Originally Posted by SevenSins
Again, why? If you did your homework and actually picked a trustworthy, responsible and ethical breeder to get your dog from, wouldn't you assume that the breeder you picked was knowledgeable enough to make appropriate breeding decisions for their breeding program without the input of perhaps a less experienced owner that wanted a dog for sport but doesn't necessarily have the knowledge of bloodlines and pedigrees, structure and biomechanics, and the long term goals of the breeder's program?
If you did your homework and placed your breeding potential dog in a trustworthy, responsible, and ethical home that is knowledgeable enough to raise, train, and prove out the dog in an appropriate fashion, doesn't it seem reasonable to allow them some say in whether the dog is used to perpetuate the breed, to a degree that reflects their knowledge? After all, you know the lines, but they know the dog, and if there is a compelling reason to not breed the dog they, having thousands of dollar likely invested in the individual, could well deserve to weigh in.
It's a relationship that, from what I've seen, works best when based on mutual respect and honest communication. When one player holds all the cards, unilateral decisions and a combative relationship seems far more likely.
Then again, I'm in the "it takes a village" camp. Playing king for the day never really appealed to me.