Professional Breeders

I don't support breeding dogs for profit. I don't mean this is as an attack on any idoggers. It is simply how I feel. There are a zillion unwanted dogs. We do not have a dog shortage. To me, an ethical breeder is breeding for a purpose (conformation, performance, hunting, service, etc), is not looking to make a profit, will take back any dog at any time, and is involved with rescue. 

 

Dog_ma

I don't support breeding dogs for profit. I don't mean this is as an attack on any idoggers. It is simply how I feel. There are a zillion unwanted dogs. We do not have a dog shortage. To me, an ethical breeder is breeding for a purpose (conformation, performance, hunting, service, etc), is not looking to make a profit, will take back any dog at any time, and is involved with rescue. 

   The problem is though, that while show breeders tout how they provide healthy, well bred specimens of the breed, the majority of their pups; probably 3/4 or more, go to other show homes or other types of above average, dog knowledgable families. NOTHING wrong with that! Absolutely nothing wrong with it, in fact, it's commendable. But then that leaves out a gaping chunk of responsible, ethical, loving homes that have just as much a right to own a certain breed as the elite breeders/owners. The fact is, there IS a market for purebred puppies. And I honestly do not believe that owners who have reserached the breed or have experience from owning the breed should be shut out. I don't believe one's dogs need to be titled show or working dogs to qualify them as reputable/ethical. Conformation breeders, as I mentioned, have the vast majority of their pups going to show or performance homes (such as agility, tracking, etc) and that shuts out average buyer. Working breeders - ones that truly use their dogs for serious work or high drive sports such as Schutzhund ... well, I think it's safe to say that the extra prey drive, energy, aggression those dogs possess make them poor candidates for most pet homes.

     Yes, there are unwanted dogs, but they are unwanted for a reason. Temperament problems, behavior problems or other "baggage" from a previous home, health issues. There are homes that prefer to deal with this and take pride in nursing these dogs back to health. But then that brings us back to the average (albeit responsible) family who wants a puppy of breed X for their family. They want your typical family dog with a reliable temperament, good health, and good pet personality. Many times they're turned down/snubbed by show breeders. And for reasons that makes no bearing on their suitability as a home. I see no problem with breeders breeding pet dogs that will go on to become wonderful pets for their families. After all, when all is said and done, those things - showing, herding, schutzhund, agility - they're all just hobbies for the breeder or owner. Their dogs are no better because they have titles. The breeders are no more ethical because they show or work their dogs and are not disreputable if they don't do rescue.         

HoundMusic

The problem is though, that while show breeders tout how they provide healthy, well bred specimens of the breed, the majority of their pups; probably 3/4 or more, go to other show homes or other types of above average, dog knowledgable families....   

But then that leaves out a gaping chunk of responsible, ethical, loving homes that have just as much a right to own a certain breed as the elite breeders/owners. 

And I honestly do not believe that owners who have reserached the breed or have experience from owning the breed should be shut out.

 

I have to agree- being one of those dog owners.LOL! I don't think it is fair to limit well bred purebred dogs to only an elite few and expect the rest to clean out the shelters when they want a dog. The fact that I choose not to title or show my dog does not make him a less "gorgeous" representive of his breed and I know I give him just as happy, rewarding and healthy life as any one else could.

I certainly don't expect everyone to agree with me.

If a breeder is breeding for excellent companionship, doing health testing, not in it to make a profit, and involved in rescue - I think that is fine.

I never said only show dogs should be bred. Many show dogs shouldn't be bred, IMO.  

Chuffy

Do you think there is a limit, morally speaking, as to how high the profit margin can be or can people charge as much as they like? 

I think that pricing a puppy for sale is the same as pricing anything else for sale. If you don't care about profits and simply want hapy consumers, you can price low. If you want to profit (and profit doesn't mean get rich, simply means that you take in more money than you put out. A profit could be $1,000 a year or $100,000 a year), you price higher than your expenses. You also price according to what the market will pay. When I was shopping for a malinois puppy, they were in the $500 - $1500 range, with most on the lower end. Corgis tend to be a little more expensive. Where I live there's a boxer breeder who can get $5000 for a puppy, but he doesn't *always* charge that much, and another boxer breeder who gets somewhere in the $2000 range. If there are good homes for them at those prices, then I see no reason to lower prices simply so you can avoid being labeled as *profiting*.

HoundMusic

But I price my pups @ what I believe they're worth, and I won't sell them - or myself short.

 

I don't think that is possible.  What is a human child "worth"?  You CAN'T put a price on something like that, surely?  The only way I can see to do it is to ask, "How much has this pup cost me in terms of money?  How much of that can I realistically recoup?" 

Do you suggest that shelters are doing the dogs a misservice because they are "cheap"?  Or perhaps those dogs just aren't as "good" as yours? 

HoundMusic

Have you ever thought maybe that breeder's price was so low because she wanted pups to sell quickly?

 

No.  I find it slightly insulting that you would think I might find such a person admirable.  The pups had homes waiting before they were conceived.  "Selling quickly" was not an issue.  This lady merely wanted them to be affordable - not least because she had built a rapport with each and every future home and was friends with the "buyers".  Of course she didn't want to take lots of money off them.  If you were to sell something to a friend of yours, wouldn't you want to keep that price down as much as possible?  If you re-read my previous post I didn't say anything about "marking the pups down".  I said she worked hard to keep costs down.  Do you understand what I mean by that?  I'm going to make an educated guess and say she made a little on one litter and lost a little on the other, when a C-section was necessary because a pup got stuck.

HoundMusic

Would you expect a breeder to approve a home they might otherwise turn down because they knew that home would go to a less reputable source for a pup? Makes no sense.

Of course it makes sense!  What does "turning a home down" achieve?  My sister knew very little about dogs until she found this lady who has since become something like a mentor for her.  She's learned a lot and been influenced a great deal.  If she had just been "turned down", my guess is she would have simply gone elsewhere.... somewhere that cared less about the pups they were selling and therefore didn't care too much or ask awkward questions or express any interest in the pup whatsoever post-sale. 

HoundMusic

After all, when all is said and done, those things - showing, herding, schutzhund, agility - they're all just hobbies for the breeder or owner.

 

No they are not.  For example, showing was started as a way to select the best breeding stock. 

HoundMusic

The breeders are no more ethical because they show or work their dogs and are not disreputable if they don't do rescue.         

 

 Emphasis added by me.

 I whole heartedly disagree with you on that last score.  If a person LOVES their breed (and they bally well should do if they are producing more of them) then how can they NOT be involved with their breed rescue?  That does not compute for me.

corgipower

Chuffy

Do you think there is a limit, morally speaking, as to how high the profit margin can be or can people charge as much as they like? 

I think that pricing a puppy for sale is the same as pricing anything else for sale. If you don't care about profits and simply want hapy consumers, you can price low. If you want to profit (and profit doesn't mean get rich, simply means that you take in more money than you put out. A profit could be $1,000 a year or $100,000 a year), you price higher than your expenses. You also price according to what the market will pay. When I was shopping for a malinois puppy, they were in the $500 - $1500 range, with most on the lower end. Corgis tend to be a little more expensive. Where I live there's a boxer breeder who can get $5000 for a puppy, but he doesn't *always* charge that much, and another boxer breeder who gets somewhere in the $2000 range. If there are good homes for them at those prices, then I see no reason to lower prices simply so you can avoid being labeled as *profiting*.

 

Thanks for answering my question.

Going back to the breeder of my sister's dog - he is a pet quality pup but from a good line.  His cousin was Best in Group in Crufts twice, Reserve once, and was sold for £25,000.  That sum made me feel queasy for some reason.  I mean, that's a deposit on a house, not a dog!  It says "greed" to me.  I can't help but think dogs don't profit from human greed.  So *I* think that yes, there is a limit.  But I couldn't say where it is or should be.
 

Chuffy

HoundMusic

But I price my pups @ what I believe they're worth, and I won't sell them - or myself short.

 

I don't think that is possible.  What is a human child "worth"?  You CAN'T put a price on something like that, surely?  The only way I can see to do it is to ask, "How much has this pup cost me in terms of money?  How much of that can I realistically recoup?"   

     I think it's appalling you'd compare selling a puppy to the worth of a human child    I will not even dignify that with a response, it disgusts me so thoroughly 
    

HoundMusic

 Yes, there are unwanted dogs, but they are unwanted for a reason. Temperament problems, behavior problems or other "baggage" from a previous home, health issues. There are homes that prefer to deal with this and take pride in nursing these dogs back to health. But then that brings us back to the average (albeit responsible) family who wants a puppy of breed X for their family. They want your typical family dog with a reliable temperament, good health, and good pet personality. Many times they're turned down/snubbed by show breeders. And for reasons that makes no bearing on their suitability as a home. I see no problem with breeders breeding pet dogs that will go on to become wonderful pets for their families. After all, when all is said and done, those things - showing, herding, schutzhund, agility - they're all just hobbies for the breeder or owner. Their dogs are no better because they have titles. The breeders are no more ethical because they show or work their dogs and are not disreputable if they don't do rescue.         

I've been reading through this thread and have seen many good points....many interesting posts....but this comment (I underlined it) really rubbed me the wrong way.......I feel like if a family gets a puppy, that say for example barks allot out of boredom, and the family drops the pup off at the local shelter, this dog is there for a reason? Are you sure the dog just ended up with a family that wanted a  typical dog- that they didn't need to train/exercise? Maybe I'm taking this personally, and I'm sorry if I am....but my dog ended up in the shelter because his elderly owner had a massive heart attack, his son didn't like dogs, so he dropped him off at the local shelter which happend to be a high kill gassing shelter. My dog wasn't there for a reason, he did no wrong except end up with a crappy owner (there's more to his owner to make him crappy).

I feel like if a family wants a typical family dog it's unrealistic...they all need to be trained, exercise, some have unexpected health problems that come out of the blue, and if you don't/can't take care of your dog healthwise you shoudn't own it. They all need guidence, training, etc.

I see the positives and negatives of getting a dog from and breeder and shelter....I've owned both....I'm not against responsible,ethical breeding and I'm not against rescues.

HoundMusic

I think it's appalling you'd compare selling a puppy to the worth of a human child  I will not even dignify that with a response, it disgusts me so thoroughly ...

 

No, I am not comparing a puppy to a child.  What I am getting at is - how do you put a price tag on a "life"?  Do you see? 

HoundMusic

As for shelter dogs, how do they play into the equation? People either donate $ and supplies to them, or they are state run and recieve government monies.

You are joking about government funding, right?  You pay X for the dog and its a fixed fee.  There is NO WAY in most cases that it would be enough to cover the S/N, food, health care etc that the dog has cost them.  Happily they also receive donations and legacies and people can "sponsor a dog" or take in items like food and blankets to help them out.  To answer your question - you said you priced your pups according to what they were worth.  Dogs at the shelter will cost less, but I don't think it means they are "worth" less.  They are just as deserving of a loving home as any pure bred pup, and have probably had more money spent on them in their life time, not to mention costly rehabilitation that likely will have been needed.  Why shouldn't shelters also bump up their prices to discourage impulse buyers? 

The whole "impulse buyer" thing is a moot point anyway. A breeder worth their salt has homes lined up for their puppies before the puppies are born, so if an impulse buyer comes knocking, well, sorry, but they pups are already taken.  And if it's a large litter and some do need homes then the questions asked and the contract to be signed would probably be a deterrant to many impulse buyers.  As I said in an earlier post, I don't think any breeder should be trying to "put off" prospective buyers.  I would hope that rather than just "chasing them away" (with a hefty price tag or some other method) they would take the opportunity to strike up a very real friendship with potential puppy buyers and influence their choices and help them to learn, if they needed to learn, more about dogs so the dog they purchased (wherever he was bought from) would be happier and healthier.

Chuffy

What I am getting at is - how do you put a price tag on a "life"?  Do you see? 

I hear ya chuffy, but the thing is ~ it's done all the time. There are birds that cost thousands of dollars. Horses can go for anywhere from a few hundred to tens of thousands. Snakes can be very expensive. Hamsters are pretty cheap usually, but even they can get pricier if you go to a breeder instead of a pet store. Do you suggest we should just give the animals away for free? Do you suggest that breeders should just keep all the puppies themselves? If someone wants a dog that comes from a long line of CH's then they should expect to pay more ~ putting the titles on the dogs costs a lot of time and money. If someone wants a puppy whose parents were health tested, then they should expect to pay more ~ all those tests cost money. If someone wants a dog that they can breed themselves, they should expect to pay more ~ that's a dog that the breeder could have kept for their own business. As far as shelter dogs go, I think it's great for people to adopt - but I wouldn't pay $1000 for a shelter dog - with no knowlege of the ancestry. It's not a "life" that has a price tag - it's the show fees and the vet bills that have a price tag.

This news org call this a puppy mill.... some might call this a backyard breeder.... others might call them professional breeders (they had 752 dogs, selling them in ranges from several hundred to up to $2400 over the internet).  I call it horrifying.

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/dailystar/229469.php

To be clear, though, I am happy to research and obtain a pup from a responsible, reputable, respected, and results-oriented breeder (results meaning health, temperament, and work aptitude etc).  I am also happy to have my pup who came from a breed-specific rescue (Gracie).  I am also happy to have my BF's stray puppy (Achilles) and abandoned dog (Jada).

Edit to add that Gracie was a result of backyard breeders, and Jada was a mother of backyard bred pups.... for profit (previous owner).

Chuffy

 I whole heartedly disagree with you on that last score.  If a person LOVES their breed (and they bally well should do if they are producing more of them) then how can they NOT be involved with their breed rescue?  That does not compute for me.

 Or maybe if someone LOVES their breed, they should be supporting breeders who are preserving the essence of that breed? Really who's "rule" is it that breeders must be involved with rescue or they are "bad"? I judge breeders by the dogs they produce - I accepted long ago that not every breeder is going to do things the way I would and that's ok. It doesn't mean they are wrong, bad, irresponsible or that people shouldn't buy from them.

 

BlackLabbie

I've been reading through this thread and have seen many good points....many interesting posts....but this comment (I underlined it) really rubbed me the wrong way.......I feel like if a family gets a puppy, that say for example barks allot out of boredom, and the family drops the pup off at the local shelter, this dog is there for a reason? Are you sure the dog just ended up with a family that wanted a  typical dog- that they didn't need to train/exercise? Maybe I'm taking this personally, and I'm sorry if I am....but my dog ended up in the shelter because his elderly owner had a massive heart attack, his son didn't like dogs, so he dropped him off at the local shelter which happend to be a high kill gassing shelter. My dog wasn't there for a reason, he did no wrong except end up with a crappy owner (there's more to his owner to make him crappy).

 Many dogs are in shelters due to at the very least, a lack of training. People don't generally give up well mannered, easy to live with, obedient, perfect dogs. That doesn't mean they all have serious problems and there are plenty that could be great dogs with just a bit of basic training. Our corgi was given up because he was chasing kids and grabbing their pants. With a bit of basic training he is a perfectly good dog. But certainly some were given up for very real issues. And the problem comes in when shelters are not honest about about dogs people are adopting or they just don't know enough about temperament/breed type to match dogs appropriately. You can't expect that most people looking for a pet are going to be able to effectively evaluate the dogs at the shelter to pick the one that best suits them.