I have been asked about the possibilty of lifting the breeding restriction on a dog I bred nearly 3 years ago.  I have spoken to the owner on the phone and intend to visit as well to see if dog is suitable - in my opinion.  I have informed her of relevant health checks that need to be done.  My question is, if I did decide to lift the restriction, could I get them to sign a contract stating that they will only let him be used on bitches that have also had health screenings etc and also similar for bitches should I ever be asked to lift one of them.  I intend to go through the possible trauma, expense and heartache that can be invloved in breeding and as far as I can be, be certain that they understand that side of things too.
Before some people get on my back about is he shown etc - this is a very well bred dog from excellent, well established lines, but not shown.  It is my opinion that not all dogs used for breeding have to either be shown or worked, there is room in the 'market - although I don't like that word' for quality pets to be bred.
I would like to know if anyone else has written contracts for this purpose.

Generally I wouldn't' remove endorsements from an unshown male unless I was wanting to use him myself.

Unlike with a  bitch where the owners have got a litter to look after and home with a male it is seen as an easy money with no responsibilities.  the kind of bitch owner who will ask to use the dog is likely to be a BYB or Pet owner who doesn't have enough knowledge.

Also the dogs owner isn't going to know enough to know which bitches to accept.

So yes he may be a dog worth using, but is very unlikely to be used to produce quality puppies, as ethical breeders will not be seeking him out, but sticking to dogs they have seen and whose pedigrees and relatives they can see.

Why not suggest they show him to show his good qualities to the kind of breeder whose bitches would make suitable mates.

If you explain how dogs become studs (by being not only well bred but seen to be Superior or comparable to their peers) they may realise it isn't something they should do, or in fact do it properly.

I would never left endorsements personally on male in a pet home. There is no need to in my opnion. 

One thing I stand to my guns on if they want to use the dog get their butts in the ring for a year or two and prove it is for the right reason.

I think it would depend on the breed, I would in my breed as there's so few males to use over here in the UK and there are some dogs with very good health scores here in the UK and as 90% of them go to pet homes we'd be in the doggy do do if we didn't!

Ditto - I have a clause in my contracts that if a dog/bitch is not shown then I will omly lift the endorsements if I plus a breed judge asses the dog and agree it is worthy to be used for breeding. I then have a separate breeding contract. Our gene pool is such that we need diversity.
Edited - and of course the health checks necessary for the breed are acceptable.

If and when I have ok'd an endorsment to be lifted I have always had the choice in the stud or bitch with the owner, to be honest I have never needed a contract to do this as the owners have always had me as their mentor and trusted my judgment to do the best for all dogs and the breed.  If the relationship isn't that strong a contract certainly can be drawn up.

The problem with not having the said perspective stud or breeding bitch as a show or working dog is not getting to mix with the appropriate people and their dogs learning from them the experience and help as to what is out there.

As already said no-one in the know would use this stud without it's worth being shown in the ring, which means only a novice breeder or pet to pet breeder would ever use him, that also leaves the floodgates open for the Dam and Sires pups to also be breed from further down the line, even if endorsed how does the breeder (your pups owner) know which dogs/bitches are for their pups to use or even if suitable.  This is how good lines and health go out the window, unfortunately a healthy dog with good scores etc, is not always to breed standard therefore if used to breed from is damaging the line.

If this studs owner is not interested in mixing in the world of dogs, how can she possibly do the best for the breed, and be able to advise any owners of future pups if she wishes to lift endorsments, you only gain that knowledge through mixing with dog people. :-)

ALWAYS remember once you lift it that is it NO going back.  You can make a mistake and fix it.  If it is a pet it is a pet.

Hi,

I have been asked if I would lift endorsements. I always say if they are showing the dog and doing well I would consider it after they had the relavant health checks.

Once you lift the endorsements they can not be put back. A written agreement would not stand up in a court unless witnessed, but how are you going to know when they have used the dog andwith what??????????????
You say he is not showing, would they consider puting him in joint names with you, then you could have a say in what happens!

So Blue,  the right reason to breed dogs is for the show ring only?? mmm

This is fine if you have a breed with a large gene pool, but unfortunately we cannot all keep 2 or 3 promising pups and we cannot always find show homes for excellent puppies. Not everyone can afford the time or money to show - some try it but dont like it, so why should a breed line be lost after the hard work of the breeder results in a dog being in a none show home? I am NOT saying that I agree with breeding "willy nilly" from dogs that are not top quality, but remember that there are top quality dogs, sometimes unique lines living in pet homes. It is a matter of circumstance. Breeders tend to keep bitches, so why should their male lines be lost due to the unfortunate fact that they cant keep more than one or two males?

The question isn't about a breed line being lost it is the fact that a male in pet hands unworked and unshown is not going to attract bitches owned by responsible knowledgeable breeders. 

Unless the right people see him then he is not going to be asked to be used. 

The kind of enquiries a Pet owner is going to get from someone in the street or park are not going to be the kind that will improve or maintain the quality in a breed.

To another poster yes dogs should be bred for breed improvement and maintenance, which is demonstrated by working or showing the breeding stock.  Very occasionally a very experienced breeder may see a diamond in the rough they or a fellow breeder have bred and wish to use him, but most breeders want to see the dogs in the flesh, see them assessed against their peers, and where possible see their offspring.

I don't think question from the OP relates anything to the senario you are describing at all.  

Why do we have such a hard time on here to get right to the point or discuss what the orginal question is about.

A breeder not wanting to lose a line and a possibilty of having a option to have someone help out is entirely different to a "pet"  wanting to have the endorsements lifted so the dog can be used at stud. 

I am sorry a line is not the end of the world if the quality isn't there.   The dog hasn't even been assessed as to suitability or anything.  What about the people behind that breeders lines. 

The Pet question is the same old question you hear so many times over and over again.   Cake and eat it rings a bell so many times.

Lets look at the original question. The OP has expanded and gave us any other information except it is a pet and THEY want to make it avaliable for stud..

Where does your post and the original one bare any resemblance?  There isn't any!!!

The question isn't about a breed line being lost it is the fact that a male in pet hands unworked and unshown is not going to attract bitches owned by responsible knowledgeable breeders. 


The kind of enquiries a Pet owner is going to get from someone in the street or park are not going to be the kind that will improve or maintain the quality in a breed.


Couldn't have said it any better Barabara.

Thank the lord for people with common sense in the world and some understanding of the meaning in the words " Guardians of the breed"

My breed is being destroyed in it's origin of country by "pet" litters and the offspring from pet litters being bred from. So are so many others the exact same.

 

Did I say that?  

Dogs are generally worked or shown.  What other reason would you need to breed a litter???

Let's see the recent ones I have read recently.. 

" My visa card needs paid"..

" I just love having puppies around and the kids love it"

"he had such a good temperament".

Have you read the dog paper the last fornight at how many dogs were destroyed in 2007.

Not everyone can afford the time or money to show - 

interesting, I don't know how many times I hear this comment but half the people I hear saying that always manage to have a litter of pups in the pipeline. I breed occasionally because I like to be out showing and this means I don't have the time for puppies not the other way around..If you have time to rear a litter you can get around half a dozen champshows in a year.

so why should a breed line be lost after the hard work of the breeder results in a dog being in a none show home?

but remember that there are top quality dogs, sometimes unique lines living in pet homes

Are you reading the same thread as me?? No disrespect BUT there is nothing in the OP post to say this is the case AND even if they came back and said it was we are all posting on a thread where a pet person has asked for the endorsements to be lifted because someone wants to use the dog at stud.. or I am!!!  

It is a matter of circumstance. Breeders tend to keep bitches, so why should their male lines be lost due to the unfortunate fact that they cant keep more than one or two males?  

Of course it is a matter of circumstances we are all in the same boat trying to keep lines going but keep a low amount of dogs that are all kept in a well loved socialised enviroment. That doesn't mean the pet market needs dogs with unendorsed papers to use at stud just incase we need to use them.

Sorry not venting at any of you personally :-)  Honestly :-)  I am just sick to death of some people thinking it OK to buy a pet and just breed it or put it out to stud with this " easy money" attitude and also why the posts by some members always seem to be translated into something that isn't in the orginal question then challenge those who just answered the orginal question. :-(

Orjack not sure if you actually breed but I remember you recently also made a point that you thought it OK to breed for the pet market..

I wonder if you would also agree that if you breed poor quality dogs for the pet market they should be sold for that also.. say £100 each..

If you breed poor specimens that dont' resembled the breed you can't exactly sell them claiming the resemble the breed standard surely???

I bet not :-))

I wonder just how many of these "pet" breeders breeding for the pet market only sell their puppies off the back of those who work day in day out protecting their  breed..  " my pet puppies have 20 champions in the pedigree, it is all red".

PS Fillis the OP has Goldens.  Unless I am mistaken that won't be a small gene pool.

I'd not thought of being joint owner with him - a good idea.  Will keep it in mind.

>> Hi Ells - Bells,

Your welcome, that would be the only way to protect your line and have some control, as you would have to sign registrations papers, hopefully therefore have some control who they used the dog on and who they sell them t!!!!.

Ps Hi Blue I love reading your thread answers you say what I expect alot of us think, but wont say, it's brill to think there are like minded people out there.A brilliant Lady in my breed who has had over 34 Champions in three sizes said.

" We are the caretakers of your breed, we should leave it as we found it or better". (that might not be quite right, but I'll check up. Lol :-)

I admit I did not look at the posters breed BUT she did not say just who had made the request. There is always the possibility that another breeder (who shows or works their dogs) made the original enquiry - it does happen when someone wants a particular line. It is not always the case that it was "Joe Blogs down the road" wanting the local dog for his bitch. She asked also about a contract if she lifted the endorsement, and I (one of the few) answered that. I do not approve of breeding for reasons other than to further the breed and I can think of no reasons to breed from PET QUALITY dogs, but occasionally there are dogs in pet homes that are NOT pet quality, for the reasons I previously gave.

Blue. Dogs are 'mans best friend'. They have evolved and been bred over the centuries to do jobs of work. Showing dogs is a 'sport' and a relatively new one at that. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with showing dogs. I am saying that to state that the only reason one should breed dogs is to show. That in my opinion is wrong. Most dogs end up as wonderful companions in pet homes. A smaller number go on to do a job of work. It is important that anyone who breeds, breeds from healthy, temprementaly sound dogs who have been health tested and found free from hereditary diseases. That goes without saying. You appear to be saying that only dogs that are going to be fit for the show ring should be produced, are you not? I don't happen to agree. Just because a dog has the wrong colour or is carrying it's tail too high, too low, it's back is too long etc. does not make it a bad unhealthy dog. You make the point that you want to protect 'your line'. Unless you give people the oportunity that was given to you, your line will end with you. Your line did not start with you, it started way back. If the breeders whom you bought your pups/breeding stock off, took the same stance that you are taking then you would not be in the priviliged position of being able to breed. You seem to be saying that other than yourself, the people who you sell your pups to are not responsible enough to breed from those pups. I have read much earlier postings of yours where you state that you would lift breeding restrictions if the correct health tests have been carried out and then in later post you state that under no circumstances would you lift breeding restrictions? I have to ask myself if it is really to protect the breed or do you not like competition? perhaps you don't want anyone to breed a future champion? There is also the point that it is highly unlikely that everydog you breed will end up in the show ring either by dint of fact that they would not be good enough or that people simply want pets. Can you catagorically state that evey puppy that you have ever bred has become a champion? Very much doubt it. What happens to the surplus that you breed? you are in my opinion ultimately breeding (hopefully) healthy pets some of which may go on to be shown as a sport. You don't give the surplus away. You do charge so therefore money is involved. Im not saying that you make a fortune or you actually make anything. Depending upon the breed and the cost of puppes you could come out ahead or more likely not with the work involved. I agree that there are people who without anythough would stick a couple of pets together, pure bred or cross and think yup, I could make a quick buck here. But to breed for love of the breed with healthy dogs, of good temprement, free of hereditary conditions but without the intention of showing them for sport is not wrong. We are not talking about dogs that 'don't resemble the breed'. If you sell a puppy whom you have endevoured to ensure is a good specimen of the breed then why would you want to prevent the owner of that puppy doing the same?

orjack-as i've been reading through these posts i have been thinking the same as you-not all dogs produced go on to be champions and not all dogs are perfect so some will inevitably be "pets". Also, dogs that people show are still pets and spend a huge amount of time in the family home (unless caged/kenelled) so are these not considered pets aswell?
I happen to think some breeders (for whatever reson) are afraid to let go and let others have a try-as you said possibly afraid of someone else producing a champion. Everyone has to start somewhere after all.
I'm not causing an argument here but ive read people say id never give a pup to someone without experience - well how did they start then. Owning/breeding etc is something we all start at the beginning with. We all make mistakes (we are human) and we all have different views and opinions.
I thought these boards were to express opinions and advice-not jump down the throat of someone askinf a question and for a piece of advice.

> Showing dogs is a 'sport' and a relatively new one at that.

Schipperke's were being shown in the sixteenth century by monks - How old do you want???

In europe Giant schnauzers to win a show. have to show just the same as over here, but then they also have to prove they can work - to gain thier titles. I love this idea to be over here.

One of my mini's that grew too big does agility insted another one does pure obedience, not with me though have not got the patience.

Just wanted to point out showing dogs has been around for CENTURIES. :-)

Mine are all pets first, show dogs second.

I am saying that to state that the only reason one should breed dogs is to show

I would really be interested to know why you would breed then?  If it isn't for show and isn't for working what other reason is there?  

You appear to be saying that only dogs that are going to be fit for the show ring should be produced, are you not?

Not at all , I never said that BUT good specimens should be breed from but breeding good specimens will still supply enough surplus for the pet market with out the all the additional ones from poor specimens  the numbers prove that without a debate! :-)

Just because a dog has the wrong colour or is carrying it's tail too high, too low, it's back is too long etc. does not make it a bad unhealthy dog. I don't think I every said that either you are again misquoting me. It certainly fits into the catagory NOT suitable for breeding though.

You make the point that you want to protect 'your line'. Unless you give people the oportunity that was given to you, your line will end with you. Your line did not start with you, it started way back. If the breeders whom you bought your pups/breeding stock off, took the same stance that you are taking then you would not be in the priviliged position of being able to breed. You seem to be saying that other than yourself, the people who you sell your pups to are not responsible enough to breed from those pups.

You must be having difficulty understand the genuine reasons for breeding.   I never said that my lines were created by me BUT someone trusted me to let me have offspring from their lines the least I can do it protect them and that persons reputation and not let offspring fall into the back yard breeders hands ;-) .  I am more than happy to let others have what I have been given as long as they are prepared to protect the breed also. Firstly I don't breed very often, my litters have been 4 or less but over that last couple of years I have sold 2 puppies to 2 people who will breed from them. both with show, both have a genuine interest in the breed and not the money in their pockets. In my opinion my breed and so many others are being distroyed by people with I guess similar look at breeding as yourself.   Why should I or any genuine breed enthusiast sell a dog to a pet person JUST for breeding?

You seem to be saying that other than yourself, the people who you sell your pups to are not responsible enough to breed from those pups. Sorry I didn't say that at all.

I have read much earlier postings of yours where you state that you would lift breeding restrictions if the correct health tests have been carried out and then in later post you state that under no circumstances would you lift breeding restrictions?

Sorry you have misquoted me again.  Your doing well with the quoting eh ;-)   I said I would NEVER lift endorsements from ANY dog in a pet home. I wouldn't and I stand to that.  It wouldn't matter if health tests have been done or not. There is no reason for someone with a companion pet to breed except for negative reasons in my opinion. ( excluding examples that have been given in this thread. Ie to help a line or to help a breeder with a lost line etc all valid reasons

I have to ask myself if it is really to protect the breed or do you not like competition? Confused here, competition?? that doesn't make any sense to me whatever you meant though you are incorrect. If only you knew.. I have only been showing my breed for approx 7 years. I would love for there to be more people interested in my breed around me as it would be so much more fun. I have to travel a day each way to most shows occasionally sharing the travelling. I encourge our breed club to encourage youngsters into the breed BUT for the right reason


But to breed for love of the breed with healthy dogs, of good temprement, free of hereditary conditions but without the intention of showing them for sport is not wrong.

The only people who I have heard saying that is the pet breeders who breed their litters for the pet market only and try to defend it. In my opinion that is commerical breeding.  People who breed like this have no real knowledge of a good one or a bad one.

I can assure you that I don't even break even very often but I don't see my interest in my dogs as a money making scheme, I love them and enjoy showing them.  I am interesting in the genetics and many other dog interest.  I have no interest in people breeding dogs for the sake of it.

I'm not causing an argument here but ive read people say id never give a pup to someone without experience - well how did they start then.

You have never heard me say and you will honestly never hear me say it as I have only been involved in  my own breed for 7 years so I am very very much a novice. I am grateful to those who sold me dogs and because of that I will protect these peoples lines and hopefully carry on their hard word. I would really really love for more people to genuinely get involved in my breed. There are so few real breed enthusiasts now that the pet breeders are having a wail of a time 

Hi,
I must admit there are four colours in Mini's.

One of these colours has been mixed up so badly in this country, the colour now often fades by two finishing a promising showing career. Where as again in Europe they never mix the colours when breeding and the fading doesn't happen.

I was lucky enough having shown another colour for several years, then having waited two more years to get one of this colour with superb european lines. I have been entrusted to look after this line and keep it pure.
I plan ahead years following lines, always looking for improvement to one day have my own champion.
Yes some go as pets but all are endorsed to protect this colour and this breed.

I have answered the question and have given a good solution - Joint Ownership.

I agree with what is being said about breeding for work or the show ring in principle. The idea being that the breed standard be adhered to as much as is possible, and therefore any dogs bred actually LOOK like the breed they are.

It might be slightly different for me, as my breed is a popular and prolific one. However, I know of several breeders who have had excellent success in the show ring who breed 'pets'. One of those breeds only a very occasional litter, usually if she wants one for herself. All of her dogs and bitches have been successful in the show ring, yet she sells the pups as pets only, although obviously helping people chose the right pup if they do wish to show. Sh etells people that if they turn out to be show quality, that is a bonus. Her reasoning is that you can never tell for sure if a pup is going to be good enough to do well in the ring and if someone has bought it to show only, what might they do if it does turn out not to be show quality? Another has been breeding for 30 plus years, and judging for quite a few of them. They breed quite a few litters, most of which go as pets, and due to the numbers they breed, I assume they realise this will be the case.

I don't think there is anything worng with breeding in the above circumstances, as the dogs they are breeding, although they are going as pets, are not 'pet quality' and that is the big difference.

In answer to the OP, I probably wouldn't be prepared to lift the endorsements on a pet dog. There are plenty of excellent stud dogs of that breed about, and plenty of the breed are already exploited enough. if they were really interested in the breed itself, not just having a stud, and were prepared to their research and show the dog, and it was successful in the ring, I might change my mind.

I have answered the question and have given a good solution - Joint Ownership.

If it is for the benefit of the breed then I agree it is an option.   :-) 

Blue - according to you a pet home equates to a pet quality dog. Do you really think that there are no outstanding dogs that have gone to a home because it is the right home, rather than going to a home because the new owner says they will show? I am sure, hand on heart, plenty of us can say they sent a dog of good quality, which would probably do well in the show ring to a home where it will not be shown. If we can trust that owner not to make rash decisions over breeding and consult the breeder before any matings, why on earth be so against it being used by a responsible breeder on his/her bitch? The "breeders" you are referring to would not care that there were endorsements on the dog in the first place as more than likely they would not give two hoots about breeding unregistered puppies.

Freds mum just so you do understand that decent breeders do share with novices honestly and do help them out.   My first few westies were bought from lovely show people but they were bought as show prospects and the were endorsed ( I think all but one) .  I showed them locally , then at champshows and with these got the hang of trimming, I actively learned about the breed best as I could and proved my interest was genuine, I took part in anything to do with the breed , seminars etc and travelled all over to learn and I am still very much learning.  I think just in the last year I am getting the hang of the trimming.   These two bitches are the beginning of my own lines.   It is like an apprenticeship.   6 years ago I was terrified to go in the show ring.  I am still very much a novice but I know how far my journey so far has been, how much time has been invested and how much money also.   

Yes I may sound defensive but you just have to look around you at what some people are up to with these lovely creatures that have been enstowed upon us. Don't be fooled. :-)

Blue - according to you a pet home equates to a pet quality dog.   No not at all you are taking my wording out of context...   it is just a general use of words when picking puppies. The difference for me between a show prospect and a pet prospect may just be I preferred the nature of one over the other. My aim isn't though to breed puppies only suitable for pets that couldn't be shown at all.   I take great pride like so many other good breeders when I hear from a puppy buyer who has had a passing comment about how lovely her dogs is.  It is called breeding to the breed standard.  Breeding poor quality to poor quality generally only breeds poor quality come on!!!

Do you really think that there are no outstanding dogs that have gone to a home because it is the right home, rather than going to a home because the new owner says they will show?  

Fillis I think that is a silly question of course I know there are loads of good dogs in pet homes. Apart from the puppies I have kept and the 2 I let go to show freinds the rest are in pet homes. Often when I see them again I think " why did I not keep that". I really prefer my puppies that I don't keep go to lovely pet homes as i know they are there for live but I am well aware there are good show quality dogs in pet homes. My house has a beautiful boxer bitch that I paid £1500 ( I know price doesnt mean anything) she had a young successful show career. I bought her and she is now a pet. Being spayed very very soon.  I also have a pet girl who is a beautiful bitch , infact her first litter she produced one of the youngest champions in her breed history. ( I didn't breed the litter)  she is also a pet.

Again I will stress these are a different senario that is being defended in this thread.

The "breeders" you are referring to would not care that there were endorsements on the dog in the first place as more than likely they would not give two hoots about breeding unregistered puppies

Fillis I think you may be getting out of touch out puppy farmers are now being a bit smarter they breed from the home, they KC register their puppies it is all part of their marketing and sales speel now to fetch good prices for their pups. 

I know you know exactly what I mean and what I am referring to. :-)

By the way I take this serious Code of Ethics.. http://www.champdogsforum.co.uk/board/topic/102934.html

I certainly have no time for the back yard breeders nor the time to waste defending my opinion that they do no good for their respective breeds the thousands being put to sleep every year do it for me. :-))

I agree with what is being said about breeding for work or the show ring in principle. The idea being that the breed standard be adhered to as much as is possible, and therefore any dogs bred actually LOOK like the breed they are.

Exactly! Look and also BEHAVE like their breed. This is after all the two main reasons for why people pick a breed in the first place rather than a mongrel -they are after a certain look and a certain temperament. By breeding pets to pets for no other reason than to create more pets, we end up with dogs that will more and more lose all of this. You only have to look at any numerically strong breed to see this. Who hasn't seen cavaliers with really long faces and tall legs that are almost twice as big as they should be?  I had two males at the top end of the breed standard size wise and when I walked them one woman with a pet bred cavalier used to sigh and say she wished her cavalier had turned out a "miniature" like mine, as that was what she had wanted -no a giant.  Also I for one have seen Goldens that have no interest in retrieving (which is so alien to the breed it's like having a dog that miaows rather than barks), and numerous ones with aggression problem, same again. Totally wrong for the breed. I could go on and on about most breeds. All of these dogs were bred from pets by people who were not interested in showing or working.

Almost any dog can make a great pet even if it has some fault that makes it not look the way it should, or indeed behave the way it should but it should STAY a much loved pet and not create more dogs that all have the same faults.  Likewise a wellbred dog from a show  breeder will make a great pet, the fact that it looks or acts right for the breed doesn't make it NOT a wonderful pet! Why should pet owners have to settle for anything less?

In my breed (not nearly as numerically strong as yours) there are plenty of registered puppies from breeders no-one in the show fraternity have heard of, but also there are those that are not registered which cost nearly as much as the registered ones. Unfortunately, demand outstrips supply and people wont wait, so I know all about the more unscrupulous breeders: even down to the "traders" giving false pedigrees for litters bought in from overseas :-( It still comes down to breeding for the right reasons and using the dogs which are right for the bitches - wherever they happen to live. A champion dog and a champion bitch do not necessarily produce champion puppies. In most breeds we can cite dogs/bitches which have been shown with not much success producing champions, so if the right dog, with the right pedigree for your bitch lives in a pet home, what is wrong with using him as long as he passes health checks and you can register the puppies?

A champion dog and a champion bitch do not necessarily produce champion puppies.   Of course that doesn't always happen.  If only BUT

There are unlikely to produce dogs that have ears like bats, be 4 inches longer than required, 5 inches bigger than the breed standard in height, be twice the weight of the breed standard requirement are they or on a lot of occasion not even look like the breed at all :-)

I think this thread has taken the silly route now :-)

"I'm not causing an argument here but ive read people say id never give a pup to someone without experience - well how did they start then."
As i said blue "some people" i did not quote you specifically nor name names,

I did appriciate that Fredsmum, I was merely saying you won't hear that from me. I thought I was giving you informative advise just to assure you half of the rubbish you hear about good breeders is just that , Rubbish!!! :-)

In Response to orjack

Reasons for breeding are to maintain the qualities of a breed.  some may be used for work, but the majority of breeds are loosing their original purposes and we keep them purely as companions.

Basically we are maintaining a living historical relic which happens to make a good companion now that it's main purposes are dying out.

Showing or working (where appropriate) are the arena's for proving stock worthy of reproducing.

In the wild the animals able to reproduce would e those most suited to surviving.  In captivity it is those most suited to our purpose, in other words the breed standards.

As has been point out every litter should be bred with the standard, in mind.  Contrary to many peoples beliefs (many of whom have never read a breed standard) this includes temperament health and working ability (where appropriate).  It is generally accepted that there are too many dogs bred so there is no room for people breeding just for the pet market, every pet should be of as high quality as the one the breeder keeps for the next generation.

Just as in the wild population only the select few are good enough to breed.  I wonder if it is the fact that we anthropomorphism our dogs that some people find it hard to believe that all our dogs are not breeding material, as we believe we all have the right to have children?  As a rule humans do not inbreed yet we have a lot of genetic health disorders, so is ti really such a bad thing that with inevitably small gene pools we seek to limit breeding to those individuals with proven health and typical breed traits, and that breeding like parenthood carries lifelong responsibilities for the lives so produced.

As for breeders not wanting others to join in nothing could be further from the truth, but we only want new breeders who are going to be as committed to their breed as we are.

In my last litter I only had two bitch pups.  I had gone to the trouble of going abroad to mate my bitch, but had promised a pup to a keen newcomer in Scotland (that used to be strong are for the breed but has no established breeders now) as a foundation bitch with show potential.  I let her have the pup more likely to do well, and she won a RCC with her as a puppy.  Another breeder let her have Pick male in their litter and he won the CC, BOB and Best Puppy In show at last years Hound Association championship show.  These we hope will make a sound foundation for the time they come to breed.

I had five males in that litter, but sadly even though 3 owners had hoped to show only one has as yet done so.  Another entered a show and forgot to attend, and a third feels too shy to try.

Breeders are always hoping that some of the homes they entrust their lines to may become more deeply involved in our breeds, but few ever do.

Few owners for perfectly good reasons cannot give the commitment breeding requires, but sadly many are quite happy to treat breeding with as much commitment as a one night stand.

In Response to jackson

I think you will find that most breeders will only sell to a home where the dog will be a companion first and foremost.  But there is no reason why the person wanting a companion does not want to do more with it like show or work and will choose the pup showing most promise in that direction.

If someone only wants to show then they can show vegetables or some inanimate object if showing is all they are interested in.

Anyone showing any form of Pet or livestock first has an interest in that animal, the showing is in addition.

Sadly there are a few people for whom the secondary interest becomes the primary one.

In response to Orjack - an excellent post.  Very well put and I think you speak for a great many people who read these boards.

Without any rudeness intended, but those who are not breeders deeply involved in their breeds do not see the bigger picture where breeding is concerned.

All puppies are and should be companions first and foremost, but no breeders should breed puppies that can ONLY be pets.  If that is the breeders sole aim then frankly they are doing no-one least of all dogs a service, as there are many many dogs in rescue centres up and down the country who would make good pets, nearly 8000 of which were put to sleep last year.

That is about equivalent to 3/4 of the UK population of my breed (assuming an average lifespan of 12 years).

With the over exploitation of many popular breeds there would be no harm to the breeds gene pools if the breeding was cut to only those breeding properly to the breed standards, and health screened stock.  In fact a lot of good would come out of it as far as rescue statistics, quality and health of the resulting pups and the reputation of pedigree dogs.

Yes puppies would b e harder to come by, but then people would expect to wait for a puppy and do their homework while waiting.  There would be hardly any impulse buying with the poor pups in rescue within weeks or months.

Those who see nothing wrong with ONLY pet breeding need to look at the rescue scene for these breeders, as those breeding only for Pets do not take long term responsibility for the puppies they breed, meaning they do not take back the pups the owners have tired of.

The reason pedigree dogs and pedigree dog breeders have overall such a bad rep is because the vast majority are churned out by people who don't give a stuff about the breeds they exploit, whether they are typical, healthy and of good temperament as at 8 weeks old or less they are cute, and they exploit the fact that once part of a family whether sick, bad tempered or untypical the owners in the main will stick by them, or give them up to rescue.

It is these unhealthy and bad tempered ones the Vets see and that cause problems in society giving all dog owners a hard time.

Excellent post Barbara

All of the breeds I love & have owned have been exploited by puppy farmers, pet breeders & BYB sadly.

My first love will always be the GSD, Ive never owned a GSD with english breeding All mine have been 100% german, so unlike other people who had GSDs in the 1950s I have moved forward with the times & have seen the health, character & conformation of the breed from the lines I prefer improve, whereas Joe Public prefer the type of dog that was the norm in the UK back in 1950-with all it's problems(temperament, HD, epilepsy etc)so if they get a bitch & a dog off they go breeding without any thought to what a GSD really is. It is these dogs by & large that end up in rescue-few come from the breeders that stick to the type seen in Germany. When the dogs come to the rescue it is obvious how they have been bred simply by their appearance. Fot example a 16 week(yes week)old puppy has alleged savaged someone in the village I live in(funny I've heard nothing)when asked about the puppy going back to the breeder, no way was the answer "the breeder wasn't a breeder just someone whose bitch as puppies for pets !" after that it was rescue's responsiblitiy. The father had been killed in an RTA & they had not seen the mother or been into the breeders house because the bitch was too nasty to allow anyone to see her !! & they still bought the puppy because it was cheap & a"real Alsatian"<Sigh>the owners obviously presumed because they had stressed that the puppy was aggressive that rescue would immediately collect the puppy, in fact the opposite, if a dog has bitten there is no way the Rescue can accept the dog to rehome.

I dearly love Border Collies, but they are churned out unregistered by BYB, pet owners & puppy farmers without any health testing or consideration to whether the dogs are suitable to be bred from. My dogs have all come from working backgrounds(even my two KC registered ones)parents, g parents etc etc all health tested & able to work(including a line to an International Supreme Ch-who my puppy resembles in more ways than one) There are \BC's that come to our training club that don't even look like BCs & because they come from untested parents a good few have severe health problems.

Then there are my Cavaliers-as Marianne has written non show bred Cavaliers hardly resemble the breed at all-puppy farmers are known for using a Cavalier dog on a Welsh Sprinnger bitch to produce more puppies & of course they can be sold earlier because they look older than they really are. No health testing done or hearts & eyes checked by GP vets when they really should be done by Cardiologists & Eye Panellists

If you breed without regard to breed standard & purpose(in the case of BCs) you end up with dogs that no longer resemble the breed they are meant to be with health problems & temperament problems that go hand in glove with breeding for money. My puppy has strong herding instincts despite the fact that he is from an Obedience breeding-

Ells-Bells just one simple question do you work or show your dogs? 

MM you will always get this type of debate from people either that are or that have freinds who,  breed their pet dogs in their home environment but who have no real involvement with their breed, they may do the odd bit of health checking and think that is what makes them fantastic ethical breeders.  It isn't what the breeds need or the breed standard asks of them. :-)

These along with the big commercial type breeders are the reason government I think are changing their view dog breeders in general.

Very well put and I think you speak for a great many people who read these boards.   Perhaps  many reader , I don't know the type of people we are reading and those who are not members but I am pretty confident it is NOT the " speak" of many ethical breed enthusiasts.    Like or lump it.  :-)

> In most breeds we can cite dogs/bitches which have been shown with not much success producing champions, so if the right dog, with the right pedigree for your bitch lives in a pet home, what is wrong with using him as long as he passes health checks and you can register the puppies

But the pet owner isn't going to know if their dog is any good or not, because they haven't the experience.  An experienced breeder will also not likely see this great dog unless it belongs to themselves or a friend.

My latest youngster is from two champion parents and all four champion grandparents, she will never make a champion, but has good qualities that I can use by mating her to the right dog,a nd because she has such good dogs in her background I have a good chance of breeding something worthwhile from her.  Her sister who is shown and has already won a RCC as a puppy will go on to become a foundation bitch for a new breeder. 

The males are very similar to each other and would make useful studs if anyone wanted to use them as their litter is the only one carrying their sires bloodline as I took my bitch abroad to mate, but being in pet homes where no-one will see them they are unlikely to be used, unless a fellow breeder approached me to ask about them, and one of them agreed to let their dog be used, I might lift the endorsement, but to safeguard things might ask the dog be put in my name, and I would pay for the health testing.

In most other instancees there is another way of getting the bloodlines you want without resorting to using a dog in a Pet home.  You have to consider that thsi Pet dog may not work out as a stud, may be too fat, been told off for mounting behavior, and being used may alter his outlook and make him less easy to live with.

Yes, I do show occasionally and I intend to keep a bitch from a litter later this year to train up as a gun dog.

Thats exactly what I am saying, Barbara - if a breeder approaches you and asks if you have a good dog for his bitch surely you would consider lifting the endorsements, providing the owner was happy and aware of the pitfalls, the other breeder was happy with the dog, you were happy with the bitch and the health checks were satisfactory. You then make sure that the dog is only used on bitches you approve. I am not condoning pet to pet matings, but breeding for the right reasons. It is so sad that it is automatically assumed that anyone owning a dog without endorsements would rush out and mate him to anything. There are plenty of breeders who show or work their dogs that I would class as not breeding for the right reasons.

if a breeder approaches you and asks if you have a good dog for his bitch surely you would consider lifting the endorsements, providing the owner was happy and aware of the pitfalls, 

Fillis I would imagine that it would be rare that a good knowledgeable breeder couldn't select a proven stud of equal or better quality from the show or working world without having to take a dog that was ultimately placed as a pet only.    We are forgetting that quite often using a dog and stud changes its nature, his territory marking habits etc.

What you are describing Fillis is certainly the ideal if the senario in the rare occasion it may happen in a breed with a very small gene pool.  In my opinion this senario isn't like this at all and it is a breed with a large gene pool with an already massive registration.