Ball python "mills" *rant* (Not trying to offend anyone)

[Serpent_Nirvana]

I have a lot of thoughts on this ... I'm going to try to avoid redundancy.

By and large I agree 100% that terms like "___ mill" ("puppy mill," "snake mill," "kitten mill," etc.) and "backyard breeder" are contrivances of the animal rights movement to try and help demonize all breeders. To many, if you're a large-scale breeder, you're a "mill;" if you're a small-scale breeder, you're a "BYB."

About the only people who manage to escape either label are those precious few small-scale breeders who also show their animals. In my experience these folks are often breeders who have bought into much of the animal rights rhetoric, and promote and propagate it by liberally using those terms to describe anyone who isn't them. I suspect that it's this mindset that the OP had originally bought into (minus the show aspect, of course, since there isn't much support for Royal Python shows).

I try not to use these terms for that reason. If I have to, though, I sometimes break it down into categories: "Mill breeder" describes a large-scale breeder who takes extremely poor care of the animals and is simply pumping out huge numbers of poor-quality animals to make a profit. "BYB" describes a small-scale breeder who takes extremely poor care of the animals and keeps them solely for the purpose of someday making a profit. Again, though, these are my personal definitions for terms that I prefer not to use. To many, "Mill" means "Any large-scale producer of animals" and "BYB" means "Any small-scale breeder." The net effect is to provide plenty of negative terms for any type of breeder, large or small, for-profit or not.

Nothing is black-and-white, and no breeder or even keeper of animals is going to do everything 100% perfect to please everyone. I met a breeder client at a small animal repro practice who could be easily described as a "puppy mill" (like JayCee's friend, she breeds "doodles," or whatever they're called). I don't love this craze of deliberate production of mixed-breed dogs -- far from it -- and what this woman does, I must admit, does rub me the wrong way. However, I can't deny that her dogs were in lovely condition and well-cared for. She was doing health clearances on all of her breeders. Last but most definitely not least, they had wonderful temperaments: Outgoing, loving, friendly. By contrast, another breeder had a show dog of a very large breed that is often the target of BSL. This dog was a Gr. CH but had to be muzzled for her ultrasound, and this dog's brother was described as "psychotic." I had much bigger ethical concerns about helping this woman propagate her "psychotic" Gr. CH line than about helping the "Doodle mill" woman. However, according to many, breeder "A" would be defined as a bona-fide puppy mill (bad, wrong, evil) while breeder "B" would be defined as a legitimate show breeder (good, okay, acceptable "reason" for breeding).

I don't have a problem with taking the animal's value into consideration when contemplating how far to go with veterinary care. In fact, I think that for most breeders it is the most sane and logical thing to do. I hate to say it, but it doesn't make a lot of sense for a breeder to pay thousands to have a female snake spayed due to ovarian cancer. At the end of the ordeal, he's out thousands of dollars and has no breeder to show for it. I would not oppose his decision to put the snake to sleep for financial reasons. This is a place where I'm sure many people will disagree, as it is a "production mindset," and a lot of people have a real problem with it. I don't oppose it, so long as the animal doesn't have to suffer.

What I do find infuriating is to see an animal that is suffering with an illness that's brought on by poor husbandry, that the owner cannot afford to fix -- and shouldn't HAVE to, as it could easily have been prevented. But, as has already been said, this is a whole different issue.

I'm sure I had more to rant on, but this is already way too long, so I'll leave off at that ...