TheDogPlace - Home >> Library >> Projects & Issues

CounterPoint

to Assigning Blame

First, and I suppose as typical of a counterpoint, I do have an issue with the idea that blame HAS to be assigned.  It seems effective in only helping people (some or all) become defensive, not to mention that it rarely, if ever, results in something remotely close to a solution.  I should also apologize now because I can't think of a single jingle or sitcom theme song to use to help me make any points.

With that said, no single person can have a real handle on what is going on in the "dog market" today, which is about all I can pull out of the first four paragraphs regarding economics and the author's inability to understand it while the Beverly Hillbillies were on.  Why?  Because no one has studied it.  Without this information, the debate is clearly going to be limited to personal experience.  The personal experience of this author covers ground in both breeding and rescue of purebreds as well as extensive rescue and placement of many mixes.  As a result, I believe my view is fairly well rounded which is not the same as correct if only, because, as stated before, it is still not a sample of every experience. 

 The tragedy of this "dog market" is that unlike any other animal (with the exception of some cats). Dogs are at the height of their economic value when they are puppies.  We can confidently exclude those very few show dogs that are sold for small fortunes, they definitely make up less than 1% of the total number of transactions anyway.  So, if something has inherent value when it is young (even mixes can be found in the local paper for $100 or more) then the drive is to produce.  Unlike other livestock where an adult is worth more (because of the costs associated with getting it to a "production" age), dogs are at the whim of their charm as puppies.  If they are unlucky and end up in a home or situation that is less than ideal, the road is only downhill. 

Additionally, a less than ideal home is further motivated to consider avoiding "investing" (keeping with our point about economics) in the dog since they won't get it back... unless, they breed.  While the Rich and Spoiled American doesn't seem to consider making the family BMW into a cab or renting out the spare bedroom, the idea of making Muffy pay her way seems quite reasonable and can be masked under the rationalization of emotion, that she is such a good dog.  This is hardly limited to the ignorant backyard breeder.  Plenty of "responsible breeders" are just as inclined to breed a dog that they know is hardly exceptional in the eyes of anyone (except their checkbook).

The author of who wanted to assign blame casually passed off that she didn't see any change in philosophy happening soon.  I disagree.  It may pass under her radar as she attends dog show after dog show and hangs out with the same people every week all spouting the same rhetoric that they can all happily agree to, so that they can assign the blame elsewhere, but the fact is, a shift is taking place.   More people are adopting from shelters and rescues, more people are choosing (not settling for) mixes, more people are spaying and neutering and more people are becoming educated and more people are fighting for legislation to change the status quo.  That is obvious. Ask any of your old time breeder friends who were around in the 70s and 80s if there was any legislation to fight in those good ole’ days.  Unless they were opposing local licensing, they weren't very busy with any legislative efforts!

Fact is, regardless of how you want to pass the buck over what the puppy mills are doing, the ultimate responsibility falls on the individual who makes a decision without being informed.  However, for those individuals who seek information, they can very honestly pass some of that responsibility to the shoulders of "breeders" (which let’s be honest, that is what makes up a breed club whether a regional or parent club to the AKC or other registries).  Information is not always available and forthcoming.  Often, when it is, it is slanted so that the marketing of that breed is more favorable.  It's just great economics and part of the American way to "market" your product by putting that good spin on it. 

Her points are founded on the absolute that rich and spoiled Americans want purebreds.  Some do.  Some do not.  There are thousands of shelters and rescues placing thousands of dogs everyday that are not purebreds.  Is the assumption that their genetics guarantee that they are going to homes that are inherently bad?  Or that these people can't afford or justify getting a really good dog (as defined by being a purebred I suppose)? I assure you, they are not.  As mentioned before, no one person can have a global view and yes, the population of the US constantly increases and as it does, if the purebred market is stationary at 30% then the population of the purebred market grows but not because no one adopts a mutt and not even because more people aren't choosing mixed breeds!

It is actually amazing how adaptable the economy and individual's buying decisions are.  If a store is out of Cheerios, most people will buy some Corn Flakes (or other substitution).  Some will even be mature enough to do it without whining because they didn't come from an age that said that if you are able to breathe you should have everything just as you want it.  If poorly bred purebreds were not available (and sorry, but yes, they do fill up the shelters, and guess what, even some well bred ones that show up there) in shelters and needing rescue, then the focus could turn to the irresponsible ownership and care of mixes (if the problem were that easy to separate).  At present the problem is so global, that it isn't.  Those who should be spearheading, with righteous indignation, a move to get something done, are busily passing the buck and assigning blame while eating their Banana Pudding at the Tarheel Circuit.  It is just another aspect of the tragedy.

A final anecdote cements the point above.  I promised to help a friend who wanted to get a dog.  Her last had died a few years before and it had taken her some time to be able to cope with the idea of ever losing another.  When she decided she would, she gave me a rather specific list of what she wanted.  We were going to go the rescue route and she wanted a female boxer with cropped ears (don't get me started on that), under 2, fawn with black mask and some white but not too much that was great with cats.  Initially I was irate but I held it back.  With so many great dogs needing homes, why was she so picky?  Still I got to work, I am ashamed to say that the problem is so dramatically bad that we found the dog she described exactly as listed above in less than 1 week less than 150 miles away.  Perhaps the saddest part is that this is still the case even though, as mentioned previously, the attitude is shifting and things are and have been improving. 

Just like any other cultural shift that brings its own effects on the market, you can be part of the change or get left behind.  Those breeders who want to believe that it is still the 1970s will be left there.

April 2005  Julie Hensley, DigitalDog : www.digitaldog.com