What would you term as an experienced breeder?  I was having this discussion with a couple of people recently because I think some people equate experience to the amount of litters bred whereas I would say an experienced breeder is someone who is producing consistent typical, winning stock regardless of how many puppies are bred.    Is someone who's bred over 120 puppies and only made up 2 titleholders anymore experienced a breeder than someone who's bred, say 30 puppies and had 2 titleholders?      

And then another twist, why is a someone who breeds supposed to be more experienced and knowledgable about a breed than say someone who's maybe owned said breed for over 25 years, shown their dogs but just owned males and never bred a litter?  I think I would trust the opinion of someone who's been 20+ years with the same breed than a novice who's bought a bitch and then 2-3 years into ownership is breeding their first litter.  Yet recently I heard criticism that 'a person' wasn't experienced in the breed because they'd never bred a litter, yet this 'person' has had a dog used at stud and owned the breed since the 1980's - personally I wouldn't call that inexperienced.  What do others think?

I see that as two separate issues. A person must have bred at least one litter to be a 'breeder' in the first place. If they've only had stud dogs then they're not a breeder IMO. But a person could have biches of five different breeds and had a litter from each, and though would have a level of breeding experience in general couldn't honestly be said to be very experienced in each breed.

To be knowledgeable about a breed is another question entirely. People can gather enormous theoretical knowledge about things that it's impossible to have experience of - historians, for example. But with a breed, I'd certainly consider the more years of ownership the better, at least to know the foibles of the breed.

I really dont know what would be experience... different issues, varied experiences... I have bred 8 litters in 32 years (same breed) (18 years between 4th & 5th litters)... and have experienced some wonderful events, and some disasters..  so I wouldnt class myself as experienced... only someone WITH experience in certain fields (does that really makes any sense )  also own 3 adult males, which I have never used at stud, nor studded any previous boys over the years...so, although have experience at matings.. have no experience whatsoever at stud handling... I have, I think, a good knowledge of my breed, but there are many aspects where I have limited experience...

I have bred crufts qualifiers, and in my late hubby's era, a couple of FT winners... but not yet bred a CC winner... nor an FT CH

But where I can say I have experience is in ownership, living with difficult spawn of satan, to the girl who empitomises the perfect temperament... have lived with 21 Labs in those 32 years.. and live with 9 at the moment.. now thats experience ;)

I know people who have been in my breed for many years and yet in my opinion know little of somethings I think it is extremely important to know in the breed such as colour genes etc.
I have been in my breed for 10 years and do not class myself as experienced, I have owned a stud dog and bred litters, I know pedigrees and colour genes better than I know names of people but that is because these things in my breed fascinate me (some breeders would think that sad)!!! I have hand reared a litter and lost a litter and nearly the mother at full term pregnancy where the mother had been ill and the pups had rotted inside of her. The breeder stood next to me in the vets for support has many many years experience in the breed and said.......I have never seen anything like this and I hope I never see it again!!!..
I have experience of a rescue dog (my first dog) who had been beaten  and was aggressive who I lived with for 11 yrs and he was great, yes he had problems and we learnt as we went along.

So although I have experienced many things in my 10 years I definately do not count myself as experienced.
Interestingly in my breed there are those breeders who you think are experienced and have bred champions etc BUT there are many more who have that same experience but no champions or stud book numbers. They are all experienced but in a breed with high numbers in the ring and born every year it is very difficult to get a champion etc. and then you have the people who are experienced in the breed who are willing to help and share the experience they had gained over the years they are the best of all.

What would you term as an experienced breeder?  I was having this discussion with a couple of people recently because I think some people equate experience to the amount of litters bred whereas 

Well firstly I would say being politically correct and experienced breeder has nothing to do with the show ring although that would be ideal. If you are talking show results I would term that as a "successful breeder". Experience is just that.I don't also think that quick success from one or two litters makes a successful breeder long term.  Maybe others will

I would say an experienced breeder is someone who is producing consistent typical, winning stock regardless of how many puppies are bred.

Wins value also varies depending on the breed you are in , the popularity and the entries.  The other thing is for example number of puppies in litters.  I get between 1-4 pups on average of what I have had 3 is the average. ,  in 1 to 2 litters of your breed you would have what I got in 10.!!!!!!!! so weighing up how succesful your stock is depends on the puppy numbers to IMHO.  

And then another twist, why is a someone who breeds supposed to be more experienced and knowledgable about a breed than say someone who's maybe owned said breed for over 25 years, shown their dogs but just owned males and never bred a litter?  I think I would trust the opinion of someone who's been 20+ years with the same breed than a novice who's bought a bitch and then 2-3 years into ownership is breeding their first litter.  Yet recently I heard criticism that 'a person' wasn't experienced in the breed because they'd never bred a litter, yet this 'person' has had a dog used at stud and owned the breed since the 1980's - personally I wouldn't call that inexperienced.  What do others think?

This is a strange one and I suspect more personal conflict that anything of real weight to be honest.

I think it depends on what information or experience you are relying on and what you are needing an opinion on.  Neither would be the first I would pick up a phone to I think just based on the comments only for most things I would need to ask questions on.  The first person would not know much about bitches problems and the other not very much about the long term changes of the breeds

I think someone who has say had a few litters and has had a few successful pups can or won't know just how successful as a breeder they are, for me a successful breeder is someone who produces consistantly good stock over a reasonable length of time out of a number of litters.

Using myself as my own example  :-D I think my top puppy I have bred was in my 2nd litter, even after repeating the same mating,  now my problem has been the numbers of male puppies I get to bitches so I don't keep the picks as I can't keep more than one dog.

There are so very many variables in good and expereinced breeding and breeders. ..

Is someone who's bred over 120 puppies and only made up 2 titleholders anymore experienced a breeder than someone who's bred, say 30 puppies and had 2 titleholders?   

   YES they are more experienced maybe not more successful but more experienced as success doesn't automatically give experience. Would someone who had their 1st litter and got 2 champions in the litter be invited to give CCs over the person who has had 5 litters  2 champions , a  few best puppies , a couple of stud book here or there but no more champions. It depends on the circumstances I guess

And then another twist, why is a someone who breeds supposed to be more experienced and knowledgable about a breed than

Forgot to ask or add who said this is the case ? ( I don't mean tell me) I mean that is a matter of opinion and you will find it will vary from person to person. I can't see this being a shared opinion in fact I can see most people even getting or trying to make a comparison as they are two extremes  and too subjective. :-)

I think there are two distinct terms here - experienced and/or knowledgable.  Of course, one cannot be an experienced breeder (in the literal sense of the word) without having first experienced breeding a litter.  But an experienced knowledgable breeder - now that's what I would look for.

Debs

I would imagine everyone would have their own opinion on this and  groups of people would differ. I have had pedigree dogs all my life, my own dogs for 40 ..cough, cough years and bred puppies for nearly 30. I'm on my 8th generation now, whelped many litters for myself and others and am generally the one people call , in my area, if they are having problems. I've had winners, bred winners and handled many winners for others in a variety of breeds but don't think showing is now the 'be all and end all'. The largest percentage of my puppies go as pets and athough always very well bred, their temperaments are paramount. I stay friends with many of my puppy owners and infact started a training class many years ago initially to ensure that the pups would have the best start and that the super temperament would be well channeled.
I have owners on their 3 (in succesion) dog from me.
BUT I'm not an avid show gower ( in fact have only attended a small handful of champ shows, in classes of over 25, in the last few years to qualify my 2 latest girls in the off chance I attend Crufts ). If I asked on this forum whether I should mate one of my bitches I'm sure I would have a great many who would tell me all the ways I'm going wrong; especially if the said bitch hasn't been shown.
Am I an experienced dog breeder?..... depends on  who's asking.

Am I an experienced dog breeder?..... depends on  who's asking

Of course you are.

Experienced does'nt mean success.  Not that I am saying you havent had any.:-)  To qualify for Crufts in classes of 25 is excellent. To be placed at all in these classes are excellent.  I doubt you would find anyone who would say it wasn't a decent win. 

A young bitch I bred and although liked her I didn't think she was top drawer or quite what I was looking for 100% so put her away.  I showed her this year 3 times, 2nd out of 17( PG class) , 3rd out of 17 ( Limit class)  & 2nd out of 12 ( PG class) , She still isn't 100% what I was looking for so have put her away again BUT I was delighted with this :-) 

Too True Blue!!   You should be delighted... I would be delighted in such strong classes.

I do get a little ratty though when I hear of exhibitors claiming great wins in other breeds where the class size is so small that they cant fail to qualify; in fact often just sharing out the green cards between the handful there. I cant make up my mind if I'd be more or less  keen to travel hundreds of miles to show my dogs if this were my experience.

Hi everyone, I have longed trawled the boards without joining!! The posts have sometimes proved completey invaluable to me with advice readily consumed!! This post however made me join up!
I believe you are a breeder once you have bred a litter. A fairly knowledgeable breeder when you have had a good few litters, have a handle on genetics, health problems and tests etc for your breed, plus some of the problems we all know can be experienced with whelping.
Choosing to mate your bitch is a bit like reading about having children.....or actually learning how to cope with tantrums at a checkout, child illness (my son died of cancer), teenage angst (currently in our house)....anyway, you get my drift.
Experienced breeders are those who come under all the above, plus hand-reared, held pups in their hands crying while the puppy dies after early morning vet visits. Its knowing how to be in tune with your dam to gain trust while you mess around with nature.  Its going through many, many times of complete joy and pain.....yet doing it anyway.
This has nothing to do with showing.  Although we do show, anyone knows 80% of your litter are going to pet homes.  Experienced breeders never take the money and run. They assist their buyers with the joys and tell them about the way the dog will need training etc etc. They understand the paramount need for socialising puppies so all their puppies go home as confident babies, if that means an 18 hour day, so be it!
Some people hate the back biting and sometimes ego based decisions of breeding for show. Yet they breed quality pups with all the above in mind. Some buy in dogs from others and make champs from them with not a whelping box in sight.  Sorry to ramble and I know many may disagree, but I believe experienced breeders have the icing on the cake if they also successfully show and win. The analogy would be .......Does it make me an experienced MUM if I have my baby, then put her week after week into beauty contests! Thats not what makes me an experienced mum, it would just be a pleasure if she won.
I won't consider my self experienced unless there is nothing left to surprise me as a breeder (losing dam, all the litter, deformed pups etc). But I am on my way to being knowledgeable. Non of my dogs have had temp problems, owners have all info and support day or night. My duty as a breeder is to see non of them come back or end up in rescue, if they do I haven't done my job properly (Crazy circumstances taken into account of course!).  So it all depends on your viewpoint , passion and priority really.
By the way, hope I haven't offended anyone with my very first post  Nice to meet you all.   Oh, my bitch is about to give birth (maybe today). Her dad won best dog at Crufts this year, we are keeping one or two back, all others are reserved, but if they don't make the grade? so what, they will still be fantastic, well loved and it all adds to my experience!!!   Best wishes to you all 

Welcome to Champdogs Willow.

but I believe experienced breeders have the icing on the cake if they also successfully show and win.

Agree 100% 

I would just like to say we are sometimes mixing up the concepts of experienced and good breeders.  A person becomes a breeder the moment a bitch they own has a litter, same as you become a parent when your first child is born.  None of these make you good or experienced.

In human reproduction we do not practise active selection, so just having children could be compared to all the ways pups are bred , bu accident, haphazardly, well and for profit with no care whatever.

In human terms a neglectful parent will have their children taken away, nd very occasionally this happens to dog owners, not often enough to those who exploit dogs.

Sadly many people approach dog breeding in the same way they would approach having children, I can so I will.

With breeding livestock the knowledge of genetics, breeding lines, health and vigour are paramount.  It is rare that humans check out each others health background and decide not to have children.  I have an eye condition, it is congenital and probably not hereditary.  If I were a bitch I would have probably chosen not to breed from me just in case as the reason for the problem wasn't really known, fortunately I have two fully sighted healthy children.

Other people have Heart disease and other genetically influenced health issues in their family, and still choose to take the risk of having children, some very few people screen their unborn babies for problems and choose termination, but most people just cross their fingers and hope for luck, this would make them an irresponsible breeder of any livestock.

Many people fail to understand this, not purely from greed but probably because they to equate breeding from their dogs as being similar to having children, and their attitudes to both are likely to be similar.  I expect in the past dog breeders were also livestock breeders and used similar unemotional criteria in selection of breeding animals.  The so called puppy farmers of today are rarely actually from livestock farming background.

So to me I woudl always seek Knowledgeable over expereinced, but both together is best.  Expereinced is simply doing something over and over.

So to me I woudl always seek Knowledgeable over expereinced, but both together is best.  Expereinced is simply doing something over and over.

Totally agree with you also Barbara.

I think what a conscientious responsible novice breeder should do is ensrue they have the experience they need on tap from others to supplement what they do not have.

Even after many years of experience situations will arise that you have no experience of, but hopefully you will know someone who has. 

This one reason why breed clubs are formed so that breeders and those interested in their breed can share knowledge experience and information.

Welcome to the board, if your post has broken TOS then admin no doublt will edit when they see it.  Hope you have fun joining in.

Willow13
ego based decisions of breeding for show.
How wonderfully refreshing to read all your wise comments ( but especially the above) and I couldn't agree more.
I think some people are living in cloud cuckoo land if they believe that the majority of people who chase all over the country to get the precious square of cardboard are making all their breeding decisions  for the good of the breed.
They want to win. Its their hobby.
I've been there and done that ....using the latest BIG winner ( who was a fluke!), sought out the opinion of loads of judges ( some knew far less than I) and hoped that one would have the wisdom and integrity to see that my dog was the best ( when he patently wasn't.... I learned later.)
These days I now let the other commited souls do all that for me and then I use their dogs....... the last boxer stud I used was good enough for the breed record holder so that'll do me.

>I've been there and done that ....using the latest BIG winner ( who was a fluke!),

if a "fluke" why would you use it - surely not on reputation only ......

>the last boxer stud I used was good enough for the breed record holder so that'll do me.

but was it "good enough" for your bitch?  i.e. compatible for phenotype and genotype?

IME most genuinely successful breeders (as opposed to simply "experienced" ones) are those who breed only from the best quality brood bitches to the most compatible stud dogs for each bitch and have a very clear vision of what they should achieve from well thought out and carefully planned matings.   Simply using the top winner in the ring or the dog with the most red in it's pedigree as the criteria for a mating goes for nowt ;)

regards, Teri 

IME most genuinely successful breeders (as opposed to simply "experienced" ones) are those who breed only from the best quality brood bitches to the most compatible stud dogs for each bitch and have a very clear vision of what they should achieve from well thought out and carefully planned matings.   Simply using the top winner in the ring or the dog with the most red in it's pedigree as the criteria for a mating goes for nowt

regards, Teri 

Hit the nail on the head Teri.  There is a clear difference between Successful and experienced breeders.

using the latest BIG winner

Hi Teri,
I presume you did realise that I was talking about many years ago, over 20 in fact,when winning was rather important to me and I thought I knew it all.  What was your breeding program like 20 years ago?
And as to using the Breed record holders 'husband' fairly recently (4 years ago..... when the BRH was still just a little pup ) .....  yes in my humble opinion it was a very good match, phenotypically and genotypically (as far as we can tell at the current stage of scientific knowledge.)
Were you born knowledgeable Teri or, like me, did you have to get there the hard way?

using the latest BIG winner

Hi Teri,
I presume you did realise that I was talking about many years ago, over 20 in fact,when winning was rather important to me and I thought I knew it all.  What was your breeding program like 20 years ago?
And as to using the Breed record holders 'husband' fairly recently (4 years ago..... when the BRH was still just a little pup ) .....  yes in my humble opinion it was a very good match, phenotypically and genotypically (as far as we can tell at the current stage of scientific knowledge.)
Were you born knowledgeable Teri or, like me, did you have to get there the hard way?

Hi tooolz

>I presume you did realise that I was talking about many years ago, over 20 in fact,

No - I have no prior knowledge of your history, experience or breeding methods - you could have been referencing any point in time from a few weeks to decades :)

>yes in my humble opinion it was a very good match, phenotypically and genotypically (as far as we can tell at the current stage of scientific knowledge.)

Good - however when referring to pheno and geno types I was not using them in scientific terminology, purely on pheno being what can be seen by the naked eye and genotype being the stock behind their pedigrees, including health status, hereditary and familial, and basic genetic traits of the lines being used.  Worthy stockmen (of any species) some without so much as basic schooling never mind in possession of scientific data have used this criteria over more decades than I've been around to evaluate which animals should be bred on from and into which lines etc :)

>Were you born knowledgeable Teri

Is anyone?  FWIW I don't consider myself to be particularly knowledgeable - pretty average in the main but I have more than a passing interest in a few areas and am keen to learn :)   I do believe I have a good eye for dogs in general but am the first to admit I have enjoyed the benefit of good counsel with a selection of very successful dyed in the wool dog folks whose brains I've picked regularly over many years  ....... come to think of it I'm probably more of a sponge than an intellect :D

Hi Teri,

No - I have no prior knowledge of your history, experience or breeding methods - you could have been referencing any point in time from a few weeks to decades

Sorry it was all further up in this thread and I  assumed that you had read it.
Regards,

Tooolz

The largest percentage of my puppies go as pets

i would just like to ask everyone who reads this topic out of every litter you have bred how many of the pups sold to people who wanted to show?

More went to people intending to show, but fewer ended up showing.

Of the 74 pups I have bred and reared 29 have been shown at least once.

Of these 14 are still youngsters, but of the others I have bred 3 UK champions and a boy on 2CC's and a RCC, several other RCC winners, and Stud book number holders.  Also 3 overseas champions, with one waiting for the year and a day needed between qualifying awards in her country.

I have bred four litters in almost 30 years of showing.  One litter of three - all three were shown and they all won at  least a Res CC and one is the breed record holder.  Next litter, 5 puppies - three shown - all won the equivilent of a CC (this was a non CC breed).  Next litter, three puppies - one shown, did OK at open shows.  Last litter 1 puppy, not shown.  I am still in contact with all bar one of the owners even though the youngest puppy is now 10 years old! :)

Debs

Between 10% and 25% of each litter have qualified for Crufts.

i only asked this because my last litter of border terrier pups had at least 40 champions in the pedigree (would be loads more if i went back loads of generations) so obviously these are well bred pups with nice quality parents with good showing potential and not even one went to a show home nor was anyone interested in how they were bred. i kept a pup and she looks great

I think you will find that you are more likely to get enquiries for pups to show from people that have admired the parents so those whose dogs are winning are more likely to be approached for a pup out of their stud or bitch, or approach the owners/breeders of those winning dogs.

so people that show at proper shows will only buy a pup from people that show at those shows and and not just anyone that has well bred dogs?

How do people know about 'well-bred' dogs if they haven't seen the parents, or know of the parents' bloodlines?

easily what about local papers or papers you can get all over the country? i and i expect plenty of other people would be willing to email pics of both parents and copies of the pedigrees. also i have pics of my older bitches parents and copies of their pedigrees, my older bitches sire is moonlight dream of foxfinn featured in the country mans weekly regularly, and my younger bitches grandsire is ch quatford quatro (i think) granddam is majeika lady in red (border terriers) so i would say that these are well bred and i expect plenty of other people would if they bothered to enquire

Yes but someone wanting to show successfully will want to buy from someone who breeds successful show dogs, same as someone wanting a top flight trials dog will want to go to someone that breeds such.  someone who just wants a companion but is happy to have a go at either showing or working, but isn't bothered about how they will do will happily show or work what they have, but after they have been doing so for a while they will e in a position to evaluate their dog/s and may find they are not the quality they want.  If the breeding is good they may breed something better from their well bred bitch by using a compatible dog and hopefully get better.

If what they have is too poor in quality it might take several generations to make appreciable progress and they are better off loving the ones they have, but buying in something of higher quality.

A novice breeder will have to prove the worth of what they breed themselves by showing or working successful home bred stock, when others see that they are producing the goods then they will eventually get enquiries for show or working stock, but no-one serious about a show or working dog is going to go to the Novice unless they know the foundation is what they would want, but they would probably go to the breeder of the foundation stock as they will know better how to choose them a pup knowing how the lines develop.

From experience for example I know I kept the wrong pup in my first litter.  I may have bred better had I kept a different bitch.  Breeding is often one step forward and then a step back.  For example I wanted more bone and a stronger head, I got those but I didn't get a shorter back than the slightly long one I already had, and to boot I got a narrow front on the pup I kept, and in hindsight should have kept the sister with a wider front that was just right in adulthood, but I didn't know how the pups would develop. 

I solved that problem in the next generation, and got super neat ears, but lost some of the substance, so next time I finally got what I wanted, took me 3 generations, where it may have taken just one or two to get there with more knowledge.  Then of course nature being what it is you sometimes get something you wouldn't expect when looking at the parents and their pedigrees.

easily what about local papers or papers you can get all over the country?

IMO...These are usually the last place (or rather, the wrong don't go there place) anyone should look for a puppy. If someone needs to put their pups in the local rag they havn't got the support of their breed club and in most cases no health checks, just using the local dog, just breeding pets and in most peoples eyes are just breeding for money. Using the bitches womb as a bank account. (A comment I read elsewhere but which I feel sums up a lot of puppy producers litters) I would only consider a puppy seen in the paper if both parents did the job they were bred for, or were show winning dogs from experienced homes. Maybe this is not for 100% of pups advertised, but certainly a big majority. You only have to look at the adverts, especially in the 'free papers'. I find it amusing :rolleyes: that those that don't do anything with their dogs and 'pooh pooh' show people, are the very same people that boast of how many champions are in the pedigree, or the 'crufts qualified' grandparents, or the 'famous' affix back in the generations, as if that is the be all and end all of the 'excellent' pedigree they are showing. If you can't 'read' your pedigree, know the dogs there and how they actually match with each other in the pedigree how can you know the 5 gen pedigree is a good one?  And people fall for it, then go on to breed from these dogs.

With such a huge dog population, with many poorly bred and raised dogs in rescue, I would ask....why breed? My answer would be simply for show or work or some dicipline, to keep the breeds we have and continue some excellent lines with people who know what they are doing, or mentored by those that do, with true regard to producing healthy happy even tempered dogs. Many may well go to pet homes, but at least those that do should be well bred and carry everything needed for a long and healthy life (hopefully). There would be enough from these sources to fulfill the pet homes. If the only purpose is to breed for pets, then I see no reason for adding to the dog population.

But, this is just my opinion and I would love to see what opinions others have on here, and what you think justifies breeding a litter? :)

the problem is the paper is the first place most people will look, and by god breeders not choosing not to or needing to advertise in them means the bad breeders have this venue all to themselves and have nothing better to compare with.

I have in the past advertised when the odd pup was still available taking care to stress health tests winning bloodlines and the price and have had two or three top rate homes.

Of course you get more unsuitable enquiries too, but there is a way of saying no that may make the person consider if having a dog or living creature of any kind is suitable for their lifestyle.

If I could afford it I would put a regular advert in all the local papers advertising the breed clubs and the right places to get a pup.

If US statistics are anything to go by only 12% of pedigree pups are bred by enthusiasts who work or show the dogs and health test.

If only these people bred then there would be no dogs in rescue and the good breeders who anguish over whether to breed a litter at all because of the rescue situation in their breed would be able to breed a little more to widen their breed lines and pups would not be the throw away commodity they seem to be with too many unsuitable owners being able to buy a pup from those who only care about the buyer having the right money.

what you think justifies breeding a litter?
Hi Calmstorm,
I usually have a litter when: a. I want one and b. when existing pup owners want a replacement /addition.This list forms over the year and then I decide whether to breed or not.I always let down way more people than I can please.

On the matter of knowing dogs on pedigrees( mentioned by a previous poster); reading the typed word does not mean knowing what that dog was like and certainly tells you little about their temperament.I have several generations of my breeding on my bitch tail line. I lived with them and at their end,they died in my arms.
I was reading one of my pedigrees recently and had to smile.....I'd known all of at least 4 generations of the dogs in it , had met them or at least seen them in the flesh, some of them had sat on my lap when visiting their owners(my friends) socially..... Breed record holders, other champions and their mums.All of these dogs were considered to be their owners 'pets'. 

experience isnt about breeding winning stockor how many title holders you have bred

About one pup per litter goes to someone who intends to show but like all things, life catches them up. Sold a lovely pup to a keen teenager and her super-supportive parents, by the time the puppy was a year old and despite winning fairly well, she had retired as a family pet.... the girl had discovered BOYS!!!!
Others have gone to novice breeders who have gone on to produce their own lovely ( winning) dogs.

experience isnt about breeding winning stockor how many title holders you have bred

But surely that would make puppy farmers experienced breeders then because they churn out constant litters from their bitches?      To me, an experienced breeder is someone who starts with good quality stock and has an understanding of conformation to improve with the next generation & so on.    Anyone can breed a puppy, but it takes a good experienced breeder to breed a better puppy.

Couldn't agree more Christine :)

Puppy farmers are experienced breeders, they just are not knowledgeable or caring breeders.

But surely that would make puppy farmers experienced breeders then because   Yes Christine it would make them experienced.

Being honest you are using the word experienced in the wrong context.  Anybody doing something over and over again will become expereinced. It doesn't however make them successful knowledgeable breeders who produce good working or show stock.

Hence the reason I a few of us have seperated the two.  A woman can have 5 kids have have expereince and child rearing but still be a rubbish mother who raised malnutritioned criminals :-)

Exactly that is why I think expereinced breeder is not the most important criteria, knowledgeable is.  Some of the best breeders have bred but rarely, adn alos have been blessed with good luck.  Even success isn't a good measure as who is more successful the breeder who breeds a litter a year and gets a good winner every other litter or so or the breeder who breeds more often (but still ethically) and gets a lot of dogs into the ring/field, of which one or two are bound to win through.

Anyone can breed a puppy, but it takes a good experienced breeder to breed a better puppy.

Sadly No it doesn't it takes a good caring knowledgeable breeder to breed better puppies.  Experience in the correct use of the word I believe doesn't mean this.  

I think everyone knows where you are coming from but your opening post confused the 2. 

i think you can be experinced at breeding puppies (ie be very knowleadgable about mating, whelping etc etc) & be experinced about breeding "dogs" Ie all of the first persons experince but then also knowledgable & successful in Excellent breeding type. (wether thats in Breed Type, working type(ability & Drive Etc)

To be truthful, unless you are breeding dogs for a specific duty eg. working gundogs, Guide Dogs etc.   then the only reason for breeding is to improve on the generation before.  Anyone who isn't doing this, IMO, isn't becoming experienced because experience should give them the foresight to be able to recognise what stud dogs suit their bitches.

As I said before, anyone can put 2 dogs together and mate them and produce a litter of what look like the breed their supposed too, but experience gives you an 'eye' and it tells you the improvements you have made.

And to me - quantity doesn't equate with quality.

Hello everybody, I am new to forum and picked up on this interesting thread and the diversity of opinions.

I think that that to be knowledgeable one must have been prepared to learn and put into practice what has been learned, experience comes from applying that knowledge over time. Experience gained by repetition but no improvement in knowledge, to me, is not 'experience' just repetition!

Success is more subjective and depends what criteria you decide defines success, for instance hypothetically IF I bred a litter that went on to have contained two show champions but had health problems, and another litter which produced no health problems but all became much loved family companions then which has been more successful? In my opinion the healthy litter is more successful, but if my goal was to produce show champions then I might say the first litter was more succesful???

What do you all think?

Hi Della,

Welcome to the forum. Pleae take this all the right way :-)

I do understand where you are coming from and like wise exactly where ChristineW is to but whilst everyone is on the EXACT same wave length the use of words are not politically correct in my opinion.  I don't actually think there is much dlivesity of opinions at all being honest.

Both the original post examples and also your example in your last paragraph are neither ideal breeders or senarios.

To quote you:
IF I bred a litter that went on to have contained two show champions but had health problems, and another litter which produced no health problems but all became much loved family companions then which has been more successful? In my opinion the healthy litter is more successful, but if my goal was to produce show champions then I might say the first litter was more succesful??? 

As still a relatively novice breeder myself ,these comments for me this are a very very inexpereinced way to look at breeding.  NEITHER to a good breeder would be satisfactory results if the lovely family pets were not of reasonable quality also. A good show breeder would not want a litter that had 2 champions and the rest of the litter with health problems over a litter of healthy pups.

Being honest and with no disrespect to you whatsoever or implying this to you as I don't know a thing about you but this is generally the type of thing you often read the pet producers saying honestly when justifying their pet litters they breed for the pet market.
    
A good breeder should be striving to acheive both, health pups with excellent temperaments THAT CAN ALSO win in the show ring.    Not one without the others.

Yep they want healthy typical pups with hopefully oen or two with that something extra (often character as well as all the best traits in one package) to go in the ring.

Hi Blue, no offense taken. As I said I am new to this forum.

The example I gave was hypothetical and I agree neither is ideal. But I am a bit concerned that the aim seems to be pups for the show ring only.

To fill you in a bit more, I have had my breed for nearly 40 years, buying my first very nice quality bitch from a respected and well known breeder at the time.
I showed her a little, watched and listened around the ring, tried to learn all I could from those who knew much more than me, and took advice from my bitches breeder when I decided to have a litter.
However I decided along the way that the show ring was not for me, I'm not into competition and politics.
Over the years I have had one or two bitches at most at any one time, family companions and my current bitch goes back in a direct line to my first.
I try as we all do ,I hope, to breed to  the breed standard,  health test before breeding, home pups responsibly. Not one has ever been through breed rescue in all these years.
I only breed to have one for the next generation for myself, when I get too old to expect to outlive the last litter I shall not breed again. Although my pups go mainly to pet homes two have been shown in the past because that was what their owners wanted to do though they did not buy them 'to show' Neither disgraced themselves, one had several firsts, the other 3 Reserve Challenge Certificates in a numerically large breed.
People have come back to me for a second or replacement dog when they have lost one I bred, because they trust that they will most likely get another good companion who will turn out to be a good example of the breed with low risk of health problems and most importantly a good temperament. If they wanted a 'show dog' I would recommend that they approached someone with currently winning dogs.
I go to the odd show to have a look at my breed, over the years I have seen some improvements in some qualities, and also some fashions  come and go that I would say are less beneficial.
I am not experienced at showing but I consider myself an experienced responsible occasional breeder and have learnt from one or two heartaches along the way too. Until his death, the breeder of my first bitch kept in touch with me, gave me invaluable advice and support, explained pedigrees and became a great friend.
Does not being very interested in showing make me an undesirable breeder or imply that I have no knowledge of my breed?  I don't know what you mean exactly by pet producer or pet litter, I always thought even those who breed for 'show' are fortunate if they have more than one or two in any litter who are 'show quality' and the rest then surely go to 'pet' homes?
So I don't know whether you think that I meet any of the definitions given - back at  the very first question 'what makes a breeder experienced?'