OMG say it isn't true!?

pboae

It adds up to making the sales less profitable. If enough people didn't buy them, they wouldn't stock them. The people who are going to expend time and effort researching their pets, would still find a reputable breeder to buy them from. But it would make it a lot harder for people to go in on a whim buy an innapropriate pet and an innapropriate cage only for the novelty to have worn off by the end of the week.

It's not just about buying animals either. I won't buy anything in a shop that sells animals, many other people do the same. Boycotting shops was one of the main reasons most pet shops stopped selling puppies.

Yes there are some crap rescues out there, but that still doesn't excuse the likes of [EMAIL="P@H"]P@H[/EMAIL] pretending that the left over animals they are selling off cheap are 'rescues'.

And yes there are lots of other areas of animal welfare that need to change as well. But if you are going to use that as an excuse nobody would ever do anything, so no progress would ever be made in any area. What was the point in me boycotting shop that sold puppies when people still bought them? What's the point of me buying free range eggs when other people still buy battery? What's the point in me not beating my dog, when so many other people do? All anyone can do is chip away with the little things they can do, and when enough people are willing to do that, big things can happen.

poppy_f1

Emmabeth wrote: »

Some of the people who work for them try their best .... but i wouldnt take a pet of mine to a vet who would be happy to be associated with them!

personally im the opposite
my last dog was diagnosed with a heart murmur at a young age, he was about 11 and got really bad puffing and panting and not settling, to him to our normal vet at the time who said it was down to him being fat
not bein happy with this diagnosis took him to the PAT vets, who looked at him in depth, gave him a ecg etc turns out he was in early stages of heart failure, unfortunately he died approx 4 weeks later however at least we knew the cause, if we hadnt gone elsewhere for a 2nd opinion, yes he still would have died but we wouldnt have known why
its casue of this instance that when we got our current dog we took him to PAT and registered him there

~Chameleon~

pboae wrote: »

But for the stores round here, the vets that are happy to work there are presumably happy to see animals in those conditions every day. I wouldn't let them anywhere near my dog.

The vets don't have any jurisdiction over any of the animals actually sold by P@H. They are completely seperate entities, although obviously they are 'employed' to provide health checks as part of the sales process, and also provide treatment should an animal happen to become sick/injured whilst part of the active sales stock.

However, store managers are not encouraged (by HO) to use the vets for treatment unless absolutely necessary, and any animals that become sick whilst still in the quarantine period are often returned to the 'factory' suppliers for replacement and never even get to see the vet. If people really knew what happened to these animals behind the scenes they'd never contemplate buying from them again

ETA: Please don't let the actions of the pet store reflect on your judgements of the vets and nurses working for Companion Care. They are totally independant of each other, apart from sharing premises and should be viewed in the same way you'd view any other veterinary practice.

pboae

Sorry Chameleon, I didn't mean to imply that the on site vets had any formal obligation to the animals at [EMAIL="P@H"]P@H[/EMAIL], but I still think they have a moral obligation.

I am not a vet, but I couldn't take a job that meant I had to go to work daily in an environment where animals are being mistreated. I couldn't just turn a blind eye to it on the basis that it was another company's problem and nothing to do with me. I wouldn't want someone who could do that to be responsible for the care of my animals.

As a customer I can (and have) walk into [EMAIL="P@H"]P@H[/EMAIL] see an animal in distress and cause a fuss until it's dealt with. If it's urgent and they won't deal with it immediately I've threatened to call the RSPCA and generally I've found that that finally prods them into action.

I know what goes on behind the scenes, as you obviously do as well, and I can't believe that a trained animal care professional would be blind to it. Yet they choose to ignore it and share their premises anyway.

~Chameleon~

pboae wrote: »

Sorry Chameleon, I didn't mean to imply that the on site vets had any formal obligation to the animals at P@H, but I still think they have a moral obligation.

I am not a vet, but I couldn't take a job that meant I had to go to work daily in an environment where animals are being mistreated. I couldn't just turn a blind eye to it on the basis that it was another company's problem and nothing to do with me. I wouldn't want someone who could do that to be responsible for the care of my animals.

It's ok, I fully understand and I'm in complete agreement with you, hence why they ended up one employee less

Jellicat

Emmabeth If thats what motivates your conscience, fine. There's not going to be any major shift in the way animals are treated until the way we see animals changes, and that is hardly going to be imminent when most of the population doesnt even care about the PEOPLE it enslaves in order to buy trainers and cheap Primark clothes. I see it as a losing battle. You can educate all you want, but people are lazy. They will go to Pets at Home rather than seek out a breeder most of the time, its that simple. As I've said I would happily see a complete ban on all animals being sold in shops, but its just not going to happen. Sure, maybe you'll be costing [EMAIL="P@H"]P@H[/EMAIL] a few million with your educational efforts, and yes they care about the sales, but I think if you think its going to make them change their ways you are decieved. There's no way a chain the size of that could get all of their animals from repuable breeders, no matter how much money they lose out on. And stopping selling animals? Also not going to happen while they're still raking in millions from the majority of ignorant and/or lazy people. The ones that replaced my rats? It doesnt make a difference. I cannot buy all of them, if I had not bought them that bratty child would have had them bought for her by the sounds of things, [EMAIL="P@H"]P@H[/EMAIL] would be no worse off and my little pair of darlings would probably be suffering by now. I am certainly not saying "this is acceptable" by buying from them, I'm saying "It is not acceptable for these creatures to into the care of someone who will more than likely not look after them properly".

Pboae, covered much of the profit angle in the previous part of this post. Enough people are never going to stop buying to stop [EMAIL="P@H"]P@H[/EMAIL] stop selling. And no, charities do not excuse pets at home, but why is no one getting mad at the charities as well as [EMAIL="P@H"]P@H[/EMAIL]? The enclosures the SSPCA keeps rabbits, ferrets and guinea pigs in are MILES smaller than the ones Pets at Home have. And they are often there far longer.

The difference between eggs and animals is that eggs dont have consciousness, animals do. Eggs do not suffer. By the act of buying a battery egg, you are not saving the egg from a miserable life, so if you have money they is no reason to choose battery for moral reasons, as I did choose my rats for them. And I'm sorry, but the dog beating argument was just nonsense. I have to say I feel really resentful towards you for suggesting that I am as bad as a dog beater for choosing to buy animals that were going to suffer otherwise. Just because I have a different moral stance on it from you does not mean you have to be so rude.

~Chameleon~

Jellicat wrote: »

The difference between eggs and animals is that eggs dont have consciousness, animals do. Eggs do not suffer. By the act of buying a battery egg, you are not saving the egg from a miserable life, so if you have money they is no reason to choose battery for moral reasons, as I did choose my rats for them.

Where on earth do you think eggs come from? Have you never stopped to consider the poor hens that are confined four to a cage only a foot square in size and never see the light of day? Don't you think those poor hens are suffering a miserable life just to provide you with cheap eggs? Have you never stopped to think why they are called "battery" hens/ eggs?

Incredible! :rolleyes:

pboae

Jellicat, in your determination to be outraged and defensive you've missed the point quite spectacularly. I wasn't for suggesting you are as bad as someone who beats their dog, and it is patently ridiculous for you to try and suggest otherwise. I was saying that I don't do these things because I feel it's the morally right thing to do, and not because of what other people do.

As Chameleon has pointed out, it is the buying of the eggs that causes the chickens to be kept in the conditions they are in. Just as the pet shops trade in live animals causes the breeding animals to be kept as they are.

If your moral stance is that you want to support that trade, I've got no argument with that. Everyone makes their own decisions on such things. I was taking issue with you claiming that you take that approach for the greater benefit of the animals, and that as such you aren't part of the problem.

foreign_correspondent

Jellicat wrote: »

Enough people are never going to stop buying to stop P@H stop selling. .

Why not?

There have been some huge changes in what retailers sell in the last twenty years due to people making different buying choices..

for example...

Fur coats used to be sold in high street stores, people stopped buying them, therefore you no longer see them.

Puppies used to be sold in pet shops, people stopped buying from the shops and complained - it is now very unusual to see.

Battery eggs used to be the norm (and no, the eggs do not suffer, but the chickens that produce them live a short and thouroughly miserable life!!) but due to consumer choices are now selling less and less.

As a result of consumers "putting their money where their mouth is", fairtrade tea, coffee and chocolate is now available in all supermarkets, Nestle have somewhat improved ther practices (baby milk etc), Organic food and free range meat is widely available, restaurants serve vegetarian options as a matter of course, etc erc etc

People will only sell what there is a demand for. Every time you buy an animal from a horrible, unsuitable cramped cage you just free up that cage for another poor creature. Feeling you have done something for animal welfare is a bit delusional really.