Breed a litter and then kill half the pups???

This is where to talk about Pit Bulls!

Postby babyreba » February 2nd, 2006, 8:25 pm

Man, I said I'd not post here again, but here I am . . .


I have one more question, and this is not to be argumentative, but to genuinely figure out the priorities here.

When people thought Diane Jessup may have euthed Guppy based on the fact that she may have been too soft, temperament wies, for the work Diane wanted her to do, people seemed to be upset about that. And the implication was that, if she did so for that reason, it was inappropriate.

Why would that be inappropriate if it's OK for a breeder to cull?

Again, I'm not trying to argue, I genuinely want to know.
User avatar
babyreba
Supremely Bully
 
Posts: 1132

Postby Fear_the_Sheeple » February 2nd, 2006, 8:44 pm

When people are completely set on a purebred dog w/ papers for a pet, you refer them to a responsible breeder, correct? There are always those people who are convinced a purebred w/papers puppy is going to be better than a rescue so you say fine, I'll refer you to a responsible breeder so you don't go support a byb. So what if all responsible breeders culled pet-quality pups? Where would those people go? BYBs or pet stores, right? There would be no other choice. Obviously not all responsible breeders cull pet-quality pups, but I'm hearing that people think this is a good practice.

I think there is a market for purebred pet dogs, and that if there weren't any, all it would do is send more people to bybs and pet stores.
User avatar
Fear_the_Sheeple
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1558
Location: FL

Postby SisMorphine » February 2nd, 2006, 8:58 pm

Fear_the_Sheeple wrote:When people are completely set on a purebred dog w/ papers for a pet, you refer them to a responsible breeder, correct? There are always those people who are convinced a purebred w/papers puppy is going to be better than a rescue so you say fine, I'll refer you to a responsible breeder so you don't go support a byb. So what if all responsible breeders culled pet-quality pups? Where would those people go? BYBs or pet stores, right? There would be no other choice. Obviously not all responsible breeders cull pet-quality pups, but I'm hearing that people think this is a good practice.

I think there is a market for purebred pet dogs, and that if there weren't any, all it would do is send more people to bybs and pet stores.

There is "humane culling" which basically means speutering the pup prior to adoption. But pediatric speutering, in itself, is also controversial.

The breeder that I know who culls (only pups who are not perfect health/temperment wise), will often write the contract of supposed "pet dogs" so that she is still part owner. These dogs are a possibility for showing/breeding in the future. She has final say. If that dog turns out to be not what she's looking for as far as comformation goes, what does she do? Well she speuters it and relinquishes full ownership to the family who adopted. Humane culling. That dog's genes will not be passed on.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby Fear_the_Sheeple » February 2nd, 2006, 9:03 pm

Right. That's what I think should be done. No reason to kill them, when people are always trying to refer others to buy from a responsible breeder if they won't adopt. It's already too tempting for people to buy from bybs, if there weren't any pet quality pups from good breeders, that's exactly where people would go.
User avatar
Fear_the_Sheeple
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1558
Location: FL

Postby mnp13 » February 2nd, 2006, 9:16 pm

babyreba wrote:I'm saying is, is it right for me to actively go to a shelter, take animals into my foster program and after figuring out which I liked best, put the rest to sleep? I personally don't think it is. But I equate that to the rescue version of what breeder culling is about. Like POP said, if you can't provide for a life you bring into the world, you shouldn't bring it into the world. Likewise, I do think if this were a different circumstance and a rescue org. posted a litter of pups they picked up and told everyone that they were only going to adopt out the cute ones and PTS the rest, the entire board would be in uproard. Not that this topic didn't create uproar where it was posted, but still . . . I'm not naive, but I am a bit surprised how accepting people are of this practice.


I think that is different. If you were to choose 10 puppies and then just kill the ones you didn't want, why did you choose them in the first place? If a breeder could choose to only end up with 10 puppies that were exactly what they wanted to breed for they would I'm sure.

If a rescue picked up 10 pups and after 6 months some were still in foster care with no realistic hope of being adopted, no, I could not fault that rescue for putting them down. Sometimes choices have to be made to give other dogs a chance.

babyreba wrote:So basically, I'm judging all breeders who, in this modern day and age, cull based on looks and conformation.


and drives. Conformation leads to functional working ability. Drives dictate a lot about the working potential. there is far more than just looks involved for a performance breeder. I don't think any breeder should only be breeding for looks. That relates to my "total package" feelings about responsible breeders.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby concreterose » February 2nd, 2006, 9:20 pm

I suppose I can see both sides of the coin. I do believe in culling, couldn't see myself doing it, so therefore I would not breed. However, if you look at dog ownership in the past, most dogs were acquired to do a job...hence the role of a BREEDER. MOST people who had pets, 'adopted' their pets, be it the pets were strays that they fed, or dogs that 'appeared' on their doorstep and 'adopted' the families. The average household of old did NOT purchase animals. In the south, (country land where my father lives) no one buys animals for pets. I can honestly say, when I PURCHASE another dog, it will be for performance, or because I decide to show. If I decide to get a PET quality dog, off to a rescue or shelter I go. I think that PET owners can get a good quality pet (and yes there aregood examples of purebreds) from a shelter or rescue. I guess I just don't see the rationale in purchasing a pedigreed dog from a breeder (especially in these times of overpopulation crisis) if you are not going to work the dog, or show the dog as breeding prospect. I won't spend my money for a pedigreed pet. JMO
User avatar
concreterose
Loyally Bully
 
Posts: 719

Postby mnp13 » February 2nd, 2006, 9:23 pm

babyreba wrote:When people thought Diane Jessup may have euthed Guppy based on the fact that she may have been too soft, temperament wies, for the work Diane wanted her to do, people seemed to be upset about that. And the implication was that, if she did so for that reason, it was inappropriate.


She had the dog for over a year, did nothing with it - not even basic obedience (her words), and then decided that she just wasn't the right dog for what she wanted her for. this is from an 'expert' who should be able to pick out a dog with the correct drives and temperament with no problem.

Guppy became inconvienient so then Guppy had outlived her usefullness. Yes, I do see that as different.

babyreba wrote:Why would that be inappropriate if it's OK for a breeder to cull?


I would relate your example to a relationship. Dating someone two or three times to see if you are a potential match vs. stringing someone along for a few years just to see what will happen and then saying 'oops, no I don't want you anymore'

babyreba wrote:Again, I'm not trying to argue, I genuinely want to know.


I don't think anyone has been argueing, I think this is very productive discussion.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby Fear_the_Sheeple » February 2nd, 2006, 9:39 pm

I guess I just don't see the rationale in purchasing a pedigreed dog from a breeder (especially in these times of overpopulation crisis) if you are not going to work the dog, or show the dog as breeding prospect. I won't spend my money for a pedigreed pet. JMO


I agree completely. I could never fathom buying a dog when there are millions of wonderful dogs who die each year without knowing love or comfort.

There are people, however, who insist on a pedigree. After all, how many people are duped by the "champion bloodlines" line? It always seem like there are hundreds of classifieds claiming exactly that. People think that's something to be proud of, unfortunately most of the time those people have been duped.
User avatar
Fear_the_Sheeple
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1558
Location: FL

Postby SisMorphine » February 2nd, 2006, 11:03 pm

Fear_the_Sheeple wrote:There are people, however, who insist on a pedigree.


I don't necessarily think that all people who purchase pet quality from a breeder are out for the pedigree (though, admittedly, most are, I see it every single day in my profession, but then again to them "pedigree" means that they come with papers of one sort or another, they know nothing beyond that). But there is also the small group of people who do not want to show, but do want a dog who's lineage is known, so they can have a general idea of the dog as an adult, and who want to raise the dog from a pup correctly so that they can have a great, all around, bomb proof dog, with fantastic health.

This is where I think that Greyhound rescue has a HUGE advantage. You can trace each and every racer back many many many generations. You don't get any surprises as far as lineage goes with them. Of course you can get surprises with how they were raised, and every single day of my life I realize how totally frickin' lucky I was to fall for Wally, who is totally bomb proof. I do a Greyhound walk every week and there are dogs we walk with who are horribly dog aggressive (not a natural Greyhound trait), who have strange triggers which set them into crazy mode, who are TERRIFIED of people or any non-Greyhound dog. I am beyond lucky that Wally grew up in a racing kennel that was attentive to their dogs and not abusive. I LUCKED OUT. Frankly, I haven't met a single other Grey I would ever want in my home.

So this is where I worry about rescuing another dog. Yes, I work with rescue. Yes I foster dogs. There hasn't been a single dog who's come through this house that I have wanted to keep. I have loved them, but know that they are not the dog for my family. I do not want to show a dog, I want a pet, a companion, and frankly at the moment a puppy from a responsible breeder is looking like the best option for me because in my line of work I need a bomb-proof, well mannered, dog. And I KNOW that I can get that if I do it myself, but rescuing is a crapshoot. Yes there are PLENTY of rescue dogs who go on to do CGC, therapy, and other amazing things. But it's far less guaranteed than a pup from a responsible breeder who's lineage is known and who you bring up yourself, the correct way.

I fully believe in rescuing, don't get me wrong. But, as I have said before, in my line of work (where my dogs need to be readily adaptable to any and all situations at all times, and need to be ambassadors of their breeds) I can't mess around. So I wouldn't say that everyone out for a pet quality dog from a responsible breeder is just in it for the peds.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby Fear_the_Sheeple » February 2nd, 2006, 11:11 pm

So I wouldn't say that everyone out for a pet quality dog from a responsible breeder is just in it for the peds.


I agree. I was basically talking about John Q. Public who wants a purebred dog, and referring them to go to a responsible breeder rather than a byb. They initially didn't know the difference, but just wanted a purebred dog.

Your example is another good reason why I think responsible breeders should keep their pet-quality pups.
User avatar
Fear_the_Sheeple
Enlightened Bully
 
Posts: 1558
Location: FL

Postby SisMorphine » February 2nd, 2006, 11:18 pm

Fear_the_Sheeple wrote:
So I wouldn't say that everyone out for a pet quality dog from a responsible breeder is just in it for the peds.


I agree. I was basically talking about John Q. Public who wants a purebred dog, and referring them to go to a responsible breeder rather than a byb. They initially didn't know the difference, but just wanted a purebred dog.

Your example is another good reason why I think responsible breeders should keep their pet-quality pups.

And this is where I personally become torn on the subject of culling. If you think about it from a stance where you distance yourself, you can say that yes, culling is helping to keep only the best of the breed in view, keeping the lines spotless. But then I remember that I, myself, want a pet quality and not a show quality. My two halfs collide.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby mnp13 » February 3rd, 2006, 12:10 am

SisMorphine wrote:But then I remember that I, myself, want a pet quality and not a show quality. My two halfs collide.


Do you 'want' a pet quality, or would you 'accept' a pet quality?

I don't mean that in an arguementative way. If there were two pups left from a litter and everything else being equal, would you definately go for the dog that was less 'flashy'?

(Personally, I think underbites are cute)
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby SisMorphine » February 3rd, 2006, 12:20 am

mnp13 wrote:
SisMorphine wrote:But then I remember that I, myself, want a pet quality and not a show quality. My two halfs collide.


Do you 'want' a pet quality, or would you 'accept' a pet quality?

I don't mean that in an arguementative way. If there were two pups left from a litter and everything else being equal, would you definately go for the dog that was less 'flashy'?

(Personally, I think underbites are cute)

No, not definately at all. Of course if I had a decision between two puppies who had the same temperment and one was WAY cute (ie: flashy) I would obviously go with the cute one. I say I want pet quality because I do not want to show and I don't want to take away the possibility of showing from anyone who actually wants to.

The breeder that I want to get a pup from (bull terrier) shows her own dogs, so even if I don't want to show she would show the pup. But my issue is I do NOT want an intact male in my house. I already have a male who wasn't neutered until he was 4.5 and he has to wear a bellyband because he marks like nobody's business. I do not want another one of those. So I say pet quality because I do not want to show and I do not want an intact male in my home. But if offered the option of show quality without having to keep him intact for show, of course I'd jump at it.
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby mnp13 » February 3rd, 2006, 12:28 am

Gotcha. I figured that's what you meant, but thought it was better to just ask and be sure.

You wanna talk marking? I was all over Demo because Connor kept marking in my parent's house. My parents have nice furniture, and you can imagine how happy my mom was. I told Demo to keep him on leash and watch him like a hawk. I was ready to kill when there was still fresh pee on the dining room chairs. Demo insisted that Connor had been on leash the whole time. Then we caught him... Connor was walking on three legs while he peed. :rolleyes2:
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby SisMorphine » February 3rd, 2006, 12:33 am

mnp13 wrote:Connor was walking on three legs while he peed. :rolleyes2:

HAHAHAHA!
Mine KNOWS he's not allowed to do it, so he'll only do it when no one is in the room (which makes it very difficult to correct, ya know?). He was fine when we lived at my parents house because he was an only dog.
Now at the new house there is a kennel run out of the basement so he is always smelling other dogs (even though they are never in his living quarters). Plus the daytime manager (who I call my daytime roommate since she has a room here and is here every weekday) has two Rotties, one of whom is a show female who is just coming out of heat now. So Wally's been trying to mark EVERYTHING!

Luckily Hoyden made Wally two Bad Boy Bellybands so he wears those probably 16 hours out of the day. Brat dog.

PS: Since we've moved into this house Wally has completely ruined two chairs (one an antique) and a set of drapes with his excessive marking. There are also telltale stains on the back of the couch, even though I've cleaned them a million times and used an upholstery washer on it. Damn dog!
"All changes, even the most longed for, have their melancholy; for what we leave behind us is a part of ourselves; we must die to one life before we can enter another." -Anatole France
SisMorphine
They're like service dogs gone wrong.
 
Posts: 9231

Postby Red » February 3rd, 2006, 12:39 am

Well, some people (like myself) choose to put those emotions aside to make the decision from a different perspective.


You? Okkkey.
No point discussing this farther, at least for me.
User avatar
Red
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 151
Location: South CA

Postby Kangas Mommy » February 3rd, 2006, 12:56 am

Yeah everyone has their own opinions with whats right and wrong. I think it is VERY WRONG. And i will still compare it with what Hitler did. Its screwed up. Now if the temperments are bad or there is a medical problem then maybe thats fine to do. But if they are just pet quality with no major problems i dont see the point. These people shouldnt breed. Give me a break. It makes me sick. What if these breeders have a child and god forbid there is something wrong and the child is less then perfect will that child be culled? :|
User avatar
Kangas Mommy
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 156
Location: PA

Postby mnp13 » February 3rd, 2006, 1:01 am

Red wrote:
Well, some people (like myself) choose to put those emotions aside to make the decision from a different perspective.


You? Okkkey.
No point discussing this farther, at least for me.


Um... I'm not quite sure how to take that comment. So, I'll clarify what you posted.

I can't kill spiders, and though I know that there are mice in my basement, I can't set mouse traps. emotionally, I have a hard time killing anything bigger than misquitos. However, from a 'step back and think about it logically' stand point, I understand the reasons for culling litters. I do not think it is an irresponsible thing for a breeder to do. I could never do it, but I don't have a problem with the people who do and won't condemn them for choosing to do it.

For me, it's like the 'abortion issue'. I could never do it, but I will not pass judgement people who do or try to deny them the right to do it. "Logic side" vs "emotional side"

I don't think I have been overly emotional in this discussion at all. I tried to keep emotion out of it actually, because emotionally I find killing just about anything horrifying.

Normally? Yup, I'm overly emotional, reactive and I tend to go off about things. I think I've gotten better about that though, aren't modern pharmacuticals amazing?
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17232
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby DemoDick » February 3rd, 2006, 1:19 am

What if these breeders have a child and god forbid there is something wrong and the child is less then perfect will that child be culled?


This illustrates my point. You are comparing human lives to the lives of animals, something I can't due due to personal beliefs. I feel that human life is intrinsically more valuable than animal life. Because of this, I don't think it is fair to compare ethnic cleansing with culling.

Demo Dick
"My first priority will be to reinstate the assault weapons ban PERMANENTLY as soon as I take office...I intend to work with Congress on a national no carry law, 1 gun a month purchase limits, and bans on all semi-automatic guns."-Barack Obama
"When in doubt, whip it out."-Nuge
User avatar
DemoDick
They Like to Fondle My Gun
 
Posts: 1910
Location: New York

Postby cheekymunkee » February 3rd, 2006, 1:44 am

aren't modern pharmacuticals amazing?


better living through science :prescription: :headbanger:
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

PreviousNext

Return to Pit Bull Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users