Sorted! Nationwide limit on dog price

Just thoughts.

I think maybe that if there was a nationwide limit on what anyone was allowed to charge for a dog then we could find that the problem of over breeding was a lot more under control.

I'd suggest £150 as the limit for private sellers and £200 as the limit for rescue centres.

I am aware of the cost of health testing but since the people who do this are producing pups for themselves and to further the breed they love then I see no reason why they can't fund it as a hobby is usually funded.

Your thoughts?

rune

It wouldn't work...it is the same with everything in life, you pay a certain amount for a reason according to design, quality, rarity, etc.,...same as dogs!

What would putting a £150 price on all puppies achieve?

Hmm, my window was darkened momentarily when a pig flew past...............

We live in a democracy and free economy, in other words there we can charge what we like for what we like and people will either pay or walk away.

What other commodities are there which have a maximum price.

In fact is not what you are suggesting price fixing which, last time I looked, was considered illegal in some circumstances?

The bad breeders would still make money - They will not be paying out for studs, health tests ect - so with hardly any money going out just means a higher income.

Interesting concept

I can see lots of advantages in your ideas BUT I wonder if this could be carried out in practice?

To a certain extent, the price of a pedigree pup is governed by market forces, supply & demand. If the breeder is limited in the amount he/she could charge, & if demand outstripped supply, there would surely be a temptation for both potential buyers & potential sellers, to do "off record deals", backhanders, or give payments other than monetary ~ but obviously only the limited price would go through the books & be on the receipt!

And how would the price limits be checked & policed?

But I totally appreciate your point that most reputable breeders state that they only breed to further their breed, as a hobby & for the enjoyment, so yes, most say they aren't in it for a profit, & on that basis should be able & prepared to fund any losses themselves.

As for rescues, I've no problem with setting a limit for the price charged, because anyone who thinks it's too low can obviously make a voluntary donation, and if anyone thinks it is too high, then they probably haven't thought about the other costs of having a dog.

BUT perhaps it would be better for rescue dogs to be cheaper than non-rescues to encourage people to opt for a rescue dog where possible?

Just my initial thoughts, but I suspect that others may have something to say about breeders selling potential championship winning dogs against those dogs that for whatever reason, could not be shown? And what about the dogs returned to breeders?

Might cut to the chase more to strictly licence breeders - make sure the criteria are set in such a way as to render backstreet breeders ineligible for a licence - then have the power to put all pups bred by unlicensed breeders up for rehoming.

£150 is probably more than some backstreet breeders of say, staffies, get 'down the pub' for a pup (I've been offered staffy pups for £30-£50 in the past by my dodgy ex-neighbours' daughter).

can just clarify something, in case not all people know.

Just because you BREED does not mean you need a LICENCE!

The fact you have not got a licence does NOT reflect your lack of worth as a breeder, nor does the opposite apply.

Licenses are only required if certain criteria are met!

To right!! Someone I know of has a licence which entitles her to nine litters a year - something to be proud of...ermmm nope.

Never bred myself but I understand some health checks can cost £100 or more so anyone with a breed that has only one or two pups would be making a huge loss each time or not health checking. I think I would prefer to pay more and be sure the pups are checked.

Yep----we'd havre to stop dogs being looked at as a commodity.

We can't charge for children and maybe other living things deserve the same protection?

I'd rather that happened than have an 'ownership' test or a license fee for each dog.

rune