Does this breeder sound reputable?

[nomrbddgs]

@DebraDownSouth:

That said, I applaud your placements of dogs over money. That is what good breeders do. But it sounds like you think bomb-proofing requires kids under the roof… so I guess you think people with children should ONLY get pups from someone like you. OOOPS Robyn et al... you are now relegated to those awful rescues that also are not as good as those with children.

I deal weekly with people who got pups from reputable breeders who have issues. Some, maybe most, because the breeder placed dogs in homes that were not appropriate or didn't recognize the temperament of the puppy.

Stop bashing rescues for health or temperament.

Just a few things, there are quite a few rescues that clearly state, on almost all of their adoptions, 'better off in a home with children over 12, etc'. So what is that saying? Obviously, a lot of these dogs are felt to be not good with children-and that is put out by your evaluators/fosters. So how can it be said that rescues are well socialized with children and are able to be placed with children? I'm not saying all rescues dogs are like this, but a reality is most are because most of these dogs have little socialization with adults, never mind children.

What people are you dealing with that got pups from 'reputable' breeders? If they were truly reputable breeders, they would take the dog BACK! Then you wouldn't have to deal with them. As a breeder, we have to think of the whole household and what is the best fit. I have turned down a lot of people because I simply feel they are not appropriate for one of my dogs, or I don't have the right temperment for them. If it was the right fit, the dog is happy and the people are happy. And yes, I have placed my dogs at lower prices when the right home fits as well. I prefer to have a proper home for the dog than have an unhappy dog. Which is what I have done recently as well. So, as breeders, we do think of the best interests of the dog as well. If a dog is not happy in my home, I will find the right home for him.

Most of the rescues that are dealt with do come with issues irregardless of what you say. Whether they are mental or physical. It is a crap shoot in the long run with any dog. I agree with that as to the physical well being, no one, NO ONE, can determine long term what can happen to anyone or anything physically or mentally. Things happen. The reason they are in rescues is that the 'reputable' breeder (as you say) is not taking them back. Sorry, but they can't possibly be that great if they won't take one of their own back.

I seriously don't know what 'reputable' breeders you have come into contact with, but maybe you should talk to some more truly, reputable breeders before you lump us all into your category. By the way, I don't have 10, 20 or 30 dogs either. I do know people who have. But at this point, that is because they have taken a few of their dogs back and also have rescues they are trying to place. I have the boxer rescue, who will not live another 4 years, an old dog that does need to be put down as she is now in pain most of the time and her health does not give her quality of life, two female b's and one neutered male b and one puppy. So, am I one of your 'reputable' breeders as well? I take good care of my dogs, they are all pets first, show dogs second.

I'm not trying to 'bash' you, I don't think anyone is here, but we are trying to educate you as to what a 'reputable' breeder really is. Based on your experience with what you call 'reputable' breeders, I think maybe you should re-evaluate and stop lumping us into the same category. I, in fact, do more health testing on my 'pets' that most lay people do. I think on this forum, most people do more health testing than the average 'pet' person as well.

[DebraDownSouth]

@lvoss:

I think you are the one who is impressively misinformed. I don't know about all areas of the country but at least in this area, the responsible breeders don't have 10, 20, 30 dogs, they have maybe 5-6 dogs and they are house dogs and well socialized, well loved, and trained. I suppose with a litter in the house almost any breeder could technically have 10 dogs but that doesn't mean they aren't carefully socialized, observed and evaluated.

I also disagree that temperament and behavior are not of primary importance when bringing any new dog into a household.

Wow thank you for missing the essence of what I said and latching onto numbers. We'll forget that I met several breeders at Nationals who said they had 8 to 12 ADULTS in their homes, which meant with even 2 litters up to 20. I was trying to make a point. Since it seemed to fly over your head, I'll make it basic.
It is disingenuous to slur the "bomb proofing" and socialization of rescues who are usually in homes with only a few dogs compared to a breeder's time per dog who has several adults and a litter. The rescues are fully as able to socialize. THAT was the only point, not whether you know anyone with 10 dogs in the house. I'd be really snarky and pull up breeder web sites to prove numbers 10 and up, but since that wasn't the POINT, won't bother.

Nor did I say TEMPERAMENT wasn't an issue. But you knew that. I said the temperament of rescues is fine, as fine as breeders, when a rescue does it's job and the breeder does its job. Again, you knew that was the point and pretending I indicated a TEMPERAMENT just in of itself wasn't important is incredible.

[DebraDownSouth]

double post

[DebraDownSouth]

@nomrbddgs:

Just a few things, there are quite a few rescues that clearly state, on almost all of their adoptions, 'better off in a home with children over 12, etc'. So what is that saying? Obviously, a lot of these dogs are felt to be not good with children-and that is put out by your evaluators/fosters. So how can it be said that rescues are well socialized with children and are able to be placed with children? I'm not saying all rescues dogs are like this, but a reality is most are because most of these dogs have little socialization with adults, never mind children.

What people are you dealing with that got pups from 'reputable' breeders?
Most of the rescues that are dealt with do come with issues irregardless of what you say. Whether they are mental or physical. It is a crap shoot in the long run with any dog. I agree with that as to the physical well being, no one, NO ONE, can determine long term what can happen to anyone or anything physically or mentally. Things happen. The reason they are in rescues is that the 'reputable' breeder (as you say) is not taking them back. Sorry, but they can't possibly be that great if they won't take one of their own back.

I seriously don't know what 'reputable' breeders you have come into contact with, but maybe you should talk to some more truly, reputable breeders before you lump us all into your category
.
I'm not trying to 'bash' you, I don't think anyone is here, but we are trying to educate you as to what a 'reputable' breeder really is. Based on your experience with what you call 'reputable' breeders, I think maybe you should re-evaluate and stop lumping us into the same category. I, in fact, do more health testing on my 'pets' that most lay people do. I think on this forum, most people do more health testing than the average 'pet' person as well.

1. You made my point for me, thank you. Rescues who evaluate KNOW the temperament and place in the right home. A rescue who is suitable for a home with kids is as safe as a breeder's dog that is safe for a home with kids. Thanks!

2. Sorry, but the breeders I meant are not JUST basenji ones. And sorry again, but as has already been pointed out, lots of responsible breeder pups hit rescue. The really responsible ones take the dogs back, but the owners didn't contact for help before dumping. That wasn't a slur on the breeder, you can't MAKE people call you if they have an issue. Of course, routine calls to stay involved help, but even then some owners don't want to admit issues. I wasn't lumping all breeders. As for health testing… um, not to be snarky, but DUH. You are breeding, testing more for genetic issues is critical. Most pet owners, even those you place pups with, will do only what they understand is important for the health of their pet. One reason I REQUIRED hips and elbow prelim at 6 mos and final at 2 yrs for my Rotties... pet or show. I worked to help them understand that even though they weren't breeding, I needed that information to have a full picture of what I was producing. And it was often pulling teeth. But the bottom line is that the average pet owner cares about overall health and you cannot show me one study by an reputable source that shows genetic testing provides anything other than less occurrence of that genetic issue. Glad you test, YOU SHOULD! But it doesn't mean a puppy from you will be one bit healthier beyond genetic issues, live longer or have less health problems than a rescue. It doesn't. And while the "mutts are healthier" mantra also doesn't hold much water, neither does claims that rescues are unhealthier. Of course if you have any dog, even from a responsible breeder, who has been malnourished, abused, sick without treatment... there are problems. But that is environment, NOT genetics. So again, a healthy rescue is as healthy as a healthy pup. I don't know rescues pushing unhealthy dogs on unsuspecting families. I do know angels who take sick and needy rescues. But again, that has nothing to do with trying to indicate that rescues are not the perfect answer for as many homes, if not more, than a puppy from a responsible breeder.

3. Educate me about a responsible breeder? Hello, I am fully aware of what a RESPONSIBLE breeder is. I don't need an education. The education needed here is for people to stop bashing rescues as less overall healthy than responsibly bred dogs once the main issues are eliminated. The education needed here is for people to stop pretending that a rescue who has often been in foster and evaluated for MONTHS so that their temperament is truly known is not as safe or good as any puppy. That, not my clear understanding of what a responsible breeder is, is the educational lack in this thread. And I AM bashing the bashing of rescues, no apology.

[sharronhurlbut]

I believe some area's of the country don't support rescue, that folks do use rescue as a dumping ground for dogs..I have heard many stories of this. Course, that makes rescue angry.
I live in the PNW. We have only 3 breeders I can think of, off hand who are NOT responsible. This is over 4 states. So, clearly, I live in a more responsible area of the country.
Not only to the responsible rescues support me, but often they will foster a b that isn't even theirs, will help with transport, and do home checks or give me tips for homes for
these dogs. I can't tell you how helpful that is.
I think all this depends on what area your in and if you have support to do rescue work.

Rescue does do all they can to find the right home for the right dog. Just a breeders do.
I don't see this as a conflict, I do think its possible to make it a win/win.

[lvoss]

@DebraDownSouth:

Wow thank you for missing the essence of what I said and latching onto numbers. We'll forget that I met several breeders at Nationals who said they had 8 to 12 ADULTS in their homes, which meant with even 2 litters up to 20. I was trying to make a point. Since it seemed to fly over your head, I'll make it basic.
It is disingenuous to slur the "bomb proofing" and socialization of rescues who are usually in homes with only a few dogs compared to a breeder's time per dog who has several adults and a litter. The rescues are fully as able to socialize. THAT was the only point, not whether you know anyone with 10 dogs in the house. I'd be really snarky and pull up breeder web sites to prove numbers 10 and up, but since that wasn't the POINT, won't bother.

Nor did I say TEMPERAMENT wasn't an issue. But you knew that. I said the temperament of rescues is fine, as fine as breeders, when a rescue does it's job and the breeder does its job. Again, you knew that was the point and pretending I indicated a TEMPERAMENT just in of itself wasn't important is incredible.

Clearly, you have a beef with breeders and I think I did get your point perfectly.

You said that rescue volunteers are better able to socialize and evaluate dogs because they have fewer dogs. I think you are impressively misinformed on several points. Are there breeders with more than 10 dogs in their household? I am sure there are but I don't think it is the "norm" in many places. I think many breeders have moved away from keeping large numbers of dogs and see many that are co-owning puppies with their puppy buyers who are amenable to them showing them and later breeding them. Even if they do have more than 10 dogs that does mean they don't do a great job at providing their puppies with critical socialization and early puppyhood experiences they need to become stable adults. Secondly, no matter how stellar a rescue volunteer is at training and rehabilitating, lack of good socialization during critical development periods can never really be fully substituted. Thirdly, I know many rescue volunteers with more dogs in their home than some responsible breeders.

I do think that you implied that temperament issues were a non-issue in rescues and that is just not true and since behavior and temperament are so critical, I think it is wrong to imply that rescue organizations are somehow going to make those non-issues simply through the fostering and evaluating process.

I think rescues are a great option for some people but they come with huge question marks that make then a less suitable option for some households and no matter what you say, HEALTH and TEMPERAMENT are some of those huge question marks. It is far better though to adopt a rescue with these question marks though then it is to go out and buy from a BYB where you are still going to have those question marks and won't have the support of the rescue organization to help you work through them.

[lvoss]

@sharronhurlbut:

Rescue does do all they can to find the right home for the right dog. Just a breeders do.
I don't see this as a conflict, I do think its possible to make it a win/win.

Absolutely Sharron.

I think that things work best when breeders and rescue work together to make sure that households get the right dog for their situation. Not all dog owners should get puppies. But not all households are right for rescues either. When both sides are willing to refer to the other when appropriate everyone wins because the dogs stay in their homes.

[tanza]

@DebraDownSouth:

Educate me about a responsible breeder? Hello, I am fully aware of what a RESPONSIBLE breeder is. I don't need an education. The education needed here is for people to stop bashing rescues as less overall healthy than responsibly bred dogs once the main issues are eliminated. The education needed here is for people to stop pretending that a rescue who has often been in foster and evaluated for MONTHS so that their temperament is truly known is not as safe or good as any puppy. That, not my clear understanding of what a responsible breeder is, is the educational lack in this thread. And I AM bashing the bashing of rescues, no apology.

Not sure who you think here is "bashing" rescue? We are just pointing out that a rescue is not the best choice for all people. And even if you look at BRAT, how many of those dogs say "no children under the age of…."....
Rescues as we all know come with a different set of baggage then a puppy... and many times because of the situation they were in there are circumstances that the best of fosters will never be able to work through... And I don't know what breeders you are referring to that have 20/30 Basenjis .. None that I know of, at least not responsible breeders. Just because you may have been involved with a less than responsible breeder, don't lump all the rest into that catagory

[DebraDownSouth]

@lvoss:

Clearly, you have a beef with breeders and I think I did get your point perfectly.

I have no beef with breeders. I have beefs with breeders bashing rescue. Surely you are able to see the difference, no?

You said that rescue volunteers are better able to socialize and evaluate dogs because they have fewer dogs. ..blah blah blah.. 10 dogs that does mean they don't do a great job at providing their puppies with critical socialization ..blah blah…lack of good socialization during critical development periods can never really be fully substituted. Thirdly, I know many rescue volunteers with more dogs in their home than some responsible breeders.

I was responding to someone indicating BREEDERS only able to do a good job. Let the 10 dogs go, really, it wasn't the point. Make it 6 compared to 2 if you really need numbers. The POINT, the ONLY POINT, was that a rescue sure as heck can do as good of a job. Period. As for early socialization, having seen so many rescues of many breeds who came up with horrific situations, I say.. again.. not really. Some dogs have bad temperaments that the early issues cannot be overcome. Most dogs, given proper socialization even as adults, do fine. Thank goodness. As for rescuers with many dogs, just like breeders with many, they are not the norm.

I do think that you implied that temperament issues were a non-issue in rescues…more smoke throwing to avoid what was really said and address that….I think it is wrong to imply that rescue organizations are somehow going to make those non-issues simply through the fostering and evaluating process.

If you got that, I already tried once to explain. Since you ignored my clear explanation, no sense in saying again what you want to continue insisting that wasn't meant. What you are insisting is insultingly stupid and never said.

I think rescues are a great option for some people but they come with huge question marks that make then a less suitable option for some households and no matter what you say,

And I say, prove to me the health stats on well bred versus byb. Please. And I also say 90 percent of people looking for puppies don't know a responsible from byb, so again… it's usually a pig in a poke for most. But even when they do... again, you can certainly decrease genetic issues, but that's about it. And again, a TEMPERAMENT TESTED socialized rescue is as safe as any responsible breeder dog for a pet.

And I am sorry for all the responsible breeders who support rescue. Honest, I love you people. I don't lump you with the rescue bashers any more than I lump responsible breeders with puppymills or byb. My only issue is bashing rescue.

[DebraDownSouth]

@tanza:

Not sure who you think here is "bashing" rescue? We are just pointing out that a rescue is not the best choice for all people. And even if you look at BRAT, how many of those dogs say "no children under the age of….".... don't lump all the rest into that catagory

I started to go all debraly and quote you where i already answered the above… but why bother.

I understand... some breeders don't have homes lined up, get back adults and can't place them, and see rescue as a competition. Snarky enough comment for you?

Because the continued twisting of what I said, or saying the same thing again I responded to already convinces me that some folks will continue to twist and ignore so why bother.

And now, really done. I just hope people thinking of rescue consider the source of the nay-sayers, do their homework, consider the bazillion rescues who have made superb pets, and realize it is usually a great choice and almost always at LEAST as good of a choice as a breeder's puppy unless they want to show and breed.

[tanza]

@DebraDownSouth:

I understand… some breeders don't have homes lined up, get back adults and can't place them, and see rescue as a competition. Snarky enough comment for you?

And I would not consider the above breeder, responsible. I do not know of any breeder that considers rescue as "competition"

[lvoss]

@DebraDownSouth:

I have no beef with breeders. I have beefs with breeders bashing rescue. Surely you are able to see the difference, no?

Actually, you took one statement about rescues being at higher risk of health issues than dogs with well tested and carefully bred parents to be rescue bashing and then turned this thread into your chance to breeder bash. I think that demonstrates an issue with breeders.

@DebraDownSouth:

I was responding to someone indicating BREEDERS only able to do a good job. Let the 10 dogs go, really, it wasn't the point. Make it 6 compared to 2 if you really need numbers. The POINT, the ONLY POINT, was that a rescue sure as heck can do as good of a job. Period. As for early socialization, having seen so many rescues of many breeds who came up with horrific situations, I say.. again.. not really. Some dogs have bad temperaments that the early issues cannot be overcome. Most dogs, given proper socialization even as adults, do fine. Thank goodness. As for rescuers with many dogs, just like breeders with many, they are not the norm.

I know a lot more rescuers with 6 dogs than 2 so the point of they have less is still FALSE. You wanted to make rescuers look better than breeders but you exaggerated breeder numbers and down played rescuers numbers to do it.

@DebraDownSouth:

If you got that, I already tried once to explain. Since you ignored my clear explanation, no sense in saying again what you want to continue insisting that wasn't meant. What you are insisting is insultingly stupid and never said.

Here is exactly what you said

@DebraDownSouth:

There are situations where a puppy IS important. But it isn't for temperament or behavior.

I still believe that temperament and behavior are the primary concerns when adding a new dog and they are the primary reason most families opt for a puppy over a rescue because rescue dogs do not have the socialization to the hectic daily routines of most families. It has been pointed out time and again that far more adult dogs list "not good with children" then list "good with children" so absolutely TEMPERAMENT and BEHAVIOR are important in choosing a puppy over rescue.

@DebraDownSouth:

And I say, prove to me the health stats on well bred versus byb.

It is really hard to prove with health stats seeing as BYBs won't spend the money to test or submit the data. What we do see is the data from the owners of those dogs and only significantly for Fanconi where it is required that the information be published in order to have the test.

[dcmclcm4]

The majority of my rescues have never been around children since they have lived in crates 24/7. Since I do not have children, they are not exposed to children in a household. They might meet children at events, etc. but that is not the same as living with children who might pull their tail, carry food around at their height, etc.

Jennifer

[khanis]

@DebraDownSouth:

I understand… some breeders don't have homes lined up, get back adults and can't place them, and see rescue as a competition. Snarky enough comment for you?

And now, really done. I just hope people thinking of rescue consider the source of the nay-sayers, do their homework, consider the bazillion rescues who have made superb pets, and realize it is usually a great choice and almost always at LEAST as good of a choice as a breeder's puppy unless they want to show and breed.

WOW! With what you made this thread out to be, perhaps a TT is in order.
NO good breeder views rescue as competition.

MY dogs, as most well-bred dogs, have temperaments beyond comparison to any rescue. Sure, some rescues are one in a million… but that isn't the norm.
FEW RESCUE DOGS, IF ANY, CAN BE CONSIDERED BOMB PROOF.
I do not care who has evaluated it, spent time with it, and TT it.
The vast majority of dogs in rescue to not have a history that rescue knows 100% about.
The vast majority of people that turn dogs into rescue tell the truth. They are ready to be done with the dog, and if it takes making up crap to shove the dog off on others, it is done.
Don't even waste your breath to try and refute this... I have seen it way too much.

And a rescue is almost always as good of a choice as a well-bred puppy?
You obviously believe this to be true... but it is merely an unsubstantiated opinion that all I can really do is laugh at someone that believes it.

I do rescue, so don't think I am a rescue-basher... but as a responsible breeder, I feel it is my position to help clean up the messes of others. If I don't do it, more dogs fall into the wrong hands.

In fact, I have been in contact with the OHS and they have contacted the new owner of the 11yo R/W Basenji girl that was recently posted on the Oregon HS website. The dog is doing well and I am awaiting the info on the breeder. They have followed up with me with 4 phone calls... do I need to worry about someone else's dog? No, not really. But, if it were mine, I would hope that another responsible breeder would do the same.

[sharronhurlbut]

Kathy, re this dog in the OHS. I have tried to get her out and into BRAT.
The shetler will not release her to us. They want to place her. As its a no kill shelter, that's better than some.
This is just fyi.

[DebraDownSouth]

@tanza:

Not sure who you think here is "bashing" rescue? We are just pointing out that a rescue is not the best choice for all people. And even if you look at BRAT, how many of those dogs say "no children under the age of…."....
Rescues as we all know come with a different set of baggage then a puppy... and many times because of the situation they were in there are circumstances that the best of fosters will never be able to work through...

Not bashing rescue dogs? Really, what thread were you on? Review below.

@lvoss:

Actually, you took one statement about rescues being at higher risk of health issues than dogs with well tested and carefully bred parents to be rescue bashing and then turned this thread into your chance to breeder bash. I think that demonstrates an issue with breeders.

I still believe that temperament and behavior are the primary concerns when adding a new dog and they are the primary reason most families opt for a puppy over a rescue because rescue dogs do not have the socialization to the hectic daily routines of most families. It has been pointed out time and again that far more adult dogs list "not good with children" then list "good with children" so absolutely TEMPERAMENT and BEHAVIOR are important in choosing a puppy over rescue.

And continuing to say my issue is BREEDERS is dishonest. No beef with responsible breeders. My only complaint is anyone, breeder or not, bashing rescues. Although I DO have a new beef, it is twisting my words and continuing to repeat something I clarified… such as that temperament doesn't matter. OF COURSE IT DOES. But a temperament tested, fostered, socialized dog who has been deemed good with kids IS just as safe as your puppies. AND, once again (typing slow so maybe you all stop repeating it over and over).. I didn't CLAIM ALL RESCUES GOOD WITH CHILDREN. For crying out loud, how many times do I have to say it.

@nomrbddgs:

And there are benefits from the health perspective to temperment of the dog that you know about.

@YodelDogs:

The initial adoption fee for a rescue may be a little bit less than a responsibly bred dog but the risk for health issues may prove higher, and far more expensive, in the long run.

Okay so rescues AND homes without children living in them can't prepare a dog to live with kids:
@khanis:

For others, it just will NOT work.
I have kids, so I know that is imperative to many families getting a pup… my pups are kid-proofed more than any puppy could possibly be that does NOT have children living under the roof. If they hit 8 wks in my house.. they are literally bomb-proof to all noises and kinds of people. You don't generally find that in rescue.

Actually most rescues ARE fine, or they don't make it into rescue… unstable dogs should always be put down. Nor is the modern family an issue. Unruly abusive children would be, they would be for ANY dog.
@lvoss:

It can be very difficult for families to find adult dogs that have been well socialized to the chaos of the modern family and of the temperament to take it all in stride. That doesn't mean that there are not adult dogs that will fit the bill but they are definately not the most commonly seen in the surrendered dog population.

@nomrbddgs:

Just a few things, there are quite a few rescues that clearly state, on almost all of their adoptions, 'better off in a home with children over 12, etc'. So what is that saying? Obviously, a lot of these dogs are felt to be not good with children-and that is put out by your evaluators/fosters. So how can it be said that rescues are well socialized with children and are able to be placed with children? I'm not saying all rescues dogs are like this, but a reality is most are because most of these dogs have little socialization with adults, never mind children.

Most of the rescues that are dealt with do come with issues irregardless of what you say. Whether they are mental or physical. It is a crap shoot in the long run with any dog. I agree with that as to the physical well being, no one, NO ONE, can determine long term what can happen to anyone or anything physically or mentally.

@lvoss:

Secondly, no matter how stellar a rescue volunteer is at training and rehabilitating, lack of good socialization during critical development periods can never really be fully substituted.

I think rescues are a great option for some people but they come with huge question marks that make then a less suitable option for some households and no matter what you say, HEALTH and TEMPERAMENT are some of those huge question marks.

[DebraDownSouth]

@khanis:

MY dogs, as most well-bred dogs, have temperaments beyond comparison to any rescue. Sure, some rescues are one in a million… but that isn't the norm.

Actually, it really is. Most dogs in rescues and shelters are there due to stupid or irresponsible owners, not temperament. Lets get real okay? Responsible breeders make up .. I forget the AKC stats… quite a bit less than 20 percent show their dogs in any venue, never mind percent who do their breed's recommended genetic and health testing. That's only akc. Yet most dogs are perfectly fine temperaments. Exceptions? Sure, guardian breed dogs and others. But generally, nope. Which is why there aren't hundreds of people dead every year from those poorly breed insane dogs you imagine are out there. MOST dogs have fine temperaments... maybe not for every home, but certainly okay. Most dog issues are not the dog's temperament but the owner's issues.

FEW RESCUE DOGS, IF ANY, CAN BE CONSIDERED BOMB PROOF.
I do not care who has evaluated it, spent time with it, and TT it.
The vast majority of dogs in rescue to not have a history that rescue knows 100% about.

Heads up. Unlike a human sitting in psychoanalysis, you don't need much history. Live with a dog for 3 to 6 mos and if you aren't able to evaluate the temperament and bomb proof it as much as any other dog, you need some help. Doesn't mean every dog for every home, but then, neither are Basenjis right for even MOST homes.

The vast majority of people that turn dogs into rescue tell the truth. They are ready to be done with the dog, and if it takes making up crap to shove the dog off on others, it is done.
Don't even waste your breath to try and refute this… I have seen it way too much.

I think you meant DON'T tell the truth. And we agree. Again, so what? You spend time with the dog, you'll get all the info you need.

And a rescue is almost always as good of a choice as a well-bred puppy?
You obviously believe this to be true… but it is merely an unsubstantiated opinion that all I can really do is laugh at someone that believes it.

Typing slow again. Puppies are hard for most people to raise right. If they have the ability to raise a puppy right, they could also live with a rescue. So yeah, it's laughable you want to argue a rescue won't do just as well unless they want to show or breed. Genetic diseases aside… which I grant and have said.

[DebraDownSouth]

@dcmclcm4:

The majority of my rescues have never been around children since they have lived in crates 24/7. Since I do not have children, they are not exposed to children in a household. They might meet children at events, etc. but that is not the same as living with children who might pull their tail, carry food around at their height, etc.

Jennifer

Then you would be wise to never place in homes with children… or do you mean dogs you have adopted? Not sure if you mean you rescue to place or your own adopted dogs. If you rescue to place, here is a thought.. should anyone do rescue if they are not able to find kids to expose them TO? Because most homes have kids visit... family, neighbors, whatever. I consider exposing to children to be critical. It really is important to know how a dog is. What if one of those rescues has issues with children and is a danger?

[khanis]

Debra,

Do you have any idea how much rescue Jennifer does for the Basenji breed??
I gather you don't by the rude comments you are making.
Jennifer is an ANGEL and does more than many folks combined when it comes to rescue. Bless her for being there for so many of these dogs.

THIS THREAD NEEDS TO BE CLOSED.
You are a rude individual to folks that you do not know in any way.
We can all suffice to say that you would argue til the cows came home…
the fact is, you are bashing those of us on here that are good breeders AND we do rescue.
Get past yourself and realize you are preaching to the wrong choir.

[lvoss]

I agree this topic needs to be closed.