Last Chance to stop the Python and Boa Ban!

[WingedWolfPsion]

Animals should never be considered a source of income... ever.

Wait, what? And why?
I'm a professional reptile breeder. They are my primary source of income. This is a business for me, and I'm proud of the way I run it, and the way I care for my animals.

I cannot think of a single reason why animals should not be considered a source of income. That's really an incredibly general statement. Do you hate farmers, or something?

I have an issue with people who abuse and neglect animals. I don't have an issue with people who make money by breeding animals, and I don't see why anyone else should.

Your hatred of designer dogs is also without explanation. Someone who wants a puggle doesn't want a pug or a poodle, or the random dog from the shelter. They want a puggle, so why shouldn't they be allowed to buy one?
Most dog breeds started out when someone bred several different breeds together to come up with something new that was more suited to their purposes or more appealing to them. That process has not stopped, new breeds are still being created.
The person selling puggle puppies is not to blame for the shelters being full of unwanted dogs. The dogs THEY produce are wanted--if they weren't, they couldn't sell them.
One dog is not exactly like every other dog. You can't just remove all the puggles, and expect the people who wanted them to go pick up a shelter mutt. It doesn't work that way.

The truth is, there will always be stray dogs and cats, because these animals evolved to live in human environments. We made them into pets and we care for them, but at their most fundamental level, they are species that evolved to scavenge from us. It never ceases to amaze me how folks can proclaim that strays will die horrible deaths from disease if they aren't found, and then turn around and state that those strays are breeding and producing more animals that will succumb to the same fate.

You know, a sustained breeding population in MOST species indicates that they are getting what they need to survive. Feral dogs and cats don't have lives that are significantly worse than those of other wild animals. We just don't think about it that way very often.

It's not really good for us to have packs of feral dogs roaming around, or feral cats all over, because they pose a danger to us--either direct or through disease. But as far as the animals are concerned? They're doing what they evolved to do. They're surviving on our garbage and the rodents we attract...and they're thriving, in urban and suburban environments. An increasing or stable population = success.

Because of this, there will ALWAYS be 'unwanted dogs and cats' in the shelters. There will always be rats and pigeons and squirrels and raccoons and sparrows and starlings all over the place in the US, too. The idea that every cat or dog should have a home with a person is simply outside the bounds of reality. It's a shame that so many have to be euthanized, yes--but attacking professional breeders as if THEY caused it to happen is ridiculous. If everyone stopped deliberately breeding dogs and cats tomorrow, there would still be more of them than people could keep, and that would never change. It's not a tragedy, it's what these animals evolved to be. We did not deliberately create the domestic dog--it evolved to live in the environments we create around us. Considering it to be any different from a deer or a pigeon is just hypocritical.

So tell me...why exactly is it wrong to breed animals for income?

[Stefan-A]

I have an issue with people who abuse and neglect animals. I don't have an issue with people who make money by breeding animals, and I don't see why anyone else should.

I guess it's the notion that breeding for money leads to two things:

1. Neglect or abuse, usually through less than optimal living conditions and overbreeding individual animals. Think: Puppy mills. Naturally, that's not what has to happen and it does not mean that people who don't breed animals for money don't abuse and neglect their animals.

2. Selling to just anybody. The larger the quantities, the bigger the need to "unload". Doesn't mean that occasional breeder don't do this, either.

I'm inclined to agree with you on the "designer dog" issue. I am however going to take it a few steps futher and say that the I find the whole idea of purebred dogs both sad and hilarious. When people brag about having a purebred or prize-winning whatever, I really just want to tell them: "No, you have a disfigured, inbred wolf." This can be applied to designer dogs as well. In some cases, the same principle applies to snakes and other reptiles.

[aSnakeLovinBabe]

I guess it's the notion that breeding for money leads to two things:

1. Neglect or abuse, usually through less than optimal living conditions and overbreeding individual animals. Think: Puppy mills. Naturally, that's not what has to happen and it does not mean that people who don't breed animals for money don't abuse and neglect their animals.

2. Selling to just anybody. The larger the quantities, the bigger the need to "unload". Doesn't mean that occasional breeder don't do this, either

yeeeesssssss. <3

I'm inclined to agree with you on the "designer dog" issue. I am however going to take it a few steps futher and say that the I find the whole idea of purebred dogs both sad and hilarious. When people brag about having a purebred or prize-winning whatever, I really just want to tell them: "No, you have a disfigured, inbred wolf." This can be applied to designer dogs as well. In some cases, the same principle applies to snakes and other reptiles.

I have to be perfectly honest with you Stefan, I agree... I DO think that the whole purebred dog thing is absolutely silly... and when it affects the animal's well being it's not so great... what I mean is how some breeds are especially prone to certain health issues because of their severe disfigurement (English bulldogs and their breathing problems for one, and great danes with their extremely short life spans)

BUT.... for me it came down to this. You have to pick your poison. At least with the purebred thing, most of the breeders and what not, they have some sort of standard! They have expectations and very high standards and they care about their freaking dogs more than themselves. The GOOD breeders, that is. Oh yes... that lady that comes into my store that breeds those hideous chinese cresteds (those half naked tiny little "dog" things)... oh yesss she drives me nuts with her incessant petty little things about all our products and the way she fusses over those dogs.... but in the end what matters is that she loves them so much, and that they are SO healthy and happy because of the way she cares. We cannot say the same for those who are filling the world's pet stores with as many random combinations of dogs as they can make!

[MasSalvaje]

When people brag about having a purebred or prize-winning whatever, I really just want to tell them: "No, you have a disfigured, inbred wolf.".

I vote this the best quote of all time!!!!!!!!!

Stefan, it is too bad that we live half a world apart and will probably never meet in person. I think we would get along you and I.

-Thomas

[aSnakeLovinBabe]

I've already said quite enough and I really don't feel the need to elaborate any further. You took one single quote from my entire post and get all up in arms about it. You took it a bit too literal. But I stated my opinion and it's not going to change.... And actually I DO have a problem with the way a lot of farm livestock are raised. But this is a garter snake forum. And I'm on my lunchbreak.... And so I'll leave it at that. I am entitled to my opinion as much as you are yours.

Wait, what? And why?
I'm a professional reptile breeder. They are my primary source of income. This is a business for me, and I'm proud of the way I run it, and the way I care for my animals.

I cannot think of a single reason why animals should not be considered a source of income. That's really an incredibly general statement. Do you hate farmers, or something?

I have an issue with people who abuse and neglect animals. I don't have an issue with people who make money by breeding animals, and I don't see why anyone else should.

Your hatred of designer dogs is also without explanation. Someone who wants a puggle doesn't want a pug or a poodle, or the random dog from the shelter. They want a puggle, so why shouldn't they be allowed to buy one?
Most dog breeds started out when someone bred several different breeds together to come up with something new that was more suited to their purposes or more appealing to them. That process has not stopped, new breeds are still being created.
The person selling puggle puppies is not to blame for the shelters being full of unwanted dogs. The dogs THEY produce are wanted--if they weren't, they couldn't sell them.
One dog is not exactly like every other dog. You can't just remove all the puggles, and expect the people who wanted them to go pick up a shelter mutt. It doesn't work that way.

The truth is, there will always be stray dogs and cats, because these animals evolved to live in human environments. We made them into pets and we care for them, but at their most fundamental level, they are species that evolved to scavenge from us. It never ceases to amaze me how folks can proclaim that strays will die horrible deaths from disease if they aren't found, and then turn around and state that those strays are breeding and producing more animals that will succumb to the same fate.

You know, a sustained breeding population in MOST species indicates that they are getting what they need to survive. Feral dogs and cats don't have lives that are significantly worse than those of other wild animals. We just don't think about it that way very often.

It's not really good for us to have packs of feral dogs roaming around, or feral cats all over, because they pose a danger to us--either direct or through disease. But as far as the animals are concerned? They're doing what they evolved to do. They're surviving on our garbage and the rodents we attract...and they're thriving, in urban and suburban environments. An increasing or stable population = success.

Because of this, there will ALWAYS be 'unwanted dogs and cats' in the shelters. There will always be rats and pigeons and squirrels and raccoons and sparrows and starlings all over the place in the US, too. The idea that every cat or dog should have a home with a person is simply outside the bounds of reality. It's a shame that so many have to be euthanized, yes--but attacking professional breeders as if THEY caused it to happen is ridiculous. If everyone stopped deliberately breeding dogs and cats tomorrow, there would still be more of them than people could keep, and that would never change. It's not a tragedy, it's what these animals evolved to be. We did not deliberately create the domestic dog--it evolved to live in the environments we create around us. Considering it to be any different from a deer or a pigeon is just hypocritical.

So tell me...why exactly is it wrong to breed animals for income?