goldmali i understand what your saying BUT you yourself has put this *looking up*.....nothing is ever black and white

If you put it back into the context I wrote it in you will see that my point was that it can be okay to breed from a bitch with a fault if your aim is to get rid of the fault and ensure that no pups born with the same fault are bred from.

SO i think if people where to read up and find out if there dog is of breed standed...you dont have to show to find this out ,and all the health tests are in place i dont see theres any problems :-)

How on earth would a pet owner know what was a minor fault or not, unless they were told in the show ring? You cannot interpret a breed standard unless you have seen lots of dogs of the breed, otherwise you cannot possibly know what is meant by for instance "medium", "long", "brown", "dark" or whatever. When I was 12 I read the breed standard for smoothcoated guinea pigs, looked at my pet at home and convinced myself she fitted the standard perfectly, just from reading the words. Of course, once she was at a show bench and I saw others I realised the many faults she had -faults I could never have imagined just from reading the SOP.

No. It's like saying ' there will always be people who drive without insurance so lets make it a little cheaper to pay for and try to eliminate part of the problem'.

You're comparisons suggest that I am advocating puppy farming. I don't. I think they should be shot, personally.
I am suggesting that the uphill battle of changing the whole buying attitude of the general public could be made easier by trying to control the source - ie presenting them with an alternative to waiting months for a show-litter puppy or going to a puppy farmer.

To give another example...if I go to a particular German car manufacturer for a new car, they are going to tell me that I will have to wait until at least next march to get it (it's true, i found out yesterday). Like many people would, I am going to go to the other German car manufacturer for my car because I don't want to wait that long. I don't need a new car, I just want one. I am not going to buy a £200 banger... because I have a decent alternative available to me...
Can you see the difference?
Compromise doesn't have to be a bad thing.

Can you see my point? That with support from the likes of the breeders on here, people could be breeding good (not great) quality puppies for PET homes which are much, much better of than the alternative.

I do see your point and your example in question would certainly be better than many others -but WHY do we need people to breed pets when there already are plenty of pets available from show breeders? There IS no shortage of good pups for the person prepared to wait a bit. Most of the time there wouldn't even need to be a long wait. For the impatient, most of the time they would not make a suitable owner anyway as they have the wrong mindset to start with -want it now so often equals a belief that pets are disposable.

if the stud owner is of any good she should be able to help ,plus the bitches breeder can help, sorry but you dont have to have loads of judges going over to say she is a good standed of the breed, 1 or 2 is fine after all this dog isnt going to be entering cruffs is it ,the owner would just need to know if its a good standard.

yes sorry i took it out of context!

ok if it was me and i had a bitch i wanted to breed from and everything was inplace ie tests,health,well rounded bitch, and i didnt want to show id have her gone over by afew people i knew and that would be it , but i do like showing! but i see where others are coming from, the ppl that dont wait shouldnt go to a puppy farm and ppl that health test and breed to high standeds shouldnt be classed the same!

I am suggesting that the uphill battle of changing the whole buying attitude of the general public could be made easier by trying to control the source - ie presenting them with an alternative to waiting months for a show-litter puppy or going to a puppy farmer.

But then the show breeders will not be able to sell their pups, and will have to give up breeding! And so we are back to square one again.

In my main breed there used to be something like a maximum of 3 litters born per year. People who wanted the breed knew they might have a wait of a year or so to get a pup. Now, 75 % are pet breeders and pups are available ALL the time. That has meant those of us that breed responsibly and also show have to breed less, because we can't find enough good homes for our pups. (There will never be enough show homes, typically one or maybe two pups per litter go to show homes, average litter size is 8-10.) Always having to keep 2 or even 3 pups per litter means we will breed less and less frequently, and so less and less pups from us will be available. I have a total of 6 dogs that I had to keep because I could not sell them -that is 6 extra wellbred litters that could have been born had I been able to know I'd only need to keep ONE pup per litter. Instead I now have to tell people I will have my next litter 4 years after the last one, no sooner, and others have the exact same problem. I cannot risk suddenly having 3 more dogs again. So the pet breeders take the opportunity to breed more and more as nothing else is available, and if THEY get stuck with puppies they dump them on the RSPCA or even just turn them loose to be picked up as strays. (Yes it is happening exactly like this.) If there was a "middle" category of breeders AS WELL, the "top" category would have to give up altogether. Because the bottom category WILL not stop as long as there are people that will buy from them, and it doesn't matter to them if those buyers are totally unsuitable.  Like I said before, there is no shortage of pups.

I'm not running out on this discussion because I think it is worth having - but I have to go out. I will be back. Please bear with me - I really do think it's a conversation worth pursuing...although I am not sure that you all agree... :)

>I know where I wanted one from but I would have gone elsewhere after a certain period of waiting and I wouldn't have changed breeds.
>Like many people would, I am going to go to the other German car manufacturer for my car because I don't want to wait that long.

I don't get it; you wouldn't be prepared to change breed of dog if one wasn't immediately available but you see no problem in changing 'breed' of car?

i mean no nastyness at all with what i write and im not good with words ,but i hope i havnt afended any1

>if the stud owner is of any good she should be able to help ,plus the bitches breeder can help

Neither of these people is particularly unbiased; the breeder will have an emotional attachment to 'her' puppy (and will also have a relationship with you) and the stud dog owner has a financial interest. It's important that the people assessing each dog have as little connection to you or the dog as possible - it's unbiased, independent opinions that are needed.

what about show kennels that dont health test OR still breed knowing their lines carry somthing!! and are still breeding to this day!! now i feel sorry for these poor familys thinking thayve done everything they should but think because this is a show kennel/breeder everything is in order and their takeing home a happy healthy pup well maybe they are lucky or maybe that 1 will start to show signs soon and die at a young age :-(

Nobody says all show breeders are good. There are good and bad in all walks in life. But just like people do research when buying a car or washing machine, they need to do research when buying a pet. And these days it is SO easy to check if somebody health tests or not by using Mate Select. People used to be able to hide a lot, that is no longer so.

yes i get your point :)

And of course there are no health tests for bad mouths, cow hocks, poor feet, etc, all of which are hereditary and affect an animal's quality of life, and are only checked for in the showring.

yes very true but jo blogs not know this and think because a well known kennel/show breeder all is well....ppl need to no that like you say good and bad in all walks of life and even with show/breeders so my take on this is to any1 reading this threed plz do your home work on the breeder your going to get a pupy from and make sure you see all paper work/ health tests read up on what tests your chosen breed needs! :) like every1 on here i wish all breeders would put their breed 1st!! then more healthy dogs in the world! :)

And of course there are no health tests for bad mouths, cow hocks, poor feet, etc, all of which are hereditary and affect an animal's quality of life, and are only checked for in the showring.
Quote selected text.........

yes thats right Jg but breeders are still produceing these, becuase they like there lines!! even tho these affected go to "pet homes" it affects their quality so why do they still breed these lines :(

> That with support from the likes of the breeders on here, people could be breeding good (not great) quality puppies for PET homes which are much, much better of than the alternative.

Katien, it seems to me that your argument suggests there is a gap in the market and that there are some willing people who can fill that gap simply by being better than puppy farmers.

I believe we need to aim higher than that - "being better than the alternative" is just not good enough.  Education needs to start with the buyer - so that they make well informed choices about any puppy they wish to buy.  I don't agree that pet breeders (even those that are getting some good advice from an internet forum) will produce the kind of quality that I as a buyer would be looking for.  I certainly wouldn't assume every breeder who shows their dogs is making the right decisions either but I also wouldn't go to someone who has never set foot in the ring.  Health tests are an important part of the decision making process but I want judges feedback too :)

There are a number of breeds that are being bred in large numbers, in peoples homes, and by caring people.  They may have done the necessary tests but not really understand why they are important.  A casual perusal of their adverts suggests that they have no concept about coat (colour or texture) they clearly didn't understand what a mating might produce and they have very little information about the family of the dogs they've used.  Lovely people I'm sure, but clueless.  Buyers really need their breeders to be expert in their chosen breed - someone who regularly shows or works their dogs stands more chance of being better educated in their breed and is a safer bet for a puppy buyer.  There may well be some people like you that are getting excellent advice from their breeder (who also works or shows) but they will benefit from referrals in that case.  The chances of happening upon someone like that in an advert is slim to zero.

I'd urge puppy buyers to go to breeders with a depth of relevant experience and remember that if those breeders don't have pups available they can put you on a waiting list or refer you to other trusted sources.

Katien, it seems to me that your argument suggests there is a gap in the market and that there are some willing people who can fill that gap simply by being better than puppy farmers.

I believe we need to aim higher than that - "being better than the alternative" is just not good enough.

I agree. Sad as it is, the puppy farmers/back yard breeders will always exist, because if nothing else, there will always be people with money wanting to buy a dog, whether they are totally unsuitable or not. The good breeders will not sell to them (and if this "middle" category existed, that would surely include them as well -not selling to just anyone), but the bad will because they are ONLY in it for the money. And there are enough unsuitable people around to keep the puppy farmers going. Example: Joe wants an Akita. He lives in a studio flat and works fulltime. He wants the dog to show off with and he wants to train it to be aggressive towards people. He wants to offer it at stud. He tried buying a puppy from a good breeder but is turned down when the questions asked are not answered to the breeder's satisfaction. So he goes to the bad breeder, says "I want to buy an Akita pup." Breeder replies "Sure, take your pick and give me your money" -and that is the end of story.

yep goldmali what you have wrote is worrying and this is what im against ..they are all puppy famers because they dont care about their pups and their welfare its all about the money!! :(

> if good example means show dog, how are show breeders going to meet the demand for pet dogs by the general public? Where else are people going to go to get their dogs if show breeders cannot fulfil the demand?
>
> At the moment they largely go to puppy farmers. Would it not be better to promote responsible breeding from dogs that are not necessarily shown?

I agree there probably aren't enough show breeders producing enough litters to meet demand, particularly if campaigns to steer people away from puppy farmers are the success we hope for and even if fewer people take on dogs when they really are not in a position to, again something we all hope for.
However, anyone can have a "show dog".  I don't believe you have to carry away Best of Breed at a championship show but I do think you should take yourself off to a few shows and win a few placing from a judge or two. 

Pet owners don't just want healthy dogs, they choose a breed and they should get that breed.

> Showing isn't for everyone, it's that simple.

That's fine.  I'm not a big fan either :)  I'd rather have a nice days walk :)
I don't like the competitive side of things, I don't think it brings out the best in people that really should all have joint aims.  Would much prefer if it was a simple, individual assessment.  But it is what it is and I recognise the need to do it. 
There are other benefits to going to shows.  If you don't, I feel it must be very limiting in accessing other breeders who hold the quality dogs that you would wish to use and there is so much more to be learned by networking in this way too.
If you really don't want to show, or work or whatever, well you don't have to breed. :)

Of course, I should have said in my previous post if you find you are not getting placed then you know you have not got a dog worthy of breeding. :)

To be fair the reason for so many dogs in rescue with 100 dogs a day put to sleep is because the supply is FAR BIGGER THAN THE DEMAND FROM RESPONSIBLE PET OWNERS.

If only those showing working and those seriously involved in being custodians of a breed for the long term bred, then there would virtually be no 'rescue problem' as such breeders re-home their own.  Also there would be very few easy come easy go owners abandoning their pets due to the more careful vetting of such breeders (it's in their own interest not to have to help home a dog later if at all possible).

Marianne can attest to the totally different situation and attitudes regarding dogs in Scandinavian countries, and a virtually non existent rescue situation.  yet we have huge issues in most English speaking countries, like USA, UK and Australia.

> Showing isn't for everyone, it's that simple. I wouldn't go in a ring for love nor money. Doesn't make me a bad person, dog owner or necessarily a bad breeder for that matter.
>
>

The main reason fro advising showing or working being an essential part of breeding is assessment by others of ones stock,a nd more importantly being part of a breed community (not just to compete with/against but for sharing knowledge) gives the breeder many more tools that the most well meaning pet owner that health tests and breeds from their pet.

No breeder can really afford to breed in isolation, a lot more than just the parents goes into the production of the puppies.

When one starts showing or working ones dog, one joins in the breed community, and gets to see what the breed is producing, which lines produce what, which lines seem to blend well, which don't.  You should be able to be mentored and gain knowledge from other breeders that fleshes out the 'good pedigree'.

I have now owned 7 generations of my breed.  This means that I will have known all the UK, and many of the overseas dogs in my current pedigrees.  They won't just be names on a piece of paper.

To be a good breeder you need to remember that your part of a bigger picture.

It could be argued that you could make a really good breeder by just attending shows and trials working vents, and studying the dog over time, but I can't see anyone doing that and not at some point wanting to take part too, or have their stock proven at such events, even by other owners.  Some older breeders end up doing this when they no longer feel able to work or show but can continue to breed the quality dogs for others.

> So to continue my example in my case - yes, I would have asked the breeder of my girl to help me select a stud which might have helped to counter the fault, the puppies would have gone to homes where people would have got an absolute grilling and they would have been registered and endorsed. But at no point would I have shown her.  Now according to general feeling, this would have been a very bad idea.

The reason often things are breed specific.

This is exactly what those of us in numerically small and endangered breeds try to do (though we prefer to get people showing too) as we need to keep the gene pool as open as we can, and such one of litter breeders will breed with full support (and a lot of commitment) from their bitches breeder and to a large extent the mentor will be helping vet homes etc.

But and it's a big but, in the majority of popular breeds there are far too many puppies bred, especially poor quality ones.

I don't know where the 40 thousand Labrador pups registered with the KC every year go.  there are more of them bred than all the breeds in several groups put together.  every other dog I meet is not a Labrador, so it makes me wonder.

Also if no pet Staffie litter were bred for the next 10 years it would be no bad thing.

I think there have been some very good points made on both 'sides' here (I know that everyone is on the same side really - wanting healthy, quality puppies). I'm also going to play devil's advocate by introducing a couple of extra thoughts that I have had while reading these posts.

1. It is virtually impossible to convince people that there are differences between dogs bred by 'responsible' breeders and back yard breeders, puppy farmers or whatever. (And what is a puppy farmer anyway? To some it is anyone who breeds a litter without competing in some form of competitive event.) People are used to shopping around for discounts/bargins etc. They are familiar with a concept that something without a 'brand name' but basically the same product can be purchased at a cheaper price. They are also familiar with a 'no frills' concept and that is precisely why Dill's original post was so spot on, the 'only a pet' is NOT a 'no frills' alternative to a show dog. 

2. We do all like to believe that the majority of show breeders only breed from outstanding animals that have passed their health tests, have no breed faults and are sound in limb and temprement. However, very clearly this isn't true simply because these perfect animals don't exist. Show breeders have to compromise somewhere too, especially these days where the majority only keep small numbers and don't have the luxuary of choice. There are also a great many novice breeders that believe they have a line after breeding one litter and will want to continue their 'line' even if there is only one mediocre bitch puppy in the litter. In the past the larger show kennels were kept by people who were genuine stock men and women, rather than people that went to shows. They were in a position to be ruthless and keep only the best and they frequently worked together for the good of the breed rather than focussing on short term personal ambitions. I also think they were far more critical of their own stock, irrespective of show wins. A flashy looking dog with a confident handler can easily rack up quite a few wins under non specialist judges even if it is not a particuarly good example of the breed. I've seen (as I'm sure have many of you in your own breeds) some dreadful examples of my breed winning at shows - just because a dog wins doesn't mean it is worthy to be bred from. I'm not talking about hidden inherited conditions but visible problems such as bad mouths and poor fronts. The 'minor fault' mentioned earlier is as likely to be perpetuated by a 'show' breeder as by a 'pet' breeder I'm afraid.

3. I do however fully agree with the concept that breeding stock is assessed by an external judge - after all that is why livestock shows originated - not to give owners a nice day out!! However, in my breed for example it is not uncommon for breeding bitches to never see the inside of the show ring, in fact my three current show dogs were out of bitches that were unshown (apart from a couple of occasions as puppies). Some of our outstanding brood bitches have  done very little in the show ring but have more than proved their worth in the whelping box and I have also heard an argument that show bitches may not make as good mothers as their more frumpy stay at home sisters!

4. On the same vein as 3, I do agree with the point that the show ring is a basis for assessing structure and temprement but breeders in the working events such as agility and obedience are still able to produce quality puppies for their requirements without this conformation assessment. If they are involved in some form of competition and are health testing etc, but producing puppies of an incorrect colour or ear placement for example - would this by definition make them less worthy than conformation show breeders? What about shepherds breeding sheepdogs - outstanding at what they do but their dogs are unlikely to be contenders for BOB awards...

5. This isn't specifically relevant to the debate but the assumption has been made that if someone is a 'good owner' they will be prepared to wait for a year or two to get a well bred show puppy and be able to pay hundreds of pounds for it. If they cannot do this then they must turn to a rescue which may also be in short supply for what they are looking for or go without a dog. Unless they are in a position to obtain perhaps a cheaper 'run on' puppy from a breeder then they will have to settle for second best. However, there may be situations where a very good owner does not want wait for a long time to get a puppy or cannot spend just shy of a thousand on purchasing one from a top kennel. If they have unexpectedly lost a dog after spending hundreds on vet fees it does seem a pity they are considered in the same vien as the 'I want it yesterday' brigade.

Other posters have rightly said that simply because someone shows doesn't make them a good breeder - I would also say that simply because someone doesn't show doesn't make them a bad breeder. The wider picture has to be considered. There are some people breeding labradoodles commercially that are doing all the recommended health tests for both breeds and more, are breeding primarily for superb temprements and a specific 'breed type' and are refusing to sell to owners who do not meet their stringent criteria. Conversely there are people unfortunatly breeding for the show ring who refuse to health test or who continue to offer dogs at stud that have repeatedly produced problems. I wish it was as simple as show breeders good, non-show breeders bad because then it would be very easy indeed to educate the public and bad breeders could be easily identified. Returning to Dill's excellent post again, buyers need to look at all the aspects rather than only a very limited spectrum to ensure they are able to purchase a well bred, happy, healthy puppy. I would virtually always recommend the show ring as the best starting point for potential owners because the motivation to produce the next generation of show dogs coupled with peer pressure generally produces better results than a purely financial incentive. However, it is the overall package rather than just one particular aspect of it that defines a truly responsible breeder.

tricolour you really have a great way of putting things across, excellent thought provoking post.

True, Tricolour. It also pains me to say that 'some' pet people do a better job of rearing their litter than show people do in my breed because they are more likely to be home reared throughout and well socialised (busy household, kids handling the pups etc) than show stock kept in a kennel/dog room and the litter being reared in a sterile environment accordingly. I say it pains me because I know full well Joe Public nearly always knows nothing about/isn't interested in the health tests for my breed and isn't breeding because the bitch is a good example/good worker etc.

Collies can be easily damaged by the first 12 weeks of their life (more so than some other breeds who will happily have good temperaments almost regardless of what they are exposed to) so it can be like hens teeth trying to find a pup you like from good parents who have had all the health tests done (and litter too) and who are home reared until they go to their new owners (not raised in the kitchen for the first 3 weeks then stuck out in a kennel when they are the most hard work but equally benefit the most from being around you).

tbh i think theres good and bad on both sides and its unfair to think cus someone doesnt show there dog that they shouldnt breed you can have a pefectly healthy dog and show and still get puppies witch may not be perfect to the show world, not all is perfect . But for anyone to say you shouldnt breed a dog with maybe a over/under shot mouth witch wouldnt make much different to pet owners with no intentions of showing, doesnt mean in everyother aspect that the dog can  not be as perfect as every other dog breed properly !!!!you wouldnt  say to a female with diabeties,epilepsie downs syndrome the list goes on that they can not have children because other people see them as not healthy so why any different surely its as long as these dogs  are fairly and rightfully treated with the respect that they deserve and just to be CLEAR im not saying breeding badley is an excuse but what iam saying is  i dont see a problem breeding a dog not for the show world and just for pet owners as they equally can (not all the time) be looked after the way they should be .Each person has an opinion and noone on this forum is better or worse than the next people surely it should be healthy debate and not whos perfect or not !!!

what about things like people on here dont like to buy things =from the vets for there dogs at (over rated prices) and go on the internet to save a few pounds i get every thing my dogs need from the vet at vets cost then if there is a problem with any meds they have or infuture need then its not my fault i put all my faith in my vets thats what they are there for i trust them 100% to do the right and perscribe the right things

OH AND I WISH THERE WAS ALIKE BUTTON ONHERE AS I LOVE AND AGREE WITH SO MANY COMMENTS MADE
ALL DOGS FOR ======= RIGHTS X

>But for anyone to say you shouldnt breed a dog with maybe a over/under shot mouth witch wouldnt make much different to pet owners with no intentions of showing,

Badly overshot mouths can cause painful mouth problems for a dog; sometimes the canines make holes in the hard palate because the deformity means there's nowhere else for them to go. Cow hocks can affect their movement with the stresses being put on the wrong part of the joint, leading to arthritic changes and pain in later life. No caring breeder would risk breeding puppies with that to look forward to.

Badly overshot mouths can cause painful mouth problems for a dog; sometimes the canines make holes in the hard palate because the deformity means there's nowhere else for them to go.

I had a cat like that once, one I' bought in to be a stud. His bite was okay when I got him but as so often happens as he grew his jaw changed and he ended up with his lower canines sticking into his nose, actually making holes. Needless to say he was neutered and the offending teeth were removed at the same time. At the moment I have a Persian girl I've bred myself who has a very deformed mouth, I didn't even realise how bad until I REALLY looked closely -I dare say had she been shorthaired her face would have looked asymmetrical, now the fur hides it. She has no problems eating but she has one tooth sticking out of her mouth and that always gets caught on things. She will be spayed ASAP and the tooth removed at the same time.

If bad bites are bred from, eventually you can end up with animals unable to eat properly, it's like any other fault -stop it at once before it gets worse in the next generation or the one after that. If you are HAVING to breed from something wrong you MUST know exactly what is behind both the lines so you know the likelihood of what will happen next (and of course the likelihood should be that it is improved!) -there is no way the pet owner will know this.

Somebody I know recently imported a dog from abroad, spent a fortune, but didn't go and see it before it was shipped over, trusted the breeder. Dog arrived with bad mouth, so she placed it in a pet home. Lots of money lost and great disappointment, but the only sensible thing to do.

wow tricolourlover you sure do have a way with words ,i wish i could write it down like that ,thankyou :) x

tricolourlover, Another vote from me!! Excellent post!!

Jeangenie,

The future of dogs shouldn't just lie with the showing world as we all know how corrupt it is there and if you find your breed to be judged honestly, then you are in the minority or one of the back-scratchers!  I know many people in the dog world who has either had enough of the nonsense or indeed is profiting from the showing/judging carryon and in many different breeds, not just mine.

If you have such an avid interest in a breed that you are wanting to breed, surely you would own several breed books?  All of them have very good descriptions of breed standards which would be easy to follow, even for someone never set foot in a ring?

Also, I know people in the dog world through loads of different ways, not just the showring.  I think if you have an interest in a breed, it doesn't need to begin and end in a showring.  Especially nowadays with the breed forums and meet ups.  It's so much easier to meet from all over the country for much more interesting reasons than showing!

Also, Are you saying that every pup that has show potential goes to a show home? That's nonsense.  Well, maybe in smaller numbered breeds but in a popular breed, loads of show quality without faults go to pet homes.  Who's to say that pup wouldn't have taken the show world by storm?  But she shouldn't be bred from because she's never shown her qualities to a judge?  I think this is a very naive way of thinking, it's either your way or no way?

If you have such an avid interest in a breed that you are wanting to breed, surely you would own several breed books?  All of them have very good descriptions of breed standards which would be easy to follow, even for someone never set foot in a ring?

I commented on that subject earlier and pointed out there is no way on earth you can tell how good a dog is just from reading the breed standard, unless you are used to seeing dogs in a ring. You cannot possibly interpret it properly just by the words so will just apply it all to your own dog and decide he or she fits it perfectly. Using Malinois as an example: If you own one dog and don't see them at shows, how do you know if your dog is "fine in proportions"? It might be fine next to your friend's Saint Bernard, but compared to a dog of the same breed it could be the exact opposite. Head long but not excessively so? What does that mean without seeing others of the breed? A Cavalier would have a long head compared to a Pekingese, but would be very short compared to a Malinois.  Eyes medium sized? Preferably dark brown? What is actually "dark brown"? Ears moderate length? Tail medium length? What is medium, moderate? I could go on forever!

Who's to say that pup wouldn't have taken the show world by storm?  But she shouldn't be bred from because she's never shown her qualities to a judge?

Because otherwise there is no way of knowing! It's perfectly possible to have two littermates where one is exceptional quality and one is rubbish -it's the luck of the draw. But to the pet owner they may look identical. You only have to consider the fact that people who come to visit me will make comments like "How do you tell your dogs apart?" to know the non-show person cannot tell the finer points of a breed.

>The future of dogs shouldn't just lie with the showing world as we all know how corrupt it is

It's no better and no worse than any other part of society.

>If you have such an avid interest in a breed that you are wanting to breed, surely you would own several breed books?  All of them have very good descriptions of breed standards which would be easy to follow, even for someone never set foot in a ring?

No, not at all. Words can be very difficult to put into context - define "moderate", for example, when you've got nothing to compare it to?

>Are you saying that every pup that has show potential goes to a show home?

No, not at all; few puppies, even in the best bred litter, could honestly be described as having 'show potential'! However surely the ultimate aim for every breeder is for their pups to be as close to the breed standard as possible, whether or not they're going to be shown? 'You can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear' - meaning the quality of pups from repeated pet-bred litters is, over just two or three generations, noticeably lower than those from breeders who don't allow themselves to wear rose-tinted specs. ;-)

>but in a popular breed, loads of show quality without faults go to pet homes.  Who's to say that pup wouldn't have taken the show world by storm?

That would be the ideal for all puppies from all litters.

>But she shouldn't be bred from because she's never shown her qualities to a judge?

Not when it's so easy for her owner to enter her at a few shows and prove her point. As has been said before, the owner needn't be the handler in the ring, so personal shyness isn't a valid reason not to do this. It's a bit like saying "I know I'm a goiod driver so why should I have to take a driving test?" or "I know how to lay bricks - why should I have to bother with planning permission and building regulations?".

Not really replying to anyone in particular here.
I have an interest in showing, always have done - but so far, have never got beyond ringcraft. I am hoping to have a little go in the near future (as stated on another thread).
I am devoted to my breed, sorry won't bore you with all the details regarding health testing, careful stud dog selection, studying of pedigrees etc as I have stated this on more than one occasion on this forum and I am in danger of boring myself, let alone anyone else!

Anyway, I do believe that the vast majority of those who don't show, do NOT have their breeds best interests at heart. Most of them appear blissfully unaware of health testing and breed standards. As someone therefore who doesn't currently show, I fall into a small minority.
I am dedicated to my breed, am a breed club member and have been treated very respectfully by those show people I have come into contact with.  You simply cannot tar everyone with the same brush - there are many good breeders out there who do show and certainly there are also some good breeders who don't. There are show kennels (successful) that I wouldn't touch with a barge pole, but many more pet people who I also wouldn't touch with a barge pole!

I had two pups from the last litter go to homes whereby both new owners had contacted not only myself, but also TOP show breeders who had pups around the same time.  One of the new owners travelled all the way from Hampstead, London (which meant an 8 hour round trip) to me for their pup, even though a top kennel was just 30 mins away from her. The other travelled a couple of hours to me, again, she had a large show kennels nearby, this time only 40 mins away from home.... both gave the reason that having researched the breed for several months, they knew as soon as they spoke to me, that they had found the right breeder for them.  Both were professionals, so money was no object.  Therefore, I must be doing something right. There are others like me... but maybe not many.

I firmly believe that attempts by some show people to completely dismiss responsible breeders who don't show, are not doing the breed any favours. Widening gene pools can only be for the benefit all breeds..... provided that all dogs and bitches used for breeding purposes are health tested, of sound temperament and true to type - bred from well known and respected lines (as oppose to totally unknown pet lines) and the breeders practices are excellent in every way imaginable.
As a person generally in life, I try to judge people on an individual basis, without trying to put others into little boxes. The same should apply specifically to those who breed dogs - there are excellent show breeders and some excellent non show breeders.... just as there frightful show and non show breeders....I know of show people (not being breed specific here) whom if they didn't show, would be clearly be regarded as running puppy farms, given the sheer volume of their breeding stock and pups churned out... food for thought indeed.
As someone who always goes out to stud and uses only health tested show dogs, I am very grateful that not all show people have their minds closed to some breeders, purely on the basis that they do not currently have a bitch that is being shown.
i hope I get the chance to have a little bit of fun showing, but I could never commit to any proper serious campaigning.... I do not have the time, plus it does change some people and not necessarily for the better.

>Widening gene pools can only be for the benefit all breeds..... provided that all dogs and bitches used for breeding purposes are health tested, of sound temperament and true to type

I agree - but it's the 'and true to type' part that cannot be determined in isolation, and requires comparison with others.

And of course, if you don't attend shows how on earth do you know which stud dog would suit your bitch best? How do you know how his previous offspring from other bitches have developed? Is he the only good dog from a mediocre line, or is he from consistently good-quality animals? You really are 'flying blind'.

Great post, Cavlover, but I think we are all preaching to the deaf.

Also, what about the 'fit for purpose'? Many a showdog may look the part but I don't know many in both of my breeds that could do a days work!!  Champions being bred to champions the would be too noisy for the field or far too much coat to get past the first bush!  And this is not just my breeds.

Also, what about the 'fit for purpose'? Many a showdog may look the part but I don't know many in both of my breeds that could do a days work!! 

The purpose of MOST breeds these days is no longer relevant or even wanted -with the exception of the toys whose purpose always was as pets. For the others, like I said before in an ideal world all dogs would be dual purpose, but as it is now the majority of breeds that are still needed for work have a show version and a working version, and I see no great problem in this. The person who wants a dog for work for a living (a shepherd or a policeman or gamekeeper or whatever) isn't going to care about looks, only working ability, and the person wanting a pet (as all showdogs should be) are better off with a dog without a very high drive for work.

>Champions being bred to champions

You wouldn't limit your gene pool to just champions, though, would you, especially in numerically strong breeds? You'd look at the dogs which produced the champions and see where their genes might blend well with those of your bitch.

Definitely preaching to the deaf cracar!  I knew I was wasting my time... but I stand by every word ;-)

In my breed some show people will keep back smaller bitches for showing and their larger sisters for breeding ... what is that all about exactly?
Seemingly, bitches suitable for showing might not be deemed an ideal size for breeding and vice-versa.

I hear what you're saying; I just think you're leaving too much to chance, when it needn't be so. Independent assessment should be thought of as another 'health test' required before breeding. I personally think breeding is too important to rely on hoping for the best.

>But for anyone to say you shouldnt breed a dog with maybe a over/under shot mouth witch wouldnt make much different to pet owners with no >intentions of showing, doesnt mean in everyother aspect that the dog can  not be as perfect as every other dog breed properly !!!!

>you wouldnt  say to a female with diabeties,epilepsie downs syndrome the list goes on that they can not have children because other people see them >as not healthy so why any different surely its as long as these dogs  are fairly and rightfully treated with the respect that they deserve and just to be >CLEAR im not saying breeding badley is an excuse but what iam saying is  i dont see a problem breeding a dog not for the show world and just for pet >owners as they equally can (not all the time) be looked after the way they should be

I can't believe you've written this!  To suggest that breeding dogs with a known fault, structural or health problem is no different to people with health problems having children is mind boggling.   

The person who breeds those dogs has a responsibility not only to the dogs but also to the new owners of those dogs and to deliberately breed dogs with known health problems which the pups will then carry and/or suffer from is irresponsible in the extreme!  

Don't forget the people who are buying the pedigree pup will be paying good money for it, money they may have had to save for some considerable time and they deserve the best puppy they can get?    They won't be doing this if the breeder is claiming to do everything right yet is deliberately  breeding substandard parents :(

There is one thing you seem to have ignored in all this.

Most of the pet bred pups are in breeds that are in no short supply, so there is no real need for people to be breeding more pups in the first place.   The only real reason for the pet litters being bred as far as I can see is to make money out of what was supposedly bought as a pet :(

Unfortunately too many of these people don't really understand the needs of a dog and certainly don't understand the needs of a bitch with pups.  I have heard of many local 'pet breeders' in the last few years and am horrified by some of their ideas regarding care of the bitch and pups.   Don;t you think that the people buying those pups deserve pups that heve been brought up carefully, well socialised and prepared for what life as a pet will demand of them?  It's not something you can skimp on - preparing pups for life is a large part of being a breeder and is very time consuming.

And who said anything about NOT attending shows?
And what about the stud dog owner who allows me to use their successful show dog for my bitch, are they "flying blind" too, even though (in my case) they will have been successful showing the breed for many years?
Too many closed minds... too many still striving to be elitist.

How about being elitist in terms of excellent breeding practices (in all areas) as oppose to exhibitors only?

>And who said anything about NOT attending shows?

Sorry - I must have missed the part where pet breeders attend several shows a year just to spectate and keep up to date with the state of their breed. ;-)

>And what about the stud dog owner who allows me to use their successful show dog for my bitch, are they "flying blind" too, even though (in my case) they will have been successful showing the breed for many years?

Perhaps; there are stud dog owners who are happy just to take the money from the use of their dogs, just as there are bitch owners who are happy to take the money from the pups from their bitch. As you pointed out, not everyone in the show world is purer than the driven snow.

>How about being elitist in terms of excellent breeding practices (in all areas) as oppose to exhibitors only?

Breeding is about being elitist. It's one of the times when being 'good enough' isn't always good enough.

Pet owners deserve the best puppies possible.

Ah but jeangenie, I am talking about me here, not "pet breeders" ..... I am also talking about the sort of stud dog owners I go to - I wouldn't go to a money grabbing type. As I recently stated on here, the last stud dog owner (show breeder) I went to offered me the chance to pay the fee once pups were on the ground (I chose to pay at the time of mating).....

Are you unable to look at this in any way other than generally? I was clearly talking from my own personal experience and not about breeders who don't show full stop... most of whom I have nothing in common with ;-)

I didn't say breeding shouldn't be elitist did I? I suggested it should be elitist for those who are excellent at what they do and not simply because they show their dogs...

As I've said several times, I believe showing should be considered in the same way as other pre-breeding tests. Hip-scoring is done once; BAER is done once, DNA tests are done once. However some eye tests are annual. To get a reasonable consensus of independent opinion, half a dozen shows in the first two years of a bitch's life (some as a pup, some when adult) would be enough to determine whether she's close enough to the standard to breed from.

And as I said, in toy breeds, you often find that show breeders will show their smaller bitches, meanwhile their larger brood bitches don't ever set foot in a show ring - because they would be deemed too large for showing! Well, too large to get placed, I should say.

Very interesting thread. For me, I believe you should either be getting a puppy from a reputable breeder, health tested, socialised, raised as part of the family etc etc etc or from a rescue. I see no excuse for getting a dog from a random breeder be he a BYB or a well meaning novice. I PERSONALLY would only buy from a breeder for the purpose of showing, other than that rescue is fine by me. Of course if you have an interest in a particularly unhealthy breed you may be slow to choose from rescue, but there are a LOT of common, popular breeds in pounds/rescues as well as breed club rescue's to choose from.

I agree there should be a standardised permit allowing/compitent to breed dogs or infact, any animal.  But why do show people pick the dogs good enough? You know as well as I do that it would be friends of friends and the little hobby guys (who still do the best for their dogs) would be 'over-looked'.  Your names not down, your not getting in, is the attitude a lot of people find when starting showing.  I was lucky, I'm a 3rd generation dog show person so I was 'included' for who my family was but I've seen and infact befriended newcomers who are going home in tears with some show folks attitude. 

Anyway, Lost track there a bit.  If all the show folk pick the best of the best to breed and no-one else is allowed, where do I go for my next working dog? Or the police for their dogs? Or guide dogs? or hearing dogs, I mean, they use mongrels!!, or customs or the sled hobbiests.........We all want good sturdy dogs built for the purpose of brains and brawn, beauty never comes into it for me.  My lot would be hopeless at shows.lol.

> half a dozen shows in the first two years of a bitch's life (some as a pup, some when adult) would be enough to determine whether she's close enough to the standard to breed from.

Some 'younger/newer' overseas kennel clubs actually do require certain level of show achievements from the parents in order to register puppies.