Sorry-- although I do have sympathy for Pedlee, I agree absolutely with Rabid. I come from the rescue side of things, and don't breed. There are soooo many rescued dogs who need all the resources available to them, and none of these resources should be spent on dogs bred by "responsible" breeders. Breeding dogs should be seen as a privilege, not a right. Only those people who can fulfill every condition of being an "ethical" breeder should even consider breeding.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I come from the rescue side of things, and don't breed. There are soooo many rescued dogs who need all the resources available to them, and none of these resources should be spent on dogs bred by "responsible" breeders. Breeding dogs should be seen as a privilege, not a right.

Pedlee could have just ignored the fact that this dog was picked up as a stray - and then it may have gone into rescue anyway and all the costs would have been down to the rescue. As it was she stood by the dog she had bred and did everything she could to ensure this dog's safety and future. Those who don't breed ethically wouldn't have gone to such lengths and it is those breeders who just couldn't care less what happens to the pups they have bred who are responsible for the overwhelming numbers in rescues all over the country.

At least this dog isn't costing the rescue money to secure it's future unlike all the other poor dogs who end up there because nobody cared at all.

Hear hear, Harley.

I'm astounded that anyone would think that a breeder who pays to release one of their 8 year old pups from a council kennels, chases up who might be the current owner, arranges not ne but two foster homes, then pays to transport it to somewhere where the poor creature won't be moved from pillar to post in the short term, is somehow an unethical breeder and acting irresponsibly, so should be condemned. It really beggars belief. Come on, welcome to the real world!

and none of these resources should be spent on dogs bred by "responsible" breeders.

Sorry Zan, but that quote made me laugh, sorry but it really is laughable, you only want to spend your funds on irresponsible breeders?

You're there to help dogs in need. Responsible breeders not only do all health tests but we vet as carefully as we can to hopefully never have rescues bothered, we hope that our pups owners will always come back to us, and hopefully take a lot of strain off your backs when situations like this do happen.  If they come back to us and it is impossible to have the dog at that time, why would you not wish to help us as much as the ones who just breed any dog and give them out to anyone with a wad of cash?

Thanks Zan, glad to hear someone agrees. 

>So let me get this right rabid. Not only should I be able to see into the future and have a purpose built kennel to allow for a returned pup to stay at any time, plan litters more carefully so that they don't coincide with moving house, have a spare room free at all times to allow for a returned dog that may need isolation and keep thousands in reserve for c-sections/breeding complications/kennelling fees and I should somehow be able to plan that none of the above happen at the same time (which is what has happened to me)?

No, I've never said you should have a purpose built kennel.  (I believe others have made that suggestion, not me.) 

Yes, I would think it makes sense not to plan a litter when moving house. 

And yes, I absolutely think you should have thousands put aside if you intend to breed - partly for breeding costs, and partly for situations like this.  Especially if you are breeding more than one litter, because you have an ongoing responsibility to the existing dogs you've already brought into the world, and not just the current puppies.  The more litters you breed, the more dogs you have 'out there' in the world, and the more likely it is that you will be called on as the breeder to care for/rehome them at some point in their lives.  If you don't have the resources, don't breed more than you can manage to be responsible for.  TBH, I can't believe you are bringing more dogs into the world when you have had to see one from a previous litter end up in rescue.

>a breeder who pays to release one of their 8 year old pups from a council kennels, chases up who might be the current owner, arranges not ne but two foster homes, then pays to transport it to somewhere where the poor creature won't be moved from pillar to post in the short term, is somehow an unethical breeder.

The dog has ended up in rescue kennels.  That is one less place in rescue to another dog in need.  How can you say that a responsible breeder can allow a dog they have bred, to end up in rescue?  I have friends who work for a breed rescue, and I know what they would think of any breeder who allowed their dog to be in rescue and didn't take it on themselves... regardless of what the breeder has tried. 

> If they come back to us and it is impossible to have the dog at that time, why would you not wish to help us as much as the ones who just breed any dog and give them out to anyone with a wad of cash?

You quite obviously miss the point:  An irresponsible breeder is one who cannot take responsibility for the dogs they have bred and leaves rescues to pick up the pieces.  It is, therefore, not really possible to have a responsible breeder who wants a 'rescue' to help take on dogs they have bred - such a breeder would not be 'responsible'!

I hope I don't come across your rescue then to be turned away and dismissed because of your rules. Lovely to see you are associated with a rescue with conditions that quite obviously support puppy farms and BYB as that is where the rest of your rescue dogs come from.

Do you work in breed rescue or a general rescue ?

> Only those people who can fulfill every condition of being an "ethical" breeder should even consider breeding.

It was a couple of these 'ethical' breeders who were encouraging Pedlee to lie to the council kennels ..........................

Rescues are not there to pick up the pieces for 'responsible' breeders.  Because breeders should not be breeding if they don't have provision for unforeseen circumstances. 

Rescues exist because of irresponsible breeders who don't take responsibility for the dogs they have bred. 

They also exist because BYB continue to breed - and will continue to breed, whatever.  That does not mean rescues 'support' BYBs, far from it.  They very much wish all BYBs would stop breeding.  But obviously they are not going to, so someone needs to be there to care for the dogs.  That doesn't mean a rescue 'supports' BYBs, anymore than an orphanage 'supports' parents abandoning their children...

I really wasn't going to say another word, but honestly, how can anyone involved in rescue make such a ludicrous statement!What a strange
attitude from a dog lover. Evidently, now we know, all dogs are not born equal!  (In response to Zan)

Rescues exist because of the dogs.

It is quite funny as if you go to most breed club websites they always have rescue details on most if the websites but never see any disclaimers saying by the way if you are a breed club member we won't help you.

I would make a distinction between breed rescues, in particular breed club rescues, and general rescues. The former may have some role in supporting dogs and their breeders, especially in unforseen circumstances like severe illness and so on. It is part of the reason hey have been set up.

Ah so there is a need to support ethical breeders then?

So using your analogy Rabid, children shouldn't come into care if they were born into a 'good' family and have lost their parents or something else life changing has happened in their lives. 

Well I think it is probably more realistic for a breed club to have a rescue- it is more responsible and ethical to be prepared for situations that migth go awry- isn't that what we are saying overall?

Yes exactly.

I would still like Rabid to answer my question about family versus dog contingency fund.

LJS   It seems to me, it would appear dogs should only be bred by someone so wealthy they could never possibly have this type of dilemma!  I think some contributors are a little too idealistic, we live in the real world, not fantasy land  :)

Pedlee, your 'signature' was rather prophetic.

Glad you have found an reasonable outcome for your dog.

Here in lies a lesson to become an ethical breeder...one must first have  a crystal ball that is able to see into the future 10/15/20 yrs or so.

One must put thousands of £££,s in the bank and NEVER draw from it, ( no matter any fanacial crisis) incase at some point 20 yrs later one needs it to house / kennel a dog that may come back to you.

One must NEVER think of moving house OR plan a new litter, incase by chance a dog may be in need.

If only life was so simple, death, loss of work, injury, take your pick on any of the mentioned that frequently jumps in front of us...... So what is this mythical breeder going to do 10/20 yrs after they bred a litter when faced with choices...... Forget mortgage , loss of life, or home, due to keeping those spare thousands for that maybe rainy day ,the need to put a dog in kennels.....

I am flabbergasted at the attitude of some.

I would suggest some need to carry oxygen around with them, due to the altitude up there in the clouds.

How can anyone who shows such unconditional care and consideration to a dog in need (well that is providing they have not been bred with care) and hate their fellow man so much. To my mind there is something wrong with the wiring it does not co-relate if that is the right word, the whole thing seems so very unbalance to have had any rational thought applied at all.

I wasn't going to get involved with this aspect of the discussion but I can't let this go

They also exist because BYB continue to breed - and will continue to breed, whatever. That does not mean rescues 'support' BYBs, far from it. They very much wish all BYBs would stop breeding. But obviously they are not going to, so someone needs to be there to care for the dogs. That doesn't mean a rescue 'supports' BYBs, anymore than an orphanage 'supports' parents abandoning their children...

This absolutely DOES mean that rescues who take in dogs from BYBs and puppy farmers are supporting them!

Why else do you think people who buy easily, discard just as easily, if not because they know that the dog will be looked after. 

The number of abandoned dogs has grown to fill the number of rescue centres, and the number of BYBs and Puppy farmers has increased accordingly.   

At the same time, the number of responsible breeders, breeding regularly, seems to have shrunk dramatically.    Every responsible breeder I know has reduced the number and frequency of litters that they breed

Every responsible breeder I know also raises funds and personally contributes funds to breed rescue on a regular basis - most of us know 'there but for the grace of God...' - in addition to having a puppy contract which states that the puppy should come back if it needs rehoming.

Pedlee,
Well done on doing your best for your dogs in extreme circumstances.   There are many breeders who wouldn't have done what youhave.   And apparently they would be lauded by some for just letting rescue take the dog.  

The world's gone mad!

Totally agree with you Rabid (and Zan and Goldmali). I would hope the breeder would at least use some of the money they will get from selling their current litter to help fund this dog's stay in kennels. No way in the world would I allow one of my dogs to end up like this - and as an 8 year old large breed he will be much harder to rehome. So much for 'dog must be returned to breeder if owner can't keep him/her'. Perhaps they should have added ...'if it is convenient for me to take him back. If not he will end up in rescue and take his chances like any other dog.' Sorry if this sounds harsh but I can't believe people are condoning this - as Rabid has pointed out, a very dim view of this would have been taken if it had been anyone else but a member of this forum.  

Ok so how can you guarantee that it would never happen to you ?

And so the cruel pot shots continue........ I personally think it might be a good idea to close this thread before anyone else can have 'their go' at Pedlee.

(In reply To Marisa not LJS))

>a very dim view of this would have been taken if it had been anyone else but a member of this forum.  

If Joe Bloggs spends time to find the owners of a stray, pays to get the dog from a council kennel where they might be put down after a week, finds 2 foster homes and pays for the dog's keep, then liaises with a breed rescue, then organises and pays for (refusing financial help) transport to a temporary refuge they'd be applauded. If the breeder of the dog does the same she's berated. This has gone beyond bizarre.

You are so spot on Jeangenie  It beggars belief.

> xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">No way in the world would I allow one of my dogs to end up like this

I am so pleased that you are able to categorically state that you will never be in such a position as Pedlee has found herself in. It must be wonderful to know that whatever life throws at you will always be able to cope unlike us lesser  mortals who may struggle in certain circumstances.

In my life I have discovered that however much one plans and saves for the future life can throw us a whole bunch of difficulties - through no fault of our own - and we can find ourselves in a place we never, ever thought we might be. Life has also taught me that compassion and kindness can make the world a better place and nobody is infallible.

I am sure Pedlee has broad shoulders so think it is important this gets discussed as I think there is a definate point to get get cleared up about reality and idealistic views on how people's lives actually pan out.

Nobody is questioning that trying to put in place as much contingency to make sure any dogs that you breed are going to have the back up if things go wrong ( oh gosh yes puppy owners also have things happen to change their lives hence why some dogs are returned or end up in rescue ) but to be quite so black and white on this is just unrealistic.

For many years our breed rescue helped out if a breeder had a dog back on an informal basis, especially if there were no dogs currently in rescue, mainly by passing details onto people looking for a rescue dog.  it became necessary to make policy clear.

And this is our breed rescues Policy re breeders.

Assistance to Breeders Occasionally a breeder may have a dog returned due to a variety of reasons. The Elkhound Rescue Fund recognises the need for clarity on the position of the Charity and in such circumstances and in June 2008 agreed the following:

Elkhound Rescue is able to assist Norwegian Elkhound breeders who find they have had a dog returned in the following way:

            i).         Elkhound Rescue will assist breeders in locating homes for dogs returned but preference will always be given to Elkhounds currently kennelled at Rescues expense.

            ii). Elkhound Rescue will offer to list details of dogs returned to breeders on the Elkhound Rescue website. With details of each dog and contacts.

            iii). Elkhound Rescue may be able to assist in other ways but it  is expected that any costs incurred by Elkhound Rescue will be fully re-imbursed

iv). The Elkhound Rescue Fund offers this as a service in good faith to breeders seeking a home for Elkhounds. Elkhound Rescue are not responsible for any subsequent costs or issues.

Updated  December 2012

This means that breeders have something to fall back on in the short term emergency situation, and access to people looking for a rescue dog.

I am sure Pedlee has got broad shoulders, but frankly I think this could be aired until the cows come home never get anywhere  :(

Nobody would dream of suggesting there shouldn't be contingency funds and plans- but that is what they are plans. Even the best laid plans can fail in times of crisis.

> One must put thousands of £££,s in the bank and NEVER draw from it, ( no matter any fanacial crisis) incase at some point 20 yrs later one needs it to house / kennel a dog that may come back to you.

Interesting point, and one which is breed-dependent. Will you need to put away less money for a toy breed which may live for 16 years, but only have 2-3 per litter, than someone who has a giant breed with 8-10 per litter but only lives for 7-9 years? Would you need extra cash to support the health of certain breeds which suffer a prolonged and medically expensive old age?

Someone bred my oldie rescue girl, and someone also didn't claim her as a stray... there's no way of finding out anything, no traceability. With the hundreds and thousands of BYB-bred puppies flooding the market weekly not to mention the PF-bred ones, I applaud anyone who stands up to be counted whenever one they have bred ends up in rescue and takes responsibility - ANY responsibility.

Surely SOME responsibility is better than NO responsibility, which is what 99% of dogs born in this country [and overseas!] can expect throughout their lives?

Well done Pedlee for what you've done so far, u know many a breeder who'd call themselves responsible wouldn't of done this.

One thing people are failing to look at is the dog and its welfare, sometimes going back the breeder isn't always the best thing for it. Depending on the situation of the breeder and dogs they have might mean it wouldn't do it any favours. Unless we are there actually in the situation that Pedlee has found herself in I really don't think anyone should be so quick to criticise. None of us know the kennels that the dog finds itself in right now either. Where this dog is right now must be so much better than one the home he was in previously and also the pound kennels too!!

If Pedlee did nothing for this dog then yes I could see why people would be upset, she's not washed her hands of this dog and two, yes two fosterers have let her down, so really breed rescue was the place to go and she has put hands in pocket and paid out for this dog too: 
In an ideal world yes maybe she could of taken this dog back, maybe if she didn't have a litter on the ground. The world isn't a perfect place and we can only do the best we can at any given time!

Last year, a successful American businessman had a promotion which meant that had to relocate to the UK from his home on the west coast of USA.   He and his wife moved over here, acquired a lovely house in Surrey and he and his wife brought all three of their dogs  - 2 aged 5/6ish and one elderly old girl - their family - over to the UK. 

They settled happily here, the husband jetting off every couple of weeks to oversee various contracts in Africa and Europe and everything was fine ...until the end of the summer when the wife (aged 46) died suddenly - leaving her husband and dogs on their own in a foreign country.    Eventually, this poor chap had to make the decision to rehome the dogs - his whole family.  

He contacted Breed Rescue - who, thanks to Gabrielle and others - were able to rehome them.   But according to some of you, they should have gone back to their original breeder - in the USA?????

About two and a half years ago, we acquired our last puppy - a labrador - and we had such plans .........six weeks after Odin joined us, out of the blue,  my OH was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and died eight weeks later.   We hadn't planned for that either.

Those of you who are oh so po-faced and harsh in your condemnation of Pedlee should think hard .....it must be very hard up there on the moral highground ......it must be difficult to breathe in that rarified altitude.

Once again, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.........

> And this is our breed rescues Policy re breeders.
>
> Assistance to Breeders Occasionally a breeder may have a dog returned due to a variety of reasons. The Elkhound Rescue Fund recognises the need for clarity on the position of the Charity and in such circumstances and in June 2008 agreed the following:
>
> Elkhound Rescue is able to assist Norwegian Elkhound breeders who find they have had a dog returned in the following way:
>
>             i).         Elkhound Rescue will assist breeders in locating homes for dogs returned but preference will always be given to Elkhounds currently kennelled at Rescues expense.
>
>             ii). Elkhound Rescue will offer to list details of dogs returned to breeders on the Elkhound Rescue website. With details of each dog and contacts.
>
>             iii). Elkhound Rescue may be able to assist in other ways but it  is expected that any costs incurred by Elkhound Rescue will be fully re-imbursed
>
> iv). The Elkhound Rescue Fund offers this as a service in good faith to breeders seeking a home for Elkhounds. Elkhound Rescue are not responsible for any subsequent costs or issues.
>
> Updated  December 2012
>
> This means that breeders have something to fall back on in the short term emergency situation, and access to people looking for a rescue dog.

SO basically Elkhound rescue is not wanting to help a genuine breeder who may find themselves in a difficult situation through no fault of their own. But is willing to pick up the pieces  where the breeder does not come forward, Most likely a puppy farmer or BYB who has no interest in the puppies. Or from Owners who have decided they no longer want the dog so don't pick it up from the stray kennels.

Once again it seems like the best breeders are being criticised and penalised where the  ones who couldn't care less about their dogs are helped to get away from their responsibilities.

And this is obviously not just Elkhound rescue. All over the country rescues refuse to help breeders like Pedlee but pick up the pieces from the careless breeders and owners. All the dogs in rescue were bred by someone. Why not help the genuine breeders? From a rehoming point of view a dog like Pedlees where its history is known and the breeder is willing to help is a much better prospect than a puppy farmed dog whose breeder and owner couldn't care less about them.

> Pedlee, your 'signature' was rather prophetic.

Anyone who has read my posts about Hattie (Hank's litter sister) will understand that signature and will appreciate that I don't just "give up" when the going gets tough. :)

I really don't think I can justify myself any more and frankly am losing the will to live in trying to do so ... I have done what I've done and honestly feel Hank is in a better and more stable place now than had he gone to yet another foster home who may possibly have let me down again. In life there are no guarantees. To come back here at this moment in time would undoubtedly have been more stressful for ALL concerned. I could recite many a story of what I've done for my dogs and litters (there have only been 3, including this current one) which go above and beyond. If what I've done makes me a bad breeder in the eyes of some then so be it ...

I'm not sure where all this 'high moral ground' and 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone' stuff comes from.  This is not about judging, this is about encouraging responsible breeding practices.  Do you 'judge' BYB and puppy farmers from your own 'moral high ground'?  I don't think you'd see your opinion of them in that way.  Same goes for my opinions about breeders.

>Here in lies a lesson to become an ethical breeder...one must first have  a crystal ball that is able to see into the future 10/15/20 yrs or so.  One must put thousands of £££,s in the bank and NEVER draw from it, ( no matter any fanacial crisis) incase at some point 20 yrs later one needs it to house / kennel a dog that may come back to you.  One must NEVER think of moving house OR plan a new litter, incase by chance a dog may be in need.

Again, the same manouvere used by JG about a page ago - exaggerate the OP's position to show it to be wrong ;)

I could then exaggerate my position and say:  No, instead just breed willy-nilly and have no care in the world for the dogs you're producing...  But that would be silly, wouldn't it?  Because that's not what you're saying, is it?  About as silly as exaggerating my position is, because that's not what I'm saying either.

Obviously things happen in life which we don't expect and aren't prepared for.  That is why, when breeding, you should be conservative about the number of puppies you're bringing into the world as a breeder - because you have a responsibility to them which continues throughout their lives.

It doesn't mean you need to 'see into the future', but it does mean you should have some money put by to cover unexpected circumstances.  If you don't have it, then there are such things as overdrafts, loans, credit cards, borrowing from friends or family, and so on.  Kennelling a dog for a few weeks is not going to cost thousands.  If you don't have it, then don't breed another litter and have that on the ground - because you need the money for the existing dogs you have out there and your responsibilities to them.

The fact remains that there is a dog in rescue now because a breeder couldn't have him back or finance kennels for him.  That means a charity is funding a dog's upkeep because the person who brought him into the world is unable to meet his needs.  This is the factual reality of the situation.  You can argue that this is justifiable and ok, and that the breeder has done all she can - but these are the facts.  Personally, they're not facts which sit well with me.

I'd also add that it is one thing for poor Pedlee to be in this situation and to have no other choice but to do this.  It is quite another thing for Pedlee to receive the support, praise, admiration, approval and endorsement of many members of this forum, for what has happened. 

It is possible to accept that Pedlee had no other choice - whilst also holding a position that what has happened is not necessarily something to be held up as the ideal behaviour of a responsible breeder.  What I'm saying is:  A newcomer to this forum can quite easily see here that Pedlee was in a difficult situation.  But if what follows is whole-hearted endorsement for what she has done, that really doesn't communicate quite the right message IMO.

>The fact remains that there is a dog in rescue now because a breeder couldn't have him back or finance kennels for him.  That means a charity is funding a dog's upkeep because the person who brought him into the world is unable to meet his needs.

Excuse me, but 'the breeder' is financing kennels for him. Those, currently, are being organised by a breed rescue, but supported by the breeder. The dog is secure in one place rather than being shuffled here, there and everywhere, getting more and more stressed and distressed. The charity is not losing out but is doing the role it was designed to do.

>But if what follows is whole-hearted endorsement for what she has done, that really doesn't communicate quite the right message IMO.

Acknowledging and not shirking one's responsibilities should always be applauded. IMO.

WELL SAID JG!!

I do wish we had a "like" button!

> SO basically Elkhound rescue is not wanting to help a genuine breeder who may find themselves in a difficult situation through no fault of their own.

I don't get it, it says quite clearly they will help in unforseen or difficult situations, but breeders will be expected to re-imburse rescues costs, what is unreasonable about that?

Would also likepto add my support to pedlee too, don't let the perfect people get you down :-(

Like button for JG's post too

No, instead just breed willy-nilly and have no care in the world for the dogs you're producing... But that would be silly, wouldn't it?

It would be silly, except that actually, this is EXACTLY what happens when rescues take in puppy farmed and backyard bred dogs.   It may not be verbalised but that message is being received loud and clear by the BYBs and Puppy Farmers whether you want to admit it or not, and they are acting on that message.

Meanwhile, decent breeders are castigated for doing the utmost for the dogs they breed, even when it's many years down the line.

Perhaps all responsible breeders should stop and just let the puppy farmers and BYBs carry on, and the rescue people can then sit back and congratulate themselves that they are now rid of those evil responsible breeders taking their dogs back and depriving the rescues of their dogs.?

One thing is for sure, whilst they don't have to take responsibility for the dogs they use and the pups they breed, the puppy farmers aren't going to stop and neither will the BYBs

Wow... 103 posts made after the OP requested its closure and for Moderators to lock the thread.

   I cannot see how bickering after that defining point in the thread,pro or anti the OP can be of any possible benefit to the OP (or anyone else) now that the situation is resolved.
  Surely most of the bickering is now moot and therefore unhelpful,if there was fault to be found then the old adage of 'it's not the mistakes that you make, but what you do about them' rings true here as we can all agree that we are all fallible.
      It is also part of the TOS of this forum and an ethos Admin reminds us of often, to remember that 'What is done is done so concentrate on the advice for what the OP can/should do now'
     However as forum members know, that with the 'hot potato' threads of puppy litters (for most commonly occurring example) this does not happen. I think we can all acknowledge that this happens not because (as is often accused) forum members like to just kick someone when they're down with an (apparently) unhelpful ethical/moral boot! But rather because long standing members see the comings and goings of people that find their way to this site in the first instance via an Internet search... And as Google (in particular) has Champdogs threads in the first 3 search results for a lot of dog related topics, most members will post advice but also with a cautionary reminder or statement of fact or opinion *not* for the OP (as what's done is done) but for subsequent 'Google search' readers of the thread who may be *about* to make the same mistake.
        On that topic of advice being given (solicited or not) for breeding and breeder responsibility perhaps as a Forum it may be time to review the Forum article from Admin we all link to 'should I breed my Bitch' as the evidence suggests (from many member comments on this thread) that the large paragraph in that article that states (paraphrasing) 'ethical breeders accept puppies back at anytime no matter if its a bad time...' Is in fact notrealistic.
        So we the Forum should not be promoting unrealistic ideals and had that not been the case perhaps the OP on this thread may not have been upset and also that makes litter decisions much easier for those new to breeding taking such articles as gospel?

'ethical breeders accept puppies back at anytime no matter if its a bad time...'

Yes HG, very unrealistic, goes to show many of us have not read it, **guilty** as that point would have been raised.

I've just had a thousand bad time images going through my head, top of the list is the death of your spouse or a child, or being in hospital, or living in now rented accommodation that does not allow pets, along with all the others.......... 'no matter what' was a very silly thing to have down as an ethical breeder.

No-one can ever, ever predict what life will throw at us..... life is full of exceptions in everything we do, as long as we care,  and try our hardest what more can you ask of a person.

I should thnk it should be changed to something  like ethcal breeder wll do ther upmost to ensure suitable accommodation and care of dog should it need to be rehomed. Or something like that.

> ethcal breeder wll do ther upmost to ensure suitable accommodation and care of dog should it need to be rehomed.

Sounds good to me :)

I'm not sure where all this 'high moral ground' and 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone' stuff comes from.

It comes from the benefit of seeing life and what it can throw at you, when you least expect .

Some folk need to come down from the moral high ground where they can confidently see into the future,    to hopefully see what the rest of us see............life plays by it  own rules, and keeps changing them at a whim .

Anyone who can confidently predict what they will do in 10/20  yr time is not living in reality.

The best we can all do is hope,  what we would like to do does not knocked sideways be fate.

I think you're missing the point.  I've clearly said that no one knows what life is going to throw at them, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have several hundred pounds put aside for unexpected expenses if you're going to bring more dogs into an already over-populated world.

Not unreasonable at all but the question is if you had to use that money for a family emergency would you ?

"I think you're missing the point.  I've clearly said that no one knows what life is going to throw at them, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have several hundred pounds put aside for unexpected expenses if you're going to bring more dogs into an already over-populated world."

No it's not unreasonable - and in an ideal world all breeders do this.   But sometimes lives throws more than one curved ball at you at one time - and then you discover that the several hundred pounds have been drained down far too fast.    In Pedlee's case, she HAS paid for her poor old boy.  

Rabid - by the sound of it, the OP has already spent several hundred pounds

I think you're missing the point.  I've clearly said that no one knows what life is going to throw at them, but I don't think it's unreasonable to have several hundred pounds put aside for unexpected expenses if you're going to bring more dogs into an already over-populated world.

I the point is,  Pedlee has already probably spent  those several hundred pounds... so what other point is there ??

What else do you expect her to do?????????