Yeah, I think a retired, already trained basenji will be a perfect first dog 🙂
Does this breeder sound reputable?
-
Sharon, I was quoting Robyn.
-
Sorry, I knew that, just typed the wrong name..should have been Robyn.
Robyn, I do have to say Debbi J is right, as far as my knowlege goes.
Jennifer Hill, who is part of this group, can tell you just how many puppymill b are posted.
She is the angel who deals with this. -
I know that when I was actively doing rescue the majority of rescues came from either BYBs (breeders not actively involved in the basenji community) or puppy mills. A few came from breeders known in the basenji community and only a handful of those outright refused to take responsibility. I don't know what the percentages were because I never calculated them.
I don't think that Robyn meant to imply that there are not well known breeders who are not taking responsibility but that in her experience those are not where most of the dogs are coming from. At this point in time, most of the rescues I am seeing are coming from internet sales by BYBs.
-
<< if the person looking at a $300 dog, $700 to $1000 a big jump for most. >>
If a person can't afford $300, then they shouldn't be getting any dog IMO. Just a vet check right after that is at least 40-50 bucks. Wasn't someone just talking about this earlier in this post? You don't want to put more money into the dog, but you're going to get another one? Doesn't this happen a lot to the people that put dogs in rescue? They conveniently get rid of a dog because of vet costs or lifestyle changes then turn around within (usually) a year and get another dog?
<_>
I have heard this bashing from rescuers as well. Most rescuers who don't have experience with reputable breeders do this as well. The facts are the facts-there are bad people on both sides of this particular coin, just as there are good people.
When did this conversation turn into 'rescuers vs breeders' ?? Aren't we supposed to be about the same thing? Getting dogs into the right homes??_
-
<< if the person looking at a $300 dog, $700 to $1000 a big jump for most. >>
If a person can't afford $300, then they shouldn't be getting any dog IMO. Just a vet check right after that is at least 40-50 bucks. Wasn't someone just talking about this earlier in this post? You don't want to put more money into the dog, but you're going to get another one? Doesn't this happen a lot to the people that put dogs in rescue? They conveniently get rid of a dog because of vet costs or lifestyle changes then turn around within (usually) a year and get another dog?
I 100% agree with this. The initial purchase price (whether it is $300 or $1000) is only a fraction of what it costs to own a dog. And yes, in this thread and in other threads, we've seen people re-home a dog (that sounds like training might be able to fix) that "can't afford" a behaviorist, only to turn around and buy another dog - or plan on buying another dog within a year. They don't listen to the advice that their home situation (lack of structure or training - animal & human) might be the cause of the behavior problems and expect immediate fixes. Their view is the dog is a failure, not that they were a major contributing factor to its failure.
Personally I've come to dread the new puppy threads each winter because many of them have purchased, without listening to the advice given, and you know that a good portion of the pups shown off will be re-homed.
I don't think anyone here is against rescue. At the same time, I don't think rescue should be against anyone going to a responsible breeder. It is an individual choice. I made the choice to initially get 2 retired show dogs - they needed a good home. And I didn't make the wrong choice - for me or for my dogs.
-
I haven't bought a basenji in 8 years, but back then Robyn even YOU quoted me something like $1500.
I'm sorry but you are mistaken. I have never asked more than $800 for a puppy and that includes show prospects. But, considering the puppy mill located just a few hours away charges $1200-1500, I may have to raise my price just to keep up.
-
@debbi:
Hi, Robyn,
Maybe things were different when you were doing rescue.
It was easier to trace the origins of each rescue back then. I did quite a bit of detective work and kept accurate records of my findings. The majority of Basenjis that came into local rescue were from two puppy mills or a cluster of BYBs who bred their dogs back and forth. My estimate of 95% coming from BYBs or puppy mills was actually generous considering only 1 out of 50+ rescues I rehomed came from a responsible breeder.
Debbi, correct me if I am wrong but doesn't BRAT rehome approximately 500 Basenjis each year?
-
I 100% agree with this. The initial purchase price (whether it is $300 or $1000) is only a fraction of what it costs to own a dog. …
I don't think anyone here is against rescue. At the same time, I don't think rescue should be against anyone going to a responsible breeder.Sorry, again an additional 700 to BUY the dog on top of the care IS a lot for most people. Period.
Nor did anyone bash breeders or getting from breeders. It was breeders bashing rescue dogs or inferring (or out and out claiming) not healthy or risky temperament. From breeders who if they know ANYTHING know that temperament testing is as valid on a rescue as their own pups (well unless they suck at temperament testing)…and is VERY reliable on older pups and adults. Now I am done on this topic. I left here crying yesterday because I couldn't believe people I thought were knowledgeable and cared about the breed were pushing breeder dogs and putting down rescues. So I have my big girl panties on and my rose colored glasses removed. 'nuff said.
-
Arlene,
I have to respectfully disagree. Not everyone can fork out $1000 for a dog. Does that mean they can't take good care of the animal and pay for an emergency vet bill? No.
Heck, I don't have $1000 laying around in the event my engine blew… part of the life of a FT student and single mother.I place my pups for $950. I have worked with MANY folks on payment plans, and reduced prices for the right home. I placed a lovely boy [that I bred] that is nearly 3 years of age and neutered… for $100 last week. He is in a fabulous home and gets to be a service dog! Sure, he lives in DT Portland, so no fenced yard, but he will live the life of Riley and have more attention than he could here in a group of 6 dogs. And I know for a fact this gal would NOT have had $1000 for a dog. Period.
Debra,
I do not, nor will I ever push rescue on folks. I tell them their options. For some folks, it is the best option. For others, it just will NOT work.
I have kids, so I know that is imperative to many families getting a pup... my pups are kid-proofed more than any puppy could possibly be that does NOT have children living under the roof. If they hit 8 wks in my house.. they are literally bomb-proof to all noises and kinds of people. You don't generally find that in rescue. -
It was easier to trace the origins of each rescue back then. I did quite a bit of detective work and kept accurate records of my findings. The majority of Basenjis that came into local rescue were from two puppy mills or a cluster of BYBs who bred their dogs back and forth. My estimate of 95% coming from BYBs or puppy mills was actually generous considering only 1 out of 50+ rescues I rehomed came from a responsible breeder.
Debbi, correct me if I am wrong but doesn't BRAT rehome approximately 500 Basenjis each year?
It's closer to 350 basenjis a year that BRAT places. We average 500 or more rescue forms a year from people wanting to rehome their dogs. We are usually able to help approximately 100 - 150 families keep their b's through help and education.
BTW, there are good breeders who do take back their dogs. We really appreciate it.
Debbi
-
@debbi:
It's closer to 350 basenjis a year that BRAT places.
Thank you, Debbi. I think I was adding in rescues rehomed by other organizations and private rescuers to come up with the 500 number that was stuck in my head.
-
Debra,
I do not, nor will I ever push rescue on folks. I tell them their options. For some folks, it is the best option. For others, it just will NOT work.
I have kids, so I know that is imperative to many families getting a pup… my pups are kid-proofed more than any puppy could possibly be that does NOT have children living under the roof. If they hit 8 wks in my house.. they are literally bomb-proof to all noises and kinds of people. You don't generally find that in rescue.I don't mean push down throats, but I push them to consider. For the rest, sorry I am shaking my head. Any decent rescue foster home works to bomb proof too. And they evaluate the dogs. And you know what, most of those have only a few dogs in their house so they can closely evaluate and spend time… unlike breeders with 10, 20 or 30 dogs. And they place depending on the dog and the family. And if you really believe people with children should only get puppies, I am sorry that you are impressively misinformed. There is a difference between WANT a puppy and it be imperative for any other reason. There are situations where a puppy IS important. But it isn't for temperament or behavior.
In fact I suggest strongly that a family with children who is capable of training a puppy doesn't NEED a puppy but can do it. A family that thinks it NEEDS a puppy BECAUSE they have children probably haven't the ability to TRAIN IT OR THEIR KIDS and don't need one. Hmmm.. just a thought.
And someone who can only bond with a pup doesn't need a dog at all.
That said, I applaud your placements of dogs over money. That is what good breeders do. But it sounds like you think bomb-proofing requires kids under the roof... so I guess you think people with children should ONLY get pups from someone like you. OOOPS Robyn et al... you are now relegated to those awful rescues that also are not as good as those with children.
The truth is, exposing a puppy to many many many situations, whether kids live IN your home or not, prepares and bomb-proofs. And you know that... or should. And the next truth is that no matter what YOU do, you place a puppy in an idiot's home where a child hurts the dog, your bombproofing for kids goes down the drain. You place a pup who has limited or even NO experience with children ... but otherwise "bomb proofed"... into a home with parents who supervise and get correct behavior from their kids, the pup is going to be perfectly fine.
I deal weekly with people who got pups from reputable breeders who have issues. Some, maybe most, because the breeder placed dogs in homes that were not appropriate or didn't recognize the temperament of the puppy.
The Arabs have a saying... trust in G-d but tie your camel. Yeah, if you want a puppy whether it is from a rescue or breeder, do your homework. Being a breeder with champions out the ears doesn't make your pups great pets or great pets in the wrong home. And I haven't had a rescue I have adopted over the years... except my chow/coyote mix... that I wouldn't put their health AND temperament up against the best bred dogs of their breed. And that was the ONLY point I ever meant to make. Stop bashing rescues for health or temperament.
-
The rescues I have had through my own independent rescue from 2001 to the present have more health issues than the ones from B.E.A.R.-Basenji Education and Rescue in OH from 1992 to approx. 2000. I rescue mostly commercial breeder dogs or their offspring but some came from BYBs. I think the problem is the inbreeding. Reputable breeders are smarter now about who not to sell their pups to so there is a limited number of breeding dogs these other breeders can obtain. I used to see Chs in some of the early rescue dogs pedigrees, now I rarely see any even in the 5th generation.
I recommend getting eye exams and thyroid testing done on rescue Bs as these are the problems my rescues have. Fanconi has not been a major problem but I have not rescued an entire litter with Fanconi which is possible since these breeders do not test. I have only rescued three Bs with Fanconi since 1992, two were affected and a young one that has tested probably affected.
Jennifer
-
I don't mean push down throats, but I push them to consider. For the rest, sorry I am shaking my head. Any decent rescue foster home works to bomb proof too. And they evaluate the dogs. And you know what, most of those have only a few dogs in their house so they can closely evaluate and spend time… unlike breeders with 10, 20 or 30 dogs. And they place depending on the dog and the family. And if you really believe people with children should only get puppies, I am sorry that you are impressively misinformed. There is a difference between WANT a puppy and it be imperative for any other reason. There are situations where a puppy IS important. But it isn't for temperament or behavior.
I think you are the one who is impressively misinformed. I don't know about all areas of the country but at least in this area, the responsible breeders don't have 10, 20, 30 dogs, they have maybe 5-6 dogs and they are house dogs and well socialized, well loved, and trained. I suppose with a litter in the house almost any breeder could technically have 10 dogs but that doesn't mean they aren't carefully socialized, observed and evaluated.
I also disagree that temperament and behavior are not of primary importance when bringing any new dog into a household. It can be very difficult for families to find adult dogs that have been well socialized to the chaos of the modern family and of the temperament to take it all in stride. That doesn't mean that there are not adult dogs that will fit the bill but they are definately not the most commonly seen in the surrendered dog population.
-
That said, I applaud your placements of dogs over money. That is what good breeders do. But it sounds like you think bomb-proofing requires kids under the roof… so I guess you think people with children should ONLY get pups from someone like you. OOOPS Robyn et al... you are now relegated to those awful rescues that also are not as good as those with children.
I deal weekly with people who got pups from reputable breeders who have issues. Some, maybe most, because the breeder placed dogs in homes that were not appropriate or didn't recognize the temperament of the puppy.
Stop bashing rescues for health or temperament.
Just a few things, there are quite a few rescues that clearly state, on almost all of their adoptions, 'better off in a home with children over 12, etc'. So what is that saying? Obviously, a lot of these dogs are felt to be not good with children-and that is put out by your evaluators/fosters. So how can it be said that rescues are well socialized with children and are able to be placed with children? I'm not saying all rescues dogs are like this, but a reality is most are because most of these dogs have little socialization with adults, never mind children.
What people are you dealing with that got pups from 'reputable' breeders? If they were truly reputable breeders, they would take the dog BACK! Then you wouldn't have to deal with them. As a breeder, we have to think of the whole household and what is the best fit. I have turned down a lot of people because I simply feel they are not appropriate for one of my dogs, or I don't have the right temperment for them. If it was the right fit, the dog is happy and the people are happy. And yes, I have placed my dogs at lower prices when the right home fits as well. I prefer to have a proper home for the dog than have an unhappy dog. Which is what I have done recently as well. So, as breeders, we do think of the best interests of the dog as well. If a dog is not happy in my home, I will find the right home for him.
Most of the rescues that are dealt with do come with issues irregardless of what you say. Whether they are mental or physical. It is a crap shoot in the long run with any dog. I agree with that as to the physical well being, no one, NO ONE, can determine long term what can happen to anyone or anything physically or mentally. Things happen. The reason they are in rescues is that the 'reputable' breeder (as you say) is not taking them back. Sorry, but they can't possibly be that great if they won't take one of their own back.
I seriously don't know what 'reputable' breeders you have come into contact with, but maybe you should talk to some more truly, reputable breeders before you lump us all into your category. By the way, I don't have 10, 20 or 30 dogs either. I do know people who have. But at this point, that is because they have taken a few of their dogs back and also have rescues they are trying to place. I have the boxer rescue, who will not live another 4 years, an old dog that does need to be put down as she is now in pain most of the time and her health does not give her quality of life, two female b's and one neutered male b and one puppy. So, am I one of your 'reputable' breeders as well? I take good care of my dogs, they are all pets first, show dogs second.
I'm not trying to 'bash' you, I don't think anyone is here, but we are trying to educate you as to what a 'reputable' breeder really is. Based on your experience with what you call 'reputable' breeders, I think maybe you should re-evaluate and stop lumping us into the same category. I, in fact, do more health testing on my 'pets' that most lay people do. I think on this forum, most people do more health testing than the average 'pet' person as well.
-
I think you are the one who is impressively misinformed. I don't know about all areas of the country but at least in this area, the responsible breeders don't have 10, 20, 30 dogs, they have maybe 5-6 dogs and they are house dogs and well socialized, well loved, and trained. I suppose with a litter in the house almost any breeder could technically have 10 dogs but that doesn't mean they aren't carefully socialized, observed and evaluated.
I also disagree that temperament and behavior are not of primary importance when bringing any new dog into a household.
Wow thank you for missing the essence of what I said and latching onto numbers. We'll forget that I met several breeders at Nationals who said they had 8 to 12 ADULTS in their homes, which meant with even 2 litters up to 20. I was trying to make a point. Since it seemed to fly over your head, I'll make it basic.
It is disingenuous to slur the "bomb proofing" and socialization of rescues who are usually in homes with only a few dogs compared to a breeder's time per dog who has several adults and a litter. The rescues are fully as able to socialize. THAT was the only point, not whether you know anyone with 10 dogs in the house. I'd be really snarky and pull up breeder web sites to prove numbers 10 and up, but since that wasn't the POINT, won't bother.Nor did I say TEMPERAMENT wasn't an issue. But you knew that. I said the temperament of rescues is fine, as fine as breeders, when a rescue does it's job and the breeder does its job. Again, you knew that was the point and pretending I indicated a TEMPERAMENT just in of itself wasn't important is incredible.
-
double post
-
Just a few things, there are quite a few rescues that clearly state, on almost all of their adoptions, 'better off in a home with children over 12, etc'. So what is that saying? Obviously, a lot of these dogs are felt to be not good with children-and that is put out by your evaluators/fosters. So how can it be said that rescues are well socialized with children and are able to be placed with children? I'm not saying all rescues dogs are like this, but a reality is most are because most of these dogs have little socialization with adults, never mind children.
What people are you dealing with that got pups from 'reputable' breeders?
Most of the rescues that are dealt with do come with issues irregardless of what you say. Whether they are mental or physical. It is a crap shoot in the long run with any dog. I agree with that as to the physical well being, no one, NO ONE, can determine long term what can happen to anyone or anything physically or mentally. Things happen. The reason they are in rescues is that the 'reputable' breeder (as you say) is not taking them back. Sorry, but they can't possibly be that great if they won't take one of their own back.I seriously don't know what 'reputable' breeders you have come into contact with, but maybe you should talk to some more truly, reputable breeders before you lump us all into your category
.
I'm not trying to 'bash' you, I don't think anyone is here, but we are trying to educate you as to what a 'reputable' breeder really is. Based on your experience with what you call 'reputable' breeders, I think maybe you should re-evaluate and stop lumping us into the same category. I, in fact, do more health testing on my 'pets' that most lay people do. I think on this forum, most people do more health testing than the average 'pet' person as well.1. You made my point for me, thank you. Rescues who evaluate KNOW the temperament and place in the right home. A rescue who is suitable for a home with kids is as safe as a breeder's dog that is safe for a home with kids. Thanks!
2. Sorry, but the breeders I meant are not JUST basenji ones. And sorry again, but as has already been pointed out, lots of responsible breeder pups hit rescue. The really responsible ones take the dogs back, but the owners didn't contact for help before dumping. That wasn't a slur on the breeder, you can't MAKE people call you if they have an issue. Of course, routine calls to stay involved help, but even then some owners don't want to admit issues. I wasn't lumping all breeders. As for health testing… um, not to be snarky, but DUH. You are breeding, testing more for genetic issues is critical. Most pet owners, even those you place pups with, will do only what they understand is important for the health of their pet. One reason I REQUIRED hips and elbow prelim at 6 mos and final at 2 yrs for my Rotties... pet or show. I worked to help them understand that even though they weren't breeding, I needed that information to have a full picture of what I was producing. And it was often pulling teeth. But the bottom line is that the average pet owner cares about overall health and you cannot show me one study by an reputable source that shows genetic testing provides anything other than less occurrence of that genetic issue. Glad you test, YOU SHOULD! But it doesn't mean a puppy from you will be one bit healthier beyond genetic issues, live longer or have less health problems than a rescue. It doesn't. And while the "mutts are healthier" mantra also doesn't hold much water, neither does claims that rescues are unhealthier. Of course if you have any dog, even from a responsible breeder, who has been malnourished, abused, sick without treatment... there are problems. But that is environment, NOT genetics. So again, a healthy rescue is as healthy as a healthy pup. I don't know rescues pushing unhealthy dogs on unsuspecting families. I do know angels who take sick and needy rescues. But again, that has nothing to do with trying to indicate that rescues are not the perfect answer for as many homes, if not more, than a puppy from a responsible breeder.
3. Educate me about a responsible breeder? Hello, I am fully aware of what a RESPONSIBLE breeder is. I don't need an education. The education needed here is for people to stop bashing rescues as less overall healthy than responsibly bred dogs once the main issues are eliminated. The education needed here is for people to stop pretending that a rescue who has often been in foster and evaluated for MONTHS so that their temperament is truly known is not as safe or good as any puppy. That, not my clear understanding of what a responsible breeder is, is the educational lack in this thread. And I AM bashing the bashing of rescues, no apology.
-
I believe some area's of the country don't support rescue, that folks do use rescue as a dumping ground for dogs..I have heard many stories of this. Course, that makes rescue angry.
I live in the PNW. We have only 3 breeders I can think of, off hand who are NOT responsible. This is over 4 states. So, clearly, I live in a more responsible area of the country.
Not only to the responsible rescues support me, but often they will foster a b that isn't even theirs, will help with transport, and do home checks or give me tips for homes for
these dogs. I can't tell you how helpful that is.
I think all this depends on what area your in and if you have support to do rescue work.Rescue does do all they can to find the right home for the right dog. Just a breeders do.
I don't see this as a conflict, I do think its possible to make it a win/win. -
Wow thank you for missing the essence of what I said and latching onto numbers. We'll forget that I met several breeders at Nationals who said they had 8 to 12 ADULTS in their homes, which meant with even 2 litters up to 20. I was trying to make a point. Since it seemed to fly over your head, I'll make it basic.
It is disingenuous to slur the "bomb proofing" and socialization of rescues who are usually in homes with only a few dogs compared to a breeder's time per dog who has several adults and a litter. The rescues are fully as able to socialize. THAT was the only point, not whether you know anyone with 10 dogs in the house. I'd be really snarky and pull up breeder web sites to prove numbers 10 and up, but since that wasn't the POINT, won't bother.Nor did I say TEMPERAMENT wasn't an issue. But you knew that. I said the temperament of rescues is fine, as fine as breeders, when a rescue does it's job and the breeder does its job. Again, you knew that was the point and pretending I indicated a TEMPERAMENT just in of itself wasn't important is incredible.
Clearly, you have a beef with breeders and I think I did get your point perfectly.
You said that rescue volunteers are better able to socialize and evaluate dogs because they have fewer dogs. I think you are impressively misinformed on several points. Are there breeders with more than 10 dogs in their household? I am sure there are but I don't think it is the "norm" in many places. I think many breeders have moved away from keeping large numbers of dogs and see many that are co-owning puppies with their puppy buyers who are amenable to them showing them and later breeding them. Even if they do have more than 10 dogs that does mean they don't do a great job at providing their puppies with critical socialization and early puppyhood experiences they need to become stable adults. Secondly, no matter how stellar a rescue volunteer is at training and rehabilitating, lack of good socialization during critical development periods can never really be fully substituted. Thirdly, I know many rescue volunteers with more dogs in their home than some responsible breeders.
I do think that you implied that temperament issues were a non-issue in rescues and that is just not true and since behavior and temperament are so critical, I think it is wrong to imply that rescue organizations are somehow going to make those non-issues simply through the fostering and evaluating process.
I think rescues are a great option for some people but they come with huge question marks that make then a less suitable option for some households and no matter what you say, HEALTH and TEMPERAMENT are some of those huge question marks. It is far better though to adopt a rescue with these question marks though then it is to go out and buy from a BYB where you are still going to have those question marks and won't have the support of the rescue organization to help you work through them.
