nobody yell at me, but I think it would be ludicrous to expect a breeder to not be paid for their time, to reimburse their expenses, etc. Someone pointed out that there's a difference between working because you "have" to, and working because you "love" what you do (as breeders say).
I'll put this argument in perspective to myself. I "have" to work. Almost every adult person I've ever run into has bills to pay, and so you work to pay them. So I "have" to have a job. However, I also work in radio, and I "love" radio because it's so fun it's not like holding a 'real' job. Because I love it, should I earn no money for it? Should I only be reimbursed for work that I hate--say, I go be a DJ for free on weekends, but get paid to do something that I'd really hate to do Monday-Friday? I should only be allowed to get paid for doing things that I dislike, and should do things that I love for free, simply because I love it?
Did we just time-warp back to the U.S.S.R. or something?
Anyway yes, I believe you should be paid for what you do.
I also believe the high cost of a dog is a DETERRENT to both to irresponsible owners who would get a dog as an impulse purchase, and to good-intentioned owners who would be wonderful pet parents "if only"...if only they could afford the vaccinations...the obedience lessons...the spay/neutering...had enough time to spend...the list goes on and on and on.
The burden is put on the buyer of the dog, then, to seek out responsible breeders...even to look at rescues & shelters as a first stop on the road to pet ownership. I did that, but alas all I could find was pit bulls and I don't think I'd be a good "pet parent" to a breed of dog that I am wary and downright afraid of.
And the burden is on the breeder to responsibly breed, and to sell to people they feel could care for their babies. I personally like the questions breeders ask potential customers on TOP of charging money. To me, that's a mark of responsiblity. They are, after all, tranferring the care of a living being to another person. |