Who or what would you term to be a back yard breeder?

Is it just someone who has no regard to any health screenings, breeds because they can and have no responsibility once pups are sold?

Or...what about the person whose dogs aren't kc but are health tested, scored, bred responsibly, sold with a contract and takes responsibility even after they are sold for life?

I know this might be controversial but just wondering, afterall, everyone has to start somewhere...

Thoughts please...

> Or...what about the person whose dogs aren't kc but are health tested, scored, bred responsibly, sold with a contract and takes responsibility even after they are sold for life?

That seems to be fairly uncommon, so I would have to ask why not registered?

To me it is somebody who only breeds for the sake of breeding. Because it is fun, because they want to sell, because all their friends want one. They have no other involvement in dogs than breeding. The dogs may be well looked after and may even be health tested, but they would never do anything inside a show ring, or in a working capacity. And adverts are normally worded "Deposit secures" with "pups fleaed and wormed" (sic) thrown in like some kind of reassurance.

>Or...what about the person whose dogs aren't kc but are health tested, scored, bred responsibly, sold with a contract and takes >responsibility even after they are sold for life?

If you don't have any actual knowledge about the ancestors of your dogs beyond the names on the pedigree,  how is this breeding responsibly?

Some health tests (DNA) rely on knowledge of the parents/grandparents/great-grandparents, for the test to be verified and reliable.   If your dogs aren't KC registered, then the pedigree cannot be relied on. 

If the dogs aren't KC registered, why not?   Was the dam too old to be bred?   Did either parent have endorsements on the pedigree preventing registration of offspring?  Had the dam had too many litters?     Does either parent have a fault preventing them from being suitable to be bred?    Lets face it, if you only breed from dogs which are pet quality, then it will be difficult to improve on that.

Part of being involved in canine activities is the contact with other breeders who know the lines and dogs.   This is invaluable when it comes to health.    It's also invaluable when it comes to temperament.   And being involved with the breed brings a better sense of what a good example looks and behaves like.   We all think our own dogs are the best in the country/world, and there's nothing wrong with that.   But when it comes to breeding,  a responsible breeder looks critically at their own dogs to see where improvements can be made. 

One thing I have noticed with back yard breeders, is that they rarely advertise their pups at reduced prices.   Every one of them seems to advertise their pups at Top winning kennel prices.   Yet they haven't produced anything like the quality you'd find in a Top flight kennel.

Don't you think that puppy buyers deserve the best that their money can buy?   If they are paying top dollar, then surely they should get top quality?

I agree, everyone has to start somewhere, but the fashion these days seems to be to start with no preparation or research.   What is wrong with saving up for a well bred KC registered pup from a good kennel?, involving yourself in activities that give you a grounding in understanding the breed, and also puts you in touch with experienced and knowledgeable breeders who will help you to breed if your dog proves good enough.   Yes this all takes time, and it will cost money, but it also proves commitment and responsibility.

Whereas, buy a bitch, do some tests, get her pregnant, sell the pups, just smacks of money money money :-(

Hmmmm...this makes for interesting reading. But on the flip side, I have seen kc assured breeder's puppies advertised where I would run a mile. For example, puppies from a gsd dam who's hip score was 11/4. Now I know it falls within the kennel clubs recommended range but there is a huge difference between the left and right. Or the shepherds being bred because they are non standrd coat colours or "rare" as the advert put it but the father had a hipscore of 29 and the mother 18, these were sold at £800 each. The pups were endorsed from breeding but surely the parents shouldn't have been bred from? Is this not unethical? The lady was proud to say "atleast they are epilepsy clear".

Would these pups not be at higher risk of HD? Elbows were 1 in the first litter and 2 in the second. Any unsuspecting buyer would simply look at the colour and want one. Sadly lots of buyers don't do enough research - won't they be paying for it later?

My 1st shepherd was from someone whose bitch was unregistered and the sire a kc champion. I researched the breed but although aware of health issues didn't really know much else. There are buyers out there who wouldn't have even done that much.

I know these breeders are few and far between but do they fall in the byb category?

>For example, puppies from a gsd dam who's hip score was 11/4. Now I know it falls within the kennel clubs recommended range but there is a huge difference between the left and right.

Malcolm Willis used to say that with disparate scores like that, the lower number is due to heredity and the higher number affected by trauma.

BYB live and breed in the NOW.
They produce a cash crop, albeit perhaps well reared, but with little concern for the BREED, for its future or ( in pedigree research) ..it's past.

There are bound  to be definitions for other types of breeders I'm sure....

> If you don't have any actual knowledge about the ancestors of your dogs beyond the names on the pedigree,  how is this breeding responsibly?

Not registering does not mean this is the case.  What about the designer crosses?  Yes, the vast, vast majority are bred for money/fun/to see what comes out etc but a select few people do breed them properly: health testing parents, breeding for sound temperament, health, selling pups with contracts and offering lifetime backup.  There's a cockerpoo breeder near me who does this - she has show dogs, she is a very responsible breeder.  She doesn't breed for money - I believe her thoughts were that if people were going to be producing these crosses, she would do it in the best way possible to give them the best chance of a good life she could by producing top quality, sound temperament pups.  But because they are crosses, they can't be KC registered (except perhaps on the activity register but not the same thing, of course).

>There's a cockerpoo breeder near me who does this -she has show dogs, she is a very responsible breeder. She doesn't breed >for money - I believe her thoughts were that if people were going to be producing these crosses, she would do it in the best way >possible to give them the best chance of a good life she could by producing top quality, sound temperament pups.

You may believe her thoughts were altruistic, but my guess is, she saw an opportunity and went for it.   Any of us could do and say the same, but it doesn't change what it is.   

Sell it how you like, this lady jumped on the bandwagon of crossbreeding to produce what?   Pups that may or may not grow up to be as advertised?   And why?   Because other people were breding them, and they were selling!  

How is this responsible breeding?

You may believe her thoughts were altruistic, but my guess is, she saw an opportunity and went for it.

I agree. Unless somebody breeds crosses for important work like guide dogs, hearing dogs etc, then how can producing crossbred puppies for no other reason than to sell them ever be responsible?

I am not in the market for another puppy but do like to see what is out there. One registered kennel is selling a litter of stunning gsds. Ad sounds brilliant. Parents are health tested and scored. Sire is a champion. 5th generation pedigree. Epi clear. Selling for an unbelievable price of under £600. Last line of ad....these pups will not be kc hence price.

I don't want to start arguments,  just discussion. And everyone is entitled to their opinion so will not find any confrontational replies from me. I just feel that these types of ads and litters make these people just as much byb as those who are simply in it for the money.

This is pretty much right for me!

http://www.dogplay.com/GettingDog/breedercomparison.htm

I know someone who breeds Cavalier King Charles Spaniels amongst others and she doesn't have any health tests done on her bitch and when asked why? she replied because she knows there is nothing wrong with them. :-(  and they are KC reg. But I'm wondering is that possible if they haven't had any health checks?

But I'm wondering is that possible if they haven't had any health checks?

Absolutely 100 % NOT possible.

> she replied because she knows there is nothing wrong with them.   and they are KC reg. But I'm wondering is that possible if they haven't had any health checks?

No of course it's not. Ostrich Syndrome sells puppies!

Who are you going to buy from? Me who tells it like it is? That ALL lines carry genetic diseases and without looking you will never know...
OR...a smiley seller who says there's nothing wrong with the breed and they have NO problems?

Simple marketing!

Epi clear.

Quite apart from the unregistered bit, this alone would make me wonder. Seeing as there is no such thing as a test to check any dog is clear of epilepsy (just like there is no test to check it HAS it!) -how could they possibly make such a claim? It's a bit like saying nobody in your family will ever get cancer because so far, you don't know of anyone that has. You can never be certain when it is a condition you cannot test for.

For me it's somebody who breeds for one reason ......... MONEY!!!    Extending from that, it would be somebody who just puts Dog A to Bitch B.  Usually dogs that live under the same roof (to cut their outlay costs).  Further, they tend to get their puppies sold asap.   Usually well before 8 weeks and before they start costing a lot in feed bills, and with the work involved too.    In other words again, it's just about another source of income.

This is quite different, for me, to the hobby breeder who does it for the love of the breed, usually.  For me, they don't necessarily have to show although I prefer it if they do as it shows a degree of caring what they produce.   The hobby breeder is usually prepared to be there for the life-time of the puppies they produce - unlike the BYB.   And unlike the BYB too, the hobby breeder doesn't churn out puppies, just producing the occasional litter.

I'm not getting into designer breeding other than to say that's something else a BYB would do - for income.

"But I'm wondering is that possible if they haven't had any health checks?

Absolutely 100 % NOT possible. "

Actually I disagree.   If a breeder has been in their breed and producing sound healthy puppies from known stock (background) for generations it is possible to know whether a particular pairing should produce similar - with the proviso that there is always the unexpected that crops up with any livestock breeding.   I know of a lot of breeders within my own main breed that actually do know enough, gained over many generations of breeding within their lines, that would only test if a problem cropped up.   And actually they are more likely not to repeat that pairing or take that particular animal out of their programme.

Marianne epi is exocrine pancreatic insufficency

Oh yes they breed for money.

Actually I disagree.   If a breeder has been in their breed and producing sound healthy puppies from known stock (background) for generations it is possible to know whether a particular pairing should produce similar - with the proviso that there is always the unexpected that crops up with any livestock breeding.

We are talking about CAVALIERS here -where a heart murmur can show up at any stage in life but where it may make a HUGE difference if it shows up aged 3 or aged 8, and where only an MRI scan can tell you if the dog has Syringomyelia or not. It may be totally free of symptoms but could be producing pups that are affected. So yes 100 % impossible to be certain you are producing healthy pups unless the tests have been done.

Marianne epi is exocrine pancreatic insufficency

Ah right -the small letters threw me. I'd have guessed it was something else if it said EPI. :) (Like HD, PRA, MVD etc.)

in thee case of gsd in the case of the stunning litter not kc registered etc I wouldn't be interested anyway. If they are so good why would they not be registered.? There are also other health test results for that breed I would want before I got anywhere near them. Funny they chose to mention epi when there are other tests that are needed why pick just that one? I didn't think it was a particularly usual test for gsd although great if its done as they are susceptible
For me a breeder needs all health tests  for the breed preferable some sort of showing working interest for their dogs. Dam and sire at appropriate ages and kc registered. After that I might start looking more seriously. 
like your definition toolz although as you say there are many others. Just look at eastenders for one example !

I agree....The "Stunning" GSD litter...health tested, Champion Sire, stunning looks......why not KC register and give the owners access to the entire database of breeding dogs in the pedigree and the health results of that extended family?
Pedigree of the mother endorsed "Not for Breeding" perhaps?
Too tight on profit margin to shell out a small proportion of their takings?
Had a run in with the KC for another matter perhaps?
We can hazard a guess, but the likelihood of it being for any 'moral stance' is statistically unlikely ...when in the eyes of Joe Public KC reg is a 'kite mark' or official stamp of authenticity.

See, I would class that litter to be advertised by byb because there is no real detail. Yes they are hip scored but what is the result? If both parents are kc, why aren't the pups? What do the pups come with?

I hate the fact that some pups are sold without vaccination or microchips and apparently that is reflected in the price!

I must say, that though not ideal, hobby breeders are a step in the right direction - be it a small one. I would like to hope that any advice given to these people would not fall on to deaf ears. And that they would try to keep on improving.

Sorry about the EPI mistype

>I must say, that though not ideal, hobby breeders are a step in the right direction - be it a small one

I am confused, why is a hobby breeder not ideal?  most of the breeders (if not all) on here are hobby breeders

and most of us would certainly never vaccinate a pup before going to new home unless it is staying for longer than 10weeks...

I hate the fact that some pups are sold without vaccination or microchips and apparently that is reflected in the price!

Other than for the smallest toybreeds, it's always better to let pups go to their new homes at 7½-8 weeks of age. That means the first vaccination cannot be given as most vaccines require the pup to be 8 weeks old (so clear of mum's antibodies). Unless they stay with the breeder until 10 weeks, when the second can be given, it is pointless giving the first. It is very common to find that a new owner's vet does not stock the same brand vaccine as the one the breeder used, and therefore the new owner has to either find a different vet which stocks the new vaccine (I once did this with a pup I'd got, it involved a 3 hour journey -no local vets stocked the same vaccine) or they have to start the new vaccination all over with a different brand. So far better to never give a first vaccination unless you know the second will be given at the same vet surgery as well. Also, when pups go just before or at 8 weeks it works out perfectly for the new owner to take the pup to their own vet within a couple of days, as they then get the check up most breeders will require, and it is peace of mind for them and the breeder, knowing the new pup is healthy.

most of the breeders (if not all) on here are hobby breeders

I have to admit I dislike the label hobby breeder. That sounds like the hobby is simply breeding, when in fact it is so much more (for those not in it for money, anyway!) -it is showing, working etc, with breeding being but one small part of it. But I wish there was a better/easier way to describe us. If somebody asks me about our dogs, I tend to simply say I show and breed, always putting the show part first, but my husband always goes a step further and says we show a lot but only breed every few years when we want a new pup to keep to show.

It's all about money with BYB they don't know what health testing is they have never heard of it.

yep theres a young local lad breeding working cocker spaniels,they are locked in a shed,I have reported this to the local police who informed the rspca,its discusting

Sheila

> You may believe her thoughts were altruistic, but my guess is, she saw an opportunity and went for it.
>
> I agree. Unless somebody breeds crosses for important work like guide dogs, hearing dogs etc, then how can producing crossbred puppies for no other reason than to sell them ever be responsible?

I dont agree.  There are appx 6 million dogs in this country? And by far the biggest majority are pets.  They are kept by people who want the companionship of a dog. These owners are not interested in showing or working their dogs.

Breeders of show and working dogs are a tiny minority of the dog breeders in this country and it is not possible for them to supply the number of dogs needed for the pet market. Especially these days when there is huge pressure  not to breed many puppies.  Are you saying that no one should own a dog unless  they want to show or work? and if that is the case then what happens to the pups that dont come up to scratch? We need pet homes for those.

>then how can producing crossbred puppies for no other reason than to sell them ever be responsible?

Why is it so wrong to breed quality health tested dogs for pets as it is after all the most important role of a dog in our society?  Personally I think that we should not only be educating puppy buyers about how to buy a puppy but we should be educating these "Backyard Breeders" about how to breed happy healthy dogs and educate them about their responsibilities as regards the life of the puppies they produce.

Breeders of show and working dogs are a tiny minority of the dog breeders in this country and it is not possible for them to supply the number of dogs needed for the pet market.

First of all, it is nothing but a DISGRACE that PROPER breeders are in the minority. It never used to be like this! I think it is perfectly possible for good breeders to supply all puppies that are wanted, the trouble is today's impatient buyers who want it all and want it NOW. If all buyers were prepared to wait for a wellbred pup, even just a few weeks, wait for the right pup, good breeders would be able to sell their pups, and would therefore be able to DARE have more than one litter every 3 or 4 years. As it is now, with the pet buyers almost always going for what is ready the soonest, the good breeders breed less as the risk is huge that they otherwise get stuck with pups. I have had to keep 3 from the same litter in the past, and know somebody who had to keep FIVE. And those pups were a lot better bred than what else was out there, from non health tested parents.

Then of course you have the simple fact that a LOT of those people buying the badly bred pups should not own a dog at all, but the greeders will sell to anyone who hands over the money.

Are you saying that no one should own a dog unless  they want to show or work? and if that is the case then what happens to the pups that dont come up to scratch? We need pet homes for those.

Not at all. What I am saying is that surely even a pet buyer deserves a pup that is healthy, and looks and acts like the breed is meant to be -which CANNNOT be said about the majority of pet bred litters.

Why is it so wrong to breed quality health tested dogs for pets as it is after all the most important role of a dog in our society?

Because they will NOT be quality, and they will have been bred for money. Decent health tests doesn't make a breed alone. I know I have told the story many a times here before, but it really does sum it up. Years ago I was out walking the 2 Cavaliers I had then, when I met a woman with a pet bred Cavalier. All she ever wanted was a pet, but she looked at mine and sighed and said she so wished her dog looked as nice as mine -as this is what she had expected when choosing the breed. But by going to a pet breeder who didn't show, she ended up with a dog 50 % bigger than my show bred ones (which were all pure pets, never, ever shown, but bought from show breeders) and with a different type and mismarkings. These days, what I see most commonly at training classes etc are people with pet Chihuahuas, again bought from pet breeders. They look at my Papillons and ask where I got my nice Chihuahuas from -as mine are SMALLER than their giant oversized dogs.........when it should be the other way around. Everyone chooses a breed for a reason, and the pet buyers are not getting the dogs they were expecting.

I knew there would very very different opinions on the subject but this has been really, really interesting.  There are lots of things that would need to change to curb bybs but essentially I think the buyer needs to change. Until this happens there will always be a market.

And I'm sorry if this upsets anyone but there used to be one word that described these so called 'designer dogs' ...mongrel, and a time where you couldn't even give them away for free!

This is crossposted from another forum - someone went through all the adverts in their area... I'm only posting half as it's so long, but it's enough to get the picture!

GSDs £650-750, £500 is the average for a non health tested non reg GSD
Goldies health tested/reg are around £750-950, goldie no papers or health tests £500-600 poodle crossed with goldies are nearly a grand (no health tests or papers)
labs with no papers/tests are £400-500, with health tests/reg around £600-700 crossed with poodles no papers or tests (some have tests) around £750 upwards
the new 'miniature' lab / goldie crossed with poodles go anywhere up to £1500 even with cockers in the mix to
cockers with no papers / tests around £300-450, with tests/papers £600-750 cockers crossed with poodles go up to £1500!
CKCS with no papers/tests around £400-500, with tests/papers up to £750, crossed with poodle around £700-900
Siberian huskies no papers/tests £500-600, with papers tests £500-750,
Alaskan malamutes no papers/tests £500-600 with papers / tests £750 upwards
Siberians crossed with malamutes no tests/papers from £500
French bulldogs tests/papers from £1000-4000 no papers/tests from £1000-1500
Schnauzers around £750-900 depends on colour white going for more
pug crosses with no tests around £500-1000?!
pugs with health tests/papers around £800-1200
Dogue de Bordeaux generally papers/tests for £1000, with no papers/tests around £800
shih tzus around £500-750 for paper/tests around £500 without papers! but the new imperial small ones go up to £1500

>I hate the fact that some pups are sold without vaccination or microchips

Ok, then you will hate me!  I refuse to have my breed vaccinated early.  A pup that I intend to keep doesn't actually get done until they are 10 weeks of age.  The bitches do tend to feed the pups for longer than the larger breeds. 

As for microchipping, my vet prefers to leave these tiny tots until their 6 month free puppy health check.  He does me a cracking deal on price if I pay for the jabs and chip at the same time.  Just £7 for the microchip.  He just prefers not to chip a 500gm puppy if it can wait. 

That will have to change by April 2016, because it will then be illegal to sell an unmicrochipped puppy.

> I think it is perfectly possible for good breeders to supply all puppies that are wanted,

I dont think so. Last year the Kc registered 223770 puppies. Now many of those will be volume breeders so if we say 1/2 were bred by "good" breeders that is only 110000 puppies. with a population of 6 million dogs we need very roughly 500000 puppies born per year to maintain that figure. that is a discrepancy of 400000 puppies.

> Not at all. What I am saying is that surely even a pet buyer deserves a pup that is healthy,

And they will get a healthy dog if pet breeders are encouraged to health test and buyers are educated to do their research.

> Then of course you have the simple fact that a LOT of those people buying the badly bred pups should not own a dog at all, but the greeders will sell to anyone who hands over the money.

unfortunately you will never be able to eradicate the minority who either should not breed or own dogs. I suggest that the people on this forum are the "rolls Royce of breeders and dog owners. and in between us and the bottom section are a lot of people who are reasonable dog owners who just need a bit of education and encouragement to up their standards.

> and looks and acts like the breed is meant to be

I am not sure I agree with this. For a start a lot of breeds in their original state are simply not suited as pets in todays society. What most people want as a pet is not a Border Collie that wants to herd 24 hours a day, a gundog which has the energy to work the field all day or a great dane that is capable and willing to take down a wild boar. Most dogs with the exception of the toy group would not make good pets if they still acted like the original breed. As far as looks go that is down to personal taste as much as anything else. Pedigree dogs already come in many different strains and types. There is no one right type for any of the breeds currently out there.

> which CANNNOT be said about the majority of pet bred litters.

Rubbish. I am a groomer and see hundreds of dogs of different breeds. A lot of them from pet breeders. They may not all be capable of winning a show when compared to an arbitrary standard but they are still recognisable as the breed they are supposed to be. And at the end of the day If the earset isn't quite right or the angulation a bit steep it doesn't make any difference to their ability to be a good pet. What about the pups you have bred that havent come up to the breed standard? or has every pup you breed turned out exactly to the breed standard? Does it matter to their owners that they are not absolutely top quality? I can assure you that even if the dogs my customers have are not crufts standard they are very good pets and loved very much. There are very many good dog owners out there  who just want a nice pet. We should be aiming to increase the number of well bred healthy puppies out there so why not educate the breeders who are almost there?

> Years ago I was out walking the 2 Cavaliers I had then, when I met a woman with a pet bred Cavalier. All she ever wanted was a pet, but she looked at mine and sighed and said she so wished her dog looked as nice as mine -as this is what she had expected when choosing the breed. But by going to a pet breeder who didn't show, she ended up with a dog 50 % bigger than my show bred ones

Well that is totally down to her research. It is not the breeders fault if she bought one from them instead of going to a show breeder. If looks were that important to her then perhaps she should have looked into it a bit more and then she might have realised that there were different types of dogs out there. Its like me going into a shop and buying the first washing machine I see and then realising that other machines have a faster spin than the one I just bought. Buyers need to take some responsibility themselves if what they buy is not what they actually want.

> Everyone chooses a breed for a reason, and the pet buyers are not getting the dogs they were expecting.

There is plenty of choice out there. I believe it is the responsibility of the buyer to do the research needed to ensure they get what they want.

And anyway the vast majority of pet owners are very happy with the pups they get. They love them regardless of how big or small they are. Looks are not really the issue. The issue is why shouldn't people breed for the pet market? and nothing you have said is a valid reason why people should not breed dogs just to be pets. If they choose the parents to have good temperaments and health test and rear the pups well then I still dont see why they shouldnt. Whether you like it or not the pet market is the biggest market for dogs out there so what is so wrong with trying to improve the standard of the dogs being bred for it? A pup bred by a good BYB will be streets ahead of a puppy farmed one.

> He just prefers not to chip a 500gm puppy if it can wait. 

I regularly microchip puppies for breeders and have done very small breeds. It is no more difficult that doing a larger breed. Not sure why your vet would have a problem with it.  Especially as there is now a mini chip.

Need a 'LIKE' button for Marrianne's post :-)

there used to be one word that described these so called 'designer dogs' ...mongrel, and a time where you couldn't even give them away for free!

Yes  crossbred dogs used to be called MONGRELS.   I got one for free at 18 months old back in the 80s and he was one of the best dogs I ever had.  Not the healthiest though :-(    He was so beautiful, 17" Whippet-sized Afghan Hound X, complete with coat and movement, I used to get stopped in the street.  Everyone wanted one, and everyone's brother wanted to use him on their bitch  ! ? ! ? ?     I could have made a fortune had I had more like him, but the rest of the litter were almost Afghan sized terrier types with smooth coats.

Sadly, this is what has happened to the mongrel.   People saw pound signs instead of the dogs, and the rest is history :-(

The designer dog - a triumph of creative marketing over responsible dog breeding :-(

> That will have to change by April 2016, because it will then be illegal to sell an unmicrochipped puppy.

How's that going to be enforced then?
As the law stands now, a microchip is not legal proof of ownership.

And just to add - 2015 in Wales.

> There is plenty of choice out there. I believe it is the responsibility of the buyer to do the research needed to ensure they get what they want.

Yes, but.... people are now breeding on from those dogs, papered or not. And asking high prices. The properly-reared, registered dogs from good breeds have become devalued.

I am a groomer and see hundreds of dogs of different breeds. A lot of them from pet breeders. They may not all be capable of winning a show when compared to an arbitrary standard but they are still recognisable as the breed they are supposed to be

Smithy,

You really don't get it do you?   

There is a vast difference between for example a Yorshire Terrier bred for show, and the ginormous 'Yorkies' that most people get. 

It's like paying for a Rolls Royce and getting a Ford Cortina.   Does the same job, has nice shiny paint, the engine works and it will get you from a to b.   But a Rolls Royce it isn't.   And if you've paid for one, surely you have a right to expect one?

What about the pups you have bred that havent come up to the breed standard? or has every pup you breed turned out exactly to the breed standard?

Every show breeder breeds with the hope of getting at least one show prospect puppy.   Really good breeders might get 2! If they're lucky.   But the rest of the litter will be excellent pets - along with the show dogs who are also pets for 96% of their lives.   Most ordinary folk wouldn't even notice a difference between the show puppy and the pet puppy - even if that difference is pointed out, because often the difference is minute,  and breeders could be accused of 'nit picking'.  But that's how you keep quality high.

Yet most people can tell the difference between a show bred dog and a pet bred one, because pet bred might resemble the breed they're supposed to be, but they are clearly not what they should be.

I dont think so. Last year the Kc registered 223770 puppies. Now many of those will be volume breeders so if we say 1/2 were bred by "good" breeders that is only 110000 puppies. with a population of 6 million dogs we need very roughly 500000 puppies born per year to maintain that figure. that is a discrepancy of 400000 puppies.

I disagree.  The figure doesn't need maintaining.    You have completely ignored the numbers of dogs entering rescues every year.   Bred by the very breeders catering to the people who wouldn't wait for a carefully and responsibly bred dog from the 'Rolls Royce' breeders.  The ones who buy the almost pedigrees of the bybs and puppy farmers.

Many of the dogs you referred to are deemed disposable, by their owners, and by their breeders.   

>

> You really don't get it do you?   
>
> There is a vast difference between for example a Yorshire Terrier bred for show, and the ginormous 'Yorkies' that most people get. 

Actually I think it is you that doesn't get it. they may not not be to your taste but those ginormous yorkies can  and do still make good pets.

> It's like paying for a Rolls Royce and getting a Ford Cortina.

That is a very good analogy. We are the Rolls Royce of breeders. But not everyone out there wants or needs a Rolls Royce. Yet we are saying every dog should be a Rolls Royce. RR are the best cars out there but there are plenty of other cars that fulfil the same need even if they are not quite as well built as the RR.
And as for price then that is down to the buyer. Its a market economy. If people want to buy a Cortina and pay a Rolls Royce price then why shouldnt they? No one holds a gun to their heads. Research again. We may think that a lot of the doodles are over priced mongrels but no-one forces people to buy them. The vast majority are happy with the dog they get and the price they pay. I should know. I groom enough of them. Just because I wouldnt pay that much for that breed doesnt mean they shouldnt. I wouldnt pay silly money for a frenchy either but plenty of show people do.

As for rescue a quick look finds a report that 120000 dogs were picked up as strays last year. Whilst that is a large number of dogs it is actually only 0.2% of the total dog population. In an idea world there would be enough good homes for all puppies born. In an idea world there would also be a good home for every child born but humans being what they are it will never happen.

It is a bell curve with the show breeders at one end and the poorest breeders and owners at the other. the vast majority of owners and breeders fall somewhere in the middle neither awful nor wonderful. Rather than trying to eliminate everything of a lesser quality than our selves we need to bring that middle section towards our values and skew the bell curve towards the better end of the spectrum.

>> There is a vast difference between for example a Yorshire Terrier bred for show, and the ginormous 'Yorkies' that most people get. 
>Actually I think it is you that doesn't get it. they may not not be to your taste but those ginormous yorkies can  and do still make good pets.

But they're not Yorkies - one of the whole points about a Yorkie is that it's very small! They're Yorkie-type terriers, and therefore the buyers are being misled.

>If people want to buy a Cortina and pay a Rolls Royce price then why shouldnt they?

But if they're expecting a Rolls Royce and end up with a Cortina they've been scammed.

> Yes, but.... people are now breeding on from those dogs, papered or not. And asking high prices. The properly-reared, registered dogs from good breeds have become devalued.

So its all about maintaining the price of quality dogs then? Not about dog welfare?

And didn't you just post something that showed that generally unpapered pedigree dogs generally sell for less than papered ones? so what is the problem there?

I think we should be aiming for all dogs to be bred well from health tested parents and reared in good conditions whether those are pedigree or doodle. Price is  irrelevant as people pay what they want. I wouldn't pay £100 for a pair of designer jeans I would rather  pay £5 from Asda. I really dont think the designer jeans are that much better than my cheap ones but I wouldn't try to stop those people who want to pay silly money for theirs if that is what they want. I would like those expensive jeans to be made correctly though. In the same way I would like those expensive doodles to have been bred well from health tested parents etc.  And whether we like to admit it or not it is a fact that those doodles often don't suffer from the health problems of their parents in the first generation so are  healthier as is often claimed.

A quick input about rescues...

Although they do a sterling job and I wouldn't want to live in a society without them, many a dog owner wouldn't qualify for pet because of their circumstances. I keep referring to gsds because they are the breed I know a little more about. There are many good gsd owners who live in flats or houses with small gardens, who compensate this by taking their pet out more but these people would fail home checks. Then are are those whose properties back onto open land and are expected to fence acres before they can be considered. I myself would have failed because of the hours I worked, even though I could come home at lunch to break up the time a dog would have spent alone.

What do those people, including myself, do? Look on gumtree etc and buy a cheap dog. I knew nothing about buying when I got my 1st gsd. I was lucky he turned out to be a 'good'un'.

This, unfortunately,  also seems to contribute to the demand of byb pups. I know some great rescues,that can be flexible but these seem few and far between.

P.s I apologise,  perhaps hate was too strong a word to use in regards to vaccines. What I meant was the risk of these pups not getting any jabs or being microchipped when brought fom byb. Its sad they have had such a crappy start in life and worse when they end up in homes that are no better. I am sure as a responsible breeder, you keep in touch with anyone lucky enough to have one of your babies and know that this wouldn't be the case for them.

> But they're not Yorkies - one of the whole points about a Yorkie is that it's very small! They're Yorkie-type terriers, and therefore the buyers are being misled.

But their parents are yorkies and their parents were yorkies. and the parents before them were also yorkies. At what point do the offspring stop being Yorkies?

>> If people want to buy a Cortina and pay a Rolls Royce price then why shouldnt they?
> But if they're expecting a Rolls Royce and end up with a Cortina they've been scammed.

Then they should do their research.

and as I tried to say in my other post about designer stuff if people are happy to pay an inflated price for something they perceive as better then why shouldn't they? After all we pay a higher price just ebcause we want a dog of our chosen breed rrather than a mongral from the dogs home. when the mongrel would fulfil many of the functions our pedigree pets fulfil. Sorry no time for more as I have some doodles to groom

> You may believe her thoughts were altruistic, but my guess is, she saw an opportunity and went for it.   Any of us could do and say the same, but it doesn't change what it is.   

I wouldn't say altruistic entirely, I dare say she did see an opportunity.  But she's still breeding them with full health tests etc, and she charges the same for them as she does for the parent breeds to cover her costs.

But rather than labelling her just another BYB is it not possible that maybe, just maybe, she's trying to improve what it more or less a new breed now?  No different to any breeder of purebreds trying to improve their breeds and they were all crosses at some point.  Like as not, these doodles are here and I don't think someone trying to produce better ones in a market full of bad ones is a bad thing.  The ones I've met from her have been absolutely outstanding dogs in every way.

Now don't get me wrong - I do disagree with doodles on principle but if they are here, then they should at least be bred properly.

>>The properly-reared, registered dogs from good breeds have become devalued.
>So its all about maintaining the price of quality dogs then?

You're misunderstanding. 'Value' isn't all about money, is it? Items can be financially worthless but also have immense value. Would replacing 'devalued' with 'under-appreciated' give a clearer meaning?

We are talking about CAVALIERS here

Sorry, I wasn't aware the OP referred to Cavs.   Obviously I'm not being 'breed specific' - and my comments can only relate to my two breeds, Bassets (main breed) and Whippets.

I'd also like to say none of my puppies went home with any vaccination shots - why?   Because far too many vets seem to ignore any previous shots, and start over meaning the puppy may well have more vaccination shots than necessary.   Mine went home, at 10 weeks, with strict instructions that the owners take them to their own vet within 48 hours for an initial health check (and mine did have one before they were sold and went with a Health Certificate from my vet) and for their vaccination to be started.    Microchipping - moot point because again when I was breeding, there was no official requirement for this - and I wasn't happy to have this done (and still am not much as my Basset was chipped during a dental last year), preferring to leave that up to the purchaser.   I am aware that all that is about to change when it becomes a legal requirement - at which point I suppose I'll have to have my Whippet 'chipped.

I have no problems with people breeding 'oodles' or indeed for the pet market IF THEY USE THE SAME CAREFUL USE OF HEALTH TESTING AND PEDIGREE ANALYSIS AS ETHICAL BREEDERS DO, I personally don't want to go down that route so they are welcome to make it their living if they do it properly.
But....most BYB and ' oodle' breeders just happen to own both parents...maximising profit.
The seldom register them..... Maximising profit
The have open waiting lists, first come, first served....maximising profits.
They often swap dogs, pups, studs amongst themselves....seen often in Facebook.....maximising...yes you get the drift.

I often read puppy listings here and elsewhere saying ' excellent pedigree'.... Convenient that they or their pals just happen to have these perfect mates. The most recent said " quality pedigree" where, in fact, both parents sported well know puppy farm names.
As I say....BYB live in the NOW...they want money, they own two dogs, despite having NO idea which dogs in the pedigree present health issues....its profit.