GS is not right! Come on! Is there one part of that post that reflects a small government free market point of view?
I'm an animal lover who currently has two mutts, but I've competed with purebred dogs before. Breed fanciers do serve a purpose. There is a benefit to there being a great variety of purebred dog types and functions, and some people make a good honest living in the promotion and competition and breeding of these dogs.
The overpopulation of dogs at shelters is a problem. But the solution is not to villify the purebred dog fancier. Backyard breeders who 'just think it'd be fun to have a litter' or think they can make a couple hundred bucks selling puppies because their dog is pretty, are the problem. Not the breeders who not only breed very selectively, but strictly control which pups are sent to breeding homes.
The "small government free market" point of view shouldn't be taken to extremes. If it is, we'd also be having blonde blue-eyed human babies bred and sold for profit.
Backyard breeders who think they can make a couple of hundred bucks.
ROTFLMAO....
Let's hope that is less than 1% of the backyard breeders.
I have Labs from both home and pro breeders and the bottom line IMO is temperment of the canines lineage and training/obedience by the human parents.
OK, then. I agree with you that no breed should die out. However, there needs to be strict regulation on the breeding of dogs and cats. Inbreeding has nearly ruined a great many breeds.
I will also take my cross bred Harm over any thoroughbred in the world. He is smart, handsome, loyal, gentle, protective, and does not have the health problems that so many purebreds have. He is Alaskan Malamute/Siberian Husky/Lab cross.