Is “ reputable breeder” an oxymoron?

[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.

This x1000. All the families that we’ve known who have returned a dog to a rescue or shelter had originally gotten that dog from a shelter or rescue. The dogs all had behaviors that were incompatible with normal family life or unsafe. It’s sad because these were people that were willing and did spend thousands on vets and behavioral training trying to keep the dog. Chihuahuas, pit bull mixes, huskies and German shepherd dogs with behavioral issues are extremely difficult to manage. These breed types are also not right for many families and lifestyles even if they don’t have socialization or health issues. I looove huskies but at my age I no longer have the stamina to walk and run several miles everyday. I’m not going to rescue a husky because some twit on Nextdoor is pushing everyone to save a life.

People need to stop listening to the adopt don’t shop nonsense. Dog companionship is wonderful but only if the dog and their humans are compatible.

[Anonymous]

Of course it's not an oxymoron. There are absolutely good breeders out there (but the majority of breeders people think are good are not)

If we want healthy, stable dogs available, people need to intentionally breed healthy, stable dogs. That means a battery of health tests, temperament tests, training to prove bidability in whatever supports the breeder's goals for their line, etc. Done right, breeding doesn't net much money. It's not a viable business, it's a hobby/passion.

If we ban people from doing it "right", then the only dogs left are ones from crappy breedings and the levels of anxious, cancer filled, aggressive dogs will rise because accidental breedings and mills aren't putting together the best versions of dogs.

I ran a basic obedience class in arlington for years. When I started 20+ years ago, most of the dogs were lovely. As time went on, more and more reactive, fearful, and downright aggressive dogs signed up. I had to implement barriers and request people do privates before trying group classes because I was worried what would happen in a group setting. None of those dogs were from "good" breeders. They were newspaper dogs, shelter pups, tonnnnnns of amish dogs, etc. All the "nice" dogs were spayed or neutered by the responsible owners, only the sketch people let their dogs breed. Sometimes they were good dogs, but often times they weren't.

I don't mean that shelter dogs aren't good! I've had 5 of them over the years, 3 were wonderful and 2 were a disaster. I've also had multiple breeder dogs, and one of those was a mess too. The difference with the breeder dog is that she spayed the mom after stories of temperamental challenges from offspring, so those lines will not continue.

TLDR: If we don't have good breeders doing it all right, there won't be any more good dogs.

[Anonymous]

So many of my friends and family with rescue dogs have ended up with really reactive or neurotic dogs. Granted, some friends and family have difficult breeder dogs, too. But it did sway us. I suppose we could have gotten a rescue puppy instead of an older dog to avoid the trauma rescue/shelter dogs have endured, which is what we mostly were worried about.

What I don’t understand about the argument is what the end game is for “rescue only” folks. Isn’t the plan to eventually have all dogs be wanted dogs? To not have the need for shelters, pounds, and rescues, because dogs are all part of families? That means no puppy mills, no unscrupulous breeders, and all pets spayed or neutered. What you are left with is ethical and responsible breeders of working dogs and pets. So I got my dog from the source that I find to be the long term solution - a family where dogs live inside, no cages or pens (aside from whelping and little puppies) where any one female has a couple of litters over her lifetime and no more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course it's not an oxymoron. There are absolutely good breeders out there (but the majority of breeders people think are good are not)

If we want healthy, stable dogs available, people need to intentionally breed healthy, stable dogs. That means a battery of health tests, temperament tests, training to prove bidability in whatever supports the breeder's goals for their line, etc. Done right, breeding doesn't net much money. It's not a viable business, it's a hobby/passion.

If we ban people from doing it "right", then the only dogs left are ones from crappy breedings and the levels of anxious, cancer filled, aggressive dogs will rise because accidental breedings and mills aren't putting together the best versions of dogs.

I ran a basic obedience class in arlington for years. When I started 20+ years ago, most of the dogs were lovely. As time went on, more and more reactive, fearful, and downright aggressive dogs signed up. I had to implement barriers and request people do privates before trying group classes because I was worried what would happen in a group setting. None of those dogs were from "good" breeders. They were newspaper dogs, shelter pups, tonnnnnns of amish dogs, etc. All the "nice" dogs were spayed or neutered by the responsible owners, only the sketch people let their dogs breed. Sometimes they were good dogs, but often times they weren't.

I don't mean that shelter dogs aren't good! I've had 5 of them over the years, 3 were wonderful and 2 were a disaster. I've also had multiple breeder dogs, and one of those was a mess too. The difference with the breeder dog is that she spayed the mom after stories of temperamental challenges from offspring, so those lines will not continue.

TLDR: If we don't have good breeders doing it all right, there won't be any more good dogs.

This. Our family got a lovely fluffball puppy this summer. He has a sweet temperament and is a perfect dog for our family. He was bred as a companion dog and is good at his job. Without breeders these sorts of dogs won’t be around any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it's not an oxymoron. There are absolutely good breeders out there (but the majority of breeders people think are good are not)

If we want healthy, stable dogs available, people need to intentionally breed healthy, stable dogs. That means a battery of health tests, temperament tests, training to prove bidability in whatever supports the breeder's goals for their line, etc. Done right, breeding doesn't net much money. It's not a viable business, it's a hobby/passion.

If we ban people from doing it "right", then the only dogs left are ones from crappy breedings and the levels of anxious, cancer filled, aggressive dogs will rise because accidental breedings and mills aren't putting together the best versions of dogs.

I ran a basic obedience class in arlington for years. When I started 20+ years ago, most of the dogs were lovely. As time went on, more and more reactive, fearful, and downright aggressive dogs signed up. I had to implement barriers and request people do privates before trying group classes because I was worried what would happen in a group setting. None of those dogs were from "good" breeders. They were newspaper dogs, shelter pups, tonnnnnns of amish dogs, etc. All the "nice" dogs were spayed or neutered by the responsible owners, only the sketch people let their dogs breed. Sometimes they were good dogs, but often times they weren't.

I don't mean that shelter dogs aren't good! I've had 5 of them over the years, 3 were wonderful and 2 were a disaster. I've also had multiple breeder dogs, and one of those was a mess too. The difference with the breeder dog is that she spayed the mom after stories of temperamental challenges from offspring, so those lines will not continue.

TLDR: If we don't have good breeders doing it all right, there won't be any more good dogs.

That is such BS. My family has had wonderful rescue dogs all our lives.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think it’s an oxymoron at all. If you only want rescue dogs, then that’s your choice, but other people make other choices for their own very good personal reasons.

To give an example, as someone who grew up without dogs, I was much more comfortable getting my first two dogs from a wonderful breeder who temperament tested the puppies, provided support, etc. This experience allowed me to learn a lot about dogs and training and dog ownership. My next two dogs happen to be rescue pups, but I don’t think I could’ve started there. I would not have had the confidence or knowledge to take on that endeavor if I hadn’t gotten my two dogs from this amazing, caring invested breeder.

To say that reputable breeder is an oxymoron is a very narrow view of the entire existence of dogs in my opinion.

[Anonymous]

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

This, plus they ensure that mother dogs aren't mistreated, and they try to ensure that genetic conditions that have destroyed species like Swiss Mountain Dogs, Cavaliers, and Flat Coated Retrievers aren't perpetuated.

People saying that "betterment of the breed" isn't a priority are ignoring the fact that yes, sometimes it means "their coat is perfectly symmetrical" but also it sometimes means "we don't lose them to cancer before their 6th birthday".

[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 don't really get why the hobby of hunting should be prioritized in this way. It is very cool how a pointer is bred so perfectly for hunting birds, but it's also cool how a whippet is bred so perfectly for running fast, or a border collie for working with a partner to herd sheep. Why should one hobby be allowed to continue, while the others aren't.

As to your comment about no reputable breeder selling pets, plenty of reputable breeders sell dogs as pets, usually dogs that don't meet breed standard closely enough to be shown or bred.

[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.

So you want to genocide the entire species of dogs?

Yeah cause that would happen. There are enough dogs , cats, rabbits, ferrets, hamsters, etc in the US right now that we are not going to run out of any one species for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course it's not an oxymoron. There are absolutely good breeders out there (but the majority of breeders people think are good are not)

If we want healthy, stable dogs available, people need to intentionally breed healthy, stable dogs. That means a battery of health tests, temperament tests, training to prove bidability in whatever supports the breeder's goals for their line, etc. Done right, breeding doesn't net much money. It's not a viable business, it's a hobby/passion.

If we ban people from doing it "right", then the only dogs left are ones from crappy breedings and the levels of anxious, cancer filled, aggressive dogs will rise because accidental breedings and mills aren't putting together the best versions of dogs.

I ran a basic obedience class in arlington for years. When I started 20+ years ago, most of the dogs were lovely. As time went on, more and more reactive, fearful, and downright aggressive dogs signed up. I had to implement barriers and request people do privates before trying group classes because I was worried what would happen in a group setting. None of those dogs were from "good" breeders. They were newspaper dogs, shelter pups, tonnnnnns of amish dogs, etc. All the "nice" dogs were spayed or neutered by the responsible owners, only the sketch people let their dogs breed. Sometimes they were good dogs, but often times they weren't.

I don't mean that shelter dogs aren't good! I've had 5 of them over the years, 3 were wonderful and 2 were a disaster. I've also had multiple breeder dogs, and one of those was a mess too. The difference with the breeder dog is that she spayed the mom after stories of temperamental challenges from offspring, so those lines will not continue.

TLDR: If we don't have good breeders doing it all right, there won't be any more good dogs.

The best breeder, with the best-bred dog, is still completely undone by the untrained/untrainable end-user. If you want healthy, stable dogs, you have to have well-informed, well-trained dog handlers.

A well-trained human can make a good dog out of a mixed-breed rescue. An ill-informed human that thinks breeding is enough will utterly ruin even the best genetics a dog can have. Problem is, your breeders are very rarely looking for this. They'll screen for abuse, and for reputable end users if the dog is purpose-bred (because their reputation is on the line), but if the dog is "pet quality", they're not going to make sure the future owner is properly qualified. They don't have the time; they're training for sport.

Anyone who wants to actually be reputable is going to have to fix that gap, and I don't know a single breeder who does. The ignorance quotient of recent-year dog owners is astronomically high, and it shows. Stupidly blaming shelter/rescue dogs isn't going to solve for human error/idiocy, nor is "reputable" breeding of purebreds. Stupid people are still going to stupid, and there are plenty of breed rescues and purebreds in shelters that support that statement.

[Anonymous]

I live in Ward 3 among many people who think like OP, whose stupid “hound mix” [read: 75% pit bull,I have eyes David] from the shelter by way of SC or WV will try to kill my pets every afternoon.

PP is correct that OP-like thinking and endless posturing on social media is going to swing the election to Trump. As a Dem with critical thinking skills, this makes me sad.

Quit trying to legislate shit that goes on in other people’s homes, OP & Friends! And frankly the fewer reactive pit bull “hounds” we have running around CCDC, the better. They -should- be euthanized.

[Anonymous]

I’m happy that we did the research, selected breeds that were appropriate for our family, and found breeders who cared about the health of their dogs and their future homes. We didn’t want a pitbull or Shepard mix, and if dogs like that end up in shelters that is due to someone else’s negligence.

[Anonymous]

So should all dogs be the result of accidental matings? We’ll just have hounds and pit bulls and whatever other breeds are allowed to roam loose? Companion dogs suitable for suburban living will be gone?

[Anonymous]

The rescuses are charging and reselling dogs. Be real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+1

My sweet little toy poodle was a mama rescued from a puppy mill, and she ended up in rescue which is how we came to adopt her. When she had a stillborn pup, they horrible puppy mill people threw her out. Lots and lots of trauma, poor thing. She is doing amazing now, but it was a long road and adjusting was very hard for her. She'd never even been in a house before coming into rescue. She was terrified of everything. Do not support puppy mills in any way -- what happens to the dogs there is horrific.