>i still dont understand why people are saying that breed rescues are not there to help out the reponsible breeders.

Because the responsible breeders are the ones that deal with their own problems themselves, not pass the buck.

surely the breed resues would be more than happy to help the responsible breeder who has done all they can to produce healthy pups- but due to odd numbers are not selling?


Very true and just like a good breeder they generally vet very carefully before re-homing as a breed rescue obviously knows the breed and it's requirements very well. I also have a friend who got an excellent 8 month pup from a breed rescue, she couldn't believe her luck.

>i still dont understand why people are saying that breed rescues are not there to help out the reponsible breeders.

Because the responsible breeders are the ones that deal with their own problems themselves, not pass the buck.

but if the responsible breeder has done all they can- then it isnt about passing the buck it is ensuring that healthy puppies are given good forever homes.
the breed rescue i am involved in is run by a very good breeder. she has never used the rescue to home any of hers- but has never turned a dog away no matter where it came from. at the end of the day they are there to help the dog.
perhaps it is more a matter of the breeder not wanting to approach breed rescue as they dont want to 'lose face'

Perhaps if you could explain how this is done you could save puppies, so please share this information

Easy,   If I had 6 pups let over, (extremely unlikely but we'll use 6)

We know at 8 weeks pups are generally starting to up their play fighting and become uncontrolable, so there is no way the litter would stay as one group. I would watch their characters firstly to make sure I did not put two fiesty ones together. I would pop up 3 heated kennels, (small - medium breeds I have a large house so I would most probably segregate into different rooms) but without a large house, heated kennels for med - large breed. Small could be handled indoors.

I would set up a training programme for each pup, methodically list down everything done with each pup every day, giving pups two at a time play and exercise, sometimes mixing up the pairs, so as not to get too attached to one littermate, one to one training from 8 weeks only needs to be 15 mins twice a day along with play it is enough with a large litter. I would take it in turns for each pair throughout the day to come into the house for family time twice a day, very important to bond with the human family too.

As the pups got older the one to one training would increase, some I may even be able to do in pairs depending on character. It is all workable JG if you put your mind to things, and organisation is the key, you would need to know which pups are doing what, some would be further on than others, some would need more attention and time, but very workable.

And I would be constantly using all contacts to find good homes in-between, the pups would not be pshychologically unable to be a normal pet, as they would have one to one and family time, no different to any other kennelled dog, and certainly much more contact than a pup left in quarantine, with training thrown in too.

And you go to work when?

> And you go to work when?

I thought, (judging by the way a new dog/puppy owner gets an ear bashing here for getting a pup/dog when at full time work/out a lot) a breeder would ensure there was somebody at home for at least most of the day when they had a litter?

Thankyou Theemx.

Who would buy a pup that was hand reared? I would want to see the set up and it would depend on the breed and the breeder - but it would be a serious factor in my decision. Would it not bother anyone else?

What do others think of handreared puppies, are they in your opinion likely to be as Theemx says, not able to mix with other dogs well due to no doggy mum being there? Or has anyone found different? Answers to Theemx questions abobe please and discuss, as this is stil relevant to culling or not.
Thanks

I thought, (judging by the way a new dog/puppy owner gets an ear bashing here for getting a pup/dog when at full time work/out a lot) a breeder would ensure there was somebody at home for at least most of the day when they had a litter?

Have to say I agree, I thought responsible breeders were there more or less constantly until all puppies were homed?
Wonderful post carrington, simple explanation of how it can be done with much work, time and effort on the part of the breeder but then is that not what breeding is all about...

Yes of course - but for months and months? Carrington (I think - will have to check) said that she'd wait up to a year if needs be.

I don't know anyone who can take a year off even from a part-time job to successfully raise 6 puppies at once.

I work from home, and only part time whenever I wish, I wouldn't breed otherwise

Pups always sleep at my feet when I work, I can still talk to them and see what they are doing, I personally would not find it a problem at all, to work around 6 pups, but that is me and I am used to puppies and dogs being with me all day.  I can only speak from my own perspective.

I think you'll agree that most people don't have the luxury of working from home, and need to leave the house for at least a few hours evry day to be able to survive.

And of course some people live in properties with a limit to the amount of dogs over a certain age that they're allowed to keep.

True, but I have to be honest, leaving for work part-time would still be workable, the pups would learn to sleep whilst out, and in that case for play and family time it would have to be 3 pups at a time as time would be shorter, one to one would also have to be cut down, but not so bad that a dog would be untrained.

If the breeder would need to go back full time, then she could employ someone/or ask a friend to just do puppy play with each group throughout the day and other training would need to be done at weekends, not as good but it still wouldn't be hell on earth for the pups at all.

The second part. And of course some people live in properties with a limit to the amount of dogs over a certain age that they're allowed to keep.


In that case they should not breed, as we all should cater for dogs being returned to us, it is something a breeder should always have in their mind.

just to go back to the handrearing- i have handreared quite a few litters of pups & kittens, i know of the possible behaviour problems that can occur- but to my knowledge ( still in touch with most of them & i kept one kitten) none of mine developed these. i beleive this is because it wasnt me hand rearing them it was my neutered bitch- i fed them, but she washed them, played with them & taught them acceptable behaviour.
my boy was taken off his mum at 3 weeks & had the worst start possible- kept in isolation until he came to me a 10 weeks. however he is the best balanced & happy dog imaginable- he gets on with all other animals.
the only telltale of him leaving his mum so early is his difficulty in reading body language sometimes- a snarl he recognises & will submit & appease. but if a dog runs at him barking he thinks they want to play.
again i think this is down to my girl 'adopting' him when he came home & teaching him how to be a dog.if there is a suitable female around i think hand rearing can be very successful- i also know of freinds who have hand reared without a bitch around & have produced lovely well balanced pups.

Personally I think if you breed you are responsible for them puppies- I do not believe in culling them unless there is a severe handicap, agression ect, but if the pup is perfectly normal and healthy then it is the breeders responsibilty to give that puppy a happy forever home... Culling them is not the answer, if you can't find a home then you are their home- if you can't provide for them then you should not be breeding- they have souls to. To cull just to have another litter later on is cruel- mise well have given the bitch an abortion- Just my opinion.

I bred my bostons one born with a rectal prolapse (most breeders would have pts) we did a purse string on him and well since its my fault he was born he is now part of our family now 7yrs old. Had a bitch at 7 weeks with cherry eye's did the op on her and decided to keep her as well. Not there fault they were born so why should I have the right to say they die, I brought them here so they will live out there lives with us. Thats the one reason why Iam no longer breeding I would have way to many dogs. I feel if you bring them into this world then they are your life and killing is not the answer- if they were human well guess I need say no more.

This topic just really irks me- Always telling people if you breed be prepared to care for the whole litter or ones that are not sold ect ect and here breeders are culling them so they can breed again in the future- come on! Just sickens me. I am a huge animal lover and believe animals should die of natural causes especially not at a young age by the hands of a human because they don't know what to do with them- sadens me for all the animals pts in the pounds

>for play and family time it would have to be 3 pups at a time as time would be shorter, one to one would also have to be cut down,

Behaviourists tell us that, with multiple puppies, for every 5 minutes they interact with each other they need to be separated from each other and have 15 minutes individual interaction with people, if they're not to become too pack-orientated and dependent.

>And of course some people live in properties with a limit to the amount of dogs over a certain age that they're allowed to keep.
>In that case they should not breed,

That rules out entire populations from various cities in the world.

>> And of course some people live in properties with a limit to the amount of dogs over a certain age that they're allowed to keep.
>> In that case they should not breed,
> That rules out entire populations from various cities in the world.

I thought the diference between a good/reputable breeder and a BYB/puppy farmer (apart from health checks etc.) was that a good breeder will always be prepared to take a pup/dog back, if a 'good/reputable' breeder is restricted to the number of dogs they have on a property they either cant offer the option of having a dog/pup back, or they are lieing about the fact they'll take one back, in either case it just seems the same as a BYB/pupy farmer with a better health history on the litters.

It seems then, that most breeders are restricted to dog numbers and therefore can't take pups back, so not all of the pure-breeds in shelters have come from BYB - they must also come from 'reputable' breeders who don't have the room to take back pups/dogs.

In Response to lincolnimp

This is exactly what I mean by responsible breeding.  The breeder makes the hard choices for the god of the breed.

Here here.

If you had a slightly weak puppy, would you cull before trying to assist?

I would definitely try. In my first litter I had one girl that was only 5 ozs which for a Golden is tiny and she almost had not fur on her paws and top of her head (she was like a little mouse). I made sure she had one of the best teats and she would always bury herself under the others when she wasn't feeding. I wouldn't allow the others to knock her off a teat although they always tried to and because of the size of them they could. By 12 months of age she had become a strapping bitch and in fact probably a bit big for the standard to be honest. Imagine if I hadn't given her a chance.

on one hand experienced owners & breeders on here are saying that anyone who seriously wants a particular breed , if they are serious could save £50 amonth for a yr to buy a pedigrre puppy- yet in the next sentance they say that good potential owners are not willing to wait for that puppy- leading to culling of puppies.
which is it??

   I think the phrase boots and fits comes into it.

I disagree , some people are happy to wait 6-12 months during which time they can save BUT most won't wait 3 years.

but in the breed talked about- if it is that low numerically. they wouldnt go elsewhere as his been said.
if i wanted - umm i dunno a blue dane- then i would have a choice of breeders & would go to whichever had the pup at the right time for me ( taking everything else into account like health tests, temperament of parents etc) that would not be possible in such  rare breed & if people really did want one then surely they would wait!

What do others think of handreared puppies, are they in your opinion likely to be as Theemx says, not able to mix with other dogs well due to no doggy mum being there? Or has anyone found different? Answers to Theemx questions abobe please and discuss, as this is stil relevant to culling or not.
Thanks 

100% with Theemx, 

I hand reared a bitch due to little milk.   She won't mix with other dogs often.  She won't fight or anything like that but she won't have nothing to do with them, she doesn't want to play with them etc. She is 4 now. Her mother was a lovely natured sociable bitch with both dogs and humans and I have a daughter from now her also who is 20 months the same as the grand mother.   The hand reared bitch thinks she has only to mix with humans.   I was a tiny bit cautious mating her but she was the only bitch from my original show bitch and I would have lost that line. We never leave a litter unattended till weaning time so every possible outcome was planned for including losing the resulting litter but the potential gain outweighed the risk for me. Luckily all went well and I have a lovely daughter from her who is winning well and a beautiful natured bitch.  Although my bitch who was hand reared is a beautiful bitch she was was spayed after the litter. I was grateful to get something from her though.

>was that a good breeder will always be prepared to take a pup/dog back,

Yes, or do all they can to help the current owner find a new home. A dog could need rehoming at 7 or 8 years, and even the breeder's circumstances might have changed so that physically taking the dog back would be impossible. A responsible breeder won't just take the money then turn their back, which is the norm for puppy farmers and BYBs.

We never leave a litter unattended till weaning time
What happens then, how long is an acceptable time to leave them?

Yes, or do all they can to help the current owner find a new home.

Ah. I seem to have missed that bit when people talk of responsible breeders.....so very often then the dog will remain in the owners home until a home is found, for any reason and including even when the circumstances dictate that this is not the best option? Can't help but wonder, if the breeder can't find a home for their surplus puppies, how will they find a home for a stroppy 12 mth old, or an elderly dog, or a spolit middling one?

I appreciate the breeders circumstances may have changed, and if thats the case then I would expect no more puppies are forthcoming, but how do they find a home for this dog? if a puppy/older dog needs rehoming and the breeder talks on here, they are always encouraged to take it back, thats said to be what a responsible breeder does and if you can't you shouldn't have bred the litter......

HO Hum breeders will take back or if they can't they use their network of friends in the breed or the stud owner to help them out in the short term until other measure can be out in place. Puppy farms never take back don't care what happens to puppies. But I do believe that we were trying not to go down the good breeder better than puppy farm route in this thread.

Lets just say for arguments sake that the rare breed being discussed is a lanky legs mouse-hunter , and there are only one or two breeders who breed every three to five years.  they have waited a long time and when the litter arrives there are no bitch pups or dog pups for them.  they have the choice to wait yet again, but see another breed the short legged rat-hunter, much more numerous and has some similar characteristics, and the time is really just right to have a new canine in the family.  So they end up with the short legged rat-hunter.

A real breed here of British origin, the Smooth fox Terrier, at one time extremely popular, but now bred in single figures.  it hasn't the disadvantages of coat care of the wire fox, so that can't be the reason for it's declining.  Yet look at how many Jack Russells or so called Jack Russellls there are around, lots and lots of them, and many do not have nearly as charming a terrier personality as the sadly neglected Fox Terrier.

Younger people of below 40 years may never have even seen or heard of one, yet I am sure that among the people that a Jack Russell suits would make great owners for one.

I met loads of people that think my dogs are great, and I am pretty sure that a lot of the local Husky ownership is down to people mistakenly taking them for that breed, I actually had someone tell me their Friend had just bought one of those after seeing me with mine, and yes it was Husky without papers.

There seems to be no rhyme or reason as to why some breeds are popular at any time and others with  similar characteristics don't find favour.

Here are some examples of breeds with similar characteristics or natures:
Leonberger, well established and thriving, yet the Estrella not.
Finnish Laphund yes, Swedish Laphund no.
Akita (American type), and Alaskan Malamutes yes, Greenland dog/Eskimo dog no
Siberian Husky Yes, Norwegian Elkhound declining.
Japanese Shiba Inu, yes, Finnish Spitz no.
Springer Spaniel yes, Field Spaniel no.
Irish Setter yes, Irish Red and White Setter no.
West Highland White terriers yes, Sealyham especially and to some extent Scottish Terriers no.
Even worse some established breeds are not being supported and unreliable (as to resulting looks or temperament) crosses are taking their place.  For example the Irish Water Spaniel, Curly Coated Retriever, or the imported Spanish Water Dogs and Lagotta Romagnola.

What abot um the argument of well let them die out.

Some of the most popular breeds took some time to become accepted, the GSD and the Rottweiler are but two.  Now both breeds are victims of their own popularity.

Two more breeds that in my childhood were not common are the Border Terrier and the Flat coated Retriever, but there are huge entries at shows now and I see them regularly.

To satincollie...This is true........which is why I mentioned responsible breeders.....but as you have pointed out, if they need a home for a return they turn to friends, stud dog owners etc etc.....so why oh why can't the same thing be done for surplus puppies?

I have had experience of this as an owner.

I took my 2 Chows to the vet at 3 months old for lameness and it turned out to be severe elbow displasia, both dogs, both elbows. I nervously contacted the breeder about this as I knew it had taken him 2 years of trying to get this litter ( I had waited 7 months) and that he had kept 2 for showing. He had his 2 pups and the mum tested and they all came back the same as my boys results. He elected to have the 2 pups put down and had the mum spayed. OK these pups weren't 100% healthy but neither are my boys and they still have a good if not perfect quality of life. I can honestly say they are happy dogs.

I had really mixed feelings about his decision, he had sent me pictures of the 2 he kept and the boy was the identical twin to my Balto. I know the surgery is expensive and rehoming probably impossible but I still found it upsetting.

I wouldn't get another dog from him again just for the fact that he didn't test the parents. The bitch (and sire) was a champion and her brother best in breed in New Zealand. As a novice owner I thought I was buying the best quality. I've learnt that KC registration and champion parents stand for nothing. If I knew in advance he would PTS for genetic problems that he didn't even test for then I would have gone elsewhere.

>so very often then the dog will remain in the owners home until a home is found,

Yes, just the same as breed rescue, in my breed anyway. To avoid too much disruption to the dog to be rehomed, it stays in its current home for as long as possible, ideally until a co-ordinator can collect it and take it to its new owner the same day.

>Can't help but wonder, if the breeder can't find a home for their surplus puppies, how will they find a home for a stroppy 12 mth old, or an elderly dog, or a spolit middling one?

Because of course by then they probably don't have a litter of puppies to home as well.

Good question Calmstorm, may however be better on the other thread.   I assume you do not breed that you ask??

When I say unattended I mean JUST that , NEVER left unattended. Plain and simple. They are supervised 24/7 for the first 4 weeks of their life. Longest is for 5 mins toliet breaks, cups of tea or washing hung out but there is always someone there.   I have a rota of supervision in place with 3 responsible adults.

At weaning time they are up running around ( I wean mine 4-5 weeks small breed) so they can be left unsupervised for short acceptable spells IE 15-20 mins. In another room perhaps.  WHAT I DON'T MEAN BEFORE YOU ASK IS LEFT ALONE IN THE HOUSE.  My puppies are never ever left alone in a house for the first 10 weeks of their life.
My adult dogs are only left for a 1 hour space during the day on the occasion IF both my husband and I are working on the same day out the house.

The supervision in my house ;

I work some days from home and some days from my office 15 mins from my home.

If I am out the home I leave at approx 10am.

My mother who works for me part time to help with both the dogs and she does a little bit of cleaning and washing etc for me ( when I have pups she does nothing but sits with her feet up watch TV and watching them.)  She starts at 10am. ( she is there for the 5 min change over)

Her shift is 10am -2pm normally but if I have puppies which isn't often she is there to fill every single gap on any given day. This could be  10-3pm as my husband is alway in by 3 am. He is an early bird.  If either of us had a commitment the others would fill in.

In italics I said in the short term that is less likely to be the case with unsold puppies as the older they get the less appealing they become  to most puppy buyers. A single older dog will be assesed and long term arrangements made after the short term help has been given.

    Can't help but wonder, if the breeder can't find a home for their surplus puppies, how will they find a home for a stroppy 12 mth old, or an elderly dog, or a spolit middling one?


Because of course by then they probably don't have a litter of puppies to home as well.

I'm talking about the 'surplus' ones, which could be only one or two, maybe more, with the remainder of the litter sold they don't have a litter then either, do they. So if all these measures are in place, there is an excellent support to find puppies homes at any age, as has been said it is possible to rear them successfully if you put your back into it.

You say breed rescue will help a breeder in these circumstances, then why can't they do the same for a surplus puppy or two from the same source, a breeder? The puppies could stay in the breeders home till homes are found. if they do it anyway, how hard is it for them with a puppy.

In italics I said in the short term that is less likely to be the case with unsold puppies as the older they get the less appealing they become  to most puppy buyers. A single older dog will be assesed and long term arrangements made after the short term help has been given.

So, in among a breed, why can't this help and assistance be forthcoming anyway? Do responsible breeders not help each other out (I know brainless does) when there is an odd pup or two needing a home? Why do it for a return the breeder can't accept, yet not for a puppy/yearling?

There are also people who would much prefer an adult even a young adult, with a few creases to iron out, in experienced hands is less work than rearing a puppy to adulthood.

I have a foster here, can't see why anyone would have cast her off, but they did, and she is just 18 months old.  She was supposed to be purebred, but is obviously not.

I don't really think anyone has been talking about an odd pup or two I dont know anyone that culls for the sake of one or two (dont personally know anyone that culls for anything other than health issues) and I thought  the whole debate was about culling pups from larger litters.  There are limits to what  even a good breeder network and breed clubs can do.
I'm going to finish this discussion here for me, as I dont really think its going anywhere other than round in ever decreasing circles.
As I've said before I believe it is rare to cull puppies these days but I do believe a breeder is taking full responsibility if they do decide too cull.

> So, in among a breed, why can't this help and assistance be forthcoming anyway? Do responsible breeders not help each other out (I know brainless does) when there is an odd pup or two needing a home? Why do it for a return the breeder can't accept, yet not for a puppy/yearling?

I think the difference is that the dog ending up coming back for re-homing should if the breeder does their job properly only be the occasional one (about 1 in 10 or less of pups homed), and in the case of a large litter your in that situation from the get go.  I very much doubt any breeder would cull just the one extra pup.

Having back and rehabilitating an older pup or dog is quite different to trying to rear several unsold, plus your own new pup.

Breed rescue are there to help out dogs that find themselves with no-one to help them out, not to bail out breeders.  Breed rescues are supported by breeders and breed enthusiasts so their resources are often pretty tight.

The discussion was about culling healthy puppies, and other matters relating to that. The reasons seem to be given as no homes available, the rehoming matter was bought up and I think it is quite fair and revelant to ask why, if they are to be helped by other breeders friends and breed rescue, why the same format cannot be used to help those that find themselves with puppies surplus to the order book. Its no more 'bailing the breeder out' with a dog they can't take back than it is helping with puppies that can't find homes because of no order book space.

On the other thread, it was said that breed clubs recommend this, that the kc also recommended this and both were taking steps to make breeders aware of this. The discussion was then on who actually believes this is ok, and in what circumstances, as is being discussed.

I think you will find it's a matter of numbers, say several pups in a litter with no prospect of homes versus a carefully homed dog coming unstuck because of change in owner circumstances.

It is a fact that there are more dogs bred than there are suitable homes for, but good breeders try to limit any impact and mop up their own rescue situations, compared to those who don't see any responsibility after the pups leave them, and they have banked the sale price, or those who won't accept their accidental litter may swell rescue figures down the line.

Would anyone here as a breeder admit to culling puppies for the reasons mentioned in the original post?

Anyone bought a pup from a litter where others were PTS??.....

the rehoming matter was bought up and I think it is quite fair and revelant to ask why, if they are to be helped by other breeders friends and breed rescue, why the same format cannot be used to help those that find themselves with puppies surplus to the order book. Its no more 'bailing the breeder out' with a dog they can't take back than it is helping with puppies that can't find homes because of no order book space.


Exactly, using the Doberman story as an example of this, where the breeder had the 6 month pups pts, due to not finding any reputable homes for them, I don't know what the breeder went through to find homes, who she contacted, whether she went through her breed club, whether she thought of kennelling at her home for now and trying to keep them.  Or whether this was a breeder that just waited through advertisements on websites for anyone to contact her! Finding all unsuitable.

But breed rescue should be a port of call too, it's a way of reaching out to a lot more people really interested or already having the breed, after everything else has failed.

Perhaps this was done though, but contacting breed rescue is just as good a place to find potential owners as anywhere else, and they will be vetted well too. And quite rightly this can be done without the pups needing to leave the breeder.

> The reasons seem to be given as no homes available, the rehoming matter was bought up and I think it is quite fair and revelant to ask why, if they are to be helped by other breeders friends and breed rescue, why the same format cannot be used to help those that find themselves with puppies surplus to the order book. Its no more 'bailing the breeder out' with a dog they can't take back than it is helping with puppies that can't find homes because of no order book space

Finding the RIGHT home for ONE adult dog is not the same as finding the RIGHT homes for 4,5,6 or even 7 puppies.  The breeder will be able to foster out the dog for a while with other breeders maybe, or keep it themselves, until a suitable home is found.  I have done this for other breeders in my breed.  I was quite happy to take in an older dog for a short while.  Would I have four 8 week old puppies in the house? No way!  The reason that people are able to help out in a breed where culling takes place is that there are very few rescues because people find the RIGHT homes in the first place, not just home the puppies to anyone who they think might be OK.

Debs

> Would anyone here as a breeder admit to culling puppies for the reasons mentioned in the original post?
>
> Anyone bought a pup from a litter where others were PTS??.....

Yes and Yes.

Debs

> they say that good potential owners are not willing to wait for that puppy- leading to culling of puppies

not my view of a good potential owner

Have been watching this thread and I am surprised to learn that this sort of culling still goes on though with some very popular breeds I am not surprised it is happening.  Years ago white Beardies would have been culled as well as all other missmarked and somehow wrong for the standard breeds.  I would hope we are more enlightened now and that it didn't happen so often but it would appear the people that know still see it happening.

As a breeder I would never cull a puppy because it was the wrong colour shape size or just plain ugly, however, a sick or ill tempered animal I would consider culling if I was sure of my ground.  Jeangenie is absolutely right about bringing up siblings. You have to be ready to dedicate a lot of individual training to each one separately and together and if a number where to be kept you would certainly need help to keep your breeding stock and extra puppies in good condition mentally and physically.

I hope I never have to face it but if I do I hope I have the courage to make the right decision no matter how hard, but surely the way to be sure you will not need to cull unwanted puppies is to only breed when you have a strong waiting list.  Even then you may come unstuck.  Case in point I had a large litter, for the breed, and mostly boys.  My list was mostly girls so I had to re evaluate my whole strategy and start the process again of interviewing prospective owners etc.  I always intended to keep one for myself but if there was a need to keep any I would do so but work my socks of to find the right home as keeping two of the same age is no fun.  Anyone who would like to have my coping strategies I will be glad to pass them on but be warned it cost money and time and it not to be undertaken lightly.

I had at one time a juvenile bitch a yearling bitch and puppy bitch and a puppy dog not to mention the older guys who have been here for ever (so it seems).  That was more than a 24 hour a day job and the training was exhausting.  They are now all adults, youngest pair nearly two years old, and only now am I prepared to enslaved myself to another little ball of fur.

>Exactly, using the Doberman story as an example of this, where the breeder had the 6 month pups pts, due to not finding any reputable homes for them, I don't know what the breeder went through to find homes, who she contacted, whether she went through her breed club, whether she thought of kennelling at her home for now and trying to keep them.  Or whether this was a breeder that just waited through advertisements on websites for anyone to contact her! Finding all unsuitable.

That was explained in the previous thread. Perhaps you missed it.

I did. **wink**

playing Devils Advocate here  ...as a breeder of rare breed poultry I have this dilemma with every batch of eggs that I allow to hatch out  there are simply not the homes for cockeral chicks  and you cannot keep large numbers of cockerals together - so they are culled .....is this also wrong ? and if culling the 'wrong' sex of poultry is viewed as the responsible thing to do in the Poultry world then why is it different for dogs ?

Yvonne

Probably there isn't any difference ethically, but we tend to see it differently because dogs are pets and poultry are food!! Of course some people may just view both as 'livestock' though. 

Poultry can be pets too, as long as you don't have too many of them so that they aren't individuals. They all have different characters.

I think it's similar to the lily-beetle thread; or what flea-killer to use. If you can accept killing one life-form it's very difficult to condemn killing another without seeing hypocritical.

I would agree just about anything can be a pet, I had a pet snail once! Personally I believe in treating all creatures as humanely as possible. I wouldn't have a moral objection to culling of puppies (do hate that word though) as long as it was done absolutlely humanely, and of course such a decision taken very seriously. I think it is much worse to badly treat an animal than painlessly put to sleep a puppy.