I am so surprised that some people think they should put their dogs out to stud when they havent even thought about the tests they need to have before breeding!this is an example of what some people say"i have a friend and she wants to breed from her bitch so she is looking for a stud dog but not kc"! it's so irresponsible.Responsible people who care for their dogs never would dream of breeding from a dog which did'nt have any tests and they would'nt even think of breeding from a dog which hasn't been kc registered!im not trying to sound nasty i just think people shoul'd care for their dogs instead of putting out not tested,not kc registered stud dogs it's just so irresponsible!!!!!

I agree. It should be a crime. There is so much information online that explains what a responsible and reputable breeder does and goes through to IMPROVE their breed. That is the only reason a dog should be bred. Perhaps you could find some articles about reputable breeders which will explain the genetic testing and the pedigree study that goes into it and finding an appropriate mate,  along with so much more. Then you could give it to this person. Also something about all the dogs in shelters living horrible lives waiting for death. I put a poem which will bring tears to anyone's eyes. I forget which thread it's on. But it shows what happens to so many pups. Does this friend know for certain their pups will all have good homes? That's a scary thing itself.

I know....it's maddening isn't it. It's a matter of educating people. So many just flat out don't know any better. I hope you can make a difference in this one instance. Let us know.

Carrie

Yes I agree with most of your post. Dogs shouldn't be breed for money or just because people want to see how cute the puppies are. They should be health checked and only bred from if they are completely healthy. BUT surely a dog can be up to the ''breed standard'' WITHOUT having to be KC registered? I know its a trusted name but it seems to me as if people think ''IF ITS NOT KC DONT GET IT OR BREED FROM IT'' Im sure there are people with healthy dogs that aren't KC registered.      

hi sara, you are right, your dog does'nt have to be kc to be a good breed standard,i have 2 sibes one of which is kc the other not ,although he is pedigree and comes from good stock,but sadly his club in germany is not accepted over here by kc,yet even without his kc i have been approached by a breeder who wanted to use him as she knew his parents,and i refused but at the end of the day that was my choose.,and because i have a bitch of my own that if one day i deceided breed i would have both parents,etc etc but as i can't kc i can't test therefore can't use.

Untill people stop buying these non health tested dogs they will continue to breed from them.. I love to be nosey when i see a litter advertised so ring a few up lol only to be told well the ancesters are hip scored so there was no need to have the parents done... What a good excuse, but people still buy these pups..And why because they are cheap, but why should good breeders drop there prices when they put lots of work into producing a quality litter......

Thing is guest the people who think this way probably don't know that dogs can be health tested, think that it does not mater that the dog is not registered, that they have no idea if there is any problem the dogs ancestry. They do not know that their dog/bitch could be injured during the mating, that they could be bitten, that the bitch/dog could pick up a serious infection. That the bitch may die giving birth, the cost of vet fees involved, the cost of food for the bitch, that they are legally responsible for any pups they product. But they do know that dogs can make puppies, that puppies make money and they have a dog.

I think it's of vital importance that not only are the breeding pair KC or AKC (whatever) registered, but also with champion and other working titles. It is proven then that they have the temperament to do the work they were bred to do, have the comformation correct to their breed. Just anyone's opinion of the dog isn't good enough. Breeding dogs should be the top of the line, the best in comformation, temperament, health and anscestoral history, longevity etc. And it should be proven. Not being resistered doesn't prove that they're purebreds even. Many health issues are recorded, such as hips/elbows in the U.S.A. in an organization called OFA. You can look up a prospective litter's parents and see that they have good or excellent hips for instance. They've been x-rayed and recorded with OFA. There is a similar thing for some other genetic diseases, Von Willebrands, eyes and more.

There are just far far too many unwanted dogs in shelters, being murdered, and purebred dogs that don't quite measure up. If the breeders aren't conscientious, they aren't careful who they give their dogs to. They can go to bad, abusive homes. They don't have a contract to neuter or spay their non-show dogs. (this is important) Perpetuating their numbers doesn't do the breed any good. Individual breeds will begin to go downhill in quality if bred without these high standards that reputable breeders use. There will be more buyers that don't know any better who will settle for these substandard and inexpensive dogs, will turn around and breed their dogs and look at the math.....an explosion. This is in fact what has been happening. People don't neuter their dogs and they go down the road and breed Miss Molly, also unspayed. On and on it goes.

This is why I'm so adamant about this.

Carrie

Hi Carrie
in the UK we breed regularly from dogs that are not champions.I believe it is harder to make up a champion over here than in the USA?? If we were to only breed from champions then we would have a very limited gene pool!!
I know that most USA pedigrees are all 'RED TYPE'...we had a post on this a long time ago and over here the average number of champions in a 'good' 5 generation pedigree was 20-25 (someone correct me if you can find the post please)
At crufts this year in our breed (Elkhounds) out of the 4 main winning dogs(DCC,RDCC,BCC,RBCC) only one had a champion sire or dam...and thats not unusual.
Archer

Hi Carrie

As Archer has said it is much harder to make up a champion here in the UK than it is in the US - the same goes with the obedience titles.

In the US once you are a Champion you only compete against other Champions.  In the UK there is no separation, all the class winners regardless of status compete against each other.

In Obedience you can gain CD, CDX,  UD, TD  etc by not losing too many points. Many of your Champions seem to go straight out and get an obedience title - this could not happen here.

In obedience we only have Ob. Champions and you have to work your way up though many classes to get there and only one dog per show, at Ch shows can get the title.  We have classes like Pre-Beginner, Beginner, Novice, A, B, C and Ch C.

In Working Trials we have CD, CDex, UD, UDex etc and these are very different competitions from yours as they consist of obedience, agility and tracking elements, and you have to get (or not lose) a certain number of points to get the qualification.

It is strange how different our countries are - I was going though the AKC Awards Books recently and there seem to be over 65 different titles that American dogs can get and this does not include all the agility and breed specific permutations - I believe we have about 18

In the UK it is a problem if a 'popular sire' is over used, in the course of one generation you could change the breed type that has taken years to establish and 'heaven help us' if a health problem should develop after a dog has sired a few dozed puppies it could mean the end of a healthy breed. What is needed are breeders of knowledge

Have to agree with you Jackie.I think it is always wise to use a male 'cautiously' untill you can see what he is producing.Some dogs may throw a certain good thrait or bad fault even if they don't have it himself and so by observing his offspring as adults you can see wether or not he will compliment a certain bitch.
Archer

Wow, that's very interesting. I am not well versed in the show circuit at all. I see your point. I thought, from what I had heard over here that it was fairly difficult to achieve championship titles. But I see that may still be less difficult than over your way. Yes, the gene pool is already quite small.

My dog Lyric is from a sire who has not gone through his paces and doesn't have championship. But his damn does and the sire's sire is a very well known Doberman, has been #1 Dobe in the country many times over. His name is Repo Man. You can find him online. He's lovely. He was shown on TV one night and I was so suprised. They did a little pre show program about him and his career. He was hopping out of a jet and sleeping on a hotel bed with his handler. Anyhow, he has sired many champions.

So, although my dog is neutered and I want him just as a pet, he was sold to me on an unlimited registration, which means the breeder thought I could breed him if I wanted, but she wanted to help me choose a bitch and help with promoting him. I wasn't interested in all that. I really just want a good, well trained pet. Limited registration means you have to neuter or spay the dog. Most breeders insist on this when you're buying a pet, not show.

This breeder of Lyric's sire just won breeder of the year award for Dobermans as well as for the working group. She's been at it for 45 yrs. or so.

Bottom line is, is that it's important to be careful not to go to a back yard breeder for any dog. If they get business, they keep on breeding indiscriminately without caring enough to go through the responsible care it takes to improve the breed.

Carrie

The logical conclusion of this, then, is that any dog who is not going to be used for breeding should be castrated? What do you think? I know you're talking about deliberate matings, not "accidents" - but unless we owners of entire dogs can be certain sure that owners of bitches don't take them into parks etc whilst in season....then accidents could and do happen. Presumably this is why the Dogs Trust is pushing neutering so enthusiastically.
Cathy.

Not at all!! My 3 boys will only be castrated if needed for medical reasons. They will not be bred from but why should I have them castrated??
Archer

cal.net . . .

http://www.ida.net/org/bhs/spay.html

No matter how careful you are, there is still a chance of accidental pregnancies. If you're not an experienced, knowledgeable breeder and you're not going to breed, why keep a dog intact? They make better, less dominant pets when they're neutered among other reasons. Please check out those websites.

Carrie

ooooh - can of worms you are opening there :) I wouldn't dream of having Willis castrated - he's not dominant and he's a happy well adjusted dog. I don't believe in forcing responsible folk to neuter - just for the sake of it :)

It depends if the owner is responsible enough to care for their animals properly. If they're not, then spaying and castration is sensible. If they are, then there's no need unless it is for medical reasons. Neutering is more likely to be damaging to a dog than a bitch, and IMO should not be recommended routinely.
:)

Same here, would not dream of castrating without a medical need, see no point in buying and rearing a male because I like the look and temperament and then removing the hormone producing organs that produce that very thing that attracted me to keeping males and not bitches in the first place. Add to that the fact that the only male I have castrated was sick all his life because of my actions.

Well I've never had a dog castrated unless it was for a medical reason & never had an unwanted pregnancy either dispite having 7 dogs & four bitches at one time. My GSD is spayed(conditions of her rescue rehoming), Never lost one from prostate/testicular cancer either. Mine you thats only in 46 years of personally owning dogs so I suppose it could still happen

Hi Carrie,

His breeder sent me some photos of RP as a puppy along with his sire's photos.  Thought his sire was a bit overdone for my liking but RP is lovely (from his pics.)
~~~~~~~~~

Hi Jackie

I know what you are getting at and it is not just in this country.  All but two of the Dobermann imports over the last ten years or so have one particular dog in their ancestry that is known (like many other dogs) to throw a particular problem.  Whilst this problem is not major (and I am not saying what it is) it could have been and it is getting difficult to find a Dobe without him in their pedigree in Europe these days.

I do feel there should be a limit on the number of times a male should be allowed to be used at stud during his lifetime.  It is not just his progeny that may have a problem but if it is recessive it could come to light when two descendants are mated together.

Agree, it is sometimes the imported dogs that have the most potential for causing a problem, just because they are 'new blood' they may be used without due care as to what they are caring. Dogs that have generations born in this country and they and their ancestors are known by people and breeders with in the breed, there is not a lot of surprises to surface, but imported dogs are to some extent an unknown quantity and tracing progeny for generations is not so easy. This does not apply to all imports, of course, and some imported animals have a lot to offer their breed, but I would still be worried about over use.

Amen to that :-)  I wholeheartedly agree with you, Jackie.