Split from Rat Birthing

[Annastasia]

I'm splitting this from Libertine's rat topic, since it got completely hijacked. Watch yourselves, and don't let this get out of hand and closed. You're lucky I even let you keep the debate at all.

 

[KathyM]

Did I say there were breeds? The papers do matter more than you'd think, at least if you're breeding for show. It's proof the rat comes from the lines you say it comes from.

This must be another example of the country difference. I've shown a fair bit over here and you don't need a piece of paper to prove who the rats are *lol*. You do need to give the name of the breeder, but that's so they get their credit for breeding any winners, not to check their passports or anything!

Do you even know anyone who sells to shops? Have you bothered to ask them about their stock?

Sadly yes I do. I bought a rat from someone at a show, before I knew who was good and who was bad. I then found out they were selling rats to petshops - two of my sister's rats are rescues from that situation as the breeder had flogged them underage for fag money.

I have spoken to her about her rats (I was thinking about buying from her,) and she specializes in blue dumbos (which I hate, thus not buying, lol) and told me two breeders with websites and background info on their rats that her lines came from, they both seemed highly reputable and were show stock, and she kept papers on each of her litters as well as every individual breeding adult so she could keep track of everything.

But she's not keeping track on them fully though is she? I mean it's completely up to you how you feel about that, but you can't say she's got a good picture of her line's health and temperament if she sells to a petshop - it's just not possible.

If someone had told her the date they purchased a rat from the shop and described the rat to her, she could have looked it up in her files and told them which litter it came from. Obviously not everyone would have everything in such neat order, but some people do care.

I didn't say she didn't care. I said she doesn't do things as I and many other people over here would class as responsibly. Whether one or two people choose to update her on how they're oing, they could be getting bred from irresponsibly, being kept poorly, or have illnesses and die without her knowing. These are things I would want to know about if I was still breeding.

With any animal that can be shown, there is show quality and there is pet quality. It is a thin line. That is what I mean. I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept. If it would do well in show, it is show quality, if it would not, it is pet quality, that is all I mean when I say that. Most serious rat breeders who are really, really into it are breeding for show quality. Again I can compare it to bettas... you can buy two CTs from Petsmart and breed them and get decent fish, but they're not going to be show quality; they wouldn't win any awards.

Again I think I mustn't be explaining properly. That's certainly not how it's done over here. Rats are bred for health and temperament first (by those breeding properly) and those that do well in shows do well in shows, but ALL are "pet quality". There's no thin line, or at least there shouldn't be. Are things not done that way over there? Are show rats not meant to be an example of health and good temperament too? Like I said, I have a mix of rats, some have done well at shows and others wouldn't, doesn't change that they're all "pet quality".

And picking a petshop you know is careful not to let animals go to uninformed owners can serve the same purpose, don't you think?

No, sorry. You can't follow each rat's progress, you don't know what they've died from and when and your homes aren't vetted. I *personally* would never let any animals come into the world if the only way to home them was through a petshop. It's not what I'd class as responsible or caring. Of course I understand how other people have different views, but I'll never ever see petshops that sell live animals as a good thing. I've mopped up too many of their mistakes.

All of them? When pairs have already been proven to produce healthy even-tempered pups, I don't see how. The pet shop does have her contact information so a buyer can choose to contact her if there is a problem with one of her animals, but it is entirely up to them.

Yes, all of them! It's part of responsible breeding. Of course you can't expect not to have one or two slip through the net, but the aim is to keep as clear a record of health and temperament as possible. Pairs having had healthy kittens doesn't mean their kittens will not show health or temperament problems later in life, as is so bloomin common. Temperament problems often don't rear their ugly heads til maturity and beyond (6-10 months being a critical time in bucks). Tumours, respiratory problems, brain problems, kidney problems, all often come on in later life and to breed properly you need to know who's had them and who hasn't.

Haha, I think they must be. Mostly on the whole pet shop supplier angle. You're absolutely right, pet and show quality are not mutually exclusive and I never implied that they are, but these are terms that are extremely common in show circuits. Like I said, a pet quality animal is just one that wouldn't do well in show. "Pet quality" is a term usually applied to animals produced from lines meant for show, meaning that show lines ARE bred to be wonderful pets as well, just that some animals don't quite make the cut for show and are better off as pets only for whatever reason . Usually it means they don't quite meet the standard for the breed, but it can also be that the individual animal just doesn't like the show atmosphere.

Ahaa the pet versus show thing comes up again. I think the term "pet quality" should be dropped personally - I think it's quite annoying to those that breed properly, as that should always be the priority - sound health and temperament. What shows well usually comes below that, at least with the decent breeders I have met ersonally (and they're the top breeders in this country).

I think that's why we're disagreeing right there... that's not always true. My local pet shop can and does refuse to sell certain animals if they think the customer is ill prepared to care for them. Birds are one of those animals, which is why that bird breeder I mentioned is comfortable supplying them. The rat breeder I know through a friend supplies her pet shop because, while they won't outright refuse the sale of a rat, they will refuse the sale of her rats and instead steer a customer toward the "feeders". Not only do some small-time hobby breeders care, some pet shops do too

So what you're saying is, if people come in and want a rat, and aren't experienced enough to have the "posh" dumbos, they get sold a feeder? That's appalling. All animals deserve a knowledgable and responsible home, which is why the sale of live animals in petshops should be banned. I think (without any offence intended) you have quite a nice and naive view of petshops as a whole - they're a business and are there to make money. Why on Earth would they send buyers away?


Annastacia - thanks for splitting this topic - could you put the post where I gave Libertine some helpful links back on her thread? They were for her, not part of this debate. Thanks

 

[LisaLQ]

What's wrong with blue dumbos? Indigo would turn in his grave...

I'm a regular lurker, and had to post that, sorry....

Mum of 20 rats - both from breeder and pet shop originating rescues. I think they key thing here is responsibility. Someone who churns out rats via a pet shop = irresponsible. Someone who takes care to make sure all the rats they breed and breed from are healthy and homed properly = responsible.

There's no point arguing about whether Libertine was responsible or not. We all do stupid things sometimes. But we dont pat people who deliberately breed crossbreed dogs on the back, why any different with rats?

And yes, I had to pass a home check for many of mine, fill in a questionaire, and pass on my address and phone number. But to be honest, anyone who doesn't want to isn't worth rehoming to as they must surely have something to hide. I mean the dog shelters dont just open the door and hand out puppies to anyone!

Let's try this another way. If you bought a dog from a "breeder" via a pet shop, and that dog got ill, and the vet told you that it was genetic, how would you let the "breeder" know that her lines were passing on health issues? And if you didn't think of letting them know, or didn't want to - how would the "breeder" find out? And if they did find out, do you think they'd care, if they just handed them on to a pet shop to sell to anyone who wanted one?

Last year, I found out about a pet shop closure, they were selling 100s of rats, many pregnant, because they couldn't be bothered any more. I ended up fostering one mum who was only a baby herself, and was on her second litter - she'd got pregnant on the same day she gave birth to her first.

Do you think they cared? Not one bit. It's these kinds of people we should be coming down on, not those who defend good actions. I'd personally be very happy to see the end of selling live animals through pet shops. If people dont want "show quality" pets, they should go to a shelter and offer one of the thousands of animals there a home. Not breed more!

 

[Synirr]

I'm glad the topic was split, thanks much

But she's not keeping track on them fully though is she? I mean it's completely up to you how you feel about that, but you can't say she's got a good picture of her line's health and temperament if she sells to a petshop - it's just not possible.

She keeps track of the majority of them, not all of her rats go to the pet shop, just some of the pet quality ones (I know, you hate it, but I'm going to continue using the term ). It's a numbers game, sure, but I personally don't think it's necessary to keep track of every last animal.

Whether one or two people choose to update her on how they're oing, they could be getting bred from irresponsibly, being kept poorly, or have illnesses and die without her knowing. These are things I would want to know about if I was still breeding.

I'd like to know these things about my bettas too, but I'm not going to email everyone I've sold one to and ask. Those who buy breeders from her probably do keep in touch, just like forum members here keep in touch with me and let me know what's going on with my fish. It's the same as what you're talking about, staying in contact with buyers and keeping track of the animals, only she chooses not to do it with all of them. Maybe to you that's unresponsible, to me it's not unreasonable.

With any animal that can be shown, there is show quality and there is pet quality. It is a thin line. That is what I mean. I don't understand why this is such a difficult concept. If it would do well in show, it is show quality, if it would not, it is pet quality, that is all I mean when I say that. Most serious rat breeders who are really, really into it are breeding for show quality. Again I can compare it to bettas... you can buy two CTs from Petsmart and breed them and get decent fish, but they're not going to be show quality; they wouldn't win any awards.

Again I think I mustn't be explaining properly. That's certainly not how it's done over here. Rats are bred for health and temperament first (by those breeding properly)

No, I mustn't be the one explaining properly, because as I thought I said, that is exactly the way it is done here. A show quality animal is also a pet quality animal, just not vice versa. Is it just the terminology that is confusing you?

Ahaa the pet versus show thing comes up again. I think the term "pet quality" should be dropped personally - I think it's quite annoying to those that breed properly, as that should always be the priority - sound health and temperament. What shows well usually comes below that, at least with the decent breeders I have met ersonally (and they're the top breeders in this country).

...Many breeders I know use that term themselves, or a variant of it. You have to be able to make the distinction between what would show well and what would not, don't you agree? It has nothing to do with what would make a good pet, ALL of them should be bred to make good pets, like I said, it's all in the showing. The distinction lies entirely in their showing qualities, not in their pet qualities, since they should all ideally have good qualities as a pet animal. It's all about whether the animal would be likely to place in show or not, and therefore whether it would be worth breeding future show lines from or not. Obviously it has to have a good temperament and disposition to be a good show animal in the first place.

So what you're saying is, if people come in and want a rat, and aren't experienced enough to have the "posh" dumbos, they get sold a feeder? That's appalling. All animals deserve a knowledgable and responsible home, which is why the sale of live animals in petshops should be banned. I think (without any offence intended) you have quite a nice and naive view of petshops as a whole - they're a business and are there to make money. Why on Earth would they send buyers away?

Hey, I didn't say it was ideal. Most are horrible places, and trading a better bred rat for a feeder isn't exactly a morally sound practice, but this is the US where we sell live rats as snake food. I'm under no illusions about pet shops, the majority are horrible places, all I was saying in that case was that the breeder was looking out for the interests of HER rats by selling there. And, as mentioned, not all pet stores are like that all the time, a small minority will outright deny sales for the right reasons. My local shop does sell rats and mice as feeders, and it has its flaws, but it looks out for its birds and reptiles in particular. It takes reptiles from homes where they weren't cared for properly and will actually pay for their vet bills if they need care and nurse them back to health before reselling them, and tries to make sure they go to someone who has had previous experience with reptiles, or who they know and trust will at least do plenty of research. If you buy a large species of fish, or one that needs special care, they will quiz you about your tanks. If they don't know you and you want to buy any bird that isn't a finch, well... prepare yourself, haha! So they're not all bad, it just depends on who owns them and how much care they take in hiring the right people. I'm just lucky in that my local shop is owned by a very caring and nice lady. And here I thought I was the cynic?

What's wrong with blue dumbos? Indigo would turn in his grave...

Haha, nothing at all! I actually adore blues, but dumbos aren't my cup of tea. I like hairless though, so my tastes are questionable as it is

Let's try this another way. If you bought a dog from a "breeder" via a pet shop, and that dog got ill, and the vet told you that it was genetic, how would you let the "breeder" know that her lines were passing on health issues? And if you didn't think of letting them know, or didn't want to - how would the "breeder" find out? And if they did find out, do you think they'd care, if they just handed them on to a pet shop to sell to anyone who wanted one?

Well, like I said earlier, the breeder I was talking about does keep track of the majority of her rats which go to other breeders and personal sales, and she does certainly care about genetic disease. Again, it's a numbers game, and I guess it comes down to personal opinion but I don't think it's necessary to keep track of all of them to get a good idea of the health of a line.

 

[KathyM]

She keeps track of the majority of them, not all of her rats go to the pet shop, just some of the pet quality ones (I know, you hate it, but I'm going to continue using the term ). It's a numbers game, sure, but I personally don't think it's necessary to keep track of every last animal.

Then we differ. The ones you don't track could be carrying deadly diseases or temperament problems. If your friend can live with that, so be it, it's still not making sure the rats are healthy. Half a job doesn't cut it

I'd like to know these things about my bettas too, but I'm not going to email everyone I've sold one to and ask.

Again, your prerogative, you won't have a full picture of the soundness of your fish.

Those who buy breeders from her probably do keep in touch, just like forum members here keep in touch with me and let me know what's going on with my fish. It's the same as what you're talking about, staying in contact with buyers and keeping track of the animals, only she chooses not to do it with all of them. Maybe to you that's unresponsible, to me it's not unreasonable.

Yes to me that's not keeping a full picture of the line. Therefore it's worth zilch when determining how healthy her rats and their progeny are.

Again I think I mustn't be explaining properly. That's certainly not how it's done over here. Rats are bred for health and temperament first (by those breeding properly)

You don't need to "explain it properly" to me, I've been involved in the show world and explained my view of it - I understand what I'm talking about perfectly. I've accepted that things must be different where you are, and therefore there's nothing to explain.

No, I mustn't be the one explaining properly, because as I thought I said, that is exactly the way it is done here. A show quality animal is also a pet quality animal, just not vice versa. Is it just the terminology that is confusing you?

Nothing's confusing me I've explained how it is.

Many breeders I know use that term themselves, or a variant of it.

Other than your friend? Like I said, different here (thankfully).

You have to be able to make the distinction between what would show well and what would not, don't you agree? It has nothing to do with what would make a good pet, ALL of them should be bred to make good pets, like I said, it's all in the showing. The distinction lies entirely in their showing qualities, not in their pet qualities, since they should all ideally have good qualities as a pet animal. It's all about whether the animal would be likely to place in show or not, and therefore whether it would be worth breeding future show lines from or not. Obviously it has to have a good temperament and disposition to be a good show animal in the first place.

So basically exactly what I've been saying for the last three posts and you've been disagreeing with? LOL

Hey, I didn't say it was ideal.

Good job we agree on that then. Shame your friend is happy to sell rats to a shop with morals like that.

Most are horrible places, and trading a better bred rat for a feeder isn't exactly a morally sound practice, but this is the US where we sell live rats as snake food.

We have frozen rats sold over here, I'm not against feeding reptiles what they need. I am against however the lesser moral value put on the feeders in your country that's appalling. I certainly wouldn't be wanting to do business with petshops like that, it's frankly disgusting to me.

And, as mentioned, not all pet stores are like that all the time, a small minority will outright deny sales for the right reasons.

Like to sell feeders to the crap homes instead of the "posh" rats? Because they don't deserve better.

It takes reptiles from homes where they weren't cared for properly and will actually pay for their vet bills if they need care and nurse them back to health before reselling them

How is this special? It's their responsibility to.

So they're not all bad, it just depends on who owns them and how much care they take in hiring the right people. I'm just lucky in that my local shop is owned by a very caring and nice lady. And here I thought I was the cynic?

It'd take more than that to convince me. Sorry!

Well, like I said earlier, the breeder I was talking about does keep track of the majority of her rats which go to other breeders and personal sales, and she does certainly care about genetic disease. Again, it's a numbers game, and I guess it comes down to personal opinion but I don't think it's necessary to keep track of all of them to get a good idea of the health of a line.

She can't really be that bothered about genetic problems if she sells to a petshop. End of. Yes it is necessary to keep track of them all if at all possible.

I'm getting tired of saying the same thing over and over again, so that's me done.

Edited - for some blimmin reason the quotes won't work. Tried to edit it to make it work and isn't doing it for me.

 

[libertine]

Kathy,

Here is my view on it. You are a negative person, out to try to force your views on the rest of us, without a care how we see the world. You are a contrary person and quite arrogant in thinking that everything you say is right. You also seem very smug and condescending in your posts, which I find quite aggravating.


Thanks Much
Sara

P.S.

Delete this if need be, but this is my opinion!!!!!!!

 

[KathyM]

You are most welcome to your opinion - of course you will feel that way considering my view goes against everything you chose to do. All I can say is that I speak what I feel and what I know from experience, and I speak for the animals, not for you. This thread was split from your thread to avoid confrontation with you, and quite rightly so, and yet you choose to come back to insult and stir. I've posted advice for you and you threw it back in my face when all I was thinking about (and what you should be thinking about) was the rat babies. If you choose not to take that advice both on the care of these rat babies and on future breeding responsibility, all you have to answer to is those babies you produce. If you believe that breeding rats with no care for health or temperament is okay, then I can't change that, but I certainly won't sit on a public forum and pat you on the back when I feel it goes against animal welfare and where other people could be reading your thread thinking "What a great idea" when frankly what you've done is not a good idea (whether intentionally or not).

Take care and good luck with the babies.

 

[Synirr]

You don't need to "explain it properly" to me, I've been involved in the show world and explained my view of it - I understand what I'm talking about perfectly. I've accepted that things must be different where you are, and therefore there's nothing to explain.

Um... no, see, because I'm agreeing with you on this point, but you're still trying to argue with me about it, so obviously I'm not getting something across

Many breeders I know use that term themselves, or a variant of it.

Other than your friend? Like I said, different here (thankfully).

Here, let me provide you with a few references that a quick Google search turned up:
Cat Fancier's Association
International Bengal Cat Society
Shadow-Wood Samoyeds
What is a “pet quality” puppy?
Foxstone Maltese

The freakin' Cat Fancier's Association uses the term, geez. Do you believe I didn't just pull it out of my arse now? When are you going to understand that talking down to me isn't going to work because I can and will back up my points? That's the tactic you are trying to use, whether you consciously realize it or not, and I'm not intimidated. Look at your posts and what you are saying to me, do you realize how condescending it sounds most of the time? I know you're not really a mean-spirited person, so I wish you could correct that, it's not the way you speak to someone you're trying to influence in a positive way.

You have to be able to make the distinction between what would show well and what would not, don't you agree? It has nothing to do with what would make a good pet, ALL of them should be bred to make good pets, like I said, it's all in the showing. The distinction lies entirely in their showing qualities, not in their pet qualities, since they should all ideally have good qualities as a pet animal. It's all about whether the animal would be likely to place in show or not, and therefore whether it would be worth breeding future show lines from or not. Obviously it has to have a good temperament and disposition to be a good show animal in the first place.

So basically exactly what I've been saying for the last three posts and you've been disagreeing with? LOL

Like I said above, I haven't been disagreeing with that at all, I've been trying to agree with you, but I can't seem to get that across

We have frozen rats sold over here, I'm not against feeding reptiles what they need. I am against however the lesser moral value put on the feeders in your country that's appalling. I certainly wouldn't be wanting to do business with petshops like that, it's frankly disgusting to me.

We have frozen here too in the good shops. In places that know their stuff it's encouraged, since it's healthier for the reptiles anyway, but the vast majority do still carry live since it's sorta the norm over here still and most reptiles coming straight from the supplier haven't been weaned off of it. If you buy a snake that doesn't come from a specialty supplier or breeder that uses frozen you're going to have to wean it yourself, which usually means using a few live critters in the process, unfortunately . It is a major cultural difference there to be sure, most of you UK folks think feeding live is barbaric as I understand it, but here in the US it's just slightly unsettling to the majority. I couldn't do it myself, one of the major reasons I've never owned a snake. A lot of us US folks aren't even aware they can be weaned to frozen/thawed, we think it has to be alive for them to eat it.

Like to sell feeders to the crap homes instead of the "posh" rats? Because they don't deserve better.

Oh gee no, my pet shop doesn't even carry posh rats, that's the other one that doesn't outright deny sales, they just pawn the sickly cancer-ridden rats off on ya . Now you're just being contrarian for the sake of an argument, and honestly, I tire of it.

It takes reptiles from homes where they weren't cared for properly and will actually pay for their vet bills if they need care and nurse them back to health before reselling them

How is this special? It's their responsibility to.

Taking sick animals from customers isn't their responsability at all, those animals didn't go to the customers sick, and sometimes the animals didn't even come from that shop at all. They take a gamble that the resell price will pay for the vet bills, but it doesn't always, so they sometimes lose money this way. Normally sick animals like that go to the animal shelter where they are euthanized because our local shelter doesn't have the facilities to care for reptiles. That's how it's special.
They currently have a leopard gecko with a calcium deficiency who is recieving calcium injections, and his vet bills are already almost double what his resell price will be. That's what happens when idiot owners feed them nothing but undusted crickets for months.


One last word on keeping up with genetic disease... non sex-linked genetic diseases are generally Mendelian, so when both parents are carriers, statistically 1 in 4 offspring will have the disease. That's the numbers game I was talking about. Say you have a pairing that does produce offspring with genetic disease... keep track of one offspring and you have a 25% chance of catching the disease. Keep track of two and you have a 50% chance. 3, 75%. 4 and you have a nearly 100% chance of catching it. Of course, with statistics it's never really 100% certain, but you can be real close, and what if you keep track of, say, 10? That's an excellent chance you're not going to miss it. Sex-linked diseases are trickier. If the female is a carrier, 50% of all her male offspring will have it, if the male is the carrier but the female is not, none will have it but all females will be carriers. I don't know of any sex-linked diseases in rats of course, not being an expert in rat genetics, lol, but there might be some . Colourblindness and hemophilia are examples in humans.


EDIT:

You also seem very smug and condescending in your posts, which I find quite aggravating.

She's right Kathy, you really do, and I promise I'm not saying that just because we've had a heated debate or to be mean or anything like that. Like I say, I know you're not really a mean-spirited person from your other posts, but when you have a strong opinion about something it brings out the very worst in you, and it really isn't helping your cause in the least I don't think . It's good to have opinions, but it's also good to know how to express them.

 

[KathyM]

Here, let me provide you with a few references that a quick Google search turned up:
Cat Fancier's Association
International Bengal Cat Society
Shadow-Wood Samoyeds
What is a “pet quality” puppy?
Foxstone Maltese

Cat and dog links - Iwas talking about breeders of fancy rats in the UK.

The freakin' Cat Fancier's Association uses the term, geez. Do you believe I didn't just pull it out of my arse now? When are you going to understand that talking down to me isn't going to work because I can and will back up my points? That's the tactic you are trying to use, whether you consciously realize it or not, and I'm not intimidated. Look at your posts and what you are saying to me, do you realize how condescending it sounds most of the time? I know you're not really a mean-spirited person, so I wish you could correct that, it's not the way you speak to someone you're trying to influence in a positive way.

I thought we were having an adult debate but you're going too far now. I haven't stooped to personal insults, I've been backing up my posts in a factual non emotional way. I find your posts very condescending too, but I didn't insult you.

One last word on keeping up with genetic disease... non sex-linked genetic diseases are generally Mendelian, so when both parents are carriers, statistically 1 in 4 offspring will have the disease. That's the numbers game I was talking about. Say you have a pairing that does produce offspring with genetic disease... keep track of one offspring and you have a 25% chance of catching the disease. Keep track of two and you have a 50% chance. 3, 75%. 4 and you have a nearly 100% chance of catching it. Of course, with statistics it's never really 100% certain, but you can be real close, and what if you keep track of, say, 10? That's an excellent chance you're not going to miss it. Sex-linked diseases are trickier. If the female is a carrier, 50% of all her male offspring will have it, if the male is the carrier but the female is not, none will have it but all females will be carriers. I don't know of any sex-linked diseases in rats of course, not being an expert in rat genetics, lol, but there might be some . Colourblindness and hemophilia are examples in humans.

I said you need to be able to aim for keeping a history of all your rats. You don't agree and that's fair enough. The percentage argument doesn't cut it, and I think if you read it through again you might agree. You have say 12 rats born with a 25% chance of inheritied disease. Each rat has that 25% chance, so keeping track of four of them isn't going to work, because it's not just those rats that have the chance, it's the whole litter. *My opinion* that I've been trying to put across (and I've said all along this is just my opinion) is that if you can't aim to keep track of ALL of the rats born (allowing for the rare ones that slip through the net as I said), you cannot seriously put the argument forward that you have an accurate picture of that line's health and temperament. I can't say it any clearer than that. You don't agree and that's your choice as I said, but I'm not going to coninue going round and round in circles when that is the fact of the matter.

EDIT:
She's right Kathy, you really do, and I promise I'm not saying that just because we've had a heated debate or to be mean or anything like that. Like I say, I know you're not really a mean-spirited person from your other posts, but when you have a strong opinion about something it brings out the very worst in you, and it really isn't helping your cause in the least I don't think . It's good to have opinions, but it's also good to know how to express them.

Again the insults. I haven't resorted to that low level. The reason Libertine feels that way is because she knows what she has done goes against everything I believe in, and vice versa. I haven't insulted her (I've been restrained *lol*) and I haven't insulted you.

How is wanting to protect animals "mean spirited"? My "case" is not to impress you two or keep you both thinking I'm sweet. My "case" was the rats, and I couldn't right honestly give a flying monkey's bum what you as humans think of me or the way I share my experience. I've presented the facts as I know them - you've given yours. I said I'd leave the thread and that's when the pair of you came in with the insults. I can at least say I didn't resort to petty name-calling or insults, and believe me when I read threads saying "Wow I let my petshop rat/cat/dog breed and now I don't have a flipping clue what I'm doing but aren't they so cuuuuuuute and sod those who think I did a dangerous thing because I have baaaaaaabies", that's a bloody achievement.

I right honestly can't be arsed coming back to this thread if all you're going to do is insult my personality because that shows the death throws of a decent debate.

 

[Synirr]

Cat and dog links - Iwas talking about breeders of fancy rats in the UK.

I guess I misunderstood then, because I was talking about breeders in general. I wouldn't know if breeders of fancy rats in the UK use the term, obviously, being from the US myself.

I thought we were having an adult debate but you're going too far now. I haven't stooped to personal insults, I've been backing up my posts in a factual non emotional way. I find your posts very condescending too, but I didn't insult you.

My apologies, that wasn't meant as an insult, I was trying to let you know that I feel insulted. I do feel like you are talking down to me, and that's what I said, and that I know you're not a mean-spirited person... I'm not sure how that's an insult, but I do apologize if you interpreted it as such, it was not meant to be. I feel like it's a psychological tactic you're trying to use or something, even if you're not doing it consciously, it's the kind of thing people do in arguments and debates all the time. Like you're trying to make me submit to your opinion by using dominating language. I'm really honestly asking you to look for it in your posts, honestly, just take a time out and try to read them from a third-person perspective. I know I'm probably using condescending language too, partly because you put me in defensive mode, and I apologize for that as well, I try not to most of the time but I'm not always 100% aware of it.

Each rat has that 25% chance, so keeping track of four of them isn't going to work, because it's not just those rats that have the chance, it's the whole litter.

But the point being that if you catch just one with the disease, you know that the whole line potentially carries it. You're going to want to keep track of more than 4 statistically speaking though, really, to be safe about it. I understand your opinion on the matter though and you're welcome to it, I was just explaining mine . I do have my reasons, that's the point I was trying to make, and I'm sure you have yours.

Again the insults. I haven't resorted to that low level. The reason Libertine feels that way is because she knows what she has done goes against everything I believe in, and vice versa. I haven't insulted her (I've been restrained *lol*) and I haven't insulted you.

I know there's probably nothing I can say to make you believe me, but I wasn't trying to insult you (I tried to make that clear when I originally posted it, but I see I failed miserably) I was just being honest. Your comments are so strongly-worded sometimes that they are borderline hurtful... and that doesn't make anyone want to listen to you. If the owner of the animals is inclined to ignore you, how does that help anything? I really, really, honest to God have nothing against you and I hope you'll believe me when I say that I would never say anything hurtful to you just for the sake of being hurtful. I also understand that you have the animal's best interest at heart, as we all should. But I think you also need to understand that people skills play a role too... are you aware that they train animal control officers in how to deal with people? It is a large part of their training, in fact, and animal shelter workers too. They have to be able to get people to sign animals over to them without having to get a warrant because sometimes the people will move the animals before they come back to collect them. You have to be able to get people to work with you for the good of the animals sometimes, do you see what I mean? Barging in and making demands isn't always the right answer... in fact, explaining the situation and asking nicely usually works best, according to my friend who worked as a volunteer animal control officer over the summer.

Maybe it's best if you look at humans as animals too. We're stupid critters and we deserve a second chance sometimes, ya know? Not everyone knows how to properly care for their pets, but that doesn't mean they know any better, they might simply be ignorant, and that needs to be considered first and foremost. If you jump to conclusions and condescend and insult they are going to write you off as a jerk whether or not your intentions are good and are likely to just ignore you. I don't care how much you love those animals and want them to get the proper care, if you don't consider how to approach their human caregiver and their human chooses to ignore your advice, they're not going to get the care they need. The best approach is to point out what they are doing right, if anything (to warm them up to what you have to say next,) then politely point out things that could be improved upon and explain why. The why is important so they know you know what you are talking about and trust your advice.

Do you see my point at all, even a tiny bit? Please don't make this about who's right an who's wrong, like this whole thread has been, I just want to know if you can see why I feel the way I do about this.

 

[KathyM]

Of course I see your point, but I'd like it if someone saw mine.

My language hasn't been insulting, I have posted in a refrained manner because if I don't I'm likely to say exactly how I feel in a very heated manner, which won't help anyone, and will be insulting.

So you see, the way I type which fair enough might come across as condescending to you, s me cutting out all emotion that I want to spew out when I see posts like this.

Whether you agree with my posts, and whether or not Libertine likes me is of little consequence to me as a person (no offence intended).

I've tried to see things from your point of view, but it hasn't changed mine, I'm sorry. I can't agree with you on here when I don't really if you get me. Now that I've tried to be fair about my posting manner, can you at least afford me the same reflection?

Imagine (and I have no idea about your background so if you share any of this I don't mean it condescending) having had the rejects, the deaths and the abused. Imagine having had a rescue dog die from it's history of being farmed by idiots who didn't think of her first. Imagine having lost a rat to an emergency c-section that Libertine hadn't probably prepared for financially or otherwise. You say you've mopped up the petshop dropouts like I have - I just don't understand how you can be so supportive of what I and others would call poor and irresponsible breeding.

Then imagine giving good advice and links to someone who is doing it ALL wrong. Imagine being told to shove it up your backside because they're willing to sacrifice that good and potentially life saving information to prevent them looking like they've done something REALLY wrong. If you look at both threads, other people have offered sound advice too and had it thrown back in their face, despite that advice being given in a "softer" manner than mine. That instant "You're having a go" attitude when someone offers advice is not the product of people's posting methods (because their posts were put nicely), I suspect that reaction comes from a guilty conscience. If there hadn't been that instant hackles up reaction, I would've agreed that it was my posting manner, but others have already tried nicely and got it thrown back in their faces too. I think sadly Libertine is more interested in being popular for breeding cute babies than in reading the good advice she's been given and using it - if that isn't the case then I apologise profusely, but that's how it comes across on here (which is in fairness to Libertine a message forum and difficult to get a proper picture from).

Then imagine that times by ten because you see some new idiot every day thinking it'd be "cute" to breed more animals like the ones you've mopped up.

I'm pig sick of seeing animals brought into the world this way and seeing people get patted on the back for it, when most of the animals I have here are the rejects of this kind of breeding. So you can imagine how I don't really give a sh*t if Libertine doesn't like me, because I don't really like people like her either.

Nothing makes a blind bit of difference, so here, I give in. Breaks my bloody heart reading posts like this and nothing ever changes.

Edited to add:

This is Ruby. She was bred by her old owners because she made "cute" babies that sold easily. Dumped at the pound with her four crossbreed puppies to be put down because they couldn't sell the pups and they were all seen as worthless.

This is her when she arrived at the rescue that saved her from PTS (and literally by the skin of her teeth, she only had hours to go).

Look at the top picture again. That was her when she arrived with us. She died 11 months later from mammary cancer which she was diagnosed with a month after she arrived - she was 7, just 7. If she'd been spayed and not used as a puppy machine, she'd be alive now.

Now I know she's a dog, not "just a rat". But imagine 10 months of knowing the one thing you loved as much as your own children was going to die, and you didn't know when. Think of how that cancer ultimately spread to her brain (after spreading to her lungs) and imagine her not knowing who you were any more, and being petrified of you. Then imagine having to old her down while you had her put down, and looking in that animal's eyes knowing she didn't know you any more and to her you were just one of the ones that abused her. Then tell me it's okay to breed without thinking of the animals.

I can't, I just can't, come back to this thread. I hope now you understand why.

 

[Synirr]

So you see, the way I type which fair enough might come across as condescending to you, s me cutting out all emotion that I want to spew out when I see posts like this.

I don't think you're cutting out all emotion, or it wouldn't come across as anything but unbiased honest opinion, right?

I just don't understand how you can be so supportive of what I and others would call poor and irresponsible breeding.

I really don't support making the uninformed decision to breed like Libertine did, I was just trying to give her the benefit of the doubt really and I admit I got carried away in doing so and probably made it sound like I supported the breeding of petshop rats more than I do. All I was really saying is that some pet shop rats, at least where I am from, do come from breeders who know there stuff (by my standards, ahem), so as long as you do thoroughly look into their origins and everything checks out, breeding from them would be alright.

If you look at both threads, other people have offered sound advice too and had it thrown back in their face, despite that advice being given in a "softer" manner than mine.

Libertine thanked people for their advice in one of the threads, and specifically thanked me for "not sounding comtemptous about it" in the other. She did take the advice given from the sound of it, incase you haven't been checking the other two threads . I actually just went back over both threads and I don't see a single place where anyone had their advice "thrown back in their face" (EDIT: well, other than possibly you.) She did seemingly ignore some of it for a while, but she has caught up now

I'm pig sick of seeing animals brought into the world this way and seeing people get patted on the back for it, when most of the animals I have here are the rejects of this kind of breeding. So you can imagine how I don't really give a sh*t if Libertine doesn't like me, because I don't really like people like her either.

I totally understand, I just think you're writing her off too quickly as the wrong kind of person. I honestly believe she has the best interest of those rats at heart, as evidenced by the fact that she has taken the advice of forum members and is now taking good care of them. I can't speak for her obviously, but maybe she'll look into what you've said about rat breeding in the future if she chooses to pursue it and research some breeding lines, you never know. The "wrong" kind of person usually doesn't stick around to hear such strongly-worded criticisms as you have presented, it speaks well of her character.

Now I know she's a dog, not "just a rat". But imagine 10 months of knowing the one thing you loved as much as your own children was going to die, and you didn't know when. Think of how that cancer ultimately spread to her brain (after spreading to her lungs) and imagine her not knowing who you were any more, and being petrified of you. Then imagine having to old her down while you had her put down, and looking in that animal's eyes knowing she didn't know you any more and to her you were just one of the ones that abused her. Then tell me it's okay to breed without thinking of the animals.

I'm terribly sorry for your loss, and I never said it was ok to breed without thinking of the animals. I know they were "just rats", but like I mentioned before, I've lost many a rat to cancer so I have some remote idea of how you feel, I too had to watch them waste away as it slowly spread. I believe it started as mammary cancer every time. I've also lost well-loved a rabbit to cancer, and our golden retriever currently has a fatty tumor but thankfully it is benign. She's poorly bred and has had bad hips and arthritis from a young age.

 

[OohFeeshy]

but it's hard to congraulate someone on the birth of irresponsibly bred babies, when there are hundreds in rescue in this country and hundreds that die early from lack of care and research when breeding.

Just to throw another spanner in the works, does that mean you won't congratulate a pregnant woman because there are millions of people in Third World countries that 'die early from lack of care' (broadly speaking)? Just wondering...

 

[KathyM]

I would congratulate and celebrate on the birth of a responsibly bred baby human just as I would with a responsibly bred rat, dog, cat, etc. Would I congratulate someone breeding for the sake of a cute baby when there were serious health risks? No.

 

[Synirr]

I would congratulate and celebrate on the birth of a responsibly bred baby human just as I would with a responsibly bred rat, dog, cat, etc. Would I congratulate someone breeding for the sake of a cute baby when there were serious health risks? No.

I'ma get ranty here, but THAT really bothers me. When people with bad genetic diseases they know they have have children, or carriers of those diseases that know they and their partner both carry it have children. I watch too much Discovery Health Channel so I see it all the time... people with Marfan's syndrome having kids with Marfan's who will have to have their aorta operated on before they're in their teens to avoid it basically exploding on them . Or one couple who had a child with polymorphic light reaction syndrome, who can't even go out in the daylight without a special head-to-toe suit on or he'll break out in full body rashes (this can happen even if exposed to a bright lightbulb!), so what do they do? Why, have another kid of course. Their doctor told them there was a chance the second child wouldn't have it, but wouldn't you know, he does. Now the two boys have space suits made by NASA they get to wear so they can go outside sometimes, isn't that exciting?

To me that's even worse than poorly bred animals, because as horrible as it sounds, at least animals can be put out of their misery. I'd hate to live with a condition like dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa, where at even the slightest touch your skin just peels off and you have to live bandaged your whole life and be in pretty much constant pain... those people have to have their fingers amputated and such because of it. I think we'd all agree that any animal born without skin would be better off being humanely euthanized, but if it's a human we try to save it and let it live a life of misery... I'm not sure how humane that really is.

Anyway, that's waaaaaay off track