Why do owners who retire their show dog rehome them???

I would also like to make the quick point that I once owned a breeder rehome.  It was my Zander.  He was two years old, had been shown a couple of times, but the breeder had too many dogs, so he fell on the back burner.
 
Now, by DPU's reasonsing, Zan should have just stayed at that kennel instead of being sold because he was "no longer useful".  I didn't have Zan for long, but I thank whatever may be out there EVERY DAY for allowing me time with that dog.
 
He sat in a kennel run with two or three other dogs for two years.  He had been shown three, maybe four times, and that was the extent to which he had been "out and about".  Beyond that, he basically rotted in a kennel situation.  No real one on one time, no attention.
 
But he should have stayed there.
 
I bought Zan for $500 to be my first show dog, and fate kicked me in the groin by having death take him from me, but still, I thank whatever is out there, because SOMETHING told that breeder that Zander needed to be OUT of that kennel run and IN A HOME with somebody who cared!  She still wanted to use him for breeding when she sold him, but she gave him up so he could live inside with somebody who loved him, and wanted to show.
 
Madame Sadie, who I was considering purchasing was to be a breeder rehome.  Sadie was returned to the breeder after her former family ran into financial troubles.  The breeder had too many bitches at present, and offered her to me for....the price of an airplane ticket.  That's it.  She wanted the price of the airefare, and one litter back out of her.
 
Deal of a lifetime (You have NO idea unless you're "in dogs" to know what a big deal it is to be offered a well bred bitch like that for your foundation).  This woman KNOWS me.  I've helped her with her other dogs.  She knows how badly I wanted to show.  She was willing to give her to me for her airfare and a litter back (at least a year down the road at that).
 
Sadie.....despised cats.
 
Like Liesje, being able to live with cats is a MUST.  I have cats now and will always have cats, and I cannot have a dog around who poses a threat to my cats.  As much as I wanted that bitch, my loyalties came FIRST to the animals already in the home.  I couldn't be selfish and endanger my two old kits because I wanted to show.
 
Sadie now has a lovely home with a breeder judge.  As an extra kick in the crotch, her breeder entered her in a show on a whim, and she went BOB from the classes...nice.  I kick myself everyday because I had to make that decision to deny the chance of a lifetime....but I look at Kaia and Kida, and realize I made the right choice.
 
I go to Zander's gravesite and lay down flowers, and realize that even though he is gone much too early, the breeder made the right choice in giving him up, instead of letting him continue to waste away in that run.
 
Are some breeders selfish?  Indeed they are.  They only want the next big winner and/or producer.
 
These two were thinking of their DOGS and not THEMSELVES.

I'm jumping into this one late, and I've read at least half of this thread, but forgive me if I repeat what someone else has said (although everyone seems to be repeating themselves enough, maybe I shouldn't worry). Anyway, I think there are some serious misunderstandings going on here.

These are the facts as I see them:

We need purebreds. Why? Because dogs are needed by many many people as working dogs for a highly specialized task and a LOT of money and resources would be wasted if these people just picked random dogs off the street to do their work. If anything, more dogs would need rehoming if we didn't have purebreds. Dogs vary soooo widely in their conformation, temperment, and abilities. They all have seperate jobs! Included in a dog's "job" might be a companion for a child or a hiking buddy for an active adult or a personal alarm system for a single young lady living in a dodgy part of town. Everybody's got a reason and a purpose for wanting a dog, and some dogs don't fit those purposes. A great majority of the time, a rescued dog will do, but not always.

We need responsible breeders. Why? First of all, because we need purebreds and in order to have purebreds, we need breeders. Also, because we need something to replace the irresponsible ones. Rehoming abandoned dogs is very very good and noble, however, it is still only treating a symptom of the problem of overpopulation. The solution is for ALL breeders to be responsible, not for there to be no more breeders.

Finally, breeders need to have the best interest of the breed in mind. Why? Because if they didn't, purebreds would cease to be predictable. Being loved is not a good criteria to remain in a breeding program. The dog has to be as close to ideal as possible. It makes no sense to keep and breed a dog that is less sound than another dog simply because the owner is more attached to it. I believe this erroneous philosophy comes from the way people feel about their own children. We protect OUR children because they're ours, not because we feel they're superb human specimens. This should not apply to dogs.

Okay, now that I've laid the groundwork, the fact is, if we need purebreds, we need breeders. If we need breeders of purebreds, we need them to care more about the breed than about individual dogs. If we want the breeders to do that, we either have to accept that they will be rehoming the occassional dog or we have to start including a dog breeders tax so they can afford to quit their jobs and spend all day taking care of animals that have been excempt from the breeding program.

Although, I would like to add one more thing to this... I do personally aspire to breeding dogs for work, show, and companionship, and I don't plan to rehome my retired dogs. The reason being that my dogs are first companions to me. I don't think it's terrible for a dog to have to be rehomed, but I do think it would be hard for me. Yes, I will be keeping my retired dogs for selfish reasons! Now, for those who are saying it's irresponsible to not rehome dogs, let me defend myself. The idea is that people rehome older dogs so that they can make room for newer dogs, which implies that they need newer dogs. I don't need newer dogs, so rather than get a new puppy, I will simply care for the dogs I already have. It's a personal decision. I don't think it's wrong to rehome retired dogs, it's just not something I personally want to do, although naturally, I'm prepared for situations to arise.

ORIGINAL: mrv

Shelters offer one option for people looking for either a puppy or a dog.  All breed rescues offer an additional option, especially when fostering is involved.  Breed specific rescues offer another option.  Breeder rehomes offer an option, and breeder puppies offer an option as well.  All these options occur on a continum from the best of the best to the worst of the worst.  It is up to the person looking for a dog to make their own choice.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with people choosing a variety of options for their lives.  Folks get dogs for any number of reasons.  There is nothing wrong with wanted to participate in dog sport nor is there anything wrong with having a general buddy and companion.

To pass judgement on any effort that results in a dog getting a good home is value based and suggests an "elitist" mentality of only my way is right. 

Mrv, many months ago I had a family with an autistic child that was very much interested in my foster mix shepherd.  I was very uncomfortable with this and created a thread to get myself educated.  There were many helpful responses but you were the most helpful.  I did my research and was prepared with literature and references to convince the family to go with a Service Dog.  The family did eventually decided to apply for a Service Dog and what they got was a Service Dog that did not cut it or make the grade.  My rescue organization helped make this happen.  This is a good rehoming situation.

So I understand good rehoming situations like this and I also understand rehoming to better the dog's life.  I can not see a breeder rehoming as anything but a rescue situation.  And I don't judge anyone who takes in these dogs.  They have done good.  It is the practice that I object to.  Most on the forum advocate not to purchase a pet shop dog as a tactic to eliminate the puppy mill practice.  This is a huge sacrifice since the pups are alive and are in need of home.  I don't understand why you do not see a similarity. 
 

I can not see a breeder rehoming as anything but a rescue situation. And I don't judge anyone who takes in these dogs. They have done good. It is the practice that I object to. Most on the forum advocate not to purchase a pet shop dog as a tactic to eliminate the puppy mill practice. This is a huge sacrifice since the pups are alive and are in need of home.

How many times does it have to be said?  There IS a segment of the dog market that is ONLY interested in well-bred, health tested, adult, partially trained, pure-bred dogs.  Like it or not, it's the truth.  I know people like this myself.  If they don't get a re-homed dog from a breed rescue or breeder, they won't get a dog, period.  They're just not interested in shelter or rescue dogs.  I'm not saying I agree w/ this b/c I think it's always best to check ALL options, but it happens all of the time.  People that buy from puppy mills is different b/c those people could very easily find a well-bred pup that costs less or even find a purebred pup in a breed rescue or a shelter somewhere.  But we're talking about people who are just not interested in any puppies or any dogs that have "unknowns" about their hips/elbows status, in-bred temperament, what other animals they've been raised with, etc.  You can't just ignore these factors simply b/c it makes you uncomfortable.

WOW,,what a thread going here. Jumping in really late. Read most of this whole thing,,and to be honest its another one of those threads that finds me agreeing with both sides in different areas.   I'm confused right now as to how I would answer this in one short paragraph.  
I think if your a PET (only) owner such as I am,, its hard to look at the breeder or show attitude about rehoming your dog. 
Bubblegum was a retired show dog and breeding dog..she had given birth to 16 ( was originally told 18 ) puppies in Nov. and I got her in Jan.  She had gotten Mastitis and could no longer be used for breeding.  Her breeder didn't advertise her..she told me she has a waiting list of people interested in her retired dogs...don't know if I believe her or not.   My son works with her husband and that is how I found her.  In a house smaller than mine (which is small ) she had Bubby, all of her pups, a brother and father and 3 older pups from another litter. You can not have that many giant dogs in one small house.   She SAYS they are family/house dogs...yet when I was there the dogs were brought up to show me from the kennel in the basement.  That is not what I call a "house" dog and because of this I don't believe a breeder who says their dogs are their house dogs.
GIVING BUBBY UP,,, I will NEVER forget the day she came to my house for the first time...she never took her eyes off of her Mom.  When her breeder sat down, Bubblegum sat right in front of her...faced towards her and stared in her eyes. I said to Pam "how can you give this dog up, she so obviously loves you so much!"  Her answer was she is a teacher and each year must let her students pass to the next grade and has gotten used to that. I don't agree to that attitude at all, just not the same thing.  To this day ( almost 3 years later ) I think of the way Bubblegum loved her mom...and I KNOW she loves me just the same,,, but she has a much better life now,,no kennels,, no stick up her butt to make her go when she was told,,,no baths in Tide to keep her white.  I often wonder,,,if her breeder walked in the door right now..would she remember her??
Bubblegum was free to me...BUT she cost me nearly $500 to spay. How can she be SOLD when the new owner will have to put out that much money. We are talking giant breed here.  My choice was a good price for one of her NOT show quality pups,,,or free Bubblegum with the promise to spay.  DH wanted the older dog...so we went with her.
I feel in some ways she was abused,, I feel in some way that I rescued her.  But it is because in my eyes... and from what some people have said,, I don't think "show life" is a very good life for these dogs.  Again,,,that is the pet owner in me,,, not the breeder or show attitude that I can't really understand.  It took a good year to get her settled into a life of a pet.  Yes she is used to people picking and poking at her..but she doesn't trust them. She will walk with me nicely ONLY if I put her "show collar" on and demand that she walk like the show dog...which I do not because I don't need her almost leaning into me as we are walking.  Even though she knew show commands (what ever they are ) I had to teach her to sit...and other et commands.
To this day,,I don't see how her breeder could have given her up. EXCEPT I think breeders and show people ARE in it for the joy of showing or breeding...they are in it KNOWING they will give that animal up eventually. Kind of like raising a farm animal to take to the fair and eventually sell for slaughter.  They have to have a different attitude than people like me who are looking for a pet dog.
If you do take a retired show/breeding dog...I don't think you should expect a dog that will be everything you ever desired..although it could end up that way. You are getting a dog that has been raised differently than you would raise a puppy...and sometimes it will not be socialized even though it comes from a home filled with others.  They are usually not being worked with, or really treated like a pet.
I understand exactly where DPU is coming from though... but I would rather see these dogs go to a loving home than lay in a kennel the rest of their lives.  I don't see where there is any comparison between this situation and the retired grayhounds from the rescue. Those people are going to get a few dogs at a time and then find them homes..many/most retired dogs never do get homes.

Unfortunately we have many unwanted dogs in shelters and organization situations, in reality more dogs than there are good homes.  A second reality is there are multiple niches of dog owners out there.  I happen to be one who participates in dog sport.  One reason I participate in dog sport is to provide balance in a career choice that is demanding and very stressful.  A shelter dog, a mixed breed, does not allow me the opportunity to travel, compete and maintain long distance friendships.
 
Breeders who rehome dogs do so for both good and bad reasons.  I prefer to focus on the outcome, is the dog better off.
 
To stretch the analogy further and put a real emotional spin on it, should people in the developed world not have children because there are children who are homeless in other countries.  Of course not, but the logical is the same.
 
The reality is education.  Rehomes support education because they clearly and completely demonstrate that you dont need to buy a puppy to have a great bonded companion.
 
Painting all owners and all breeders with the same brush (rehoming is about people who dont care enough to keep dogs until they die) is not helpful nor is it an accurate response. 
 
There are many situations in which people are looking for older, socialized, "known history", specific breed, etc.  why paint them and those who help them find those dogs as selfish individuals who just wont or cant take a shelter dog?  Again sounds like too black and white for me.  I used to live in a black and white world, I have learned that is far more gray and my judgments dont really make a whole lot of difference.  Tolerance will get me much farther on any given day.   That is why I do not, nor do I believe I will agree with your points on this topic.

It is the practice that I object to. Most on the forum advocate not to purchase a pet shop dog as a tactic to eliminate the puppy mill practice. This is a huge sacrifice since the pups are alive and are in need of home. I don't understand why you do not see a similarity

 
How many people have posted that they want to know a dog's lineage and the health history of the parents?  How many have posted that they are looking for adult dogs, raised in a manner that includes heavy socialization as well as basic training?
 
So in your words, not mine- the practice of rehoming retired show dogs is equivalent to the practice of killing greyhounds by the thousands and now buying puppies from pet stores?  None of what you claim is equal or like rehoming retired show/performance dogs even comes close to the mark. 
 
 

Thank you Mrv for the respectful response.  I apologize to you if my previous comment was flippant...but broccoli?
 
Do not think that I do not see or understand your views.  I most certainly do and I can easily say that yes there is a legitimate niche for satisfying a need and want for certain dog owners. It just seems so convenient and beneficial to one side.
 
My strength, my fortitude comes from clear black and white views.  To me gray areas represents doubt.  You can not do my volunteer work with having doubts.  Can I switch from black to white and vice versa.  Yes.  When I first came here I thought it was ok to buy pets from pet shops and a breeder (no distinction).  Since being here, the forum has enlightened me to not honor this practice.  Today, after this thread, I have switched back and I will look at these dogs as rescues and take them in.  I know the risk and I am willing to accept it.  I hope someone will come up with another way to stop these practices. 

ok, let's do some math. I acquire a setter puppy we'll call Sue. I train and campaign her and put a conformation title, an obedience title, and a field title on her, I think she's lovely, so when she's four years old I find the perfect stud and breed a litter. I keep my pick of the litter, we'll call her Betty. After four years I decide Betty isn't perfect enough to breed, but one of her littermates is. So I get a pup from a breeding of the littermate. At this point I have Sue, who is now 8 years old, retired from showing but I use her for actual hunting, I have 4-year old Betty, who I am still showing in field trials, and my new pup, who happens to be male, let's call him Fred. That's three dogs. I've bred one litter, which means I'm responsible for 10 other dogs lives. OK, so four years later I've put a bunch of titles on Fred. I have 4-year old Fred, actively showing, 8-year old Betty, retired from showing but using for actual hunting, and I have 12-year-old Sue, retired from everything but slow walks and cuddles. I also occasionally foster a dog from rescue or occasionally need to foster one of the dogs from my one litter, so I have 3 to 5 dogs in the house at any one time. I find a lovely bitch and breed Fred and arrange to keep the pick of the litter instead of a stud fee. Sue passes on shortly before I bring home my new puppy. So I can indeed maintain fewer than five dogs in the house, compete at all times, breed responsibly, and never feel the need to re-home one of my show dogs.
I'm not convinced breeding a litter every single year is being responsible. Gee, if I bred a litter every year after five years I'd be responsible for 40 to 60 dogs lives. No one can do that responsibly. Do we need that many dogs cranked out into the world?
I'm not convinced in-breeding within a "line" is being responsible either. Outcrossings to other people's studs is the way to go.

I have read this whole thread now. 

Here's the thing.  A responsible show breeder will breed a dog to try and get a specific "type", "set", "look" in the offspring.  He may keep a pup from that litter or wait for another litter.  When he picks a pup to keep, he now decides that the mother of the pup needs a new home so he can concentrate on the new pup.  The breeder has now created a dog that needs a new home.  But he also did that in breeding the mother to begin with....

So the sticky slope with some folks who don't show or understand the desire to show, is that people are breeding lots of pets anyway.  The breeder may not feel that they are.  Some folks on here may not feel that they are, but the reality is that if someone breeds a dog for show, finishes the dog, then rehomes it, the final outcome of that dog is a "pet" home because the dog can no longer be shown in conformation.  So the breeder is breeding pets.  I think this is the view of some people, mine included, but I don't think there's anything wrong with it.  If the breeders did not exist, there would be no goldens, GSD, BC, etc.  They'd all be one homogenous mix.  I don't mean to offend any breeders on the forum, but this is how, to me, the logic comes full circle. 

I guess I see a difference in breeding, say GSD or BC's for herding work that they are actually going to do, then I do in breeding for just conformation shows.  I don't breed, I don't have purebreds, so perhaps my opinions are biased.  But I haven't read or found any logical arguments to change that feeling.  To me, and this is my opinion, conformation shows are beauty pagents and not something that I can find myself getting into.  I can more understand a BC breeder continuing a line of great working dogs to be able to have a dog in the future that can do the work, than a conformation breeder breeding for just looks.  Just my Opinion, which I'm entitled to. 

I guess rehoming a show dog is no different than selling the pups in the first place.  This goes to what someone else pointed out, that it's a difference of atttitude towards dogs.  I feel that dogs should be adopted for life and only rehomed when necessary to save existing family or prevent serious harm to the dog (ie-new dog does not get along with current dog at all, or cats, etc...)

So I can understand DPU's side on this, though I'm not as vehemently opposed to it.

Ok lets expand with "string theory" and not the physics kind.  One of the most telling and memorable training events I ever had in college involved a strategy used by Virgina Mateir (may have spelled the last name wrong, it was many years ago).  You get  a group of people together.  You take a string and pass the end from one person to another with no specific pattern.  Each individual holds the string just hard enough to keep possession.  Now move one person.  Every one holding the string needs to respond with some movement to prevent loosing their own hold on the string.  It is sort of like ripples in a pond but demonstrates that the impact is greater closer to the source.
 
If I correctly read you post, you are considering rescuing pet store dogs.... If that is done with full price paid, that is connected directly to the brokers and the breeders.  In some areas  brokers pay an absurdly low price for puppies (25.00 to 75.00) that are later listed in stores for a thousand or more.  If those folks in the pet store get those kind of dollars, what impact with that have on the economics of pet store operation?    I feel that if merchandise keeps moving off the shelves (or out of the crates) then suppliers will keep producing. 
 
Rehomes are often placed at no or minimal cost and essentially represent a "loss" economically to breeders.  The issue in the breeders with whom I have direct contact is: will the rehome benefit the dog?  A single animal rehomed has a different impact than a purchase of a dog from a retail establishment.

I'm not convinced breeding a litter every single year is being responsible. Gee, if I bred a litter every year after five years I'd be responsible for 40 to 60 dogs lives. No one can do that responsibly. Do we need that many dogs cranked out into the world?
I'm not convinced in-breeding within a "line" is being responsible either. Outcrossings to other people's studs is the way to go.

 
Those are two very good points, they'd make a great discussion on another thread.

I'm not convinced breeding a litter every single year is being responsible. Gee, if I bred a litter every year after five years I'd be responsible for 40 to 60 dogs lives. No one can do that responsibly. Do we need that many dogs cranked out into the world?
I'm not convinced in-breeding within a "line" is being responsible either. Outcrossings to other people's studs is the way to go.

 
 
[sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif]
 
And then we have the people who rescue, who only put a small dent into an over population of dogs, who sometimes can't sleep at night, because they couln't save one more dog.
 
 
 

Mrv, I understand what you are saying and I understand the economics and the perceived encouragement of supporting the practice.  But these dogs deserve to be rescued too, just as the breeder#%92s .  To date nothing has had an effect on the practice.  I believe the dog professional has the strength to do something about it.  Rather than advocating boycott, find another way.  I am only one person and I am doing what I am doing with a clear conscious. 
 
The below quotes are yours and pretty much sum of the what I consider the opposing views.  You must now respect my path. 
 
It is up to the person looking for a dog to make their own choice
 
In breeds in which I participate, rehoming is an honored pursuit
 
Rehomes are just as valid as rescue,,, in fact more so economically,,, because they allow rescue dollars to be spent on dogs who have no other resources or support.
 
Rehoming is not about getting "Rid" of a dog.  It is about getting a dog a loving home.  I fail to see how that can be considered a heinous act.

Yes it is absolutely true,,, we agree to disagree.