@elbrant said in Pups dying of parvo as California pet buyers turn to backyard breeders online in pandemic:
@jengosmonkey I wasn't able to read the article (paper is subscription based), but I agree that this is worth a conversation. But which topic.... parvo/shots, backyard breeders, pandemic-inspired adoptions, or..... ?
Right? There's a lot to unpack from that article. Sorry about the pay wall. Feel free to take this any direction you'd like. For me... I was most interested in the breeding permit that CA is considering. This link will take you to the complete text of the bill - AB-702 Animal breeding: permits
This link will take you to the AKC response to the bill: California: Bill Seeks to Regulate All Dog Breeders
So this is my take... my opinion. I hate it. When I had the chance to look for new Basenjis this last summer, I had the opportunity to speak with several breeders. Years before that I had the chance to speak with rescues. Now no one showed me the books, but no one I spoke to was making any money. Yes they got some money for puppies and less for rescues, but that was to offset the costs. Costs for vets, testing, breeding, equipment, transportation, food, shelter, shows, etc. Each one of those components can be split into a number of additional components. Breeding for basenjis: DNA Fanconi & PRA, hip x-rays, stud fees, lab tests to determine ovulation, sonograms, diet, whelping equipment, vet during delivery if needed, puppy shots/health certificates and I'm certain I've left all kinds of stuff out.
Point is... responsible breeders ARE doing the right thing and most are covering the majority of their own costs. Yes puppy sales offset "some of the costs", but they don't cover the entire cost of a breeding program by a long shot, which is far more extensive than simply having a male and female consummate.
From what little I know... one aspect of a breeding program entails showing dogs and gaining the recognition of fellow breeders that your line is pointed in the right direction in terms of confirmation standards. That seems to be acknowledged through awards and then requests for breeding. There are a ton of costs involved in making that happen.
It also takes time to grow dogs out. Time to see if they if they're of the breeding quality a breeder wants in their line. Time to allow them to mature so they can be bred. They still have to be fed, housed, loved and kept healthy. More costs. And, if a breeder decides to let one go it takes time to find the right home. And be willing to take the dog back if things don't work out.
And I'm only scratching the surface here. Let me see if I can wrap this up. Backyard breeders; although, I REALLY like the name "Greeders" aren't doing any of this. It is all about the money and they'll remain underground, under the radar selling pups for as much as they can, breeding as often as they can and getting rid of the pups as fast as they can. I don't see this bill changing any of that.
Instead I see this bill adding additional costs to a hobby that is already very expensive. If the expense doesn't break the backs of responsible breeders, permitting will. Some municipalities will simply not allow it in order to avoid the cost of enforcement.
I genuinely encourage constructive disagreement.