hi, may i ask what happens if you breed for a dog / bitch that has endorsements? over here we have man registert and limited register. limited you can not show breed or export. limtited you can compete in agaility nothing else, limited reg puppies are always cheaper here

> That is a very unfair comment Jeangenie, that may be your opinion.
> Any breeder that spends the time and money breeding there dogs with care does not make them a bad breeder just because they have not put endorsements on them.

Denese - a GOOD breeder will always put endorsements on puppies that s/he has bred - that way one can see, two or three years' down the line whether the puppy which looked like the swan has turned into the ugly duckling or vice-versa.   Please don't forget, the breeder's affix will always show on the pedigree of puppies produced by any breeding - and a good breeder wants to know that GOOD puppies ae produced.   

In fact, checking the KC registrations of puppies (now dogs) that I have bred and kept, I have only lifted the endorsements on FOUR puppies in 40+ years - two bitches from whom we've had a litter (or two litters in one case) and two for dogs whom we've allowed to be used at stud (twice in one case, once in the other).

But there again, I'm not flooding the market with pet puppies.

If for no other reason, endorsing a puppy's registration is useful for one additional respect.

I find it very enlightening to gauge potential buyer's attitudes when I announce that my puppies are endorsed. Recently a very attractive couple wanted to buy one of my pups- giving the stock answers  " just a pet/we only want it for a family pet/noooo we'd never breed or show it"
When the subject of endorsments was raised their whole demeanor changed with questions of how they could get out of it.

Needless to say no pup for them.
I feel the need to protect my breed as it would seem that every Tom Dick and Harry thinks it would be a nice 'cash back' scheme to bang out some cute likkle Cavalier pups. Almost every pet Cav I meet is about to/just had/thinking about - having a litter from them.
So not only does the endorsement reduce that trend it tends to weed out the ones who are in it for a fast buck.

> people are not honest never have been never will. If they pay for a dog costing a £1000 the average price for a pup of my breed, which is not endorsed they can make money tada

This is an honest question and not meant to be inflammatory

If we breed to get a decent pup for ourselves and there are others needing pet homes surely the fact that pups sell for £1000 etc encourages byb to breed?
If pet pups were only £200 instead do you think BYB would risk expensive vet fees for a much lower potential reward? If not then are we not encouraging this by the fact that pups cost so much?- I am expecting backlash to this question but it is genuine.

hi, may i ask what happens if you breed for a dog / bitch that has endorsements?

The puppies cannot be registered.

>If the KC made a rule a dog had to be 2yrs old before day of mating dog/bitch would you still feel to endores your puppies.

Yes of course. I still wouldn't know at 3 or 4 weeks when I register them if they're going to pass their BAER, or what their hipscores will be at 12 months of age!

If we breed to get a decent pup for ourselves and there are others needing pet homes surely the fact that pups sell for £1000 etc encourages byb to breed?
If pet pups were only £200 instead do you think BYB would risk expensive vet fees for a much lower potential reward? If not then are we not encouraging this by the fact that pups cost so much?

I do think that is a very valid point. I wouldn't really agree with as little as £200 as its TOO cheap and sadly quite a few people tend to value what they have paid a decent amount for more than anything cheap, but I do see your point and think you may have something there.

LucyMissy
O.K. so you are saying that why breed from a dog that you THOUGHT did not conform with breed standards!! Now does that mean! you breed from a dame that does not conform? that is where this puppy has been born from!
Just because a dame may have one pup that is not up to A standard out of her litter, that has had genes of dame and dog, does not mean her puppies with be the same. Good looks may be all some breeders are breeding for but! temprement must play a large part in the breeding. If I was to beleve all that I am being told to be true! there would be NO dogs out there with breeding faults, Correct!!
So no endorsements would be necessary!

1. - Where did I say that Dam did not conform to breed standard?
2. - Are you saying that you would breed from a dog / bitch that did not conform to breed standard?
3. - I agree that temprement has a large part to play but if my breeding stock did not match temprement AND breed standard requirements they would not be bred from. I think what you are saying is that you would breed from yours anyway?

Is that £££ signs I can see in your eyes Denese???

Is everyone here aware (I know most of you are) that endorsments can be lifted immediatly when the breeder asks?  and they only have to be lifted ONCE.  once they are lifted thats it.  But every good breeder I know whats to ensure their lines are secured. 

I can't see why endorsments are a problem.  They act as detterant to those who don't fully understand (Can't breed from bitch) isn't true, with endorsments you can still breed you can't KC register.  But it puts off people who don't think! :-D

of course though it does have to be made clear in a signed contract that pup is endorsed otherwise the KC will lift them themselves.

Infact any bitch being sold as a pet home will be endorse but won't say couldn't be bred from.  If someone came back to me and said they wanted to breed their pet, aslong as health tests were done, she conformed to the breed standard and they allowed me to help them find a suitable stud I would be happy for them to breed and will lift endorsements on a pet bitch.  Pet doesn't always mean less quality.  Pet means someone brought who doesn't want to get into showing or working etc etc etc.  If I had a mis mark in the litter or an obvious fault then pup would be sold with contact to neutre, aswell as being endorsed. :)

Coming into this very late, our Roodee has some breed"faults"nothing life threatening nor that will be obvious when he is mature-he has only one endorsement-not to be exported. However his breeder knows that the chance of us breeding from him are minimal & that even if we do not breed from him he will have all the health tests done for the improvement of the knowledge about SM etc in Cavaliers. We did not pay any less for him & wouldn't have expected too. I don't consider that we do not"own"him-in fact I feel it is a privilege to be able to share my life with him, he is all I want in a dog & more.

I do wish that the endorsements would legally protect the dogs, but tey don't sadly. What they do do is put some people off buying the puppy for the wrong reason in the first place & discourage some people from breeding/selling on the puppy aboard.

What the OP needs to consider is how "serious"a fault does the puppy have & do her good points exceed the poor ones. There will never be the perfect dog(when compared to a breed standard), but a fit & healthy good example of the breed doesn't mean it cannot have a"breed"fault. Perhaps better a poor tail carriage that a dog that cannot walk/run without being stressed

to lucy missy
anyway to get back to the point did you take the puppy to the person whop,s dog you used to see what they thought?
And i too would hang fire yet what is the rush? at 4 and a half weeks (sorry dont know how to half on p/c)

>sorry dont know how to half on p/c

If you hold down the Alt key while typing 0189 on the numeric keypad (on the right, notalong the top!) you get ½. :-)

I haven't as of yet - Had a chat with hubby and we've said we will leave it a couple of weeks and see what happens and then take her for the stud owner to have a look at.

Like you all said, there's absolutely no rush so we'll hang on in there and see what happens. I just wanted some advice as have never experienced it before.

£1000 is the average for a puppy some go for more or less, do you not think that if they were sold cheaper (£200 being a rediculous price, as they are a large breed, cost a lot to feed insure and care for) that byb would think 'hmmmm a cheaper Dogue some pups are being sold for £1000+ we could sell ours for that kc registered''. But not kc registered they would struggle to get £400 which i know is still a fair amount but sheople are beginning to understand a dog without papers isn't a good thing.

Pups sell for £1000 why reduce the price when there are other litters of less quality for the same price or more, you wouldn't sell a car that was worth the same at a lesser cost to the others in the showroom. I know pups are not cars but its the best analogy i could think of. Also if you sold such a breed at a lower cost do you think that they could possibly be bought more on impulse, instead of rigorous saving and long hard thinking sessions? You can pick up a staffordshire for £200 and they are readily available, so much so that one wakes up at breakfast 'i want a dog' and can come home with one before teatime. I don't know why the cost range is so high between breeds, but thats not something an individual sets in stone. The costs for one breeder of a Labrador could be similar for a Dogue breeder, yet there is quite a substantial difference in puppy costs. I'm not questioning this as its the way it is, but i have acknowledged this fact. Larger breeds should be more expensive as the costs to keep are more.

Perhaps if all potentially dangerous dogs had a higher price tag they would be less accessible? I don't know? Then its down to responsible breeders to endorse. I know this doesn't biologically stop them from copulating and producing BUT if they cant sell the pups for the price they paid for a pup they could think twice. With the GP cottoning on to the whole kc parents but not a kc pup ( light bulb ) we shall look else where. If the KC took a leaf out of the BHS's book and actually did checks on breeders then eventually KC registered could mean quality and they could have the kite mark they have always wanted.

£££ signs may encourage those, but endorsements can also discourage. I think maintenance is on the list of bybs and a bigger breed like mine costs an awful lot to feed and are not the easiest to mate. Compare to a cocker or smaller breed, less food, less kennel space and not every home can accommodate such a large dog, compared to other breeds more known for family pets.

Louise

Sorry to mention Staffords again, but this brought me to a specific example a few weeks ago when i was in the pet shop buying my Degu food. I have built up a rapour with the owners so we often stay to chat. A rough looking bloke came in with a tiny staffy pup under his coat, must not have been 5 weeks old and wasn't weaned. They said it was far too young to have left its mother, and i felt sick, wanted to steal the puppy away from him. He bought some pouches of JWB puppy meat and some puppy milk and left the shop. I was disgusted and really thought what the breeder was thinking (lets get rid asap). The shop owner came said to me that he had come in that morning saying he wanted to get a dog and he might be back later to buy things for it

Getting back to tails -one of my breeds should NOT have the tailed curled over the back, the othwr should. On the one that shouldn't you very often see pups with the tail held over their backs. Many of these correct it as they grow older -its a puppy thing. However some don't, and I've found it's been a question of learning to judge as puppies just HOW high the tail is held, and from that I ca get a decent idea of the look of the pup as an adult. My very first bitch I cannot remember as a pup but looking at photos, she had her tail way up over her back -she has two CCs today and although she occasionally flies her tail a bit high, nothing like in those early photos from 7 to 12 weeks of age. So I agree that experienced people in the breed who's had a few litters would probably be a good idea to ask -good luck! And also by the way, in my last litter I had a pup who had a tail kink -he went for the same price as the others but went to a working home on the understanding (in writing) that he would not make a show dog because of the kink.

Hi Louise- I just wonder if breeders got together and agreed lower prices may make byb less attractive

> Pups sell for £1000 why reduce the price when there are other litters of less quality for the same price or more, you wouldn't sell a car that was worth the same at a lesser cost to the others in the showroom

Because hopefully the aim is to breed a nice pup for show or line continuation- so if we take money out of the equation my aims would be
1- A good pup for myself that would be good enough to show/ breed in future if doing well
2- Find the very best home possible for any extra pups I do not wish to keep. A pensioner for example may not have much money but offer a great home

If we don't look at a dogs worth and think about securing the best home and others do similar then byb would not be able to sell at a high price as genuine breeders would be selling their pups for less so why go to a byb- Does that make sense?

.> a large breed, cost a lot to feed insure and care for

I agree and the new owners will be commiting to high costs for the life of the dog therefore a lower price may reflect the higher ongoing costs?

> Also if you sold such a breed at a lower cost do you think that they could possibly be bought more on impulse, instead of rigorous saving and long hard thinking sessions?

This is a good point but how much is a lot? - I have children and a mortgage etc so I have to save no matter the cost and I agree you may have to screen very vigorously which I am sure we all do anyway.

> Larger breeds should be more expensive as the costs to keep are more.

I disagree entirely here- If you mean for the 8 to 12 weeks you have the pups then yes pups will eat more than a smaller breed in the same time period. Vaccination costs and microchipping cost the same as does much of the equipment needed. Smaller breeds may cost more in C section costs etc. Again we are in danger of measuring a dogs worth rather than securing the best future and working together to make breeding less attractive to byb.

> BUT if they cant sell the pups for the price they paid for a pup they could think twice.

This is my point exactly

I knew the question would cause debate but I wonder if by genuine breeders charging high prices for the puops they don't want to keep we actually create a lucrative environment for the byb and if the whole issue is solvable by ourselves

>I knew the question would cause debate but I wonder if by genuine breeders charging high prices for the puops they don't want to keep we actually create a lucrative environment for the byb and if the whole issue is solvable by ourselves

In theory anyone who charges more for each puppy than it cost to produce them (cost of producing litter divided by the number of puppies for sale) is profiteering to a certain extent.

If 'the average' litter is 8 (breeder keeps one, so 7 to sell) and the litter cost say £2500 to produce, each puppy should cost £357.

I meant more to keep until they are of breeding age, not as puppies.

Pensioners may make a good home for your breed (not sure what your breed is) but i very much doubt they would for mine, unless Arnie was the pensioner asking me for a puppy. If the pensioner doesn't have much money they wouldn't be able to afford insurance at nearly 45 per month per dog! Also the food they need, quality is expensive and a 15kg bag can last one week.

Are c-sections cheaper for smaller breeds? I though the anesthetic went up in price as the dog went up in size. I.e the price of my breed is approx £600 for a section and £1000 for a Gastric Torsion Op ;-)

At the end of the day, i vet my puppy homes very well. I also endorse and hopefully have my wits about me to sniff a byb a mile off. Having refused several homes on my own pups.

I see where you are coming from but i very much doubt that they would reduce their prices. Lower prices tend to attract the wrong people and no matter how good a home you can offer if you cant afford the original purchase price how could you afford the maintenance of a large dog.

It all comes down responsibilty but money trumps responsibilty and as long as their is money in the world things will never change.

> I meant more to keep until they are of breeding age, not as puppies.
>
>

Possibly but I am still not sure why this should mean someone should pay more- You would be keeping her anyway so not sure why cost of food until the time you choose to take a litter to bring a youngster out is relevant?

> Pensioners may make a good home for your breed (not sure what your breed is) but i very much doubt they would for mine, unless Arnie was the pensioner asking me for a puppy. If the pensioner doesn't have much money they wouldn't be able to afford insurance at nearly 45 per month per dog! Also the food they need, quality is expensive and a 15kg bag can last one week.
>
>The point is generic so for a larger breed it may be a family where one adult works and one is at home so living on one wage but with lots of time to give a dog

It's the point of as breeders we set the benchmark figure and byb then look at that and decide if they can make money or not so maybe if a kc reg dog of whatever breed was less attractive as a source of income they would be less inclined to buy one to breed from

Good way of looking at it Jeangenie- I have only had one litter as you know and had one pup which I am keeping so I have not had to make the decison yet.
The cost of stud fee, equipment and vet fees cost me three times more than it would have to buy a pup in but it has been worth it and I can't wait to get her in the ring. I hope to breed from her in about two years time if she does well in the ring again to aim to get a pup to keep.
I did however rehome a puppy I had bought to show who did not turn out- Originally her breeder was having her back but five minutes before we were due to meet she changed her mind (I had driven for two hours to meet her) I then refused three people offering me a reasonable price for her and sold her for almost half of what I had paid months before as I knew it was a better home. I was worse of financially but she is not a product and I feel better although poorer.

Who said breeding was easy?!

> It would be better I supose if all pups by the KC were and you just lifted them. I think!!!

i agree.

it would be nice to be able to trust everyone but so many really good breeders here have reported problems with vetted candidates later on, i'm of the view we should protect them as far as we can

Automatically endorsed? i agree

I wonder if adding a fee to lift the endorsements as well as getting permission from the breeder, would make any affect. Or endorsements are not lifted if minimal health tests are not done or are not of a satisfactory result i.e over the breed average for hip scores. More pups maybe born unregistered but then having trouble selling them due no kc registration and being drummed into the public that a dog without kc papers is at greater risk of health issues. Why dont the kc just take a leap and do it stick thier neck out for once.

Louise

I suspect the KC could do that if they wanted to, but it might be better to get rallying support from the majority of breed clubs to support it too. Sounds like a really good idea.

I wonder if adding a fee to lift the endorsements as well as getting permission from the breeder, would make any affect.

Less would be endorsed. That's the way it is done in cats so nobody registers anything even POSSIBLY wanted for breeding or kept back as non active (i.e. endorsed not for breeding), kittens that are pure pets (obvious faults) only are. No breeder wants to cough up a tenner to change a registration.

What about a petition from breeders and doggy people. Start off with champdoggers, mandatory health tests for breeds? Say a dog that is excelling in the ring, but has a hip score of double the average for his breed, would that be an automatic no or could they appeal as he would be bringing something to the table? I suppose parent and siblings hip scores would have to be viewed in the deciding factor. What would be the cut off point as in grading exams whats a fail one or two points over the average or not at all.

Louise

I think this topic is veering too far off the original question now ;-) If you want to discuss mandatory health testing etc, it's probably best to start a new thread

Thanks

LucyMissy,
I have only just come back to my computer to get your comment, as I have been with my daughter as we have just had a beautiful new grandson.
You say ££££ signs in my eyes? get a grip! any good breeder very rarly makes a penny! I never have, I have breed when I needed a pup. You do not know me or my morals. So please do not judge me, I have NOT judged you. I have always a long waiting list, even when I have NO puppies. I get highly recommended from people that buy my puppies. So why do you have a problem with that?
"This is a Discussion site"

Denese 

anderbel,
only just returned to my computer, to read your comment as been with one of my daughters, who has just delivered us a beautiful grandson.
I do agree, endorsements would protect, the bitch. I have never been asked if my dogs carry endorsements.
But! the people that put the dogs at great risk are the ones that see endorsements and then go to a dog down the road, mate do not KC register the pups except for dlr, so the pups can be sold for a quick £.
A lot of my breed have to have c/sections so to breed them  does cost.
I wonder if all KC dogs were tatooed with the dog breeders signature, would help. I know what people are trying to do with the KC endorements but! in most cases does not work ?

Denese

>I wonder if all KC dogs were tatooed with the dog breeders signature, would help.

Good grief! A GA would be needed to keep a dog still enough to tattoo a signature. Just the regular ID tattoo would have all the info needed to trace the breeder.

DITTO I would hold fire on making any decisions , unless the tail is flying too high...

I would only rule out a puppy at 7 -8 weeks.  In my breed they change daily.    i never used to keep what appeared gay tails although setting was fine but have kept 2 and they are perfect now.

What I don't get with people to be honest ( sorry no disrepect to the poster) but WHY breed a litter and not at least 1) give it a chance to at least 8 week and 2) not run on something that has " potential" a bit longer.

I am not saying run on ones that are 100% a no but all the time , money and effort..

I run 3 of my litter 15 months ago on for 6 months.  They change so much even after the 8 weeks.

As usual Tooolz 100% bang on.. I love the ones who question the endorsements but only want the family pet.  If they even question it that is enough for me :-)

I run 3 of my litter 15 months ago on for 6 months.  They change so much even after the 8 weeks.

Indeed. I wish it was possible for me, but in my breed it would be difficult -they get so attached to one person and also need so much more socialisation than most other breeds. But I shall share the story of one litter I had. I had four dogs and two bitches. I picked the bitch I felt was the best. There was one dog that all of us who saw him disregarded as the only non show quality one, and there were judges who saw this litter. (At just over 7 weeks.) Fast forward a few years and my bitch is the WORST in the litter without a doubt (thankfully she managed to give birth to VERY nice puppies who already have done much better than her), the other bitch has an RCC, and the dog everyone thought would be no use for showing is STUNNING and could do extremely well if his owner was into shows -but alas she isn't. (He's an agility dog.) He's far better than the dog that is being shown -and he has a CC. Such is life LOL and I learnt a lesson!!

Oh yes I appriciate it is very hard with certain breeds and certainly some sizes but people seem to be too quick to off their pups at times :-)

If I showed you a photo of the 3 I run on last year the one you would like the least is the one that turned out the best, I had a gutt instinct about her. I did not like her at all till 7½ weeks but at that age she was a stayer.

The trouble with running them on Blue is I tend to keep them :-)
Well......... once they've got their little feet under our table....it's too late, my hubby says " he/she's staying!"

Lucky I've got my dog nanny and can use her house as 'the annexe'.

LOL...  bawled my eyes out manya  times at 4 -5 months of age :-)

I couldn't run a pup on past 3 months as once they are here past that age they are here to stay good bad and indifferent, and I have a five dog limit on what I can keep. I have five now.

12 weeks is at least given them a chance. 

I don't breed but never know how some of you guys do it by running on pups and if they don't come good then they go to pet homes.. That would tear my heart apart doing that.
I guess you have limits as to how many dogs you can keep, but all the same not sure its something i could ever do...

My eldest came from a breeder who didn't make her choice as to which one she was going to keep until the last minute, i picked up my boy and changed my mind on the day as to which one i wanted. She pointed out which one she thought she was going to keep but wasn't 100%, as it was she did keep him and he has just this year got a RCC at Crufts and a CC at another champ show. So she did choose well in the end..

As many breeders i have spoken to they have to go with what they have in front of them, they often get lots of other knowledgeable breeders in to check the litter and get opinions.

I could never run on, (a) I would get too attached as my dogs are primarily pets and companions and only secondly show dogs / breeding stock, and (b) my hubby is whinging enough about me having 3 dogs and wanting a 4th, if I got 2 or 3 nice bitch puppies from my girl there is no way I would be allowed to keep them for 6 months to see which was best. I will just have to pick at 10 weeks and keep my fingers crossed! :-)

I could never run on,

It is just as well some back put their breeds first and their emotions second.  I am not judging others but "some" of our top kennels of modern days have had to just to ensure that the quality remains high in their breed.

I could never run on
That presents many problems if people keep not the best puppy in each litter and breed on again - not saying that's what you do but it is what happens - and the quality of the breed falls instead of progresses. :(  It also explains how some people have been showing for many years and still aren't winning.......... it happens a lot!

To me to be a good breeder one needs to be objective and not emotional about dogs.  That doesn't mean not care!  I have had no problem finding good pet homes (good being the important word) for pups that haven't grown to their hoped for potential.  We've all only got limited space in 'the cuddle box'! :)  My daughter doesn't agree with me and has already got 2 out of her 3 dogs in her cuddle box! :)

my hubby is whinging enough about me having 3 dogs and wanting a 4th
there is no way I would be allowed
You've just reminded me why I choose to live alone! :) :) :)

I agree that all pups should be endorsed - I endorsed those I have kept for myself even.

However, it has come to my attention that in my breed at least, "breeders" are selling pups registered with the Dog Lovers Club for pretty much (and in some cases more than) the same price as KC registered pups from health tested parents.... usual excuse is "Both parents are KC reg but I am not KC Reg ing the pups as I only want them to go to pet homes" - Oh right, and nothing to do with the fact that your bitch and stud are both endorsed and you have done no health checks, have no real interest in the breed and just out to try and make a bit of money ?

It makes my blood boil but I am beginning to think the endorsment option is having no effect in stopping backyard breeders. Clearly, the public no longer holds the KC in high esteem as they once did and are more than happy to pay mega bucks for a pup that is unregistered/dog lovers club registered and from a breeder  who has no regard for the breed itself.

However, it has come to my attention that in my breed at least, "breeders" are selling pups registered with the Dog Lovers Club for pretty much (and in some cases more than) the same price as KC registered pups from health tested parents.... usual excuse is "Both parents are KC reg but I am not KC Reg ing the pups as I only want them to go to pet homes" - Oh right, and nothing to do with the fact that your bitch and stud are both endorsed and you have done no health checks, have no real interest in the breed and just out to try and make a bit of money ?


Being honest it is not a situation I have every found myself in with someone who has bought an endorsed puppy from me BUT I will stick my neck on the line and say although you cannot guarantee I think it comes down to very careful puppy buyer selection.

You have to really really really be sure you trust the person buying a puppy.

I have a simple rule that unless there is particular circumstances for a person to want a particular sex I do not let people book a particular sex. I think go through all the endorsement rules , so they have two hurdles to get over before I even take their name.

Some may disagree with my method , that is fine BUT it works for me. I don't know what sex I am generally keeping as " the one" can be either sex for me..

Ha ha I know what you mean! But (a) I do love him, (b) he earns much more than me so I can spend his money on dogs and dog shows (!) and (c) he isn't interested in going to shows, so is usually at home to look after the dogs that I don't take to the shows. :-D

>>You've just reminded me why I choose to live alone! :-) :-) :-)

Glad that you took it in the way that it was meant!! :) :) :)