If Burnaby wanted to really do something useful, they might start by partnering with local pet stores and rescues to develop a comprehensive public education program...oh, and maybe actually enforce their own animal control/treatment bylaws.


----------



## Fish rookie (May 21, 2012)

I will try to be there even though I do not live in Burnaby.


----------



## DBam (Aug 9, 2010)

Elle said:


> If you mean some of the far-out extremists at PETA, no argument. But enforcing basic care and responsibility isn't "treating animals better than people", nor are the two mutually exclusive. Ignorant whackjobs who abuse animals are far more likely to abuse other humans, IME, and both should be prevented at all costs.


Absolutely, I did mean the PETA types and the culture and mentality they foster. Many people aren't willing to take responsibility, and it's basically shaping our world now, especially anything legal or judicial.

Maybe the city of Burnaby could do more about following up on stink holes like Pet Habitat. If even after the CBC marketplace feature they're still doing what they do (and I haven't been there since but I'm assuming they do), maybe heavier enforcement crackdowns could start there, and not bother other businesses like IPU and KE that aren't dirty and don't need tv programs to expose them.


----------



## Master wilkins (Dec 10, 2012)

I fully agree with the ban of the sales of puppies and kittens in stores, but not fish or corals...

Puppies and cats should only be allowed to be sold from licensed breeders. 

Banning the sale of fish and corals is completely stupid.


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

DBam said:


> Hopefully Nicole doesn't go and undermine the majority of aquarists, or instead decides to buy her marine fish from clean sources, or at least does homework on how they're caught if it deeply matters to her. That whole dirty fishing issue is something the aquatic community can address (right here on BCA even) without asking municipalities to make laws banning all sales outright. Please don't take offense Nicole, but I think that's the way to see the right kind of change. People need to be educated. Taking away all marine fish sales in Burnaby would probably annoy more than a couple of people, nor does it directly address the issue. Grant marketed net caught fish, and has posts on here describing differences in stores between net and cyanide caught fish. Maybe the new IPU will continue this. However, if you ban all marine sales, they won't be able to even offer you that.


?? When did I say I want everything to be banned ?? Of course I'll take offence for something I didn't say. In my first post I said "Maybe there shouldn't be a ban but there should be stricter regulations." Then in my second post I once again said, "That's why I suggested stricter regulations instead of banning all animals." As a fish keeper, why would I want to ban myself from keeping fish?! Goodness, I need to learn to keep my 2 cents to myself on here. So, this is my last post on this thread.

I want the ban for mistreated animals (which includes fish) but there are definitely good pet stores too or else I wouldn't have anything in my tanks! I never said I wanted to ban all marine sales. Did you not notice all the past coral group buys? I said I can see why there are other people who would want the ban to pass. They most likely don't keep any pets and all they see is the cruelty behind it. I would be very upset if I couldn't buy any more corals..I do support aquacultured corals and captive bred fish over wild caught ones though. I 100% support responsible pet stores.

I agree education is key. Easier said than done though. The dirty fishing business cannot be solved through just talking about it, just like the whole puppy mill business. It's been talked about for years. I'm not confident KE isn't dirty but let's not get into that because frankly, there are people who just don't care how they get what they want. I think most people on here agree that there should be a ban on the sales of dogs/cats and that's the side I'm on.


----------



## Fish rookie (May 21, 2012)

Nicole said:


> *I didn't realize fish would be included in the ban. It is unfortunate but i am for the ban* if it means shops like pet habitat can quit selling their puppy mill dogs and deceiving customers into thinking they come from some non-existant championship family line. I know many of us on here are disgusted when you see shops sell unhealthy fish. What about unhealthy cats, dogs, birds, etc?


I think the above quote is what he was referring to.

Anyway, you are entitled to your opinion and I do not have a problem with you either for it or against it or whatever you feel is right.

People could lose income and shops may close down which concerns me more.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

The main agenda is to get bans on puppies, kittens and rabbits, but heard through the grapevine that they will try to expand any animal ban to include pretty much anything that pet shops sell, including corals and sw fish. In reality, they can make a stronger argument to stop the selling of imported, wild-harvest sw fish and corals than they can for kittens and rabbits IMO. I think that having as many pet lovers attending will help get the message that regulating puppy sales to keep puppy mill pups out is something people can support but that trying to shut down our petshops and expanding their demands to pretty much every animal is not. 

With fanatics like this, you know that its a "give them an inch and they'll take a mile" kind of mentality. They send out their first media salvo mentioning puppy mills & etc. but their true agenda is to shut down all pet shops since they don't think animals should be sold or kept as pets. If they had their way, we'd all be vegans and all the animals would be running around loose with more rights than humans. 

Just a while ago, they were trying to ban all reptiles and exotic animals in BC if I remember correctly.


----------



## crimper (Oct 20, 2010)

Here we go again.

People, please do enough deligence on reading post before jumping into conclusion. Can we avoid posting things that may provoke debate and disagreement unless otherwised asked for your own opinion. And please stop stirring the pot if we can.

This thread is posted to make all of us aware about the proposed ban and not to have a discussion and debate.


----------



## Fish rookie (May 21, 2012)

Like I said i will try to be there even though I am not a resident of Burnaby. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.

"I think that having as many pet lovers attending will help get the message that regulating puppy sales to keep puppy mill pups out is something people can support but that trying to shut down our petshops and expanding their demands to pretty much every animal is not. "

This is exactly how I feel as well. Well said.


----------



## scott tang (Jan 29, 2012)

ban the sail of dogs and cats good idea simply because so many at the spca are put down every thing elts is not a good idea to ban


----------



## Dawna (Jul 29, 2013)

I dislike how they use animal cruelty as the factor to ban pets from pet stores when each pet store receives animals from variety of sources and treats their animals in their own unique ways. Sure, I like the intentions of banning mills and other improper care facilities for animals. But why don't the organizations ever speak about how they euthanize millions of pets a year due to "lack of space" or "lack of resources" and "behaviorial problems." I like watching dog whisperer. He made me believe that pets still have hope despite their initial negative behaviours. This means behaviorial problems shouldnt be a reason to euthanize right? Please tell me that the dog whisperer was right  Or else I will be sad  LOL. They should have clones of the dog whisperer to train the pets. 

They should instead be banning animal cruelty mills and support a higher reinforcements /requirement to run a properly cared mill. From some documentaries I have seen, the law [in US, not sure about here] to allow a mill to run only requires minimal standards such as pets getting some kind of food, some water and some shelter for bad weathers.


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

In Powell River, there was one crazy woman running the shelter up there who would take people's dogs out of their yard if she didn't like how they were taking care of the dog. She took my friend's dog and he had built it a half ACRE fenced in dog run with a huge yellow cedar doghouse, high quality food and everything a dog could want. When they called her, thinking the dog got out, she denied having their dog. It was only a couple days later, after they had spent hours driving and walking all over the whole area that they popped in to the shelter and found she had the dog. A neighbour then told them that she had opened their fence and walked in to take the dog. What a nutbar! If she did that in the States, the owners would have probably shot her. Luckily my friends are nice people but that worked against them because she still refused to give back their dog and they had to threaten to go to the police before she let them take back THEIR dog which she STOLE from their yard. Nutbars are everywhere!!!!


----------



## Fish rookie (May 21, 2012)

Taking the dog secretly from its nice big home with good food and all away from its owner to some shelter is indeed an act of animal cruelty, not to mention trespassing, thief....

We expect good deal from pet shops but if they are banned from selling this and that they will have a hard time making a profit, they wont be able to offer any good deal or put extra people on the floor to take good care of their pets or have extra money and time to train its employee to provide better customer service...etc. It is not good for pets nor pet lovers/consumers.


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

For those of you who can, please go out and tell council how you feel about this, and also how it's likely to impact both responsible owners and the stores who take care of their livestock and acquire them responsibly.

Are any Burnaby sponsor members like J&L or IPU able to attend?


----------



## Momobobo (Sep 28, 2010)

I will consider going...I don't get home from school until around that time so probably not.

If this passes, I guess I'll be out of a job soon :\


----------



## kacairns (Apr 10, 2012)

Momobobo said:


> I will consider going...I don't get home from school until around that time so probably not.
> 
> If this passes, I guess I'll be out of a job soon :\


There is always the Richmond store if the people running city hall in Burnaby are idiots =)


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

Well if puppies, kittens, small animals and reptiles are no longer allowed to be sold, then you know they are going to target birds, fish and corals next cause their real agenda is to shut down all pet shops.


----------



## Dawna (Jul 29, 2013)

It was a great experience today going there. Thanks to all that went there and supported.


----------



## DBam (Aug 9, 2010)

How did things go?


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

My sincere apologies. Got stuck with too much work to go tonight. Too many last minute editing jobs for students to even leave the house all day. I hope that there was lots of support for keeping things sane with regards to the regulation of the pet industry. Again, my deepest apologies for not making it tonight and bravo to all who did attend.

Anthony


----------



## Dawna (Jul 29, 2013)

DBam said:


> How did things go?


Kathy was our delegation and she spoke with a lot of power about how their family has been working and dedicating 7 days a week to provide as much service and care for the animals and the compassion towards them. She provided over an inch stack of papers of signed petition from supporters in opposing Burnaby pet store ban. She had also pointed out the intention of the rescue groups to ban the stores was to get everyone to buy their pets from shelters in which they think there are some unspoken profit being made.

The opposition group mainly used puppy mills and the lack of spaying and neutering kittens and puppies as their reasons to shut down the two/three Burnaby pet stores left in Burnaby that sells varieties of animals. They say pet habitat got their animals from hunte Corp. which got their supplies of pets from mills. Then they switched to saying they euthanize a large amounts of pets every year due to over population and blame it on the pet stores for not offering neutered and spayed options for their puppies and kittens. They said pet stores claims they cannot spay or neuter them until they are older. But the rescue groups and advocates said they do it on animals as young as four weeks. After that they switched to a short clip of puppy mill documentary from animal planet that I would presumably they took off YouTube because I had watched the full clip before. They had reedited it to crop the part they want and because delegations have a limited time to speak. The clip showed US puppy mills and how cruel they were treated.

Then I believe a neutral delegation was given his perspective of what he thinks and had observed from the two delegations. He pointed out how ridiculous it is that the meeting was about Burnabys pet stores yet the advocates used puppy mills from another country as part of their reasoning. He has also note that pet stores are regulated by laws all the time yet animal organizations do not have any regulations at all. How the animal shelters are caring and treating the animals are unknown. How the donations fundings are distributed are unknown. The government and the public has no control over the organizations. Apparently there's no official documentations for being part of an animal rescue group. So anyone can claim to be an animal rescuer from a group.

The only perspective of the animal organizations we get are from the constant advertisements from the organizations themselves.

Overall the family of kinged pet store expressed their disappointment about the reasons why their pet store should be banned because the reasons were unjust towards the store. Kathy claims their store sells puppies and kittens received from their own customers who has pets of their own that gave birth. Its the reason why there are many times kittens and puppies are not available at the store. As for spaying and neutering, I overheard after the meeting that animals shouldn't be spayed and neutered at such a young age as they are still growing and the procedures can affect their hormones and growth.

No criticisms were pointed directly at king ed pet store as the reason to ban that stores whereas pet habitat was their main headline pet store the animal rights activists and animal rescue groups used as a representative store to shutdown all Burnaby's pet stores from selling animals.

At the end a democratic vote was made by the councils and the pet stores gets to keep their businesses running for now while the councilors are considering how to integrate a system to regulate the animal shelters to find out what they had been doing behinf the scenes while nobody is watching to get a fair perspective of things as many supporters on their side could of been misled by the acts shown in public.

A side note of my observation: The advocates and animal right activists left the room first and gave rude gestures and facial expressions towards us along the way whereas at the beginning they stood there posing like a lion with pride. Its surprising how after they lost they can become such different people. It makes me doubt about the care of animals in these organizations and how its these types of people that many donators are entrusting pets lives to. I have nothing against them. I had even offered to volunteer at SPCA few months ago. I just find it unjust to ban the pet stores and with the sudden negative aftermath behaviors from the other side, it had just made me realize those proud activists and advocates we see in public arent always what they seems like.


----------



## dmaobc (Apr 24, 2010)

Thanks Dawna for sharing experience.


----------



## AWW (Apr 22, 2010)

What! are you serious. They were promoting neutering at 4 weeks? This is an awful practice.

This group fights for many good points, but has nothing but flawed solutions.....


----------



## Dawna (Jul 29, 2013)

You are welcome guys. 

From what I have heard afterward, not verified if true or not:

There is a "like" button on some animal organization sites and there are thousands of "likes" that shows publicly how many support and like them. But people question if they were all from people or are a few hundred of them are actually from bot companies that create many "likes" for false perception to make their sites look so attracting. Some question how much of their donations actually go towards the animals rather than the ads and other hidden sources. 

At some point SPCA ended up backing out of the meetings.


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

Sounds like a victory in the meantime. Thanks for the lengthy write-up and sharing.
I wish KE would tell their customers to neuter their pets instead of selling the offsprings because then it's just a constant cycle..but I'm glad they don't have to shutdown their business and at least their dogs/cats aren't from mills.
As for the opposition, whoever thought of the argument should be fired. This was like trying to ban apples by shutting down the sale of oranges.


----------



## Fish rookie (May 21, 2012)

An ignorant question if I may: if all dogs/cats are neutered, does that mean they will likely become extinct in the near future?


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

Thanks Dawna. Greatly appreciate reading about the meeting. Just took a few minutes to go congratulate Kathy and Ron on a good job at the meeting.


----------



## Dawna (Jul 29, 2013)

SeaHorse_Fanatic said:


> Thanks Dawna. Greatly appreciate reading about the meeting. Just took a few minutes to go congratulate Kathy and Ron on a good job at the meeting.


Yup should of been there. They invited all the supporters for chinese dinner after. There were more than enough for everyone and there was tons of take out boxes to wrap up the leftovers lol xD


----------



## Nicole (Nov 21, 2011)

Fish rookie said:


> An ignorant question if I may: if all dogs/cats are neutered, does that mean they will likely become extinct in the near future?


Lol I don't think that future would be near by the time all the dogs/cats are neutered. Unless you mean like RIGHT NOW if we neutered every single dog/cat then yes I would assume the species would just die off without having offspring. That goes the same with any animal including humans. If humans don't reproduce then we'll eventually become extinct. The point is there are so many dogs/cats already that we actually purposefully kill them on a daily basis because shelters don't have unlimited space/time to care for them.


----------



## Fish rookie (May 21, 2012)

Nicole, I agree mongrel and mixed breed or less than ideal pure breed should be neutered because there is no point to pass their gene on; but for a show champion dog I feel that we should continue to perfect such a bloodline with selective breeding so we can further perfect the breed in terms of appearance and temperament. Once you neuter such a dog the blood line--which is many generations of hard work by many breeders-- could be lost forever. So, I am not for neutering all dogs/cats, but just most of them. Just my own opinion.


----------



## kacairns (Apr 10, 2012)

Honestly these people who are all about protecting the animals should focus their efforts elsewhere most of the time. I've been attempting to sway peoples opinion for neutering/spaying of humans in certain instances, probably have better results then doing it to the animals  ^^^


----------



## SeaHorse_Fanatic (Apr 22, 2010)

kacairns said:


> Honestly these people who are all about protecting the animals should focus their efforts elsewhere most of the time. I've been attempting to sway peoples opinion for neutering/spaying of humans in certain instances, probably have better results then doing it to the animals  ^^^


Psst, Kevin, your wife volunteered you to be the first test subject.


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

Thanks Dawna. It's too bad that so many good causes (animal welfare, human welfare etc.) are infiltrated and ruined by crazy extremists. However, I'm glad that Burnaby is looking at this from all sides.

Spay/neuter at 4 weeks is WAY too young. We snipped all our animals at about 6-12 months unless they came "pre-fixed". I would love to see the municipalities heavily enforce licensing and then divert some $ into free spay/neuter clinics and education. better to fix the issue at the source. Unfortunately I don't think we're in any danger of running out of rescue mutts/extra cats though, based on the number of people out there who can't be bothered to fix their pets.



> for a show champion dog I feel that we should continue to perfect such a bloodline with selective breeding so we can further perfect the breed in terms of appearance and temperament.


To me this is a real problem area. I don't think there's enough concern over function and health of the animals, and FAR too much emphasis on breeding for a "look" or style. The result is an unhealthy animal and a weaker gene pool. Quite frankly I also think that many show breeders have completely ruined the "breed of the week" by turning out low quality animals to fit the demand. Look at the issue with toy dogs with overly fragile bones from being bred for small size over health, or bulldogs, pugs and Persian cats who have been bred with such extreme facial issues that they have breathing issues. My pet hate is what's been done to German Shepherd show lines with the extreme sloping back. They have all but ruined that breed, as those dogs suffer from crippling congenital hip issues. The only dogs saved from it have been the working lines, which are actually bred to be working functional dogs and are a lot healthier. Try comparing photos of "show dogs" in any breed between now and 25 years ago...the differences are insane.

I've worked in both small animal and horse rescue and seen exactly the same issue in more breeds than I can count (I could go on and on about what's been done to Thoroughbred racehorses as a breed), and it disgusts me.


----------



## DBam (Aug 9, 2010)

Elle, 
I do agree with you. Unfortunately, I don't think any of this will change unless the value proposition of pet animals changes, and I think the majority of people don't want to start paying 150-200% of what they currently are for cats and dogs. The cost to fix a cat is usually at least 2-3x the cost to buy the animal, if not more (lots of people give away kittens). Dog breeders could do fixing, eye/hip/heart/thyroid/bone exams, or whatever the breed is prone to, before selling puppies. Unfortunately, that would probably cost maybe $500-800 alone, and breeders would have to jack prices or stand to make little or no profit. Basically, people would have to pay more, and breeders make less money in order to make that work.


----------



## Elle (Oct 25, 2010)

> Dog breeders could do fixing, eye/hip/heart/thyroid/bone exams, or whatever the breed is prone to, before selling puppies. Unfortunately, that would probably cost maybe $500-800 alone, and breeders would have to jack prices or stand to make little or no profit.


Yeah, it's a problem. What gripes me is that responsible breeders already do this. Our friend's Ridgeback came from a breeder that tested hips, eyes, heart and temperament in ALL of their dogs, plus X-rayed and vaccinated before they were sold. If a dog failed to test out, it was removed from the breeding pool, fixed, and sold as a pet at a lower price. Eliminating those dogs from the gene pool also maintained the quality of the breed. Their "show quality" dogs sold for $1500+ but you could be assured that they had done everything in their power to ensure that you were getting a healthy, well bred animal. Another friend used to breed Dogo Argentinos. Same deal...she spent the money to properly care for them and breed quality dogs, and was able to charge accordingly. Djamm's dad used to breed Maine **** cats...same thing again.

I've seen backyard breeders selling crap quality animals for $750, so it's not necessarily that initial purchase price is a barrier. People don't consider that over the life of the animal, the purchase price is a lot less than your basic vet bills, food, etc. I used to hear all the time "well, we can't afford to pay $200 to adopt a pet!" and my reaction is "How are you going to afford the first major vet bill, then?" Some people see pets as a cheap disposable toy or status symbol, so they buy the cheap "purebred" puppy from the online ad or the paper rather than spend the time and $$ to go talk to the breeders, see the parents and the operation, and understand what they're getting. It's an education issue as much as a budget issue, and they only way to fix it is to educate the public so they can make better choices.

Animal Advocates (AAS) has a really interesting take on how to effectively curb irresponsible breeding: http://www.animaladvocates.com/dog-breeding/regulations.php

FTR, we own a wonderful mutt (Husky/Rottweiler) who was an "accident" because her owners failed to spay her mom (farm dog). I adore my dog, but I still think that her mom should have been spayed rather than having 2 litters of "free" puppies.

For people not looking for a purebred or specific breed, there are awesome crossbreeds out there, many of which are amazing family dogs, which are not expensive to buy or adopt (most good rescues cover initial vet costs as well). There are also a lot of breed specific rescues.


----------

