How irresponsible it this article? :mad:
Discussion
Now I do not read Grazia, EVER!! but this was shown too me via fb. Can't believe what I have just read. As a result I have commented on their fb page (would do twitter but I'm not on it). They are actually receiving quite a backlash.
I would like to think most people would agree this is an irresponsible article, I really hope they retract it or something. I believe Grazia is quite well read (unfortunately!) I would hate to think it will give others an idea that a bit of 'on the side breeding' sounds easy and a good idea especially when they may not have considered previously!
Edited by bexVN on Sunday 5th July 12:15
moorx said:
Ridiculous! 
I wonder whether she declares her additional income to the tax man?
HMRC will not be interested as it is too easy to draw up accounts showing losses (after all allowable expenses are taken into account) to reduce tax payable on other income.I wonder whether she declares her additional income to the tax man?
Breeding on a smallish scale (when done properly) should be looked upon as a way of making a hobby (when you will be keeping dogs anyway) pay for itself.
moorx said:
Cliftonite said:
Breeding on a smallish scale (when done properly) should be looked upon as a way of making a hobby (when you will be keeping dogs anyway) pay for itself.
What a sad way to regard your pets. I don't need my dogs to pay for themselves, nor do I need to exploit them.Perhaps this is better?:
. . . breeding . . . COULD be looked upon as a way of becoming a hobby (when you will be keeping dogs anyway) that COULD pay for itself.
My wife has kept Cavalier King Charles Spaniels for over 15 years and was breeding them, until recently, for some 12 years. Her reason for doing so was certainly not for money! It was for the love of the breed, and her adored dogs, who were enthusiastic mothers, were certainly not considered to have been exploited!
They currently continue to enjoy the life of Riley and are in the garden with me now, happily sunning themselves.
Err... I'm not sure... what is so irresponsible in that article? Genuinely.
If people want pets where do they come from? Other people's pets. I'd rather buy from a person breeding their own pets than from some dodgy intensive breeder who gives not a jot about the animals he's churning out.
Or am I missing something?
If people want pets where do they come from? Other people's pets. I'd rather buy from a person breeding their own pets than from some dodgy intensive breeder who gives not a jot about the animals he's churning out.
Or am I missing something?
Piersman2 said:
Err... I'm not sure... what is so irresponsible in that article? Genuinely.
If people want pets where do they come from? Other people's pets. I'd rather buy from a person breeding their own pets than from some dodgy intensive breeder who gives not a jot about the animals he's churning out.
Or am I missing something?
Yes.If people want pets where do they come from? Other people's pets. I'd rather buy from a person breeding their own pets than from some dodgy intensive breeder who gives not a jot about the animals he's churning out.
Or am I missing something?
It is not the fact that she is a breeder that annoyed me so much about this article, there are always going to be breeders, good and bad.
This article stinks because:
She went into breeding not out of passion for the breed but purely for money, first big cross.
The article is at fault for promoting this type of breeding as easy and a great way to earn extra money without even mentioning the responsibility that goes along with long term follow up of the pets you breed and sell on. That repeated breeding from animals too make money is also not thinking about your pet (it is a pet, not a money making machine) It states that they had been too busy to get their pets neutered, so it is not as though this is what they had planned all along. It just shows a lack of forethought.
The first paragraph states how much money can be made from each pup/ kitten. Genuine breeders whilst they do charge for their pups (obviously) would not make that their foremost thought (again I blame the way the article is put across as well, not just the 'breeder').
There is no mention of the number of abandoned/ unwanted pups/ kittens every year (which includes pure breeds) a more thoughtfully researched article would have at least briefly mentioned this.
There are no negatives really discussed, such as the emergency caesarians (expensive and traumatic for the Mum), neonate loss, failed matings (which cost each time), and other complications. There is very little to suggest that she researched what she was doing which gives the impression that anyone could fall blindly into it.
Cliftonite said:
You have totally misunderstood what I have attempted to say. Which was that money will not be made out of breeding and this should not be the motive for doing it. However, if someone wants to get involved in it, then do so with eyes open.
Perhaps this is better?:
. . . breeding . . . COULD be looked upon as a way of becoming a hobby (when you will be keeping dogs anyway) that COULD pay for itself.
My wife has kept Cavalier King Charles Spaniels for over 15 years and was breeding them, until recently, for some 12 years. Her reason for doing so was certainly not for money! It was for the love of the breed, and her adored dogs, who were enthusiastic mothers, were certainly not considered to have been exploited!
They currently continue to enjoy the life of Riley and are in the garden with me now, happily sunning themselves.
I don't think I misunderstood your initial statement. Your second statement has a different meaning entirely.Perhaps this is better?:
. . . breeding . . . COULD be looked upon as a way of becoming a hobby (when you will be keeping dogs anyway) that COULD pay for itself.
My wife has kept Cavalier King Charles Spaniels for over 15 years and was breeding them, until recently, for some 12 years. Her reason for doing so was certainly not for money! It was for the love of the breed, and her adored dogs, who were enthusiastic mothers, were certainly not considered to have been exploited!
They currently continue to enjoy the life of Riley and are in the garden with me now, happily sunning themselves.
Your wife may have been a responsible breeder (sorry, but I still don't 'get' breeding from pets and never will) but the article isn't about being a responsible breeder, it is about making money by indiscriminate breeding, which to me is exploitation.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
CaptainMorgan said:
Saw this earlier, went to post my disgust at the article on their facebook page (not that I expected it to do anything) but it appears the rest of the animal loving world have got there first, and made a better job of making a point than I could.
a vet nurse group I'm a part of has gone a bit mad at them for a start 
.Piersman2 said:
Err... I'm not sure... what is so irresponsible in that article? Genuinely.
If people want pets where do they come from? Other people's pets. I'd rather buy from a person breeding their own pets than from some dodgy intensive breeder who gives not a jot about the animals he's churning out.
Or am I missing something?
When I bred a litter I If people want pets where do they come from? Other people's pets. I'd rather buy from a person breeding their own pets than from some dodgy intensive breeder who gives not a jot about the animals he's churning out.
Or am I missing something?
1. Spent 2k on testing (our dog and the stud) and getting the right stud (this meant that I was more likely than not going to lose money breeding this litter)
2. Ensured they were genetically compatible (with respect, you have NO idea how much work this is - it took us 7 months to find a suitable dog - it is damn near impossible to get people to even tell you about their dogs and lines - let alone any conditions they might have suffered from and their parents and grandparents let alone ensuring their COI was sufficiently low enough to seek to preclude recessive conditions coming out)
3. researched genetics and genetic conditions so I fully appreciated the test results and where appropriate I was able to take suitable judgement calls (in the end I did not have to as I found a stud who did not have specific conditions in his lines)
4. Spent 4k to actually get a mating (this meant driving to another country and it took us over a week).
ALL of that is what everyone should consider and take whichever steps are needed to ensure the improvement of the breed and also to ensure you are not breeding awful conditions in (there are breeds well known for cancer, DCM, HD etc..).. It is lives you are talking about.
To give you an example of why the above steps are necessary, two f**kwits I know (but no longer speak to as a result) bred two inbred lines together. As a result, out of 7 dogs, I know 3 have HD, two had ED and one has brittle bone disease. This litter is less than one year old. They bred quickly and cheaply without testing because they wanted to make a bit of money quickly to buy a car.
Last week Grazia published an article looking at how more people are making money through a variety of different income streams. One of the stories included in the piece featured a pedigree cat and dog breeder.
We have taken all the feedback and comments for this article on board and we apologise for causing any offence.
In response to some of the comments we have received, we’d also like to make it clear that Grazia in no way promotes or condones irresponsible breeding or unfair treatment to any animal.
We want to thank everyone who took the time and trouble to write to us.
This is what Grazia have just written on their FB page, bit of a cop out if you ask me.
I have suggested they do another properly thought out article; this time pointing out all the possible negatives to home breeding (I gave them a decent list to help!)
We have taken all the feedback and comments for this article on board and we apologise for causing any offence.
In response to some of the comments we have received, we’d also like to make it clear that Grazia in no way promotes or condones irresponsible breeding or unfair treatment to any animal.
We want to thank everyone who took the time and trouble to write to us.
This is what Grazia have just written on their FB page, bit of a cop out if you ask me.
I have suggested they do another properly thought out article; this time pointing out all the possible negatives to home breeding (I gave them a decent list to help!)
Gassing Station | All Creatures Great & Small | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff