Should Chow Chow be bread?

ORIGINAL: Xerxes
There are incredible numbers of responsibly bred dogs that aren't AKC recognized.  Ever seen a Galgo or Azawakh or a Sloughi, Lurcher, Staghound etc at an AKC dog show?

My earlier commet about AKC recognized was due to my own ignorance.  I did not realized there were established breeds not recognized by the AKC.

My point is that if I'm breeding a Great Dane to a Pharaoh hound is that the ONLY reason to do so is to make money.

 

This helps shed some light on the difference of oppinion.  I do not think that the only reason is to make money.  I am under the impression that the whole pure breed and  show dog thing is about money.  I know that is not the case for everyone it just seems that is the majority but I could be wrong.

I still don't see how it is ethical, in the least, to purposely crossbreed dogs-especially if the only goal is money.  You get a dog with an unknown temperment, unknown size, unpredictable health issues, and that's just scratching the surface.

I don't think we'll see eye to eye on this at all.

As far as the unknown charateristics this is always true pure breed or mutt.  It is just to differend extents.  Some have said many show dogs pups are not show quality.  Some of them do not look right or have the right temperment.  The pups will have some of the characteristics of the parents we just do not know which ones.  Of course having two purebreeds narrows the range but it does not eliminate it.  Why would we want to anyway?  I love that there are all different kinds of dogs.

I doubt we will see eye to eye.  I am just trying to understand the position.  Understanding it does not mean I will agree with it.

Also just wanted to say thanks to fouriscompany for answering some of my questions and helping me learn.

didn't mean to hit the reply button!

I didn't read all the replies either... got tired of it after the second page.
Personally for me..there are just too many dogs in this world since so many will never see homes and are PTS.  For that reason...I don't think there should be any pure bred breeders out there breeding their dogs unless they have homes for them. BUT, I sure don't think we should decide that any certain breed should be the one to not exist anymore. While most dogs might have had a job at one point..most do not now so why think a Chow is useless because it doesn't have a job.
My Great Dane doesn't have a job either...except to be my pet,,my companion, my best friend. Thats all she needs to be. And that is all a ChowChow needs to be also.
I have to wonder when it was said earlier that most mutts never find a home because people are looking for pure breds. I don't know if I can agree with that at all...there are certainly more mixed breeds that come into the clinic that I work in than pure breds. 

[blockquote]
[blockquote]

ORIGINAL: TH


This helps shed some light on the difference of oppinion.  I do not think that the only reason is to make money.  I am under the impression that the whole pure breed and  show dog thing is about money.  I know that is not the case for everyone it just seems that is the majority but I could be wrong.

Trust me, there is no money in showing purebred dogs.  LOL
 
ETA:  Unless of course you're able to become a really good professional handler.[/blockquote][/blockquote]

Trust me, there is no money in showing purebred dogs. 

No but there is money breeding THAT show dog.    On the Dane board that I belong to... most are show dogs and most breed them. I do believe that is more for money than anything else.

[blockquote]

ORIGINAL: dyan

Trust me, there is no money in showing purebred dogs. 

No but there is money breeding THAT show dog.    On the Dane board that I belong to... most are show dogs and most breed them. I do believe that is more for money than anything else.

 
Well, we spent over $3000 training and then finishing Beau with a professional handler, so there is quite a deficit to overcome!  Plus the cost of the tests and then the dog himself.[/blockquote]

ORIGINAL: dyan
No but there is money breeding THAT show dog.    On the Dane board that I belong to... most are show dogs and most breed them. I do believe that is more for money than anything else.

It takes A LOT of money to campaign a dog in the show ring, pay for all the health tests to breed, fly in the best stud or fly your girl to them, care for the puppies, emergency c sections, and LOTS of other things that can wrong. Responsible breeders don't make any money and are lucky to break even.They breed for the love of the breed; trying to improve it and preserve it. If I ever breed those are EXACTLY the reasons I will do it. I'll spare no expense or effort. It's the breeders who scrimp on expenses like showing and health testing that are able to make a profit.

Laurelin, agilebasenji, Tamara,
 
Thanks for your responses. What you all have said makes sense and I appreciate your polite responses and trying to help me understand the orther side of the issue. []
 
(agilebasenji, In regards to the people breeding: I wasn't trying to start another discussion, I was just using it as a analogy. I didn't mean to get off topic. Also, sorry I misunderstood you prior post.  

Responsible breeders don't make any money and are lucky to break even.They breed for the love of the breed

My definition of responsible breeder does it for the love of the puppies!  Not to win a ribbon or meet some breed standard imposed by man.  Of course it is possible to do both at the same time.  But it is not nessesary to care about a particular breed to do it responsably.

ORIGINAL: TH

Responsible breeders don't make any money and are lucky to break even.They breed for the love of the breed

My definition of responsible breeder does it for the love of the puppies!  Not to win a ribbon or meet some breed standard imposed by man.  Of course it is possible to do both at the same time.  But it is not nessesary to care about a particular breed to do it responsably.

Well of course they love the puppies too! I know I do. [] But breeding ONLY because they love puppies and not paying attention to the breed standard or health testing is not good.

I have a question, and it is an honest question... what would dogs do if humans didn't exist?  Is there any scientific proof that they would mate with their own breed or would they intermingle?  I really don't know, so anyone who has *real* knowledge, let me know.
 
I just think that we, as humans have the responsibility to treat nature just as that.  Changing things for our own pleasure can be dangerous.  Now, I say that with a forked tongue, because I love Ridgebacks and if it weren't for someone mixing like 7 different breeds, Ridgebacks wouldn't exist.  Same for Weimaraners and many other breeds.  Actually, very few have remained unchanged since they were domesticated.  And that record goes so far back, who really knows?
 
I think there should be some responsibility in mixing breeds.  Keep in mind that most dogs were "created" for a working purpose.  And when a great dog was "created" people worked very hard to keep to the breed standard.
 
Look at the extinct animals... the Dodo bird for example.  They are extinct because mankind didn't care enough to preserve them.  You may ask, who cares?  Well, I'll tell you.  I wish they still alive.  I believe that they, as part of creation, add to the richness and diversity of this world.  And if we don't appreciate and respect nature and animals, it will come back to bite us.  It already is....
 
[8|]  Eh-hem... getting off of my soap box now.

ORIGINAL: TH

Responsible breeders don't make any money and are lucky to break even.They breed for the love of the breed

My definition of responsible breeder does it for the love of the puppies!  Not to win a ribbon or meet some breed standard imposed by man.  Of course it is possible to do both at the same time.  But it is not nessesary to care about a particular breed to do it responsably.

 
Of course breed standards are imposed by man... man created the domestic dog and developed different breeds. Standards are there to differentiate a Boston Terrier from a Rottweiler. When it comes to responsible breeding, one shouldn't focus on just one thing but the whole package.

But breeding ONLY because they love puppies and not paying attention to the breed standard or health testing is not good.

Of course health testing makes sense.  It is the part about breed standard I question.  I keep hearing it is a requirement of a responsible breeder.  I just have not heard a reason that makes sense to me.  Although I am starting to understand some of those who take this stance a little better.  I still do not agree with it. 

(Decided not to get involved)

ORIGINAL: TH

But breeding ONLY because they love puppies and not paying attention to the breed standard or health testing is not good.

Of course health testing makes sense.  It is the part about breed standard I question.  I keep hearing it is a requirement of a responsible breeder.  I just have not heard a reason that makes sense to me.  Although I am starting to understand some of those who take this stance a little better.  I still do not agree with it. 

 
I think that health testing is important.  Testing helps breeders decide what animals should be bred.  I see nothing "bad" in health testing.  If I go to a breeder for a dog, I would like to have the most assurance possible about health and temperment.
 
Also, I THINK, Im not positive, but I think some "labradoodle" breeders do test, not many though.  I really think there are only a select few who truly would like to create a "breed".