do dogs have a need to breed?

I had an interesting conversation with my grandfather about dogs and their 'need to breed'.

He once had a German Shepherd named Queenie who basically did as she pleased. If she wanted to chase a cat, she did. If she wanted to help herself to what was in the fridge, she did. If she wanted to go prowling for dogs, she did. She never had a litter though, which my grandfather attributed to her high standards of picking a mate.
Had she found a dog she wanted to have puppies with, he would have let her because according to him, dogs should be allowed to breed if they want to.

I remember hearing theories over and over again when I visited vet offices. People did not want to spay their pet until it had a litter, since that's whats better or what it would want or what is healthy.
How could we ever know that?

It's not like watching Discovery and seeing wolves choose a mate, breed, and carry on the species.
Domestic dogs are controlled, almost exclusively, by humans. We choose their breeding destiny.
But if we didn't, would domestic (house) dogs take over that responsibility?

I understand the merit of responsible breeding. I admire breeders who are involved in or at least understand rescue. I don't think I've met a single responsible breeder who was breeding because their dogs wanted to. Correct me if I'm wrong breeders, but isn't the usual reason 'for the betterment of the breed'? A totally human controlled enterprise?

While grandpa was talking, I remember reading Elizabeth Marshall Thomas' The Hidden Life of Dogs. She seemed to think that dogs do indeed have a desire to procreate, and she let them. To a point, her 'discoveries' were at least food for thought - and this is one of those thoughts.

- Would our dogs, if left to their own devices (but still in our domestic sense of care), have a need to procreate?
- Could pet/house dogs still retain the natural desire to procreate and carry on the species?