I have recently noticed a drop in the age that some breeders are now offering their dogs at stud. Infact, I have recently seen dogs as young as three months being offered at stud. I would have thought that all stud dogs should have at least reached maturity and had all the available health tests done before they are even considered for mating. Any thoughts? Is it a sign of the times? Does your breed club have a recommended minimum age for stud dogs?

the minimum age in my breed would be about 14 months as by then they could have been hip scored and the results back, also they need to mature so as to gauge temperament and character to ensure these are suitable as well as health.

Same as MandyC in my breed. 

>I have recently seen dogs as young as three months being offered at stud.

I would have thought that would be more dud than stud?  :-D

Surely it depends on how quickly the breed grows and matures?  a toy breed might be physically more mature at 1year old than a large breed ;)   It would also depend on which health tests were required in the breed and at what age they should be performed

Our breed club has a minimum of 18 months for stud dogs. Slow maturing breeds need time.

Ditto, the dogs have to be Hip Scored, eye tested , preferably kidney function tested and nwo DNA tested for prcd-PRA.

Well, my boy at three months could not do the deed- and I find it hard to imagine how any dog of this age would be able to cover

Leaving aside all the health tests, hip scores/elbow grades etc - how can one tell at 3 months whether a pup has the bone/temperament/attitude to be a good stud dog?    A breeder should be looking for a dog which will complement a bitch's attributes, and balance up any minus points - how could any one tell at 3 months?   For heaven's sake - there are obviously people out there who see £ signs in their puppy's progress :(

> I would have thought that would be more dud than stud?  :-D
>
>

:-)  :-) 

I have a toy breed that is sexually mature at 6 months.  Although I have actually used a boy at a year old, I usually go for around the 18 month mark.  They seem so much more confident about it, and the last thing you want in a stud, is for him to be put off for life if he's used before he's totally ready.

Had to laugh at the thought of 3 months though!     I recently ran on 4 pups until I decided which to keep for show.  The last 2 stayed longest while I made up my mind.  At 14 weeks this week, the one has gone to a show home.  He might have been playing humpty with his teddy, but advertising him for stud????? 

It's daft! I wouldn't allow a dog to be used at stud before about 18 months - nobody can tell what they'll be like at maturity until they get there! I actually prefer to use dogs which are much older - 8 years or so, or even more - longevity's important.

I agree with Jan, the older the better for me.    In my breed elbow dysplasia is creeping in and some breeders are being ostrich-like about it breeding from stock showing higher than average incidents of the problem.     We have dogs that have been lame & x-rayed at a year old coming back with 0 scores, only to be still lame and specialists then consulted who have confirmed that ED is there.   Scoring at 3/4/5+ seems more sensible to me.  We have also had LM's pass an initial eye test for HC, only to be screened later in life & fail! 

Exactly Christine! Newfies can have clear hearts aged 1 then go down hill rapidly and can change EVERY year! It would be 2 for Newfies, with all the health tests.

Yorkies, I waited till each boy was 3 as I felt they needed time to mature and develop, they don't really round out till 3 anyways and I want to see what package we'll be dealing with!

No way Hosea would I ever use a boy under 2...they need time for their brains to match up to their balls and to be honest it would be so hard to divert them once they've had a scent of 'heaven', they need to be trained and focused on you!(well, I mean ME!)

People that are rushing to use their dog at stud as young as 3 months just scream 'money maker' to me.

I think a lot depends on breed. We don't have a minimum age but dogs have to be hip scored so the minimum is going to be 13 months. Ideally, dogs should have a clear eye cert at the age of around 3 yrs - but in a numerically small breed with a very limited gene pool, it's easy to find that if you wait till the dog is old enough, the intended b1tch will be too old!
Back in the black & white days, a potential future stud dog would ideally be used for the first time at around 9-10 months on an experienced b1tch with a very equable temperament. He would then not be used again until his 1st litter had been assessed for quality. That was in the days before a string of health tests was necessary, of course.
3 months is laughable, you can't even assess bite or ear carriage at that age, nevermind temperament.

> Leaving aside all the health tests, hip scores/elbow grades etc - how can one tell at 3 months whether a pup has the bone/temperament/attitude to be a good stud dog? 

quite. in by breed as in most large/giant breeds dogs aren't fully mature till about 2 and half/three- how can you possibly tell before then if you think they are suitable? they could end up looking like anything!

Just thinking about my own boys, they are very different now to what they were when they were 2 years old - that was their adolescent phase and they aren't a big breed in the slightest.  TBH I don't think stud dogs should be used until they are 3 years old and fulfill the breed standards and pass the necessary tests.  By waiting till they are 3 you can also make sure they do not age prematurely (with regards coat colour etc) and that they are of sound temperament.

I always wonder what is the rush in using dogs straight away when they hit the "suitable age".
Surely waiting until a dog is little older(4-6 years) nothing is lost but a lot of possible illnesses would have popped up(the stud itself and relations).
Also why don't people get the dog to cover a bitch and then wait for few years for healthresults of those puppies before deciding if the dog has left nice enough offspring.
Sometimes I think the rush is there so the nice dog gets used BEFORE something nasty might pop up in the lines...

Obviously sometimes the dog is suitable match to an older bitch and needs to do the business when young but often it seems many dogs get used loads when they are young and then the next "stallion" comes around.

I can't see most people actually planning years ahead when it comes to their lines, most seem to rely on using the current top dogs or the dogs others have used recently...
Not many complete surprises when you read the litter details seems little imagination goes into choosing a stud.
Dogs used are mainly the dogs in the show ring now or dogs not seen in the ring but the bitch owner owns themselves(which is a little dodgy too, having the best match at home...).

I think UK should introduce the limits of how many puppies each stud can sire, that should slow down the urge of letting a dog mate as many bitches as possible when very young and make people think little more who they give their dog for...

I'd agree with this as Bitcon Troubador is in a hell of a lot of cockers pedigrees, the dog must have been at it all the time!!!

The psychological damage that is done to these poor dogs must be immense :-(  I disagree with pimping dogs out like that - find a good couple of lines and stick to them (the next generation will find other lines and so on).  I like how some breeders have exlusive contracts with the stud dog - I think it is more sympathetic on the animals.  People wonder why stallions (horses) can be so difficult to work with - its because they are overused in-hand or plugged into a machine and not allowed to be horses.  The same can be said for many of the popular stud dogs.
Maybe I am being unrealistic and romantic though.

No you arent I still intend to get  Whistler all checked out and maybe breed him once. But if he failed any test I would not after reading all your posts it would be irresponsible of me and I would not have pups brought into the world and not be 100% sure of who would have them. Its a big responsibility and Im not 100% sure I will, as he is a big dog for his breed and I would not breed for show but pet only. Thats if antyone would want him as a stud anyway, but i cant bring myself to castrate him for no reason unless there was a health risk.

Things aren't necessarily that cut and dried.

If you wait too long before using dog then he may never make a stud dog (it has certainly happened with many a nice dog in my breed, including some nice champions).  With a small gene pool some males have only close relatives available until a generation goes by, conversely a bitch may be ageing when a more suitable younger male comes along.

The idea of waiting on what a male has produced maturing only works if he is used early enough to still be viable when his offspring are mature.

For this reason I try to use young or untried males on bitches that are older and have already produced good and healthy offspring and would prefer to use an older male on a young bitch.

This way at least one party is older and has shown they do not have any problems that come on later in life, with the vast majority of problems being recessive so both parents carrying the trait, it helps a little.

I often look at the pedigree of a current or upcoming litter to see if ti would tie in with my plans,a and hope against hope that something nice in the male line will be shown and possibly available to use, it it turns out as it's breeding suggests.  There is a 3 week old litter by a male I used on my Myka for her first litter, with which I was very pleased.  By the time I can keep another pup from her the stud may be too old, but a good son may be available.

Some of us are making outline plans generations ahead.

I'm by no means an expert but in my breed I think the youngest I would use is 2 years old - preferably a little bit older.  Initially when I was first thinking of having a litter I wanted to use a very nice older dog but as he hadnt been health checked, I felt it was too much to put him through at his age.  Its such a shame and such a waste really because some of the older lines in my breed are the better lines.  I've also noticed that some of the bitches are being bred when they are just two years old, which I personally feel is too young as the breed really doesnt mature until they are 3 years old - and they're still clowns even then!!!  LOL.

Kingdom 

I don't think so! I think it's very realistic, you'll never ever see my dogs in crackers and not allowed to run and play free...unlike some people who hardly ever let the dogs out of the cages in case they break their coat! They are, after all, dogs first! But, help me here a bit! Don't ALL registered Stallions have HAD TO MAKE THE GRADE!? They are assessed and passed fit to be used as studs? If they don't the party is over? Or have I got things wrong?

No in this country stallions aren't graded - it is not mandatory.  Much like dogs, anyone can be used at stud.  Race horses are different though as breeding is closely regulated - but even then, so long as you can trace the pedigree any old horse can be used.

Kingdom, if the older dog is in perfect health then why not use him anyway?  Any health problems would have shown up surely before middle age?

Well that was my original thinking too but then I researched siblings etc., and found that some of them had extremely high hip scores so decided against it.  Additionally, I'm very outspoken when it comes to health issues so I would have been a hypocrite to go down that road.  Its such a shame he wasnt health tested when he was younger because he really is quite lovely.

Kingdom

It must be race horses I'm thinking about then, we had a lot of Yards in Berkshire...

The breeding of horses unfortunately has all of the same problems that dog breeding has.

"Hmmm, I have a mare that is vicious and can't be ridden, she also has a injury cause by a conformation fault.  What can I do with her?  Ah hah! I shall breed from her!"

:-( shame eh....it's always the money before ethics!...isn't that the truth!