Jump to content
BC Boards

Question on Border collies now in amish hands


Recommended Posts

We have had papers on dogs that were surrendered that originally were in Peoples hands but, now The parents have some how become possion of the Esh's of the world. Which to me screams puppy mills.

 

Does the registry worry about those breeders? What happens if say. One Esh was raided here in Pa and dogs were removed to the PSPCA. Are the dogs papers terminated? Rurally the PSPCA doesnt Spay or Neuter.

 

I know they caught some non amish mills but, are they looking at Pa, Oh, and WV

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok I don't get the distinction between "peoples" and "eshs" as I have *no* idea what those words refer to - are you saying some dogs were originally in someone's hands that you know and then ended up at an amish farm and you're worried about the mill issue?

 

If so, remember that not all amish are going to be puppy millers; that's a huge generalization. I wouldn't be surprised however if they allowed unaltered animals to procreate given that I'm not sure how up on s/n they are. Might be a great chance to educate them, though I'm not sure how open to surgical treatments they are due to their religious beliefs. I do remember my dad saying that the amish generally are good about vet care for animals although there are always bad apples in the bunch - he grew up in N. IN where there is a large amish population.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok I don't get the distinction between "peoples" and "eshs" as I have *no* idea what those words refer to - are you saying some dogs were originally in someone's hands that you know and then ended up at an amish farm and you're worried about the mill issue?

 

If so, remember that not all amish are going to be puppy millers; that's a huge generalization. I wouldn't be surprised however if they allowed unaltered animals to procreate given that I'm not sure how up on s/n they are. Might be a great chance to educate them, though I'm not sure how open to surgical treatments they are due to their religious beliefs. I do remember my dad saying that the amish generally are good about vet care for animals although there are always bad apples in the bunch - he grew up in N. IN where there is a large amish population.

 

 

I will tell you in Pa the amish are large millers and their dogs are in terrible shape. We rescue them. They would make you cry to see their feet, teeth and general overall appearance.

 

They will also take/buy dogs from the "english" to breed which I assume is how they came to get the parents of the dogs we received in rescue.

 

There is a place called almost heaven (raided) that is owned by an Esh. People thought they were buying Pedigreed dogs form them (aussie) and they also were turned in to us for the usual inappropriate placement purchase. Dogs there have been proven by DNA to not even be the breed they were sold. Let alone they called themselves a rescue.

 

http://www.nppmwatch.com/ Their case is written up on this page over and over. The vet to the puppy mills is suspended too for scaldling a puppy and cutting off it's tail with scissors in front of an undercover officer.

 

I'm curious what happens, if they are watched?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was also very confused the original post. I had also never heard the word "Esh" before and had no idea what it meant; the way that it is used sounds like an insult, and comparing the "Esh" to "People" -- as though they are not really human beings -- was really disturbing. I'm sure I am misunderstanding this and apologize in advance. I know that you don't want to insult Amish people generally as "evil animal abusers" any more than you would want to insult Jews as "evil money lenders" or Muslims as "evil terrorists." I can also apreciate how difficult it is when you work in animal rescue not to get angry; sometimes people get carried away when they angry.

 

(BTW, I wrote privately to you, Cheryl, asking for clarification, but for some reason I got a flag that said that you couldn't be located and I couldn't send a message to you. Very confusing.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was also very confused the original post. I had also never heard the word "Esh" before and had no idea what it meant; the way that it is used sounds like an insult, and comparing the "Esh" to "People" -- as though they are not really human beings -- was really disturbing. I'm sure I am misunderstanding this and apologize in advance. I know that you don't want to insult Amish people generally as "evil animal abusers" any more than you would want to insult Jews as "evil money lenders" or Muslims as "evil terrorists." I can also apreciate how difficult it is when you work in animal rescue not to get angry; sometimes people get carried away when they angry.

 

(BTW, I wrote privately to you, Cheryl, asking for clarification, but for some reason I got a flag that said that you couldn't be located and I couldn't send a message to you. Very confusing.)

I have to leave for work but, I cant be PM'd but, look at that website it clearly lists the names places I wish they knew what type of dogs each mill breeds. I know that they sell older Bc puppies off signs on the side of the road for 50 dollars and Glen highlands has purchased some from out the back which means you dont get fed anymore untill we shoot you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We have had papers on dogs that were surrendered that originally were in Peoples hands but, now The parents have some how become possion of the Esh's of the world. Which to me screams puppy mills.

 

Does the registry worry about those breeders? What happens if say. One Esh was raided here in Pa and dogs were removed to the PSPCA. Are the dogs papers terminated? Rurally the PSPCA doesnt Spay or Neuter.

 

I know they caught some non amish mills but, are they looking at Pa, Oh, and WV

 

The ABCA's investigations are complaint-driven. There is no way the ABCA would know about an objectionable kennel unless it received a complaint about it. If it receives an apparently credible complaint of misconduct, it will investigate. Remember, though, that what the registry can do is very limited. For example, Swafford is flourishing, with a more extensive operation than he had back when he was expelled from the ABCA five years ago.

 

Normally, dogs removed to an SPCA following a raid, and then adopted by someone, would no longer be able to produce offspring eligible for registration, because the owner of record is required to sign the registration applications for the offspring of that dog, and the new owner is not the owner of record. Only if the raiding authorities were getting the raided owner to sign a transfer of ownership on the papers, and the SPCA was passing those papers on to the new owner, could the new owner breed and register pups from that dog. But if the SPCA is doing that, they don't deserve to be called an SPCA.

 

Note: I too was baffled by the original post. On looking into it further, it looks as if Esh (or actually, Esch) is a surname.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I know that they sell older Bc puppies off signs on the side of the road for 50 dollars and Glen highlands has purchased some from out the back which means you dont get fed anymore untill we shoot you.

 

Glen Highland Farm pays puppy mills for dogs?!? I hope you're wrong about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all know that there are a number of puppy mills run by people of amish background, but do you seriously think that all of them do that?! That's taking incredible leaps and quite offensive. Perhaps the question should be "What will a registry do if dogs registered with their organization are used in puppy mills as breeding dogs." It really has nothing to do with who exactly is running the mill, so why bring that into it?!

 

(I can't let prejudice stand without comment, sorry)

 

That said, I know that the legit registries around generally will try to do something if it is reported that dogs registered with them are mill dogs, but where their ability to actually fix the issue is, I don't know. I know ACK does kennel inspections and can suspend breeders, not sure about UKC, and ABCA has already been addressed well above. If there is a suspected mill, I'd be reporting them to the local AC, SPCA, etc. Your local resources are going to be your best bet vs registries which have no legal standing as far as I know. The USDA can step in on commercial establishments if animals are not directly bought at the location, but they are severely understaffed, so action is slow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My MIL is Moravian (an Amish flavor - and we have some relations named Esh) and I assure you neither she nor anyone in their family has ever run a puppymill. Unless four neutered/spayed rescue dogs counts. :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course all Amish people aren't puppymillers, but the Amish breeders do have a reputation here in Central Pa. as puppymillers or, at least, irresponsible back yard breeders. That's not to say there aren't any Amish people who breed responsibly - it's just to say that the bad name that the Amish have as breeders in Pennsylvania is not without a very reasonable cause.

 

I'd buy quilts, produce, milk, eggs, poultry, meat, baked goods, etc. from the Amish any day of the week. It's not quite the same but our mechanic is a Menonite and he does great quality work for a very reasonable price.

 

But I would be very, very, very careful about buying a dog from an Amish breeder. The ones that I have met have had severe temperament issues and appear to be structurally questionable. That's not stereotyping at all - it is what I observe from what I have seen. Again, there are probably exceptions.

 

As far as GHF buying dogs, I don't know anything about that. I've never been asked to deal in any way with a dog at a puppymill or breeder of any kind and I've never heard of such a thing happening.

 

That would be a good question to contact the folks at GHF about directly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This always rubs me the wrong way too and I'm going to speak up this time.

 

Puppy milling and BYB are not unique to the Amish. In fact, I would guess that they make up a very, very small part of the problem (in terms of the "big picture"). Puppy buyers would be wise to scrutinize ANY breeder carefully, Amish or not. Why not just drop the "Amish" part from Board messages as several others have suggested?

 

(Sorry for the off-topic message.)

 

Kim

Link to post
Share on other sites
Glen Highland Farm pays puppy mills for dogs?!? I hope you're wrong about this.

 

 

No they are willing as we are to pay to rescue dogs from terrible situations to save their life. Main line rescue does it form time to time.

It's not always the best thing but, it happens.

If you look at the article where the vet lost his license the mother of the head of main line was with the officer in order to pay for an older dog to save it as part of the investigation. It just so happened the vet was there and did the tail amputation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW I regret if I have offended anyone with great amish family or friends but, In Pa their treatment of animals is well known.

 

They break horses by tying them out without food or water to break their spirit. Dogs are livestock and nothing more.

 

My question was an honest one. I honestly wondered if the ABCA ever looks at other puppy mills. Yes I know Swafford is Flourishing. Clean slate (closed Rescue) was pulling dogs in his supposed rescues name. Always from places that didnt spay or neuter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BTW I regret if I have offended anyone with great amish family or friends but, In Pa their treatment of animals is well known.

 

They break horses by tying them out without food or water to break their spirit. Dogs are livestock and nothing more.

 

My question was an honest one. I honestly wondered if the ABCA ever looks at other puppy mills. Yes I know Swafford is Flourishing. Clean slate (closed Rescue) was pulling dogs in his supposed rescues name. Always from places that didnt spay or neuter.

 

It's not just your posts today I've found pretty offensive, it's happened several times people have brought up Amish on this board. So this is not just directed at you.

 

First of all, Esh used in this way is pejorative. Period. Even IF someone is a puppymiller or any other sort of immoral a**hole I don't think it makes it ok to use pejorative terms to describe their culture and in fact will totally undermine whatever argument you have to most listeners, even if your argument is true.

 

Second of all, your defense/apology is still bigoted. "In PA their treatment of animals is well known." There are white, non-amish puppymillers all over - probably way more than amish. Their treatment of animals is also well known. Yet none of us assume anyone to be a puppymiller just because they are white and non-amish. Would you admit there are amish people who do not treat animals cruelly and do not run puppymills? Or do you truly believe even the non-millers are ALL animals abusers and mistreaters?

 

But Sheryl, I do appreciate the work you do as a reputable rescue and understand where some of your anger is coming from here, and share it. I also think this whole thing, especially your phrase about treating dogs "as livestock", brings up interesting issues related to cultural differences people have in their views on living with/owning animals. Our culture's view certainly isn't the only one out there, something DH had to deal with when working with Mexican-American family adoptees a lot. Many of the 1st generation families he counseled really did have completely different views regarding dogs than anything he had been raised with, such as believing it was ok to have short-coated dog live outside all the time, even in sub-zero winter nights. Or hitting them a lot. But these weren't evil people who liked being cruel to animals, they were merely intending to have pets the same way their parents/grandparents/everyone they knew had had. Some people would argue this is ignorance, but that is NOT the same as a real cultural difference in how animals are viewed/valued.

 

I'm interested in what others think about where the line really is between what might be different cultural views about animals' places in our lives, and whether all cultural views should be allowed. Or, is there any sort of (for lack of better term) inalienable rights that animals do or should have with humans? I KNOW of no one on this board that supports the animal rights movement (e.g. PETA), but I'm not asking about that. I'm asking what is your philosophical opinion on where valid cultural precedent stops and true mistreatment begins?

 

I don't know if anyone will want to respond to this (it may be too inflammatory to try and explore this topic, but I don't mean it that way at all). But it is something I've considered a lot since I've been on this board, for various reasons, and almost asked several times. I am interested in where people draw their own lines on this, not out to say anyone is wrong. I personally do believe animals *should* have certain inalienable rights. I do think there are ways of treating animals that are NOT ok, unequivocally. I would say treating dogs "like livestock" isn't how I would do it, but it doesn't have to be unethical AT ALL. Yet our own culture's typical treatment of commercial feedlot animals crosses the line in my mind; I don't even think true livestock should be subjected to that. But speaking to the point at hand, I would like agencies like USDA to have a more active, functioning role in finding millers and shutting them down, either through fines or charges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, in reading the link Sheryl provided, I believe the "Esh" was a mis-spelling of a last name, "Esch", which was that of a person involved in large-scale puppy production. I don't believe it was meant in any other fashion, unless it was similar to using the expression, the "Swaffords" of the world.

 

I do believe there are cultural bases, religious beliefs, whatever they might be, that might encourage certain behaviors or practices that those of other cultures or beliefs might not agree with. In this case, I understand that certain religions do not believe that animals have souls and therefore may be "treated" in very different manners than one would treat a human being - and that treatment may include practices that those on these boards would consider abusive.

 

I have been one of those that have previously pointed out that the Amish/Mennonites have been well known and well documented as a group that has numerous members who practice large-scale puppy production. They are certainly not alone in this commercial practice, any more than all Missourians are puppy millers. I have also noticed that many large-scale puppy producers (like Swafford) tend to have flag-waving and/or family values and/or religion-touting websites, but that doesn't make all patriotic, family-oriented, or religious people puppy-millers. I think most of that is just prominently displayed to mislead the gullible into thinking the sellers are trustworthy and righteous.

 

So, Sheryl, I understand your feelings and empathize with them, but I think we as a group need to avoid pointing a finger at any particular segment of people and simply address the greater problem of puppy-milling, backyard-breeding, and responsible acquisition and ownership of dogs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sheryl, are you absolutely sure that Glen Highland Farm does this? Do you know it of your own knowledge?

 

Eileen if you want to email me I'll answer your questions but, the amish dog thing was open knowlegde on their conner house page for a while. Trying to advertise their plight long before Oprah and every other celebrity took up the cause.

 

I should edit this to add that it isnt a regular thing to do but, we paid an elderly woman for dogs to get them in a new life. They are now all happy, fixed and well placed. We recently offered to pay the 50 dollars to a jerk to get a little smooth coat dog(min Pin puppy) off a chain.

 

As a rule I dont think anyone would go around buying puppies but, Pa didnt try to place a ban on shooting your dogs for nothing. Being out the back is something every person who deals with puppy mills talks about.

 

This guy is an example he's 8 to 9 and I'm guessing he didnt manage to breed a few females so he was offered out to be picked up. The pages we get with them have tons of euth's marks on them. I have personally picked his teeth out of his mouth with my hands. His feet are splayed he was shaved almost naked (matted I'm sure). We are taking him in see if he can be neutered and have his teeth cleaned next week. We wanted our best vet for him. I worry that he's too frail but, we will see.

post-5554-1242909010_thumb.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't speak for Eileen but I think that this is the kind of allegation that needs to be based on fact and not conjecture or hearsay. Purchasing pups or dogs from puppy millers and so forth "to save them", is just contributing to the problem by lining their pockets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't speak for Eileen but I think that this is the kind of allegation that needs to be based on fact and not conjecture or hearsay. Purchasing pups or dogs from puppy millers and so forth "to save them", is just contributing to the problem by lining their pockets.

 

If you look above I edited my post after the fact but, I'm not saying everyne is running around buying pups to line pockets but, a case of knowing the dogs are out the back and dying or that the puppies are really sick and trying to get them help. I have seen this is print so I Dont think it's a hearsay or conjecture for any rescue. I think it's tough to turn your back when you know a dog is suffering and the person who has the dog says let it die or give me a few bucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sheryl - Absolutely, no one concerned with rescue is purchasing those pups with the goal of lining the millers/BYB's pockets but out of sympathy and a desire to help save or improve the life of an innocent animal. The problem is that it helps to perpetuate the problem when these unscrupulous folks make money off the compassion for people who wish to end the suffering of the animals. I think it's a lose-lose situation because if you don't pay for and save that animal, it's horrible. If you do, you contribute to the perpetuation of the problem by saving one animal and maybe condemning another to a similar situation.

 

I have the greatest admiration for people like yourself who give your emotions, time, money, and efforts to save these poor animals and provide them with a loving, healthy, and safe life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Eileen if you want to email me I'll answer your questions but, the amish dog thing was open knowlegde on their conner house page for a while. Trying to advertise their plight long before Oprah and every other celebrity took up the cause.

 

Sheryl, please feel free to provide me details by email, but I think you should answer my question on the Boards, since you said on the Boards that Glen Highland Farm does this. I asked if you know for a fact that GHF pays money to puppy millers in order to buy/save individual dogs. If you were just assuming that they do because you and others have done so, I think it's only fair to say so. There's no disgrace in saying you don't know it for a fact, if you don't -- we all speak loosely and without real knowledge at times. I just want to know if you're sure about this or not.

 

As for the rest of this, I don't know what you mean -- I don't know what "the amish dog thing" is, and "advertising their plight" is different from paying money to the puppy millers to buy them. I don't see anything currently on GHF's Connor House page that would suggest that any of the dogs were bought from puppy millers. ETA: Unless what you're saying is that it's a known fact that there are Amish puppy mills. I think everyone would agree with that. I think the issue others are pointing out is that there's a difference you don't seem to be seeing between saying "I will tell you in Pa the amish are large millers and their dogs are in terrible shape," as you did, and saying "There are puppy mills in PA owned and operated by Amish families, and their dogs are often in terrible shape," which no one would disagree with.

 

If you look above I edited my post after the fact but, I'm not saying everyone is running around buying pups to line pockets but, a case of knowing the dogs are out the back and dying or that the puppies are really sick and trying to get them help. I have seen this is print so I Dont think it's a hearsay or conjecture for any rescue. I think it's tough to turn your back when you know a dog is suffering and the person who has the dog says let it die or give me a few bucks.

 

Of course, I know that "everyone" -- let alone GHF -- is not buying pups with the intent of lining the pockets of puppy millers. I am not questioning anyone's motives. I certainly agree it's tough to turn your back when you know a dog is suffering and the person who has the dog says let it die or give me a few bucks, but IMO if you can't persuade the person to give you for nothing the dog that he's going to shoot, the only ethical thing to do is to walk away. Think about it. He does not want the dog. He is going to starve it to death or shoot it. If he won't let you take it off his hands for free in those circumstances, then the little bit of money you're paying is really important to him. If you pay it, you are supporting his puppymilling operation, because you're making it more profitable for him. You're increasing his bottom line. As long as he stays in business, another dog will come down the pipeline to fill the place of that suffering dog, and all his other suffering dogs. The only thing that will reduce the amount of canine suffering going on in his establishment is if he goes out of business. (Please note that I'm talking about puppy millers here -- people who are in the business of producing pups for profit. I'm not talking about buying a dog on a chain from some individual dog owner who's neglecting him, but is not in the business of producing and selling dogs for profit.)

 

I hope you don't think I'm picking on you here. I interpreted yoiur "Esh" statements the same way Sue did, once I saw the piece about the PA puppy miller whose name was Esch (though I was taken aback by them before that). And I admire your rescue efforts, and your concern for the dogs in need of rescue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Think about it. He does not want the dog. He is going to starve it to death or shoot it. If he won't let you take it off his hands for free in those circumstances, then the little bit of money you're paying is really important to him. If you pay it, you are supporting his puppy milling operation, because you're making it more profitable for him. You're increasing his bottom line. As long as he stays in business, another dog will come down the pipeline to fill the place of that suffering dog, and all his other suffering dogs

 

This exact statement is the hardest thing for me to live with. I understand the idea behind what is stated but actually turning and walking away is all but impossible for me to do. the best way I can do it, is to stay far away from that type thing and offer my services in ways that I can truly manage.

 

A question....

I have heard many times that in the Amish community/religion all animals are considered put here on earth to serve man and his needs. Hence the reason why they feel justified in treating their animals in the manner in which they do.

Can someone tell me if this is true or just more hearsay?

I have tended to believe what I've heard but this thread has given me many things to question. Just trying to educate myself with the truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an interesting comment on the link that Sheryl provided, from a hearing concerning Mr. Esch and his large-scale breeding operation. Another person, same last name so I'm maybe thinking possibly same cultural/religious/social background (and that is an assumption), made the comment that since there is definitely a demand for puppies, if people like Mr. Esch were shut down, it would just result in more puppy production going "under the table".

 

I believe that the answer to the big problem is education, about puppy mills, backyard breeding, large-scale dog brokers (and I don't mean responsible brokers, because there are those), pet shop puppies, and other poor practices. I expect that even wide-scale education will not prevent large numbers of people from financially supporting this type of business either through ignorance, gullibility, selfishness, or misplaced compassion, but I certainly hope it could make a positive difference in the lives of significant numbers of innocent and exploited animals. But, as long as there is a demand, there will be those that exploit the animals to make a profit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A question....

I have heard many times that in the Amish community/religion all animals are considered put here on earth to serve man and his needs. Hence the reason why they feel justified in treating their animals in the manner in which they do.

Can someone tell me if this is true or just more hearsay?

I have tended to believe what I've heard but this thread has given me many things to question. Just trying to educate myself with the truth.

You might try a Google search, which I did, and read some articles - of course, taking everything with a grain of salt and considering the sources.

 

I was under the impression that Amish did not believe in registrations of animals, which I find would seem to be contrary to producing purebred, registered puppies.

 

There is a great deal of variability between different congregations of Amish and Mennonites. I don't think one can paint all with a single brush, in spite of the many principles the different groups may share. I personally find some of their traits and characteristics to be extremely admirable. We felt comfortable enough with the local Mennonite community where we lived in Western NYS, that our children attended their vacation Bible school in summer for many years. I find certain other traits or customs of some congregations to be less appealing to me. JMO, and easily applied to any social/cultural/ethnic/religious group.

 

Sadly, the word "Amish" seems to be way over-used right now as a marketing tool in a number of products, and that also seems to be contrary to the basic principles of these congregations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there an official ABCA stance on large scale breeders? I am talking about people producing 50 to 200+ pups a year, very few of which ever do any meaningful work on livestock. Some of these breeders do keep their pups clean, health test the parents and make an effort to sell to responsible owners, but I don't see how they are contributing anything to the breed as a whole. When you are raising that many pups you just don't have the time to train the parents on stock and actually know which ones are worth breeding in the first place. I see litters advertised sired by dogs that are under a year old. Videos show the sire running in circles in a round pen, the breeder brags about his working ability and puppy buyers eat it up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...