Although there may be instances where the internet is the only choice due to rarity or distance, I would propose that the best way to choose a puppy is to let them choose you. If one cannot do that, then I guess C'est la vie.
Back in 1994, Gen. Missy "chose" us at a animal sanctuary. While other dogs were busy going bezerko in our presence, she just looked us in the eyes, walked on over, and the connection was made.
In 2004, Gen. Gretchen "chose" us, emerging from a pack of wild little GSD puppies on our breeders living room floor to claim us as her own.
Walter & Garland - Camp Canine caretakers
Gen. Gretchen - 9 y.o. GSD - Special Forces/Seal/DOTL Cloudbusters
Gen. Missy - GSD/Aussie - Joined Special Forces/DOTL Rainbow Division, June 11,2006
Miss Inga - 3 month old GSD. Still a civilian at this point.
dturm wrote: I wondered about the breeders, but if four is the minimum number of breeding animals it should only impact the larger breeding operations. If I read this right, it's not new regulation (the law has been on the books since 1966) it's just updating and applying it to modern situations. Due to new technology and sales that never were able to happen this way before the internet there have been loopholes exploited by some individuals.
Hopefully - this removes the perceived line between "breeder" and "puppy mill"?? The perceived line being that breeders breed good dogs while puppy mills don't. But there's a HUGE warehouse operation in MO for Aussies that blows my mind - I think they have over a hundred dogs for sale last time I looked?? Maybe those dogs are all clean and healthy - still doesn't make the place a purveyor of nicely-socialized dogs.....
Hopefully - this removes the perceived line between "breeder" and "puppy mill"?? The perceived line being that breeders breed good dogs while puppy mills don't. But there's a HUGE warehouse operation in MO for Aussies that blows my mind - I think they have over a hundred dogs for sale last time I looked?? Maybe those dogs are all clean and healthy - still doesn't make the place a purveyor of nicely-socialized dogs.....
If it's in Missouri and they have that many dogs for sale, chances are very good that it's a puppy mill. There are even more mill operations in Missouri than there are here in Oklahoma and that's saying something.
Cat (Jim just reads the forum once in a while)
Our toys:
2003 Damon Ultrasport 3873
(picture on profile)
Boat = ProCraft Fish & Ski
Working our way toward retirement...wishing it was soon.
So when has the Federal Govt been really good at regulating anything? I guess it will make some folks feel better but that is exactly what these rules are intended for.
fla-gypsy wrote: So when has the Federal Govt been really good at regulating anything? I guess it will make some folks feel better but that is exactly what these rules are intended for.
Pretty cynical point of view, but I understand the sentiment. The only way I'd respond is that what we're doing isn't working. Trying something else is a good move, IMO. If it doesn't work, costs too much, creates too many complications then rework it.
Doug & Sandy
Jill (11yr old Golden)& Charmin (16 yr old something)
Henry NOW a camping cat
2008 Southwind
2009 Honda CRV
fla-gypsy wrote: So when has the Federal Govt been really good at regulating anything? I guess it will make some folks feel better but that is exactly what these rules are intended for.
Pretty cynical point of view, but I understand the sentiment. The only way I'd respond is that what we're doing isn't working. Trying something else is a good move, IMO. If it doesn't work, costs too much, creates too many complications then rework it.
Cynical ? Yes, very! But we are talking about the Federal Govt.
fla-gypsy wrote: So when has the Federal Govt been really good at regulating anything? I guess it will make some folks feel better but that is exactly what these rules are intended for.
Pretty cynical point of view, but I understand the sentiment. The only way I'd respond is that what we're doing isn't working. Trying something else is a good move, IMO. If it doesn't work, costs too much, creates too many complications then rework it.
Cynical ? Yes, very! But we are talking about the Federal Govt.
I tend to agree that it is just some more government control. The thing that irritates me is that there are a lot of dogs in shelters. They need homes. Just try and get one of those dogs. I saw an ACD at a shelter a few hundred miles away. I called and said I would drive over and look. They told me, sorry that dog is being transported tomorrow to a new shelter a couple of more hundred miles away. I told them I would drive there and meet them at that shelter. NOPE! Dog is then being transported to a Denver, CO shelter. However, they would take a donation. Just sounded like they didn't want people even getting their dogs. The shelters are just running a puppy business their selves on the backs of dogs that need homes. We live on a huge ranch where a dog can run, play and work. Not like I live in a one bedroom apartment in a big city and will leave the dog in a crate all day.
WyoTraveler wrote: The shelters are just running a puppy business their selves on the backs of dogs that need homes. We live on a huge ranch where a dog can run, play and work. Not like I live in a one bedroom apartment in a big city and will leave the dog in a crate all day.
Just because you had an unfavorable experience with a single shelter does not make shelters, as a whole, bad. Factory animal farms, be they raising meat animals or pets, have a horrible, nasty history of abusing the animals in their care, neglecting them, having the females pop out offspring nonstop without regard for their well-being, only caring about profit. Yes, there are shelters out there that are really hoarders posing as rescues, which is an entirely different story.
I, personlly would rather see people become educated on what makes a good breeder, and buy responsibly than have the governemnt intervene, but as long as there are Petlands and internet sales, clueless people will doom thousands of breeding dogs to a horrible "life".
Francesca Knowles wrote: I'd like to point out that the "Federal Gov't" is the Very Same Government that runs our highly regarded Military...
Not everything the Feds do in our names, at our direction, and with our consent is wrong.
I totally agree with this statement in that we have the best military on the planet and I am proud of what they do. We also have the most expensive military on the planet. I would remind you that this is the same govt that is supposed to secure our borders and stop the flow of illegal drugs in our society. Do we want them in the pet business too?
Online
Offline
