What would those two vain individuals care..unless they were a rescue dog to be put down.

Posted by: keith | August 3, 2007 02:37 PM

It should be noted that up to 30 percent of shelter animals are purebreds, so if you "must" have a purebred, you can still get one at a shelter. Personally I like "mutts" better, but to each his own.

Posted by: Maya | August 3, 2007 02:38 PM

Wait....so because I want a puppy or a dog from a breeder, Im contributing to people who dont take care of their dogs?

I Dont have a responsibility to take care of other peoples dogs. If I want a new dog, and I get one from a breeder that I know and respect, who I am sure does not overbreed and raises good, happy dogs - thats enough for me.

I don't need to deal with potentially mentally unstable/strange background dogs. If I want to take on that challenge, thats fine - but blaming people who buy new dogs for the ones in the shelter dying? Come on now, thats just retarded.

Dogs are in shelters because immature/irresponsible owners do not fully research the time and energy needed to buy/train/keep an animal. When they find out how much work it is, they give up. These sad cases are very sad indeed, but that doesn't instantly make it my job to rush in and save them.

The onus of your focus, while admerable, is misguided. Ownership of a dog should be harder to come by, like being liscenced to own a gun or drive. Abandonment should have a harsher penalty. However, noone should be forced, or feel guilted into, taking in a rescue dog.

Posted by: DogLover | August 3, 2007 02:55 PM

The biggest source of income for the AKC is registering puppy mill puppies

They have a business deal with Hunte Corportation of Missouri, the biggest puppy mill broker in the US

These dogs are raised in horrible abuse, no vet care, bred until they die.

(see video and photos at http://www.prisonersofgreed.org

The AKC knows this. But all those puppy mill dollars pay for silly dog shows, breed clubs, and lobbying AGAINST breeder licensing and regulations (the AKC protects their puppy miller friends!)

The AKC and its membership have blood on their hands from this torture.

Posted by: kelly | August 3, 2007 02:57 PM

Doglover, you're right, there's no law that says you are required to adopt a dog from a shelter. But at the shelter I worked at, we got over 10,000 animals a year.

When someone gave up their pet, we would ask, where did they buy the pet from? 60 percent of people bought from a pet store, 30 percent from breeders, and 10 or so percent from "free kitten / puppy" ads. Thats thousands of shelter animals given up by people who got them at the places you're discussing.

They were given up because the pet stores, breeders and others do not screen people as well as they should. These pets were bred / created only to wind up at shetlers.

When you give money to these people, you're contributing to the homeless animal population with your dollar.

As for special licenses, AMEN! I agree with you, and I think that the shelters do a good job of screening people. I have long maintained that shelters should be stray only, so that people with pets can't drop off unwanted animals at shelters like a McDonald's drivethrough.

Posted by: Maya | August 3, 2007 04:07 PM

It's a good start, let's hope we can make something out of it!

Posted by: Brianna Fritchey | August 3, 2007 04:56 PM

Doglover, you're right. Of course, you don't have to adopt from a shelter. But the amazing feeling you get from saving an animal from a certain death is a feeling money can't buy. A shelter animal for me every time.

Posted by: Michael | August 3, 2007 05:09 PM

I have to admit, I'm somewhat on the fence on this one. As a kid we had pure-bred Scotties, and I loved every one of them. We knew the breeder and she loved those dogs SO much. And I can understand why someone would want a pure-bred puppy; I know someone who went that route because she has a six-month-old baby and didn't want to "risk" a shelter dog. But puppy mills are a totally different story and despite what some might think, the pet store pups are sometimes sicker than the shelter dogs! My sister has three rescues (one literally was rescued not from a shelter, but an overflowing creek bed) and they are all sweethearts! I think the problem with these, um, "stars" is that not only do they spend thousands on these dogs, but they are discarded almost immediately, as if they were a designer gown they wouldn't be caught dead in twice! I think a more effective campaign would be protesting dogs-as-accessories! I don't want anyone saying "oh, chihuahuas are SO 2006!" People should be licensed to have animals, and frankly children, but as it has been pointed out, THAT issue is for another blog!

Posted by: BullyDawg | August 3, 2007 05:17 PM

GREAT CAMPAIGN!! Have you tried sending them some VERY SWEET VERY SMALL VERY DEAD HAND-BAG dogs from ponds ;-) Or one could send them pics of sweets dogs and African children - wearing signs similar to "would you take me if I were, like, really expensive and had 'responsible ' origins..?"

Imagine we were in China or India. Human overpopulation faces not only a local threat to the environment, resources and stability but also on a global scale. There are hundreds of millions of foster children in shelters looking for homes but not enough places and food, etc.

The government rightly wants to intervene. It prohibits, with tax penalties, more than one child per family.

Now - there is one exception... Child-breeders are EVERYWHERE... child-factories as well as local mom-and-pop-shops breed and sell children for low to very high prices. The children are being removed from their mothers at only 12 months of age - then the mother is (often artificially) impregnated again - goes through the stress of bearing and cannot enjoy to see her own grow up, etc..

No - under these circumstances - we must follow the Chinese and Indian example and prohibit any sort of breeding - at least until the shelters are empty. There is no responsible breeding FOR PROFIT.

THE BEST and IDEAL world would PROHIBIT the SELLING of ANY ANIMAL - as much as selling children and slavery is prohibited today. If nobody breeds for compensation - there will be less abuse.

The southern States alone have more than enough strays to fill the few responsible homes (loving and responsible are often two different things) for decades to come.

But the term "responsible breeder" is, given the circumstances with 3 million animals killed in shelters and millions warehoused, as disguising as "responsible slave-, heroin-, or toxins-dealer"? Mom-and-Pop can err too and miss the point when the hobby has become a deadly passion!!!!

Any autonomous, emotional, intelligent animal "sold" is a historic disgrace to us all - and really really stupid on top.

STOP the (make $ with)animal LOVERS!!! With friends like those...

Posted by: hugo pottisch | August 3, 2007 06:07 PM

Maya, to my knowledge, nobody suggested that you are responsible for caring for someone else’s dog. (“I Dont [sic] have a responsibility to take care of other peoples dogs.”) However, it IS our responsibility as human beings to care for animals that other people have chosen to abandon/neglect/abuse. And while you have every right in this world to purchase a dog from a breeder, please keep in mind that there are millions of wonderful, loveable, healthy animals that are in shelters not because they are vicious, dangerous, or unruly, but because of unfortunate circumstances. For instance, there’s a dog in a shelter right now because her elderly owner died. Another dog is in a shelter because his owner moved into a new apartment and the lease didn’t allow pets. I cannot comprehend wanting a pet to love and, at the same time, ignoring that so many are available and in need of good homes. These are living, breathing creatures that are equally entitled to our compassion and to the same quality of life as a puppy that is bred to meet AKC guidelines; they are not objects or materials to be custom-designed or special ordered.

Also, when a high-profile celebrity pays $3,000.00 for a dog that she intends to use as an accessory (until the novelty of that dog wears off and she decides to upgrade to something cuter, smaller, or trendier), rather than to have as a pet, a trend begins—an awful trend that DOES contribute to the homeless animal epidemic.

P.S. Maya, your use of the word “retarded” is somewhat offensive.

Posted by: Karen Leigh | August 3, 2007 09:39 PM

I have to agree with many of the comments on this page. Breeding pure breed dogs is in no way an awful ordeal. Matter of fact, it respects the breeds and maintains the continuance of the breed, their history, and if done by professional or smart breeders, the health of the breed. Personally, I own a pure breed Chihuahua. He is neutered and I don’t care about the papers, we love him so much. My cats were all adopted and we love them just the same. We searched for a dog through local shelters and sadly, no dog was a match for my family. We are planning to adopt another dog here in the near future and will search newspapers, local pounds, and local shelters first. I understand that people desire a full breed dog for their history and profile, even for their breaded abilities like working breeds and sporting breeds. However, I do understand PETA’s message as well: Needless deaths of cats and dogs without homes seems so unfair, and shame on the irresponsible owners. Again, some owners die, or move or have children and the dog can not cope. This is a situation that can be conquered for the better as long as the proper message gets out there. Dogs are not like a fad pair of shoes, the coolest breed is in season. Instead, they are lives no matter what the breed that deserve safe and loving homes, forever. And in another direction, the cost of sheltering these stray and abandoned animals is a great expense that will eventually fall in the pocketbooks of the unexpected. If we were smart, and we all are, don’t put the blame on Paris Hilton and Brittney Spears; let’s work a more preventative measure. Put the blame on all those parents who buy pets as babysitters, those who chose their pet in season, and those who left them abandoned. Let’s put out the message that everyone deserves a second chance, and in this case, why not the wrongly prison dogs and cats, who only want a home and guidance, and most of all, love.
Cheryl

Posted by: Cheryl | August 3, 2007 10:08 PM

I agree that getting an animal from a shelter is a wonderful thing to do yes you are saving a life, but, I also believe that purchasing a dog from a pet store...not a breeder is also saving a life my dog mimi is 6 months old we found her when we happened to walk into a shady pet shop in silverlake where the puppies were being fed once a day, and were confined to a small glass box without so much as a dish of water (and this is not the first petshop I have seen in this condision) the man was starving them to keep them small. If i could, I would have purchased all of the sickly little animals but mimi looked into my eyes and I couldn't possibly leave her there to die, we payed 800 dollars for her...she is supposedly a pomeranian but I beg to differ... she weighed 15 ounces when we got her at three months old and we brought her home that night and she almost died from diabetic shock, she spent the next two weeks in the animal hospital with an IV stuck in her little arm, she is now 6 months old and weighs 13 pounds she is the love of my life and I wouldn't trade her in for anything in the world, not everyone who purchases their dog at a pet store is a terrible person...paris and britney, YES but certainly not all people. if your an animal lover you love all animals, not just the ones in shelters...If everyone got their dog from a shelter what do you think would happen to the ppor animals in those overpriced petstores? I can asure you they wouldn't keep them past a certain age and then what? I love peta but they seem to send mixed messages.

Posted by: MIMIMYLOVE | August 3, 2007 10:09 PM

Karen,

The fact that you are addressing the wrong person is even more offensive. The commenter's name appears below the comment, not above.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 3, 2007 10:36 PM

There is NOTHING wrong with ethical breeding, didn't PETA kill a bunch of pound animals? You are one group to talk!!!!

All my purebreds are adopted but one day if I had time and wanted to show I want the option to do so, you don't have the right to take that away from me.

Why not concentrate on the puppy mills and pet stores, not the ethical responsible breeders out there. Don't lump them all together as they aren't all the same!

Posted by: MIA | August 3, 2007 10:39 PM

Mimmylove, your concern is a common one. If pet store animals are being neglected, there are cruelty agents in your region that you can call. Pet stores are not by law allowed to neglect their pets.

And just so you know, handing 800 dollars to a pet store enables them to buy and abuse even more puppies.

Not that I blame you, you obviously care for your animals, but you can buy all the pets from the pet store and they will just make more of them to neglect.

Posted by: Maya | August 3, 2007 10:41 PM

Here's the thing. Having a pet is a luxury. It's a wonderful thing -- I have two cats and they bring me so much joy. But it's not necessary. You don't need it to be happy. And if you do want to have a dog or cat for companionship, there's just no reason you need a certain kind of dog or cat. We have a human overpopulation problem, but I understand a couple saying that they still want to have their own child, rather than adopting. I get that.

But that simply doesn't hold water when you're talking about animals. There is a massive -- fucking monumental -- pet overpopulation crisis in this country. Cats and dogs are dying by the millions upon millions in shelters. With just that piece of information in mind, it is supremely selfish and irresponsible to decide that you're going to bring an animal into your life and choose to get that animal from someone who is breeding them instead of saving one from a shelter.

And as bad as that is, it's even worse for people to try to make money by breeding animals in the first place. No matter how "responsible" they are about their breeding practices (and trust me, the vast majority of breeders keep their animals in lousy conditions), they are doing animals a disservice by bringing more into the world when there are countless cats and dogs waiting for a home.

I simply cannot understand why anyone would dream of going to a pet store or a breeder to get a puppy when they know that means not just that another puppy who is hours away from being euthanized isn't going to get a reprieve, but that they are actively supporting someone who is bringing more animals into a world that has to kill them by the millions already because there are too many.

No matter what excuses you have for it, it is cruel and unethical. And, sad as it is, while you may think you are "rescuing" an animal from a pet store, all you're doing is giving those assholes an economic incentive to breed more animals into this horrible vicious cycle where they (maybe not the one you bought, but certainly most of her littermates) will inevitably be neglected and die.

Posted by: Geoff | August 3, 2007 10:43 PM

Maya, I apologize for addressing my message to you. I should have addressed it to DogLover, for whom it was intended.

To the anonymous person who pointed that out, thank you. Also, the only person who should have been offended by my oversight was Maya, and, again, to her I apologize. DogLover's intentional use of the word "retarded," a word that is hurtful to so many people, is, I believe, far more offensive to readers than my oversight.

Posted by: Karen Leigh | August 4, 2007 01:26 AM

"DogLover's intentional use of the word "retarded," a word that is hurtful to so many people, is, I believe, far more offensive to readers than my oversight."

DogLover's abject fear of apostrophes and grammar offended me more than anything else. The "it's not my problem because I should be able to have anything I want and damn the consequences" rhetoric is both boring and typical of most people who've never considered that their petty desires may not be the most important thing in the universe.

Posted by: DaliyVeg Editor | August 4, 2007 06:53 AM

My fight against "pure-bred" puppy mills began practically since I became an animal activist MANY years ago. Throughout the years, I had written several articles in the paper to make the public aware of them. I have written numerous times to my (good-for-nothing) Senator. I had petitions signed to send to him. His appeasing response was that he doesn't like them either, and is focused on shutting them down. (Well, does it take years and years and years to shut them down???) And several times I have signed nationwide petitions that were presented to our govt. The HUA has an annual protest in Harrisburg, PA EVERY year in light of the fact that Lancaster, PA is known as the "puppy mill capitol of the nation." Reputable breeders from Lancaster are outraged that they are being classified along with the puppy mills, and I suppose they have been trying to fight against them too.

I have verbally told whoever I could about puppy mills. I know people who bought puppies from, paid the hundreds of dollars, never received the breeding registration papers, ended up having to pay high vet bills, then eventually had no choice but to have the pup/dog euthanized. One local vet voiced himself to the govt. about puppy mills, but it only fell on deaf ears.
Yet, somehow with all of this, the govt. doesn't recognize puppy mill owners committing crimes...not only with animal abuse, but also with the pet store owners who are frauds.

If this situation can be possibly exploited any more, Gov. Rendell (PA), USED this issue for one of his campaign promises to close down puppy mills when he ran for re-election. He wanted to gain the animal lovers' votes. It worked; he won; but the mills are still in operation. (no surprise there)
Our disgraceful local shelters, who end up with some of these pups/dogs, remain useless on this issue. Law enforcement doesn't make any efforts.
I know that people from across the nation have also been strongly protesting against puppy mills for many years...and all of our efforts have been ignored, including bodily protests in front of pet stores who are involved in this horrendous operation.
It only stands to reason, as usual, that more than the "breeders" and pet store frauds must be making pocket money from these puppy mills.

Where do we go from here?

Posted by: Ariel | August 4, 2007 08:49 AM

this is so fake and you did a very bad job at it.

Posted by: Nikki | August 4, 2007 09:40 AM

Both of my Cairn terriers are from a local family breeder and I love them dearly, but since the time that I got them, I've learned that Col. Potter Network rescues Cairns and since I love Cairns, I can get my next one from them. My Cocker Spaniel is from the local shelter. She is a wonderful, sweet old girl and I can't imagine why anyone would've given her up.
There are thousands and thousands of dogs and cats who die each year just because no one wants them. The debate isn't about whether or not a particular breeder is good or about freedom of choice, which is a right in this country, but about the simple fact that there are so many animals who need homes and won't get them. I am not sorry that I got my Cairns from the breeder; I didn't know, then, that there were other options and I wanted a Cairn. But now, I would always opt to adopt!

Posted by: Susannah | August 4, 2007 11:37 AM

Karen, I'm sorry too. I've been home with the flu and I'm extra grumpy LOL. ;)

I completely agree with you about breeding. Believe it or not, one of the dogs at my former shelter workplace had AKC papers, and the person wanting to adopt the dog demanded that we call the AKC and the former owner to somehow verify the "purity" of the dog.

Well we bent over backwards for this obnoxious adopter, and the AKC were really difficult to deal with and were really snotty as though the dog could not possibly be "pure" if it was at a shelter.

So I agree fully, this kind of nonsense just objectifies animals.

Posted by: Maya | August 4, 2007 02:44 PM

I'm a PETA member and have agreed with their policies up until now. However, I'm extremely disturbed by the latetst attack on pet stores and breeders. At first, I thought they were going after pet stores because the dogs are from puppy mills. This I would understand because of the unfair treatment of the animals at mills. The fact that they are going after pet stores and breeders and those that purchase purebred animals because they do not support animal adoption is RIDICULOUS!! They are destorting the truth by saying that a shelter animal is killed when someone purchases a purebred. If someone wants a certain type of bred that they cannot find at a shelter than they should be allowed to go to a pet store or breeder. That is NOT the same person that would be resuing a animal from a shelter anyway (i.e Paris Hilton). I think PETA is way off on this one and needs to focus on animal cruelty. Why not spend the time and money (BTW, my membership dollars) on rescue efforts, non-kill funds and marketing campaigns for shelters. PETA is stepping into dangerous territory. If you pressure someone to get an animal they will not be happy with then you are just repeating the cycle where pet owners adopt and then give the animal back. Here's an idea which offers a solution instead of just a fight: encourage pet owners who buy from a pet store or breeder to get a friend for there dog from a shelter. Please PETA, stop beating up on people who love animals and focus on those who are being cruel to them.

Posted by: PeaPod | August 4, 2007 03:06 PM

Mimmy, you are just plain WRONG if you think that buying a dog from a pet store is "rescuing" it

This is a common excuse by people who feel guilty because they supported animal abuse with their dollars

All you did, Mimmy, was give your money to animal abusers and allow them to ABUSE MORE ANIMALS.

You helped that pet store and those puppy mills abuse and kill more animals. And they are doing that right now while you try to make yourself feel good. With your money.

For as long as the gullible and foolish and SELFISH keep buying from pet stores and websites and classifieds, the torture at puppy mills will continue.

And telling yourself it is OK does not make it OK.

Posted by: kelly | August 4, 2007 03:29 PM

haha, c'mon....this is by far the most ridiculous thing i've ever seen. i agree that paris and britney are retarded, but the two females imitating them are twice as bad. please, before it's too late...protest something meaningful. like, i don't know -- human life. haha, peta cracks me up, have a fun life ya'll. i'm sure this post won't make it, funny how you can't take criticism even though that's what peta seems to be based on.

Posted by: joe blow | August 4, 2007 03:35 PM

After having read all these comments, I am a bit disturbed by the attitude that some people show toward others. "Retarded" certainly offends me, although I don't think that Doglover meant to offend anyone. Many people use that word and are completely ignorant of how hurtful it is. If we all had siblings who were challenged, we would certainly be more mindful of the use of that word. I have a fifteen year old purebred Golden Retriever--inherited, Mom's dog, and she passed away. HE was purchased from a reputable breeder, but still has the health issues common to purebreds. He has hip displasia. I have to clean his ears daily and actually flush them twice a week, because they are prone to infection. Now he is blind, but still mobile but my dilemma has to do with whether or not to put him down...he is blind and in occasional pain we treat with medication but his quality of life...on the other hand, I can't bring myself to do it. For the most part he seems to be content, he's just OLD. And blind. I will not get another dog, already have three cats, all of whom were strays. If I did get another one, however, I would get one from the pound. Purebreds need new blood once in awhile, just like people. Take a look at at the Royal Family; has anyone ever seen an uglier group of people? Sorry, I know I am off the point. But I agree that there is no need for a "specific" dog, and I certainly have no intention of supporting breeders, puppy mills, or exploitation of any kind.

Posted by: Monique | August 4, 2007 04:56 PM

I must admit I was one of those people that I bought a dog from a pet store (2 years ago). I was so ignorant about suffering and the fact that I could have saved a life by adopting a dog from a shelter!!. I do love my dog, and because of it I have learned to respect other animals. I thank PETA because now I understand how important is caring about animals... I learnt my lesson: I have spayed my dog and adopted other two very nice and wonderful dogs from a shelter (while helping finding homes to others from the street). I am doing my best to tell as much people I can (In Chile) what I have learnt from all of you PETA friends. MUCHAS, MUCHAS GRACIAS!!!!!

Posted by: Ana Maria | August 4, 2007 09:19 PM

Doglover, YOU NEED TO CHANGE YOUR NAME!

Your feeble attempt to intellectually justify your hardline, selfserving, pompous argument and outrageous use of the word "retarded" is disturbing at best, AND overrides the one good point you did have regarding more stringent laws and/or requirements to get a dog!

For the record, nobody is making you do anything... but I don't know any dogLOVER who has more inane reasonings than you and who are as adamant as YOU about BUYING the "perfect" dog when there are so many out there that are perfect and in need of a loving home!

You're obviously unaware that most pure breed rescue squads spend alot of time, energy and money to rehabilitate their rescues and do a thorough research on potential owners unlike the pounds that usually don't have the time or resources to do the same. But there are wonderful dogs in them as well that are not a so-called "challenge!" I KNOW.

And since when is a little TLC [which for the most part is all most rescues really need] so challenging?!! Duuuh!

Your assessment of PETA encouraging the public to rescue and not buy as a "guilt trip" and your arrogant remark about it not being your problem to run in and save a dog who needs saving is really NOT typical of a TRUE doglover!

So, if you choose NOT to adopt a rescue because you don't want that "challenge," that's your problem, and God forbid any pet of yours that doesn't measure up to perfection! You may be entitled to your opinion but listen up!! NO pet should be loved so conditionally!

Too many dogs, and cats, end up in the pound because of so-called doglovers like YOU!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 5, 2007 12:28 AM

My husband and I are very blessed to have two doggy companions-one from a pet store and one from a shelter. I love both of my girls equally! I would never buy another dog from a pet store again, however, I do feel like Lina, my pet store baby, was liberated from slavery thanks to me. Furthermore, I worked very hard to have that pet store closed down, and I was successful. I just hope that we can all remember to love ALL animals regardless of their origin. Thanks for loving!

Posted by: Melanie | August 5, 2007 01:18 PM

All these issues are just another pitiful example of the human race exploiting other living beings for their own selfish interests. It needs to stop and PETA does a great job of staying on top of these issues and bringing it to the attention of those of us who care. In any event, I just wanted to add that although it is preferable to obtain an animal from a shelter, I do feel that there are ethical breeders out there who are not as concerned about making a profit as they are about promoting a breed that they love and finding a quality home for them and that includes a thorough background check and an agreement to take the animal back (at any time/age) if it "does not work out". I have three Bullmastifs from one such breeder that also has an animal rescue facility that she funds entirely on her own. By the way, two of my dogs are what could be called "special needs" dogs that an otherwise profit conscious breeder may have elected to put down instead of saving them and finding a loving home for them. My point is, there are a few compassionate, ethical breeders out there that should be considered and sought out rather than a pet shop or one of the far to common unqualified, unethical, back yard animal farms!

Posted by: Jeff | August 5, 2007 10:02 PM

And let's not forget to mention what happens to the poor puppy that isn't up to the "standards" set for the breed... killed to protect the integrity. I'll take a mutt any day, dog or cat!

Posted by: rigbit | August 5, 2007 11:11 PM

MIA, the only time PETA staffers ever "kill" any animals is when the animals they have located are so horribly sick or injured that the only HUMANE thing to do is to EUTHANIZE them. The same can be said for the Humane Society and The Farm Sanctuary. And you may have the "right" to buy an animal from a breeder, but if you really want to help animals, then you have the "responsibility" to rescue an animal from a reputable shelter.

Posted by: Michele | August 5, 2007 11:18 PM

They dont even look like brit or paris!

Posted by: J D Power | August 6, 2007 05:22 AM

Melanie, thank you! I know you bought your dog from a pet store, but getting them shut down? Brava!

For all of you who want to "rescue" puppies from pet stores by buying them, what you SHOULD do is get the authorities involved, the press, your friends, any and everyone! Get them shut down, or at the very least, get them to stop selling ALL animals and simply be pet SUPPLY stores! No need to sell fish, gerbils, etc. when you're selling Kitty Condos for $250 a pop!

Posted by: BullyDawg | August 6, 2007 11:47 AM

Ok lot of comments to respond to - Im paraphrasing so bear with me.

1) Yes, my online typing skills arent amazing. However, Ive seen worse here. But if you want to pick at my grammar (or lack therof) go ahead ;).

2) A good responsible breeder asks you a barrage of questions. They have long waiting lists because they only breed when the dogs are ready, and not before. They take time and effort to early train dogs, and ensure that the owners are going to be responsible. Some even do background checks.

Im not sure where the concept of breeders churning out puppies came from. While I am sure they exist, thats not what I would call "responsible". Anyone who buys from a responsible breeder is ensuring they get a good, well adjusted dog as a pet. Many breeders make you sign a form when you buy from them saying that if you dont want the dog, you have to return it to them, not to a shelter.

3) Whats wrong with these breeders making money? How else are they supposed to stay in buisness? Breeding dogs is a full time job. How are you supposed to pay your bills?

They do a great service to us prospective owners, by giving us excellent quality dogs, while making sure we as owners are up to the task of dog ownership, with all the joy and work it requires.

4) The over angry guy on the internet who wrote :

"So, if you choose NOT to adopt a rescue because you don't want that "challenge," that's your problem, and God forbid any pet of yours that doesn't measure up to perfection! You may be entitled to your opinion but listen up!! NO pet should be loved so conditionally! "

You completely misunderstand. I have a longtime friend who worked at a breeding group, handling dogs all day. He got a rescue dog....I dont think Id be able to handle it. The dog was willfull, slightly spooked and had attitude issues which he was able to control and train out over time.

Im nowhere near as pro as him. I just want to make sure the dog I get is a good fit for me. I honestly dont care if its a mutt or not. I dont intend on showing dogs, the only dogs I want to have are for companionship.

What I am taking issue with is how PETA is equating anyone who doesnt get their pet from a shelter to being a "murderer" or what not. When in fact, many people go to breeders to make sure they have a disease free, happy healthy not abused dog to have a life with, instead of one with a questionable background.

Now, these questionable background dogs need love too, of course. (And by questionable I dont mean "their pedigree"- im talking about how they were treated). However, if someone wants to have a new dog without any of the baggage, they are not "murdering" any dogs at all any more than a human child is "murdering" a child in a shelter somewhere in Africa.

5) The use of the word "retarded" is common vernacular, and Im suprised it would be offensive. Its just a word, and its not even vulgar.

Thats all for now.

Posted by: ReturnofDoglover | August 6, 2007 12:05 PM

Hi return of Doglover.

Listen, first of all a few mistakes here and there is nothing. It's the comments that say "U R F**ing idiot U murons duuuh" that are so dumb and offensive. Not simple spelling errors.

In vet tech school we had a vet speak about breeding. She said that good breeders try to improve the health and temperament of the breed. That was the first time I as an animal caregiver understood the logic of breeding. Of course I want breeds that are gentle and well behaved. That's totally understandable.

There is nothing inheirently wrong with breeding animals in a responsible way. But if everyone used the logic you do in choosing a pet, there's more shelter lives down the drain. If everyone had high standards like you, not a single one of the billions of unwanted shelter animals would get adopted. They'd all be destroyed.

I was one of the people who killed these healthy animals every day. We simply beg you and others, please please consider helping us. That's all. Anyone who calls well intentioned people murderers is just being over the top. Ignore them.

Pet stores - horrible. They don't even call vets to see if the new owner took care of their previous pets. Pet stores sell reptiles and marine animals with bogus information. I've seen hermit crabs who live 27 years die after just a few weeks when sold by a pet store.

Reptiles end up dying after just a few months when sold in pet stores. This is abuse. No animal should be given to a human being without a screening process. When money rules, so does neglect.

Posted by: Maya | August 6, 2007 02:57 PM

ANA MARIA: On behalf of all strays thank you, thank you, thank YOU!!!

MELANIE: Hallelujah!!!

JOE BLOW: You're obviously trolling AND wasting your time.
PETA is immune to crack(ed)pots!
But while you're here why don't you learn something?!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 6, 2007 03:13 PM

First I must say that Paris and her friend are not even close to being on my favorite person list however, I see absolutely nothing wrong with purchasing animals from pet stores or breeders and this is why: I have several times tried to purchase pets from rescue organizations, their standards are so high that virtually NO ONE is good enough for them to trust an animal to. They want to know, where you work, how long you've worked there how many hours you work, how many hours the pet will be home along, some will even ask income information, if you have other pets, their ages, their immunnization records, your vets info, and some even do inhome inspections and if you don't shine in every single one of these areas,they shut you down. It is THEIR FAULT that so many rescue animals die. They set the requirements bar so high that no real human being telling the truth can qualify. I am a retired house wife who is at home all day everyday with my pets, people tease me because I spoil them so much. I recently lost a cat(it died) whom I had for over 21 years and my previous cat lived to be 17 yrs, so I evidently must have been doing something right yet these people who are on their high horse look for or create reasons to deny their animals good decent homes. Again, it is THEIR FAULT these animals face death because they are so unyeilding with such impossible restrictions.So yes! I did end up buying two of my next pets - one from a breeder, one from the pet store, and I did manage to get a third one by jumping through enough hoops and lots of begging to the dog shelter to grant me a chow that was past due to get euthanized. I tried very hard to do the right thing and was interrogated like a criminal then rejected and told I wasn't good enouugh because of it, so yes! I did take other avenues to get my pets. What was I supposed to do? Just go without? Would my going without have done any good to any animal anywhere? I purchased from a breeder and a pet store because I was backed into a corner and given no choice. If anything at all needs to be done, the countless restrictions these rescue shelters submit us to should be eliminated. Some inquires are understadable but theirs go beyond that, they are rediculous! A lot of rescue animals have problems that would cause most to feel they are not "prestine" pets to begin with so when you get someone who's willing to overlook that fact and unconditionally accept the pet anyway they're going to be punished for it? Rescue shelters should be held accountable for every animal who is euthanized because of their holier than thou attitude and denying so many helpless pets the loving homes that so many decent and loving people have not been allowed the chance to provide.

Posted by: Charli | August 6, 2007 03:25 PM

Maya,

Thanks for your post. I really dont think I used any such profanity in my post. The harshest I got was "retarded" which seems to have struck a nerve for some reason.

Id like to commend you for this :

"I was one of the people who killed these healthy animals every day. We simply beg you and others, please please consider helping us. That's all. Anyone who calls well intentioned people murderers is just being over the top. Ignore them."

Which is the most reasonable thing anyone has posted yet. And of course, 100% correct. I would consider adopting a shelter dog once Im confident Id be a good place for them to go, and not just a temporary stop and off to a new shelter elsewhere.

However if I choose not to, I don't think that makes me a bad person. I think that adopting a shelter dog makes you a great person. But its like helping with charities. If you dont contribute to the united way, that doesnt mean that you are bad. Its an empowering thing, helping the unfortunate, and it should always be looked at in that light. Never as a "do this or else".

Thanks again Maya.

Posted by: ReturnofDoglover | August 6, 2007 03:37 PM

Charli, let me enlighten you.

The shelter I worked in got 11,500 animals each year. The first few months I worked there I decided to be really lenient with people. We did not do home inspections anyway.

1. Adopted a nice brown tabby to a guy in a business suit. He seemed really sweet. Cat was returned 3 weeks later, with a URI and completely emaciated. The guy said the cat was a "snob" because it hid under the couch. We had to destroy that cat.

2. Adopted a sweet dalmation to a girl, didn't make her bring in her dog to meet new dog, as we usually required. Adopter forced new dog into the face of dominant dog. New dog attacked dominant dog, and was brought back to shelter. Had to be quarantined and destroyed.

3. Woman adopted stray and said she really wanted her own vet to spay the cat. We let her. Cat returned with URI and pregnant. Adopter said the cat kept breeding with other cats, she didn't want it anymore.

Do you want me to keep going?

Shame on you for saying the shelter staff are to blame. They didn't drop off those animals at the shelter. They're just trying to find them homes.

Our worst nightmare was adopting a nice animal to someone only to have it neglected or abused. It haunts me forever to think of those animals that we gave to bad homes.

Yes, you may be a good adopter. But do you think we're psychic? How are we supposed to know if someone will care for the animal, and what do you have to hide?

Posted by: Maya | August 6, 2007 03:51 PM

R Doglover, thanks ;) And just so you know, it can be a bit challenging adopting from a shelter. But there are many different types of shelters, and I recommend finding one where the people are kind and patient. They can help find just the right animal for any type of home. ;)

Posted by: Maya | August 6, 2007 04:42 PM

DOGLOVER: For you to persist in and justify your thinking because of your friend's one or two experiences, and your determined mindset, then you might consider the many lawsuits against breeders for selling sick and troubled animals.

AS I MENTIONED IN MY PREVIOUS POST REGARDING "PURE BREED RESCUE SQUADS"... THEY TAKE IN SPECIFIC PURE BREEDS, EVALUATE AND ALMOST ALWAYS REHABILITATE THEM BEFORE TURNING THEM OVER TO A NEW HOME, THEREFORE CHANCES ARE STRONG THEY CAN GIVE YOU EXACTLY WHAT YOU WANT [which in your case is NO "challenges!"]

re your hang up on the word murder used by PETA I believe that if one has ears to hear the message and gets it instead of scrutinizing it they wouldn't be getting hung up on a word no matter how strong or controversial it may be.

However, the INFERENCE of the word "retarded" in your post was loud and clear thus offensive and your excuse for using it is naive at best.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 6, 2007 06:03 PM

This is BS. I know thousands of people who prefer breeders instead of kennels, because the animal coul be dangerous, rabid amoung other things so how is it bad for people to buy from a breeder? PETA kills 2/3 of the animals that "save" so kennels have a lower kill rate then that.

Posted by: Mitur Banisderty | August 6, 2007 06:08 PM

i agree people,you peta fags are gettin on my nerves.stop shuvin vegan bullshit down our throats.the stray populatoin would overun if we didnt adopt.every thing that happens is cruel to you tards.stop bein pussies and get dirty ya fags!word up to the redneks i live wit

Posted by: matt thinks peta is gay | August 6, 2007 09:20 PM

Yes, the word "retarded" is offensive. It is a label, and I have heard people say it to and about my sister all my life. It is dehumanizing. It implies that those who are "retarded" have less value. Less worth. Less value as a living creature. Shall we start breeding humans too? I am certain by having read the posts of the person we all know, that neither "1984" nor "Brave New World" are part of his lexicon. And is a perfect example, according to his own argument, of the word "retarded," which in his case means a deliberate choice to be ignorant, backward and offensive.

Posted by: Monique | August 7, 2007 12:24 AM

To "matt thinks peta is gay": if you are reading PETA's website, then why would you dare suggest that we are "shoving" veganism down your throat? You chose to be on this site. If you don't like it, don't read it. Oh, and in case you don't know, it's called freedom of speech. Isn't that one fairly important component of the American bill of rights? I am Canadian, so if I haven't got it right, please enlighten me. Also, you might want to enroll in a basic grammar class - you clearly cannot string together a coherent sentence.

Posted by: Michele | August 7, 2007 10:48 AM

Why does it matter where people buy dogs from? PETA: YOU GUYS NEED A HOBBY OTHER THAN TRYING TO MAKE EVRYONE ELSE BELIEVE WHAT YOU THINK!! NAZI'S. Absolutely ridiculous. The president of PETA is like Hitler. I wear rabbit fur and got my dog from a breeder so what are you going to do spray paint my coat I'll just buy another so more die. You going to kill my dog? I bet you guys drive around with leather in your car.

Posted by: Jess | August 7, 2007 11:39 AM

Relax Monique! Life shouldn't be so serious. I frequently refer to myself as retarded when I make a mistake, and Im sure if you hang around any high shcool you will hear it used as well.

Im not actually retarded. Nor would I use the word to describe anyone with any kind of learning disability or special needs. However, if you can't poke fun at yourself, and human frailties, than life becomes awfully serious awfully fast.

Mr Serious Anon guy who types in All Caps : Yes I saw that. There are shelter options for me, I know. But if I do not choose to exercise those options, that isn't going to make me a bad person. Why are you so angry?

And yes, it is "retarded" to assume that people who buy dogs from responsible breeders are "murdering" puppies in pounds somewhere, and equally so to put the onus on these dogs' fate in the hands of the adopters or the breeders, instead of on the people who FILL these shelters in the first place.

Posted by: ReturnofDoglover | August 7, 2007 12:20 PM

KnowitallpsychoJess: save the ignorant blathering for those who care!

TO DOGLOVER: Why are YOU so IGNORANT?!

...and just because you call yourself "retarded" makes it okay?!

NOBODY IS FORCING YOU DO TO ANYTHING! QUIT BEING SO DEFENSIVE AND REPEATING YOUR VANE THREATS TO DO WHAT YOU WANT!

If PETA's causes and objectives are so contrary to yours and you refuse to be openminded to a better way so be it.

Why the hositility towards anyone who took exception to your arrogance?
Are you trolling?

Responding to your retarded posts seems to be a waste of time because you obviously can't, won't, don't get IT.

Posted by: Anonymous | August 7, 2007 03:39 PM

it doesnt' really matter what anyone thinks or doesn't think here. the simple fact is this: while you are no literally killing an animal, if you get an animal from a breeder, even if they are reputable, that means another pet that has to go to death. breeding is a sad manipulation anyway, if you have seen the history. bulldogs used to be healthy and stealth. now they are lovely, mostly sick guys who find it hard to move. sure you can do whatever you want. but i agree, if you love animals you will work toward ending the cycle of cruelty. that involves making breeding (and certainly having pets in stores) much rarer as it will not be lucrative. people will move onto another living means, that's no excuse to keep this practice alive. we have to start to see animals in the very new way humans are finally coming around to, which is not as entertainment, or for show, but to coexist. it seems such a simple concept. there are a lot of calm lovely animals who have been given up, as well as more challenging ones. as humans, with circuses and the like, our history of abuse of animals is so long and rich that we DO indeed owe something back.

Posted by: hawley | August 7, 2007 03:57 PM

Mitur, Mitur, Mitur!
BS is what YOUR post is because you do NOT take into consideration the MANY healthy, balanced and beautiful pets that are in the pounds and rescue centers!

YOU and ms DOGLOVER are indeed entitled to your freakin' [can't see the forest for the trees] opinions and weak justifications... so be it!

Posted by: Anonymous | August 8, 2007 12:29 AM

Maya,
Shame on YOU for not reading my post more clearly. I have nothing to hide, Ive always told the truth when attempting to adopt a pet which is why I stated "the shelter standards are too high for any real human being telling the truth" Think about it, if I would have had something to hide as you questioned, I would have lied and gotten approved by the shelter. I applaud you for trying so hard to find homes for your animals but the fact still remains that the rescue shelters I've had experience with do not share your determination. I did NOT attack your character in any way and would appreciate your not attacking mine for speaking nothing but the truth. A couple of the shelters I was in contact with were aware of the advanced ages of my cats, I even sent photos of them lounging happily in my care. I also told them that I could provide proof of their ages via their papers yet that still wasn't good enough for them. After reading your reply I still feel that it is the shelters' fault that so many precious animals must die. They claim to be looking out for the animals' best interest but what world do they come from to think that their best interest is for them to die before getting adopted to a loving home? How many people do YOU know who are literally teased for doting on their pets so much? My pets sleep on my furniture, get filet mignon for their birthdays, have more toys than any human kid, and get played with several hours a day. Perhaps the shelter where you work(ed) is different than the ones I have dealt with but it still doesn't change the fact that the ones I dealt with were not fair with me AT ALL!

Posted by: charli | August 9, 2007 04:22 PM

Charli, although I know you will try to deny it, it sounds like you were attacking all shelters. All shelters are not alike. It sounded that way because instead of seeking out another more understanding shelter, you preferred to go somewhere else.

Also, it sounds like you were not actually denied by any shelter, but rather you did not want to offer all of the information they were asking.

Feel free to correct me.

I did not mean to attack your character when I said what do you have to hide, rather I meant it more like "what do you have to lose?"

Obviously I know nothing at all about you! You certainly may be an excellent pet parent. I don't know you so I can't say.

But don't ever say it's a the shelter worker's fault. Until you've had do destroy 800 plus healthy, friendly animals with your own two hands by poisoning them, don't expect me to respond rationally.

And our shelter was very lenient. Did you even read the cases I wrote about?

Posted by: Maya | August 9, 2007 10:46 PM

Maya,
Please re-read my second post where I clearly stated that "the shelters I have been in contact with" Sometimes the truth isn't pleasant to acknowledge but it's still the truth just the same.
Here comes the correction: I DID give those shelters every single thing that they asked of me but in their eyes NO ONE is good enough. You could be God and still not be good enough. The part you are correct about is that yes I am a very good pet mommy, even when my pets die (usually from old age) I don't dig a hole in the back yard and toss them in (Not that there is anything wrong with that) but I get them professionally cremated so they can still be with me in their lovely urns.
Just like I said before, your shelter may be different, but the FACT still remains that the shelters "I'VE BEEN in contact with" seemed to be more enthusiastic about putting an animal to death than giving it a chance of having a wonderfullife. If you really REALLY want to help these animals try lobbying to get the unachievable restrictions that "most other" shelters impose upon people changed - I would gladly join you.

Posted by: Charli | August 10, 2007 06:41 PM

Charli - I am sorry you had those experiences, and for what it's worth, I worked for 2 shelters: one was an extremely large inner-city shelter (where they were lenient) and we got in 11,500 animals each year.

The other one was a tiny, no-kill shelter. Well the no-kill did indeed have some very snotty people and they seemed to put many demands on people adopting. However, they almost never rejected anyone. If someone walked out without an animal, it was because the person gave up on the process, which took a few weeks.

Did you get outright rejected or did you give up? Don't tell me the answer, because I think it's probably none of my business, but if you gave up, it's different than the shelter rejecting you.

Here is what I'm lobbying for: stray only shelters. The first shelters in history were stray only. Now most shelters are half stray and half people surrendering pets to shelters because the owners don't want the responsiblity. The surrendered pets all get adopted while the strays all get destroyed. I'm lobbying for stray only shelters.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE try to see it from the shelter workers perspective; they love their shelter cats and dogs very much and (we) lie awake at night worrying that the animals will be neglected if they don't screen people properly. That is one hell of a lot of guilt to live with every day of your life.

But don't take my word for it, visit or volunteer at a shelter for a few months and just listen to what goes on between the public and the shelter staff. You'll be shocked. You can learn so much more about what the job is really like if you get involved, even just petting cats or walking dogs. That way too you can influence their decisions!

And I beleive you that some shelters are very snotty. But obviously not all of them are. We actually crossed state lines to get one of our cats. So don't judge all shelters by the ones you've seen. I do hope you try again as I can see that you'd give shelter pets a great home! :)

Posted by: Maya | August 11, 2007 03:17 PM

PS.
Yes Maya I did go elswehere to purchase two of my next pets when the shelters turned me down because NO WAY was I ever putting myself through that again. Because of major health issues I have adopted a stress free life and I'm trying to keep it that way.

Posted by: Charli | August 12, 2007 10:48 AM

Hi Maya,
Thank you so much for your kind words. I understand just what you mean about sitting laying awake nights and worrying over animals. I still do that for the adorable little cat I tried to adopt named Pugsley. Every day I wonder if it has gotten into a new home even half as good as the home I would have provided for him or if he has been put to death because of the snotty shelter worker I had dealt with. If you know of shelters that are NOT so particular and snotty that way I'd be more than happy to hear about them. As for the many other shelters I inquired of, they had all the same impossible restrictions and very personal questions as those I had such bad experiences with so based on that I didn't bother to waste my time with them either. The fact is that I simply don't care where my pet comes from, I don't have any children and have always just been looking for something anything to mother and spoil as I would a child if I had ever been able to have one of my own. The reason I am so upset with the shelters "I've been in contact with" is because even tho I am an excellent pet mommie and everyone who knows me is aware of this that it meant absolutely nothing to them at all. So if I can walk into a pet store and purchase a pet or slap down a wad of hundreds to a breeder with no questions asked, I will most definitely do that as opposed to going through my own judgement day here on Earth and more stress than if I were adopting a human child. Again, my first choice was a rescue shelter but they treated me horribly so I vowed to never go through that again. However if there is a shelter out there somewhere who will appreciate the wonderful pet person that I am and give me credit for that, and there is absolute proof of that, I will definitely take that into consideration and give some thought to giving them a chance again. But until then I will stick with the "no questions asked" method of adopting my pets.
Thank you for your post.

Posted by: Charli | August 13, 2007 04:54 PM

Hi Charli!

Listen, I have no idea the specifics of your case, so if you want to email me I will certainly refer you to good places in your area / state if you want.

Please, let me explain what a "Revolving Door Shelter" is. Animals get brought into the shelter. They are either unwanted, or have been neglected, abused or abandoned.

Then someone adopts them. The shelter does not do a good job of screening the person. The pet goes home and gets unwanted, abused, negelected or abandoned again. That's called a revolving door shelter, and it's what every shelter dreads: their work is useless.

The shelter workers don't have a crystal ball. How can they possibly know what a lovely person and mom you are with no questions? Just because you're a lovely person does not mean that they can use psychic powers. You're a stranger to them when you walk into the door.

If they want to just hand the animals to strangers, they could just call themselves a pet store. The concept of a shelter is to find homes where the history of vet care and committment are better than the factors that brought them to the shelter in the first place.

Please email me if you want pointers! I'm also a vet nurse and can be a good resource!

kery@felinezen.com

Posted by: Maya | August 13, 2007 05:58 PM

Ridiculous isn't it????? This is the link to one of MANY rescue shelters that makes it virtually impossible for any good intentioned human being to rescue a pet in need. Please see link below this is proof of the point I've been trying to make. After you've filled out this rediculous form and provided them all the information they require they still treat you like a substandard life form:
http://www.persianrescue.net/Application.htm
Btw, the cat that I ended up purchasing from a pet store is not a pedigree in any way, just a regluar domestic short haired cat whom I love just as much as I do my Persians.

Posted by: charli | August 13, 2007 06:39 PM

We are forever responsible for that of which we have tamed...

Posted by: Tammatha Leigh | August 20, 2007 01:44 AM

That is ridiculous dogs matter more than Shitty retards that thinks that dogs should die. Who ever hates dogs I hope you burn in HELL for Eternety why Im in HEAVEN with my personal SAVOIR

Posted by: Alisa | December 20, 2007 11:25 PM

PETA, the reason America is in the shape it is!!!

Posted by: sonny | January 8, 2008 12:55 AM