Firstly, nobody who tries to define a backyard breeder can do so, without describing registered breeders as well. The mannerisms and modus operandii are identical, and denials of overcrowding and overbreeding by registered breeders cannot be taken at face value. And the animal show scene encourages breeding - the points for "breeder of the year" are predicated on more animals being at shows, rather than less. And there is no selection criterion based on kennel/cattery of excellence factors.
Come to think of it, the cat fancy in South Africa don't at this point even have cattery of excellence program on the radar screen, and when or if they do, it will only be "voluntary".
Second, every time anyone describing the pet overpopulation problem uses the term "BYB's and puppy/kitten mills", the registered breeder fraternity cheers and goes off to the next show, and breeds the next litter, secure in the veneer of respectability afforded them by their club and registry affiliation.
Third, how is it possible that merely being a member of a club and hence a fee paying adherent of a registry automatically makes you a respectable (they will use the word "ethical") breeder? Anyone can do it, and many do.
Do the clubs or registries have any qualifying criteria, like written exams that have to be passed before admitting somebody as a registered breeder? No they don't. And why not? Because the registries would be limiting their own fee income.
So we are encouraged by the breeder propaganda to accept registered breeders as "good" and all other breeders as "bad". so let's ask : what have the cat and dog registries done lately for the benefit of the animal? Well clearly nothing. Go and look at pedigree dogs exposed, PDE 3 years on, and the reaction of the KC to the advisory commission recommendations in the UK.
This is the Oregon house bill 2470, enforcing the most basic of conditions of care for the dogs of breeders - all breeders. And how did the AKC members react to "one of their own" (dog judge Ted Paul) who worked with HSUS to lobby successfully for the adoption of this bill?
Now: I put it to you that having read the bill on the link above, how could anyone interested in the welfare of their animals, object? and yet the entire AKC membership want Ted Paul dismissed. Now THAT tells you about the character of the people inside the dog fancy - in America, at least. And this is probably pretty representative of the cat fancy too - and other countries' fancies as well, surely?
If pet owners are the ones who are "irresponsible" for not sterilising, and become tomorrow's "backyard breeders", why are "responsible" breeders continually breeding more puppies and kittens for sale to the same pet owners they complain about? And why do "responsible" breeders pass on unsterilised animals? From where do "backyard breeders" get their breeding stock?
I suggest we should merely refer to "registered" and "unregistered" breeders - it's more honest.