what if they find out something else further down the line than has been stipulated in the original contract ?, no crystal balls yet , should the not beable to consider that too and restrict breeding to protect their dog and its offspring ?

why not purchase another Brittany rather than breed ? that way you wont need homes for surplus pups and all that entails .No worries about endorsements . breeding is as you know a risky business for the bitch and may be expensive for you if things arnt straight forward

I think the potential issues have to be specified on sale.  And for the benefit of the breed. 

Otherwise - look at it from purchasers point of view - total restriction.  Let’s do one hundred tests?  And even if you pass them all - I still don’t have to lift.. 

There has to be a purpose to the restriction!!!

Its a Good job we don’t practise this form of eugenics on humans

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I appreciate your input.  But I want to breed
My pup.  She is amazing.  And I believe (and not everyone will agree) most bitches benefit from having pups.

Its not to do with the money.
Fortunately I can afford to follow up this
Principle..

Most of all it’s about wanting the best for dogs and not breeders.

actually I think dogs and cats for that matter are rather exploited anyway given the numbers that are bred with no thought for anything . Sticking to endorsements for responsible breeders seems good for me

>A Carte Blanche restriction for no specific Reason - not acceptable.

Imagine that you've sent a litter of unendorsed puppies out into the world, then you hear at 8 months that one of them has developed epilepsy, and potentially none of them should be bred from. But there's nothing to stop the new owners breeding and registering the offspring, perhaps spreading the condition further.

Or a pup's previously perfect mouth might go wrong when the adult teeth come through, totally unpredicably; again, not something you want to perpetuate.

It's not possible to list all the possible reasons why a pup might not prove to be a suitable breeding animal in the future, so it's absolutely right to apply a blanket ban.

sorry at this point we must disagree. better for having pups! that's like me saying a female is better for having children . absolutely not

Nope
Don’t agree.  That’s when people steal dogs to breed....

We need a proper control.

>And I believe (and not everyone will agree) most bitches benefit from having pups.

From a medical point of view it's absolutely the opposite.

Oh that’s crazy.  You are saying anything that goes wrong with any puppy of that breed precludes any puppy breeding!

Some of these conditions (eg epilepsy) often are not hereditary.

Sorry that is not Using common sense. 

You seem to be saying every breeder should put a
Blanket ban on
Any puppy they sell
Being bred (apart from
Them
No doubt).

I can only conclude you are a breeder!

So you seem to be thinks It is Fair to ban ANY breeding just in case something may go wrong?  Why are we breeding at all?

But you ignore the fact hereditary conditions usually show early.  Conditions appearing later are often environmental or plain bad luck.

I think we all (as in UK dog breeders here on CD) are singing from the same hymn sheet -we all want and value endorsements.

A dog is more than a pair of hips. There's other health, looks, character and a lot more to consider. And not everyone is in a position to breed. Unless you really know a person, how would you feel reasonably sure that they would not breed a litter, leave the pups alone to go to work, sell them not endorsed to anyone who was willing to pay, as just one example. It's not just the dog that has to be suitable for breeding, it's the owner and the owner's premises and circumstances as well. And I would not trust somebody who had not convinced me that they had all the right circumstances. I did once - big mistake. It very nearly ended in disaster. One pup in need of a new home just 5 days after it had been sold by the breeder. And that was the only pup the breeder managed to sell. Sure both parents had good hips and eyes, but that didn't ensure anything else. Never again. My contract now states I will only lift the breeding endorsements if the dog has had the relevant health tests for the breed with acceptable results, if it has been shown or worked and proven itself to be a good example of the breed, and is of a suitable temperament. I clearly state that I will not lift the breeding endorsement for a dog that is kept as a pet only. That's not only safeguarding myself and my dogs, it's safeguarding the entire breed.

And what with the law changing on the 1st of October, currently it is very unclear as to who will be able to breed in future.

It depends.  I don’t want to appear like our politicians.  The bitches  have calmed down with pups.  My vet agrees. 
Not all.  As I say that is a personal
Finding perhaps not a world wide justified one!

That sounds positive.

I know
Many vets wont agree with you ... depends on the bitch

But then  again no expert  agrees on anything today

> ou missed the  point.  I was obviously not clear. A restriction saying no breeding without a valid hip score or eye test or whatever  - no issue A Carte Blanche restriction for no specific Reason - not acceptable. Specify what you want and require (for the benefit of the breed ) and that should Be your restriction. Now what possible complaint can breeders have About that? We should all be singing from the same hymn sheet.

With each breed having different health testing with new tests coming out all the time if the KC tried to talior the endorsement to personalise it for each breed or breeder this would create a huge workload. That's why it's in the rules for placing the endorsement that the person who does when they sell it they must have something singed to say the new owner understands them and what conditioned if any they will be lifted on. The first and second person then must stick to it, if person 1 tries to go against it the second can get the kc to lift it once original conditions are met.

The issue here is that the person selling this older pup was not the person who put the endorsement on. Knowing you wanted to breed did you not contact the breeder who placed the endorsement to make sure there wouldn't be an issue?

Possibly not it may well allow.the big commercial.breeders to carry on breeding while.making it very hard to impossible for.those small good breeders .atm it's a big question.depending on your circumstances it could.mean u may not be able to breed. Worth keeping a close eye on your local.councils website

No I didn’t.  I relied on the kennel who sold her to me and her assurances l.  In my defence we didn’t know the true background then!

>Some of these conditions (eg epilepsy) often are not hereditary.

But often they are.

>You seem to be saying every breeder should put a Blanket ban on Any puppy they sell Being bred (apart from Them No doubt).

I agree that all puppies should be endorsed; I endore mine, including the ones I keep.

>But you ignore the fact hereditary conditions usually show early.

Not generally before puppies are registered before sale though! Endorsements can only be placed when the puppy is in the phyical possession of the breeder. Once the puppy has gone to its new home then it's too late, so naturally they're applied 'just in case'.

>I can only conclude you are a breeder!
>This is our fifth generation of Brittany spaniel. Starting with a prize winner from la Roche Sur Foron in France. Whilst they have been pets to us, we have bred them with good pedigree dogs in France. 

And so are you.

Breeders need to put endorsements on the pups before they leave otherwise it's too late. if that perfectly fine pup you let go at 8 weeks turned out to say be blind by pra by time it's a year but the owners decide they still want to breed it anyway, The breeder can't now do anything to stop those genes going back into the gene pool harming the breed. But if the breeder has pit endorsements on and in the singed paperwork they stated it would be lifted after a clear eye test and over 2 that dog would then not aid in spreading pra in the breed and causing heart and for more owners and dogs. Had the dogs eye been clear at 2 and the breeder still refused to lift the owner could get the kc to lift.
The same can be said for any of the health problems that are not present in the first 8/12 weeks.

> No I didn’t.  I relied on the kennel who sold her to me and her assurances l.  In my defence we didn’t know the true background then!

What has the person you brought her from said about this all?

To be honest your probably better of just buying a second one if that's your only reason for wanting to breed, rather than breeding one, espicaly at this point.
The kc won't lift in your circumstances as no agreement between you and the endorcer.
Even if you go to small claims court under the pup being miss sold not as described ect they can't force the seller to lift them as the seller can't, all they will likely do is get you back some of the money you payed espicaly if there is a price difference between a pet and breeding dog in the breed. Which still won't solve the endorsement issue.

>sadly I am not hopeful as the kennel lady made it clear she was speaking for herself and her friend.

Definitely speak to the breeder herself, and get it from the horse's mouth. Also it'd be sensible to get the hipscore done when the bitch is old enough, as well as any other tests that Brittanies need, to strengthen your case.

Thanks.

Well legally I reckon I can also sue for
The pricemof puppies etc ...but I really don’t want to go that route  if I don’t have to xxx

Sorry the rules need to be changed.   Breeders should be subject to appeal.

> Well legally I reckon I can also sue for The pricemof puppies etc ...but I really don’t want to go that route  if I don’t have to xxx

That's been tried before, and failed, because there's no certainty that a bitch would get pregnant anyway.

> Sorry the rules need to be changed.   Breeders should be subject to appeal.

The rules will not be changed. Dogs are no longer viewed by the KC and the public as property the purchaser is entitled to do with as they please. The attitudes towards breeding is that it is the breeding which must be justified, NOT placing the endorsements. In other words there is always a good reason for endorsements - the avoidance of unnecessary breeding. Plus of course the welfare of dogs, to help ensure they are not misused by their owners. None of this is ever going to change, on the contrary it is going to be stricter and stricter in the future.

You speak about yourself as experienced but the fact that you don't appreciate the above and also say strange things such as "professional governing body" suggest a complete novice... There is no professional governing body because dog breeding is not a profession. The whole point behind placing endorsements is that the breeders love and care for the puppies they help bring into this world, and want to do everything in their power to help ensure they live happy and healthy lives...

I'm sorry but if I were the breeder in your situation, I too would not have lifted the endorsements unless I knew there was a good reason for your dog to be bred. You made a mistake by not appreciating the significance of the endorsements when you bought your dog, but it's not the end of the world surely. If all you want is to own two dogs then you don't need to breed for it, just buy a puppy. If your frustration is due to "not getting it your way" then it really is futile, you might as well bang your head against the wall so better not

Perhaps you are right.  Perhaps it will remain a closed shop and all about money.  You say it’s now about breeding
- well it should be about ensuring the dog you breed from is healthy.   You are effectively saying only breeders who do it for money can breed and the puppies they sell can’t be bred from so we keep it a closed shop.....  in today’s world that is unacceptable.

This won’t avoid  breeding - that is a misconception.  it will make
More breeding of dogs who are  not registered with KC and thisnless protected (or should be).

Misleading the innocent purchaser is unacceptable.  It’s
Nothing to do with “getting my own way”.  Really silly comment if you had read my entries you would see that was nothing to do with it.  I bought a puppy and was told there was a restriction on breeding until she had a satisfactory hip score.  The goal posts then kept changing.  That is what is unacceptable.  It is about honouring a commitment.  A breach of contract. That is what I am upset about but now you have advised there is no profession and no governing body  it really is a buyer beware and be extra vigilant who you buy from. 

So I will breed my dog if I am satisfied with her health tests  (I have Homes already before you ask) and her puppies won’t be registered with the KC. Unless the restriction is lifted by the breeder.  That is a shame for the KC.  And does not protect
The breed just the breeder.  That is what I find most disappointing.

You don’t have to respond and have the last word.  I have
Had the help I needed on this and thank you for your input.

I hope the rules do become much stricter and less open to abuse.  An appeal process is the only way to make breeders responsible and protect the breed.

> Perhaps it will remain a closed shop and all about money.

But it's not all about money, is it? It's all about not registering puppies from animals which don't conform to their breed standard, and might pass on deleterious genes. That's responsible.

>well it should be about ensuring the dog you breed from is healthy.

Exactly. It is. When puppies are registered nobody knows how they'll mature and whether they'll be suitable to breed from, regardless of their pedigree. Get her hips scored and if the result is below the breed mean score, contact her breeder directly, not through the person you bought her from.

Incidentally, why was she sold at such a late age? Could it be that she has been found to have a known problem so shouldn't be bred from anyway?

> So I will breed my dog if I am satisfied with her health tests  (I have Homes already before you ask) and her puppies won’t be registered with the KC. Unless the restriction is lifted by the breeder.  That is a shame for the KC.  And does not protect<br />The breed just the breeder.  That is what I find most disappointing.

Now that is disappointing to hear. Why would you want to breed from a bitch where you can't register the pups? Will you actually be able to find a suitable stud dog who has been health tested whose owner wont care you can't register the litter? Being the breed is limited in numbers i can't see anyone agreeing to that.

You did include the kennel name in your post before it was edited. You haven't answered my questions. As an experienced responsible breeder don't you endorse ALL your puppies until all health testing is done & use a written contract ? I would expect any responsible breeder who breeds dog that are registered with the UK KC to do so.

Me connected with this kennel ? I don't think so as I only have working sheepdogs(ISDS) to work with my sheep flock. Not shown nor worked to the gun

You seem to be trying to appear naive yet highly experienced as a breeder two things which shouldn't go together

Reading through all this sad affair, from a breeder's point of view, and given my breed is slow maturing so you do have to wait for maturity to know whether the animal is good enough to be bred from, all the pups we bred and sold as puppies carried endorsements.   And under the UK KC guidelines, a written statement went with the puppies on sale together with the Sale Contract.   This statement was signed by both me and my buyer with both parties having a copy,  so THERE WAS NO MISUNDERSTANDING later on.  It didn't happen but had anybody wanted to breed from those puppies we sold as pets, I'd have to have seen them before lifting the endorsement and I might have given advice as to what stud (bloodlines) I felt would be right for the puppy.

I know the KC will 'interfere' and lift endorsements because it's happened (not to me) and that annoys me because once lifted, the dog could be mated and to any stud dog/brood bitch.   Surely the breeder has the right to control what happens to their bloodlines going forward?  

If you haven't signed anything re your situation, then in all probability, the UK KC will lift the endorsement for you.

From 1234 - "The KC will lift it, if the Seller can't produce a contract signed by you both... "    Exactly.

Thank you.

I have merely bred my Brittany spaniel and found really good homes for the puppies.  It is not my profession but I am very responsible. 

Please try not to descend to make this personal.  I wanted advice.  I have had  some really positive advice which I will follow.

The point I make about an appeal system for
All is a good one.  You may not personally like it - but it would be fairer for all and promote the KC.  And safeguard the dogs.  From all breeds including working sheepdogs.

Yes of course  if  I am forced to and have no option.  Along with the myriads of others!  I am afraid you are wrong.  There has never been a problem.  It is highly common as people
Don’t want to pay the high costs.

> I am afraid you are wrong.

I'm afraid I'm finding it difficult to work out who you are replying to ..... who is wrong?  About what?

And I believe (and not everyone will agree) most bitches benefit from having pups

Really ?? So most bitches should be bred from regardless of their breed(or lack of) you want MORE dogs to be bred ?? Despite the number of PUPPIES in rescues let alone adults.

If you are from the"old school"then you would hold to the belief that only the very BEST should be bred from to improve the BREED not to allegedly benefit the bitch. Breeding from a bitch shortens their lifespan not increases it & medical evidence shows there are no proven benefits from a bitch having a litter.

I do hope the kennel owners learn of your diatribe on here & set the story straight. Another for my ignore list

I think there is every need to endorse every puppy born without "reason" as such.
Every pup should be endorsed and in my contracts I state that I will lift those endorsements if and when the time is right and all health testing, temperament testing and breed traits are correct. Then I will sit down with my puppy buyers and we will discuss the lifting of the breeding endorsement. Not only are the health requirements vitally important but also the reason to breed and the owners circumstances, have they the time and experience ? Have they got a good mentor or can I be available to help ? Breeding puppies is not a task to be undertaken lightly, lives are at risk, Mum and the pups. The future  stability of the breed and the gene pool too.
I also make sure in my contract (As much as possible) that I would be 100% involved in any re-homing and will keep in touch with owners be they original or new ones.
These dogs are the future of our breed and as a caring responsible breeder I will try my hardest to make sure that any pups I breed are given the best chance of a good life with people around who look out for thier needs..not the owners needs.
All my pups are endorsed and I have a separate  signature from new owners stating the have been given time to read and understand the constricts of the endorsements.
It's what Good breeders do. If you want a dog to breed without the support of the breeder then no one makes you purchase from me or others like me.
Maybe you can have this lifted but would it not be better to get to know the original breeder and to work with her, to build a relationship of trust and enlist her support.

But u do have another option and that is to purchase another brittany so u have the two dogs u want. 
As for breeding is good for a bitch calm is  a benefit to the human  not the dog . As dogs mature and with good training a dog will calm
If a dog us too excitable for.its situation  it's usually the wrong breed for.the circumstances or  needs to mature and further training. 
.i speak as a non breeder who has a breed that is quite excitable as a pup  and takes  a long time to mature, a flat coat retriever.
Yes it's taken time and a lot of training, she is not a working dog but a pet  but we have got there and not by her having a litter
As for endorsements whuch as marriane and others explained is not just about health but a myriad of other things I completely support them and feel it us a sign of a good breeder who cares about their lines and future of their dogs and breed. We will never stop people breeding unnecessarily but at least some will be protected.
r .

>I should be entitled to breed the dog and register the puppies with the KC if it passed the hip score test<

No, no you are not. Just because you have a bitch it doesn't mean you are entitled to breed, and it's that mind set which has ruined so many breeds and caused a surge in back yard breeders. Not every dog is good enough to be bred from. Simples. What activities are you doing with this girl to prove she is a good enough example of her breed to be bred from? Has she been consistently placed in championship shows, gained her studbook number? Or has she won awards in another discipline?

You haven't even had her hip scored yet, so I don't think it's unreasonable for the breeder not to be lifting the endorsement. She could lift it, then you could either not get the tests done or get a bad result and be able to breed from her anyway. She is protecting the bitch she bred. She will want to have an input with what stud is used because she knows her lines better than anyone else, and she knows which dogs will suit them rather than undo all her years of hard work.

To me, you have tunnel vision of "I want to breed" and making the breeder out to be this awful person standing in your way and not taking on board any of the reasons of why she won't lift the endorsement. If you're initial intentions were to breed, you should have either bought a bitch with no endorsements or got a written agreement that endorsements would be lifted if X, Y and Z conditions were met which would then be a standing legal document if the breeder then refused to lift the endorsement.

>I have merely bred my Brittany spaniel and found really good homes for the puppies.  It is not my profession but I am very responsible.

I'm not sure what this is in reply to, because you don't quote  the comment, but if it is to my comment that you are, like me, a breeder, then yes, you are a breeder. Having just one litter makes you a breeder, the same way as just having one child makes you a parent.

>So I will breed my dog if I am satisfied with her health tests  (I have Homes already before you ask) and her puppies won’t be registered with the KC. Unless the restriction is lifted by the breeder.

If you want to be seen as responsible then don't consider breeding unregistered puppies. They will be of no benefit to the breed at all.

I'm a bit confused. In your first post you say "We recently purchased an 11 month old Brittany spaniel puppy." and then shortly afterwards you say she's now over 2 years old. You also say you arranged the hip score test. What was the result?

> I'm a bit confused.

You are not alone there!!!  The more I read about all this, the more confused.com (and suspicious about the whole story)  I get.

Again, immature stock should always be fully endorsed to protect the breed, and the breeder's bloodlines.   Only once did I sell to another breeder, to my great regret, as previous written.    And by no means would I necessarily lift an endorsement, even if hips/elbows produced a low score.   This is, of course, important in breeds that have poor hips/elbows, but that still doesn't mean the animal is of 'outstanding quality' with lots to give back to her breed.   By a long way.   What about breed type!

I took it to mean the dog was 11 months at purchase( ignored recently) and is now 2 years old. The hip score I think is booked for next month . The breeder sells part trained Brittany's it looks to be for working given they explained what part trained meant and also breeds pups.    From what has been said I think the op wanted a dog as a pet to breed so she could have a mother and a puppy as she had before. That's just how I am reading it and could be wrong

Dear all,

I don’t mean to be discourteous as many of you have been very helpful and all of your views are important even if we can’t all agree with all of them.  That’s what a democracy is all about.

However I really am over and out now.  I am on holiday. I had just wanted a little help and guidance which I have now had.  Am sure we all love our dogs and are responsible dog owners in our own individual ways.  It’s not about point scoring or being personal....

Genuine thanks to all for your input and opinions.  All valuable even if many differ.  Including vets... and no they don’t always agree.  Helps each of us  to be able to make informed decisions - taking the good and bad and realising that probably none of us are ever 100 per Cent right and have lots to learn from the experience of others. 

So Thanks again for your input and I wish you all well....

Enjoy your beloved dogs and stay happy but please don’t  get stressed by the fact your opinions may not be agreed - it’s just not worth it!

Here are the rules regarding endorsements: https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/media/8269/endorsements.pdf
"In order to comply with the Kennel Club rules on placing endorsements, the KC requires that the dog be in the physical possession of the endorser and that they obtain a written agreement, ideally in the form of a private contract, signed by the new owner to acknowledge that they have been informed that an endorsement has been placed. If endorsements are being used, it is helpful to both parties if the contract mentions why these have been placed and under what conditions they would be removed (if at all). This contract must be signed and dated by the purchaser showing that they have been informed of the endorsement prior to or at the date of sale. Even if the breeder chooses not to draw up a full contract, there must still be a document stating which endorsements have been placed, signed by the purchaser."

Are you the first owner after the breeder?  This is important as if the person you bought pup from was not the person placing the endorsement then you can do nothing about it being lifted.  the contract would have been with the breeder and the first owner and the endorsement being placed needed to be acknowledged and signed by both parties in writing.
"4. Regulation B12b 1), 2) and 3) only apply where the registered owner who originally placed an endorsement
on a dogs record, transfers the dog to a new ownership. If subsequent transfers take place, the endorsement
becomes a matter between the parties involved. In such cases the registered owner placing the endorsement
shall not be responsible if notification of the endorsement is not given to any new owner, and may exercise his right to decide whether the endorsement be maintained or removed subject to (5) below.

This is the form to apply to have them lifted should the breeder (person who bred the pup and assuming placed the endorsement, you can check with the KC to see who placed it). https://www.thekennelclub.org.uk/forms/lifting-an-endorsement/

> NOTE:  The dog had not been spayed.  If the breeder had not wanted the dog to be bred and only ever<br />To be a pet,  that would be the only certain way to do it.  Why didn’t she?

because she was still immature at 1 months.  Prepubertal neutering carries many negatives and most breeders would advise waiting until full skeletal maturity before neutering either sex, so about 18 - 24 months in a medium size breed.

Also in Spaniel breeds neutering can have a  very negative effect on the coat, making it difficult for the owner and unpleasant for the dog to be groomed effectively.

There is also increasing evidence that leaving bitches intact for longer increases longevity.

I endorse every puppy I breed including the ones I keep myself.

I was more than happy to remove the endorsements once all health testing had been done, but new tests become available all the time, so to have them specified (I state all breed appropriate health testing at given
time) in the puppy contract would not be a good idea.

Sadly I also had a situation where despite health testing I refused to remove the endorsements.

The owner had mental health issues, had decided to sell her home and live in a touring caravan, and wanted to breed from her well bred bitch, who had been shown.  I even offered to have a litter for her, but no she wanted to breed a litter in totally unsuitable circumstances stating she knew all about breeding as she had bred cats in the past.

She approached various stud owners who all refused to let them use their dogs, and the bitch was also now over 5 years (past the age advised by our breed club for a first litter.

To my horror on the next season she deliberately mated her to a Border collie on the site.  Next our breed community hear that she is touting the crossbred pups to all in the area, and can't sell them. At 12 weeks of age.  they had been reared in the toilet compartment of the caravan!!!  She finally agreed to let friends in the breed pick them up, and we managed to find them homes.  Their temperaments were totally untypical of my breed, and would not have suited anyone but someone used to the sires breed.

So how would lifting the endorsements have protected this bitch and her pedigree pups potentially from further exploitation, or have them ending up in rescue.

Endorsments do not protect the dogs though do they, at all.  Thousands of un registered dogs are for sale on petsforhomes from KC registered dogs who's parents have endorsments.  They don't stop people breeding.  They just prevent people wasting money on health tests and registration costs.
I have a relative rare gundog breed and there has already been this year a litter of un-registered un-tested puppies for sale.
How did this happen?  The parents have endorsments, the owners bought a dog and a bitch....away you go.  The puppies sold at much less than other litters listed.  Because frankly pet owners don't care.
I am not a breeder, everything that comes in my house is neutered wether it is dog, cat or rabbit.

You are correct in reality not being able to KC register the pups may only put people off breeding casually, an in numerically small breeds they may find it hard to find a stud dog owner..

Someone determined to do so will, and there are of course the mickey mouse registries, set up for such breeders to add a veneer of respectability and dupe people into thinking registered with whoever is the same as KC registered.

Sadly in my numerically small breed all those using the KC fully health test their stock, but there are more bred by commercial and pet breeders and these are primarily the dogs who steadily come through our breed rescue (funded by true breed lovers and breeders).

So as a breeder I can only hope the endorsements give the person pause.  Why should they breed unless they are going to adhere to the standards I have set as a breeder for my own breeding.

Oh as for money, in my breed the commercially bred puppies are being sold and sometimes resold for more than reputable breeders who have piled money into health screening, care and investment in their bloodlines.

Please don’t dump all pet owners under a 'don’t care’ umbrella 20162018.
I’ve only ever been a pet dog owner, but I want the very best for any dog that comes into my home and that means carefully looking for breeders who health and temperament test their breeding dogs.