There has been much written in the animal rights community, alleging that no one should buy a dog, or any other pet, from any breeder, for any reason. All dogs should come from rescue, or a shelter, never someone who deliberately bred it. The mindset behind this is that if you buy a dog, instead of adopting from the shelter, then some dog in some shelter is going to be put to death because of that decision. Also, that buying from a breeder supports 'an industry founded on abuse!' and other such anti-breeder sentiments. In the world of the animal rights activist, of course, all breeders are evil, money grubbing pariahs who prostitute their poor animals for filthy money. Every last one of us. None of us are stewards of valuable bloodlines, none of us love our dogs and pay for the most up to date and expensive feed and vet care for our pets, none of us spend all our leisure hours playing with those pets or taking them to various performance events so they can play and be dogs and do what they were born to do, none of us live with our beloved dogs on our couches, no. We are all filthy 'puppy mills' who care NOTHING about the dogs and only about money, and living with a breeder is the worst possible life any poor pet can lead. It does not matter how many we breed or how few, or even what kind of facilities or training regimen or lifestyle our dogs lead; if we are breeding at all, we are The Problem. Not only is that a ridiculous position to take, it flies in the face of all logic. However, this is becoming increasingly widespread as bumper sticker philosophy, and a lot of 'animal lovers' who do not really understand the basics of this credo, and who think that rescue is a noble calling, are passing this around as if it were self-evident instead of wrong-headed, feel-good propaganda. Not only is this a blatant attempt to 'guilt' people into going to the shelter rather than to a nasty breeder if they want a pet, it is a vicious slander of people who have spent their lives (and several fortunes) doing their very best to create beautiful, healthy puppies for families to love. It promotes the idea that families are better off to settle for what they can find from other's castoffs at the shelter, rather than finding a breeder who has carefully and meticulously created a perfect puppy to fit their lifestyle. This concept completely overlooks many of the very obvious, and dangerous pitfalls, in making such a decision, and this goes beyond merely being an internet stone throwing contest. I want to talk about many of those pitfalls here, because behind the beautiful idea of "give that poor shelter dog a chance!" lurks the truth that there is a huge difference between deciding to take a shelter dog home while being fully cognizant of the downsides, vs being guilted into going to the shelter because of pressure from friends and the media, when you really want or need something more than a pig in a poke.
One of the arguments to send people to rescue is that breeders over-price puppies, and that it is a lot less expensive to get a dog from the shelter or a rescue. Actually, that is often untrue; I see dogs on shelter and rescue sites daily whose adoption fees are FAR more than I charge for a companion puppy. There is NO difference to the consumer, price wise, 'adopting' vs buying from a reputable breeder, whether that be a high quality commercial producer or a small time specialty breeder like myself. The 'adoption fees' include the required neutering (breeding is evil, exploitative and cruel, you know) shots at outrageous prices, and often various 'health costs' from worming or flea treatment, skin diseases, ear mites, and the list goes on. Depending on the source, the medical costs can be anywhere from reasonable to high, but are often pretty inflated; and there is a general cost for the fostering written in as well so that by the time you take your new 'adopted' puppy home, you have spent as much as if you came to a top show breeder to buy a pet quality puppy. And the only papers you will get are not ones you want to keep. ;o)
Another argument is that puppies from breeders are all 'unhealthy.' This is actually almost funny, if it were not so sad, and so untrue. The basis of this belief is that there are certain illnesses that seem to plague some breeds more than others, and the story from the AR community is that this is because breeders are just cranking out unhealthy puppies for money. But the real truth of the issue is, the only reason anyone is aware that a certain breed has a health issue is because the breeders and their vets track these things in order to combat them. How do we know the incidence of, say, hip dysplasia in German Shepherd Dogs, and why do we know it is improving? Because the dogs are being screened by caring breeders who want to produce healthier puppies. Without those breeders presenting their prospective parents for testing, no one would know how many in the breed had a problem, or how to go about fixing it. And no one spends the money to track these issues in the mixed breed pet owning community. It is widely believed that mutts are generally healthier, since there are no exhaustive lists of health concerns that follow mixed breeds; but this is a silly myth. Anyone who has spent any time in a vet office can tell you that there are plenty of mixed breeds suffering from the exact same problems as their fancier cousins. Some of these issues are based on general body type, such as hip dysplasia which seems to affect large breeds (and large mutts!) or patellar issues that plague the toy breeds (and small mutts!) Others are based on inheritance, but mixed breeds inherit just as many negative genes as purebreds, it is just that no one tracks them for the incidence the same way that purebreds can be tracked. And sometimes, mixed breeds inherit several different issues from their various ancestors. The truth of the matter is, at least the majority of breeders are aware of potential problems in their breeds and are working diligently to confront and eradicate them. For the buyer, that means a lot.
The pup from the breeder and the pup from the shelter may look alike, on the surface; both are cute and cuddly, both are worthy of a loving home. The difference, though, is pretty telling. At the shelter, you get a dog in a cage, parentage usually unknown, health issues if any of said parents also unknown, health testing at all of those parents pretty unlikely. You have no idea what kind of temperament the parents had, no idea what kind of socialization or enrichment the puppies got as weanlings, and there is seldom a really decent screening process. Oh, they screen, but not for the sorts of things that breeders look for; they want to know if the prospective owners are gainfully employed and how much they make, do they have a fenced yard, do they own other animals (usually considered a bad thing) and are any of them intact (almost always a bad thing.) They do screen for things of that nature, but there are a lot of intangibles that get glossed over if you don't really know the dogs you are placing as individuals. Many shelter personnel are neither trained nor qualified to figure out which pup/older dog would be the best fit for younger kids vs pre teens, which dog/breed works better in a high energy household as opposed to an elderly couple, etc. They are working under a lot of limitations because they just don't KNOW; often they have no real idea how big they will even grow up to be much less anything else, and their only observation of these animals has been in a completely unnatural, stilted and highly stressed environment that can make good dogs look bad and bad dogs 'lock down' and seem fine right up until they blow... Health guarantees? Temperament guarantees? Yeah right. You bought it, (excuse me-*adopted* it) you own it, health and temperament issues and all. If the pup/dog develops serious health or temperament issues, they will direct you to the vet or a good trainer, and offer you good luck. Oh, you can return it, but you will not get a replacement for that several hundred dollar 'adoption' fee, you will get attitude for being a 'bad owner' for returning a dog that didn't work out, often for reasons beyond YOUR control. And, in a few cases, overburdened shelters or rescues may 'gloss over' the bad points to try and get more animals moved through the system. Too many animals coming through the doors means they will not be able to keep them long enough to catch the telltale signs of a problem, assuming they are experienced enough to see it. This is where you get the horror stories about kids savaged and etc. I am not demonizing rescues or shelters here, I have been engaged in rescue for many years, and I have seen some very well run shelters who would never do such a thing, and I'd say they outnumber the bad ones. But, it is undeniable that shelters and rescues are working with a handicap when trying to make any kind of predictions about what you can expect, long term, from adopted dogs.
A breeder will have a record of health testing on the parents usually for several generations, and a pedigree that shows what those dogs were good for. This is sort of important if you are getting a dog for a special purpose, such as herding livestock on your ranch or working as a police or search-and-rescue canine, or a service dog for the handicapped. Pedigrees track more than parentage; they show a lineage of talent behind your puppy, giving you a good idea what you can expect. The breeder who delivered and sat over these puppies for weeks has socialized those puppies and has a pretty good idea, after several weeks, how best to fit those pups to prospective homes; so we don't waste the time of an elderly couple sending them the hyperactive overacheiver; we send that one to the high end performance trainer and put the sweet, quiet one with the retiree. Health and temperament guarantees are offered by most breeders, which gives the prospective owner genuine remedies if things do not work out. Because it is in the best interests of all concerned, the breeder tries very hard to make sure these arrangements are beneficial to all concerned, because first of all they are a lot more involved with their puppies from the beginning so they are more emotionally invested in wanting the pups to be happy, and there is also the issue of (in the best cases) wanting the new owners to be happy with their new pup so they will love it and give it the best of everything, and (lesser case but still valid) they don't want to see it come back through the door in 18 months because the people are unhappy so they are going to do the front work to see that does not happen. This is where those intangibles of time spent socializing and enriching these pups, and sorting and screening homes to make sure they are paired properly, really makes a difference.
Yes, it is also true that just like shelters and rescues, there are also low end breeders who breed more than they can reasonably manage and who will therefore be less likely to 'screen' beyond whether or not the check will clear. But, as in the case of shelters, the good ones far outnumber the bad ones, it is just that the bad ones get all the press. This is pretty much true of most things in life, actually, but in recent years the ARAs, and especially H$U$ have seized on sensationalizing every single 'bad one' totally out of proportion to reality, presenting each as 'typical' of breeders in general. Of course, each such 'puppy mill bust' comes with a camera crew and a pre-packaged rollout of begging for donations to 'help us with this crisis.' All of this is arranged far in advance of the actual bust; does nobody ever realize just what this means? This is a BUSINESS, people. (Remember Katrina? Remember the millions of dollars in donations to 'help Katrina victims' that H$U$ *still* has not accounted for? Uh huh. Business as usual for those folks.) Sad faces of puppies and kitties will make people open their wallets even faster than sad faces of hungry children; sick but true. As far as that goes, more recently this has escalated to hitting breeders that are NOT doing anything wrong; frankly because there are not enough 'bad guys' out there to keep the 'problem' of 'puppy mills' inflated to the level of a 'crisis' they can sell to the public, to keep the money rolling in consistently. (Now, where have we seen that before, even recently as a matter of fact? *coughcough*MFA*cough*) I wonder where they learned such tactics? Wonder no more; the ARAs teach this stuff in seminars. Incidentally, those seminars that teach terrorist tactics to animal activists? Those are paid for by, you guessed it, your donations to organizations like H$U$ and PeTA, who run flashy ads with heart-wrenching photos of abused and neglected puppies and kittens to get you to part with your green. If you ever wondered what they use that money for, or had some vague thought that they supported animal shelters and helped animals in need, wonder no more. Your donations do not go to provide more care or feeding for a single needy animal; instead they are funneled to cushy pension plans and lobbying to make animal breeding illegal, and yes, those seminars where they teach people how to infiltrate local animal control and city councils, or how to disrupt animal training events, or writing petitions to stop hunting and fishing in your state.
The POINT here is, adopting dogs is a noble calling. I do not want people to take away from my comments that rescues and shelters are bad, or that adopting a dog is always a poor choice. I have done rescue and re-homing for the past 20 years; if I did not believe in the process, I would not be engaged in it myself. Many rescues do a very good job, and even from a breeder you can get a pup with issues. It is more a matter of weighing options, and a rescue dog is often a win/win for the dog and the new home. I also do not want to pick on rescue workers here, they have a tough enough time. It is hard work, from people dedicated to taking animals that have not had the best breaks in life, and trying to turn things around for them. And adoption works; there are literally millions of dogs that have been saved from euthanasia who are presently making their owners very happy.
BUT, there are many situations where an adoption should not be the first choice, and it certainly should never be presented as the only choice. Pretending that buying puppies from whatever outlet is inherently wrong and bad, (whether that be a breeder, or pet store, or your neighbor,) is irresponsible and wrong headed. The same arguments that apply to pet store puppies as far as socialization and etc., apply to shelter dogs as well; and as others have stated, most pet shop pups get a lot more handling once they get to that pet store, than the majority of shelter or rescue dogs. And often they arrive at that pet store too young, before they really should have been taken from their dams which is a sign of irresponsibility on the breeder's part on one end, but at the same time if they are just cranking out pups for cash it's probably for the best to get the pups out of the environment sooner anyway. They are not going to benefit from a longer stay if they have been yanked off their dams to make her dry up sooner, and are not being enriched anyway. At least in the pet store they will get plenty of handling and affection. Even in an ideal shelter or foster situation, they are seldom the entire focus of the rescue personnel, while pet shop puppies (and kittens) are the belles of the ball and the undisputed biggest attention getters. I worked for a pet store when I was a kid, it was one of my first jobs as a matter of fact, and I learned a LOT from that facility, not all of it bad. The pups were kept very clean, they were taken out and worked with all day, we watched them carefully to make sure they were not wallered to death and that they got plenty of time to rest. People bitch about 'spur of the moment purchases' but the simple fact is that a lot of people do that anyway, that is not the shop's fault and in the absence of a pet store these same idiots will be buying pups from ads in the newspaper. Which is also not always a bad thing. Like all things in life, making a decision that will impact your life for maybe as much as 20 years needs more thought and preparation than buying a pair of shoes. But at the same time, everyone is on a learning curve, and sometimes those people with pups in the paper are nice folks with decent pets that were gleefully and delightedly raised in their kitchens, given much love and support, and cradled in one child's lap after another as they grew. It is unfair and actually unreasonable to label those puppies categorically 'undesirable' because their owners are not as accomplished or knowledgeable as some other people.
Bottom line is that the concept that puppies should only ever come from a shelter or rescue is ridiculous, and condemning pet stores on generalized criticisms that actually apply equally as well to shelters themselves is kind of an oxymoron. And, implying that all breeders, or even commercial breeders are 'puppy mills' is BS to start off with, it is demonizing people who work very hard without a shred of fairness to the accusation. It is roughly equivalent to attacking all car dealerships as 'disreputable' businesses that ought to all be shut down, because everyone has a story about some used car they bought that blew up once it left the parking lot. It's a load of crap.
