I'm not saying people shouldn't charge a decent price for their pups, but in my view puppies shouldn't be bred solely to supply the pet market. i.e. all puppies are bred for sale. Any litter (regardless of breed or cross or whatever) should be bred for the betterment of that breed (or cross if they are creating a new breed) and therefore the intention should be to retain a puppy otherwise how can you better your line? Of course if there is nothing suitable then so be it.
If dogs were only bred with that in mind then there would be significantly less puppies available, resulting (eventually) to less in rescue, solves many problems all round, but until that happens then there will always be a significant number of dogs being rehomed.
Becky

I am currently ploughing my way through the whole thread at the moment ... but just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.

But how many reputable breeders are doing this? None that Ive found!

Strange because Ive met lots of labs and poodles that were friendly, outgoing, well behaved and well socialised. Whats the problem with them already that they have to 'improved' upon?

Labradoodles were not bred to get the best of both breeds btw and it was an experiment that didnt work so why continue?

:smt038 :smt038 :smt038 YES YES YES!!!! Totally agree!

The breeder keeping a pup or only breeding to better the breed won't stop dogs being put into rescue. Dogs are put into rescue for many reasons.
Just because a breeder keep a pup doesn't mean they are going to better the breed????
They may keep a pup and breed from it yes, but they may be breeding to a specific thing in the breed standard, they are breeding to what they see as being important.
A 'pet' breeder will breed for temperament and health with a general regard for the standard (ie no purple GSDs).
The show world does not and will not ever have a monopoly on breeding good all round dogs. Far from it in many cases.

Why shouldn't all dogs in a litter be sold on? Sorry I just don't get that.
I am not, as I've said, talking about puppy farming here. I am talking about someone with a pet GSD (for the sake of argument) with a fantastic temperament and health record, breeding a litter occassionally, with a similar GSD, a pet, with an excellent health and temperament history. They would,like any decent breeder, check on who the pups were going to and provide follow up info, where's the problem??? Why not sell all the litter? Why not charge a decent price?

Because the reulting pups are friendly, outgoing and sociable and look different to both labs and poodles. Because SOME of those crosses have coats which are suitable for pet owners with allergies (although it is impossible to tell if a litter will have that quality).

Yes, there are bad breeders out there, I really don't think that you should write off all breeders that 'cross' dogs, it is unfair and untrue that they are all bad breeders.

I agree with most of your post Malady - but just had to mention that I actually think that KC registration and breed standard have ruined the border collie - or should I say the people who have bred show dog to show dog, rather than keeping the breed true to their origins and only breeding from collies who are proven working stock dogs.

I don't show, and have no interest in showing. I work my dogs. But I think I can answer your question. I would imagine that puppies bred from excellent show or working lines can happily be placed in pet homes IF that pet home has researched the breed thoroughly and feel they can offer that particular breed the kind of stimulation/exercise etc etc it needs. If the pet home cannot offer the breed what it needs, they should be looking at another breed. JMO.

I have to say I'm getting fed up of people thinking that people who show and breed are a) corrupt (how else would they win?), b) money grabbers, c) breed physically deformed dogs and d) are heartless swines who rehome any dog who isn't good enough. Just because there are some people who act that way does not make all show people the devils own!

I could start saying that all pet owners are dreadful people who know nothing about dogs. Why's that? Just look at all the dogs let out to roam on their own, all the unwanted litters being produced through thoughtless owners, all the animals dumped in rescue centres... the list is endless! All done by pet owners! BUT... I know all pet owners are NOT like that. I do NOT judge them all by the actions of the thoughtless ones. It'd be nice if people realised the same with show people

Debs

Debs

Yes thank you Pod and Ramble, that's exactly what I was saying but as usual, people have what I call 'selective reading' on this board.

As I stated on another thread, I'm no expert on dogs but for example, I know what an Akita is supposed to look like. I have the opportunity to buy a puppy from a breeder but I'm not because I feel her bitch is smaller than an Akita should be and she doesn't exhibit the temperament that I feel an Akita should. That bitch doesn't need to be shown in a ring for me to know that. I can't see me breeding because it seems like a minefield but if down the line I had a lot of people wanting a puppy who I felt would be good owners, I would have all the relevant tests done and then I'd at least get the breeder to give me their opinion. Type is important, yes, because if you want a pedigree dog, chances are you want the dog to look a certain way. I just don't think the show ring is the be all and end all. There are breeders out there who don't show for whatever reason but they are as into their dogs as those that choose to show their dogs. Neither is a better breeder than the other.