PUPPIES IN PET SHOP : NO !!!!!
And this is why.........

http://www.carlinoscope.com/animaleries.htm

Open letter published in "chiens 2000" n° 281 (November 2001), in answer to Mr Ganivet ,veterinarian and president of SFC, published in n° 271(December 2000) of the same magazine , where he justified the pet shops and encouraged the breeders to sell their production by this intermediate.This entry had scandalized all the serious actors of the cynophily and attracted a lot of answers, including mine as it is.....

Mr Ganivet blames the "anti-pet-shop group" to lack arguments.To be only capable of kneejerk reactions , hasty judgments translated by incisive qualifiers :" dog's traders" "making money an its back" would be commonplaces which wouldn't have foundations.

My total refusal of puppies sale in pet - shop is certainly, to repeat Mr Ganivet's words, a condemnation without appeal , but certainly not gratuitous.

The heart of the problem is the fact that the pet-shop is an intermediary between the "producer" and the "consumer".From there follow two undeniable consequences : firsty , the cost price of the puppy by the pet-shop must be low enough to allow him to make profit out of the sale , without proposing for all that extremely expensive puppies. Secondly , there isn't any contact between the producer and the buyer.

Question of scales naturally - the volume are without common measurement. However the number of reproductives also increase expenses. There is more than that : the methods of breeding are naturally radically different. Sweet euphemism.......

To minimize the spending, there aren't plenty of solutions. Concretely : the females breed every six month beginning as soon as possible, and until death follows (or until infertility thus euthanasia follows ). Savings on the food and the care (do you believe that these dogs eat "super premium" ) Do you think that otites, abcess and other more or less severe hurts are treated ? Let us be not naives. Only what threatens the profit is treated. Minimizing the number of employees, so minimizing the time spent with every dog which is 23 h a day in a stall, all his life, it's very long. And allow me to doubt that strokes, tickes on the stomach and the other ball games are on the programme. Here I don't mention the puppies who will be lucky enough to go out. Finally, obviously, there are lesses, it's not worth to bing every two hours a puppy with a difficult start up if it is to sell it for absolutely nothing later - there 's no profit. But from an ethical point of view, is it conceivable that, so that every family have the pleasure to welcome in its detached house a fellowplayer for the children, a small ball of hairs to be loved and with whom to share a life of happiness and affection, completely similar dogs, their parents, should endure a prison life without affection and hopeless ? Is it worth it ? No I refuse. Nobody should bring up animals, whatever they are, without having some respect from them, at least love, it is better .

Other necessity for the industrial breeding : Giving up any idea of selection is expensive. The registrations at the L.O.F, the confirmations, can possibly be done. It is the degree zero of selection. But having his livestock appraised by an expert and impartial eye.(that is called a judge, during dogs shows). Turning down a dog with an important fault from reproduction, producing as a result displasia or atypical features, not using his own stallion on a female in order to avoid the passing on of a fault, it 's no longer profitable. Whether on a level of confirmation character or health point of view, the selection is what characterizes a genuine breeder. A "breeder" who doesn't select with the standard as propose, because he's supposed to produce "only" pets is worse than "a bad breeder" : he harms the race, he's bringing up. Even if the genetics isn't his speciality, Mister Ga nivet probably knows it as well as me. If we stop the pressure of the selection on a given line, this one tends to disappear. In other terms as breeder, if we don't do any selection on a given race, there is no reason for which the produced dogs continue to conform to the race standards. After all, it is may be enough for pets.......please isn't it ? Do you believe that the buyer of a dog he believed of race, isn't disappointed when he notices that his acquisition has nothing to do with the photos and descriptions of encyclopediae and magazines? That wishing "only" a dog of company, he would be satisfied with a "labrador" with a touchy character, with "Yorkshire" with the hair so wooly that it should be cropped as it impossible to keep up ? And I don't even speak about problems of health, the selection also aiming at minimizing the impact of the genetic diseases.

I don't absolutely deny the fact that it is possible to bring up dogs professionnally, respectfully and with good conditions for the breeding stock, while leading a serious work of selection. In that case, I can't believe a mere second that the breeder can content himself with prices from which the pet shop buys its puppies .

The last point but not the least : the loss of contact between the breeder and the purchaser. As a breeder, this contact is for me of the most extreme importance. Because I want to be sure the puppies I produce lead the best possible life. I want to know where is every dog born at mine's. I want to have the possibility of going to the owner's to immediately buy back the puppy whether I have the slightest doubt on his desire to keep it. Therefore, it is why my sale contract stipulates my pre-emption right. This isn't a whim "Gestapiste" of my part. To me it is the least of the things I owe to the puppies to which life was given by my fact, these puppies for the life of which I am RESPONSIBLE. Encouraging the breeders to use an intermediary, the pet shop, is wanting to make them IRRESPONSIBLE.

This contact is also necessary from the buyer point of view. It is in his best interest to keep up with somebody competent who will be able to advise him at any time. It is not pet shop's employee who will answer the phone one sunday evening, because the owner of a puppy pug worries about the weird pig's noise which it makes. And besides, he would not know what to answer ! A competent breeder knows more about his race than many veterinarians....so an "animal keeper", even with a certificate of ability ....please let me laugh ! Any way, even for not specific questions, I have never seen a pet shop able to give advice during the whole dog's life. His answer will doubtless be "please visit a veterinarian"...... haha, I think I 've just understood something.

In brief, from both the buyer and the dogs point of view, the pet - shop as a puppy (and kitten) retailer is HARMFUL. For the reasons I have just evoked, and for many others that I will not detail here (incitement to "impulsive" purchase, bad experience for puppies, no "screening" of the buyers according to races, etc...), it 's to wish that, by an education general effort of the public, we finally succeed in making it accepted and understood by all that a dog, SHOULD NOT BE BOUGHT IN A SHOP.

Sylvie Lauroz - © 2001- 2002

"Les Molosses De Pacotille"


Back to the top