Yup. That gets to the core issue. The average buyer doesn't have your resouces and knowledge to be able to assess the integrity of the breeder. There are plenty of breeders in it for the wrong reasons. And for this particular issue, there are incentives for a breeder to let a kitten go earlier than they would if the decision were based strictly on the kittens best interest.
You say that the breeder might "know" their kittens do better at ten weeks rather than 12. By what criteria might that kittten be judged to be better? It would seem to me that at best a kitten at ten weeks might be thought to do no worse than a kitten kept 12 weeks.
No, at "best" a kitten leaving at ten weeks may be BETTER (and you seem unable to get past your preconceptions about it) - and the family has two more weeks with the kitten and gets him younger, which in general families want.
As for not knowing which breeder is irresponsible and saving money and which is doing what is best for the kittens, that can be true. However, creating a false criteria that is easy to apply does not separate the good breeders from the bad. It is just like the food count approach, adding and subtracting for this and that. It has the advantage of giving an answer, but it may or may not be a good answer. There are breeders who place at 12 weeks from whom I would never get a kitten. There are breeders who place at ten weeks from whom I would be happy to take a kitten - and have. Does everyone know what I know about each? Certainly not. However, I have just communicated that both exist, which should be useful information. You just want to ignore it based on ease and based on believing that what you have read about the potential risks trumps all other issues.
By the way, based on my experience, I reject the idea that "plenty" of breeders are breeding for the "wrong" reasons.
Quote:By the way, based on my experience, I reject the idea that "plenty" of breeders are breeding for the "wrong" reasons.
Although I don't have the experience you do....I fully agree.
Wow! I had no idea this was such a hot topic! Thanks for all your opinions and unique perspectives on this subject. I am considering contacting the breeder, once the next litter has arrived, about postponing the release date. This will be my first venture into the purebred world and want to make sure my new furrbaby is as developed and confident as he can be before he comes home. Looking forward to owning a brand new, well socialised Raggie kitten!
Thanks again,
WildFeline
(05-26-2010 05:40 PM)JanH Wrote: [ -> ]No, at "best" a kitten leaving at ten weeks may be BETTER (and you seem unable to get past your preconceptions about it) - and the family has two more weeks with the kitten and gets him younger, which in general families want.
I don't see how this response is deserved - I reread your posts and saw nothing explaining why a kitten would be better at ten weeks over 12. You did however make a number of comments indicating that 12 weeks is better - early neuter, red flag, and comments about the kitten being no worse off at ten weeks, etc. I'm simply asking you to explain the other side since you voiced that ten weeks may be BETTER for the kitten. The points listed here are about what the family want's which certainly doesn't define what's in the best interest of the kitten.
(05-26-2010 05:40 PM)JanH Wrote: [ -> ]As for not knowing which breeder is irresponsible and saving money and which is doing what is best for the kittens, that can be true. However, creating a false criteria that is easy to apply does not separate the good breeders from the bad. It is just like the food count approach, adding and subtracting for this and that. It has the advantage of giving an answer, but it may or may not be a good answer. There are breeders who place at 12 weeks from whom I would never get a kitten. There are breeders who place at ten weeks from whom I would be happy to take a kitten - and have. Does everyone know what I know about each? Certainly not. However, I have just communicated that both exist, which should be useful information. You just want to ignore it based on ease and based on believing that what you have read about the potential risks trumps all other issues.
By the way, based on my experience, I reject the idea that "plenty" of breeders are breeding for the "wrong" reasons.
I don't think I've ignored anything - I've not seen explanations that support ten weeks being better unlike your statements that support 12 weeks being better. As to disreputable breeders, in this area I actually tend to think that a prospecitve buyer might just have better insights on the full realm of breeders out there. I think a breeder such as yourself will be working in their circle of fellow breeders and word of mouth referals unlike a buyer responding to unknowns through advertisements and web sites and such. Just think of all the breeders advertising purebreds that all not purebreds at all.
None of that is to suggest that they outnumber respectable competant breeders - of course they don't.
I know, or know of, almost all breeders in my general area and many more nationwide and even worldwide - the good and the bad. Do you really believe breeders do not discuss the bad breeders, particularly in their area? Ever heard of human nature? Do you really believe a pet owner who has had a phone conversation or email exchange with a list of breeders hears more about a breeder than other breeders who talk among themselves and, as a group, represent the breeders of just about every cat in the area. Who do you think gets the calls about problematic Ragdolls when they feel the breeder is not responding as they want? ; )
Jan you are the one who took issue to my statement of their being plenty of bad breeders. Now you're presenting arguments as to why you know they exist. Why did you start the argument?
Like saying 10 weeks is BETTER for the kitten - you haven't explained why you started that argument either.
You are of course kidding. First, that we as breeders know about other breeders does not indicate the proportion. I objected to your indication of "plenty" who breed for the wrong reasons. Do any exist? Of course. However, they tend not to last.
Also, why do I need to repeat. For one, I mentioned the risk of multi cat households. However, the basic issue is the superior knowledge of a responsible breeder about her own cats.
You do not comprehend the contrary view so thoroughly that you do not even recognize it is made.
Quote:Jan you are the one who took issue to my statement of their being plenty of bad breeders. Now you're presenting arguments as to why you know they exist. Why did you start the argument?
Like saying 10 weeks is BETTER for the kitten - you haven't explained why you started that argument either.
Amazing!
You have no idea what it takes to breed. Why don't you go to a show and at least talk to some breeders first hand rather then questioning them here. There are many in So Cal.