I was wanting to know from purebred dog breeders and fans - Would you still be against Designer Dogs if the problem of dogs being dumped no longer existed? I do hasten to add that shelters are not only overpopulated with crossbreds but also with purebred dogs but it seems that the mainstream excuse from purebred dog breeders is that there are too many crossbreds in shelters already without the need to breed any more so I was curious to know if this problem no longer existed would you still object to DD breeding? and if so, then why?
Only 25 to 40% of dogs in shelters are purebreds, and they get adopted out much much faster than mixed breed dogs.
However, even ifthere weren't a pet overpopulation problem, I would still be opposed to irresponsible breeding of purebred or crossbreed dogs.
It's a moot point though, as there IS a pet overpopulation problem, and always will be as long as there are irresponsible pet owners and breeders. Personally I put the blame as much on the person who takes their dog to the humane society for "Digging, shedding, drooling, jumping, chewing, etc" as I do the person who bred the dog.
simply, yes. with over 300 recognized purebreeds of dogs already in existence, there is no reason to create more and there is no reason why someone cannot find a breed of dog that suits them and their lifestyle. if breed doesn't matter, than there will always be plenty 'ooops' litters of puppies, or pups from the idiots who think their dog has to have puppies so the kids can witness the miracle of birth, or whatever other stupid arse reasons people have for doing it.
there aren't people just breeding the cutesy designer breeds, there are people who are intenitionally breeding border collies with smaller breeds like paps, and JRT's, for sports like flyball, where you want the fastest dog around but a smaller size works to the teams advantage. there are people in the working dog world that breed mixes purposefully to make better ranch dogs, or herding dogs, or livestock guard dogs.
it just gotten to an absolutely absurd level of craziness as far as i am concerned and i wouldnt be for it under any circumstances.... period.
I guess I would not be against any breeding if there were homes for ALL dogs and shelters would have waiting lists for rescue dogs, but still I would be against those who do not do health tests and produce sick dogs, as well as bad temperament dogs, either pure breeds or mixes. These dogs usually have no second chance, they are not adoptable
I do not think that just because we have over 300 breeds, we could not create new breeds....Years ago someone could had said "we have 100 breeds so......" There are still breeds being reconstructed or created and waiting for approval by registries, AKC, and FCI, and they are admitted to the registry after they meet some standards, but it does not take to breed A to B and claim a new breed, it takes YEARS of work and devotion of fanciers, research on health and behavior, selection of just the best of the best for the breeding program. I do not see that we should not have the same chance as our ancestors had, yes we should be able to create new breeds but follow very strict breeding program, including creating a standard, health research, behavior research, not just breeding cute dogs