Support Responsible Breeders

Support Professional
Responsible Pet Breeders

The Backyard Breeder Fallacy

by Ms. Jade, TheDogPress Legislative Reporter

I own purebred dogs. Once a year or so I breed a litter from DNA profiled
champion stock. For that, I will never apologize as I truly have the best interest
of my chosen breed foremost in my mind. Am I an elitist? You betcha!
Would I cringe if you went so far as to call me a dog Nazi? No. Serious
breeders mate dogs of known background in order to reduce the chances of
congenital defects and predict with greater accuracy the positive outcome of a
planned litter of puppies. Therefore I probably seem like an unlikely advocate
for the guy advertising puppies in the local newspaper. However, I am also a
civil libertarian. And I won't apologize for that either.

Proposed, pending and contested legislation around the United States and
abroad that is aimed at restricting our property rights by targeting animal
reproduction has become rampant at every level of government. Forced spay
and neuter, cost prohibitive licenses for unaltered dogs and breeding permits,
micro chipping of our animals with their information (and ours) in government
data bases, warrant-less inspection of our property, arbitrary limits on the
number of animals we can responsibly care for and mandatory husbandry
practices are some of the ways in which dog owners are being relieved of their
civil rights.

While our agrarian forefathers did not specifically guarantee us the right to
own and breed animals, they did guarantee us the right to be treated equally
under the law, the right to own property, the right to be free from warrant-less
search and seizure of that property, the right to due process and the right to
commerce. With no respect for our Constitution, animal rights supporters are
working hard to relieve us of these rights by packaging restrictive legislation in a
way that is not only palatable to dog owners, even some breeders, but
misleadingly leaves them with the impression that they have supported
something beneficial. Far too many animal owners and welfare advocates are
buying into it in one area or another.

Divide and conquer. By creating stereotypes and labels, like “puppy mill” and
“backyard breeder” and attaching a stigma to those labels, the animal rights
movement is trying to disgrace the act of breeding animals. And they're doing a
great job. The media has been flooded with images of dogs being raised in
cages, in filth, in neglect. Sad faces of shelter animals behind prison bars on
“death row”. Images intended to produce an emotional response instead of an
intellectual one. And don't forget the staggering statistics.

It's not a secret that animal rights mean no more domestic animals. It's in their
mission statements. HSUS president Wayne Pacelle brags that “We have no
ethical obligation to preserve the different breeds of livestock produced
through selective breeding. One generation and out. We have no problem with
the extinction of domestic animals. They are the creations of human selective
breeding”. Allow me to translate, no animal breeding means no more animals.
Period. And while the general public cannot be sold on such a radical concept,
it's been surprisingly easy to sell them on the concept of ever tightening
restrictions. Although united in our love of domestic dogs, slick marketing by
the enemy has created infighting. Breeders both private and commercial,
rescuers, shelter staff, animal control, dog show exhibitors and pet owners are
cleverly being turned against one another to forward the animal rights agenda.
Each believing that their point of view is the only valid one and everyone else's
civil rights no longer matter.

Yes, I too personally find those images disturbing. They are the product of
gross human negligence and irresponsibility. I love animals, I have been a
shelter volunteer, and I believe in animal welfare but I am also a realist. Things
are rarely what they appear on the surface. In order to end the animal surplus
and related suffering, I want to get to the actual cause, to prevent the illness
instead of treating the symptoms, so to speak.

The demand for a product (puppies, for example) is driven by the consumer.
It's a simple case of supply and demand in a free market economy. Don't
blame the seller for being an opportunist. It's only human nature flourishing in
what is still a mostly democratic society. An uneducated consumer has every
right to purchase an inferior product and suffer the consequences. Just as the
seller has every right to promote the benefits their product, in order to
influence the decisions of the consumer. If breed purists and elitists like me are
outraged at breeders who turn a profit by selling what we consider to be an
inferior product, then we must only blame ourselves for failing to educate the
buyers.

Ignore the propaganda; dog breeding is not the cause of shelter
overpopulation. Animals end up in shelters for a myriad of reasons. Behavior
problems that result from a lack of training and proper socialization along with
normal breed characteristics that the owner finds unacceptable top the list.
Owner death, job transfer/move, landlord/rental restrictions, insurance
discrimination, financial trouble and the inability to comply with escalating pet
ownership restrictions also contribute to the problem. The system is designed
to perpetuate it.

We live in a disposable society. As long as domestic animals are viewed as a
short term convenience, instead of a serious long term commitment then
change is unlikely. The problem is one of perspective, information and
education. Pointing fingers at each other is cowardly and counterproductive.

According to a 2005 article in the HSUS magazine All Animals, 75% of the
shelter population is comprised of mongrels. Now I'm no math wizard, but I
can extrapolate that only 25% must therefore be purebred animals. If this is
true, then random bred dogs are the real cause of shelter overpopulation, not
“puppy mills”, breed enthusiasts or “backyard breeders” of purebred dogs. Yet
this same HSUS article praises the mongrel as superior because of its' larger
gene pool. One that may very well be polluted with unknown genetic defects.
They even go so far as to market them as a “designer” product. Sort of a
haute couture, one of a kind canine fashion accessory.

Now, it occurs to me that if you truly want to reduce the animal shelter
population in a meaningful and dramatic way, than you should advocate for
the elimination of the mongrel, through mandatory spay and neuter of random
bred dogs with unknown ancestry. (See, I am a dog Nazi!) Most dog breeders
know that you must have a firm grasp of the genetic past, in order to improve
the genetic future of your line. Many of the minority purebred animals that
end up in the local shelter may not have a known origin either, and are
therefore not an ethical choice for perpetuation of their breed. The same
“hybrid vigor” so highly touted in the mongrel is just as easily achieved by
crossing healthy purebreds of known ancestry to create new breeds. Man has
done so since the beginning of domesticated dog breeding and whatever we
fancy, that breed was created by this process.

The beauty of purebred dogs is that there is something to appeal to almost
anyone. I don't have to agree with your choice but I must respect your right to
make it. I'm not going to advise that consumers rush out and purchase a
Puggle, Labradoodle, or Cockapoo, anymore than I would suggest that
everyone should select my preferred breed. (Not everyone deserves one!)
Whether these designer hybrids stand the test of time or fade out with other
trends is not for me to say. Freedom of choice means the freedom to make
the wrong choice, and the freedom to make better choices in the future.

Am I a “backyard breeder”? Well, by technical definition I guess I am. I have
also been a front yard breeder, a living room breeder and a cab of my motor
home on the way to the dog show breeder. If that makes me a villain, then the
animal rights lunatics and the terrorists who support their ideology win. But if
you become an independent thinker, then freedom wins. We all win.

Ms. Jade

Please understand that I am NOT at all supporting Sub-Standard Breeders
or Inhumane or Irresponsible Animal Owners. All Dogs & Livings things
deserve the very BEST care available. However, I do not believe that
organisations should be able to Raid/steal seize/take other persons property
to acquire financial, personal or media benefits to do these Illegal actions.
Every pet Owner must provide for their Pets & not harm them in ANY way.
Unfortunately Good, Professional, Responsible, Dedicated, Trustworthy &
Upstanding Owners/Breeders are being targeted by different Organizations
so that they may obtain more animals for them to exploit for their gain. I
am very displeased to see this kind of ROBBERY going on within America
today. I do believe that stray animals should be altered & found forever
homes. No animal should EVER be KILLED because "THEIR TIME has
RUN OUT". I do not believe that organizations should Charge "Adoption
Fees" (another term for SALE PRICE) when they are getting MILLIONS of
dollars in donations to provide these services while their personal
earnings/wages are More than standard wages. PLEASE watch a few of the
video links below to see the lies & deceitful ways of PETA, HSUS, Best
Friends, SPSCA's and many more organizations that are targeting Pet
owners, Professional Animal Owners & Business Persons. They want to see
Pure Breed animals die out & for the human race to not be able to pick and
choose a Quality, Healthy, Pure Breed Pet that has Years of Health History
& A Pedigree to Back it up. Not everyone wants a stray/mutt that NO ONE
knows anything about or that someone else discarded due to a UNKNOWN
REASON. PLEAE DO NOT EVER take a pet to a shelter!! More than 80%
of ALL shelter animals are videoed, photographed & exploited for the
media & to request aditional "donations" to only be KILLED in the end.

Cruelty to Owners
Part 1

Cruelty to Owners
Part 2