A lot of inexperienced buyers like reassurances; whether you say the puppies are flead, or dont need to be flead, its just extra information. Buyers (for pets not for show etc...) probably prefer to gather as much information as they can about the puppy with regard to the procedure for fleeing, worming etc... so that they feel a little bit more informed.

I think its very unfair to say that anyone who mentions that the puppies have had all treatments up to date are back-yard breeders! To be perfectly honest, most back-yard breeders probably have a lot of experience and know what you have just said about pups not needing flead and so they don't state it!! People can be sneaky. Doesn't mean they are not back-yard breeders though does it.

>most back-yard breeders probably have a lot of experience

On the contrary, most bybs only have the one litter from the family pet, just because it seems like a fun thing to do. They're the ones who think 'health testing' means an annual check-up at the vet.

Perhaps I am wrong in thinking that when you say back yard breeders you mean puppy farmers because (in my breed) puppy farms are rife in Wales and yet they are also some of the most experienced. They abuse their experience by puppy farming for maximum profit and they wouldn't disclose anything that made them appear to be puppy farmers via an internet ad.

We are a small hobby breeder and my dogs are family pets, does this make me a back-yard breeder too?

As for flea-ing pups/dogs, our vet advises it be done every 3 months as "prevention is the best form of cure" does this mean he doesn't know his job either?

I sometimes feel certain "breeders" can be very snobby when it comes to breeding dogs, not every breeder has to be a show dog breeder, I have no show dogs at all, I breed on a small scale, with DNA Tested dogs, to better the breed, but to also make the breed available to good family homes not just people who want show dogs.

I believe some of the best, kindest, dogs owners would be extremely put off by a pretentious breeder refusing deposits, refusing guarantees and treating them like they were not good enough to own one of their pups just because they do not know all about breeding. I think some people forget what dogs are actually for these days. They are not just for prancing round a show ring and the breed standard for many breeds is so downright disgraceful that it's practically animal cruelty, hence the BBC's decision to end their coverage of Crufts. Can't say I disagree with it.

>a pretentious breeder refusing deposits, refusing guarantees

As has been pointed out before, deposits bind a breeder to selling a puppy to someone who, between paying the deposit and collecting the puppy, might prove unsuitable to purchase that puppy. Many conscientious breeders therefore retain the right to refuse to sell to these people.

And guarantees? Nobody can put a guarantee on any living creature. Nature's not like that - you can have guarantees on fridges and cars, but not living organisms.

Here is a defintion of Back Yard Breeders:http://www.nopuppymillscanada.ca/byb.htm
"The back yard breeder is the single greatest cause of pet overpopulation. Back yard breeders usually do not have bad intentions, but the results of back yard breeding are devastating.

The majority of homeless or abandoned dogs come from this category in many popular breeds and mixes, they are often destroyed in pounds. Most are sold locally through newspaper ads - the responsibility ends when the purchaser's taillights disappear from sight. "

and a chart comparing types of breeder:http://www.woodhavenlabs.com/comparison.html
also http://www.veterinarypartner.com/Content.plx?P=A&A=1448&S=0&SourceID=47
http://home.comcast.net/~nopuppymillsva/What_is_a_Puppy_Mill_/what_is_a_puppy_mill_.html

>>>>>deposits bind a breeder to selling a puppy to someone who, between paying the deposit and collecting the puppy, might prove unsuitable to purchase that puppy<<<<

No they don't, a verbal agreement is one person's word against another and it can quite easily be made clear that the deposit is refundable and the breeder retains the right to refuse the buyer the puppy at any point prior to the puppy leaving them.

And surely responsible breeders can check that someone is "unsuitable" to purchase prior to taking any deposit, no?

And as you say, there are no guarantees, so what if you do not take a deposit and you go ahead and sell a puppy to someone who you believe is suitable, who then proves at a LATER date that they are unsuitable for that puppy, what can you do then?

>And surely responsible breeders can check that someone is "unsuitable" to purchase prior to taking any deposit, no?

You'd be surprised what you can discover about people in their several visits to the litter.

>And as you say, there are no guarantees,

So any advert which states any form of guarantee is a breeder to avoid.

>As for flea-ing pups/dogs, our vet advises it be done every 3 months as "prevention is the best form of cure" does this mean he doesn't know his job either?

Why put chemicals on a dog if they aren't necessary?

> so what if you do not take a deposit and you go ahead and sell a puppy to someone who you believe is suitable, who then proves at a LATER date that they are unsuitable for that puppy, what can you do then?

I would pursue them through the courts to get my puppy back...they will have signed my very carefully written contract before sale.

Ive never had to enforce one fully yet, probably because, with so many on my waiting list, I can ensure the very best homes.

>>>>>I would pursue them through the courts to get my puppy back...they will have signed my very carefully written contract before sale.<<<<<<

The Law of contract (Tort) in this country states that if circumstances arise that can be deemed as unforseeable and are not listed specifically in the contract then the contract is void for that circumstance.

It doesn't matter how carefully you write a contract you cannot predict people's lives or circumstances. No guarantees remember.

> I have no show dogs at all,.................................. to better the breed,

How do you know you are achieving your aim?

Because as stated previously, the breed standard for many breeds is nothing short or animal cruelty. I ensure all of my dogs are tested for hereditary diseases, that they are healthy, have no deformities/genetic faults (overbites etc..) and have a good temperament and are well socialised and happy.

Focussing purely on the physical "breed standard" is not "bettering the breed" at all, it is bettering the breed standard which can, as mentioned previously, be nothing short of cruel and no good for the dog at all.

> It doesn't matter how carefully you write a contract you cannot predict people's lives or circumstances

The difference between breeding litters of puppies, to advertise for strangers to buy and the building up of a reputation for healthy, quality dogs where selling is not the aim...is I already know most of the people to whom my pups go.

>>I already know most of the people where my pups go<<

If you know them so well, so well to know that they will go to an amazing home and are at no risk, then why charge for them at all? Why not give them away? You would need to be pretty close to someone to be able to think that their circumstances wouldn't change or that they were the perfect dog owners.

Also, I find it difficult to believe that you know every single buyer of every single one of your puppies so thoroughly because if that were the case surely you would run out of people? No one can know that many people or get to know them so well in such short periods of time. And if you know them so so well why do you need your "very carefully written contract"?

If it is only "most" of your buyers then there must be some you don't know that well, in which case the risks are the same for you as anyone else, just maybe not as many.

Also, no breeder has such an amazing reputation the minute they first start to breed, as you say it needs to be built and how can it be built if not for advertising and testimonials/recommendations? It is unrealistic to act like you have always been this amazing breeder with waiting lists as long as your arm and amazing reputations. These take time and effort to achieve and you would have started out like everyone else.

>no breeder has such an amazing reputation the minute they first start to breed,

No, but their bitch is usually well-known within the breed through showring or working success, and this is where the enquiries come from.

> then why charge for them at all? Why not give them away?

I do mostly

I only actually sell one pup a year....but then I really am trying to improve the health of my breed and the people who have my pups are all working toward the same goal.
 

> It is unrealistic to act like you have always been this amazing breeder with waiting lists as long as your arm and amazing reputations. These take time and effort to achieve and you would have started out like everyone else

Everyone else? You mean breed litters for sale, advertise them to strangers because I want to breed pet dogs...no I didnt.

>>their bitch is usually well-known within the breed through showring<<

Again, Breed Standard does not ensure a healthy OR a happy dog. If "breeders" want to breed for their ego's and to say they have "show" dogs and "champions" then that is fine. MY main concern is for the dogs and my aim is to breed healthy, happy, socialised puppies to better the breed (HEALTH WISE) and go to good homes. I take my dogs to PET shows to socialise and be rated on their temperament and health not their measurements or how well they hit "breed standard".

I think these breeders need to pay mind because before long I think there will be a massive shift AGAINST these breed standard show dogs because actually it is cruel and many of the things that make them good "show standard" make their health suffer terribly.

It is not only puppy farmers that we need to be careful of it's all of these people breeding in "traits" that look better in a show ring but actually cause a detriment to the poor dog itself.

The full quote was "their bitch is usually well-known within the breed through showring or working success; these are dogs that can do the job that the breed was designed to do.

>I take my dogs to PET shows to socialise and be rated on their temperament and health not their measurements or how well they hit "breed standard".

So do the breeders of show dogs, because their dogs are also pets who live in the family home like any other.

>>Everyone else? You mean breed litters for sale, advertise them to strangers because I want to breed pet dogs...no I didnt.

So you are suggesting that dogs should not be bred from to be pets? To be loved and cared for and part of someone's family? They should be bred to look the way pretentious elitist say they should look and be made to prance around a show ring instead?

Rhodesian Ridgebacks, British Bulldogs, King Charles Cavaliers, Pugs, Dachshunds...the list goes on! << All of these "breed standards" cause a detriment to the dog...but we should all do it to them anyway because its what the showring demands? Disgraceful.

>So you are suggesting that dogs should not be bred from to be pets?

No - just that pets shouldn't automatically be bred from. They need to have proved themselves as having genes that will benefit the breed in the longterm.

> I think these breeders need to pay mind because before long I think there will be a massive shift AGAINST these breed standard show dogs

No need to worry then as I hardly ever have anything to sell. You, however had better make sure yours dont even resemble the 'standard show dog' or you may not sell your litters.

> my aim is to breed healthy, happy, socialised puppies to better the breed (HEALTH WISE) and go to good homes

Are you implying that my well established healthy line of extensively health tested dogs falls somewhat short of your standards, or that the people who wait for rather long periods of time to get one of my pups are stupid?
Perhaps your choice of breeding dogs comes from only the healthiest examples of the breed and you are prepared to travel huge distances to use stud dogs who are proving to improve the health of your breed globally?

Technology and modern way of life has left "working" dogs with not really any work to do and very rarely are they used as such, does that mean that once they are no longer needed to work or good enough to show then they are redundant?

Dogs should be cared for and loved and looked after regardless of whether their head is the right shape, their back the right length, their legs the right height for a show ring. If the "breed standard" was actually a HEALTH thing then I would completely agree but unfortunately it is the exact opposite.

And I don't think people should be deprived of having a certain breed as a pet just because it is not a show dog or a working dog and just because they will not use it as that.

I think of my puppies, nothing else and nobody else and I would rather sell a puppy to a loving family home as a pet than someone who wants it as a champion to "show" in the showring.

> So you are suggesting that dogs should not be bred from to be pets? To be loved and cared for and part of someone's family?

All my dogs are pets, where ever they are.

> They should be bred to look the way pretentious elitist say they should look and be made to prance around a show ring instead?

Prance?:-)

> Dogs should be cared for and loved and looked after regardless of whether their head is the right shape, their back the right length, their legs the right height for a show ring. If the "breed standard" was actually a HEALTH thing then I would completely agree but unfortunately it is the exact opposite.

What do you advertise your pups as? Do you say the name of the breed they resemble? Are people not going to a bit annoyed if your pups dont end up as the breed they expect it to look like.

>> Perhaps your choice of breeding dogs comes from only the healthiest examples of the breed and you are prepared to travel huge distances to use stud dogs who are proving to improve the health of your breed globally?

Not globally as I restrict the pedigree for export but yes I did, I travelled great distances to acquire the most healthy, fully tested dogs I could so that I could help to breed out hereditary diseases and genetic faults to better the breed health-wise.

I was not implying your dogs fall short of anything, I was simply stating that I do not agree with breeding for breed standard and showring as it is not in the best (health) interests of the dogs at all.

> All of these "breed standards" cause a detriment to the dog...but we should all do it to them anyway because its what the showring demands? Disgraceful.

Are you not contributing to this then breeding an achondroplastic (short legged) breed.

To some extent in a few breeds the features that make them unique are abnormalities/deformities to a greater or lesser degree, and those breeds where this is a greater degree people should breed away from the extremes of type.

This would mean in your breeds case to travel to the continent to use longer legged Continental types, if you still believe that any level of achondroplasia is acceptable (others will not). 

How well have you acquainted yourself with with breed standards that makes you think they in themselves are the cause of issues.

They all ask for healthy temperamentally sound animals.  No breed standard no breed, as it is the description of a breed, what makes it different to another.

If we took things to their logical conclusion we would not have breeds of dogs at all and they would all only be available as Wolves, perhaps modified as are Dingoes and other Pariah dogs.

Are you attempting to breed out the floppy ears in your breed, as these are unnatural reducing airflow and reducing hearing ability? 

You may think these comments silly but that is exactly what those decrying breed standards would prefer to see.

No toy breeds, no short legged short faced droopy eared, jowly etc dogs.  Anything that isn't the wild canine template.

> I was simply stating that I do not agree with breeding for breed standard and showring as it is not in the best (health) interests of the dogs at all.

If someone states that they are producing a certain breed - then doing the best you can to keep it resembling that breed, whilst ensuring that they are the healthiest examples you can produce is a given surely?

The reason I have such a huge demand for my pups is not because of 'prancing'.

>>Are people not going to a bit annoyed if your pups dont end up as the breed they expect to look like.

Why would you assume that everyone knows what the breed standard for every breed is?

Not every single dog belonging to a breed resembles the breed standard. Not at all, thank goodness. Just because a dog is listed as pedigree and as a certain breed does not mean it is breed standard, shouldn't you be well aware of that?

When you have a "British Bulldog" puppy, not every single person who would like one expects it to be a breed standard British Bulldog, to have the breathing problems etc.. that the breed standard for this breed entails.

I know breeders who are now breeding OUT the traits associated with the breed standard for some dogs to ensure a more healthy dog.

Thank you for your input doxiedaze - it's interesting sometimes to hear the alternatives.

As a potential puppy buyer (as I have been, although not currently :) ) you would not be a breeder I would go to.  I think some of your views are misguided.  I do think breed standards are very important and equal to health and temperament in that the former helps articulate the latter.  "A Breed Standard is the guideline which describes the ideal characteristics, temperament and appearance of a breed and ensures the breed is fit for function"

I want my breeder to be able to explain exactly how rear angulation and 'well laid back upper arm' impacts movement.  Why 'tail set' matters, and what is a correct coat.  

I have a wire-haired gundog and chose the breed for General Appearance, Characteristics, Temperament, Colour and Coat - all of which are headings in the Breed Standard.  This is the information that many people use to make an informed choice to fit their family and lifestyle.  If a breeder isn't going to work towards this breed type - including getting objective feedback via dog showing, or other discipline - then they may as well just breed mongrels.  Some breeds have wandered so far off type that some of them seem to be pale imitations of their former selves and hard to recognise in the street.  I agree there are some issues, in some breeds, but this is not true of all breeds and I do not know any breed club that isn't working to rectify health issues in their breed.

>>Are you not contributing to this then breeding an achondroplastic (short legged) breed.

No because the problem in my breed does not lie with the short legs it lies with the elongated back. Aslong as legs are in a good enough proportion to the rest of the dog so that it will not have any health problems that is the main thing.

There are many of my breed that have legs that are deemed "too high" for breed standard and backs that are deemed "too short" and yet are completely fine for the dog to live a happy, health-problem free life, and still look like their breed.

You are right in that all breeds have traits that make them different and that these traits can sometimes be a negative to the health of the dog but like you say, it is the extremeties that are a concern and the only people going to these extremeties are the people trying to reach breed standard and showring potential.

Thankyou for your feedback dogs a babe,

I appreciate your opinion and likewise you are not a buyer I would want for one of my puppies. I would rather a puppy went to someone that loved the breed and wanted to give the puppy a good, loving home above all else (including its ability to "work").

I am not for one second saying all dogs should be mongrels or that breeds should not hold on to their unique traits I am saying that CERTAIN traits in MANY breeds cause a detriment to the dog and therefore I would not want to continue with it in its extremity and I fully appreciate that someone, like yourself, who wants a breed-standard working dog would not come to me for a puppy.

That being said,I would hope that someone who loves my breed and wants to give it a loving, forever home but does not want to show it or use it to "work" would, in fact, come to me as a breeder. That way they could get the joy from the dog that I get from mine, irrespective of whether it "works" or "shows".

the people trying to reach breed standard and showring potential.

I think the problem lies with how some show dog breeders interpret the breed standard and how some judges prefer the over exaggerated points of certain breeds.

I see no problem with breeding for the pet market in general, as long as they are using good examples of the breed and carry out all health tests for that breed. Many retired show dogs are used by breeders for the pet market. 

Don't know about anyone else but I for one am finding these argumentative threads (although I'm sure I'll be told it is a 'discussion' lol) a bit tiresome.  And I note this thread also is being largely harried along by another new member. 

I know Mods have commented about newcomers being unjustly criticised by established members however.....I really do question the motives of some of the newer members - suspect they are being somewhat argumentative for a reason, perhaps an ulterior motive???

In fact, what was that name Polly mentioned in the other thread, you know, the one about Jemima's friend....was it Hermina? ;-)

Penfold......there is always the ignore button, you don't have to read the posts you "find tiresome"

Remember everyone's entitled to their opinion on an open forum.

>Remember everyone's entitled to their opinion on an open forum

Yes, we are all entitled to our opinion and to express it.  Thanks for reminding me :-)

>When you have a "British Bulldog" puppy, not every single person who would like one expects it to be a breed standard British Bulldog, to have the breathing problems etc.. that the breed standard for this breed entails.

The bulldog standard requires a dog that can do this: Video.

>I don't think people should be deprived of having a certain breed as a pet just because it is not a show dog or a working dog and just because they will not use it as that

I believe all dogs bred should be the very best that is possible - the only thing stopping them reaching great heights in their breed should be their owner's unwillingness to take them there. Nobody should be content with breeding 'also-rans'; the dogs' owners deserve better than that.

Aren't all puppies sold or given away by show dog breeders "also rans"

I'm sure the aim is to breed every puppy to the perfect breed standard as it's interpreted, but we all know this is never going to happen.

Who's going to buy the "also rans" if not the pet market?

>I'm sure the aim is to breed every puppy to the perfect breed standard as it's interpreted, but we all know this is never going to happen.

But that's what breeders should be aiming for; the ideal litter where every puppy could become a champion if the owners wanted to show it. Although it hardly ever happens, if you're not breeding with that in mind, what are you breeding for?

For the pet market of course?!?!

But only from health tested parents.....

Isn't breeding for a market producing puppies comercially? Breeding happy pets as a sideline to working to improve a breed and promote it is surely the conscientious way to breed ?

>>I believe all dogs bred should be the very best that is possible - the only thing stopping them reaching great heights in their breed should be their owner's unwillingness to take them there.

Being the very best that is possible....Do you mean working wise or breed standard wise?

It has been proven that many breed-standard traits are a detriment to the dogs and so that isn't the best the dog can be.

If you mean working wise...what about the many breeds that were bred for something that has now been outlawed?

As mentioned previously, in these modern times a lot of the "jobs" working dogs were bred for are no longer relevant, so are these dogs redundant now then and we shouldn't own them because we can't work them to their highest potential?

There are also certain breeds where the job they were bred to do put them in grave danger and many were killed doing their jobs....should we do this too?

Forgive me if I appear naiive because I am so new to this forum but it is beginning to sound like many of the "breeders" in these forums are on par with upper class foxhunters (also outlawed) and are still living in the 1800s.

If this is what "champion breeding" is all about then I feel sorry for champion dogs and you can give me the 'also-rans' anyday and I will gladly get them loving, life-long, health-problem free, danger free lives.

King Charles Cavaliers, Pugs, Dachshunds...the list goes on! << All of these "breed standards" cause a detriment to the dog...

The breed is called Cavalier King Charles Spaniel. I've never bred them, but I've had them as pets for many years. All were bought from show breeders. My last one lived to 15 years, 2 months and 2 days of age. I know of many a lot older than that, also from show breeders. My current one could have been a show dog, nothing whatsoever to stop him being shown, but he's just my pet -perfectly healthy, loves obedience, loves life (my vet always says she'd love a dog just like him) -where has the breed standard been a detriment to him? Of course his parents AND grandparents are heart tested and MRI scanned. Not that the breed standard mentions anything whatsoever that could be detrimental to health -have you ever read it? Maybe you could point out what in it would cause health problems?

For the pet market of course?!?!

Why don't the pet buyers deserve getting a dog that looks like its breed? That's what I wanted of my pet Cavalier, that's what all MY pet buyers have wanted. If looks didn't matter, everyone would get a mongrel. Pet breeders very quickly lose the looks of the breed -you only need to take a look around any park, any vet's waiting room, any training class, to see that.

>>Maybe you could point out what in it would cause health problems

No problem;

A Breed Standard Cavalier King Charles Spaniel was shown to be in agony due to a condition known as syringomyelia, which occurs as a result of the skull being too small for the brain. Veterinary Neurologist Dr Claire Rusbridge described the brain as a "size 10 foot that's been shoved into a size 6 shoe" and estimated that up to 1/3 of the breed suffers from this problem. Another problem that plagues the breed is heart disease. Cardiologist Simon Swift explained that about half of all Cavaliers aged 5 would have heart murmurs and the rate increases, such that by age 10 to 11 almost all Cavaliers would have the condition.

About three-quarters of the 7 million dogs in the UK are pedigree breeds, and they chalk up 10 million pounds' worth of vet fees every week. Leading geneticist Steve Jones attributed one of the key problems to inbreeding. RSPCA Chief Vet Mark Evan singled out competitive dog showing as responsible.

And there are many traits in many breeds that are just as detrimental.

The bulldog standard requires a dog that can do this:

:-)  :-)

Thanks for posting the video link.  It was a joy to watch.  Happy healthy Bulldog!

>>Pet breeders very quickly lose the looks of the breed

Not necessarily, not ALL breed traits are detrimental, just some and sometimes the ones that are the worst are not even predominant in making the dog resemble the breed. If you got 100 random pedigree dogs of the same breed and showed a photo of each one to someone, no doubt they would know which breed the dog belonged to. But there is no way that all 100 would be breed standard.

There are also certain breeds where the job they were bred to do put them in grave danger and many were killed doing their jobs....should we do this too?

People have to come before dogs, and even in today's society (perhaps in particular in today's society) we do need dogs that at times have to put their lives at risk (like people do too) -such as police dogs.

Many working breeds have had a change of job, as society has changed. Some are able to just be pets these days and nobody would want their original function restored. Some can still do both their original job or a different one -Labradors and Goldens being just one example, they can both work to the gun and work as guide dogs, as one simple example.

> About three-quarters of the 7 million dogs in the UK are pedigree breeds, and they chalk up 10 million pounds' worth of vet fees every week.

And with just one puppy farm in Ireland supplying 5,000 pedigree dogs to the southern part of the UK every year alone, let's just guess where all these defective pedigree dogs are coming from?

Oh yes, it's got to be the 10% that are from show breeders....

>Don't know about anyone else but I for one am finding these argumentative threads (although I'm sure I'll be told it is a 'discussion' lol) a bit tiresome.  And I note this thread also is being largely harried along by another new member. 

I have been biting my tongue, and purposely not replying to the OP.  But I agree with you totally.  The aggressive and confrontational tones are really wearing thin now.

Not necessarily, not ALL breed traits are detrimental, just some and sometimes the ones that are the worst are not even predominant in making the dog resemble the breed.

You misunderstood me. If somebody wants one particular breed, they want the size, the temperament and the looks of the breed. That's why they chose it. Pet breeders almost always produce puppies that have lost the proper breed looks, and for instance may be a lot bigger or smaller, have different coloured eyes, different coat type, a longer face, a shorter face, bigger ears, smaller ears etc.  I've told the story many a time here before of how I used to be stopped by owners of pet bred Cavaliers and be told they wished their dog looked like mine, because that is what they thought they were buying. Why should the pet buyers have to wish their dog was different? Shouldn't they get a dog they could be happy with just as it was, as it was what they'd chosen? By going to a GOOD show breeder, they will get that.