"breeder" selling at 3 weeks - HELP!

[lisasentous]

This person should be reported to the authorities A.S.A.P.

 

[cap032]

It amazes me how many times throughout the day, I have the urge to go and b**** slap someone. In this case, I'm referring to the BYB being discussed here. I wonder if I could find a job as a professional b**** slapper - and all the idiots of the world could be brought before me for justice :D

Go gettem girl! If you find that job let me know. Heck I'll work that job for free. We could even start up the BISF (Bama Idiot Smacking Foundation). We could probably go National with the NISF! We would have to carefully screen members though.

I do agree that the lady, no, the "idiot" (smack!) should be reported and as Diesel's Mom said then the friend could adopt one of fur babys.

 

[presley101]

I know this might be a little off base but maybe the "breeder" doesn't know what the normal behavior is for puppies and that the mother should be weaning them around this time. Maybe she doesn't understand the value of keeping them together for socialization until they are 8 or 9 weeks old. Maybe she doesn't get it at all. If that's the case, I would recommend calling the animal control folks and asking them to EDUCATE her about raising puppies.

I know we all want to rescue them from this person, but if she truly doesn't understand what they are going through, then maybe she needs the ONE chance to make the right decision and raise them with their mother, and together for the right amount of time before trying to cash in.
Just a random thought. Have any of them had a vet visit yet? They should be checked for worms and receive their first shots around 6 weeks and that can be expensive. She could be trying to dodge that bullet.

 

[gmacleod]

What is the point of animal welfare legislation if nobody bothers to report abuses? Or thinks up reasons why the abuser (and taking infant pups from their mother at 3 weeks is certainly abuse) might be given second chances?

A law can only be effective if it's applied. And it cannot be applied if people shield those who break it.

 

[punchinella]

We could even start up the BISF (Bama Idiot Smacking Foundation). We could probably go National with the NISF!

I like it!

 

[presley101]

What is the point of animal welfare legislation if nobody bothers to report abuses? Or thinks up reasons why the abuser (and taking infant pups from their mother at 3 weeks is certainly abuse) might be given second chances?

I do agree with you. My point was to determine if in fact the person actually knew what they were doing is wrong. If not, then educate them rather than taking immediate action unless you are willing to have the mother dog taken as well. It would be better to keep them with mom and together for a couple more weeks if at all possible. If not and the person knows what she is doing is wrong, then by all means, apply the law and don't look back. Take the puppies, foster them and get them good loving homes.

 

[gmacleod]

It would be better to keep them with mom and together for a couple more weeks if at all possible.

Actually, for another five weeks. It is detrimental to a pups wellbeing and development to be removed from the mother/littermates before 8 weeks of age (even if 7 weeks is the legal minimum in this particular state). This is a three week old infant.

It is difficult to believe that anyone willing to take puppies, whose eyes have barely opened and haven't even yet developed the ability to regulate body temperature, to a pet store carpark to sell is remotely interested in their wellbeing and development.

 

[presley101]

Gmac- I concede. you have a valid point. It does seem rather obvious that the breeder does nto care about the well being of the puppies.

 

[BXRBESTFRIND]

In most cases if the abuse is considered severe(selling puppies 5 weeks too early is severe to me) All animals on the property are confiscated meaning the mom would come along with the pups. If this was in California or at least in my area the pups, mom and any other would certainly be taken at least for the duration of the investigation.

I understand the point on second chances, and i also understand how easy it can be to start "breeding" but there comes a time where you have to take LEGAL responsibility for your actions and just because you happen to be ignorant to the law is no reason to get let off easy.

If this person is truly ignorant to the situation does she truly deserve to be able to breed again. We all know how serious breeding is and it is my opinion that if you dont take the time to do the research and do it correctly from the get go then you shouldnt have started and the consequences are yours alone. Now I firmly believe this carries over to human babies too but thats another discussion and ive ranted enough.

 

[gmacleod]

Well, whether they care or don't care... who knows? Can anyone really be that ignorant? But a call to the relevant authorities is what can ensure the pups' wellbeing. And that doesn't even necessarily entail their removal should the BYB be willing to cooperate and continue to care for them. What it would do, however, is prevent the carpark scenario she's threatened from taking place. Not get her to say it won't happen - prevent it from happening.