An interesting stance taken on the activities of one rescue on this blog.

http://dogpolitics.co.uk/?p=249

Mm, interesting!

Interesting indeed (it's a rescue I have always felt unsure abut) -but it gets extra interesting if you read all the comments below the article and get to see the opposing views and experiences also. It's hard to know what to believe. I do wonder if they perhaps have to PAY the puppy farms for their ex breeding dogs, like so many rescues do in the USA. In that case their profits would be a lot smaller. Then there is the question of whether anyone SHOULD help the puppy farms in this way, because effectively it is allowing them to carry on without having to either put the "useless" (to them) dogs to sleep or sell them themselves -and it would make them look a lot worse to the general public if they regularly killed their breeding dogs.

Not going to comment on the money side as I know nothing about it - however on rescuing the ex puppy farm dogs: stopping that would make no difference to the puppy farms at all.  The farmers would just find other ways to dispose of their stock - abandoning them, shooting them, paying someone else like the greyhound slaughterer to kill them for a tiny fee, any way they can and no doubt they'd do it all secretively - the public would be unlikely to find out what happens to the dogs.  It would certainly make no difference to the running of the puppy farms - if they want old stock gone it'll be gone one way or another.

Obviously in an ideal world rescues wouldn't take the old dogs and the farmers would have to deal with them properly themselves - but they won't.  At least this way, those dogs get a chance at a decent life after months or years in a cage.

> At least this way, those dogs get a chance at a decent life after months or years in a cage.

But it just means another dog goes without a home.  There are far more dogs than homes.
The whole modern rescue "industry" makes little sense to me. 

>It would certainly make no difference to the running of the puppy farms - if they want old stock gone it'll be gone one way or another.

However ethically there's no difference between paying a puppy farmer for a puppy or for old breeding stock. It's all money in his pocket, and that's all he's interested in.

I have mixed feelings about this, as I'm sure it does do a lot of good and no doubt as with anything there are more than 2 sides to a story. however, regarding the ex-breeding bitches being taken from puppy farms, I think perhaps that continuing to take these animals makes life so much easier for the puppy farmers to continue. In an uncomfortable way it's almost endorsing these places as they are 'recycling'. Submitting details of the puppy farmers to authorities to hopefully investigate and close down or at least improve, may well result in the current batch of 'used up' animals being killed but wouldn't it save so many more from having to endure the horrors of such places in future. I know this is rather idealistic as we know that even licensed premises can have appalling standards and nothing ever seems to be done- but at the very least, the unlicensed ones are breaking the law and surely keeping quiet can only be seen as condoning criminal activities? It's far from a black and white situation though.

I do wonder why very little coverage is ever given to what happens to 'used up' breeding animals, sick or deformed puppies and the ones that pass their sell by date on puppy farms. I feel it is nearly always an unplesant and untimely death. I know people who have a lot of experience in dogs who still naively believe that ex-breeding bitches are ones rescued from puppy farms in 'dawn raids' rather than the 'waste product' dumped on rescues which I believe the majority are.

I think this is so far a rather good blog. Well written and apparently factual posts and the comments I've read are generally well informed and respectful.

> I do wonder why very little coverage is ever given to what happens to 'used up' breeding animals, sick or deformed puppies and the ones that pass their sell by date on puppy farms. I feel it is nearly always an unplesant and untimely death.

Well, those that are rescued by MT are given *some* coverage.... That's better surely than a blanket of silence and dogs that get "disappeared"?

In the six years since I have been following rescues online, I feel MT has got through to a lot of people, especially in the last few years. Once click and anyone can see what these dogs come out looking like - no different to people turning a blind eye to battery egg production for decades, but shocked if they get to see what the hens look like when they come out.

Judith Summers' novels, based on her experience of dog ownership brought MT into the mainstream with the publication of "The Badness of King George" - her direct experience of fostering ex-battery breeding dogs from MT. I am sure she has reached thousands more people than MT could by themselves, and by different means from a different angle.

I have sensed the anti-puppy farm movement growing fairly strongly in the last couple of years and while tomorrow is too late for many of those dogs, Rome wasn't built in a day. Evidence has been building against PFs for some time: the Bateson Report for instance really brought it home to many in authority the scale of the problem (and myself, when I read it). I am all for calm considered approach rather than knee-jerk legislation - just look at what a mess the last hurried Act, the DDA, has left in its wake.

My parents bought a sickly, PRA-affected Cocker Spaniel via a dealer from a Welsh Puppy farm back in 1968 as they knew no better. I agree 44 years is way too long for this to still be a continuing practice, but on the other hand, thousand upon thousands of similarly-bred dogs are sold in the UK every year - probably more than in 1968! - but surely it's easier to educate people nowadays than it was back then?

I think it has to start from the grass roots up - but in the meantime, the more neglect cases MT can showcase, the better in my opinion - nobody who has ever looked at their site would buy a puppy farmed dog afterwards.

In the six years since I have been following rescues online, I feel MT has got through to a lot of people, especially in the last few years.

But they are not doing themselves any favours with their unrealistic demands such as no rehoming to anyone who has dogs or bitches not neutered, and refusing help from breed rescue.

Judith Summers' novels, based on her experience of dog ownership brought MT into the mainstream with the publication of "The Badness of King George" - her direct experience of fostering ex-battery breeding dogs from MT. I am sure she has reached thousands more people than MT could by themselves, and by different means from a different angle.

I deliberately avoided that book after having read her first which was almost as bad as Marley and me -can't stand people being cruel to animals due to ignorance. :( In fact the title alone of the second book made my blood boil (it's not the dog being bad, it's her) -so she's lost out on some audience there for sure. And that's a shame!

> I deliberately avoided that book after having read her first which was almost as bad as Marley and me -can't stand people being cruel to animals due to ignorance.

True but in the second one it's nice to see her become less self-obsessed and start to acquire some compassion. The "badness" stayed mostly in the title.

I've been involved in rescue for a very long time now and with a particular rescue so have some background info on this.
Not going to say much on here except to point out that when MT first set up they did have a charity number on their website
sowhat happehned

It was looking at the ex breeding dogs on the MT website that helped me to decide about going on my first protest. I have been very involved in the campaign against puppy farming ever since! I do think however that they could do more about reporting and campaigning against puppy farming. They have not even joined CARIAD when most of the other Welsh rescues, some of whom take in ex breeders, are members.

The farmers would just find other ways to dispose of their stock

Years ago a PF not too far from where I lived at that time closed down, he just moved to Scotland where he could expand his 'business'. He dealt mainly with the Gsd dog, although I think different breeds were to become part of the expansion plans.
The good people that bought his land ( nothing to do with dog breeding) found to their horror that on digging the land they found numerous pits full of dog remains. Most looked as though they had been bashed over the head, but some were believed to have been buried while still alive. ( this was the findings of the police and rspca) The local people had been trying for ages to get him closed down but it fell on deaf ears.
He started as a BYB but found that the money was so good he began breeding more and more and for this reason he needed to move to get away from local complaints and prying eyes. I dread to think what he has got up to since.
As far as I am concerned, people like this have lost the right to walk this planet and should be put down, ( or left in a room with dog lovers )

True but in the second one it's nice to see her become less self-obsessed and start to acquire some compassion. The "badness" stayed mostly in the title.

Drat I just typed a long response then clicked the wrong tab and lost it all.

I was saying something along the lines of the book is badly named then, and for me, it's too close to home. I don't understand why people find it FUNNY that a dog is badly trained -it's nothing to do with the dog being bad, it's the owner. Knowing Blenheim Cavaliers, having had them since 1995, I can't think of a single breed less likely to deserve to be called bad. They so want to please and are one of the easiest breeds ever to train. When they do wrong, it's almost always because they don't understand what you want, so the owner's fault. If I get angry and tell my dogs off, the Papillons and Malinois will often just stand there grinning and wagging their tails, thinking I can't POSSIBLY mean them, or if they realise I do, they go to their beds and forget about it. But tell a Cavalier off and that tail instantly drops down, those huge eyes become so sad and he looks like you've just ruined his entire life, so sad and so let down -how COULD you get angry with him? No other dog I've known can manage to make you feel so bad as they take it all to heart so much -and when praised, no other dog is as happy. So it really upsets me to read of somebody who thinks the DOG is at fault and even punishes him when he'd done nothing at all (like when the cat peed on the couch -it was obvious it was the cat, typical cat thing to do). Anyway, from what you've said it sounds like I should give the second book a go after all. :)

I think they are, a second hand dog dealer.

I do not mean that with any tone of disapproval, and as second hand dog dealers go, they are one of the better ones around - they do home check on the whole, they do spay/neuter, they attempt (if not brilliantly) to offer behavioural advice and support.

As a place to buy a second hand dog, I really have no problem with them.

BUT - what I have a problem with is the devious/underhand nature of some of what goes on - the shipping in dogs from Ireland, the cherry picking the prettiest/saddest/most easily rehomable dogs - when did you last see row after row of generic staffie x's at Many Tears? You don't, because they don't take those dogs in, on the whole.

Their reasons for not being a registered charity are poo, quite frankly. They haven't done it because if they did, they would risk losing control of MT and thereby, losing control of a large part of their personal income.

Nothing wrong at ALL with wanting or indeed needing to have a personal income - who doesn't! But be honest and above board about it.

I do not believe that ANYONE calling themselves a rescue and purporting to be doing that for the best interest of the DOGS (both dogs specific, and dogs as a whole) is above question and those that get shirty and defensive when questioned generally have got something to hide.

MT do I believe, do the best they THINK they can do for the individual dogs that come in.

What they do not do, is do the best for dogs as a WHOLE - because by supporting puppy farmers in taking the unwanted/retired animals off their hands, by shipping in dogs from ireland, by cherry picking the best dogs, they are in some respects doing dogs in general a DISservice.

However thats the catch 22 really that all rescues face - I think they have to decide for themselves which line to take, and make that clear and make everything totally transparent, then people can decide if they support them or not based on all the facts.

> I do wonder why very little coverage is ever given to what happens to 'used up' breeding animals, sick or deformed puppies and the ones that pass their sell by date on puppy farms. I feel it is nearly always an unplesant and untimely death.

Sorry, I wasn't very clear, I meant the ones which don't make rescue/rehoming centres. The poor souls at MT etc are just the tip of the iceberg as to what goes on..

>As far as I am concerned, people like this have lost the right to walk this planet and should be put down, ( or left in a room with dog lovers )

Now THAT is a sensible suggestion.  I'm in total agreement.