I started a new thread because of the unbelievable length of the other (I can't believe I read the whole thing).

Pet person apparently made her initial comment because a serious breeder refused to sell her a puppy. She seems to be disturbed by two things.

1. Serious breeders disrespect her because her motive for breeding is to make money even though she is trying to produce healthy pets.

2. She thinks that people think her dogs are being exploited unfairly for money (and she apparently is correct about the attitudes of some responders).

I'll tackle the second one first because I think it is the easiest. Contrary to a few responders, I don't see breeding for money to be any more unfair to the dogs than breeding for show wins. Keeping dogs in a kennel with no time in the house with their people, no chance to have new experiences, etc., is a sad life for a Labrador. But Pet person doesn't do this. The actual treatment of her dogs is probably a non-issue for most of us. We would be happy to sell her a pet dog that would be spayed. It is the fact that she wants to breed that is the issue.

So why is she not being treated with respect by serious breeders? She probably is producing dogs that fill the needs of her purchasers, who just want a healthy pet. The money issue is distracting from the real reason she is not getting the respect she wants. I offer as an example a well known field breeder who dabbles in conformation. This breeder has actually supported herself for decades by breeding Labradors. She has produced many field champions, including some National winners. She would undoubtedly make the list of the most influential breeders of field labs for the last few decades. She just finished judging the National Amateur Retriever Championship. I could think of some other examples of people who not only make money on their dogs but are largely supported by them and are yet considered upstanding members of the Lab community.

The difference between these people and Pet person is that Pet person has ONLY the profit motive for breeding her dogs- at least that's what she says. She is not a member of the community of breeders and therefore is not testing her stock against her goals for the breed. Serious breeders may not agree on the most important goals for their breeding program - the breeders of the new NAFC certainly do not have the same goals as the winner of Potomac, and one could argue that they don't belong to the same community. But they both belong to A community, and they are both constantly comparing their progress toward their goals with those of other people. That is one thing it takes to be a respected member of the community of serious dog breeders. Pet person, unless and until you join this community, you will not be taken seriously by most people who are in the community. You don't have to show in conformation. You could do agility, obedience, field work, contribute to breeding programs for service dogs, do therapy work with your dogs, etc. But you need to do something to test your breeding program against some sort of external standard.

The other thing that makes a person a member of the community is service to the community and to the breed. I know people who haven't ever had a litter and don't title their dogs, but they are valued community members because they belong to organizations, serve as show secretaries, teach obedience classes, or help with research projects that benefit the breed. Belonging to a club is not for everyone; nevertheless it is harder to be accepted into the community if you don't belong to any organizations devoted to the betterment of the breed. If you don't do either of these things, test your breeding stock in some way and/or serve the greater community in some way, then you won't be considered a serious breeder.

Thank you for your well thought out, calm, rational response.

Interesting points, Peggy.

I noticed that you used the words "serious breeder," which isn't really the terms used by the OP. Any reason for switching?

I like the way you incorporated concepts of community, though the Labrador "community" is really large and might include people such as commercial breeders who actually do have organizations and meetings where they are educated about how to become better commercial breeders.

"Serious breeder" is the term I have always used to designate people who have goals for their breeding program, which is what i think is the characteristic of the people who are generally considered to be part of the Labrador community. It is different from being ethical; the two do not always correlate. We have probably all at least heard of serious breeders who are not as ethical as we would like. The OP considers herself an ethical breeder, and I don't see any reason to dispute this. But the person who refused to sell her a puppy does not sell breeding stock to breeders who are not serious breeders. I don't know what I would have done if she had approached me, but I'm safe in any case, as I don't "do" chocolate.

I would say that the commercial breeders have their own community, which overlaps with the serious breeders even less than the show and field communities overlap. The OP is unhappy because of a perceived lack of respect by the serious community. I don't think she wants to join the commercial community. Although she says that her only goal is to make money, I think she wants to be an ethical breeder and would like to be accepted as such by serious breeders. Hopefully we have collectively explained to her what she needs to do if she really wants this. I know of many people who started as she did and became serious breeders with their own program for the improvement of their dogs.

I'm going to assume that pet person is completely true to her words.
The use of her dogs and the use of show/field/service dogs are the same. We are all exploiting our dogs in the way she means it. No arguing there and that is the original point of her post.

What makes us all IRRITATED is her attitude and her lack of social skills. She is benefiting from the work of the people that sold her the dogs/puppies, and the people that bred all the dogs in her pedigrees, and yet she is not giving anything back to the Lab community. She can't tell that she will give back to the commercial breeders community because those people do not take good care of their dogs, and then she would be part of the puppy mill community.

Peggy hit the nail on the head. If we put money aside, how would I evaluate a person who wishes to purchase a bitch puppy on full registration? The person would have to bring something worthwhile to the table. That person would have to have genuine merit in some way before I would consider him or her.

It is interesting to hear some discussion on what criteria people use to place a bitch puppy on full registration. It would be nice if people used the same stringent criteria when allowing their males to be used at stud. I know several breeders who would never sell a bitch puppy on full registration to a breeder of pet puppies, but they would certainly allow their studs to be used on a pet person's pet quality bitch as long as she has clearances. How much breed participation is required of a purchaser of stud service?

Very good question!! Lets have some answers!

Not to steal the thread from Peggy (great job by the way!)But here is why I and perhaps many field AND show breeders have a "problem" with PET breeders, ethical and otherwise....

The Labrador breed is a working breed, bred for many generations to be a versatile dog suited for hunting, yet remaining an easy to live with companion. We have used Labs for Search and Rescue, bomb and drug detection, waterfowl and upland hunting, guide dogs for the disabled, and recently added sports of flyball and dock diving.
We have bred the Labrador to have a level of drive and intelligence that requires an active outlet in order for it to be truly happy and healthy.
We all know that in a litter, which often has 8 or more pups, that there are some that do not have the same level of desire as the rest of the litter. Or maybe there is some type of flaw that would preclude the pup from being of "type" with the breed standard. These pups were known as culls, or as we PC people call them, "pet quality".

Labs are known for their gentle nature, which makes them an ideal companion in the home..which has lead to many wanting them for a "pet" only. Breeders of working Labradors would sell their "pet quality" pups to them. The pups would lead a happy life, the people were happy with their new dog and life was good :)

Sometime down the road, the "Pet" buyers, thinking that the breeders were either charging too much or that they could make a mint doing what the breeders do, decided to breed their "pet quality" dogs to other "pet quality" dogs, selling them to others for just slightly under or even the SAME price as the breeders were. They did this by marketing the pups off of the breeders' names and by the AKC papers alone.
Pet quality breeders are now flooding the market of good pet homes with their pups...and while a FEW are doing ALL the necessary health clearances, the pups may or may not meet the Labrador standard in conformation or in working ability, and in temperament. Yet these pups are being sold for premium prices.
Breeders are having a harder time placing their pups that don't make the grade, so to speak, because of the flood of pups from Pet breeders. Breeders having trouble placing pups, have fewer litters. This leads to more people looking for pet quality pups to go to Pet breeders.
IMPORTANT FACT: Labrador breeders are the holders of all of the past, present, and FUTURE genes of Labradors that are TRUE to the standard and PURPOSE of the breed!!! If they no longer breed their dogs for future generations, then the only thing that we have left of this great breed are the CULLS, oops! I meant "pet quality" dogs.

So, if you are not breeding for a purpose, be it in the conformation ring or hunt test/field trial/working dogs, then you are doing the breed a dis-service. If you "must" breed dogs for a living, then pick a breed that was created entirely for the purpose of being a pet!!! There are literally dozens of breeds meant for that purpose, choose one or two and leave the working breeds alone before they are ruined beyond repair.

No dogs were developed solely to be show dogs, so if that is the ONLY purpose one is breeding for (dog shows), then in reality it is no different than breeding for companionship.

There is a big difference PP.

If we breed, we breed to get the best of the best, not only conformation, soundness, temperament but also intelligence.

always striving for perfection; but even those who do not quite measure up to the standard can still be used to bless the people.

Lets not forget we need rescue dogs, narcotics police K-9, assist dogs, Thearpy (READ), as well as those labs who are detecting cancer in patients at an early age so the Drs can remove it earlier,

We wouldn't have a hard time placing our pups that don't make the grade if we sold them for $200 a pop. And it follows that pet people wouldn't be as motivated to jump on the breeding bandwagon if the potential profits were lower.

The problem is, there aren't quite enough independently wealthy breeders who can afford to participate in this expensive hobby and not recoup some of their costs from litter sales. This is an expensive hobby, and the reality is that many of us wouldn't make the expenditures necessary to show our dogs if the income from the sale of the pet puppies didn't cover at least part of our costs. If the only ones carrying forward this breed were the ones who could afford to do so while giving away their pet puppies, the breed would be in peril.

Actually I am not PP and I don't agree with PP. But I also don't agree that breeding solely for show wins is healthy for the breed and it just isn't profit breeders who are detracting from the breed. When massive bone, open coats and no proven work ethic is what wins and what is bred, then that is doing nothing more for the breed than anything else. There are plenty of show mills out there breeding 8 month old boys on prelims and their girls non-stop every cycle to ensure they have something to show in every sweepstakes class. Just because they charge $1,500 a puppy and show their dogs does not make them a great breeder. I think if people are going to pass judgment they should at least be consistent and make sure their own "community" is cleaned up a bit.

....and not EVERY puppy that comes out of EVERY litter bred by EVERY show breeder makes it in the show ring.

You all don't drown the "rejects", you place them in responsible "pet" homes, correct?? Where they are knocking over toddlers, walking their kids to school, secretly getting into the groceries in the back of the car on the way to the beach house, and waiting patiently for the contents of their Christmas stockings to be revealed!!!

This, too, is the "beauty" of a Labrador Retriever is it not?