Geez, I hadn't kept up with the comments but I had no idea some people can really presume to give such unwarranted and unwanted advice. Blech. I hope Zuzu is healthy and the delivery+spaying operations go well. As always, I'm hoping for pictures of the happy family!

if people can't tell how much you love and care for your pups then they haven't bothered to read your blog at all. i have never met anyone that treats their pets as much like members of the family as you guys. hmm, ok, i haven't actually met you, but from reading your blog for quite some time i feel as if i know you a little.
zooz and linus are lucky to be part of such a compassionate and caring family and i am sure that the pup(s) will be loved just as much.

Well said, Cheeky Prof. I mostly lurk here, but I wanted to speak up because those comments had irked me as well. Congratulations on raising two fine dogs; it's clear they have a terrific home.

And isn't it great to find a vet practice that integrates homeopathic and traditional medicine? Ours, which I'm ashamed to admit we stumbled across by accident rather than by design, has been so phenomenal with our old guy that I'll never go to a veterinary office again that doesn't offer alternative therapies.

Good luck with the birth! I can't wait to see puppy pictures. :)

You go, Cheeky! I think you and Jim are probably the best pet owners in the world and if people would pay half as much attention to their own shit and keep their nose out of other people's business, the world might actually be a nicer place. Grrr.

I can't wait to see the puppy(ies)! Hope it all goes smoothly! I'm sure it will. We'll keep Zuzu in our thoughts! And you, too.

wow. I am sorry you have to deal with crap like this. But damn, your post was _smart_. And I, not even a dog person but one of those heathen cat people, cannot wait to see puppy pictures.

Dude, fuck those fuckers.

I agree wholeheartedly with Julie.

Well said! (And, ditto on the puppy pics.)

I'm thinking you covered it in sentence number 2!

Best wishes to your little family for healthy, happy additions!

Right on!

I agree with Mac. Fuck them in the fucking ear. All those self-righteous alleged animal lovers should go volunteer at their local shelter and leave caring responsible puppy parents like us alone.

Oh my goodness. I can't believe people would be so ignorant. You're amazing pet caregivers.

I'm also mostly a lurker here, but I had to echo what everyone here has already said. Honestly, I don't know that I've encountered dog owners as conscientious as you and your husband are.

I know exactly how you feel! Those stupid people just start berating you before they even get to know you at all!
I had a "no-kill" shelter lady yell & cuss me out over the phone many years ago when the cat we adopted (that same day), squeezed through my legs as I was letting one of our dogs out. We found him the next morning but I had called (like I was supposed to...)
She just went off on me and took me completely by surprise!
She had NO idea how well we treat our animals and she didn't care!
BITCH!
Stay the good doggie mom that you are, cheeky! {wink}

If only people took such good care of their kids as you guys do your dogs, this world would be a much better place :) Right on puppy (grand)mom-to-be!

Cheeky, I can't think of anyone who takes better care of their animals. You are excellent pet parents, and anyone who says otherwise needs his or her head examined.

Internet drive by commenters can just fuck right off if they have a problem with how you're handling your dogs. Like you said, it's your business. I always blog the frustrations of dog ownership, and to some, it may be perceived that we might not love our dogs, or maybe even mistreat them, but seriously? Ask anyone that's come into our house, those dogs live better than we do (lord knows they eat better too, as we feed them a balanced "human" diet). Again, not that I have to prove anything to some random commenter.

Just by reading one entry of yours, I could gather that your dogs are the center of your universe.

But then again, I have a modicum of common sense.

How in the hell would people think you don't take care of your dogs? Morons. You are obviously doing what you think is right and there's nothing wrong with that. Jeez. People need to get a grip, you love your dogs and accidents happen.

Ok, at the risk of getting flamed off the planet....rescuers have a rough life. No, people shouldn't judge, and I know it's irritating to have people passing judgement on you, the comments strike me as a little harsh. The rescuer I am dealing with has 8 dogs that have cost her a fortune in vet bills, all of which came to her in terrible, terrible shape that she is trying to care for and place in her free time and out of her own pocket. In short, if these folks weren't a little...passionate, they'd never do this stuff.

And we need them to do this. They wind up with blind, needy, sick, broken, abused tossed away animals because some people (not Cheeky people) thoughtlessly don't care for animals. Yes, accidents happen; yes, cats run out (little turds)...but from a rescuer's perspective, it has to be really galling sometimes to see more mixed pups come into the world when so many are put down, starved, etc. I'm not saying they are right to condemn Cheeky without knowing the backstory...I can just understand the impulse to object when this stuff happens every day, and...you're having to make horrible choices between who you can take in and who you can't (do I take the one-eye purebred or the healthy mix that is 10 years-old? Which ones stays in the gas shelter and what one goes home with me? Do I tell my kid they don't get the new skateboard because I've spent our discretionary funds on vet bills for the dog that has allergies?) How many of us would make these kind of sacrifices? I guess I feel like it buys them a little tolerance.

I saw "Animal Cops" on tv in a bar the other day, and no...what you do with your animals, even though the law treats them as property, isn't really your business and your business alone. Sorry. I think the animals in the Casa del Cheeky have it made, and so yeah, I trust her, but I don't trust everybody. Liberty arguments ("it's my business") are culturally compelling to most Americans, but I don't think they apply here. Animals are not houseplants or cds or Birkinstocks. Some people are really, truly horrible and diminish us all by how they treat animals, and they should be called out (repeat: not Cheeky people). Watchdogs and tattletales do serve a purpose even if, when nothing horrible is going on, they can be pettifogging and exasperating, too.

Anyway, I am sorry this is so annoying for you, Cheeky and I hope it lets up soon. I just wanted to speak up and say that I am grateful for rescuers. They have given me my last two dogs, dear things, that came from horrible places. Yes, they stepped on Cheeky (but I think she's a bad mammajamma and can handle a few snarks), and in general what rescuers do is hard and necessary.

I hope the Zooz pregnancy goes very smoothly.

I haven't visited for awhile Cheeky. People are assholes. I'm sorry you have to put up with that. Even an occasional visitor here can see how much you love your pups!!

I agree that what rescuers do is hard and neccessary. And I've watched Animal Cops for years and done several rescues myself. I am also a staunch supporter of spaying and neutering.

But I am also a (spayed) purebreed owner, who knows breeders that are genuinely interested in breeding dogs that are healthy (with testing for genetic diseases that goes back for generations) with a good temperment and will only sell them to responsible people with a legal contract to take good care of that dog.

What I do NOT agree with is the idea that because these rescuers work hard and see a lot of bad things, they have the moral superiority to dictate what other people do when CLEARLY the animal is in a loving environment.

While we're being asked to take into consideration the hardship the rescuers go though I'd like to point out that both Cheeky and I have special circumstances about which these sanctimonious assholes know nothing but would be delighted to spend their time finger-wagging rather than discovering the actual situation in which these animals live.

If you watch Animal Cops then you probably know the guidelines that constitutes animal neglect or abuse. Basically the dog must have a shelter if it lives outside, be fed such that it's not starving, have access to water, and be in good health or under medical supervision if it's not. Very basic guidelines which Cheeky and I both go far beyond.

That whole "animal isn't property" attitude is something that is just annoying to most pet "caregivers". True, they are living animals for which we are responsible and while I'm not comfortable comparing them to electronic equipment my pets are, in essence, mine.

I am solely responsible for the animals I have taken into my house. And as long as I meet the basic legal requirements to keep this animal alive, no it isn't your business how I go about meeting those requirements. The fact that I spend thousands of dollars for their vetrinary services (several hundred just this last week to have my hedgehog humanely put down AND have her autopsied to let the breeder know that this might be a genetic issue), even with the PET INSURANCE I pay for, and perform my own fucking SubQ fluids and shots while having human-grade food shipped from Wisconsin shouldn't come into consideration? Now is THAT your business? Would you like to have more details before you feel that you're in a position to judge me or petowners like me?

While I understand the frustrations with people who do breed unhealthy animals or do not get their animals fixed and let them run loose, assuming that because SOME people do this that ALL people who have pregnant dogs are doing this is

A> just as asinine as people who let their unneutered dogs roam free
B> Makes people who take good care of their dogs feel quite defensive and, honestly, want to seperate themselves physically and philisophically from people who seemingly have the inability to make distinctions before espousing their extremist views
C>In one fell judgemental little swoop negates everything Cheeky and I do, every day, for our pets.

So, yeah I guess I was a little harsh. But since they're rescuers they can show up at this woman's site and say all the things they like?

Maybe when Zooz is feeling better, she can leave a "smelly suprise" for some of those tacky, tacky people.
You obviously have more love and consideration for your animals than most -- I applaud you.

Glad I haven't been reading all the comments. Anyone who reads your blog regularly knows what a compassionate dog lover you are.


I'm glad you wrote this thoughtful and thorough response even if it is far more than your detractors deserve.

As an owner of non-purebred cats, I don't understand what the big deal is that Zooz and the puppy daddy did the deed. I mean, sure, the puppy's not going to be a purebred, but Zooz is happy and healthy (though miserably pregnant, but that goes with the territory). Why is there a problem?

It wasn't the purebreed people who were getting on her. It was the people who don't think dogs should be bred, ever, assuming that Zooz was pregnant on purpose then getting on a high horse without actually looking into the situation. I own three mixed breed cats too.

Pure and mixed breeds are all great - but sometimes people who like one start to feel morally superior to the other and behave badly. Stupid but true.

That whole "animal isn't property" attitude is something that is just annoying to most pet "caregivers". True, they are living animals for which we are responsible and while I'm not comfortable comparing them to electronic equipment my pets are, in essence, mine.

I guess I'd like to see us intellectually where we can have intermediary understandings and relationships where an ethic of care holds but not in a property frame--that's all. Beyond that, what are you basing your "annoying to most pet caregivers" assertion on? Your own feelings projected to a majority because you think that proves a moral argument? Since I'm not afraid of making people uncomfortable or annoyed, especially when I have been polite in my comments, I don't think this is a good basis for rejecting an idea on ethical terms.

And no, if you look at my original post, I did not say that rescuers could show up at Cheeky's site and say whatever they want. Of course, they can; it's a public blog. Whether it's polite or right to do it is another question. But misunderstandings occur: not everybody reads everything they should before they say something, and not everybody's reading comprehension is where it might be (due to time constraints).

As a result...I have to wonder. Who should we aim our ire at here? Some tactless comments made by people who are passionate about protecting animals? Ok, I'll go there: "I respect the desire to protect animals, but please don't step on good pet owners while you are trying to educate the bad ones. Please be judicious in how you approach people." But here's the takeaway, for me: "Let's not let the blunder of a few tactless people obfuscate the fact that those of us who believe animals should be treated with respect and care are all trying to do good here--and direct our energy at those who do not do good."

For Cheeky, I understand the need to vent sometimes on a blog. For commentators, I understand the impulse to support and validate feelings of somebody you like. That's all good. I just ask that in the comments about "these people" refer to the people who are making thoughtless comments and not generalized to the rescue community or the impulse to be careful about producing more animals. I really don't think that's an awful thing to say.

Yes, sorry. I'm judgmental. I did read through your blog and I can tell you take good care of your pets. However, it does disturb me that you (however accidentally) let your pets breed. No, I am not one of those people that thinks no animal should be bred ever. Nor am I a nut. I am concerned dog lover/animal rescuer who has dealt with accidental litters one too many times.

When you put this type of information out there for everyone to see on the internet, of course people are going to have opinions.

Anyway, good luck on your litter and I'm happy to hear that your dog is being spayed after her c-section.

Yea, I do rescue, but it's breed-specific to Frenchies.

Several of the people in our rescue ARE breeders - top breeders, in fact. And it's my personal belief that people who breed have a moral responsibility to either DO rescue or SUPPORT rescue. I've never bought a dog from a breeder who didn't.

Here's the thing: I don't disagree with breeding; I disagree with irresponsible breeding. BTs and FBDs are two breeds that have some serious health and temperament issues -- breeding them together is just NOT a good idea.

Then, there's the fact that BTs are agile terriers while FBDs are brachycephalic dogs who simply don't BREATHE well. One need not be a rocket scientist to see the problems that could occur when you breed the two together.

And while Mr. & Mrs. Cheeky tried to keep the two separated, there is a clear history of WANTING to breed one of their dogs. Yes, accidents happen, but Zooz could have been spayed immediately after the two dogs tied, despite whether she'd been impregnated -- spaying a dog in heat is no more dangerous that delivering a dog via c-section.

I wish Zooz well. I hope she comes through her surgery with flying colors. I hope that she only has one puppy, that Mr. & Mrs. Cheeky will keep themselves. And I SINCERELY hope that the puppy will be healthy, of sound temperament, and SPEUTERED as soon as possible so that s/he doesn't propagate an unhealthy breeding any further.

Yes, I did want to breed one of my dogs, unfortunately the one I wanted to breed is the dead one. I will be responding to this in a longer form at some point but I felt that I needed to say something and this was honestly the cleanest thing I could imagine saying after reading the previous two comments.

Beyond that, what are you basing your "annoying to most pet caregivers" assertion on?

Email lists I belong to, forums I've read, people I've spoken with at confirmation groups, and the dog park. I didn't take a scientific study I'm just basing this on personal experience and many conversations. Primarily about PETA's well-known agenda to basically have no animals used by humans for any purpose whatsoever, including pet ownership. Nevermind how they'd be fed, sheltered, or medically cared for - this is why the "property" argument is potentially dangerous. It brings a lot of legal vagaries that could lead to extreme situations.

I didn't mean to make a value judgement on your beliefs but maybe I was being a bit defensive because somehow my telling Cheeky to ignore stupid comments from people who should spend their time doing good work rather than posting unwarranted nasty comments on good owners' sites, especially without knowing the whole situation became an attack on all people who volunteer anywhere? It seemed like a fairly big jump in logic and I defended myself. The fact that rescuers are good people really shouldn't come into play - as I said before, posting ugly judgemental comments on personal weblogs written by people who custom build the nicest whelping box I've ever seen isn't exactly "doing good work" as volunteering at a shelter is it? That kind of harassment is not justified. At all.

I guess I'd like to see us intellectually where we can have intermediary understandings and relationships where an ethic of care holds but not in a property frame--that's all

Legally it's just not possible to make things that vague. They're not children but they're our responsibility so where exactly do they lie? People's concepts of "ethics" vary wildly so while it would be nice to have a general concept of "animal's aren't property but they're not children but you still are responsible for their health and well-being and could be legally prosecuted or have them confiscated depending on a general code of ethics" is nice, but the only way the care and well-being of an animal can be enforced is with a legal definition of what care and well-being is, leading to a definition that might sound like they're being treated as property.

"Let's not let the blunder of a few tactless people obfuscate the fact that those of us who believe animals should be treated with respect and care are all trying to do good here--and direct our energy at those who do not do good.

But see, this kind of statement starts to sound an awful lot like an assumption that people who have special circumstances (like having an accidental breeding) and those who believe animals should be treated with respect and care who try to do good are mutually exclusive. This smells a bit smug doesn't it? That does sound a bit permissive that one's umbrage "fu" is bigger than the other's and therefore they're allowed to behave badly but anyone who gets offended and defends themselves is being harsh and oversensitive.

I just ask that in the comments about "these people" refer to the people who are making thoughtless comments and not generalized to the rescue community

The fact that you generalized an ENTIRE COUNTRY as a group of people who like to claim ownership is allowable and not potentially offensive? I didn't previously comment on that because I thought it was kind of a cheap shot but...

Honestly I don't think at any point in the previous comments anyone used the term "These People" to refer to people who work for animal control, rescuers, volunteers, or anything like that. No one said "Those damned rescuer people just suck." It was about assholes who have nothing better to do with their time than post judgemental sanctimonious shit on decent peoples' weblogs. Not doing a whit of good for the dogs, the blog-owners, or any animal lover's reputation (including yours and mine) when they could be out there doing actual good.

Clearly the deed has been done, folks, and the proud papa is now snipped so I'm really not sure what all these people expect Mr. and Ms. Cheeky to do, aside from stand around and pay for bandwidth for a forum in which people can complain at them.

Now, having written yet another long comment (again, I'm sorry Cheeky), I'm going to gag myself because this is clearly an exercise in futility. We're all very stuck in our own perspectives at this point and I don't think anyone is going to learn or change anything.

I think that we can all agree that animals should be loved and cared for (whatever our specific definitions of proper animal care might be), it's how the people have been treating each other that has been questionable. So, if you would like to continue arguing about "rescuers gone bad and the people who are annoyed by them", Lisa, you are welcome to email me at noelle@egeltje.org but I don't want to annoy these nice people with this any more.

Give em hell, Mr. Cheeky.

Looks like you got some beautiful healthy babies and you love them.........that's all that matters.

People assume that since they read a blog that they now have some great insight into your life...they never stop and think about what YOU don't tell or don't write about..