Originally Posted by garydogz

Yeah - I wasn't too happy with that expression when I used it but couldn't think of a better one to convey the thought that surely it would be better to create a dog that is custom built for the modern world than getting an older breed,which was created for a different environment, and making it convert. I would cite as an example the recent dangerous dog saga. Some things are in the nature of an animal (or person?) and will break out under certain circumstances. This should not be taken as any sort of criticism of a particular breed as we made it, over many years, for our own reasons. It is just a square peg / round hole situation. You can see why I tried for a short expression to cover this now.

Originally Posted by jackson

I think all human beings are selfish. Some more than others, and some are mostly very unselfish, but all would at some point put themselves over others, it is human nature.

Pet owning is a privalege. That doesn't mean there should be any criteria for it other than that people are able to care for and finance the pet properly, but plenty of people still want a dog so get one, regardless of whether they work all day so have to leave it on it's own, or whether they have the time to invest in it.

Yes, bad breeders will only breed what people want, I don't believe good, ethical breeders will. That is the reason that people who are turned down by responsible breeders can still get a dog, puppy farmers and back yard breeders for whom once the cash is handed over, the 'transaction' is finished and it is simply seen as a business. If that kind of breeding was stopped, and only responsible breeders who would take the dog back at any time in it's life, should the current owner no longer be able to keep it, were allowed to breed, rescue centres would be virtually empty.

I do have the breed I want. I sat down with my husband decided what we wanted in a dog and looked at the breeds available, then chose one. It woudl never have occured to us that we needed to create a whole new breed as nothing was quite perfect for us.

Originally Posted by garydogz

Hi again Jackson. I agree wholeheartedly that the problem is people rather than dogs and yes people do have dogs who should not. Your theory of making "responsible dog breeders" into some kind of unofficial welfare police is frankly absurd. Just how many personal and financial questions would you tolerate from the check out girl at Tesco before she would let you buy your groceries? Any move down this line would escalate the costs of a breeder - and therefore his pups- through the roof and in so doing make dog breeding a more lucrative proposition to the very people you are trying to eliminate.

Yes, bad breeders will only breed what people want, I don't believe good, ethical breeders will.
One of these is going out of business!

Originally Posted by jackson

The whole 'dangerous dog saga' is brought about by irresponsible breeders and owners, it has nothing to do with breeds. I have never once, for example seen reported a dog attack on a child where I thought the adults involved acted responsibly. Any dog, any breed will bite given the right circumstances.

Originally Posted by garydogz

Again yes but the question is how extreme do those circumstances have to be and are they the same for all breeds. This is my point about "against nature". Staffies, for example, are far quicker to "turn" than say a poodle and can inflict far more damage as they are bred to do just that.

Originally Posted by sallyanne

Totally different and has no relavance to this thread whatsoever,how the hell can buying shpping at tesco compare to dog ownership

Good Breeders do and will give prospective owners the 3rd degree when it comes to buying one of their pups.

Originally Posted by jackson

garydogz,

buying a dog is not the same as shopping for groceries, maybe the fact you compare the two is where your problem lies? I underwent a rather uncomfortable third degree when I bought my older girl, we still joke affectionately about her breeder calling her the 'puppy police' and my OH is largely too scared to phone her. However, Iknow wholeheartedly that she only has the welfare of her dogs and the pups she has bred at heart, and I respect her experience, so it is all fine with me. I have been more subtle with my puppy buyers, but questioned them nevertheless, and even turned down a family who drove for 3 hours to meet me as I didn't think they were suitable after all. Most website relating to puppy buying suggest you expect some questioning by the breeder, so we're not unique.

If you ask most dog groomers which dogs they have been bitten most by, they will often say Golden retrievers, yet people would imagine them one of the most biddable breeds. ALL breeds are open to damage by poor breeding and poor management and handling. Equally.

Originally Posted by garydogz

Can't you see that you are creating the very market you so abhor? I would not take too many questions from a bloke selling me a dog - I am the customer after all and if a breeder started asking financial or any other personal questions, beyond those that you could reasonably expect, then he could keep his dog and I would buy from somewhere else. If I especially wanted a particular dog I would then lie!!! Are we to give these people bank details, employment records or tax returns? What about DNA samples? Bloody cheek.