it seems that having show champions in the pedigree is a good money spinner for some and used to lend credibility to their reasons for breeding.  Yet without the knowledge that being amongst show/working people brings, how can they have any idea of what problems are in the breed as a whole and their lines in particular?

I know I've mentioned him many a time before, but my oldest and first Papillon was bought as a pure pet -I never expected to fall in love with the breed so much I'd want to show and breed. (This one is neutered, of course!!) This first one is unregistered, from an unregistered mother. He has all sorts of faults and also health problems. Yet his sire is a show dog that has won tickets! Which just goes to show that having one show parent means very little if the other isn't also good. (And it also shows SOME show people will clearly do anything for money eg. let their dog be used on an unregistered pet.......)

BTW I need that "Like" button for Carrington's post -and yours too Dill.

"And it also shows SOME show people will clearly do anything for money eg. let their dog be used on an unregistered pet "

Well said Goldmali LOL. Indeed, no doubt some SHOW PEOPLE would allow this and that makes them backyard breeders IMO. Just goes to show - there are exceptions to every rule, which is what I have been saying all along ;-). Personally, I think it is very poor practice indeed to breed from non KC registered dogs and bitches (many of which have probably come from endorsed parents and so bought under false pretences ie. pet only).  Thank you so much for proving my point :-)

>Indeed, no doubt some SHOW PEOPLE would allow this and that makes them backyard breeders IMO.

I'd agree; they're obviously doing it just for money, because it can't be to better the breed. These unregistered bitches won't have been shown and independently assessed, so shouldn't be bred from anyway. It's a shame when people who should know better go and let the side down.

Indeed, no doubt some SHOW PEOPLE would allow this and that makes them backyard breeders IMO.

Of course it does. I think you'll find I've never said ALL people that show are good breeders. I still say you cannot be a good breeder unless you have more practical involvement in the breed than just breeding and pet keeping, though.

> I really cannot be bothered with such blatantly closed minds

I think it rather unfair to keep responding to peoples disagreement with your point of view with the assertion that they do not have open minds.  I can assure you I have read and digested everything you have said but it would seem that you did not intend on offering others the same curtesy... 

> I shan't even read this thread again so no need to reply to me

although I see you have thought better of that :)

> I saw poorer quality dogs/bitches than any of my bitches (two have been assessed independantly as show quality, one I bred myself, the other I bought in) at Crufts this year... seriously, they were ugly and you have to wonder how some of these dogs qualify !!!!! 

Perhaps because predigree dogs are not judged on their "cuteness" but rather their closeness to the breed standard as indeed they should be for breeding, something best established in the breed ring.

Oh dear me !

I saw poorer quality dogs/bitches than any of my bitches (two have been assessed independantly as show quality, one I bred myself, the other I bought in) at Crufts this year... seriously, they were ugly and you have to wonder how some of these dogs qualify !!!!!

Should be no problem showing yours and doing well then. :) But the proof is in the pudding. When I used to show rats, there used to be a woman famous for looking over all the entries and saying about the winner "I have a better one than that at home". It was always at home, never at the shows..... We used to joke she should have a badge made up saying "I have a better one at home".