# What, in your opinion, is the bare minimum for a responsible breeder?



## BKLD (Apr 29, 2012)

A recent thread got me thinking. There is no black and white when it comes to breeding responsibly or irresponsibly, just a whole lot of gray area. But, there has to be some kind of minimum standard that puppy buyers hold their breeders to, and I'm curious as to what your standard is.

For me, a responsible breeder does at least three things. 1) Provides all necessary care. 2) Health tests breeding stock before any litters. 3) Keeps track of all puppy buyers and has contracts that a) controls breeding of the puppies, and b) requires that the puppies be returned to the breeder if in any event the owner can't take care of them anymore. 

To me, titling in any venue is also an important and preferred sign of a good breeder, but it is neither a sure sign of a responsible breeder nor is absence of titles necessarily a sign of a bad breeder. 

So, what are your opinions on this?


----------



## Tiny Poodles (Jun 20, 2013)

I think that absence of titles is a bad sign because if they are not successfully breeding for a purpose - either show or performance, by default they are breeding for money, and that can be the reason for all kinds of bad choices in their breeding program, from cutting corners on care to breeding dogs that have major health, temperament or conformation faults because they think they will produce good sellers such as a popular color etc. 
I would also look for a breeder who has been at it a long time or has a mentor who has been, because the longer they have been at it, the more time they have had to get it right!


----------



## BKLD (Apr 29, 2012)

While titling is preferred by me, and I personally wouldn't go to a breeder who didn't title their dogs in show, performance, or work, I don't think that it necessarily means that they're breeding for money when they don't title. I know of some small hobby breeders who do not title their dogs, but do everything else. But, I think I see your point. If they don't put in the effort there, what else are they skipping out on?

I do agree about finding a breeder who has been at it for years, or who is mentored by someone who has been at it for years.


----------



## Poodlebeguiled (May 27, 2013)

I want to know if the dogs the breeder breeds have the conformation and temperament to do the job they were selectively bred to do. So, show titles or working titles, (whatever is applicable to the breed) I want to know about. If I were getting a Borer Collie, for instance, I might run into a rancher who has bred these dogs for years and who uses them to work his ranch herding sheep. He may not show the dog or even earn titles. But if I see that his dogs are fit to do the job they were bred to do, have longevity and good health, physically and mentally able, then that would be enough for me because without those things in good order, the dog would likely break down at an early age and wouldn't be able to run all day long the way it should.

Reputation too, means a lot to me but I like to see it backed up even further with a look at longevity, health testing, etc if the above scenario isn't particularly evident. Titles in conformation, agility, tracking, obedience and such are good indicators also.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

BKLD said:


> For me, a responsible breeder does at least three things. 1) Provides all necessary care. 2) Health tests breeding stock before any litters. 3) Keeps track of all puppy buyers and has contracts that a) controls breeding of the puppies, and b) requires that the puppies be returned to the breeder if in any event the owner can't take care of them anymore.


I very strongly disagree with your point 3b. As a puppy buyer I would NEVER sign an agreement that would allow the breeder to claim ownership of my dogs if I was unable to care for them. I have made arrangements for what happens to my dogs if I can't care for them and my desires are spelled out in my will. Bob is NOT going back to his previous owner and Cammie is NOT going back to her breeder. For most of us, our dogs are the most important things in our lives. Imagine this: You are on your death bed. You have a good friend who has agreed to take your beloved dog. But if you signed a contract that REQUIRED you to return your dog to the breeder, then you don't even have the right to decide who gets your dog when you die. The dog should go back to the breeder. That's what you agreed to when you purchased the dog. In my opinion, it is crazy to agree to return your dog to the breeder, and it is totally unreasonable for a breeder to expect to retain this level of control. 

I do think that it is reasonable to expect that a breeder will help you rehome a dog and/or take the dog back if you wish to send the dog back.


----------



## BKLD (Apr 29, 2012)

Well Pepper, it's just my opinion. I adopted my Pyr mix knowing full and well that if in any event we can't keep her, she will go back to the rescue we adopted her from where they would find her a good home, and I feel that breeders should do the same. I feel that it's not expecting control so much as it is making sure that the dog doesn't end up in a shelter. I wouldn't buy from a breeder if I wasn't going to form a relationship with them, and if I didn't trust them to ensure that my dog was well taken care of if I died or was otherwise incapable of caring for them.


----------



## fuzzymom (Sep 19, 2013)

peppersb said:


> I very strongly disagree with your point 3b. As a puppy buyer I would NEVER sign an agreement that would allow the breeder to claim ownership of my dogs if I was unable to care for them. I have made arrangements for what happens to my dogs if I can't care for them and my desires are spelled out in my will. Bob is NOT going back to his previous owner and Cammie is NOT going back to her breeder. For most of us, our dogs are the most important things in our lives. Imagine this: You are on your death bed. You have a good friend who has agreed to take your beloved dog. But if you signed a contract that REQUIRED you to return your dog to the breeder, then you don't even have the right to decide who gets your dog when you die. The dog should go back to the breeder. That's what you agreed to when you purchased the dog. In my opinion, it is crazy to agree to return your dog to the breeder, and it is totally unreasonable for a breeder to expect to retain this level of control.
> 
> I do think that it is reasonable to expect that a breeder will help you rehome a dog and/or take the dog back if you wish to send the dog back.


I think the spirit of those contracts is to make sure that if you decide you don't want the dog anymore or can't take care of it the breeder will make sure it goes to a good home. I don't think most breeders would have an issue with you leaving your dogs to someone in your will that would love and care for them. In fact my breeder specifically said the contract didn't apply to family members. She just didn't wanted me selling Sage off to some stranger after she made the effort to ensure he went to a good home. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Poodlelvr (Mar 13, 2010)

When I bring a puppy into my home, I expect to be totally responsible for all their future care including finding another home if health or other problems happen. I do respect those breeders who will take their puppies back at any time, if I cannot provide. I do not want to be forced to hand my dog over to strangers, if I can find trusted people willing to provide a good home. We need to be to think this through.


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

peppersb said:


> I very strongly disagree with your point 3b. As a puppy buyer I would NEVER sign an agreement that would allow the breeder to claim ownership of my dogs if I was unable to care for them. I have made arrangements for what happens to my dogs if I can't care for them and my desires are spelled out in my will. Bob is NOT going back to his previous owner and Cammie is NOT going back to her breeder. For most of us, our dogs are the most important things in our lives. Imagine this: You are on your death bed. You have a good friend who has agreed to take your beloved dog. But if you signed a contract that REQUIRED you to return your dog to the breeder, then you don't even have the right to decide who gets your dog when you die. The dog should go back to the breeder. That's what you agreed to when you purchased the dog. In my opinion, it is crazy to agree to return your dog to the breeder, and it is totally unreasonable for a breeder to expect to retain this level of control.
> 
> I do think that it is reasonable to expect that a breeder will help you rehome a dog and/or take the dog back if you wish to send the dog back.


Wow!!! I am honestly very surprised to hear you say this. First right of refusal is as standard in the contract of a responsible breeder as is health tested parents and a health guarantee. I would not buy a puppy from a breeder who did not have this stipulation nor would I sell a puppy without the stipulation. It is the responsibility of the _breeder_ to ensure that each and every puppy bred by that breeder is in a loving, caring home for its entire life. If something completely unforseen happens, it is important that the breeder be in a position to protect that puppy. **This is, in my opinion, one of the key components of a responsible breeder.** And, since a trusting relationship is important between breeder and puppy buyer, the buyer's wishes for the puppy to go to a caring family member is an understandable and really quite ideal scenario. There are, sadly, far too many cases where an owner is suddenly unable to care for the dog and is desperately seeking a home for the dog, sometimes resorting to surrendering the dog to rescue. This is a saddening situation and it is unfortunate that that owner did not purchase the dog from a breeder who would take the puppy back to find him a loving home. The absence of this stipulation in a contract, in my opinion, is _extremely_ irresponsible.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

CharismaticMillie said:


> Wow!!! I am honestly very surprised to hear you say this. First right of refusal is as standard in the contract of a responsible breeder as is health tested parents and a health guarantee. I would not buy a puppy from a breeder who did not have this stipulation nor would I sell a puppy without the stipulation. It is the responsibility of the _breeder_ to ensure that each and every puppy bred by that breeder is in a loving, caring home for its entire life. If something completely unforseen happens, it is important that the breeder be in a position to protect that puppy. **This is, in my opinion, one of the key components of a responsible breeder.** And, since a trusting relationship is important between breeder and puppy buyer, the buyer's wishes for the puppy to go to a caring family member is an understandable and really quite ideal scenario. There are, sadly, far too many cases where an owner is suddenly unable to care for the dog and is desperately seeking a home for the dog, sometimes resorting to surrendering the dog to rescue. This is a saddening situation and it is unfortunate that that owner did not purchase the dog from a breeder who would take the puppy back to find him a loving home. The absence of this stipulation in a contract, in my opinion, is _extremely_ irresponsible.


I am aware that this is standard practice amongst breeders (although many will delete or change the clause if asked to by the buyer). It is not just standard practice of the very best breeders like you and other PF breeders. It is also a standard clause in the contracts of high volume breeders who keep their dogs in kennels (do you really want your dog to go back to that breeder?!???) and it is even standard and non-negotiable (!) in the contracts of rescues and shelters, even high-kill shelters. So if you get a dog from a shelter and can't keep him, you need to return him to the same shelter. Or that's what the contract says. I assume it is not usually enforced.

I know of one case where a dog was privately placed with an outcome that was very much to the benefit of everyone--the dog, the first owner and the second owner. The first owners loved the dog very much, but could not provide him with the exercise he needed. They never would have sent him back to the breeder. They were only willing to proceed with the placement because they met the new owner and spent a month of getting to know him with the dog visiting the new owner frequently. It was a very emotional decision to rehome that dog, but when they saw how happy their dog was with the new owner, they knew it was the right decision. It is now many years later and I am still in touch with both owners. The dog is doing very well with the new owner and the first owner now has cats. I strongly disagree with the idea that going back to the breeder is always the best decision. I don't even think that it is usually the best decision. 

As I said, I DO believe that a breeder should be willing to take a dog back, even contractually obligated to take a dog back. This would solve the problem that you mention of an owner that is desperately seeking a home for a dog. Sending a dog back to a breeder should always be an option. I just think that a dog owner should have the right to decide what happens to their own dogs. Poodles are very adoptable. If I ever had to place one of my dogs, my first choice would be a private placement where the dog goes directly from my home to the new home (perhaps with help from a breeder or rescue). Second choice might be the breeder or it might be poodle rescue (depending on the breeder and depending on the expertise and availability of the local poodle rescue). But I definitely think that poodle owners should be able to decide what happens to their dogs. I am not interested in sharing the right to control what happens to my dogs with the breeder or with anyone at all.

As a breeder (I am planning on breeding Cammie -- still waiting for her to come into heat), my buyers will be very aware that I am available to them throughout their dog's life and that I would be more than willing to take any dog that I bred back at any time. The owners will agree not to breed the dogs and will get limited registration, but other than that, they will have full ownership and have full rights to decide what happens to their dogs. They can take advantage of my offer to help, or not, as they choose.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

fuzzymom said:


> I think the spirit of those contracts is to make sure that if you decide you don't want the dog anymore or can't take care of it the breeder will make sure it goes to a good home. I don't think most breeders would have an issue with you leaving your dogs to someone in your will that would love and care for them. In fact my breeder specifically said the contract didn't apply to family members. She just didn't wanted me selling Sage off to some stranger after she made the effort to ensure he went to a good home.


I agree with you about the spirit of the contracts and I certainly think that most breeders would be perfectly happy with a private placement. But that's not what the contracts say. Most contracts say that you have to return the dog to the breeder or that you have to give the breeder a right of first refusal. That's what I object to.


----------



## Poodlebeguiled (May 27, 2013)

I found a reputable breeder. I checked him out, up and down and inside out. I got lots and lots of references, investigated everything I could about him and his dogs, current and past. He met me, we got to know each other enough that I had total trust in him and he in me. I asked him why he didn't ask me this question or that one and he told me he's been doing this for over 40 years and he can tell within a short time whether he's talking to someone he thinks is a responsible and good prospective puppy buyer. He watched me love on his 5 week old pups and must have seen something in my eyes, my demeanor and from what I told him about my history with dogs. 

That said, this breeder does no contract....highly irregular. You always hear that good breeders have good contracts. I'm very contract minded, very legal about things. lol. So, this was a bit weird for me at first. He says and I came to agree that if there's no trust, we shouldn't be doing this together in the first place. I was just going to get Matisse, but couldn't seem to tear myself away from Maurice so he sent me home with both and told me to show my daughter, decide and I could bring one back later that night. LOL. Needless to say what happened there.

He did mark the registration paper on Maurice to be limited but said he doesn't care what I do about neutering, he knows I wouldn't do anything stupid. 

I don't think he felt anything had to be spelled about regarding where the dogs would go should something happen to me. He must have figured, since he liked me, that I'd find a loving home for them in lieu of my being able to care for them. I just know...it's unspoken that he loves his dogs so much that he would take them back if there weren't anyone I could find for them. I know. He knows. And that's all there is. 

We also don't have a contract as far as him being a co owner. We discussed who pays for what for showing and whenever I want to be finished with that, he'll release that part of the thing. I've talked to several people in our handling class who have done the same thing and he's honest, reputable and I have no worries. He laughed when I was worried he'd want Matisse. He said, "I don't want your dog. hahahaha! I have enough dogs and I'm too old to take on anymore." He's a respected judge and he can't handle Matisse without being co owner by the rules. And he's going to handle him in most of the shows. He's also the president of the Puget Sound Poodle Club so he has his good reputation to maintain.

We are in constant contact. I take the handling classes he teaches, he lives 20 minutes from me. We get together by phone, email or see each other every week. He's a great guy and I love the way this is working. 

I wouldn't recommend going this route typically. But I felt this to be an exception.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

Poodlebeguiled -- Thanks for your post. I love that old-fashioned relationship way of doing business. I know another breeder who also works without contracts. She has a fabulous reputation and sells most of her puppies by word of mouth, mostly referrals from previous puppy buyers. She has in fact taken back at least two puppies and found new homes for them. She didn't need a contract to let her buyers know that she'd be there to help.

Sounds like you have found a wonderful breeder and established a great relationship with him.


----------



## Carley's Mom (Oct 30, 2011)

Carley and Stella's breeder requires all pups be returned to her if for any reason you need to re-home your dog. This is how I got Stella. She knew I would give her a great home, it was not about control, it was about protecting what she brought into this world. She did not re-sale her, I got her for free. The first owner, trusting the breeder brought her to me. I think that is a great thing. I don't think she would demand that the pup be returned, if she was convinced that the owner had a great home in mind for her dog. It is just to protect the dog.


----------



## Poodlebeguiled (May 27, 2013)

peppersb said:


> Poodlebeguiled -- Thanks for your post. I love that old-fashioned relationship way of doing business. I know another breeder who also works without contracts. She has a fabulous reputation and sells most of her puppies by word of mouth, mostly referrals from previous puppy buyers. She has in fact taken back at least two puppies and found new homes for them. She didn't need a contract to let her buyers know that she'd be there to help.
> 
> Sounds like you have found a wonderful breeder and established a great relationship with him.



Thank you Peppersb.

I already asked my daughter if she would take all my dogs if something happens to me. She would be thrilled to. And the reason I think she'd be the best person is that she is incredibly good with dogs _and_ children...adores all my dogs and when she gets married in the near future, she may not need to work so would be home. But even if she worked, she'd still do right by my dogs. She has the same philosophy about handling dogs that I do. (gee...I wonder why. lol) And knows a lot about behavior. She or my son would make a good, loving home. In fact, as much as I highly like my breeder and know he'd take good care of them and find them a good home, my first choice would be my daughter because she already knows them, they know her and she'd just be wonderful and so would her fiancé.

I think my breeder just _know_s that I wouldn't dump them into just anyone's lap or take them to a shelter. He sees me worry about them when the slightest thing is off. He's given me pills when I called him about Matisse's digestive difficulties. He told me about a terrific vet he and all those show people love. He is just so there when I need him.

My breeder of my Doberman was "reputable," had contracts and all, but when I emailed her later about his health issues, thinking she ought to know for her breeding program, I never heard a thing back. When he died and I emailed her, it was like she'd dropped off the face of the earth...was never there when I needed her. And she still has her website up so I am pretty sure nothing happened to her.


----------



## Tiny Poodles (Jun 20, 2013)

Poodlebeguiled said:


> I found a reputable breeder. I checked him out, up and down and inside out. I got lots and lots of references, investigated everything I could about him and his dogs, current and past. He met me, we got to know each other enough that I had total trust in him and he in me. I asked him why he didn't ask me this question or that one and he told me he's been doing this for over 40 years and he can tell within a short time whether he's talking to someone he thinks is a responsible and good prospective puppy buyer. He watched me love on his 5 week old pups and must have seen something in my eyes, my demeanor and from what I told him about my history with dogs.
> 
> That said, this breeder does no contract....highly irregular. You always hear that good breeders have good contracts. I'm very contract minded, very legal about things. lol. So, this was a bit weird for me at first. He says and I came to agree that if there's no trust, we shouldn't be doing this together in the first place. I was just going to get Matisse, but couldn't seem to tear myself away from Maurice so he sent me home with both and told me to show my daughter, decide and I could bring one back later that night. LOL. Needless to say what happened there.
> 
> ...


So true! My breeder, who has been at it some 50 years is the same - just good, old fashioned ethics and integrity, which I have seen proof of many times in the 15 years that I have known her.
It would be a shame if somebody new to poodles would write off breeders like this because they don't see the need to put their moral code in writing!


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

I do think that, for a variety of reasons, you do tend to see this a bit more with the long time breeders. And, I think that for those newer to breeding, having a contract that covers all of the bases as a safeguard to _protect the puppies_ is perhaps even more important than it is for the long time breeders.


----------



## BKLD (Apr 29, 2012)

Thanks for the input everyone! It's very interesting and quite informative too.

Personally, I would just rather see everything in writing, especially when I'm just starting out. I'm actually trusting of other people to the point of naivety, so I learned over time that the one that I really can't trust is myself. If I made a mistake and gave someone a puppy who was really not a good fit, I would legally be able to protect that puppy still. I wouldn't mind if they wanted to rehome the puppy with family or friends, but I would want to know about it, and I would want to be able to keep in touch with the new owners as well. It's not so much out of a want to control as it is a sense of responsibility for what you produce. 

I'm especially leery about co-ownership deals without a contract. There's just so much that can go wrong in my opinion.


----------



## Poodlebeguiled (May 27, 2013)

BKLD said:


> Thanks for the input everyone! It's very interesting and quite informative too.
> 
> Personally, I would just rather see everything in writing, especially when I'm just starting out. I'm actually trusting of other people to the point of naivety, so I learned over time that the one that I really can't trust is myself. If I made a mistake and gave someone a puppy who was really not a good fit, I would legally be able to protect that puppy still. I wouldn't mind if they wanted to rehome the puppy with family or friends, but I would want to know about it, and I would want to be able to keep in touch with the new owners as well. It's not so much out of a want to control as it is a sense of responsibility for what you produce.
> 
> *I'm especially leery about co-ownership deals without a contract. There's just so much that can go wrong in my opinion.*




I was leery too until I talked to about 7 or 8 people who are and/or have been in the past, in a co ownership deal with my breeder. It all looks like no big deal with him. He just wants to show my dog with me to get some more championships from his breeding to add to his enormous collection and to share in any future stud fees. He doesn't want to live with my dog and anytime I don't want to do it anymore, he doesn't mind. He says it's up to me...just if I want to do this hobby. And that's what I heard from these other people. Without a known history or his reputation, I wouldn't do it.


----------



## Ladyscarletthawk (Dec 6, 2011)

My bitch's breeder is one that does verbal contracts. Very trustworthy and sticks to her word. I feel that I am the same way, but I am not as trusting. I also know one cannot breed nor live without trust, so I only trust to a certain extent. A contract both protects me, the dogs, and new pet owner. I do not see that as being controlling only protecting ones investments and beloved dogs. If a breeder was good enough to buy from, and good enough to choose me, then they should be good enough to place my dog should I not be able to with someone of equal caliber. I know that my dog is in good hands! 
I was lucky to be chosen first.. I already had a toy poodle and proved I could care for coat. I was chosen to meet this woman, so she could teach me the ropes about dog shows.. I proved myself in the ring with a less than competitive bitch.. So much so I was chosen to keep and show my mini. I am grateful, but I feel that I am the exception, and not the rule. I do not feel that I am capable of choosing the right pet owner without a contract... Just in case


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## PoodleRick (Mar 18, 2013)

Poodlelvr said:


> When I bring a puppy into my home, I expect to be totally responsible for all their future care including finding another home if health or other problems happen. I do respect those breeders who will take their puppies back at any time, if I cannot provide. *I do not want to be forced to hand my dog over to strangers, if I can find trusted people willing to provide a good home.* We need to be to think this through.


I don't think the OP meant the breeder would come in and forceably take your dog. I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, the OP meant that if you can't take care of the dog for any reason, illness, finances or imminent death, AND can't find anybody else or any place else to take care of the dog THEN the breeder would be willing to take the dog back. Well that's how I read it.

Rick


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

PoodleRick said:


> I don't think the OP meant the breeder would come in and forceably take your dog. I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, the OP meant that if you can't take care of the dog for any reason, illness, finances or imminent death, AND can't find anybody else or any place else to take care of the dog THEN the breeder would be willing to take the dog back. Well that's how I read it.
> 
> Rick


Hi Rick -- I totally agree that that's how it should work. It seems only reasonable that a dog owner should be able to find a new home for their pet if and when the need to do so. But many contracts just say that the dog goes back to the breeder, rescue or shelter. They do NOT give the owner the right to find a new home for their dog. This clause had particularly tragic consequences in the case of Ellen DeGeneres and a puppy that she got from a shelter. When the dog didn't get along with her cats, Ellen gave the puppy to her hairdresser. The rescue (for reasons that I cannot understand) actually removed the dog from its new home, claiming that Ellen had violated the contract that she signed when she adopted the dog.


----------



## PoodleRick (Mar 18, 2013)

peppersb said:


> Hi Rick -- I totally agree that that's how it should work. It seems only reasonable that a dog owner should be able to find a new home for their pet if and when the need to do so. But many contracts just say that the dog goes back to the breeder, rescue or shelter. They do NOT give the owner the right to find a new home for their dog. This clause had particularly tragic consequences in the case of Ellen DeGeneres and a puppy that she got from a shelter. When the dog didn't get along with her cats, Ellen gave the puppy to her hairdresser. The rescue (for reasons that I cannot understand) actually removed the dog from its new home, claiming that Ellen had violated the contract that she signed when she adopted the dog.
> 
> Ellen Breaks Down and Cries Over Dog - YouTube


Well that's effed up then


----------



## Poodlebeguiled (May 27, 2013)

It is Rick. I think people should really read these contracts and not sign anything and everything that the breeder wants. In other words, talk things over. Before I found my breeder and I was talking to other breeders, I specifically mentioned my disapproval of neutering early or even at all and why I object and how I am responsible, bla bla bla. One breeder said, we'd talk about it. Another agreed with me about not doing an early neuter and we'd do something in the contract to make it fit. And then that bit about automatically going to the breeder if we kick the bucket before the dogs do. I brought that up and without exception, the ones I talked to seemed willing to adjust the verbiage since I explained that I had someone who would be a stupendous dog owner and would love my dogs... and that's my daughter or my son. If any would be adamant, I'd walk and find somebody that trusted me enough. If they trust you enough to give you a puppy, they ought to feel comfortable enough with your judgment. Poor Ellen.


----------



## PoodleRick (Mar 18, 2013)

Poodlebeguiled said:


> It is Rick. I think people should really read these contracts and not sign anything and everything that the breeder wants. In other words, talk things over. Before I found my breeder and I was talking to other breeders, I specifically mentioned my disapproval of neutering early or even at all and why I object and how I am responsible, bla bla bla. One breeder said, we'd talk about it. Another agreed with me about not doing an early neuter and we'd do something in the contract to make it fit. And then that bit about automatically going to the breeder if we kick the bucket before the dogs do. I brought that up and without exception, the ones I talked to seemed willing to adjust the verbiage since I explained that I had someone who would be a stupendous dog owner and would love my dogs... and that's my daughter or my son. If any would be adamant, I'd walk and find somebody that trusted me enough. If they trust you enough to give you a puppy, they ought to feel comfortable enough with your judgment. Poor Ellen.


Good advise.


----------



## Ladyscarletthawk (Dec 6, 2011)

I sympathize for Ellen and that family.. However she signed a contract, and chose to break it. I think it was morally wrong to take that dog away from that family. The rescue could have assessed the new family to see if they would make a good fit, and all would have been well. However Ellen did not discuss this with the rescue.. I think a lot of it had to do with her fame.. Just because your famous, does not mean you can do whatever you want.. I think she stepped on the rescues toes, and they did what was in their legal right to do. She says I guess I signed a piece of paper... Is that what you say about your show.. I guess I signed a piece of paper that says I have to do this show for x time lol. I really like Ellen but I think she's wrong... I would feel belittled if some celeb made a contract with me and broke it when it didn't suit them.. I would feel that they think they can take advantage because they are famous and I'm not... Just my thoughts on that.. If you don't like what a contract says, don't sign it.. If you didn't read it to understand thoroughly, then that's your problem. No one's going to hold your hand. I applaud that Ellen spent the money to try to make it work, and that she felt she found the right family. It's a shame it turned out that way.. I'm sure it was a nice family too


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Poodlebeguiled (May 27, 2013)

Ladyscarletthawk said:


> I sympathize for Ellen and that family.. However she signed a contract, and chose to break it. I think it was morally wrong to take that dog away from that family. The rescue could have assessed the new family to see if they would make a good fit, and all would have been well. However Ellen did not discuss this with the rescue.. I think a lot of it had to do with her fame.. Just because your famous, does not mean you can do whatever you want.. I think she stepped on the rescues toes, and they did what was in their legal right to do. She says I guess I signed a piece of paper... Is that what you say about your show.. I guess I signed a piece of paper that says I have to do this show for x time lol. I really like Ellen but I think she's wrong... I would feel belittled if some celeb made a contract with me and broke it when it didn't suit them.. I would feel that they think they can take advantage because they are famous and I'm not... Just my thoughts on that.. If you don't like what a contract says, don't sign it.. If you didn't read it to understand thoroughly, then that's your problem. No one's going to hold your hand. I applaud that Ellen spent the money to try to make it work, and that she felt she found the right family. It's a shame it turned out that way.. I'm sure it was a nice family too
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


Oh, I don't disagree that a contract is a contract and that she was legally wrong to breach it. Yup...read before you sign anything. She should have caught that if she had read it carefully and ought to be accustomed to contracts. But morally, it was wrong if she did have a good home for the dog. There's such a thing as the letter of the law and the spirit of the law and unfortunately, in this type of situation, the contract seemed to take precedence over the morality of it. 

I think sometimes these rescue organizations can be unyielding in their requirements and unrealistic. You hear things like if you work, the dog is alone too much. If you don't work, you can't possibly have enough money to support the dog. If you don't have a big yard, but you hike 5 miles a day, nope...not enough exercise without a big yard. If you have children under the age of 7, forget it. 

I thought about rescuing a Poodle but I read so many stories about prospective adopters being turned down for ridiculous reasons, I didn't even attempt it. I heard about a vet who would have made a great owner and he got turned down because of some stupid reason. 

I know they have to be careful. I know they don't want to make a mistake and have the dog suffer or be turned back into a shelter. Goodness knows they've already been through enough hardship. I get that. But good grief, can't they get it together and evaluate each situation a little better instead of having these black and white requirements?

I really suspect that many rescues (no, not all, I'm not saying all or even most) may be hoarders who just can't part with a single dog. I've heard of that too. Eeeek!

So yeah...they could have gone and investigated the new owners and their home, interviewed them, done whatever it is they do and let them keep the dog if they were satisfactory. So, contract or no contract, that doesn't impress me much.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

The clause shouldn't be part of the contract in the first place. Most breeders will be willing to amend this clause if they think that the buyer will provide a good home for one of their puppies. But one problem with rescues and shelters is that the employee or volunteer that you are talking to is not authorized to negotiate the contract. So you either agree to it or you don't get the dog. Here's what my local SPCA shelter tells potential adopters:

Adoption Contract
When adopting a pet from the SPCA, you must complete and sign an Adoption Contract. Three of the most important requirements you must agree to are: 
1. To provide proper veterinary care. 
2. To have the animal spayed/neutered. 
3. To return the adopted pet to the SPCA if you are unable to keep the animal. 

So suppose I adopt a dog from the SPCA. After bonding with the dog (perhaps for years), I get a fatal illness and need to find a home for my dog. What is best for the dog? A private placement? Breed rescue? Or the SPCA? Do you really think I should have to return the dog to the SPCA? 

I am not willing to agree to this clause, so I am very aware that I will not be able to adopt a dog from the SPCA, and probably not from poodle rescue. At some point in my life, it is likely that I will want to adopt and adult poodle (I've done so twice already). So I guess that when that time comes, I will be a good home that is off-limits for the shelter dogs or for poodle rescue dogs. Many people in the breeder-rescue-shelter community think that "ethical" breeders, "ethical" rescues and "ethical" shelters _should_ have this requirement. I disagree. I think that breeders, rescues and shelters should make it clear that they are more than willing to help with rehoming and more than willing to take the dog back. But requiring the return of the dog is, as Rick said, "effed up."


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

I see where you are coming from, but in my opinion, as the person who helped bring the puppies into the world, I need to have the legal right to protect that puppy should something unforeseen happen. And things happen. I 
personally believe it is irresponsible (just my personal opinion) to not do everything possible to ensure that in the worst possible scenario, I have the right to get my puppy back.


----------



## fuzzymom (Sep 19, 2013)

It seems like people who disagree with this clause want to have their cake and eat it too. They're saying the owners should have the right to return the dog to the breeder/rescue if they can no longer care for the dog, but the breeder/rescue doesn't have the right to require a return in those circumstances. You can't have it both ways. If you want to eliminate the clause then that should also eliminate your right to return the dog, which of course puts the dog at risk. Do you think breeders/rescues want dogs being returned? Of course not. They're looking out for the well being of the dogs. If you want to add a clause that a family member can adopt the dog, then just discuss it and add it to the contract. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## marbury (May 1, 2013)

CharismaticMillie said:


> I see where you are coming from, but in my opinion, as the person who helped bring the puppies into the world, I need to have the legal right to protect that puppy should something unforeseen happen. And things happen. I personally believe it is irresponsible (just my personal opinion) to not do everything possible to ensure that in the worst possible scenario, I have the right to get my puppy back.


I agree with this. Years of working with rescues, in the vet field, and with GSD's make me quite untrusting when it comes to people who adopt dogs. At some point as a breeder or someone involved in placing foster dogs you might have the unfortunate shock of seeing one of your beloved dogs pop up on the 'impounded' page of Animal Control, getting a call from a shelter worker who recognizes one of your dogs, or having a microchip company call you as their 'contact' when your dog turns up hit-by-car and abandoned at a local clinic. That is TERRIFYING. Even if you do extensive interviews with prospective puppy buyers life can get in the way of even the best situations. It's not my position to judge these people for the choices they make, and sometimes their needs as families do legitimately come before their dog.
We do 20+ 'New Puppy' exams at the clinic every week. We keep an eye on CL for dogs that our clients are missing, and easily 1/3 of the 'new puppies' we see show up on there a few weeks after their visit. 'Allergic, PCSing, pregnant, doesn't get along with cat/child/other dog'... too common.
It is for that reason that I also include a right of first refusal clause in my contract, adopted pets and bred-by alike. If someone comes to me and tells me about their fantastic home they have lined up I'm not about to 'snatch back' the dog I placed with them! That's not what I'm after. If a buyer or adopter passes on I would never roll up at the funeral and emancipate Fluffy. I would, however, expect to know about the tragedy and help the family in any way I can. That might be keeping the dog for a few weeks so the family can do whatever they need in time of grief, helping find another family to keep him, or even taking the dog back so they know he's safe.
What I'm after is creating, to the best of my ability, a situation in which I do not have to fear my precious dog being PTS at an Animal Control somewhere or tossed around from family to family to the point I loose track of where he is.

We must remember that not all people are who they profess to be, nor are they as responsible and devoted to their pets as most folks here are. To many a dog is disposable, of little worth, just for 'backyard protection' or something to churn out puppies for profit. As placement staff or breeders we do EVERYTHING we can to keep our dogs out of the hands of people like that, but no system is foolproof. My contractual clauses protect my dogs, and at the end of the day that is the most important concern to me.


----------



## Chagall's mom (Jan 9, 2010)

*marbury*: Apparently we submitted posts at the same time and mine got bounced in favor of yours, AND I'M SO GLAD IT DID!_ Thank you_ for what you had to say, the way you said it, and for what you do!


----------



## Chagall's mom (Jan 9, 2010)

BKLD said:


> I'm especially leery about co-ownership deals without a contract. There's just so much that can go wrong in my opinion.


PCA President Dennis McCoy wrote about this in his _President's Message_ in "The Poodle Papers, Fall 2013." 

PCA Newsletter: The Poodle Papers
As president of the club I find that I often get calls and emails from people regarding disputes over co-ownerships, breeding agreements or other matters involving their dogs. Inevitably it turns out whatever agreement was made in the past was not put in writing, often leading to misunderstandings and trouble for everyone.

Although written contracts can be difficult, and often costly to enforce, we would all do ourselves a big favor by putting all the elements of our dog agreements in writing. To being with, it will assure that all parties really understand what they are agreeing to. Later on, even if you never use the document to take someone to court, it will serve as a simple reminder of what your agreement was. Almost no one has a perfect memory, and putting things in writing just gives us a simple reminder of what we agreed to. Even among the best of friends a written agreement can help avoid bruised feelings at times, or lost friendships at worst, later on. With someone you know less well, it's an essential tool for keeping things in order. I feel sure that it would help many of us avoid disputes involving our dogs.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

Chagall's mom said:


> PCA President Dennis McCoy wrote about this in his _President's Message_ in "The Poodle Papers, Fall 2013."
> 
> PCA Newsletter: The Poodle Papers
> As president of the club I find that I often get calls and emails from people regarding disputes over co-ownerships, breeding agreements or other matters involving their dogs. Inevitably it turns out whatever agreement was made in the past was not put in writing, often leading to misunderstandings and trouble for everyone.
> ...


Thanks Chagall's mom! You always have such great resources. I do think that co-ownership agreements should be in writing, but of course that's up to the two parties. A co-ownership agreement is one of the very few instances where I think it makes sense for the breeder to have a right to reclaim the dog under certain well-defined circumstances. If you choose to co-own a dog without a written agreement, it certainly seems that it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for the PCA or anyone else to help you sort out any disagreements.


----------



## spindledreams (Aug 7, 2012)

Those iffy memories is why we ended up with a a dog named Lessons Learned when we finally got an ILP for him. Told my son next dog would be "Always In Writing".... 

I am currently in a co ownership with some one I like and trust but she and I do have a written contract AND we have both gone over it and tried to think of any what ifs that could happen and cover them. Any questions or concerns I had were discussed and changes made to the contract BEFORE we both signed the contract. I feel the current contract provides both of us protection and guidance for this puppy's future. 

I have to agree with others READ the contract, talk to the breeder about any reservations you have, ensure the contract is changed if necessary to make you feel comfortable with it. And keep it on file where it can be found just in case.


----------

