Giselle, you make some very good points. I guess its just a matter of opinion about whether or not dogs should be bred for a working purpose to fill a niche, or if they can be bred regardless of them not fitting into a niche. Though your point about over population seems a bit irrelevant, because that would mean ANY dog, AKC registered or not, is irresponsible to breed. And I know, there are some people who believe that too. Once again, a matter of opinion, I suppose.

Quote Originally Posted by shepgirl View Post
Very well put Giselle and you took the words out of my mouth also. Big deal if they do the testing (which I don't buy anyway) but I think we have enough breeds for everyone and creating new ones is irresponsible in itself. I'm a Shepherd lover and some breeders are trying to destroy that breed with designer dogs too..... doesn't make it right.
What makes you think that just because you don't like the dog that obviously the breeder doesn't care about the health? Its one thing to be skeptical and want to look more into seeing if they're being honest, its another to flat out say that they more than likely are lying. A breeder of any other breed has just as much of a chance of lying about testing or not lying. Just because they breed a breed you dislike does not mean they don't care about their dogs. Also, what is a designer dog? A dog without a purpose for being bred? Because most dogs now days aren't used for their original purposes. If someone has a labrador who does shows, breeding, and a family pet, but no hunting and retrieving, does that make it a 'designer dog' just because its not living up to the breed's purpose? No. A dog is a dog. There's such thing as a deigner hand bag or designer clothes, but there is no such thing as a designer dog, dogs are not objects. Regardless of if you like the breed or not, they are not objects.