Re: [PyrNet-L] RE: failure of Rescue

["Thomas Sheehan" <tsheehan03@snet.net>]

Dear Jack, and ladies and gentlemen of this list;

Love the idea of requiring any and all breeders to take back any dog, any
time, no questions asked. However, in this country, as far as business law
is concerned; "Caveat emptor", reigns supreme. We might as well try to get
General Motors to offer the same warranty. It is a beautiful thought though.

Regards to all'

Terry Rickert
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Mowery <jack.mowery@asc.mhmr.state.tx.us>
To: <pyrnet-l@pyrnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2000 5:31 PM
Subject: [PyrNet-L] RE: failure of Rescue


>
> Ken
> I don't think a commercial product/name and chipping is required.  The
> backyard breeder or the farm breeder won't do it, and people will never go
> for the added expense (even the $12 cost of the chip itself, to say
nothing
> of the chipping fee).
>
> The Forever Home name sounds lovely, and it is what my dogs (and us cats
> too) have always known they had.  But we simply need a (god, I hate to
> advocate the passage of more laws, but . . .) law, requiring that any
> breeder/seller will be required to take back an animal or pay the cost of
> re-homing/euthanizing.  I will admit that Belle was purchased from what
> would be called a back-yard breeder.  But I know who I bought her from (a
> co-worker).  I think anyone who buys a dog, usually knows where they got
it.
> We need something in place to make sure those breeders/sellers could be
> required to take them all back.
>
> Mandatory chipping could put a stop to dumping dogs, however.  Hereabouts
> there is an annual drive for rabies shots every July.  Low cost
vaccinations
> and rabies tags are handled at the local fire station.  A scanner, supply
of
> injectable chips and registration forms would not have to significantly
> boost the cost of vaccination.  A similar supply already exists at the
> vet's, just automatically chip any unregistered dog or a puppy at its
first
> rabies shot.  Chipped dogs found dumped in the country could become the
> financial responsibility of the last registered owner.
>
> Put on your thinking caps people.  I know some of the brightest people on
> earth inhabit this list.  After all, we are smart enough to be owned by
> pyrs.
>
> Jack Mowery and Belle (so when do I get my chip, daddy?) of the Amarillo
> Mountains
> and the cats (Sugar Cube, Saavik, and Fluffy-the vampire slayer)
>
> Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2000 12:17:26 -0500
> From: conmara@oaktree.net
> Subject: Re: [PyrNet-L] Failure of Rescue
>
> Jack -
>
> I agree with the conclusion that EVERY breeder should be responsible
> for
> every puppy - for the life of the dog.  A no questions asked haven.
>
> One way to promote this would be for someone to develope a branded
> or
> trademarked product name that the public would ask for.
>
> Then a breeder who subscribed to this (call it a service) would
> register
> to use the trademark.
>
> Something like:  "Forever home" "Lifetime home" - something simple
> to
> put in advertisements.
>
> The only catch would be that each pup would have to be chipped.
> Then if
> a pup showed up in a pound with a registered breeders chip - they'd
> get
> a call.  (Of course that assumes that the chip companies would start
> charging something reasonable for their chips - (today's prices are
> highway robbery).)
>
> Of course ideally the person who purchased the puppy originally
> would
> return it to the breeder (but can everyone admit failure...).
>
> This may seem like pie in the sky.  But when the public begins to
> demand
> something things can change.  And if the public decided they wanted
> a
> dog with this kind of backup (just like AKC papers) - then some dent
> in
> this problem might be made.
>
> Thanks all for listening.
>
> KenMc
>
> ***********************************
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to esquire@pyrnet.org with
> unsubscribe pyrnet-l
> as the BODY of the message.  The SUBJECT is ignored.
>