Absolute Dogs

[FatNoMoreSue]

Well well! Facebook is interesting isn’t it?

Yeah I’ve read some of the comments but was looking for the original to cut to the chase. I’ve done some of their games and am a member of their Facebook group. Logged on to scroll through through in the way you do and it’s a bit of a firestorm with lots defending her.

Lauren loves her dogs. She cares for them and devotes immense time, money, effort into their care. She has multiple dogs and co-owns dogs. She has champion agility dogs. Of course it is natural to want to perpetuate winning genetic lines of these types of dogs. You only have to see her with her dogs to see how devoted she is to them.

Social media lynch mob perpetuating lies, rumours, gossip and hysteria should make all of you utterly ashamed of yourselves. You are nothing more than bullies. Breeding dogs is not a crime. All Lauren has said is that she bred too much. I know that these puppies were loved and cared for and found amazing homes. None of this is a crime. So get over yourselves and find a new target for your hostility. Or even better, become better people and live and let live in peace.

@LovedayStar So you think those puppies were kept in suitable conditions?

Keeping animals in those kind of conditions is a crime. IT IS ANIMAL ABUSE.

@LovedayStar no one who loves their dogs overbreeds. Overbreeding is only driven by money. If she truly cared for her dogs, this would never have happened. Pull your blinkers off and look at the numbers.

All Lauren has said is that she bred too much.

So what does this really mean?

That she bred more dogs than she could care for?

That she bred dogs together who should not have been bred together because the resulting puppies were not healthy? Or temperamentally sound?

That she bred individual dogs too young? Or too frequently?

That she bred from individuals who had hereditary health issues?

Because saying you bred too much is only half the story and it's the half without consequences. If you bred a million well loved and well cared for puppies whose health was exemplary and whose parent's welfare was top notch... would that lead you to conclude you'd bred too much? I don't think it would. I think only negative consequences would lead to that conclusion.

So what does she mean that she bred too much? What were the specific consequences that led her to say it was too much? It feels like that's the unsaid bit here.

Puppy Farming is Organised Crime. Nearly all puppy farmers on this scale will have their own vet hence Tom. This is what gets them out of trouble when sick puppies are returned due to the terrible environment and living conditions, bad breeding etc but ultimately a vet is what's needed to get them their 5 star License from the council the green light to carry on breeding legally. It is extremely hard for anyone to prosecute a puppy farmer when they have their own vet consistently working for their business. This wasn't a mistake or Lauren getting carried away with breeding this was organised crime at a very high level. The council who issued her 5 star breeding licence need investigating at the very least. How many breeding dogs are they licensed for? With 700 plus registration per year that's the KC reg puppies this doesn't include puppies that they haven't filled out the paperwork for and sold non KC reg, I'm not aware that councils give out licences for more than 26 breeding dogs to any one single establishment. If they have lied about numbers they should be prosecuted. They have certainly lied to the public just watched one of their videos on teaching dogs how to be ok left alone where L states we never leave our dogs for longer than 2 hours!! Absolute bar faced lie right there! What will happen to her hundreds of breeding dogs now shes been caught out?

Nobody would be calling out high welfare breeding focussed on producing puppies with excellent health, temperament and job ability, to continue and improve her own lines and the breed. And someone who was just doing that, wouldn't have taken a period of "self-reflection" then issued a carefully worded damage limitation PR statement saying they will stop breeding.

If everything you say about her is true and she's done nothing wrong, why is she stopping and why has she released a statement saying she's messed up?

Good breeders never get themselves to the point where they "breed too much" btw.

This is no defence of AD, but re your rehoming bitches point, plenty of reliable, decent professional (versus hobby) breeders do this. To be clear, they don't just whack them on preloved, but go to great lengths to ensure the dogs go on to live long and happy lives with loving owners that the breeders have either seriously vetted or personally know. Same with retired stud dogs, who often don’t take well to being deposed by a new boy. My own dog’s dad had the best life with his adoptive parents: he adored them and they adored him. Frankly, when my own dog is no more (perish the thought), I’d jump at the chance to re home another from her breeder if the opportunity came up. To suggest this practice makes someone a puppy farm is, imo, naive. Puppy farmers don’t give a flying f how many litters a dog has had or that they live out their non-breeding days happily. Instead, they will breed a bitch to the point of exhaustion and then dump her or shoot her.

I do like their games, I've not spent a lot of money on AD, but I don't think I'll be spending any more. I've read Lauren's statement, and it's difficult to conclude from what she's said that there's no truth to the rumours. Why claim that her behaviour doesn't align with her values if she's been breeding ethically? I do feel very sorry for the people who have spent money to be an AD trainer.

I agree that re-homing retired working dogs in appropriate circumstances isn't intrinsically damning but have you seen that she did so with dogs that she originally bought from responsible breeders on contracts agreeing not to sell/pass on and that the breeder will take back/re-home the dog if it needs rehoming? These breeders are distressed not knowing what has become of dogs they bred and sold her.
It's not the scale, the re-homing on retirement, or the kennelled dogs for me, it's the way those things were done...and the apparent prioritisation of numbers of puppies and producing unusually small dogs for agility category purposes over health, conformation and temperament...and the sales practices...
Some of the employment practices sound pretty unethical too.

I think they need to confirm how many puppies in total per year they've bred. The KC numbers, 713, over 17 years are not the full picture.

If it was all untrue I would expect her lawyer to threaten defamation, and to insist that the posts were immediately removed. Look at the damage its done, if untrue she could sue for a great deal of money. Instead she's immediately said she's made mistakes, and stopped breeding. That means she's hoping that if she stops breeding the fuss will die down without any further investigation. If it's not investigated, then she could just start up quietly in a few years again. That quantity of pups is a lot of money.

Tom should be making a statement.

I love Absolute Dogs. Her statement hasn't said she fucked up. It says that over over 17 years of breeding she has gone a bit over the top. The care they show their dogs is amazing. How has she kept the top standard breeding with the KC if she was that bad? Why did the person from FIVE years ago never say anything. If I was worried about something no legal team would stop me protecting what I believed.

I think the whole world of dogs has some really toxic vile people in it. No dogs have gone missing, no dogs are underweight yes they push the sales (they're a business)

#WesupportLauren

They're always been a little murky in my opinion, although their training programmes are decent. Those 'supplements' they were peddling for a start. I also know someone who used Tom as a behaviourist and I wasn't particularly impressed with some of his suggestions for separation anxiety.

Over 700 dogs registered on the breed register alone (many more could only be activity registered as they were bred outside the KC permitted conditions) isn't getting out of hand. The information is clearly there on the KC website to find. It's purely for profit. No way could those ex breeding dogs all be rehomed diligently and I know some breeders do this but very few and then it's the odd dog here and there.

Pictures, first hand accounts, her own admissions. Really not sure what there is to support.

@Tanaki - what personal evidence have you seen that "the care they show their dogs is amazing". Other than the chosen few that get to live in the house and those that have money thrown at their rehab? Don't believe all you see on Instagram.

She has admitted to breeding too much, not to any form of neglect of welfare standards. My understanding is that the dogs and dams live in homes and are co-owned, so no one is rehomed when retired they are already in a home. I have also been on the site and there was no hidden puppy farm lurking somewhere. I have seen some of the puppies with their mum and they were the picture of health and happiness. I have also seen dogs used as breeding machines and then dumped in rescues and I know what an overbred, neglected dog looks like.

If you've seen puppies with their mum then that's more than many purchasers got to do! Puppies handed over by third parties, at dog shows, in service stations. Dogs prolifically bred from who have known aggression and reactivity just because they are talented and/or the right build for agility.

Just to clarify when I said that I have seen dogs used as breeding machines, that was in a rescue and entirely unrelated to anything to do with Absolute Dogs or Lauren. There is a whole lot of misinformation and conjecture on this thread. The question of the hour is has Lauren been breeding puppies in a puppy farm with little care for their welfare? There is no evidence of a puppy farm! Show me a photograph of cages of dogs with infected sores and covered in filth and dams cowering in the corner with bodies distorted by overbreeding, living in darkness and never seeing the light of day. That is a puppy farm! There is no proof or evidence of a lack of care. Someone is now quoting 700 puppies produced in one year... folks it was 17 years! What I have seen with my own eyes is a dam in really good health with 2 perfectly sized puppies running around on the grass with someone who was taking time to socialise them and making sure that any interaction they had with someone was positive. Sorry, but how is that a puppy farm, exactly?

Dogs bred indiscriminately with no regard to health or temperament is not good breeding, puppy farm or otherwise.

700 BREED REGISTERED (I know Devongem dogs not registered as above) is an awful lot in 17 years. That's the tip of the iceberg though.

These people are held up as the pinnacles of the dog world by an awful lot of people.

She has admitted to breeding too much, not to any form of neglect of welfare standards.

So what makes it too much?

Too much for who? For her? For the dogs? For the world?

If I loved dogs, what specific consequence would make me believe the amount I had bred was too much (rather than a lot but not too much).

Would I believe the amount of dogs I'd produced was "too much" if every single dog had been perfectly happy and healthy and well loved in a wonderful home? No, I wouldn't. I would say I had bred a lot of dogs but I would not judge that amount to be "too much". In fact, I'd be asked for some kind of knighthood for the provision of so many wonderful dogs, all of whom led lovely lives.

If I loved dogs, the ONLY thing that would make me declare I had bred "too much" would be if the volume of breeding had resulted in less than ideal welfare for one or more dogs in one or more ways.

It's the only thing that would cause me to make a value statement like that.

To say I've bred "too much" but it did not impact welfare is a contradiction. Because if welfare was not impacted, it could not have been too much.

Getting carried away or going a bit over the top, might happen on a night out.
A breeding programme takes thought, planning and consideration.

Re the numbers, in the early years of the period quoted she was breeding a litter or so a year - breeding then ramped up exponentially in the last few years of the period. If the numbers were spread evenly over the period that would paint a different picture. The real total numbers are also unclear, the 700+ aren't the whole story because of the use of multiple affixes, unregistered litters (dogs don't have to be on the breed register to compete in agility ), puppies registered without the Devongem affix etc.

There are far, far worse operations, of course. But I think it's right that someone of her profile, in her sport and in dog training, who holds herself out as an example and a role model, is being held to a higher standard than just "not criminal" or "there's worse than her".

I am not part of the agility world (our dog does very non professional canicross) but follow some of the dog sport groups and there is also criticism of the ditch the bowl type approach and some of the dogs potentially being underweight.

Have bought from tug e nuff in the past and have done the sexier than a squirrel course so disappointed to see all this come out. Certainly, the amounts of money involved must be large and i didn't know of the connections between all of the companies.

So not only is she a terrible businesswoman/dog trainer, she is also a puppy farmer.

Their training programmes are pants. A 'trainer' I went to with my dog held the accolade 'pro dog trainer' and I found out that she trained with absolute dogs. After looking into it, all she did was buy one of their online courses. How does anybody have the brass neck to call themselves a dog trainer after doing an online course? 🤦🏼‍♀️ The dog training industry isn't regulated, anybody can call themselves a trainer, that's why there are so many terrible ones out there.