Is “ reputable breeder” an oxymoron?

[Anonymous]

When we as a country and planet are inundated with dogs, when we know that hundreds of dogs are euthanized every day or left to languish in no kill shelter, Is it reputable to breed dogs because you want them to look a certain way? Or think they will act a certain way?
If breeders add even more dogs into society and charge people thousands of dollars to do so, and you consider that reputable, please share why.
And don’t say “ betterment of the breed” that’s just made up jargon by the AKC.

[Anonymous]

Reputable breeders produce dogs who will never end up in a shelter or mother bad situation because reputable breeders enforce their contracts.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, a good breeder will make you jump through more hoops than a rescue group in order to get one of their puppies and they should be completing at least the recommended testing for their breed. The contracts, while not particularly enforceable, are agreed to by both parties at the time of the sale and most buyers do comply. They also will take back their dogs of the original purchaser is unable to keep the dog, so at least in theory, their puppies won't be taking up space in a shelter. I think that at least some will insist that they remain as a secondary contact on the microchip so that they can be contacted to reclaim if the dogs do end up at a shelter. I have no issues with responsible breeders, after all, we need to get new dogs somewhere and it is better that they not all be the offspring of neglected stray/feral dogs or puppy mills. I love my shelter dogs and they are perfect for me, but that really doesn't mean that the world needs more just like them. Wherever you get your pets, if you commit to caring for them and providing them with adequate training and exercise, I consider it good.

[Anonymous]

yes

[Anonymous]

Yes

I personally believe that all domestic pet breeding should be banned by federal law and should apply to anyone who purposefully or “accidentally” breeds any domestic animal that is or can be kept as a pet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When we as a country and planet are inundated with dogs, when we know that hundreds of dogs are euthanized every day or left to languish in no kill shelter, Is it reputable to breed dogs because you want them to look a certain way? Or think they will act a certain way?
If breeders add even more dogs into society and charge people thousands of dollars to do so, and you consider that reputable, please share why.
And don’t say “ betterment of the breed” that’s just made up jargon by the AKC.

We're only inundated with pitbulls and other undesirables. I don't see any stray golden retriever puppies taking up space at the pound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When we as a country and planet are inundated with dogs, when we know that hundreds of dogs are euthanized every day or left to languish in no kill shelter, Is it reputable to breed dogs because you want them to look a certain way? Or think they will act a certain way?
If breeders add even more dogs into society and charge people thousands of dollars to do so, and you consider that reputable, please share why.
And don’t say “ betterment of the breed” that’s just made up jargon by the AKC.

We're only inundated with pitbulls and other undesirables. I don't see any stray golden retriever puppies taking up space at the pound.

That's your obvious bias talking, and your lack of experience at shelters. Maybe you should STFU and volunteer instead of trashtalking online?

Your whole vibe is so tired...

[Anonymous]

Breeders either see it as a business or are obsessed crazy dog people. I actually prefer to buy from the former because they leave you alone after the sale

[Anonymous]

No, it's not. And betterment of the breed is not just made-up jargon. There is a need for certain working breeds - service dogs, military, search and rescue, police, military, you name it. In order to preserve specific breed characteristics and avoid inbreeding - there has to be a pool of breeders.
That's the only kind I'd breeders I'm willing to support, true breed enthusiasts (and I'm not ruling out possibility of getting my next dog from one of them)
For family pets - there are plenty of dogs in shelters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes

I personally believe that all domestic pet breeding should be banned by federal law and should apply to anyone who purposefully or “accidentally” breeds any domestic animal that is or can be kept as a pet.

Agreed. There is no need for additional pets.

The only truly reputable breeders are breeding for purpose: LSGs, hunting dogs, etc. There are limited purposes where breeding for a specific function is ethical, and anything else is for profit, regardless of how you spin it. Hybrid breeders are the worst, and "designer dogs" are an abomination.

No housepet-level dog needs to be purebred, and no reputable breeder would sell one for such a purpose. Then again, most of the people who own dogs right now really shouldn't, so I think greater licensing restrictions are in order all around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When we as a country and planet are inundated with dogs, when we know that hundreds of dogs are euthanized every day or left to languish in no kill shelter, Is it reputable to breed dogs because you want them to look a certain way? Or think they will act a certain way?
If breeders add even more dogs into society and charge people thousands of dollars to do so, and you consider that reputable, please share why.
And don’t say “ betterment of the breed” that’s just made up jargon by the AKC.

No of course not, and many of your vaunted rescues are just conduits to breeders that are the worst of the worst, so get off your ridiculous high horse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes

I personally believe that all domestic pet breeding should be banned by federal law and should apply to anyone who purposefully or “accidentally” breeds any domestic animal that is or can be kept as a pet.

Agreed. There is no need for additional pets.

The only truly reputable breeders are breeding for purpose: LSGs, hunting dogs, etc. There are limited purposes where breeding for a specific function is ethical, and anything else is for profit, regardless of how you spin it. Hybrid breeders are the worst, and "designer dogs" are an abomination.

No housepet-level dog needs to be purebred, and no reputable breeder would sell one for such a purpose. Then again, most of the people who own dogs right now really shouldn't, so I think greater licensing restrictions are in order all around.

I agree with you except that part - there are always going to be puppies not suitable for work, and those dogs should go somewhere as pets. And they should go to breed enthusiasts as well - they still working dog pups and require a lot of work

[Anonymous]

The deliberate blindness of the rescue extremists to the puppy mills their rescues support is always astonishing to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The deliberate blindness of the rescue extremists to the puppy mills their rescues support is always astonishing to me.

Not all rescue are the same.
I haven't seen any puppies from puppy mills coming through the rescue I foster for, all puppies are mutts. I have seen however moms from puppy mills - and no way I would ever support puppy mills or rescues buying pups from them.
And you better look at the mirror and evaluate your own blindness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes

I personally believe that all domestic pet breeding should be banned by federal law and should apply to anyone who purposefully or “accidentally” breeds any domestic animal that is or can be kept as a pet.

So you want to genocide the entire species of dogs?