# What's wrong with pet breeders?



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

I'm not starting a debate, only a discussion. 

I used to believe that everyone MUST buy a health tested purebred puppy, from only show/working breeders.

However, I have since changed my view. I feel that it's ok to buy from pet breeders, preferably health tested, and crossbred if the owner so wished. Although I disagree with crossing vastly different types of dogs (ie bulldogs x cavaliers for example), but the common crossbreeds, like cockapoos, labradoodles I think are fine to breed purposely.

I'm not going to turn this into a crossbreed discussion, because that isn't what this is about (and there's already a crossbreed thread going on). But I feel that pet breeders shouldn't be slamed. I got Ollie from a pet breeder. She was breeding her pet bitch, basically because she wanted her to have a litter. She sensibly chose a good stud dog who was health tested and had good conformation. Her own bitch was also a great example of the cocker spaniel breed, so the litter were good specimens of the breed. 

I don't see anything wrong with supplying the pet market, as long as you choose your stud dog wisely (preferably health tested, and either good in the show ring/field trials or has good conformation), and your own bitch is either health tested, good in the show ring/field trials or has good conformation.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of dogs are pets only, not show or working dogs. So what's wrong with producing puppies that will be pets only? As long as the parents have good conformation and one or both are health tested, then I don't see an issue. 

IMO there's nothing wrong with responsible pet breeders.  Crossbreed or purebreed.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

If the bitch is good in the showring/field trials/working trials etc, then you arent a pet breeder are you??

I dont agree with it, there are plenty of excellent show/working breeders out there doing a damn fine job of supplying pups to pet owners without pet owners jumpingon the bandwagon.

I dont care how well meaning pet owners are, there is no way you can convince me they do as much research etc as the show/working breeders!

Just breeding for the sake of 'having a litter' is not a good enough reason in my book. There is no way on earth I would lift the Endorsements on any of my pups in pet homes.

This could get interesting........................

And just to add, I have seen many many many rotties bred by the caring 'pet' breeder and they look nowt like there are supposed to and its fecking annoying to think peeps are forking out decent sums of money for a rottie that looks nowt like a rottie should!!


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

I agree, me and hubby last night were looking at springers. We surfed and surfed, we want a pet not a show dog or a working dog, many of the breeders we found would not home to pet homes. We found one breeder who we fell in love with the second we saw the dogs and what they were doing was mixing the working lines to show lines but very carefully and doing health tests so no only considering temperament but looks. It was a perfect match for what we were looking for.

It's nice that there is show and working breeders but some people don't like doing either and just want a pet, i'm not saying that working and show can't be pets but it seems like a waste to either take a great show dog and not show or a working dog who would be brilliant out in the field and instead just does agility part time or a run in the park. 

I think sometimes people aren't happy that dogs are bred for just pets.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> If the bitch is good in the showring/field trials/working trials etc, then you arent a pet breeder are you??
> 
> I dont agree with it, there are plenty of excellent show/working breeders out there doing a damn fine job of supplying pups to pet owners without pet owners jumpingon the bandwagon.
> 
> ...


I did say "as long as... your bitch had good conformation". So if you don't show or work, then as long as your bitch has good conformation and has preferably been health tested, then that's fine in my book (obviously she also has to have good temperament too, but that's usually a reason why people want a litter, because their bitch is such a nice dog). 

Many people are breeding their pet bitches these days, crossbred and purebred, so its happening, whether people like it or not.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

SpringerHusky said:


> i'm not saying that working and show can't be pets but it seems like a waste to either take a great show dog and not show or a working dog who would be brilliant out in the field and instead just does agility part time or a run in the park.


completely agree. its a waste not showing a great show dog, and a dog bred to work would go mad being just a pet.

there is a market for pet only dogs, I just don't understand why some people don't like it.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Well most of my pups end up in pet homes, any Show/working homes that come along are a bonus!!

I dont consider myself to breed for show, I breed for temperament and conformation and type!! Most pet owners know nowt about conformation or type!!! And sadly, some dont care about temperament either!

There is many a potential 'champion' lying by the fireside somewhere - who cares?? the dog has a good home,what more could I ask??


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I did say "as long as... your bitch had good conformation". So if you don't show or work, then as long as your bitch has good conformation and has preferably been health tested, then that's fine in my book (obviously she also has to have good temperament too, but that's usually a reason why people want a litter, because their bitch is such a nice dog).
> 
> Many people are breeding their pet bitches these days, crossbred and purebred, so its happening, whether people like it or not.


but how do pet breeders know their dogs have good conformation?


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

noushka05 said:


> but how do pet breeders know their dogs have good conformation?


Absolutely!!!

how many would even understand the word conformation???


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> but how do pet breeders know their dogs have good conformation?


I mean as long as the dog hasn't got bent legs, arched back (in the wrong breeds), too small a head etc. Ie the dog looks like the breed or if a crossbreed, the dog is in proporation and moves correctly.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

I agree with ceearott, there are plenty of good show/working breeders to supply the pet market, not all their puppies are going to be suitable for showing or working so there's no reason why they won't be suitable as pets
I think one of the reasons there's such a crisis in rescue is because so many people are breeding thoughtlessly
If people were more prepared to wait for a good breeder's occasional litter instead of having an 'I want it now' attitude there wouldn't be place for BYBs, which at the end of the day is what anyone who isn't a PF or ethical breeder is, & maybe there would be less dogs ending up in rescue
Hope I explained myself OK as it's hard to define


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

How do us pet owners know what the breed should look like though? I could identify, say, a rottie in the street and think it was a lovely looking rottie but wouldn't know if it was a good example of the breed.

I am told that my own puppy is a very good example of the breed - now I obviously think he is handsome (as we all think our dogs are) but it has had to be explained to me by his breeder WHY he is a good example.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I mean as long as the dog hasn't got bent legs, arched back (in the wrong breeds), too small a head etc. Ie the dog looks like the breed or if a crossbreed, the dog is in proporation and moves correctly.


That is indeed the basics of conformation. So, question, how would you choose a rottie, for example, breeder?? Do you know what a rottie should look like and what it should move like?

If I showed you some pics of rotts from pet breeders and show breeders would you know the difference?? Because I would!! And so would any show breeder - a pet breeder wont!!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Dogless said:


> How do us pet owners know what the breed should look like though? I could identify, say, a rottie in the street and think it was a lovely looking rottie but wouldn't know if it was a good example of the breed.
> 
> I am told that my own puppy is a very good example of the breed - now I obviously think he is handsome (as we all think our dogs are) but it has had to be explained to me by his breeder WHY he is a good example.


Its called doing your research before choosing a breeder!! Learning about your chosen breed and learning what they should look and move like!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I mean as long as the dog hasn't got bent legs, arched back (in the wrong breeds), too small a head etc. Ie the dog looks like the breed or if a crossbreed, the dog is in proporation and moves correctly.


what about correct lay of shoulders? turn of stifle? etc etc....dont they matter?


----------



## gorgeous (Jan 14, 2009)

For me, one of the most important things when we chose our new puppy breed, was temperament. And I am unsure if a pet breeder would be that knowledgeable about their pets ancestry and of the studs ancestry.

I do think if you are going to fork out a decent sum of money for a pup, you might as well make sure you get a good one, will cost you less money (and heartache) in the long run!


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

I so agree with Ceearot in that some breeds look nothing like they are supposed to - especially the Staffie, long legs and skinny as hell some of the apparent "pure KC reg" dogs. It's awful how some people have ruined the look of some breeds because most pet breeders think if their dogs are KC regd then they look how they're supposed to without knowing anything about the breed standard. Also i'd take a bet that most pet breeders don't health test either - let alone show or work and just flood the market with inferior examples of their breed.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Ceearott said:


> Its called doing your research before choosing a breeder!! Learning about your chosen breed and learning what they should look and move like!


I understand that; think I put it across wrongly . I did years of research before I chose my breed but it is no substitute for taking the advice of an experienced breeder and having hands on practical experience of the breed. I went to plenty of shows, talked to plenty of people but still wouldn't feel completely confident that I could identify a good example from a pet breeder. I can tell poor examples, but the finer points take years of experience I would have thought? That is one of the reasons I chose a reputable breeder who does breed for conformation and temperment.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Much as I love our Bob, I personally think his conformation is appalling, his back is dipped, he's cow hocked & his gait, especially at a gallop, just looks 'wrong' somehow
I'm not sure if it's down to the lack of thought that went into his breeding- Rottweiler/husky, so his former owner told my husband, a ridiculous mating, or whether the sire & dam used were just really poor examples of their breeds
If most of the dog breeding population can't tell good conformation from poor (I believe judges have an eye for this, sorry if I'm wrong but I don't know much about showing) then really, maybe they shouldn't be breeding


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

I know what a rottie should look and move like. 

I just think its a shame that only people who show or work are "allowed" to breed. 

Rescuing is a whole other issue, but as said many times before on their forum, some people don't want to rescue or a rescue dog just isn't for them. Who are we to judge people's choices? As long as dogs aren't in any harm, why should we dictate things, like "you shouldn't breed your pet bitch" or "you can't buy puppies from a pet breeder"?


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Learning the finer points of the breed can take as little or as long as you like, it depends how much studying you are prepared to do, also, some people have a natural 'eye' for spotting a good dog - these people make good breeders and good judges.

If its something you are interested in and enjoy, it wont take long, and to me its worth it!!

I wouldnt buy a different breed before studying and talking to breeders and watching at shows first. In fact, we have already chosen our breed we wanna own when we are too old to handle rotts, which I hope wont be for a good few years yet, but already, I am watching this breed at shows already and reaading up about them so when the time comes I will be clued up. I aint forking out good money for a pet breeders puppy!!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Like I said at the beggining, most show breeders pups go to pet homes anyway, so why the need for those owners to start breeding?????

Its a rare litter indeed that has more than 3 maximum pups turn out good enough to do well in the showring.

So I am breeding for the pet market more than the show market!


----------



## Hiafa123 (May 30, 2011)

My mate bought a male springer spaniel from breeder who is regarded as a top breeder. He was a springer that wasnt like other springers, really placid, walked at your heel etc.She left him at the kennels as she was attending a family wedding and the next day the kennel owner asked if she had noticed him coughing, which he had been and advised to take him to vets (kennel owner suspected something wasnt just right. A good few tests later and the result was that the dog was not to be walked off lead,no more than 20 mins walk and tablets that cost £50 per month. The vet couldnt say how long the dog would have. He had a hereditary condition.I got a call off my friend asking to call at her house(she only lives down the road) as husband was out at work and the dog didnt seem too well.I realised that the dog was having difficulty breathing and put it gently to her that this could be it - to cut short the story he was PTS. A few days later my friend rang the breeder who had a couldnt care less attitude, said well its just bad luck I had all the tests done(although my mate didnt see any proof) and then had the cheek to offer her a puppy from his next litter with a £50 discount.My friend declined the offer.

What really pees me off is pet breeders (by this I mean breeders who dont show etc) and the back yard breeders who knock out litters like shelling peas command prices that top show dogs are.:nono: I would be quite willing to pay show dog prices if I knew that all tests had been done(saves alot of heart ache) I was interested in ringcraft classes when we got our dobe but there was only one and it was on the night that I worked:cryin:.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

Also, all these pet breeders puppies are being bred, they need to be bought, otherwise they'll end up being put to sleep or put in rescue. Why should they be disregarded? 

It's strange how some people wouldn't buy a pet breeders pup, but if a pet breeder's pup was handed over to rescue, you would have it then. I don't see what the difference is, its the same pup. Is it just about money in this situation? Its cheaper to get it from a rescue than from the actual breeder?


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I know what a rottie should look and move like.
> 
> *I just think its a shame that only people who show or work are "allowed" to breed. *
> 
> Rescuing is a whole other issue, but as said many times before on their forum, some people don't want to rescue or a rescue dog just isn't for them. Who are we to judge people's choices? As long as dogs aren't in any harm, why should we dictate things, like "you shouldn't breed your pet bitch" or "you can't buy puppies from a pet breeder"?


At the moment far too many people who shouldn't be breeding dogs are breeding & too many people who shouldn't own a dog are owning (& often giving up on) them. They are both contributing to the rescue crisis, either directly or indirectly
As for peoples' choices, what about the dogs' choices? They probably wouldn't 'choose' to be handed in to rescue but they are, & wouldn't 'choose' to inherit herediatry disorders from their badly chosen parents but they do, all because of people 'wanting' something


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Dogless - can I challenge ya then?? 

I is not being nasty or owt here, but go have a look on the net and see if you can find what you think is a bad and a good example of a rottie and see what I think. Could you also decribe a rotties movement - without googling the answer??

I have to go pick up my daughter up, but will come back to this when I get back - again, I dont mean to pressure you or owt, so dont do it if you dont want to!


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> Also, all these pet breeders puppies are being bred, they need to be bought, otherwise they'll end up being put to sleep or put in rescue. Why should they be disregarded?
> 
> It's strange how some people wouldn't buy a pet breeders pup, but if a pet breeder's pup was handed over to rescue, you would have it then. I don't see what the difference is, its the same pup. Is it just about money in this situation? Its cheaper to get it from a rescue than from the actual breeder?


For me it is about money in a way and also ethics...I wanted a good dog (as a pet) but went to a show breeder for many reasons, ethical breeding being a strong motivator. I was happy to pay (within reason) whatever price the breeder wanted for a puppy. I would not pay a pet breeder the same price for many reasons.

If I wanted a rescue dog then I would not be expecting a good example of the breed but also would not be paying the price that pet breeders expect for such a dog (often the same price as established show breeders I have noticed).


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

simplysardonic said:


> At the moment far too many people who shouldn't be breeding dogs are breeding & too many people who shouldn't own a dog are owning (& often giving up on) them. They are both contributing to the rescue crisis, either directly or indirectly
> As for peoples' choices, what about the dogs' choices? They probably wouldn't 'choose' to be handed in to rescue but they are, & wouldn't 'choose' to inherit herediatry disorders from their badly chosen parents but they do, all because of people 'wanting' something


But its a fact that some people don't want to rescue. why should we push our beliefs onto them? Not everyone has to rescue.

Dogs don't think the way we do, they don't think about the hard things life can sometimes throw at them, thats a human thinking. They just cope with whatever happens to them, and you hope that it is always good.

I don't agree with breeding two dogs who are bad examples of the breed, bad temperaments etc. But in general, what's wrong with a pet dog, that it isn't allowed to be bred?


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Sevenpets I am not going to comment as I feel these points have been raised in part on the crossbreeding thread currently active and on similar threads in the past, and just go round in circles.

What I would like to know is that you say you have changed your mind- when did you as in was it recently? has anything that has been said on this forum made you change your mind?


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Ceearott said:


> Dogless - can I challenge ya then??
> 
> I is not being nasty or owt here, but go have a look on the net and see if you can find what you think is a bad and a good example of a rottie and see what I think. Could you also decribe a rotties movement - without googling the answer??
> 
> I have to go pick up my daughter up, but will come back to this when I get back - again, I dont mean to pressure you or owt, so dont do it if you dont want to!


Certainly don't think you are being nasty! Think you may have the wrong end of the stick due to my inability to clearly explain myself today; I don't own a rottie; I own a RR. I used a rottie (could have been any breed) as an example of the fact that I can walk down the street and pick out a dog that I think is lovely but experienced rottie people would probably find fault with.

The post I think you are referring to was my badly worded cack handed way of saying I went to shows and bought my pup from a show breeder as, being new to the breed (RRs) I needed experienced show folk and breeders to guide me as my idea of a nice dog may not, in fact, be a nice dog.

Or am I just confused


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> But its a fact that some people don't want to rescue. why should we push our beliefs onto them? Not everyone has to rescue.
> 
> Dogs don't think the way we do, they don't think about the hard things life can sometimes throw at them, thats a human thinking. They just cope with whatever happens to them, and you hope that it is always good.
> 
> I don't agree with breeding two dogs who are bad examples of the breed, bad temperaments etc. But in general, what's wrong with a pet dog, that it isn't allowed to be bred?


I'm not saying they should go to rescue if they have chosen to have a puppy instead, but why can't they go to a reputable breeder (or crossbreeder if they choose) & get on a waiting list, instead of just going out on a whim & being able to buy a puppy. I think you chose the brreder carefully when you got Ollie IIRC (I could be wrong as my memorys not the best- sorry), why can't everyone do this? It might give more impulsive people time to 'cool off' if they have to wait & they may decide a dog isn't for them after all


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Dogless said:


> Think you may have the wrong end of the stick; I don't own a rottie; I own a RR. I used a rottie (could have been any breed) as an example of the fact that I can walk down the street and pick out a dog that I think is lovely but experienced rottie people would probably find fault with.
> 
> The post you are referring to was my badly worded cack handed way of saying I went to shows and bought my pup from a show breeder as, being new to the breed (RRs) I needed experienced show folk and breeders to guide me as my idea of a nice dog may not, in fact, be a nice dog.
> 
> Or am I just confused


PMSL now, no worries hun! Xx


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

Dogless said:


> For me it is about money in a way and also ethics...I wanted a good dog (as a pet) but went to a show breeder for many reasons, ethical breeding being a strong motivator. I was happy to pay (within reason) whatever price the breeder wanted for a puppy. I would not pay a pet breeder the same price for many reasons.
> 
> If I wanted a rescue dog then I would not be expecting a good example of the breed but also would not be paying the price that pet breeders expect for such a dog (often the same price as established show breeders I have noticed).


I'll explain why I chose a pet breeder over a show breeder. I found that some show breeders had a number of bitches, breeding 1-3 litters a year. I also found that some show breeders kept their dogs in kennels (especially with a gundog breed). I didn't agree with kenneling, especially with puppies.

I wanted my puppy to grow up in a family household, with only one dog (the dam), and all the breeder's attention was on that litter and those puppies. I wanted my puppy to grow up with children, other animals and to be toilet trained and socialised with sounds around the house and in the outside world.

I found that a pet breeder did all those things. Ollie's breeder was fantastic. She toilet trained the pups completely by the time they were 8 weeks old, and didn't have a single accident in the house when he came home. She KC reg'd the pups (which I believe is important when the pups are purebred), and introduced the pups to children, horses, chickens etc.

I just feel its a much more family atmosphere with a pet breeder, they concentrate on your litter and your litter alone. I personally wouldn't go to a show breeder or a working breeder.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Oks, but I am a 'show' breeder and my dogs live in the house, I dont have kennels, just a 'run' outside for when bitches are in heat. Pups are reared in my living room and visitors come and go, and they are socialised with the family etc too.

I only have a litter when I want a new pup for show.

So you cant say all Show breeders are the same!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> Also, all these pet breeders puppies are being bred, they need to be bought, otherwise they'll end up being put to sleep or put in rescue. Why should they be disregarded?
> 
> It's strange how some people wouldn't buy a pet breeders pup, but if a pet breeder's pup was handed over to rescue, you would have it then. I don't see what the difference is, its the same pup. Is it just about money in this situation? Its cheaper to get it from a rescue than from the actual breeder?


its nothing to do with with wanting to get te pup cheaper lol....some folk couldnt support a breeder who they didnt considered to be 100% ethical in their breeding practices... for example someone who breeds pets for financial gain! just like they wouldnt buy a puppy from a puppy farmer, but of course getting one of their pups from a rescue is totally different because youre not lining their greedy little pockets or playing any part in them exploiting their dogs......and anyway if someone breeds a litter that they cant sell, if they have an ounce of decency in them they stand by those pups and would never see them end up in a rescue in the 1st place.

its certainly not strange to me to only want to support the best breeders.:blink:


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> Oks, but I am a 'show' breeder and my dogs live in the house, I dont have kennels, just a 'run' outside for when bitches are in heat. Pups are reared in my living room and visitors come and go, and they are socialised with the family etc too.
> 
> I only have a litter when I want a new pup for show.
> 
> So you cant say all Show breeders are the same!


that's why I said SOME show breeders. I can't generalise because it just wouldn't be true. but its just what I found when searching for breeders.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

And if the pet breeders were like most (not all, I know!!) show breeders, we wouldnt need rescue at all, coz these breeders would take their own stock back, as I have done in the past and will do again!!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> that's why I said SOME show breeders. I can't generalise because it just wouldn't be true. but its just what I found when searching for breeders.


So why say you would never go to a show or working breeder??


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Ceearott said:


> And if the pet breeders were like most (not all, I know!!) show breeders, we wouldnt need rescue at all, coz these breeders would take their own stock back, as I have done in the past and will do again!!


exactly!!!!


----------



## kirk68 (Apr 19, 2011)

I would just like to point out that everyone seems to be tarring all pet breeders with the same brush here. Phrases like 'ethical breeding' are being bandied about in relationship to show/working breeders and pet breeders are being labelled along with BYB's. The situation is not all black and white. 

I'm sure many of us saw the thread about the Crufts winner who had over 100 dogs in her tiny home in abysmal conditions, many of which had to be put to sleep! This woman was also a breeder, where were her ethics?

Conversely, I have recently bred my pet whippet bitch. I had her fully health checked by a vet before hand and chose a good stud dog recommended by a man who has known whippets for 50 years. I saw health test results for the dog and agreed to use him. All my pups went to the vet to be checked for deformities such as cleft pallet etc before they were sold. They were all fit healthy young pups.

There are good and bad breeders in both camps.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I'll explain why I chose a pet breeder over a show breeder. I found that some show breeders had a number of bitches, breeding 1-3 litters a year. I also found that some show breeders kept their dogs in kennels (especially with a gundog breed). I didn't agree with kenneling, especially with puppies.
> 
> I wanted my puppy to grow up in a family household, with only one dog (the dam), and all the breeder's attention was on that litter and those puppies. I wanted my puppy to grow up with children, other animals and to be toilet trained and socialised with sounds around the house and in the outside world.
> 
> ...


The show breeders that I purchased my pup from do have their dogs as part of the family in their house and the puppies were brought up in a family home environment. They were played with and interacted with and very much part of family life. When I went to their house last night in fact, 3 RR faces appeared at the lounge window to see who had arrived. I have no experience of gundog breeders so couldn't comment there - but the family atmosphere was very much present at the breeders' home who did allow me to have one of their puppies.

I don't see the need for pet owners to breed I must admit but that is just my point of view.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I'll explain why I chose a pet breeder over a show breeder. I found that some show breeders had a number of bitches, breeding 1-3 litters a year. I also found that some show breeders kept their dogs in kennels (especially with a gundog breed). I didn't agree with kenneling, especially with puppies.
> 
> I wanted my puppy to grow up in a family household, with only one dog (the dam), and all the breeder's attention was on that litter and those puppies. I wanted my puppy to grow up with children, other animals and to be toilet trained and socialised with sounds around the house and in the outside world.
> 
> ...


most of the show breeders i know tick all your boxes


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

kirk68 said:


> I would just like to point out that everyone seems to be tarring all pet breeders with the same brush here. Phrases like 'ethical breeding' are being bandied about in relationship to show/working breeders and pet breeders are being labelled along with BYB's. The situation is not all black and white.
> 
> I'm sure many of us saw the thread about the Crufts winner who had over 100 dogs in her tiny home in abysmal conditions, many of which had to be put to sleep! This woman was also a breeder, where were her ethics?
> 
> ...


This is true & I'm sorry if I have offended you, ceearott has a point though about the fact that there appear to be few pet breeders that carry out health tests & provide lifetime support, I'm sure there must be some but they're a minority. I will be going to the best breeder I can find for my next dog (Shiba Inu, but not for 5 years or so!) if we decide not to go down the rescue route


----------



## kirk68 (Apr 19, 2011)

I'm not offended, just wanted to point out that there are good and bad breeders in both camps and the decision to buy a pup from a pet breeder or a show/working dog breeder is not always as simple as it appears.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Ceearott said:


> Oks, but I am a 'show' breeder and my dogs live in the house, I dont have kennels, just a 'run' outside for when bitches are in heat. Pups are reared in my living room and visitors come and go, and they are socialised with the family etc too.
> 
> I only have a litter when I want a new pup for show.
> 
> So you cant say all Show breeders are the same!


Oh i'd so love one of your pups  perhaps one day when all these have left me and I need a good healthy strong dog to pull me along in my wheelchair............


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

kirk68 said:


> I'm not offended, just wanted to point out that there are good and bad breeders in both camps and the decision to buy a pup from a pet breeder or a show/working dog breeder is not always as simple as it appears.


I found it quite simple, I saw Shibas at Discover Dogs last year & was smitten, been doing research for a while now but I still don't feel like I know nearly enough, so I'll be doing loads more, then I might be ready to find a breeder


----------



## kirk68 (Apr 19, 2011)

Never seen a shiba inu in life, just pics on google. Lovely looking dogs. Good luck with your search.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

I should also point out, that neither do I agree with show breeders who breed for a living, it just doesnt sit right with me, the same as I dont like the BYB's and pup farmers and pet owners who breed for money. 

I dislike the idea of lots of dogs in kennels, no matter how well they are looked after etc etc. My dogs are a huge part of my life and I cant have anymore now, as I cant fit anymore in the house, lol!! And its in the house I want them!! I could put kennels outside in my small garden and get a couple more bitches and breed a couple of litters a year, but thats not what I am about. 

I guess, in a nutshell, I dont like anyone who makes a proper living from dogs full stop, lol!

Have I worded that well?? :w00t:


----------



## pearltheplank (Oct 2, 2010)

IMO, the problem many pet breeders, sadly nor have many commercial breeders, is that they have no understanding of the standard or grasp the concept of confirmation. Confirmation goes much deeper than looks and beauty. Obviously, we all think our own pet/show dog is the best and there is nothing wrong in that but from a breeding point of viwe, you must be super critical of the dogs concerned


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

pearltheplank said:


> IMO, the problem many pet breeders, sadly nor have many commercial breeders, is that they have no understanding of the standard or grasp the concept of confirmation. Confirmation goes much deeper than looks and beauty. Obviously, we all think our own pet/show dog is the best and there is nothing wrong in that but from a breeding point of viwe, you must be super critical of the dogs concerned


Yeah, how many have even heard of phenotype/genotype, never mind understand it?!


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Ceearott said:


> And if the pet breeders were like most (not all, I know!!) show breeders, we wouldnt need rescue at all, coz these breeders would take their own stock back, as I have done in the past and will do again!!


Well I would certainly take back any of the litter of Mals I had and have done so and re homed on the Mal forum to a wonderful home. BUT what about when you're not told about a re home? Four weeks ago I was sharing e mails with one of the pups owners, as we all do frequently when he told me he'd be taking his dog (my pup) to Japan for three years - great and his company were paying all the fee's. Two weeks later and hardly going on the Mal forum as i'd been nursing Flynn 24/7 for eight weeks I nipped on to the forum. A thread entitled "New Malamute" Long story short - yes you've guessed it, it was said dog who was supposed to be going to Japan. I was FURIOUS not at the poor poster but the owner. Lots of phone calls, the initial one was not pleasant on my behalf and it's now sorted. Couldn't find a property with a decent garden, looked at over 39 and didn't want to bother me as I was having problems with Flynns recovery. None the less I had contracts stating they always came back to me - at least i'd like to be involved in a re home, which now I am. At least this guy had been vetted by Mal rescue and was passed.

So you see even if you tell them you want the pup back people can go behind your back, re home to who ever they think is suitable and you may not even know. That's how well bred dogs can end up in rescue too as well as pet bred dogs. So infuriating!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

I know things like this can happen and its my worst nightmare!!! I would be so ashamed to find one of my dogs in rescue!! All the rottie rescues have lists of breeders who will take back their dogs, so if rescue get any in, breeder can be contacted.

I bet you were fuming though!!!!


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> Yeah, how many have even heard of phenotype/genotype, never mind understand it?!


I do to a degree, definitely don't know much about dog breeding though


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

It was quite surreal actually - I started reading the thread and he mentioned the dogs owners moving abroad, then another post Japan - strange I thought, then that this dog had a walker and a blog on line. At this point I called my daughter because Brothie had an on line walking blog (pennies were now dropping heavily) that's Brothie, she said. The next couple of posts he mentioned a pedigree name, got the affix wrong but no way is this a co incidence I thought. I posted "That's one of my pups!!" I pm'd the poster and we had a chat then I rang the owner, very sheepish he was. But like I say it is sorted now but I was so tired with looking after Flynn that I could have burst into tears, in fact later that evening I did - all too much to take in. Big booby that I am!


----------



## angelofthenorth5 (Jun 3, 2011)

Hiafa123 said:


> My mate bought a male springer spaniel from breeder who is regarded as a top breeder. He was a springer that wasnt like other springers, really placid, walked at your heel etc.She left him at the kennels as she was attending a family wedding and the next day the kennel owner asked if she had noticed him coughing, which he had been and advised to take him to vets (kennel owner suspected something wasnt just right. A good few tests later and the result was that the dog was not to be walked off lead,no more than 20 mins walk and tablets that cost £50 per month. The vet couldnt say how long the dog would have. He had a hereditary condition.I got a call off my friend asking to call at her house(she only lives down the road) as husband was out at work and the dog didnt seem too well.I realised that the dog was having difficulty breathing and put it gently to her that this could be it - to cut short the story he was PTS. A few days later my friend rang the breeder who had a couldnt care less attitude, said well its just bad luck I had all the tests done(although my mate didnt see any proof) and then had the cheek to offer her a puppy from his next litter with a £50 discount.My friend declined the offer.
> 
> I also bought a springer pup from a reputable breeder who shows at crufts, my springer is 3 yr old and has just been diagnosed with dcm which is hereditary, they did say they were sorry for the news and to let them no how hes going on, but said they had contacted all the other owners of the litter and they were all ok, so i dnt no if they are really unawares of this condition in their bloodline


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Malmum said:


> It was quite surreal actually - I started reading the thread and he mentioned the dogs owners moving abroad, then another post Japan - strange I thought, then that this dog had a walker and a blog on line. At this point I called my daughter because Brothie had an on line walking blog (pennies were now dropping heavily) that's Brothie, she said. The next couple of posts he mentioned a pedigree name, got the affix wrong but no way is this a co incidence I thought. I posted "That's one of my pups!!" I pm'd the poster and we had a chat then I rang the owner, very sheepish he was. But like I say it is sorted now but I was so tired with looking after Flynn that I could have burst into tears, in fact later that evening I did - all too much to take in. Big booby that I am!


Oh, i think I'd have had tears too!!!

In fact, I burst into tears at the weekend at a show telling a mate something I had kept to myself for two weeks!!

Totally off-topic now, PMSL!!!!


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> She sensibly chose a good stud dog who was health tested and had good conformation. Her own bitch was also a great example of the cocker spaniel breed, so the litter were good specimens of the breed.


Unless involved in the breed, the average pet owner wouldn't know what a good example of the breed is or what good conformation is - that's the problem.

I don't have a problem with some pet breeding in the popular breeds like mine - there aren't really enough from show/working breeds to supply the demand so much better that buyers look to pet owners who have breed as responsibly as they can (which will never be as well as someone who is involved in their breed, regardless of how much they try), than they buy from byb and puppy farmers. However, there aren't many breeds that are so popular that the show/working breeders can't meet the demand so it would really only apply to a few breeds.


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

If a million years passes and I have another litter  I would micro chip every pup before it left and insist my number remain on the chip for life if that's possible because the last thing you want for your babies is a kennel at rescue - no matter how much they care for the dogs! 

I did microchip four but some had already gone, foolish woman!


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

Malmum said:


> If a million years passes and I have another litter  I would micro chip every pup before it left and insist my number remain on the chip for life if that's possible because the last thing you want for your babies is a kennel at rescue - no matter how much they care for the dogs!
> 
> I did microchip four but some had already gone, foolish woman!


That's why allot of breeders use ear tattooing, I kinda wish i'd done it myself but thankfully I now know where all my pups are and am still in contact with them all (the best one is one of them is now my sign on person at the JC :lol: I can't really remember the last time we talked about a job  )

I've never had any go into rescue but I had 1 sold when he was meant to be returned, I was so dead lucky he was bought by a friend of a friend who wanted one when I had none left. Sadly I have also faced the loss of a pup too and it still kills me inside BUT I did the right thing and got hold of everyone who had one of the pups and told them everything!

Hubby wants to breed sometime in the future, he had a better experience than me but i'm still not sure I want to ever do it again, it broke my heart far too much.


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

Ceearott said:


> Yeah, how many have even heard of phenotype/genotype, never mind understand it?!


I'd say the majority of people have probably heard of genotypes and phenotypes. What with it being on the GCSE science syllabus and that.

I do think we are being rather condescending towards the "average pet owner" here (in general).


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

rocco33 said:


> Unless involved in the breed, the average pet owner wouldn't know what a good example of the breed is or what good conformation is - that's the problem..


Is it the average pet owner that are the pet breeders in the UK?

Here we have many tiers of breeders - and pet breeders are often as informed as the show breeders - most of both aren't informed much at all regarding the fine points, but have some good general ideas on what they are doing. I would suggest that usually it is amongst the show breeders that you can find those that are the best informed, but I have found pet breeders the same.

Again we have a very limited show world here with shows very rare and only in the urban areas (Canada is largely rural with 10 - 12 hour driving distances, often, to get to an urban area.) We have a similar dog population to the U.K. with only 1/4 of the number of registered dogs (mostly mutts here - ~90%)



rocco33 said:


> I don't have a problem with some pet breeding in the popular breeds like mine - there aren't really enough from show/working breeds to supply the demand so much better that buyers look to pet owners who have breed as responsibly as they can (which will never be as well as someone who is involved in their breed, regardless of how much they try), than they buy from byb and puppy farmers. *However, there aren't many breeds that are so popular that the show/working breeders can't meet the demand so it would really only apply to a few breeds*.


Are you saying that in the unpopular breeds the show/working breeders can meet the demand and only in the popular breeds then they would not be able to provide?

I don't know, as some of us do look for unpopular breeds and have a heck of a time. I started looking for a Tibetan Spaniel or Cavalier Spaniel here years and years ago (both fairly rare in Canada). I have yet to find a breeder that ticks my boxes (which don't even include titling dogs) within a 10 hour drive. I would have to fly out, or import in, to get a pup of either breed.

Just to review the UK numbers that I dug up on that other thread as I believe they are always relevent to this type of conversation.

In 2010 there were 257,062 dogs registered when you total up the seven groups. The MINORITY will be from club affiliated breeders - http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/item/1128

The Dogstrust report shows strays picked up to be 107,000, and unclaimed and euthanized strays in 2010 to be 9,310.

http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/_resources/annualreview2010.pdf

Added up and those numbers don't begin to touch 540,000 - 600,000 dogs that are demanded just to accomodate yearly attrition.

This reflects, very much, a similar situation to what we have in North America. A tiny percentage of pups are being bred by breeders most of us would support. Regarding most that want dogs, they are being forced to choose between rescue and many other breeders which can be assessed/ranked in many ways (some better than others).

Maybe it is just the popular breeds where show breeders can't meet demand, but my experience looking for less popular breeds has me wondering about that.

CC


----------



## Malmum (Aug 1, 2010)

Too many dogs being bred by everyone, full stop! Don't know why because there really isn't any money to be made from it, I think people think it's a quick way to earn money when in reality you actually lose money. Any money I had went on the pups not bills and when they were sold, (some at seven months old and spayed/neutered) that money went to pay those outstanding bills.

Then one of my pups was hit by a car and killed at just over one year old and Flynn went on to develop HD - all a right nightmare! Never ever would I advise anyone to breed from their dog, if i'd have known sooner that my girl was expecting she'd have had the mismate.

I have my Flynny now and love him to bits but he's been through a lot in his three years too, so i'd turn back the clock if I could.


----------



## SpringerHusky (Nov 6, 2008)

Malmum said:


> Too many dogs being bred by everyone, full stop! Don't know why because there really isn't any money to be made from it, I think people think it's a quick way to earn money when in reality you actually lose money. Any money I had went on the pups not bills and when they were sold, (some at seven months old and spayed/neutered) that money went to pay those outstanding bills.
> 
> Then one of my pups was hit by a car and killed at just over one year old and Flynn went on to develop HD - all a right nightmare! Never ever would I advise anyone to breed from their dog, if i'd have known sooner that my girl was expecting she'd have had the mismate.
> 
> I have my Flynny now and love him to bits but he's been through a lot in his three years too, so i'd turn back the clock if I could.


I agree if I know now what I had known then, I too would have mismated. I adore all my pups and love hearing how they are but that does not stop me feeling bad for what happened.


----------



## DKDREAM (Sep 15, 2008)

I feel pet breeders are ok aslong as you find a good one. I did with Skye (as KC wasnt the be all and end all with me) she is a beautiful confident pup who i cant fault and many people have told me she is stunning (who show) and asked if shes reg and when i say no they say what a shame, maybe i was just dam lucky but upto now skye is looking to have a perfect mouth too.

ETA just my honest experience I dont wish to cause upset.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Is it the average pet owner that are the pet breeders in the UK?


On the whole, yes, although there are some exceptions and some grey areas. Although for a large majority of show breeders, their dogs are pets first and foremost. Showing is much more of a hobby over here than it is over the pond (at least in the US - not sure about Canada) although, again, there are the exceptions and there are those who want to win at all costs (and make money out of it).



> Are you saying that in the unpopular breeds the show/working breeders can meet the demand and only in the popular breeds then they would not be able to provide?


I think I should put that better and say the more 'specialised breeds. This is not only because of the pups they will breed, but their knowledge of the breed and selecting the right homes etc. Sadly, we've seen a huge rise in the popularity of huskies over here whereas in years gone by they were a fairly specialist breed. With popularity comes the less ethical breeders (including most pet breeders), puppies going to unsuitable homes, and a rise in those being found in rescue.



> I have yet to find a breeder that ticks my boxes (which don't even include titling dogs) within a 10 hour drive. I would have to fly out, or import in, to get a pup of either breed


I do think there are differences - for one thing a 10 hours drive would pretty much encompass the whole country over here  and there is no need to fly/import. Those that import here are almost exclusively show/working breeders who want to bring new bloodlines into the UK gene pools.


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

I'm not a fan of any type of breeding. Whilst I accept that breeding has to happen to continue our lines (agree that this should be the case) I wish more effort would be put into working/rehoming the dogs we already have. 

Many dogs in rescue are the result of pet breeders. 

Breeding should be done by people who know the in's and out of a breed and who breed to improve the breed.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Werehorse said:


> I'd say the majority of people have probably heard of genotypes and phenotypes. What with it being on the GCSE science syllabus and that.
> 
> I do think we are being rather condescending towards the "average pet owner" here (in general).


Wasnt meant to be condescending!! It certainly wasnt part of my O level syllabus!!


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2011)

I dont see why people think breeding to type is a bad thing? 

Define "pet breeder"? Do you mean breeds from their pets to supply pets? Or breeding from show/agility to supply pets? Plenty of show breeders supply their pups to pet homes. 

I have no issue with someone who's breeding their pet dog to get a show pup or to keep a pup back as long as the correct methods are followed (health tests and getting the bitch assessed by a judge or someone knowledgeable in the breed to find her flaws and her good points).

What I dont agree with is someone breeding their bitch without testing, without finding out her downfalls and without using a good stud to compliment her but any old dog of the same breed. Some lines have traits you dont want to bring in and some have traits that will work well with your bitch okay its a pain in the bum to travel half way across the country but its well worth it.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> I do think we are being rather condescending towards the "average pet owner" here (in general).


I dont' think anyone is being condescending, just trying to explain that there is an awful lot more to breeding than having a nice pet, health testing it and breeding from it.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

shetlandlover said:


> Define "pet breeder"?


That is where the complication is always going to be. We all have our own picture of what a 'pet breeder' might be, just as we have our own picture of what a 'working breeder' or a 'show breeder' might be, and all will be different with lots of grey area around the edges.

Pet breeders are important here, as we have only a tiny show community, so again where you live will bring in different ideas as well.

CC


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

To me, a lot of threads in this thread seem to contain a lot of "pedigree snobbery". It's probably not intentional but it's very visible and it's this very feeling that pushes a lot of people to go to other breeders. I do not care when I buy a pet if it's great great grandfather won crufts or if their eyes are multicoloured or even if they have no eye pigment. I have dogs who are a part of the family. Most people do not care what their dog looks like or if it matches the ideal "conformation". The idea of looks defining dog standards and the feeling that any dog not matching this standard is inferior, even if not intentional, reenforces the idea of elitism and only increases the rebellion to go elsewhere.

To put it another way... if you don't look like say brat pitt or angelina jolie... are you substandard?


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> Although I disagree with crossing vastly different types of dogs (ie bulldogs x cavaliers for example), but the common crossbreeds, like cockapoos, labradoodles I think are fine to breed purposely.This is what confuses me lol I read a lot of statements like yours above re okay to breed poodle crosses but not some other crosses. Could you explain to me why exactly as imo some poodles are crossed with totally different types imo
> She sensibly chose a good stud dog who was health tested and had good conformation. Her own bitch was also a great example of the cocker spaniel breed, so the litter were good specimens of the breed.
> 
> I don't see anything wrong with supplying the pet market, as long as you choose your stud dog wisely (preferably health tested, and either good in the show ring/field trials or has good conformation), and your own bitch is either health tested, good in the show ring/field trials or has good conformation.
> ...


There are all different types of pet breeders just like there is all different types of show breeders. Can I ask as you say she only bred because she wanted to have a litter--

Did the breeder keep anything from the litter?

How exactly did she sensibly chose the Stud dog?

Did she know most of the Bitch and Stud dogs past generations?


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

My definition of a pet breeder is someone who breeds their pets to supply pet dogs.

Also why i said that conformation is important is because you don't want to produce a dog that can't move correctly or has too long legs or too short legs for its body etc. I suppose this is mainly for crossbreeds, when choosing which breeds to cross. 

In response to Cockapoo Lover's question, when I changed my mind? Since I started working at a groomers, I've seen vast numbers of different dogs, mostly crosses, and some purebreds. Some crosses have been amazing and have been well thought out. Some have just been terrible mistakes, they just do not mix right. And for purebreds, I've seen a lot of owners breeding their pet dogs, and I just think why should I tell them any different? They love their dogs, they want a litter, why should I try to stop them? Many of them bred their purebreeds to another breed to make a cross, and I just think that why are those pups being slamed for being who they are? Being bred by a pet breeder, who's crossed their parents. Those pups deserve to be here as much as a show breeder's pup.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> Those pups deserve to be here as much as a show breeder's pup.


I'm not sure I agree with the sentiment of 'deserving to be here' as if it is a right that is earnt. Once a puppy is born of course it should be afforded the same treatment as every other puppy regardless of heritage...but whether it should have been bred in the first place is the question that is being addressed in this thread I think. It almost sounds like the old myth of breeding to 'let a bitch have a litter' to me.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

gladass said:


> There are all different types of pet breeders just like there is all different types of show breeders. Can I ask as you say she only bred because she wanted to have a litter--
> 
> Did the breeder keep anything from the litter?
> 
> ...


She didn't keep any from the litter. I think she wanted the experience of a litter and wanted to produce puppies from her lovely bitch. (the bitch was amazing, such a lovely dog and great temperament).

The stud dog is a well-known dog in the cocker spaniel world. He's done well in the show ring (won Veteran class at Crufts this year, got a Junior Warrant). He's also been health tested clear for both PRA and FN, which means that whether a bitch is affected, carrier or clear, the pups will never develop the diseases. The breeder didn't health test her bitch, so she chose a stud dog who was tested clear of the diseases, so the pups would never develop the diseases.

I can't answer that last question, but as she was such a good breeder, I'm sure she did some research into the pedigrees. No lines cross over the two pedigrees when I look at them, so Ollie is not inbred at all.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

Dogless said:


> I'm not sure I agree with the sentiment of 'deserving to be here' as if it is a right that is earnt. Once a puppy is born of course it should be afforded the same treatment as every other puppy regardless of heritage...but whether it should have been bred in the first place is the question that is being addressed in this thread I think. It almost sounds like the old myth of breeding to 'let a bitch have a litter' to me.


The myth of letting a bitch have a litter is a myth. What I'm saying is if someone wants to breed their pet dog, and have done what I suggested on the first post (good conformation, health tested etc), then why should I stop them?


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> The myth of letting a bitch have a litter is a myth. What I'm saying is if someone wants to breed their pet dog, and have done what I suggested on the first post (good conformation, health tested etc), then why should I stop them?


I'm not sure that you could stop them if they wanted to, no one can unless they fall foul of bureaucratic rules. I have already voiced my opinion on conformation etc - how would most (not all) pet breeders know what good conformation was? (not saying I do, as was covered in an earlier post too and is one of the reasons I went to a show breeder so that I could receive guidance).


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> She didn't keep any from the litter. I think she wanted the experience of a litter and wanted to produce puppies from her lovely bitch. See imo that was ratehr selfish of her. Just because she wanted to experience a litter being born she could have actually experienced pups dying or indeed the Bitch and for What!!!! So she had the experience of a litter being born
> 
> The stud dog is a well-known dog in the cocker spaniel world. He's done well in the show ring (won Veteran class at Crufts this year, got a Junior Warrant). He's also been health tested clear for both PRA and FN, which means that whether a bitch is affected, carrier or clear, the pups will never develop the diseases. The breeder didn't health test her bitch, so she chose a stud dog who was tested clear of the diseases, so the pups would never develop the diseases.Aha so saved herself some profit money by not spending on tests. I do understand Affected, Clear etc... but maybe she did not understand that in some conditions carriers can still be predisposed to the disease/ illness. PLL is an example
> 
> I can't answer that last question, but as she was such a good breeder, I'm sure she did some research into the pedigrees. No lines cross over the two pedigrees when I look at them, so Ollie is not inbred at all.


IMO It is not all about "line crossing" its about actually knowing whats behind the dog/ bitch

So you see I differ with my opinion on the fact you found her a good pet breeder


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

gladass said:


> IMO It is not all about "line crossing" its about actually knowing whats behind the dog/ bitch
> 
> So you see I differ with my opinion on the fact you found her a good pet breeder


well IMO, as long as my dog isn't going to be affected by hereditary conditions (which he won't), and my dog was brought up in a nice, clean, family environment, then that's all that concerns me.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Most people do not care what their dog looks like or if it matches the ideal "conformation". The idea of looks defining dog standards and the feeling that any dog not matching this standard is inferior, even if not intentional, reenforces the idea of elitism and only increases the rebellion to go elsewhere


These sort of comments sadden me because they illustrate why pet owners do not have the knowledge to breed. This is not a breeders perspective whether show or working at all but does seem to be something pet owners think (misguidedly). It has nothing to do with a dog matching the ideal standard but more to do with ensuring correct conformation and good movement that results in a dog that is healthy and less likely to suffer because of poor conformation. Health tests are important but not the whole story. As an example, poor construction can lead to a much higher likelihood of crutiate injury, and while it couldn't be described as a common problem, is far from rare either.

It has nothing to do with snobbery and everything about trying to do the best for the health and welfare of the future puppies.


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> well IMO, as long as my dog isn't going to be affected by hereditary conditions (which he won't), and my dog was brought up in a nice, clean, family environment, then that's all that concerns me.


Oh and how do you know he may not be affected by hereditary conditions as said a lot on here especially from non show members--
Well my dogs parents were tested and I have spend ??????££££at Vets so whats the point of buying from ethical / responsible breeders who register with the KC ----------------YADDA, YADDA Ya must have read a lot of posts smiliar to that but now you are saying your dog will be okayz as he was bred by a good pet breeder????Confused me now


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

gladass said:


> Oh and how do you know he may not be affected by hereditary conditions as said a lot on here especially from non show members--
> Well my dogs parents were tested and I have spend ??????££££at Vets so whats the point of buying from ethical / responsible breeders who register with the KC ----------------YADDA, YADDA Ya must have read a lot of posts smiliar to that but now you are saying your dog will be okayz as he was bred by a good pet breeder????Confused me now


huh? 

I mean he won't get PRA and FN as he's either a clear or carrier for those two diseases. He could get any other disease, but then who can prevent that if there are no tests for them?


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> huh?
> 
> I mean he won't get PRA and FN as he's either a clear or carrier for those two diseases. He could get any other disease, but then who can prevent that if there are no tests for them?


Hips? maybe

Ya never answered mu other query
Why do you think poodle crosses are okay but not some other types of crosses from pet breeders


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Goblin said:


> To me, a lot of threads in this thread seem to contain a lot of "pedigree snobbery". It's probably not intentional but it's very visible and it's this very feeling that pushes a lot of people to go to other breeders. I do not care when I buy a pet if it's great great grandfather won crufts or if their eyes are multicoloured or even if they have no eye pigment. I have dogs who are a part of the family. Most people do not care what their dog looks like or if it matches the ideal "conformation". The idea of looks defining dog standards and the feeling that any dog not matching this standard is inferior, even if not intentional, reenforces the idea of elitism and only increases the rebellion to go elsewhere.
> 
> To put it another way... if you don't look like say brat pitt or angelina jolie... are you substandard?


I did not buy a pedigree dog from a show breeder to be snobby, because I thought that it gave me membership of some elite group nor because I thought that anything less that 'Brad Pitt' standard was inferior. I find it insulting that you might think such shallow motives lie behind most buyers' decisions.

I bought from the breeder I did to maximise my chances of getting a healthy dog with a good temperament from a breeder who offers a lifetime of support and advice should it be needed. My dog is very much part of the family and looks alone certainly do not define the standard of a dog for me.


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> He's also been health tested clear for both PRA and FN, which means that whether a bitch is affected, carrier or clear, the pups will never develop the diseases. The breeder didn't health test her bitch, so she chose a stud dog who was tested clear of the diseases, so the pups would never develop the disease


Meant to also add to the above

She may have bred carriers of above so why/ how will she ever know that a carrier pup she sold will never be bred to another carrier or affected for that matter as the new owner may also decide to have a litter for the experience but may not pick a clear Stud/Bitch


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I'm not starting a debate, only a discussion.
> 
> I used to believe that everyone MUST buy a health tested purebred puppy, from only show/working breeders.
> 
> ...


I agree to a certain extent, providing the pet breeders do as much health testing and research as the show breeders, but it rather depends on what sort of breed you are talking about.

Most inexperienced people who have decided that they want, say, a cocker spaniel have no idea that there are working lines and show lines. Working lines could be too much for them to handle.

I also think that with a giant breed, if you buy a puppy from champion lines, you know you are getting the right temperament and bone structure, or they wouldn't be champions.

I have seen so many newfies, for example, who look like overgrown mongrels, and I have seen retrievers who are small and skinny with pointy noses! Nothing against mongrels, or pointy nosed retrievers, but when I set out to get a newfoundland, I knew exactly what sort of newfoundland I wanted.

I think you probably have more of a guarantee with show lines. You may pay a lot more, but there is nothing to stop him being a pet and nothing more, like my two.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

gladass said:


> Hips? maybe
> 
> Ya never answered mu other query
> Why do you think poodle crosses are okay but not some other types of crosses from pet breeders


yeah I know they didn't test for hips, but with cocker spaniels it isn't as hugely important as say a lab or a goldie.

No-one's perfect but IMO pet breeders should be allowed to breed if they are sensible and responsible, and if crossing, choosing the two breeds carefully.

I don't agree with all poodle crosses. Some yorkiepoos are not right IMO conformation wise.

Maybe in years to come, the experimentation of crossing will be over and new "breeds" will come through, and there will less of the strange mixing.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Dogless said:


> I did not buy a pedigree dog from a show breeder to be snobby, because I thought that it gave me membership of some elite group nor because I thought that anything less that 'Brad Pitt' standard was inferior. I find it insulting that you might think such shallow motives lie behind most buyers' decisions.
> 
> I bought from the breeder I did to maximise my chances of getting a healthy dog with a good temperament from a breeder who offers a lifetime of support and advice should it be needed. My dog is very much part of the family and looks alone certainly do not define the standard of a dog for me.


seconded, as an owner of both a mutt & 2 pedigrees, all rescues
I have to say in all my life I don't think I've ever been called a snob, but if I decide to go to a good breeder & wait rather than a poor breeder because I want something right now *stamps feet* then a snob I'm prepared to be


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2011)

Goblin said:


> To me, a lot of threads in this thread seem to contain a lot of "pedigree snobbery". It's probably not intentional but it's very visible and it's this very feeling that pushes a lot of people to go to other breeders. I do not care when I buy a pet if it's great great grandfather won crufts or if their eyes are multicoloured or even if they have no eye pigment. I have dogs who are a part of the family. Most people do not care what their dog looks like or if it matches the ideal "conformation". The idea of looks defining dog standards and the feeling that any dog not matching this standard is inferior, even if not intentional, reenforces the idea of elitism and only increases the rebellion to go elsewhere.
> 
> To put it another way... if you don't look like say brat pitt or angelina jolie... are you substandard?


I dont think owning a pedigree means snobs...its funny how its always "pedigree snobbery" never cross breed snobbery.

I find some posts cross breed snobbery like saying that NO pedigree dog was suitable for their lifestyle but __insert cross breed name___ was. I find that silly there are more than enough pedigree's to suit any life style. But I dont go OMG CROSS BREED SNOBBERY!

My dogs are my dogs...my pedigree's are my dogs, my cross breed is my dog....they are all dogs. However I find my pedigree's are healthier. So I advocate pedigree buying.

Is my pedigree a sexy movie star? No...
Is my cross breed a sexy movie star? No...
However my cross breed is so unhealthy in the past 6 months we have had 4 PTS talks with the vet. My pedigree's have never had any issues that would cost them their life.

I dont think its down to snobbery....its down to experience. Some will have experience with sick pedigree's that's up to them if they want a cross. Some have experience with sick cross's and want a pedigree...thats up to them.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2011)

simplysardonic said:


> I have to say in all my life I don't think I've ever been called a snob


I am not as lucky. Since being on the forum I have been called a "pedigree snob" over PM by 3 different cross breed owners.


----------



## newfiesmum (Apr 21, 2010)

shetlandlover said:


> I am not as lucky. Since being on the forum I have been called a "pedigree snob" over PM by 3 different cross breed owners.


Really? That's bizarre! I would always go for a pedigree dog because then I know what I am getting; I know what the dog's traits are going to be, I know what its temperament is like, and I will go for a champion line puppy for the reasons I have already stated. If a mongrel turned up looking for a home, I certainly wouldn't turn him away either!

When it comes to cats, I actually prefer moggies to pedigrees. Pedigree cats always seem to be very aloof, at least the ones I have met, and they would worry me too.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Shetlandlover, I'm sorry you've had to put up with that


newfiesmum said:


> Really? That's bizarre! I would always go for a pedigree dog because then I know what I am getting; I know what the dog's traits are going to be, I know what its temperament is like, and I will go for a champion line puppy for the reasons I have already stated. If a mongrel turned up looking for a home, I certainly wouldn't turn him away either!
> 
> When it comes to cats, I actually prefer moggies to pedigrees. Pedigree cats always seem to be very aloof, at least the ones I have met, and they would worry me too.


I've only had one pedigree cat, a tabby point Siamese when I was growing up & I have to say she was one of the best, sweetest, most characterful kitties I've ever known
Not that I love the moggies any less


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2011)

simplysardonic said:


> Shetlandlover, I'm sorry you've had to put up with that


I am not.
If my opinions and my dogs piss them off so much its their problem not mine. 

Thanks though!


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

I wonder what actual statistics are on cross-breed/pedigree, homebred/ "professional" breeder bred health.

I wonder which type of dog vets actually see more often.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> so the pups would never develop the diseases.
> I can't answer that last question, but as she was such a good breeder, I'm sure she did some research into the pedigrees. No lines cross over the two pedigrees when I look at them, so Ollie is not inbred at all.


But plenty of 'known' good breeders do breed dogs that are related due to the small gene pool/availability/desirable traits. It's the done thing with some rarer breeds, not necessarily a bad thing.

I just don't see the point of finding a health tested dog but not testing the bitch and who on earth would allow their health tested dog to cover a non tested bitch?



SEVEN_PETS said:


> yeah I know they didn't test for hips, but with cocker spaniels it isn't as hugely important as say a lab or a goldie.


Odd then that I've spoken to several cocker and springer owners about poor hips since we found out about Zak. It's a lot more prevalent than you'd think.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> It has nothing to do with a dog matching the ideal standard but more to do with ensuring correct conformation and good movement that results in a dog that is healthy and less likely to suffer because of poor conformation


Sorry but dog shows are there to enhance the "look" of the breed sometimes at the expense of health. Unfortunately the word "conformation" for some means matching a show standard. For others like yourself movement, ability to breath, good eyesight etc are the important things. I would agree totally with you with that perception.



Dogless said:


> I did not buy a pedigree dog from a show breeder to be snobby... I find it insulting that you might think such shallow motives lie behind most buyers' decisions.


I think in the post you'll find nothing about buyers being snobs. Please point out where as I can't see it. Many registered breeders actually aren't but they often give that impression even without trying. To put it simply, as soon as any group of people state that their way is the only way or superior you will get the problem arising. It doesn't matter what it relates to, religion, dogs or even .... balloon colours.

I could say I find it insulting that you should think I am so shallow that I think you have shallow motives... we could go round and do that all day  Everyone on this forum is here because they have an interest in increasing their knowledge for the betterment of their animals or trying to give away knowlege learnt.


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

cinammontoast said:


> Odd then that I've spoken to several cocker and springer owners about poor hips since we found out about Zak. It's a lot more prevalent than you'd think.


Thats why I posted Hips lol and should they not also be tested for Glaucoma??


----------



## shazalhasa (Jul 21, 2009)

Just as with pretty much all things, there's good and bad in both pet and show breeders.

I consider myself to be a show breeder as I show my dogs but I sell my puppies as pets. I do everything that I can to make sure my litters are raised well. They are born and raised in my living room, they get toilet trained, socialised, microchipped, registered and vet checked twice before leaving me with a huge pack and a lifetime of support.

I know of some other show breeders that do this too, I also know of some pet breeders who do it but on the other side of the coin, I also know both show and pet breeders who have minimal involvement with their litters.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Goblin said:


> To me, a lot of threads in this thread seem to contain a lot of "pedigree snobbery". It's probably not intentional but it's very visible and it's this very feeling that pushes a lot of people to go to other breeders. I do not care when I buy a pet if it's great great grandfather won crufts or if their eyes are multicoloured or even if they have no eye pigment. I have dogs who are a part of the family. Most people do not care what their dog looks like or if it matches the ideal "conformation". The idea of looks defining dog standards and the feeling that any dog not matching this standard is inferior, even if not intentional, reenforces the idea of elitism and only increases the rebellion to go elsewhere.
> 
> To put it another way... if you don't look like say brat pitt or angelina jolie... are you substandard?





Goblin said:


> I think in the post you'll find nothing about buyers being snobs. Please point out where as I can't see it. Many registered breeders actually aren't but they often give that impression even without trying. To put it simply, as soon as any group of people state that their way is the only way or superior you will get the problem arising. It doesn't matter what it relates to, religion, dogs or even .... balloon colours.


Your first post without explicity calling the owners of pedigree dogs snobs certainly implies it; to me anyway. I certainly could have interpreted it incorrectly - perils of the internet where we have to assume intent.

The idea of perceived snobbery then pushing buyers to other breeders as an act of rebellion I also find difficult - why would someone rather have a dog from parents who are not health tested or which is not bred for temperament just because they want to rebel? Seems a bit foolhardy and almost immature to take the risks just to avoid being labelled as elitist.

I am not a pedigree elitist by any means; my puppy is the first pedigree dog that I have ever owned BUT if I choose a breed that I want to own and spend the money to acquire one I want the best chance possible of a healthy dog with a good temperament. If I went to a rescue I would expect to make a reasonable donation in exchange for a dog that I am unlikely to know the background of.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

shetlandlover said:


> I dont think owning a pedigree means snobs...its funny how its always "pedigree snobbery" never cross breed snobbery ...
> 
> I find some posts cross breed snobbery like saying that NO pedigree dog was suitable for their lifestyle but __insert cross breed name___ was...


I would agree that that is crossbreed snobbery although I've rarely seen it in comparison. Simply read through the initial few pages in this thread and tell me honestly if you could see more of what could be described as pedigree snobbery or crossbreed snobbery? I called it as I saw it.

I have nothing against the majority of pedigree breeds even if I myself would never get it. Sorry I cannot see me, personally, getting a Chihuahua. My household will at one point get a Hovawart, preferably male and blond, as it's a breed I've always wanted since I moved to Germany. I'll check rescues before breeders though and if I look at breeders I will be looking for an accredited breeder. They do have their place and many do excellent work but I also have a bee in the bonnet about the idea only accredited, kc recognised breeders are any good. There are lots of legitimate, good breeders not recognised by the kennel club just as there are lots of really bad breeders who simply want to make money.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Dogless said:


> ...perils of the internet where we have to assume intent...


Agreed.



> The idea of perceived snobbery then pushing buyers to other breeders as an act of rebellion I also find difficult


The trouble is it's often not even a conscious decision. People seem to have an inbuilt, subconscious need to rebel.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

gladass said:


> Thats why I posted Hips lol and should they not also be tested for Glaucoma??


Retinal atrophy, I believe. Saying that, the KC recommend all dogs should be eye tested (unspecified test).

If I ever get more pups, I'll be checking everything possible. It's bloody heartbreaking to see a year old dog limping because of a hip problem.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

rocco33 said:


> On the whole, yes, although there are some exceptions and some grey areas. Although for a large majority of show breeders, their dogs are pets first and foremost. Showing is much more of a hobby over here than it is over the pond (at least in the US - not sure about Canada) although, again, there are the exceptions and there are those who want to win at all costs (and make money out of it).
> 
> I think I should put that better and say the more 'specialised breeds. This is not only because of the pups they will breed, but their knowledge of the breed and selecting the right homes etc. Sadly, we've seen a huge rise in the popularity of huskies over here whereas in years gone by they were a fairly specialist breed. With popularity comes the less ethical breeders (including most pet breeders), puppies going to unsuitable homes, and a rise in those being found in rescue.
> 
> I do think there are differences - for one thing a 10 hours drive would pretty much encompass the whole country over here  and there is no need to fly/import. *Those that import here are almost exclusively show/working breeders who want to bring new bloodlines into the UK gene pools.*


*
*

I can only speak for my crosses- but I do know of one breeder who has just imported one bitch and has another boy coming soon from America. The boy will be going into a guardian home. Very long process and expensive too, not one I think she wants to repeat either.

So she is both a pet breeder and cross breeder.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> And if the pet breeders were like most (not all, I know!!) show breeders, we wouldnt need rescue at all, coz these breeders would take their own stock back, as I have done in the past and will do again!!


But there are pet breeders that do take there stock back as well- not all of them are bad breeders!!!


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> [/B]
> 
> I can only speak for my crosses- but I do know of one breeder who has just imported one bitch and has another boy coming soon from America. The boy will be going into a guardian home. Very long process and expensive too, not one I think she wants to repeat either.
> 
> So she is both a pet breeder and cross breeder.


But surely more importantly what about the poor dog having to travel so far? 

But then money is probably more important in this breeders case ....


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

cinammontoast said:


> Retinal atrophy, I believe. Saying that, the KC recommend all dogs should be eye tested (unspecified test).
> 
> If I ever get more pups, I'll be checking everything possible. It's bloody heartbreaking to see a year old dog limping because of a hip problem.


Ollie's parents were eye tested aswell. 

I just think that if the parent/s are health tested, they are both nice dogs (conformation-wise and temperament-wise) and the pups are brought up in a nice, clean, family home who have socialised the pups, then I don't see an issue there.

Why has the dog got to win prizes (in show or working) to be eliable to breed?


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

Surely only people who want to show/breed care about the FTCH or other championship lines? Now that I've learnt about health testing, I'd far rather have a health tested dog than a brilliantly bred one.


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

I think there needs to be good pet breeders - show/working dog breeders don't breed enough to supply the pet market - I know this won't be a popular opinion.
If there aren't decent pet breeders then puppy buyers will continue to buy from Puppy Farmers and BYB's.
Yes there needs to be some form of controls, compulsory micro-chipping and the way puppies are advertised and sold etc to address the rescue situation and make people think before they buy so dogs don't end up in rescue.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

I think to be honest there's also the matter of cost. Doesn't matter if it's a crossbreeder or pedigree breeder, given a "health testing breeder" charging 1000 or someone charging 500 for what they see as the same animal a lot of people will go for 500 regardless. There is no guarantee that the more cheaper animal will be sicker, even in the long run. 

As with the other thread, it boils down to the education of the buyers as only they have the power to really influence breeders and general breeding practices.


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Goblin said:


> I think to be honest there's also the matter of cost. Doesn't matter if it's a crossbreeder or pedigree breeder, given a "health testing breeder" charging 1000 or someone charging 500 for what they see as the same animal a lot of people will go for 500 regardless. There is no guarantee that the more cheaper animal will be sicker, even in the long run.
> 
> As with the other thread, it boils down to the education of the buyers as only they have the power to really influence breeders and general breeding practices.


Exactly that.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Goblin said:


> As with the other thread, it boils down to the education of the buyers as only they have the power to really influence breeders and general breeding practices.


so true, if people only supported the most ethical breeders the rescue crisis would be solved and animals would cease to be exploited.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

goodvic2 said:


> But surely more importantly what about the poor dog having to travel so far?
> 
> But then money is probably more important in this breeders case ....


No actually it isn't 

The whole process has taken nearly a year and has been emotionally draining for her as she has been concerned about the dogs welfare the whole time.

The dog was 10 months old when she arrived not some 8 week old puppy.

Had money been important as you say then the decision she made to not bring another one over because the dog was showing signs that it would not travel well, would have been ignored and she would have just gone ahead.

Maybe if I showed you a clip of the video of the elation when puppy arrived and the photos since as she is settling into her loving family home with a hobby breeder who does not breed very often you may change your narrow- minded view of some-one you don't even know.


----------



## ClaireandDaisy (Jul 4, 2010)

noushka05 said:


> so true, if people only supported the most ethical breeders the rescue crisis would be solved and animals would cease to be exploited.


And there you have it. After 11 pages - a little common sense. 
The rescues are overflowing. The PDSA is so stretched it is putting limits on pedigrees. There are too many dogs being bred. End of. 
So someone wants want to breed a cute ickle puppy cos they (a) could use the money or (b) need a bit of excitement in their life and luuuurve babies!!!!!!! or (c) are too ignorant to get the bitch spayed and `it just happened!` :blink:
Those are pet breeders. 
And that is also what`s wrong with them.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> But there are pet breeders that do take there stock back as well- not all of them are bad breeders!!!


But not many otherwise why arerrescues so blooming full???


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Just having a catch up on this and LOL!!

Some strong opinions coming to the fore!!

But I will say, I know for a fact, that if show breeders stopped breeding rotties (just my breed, but applies to all breeds) and left it to the pet breeders, it wouldnt take long before rotties no longer looked like rotties and they would also lose certain character traits too.

The way rotties look and the character they have are part of the reason I love the breed. 

I see some rotties on the street and I cringe inside coz they look and move so blooming awful!!!! They may well be someones well-loved pet, but they aint well-bred and they aint healthy!!

And saying show breeders breed just for looks shows how much you dont know!! I, and many other show breeders breed for temperament, type and comformation and health - in no particular order - they are all important!!

Rottweiler breeding in Germany is very strictly controlled, your dog/bitch must meet certain criteria and the two dogs chosen to mate must be well-matched otherwise the mating is not allowed.

how I long for something similar in the UK!!!!!!!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

> The way rotties look and the character they have are part of the reason I love the breed.


But many people are only really are interested in having a healthy, good temperament dog. Specific "breed" looks are low down on their list of requirements.

Being told "only these are 'ethical breeders'" by people _who seem_ to have a vested interest doesn't inspire confidence. It doesn't matter if they have valid points and are really interested in the best for all dogs. It's the appearance that matters.

You only have to look at comments on the forum like


> Been hesitating on posting on here because of some negativity to cross breeds so please be nice i did visit the home and see both parents


 to realize there is a problem, even on these forums. Using a stick against people causes rebellion. Carrots work better, especially if the carrots are visible. The trouble is most people never know about the carrot in regards to "ethical breeders" be it pedigree or not.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

OK.. know I just posted.. Lets post a few german rottie advert links (unfortunately in german):
super gezogene Rottweiler Welpen (Hapert) - Rottweiler
Prachtvolle Rottweilerwelpen m. Papiere! (Marschacht) - Rottweiler
Labrador-Rottweiler Welpen (Emlichheim) - Mischlings-Welpen bis 50cm (ausgew.)
ADRK Rottweiler Rüde 6,5 Monate aus spitzen Linie (Maulburg) - Rottweiler

"Geimpft, gechipt, entwurmt und haben einen EU-Pass" means it vaccinated, microchipped, wormed and has an EU passport. If you don't know anything about rotties or simply don't care.. which advert do you think you would go for?


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Goblin said:


> But many people are only really are interested in having a *healthy, good temperament dog*. Specific "breed" looks are low down on their list of requirements.
> 
> Being told "only these are 'ethical breeders'" by people _who seem_ to have a vested interest doesn't inspire confidence. It doesn't matter if they have valid points and are really interested in the best for all dogs. It's the appearance that matters.
> 
> You only have to look at comments on the forum like to realize there is a problem, even on these forums. Using a stick against people causes rebellion. Carrots work better, especially if the carrots are visible. The trouble is most people never know about the carrot in regards to "ethical breeders" be it pedigree or not.


Which is why a good breeder is the place to go
I also think a lot of people _do_ make the mistake of choosing breed looks over temperament- take huskies, beautiful dogs that are being bred to death to supply people with a dog that is utterly miserable in a lot of homes due to the lack of understanding of the breed, not to mention the amount of them past the cute puppy stage that end up in rescue


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

Goblin said:


> But many people are only really are interested in having a healthy, good temperament dog. Specific "breed" looks are low down on their list of requirements.


That was exactly what I wanted which is why I went to a show breeder; I bought my dog as a pet. Part of my reasoning is that no reputable breeder wants their name being sullied by producing unhealthy dogs of a poor temperament - and people often ask where my dog is from. Also, do you not think the dogs need to have a certain temperament to allow complete strangers to go over them in the ring whilst they stand steadily there?


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Goblin said:


> OK.. know I just posted.. Lets post a few german rottie advert links (unfortunately in german):
> super gezogene Rottweiler Welpen (Hapert) - Rottweiler
> Prachtvolle Rottweilerwelpen m. Papiere! (Marschacht) - Rottweiler
> Labrador-Rottweiler Welpen (Emlichheim) - Mischlings-Welpen bis 50cm (ausgew.)
> ...


None of them!!! I wouldnt buy any dog from adverts and sites such as these!!

Rottweilers are bred the way they are to do the job they were bred for. Okay, so many are not worked now, but whats wrong with keeping that 'look' ??? There is reasoning behind the looks anyway, A rotties has that deep broad chest, for example, to house a large heart and lungs so it can breath easier when trotting all day, and thats just one thing.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

I imported a male from the US and spent nigh on 2 years researching breeders etc before making my mind up, and none of that ime was spent looking at stupid adverts like those ones above! If I want a dog, I will go direct to the breeder concerned.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> But not many otherwise why arerrescues so blooming full???


For a variety of reasons which could include:

People giving up older dogs of 8 years + (Some breeders may not take back at this stage or have lost contact details/moved etc....)

People giving up dogs because they are ill ( and do not want people to know so wouldn't contact breeder)

People having to re-home because some-one has died and the family have no interest in the dog. ( don't know anything about dog as no interest in finding out about breeder)

Stray dogs

Because they don't match the carpet/impulse buys ( probably too embarrassed to contact breeder)

But yes also agree a lot is also down to the breeder not giving a dam once they have been sold.

Plus just because a breeder is deemed as "ethical" just because some-one went to them doesn't automatically mean that the owner is "ethical" though this is probably least likely but with folks nowadays- nothing surprises me.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> For a variety of reasons which could include:
> 
> People giving up older dogs of 8 years + (Some breeders may not take back at this stage or have lost contact details/moved etc....)
> 
> ...


Yes, the reasons are many and varied, but it cannot be denied that the majority of dogs in rescue have been bred by pet/byb breeders who do not wanna know once they have their money, hence, also, they are also moe likely to sell to not so good owners, who are more likely ot 'give up' on the dog and dump it in rescue also.

But, on the other side of the coin, I know of 3 rottie breeders who will not take back dogs of their breeding if they end up in rescue and that is inexcusable and annoys me immensely!!!!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Ceearott: You may not buy from places like that.. most people do. People can claim the "moral ground" and state "my way is the right way" but unless they accept not everyone thinks like them, with possibly valid reasons, the problem will always remain.

Unless you are after a specific type of dog this type of site will probably be people's first call. Accept that and accept the fact humanity is also stupid  and do not do research on dogs. If they go to sites like this.. how should we influence the choice of purchase bearing in mind the majority of people don't care about papers and probably don't know what any or all the abbreviations stand for. They simply want a pet, often simply a cute one. Most will go through the list, look that the cheapest is chipped, wormed, vaccinated and has an EU passport which means it's been well taken care of. I know this is not necessarily true but that's the general impression someone who hasn't done any research will have. How would you educate these people to look further and deeper?

I'll throw something else out to consider.. how many people are put off from rescues by the idea of a home visit? For me it was like a police car behind you while driving. You know you are not doing anything wrong... BUT... Same goes for the idea of a good breeder potentially prying into your personal affairs to see if you would be a suitable buyer. Should they... I think so... Would it put people off... certainly. Where would people turn to .. well we all know the answer.

There is no magic answer. Flexibility to encompass all views is required. Without that being acknowledged you will always be fighting an uphill battle in regards to trying to educate people.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

I hear you, and agree about rescue, I think a lot of them are far too strict when it comes to letting people have one. The two Breed Rescues I support are two fo the more lenient ones, compared to others. One even feeds all the dogs raw - YAY!!

I believe in freedom of choice, but I wish that people could make an educated choice is all, Impossible? Probably, but one can live in hope!!

And for the record, I dont pry into my prospective buyers private lives, one of my main criteria for getting one of my pups is how much you have researched the breed if you havent owned a rottie before.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

For what its worth, i do think the amount of dogs in rescue isnt down to owners that cant be bothered to research, cant be bothered to look for a "good" breeder and (no one has actually convinced me what a good breeder actually is) cant be bothered to pay for a pup from health tested parents.
Believe it or not many people dont actually know, what to look for in a breeder, i certainly didnt know what health tests was, certainly didnt/would think it odd that a breeder didnt state he/she would take a pup back if need be, that was certainly something that would have entered my head if a pup didnt suit for whatever reason just "take it back". So for all so many pet owners are slagged of for various reasons it isnt a lack of consideration its something that a lot dont know about.

When we got our first springer and his brother 18 months later from non health tested parents, no papers, i had no idea about any htests, what to look for in a breeder and tbh ime glad i didnt because i would not have had the pleasure of 2 springers ok the first one for a shorter time that we had hoped, but harvey the 2nd one is still here nearly 11yrs later and ive enjoyed every minute of them both.


----------



## Polimba (Nov 23, 2009)

I haven't read all the cross bredding thread, so maybe I've missed something, but is the definition between a 'pet' breeder and a 'show' breeder really that black and white?

We got Zimba from someone who bred her bitch who is a pet first and foremost, she doesn't show. The sire is a champion from the other end of the country, so it wasn't a covenient mating and also she admitted she was given the Spanish inquision before using him as a stud. Both parents were health tested and all puppies sold with endorsments (she turned someone down who disagreed with the endorsements and she kept this bitch as a pet). She offers lifetime support and we have puppy renunions. One dog had dermoid sinus, she paid for him to be operated on and he is now a much loved family pet.

AFAIK all the puppies went to pet homes. We thought about showing Zimba but his over excited temperament made it hard, he just wanted fuss from the judges and play with the other dogs 

Is she a pet or show breeder, so somewhere inbetween?


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Polimba said:


> I haven't read all the cross bredding thread, so maybe I've missed something, but is the definition between a 'pet' breeder and a 'show' breeder really that black and white?


It is not at all, and within each there are many differences.



> it boils down to the education of the buyers as only they have the power to really influence breeders and general breeding practices.


Spot on, but missing the fact that education can eminate outward from community agencies. There are many examples in North America where shelters/rescues have taken on this role and diminished intakes this way.



noushka05 said:


> so true, if people only supported the most ethical breeders the rescue crisis would be solved and animals would cease to be exploited.


This is magical thinking, and it keeps coming up. I know it is well intentioned but I don't get it.

What is the point in lamenting this without thought or a method of how to get from point a to point b? We can wish all we want that only 'ethical' breeders were supported, but there is no democratic society that can make people support those even loosely defined as 'ethical'.

Meanwhile we need practical ideas of how to prevent suffering in rescues . . . and wishing to make this happen isn't one of them. Working toward helping this to happen is a solution, but only part of it.

The concentration cannot all be on breeders . . . and that is the continual focus on these threads, with the excuse being there is a concern for numbers in rescue. It confounds me that many believe the answer is in vilifying breeders as that cannot be of any help when we can have absolutely no control as to who buys and breeds.

IF concern is for those in rescue please start looking toward campaigning to change what your rescues are doing. PR, outreach, education and marketting efforts need to be part of their remit as that has PROVEN to help change community attitudes toward animals and help diminish rescue intakes as well as haphazard breeding diminishes as a result of these changing attitudes.

Reforming Animal Control - reforming-animal-control

http://www.rescue50.org/pdf/rescue50shelterreform.pdf

Animal control agencies slamming door on public scrutiny - Animal control agencies slamming door on public scrutiny | PetConnection.com

Two ways to not kill pets in Michigan - Two ways to not kill pets in Michigan | PetConnection.com



> _Pit bulls, and dogs who resemble them, can very often be adopted out as safely as any other dog. This becomes possible on a large scale when the ground in the community has been softened with PR, outreach and marketing efforts._


Fixing our nation's shelters: Yes, there ought to be a law - Fixing our nation's shelters: Yes, there ought to be a law | PetConnection.com

Let's stop neglect, abuse at animal shelters



Goblin said:


> Ceearott: You may not buy from places like that.. most people do. People can claim the "moral ground" and state "my way is the right way" but unless they accept not everyone thinks like them, with possibly valid reasons, the problem will always remain. . . .
> 
> . . . There is no magic answer. Flexibility to encompass all views is required. Without that being acknowledged you will always be fighting an uphill battle in regards to trying to educate people.


Great sense in this post.:dita:

CC


----------



## springerpete (Jun 24, 2010)

Whilst I agree with a lot of the comments regarding this issue I do have to wonder why, if you only want a 'pet' choose a working breed, there are lots of types out there that make perfect pets, why saddle yourself with a breed like a 'springer, ( as you may or may not know I'm a springer & retriever person.) that require loads of excercise and stimulation. I love all the gundog breeds but would never reccomend one from working lines to someone who just wanted a dog to take for a gentle stroll in the local park.


----------



## haeveymolly (Mar 7, 2009)

springerpete said:


> Whilst I agree with a lot of the comments regarding this issue I do have to wonder why, if you only want a 'pet' choose a working breed, there are lots of types out there that make perfect pets, why saddle yourself with a breed like a 'springer, ( as you may or may not know I'm a springer & retriever person.) that require loads of excercise and stimulation. I love all the gundog breeds but would never reccomend one from working lines to someone who just wanted a dog to take for a gentle stroll in the local park.


All mine and the 3 i have now are all from working parents, they are always walked off lead i wouldnt say they need endless exercise i really do think its a bit of a myth actually, they have the ability to go, on and on but i do think the quality of walks far outweigh the need for miles and miles. Gentle strolls tho definetly not.


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> No actually it isn't
> 
> The whole process has taken nearly a year and has been emotionally draining for her as she has been concerned about the dogs welfare the whole time.
> 
> ...


If narrow minded is putting the feelings of the dog first, then yes I am ...


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> For a variety of reasons which could include:
> 
> People giving up older dogs of 8 years + (Some breeders may not take back at this stage or have lost contact details/moved etc....)
> 
> ...


most dogs are dumped in rescue when they are reaching adolesence, not as older dogs. It's certainly the case in our rescue ....


----------



## Cay (Jun 22, 2009)

I feel that pet breeders don't know how to breed for type, they tend to breed for things like colour or health and temperament .


----------



## kirksandallchins (Nov 3, 2007)

After the mess show breeder have made of certiain breeds (most terriers or long coatrd breeds) I can understand why people are turnng against KC registered breeds

There is a wide gene pool of working Bedlingtons that look like decent examples of their breed, the same is true of Lakelands that do not have big beards or leg hair. Even some working Bearded Collies look like some of the first show champions in the breed.


----------



## sezra (May 20, 2011)

goodvic2 said:


> If narrow minded is putting the feelings of the dog first, then yes I am ...


Can I just ask then do you also disagree with Ceearott importing his dog from America?


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

sezra said:


> Can I just ask then do you also disagree with Ceearott importing his dog from America?


For breeding? Yes absolutely.

Far too many dogs as it is in the UK


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

goodvic2 said:


> For breeding? Yes absolutely.
> 
> Far too many dogs as it is in the UK


SO widening the gene pool is not a good thing is it not???????


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

The problem with this sort of post is that because there are grey areas and breeders can't easily be catagorised, we can all think of examples that may be exceptions so it ends up going round in circles.

I think it is safe to say though, that there are far to many people breeding from their pets who shouldn't be, whether it's for money, the experience, sentimental reasons - the list of reasons is endless, but in common they shouldn't be doing it because they don't have knowledge to do it properly.

Breeding is always selfish - no bitch wants or needs to have litter and putting a bitch (or dog) at risk is only every done for the breeders/owners own reasons. The difference between those involved in dogs (whether showing/working etc) is that they are always breeding with the wider perspective of the whole breed, not just how cute their own pet it. 

Breeding from a bitch (or using a dog as s stud) when you have little knowledge is not only selfish but dangerous. It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who come onto forums like this asking basic breeding questions when they are breeding from their pets.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rocco33 said:


> The problem with this sort of post is that because there are grey areas and breeders can't easily be catagorised, we can all think of examples that may be exceptions so it ends up going round in circles.
> 
> I think it is safe to say though, that there are far to many people breeding from their pets who shouldn't be, whether it's for money, the experience, sentimental reasons - the list of reasons is endless, but in common they shouldn't be doing it because they don't have knowledge to do it properly.
> 
> ...


excellently said Rocco!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

[ It never ceases to amaze me the number of people who come onto forums like this asking basic breeding questions when they are breeding from their pets.[/QUOTE]

usually when the deed has already been done!!:nono:


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> The difference between those involved in dogs (whether showing/working etc) is that they are always breeding with the wider perspective of the whole breed, not just how cute their own pet it.


You have some good points however, having a "cute companion pet" is just as worthy a goal as to have a show/working one. It's doesn't need to be a pedigree or even a designer breed. Everyone should work towards happy/healthy dogs. Whilst true breeds may be more consistent it's still not a perfect science.

I do agree that many breeders do not have a clue and shouldn't be breeding. I also agree people who do it just to make money shouldn't be doing it either. But once again.. telling people "you are wrong to do that.. only we can do it right" will not get anywhere and the result will be resentment rather than cooperation.


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

What about someone who basically has a show-bred pet dog. They've perhaps taken it to a couple of shows and it has done alright. They know from what experts have said that their dog is a good example of the breed. More importantly the dog has excellent temperament and sound confirmation. They've thought through the risks and have decided to have a litter from their (essentially good quality pet) bitch. They have asked around and several people have shown an interest in the puppies. The bitch is health tested and all test are acceptable.

This person is not a professional "show-er" but they have a decent dog and the time, energy and money to breed and raise a well-socialised litter.

Aside from those who don't think we should be breeding at all, should this person breed?

I'm just trying to find out where people's line is.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Werehorse said:


> What about someone who basically has a show-bred pet dog. They've perhaps taken it to a couple of shows and it has done alright. They know from what experts have said that their dog is a good example of the breed. More importantly the dog has excellent temperament and sound confirmation. They've thought through the risks and have decided to have a litter from their (essentially good quality pet) bitch. They have asked around and several people have shown an interest in the puppies. The bitch is health tested and all test are acceptable.
> 
> This person is not a professional "show-er" but they have a decent dog and the time, energy and money to breed and raise a well-socialised litter.
> 
> ...


If it were a bitch of my breeding and the owner wanted to keep a pup for show, then yes, under my guidance and mentorship, I would let them.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Ok quote from another thread on a contract by an ethical breeder.



> 1. The puppy described above is sold asPET
> 
> 2. If the puppy is sold as a PET by the Vendors, it does not qualify as a SHOW/POTENTIAL quality dog at this time. This puppy is sold with restricted breeding registration.
> 
> ...


I would never sign anything which distinguished a "pet" being different to a potential "show animal" in regards to being allowed to be bred from. I agree to eugenics on health grounds for animals, never when it would be due to simple looks. To me that is what this instance indicates. I would also not limit the need for Hip and Elbow scoring to be those actually "shown". As soon as people see contracts like this based around "shows" the appearance that shows are the only thing that really matter come into play. It's not intentional I know but gives the appearance of elitism and the idea that "non show dogs are second class". Tell anyone that their beloved pet is second class or even imply it and you get a rebellion.

Facing a contract like that I would not sign and go elsewhere. FYI our female dog is spayed, our incoming one will be as well. Our male is not neutered following vets advice. Simply put i don't want to breed anyway but would still refuse the contract.

Think about that. I count myself as a loving dog owner who can supply a good home to a dog with no intention to breed. I count the breeder with the contract as an ethical breeder. However they are forcing me to look elsewhere for a future dog. Something, somewhere is wrong.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Ok quote from another thread on a contract by an ethical breeder.
> 
> I would never sign anything which distinguished a "pet" being different to a potential "show animal" in regards to being allowed to be bred from. I agree to eugenics on health grounds for animals, never when it would be due to simple looks. To me that is what this instance indicates. I would also not limit the need for Hip and Elbow scoring to be those actually "shown". As soon as people see contracts like this based around "shows" the appearance that shows are the only thing that really matter come into play. It's not intentional I know but gives the appearance of elitism and the idea that "non show dogs are second class". Tell anyone that their beloved pet is second class or even imply it and you get a rebellion.
> 
> ...


Aye thats me and my contract - why would I force you to look elsewhere??


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Actually, I did a reply and its disappeared????? And Goblins post is diff now???

Am I missing summat??


----------



## raindog (Jul 1, 2008)

Goblin said:


> I would never sign anything which distinguished a "pet" being different to a potential "show animal" in regards to being allowed to be bred from. I agree to eugenics on health grounds for animals, never when it would be due to simple looks.


The difference between a "pet quality" dog and a "show quality" dog is absolutely nothing to do with "simple looks."
For me it would be about conformation - physical structure - first and foremost. A "pet" dog may be stunning looking compared with a "show" dog, but the "show" dog would have the correct physical conformation for the breed, whereas the "pet" dog, despite its looks may have (albeit minor) faults in its conformation. In my own breed I have seen a couple of absolutely stunning looking dogs, which, to the non-expert look absolutely beautiful - a picture of perfection. However, a more informed observer will see immediately that the beautiful four-square appearance of the dogs is enhanced by the fact that its rear angulation is completely wrong and would be a major problem for a long distance endurance sled dog. It's upright shoulders are a similar fault, but to the uninformed observer, the dog looks great!


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

raindog said:


> The difference between a "pet quality" dog and a "show quality" dog is absolutely nothing to do with "simple looks."
> For me it would be about conformation - physical structure - first and foremost. A "pet" dog may be stunning looking compared with a "show" dog, but the "show" dog would have the correct physical conformation for the breed, whereas the "pet" dog, despite its looks may have (albeit minor) faults in its conformation. In my own breed I have seen a couple of absolutely stunning looking dogs, which, to the non-expert look absolutely beautiful - a picture of perfection. However, a more informed observer will see immediately that the beautiful four-square appearance of the dogs is enhanced by the fact that its rear angulation is completely wrong and would be a major problem for a long distance endurance sled dog. It's upright shoulders are a similar fault, but to the uninformed observer, the dog looks great!


You worded that so well, and said what I wanted to say, but I got meself a tad annoyed, lol! So thank you!!


----------



## luvmydogs (Dec 30, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> Aye thats me and my contract - why would I force you to look elsewhere??


I don't have contracts but I've been burnt recently so am considering it. I did have a contract written out for my first ES litter but one owner flatly refused to sign it and said he worked with contacts on a daily basis and the are unenforceable. So I didn't bother. He turned out to be a fantastic owner and has imported an ES stud since then. So I'm just not sure what to do now...


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

luvmydogs said:


> I don't have contracts but I've been burnt recently so am considering it. I did have a contract written out for my first ES litter but one owner flatly refused to sign it and said he worked with contacts on a daily basis and the are unenforceable. So I didn't bother. He turned out to be a fantastic owner and has imported an ES stud since then. So I'm just not sure what to do now...


Well, if folks dont sign my contract they dont get a pup simple as, mind you, never had anyone refuse before though. I know it would be diff to enforce in reality, but it gives me a little peace of mind and mine was put together with advise from Trevor Cooper and he reckoned it would actually be enforcable on most points in it. If you wanna use mine and twiddle with it for yourself, feel free. Its also part of being an Accredited Breeder that I have a contract for each puppy I sell.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

goodvic2 said:


> most dogs are dumped in rescue when they are reaching adolesence, not as older dogs. It's certainly the case in our rescue ....


Yes that too, some of the examples I illustrated were in regards to people not returning to breeder and the list was by no means the only reasons.

However I have seen many old dogs and cats at Woodgreen Animals Shelter as well as some others.


----------



## Werehorse (Jul 14, 2010)

It always amazes me how many older dogs there are in rescue and when I win the lottery I am going to have a big kitchen full of old dogs from rescue sprawled on rugs in front of an Aga.

Just sayin.


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> but how do pet breeders know their dogs have good conformation?





SEVEN_PETS said:


> I mean as long as the dog hasn't got bent legs, arched back (in the wrong breeds), too small a head etc. Ie the dog looks like the breed or if a crossbreed, the dog is in proporation and moves correctly.


I agree



SEVEN_PETS said:


> Also, all these pet breeders puppies are being bred, they need to be bought, otherwise they'll end up being put to sleep or put in rescue. Why should they be disregarded?
> 
> It's strange how some people wouldn't buy a pet breeders pup, but if a pet breeder's pup was handed over to rescue, you would have it then. I don't see what the difference is, its the same pup. Is it just about money in this situation? Its cheaper to get it from a rescue than from the actual breeder?


I agree with this too, I would far rather buy a puppy from any sort of breeder where I can see the mother, see how they are reared and make an educated guess on how they will turn out rather than take an unknown from a rescue.



Malmum said:


> If a million years passes and I have another litter  I would micro chip every pup before it left and insist my number remain on the chip for life if that's possible because the last thing you want for your babies is a kennel at rescue - no matter how much they care for the dogs!
> 
> I did microchip four but some had already gone, foolish woman!


Surely you would have no right to do that. Once you have sold a pup it is nothing to do with you,. you have no rights over it.

I hate threads like this. I hate that there are so many people that are so blinkered. I bet 75 percent at least of pet dogs are bred by someone that has just had the odd litter from their pet bitch. Where the heck would all these dogs come from if only the wonderful breeders that breed one litter every few years because they want to keep a pup to show were allowed to be bred.
No way would I buy a pup from this sort of breeder as their attitude would chase me straight away.

I agree that there are SOME pet breeders that should not do it just the same as there is SOME show breeders that should not do it. Luckily no amount of debating the same subject over and over again is going to alter the fact that a huge number of pet bitches are going to be bred from each year and the pups are going to find homes so your average pet dog owner is going to find a puppy of their choice when they want one not have to wait years for the 'right' breeder. If you are a dog owner you want to own a dog, they are part of your lifestyle - you are not going to wait for years.


----------



## luvmydogs (Dec 30, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> Well, if folks dont sign my contract they dont get a pup simple as, mind you, never had anyone refuse before though.


See thats the thing - this guy turned out to be fab and is helping further the breed. But if I had been determined he signed the contract, he might have walked away.


Ceearott said:


> If you wanna use mine and twiddle with it for yourself, feel free.


Thanks - where can I find it?


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Its on here, lol! In the other thread 'duty of care contract'

Like I said, I have to have a contract as part of my being in the ABS.


----------



## luvmydogs (Dec 30, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> Its on here, lol! In the other thread 'duty of care contract'
> 
> Like I said, I have to have a contract as part of my being in the ABS.


eerrrm which other thread lol? :blink:
My breed isn't eligible for the ABS. (not that I think much of it - or the KC, anyway)

ETA: oops - duty of care one - it won't let me into it, keeps saying 'bad gateway


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

luvmydogs said:


> eerrrm which other thread lol? :blink:
> My breed isn't eligible for the ABS. (not that I think much of it - or the KC, anyway)
> 
> ETA: oops - duty of care one - it won't let me into it, keeps saying 'bad gateway


Off topic, but when I get 'bad gateway' I log out and back in and it solves it!!


----------



## luvmydogs (Dec 30, 2009)

Dogless said:


> Off topic, but when I get 'bad gateway' I log out and back in and it solves it!!


Thanks! It worked!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Reason it may be different is there's two threads. One is in the contract thread. The other here. Link the contracts thread to point here as well. 

Like to point out Ceearott I'm not attacking you. just trying to get my point over and you provided a good example. It's the reason I didn't actually post your name on the quote.

It doesn't matter what the "intentions" are. if you have "SHOW/POTENTIAL" written down, to the common pleb (that's me) it means anything else isn't as good and this is mainly due to looks. The very word "Show" enforces that impression. 

Let's slightly change this to something else.. When training someone to use a computer program I've known a trainer to say "point the mouse at the XYZ icon". On one occasion a person picked the mouse up and literally used it like a pen on the screen. Sounds silly to anyone who knows about computers. When very familiar with a subject words are based in the context of that subject. When coming from outside the same words can have different meaning.

You may not have anyone complain about the contract and refuse to sign, however someone else who sees that contract without actually meeting face to face and learning your actual views may look at it, read the word SHOW/POTENTIAL and decide never to get a puppy from you. It also reaffirms the idea in their mind that pedigree breeders are "elitist" and only interested in show dogs. Whilst in the pub on next Friday he has a few and says to a group of friends "did you hear Joe Bloggs got a new pup.. Had to sign a contract which said he's not allowed to breed it as it's not a show dog". In some dog circles pedigree breeders may be looked up to. In general population circles.. not so.

I'm not stupid but readily admit I'm not up on dog shows breeding etc and that is how I read the contract. I know through your posts that you love all your dogs and want the best for them and for the rottie breed in general. I'm simply trying to point to you and others like you that you must allow for other ways of thinking and perception. Saying it doesn't exist is like being King Cnut calling for the waves to stop.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Oks, but let me say though, every buyer has to sit and listen to me reading out that contract aloud and I make sure they understand every bit of it, and I explain that eg - I am selling you this puppy as 'pet' because you havent expressed an interest in showing, but I would have no problem of you change your mind and wanted to have a go'. This is fine by me as even if the dog turns out not to be ideal for show, most folk start out showing with an 'average' dog - thats not a dig, its a fact - and then they find they enjoy showing and go on to get more dogs to continue. I would be seriouslt lying if I said every puppy I breed is good enough for show!

maybe I have been lucky so far, but every 'pet' buyer have never quibbled this, most understand where I am coming from and duly agree and sign. 

Hmm, I hope I am explaining this oks, lol!

I cant be doing that bad, lol, as I have 3 buyers who have come back for another pup from me and now have 2 of mine, and 2 buyers who have 3 of mine. All from only 5 litters.


----------



## simplysardonic (Sep 1, 2009)

Ceearott said:


> Oks, but let me say though, every buyer has to sit and listen to me reading out that contract aloud and I make sure they understand every bit of it, and I explain that eg - *I am selling you this puppy as 'pet' because you havent expressed an interest in showing, but I would have no problem of you change your mind and wanted to have a go'*. This is fine by me as even if the dog turns out not to be ideal for show, most folk start out showing with an 'average' dog - thats not a dig, its a fact - and then they find they enjoy showing and go on to get more dogs to continue. I would be seriouslt lying if I said every puppy I breed is good enough for show!
> 
> maybe I have been lucky so far, but every 'pet' buyer have never quibbled this, most understand where I am coming from and duly agree and sign.
> 
> ...


This is what I'm hoping for in my future Shiba, first & foremost they will be a pet but I may decide to take up showing if I'm in a position to do so
As for contracts, they may not be legally binding but I think they're a good thing, I'm not an official rat rescue but when we had the rescue babies last year they all left with a contract that included that they were not to be bred from, with an explanation why, as well as contact details & information sheets. If nothing else it gave me peace of mind


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Ceearott said:


> Oks, but let me say though, every buyer has to sit and listen to me reading out that contract aloud


The whole process works for you and your immediate buyers. Let's face it any good breeder will get to know any prospective purchaser and I expected things like this to be explained as part of the buying process. I even realize I may be an exception but as I have stated I would not buy one. I know I'm stubborn like that.

You haven't commentated on Fred who learns about your policy secondhand and speaks up in the pub when your purchaser isn't even there to defend you. How do you think that would effect "ethical breeders" in the long term?

The rescue where we are getting our third dog also has a stipulation that the dog is to be spayed. I signed it without problems. Reasoning.. ALL dogs from that rescue have that stipulation and I have no problem with that.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Does this help?

Dogs which are spayed/neutered cant be shown, regardless of breeding/not breeding


----------



## Dogless (Feb 26, 2010)

simplysardonic said:


> This is what I'm hoping for in my future Shiba, first & foremost they will be a pet but I may decide to take up showing if I'm in a position to do so
> As for contracts, they may not be legally binding but I think they're a good thing, I'm not an official rat rescue but when we had the rescue babies last year they all left with a contract that included that they were not to be bred from, with an explanation why, as well as contact details & information sheets. If nothing else it gave me peace of mind


Same for me; I bought Kilo as a pet without any interest in showing at all bar attending shows to admire dogs and do some research. His breeders have now asked if he can be shown once if they handle him and so I started going to ringcraft with them (only once so far!!) so that he gets used to them handling him and also so that I can learn and practice at home. They have said they hope that I get into showing and join them in the ring but are lovely people who also understand that he was bought as a pet and will not pressure me should I decide that showing is not for us.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Ceearott said:


> Does this help?
> 
> Dogs which are spayed/neutered cant be shown, regardless of breeding/not breeding


No if anything that reinforces the idea that only show dogs are worthwhile to the KC and accredited breeders, This reenforces the them and us attitude that can exist between pedigree and all other dog owners (generalization there I know).

In my mind, if you want people to buy from only ethical breeders, you need to encourage the idea that health/temperament are the main, if not only reason to purchase from them. Please accept that, to the average person on the street, dog shows like Crufts are only about the look of the dog. To a lot of people this is as offensive as breeding a rottie with a chihuahua would be to you.

Don't you also think that having a spayed/neutered winner of Crufts would be excellent marketing to try to get more people to do it to their dogs therefore reducing the general dog population?


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

The original concept of showing was to show off your breeding stock, but pointless if they are 'done', dont you think??

Health 7 temperament are first and foremost in my breeding program, my Tag is Bred And Reared The Natural Way, & Bred For Soundness of Mind & Body.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Ceearott said:


> The original concept of showing was to show off your breeding stock, but pointless if they are 'done', dont you think??


Think out of the box at how others view it. I've already said a large proportion of the population view shows as being solely based on looks, not health. The english bulldog and it's health issues due to its "conformation" standard is an excellent example of why people can think that way. Another is the fact that a few years back tails/ears were, to my knowledge, docked simply for looks and that was encouraged, if not essential when showing.

You limit your statement with "The original concept". Times change. Maybe it would be better for the KC to move forward, not just for the sake of those breeds recognized by the KC but for the betterment of all dogs.

Once again I stress I am not against you or your breeding program or motives. Only pointing out how others can view it from outside. If you want "ethical breeders" you need to figure out the mind set of the majority of people who buy puppies.


----------



## Blondie (Feb 27, 2011)

Oh I do agree the KC needs to move forward faster than they are in lots of areas, maybe the new Chairman will help things along......... one can live in hope!!

Plus,where would you draw the line for getting dogs 'done' - if dogs are done as young pups it stunts and changes their growth so they never develop into the full potential they would have if not 'done', so how the heckers would you judge them???


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Goblin said:


> . . . .
> Don't you also think that having a spayed/neutered winner of Crufts would be excellent marketing to try to get more people to do it to their dogs therefore reducing the general dog population?


A couple of things jump out from this statement.

Why are we trying to reduce the dog population?

Is the thought is that reducing the population helps diminish the idiots that get dogs and dump them . . . cuz that doesn't logically follow to me.

There is nothing wrong with the current dog population. What is wrong is that a small % of people that get dogs don't value them enough to get them through that adolescent stage . . . . that cannot be cured by reducing the dog population.

Secondly, science is revealing that spay/neuter has risks and benefits . . . and I don't believe it should be pushed on owners as the only method of preventing litters. I believe this is quite harmful actually, and especially the thought of spaying/neutering dogs prior to full growth and adulthood. Some studies are even showing spaying can decrease longevity.

A Healthier Respect For Ovaries - A HEALTHIER RESPECT FOR OVARIES, by David J. Waters, DVM, PhD, Diplomate ACVS - courtesy of Dr. Patricia Jordan, DVM, CVA, CTCVH

The message DOES need to get out that haphazard and unplanned litters are irresponsible and shouldn't be tolerated . . . the message needs to get out that ownership of a dog means work and management . . . that is very different than deciding everyone should spay and neuter, as some of us are fully capable of managing intact dogs and keeping their risk of reproduction nil/minimum.

CC


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

comfortcreature said:


> A couple of things jump out from this statement.
> 
> Why are we trying to reduce the dog population?
> 
> ...


From a rescue perspective I believe we are over populated with dogs. I know the amount of people we turn away, as do the other rescue's that we have too many dogs and not enough homes.

I agree that somebody like yourself is more than responsible enough to have an unneutered dog. But walk around the big cities and you can see how many people don't neuter their dogs.

God knows how many litters are produced each year by "accident".


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

> From a rescue perspective I believe we are over populated with dogs. I know the amount of people we turn away, as do the other rescue's that we have too many dogs and not enough homes


How do you draw that conclusion . . . that there are too many dogs and not enough homes?

It can't be drawn just because the homes aren't making the connection to rescue . . . there can be a myriad of reasons for that.

I have spent a good amount of time involved in rescue as a volunteer and as a foster, so I'm not oblivious to what you are saying, but I believe you are not clearly understanding what the problems are, and as long as they are not correctly identified, they cannot be addressed.

I posted numbers up earlier in the thread about the UK, and there certainly are enough homes for all dogs that go through your rescues.



comfortcreature said:


> . . .
> Just to review the UK numbers that I dug up on that other thread as I believe they are always relevent to this type of conversation.
> 
> In 2010 there were 257,062 dogs registered when you total up the seven groups. The MINORITY will be from club affiliated breeders - Breed Registration Statistics - The Kennel Club
> ...


That is a similar situation to what we have here in Canada, and that is in the USA.

What the truth is, is that rescues and breeders are COMPETING for SOME of those homes . . . and rescues are not winning often enough.

Again, that is not an indication of too many dogs and cannot be resolved by some magical thinking that reducing population would help. What it indicates is that rescues need to sell their product better and get more on board with the idea of adoption.

As an example I already posted about an open admission shelter that went from killing 60% of the animals they impounded, to killing less than 8% (the irremediably suffering) even during this recession, because they changed their thinking and direction. - http://www.petforums.co.uk/dog-chat/172612-breeding-council-all-dogs.html#post1061186036

Many rescues take themselves out of the game in many ways that need to be looked at more closely if adoption numbers are to increase.

As well community attitudes need to be changed. Aiming at 'population', something that cannot be controlled, is useless. It has been proven that community outreach, by rescue, does help to change that attitude.



> I agree that somebody like yourself is more than responsible enough to have an unneutered dog. But walk around the big cities and you can see how many people don't neuter their dogs.
> 
> God knows how many litters are produced each year by "accident".


Yes, this has to change in many places, but the message does not have to be just about spay/neuter. It can be about discouraging haphazard and unwanted litters through management.

If you treat the public like idiots, they will rise to your expectations. They CAN learn IF someone (or agency) is willing to put the message out there. I am an educator of those with diminished capacity and this is second nature knowledge to me, with many expecting those I teach to not be able to learn.

What I see is many that are immersed in rescue mired in the idea that the public are idiots and cannot learn - therefore give them simple rules. They are wrong. People can learn, and societal attitudes can change - given leadership and a message that is pallatable.

CC


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

So we are back to the breeder situation. Spaying would reduce that "element" even if it's simply the "accidental" breeders. It may be controversial. Some say yes it's better, some say no. Some say early some say later. How do you tell what the truth is when all views are backed by scientific evidence? Think that should be in a different thread.

The point I was making with my previous posts is some great breeders don't get chosen for the reason that they are viewed as elitist. How can we push the general public to go to good breeders without a concentrated marketing effort pointing out the benefits of health. If the public _ thinks _a large number of these good breeders are only interested in look they will go elsewhere.


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

Goblin said:


> So we are back to the breeder situation. Spaying would reduce that "element" even if it's simply the "accidental" breeders. It may be controversial. Some say yes it's better, some say no. Some say early some say later. How do you tell what the truth is when all views are backed by scientific evidence? Think that should be in a different thread..


To start . . . you read the evidence for yourself. If someone wants to delve further into it another thread is welcomed.



Goblin said:


> The point I was making with my previous post is some great breeders don't get chosen for the reason that they are viewed as elitist. How can we push the general public to go to good breeders without a concentrated marketing effort pointing out the benefits of health. If the public _ thinks _a large number of these good breeders are only interested in look they will go elsewhere.


You don't need to push the public to go to good breeders. Most will come to that on their own given the right attitude about pet ownership and the duties they take on making the decision to become a pet owner.

What the Calgary success has proven is that if you make a great marketting effort to the public about THEIR responsibilities as a pet owner, and market the ACs and shelters as beneficial and friendly to them, then the public starts to make better decisions.

Save Our Dogs » The Calgary Model for Success

And there will still be some idiots, as there always will be, but the aim is to diminish their numbers and change the greater community attitude (peer pressure then helps). The killing in shelters can stop without everybody thinking the same way or becoming saints. Reforming what shelters do, to include community outreach and education (and much more) is the key.

And don't get me wrong, encouraging spay/neuter for those that understand their limitations in managing intact animals, is also part of that.

CC


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

comfortcreature said:


> How do you draw that conclusion . . . that there are too many dogs and not enough homes?
> 
> It can't be drawn just because the homes aren't making the connection to rescue . . . there can be a myriad of reasons for that.
> 
> ...


I take the point you are making and it's great you got the figures together. But you mention that the dogs trust figures don't come anywhere near the amount of dogs required (referring to strays picked up). What about litters that are dumped in rescue or the amount of dogs which are taken in daily.

Bottom line is people don't want a rescue dog. They would rather get a puppy. I don't believe any amount of reaching out to them will change their mind.

To be honest it sounds as though you are totally knocking rescue's  Many rescue's do a great job. I agree that the bigger ones have a blanket policy, and maybe they do need to be a big more flexible.

It's not that the public can't learn (although a lot of the people I meet do fall into that!), but they don;t want to. Many people can;t be bothered. That's not the rescue's fault. It's our throw away society....


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

goodvic2 said:


> I take the point you are making and it's great you got the figures together. But you mention that the dogs trust figures don't come anywhere near the amount of dogs required (referring to strays picked up). What about litters that are dumped in rescue or the amount of dogs which are taken in daily. ....


Would love someone in the UK to look for those numbers (dumped by owners). I see unclaimed strays at only 9,310. That is tiny for your population and should easily be placeable given the right rescue leadership.

Could be wrong. The UK could be where we were 25 years ago, and have huge numbers. That still doesn't mean it can't be done.



goodvic2 said:


> Bottom line is people don't want a rescue dog. They would rather get a puppy. I don't believe any amount of reaching out to them will change their mind.....


If all those in rescue feel the same way, then there is the center of the problem . . . a defeatist attitude eminating from rescue. There is no help to that, and in fact it causes harm.

Pigpile on the Irresponsible Public! - 
Pigpile on the Irresponsible Public! « YesBiscuit!

Memphis Mayor: No "Shelter Large Enough"
- UPDATED - Memphis Mayor: No "Shelter Large Enough" « YesBiscuit!

Just another irresponsible pet owner… right? - 
http://www.petconnection.com/blog/2011/02/09/just-another-irresponsible-pet-owner-right/



goodvic2 said:


> To be honest it sounds as though you are totally knocking rescue's  Many rescue's do a great job. I agree that the bigger ones have a blanket policy, and maybe they do need to be a big more flexible......


If your take is that I am knocking ALL rescues, then you have been ignoring the links I have posted to those that are successful.

I do knock, and will continue to knock, those shelters/rescues that are mired in an old model of catch and kill and blame the public . . . and I will continue to, as their model is a great part of the reason so many animals are thrown away and then killed.

If they don't understand that, I will continue to remind them of it.



goodvic2 said:


> It's not that the public can't learn (although a lot of the people I meet do fall into that!), but they don;t want to. Many people can;t be bothered. That's not the rescue's fault. It's our throw away society....


When it has been proven that shelter/rescue agencies centered in communities can change this - the throw away society attitude - within their own communities; when they in turn are not trying to but would rather blame the public . . . that is as much the shelter/rescue's fault as it is our throw away societies. Shelters, after all, SAY they are there for the animals. Many are being paid by the community for that remit and therefore it is their job to do their best, not just what they have been doing. If they are they'd be making the effort to reach out and educate when their eyes were opened to the opportunity. There is no reason rescue leadership around the world (with our internet) hasn't seen what the solutions are.

reforming-animal-control

Blog : Nathan J Winograd

CC


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

My understanding is that Germany has a low number of the population (8%) owning a dog. France has a much softer legislation where 38% of the population has a dog. Great-Britain has around 23% and 15,000 healthy dogs killed each year. I can't remember where those figures come from though. The southern and eastern countries have even more issues. Strays, puppy mills, etc. In Germany licensing is required and enforced. (Sometimes German red tape can be good ) I think most, if not all rescues in Germany are no kill rescues.

Think this is time to point out this link:
Carodog - Home

People are quite right when they say owners need to be held responsible and this should/needs to be ingrained into society. I think any good dog owner feels that way. My opinion is this would be helped tremendously if we could also eliminate the "them and us" feeling about dogs in regards to pedigree or not so all dog groups can present a united and coordinated effort.

I'll shut up and get off my soapbox now as I've hogged this thread too long.


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

A defeatest attitude... Thats obviously where I am going wrong.. :

I'm sorry but your views are very simplistic and not altogether true. 

You only have to look at the members on the forum to see how many go out and buy puppy's and choose not to rescue. 

Next time your over in the UK perhaps you can visit our rescue and discuss my defeatist attitude


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

> My understanding is that Germany has a low number of the population (8%) owning a dog. France has a much softer legislation where 38% of the population has a dog. Great-Britain has around 23% and 15,000 healthy dogs killed each year. I can't remember where those figures come from though. The southern and eastern countries have even more issues. Strays, puppy mills, etc. In Germany licensing is required and enforced. (Sometimes German red tape can be good ) I think most, if not all rescues in Germany are no kill rescues. . . .


Terrierman wrota a recent blog post comparing U.S.A and U.K. demographics. There are numerous communities from rural to large cities achieving open admission no-kill succcess in the U.S.A. The comments about Battersea euthanizing pitbulls (not allowed for adoption if I understand the ban correctly) and the importation to meet demand make interesting reading.



> In the UK, there are approximately 5.3 million dog-owning households (21% of all households) which combined own around 7 million dogs. The average dog-owning household owns about 1.3 dogs.
> 
> In the US, there are approximately 48 million dog-owning households (38% of households), owning around 72 million dogs. The average dog-owning household owns about 1.5 dogs.
> 
> ...


http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2011/05/us-uk-comparative-canine-demographics.html



goodvic2 said:


> A defeatest attitude... Thats obviously where I am going wrong.. :


Yes it is.



goodvic2 said:


> I'm sorry but your views are very simplistic and not altogether true. :


Explain please.



goodvic2 said:


> You only have to look at the members on the forum to see how many go out and buy puppy's and choose not to rescue.


That proves what?

Some will always get a puppy. Others can be swayed to get adult dogs. Here we need, at the greatest, 25% of those acquiring to decide on rescue dogs . . . and that has been achieved in many places.



goodvic2 said:


> Next time your over in the UK perhaps you can visit our rescue and discuss my defeatist attitude


I'd love to have a coffee over it. I'll look you up if I ever go.

CC


----------



## Snoringbear (Sep 26, 2008)

Ceearott said:


> Does this help?
> 
> Dogs which are spayed/neutered cant be shown, regardless of breeding/not breeding


I'm not sure how recently this was introduced, but you can show neutered dogs. You just have to fill in this form and send it to the KC http://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/download/394/neutereddogsform.pdf


----------



## L/C (Aug 9, 2010)

goodvic2 said:


> A defeatest attitude... Thats obviously where I am going wrong.. :
> 
> I'm sorry but your views are very simplistic and not altogether true.
> 
> ...


I think that shelters may be more analagous to our larger organisations. Over here (at least in my experience) the rescues are not also pounds, although the pounds might re-home, so they do not recieve any public funding - any money they do have is from fundraising. They are also almost exclusively run by volunteers - who homecheck, do transport runs, advertise the dogs, foster the dogs, fundraise and raise awareness all in their spare time. There isn't the money for an outreach campaign to the community - lots of rescues are small operations who balance on a knife edge wrt finances.

There have been campaigns by the bigger organisations such as Dogs Trust and the RSPCA and if there was going to be a concerted effort to change ideas it would have to come from them - not the smaller 'one man band' rescues - which is what most people on here will be involved in.

For the rescue I spend most of my time helping - most of our dogs would never show up on any statistics. We do take the occasional dog from the pound but most of ours are owner or trainer surrenders. The amount of greyhounds that are retired each year is around 9,000 - that doesn't include those that never raced on licensed tracks - so they then need to be added to statistics. Plus we get lots of owner hand ins that don't make it on to any register and every rescue I know is innundated with requests from people who want to give up their pets. Also every rescue I know is non-kill.

Having looked at the Dogs Trust Stray Dogs survey for 2010 there is a steady decrease in the numbers of dogs being handed in to local authorities from 1997 until it reaches an all time low in 2008 of 97,000. Since then it has climbed to 121, 693 - partly because of the recession. In addition to that you might find this interesting - as it suggests that PTS numbers are already falling:



> *2.3 What happens to the UKs stray dogs?*
> 
> The second question in the survey asks local authorities to detail what happened to the stray dogs that they handled during the period of 1st April 2009 to 31st March 2010.
> 
> ...


Source: http://www.dogstrust.org.uk/az/s/straydogsurvey/straydogsurveysummaryreport2010.pdf


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

I find contracts frightening to be honest. Once money is handed over, that puppy is mine and I should be able to choose what i do with him/her (within reason obviously ). If I choose to spay/neuter my pup, that's my choice. If I choose not to, that's also my choice and I wouldn't want the breeder to dictate their views to me. Another reason I wouldn't go to most show breeders. Most pet breeders wouldn't use such a contract, and I'd much prefer that.

I think rescues are already quite high-profile. Come on, the RSPCA is the most known about rescue in the country. If people choose not to rescue, it's probably a reason why they don't, not just because they don't know about rescues. The reasons could be; they want a puppy, they don't want a home visit, they may feel they would be judged, they think the dogs have behaviourial problems etc etc. 

I still feel pet breeders have a role in the dog world.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

I would also say that I wouldn't want to wait years for a pet puppy either. If I choose to have a puppy, I'd want one within the next 2-3 months, not have to wait 6-12 months or even longer. This may sound selfish, but as long as a puppy is well cared for when in the breeder's care, then I don't see what the problem is, and there are probably thousands of puppies ready at any one time, so I have no personal need to get onto a waiting list.


----------



## pearltheplank (Oct 2, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I find contracts frightening to be honest. Once money is handed over, that puppy is mine and I should be able to choose what i do with him/her (within reason obviously ). If I choose to spay/neuter my pup, that's my choice. If I choose not to, that's also my choice and I wouldn't want the breeder to dictate their views to me. Another reason I wouldn't go to most show breeders. Most pet breeders wouldn't use such a contract, and I'd much prefer that.


My written word doesn't always come across as it should but I will try to convey my views.

There are many reasons a contract and endorsements are used, mainly to protect the dog and the breed, and not to dictate terms to the new owners.

For example, there may well be a superficial health problem ie born with hernia- makes the dog no less worthy and once dealt with, the dog is perfectly fine but not suitable for breeding because of possible complications, that is what makes a breeder responsible. There could be many other situations that would qualify a puppy 'pet' only and that doesn't mean its inferior at all

If this was better explained to buyers then maybe it wouldn't be such an issue


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

SEVEN_PETS said:


> I mean as long as the dog hasn't got bent legs, arched back (in the wrong breeds), too small a head etc. Ie the dog looks like the breed or if a crossbreed, the dog is in proporation and moves correctly.


But HOW would they know what is correct and that it is in proportion and that it moves correctly?

To judge, and often people who just show, go to conformation and movement seminars to understand what is good conformationally, what is correct movement, and correct type - and many of these sessions also involve an assessment at the end to ascertain participants knowledge of a dogs conformation.

If people who are in and around the showring and judging attend these seminars on a regular basis - then pray tell me how a pet owner would understand that.

Show me a pet owner who could overlay the key points of the dog onto the dog and identify it's faults and understand what type of dog it is looking for in order to correct those faults.

Show me a pet owner who understands what their breed should look like when it moves - how it's legs should move in conjunction with one another and what is correct and incorrect movement - it can take a lot of learning and looking and watching and assessing dogs to understand all this.

======================

For the record I don't have anything against pet breeders who have good show or working mentors and know some who have excellent understanding of a dogs conformation because they are willing to learn.

I know that show and working breeders cannot fill the demand for Labs - which is where the PF and BYB step in - I would far sooner see a GOOD pet breeder who does everything by the book and works with a knowledgeable mentor to ensure their next generation is an improvement than see people buy from BYB and PF.

===============================

But as for saying the 'average pet owner' is capable of assessing their dog's strengths and weaknesses and understanding what is correct and incorrect movement - the number out there that can will be minimal - there are people in both the show and working fields still learning after 30/40 years + - what exactly can pet people add to that? not much from where I am sitting which is why a *good experienced* mentor is essential.

Although I've not been required to lift the endorsements on any of my pups to date, I would providing the owner met the criteria as stipulated by me in my endorsement contract - and for dogs, that means proving themselves in the show or field - for bitches - they would have to use a stud dog recommended by me before the endorsements would be lifted (fortunately - in my breed - this can mean a choice of 20 or 30 +++ dogs who I feel are suitable to improve my breeding line) -

It's rare there will only be one or two dogs suitable for a bitch whatever her strengths and weaknesses because we have, in comparison to many breeds, such a large gene pool, and such a wealth of dogs who have been fully health tested - and breeding is well known across the field as to who produces what within both the show and working arena - and if as a mentor, we don't know the answers - we will know someone else that does.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Conformation is based on breed standards- not everyone agrees with these.

Breed standards are based on personal preference and are also open to interpretation. Therefore they are not a given that a dog should have to be this way.. Just a select group choice not everyones.

We all know that a lot of breed standards have messed up a lot of the breeds and have changed breeds so that they are not recognisable to what they started out.

We all know that to get to perfection and uniformity to follow a breed standard has resulted in inbreeding and line breeding which increases the chances of homozygosity and the genetic health problems that so many breeds now are predisposed to.

So yes whilst some conformation is a requirement - some of it has caused a lot of detrimental affect to our dogs. That's why with some of the negative backlash against KC they have had to revise some of their breed standards.

Hence why the PDSA has took a stand against breed standards in 08 and has withdrawn support for the kennel Club and now it's latest policy on just one pedigree to be registered.

Also of course a show/working breeder would have more knowledge of conformation than a pet breeder because they are involved in conformation trials and shows etc....


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Swarthy, like Ceearott you are obviously passionate about your breed and you have a well written and clear post. Nobody else I know of has quite put the idea of "mentoring" so clearly and I think this could be and interesting point to move this discussion forward rather than simply repetition of the same discussion points.



> To judge, and often people who just show, go to conformation and movement seminars to understand what is good conformationally, what is correct movement, and correct type - and many of these sessions also involve an assessment at the end to ascertain participants knowledge of a dogs conformation.


I have no knowledge of these seminars so please excuse my ignorance. Are they only for "judges" and people who "show" or are they advertised outside the show circles so they could be attended by anyone ?

Is this conformation based on breed or generic to dogs in general? Again I'm looking in as an uninformed bystander. Would be you prepared to "mentor/teach" people these things outside of your preferred breed, even if it is for a hybrid/crossbreed? I know time and logistics may prevent it, just asking theoretically.

As a sideline, while talking about good breeders and their accessibility to anyone on the street, can I just ask where you advertise if you are going to have a litter at any time?

I know I did want to stay out of this thread but couldn't help it....:cryin:


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> I have no knowledge of these seminars so please excuse my ignorance. Are they only for "judges" and people who "show" or are they advertised outside the show circles so they could be attended by anyone ?


I neither judge or show and have been to a number of these seminars, and even though my idea of a labrador is different from those find in the ring there is plenty to learn.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

Goblin said:


> I have no knowledge of these seminars so please excuse my ignorance. Are they only for "judges" and people who "show" or are they advertised outside the show circles so they could be attended by anyone ?
> 
> Is this conformation based on breed or generic to dogs in general? Again I'm looking in as an uninformed bystander.


As Rocco says, anyone can attend these seminars - you get breed specific seminars and also generic ones - I've been to Breed Specific Hands on seminars with KC Accredited assessments at the end, and also generic Conformation and Movement seminars with the same Assessment at the end, I never think it hurts to refresh and update your knowledge.

I do show, but also have judged a fair bit at the lower level and am on the Breed Council C List for my breed - I have also stewarded a fair bit for other breeds - it's all useful experience.

I attended a breed specific seminar and took an assessment before I bred my first litter - I also had, and still have fantastic supportive mentors with many years of experience between them, and always there at the drop of a hat if I need advice.

The best way to find out about the lower end seminars is the back of the Dog's World - you could even have a sneaky peak in your local newsagents if you didn't want to buy a paper (although these papers can also be informative not just for showing, but working and breeding news).

Our Dogs now allows you to subscribe online for online access, Dogs World give you online access when you subscribe to their paper (I am not quite sure why they still insist on posting out when just online would be much more cost effective for those that wanted it - although the papers are handy for saving when we have a litter)

If you were interested in something specific, let me know and I can keep an eye out.

A lot of Championship shows also run seminars - but these are aimed more at judging / stewarding and sometimes breeding (although I have also seen them for show-handling)



Goblin said:


> Would be you prepared to "mentor/teach" people these things outside of your preferred breed, even if it is for a hybrid/crossbreed? I know time and logistics may prevent it, just asking theoretically.


I would guide / support / mentor buyers of my own puppies if they wanted to breed providing they met my requirements; I have also supported friends with stud dogs who have not bred, but have had their dogs used, and would obviously support the owners of any visiting bitches to my boys.

Would I support someone creating a hybrid / crossbreed - am I allowed to maintain my right to silence on that?

In all honesty, I wouldn't feel I have sufficient knowledge to advise someone who wanted to cross-breed with a Labrador - as in, I don't have any knowledge of the other breed - yes, I could, as could many others, advise them on the mandatory and strongly recommended health tests - and I wouldn't turn my back on someone who genuinely needed help for the DOGS sake - but as for directly supporting the breeding of cross or unregistered litters - I'm afraid that is something I would struggle with.



Goblin said:


> As a sideline, while talking about good breeders and their accessibility to anyone on the street, can I just ask where you advertise if you are going to have a litter at any time?


When I make a decision to breed, I place the information on my own website -I generally get regular enquiries for pups anyway, the majority of which I don't have a hope in hells chance of meeting, so direct them to rescue / other breeders dependent on their circumstances.

If I have got a litter planned and feel they would make suitable owners, I add them to my 'no obligation' waiting list while building a relationship with them

"No obligation" meaning that I build a relationship with them - but don't expect either party to commit until we have met when the pups are four weeks or over, and they have met and spent time with both my older dogs and the pups - and I insist on including children in this

Once my litter is on the ground, and I am happy everything seems OK - I advertise on Champdogs and as an Accredited Breeder, on the KC website.

It's all well and good saying good breeders don't need to advertise - and in numerically small breeds this is probably very often true;

However, in numerically large breeds such as Labs - it's a different story - unless someone is looking specifically for a dog from show or working lines - then they are usually looking for a specific dog or bitch of a specific colour from nice natured parents who are health tested.

Unless you know for a fact you are having a single coloured litter, nature offers little guarantee of meeting your waiting lists requirements, and yes, I've had to disappoint people on that basis. I also tell those that if they are prepared to wait, and then change their mind, they let me know - and I will be more than happy to advise if they want help with finding an alternative litter - this usually goes down very well.

I've had three litters - two black and chocolate, one all chocolate - the all chocolate litter were all reserved with no waivering long before the babies were on the ground - slightly different with the Black / chocolate litter - because most people are looking for a specific colour - but all other than those I've kept have been sold by 9 weeks (although several have stayed with us until 11/12 weeks because my girls seem to enjoy giving birth to puppies ready to leave around bank holiday times 

I can't say I have quite the same impact when I am pressing for information on people wanting to use my boy - as inevitably a large percentage of these enquiries are from pet owners with bitches with no health tests (where I live doesn't help with this at all  )

==================================

As an aside, these days, if I buy a pup in, it is always with a view to showing - all three of my younger bought in dogs have come from show kennels (2 from the same kennel) - the first I waited well over a year for, however, my two boys have both been almost 'chance' purchases of breeding in which I had a strong interest, and the opportunity presented itself for me to 'pick' my pup from a show perspective.


----------



## Sarahnya (Oct 27, 2008)

I'd rather buy from a pet breeder (or small hobby show) tbh, if I can see they have lavished attention on the pups and are well cared for. I would ask that health tests had been completed if a breed was particuarly prone to certain problems.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Swarthy, thanks for taking the time to respond with such a detailed post.


swarthy said:


> The best way to find out about the lower end seminars is the back of the Dog's World - you could even have a sneaky peak in your local newsagents if you didn't want to buy a paper (although these papers can also be informative not just for showing, but working and breeding news).


Do you think it would be useful to encourage the advertising methodology of generic seminars to reach a larger proportion of the population? I know in Germany we have similar dog magazines, which we get, but the majority of people looking at dogs, or even possibly breeding them may not.



> If you were interested in something specific, let me know and I can keep an eye out.


For me personally, it's not of interest. I never intend to breed anything. If I get another dog it will actually be from a pedigree breeder but that's a long time in the future. I'm simply trying to put ideas forward and make some people think of alternatives. I do vehemently dislike the them and us idea that exists between different types of dog owners as I believe this is one of the hurdles which exists when trying to get the majority of owners to go to ethical breeders.



> When I make a decision to breed, I place the information on my own website -I generally get regular enquiries for pups anyway, the majority of which I don't have a hope in hells chance of meeting, so direct them to rescue / other breeders dependent on their circumstances.


In regards to advertising on your own website. Despite the oversubsciption you suffer, do you think if you advertised to appeal to a larger market (not sure where most people go on the web in the UK), the idea of health testing and the requirements of dog ownership could reach/educate a larger group of people? Do you think if you turned people down as unsuitable owners it would enforce the "them and us" mentality?


----------



## Blitz (Feb 12, 2009)

pearltheplank said:


> My written word doesn't always come across as it should but I will try to convey my views.
> 
> There are many reasons a contract and endorsements are used, mainly to protect the dog and the breed, and not to dictate terms to the new owners.
> 
> ...


but that is not the reason for endorsements. If it was then it would not be a problem to anyone. It is more a case of breeders not wanting the pups they have bred to be used for breeding and putting blanket endorsements on the litter - in other words they are selling a puppy with limitations on it. Which is probably why there are so many unregistered litters around because of course endorsements do not stop you breeding, they just stop you registering the litter or taking advice on using the right dog - therefore you could say that endorsements encourage irresponsible breeding.

I think Sevenpets has a good point on conformation. Why shouldnt she be able to see the conformation and movement of a generic dog. Why are dogs different from other species. If I am buying a horse or a cow or a sheep I will look for good conformation, good movement and good temperament regardless of the breed. I would have no idea how to choose a show quality animal of any breed in any of the species but I would know how to choose a sound animal that would suit my purpose. So if I want to choose a 'dog' I can do the same thing surely.


----------



## gladass (Jan 6, 2011)

IMO 

1. A lot of pet breeders do not even know the history of their breed

2. Do not know how to take care of their own dogs coats without sending them out to groomers.

3. Only know the temprement of their dog as they have never actually been around any other dogs of their breed, so can only advice buyers of their own dogs temprement.

4. Do not have indepth knowledge of small things that can be within breeds eg sensitive tummies as their bitch has never suffered does not mean the pups will not etc...

5. Even although they may do the health tests recommended, they may not know healt issues that can happen within that breed that are not tested for as stated before as an example hernia's 

I personally would not buy a pup from someone who knows nothing about it apart from emm!!! My Suzy has been a great mother, she is so loveable


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Leaving rescues aside:

If people want a dog to show in the ring then they go to a show breeder.

If people want a working dog then they go to a breeder who breeds them that has prior knowledge and has proven dogs etc........

If people want a pet dog only then the majority would go to a pet breeder.


There is room for all 3 and not one of these breeders in isolation can satisfy either the requirements or demands of the other.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Cockerpoo lover said:


> There is room for all 3 and not one of these breeders in isolation can satisfy either the requirements or demands of the other.


True. The question to my mind isn't who's best which discussions like this generally turn into. It's how can "we", as dog lovers spread the knowledge and experience between the groups when these groups are often anti each other. This needs to be done without pushing the groups further apart.

It has to said that the "pet" section, as the largest group tend to be the worst, not just from the breeder side but also because owners often don't have a clue. Being told what to do isn't the answer, the answer lies in knowledge being easily accessible to those who want it. The end goal should be that the knowledge of good breeding and dog ownership needs to be culturally taught and accepted within society much as people learn stealing is wrong. One step at a time though.. first break down barriers and then make the knowledge widely available to anyone without them needing to search for it in specific locations.

Just my opinion of course.


----------



## swarthy (Apr 24, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Swarthy, thanks for taking the time to respond with such a detailed post.


No problem - will always try to help if I can.

My apologies, I didn't notice you were in Germany 



Goblin said:


> Do you think it would be useful to encourage the advertising methodology of generic seminars to reach a larger proportion of the population? I know in Germany we have similar dog magazines, which we get, but the majority of people looking at dogs, or even possibly breeding them may not.


It's an interesting idea - there are a few things to consider

Costs of such seminars are very low and well subscribed - so to advertise elsewhere would increase costs and probably require more seminars - breed specific seminars are also quite few and far between 

Showing is a very expensive hobby as it is, so costs have to remain reasonable.

Having said that, I don't think it would hurt anyone who doesn't work or show their dogs, and is considering breeding to attend a movement and conformation seminar, and ideally, a breed specific seminar, and as already mentioned, have a good, experienced show or working mentor (who would also know, or could easily find out about seminars  )

I learnt a tremendous amount through attending a breed specific seminar, and the movement and conformation seminar was a very good refresher.

I classify myself as a 'pet owner' who just happens to show her dogs, and breeds the occasional litter.

You will hear many people say you only 'breed from the best' - if this was the case, gene pools, even in the numerically large breeds would diminish rapidly -the key point (for me) is even if you don't want to show or work your own dogs, that you are breeding for the purpose of improving your dog conformationally while retaining temperament, health, and where appropriate, working instinct.

This is where I struggle to understand how pet breeders can do this without a massive amount of research, ideally including going along to shows even if only to watch, and yes, I think the idea of attending a breed specific seminar would be an excellent idea.

I would also be expecting a 'pet breeder' to keep a pup from a litter to improve their next generation, often with little need to take more than one, maximum two litters from a bitch (using different sires).

Bigger show and working breeders may not keep a pup from every litter, and TBH - this needs to continue, otherwise, smaller and new exhibitors / potential breeders coming into the dog world would not get the opportunity to get their hands on dogs with show and / or working potential.



Goblin said:


> In regards to advertising on your own website. Despite the oversubsciption you suffer, do you think if you advertised to appeal to a larger market (not sure where most people go on the web in the UK), the idea of health testing and the requirements of dog ownership could reach/educate a larger group of people? Do you think if you turned people down as unsuitable owners it would enforce the "them and us" mentality?


Touch wood, to date, I've not really needed to advertise to a wider audience - however, I do know of highly reputable breeders who have advertised in the places you talk about, and have found fantastic owners - when asked why they picked the breeders in question, they were told, that their ethics and love of their breed stood out a mile compared to many of the other adverts on these sites.

One thing I wouldn't do is advertise in my local papers - because of where I live  - but yes, if I needed to tap into a wider audience for any reason, then I would consider such sites.

The main reasons I've turned people down for my pups was simply because I didn't feel either they, or their lifestyle was suitable for a pup. I have tried, extremely hard in some instances, to try and persuade some people to go down the rescue route, or go to the breed clubs who will have details of older dogs available, because whilst I believe they could offer a loving home, I feel their lifestyle simply wouldn't suit a puppy - but as they saying goes, "_you can lead a horse to water.................._"


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Goblin said:


> True. The question to my mind isn't who's best which discussions like this generally turn into. It's how can "we", as dog lovers spread the knowledge and experience between the groups when these groups are often anti each other. This needs to be done without pushing the groups further apart.
> 
> It has to said that the "pet" section, as the largest group tend to be the worst, not just from the breeder side but also because owners often don't have a clue. Being told what to do isn't the answer, the answer lies in knowledge being easily accessible to those who want it. The end goal should be that the knowledge of good breeding and dog ownership needs to be culturally taught and accepted within society much as people learn stealing is wrong. One step at a time though.. first break down barriers and then make the knowledge widely available to anyone without them needing to search for it in specific locations.
> 
> Just my opinion of course.


 I have tried numerous times on this forum to get either pet breeders and show/working on same page and I have with crosses and pedigrees.

I have often said about working towards a middle ground so that there is at least a "standard" that all breeders across the board could work easily to and accept.
You cannot go from puppy farmer to "ethical" breeder it is not realistic hence why I said about a middle ground. You have to do it in stages, the divide is huge.

Yes there will always be those who are doing much much more and have no need to do anything. But I'm talking about raising standards and awareness to a level that is achievable across all types of breeding.

So those that are doing well could perhaps steer others in the right direction.

But if we want to improve things and get rid of puppy farmers than again as I have said many times it means all sides working together and some compromise (Ii'm talking more of attitudes than dogs well being) has to be made and a lot more acceptance.

But the barriers shown on here will always come up: no need for pet breeders, breeders do know enough about conformation, don't know enough about breed.........

First people have to accept the need for pet breeders.
Then we have a "standard" achievable for them to reach.

Whilst people do not accept that there will ever be a need then nothing will ever change and these debates just go on and around in circles.


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> If people want a pet dog only then the majority would go to a pet breeder.


That would only apply if the pet breeder had the same knowledge, care and commitment to the breed and reasons for breeding as the show/working breeders. It's certainly possible, although, the reality is that to get that knowledge the chances are that they will have been involved in some small way, even if not actively or currently active.

That sort of 'pet breeder' breeding mainly for pet buyers is not the same thing as someone breeding their 'pet'.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> That would only apply if the pet breeder had the same knowledge, care and commitment to the breed and reasons for breeding as the show/working breeders. It's certainly possible, although, the reality is that to get that knowledge the chances are that they will have been involved in some small way, even if not actively or currently active.


But by the same token don't you think that at the moment, there are ways to improve how that knowledge is spread rather than restricting it to cliques. To be more open and approachable as well as everyone simply being able to find the information easily. Care and commitment to the pups (and I deliberately don't say breed), would follow as an extension.

Yes I freely admit, as an owner of a crossbreed and breeds unrecognized by the KC I am biased against the idea of pedigree dogs and their breeder rules and regulations. I think it alienates a large percentage of dog owners. However I hope I have shown I do think they have a lot of knowledge and ideas about dog wellbeing which should be spread. It's a case of dispersing that knowledge in an acceptable way to all.


----------



## 5rivers79 (Mar 28, 2011)

Surely breeding to conform to particular characteristics is going against natural selection and evolution?

At one point or another these breeds that we love today were crossed to give them their particular traits and then once an ideal appearance and temperament was achieved they must have been inbred to sustain that new breed.

For example my gorgeous boy is an Akita and nowadays show breeders breed akitas to have a lovely gentle giant type of nature. Now looking back at breed history the Akita Inu was bred to hunt game and also to fight. Although that is unethical it was at that time a popular sport and endorsed by the Shogun and Samurai.

That original nature of the dog would obviously not be desirable with todays pet homes as we dont want aggressive dogs that want to kill and fight so breeders breed to try and remove that characteristic.

Regarding appearance even as late as the 1920s the breed looked quite different to what the Akita Inu or the American Akita look like today.










My point is we are selecting breeds on how we want them to fit into our lives and how we prefer them to look. Yes we love our pets but imo breeding to conform to breed standards set by kennel clubs is just as unethical as breeders who breed without care of health just to make money.

Breeding should be done to take care of health but not to make a poodle look like a poodle or a rottie to look like a rottie. Nature didnt intend that so why do we?


----------



## rocco33 (Dec 27, 2009)

> Breeding should be done to take care of health but not to make a poodle look like a poodle or a rottie to look like a rottie. Nature didnt intend that so why do we?


Then you'd never have your akita! In fact, there wouldn't be any breeds, just an medium sized dog not unlike a dingo.


----------



## Cockerpoo lover (Oct 15, 2009)

Would be interesting to know what breeds have significantly improved in regards to their health, longevity and being less prone to genetic diseases by following the KC breed standards and breeding practices say in the last 100 years?

I mean proven stats and facts not feelings and not HD as the results for that can be flawed.

How would the evidence relate to how the dogs health etc... would be if they were not bred to to the KC standards?


----------



## comfortcreature (Oct 11, 2008)

> My point is we are selecting breeds on how we want them to fit into our lives and how we prefer them to look. Yes we love our pets but imo breeding to conform to breed standards set by kennel clubs is just as unethical as breeders who breed without care of health just to make money.


I've not quite seen in put in words so succinctly, but I'd like to state that this sentiment is very strong amongst most of the rural Canadians that I personally know. I actually don't agree with much of the sentiment, but wanted to point out that many do. This speaks to the divide that was mentioned a few posts ago . . . as I know here I meet easily as many anti-purebred as I do anti-any other type of breeder.

Frankly, I don't like this 'divide' being propogated from either side. I'd like to drop the "antis" and see breeders start co-operating, educating, and sharing info as I believe many have a lot to learn from each other.

The MOST knowledgeable breeder, in regards to husbandry, structure, genetics etc. is a pet breeder, that many here would classify as 'commercial' cuz she keeps a kennel (small) and moves on her breeding females as they age. She is from a breeding family (she started with her mom who was an American Cocker breeder well entrenched in the show world). I cannot put into words how grateful I am that she is willing to put up with the condescension she gets on some science/genetic lists, (from those that like to judge) so that she can pass forward her experience and knowledge. She has had 50+ years experience breeding both pure and mixed and keeping track of feed back from the dogs she has produced.



> Breeding should be done to take care of health but not to make a poodle look like a poodle or a rottie to look like a rottie. Nature didnt intend that so why do we?


Unfortunately with domestic animals we can no longer fall back on 'nature's intentions' as we have already taken them out of their natural element. I do believe we still have to look at their close wild counterparts to keep an idea of what works best though.

In regards to conformation breeding - to a look - as long as it is being done along with good regard to healthy structure, health and temperament, then I can't see anything wrong with breeders selecting to maintain a specific type that pleases their eye. It is when that selection overwhelmingly favors looks and allows other elements to slip that I begin to have difficulties with the idea.

CC


----------



## WeimyLady (Jan 3, 2010)

I'm in two minds about it. I also think it depends on the breed.

I don't have too much of a problem if someone breeds from a pet bitch RESPONSIBLY. By that, I mean there is a DEMAND for the puppies, a waiting list/homes lined up BEFORE the bitch is bred, the bitch is FULLY health tested, the bitch has a temperament that is exactly as the breed should be, physically the bitch is a good specimen, and that a stud dog with ALL the same qualities is chosen. 

If the bitch and stud ticked all the above boxes, I would gladly buy from a 'pet' breeder.


----------



## 5rivers79 (Mar 28, 2011)

rocco33 said:


> Then you'd never have your akita! In fact, there wouldn't be any breeds, just an medium sized dog not unlike a dingo.


Yes thats my point. The choice is there so we choose a breed and that is where some breeders go to any extent to breed a true to type dog. If there was one breed of domestic dog would we not still love it like we love our hundred of different breeds now?

I didnt choose my Akita because he looks like the breed standard..infact he doesnt and people always tell me he must be a cross. To be honest it doesnt matter to me and i love him all the same.

I dont think there would be anything wrong at all if all dogs were a medium sized dingo lookalike. Nature itself makes changes thats why we get wolves, foxes, african wild dogs and jackals. Although not domestic even these canid species look beautiful and i bet they live longer and healthier lives than most domestic dogs.


----------



## SEVEN_PETS (Aug 11, 2009)

There's nothing wrong with people breeding for the show ring or working field trials. It's their hobby.

What I don't like is people saying that all owners must go to either a show breeder or working breeder. I don't want to show or work, I just want a pet, so I'll go to a pet breeder. The majority of dogs today are pets only, so they could also go to a pet breeder. Although most of the show/working litters are not suitable for their chosen "sport", so they would go as pets also. However, there is so much demand for puppies that show and working breeders alone can not supply enough puppies for the demand. That's where pet breeders come in. If you just want a pet, go to a pet breeder. There's no shame in that whatsoever.


----------



## Bijou (Aug 26, 2009)

> Although not domestic even these canid species look beautiful and i bet they live longer and healthier lives than most domestic dogs.
> Like


probably not given that most feral dogs are dead by the age of 5 - that's if they make it through birth and puppy hood in the first place !!- of course dying so young means that many of the diseases that domesticated dogs have do not have a chance to show themselves - -it was the same for humans too in the Middle Ages the average age of death for poor people was around 40 - and most women never went through the menopause because so many of them died in child birth or were worn out with having so many children ( and watching most of them die ) - does this mean that the menopause did not exist back then ? .

I hav'nt read through all the posts here ( too busy with the pups who have turned into POO MONSTERS ! ) but I'd just like to say the reason people point puppy buyers in the direction of show or working breeders is because they are way more likely to be the ones doing it right - it does'nt mean that the pet buyer has to show or work their dog - just that they should buy responsibly ! - lets face it your average pet breeder would'nt know their coefficient of inbreeding if it jumped up and bit them in the face and the ones that health test, issue contracts and socialise their pups properly are as rare as hens teeth - of course breeding well means that you cannot produce pups in huge numbers and puppy buyers would have to wait for their pup rather than having one instantly ( which I think can only be a good thing ) -

...... most pups bred by show breeders go to pet homes where they make excellent pets so there is no NEED for anyone to breed just for the pet market especially if by doing so it somehow justifies them cutting corners ( "after all they're 'just' going to be pets ' !" )


----------

