Pet-Keeping

Is there anything that is inherently wrong with pet-guardianship?

This is a rather difficult question for me to answer. I want to say that there is nothing inherently wrong with pet-guardianship  but I am well aware of the number of problems that we are having in regards to pet-guardianship. Breeding, for instance, just to get better pets is, I think, not morally justified. If one buys a pet at a pet store, one is contributing either towards this kind of breeding or to the very unethical practice of capturing animals from the wild. The problem here is that, while there may be nothing wrong with pet-guardianship, if there is a problem with the means through which we gain access to animals, then the morality of pet-guardianship itself is irrelevant. Pet-guardianship would only be justified if one happened upon an animal in need of guardianship, or if one was taking care of an animal who has already been bred or captured with assurance that that it would not contribute towards the continuation of current practices.

The next question, then, is what do we do with animals who are in pet-stores? What will happen if we don't adopt them? How will we contribute towards the continuation of the industry if we do?