well done to dogs today mag. they have filled it with dogs needing rescue and advise on not to breed.

I think you'll find the not to breed advice is for Staffies.

Good breeders have been limiting/reducing their breeding for years, but problem is the 'slack' is taken up by the puppy farmers and back Yard breeders who will happily sell to unsuitable homes and of course it also means the quality/health available is ever reducing.

In my own breed we have fewer and fewer puppies registered with the KC *will be under 50 this year) and bred by caring breeders, but if anything we are seeing more and more coming through rescue bred by people producing for the retail market and simply interested in the pups past sale.

Currently we are aware of two 6 month old pups sold to same owner who is pregnant, being offered for re-sale bred by a BYB who is breeding from her endorsed bitch (first litter at only 17 months) no health tests (which is why endorsements left in place), sadly the BYB took both the breeder of her dog and bitch in with plausible stories, all that can be done is stop them being KC registered.

>In my own breed we have fewer and fewer puppies registered with the KC *will be under 50 this year) and bred by caring breeders

That's just awful, and almost unsustainable. It could get to the point where you good guys will have to include less than reputably bred dogs in your breeding plans just to avoid popular sire syndrome.

> Good breeders have been limiting/reducing their breeding for years, but problem is the 'slack' is taken up by the puppy farmers and back Yard breeders

I do think JH & co have a lot to answer for.

> It could get to the point where you good guys will have to include less than reputably bred dogs in your breeding plans just to avoid popular sire syndrome.
>
>

It in our breed which is not a British breed means we have to import new bloodlines regulary (and expensively), does mean a reduced choice of dogs to choose from when planning future breeding.

With such low numbers a dog can become a popular sire simply by siring a couple of litters.

If we use the FCI advise that no dog should sire more than 5% of the number of pups registered in 5 years, then noen fo ours shoudl produce more than 25 puppies in their lifetime.

Friends and I imported a dog in 2001, he sired just 8 litters and is now in probably at least 2/3rds of pedigrees if not more.

> we have to import new bloodlines regulary (and expensively)

I'm sure you're doing all you can. At least you don't seem to have any major health problems to breed away from so that's something.

> At least you don't seem to have any major health problems to breed away from so that's something.

WE have prcd-PRA only a couple of affected dogs in 20 odd years yet when we finally got enough samples to have it investigated it was found that a high proportion in some lines were carriers, so that has reduced choices even more, but at least we can ensure no more affected pups are bred.

It is great to have the various screening tests, but it does make breeding more and more expensive for the responsible breeder, so many would be breeders are put off by cost and the huge commitment of lifelong responsibility of course, easier to buy in your next show pup/companion.

Our hip status is pretty acceptable, with 90+% scoring not above the teens.

Will the change in pet passport regulations lead to more imports and increased gene pool do you think?

> Will the change in pet passport regulations lead to more imports and increased gene pool do you think?

Yes indeed, speaking personally of course as someone who intends to pop over regularly rather than bring in stock in the first instance.

As someone who has imported in partnership, putting a dog through Quarantine before the Pet Travel scheme, and then has twice taken bitches abroad for mating, all in the space of 10 years, yes it will make things much easier and less expensive, if importing, so more of a possibility.