This List Is Off TopicPositronWildhawk Here we have a list which compiles reasons why a certain chain breeding company is a bad thing. It's true by saying that some dogs are bred in poor conditions, where a blind eye can be turned to illnesses and lack of solid food. Everything that's said about mistreatment of dogs is true; dogs need regular exercise for their hearts and bones to develop properly, reducing the risks of cancers of the marrow, and the puppies need to grow up directly exposed to humans so that they learn to socialise with them, and need to grow in low stress environments so that they won't resort to attacking other animals without warning. It is these factors which make them grow up poorly, possibly with physical defects like blindness, or a drive to attack out of self-defense, because they were taught that people and animals of a certain type were dangerous. It is these factors that make them more likely to be put down at a young age, and it is why treating dogs of all breeds and ages with respect is essential.
But this list really gives a redundant case for why we should take this factor into account. First of all, the idea that the dogs are treated poorly is in constant repetition. We can infer simply from "Breeding dogs and newborn puppies are treated poorly" that this is the argument. The factors that they receive minimal attention and food tie in with this; you're just repeating aspects of it which we should assume to be true of all dog breeders, and it doesn't introduce a new reason to adopt a dog. It wouldn't even make a supportive list of "Things Wrong With Dog Breeders"; the idea of poor living conditions with a little variety to it on every item doesn't give ten independent reasons.
Secondly, how do you know this isn't true of all dog breeders. I have had three dogs in my lifetime, and they were all bought from a private breeder. I've visited the breeders, and the dogs were given an entire field, with twice as much room as my house, as well as fresh meat and water. The mothers, with their suckling puppies, had their own private pens, with more than enough room for them to do what they pleased. The breeder made sure that we would treat each one of them with respect when we bought them, and vice versa. Our dogs grew up healthily and grew to trust and respect us, because they'd received that themselves.
Additionally, I've had four cats, two of which were adopted strays, two of which were bought from a small pet shop. As kittens, the pet shop had, in fact, given them sufficient living conditions and had made sure they were healthy, and we had too. One of them has gone through shoulder cancer, and made a full recovery, which may not have been possible if he hadn't been treated with respect.
And fact is, in a pet shop, whether it's a small independent shop or a chain company, would not keep dogs, as they simply don't have the resources. The chain shop PetsAtHome, for instance, sells various supplies for caring for your dog: toys, healthy snacks, and even has a dog grooming salon. But the only animals that can be bought directly from the shop are the much lower maintenance rabbits, chinchillas, degus, bearded dragons, corn snakes, goldfish, and the likes. More importantly, they're all happy with the conditions they're in; the resident rabbits are always excited to see people such as myself, and always full of energy. These animals are much easier to monitor, particularly on the scale of a nationwide company, and it shows that the company is biting off only what they can chew. It also shows that if an animal is sold from a chain company, it does not mean it has had a hard upbringing.
The argument's invalidity is also evident from assuming that the adoption firms are automatically a paradise for animals which have had a difficult life. Some companies will make sure the animals are treated well; one of my adopted cats was from RSPCA, and made a full recovery under the firm's monitoring after he had fallen ill by eating garbage as a stray. My other cat was found by my parents, and not microchipped, but was checked by the vet before they could say she was fit for our household. Both cats were given a happy new life, both by their temporary carers and by my family.
But this simply can't tally up with the large scale treatment of animals in adoption firms. The largest animal rights group in the world, PETA, is estimated to have euthanised over 80% of its shelter animals, simply because their policy says it is inhumane to keep sick animals alive. The fact is, they don't have the resources in their shelters to help the animals recover from the illnesses they have. There may be no cure for feline AIDS, but more animals are dying from non-terminal illnesses such as bacterial infections of wounds, and some terminal conditions such as hip dysplasia may affect a dog's life, but not kill it if treated with discipline. To some shelters, if an animal is mildly ill, the automatic decision is to kill it. It is this that is why shelter animals die, and not that the majority of people buy from pet shops. If my cat had been in such a shelter when he was diagnosed with cancer, which he made a full recovery from, they would've killed him. So in some, but not all cases, a pet shop is better than an adoption shelter; the treatment of animals does not define either of them.
So, if you want to make a list of reasons to adopt a dog, or a list of things wrong with dog breeders, which is what this list essentially is, think about giving the dog a good life after a hard one, and think about changing how people see dogs that have grown in poor conditions, and about being different from the people that automatically want puppies. Don't just assume that the "USDA licensed idiots with a few dogs in the barn" are everywhere, mistreating every dog that was bred under human monitoring. And for crying out loud, do some research and back up your argument, because however one is supposed to treat this list, it's presumably only built on one thing that caught the corner of your eye on the web. "Pet stores are cruel" is a generic statement, which evidence can confirm is not a fact of life.
This is a great post! - RiverClanRocks
I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I don't think ALL breeders are bad. I was talking about puppy mills. Puppy mills have to keep up with the constant demands of the pet store, so they have to breed constantly, and they are cruel like that to maximize profits. A responsible breeder would never be able to keep up with the demands of a pet store. Some pet stores, of course, treat the animals humanely, but we should shut down the ones that don't. And yes, PETA isn't as compassionate as they say the are (if that were true, the animals would have 24/7 service on a golden throne), and that is true about shelters. But puppy mills are still bad, and need to be shut down, responsible breeders, humane pet stores, shelters and the such are humane. I know that some breeders are responsible, I was targeting the ones that aren't. - visitor
There's not that much difference between adopting and buying so this list is pointless - RockStarr