# Breeders VS. Puppy Mills - Whats the difference?



## HiSocietyPoodle (May 2, 2010)

What is the difference between a Breeder and a Puppy Mill?

In light of Charlie and Pinky's tragic story some of us would like to keep the momentum going and see how we can help to change awareness in someway. Maybe through a grassroots movement?

I have oodles of questions. And, I know there are many seasoned poodles owners and breeders that know a lot. So I thought I would post this thread so the rest can learn.

*What is the difference between a breeder (that has several 2 or 3 litters of puppy's for sale that lives in a rural setting like a farm) and puppy mill?*

How can we spot or report a puppy mill? And who do we report them to?

What is needed to stop this inhumane treatment of animals in mills?

Is there an agency that regulates breeding? Other than AKC?

Why does AKC allow it? 

I welcome your thoughts and ideas or other questions...


----------



## KalaMama (Nov 20, 2009)

.

*What is the difference between a breeder (that has several 2 or 3 litters of puppy's for sale that lives in a rural setting like a farm) and puppy mill?*
Number of pups they are having, condition of dogs and where they house the dogs, health testing present, what type of relationship do they want with their future owners, are they willing to sell to a broker/pet store**red flag, REFERENCES REFERENCES-need to follow up and see who is happy with the puppy, etc.
How can we spot or report a puppy mill? And who do we report them to?
?
What is needed to stop this inhumane treatment of animals in mills?
Good question.
Is there an agency that regulates breeding? Other than AKC?
Not that I am aware other than county legislation which limits number of dogs(differs all across the country)

Why does AKC allow it? 
1) Money
2) Hard to police this type of thing unless they form some hardfast rules(ie: no more than 2 litters a year per breeder or something of that sort)


----------



## Beach girl (Aug 5, 2010)

Dept. of Agriculture can get involved.

Condition and health of dogs, health testing, all those things that Kalamama says.

Strictly speaking, I don't think a high number of dogs automatically means "puppy mill," but in today's world, there is certainly a connection. I think of the famous British kennels of the late 1800's and early part of the 1900's. Many of those people had so many dogs they had kennel assistants and on-call vets and similar support. They were very often quite wealthy, and put their time and money into their beloved dogs. They were very serious about breeding, and we have them to thank for our wonderful dogs of today.

They could manage 50 dogs, or whatever number, because they had the space, time, money and help available to them to do it. In today's world, most people cannot take care of more than a much smaller number than that, if they are doing it all themselves. 

In theory, I think there COULD be a place for commercial breeders. In practice, though, most outfits with a large number of dogs are not taking care of them properly and not breeding for the betterment of the breed. They are breeding for the people who want to spend $200 - $500 for a particular breed for a pet for their family and don't want to get a mixed breed from a shelter.

If that's what fits the family budget, I don't blame them for still wanting a particular breed, and not being able to justify spending $1,000 or more for a dog from a good breeder.

It goes round and round. Puppy mills exist because they turn out enough acceptable dogs that people will buy them and be happy enough with them.


----------



## HiSocietyPoodle (May 2, 2010)

I just went to the Dept. of Agriculture web site and I can't find much about domestic animals.

Who would we approach in Washington? And could we make a difference?


----------



## HiSocietyPoodle (May 2, 2010)

*Stop Puppy Mills PetitionOnline*

I just found a Petition Online that is collecting signatures. I don't know if its a scam or what they are doing with the signatures of over 4,000 names.

CHECK IT OUT http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/280/310/085/

Target: Robert Aderholt, U.S. House Congressional Representative, Congress
Sponsored by: Emily Willen

I also found this site in CANADA. shutdownpuppymills.com/


----------



## Harley_chik (Nov 7, 2008)

AKC DOES NOT REGULATE BREEDING! Most of these puppymill dogs are now being registered w/ puppymill registries anyway (Continental KC, APRI, Universal KC, etc). Why pay $25 per litter when the puppymill registries give you everything for free? The USDA is charge of regulating, inspecting and licensing "commercial breeders" (puppymills). Lord knows why it is left to the dept of Ag. As I've said before, we don't eat dogs, they aren't dairy animals, nor do they lay eggs. Why are dogs under the USDA's jurisdiction? (I've also recently found out that the USDA is in charge of licensing exotic animal owners, like those w/ big cats and bears. WTF!) 

The problem w/ legislation is that it is a very complicated issue. Number of breeding dogs and litters isn't an effective way to determine what's a puppymill. People who breed toy dogs can easily keep more that those w/ large dogs. I've never seen a law that says co-ownerships are exempt either. There is/was a proposed law in TX that stated any breeder w/ more than 11 breeding females will be licensed. Sounds reasonable on the surface, right? But any dog over 4 months is consider an adult. Say a Maltese breeder keeps 4 breeding females and two show prospects (females) and a smaller than average puppy that just needs extra TLC past the age of 4 months. If they have co owner ship agreements on 4 other females, whether they are show dogs, breeding dogs or females that just aren't spayed by 4 months, they now have to be licensed. What about a breeder that also handles dogs? If they have their own intact females over 4 months and keep any client dogs on their property for any amount of time, they are subject to licensing. Such licensing actually creates puppymills in that the dogs now must be kept in kennel buildings, not residential homes as loved companions, they must live on concrete w/ drainage systems or wire. 

I would never spay/neuter any dog at 4 months. Small breeds are often so small that anesthesia is a big risk at that age and I believe altering at 4 months can be detrimental to the growth of large breed dogs. So all this puppymill legislation does is put more breeders under the incompetent eye of the USDA, put more dogs in a bad situation (in a kennel instead of the house) and it creates the potential for a lot of dead toy breed puppies and large breed puppies w/ painful HD.

Someone recently said on another forum that "the people that will follow such laws are already doing things the right way (in this case often better) and those that are doing it wrong don't care if they are breaking laws or not." USDA inspectors are negligent in their duties, IMO many are paid off and it's not secret that they are on the side of the breeder, not the dogs and not the consumer. Puppymillers are smarter than you think too. They maintian separate properties under different names. They register dogs under various family member names. Put some dogs under their madian names or change company names ever so often (Wizard of Claws). They have lobbyists and play the struggling farmer card. In ag areas, politicians are not going to risk going after "puppy farmers" if it means upsetting the Cattle Growers Association or other AG groups. 

To end on a positive note, what we need to do is to change people's views on pet ownership. (I think school programs teaching children that dogs aren't toys, they are lifetime commitement would be great.) We need to offer free/discount spay/neuter programs. The HSUS and PETA could bankroll this and still have plenty of money left over for their greedy execs. We could pass laws banning puppysales in petstores, parking lots and fleamarkets. The internet trade is a tricky one, but IMO if people can find a breeder online they can find out about puppymills online too. Puppymills are mentioned all over facebook and every pet forum I've ever belonged too.


----------



## SnorPuddel (Jul 8, 2010)

Personally I think legislation is the way to go.

People don't educate themselves about most things and they are impulse buyers which is why pet stores and the internet are perfect places. They can find something and buy it right away. Too many things are throwaway in our culture, animals, children, the earth..

There is something called PUPS Act (Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act) it is intended to close a loophole with internet sales.
The ASPCA, AVMA, Best Friends and yes HSUS support this legislation. The AKC is currently studying the impact of this measure. (No doubt to decide how much money they will lose in registrations, sorry, I think that the AKC needs to take a stand against millers).



Harley_chik said:


> The problem w/ legislation is that it is a very complicated issue. Number of breeding dogs and litters isn't an effective way to determine what's a puppymill. People who breed toy dogs can easily keep more that those w/ large dogs. I've never seen a law that says co-ownerships are exempt either. There is/was a proposed law in TX that stated any breeder w/ more than 11 breeding females will be licensed. Sounds reasonable on the surface, right? But any dog over 4 months is consider an adult. Say a Maltese breeder keeps 4 breeding females and two show prospects (females) and a smaller than average puppy that just needs extra TLC past the age of 4 months. If they have co owner ship agreements on 4 other females, whether they are show dogs, breeding dogs or females that just aren't spayed by 4 months, they now have to be licensed. What about a breeder that also handles dogs? If they have their own intact females over 4 months and keep any client dogs on their property for any amount of time, they are subject to licensing. Such licensing actually creates puppymills in that the dogs now must be kept in kennel buildings, not residential homes as loved companions, they must live on concrete w/ drainage systems or wire.


I have not seen legislation that requires dogs to live on concrete, but then again I have not ready legislation for all the states. I have a few that I focus on.
The AWA certainly doesn't require that.



Harley_chik said:


> .
> Someone recently said on another forum that "the people that will follow such laws are already doing things the right way (in this case often better) and those that are doing it wrong don't care if they are breaking laws or not." USDA inspectors are negligent in their duties, IMO many are paid off and it's not secret that they are on the side of the breeder, not the dogs and not the consumer. Puppymillers are smarter than you think too. They maintian separate properties under different names. They register dogs under various family member names. Put some dogs under their madian names or change company names ever so often (Wizard of Claws). They have lobbyists and play the struggling farmer card. In ag areas, politicians are not going to risk going after "puppy farmers" if it means upsetting the Cattle Growers Association or other AG groups.


I agree USDA is negligent if you click on the link to the AVMA posted above you will see what they have to say on the inspectors. The USDA also does not have enough inspectors. I have to say that I am disappointed in the AKC, they don't support any legislation for animal welfare, they say they do, but in essence they don't. Patti Strand is a big reason for that. 

Here is a link to Best Friends Puppy Mill Legislation for various states and federal


----------



## SnorPuddel (Jul 8, 2010)

HiSocietyPoodle said:


> I just found a Petition Online that is collecting signatures. I don't know if its a scam or what they are doing with the signatures of over 4,000 names.
> 
> CHECK IT OUT http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/280/310/085/
> 
> ...


The most important thing to remember when emailing or writing your representatives is that if you are using a form letter, personalize it, don't let it be just another form letter.


----------

