Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Donedeal and the likes

124

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    lrushe wrote: »
    So maybe I'd change my answer to people power & education even going into schools & starting with young kids because you can put all the laws you want in place but there will always be someone there to get round them, you have to get the majority to want to do the right thing.

    Already being done. I know that EGAR visits schools & there are other schemes but I don't know what the take up is like. It should be on the curriculum but it won't be until the majority insist on it.

    http://www.dogstrust.ie/education/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,524 ✭✭✭Zapperzy


    DBB wrote: »
    Ooooh! Where could I get me one of those?!

    Well I'v heard of mini rottweilers so I would expect to see them on donedeal soon! :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,047 ✭✭✭are you serious


    Zapperzy wrote: »
    Well I'v heard of mini rottweilers so I would expect to see them on donedeal soon! :D

    Ive got a "mini" Rottweiler... She is 4 months old... in another month or 2 I dont think she will be mini any more :p


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭GT_TDI_150


    Discodog wrote: »
    Rescue dogs are the innocent victims & every one that is rehomed means one less dead dog. Lots of rescues have pedigree dogs - one well known charity has loads at the moment & they all come health checked, behaviour tested, vacc'd & neutered.
    what one is that


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    Discodog wrote: »
    Rescue dogs are the innocent victims & every one that is rehomed means one less dead dog. Lots of rescues have pedigree dogs - one well known charity has loads at the moment & they all come health checked, behaviour tested, vacc'd & neutered.

    I'd thank you to stop throwing up the statement that rescue dogs are "health checked" every time the topic of genetic health testing comes up. Quite frankly it's deliberately misleading people for the purposes of forcing rescues on them. It's exactly the same tactic that used by puppy farmers and back yard breeders to peddle their wares and its nothing short of disgusting :mad:

    "Health Checked" at most means a vet has seen a pup, it was alive at the time they saw it and not obviously likely to drop dead sometime in the next week. It does not mean the pup is healthy! It doesn't even guarantee that it isn't riddled with worms and fleas - only that if was the vet would have advised this be treated.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,822 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hellrazer


    Discodog wrote: »
    You can't because you could not prove that the vet was negligent especially as another vet would have to testify against them.

    Thats a ridiculous law aswell--Ive seen it in my job aswell-a member of the same profession having to testify against someone and they very rarely if ever go against one of their own.

    Well as an animal lover you wouldn't mind waiting 2 years especially if it was for the good.
    Nope--not if it was a particular breed that I realy wanted.Im actually researching my next dog now but I wont have room/time for it for a couple of years.

    Not with 6000 dogs being killed every year - there is never going to be a shortage of mongrels.
    Youre not getting me.Say everyone stops buying pedigrees which was what your original post said--any type of dog would become desirable including mongrels and then these would start to fetch high prices.People would just breed anything they had at hand and I feel the situation would be worse.

    We have had such law for 100 years & it has not been effective in Ireland. We will never see huge fines or prison & we only have 5 ISPCA Inspectors for the whole country. Our new Dog Breeding Bill & the expected Animal Welfare Bill will not make any difference because they won't be enforced. We will never have proper enforced law until the majority support it & insist on it as they do in the UK. It is a cultural problem that will take generations to improve.

    Agreed-this new bill wont make the slightest bit of difference.But its not a cultural problem.Its a legislative one.High fines/prison for those that mistreat animals will solve the problem over night and not within generations.


    Rescue dogs are the innocent victims & every one that is rehomed means one less dead dog. Lots of rescues have pedigree dogs - one well known charity has loads at the moment & they all come health checked, behaviour tested, vacc'd & neutered.

    I know resusce are doing the best that they can.Ive just had no luck with rescues.I am considering a rescue mongrel for my next dog but it will have to be a puppy and will have to have some idea of what its going to turn out like.I would love to try an older dog but honestly I dont know that dogs history and I really couldnt take a chance with young kids in the house.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    I get the people that willy-nilly match dogs might be breeding animals more prone to illnesses but could breeders not cause other health problems by trying to breed away from certain things?

    The idea is to eliminate a specific gene or combination of genes from the gene-pool by not breeding from dogs that have displayed signs of a specific health problem or tested positive for either having that trait or the gene that causes it. With conditions that arise from, or are contributed to by the actual conformation of the dog itself its not as straight forward so ideally in this regard you would be breeding with a view to trying to minimise the risk
    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    And id the confined gene pool not cause for concern when talking about pure breeds?

    Yes it is, and this is the whole point. A responsible person will be continually breeding 'new blood' into their lines to add a certain amount of diversity while remaining 'true' to the breed standard that defines the breed. There will be a certain amount of breeding within the same lines also as they may demonstrate strong qualities the breeder wishes to keep (which may be certain aspects of conformation appearance or indeed for the absence of a particular health problem). Now this is where it all gets extremely complicated and I get lost :o. There is a calculated inbreeding co-efficient, (it's a complex mathematical calculation) which gives a very good indication of what is a 'safe' amount of shared genetic material ie. dogs from the same family lines and there are limits and a point at which it can turn around and become detrimental.

    Figuring all this out goes far beyond the mental capacity of most people (including me!) and is exactly the reason why breeding pedigree dogs (or any species) should not be taken lightly.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    I'd thank you to stop throwing up the statement that rescue dogs are "health checked" every time the topic of genetic health testing comes up. Quite frankly it's deliberately misleading people for the purposes of forcing rescues on them. It's exactly the same tactic that used by puppy farmers and back yard breeders to peddle their wares and its nothing short of disgusting :mad:

    "Health Checked" at most means a vet has seen a pup, it was alive at the time they saw it and not obviously likely to drop dead sometime in the next week. It does not mean the pup is healthy! It doesn't even guarantee that it isn't riddled with worms and fleas - only that if was the vet would have advised this be treated.

    Could you please quote all these examples of where I have mentioned health checked or genetic testing & by the way the topic of the thread is not Genetic testing ? You are the one making sweeping statements & whether you would "thank me" or not I will state what I know to be the truth. I am not trying to force a rescue on anyone but I am trying to prevent thousands of dogs being killed unnecessarily. You may find that disgusting but I do not.

    You know very well that there are rescues in Ireland that thoroughly health check their dogs & at at least one does a detailed behavioural check. We have seen countless threads, when rescues were allowed to post, where they had spent fortunes treating dogs before rehoming.

    No one is going to genetically test an adult dog that has been neutered because it would be totally pointless. It would be a virtual impossibility to check a litter of puppies when one or both parents are missing. At least a rescue will still be there if problems occur & the good ones will always offer back up.

    May I suggest that in the interests of balanced & harmonious discussion that you avoid unnecessary "angry faces" & bold type. I will leave others to decide if I am using the "disgusting" tactics of the puppy farmers.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Hellrazer wrote: »
    Agreed-this new bill wont make the slightest bit of difference.But its not a cultural problem.Its a legislative one.High fines/prison for those that mistreat animals will solve the problem over night and not within generations.

    I have spent many hours trying to work out why Ireland is one of the very worse in Europe regarding animal welfare. People blame the lack of law but the UK has only introduced a welfare law recently. During all the time, that I worked in rescue, we only had the same 1911 Act as in Ireland. We never had any problems securing prosecutions.

    But the key difference is the attitude of the majority of people. The RSPCA is a huge organisation with massive public support & financial backing. Whenever there are any public cases, like the Amersham horses, thousands of people offer help & support. That doesn't happen here. The UK is far from perfect but the difference is that the majority support animal welfare in the ballot box & from their own pockets. You can only have effective law & punishment if the majority support it. One other reason why there is a problem with prosecuting here is that it is very difficult to get a Vet to testify that an animal has suffered.

    By the way I have three dogs here that all came directly off the street. They were all in poor condition & unsocialised. All three are now superb with kids - even though I don't have any. If you are still considering a rescue dog then why not try putting your past experiences behind you & getting to know a rescue that can provided the right dog for your needs & that offers ongoing backup. You can't judge every dog or rescue based on past experiences.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    what one is that

    I will PM you as we are not allowed to mention specific rescues here.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    Discodog wrote: »
    I am not trying to force a rescue on anyone but I am trying to prevent thousands of dogs being killed unnecessarily. You may find that disgusting but I do not.

    Please quote where I have said that :rolleyes:
    Discodog wrote: »
    You know very well that there are rescues in Ireland that thoroughly health check their dogs & at at least one does a detailed behavioural check. We have seen countless threads, when rescues were allowed to post, where they had spent fortunes treating dogs before rehoming.

    No one is going to genetically test an adult dog that has been neutered because it would be totally pointless. It would be a virtual impossibility to check a litter of puppies when one or both parents are missing. At least a rescue will still be there if problems occur & the good ones will always offer back up.

    Had this clarification been included in your first post, any ambiguity on the matter would have been avoided. As you know there is already a lot of confusion on the definition of the term 'health check'. As you also know people will read whatever suits them into ambiguous posts, as you have pointed out the topic of the thread is not genetic health testing, it isn't rescues either - it's buying a dog from done deal where vast majority of ads declare animals are 'health checked', so you have inadvertently stipulated that this is enough to those people who choose to see that.
    Discodog wrote: »
    May I suggest that in the interests of balanced & harmonious discussion that you avoid unnecessary "angry faces" & bold type. I will leave others to decide if I am using the "disgusting" tactics of the puppy farmers.

    The angry face portrays emotion - should I type two paragraphs to thoroughly describe it instead of one angry face? The bold type is for emphasis, it's commonly used for this purpose in the english language, and there is no highlight function.


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,822 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hellrazer


    Discodog wrote: »
    By the way I have three dogs here that all came directly off the street. They were all in poor condition & unsocialised. All three are now superb with kids - even though I don't have any.

    But theres the difference--you dont have any-meaning that those dogs are not around kids 12-14 hours a day.My kids all grew up with the dog we currently have and know its boundaries.Even my 3 year old knows those boundaries but thats because she was thought that way from the start.An older dog whose boundaries that I dont even know never mind the kids may not be as suitable as a puppy.

    If you are still considering a rescue dog then why not try putting your past experiences behind you & getting to know a rescue that can provided the right dog for your needs & that offers ongoing backup. You can't judge every dog or rescue based on past experiences.

    Im completely willing to give it a go and when the time comes it will be considered as I would really prefer to rescue but past experience not once but three times has made me wary of it.When that time arrives belive me I`ll be here asking for recommendations (by pm of course)


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,183 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    The idea is to eliminate a specific gene or combination of genes from the gene-pool by not breeding from dogs that have displayed signs of a specific health problem or tested positive for either having that trait or the gene that causes it. With conditions that arise from, or are contributed to by the actual conformation of the dog itself its not as straight forward so ideally in this regard you would be breeding with a view to trying to minimise the risk
    Just my take mind you, but in many cases the standard of the breed itself is the problem. Minimise is all very well, but when the standard is a defect itself how can it move forward? Classic example would be the show standard GSD with it's unnatural gait and some terrible hip problems. Others would be brain and breathing issues in other breeds. Until standards are changed for a more healthy look are these problems not going to continue, regardless of where the dogs are coming from?
    Discodog wrote:
    I have spent many hours trying to work out why Ireland is one of the very worse in Europe regarding animal welfare.
    I dunno D, but I think it might be down to people here seeing animals more as livestock, less as pets as a cultural kinda thing, so they become more a thing than an animal and some of that still holds down to today? Add in the "celtic tiger" period where people too often looked at pedigree dogs as a status symbol, again less as an individual animal. I've actually heard with my own ears people discuss their dog as a list of exclusivity and how much they paid out. It was a symbol and pricetag rather than a dog.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Just my take mind you, but in many cases the standard of the breed itself is the problem. Minimise is all very well, but when the standard is a defect itself how can it move forward? Classic example would be the show standard GSD with it's unnatural gait and some terrible hip problems. Others would be brain and breathing issues in other breeds. Until standards are changed for a more healthy look are these problems not going to continue, regardless of where the dogs are coming from?

    Completely agree - here is a thread where the breed standard for the GSD has been dissected. There are some breeds (the GSD isn't one of them) that I personally believe should not exist, never should have in the first place and should be discontinued - for want of a better word.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    That would make for an interesting thread. "Breeds which shouldnt exist anymore". Tough one to moderate however :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    Bullseye1 wrote: »
    That would make for an interesting thread. "Breeds which shouldnt exist anymore". Tough one to moderate however :D

    Precisely why I don't ever intend to name them on this forum :p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    LOL.


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,822 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hellrazer


    Bullseye1 wrote: »
    That would make for an interesting thread. "Breeds which shouldnt exist anymore". Tough one to moderate however :D

    Personally I'd love to see that thread.Cmon aj and sp-we'll mod it with an iron fist :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    Hellrazer wrote: »
    Personally I'd love to see that thread.Cmon aj and sp-we'll mod it with an iron fist :)

    Any excuse for the opportunity to ban people - mods these days :rolleyes:




    :p


  • Moderators, Arts Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 10,822 Mod ✭✭✭✭Hellrazer


    Any excuse for the opportunity to ban people - mods these days :rolleyes:




    :p


    Im sure the users of the forum could discuss such a topic in a civilised and grown up manner :D:D

    Seriously though if someone wants to start the thread we will keep an eye on it.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,183 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    For me anyway it wouldn't be about which breeds shouldn't exist today, but more about going back to the less exaggerated examples of the breed in the past. Where the animals were healthy and had some variability and were less "designed" into ever more narrow and harmful shapes.

    EG the original British Bulldog looked like this;
    Canis1Bulldog.jpg
    oldenglish.jpg
    Not the poor buggers you see today like this;
    large_20112008050427_01.jpg
    70% have hip dysplasia and other bone issues, nearly two thirds need to be delivered by caesarean section because their heads are too big and they suffer from skin conditions to beat the band. They can get heatstroke very easily and suffer from heart problems and their excessively short snouts cause breathing problems. This to me is beyond daft, it's damn near criminal.

    The "show" GSD with it's oversloped back is another obvious one and another dog with hip issues and athritis later in life. The originator/consolidator of the breed Von Stephanitz would have a fit if he saw the average show dog of today. He bred them to be the best fit for purpose working dogs. Collected the best examples of sheep dogs throughout Germany and Europe for best temperament and physical health. To the physical health end he even added in European wolf to the very early mix, which gets some GSD fanciers knickers in a twist a century later. http://www.asuperiorgsd.com/wolf-dog.html The original dog while having a more sloped back compared to a wolf say, was a squarer, physically more capable animal, not some porsche backed showdog.

    There are a lot of "fashionable" breeds like this today and for all the talk of backyard breeders/donedeal and the like and how bad they are(and they are for the most part) this explosion of dangerously inbred, physically and behaviourally compromised dogs is entirely down to the whims of the quality breeders out there. The ones that KC's throughout the world slap blue ribbons on and recommend as the best of the best. Oh the public are to blame too, but if the breeders weren't producing these designer dogs we simply wouldn't be seeing these problems today.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    "Health Checked" at most means a vet has seen a pup, it was alive at the time they saw it and not obviously likely to drop dead sometime in the next week. It does not mean the pup is healthy! It doesn't even guarantee that it isn't riddled with worms and fleas - only that if was the vet would have advised this be treated.

    So are you suggesting that the rescue people here (if there are any) treat a health check as trivial & that their dogs are flea & worm riddled ?. My local rescue takes her Vet's advice seriously - I have seen the bills. But also the other person running the rescue is a highly respected trainer & behaviourist. She spends time with every dog before it is considered for rehoming. Anyone will be able to appreciate the difference in a health check done by a Vet on behalf of a puppy farmer ie for money & a check done by or on behalf of a rescue.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    Just my take mind you, but in many cases the standard of the breed itself is the problem.

    Totally agree. The breed standards laid down by the clubs take no account of health. I seem to recall that the Pekinese that won Crufts in 2003 had to be sat on an icepack during the photographs as it was in such distress.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    I dunno D, but I think it might be down to people here seeing animals more as livestock, less as pets as a cultural kinda thing, so they become more a thing than an animal and some of that still holds down to today?

    I think that this is one reason, maybe religion is another as Animal Welfare has tended to be worse in Catholic countries. I have two elderly neighbours that were both born here, raised here & attended the same schools etc. One treats their dog well & the other treats theirs appallingly. Yet the one who treats their dog well would never say anything to the other one.

    Hellrazer wrote: »
    Personally I'd love to see that thread.Cmon aj and sp-we'll mod it with an iron fist smile.gif
    Any excuse for the opportunity to ban people - mods these days :rolleyes:
    tongue.gif

    Oh the hilarity ! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 657 ✭✭✭portgirl123


    OMG. just looking on done deal. in the last 18 hrs 135 ads have gone up in the dog section. the majority of them are litters of at least 4 pups each ad. where the hell do all these pups go.
    no wonder why the done deal ppl wont get rid of the pet/dog section. €3 a ad? why should they. they must be minted, seriously though didnt realise so many dog ads went up a day. no wonder they say ireland the puppy farm capital of europe


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    Discodog wrote: »
    So are you suggesting that the rescue people here (if there are any) treat a health check as trivial & that their dogs are flea & worm riddled ?.

    Please quote where I've said that also :rolleyes:

    This trolling in order provoke some sort of reaction is becoming extremely boring at this stage. I have no idea why you are harping on and on about the general ethics and practices of reputable rescues, but I do have to point out that there are also money grabbers masquerading as rescues in addition those masquerading as reputable breeders. These also treat there animals appallingly, I can think of 2 immediately off the top of my head, one of them has another line of business selling pedigree and designer pups.

    Once again the topic of this thread is advert sites!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    It looks like the American Bulldog looks more like the original British Bulldog.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Please quote where I've said that also :rolleyes:

    Well you tell me to stay on topic & then ask me off topic questions ! And as we are discussing alternatives to buying on done deal it is perfectly on topic to be discussing rescues as they are an option.

    Here:
    I'd thank you to stop throwing up the statement that rescue dogs are "health checked" every time the topic of genetic health testing comes up. Quite frankly it's deliberately misleading people for the purposes of forcing rescues on them. It's exactly the same tactic that used by puppy farmers and back yard breeders to peddle their wares and its nothing short of disgusting mad.gif

    "Health Checked" at most means a vet has seen a pup, it was alive at the time they saw it and not obviously likely to drop dead sometime in the next week. It does not mean the pup is healthy! It doesn't even guarantee that it isn't riddled with worms and fleas - only that if was the vet would have advised this be treated.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    OMG. just looking on done deal. in the last 18 hrs 135 ads have gone up in the dog section. the majority of them are litters of at least 4 pups each ad. where the hell do all these pups go.
    no wonder why the done deal ppl wont get rid of the pet/dog section. €3 a ad? why should they. they must be minted, seriously though didnt realise so many dog ads went up a day. no wonder they say ireland the puppy farm capital of europe

    These "breeders" will want to get rid of their stock before Christmas - no one's going to want a January pup. They will of planned well in advance to make the most of the market.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,183 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Discodog wrote: »
    Totally agree. The breed standards laid down by the clubs take no account of health. I seem to recall that the Pekinese that won Crufts in 2003 had to be sat on an icepack during the photographs as it was in such distress.
    You are kidding me. Jesus. Fully supported by official kennel club rules and "quality" breeders. Yes back yarders on Donedeal and such like are bad or at least unreliable, but the breeders can't with all good conscience be holier than thou about their own house.

    I think that this is one reason, maybe religion is another as Animal Welfare has tended to be worse in Catholic countries.
    That could be part of it too.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    Wibbs wrote: »
    You are kidding me. Jesus.

    I can remember seeing it but here's a link - great link title :D

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1046614/BBC-drop-Crufts-unhealthy-freak-breeds.html


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭andreac


    Discodog, i have to disagree with you regarding the clubs. Most of the breed clubs set up have their own set of rules and guidelines separate from the IKC in relation to breeding and are a lot stricter with their members regarding the rules etc.

    Most of them have strict rules that you have to health test your dogs to be allowed into the club and they insist of health checking and testing dogs before they are allowed to be bred and encourage all people coming into the breed to do so.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,945 ✭✭✭✭Discodog


    andreac wrote: »
    Discodog, i have to disagree with you regarding the clubs. Most of the breed clubs set up have their own set of rules and guidelines separate from the IKC in relation to breeding and are a lot stricter with their members regarding the rules etc.

    Most of them have strict rules that you have to health test your dogs to be allowed into the club and they insist of health checking and testing dogs before they are allowed to be bred and encourage all people coming into the breed to do so.

    But who sets the Breed Standard ? In theory the Peek that has to sit on ice would be classed as healthy. Same with a slope back GSD. Even genetic screening does not mean that the dog will suffer as a result of the breed standard - Sharpeis spring to mind.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,968 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    Discodog wrote: »
    Breed Standard.

    who cares about breed standard unless your buying a show dog
    donedeal is okay you can tell if its a puppy farmer when you pick the dog up


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    The fact remains that the most reliable sources of an ethical, responsible breeder are found within the showing fraternity. The history of their dogs is well documented and can be found easier than breeders from any other any other source with a bit of digging. There will always be exceptions in any discussion where sources are classified in this way. There are plenty of ethical sources amongst working dog breeders too but its important to remember that these are not usually suitable for 'average' pet homes when you take into account that factors such as prey-drive, energy levels and stamina may play big parts in breeding these types of dogs. It does irritate me that people are often unwilling to accept that the same variations of ethics are also present within the rescue group, as a person who has looked into a breed rescue in the UK to find that their practices are questionable enough for the breed clubs to publicly state on their sites that they have no connection with the breed rescue.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭andreac


    Discodog wrote: »
    But who sets the Breed Standard ? In theory the Peek that has to sit on ice would be classed as healthy. Same with a slope back GSD. Even genetic screening does not mean that the dog will suffer as a result of the breed standard - Sharpeis spring to mind.

    Breed standard is very different to health testing. Breed standards makes one breed differ from another and its the kennel club who decide this.
    What im talking about is health testing for things such as Hip Dysplacia, heart testing, eye testing etc. IKC dont care about any of these, but most breed club insist on all these tests being carried out before breeding if you want to be a member of a club.

    Regarding the Peke, have you ever been to a dog show thats indoors and under lights?? My rotties who are very healthy dogs, suffer from the heat and can get very panty so i have to be extremely careful with them.

    In that big arena the lights and everything would create a very warm environment for a dog with a big wooly coat so i wouldnt necessarily put it down to the dog being unhealthy.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,183 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Discodog wrote: »
    I can remember seeing it but here's a link - great link title :D

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1046614/BBC-drop-Crufts-unhealthy-freak-breeds.html
    :) yea, typical Daily Fail. I remember the BBC doc they reference. Well dodgy footage and some of the breeders were utterly oblivious and didn't give a feck it seems. IMHO someone who isn't a puppy farmer with two family pets that have pups, especially mongrels who end up selling them on donedeal or whatever are far ahead morally to some of these "mutant" breeds and their breeders. Again IMHO they're not far off "puppy farmers" themselves.

    That article/documentary was in '08, do you know if crufts and the KC in the UK actually changed anything or is it the same guff going on?
    andreac wrote:
    Discodog, i have to disagree with you regarding the clubs. Most of the breed clubs set up have their own set of rules and guidelines separate from the IKC in relation to breeding and are a lot stricter with their members regarding the rules etc.

    Most of them have strict rules that you have to health test your dogs to be allowed into the club and they insist of health checking and testing dogs before they are allowed to be bred and encourage all people coming into the breed to do so.
    OK but is this health testing actually doing much? Do the dogs involved look less extreme? Do they actually reduce the genetic damage? EG Would the best of breed Irish bred "british bulldog" have bang on hip scores? At least below 10? Are their king Charles' majority free of heart problems and skull/brain size issues? Or as seems to be the case these issues are "acceptable" to a certain point, but not eradicated?
    The fact remains that the most reliable sources of an ethical, responsible breeder are found within the showing fraternity
    OK if we get off the "rescue/donedeal/breeder" debate for a sec, how is going from this;
    To this with all it's attendant problems;
    large_20112008050427_01.jpg
    "ethical" and "responsible"? And it's not the only breed. Not by a long shot.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,183 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    andreac wrote: »
    In that big arena the lights and everything would create a very warm environment for a dog with a big wooly coat so i wouldnt necessarily put it down to the dog being unhealthy
    Well what about the Peke's issues with back problems? Breathing Problems because of their extreme brachycephalic heads? They can barely move about without snorting, which also causes heatstroke because the poor little buggers can't get enough air in and out. Their prevalence of congestive heart failure doesn't help. Whelping can be problematic because of their oversized heads. Their protruding eyes can be an issue, with damage and other eye problems, even to the point of their eyes popping out of their too small eye sockets. That's not a breed list that's a list of deformities. Deformities the breeders are only happy to keep producing. To avoid such issues they'd have to rejig the standard and start breeding Pekes with longer snouts, longer legs and slightly bigger overall.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭andreac


    Im not saying it def wasnt unhealthy but the conditions could have been a contributing factor that day.

    I do agree that some breeds are in a bad way and something needs to be done about it. Afaik the KC in the UK have stepped in to try and improve some of the breeds that are suffering by changing the breed standards.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    Wibbs wrote: »
    OK but is this health testing actually doing much? Do the dogs involved look less extreme? Do they actually reduce the genetic damage? EG Would the best of breed Irish bred "british bulldog" have bang on hip scores? At least below 10? Are their king Charles' majority free of heart problems and skull/brain size issues? Or as seems to be the case these issues are "acceptable" to a certain point, but not eradicated?

    Personally I wouldn't buy a dog from a breeder of a breed that can be completely free of a particular genetic issue, but considers terms like 'carrier' or 'minimised risk' acceptable as I believe a huge part of their responsibility is to ensure that these issues cant be passed on, contract or no contract - they can never be 100% sure that these dogs wont be bred from once they leave their possession eg. Von Willebrands disease or certain eye problems. In saying that though - would these dogs be 'wasted' being owned by me - a person who never intends to breed from them?
    Wibbs wrote: »

    OK if we get off the "rescue/donedeal/breeder" debate for a sec, how is going from this;

    . . . pic . . .

    To this with all it's attendant problems;

    "ethical" and "responsible"? And it's not the only breed. Not by a long shot.

    Can't really answer you on that one as I'm not at all educated in bull-breeds, I have a personal preference for working breeds that have changed little appearance-wise since the days when they were bred 'for purpose' so I suppose from this you can take that I agree with you although perhaps I didn't know it!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,917 ✭✭✭✭GT_TDI_150


    Ok, so regardless of where one ends up looking for a pup, what are the questions you would want to ask to try and satisfy you are not dealing with a puppy farmer, and that the mother and pup have been treated as should


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,183 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    andreac wrote: »
    I do agree that some breeds are in a bad way and something needs to be done about it. Afaik the KC in the UK have stepped in to try and improve some of the breeds that are suffering by changing the breed standards.
    Sadly I can see resistance. The buying public and the breeders are conditioned to many breeds and how "they should look". A Bulldog with a snout or a bigger peke may well be a hard sell nowadays.
    Personally I wouldn't buy a dog from a breeder of a breed that can be completely free of a particular genetic issue, but considers terms like 'carrier' or 'minimised risk' acceptable as I believe a huge part of their responsibility is to ensure that these issues cant be passed on, contract or no contract - they can never be 100% sure that these dogs wont be bred from once they leave their possession eg. Von Willebrands disease or certain eye problems. In saying that though - would these dogs be 'wasted' being owned by me - a person who never intends to breed from them?
    True enough. I suppose neutering such carriers might be a compromise. Then again neutering, especially at too early an age can bring it's own health issues that may be blamed on breed genetics(skeletal issues for one, and certain cancers for another).


    Can't really answer you on that one as I'm not at all educated in bull-breeds, I have a personal preference for working breeds that have changed little appearance-wise since the days when they were bred 'for purpose' so I suppose from this you can take that I agree with you although perhaps I didn't know it!
    :) There is that and certainly the working breeds seem to less problematic compared to the "toy" breeds. Then again you have genetic issues with pretty much all breeds. Hip dysplasia seems endemic across many breeds, working included, yet wild canids don't suffer from it, or very very rarely. http://cal.vet.upenn.edu/projects/saortho/chapter_83/83mast.htm As well as the genetic angle it seems diet and early upbringing also protects them. Some studies have found the aforementioned early neutering increases the risk because of improper and late ossification of growing bone ends. So these things seem multifactoral as is usually the case. Some of the less obviously physical "defects" common in our pets may be as much or very influenced by environment.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    GT_TDI_150 wrote: »
    Ok, so regardless of where one ends up looking for a pup, what are the questions you would want to ask to try and satisfy you are not dealing with a puppy farmer, and that the mother and pup have been treated as should

    Outside the obvious research the breed thoroughly beforehand and ask lots of questions you already know the answers to, buy yourself a 'breed' manual and ask to see proof of any and all claims made by the seller. Ask for a copy of the pedigree of both parents and google the names on it, you never know what this could turn up. Contact the breed club and ask them if they are familiar with the bloodlines or the seller and also any 'all breed' clubs local to them.

    http://www.dogstardaily.com/training/how-select-good-breeder

    http://www.dogstardaily.com/training/how-select-good-puppy

    Most importantly, be willing to walk away, it would be pointless putting all this effort in only to take a pup anyway because you felt exasperated at the thought of having to do it all again.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,085 ✭✭✭meoklmrk91


    I bought my dog from a Donedeal breeder, he was meant to be a pet so I didn't really care about pedigree, I am still waiting for his papers a year later and doubt I will ever see them despite the fact that both his parents were registered. But he is neutered, never planned to breed, so quite frankly it doesn't bother me.

    If I was buying a dog again I would be extremely wary, whilst I would like to support responsible breeding I feel that the vast majority of show breeders breed for the aesthetic as opposed to the health, a sad but very true fact, that is why we have so many dogs with so many damning health problems today. If they didn't breed for the aesthetic then they wouldn't win shows so really what is the point. Point in case the Rhodesian Ridgebacks, without the ridge (approx 1 in 20 pups) they are not accepted but with the ridge they are susceptible to Spine-abifida and teeny tiny holes on the surface of the skin which look like nothing but in fact go right into the spine or the skull leaving them highly vulnerable to infections and viruses'. To be honest I don't think that that can be described as ethical or responsible breeding.

    It is a touchy subject, do I support Puppy farms, hell no, BYB, as long as everyone is healthchecked to the highest standard and well treated, why not to be honest. As for show breeders, I would have previously been very supportive and would have gone this way after doing research after getting my dog and realising where I went wrong, now I am not so sure...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,054 ✭✭✭luckyfrank


    Ok guys i just bought/deposit down for a husky i saw both parents i saw had papers, i was showing the microchip with a reader, when i pick the pup up in a few weeks ill have vet cards, ive gotten the dog i wanted blue eyes and male and pure white

    Im very happy, ive seeing 3 other pups before this which i wasnt happy, there are some creeps on donedeal but there are decent people too


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭andreac


    Lucy, did you see the hip scores of the parents? This is absolutely vital in Huskies. I wouldnt touch a breeder who hasnt Hip scored.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,054 ✭✭✭luckyfrank


    andreac wrote: »
    Lucy, did you see the hip scores of the parents? This is absolutely vital in Huskies. I wouldnt touch a breeder who hasnt Hip scored.

    No i did not see hip score, both parents looked fine and moved around freely


    The sire had 5 generations of papers and was a stunning dog, tbh i asked how much deposit i shoud give and they replied what ever your want

    That was enough for me i trusted them 100%


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭andreac


    luckyfrank wrote: »
    No i did not see hip score, both parents looked fine and moved around freely


    The sire had 5 generations of papers and was a stunning dog, tbh i asked how much deposit i shoud give and they replied what ever your want

    That was enough for me i trusted them 100%

    Sorry, but that is not enough. A dog can walk freely but have very bad hip scores which could be passed on to the pups.

    I really think you need to rethink this breeder if they dont have the health checks.
    Moving around freely means nothing, 5 gen pedigree means nothing either when it comes to health.

    But if you want to go ahead and buy this pup its up to you....


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    luckyfrank wrote: »
    Ok guys i just bought/deposit down for a husky i saw both parents i saw had papers, i was showing the microchip with a reader, when i pick the pup up in a few weeks ill have vet cards, ive gotten the dog i wanted blue eyes and male and pure white

    ISDW is the husky expert around here, I'd recommend dropping her a PM, she will best be able to advise you.

    I believe I've just found their site, since they say they are so concerned about the health of the breed they should have no issues with you enquiring about hip scores, if they can't provide them I would say that it's what I suspect and is 'marketing drivel', an extremely common ploy to charge more money than other people whom they are in fact just equal to. If they have no proof their dogs are higher quality health-wise, this is because they aren't. I'd have concerns about any breeder where half of their website is written in txt spk and simple spelling mistakes tbh.


  • Users Awaiting Email Confirmation Posts: 1,139 ✭✭✭artieanna


    So where would people suggest a family with a basic income get a puppy?

    I ask because the figures mentioned (€600+)to buy "proper bred" dogs is well out of a lot of peoples reach.


    I know a few people who put dogs on donedeal specifically because of an accidental mating. This can and does happen before a female is considered old enough to be neutered. This has happened to me with my dog (I kept her indoors as soon as I realised she was in heat, but it was still too late) and cat both of whom were neutered as soon as the vet would allow.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,712 ✭✭✭lorebringer


    artieanna wrote: »
    So where would people suggest a family with a basic income get a puppy?

    I ask because the figures mentioned (€600+)to buy "proper bred" dogs is well out of a lot of peoples reach.


    I know a few people who put dogs on donedeal specifically because of an accidental mating. This can and does happen before a female is considered old enough to be neutered. This has happened to me with my dog (I kept her indoors as soon as I realised she was in heat, but it was still too late) and cat both of whom were neutered as soon as the vet would allow.

    If you are not interested in breeding (ethically) or showing then rescues are fantastic places to get great pets. There are dogs of all shapes and sizes - pure breeds, mixed breeds, all ages, all with different temperaments and personalities. Even if you have your heart set on a certain breed, have a look around your local rescues and pounds and you are very likely to fall in love! Often, rescues assess their dogs so that he owner knows what they are getting before they bring the dog home and many chip, neuter, vaccinate etc. their dogs so the donation cost covers a whole lot! Plus, you are giving a dog a home that would otherwise not have one - win win all round :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,972 ✭✭✭Cherry Blossom


    artieanna wrote: »
    So where would people suggest a family with a basic income get a puppy?

    I ask because the figures mentioned (€600+)to buy "proper bred" dogs is well out of a lot of peoples reach.

    €600 divided by 15 years is €40 per year, that's how much it costs for peace of mind. Over the course of its life a dog on average will cost in the region of €15,000 to €30,000 in food, necessities, vaccinations and pet insurance, how can people afford this if they can't pay an additional €200 on the initial outlay of the dog?
    artieanna wrote: »
    I know a few people who put dogs on donedeal specifically because of an accidental mating. This can and does happen before a female is considered old enough to be neutered. This has happened to me with my dog (I kept her indoors as soon as I realised she was in heat, but it was still too late) and cat both of whom were neutered as soon as the vet would allow.

    This was how my current dog came into the world, the female was not neutered because the owner was told by their vet it could affect her coat and ability to work, the male (bought as a companion for her) was not neutered because he was 6 months old but had been neutered since the pups were born. The money that was handed over would not have come close to covering the costs they incurred. I verified everything I was told and it all checked out so I was happy enough to go ahead as I had not been misled in any way and it was obvious a mistake had been made in lieu of extremely bad advice from a professional, but to do this again now - I don't think I'd be prepared to hand over any money at all. Part of going down this route is that you freely accept any risks and consequences.

    I just have to add though that I didn't find this litter advertised on an adverts site. Also my dog has not been problem free and she is still only a year and a half old. She was diagnosed as possibly having a hormone imbalance - further investigation was not needed as neutering solved the problem. She also has a lot of food issues which getting to the bottom of has cost more in my time and effort than it would have been worth in paying the difference for a pup from a better source.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement