Tulsan, (10/21/2007 9:07:20 AM)

This story is just too sad for a Sunday morning. I saw these little guys' pictures and thought this must be a feature on animal shelters. What an unpleasant surprise to learn of these terrible puppy mills. Anyone who would hurt or neglect a helpless animal needs serious psychiatric help and even more serious punishment.

C.G., Tulsa (10/21/2007 10:04:45 AM)

Sickening is the only word I can think of. We need more enforcement people on the job and much stiffer penalties. We also need to come up with some better regulations.

Joe, Tulsa (10/21/2007 10:27:42 AM)

Oklahoma has long been a poor example of caring concern for the animals. I have been to many breeders and have yet to find one Oklahoma breeder to have the quality of facilities, education or standards as I have seen in the neighboring states of Kansas and Missouri, both have state license and state inspectors. Oklahoma it's time you took care of your breeding industry problems.

jessica, tulsa (10/21/2007 12:07:00 PM)

This is horrible to read, I had no idea the breeding in Oklahoma had this much cruelty. Where are the laws to protect the animals? Why are WE not bringing this to a vote to protect the animals? I rather pay a little more in taxes (if needs be) to protect an animal from cruelty conditions like I just read. To think the dog I purchased from a so called legimate breeder my have been breed in

a puppy mill like this is a horrible feeling. Why are we looking over this? To think people are making money by slaving animals. This is a slave trade business and Oklahomans are supporting it by not taking the time to put PROPER REGULATIONS AND LAWS to protect not only the animals but the consumers from this. I would be horrified to find out the $650 I spent for my dog went to support this business and I will do my part and investigate the breeder I bought my dog from to ensure of this. I hope any one else that reads this will do the same.

Norm Carlisle, Tahlequah (10/21/2007 12:17:29 PM)

If law enforcement would put the same amount of money, time, and effort that they put in to chasing down pot smokers and meth heads, they might make a dent in this business and the creeps who engage in it. Then, the public could turn to a campaign that would outlaw all breeding--an activity that feeds only selfish human needs and does NOTHING for the animals. The use of the word "conscientious" to describe this activity is entirely inappropriate, if not laughable.

Lulu, Jenks (10/21/2007 2:55:42 PM)

Every animal I have ever owned came from the animal shelter or an animal rescue organization.

I guess pure bred animals are nice but "mutts" are much healthier and have less personality problems.

Adopt an animal from the shelter or rescue organization and you will have a friend forever. They are so thankful to have a good home they can't do enough please.

If people would not support the breeders or "Luv A Pet", this problem wouldn't exist!

Jason, Broken Arrow (10/21/2007 3:13:09 PM)

People with low education, skills and at the lower end of the socio-economic scale are attracted to the puppy mill business because of the seemingly easy money that can be made. Unfortunately, Oklahoma has a lot of citizens who qualify for this category and have the unstable personality disorders necessary to be attracted this type of business without caring for the welfare of the animals.

While I am a libertarian conservative who loathes more "nanny" laws and taxes, law enforcement and the government really needs to drop the hammer on these people who are borderline psychopaths. Anyone who has such disregard for the life of an animal, is not far away from having total disregard for human life.

I think the OK state gov. should:

1. Issue a moratorium on breeding licenses.

2. Roll up and discontinue the licenses on 75 percent of the breeders already in place.

3. Rigorously prosecute and enforce the laws in the books.

4. Get the media and public behind this movement so that it becomes as stigmatised as child molestation.

5. Enact laws that pave the way for Govt and Non gov't aid organizations to seek retribution for costs and expenses in civil court.

6. Appoint an Animal Rights Czar that can be the voice and image of the state gov't in it's crusade against these low lifes.

Those are just a few ideas. I'm sure others can come up with more and better ones that would curtail this problem without costing taxpayers that much.

Susan, (10/21/2007 5:45:58 PM)

This article should be used as a text-book example of "hyperbole' for aspiring writers to avoid. I wonder about the connections of the person who authored this piece, because I see Big AR written *all* over it. OMG, there were FECES in the pens...call the National guard!!

Don't even try to tell me that the person writing this article was not injecting a healthy dose of bias.

I am deeply disturbed by the message this article sends; that somehow the problem of animal neglect is a) rampant and b)that virtually all Oklahoma animal breeders fall into this category and c)it is in need of immediate attention before the world comes to an end. None of these are truly the case, but it sure makes good copy, doesn't it? And as usual, we see more and bigger government touted as the answer to all ills; never mind that throwing regulations at such problems seldom helps. (Because the people who really ARE a problem are already breaking the law, people, and they will simply ignore any new laws just like they are ignoring the present ones.) All it does is make things worse for the people who are already not causing a problem in the first place; but that won't stop the do-gooders from raving for such regulations anyway. Then they can all go home and hug themselves with satisfaction that they have done something tangible about the problem. And as usual, the ones who get hurt are the law-abiding, caring dog owners who were never a problem in the first place.

I wonder just how much the person who wrote this article, as well as the many who commented asking for 'more laws' actually *understand* about so-called 'licensed' breeders. I wonder, for example, how many are aware that in order to raise dogs in a manner that will pass USDA inspections, certain things that MANY of us take for granted, such as having the pups raised in the house close to people where they can receive proper socialization, are AGAINST THE RULES... You must house the dogs in a SEPARATE facility, just like any other kind of LIVESTOCK. That's right, people; your vaunted USDA's licensure requirements are far better suited to the *commercial production* of pets as livestock, (remember that the USDA's primary mission is the oversight of agriculture, not pets) and the rules are very clear. Can't keep your dog meds in the same fridge with your food; has to be a separate refrigerator. Can't raise the pups in a basket by your bed; have to be housed in a SEPARATE building, etc. Raising pups in your HOUSE? Oh, wait... those would be those so-called "back yard breeders" that you people rag on about. Don't seem so bad now, do they?

No, more and bigger government is not going to solve this problem. Not to mention, the way this article is written one would expect to see a "puppy mill" on every street corner in Oklahoma. In fact, the truth of the matter is that commercial breeders make up a vanishingly small percentage of the dog breeding population, and the majority of breeders do care and are providing proper care to their pets. Yet this article is a clear indictment of all breeders in this state.

The people who are engaged in the business of 'shutting down puppy mills' are remarkably plastic in their definitions. And before we get started, yes I *do* know what a puppy mill is, and I have seen such situations myself. There are people who should not be entrusted with the care of stuffed animals, yes they do exist and such behavior is horrible, but it is *not* the norm of care at the overwhelming majority of breeder's homes. To be truthful, there are a LOT of so-called animal saviors out there who are unable, or unwilling, to make the distinction. What is 'filth' for example? Are we talking about a systemic problem, or one or two piles of poop in an enclosure? How many of you are aware that excited dogs will void, and that even if your runs have been picked up in the past thirty minutes, having a stranger arrive on the premises is enough to 'get them all going,' so to speak? So the intrepid animal saviors arrive, and oh my gosh! there's poop in the runs! Oh, no! Clear

Shannon, (10/21/2007 5:54:30 PM)

"Oklahoma is a puppy mill state." That is the FIRST line of this piece. If I were a breeder in the state of Oklahoma, I would be INCENSED at this blatant exaggeration. Reputable breeders are by far in the majority, in Oklahoma as elsewhere. I note that there were even a few who made this point in the article, but somehow their comments are largely overlooked in the rush to judgment in calling Oklahoma a 'puppy mill state.'

No, Oklahoma is not a puppy mill state. Oklahoma is an AGRICULTURAL state, as are the others cited above, and it is centrally located. This is why so many dog breeders live here. And as for them being 'rural,' why wait a minit! Are we going to berate them for following the LAWS of the larger cities and taking their dogs outside city limits so as not to overrun the pet limit ordinances?

No, Oklahoma is NOT a "puppy mill state," but the author of this article is almost as bad as the people being knocked here. Bad form!!!

AngryOkie, (10/21/2007 6:02:58 PM)

"You saw these little guys pictures." Which ones? The one of the boxer in the roomy pen with the SCRUPULOUSLY clean stainless steel dishes? OK, he doesn't look real happy, but then there is some strange guy with a camera pointed at him; maybe he is camera shy. Or were you talking about the dachshund with no sign of disease or neglect? His bowl looks pretty clean too, as far as that goes. I grant you that I don't much approve of raising animals on wire, but neither of these pictures does much to make the author's case.

There are real puppy mills out there; how about we spend out time targeting them (most can already be shut down under current laws) and leave everyone else alone?

Cathy A., Tulsa (10/21/2007 7:51:53 PM)

I have worked with rescue groups and animal shelters all my adult life. These breed for greed puppy millers are guilty of abuse & neglect in every case.

How do I know? I have seen the conditons of these mills firsthand. I also know the effects this kind of "treatment" has on the breeder dogs. They are held prisoner in small cages, in many cases not even large enough to turn around good let alone get anything close to exercise. These cages are stacked in on top of the other with wire bottoms that allow the urine and fecal material to rain down upon the dog(s) below. The most pitiful of which is of course the unlucky cage at the bottom of the stack. The breeder dogs receive no vet care, they are fed just enough to keep them producing, in many cases they drink from bottles of water similar to a hampster or gerbil does. It is not the life of a pet, it is life of abused livestock.

Those of you who doubt there is a problem with how these animals are treated really need to open your eyes. If you would like to volunteer with any number of shelters or rescue groups you will soon learn firsthand the devistating truth.

We have the pleasure of having a former puppy mill breeder dog as a much loved pet. Petey was liberated from a mill in Missouri by Small Paws Rescue (of Tulsa). He had never been out of his cage in the first two years of his life. His legs were bowed from not being able to stand up straight in that filthy cage. Speaking of filth, he had to be shaved completely down and washed numerous times to get the urine & feces out of his skin. He didn't know what grass was, he couldn't walk up a couple of steps because he lacked the muscle tone to do it, the first few days he would just lay perfectly still and even duck when he looked up to see a bird fly over. Watching him blossom into a real pet was life changing for my family.

Yes these places ARE that bad, yes we must continue to work on putting them out of business, yes you can do your part... by not buying ANYTHING from pet stores that sell puppies and kittens. They get those puppies and kittens from places just like my Petey came from. There are plenty of pet supply stores that support adoption of pets instead of supporting the puppy mills. Please do your business with them. When there is no demand it will soon stop the supply.

connie curnow, bountiful (10/21/2007 10:44:00 PM)

I have no synpathy nor compassion for these puppymill breeders, especially the old lady who was caught and not prosecuted because of her age. Age should not matter...she caused pain and suffering and she should have to endure pain and suffering just as she inflicted on the innocent animals she killed and tortured for money! All of these breeders need to be prosecuted, put in jail! Tests need to be done on them fo find cures for all of our human diseases instead of on all of the innocent animals at the universities and pharmaceutical research company facilities. Research done on lab animals is always in-conclusive...it needs to be done on these breeders so that they can pay back and give back to society...even though it does nothing for the poor animals that they previously tortured!

CL, (10/21/2007 11:24:04 PM)

Of course Oklahoma is a puppy mill state. Why wouldn't it be? Land cheaper here than in many other states, no state laws that address puppy mills, little enforcement of existing animal cruelty laws. Puppy millers are certainly smart enough to tag Oklahoma as the place to set up business, especially when other states start passing more restrictive laws. My compliments to the Tulsa World for investigating and reporting.

Toni Bailey, Tahlequah (10/22/2007 12:11:29 AM)

Anyone ever considered the fact that the AKC will actually register each and every one of these puppies?! No matter HOW many litters a person breeds every year, the AKC does will take their money and send in the papers. Somehow, folks think that "having papers" is a very important aspect of owning a dog, and are "impressed" if the dog they are purchasing has them. The AKC is making a lot of money off of these puppy mills. They don't want to shut them down!

Of course, education is certainly the key to stopping this horrible situation, NOT laws to "prohibit breeders from breeding." People who want a puppy need to know the questions to ask breeders regarding their puppies, the sire and dam, the kennel-life, the puppy rearing, temperment, socialization, and health, health, health.

Instead, folks fall in love with a cute puppy, and don't ask the hard questions regarding the pup's background---which directly reflects its future. We NEED consciencious breeders who will breed only to "improve the breed," and perform the important pre-pregnancy testing before any animal is bred. HOW many breeders do you know who have had their dogs' hips and eyes checked before they are allowed to breed?! Or cardiac checks? Or thyroid tests? And that's just the tip of the iceberg....NO one is telling these people what they SHOULD do and the measures they should take, because most folks don't realize these tests should be performed before breeding.

If a puppy mill tested their breeding stock, they wouldn't make any profit at all....

And if people were made aware that they should ONLY buy pups from conscientious breeders, we might be able to eliminate this horrible carnage in our land.

Stay away from backyard breeders. Stay away from puppy mills. Research your chosen breed. Talk to many breeders. Visit their kennels. Meet the sire and dam. Know the health problems of your breed and what the breeder has done to eliminate them. Learn about newborn puppy care and temperment testing. Ask lots of questions. Puppymillers can only continue if folks keep buying from them.

dlt, (10/22/2007 11:19:02 AM)

Being ethical is not news. Being conscientious is not news. Not making a profit is not news. That's why this article failed to address the purebred dog breeder who carefully plans each breeding, health tests their breeding animals for congenital health problems, tries to improve their breed and spends countless hours & money making sure their puppies are healthy, social and truly represent the best of their breed. Instead this article leaves us with the impression that all breeders (USDA licensed, puppy mill & hobby) are evil, cruel, heartless money-grubbers. Yes, I'm sure there are some of those out there, but presenting the people who do abide by the law is simply not newsworthy. And educating the public by differentiating between the different type of breeders would simply take too much copy space and who wants to waste that when you could simply use sensationalism to fire up your readers?? Why not emphasize that enforcing the existing anti-cruely laws would take care of a great deal of the law-breakers - you want news, find out why those laws aren't being enforced and report that!! Why not do an article to help educate the public as to how to buy a pet - or is that also not newsworthy?

llw, (10/22/2007 3:23:07 PM)

Why is it that there are so many "reporters" jumping on the AR bandwagon these days. I say "reporter" because that is the correct term, but I thought they were supposed to report the truth, not biased articles like this one. It is filler at best. Sure the AR's reading this will pat you on the back, and say job well done. But what about the hard working people that take care of their animals, while making a living that you are hurting with an article like this? Did you even bother to visit a kennel? Do you even understand that USDA means licensed by the Government? Inspected by the Government?

Wow, this world is in trouble when articles like this are even allowed to be printed. You need to get your facts straight. But I doubt that you would be welcome in any kennel these days.

AngryOkie, (10/23/2007 7:15:36 PM)

Reporting the news is not always possible; there isn't enough to go around to make the necessary copy space to fill in between all the paid advertisements in the local paper. So, they have to invent something. This week, it seems to be 'puppy mills' in the sights, and so we have two very irresponsible reporters here (Gilham and Kilman) who are going out of their way to paint all breeders in Oklahoma with a very broad and tarry brush. Why? well, it's an easy accusation to make, and a difficult one to refute. And, it has the advantage of having a lot of public angst attached to it (who wants to live in a 'puppy mill state?') and is therefore easy to exploit.

Clearly, neither of them has more than a cursory understanding of the very industry they are reporting on, but this does not stop out intrepid duo from engaging in a hatchet job on local breeders with a series of pathetically biased articles intended to... what? What is the agenda, boys? Who is writing the checks here? Because no responsible journalist would be caught dead making as many jaundiced claims as you have here, or would want to be caught using such carefully twisted data. This is 'shock jock' reporting at its worst; not reporting numbers to support a case but to make a scene. Where are the OTHER numbers, the ones you don't seem to want to investigate? You spend a lot of time carefully investing misery in the stats you share, but what are they compared against, to give us a real idea of the scope of the problem? For instance, here's a line of research you neglected: you told us in nauseating detail about how many animals are 'suffering neglect' in these puppy mills. Do you have a CLUE how many animals in Oklahoma are healthy, well-fed and nurtured, as opposed to the ones you chose to focus on? Those horrifying numbers you shared might not be so horrifying if the public knew what a small percentage of the overall population of pet breeders it applies to. But gee, that won't win you any awards will it? Nor will it keep up the necessary public indignation to keep this series afloat.

Well, don't fool yourselves. Your bias is clearly showing, and I am certainly not the only one who is wondering just what agenda is being forwarded here. Because it sure isn't for the benefit of the animals you are so busy emoting all over.

Denise, Duncan (11/4/2007 1:30:49 PM)

Most people already knew that Oklahoma is a puppy mill state but if their reporting opened a few eyes than they did their job.

To the above poster, there is a hugh difference in a real breeder and a puppy mill. A real breeder breeds one breed for the betterment of the breed, not for money. The miller breeds for money only with no care to the breed.

They were not reporting on "real" breeders. Therefore, the numbers of "real" breeders vs puppy millers is like comparing apples to oranges. Your post makes no sense unless you are backing millers. You might need to talk to real breeders and see for yourself what they think about millers.

Puppy millers are in the same class of people as drug dealers, gangs, child abusers, etc. like it or not no one wants them as neighbors. Oklahoma has more than it's fair share of these type of people and it's time to make them clean up, if they won't do it on their own then laws need to be passed to help them.

Elisha, Duncan (11/7/2007 10:29:26 AM)

Denise, you hit the nail right on the head. Ther are far more Puppy millers in Oklahoma thant there are breeders that actually want to better the breed. A dog living in a wire cage with a wire bottom is by no means being loved and cared for in the proper mannor. Dogs are like two year old children. They need attention, love and guidance. Millers do not give that to their animals. All they are is money making machines. Shame on anyone that supports them. In closing I would like to say that if you (persons above) were a reputable breeder than you would have no problem with this story. That alone speacks for itself...

Pat Morgan, Tulsa, OK (12/4/2007 10:03:41 AM)

I am a volunteer for Small Paws Rescue. In the past four years I have foster approximately 15 dogs rescued from puppy mills, ranging in age from 6 months to 8 years old.

The worse abuse case that I have had in my home was Tiny, a bichon frise who was 7 1/2 years old when she "got out". She has 6 teeth left, receding gums, a terrible ear infection that took months to successful treat, and feet so splayed that she could barely walk.

She could not walk up or down stairs, did not know what a toy is and was sacred to death if a person approached her. To catch her - you had to corner her.

Aftering fostering her for 7 months, I adopted her. That was almost 3 years ago. She has progressed some - but she will never be a "Normal" dog.

Sue Bergwall, Collinsville (2/21/2008 12:08:55 AM)

We bought a Papillon from Charles/Shirley Wegner dba KC Kennel in October, 2006. She looks like a tall weiner dog with some feathers. Certainly not the $300 worth that we paid for. Of course it was dark and the Sire and Dam were not offered to be brought into the lighted puppy room. I wonder why! We love our dog, but she is not a quality Papillon.

Samantha Jackson, (3/4/2008 4:24:37 PM)

God is the foundation of evil.

rhondamorgan, Skiatook (4/23/2009 10:14:46 AM)

Why are these people allowed to continue to advertise their puppies? Seems like the Tulsa World would be able to moniter how many puppies are advertised in their classifieds by the same person. It is so unfair for people to be able to make a living by sitting back and allowing their little dogs to do all the work while living in deplorable conditions. I have dogs who have been dropped off at my house and have made their home here. I can't find homes for all of them. If they are older than a puppy, nobody wants them. Next time, please think of other than purebreed or tiny, cute puppies, who end up as large dogs anyway. Also, please think of what it means to the animal when you dump him. It may not be beside my house. I see many of them killed on the road and others who are so scared they won't let anyone get close enough to take them home.