|
Location: Co. Durham, UK
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 11,213
|
|
Originally Posted by
Ramble
Haven't got time to answer fully now...but my thoughts are pretty much that I feel uncomfortable about money being made from the sale of part trained dogs, as money must be the main factor in the sale. In a perfect world of course it wouldn't be, but the world isn't rosy and so it all makes me feel very uncomfortable. The dog's welfare at that moment and long term have to be the main priorities. Money always changes that.
The trouble is in the world of professional gundog trainers/breeders, money will always be the main priority. Many see their dogs as livestock (note the word
many, not all!) and they breed and train gundogs as a living. This is why I think it can be so difficult to find a good gundog trainer, becuase there is such a vast difference between people like me who want a dog as a pet, but want to allow it to fulfill it's original purpose (as a hobby). To the professionals who want the absolute perfect working gundog to work and breed from.
Originally Posted by
Moobli
But what if the pup that had been run on had had basic obedience training, was already housetrained, fully vaccinated, socialised with a whole sphere of different situations and was pretty much bombproof. Would you think it was acceptable for the breeder to charge more then?
I would.
This was the point I was making in my first post. I think it's strange that a show pup run on from a good breeder would fetch the same as a 8 week old pup, where as a gundog pup run on will fetch so much more than the 8 week old equivalent. I can understand there being a difference due to the level of training the run on gundog would have, but a run on show pup (from a good breeder) would also have had a significant amount of input regarding training and socialisation. So why are they sold for the exact same price as an 8 week unsocialised, untrained and more than likely un house trained pup? Not saying breeders should start charging more, but just find it very strange that they don't!
Originally Posted by
Moobli
I don't believe that reputable breeders don't make any money from the sale of pedigree pups. Example - my sister has Spinoni which sell for around £1000 a pup. Spinoni can have large litters. Say, for example, you have ten pups at £1000 each. Are you trying to tell me that it costs £10,000 to raise a litter of pups? Hmmm - I don't think so.
I also don't believe that because a *profit* might be made from selling a dog that suddenly it's welfare goes out of the window. I have never seen any evidence to support this theory.
I put *profit* because I don't believe anyone will make a huge profit on selling a trained dog - as training a dog to a good standard takes the trainer his time, effort and expertise. In most walks of life you have to pay to benefit from someone else's time and expertise - so why not in dogs?
If she paid £1000 for a Spin I think she's been well and truly fleeced!
Spins generally go for £700ish. They're certainly no longer a "rare" breed, sadly puppy farmers have realised their potential as popular pets and have already started to churn them out.
As regards to good breeders making no profit, I really do agree with this. A good breeder will always put the dogs welfare first, money second. My friend rang up a Spin breeder asking about the litter she had. She told the breeder a bit about herself and how she worked as a groom at a stable yard. The dog would have 1,000 acres to roam in as she lives on a private coutry estate and the dog would spend all day with her and her Labrador at the stable yard. She then explained that she only had £350 pounds (which was the truth) and asked whether it would be possible to buy a dog from her with this amount of money. The breeder agreed to meet her and after a bit of a vetting allowed her to buy one of the pups for £350 because she knew he was going to an excellent home. That to me is the definition of a good breeder and certainly one that doesn't put money first.