Let’s Put “Adopt Don’t Shop” To Sleep

I recently shared a picture on Facebook that said “shopping keeps dogs from needing adopting.” It was a cheeky response to the “adopt don’t shop” chant we have all had shoved down our throats for years, and I really liked the point it made about purpose bred dogs from responsible breeders being a an equally good choice. It ruffled some feathers and got people arguing. I have far too much to say to condense to one comment, and it’s been far too long since I have dusted off this blog and written just because I enjoy writing, so here goes a long one.

First, I want to preface this by saying I have ZERO issue with rescue dogs, whatsoever. I grew up with rehomed dogs, and have had a rescue dog myself. Rescues and shelters are a necessity, and for many people, they can find excellent companions through these channels. I applaud the tireless work done by many in the rescue system, and the sincere efforts to find dogs new homes. What is problematic is the denigration of one’s choice in where to source a dog, whether one chooses to purchase a dog from a breeder or from a shelter or rescue group. Which leads me to my first point.

Terminology

Let’s talk about words. The animal rights movement has become very very good over the years at coining emotionally charged terms to bend you to their agenda subconsciously. Think “factory farms” and “puppy mills.” They elicit negative feelings associated with the terms, but what do they really MEAN. The same goes for using words like “adopt” and “rescue.” These are in the same vein as “fur baby” for me and “adopt” in terms of animals really carries the same ick factor in my opinion. It’s a way to anthropomorphize and give warm fuzzy feelings to make a transaction more than what it is. I am sure many will crucify me for saying this, but at this point in my life I find using the word adopt for a dog to be offensive. Perhaps it’s due to my years now in child welfare law, but after seeing what it takes to get a human child from the point of removal from a horrific situation to finally culminate in actual adoption, applying it to a dog being rehomed diminishes what it actually means. These are animals, not humans. Humans did not birth them. Many will hate hearing this, but it’s the hard truth—animals are still PROPERTY under the law. When you exchange money for a dog, whether it is from a breeder or a shelter, you are making a purchase. It is not an adoption. Some may shrug it off as semantics, but I see it for what it is. Anthropomorphzing animals, making the purchase a feel good warm fuzzy, but with deeper seeded intentions: the long term goal of animal rights which is to give animals equal rights to humans. You may call it slippery slope, but I spent too many years in animal law to not see the writing on the wall. Saying “adopt don’t shop” is absolutely ridiculous because obtaining a dog in any form is shopping. 

Myths

Everything about “adopt don’t shop” is clearly anti breeding and has for years vilified breeders as all that is bad for dogs. Quite ironic, considering many breed specific rescues wouldn’t exist without breeders and parent breed clubs. Painting all breeders with one broad brush is just another great illustration of how insane animal rights extremists truly are. You would be hard pressed to find many people more passionate and intensely caring about dogs than responsible breeders. We are obsessed, and the amount of time, thought, money, energy, and heartache put into our breedings is more than many humans put into our own reproduction. Its a common theme of the AR agenda to make monsters of those in various animal industries: dog breeders, dairy farmers, circus workers, etc……but the reality is why would these people do these things without a love for the animals when they spend day in and day out with them, and even disregarding that, why would they mistreat their valuable property? It’s nonsensical.

Nonetheless, breeders have long been blamed for the shelter numbers and the root cause of overpopulation, along with the existence and possession of intact dogs. Again, all goes back to the AR desire to end dog breeding. In reality, the decades of pushing spay and neutering of pets has all but eliminated unwanted accidental litters. That, and the way we keep dogs as an integral part of the family compared to past decades where dogs were kept as companions outside with greater potential to roam. Furthermore, more people are responsibly owning intact dogs without ever breeding them. 

Breeders have been so vilified, and the dog show fancy slowly shrinking, that there’s a lot less breeding being done as a result. There are no doubt a lot of other factors at play as well, but the supply of dog breeders has diminished and therefore so has the supply of purebred dogs. So ironically, for all this effort at fighting dog breeding, AR has contributed to a supply and demand issue that has created a market for what they view as the most evil and unethical breeders, the large scale commercial breeders. People still want purebred dogs. Another issue with the diminished supply has spawned another sector of dog breeding many consider unethical, the doodling phenomenon. Unintended consequences are a real bitch. 

Rescue Issues

So now we have this perfect storm of less hobby breeders, more commercial breeders, and doodling of all the breeds. What else contributes to this demand for dogs? Well, going back to the myths, shelter numbers have actually gone way down over the years. So much so that there has been a LOT of shuffling of dogs to keep shelters and rescues going. Yes you heard that right, and it isn’t news. The Northeast has a long history now of shipping dogs from the South by plane to store front shelters with waitlists and exorbitant prices to buy a dog, erm, I mean “adopt.” If this was all done with true altruistic intentions, why not take that profit and put it back into stemming the issue in the South? 

And it’s not just the South these dogs are being sourced from. It’s on a global scale, and has been for decades now. I take it for granted that this is common knowledge after all my years with NAIA and UKC, but it still comes as a surprise to many. Some shelter numbers were so low that BREEDING was even discussed at, gasp, an HSUS conference years ago—I cannot make this up!! Now I’ve no issue with shuffling dogs regionally to fulfill a need where shelter numbers are low and to remove them from areas where unwanted and homeless dogs are high. My problem is the CONCEALMENT of the source; importing dogs from other countries to rehome them is also excessive, and worse, problematic with the diseases introduced with them. 

The worst aspect of concealed shuffling of dogs is when rescues intentionally hide bite and behavior histories. This is where the no-kill movement (that I fundamentally disagree with) has gone way too far. It’s disgusting and is downright criminal, as it has resulted in human deaths in many cases. When I left NAIA we had gotten the first legislation passed that required shelters and rescues to disclose bite histories on dogs, and while I was proud of that work, it’s sad that it was necessary.

I don’t have any numbers or statistics to back this, because accurate data gathering for shelter numbers and sources of dogs has proven near impossible to collect, but I would wager that a lot of these dogs being sold to new owners end up back in the system. The reality is the majority of dogs in shelters and rescues are there due to owner surrender or dumping, not tons of litters and excess puppies being bred as we’ve been led to believe over the years. In this age of social media and advanced technology, people want instant fixes for everything, and that includes dogs. Just take a gander through any breed group on Facebook and you’ll see how little people train or even want to begin to understand training and instead want a tool, such as a harness or e collar, to fix their problems instantly. So it should be no surprise that lots of dogs end up in shelters due to their OWNERS, not breeders. 

Then we have rescues being over protective and at times completely absurd at vetting prospective new homes out. If there is such a high rate of overpopulation and homeless dogs that purchasing a purpose bred dogs kills a shelter dog (don’t even get me started on that obtuse rhetoric), why are we being so extremely selective on homes and placement? I’ll use myself as an example. Years ago I wanted a rescue border collie mix. I lived on 10 acres in the country, with a 1 acre fenced dog yard. No kids. In house lawyer for a dog registry. Active in sports with my other dogs and an amateur dog trainer. They almost didn’t “approve” me because I had an intact male dog in the home, and they didn’t like my normal 8 hour work day. I’m sorry, what??? Sadly I have heard of far more ridiculous reasons very suitable people have been turned away from rescues or shelters….the vetting process sometimes is more intrusive and complex than it is for foster parent approval for HUMANS.

Clearly, the rescue versus breeding paradigm is mutli faceted and more complex and layered than can be covered in a blog post, much less commentary on Facebook. However some things can be simplified. 

The animal rights crazies can try all they want, they will never end dog breeding and keeping dogs as the integral part of our lives that they are. 

There’s hoarding and horrible actors in both dog breeding and the rescue world alike, just as there are wonderful breeders creating lovely purpose bred dogs, and wonderful rescues thoughtfully rehoming dogs.

It’s ok to want purchase a purebred dog.

It’s equally ok to want to purchase a shelter dog. 

It’s not ok to denigrate one choice over the other.

What is most important is that the purchaser does their research into what they want, what fits their lifestyle and needs, and that they make their CHOICE responsibly. 

I confess, I did not enjoy trying to unravel what all had been done to my rescue dog in his prior life. Maybe it makes me a lazy trainer, so be it. If I did it for a living it might be different, but I don’t, so I don’t personally want to figure out and fix issues I did not create. I have dogs first and foremost as companions, but I also have specific traits I want from them and goals for them, so purpose bred dogs are best for me. I like the higher predictability genetics give me, and knowing what I’m getting into helps me enjoy their companionship that much more. 

Whatever you reasons, whatever it is you want out of your dog, do your research, and let others enjoy their own choices without judgement. So let’s put this ridiculous “adopt don’t shop” insult to sleep and all go out and enjoy our dogs!