I would also be asking a breeder how successful they have been in the show/working world and why they were breeding this litter.  To me the whole point of breeding is to improve on the previous generation, there seems to be a scant disregard for this!

> As this is a thread about GENERAL rules then a GENERAL rule is to check for these problems

Hi Lea, I see your point but beg to differ as IMO checking for these problems could be putting many general buyers at a distinct disadvantage as off the top of my head I can't think of a single breeder closely known to me that wouldn't be offended by going down that route .... in fact I know of quite a few that would be outraged rather than just offended and certainly the prospective puppy purchaser would be leaving empty handed (but with a flea in their ear rather than mites LOL)

Teri :)

I'm still coming to terms with the implications of this. Are you saying that if a person is looking under the fur or in the ears of your pups and you ask why... they say " I'm looking for fleas or ear mites" you wouldn't be offended...well I'm very suprised indeed.

Good point Christine - I think the reasons for breeding should be very high on the list of priority questions when deciding on which breeder to take enquiries further with :)

>I'm not a fan of a stranger sitting beside me when at the wheel LOL.

I have my husband sitting behind the stranger ... ;)

> they say " I'm looking for fleas or ear mites" you wouldn't be offended

No, because I'd imagine they'd seen some unhealthy litters in the past, and I'd know that they wouldn't find anything bad with mine.

> Their usual question is " Well...would you consider us for a puppy".

That comes into it too - in fact that comes into it first. But if all breeders checked for bites etc - there wouldn't be people having bought undershot pups with ear mites etc - so as a general point it is something to check. Not all breeders can be trusted - not aimed at anyone, but a general point - bearing in mind a dog breeder is anyone who produces a litter of puppies. Agreed? :-)

> I have my husband sitting behind the stranger

LOL - I'm not SCARED of the stranger - I just don't want him/her to see how woefully bad I am when driving a strange set of wheels :-D

Think I mentioned that one earlier Christine - but it got lost in the fracas. ;-)

What fracas????????  ;-)

Yes i see what you mean. Unfortuatly so many people go to a' breeder' and listen to a sob story Ie - my A B C had an accident that why they have mites as I didnt look after the pups as my ABC was in charge.
Also SO many people that I know think pups only have to be KC registered if you show. And you only have to go to a show breeder if you want to show. the rest can get from pet breeders. :( :( :( :( :( :(
So if we had a general rule of thumb for what should be looked for and why, hopefuly it will help the 'pet' puppy owners, that face it, we see plenty lookimg for a pup, normally the ones that say they dont need KC reg as only want a pet are slammed down or made to feel they are wrong,. So i we had WHY they should look for these things, we will educate people :) :)
So sorry toolz, but If I was coming to see pups that I had waited months to get and built up a realtionship with the breeder, I wouldn't be checking the pallet or for mites,as I would know the ouos were ok after regular updates and the trust between myself and the breeder but unfortunatly I want to get it across to the people that I WANT IT NOW and make sure they at east steer away from the puppy farms, peopl importing pups from them etc.
If we can get that far we can then go on to the thing we want most, but for the moment, general rules is better :)
Hope that explains my thought hun :)
Lea :) :)

> No, because I'd imagine they'd seen some unhealthy litters in the past, and I'd know that they wouldn't find anything bad with mine.

Well you're a much more understanding person than I   JG. Next you'll be telling me you'd happily provide a puppy stool sample to prove you'd wormed them.
A bit like the film " love means never having to say sorry" ....I though a good reputation was just that......  good :-)

> Hope that explains my thought hun

Perfectly ma dear.

In these days of 'them' versus 'us'  Puppy farmers/BYB v reputable breeders, as Teri says, it may not be wise to advise the 'fine tooth comb' method of trying to aquire a top quality puppy from a breeder with a waiting list as long as your arm :-) And we are supposed to be encouraging MR SMITH to buy from a reputable breeder nest pas?
Each to their own.

> If we can get that far we can then go on to the thing we want most, but for the moment, general rules is better

But Lea, you did open the thread saying

>If you dont agree wth someone please say WHY

Isn't that what us terrible twins have been doing :-D

Yes it is :) :) :) LOL
Just trying to get the general rule also that the laymen will read :) :) :)
I do value everyones opinions of this and know there will be from one extreme to the other :) :) :)
Lea :) :) :)

Yes Lea Hun, I think you explained that very well...;-)

>Next you'll be telling me you'd happily provide a puppy stool sample to prove you'd wormed them.

I'd think it a bit odd, but yes, if they wanted one they could have one. After all, I've got nothing to hide! ;-)

I always tell my new owners to be sure to take the pup to their own vet for a thorough check (even though my own vet has checked them all) within a couple of days so they can be reassured that there's nothing wrong, but if, on the offchance there is, please would they return the pup. I've never had one returned ....

>A bit like the film " love means never having to say sorry"

I never understood that - surely Love means being even more willing to apologise, even if you've done nothing wrong?

> I want to get it across to the people that I WANT IT NOW and make sure they at east steer away from the puppy farms, peopl importing pups from them etc.
>

Exactly,alot of people have no idea what a reputable breeder is and buy from the first litter they see (or worse go to a pet supermarket).They don't know what to look for and come away with a pup riddled with worms/underweight/mange/mites.I understand the offence that would be caused  to a responsible breeder and why by checking a puppy but unfortunatly there are many ,many more " breeders" that would happily sell pups with those conditions than there are good ones :( I've heard about new pups with all those conditions recently and would hope that after the experience if they were ever in that position again they would check.If they know what to look for they know what to walk away from and not support that kind of breeding.
It would be wonderful if all breeders were top class and no one had to worry about trust but unfortunatly for most puppy buyers the back yard variety and dealers are who they come accross first.It would be a disservice to tell them not to check out a puppy for obvious health problems easily spotted,if they did then hopefully it would make them look for a better breeder.

>I've heard about new pups with all those conditions recently

We see lots of those pups coming in for their first jabs. I know these litters are common, so I'd encourage every prospective buyer to check for themselves and be prepared to walk away if they don't like what they see. As this RSPCA leaflet says:

"Health checks you can make yourself
- Avoid skinny dogs or puppies. Also avoid puppies with potbellies, as they are quite likely to have intestinal worms.

- Never be tempted to take a puppy with runny eyes, a runny nose or a cough. Teeth should be clean and white. Gums should be pink and not smelly.

- Make sure the puppy's bottom is clean without any signs of diarrhoea or soreness.

- Check for fleas and other parasites. Many puppies have them but they can be treated. Brown or yellow deposits in the ears are one sign of ear mites."

>It would be a disservice to tell them not to check out a puppy for obvious health problems easily spotted,

Exactly.

> It would be a disservice to tell them not to check out a puppy for obvious health problems easily spotted

Yes I agree if they know nothing of the breeder, going on spec and are not sure that the breeder is of the highest caliber ....then, I would say fair enough have a full inspection. The problem would arise when the 'excellent' breeder with only one or two puppies to sell, gets offended by the 'searching for faults' procedure and as a consequence, loses them the chance of an excellent pup with great aftersales.

One bit of advice I would give to any puppy owner would be suspicious if they have the entire litter to choose from (or that the whole litter is for sale) - unless the breeder had magnanimously agreed to let them have pick of litter or they have all turned out sub-standard for some reason. Surely a sign of a decent breeder is to produce one for themself.

The trouble is Toolz, that you're judging yourself by your own standards LOL - as we all do. When we know we are reputable ourselves, it is easy to think that everyone should believe us.

However, in dogs as in all walks of life, there are some very clever people who can give a fantastic impression whilst being just as dodgy as the next one. No, I don't mean you, or me! - but they're out there. I'd have no problems with people doing these basic checks, and would be happy to help them through it, confident in the knowledge that they wouldn't find any problems.

M.

I'm with Tooolz as well. I'd be extremely offended if people wanted to check a puppy of mine for fleas, hernias and dirty ears! Indeed I've never had it happen yet. Bite yes if the pup is to be shown, testicles for a show dog yes too,  -and lots of checks if the puppy will play and tug, and for a show pup I expect a careful examination on the table, but anything else -I'd be mortally offended. Same with kittens, and there I can say hand on heart in 19 years of breeding I have NEVER had one single person wanting to check coat and ears for being clean. If the puppies/kittens cannot even be trusted to have such basics right, then the breeder isn't right. So likewise, I've never checked any puppy out like this that I've bought myself either. It's just like I'd instantly dismiss any breeder who mentioned on their website, in adverts or similar that their pups are treated for fleas before being sold! It doesn't give a good impression, it gives a bad one- because why would they need flea drops if they didn't have fleas to start with?!

>It's just like I'd instantly dismiss any breeder who mentioned on their website, in adverts or similar that their pups are treated for fleas before being sold!

I am starting to see so much of this, 8 week old puppies Frontlined before sale. I can't believe that you'd need to treat them for fleas, and if I did I'm darn sure I wouldn't put Frontline near a pup of that age.

M.

> The problem would arise when the 'excellent' breeder with only one or two puppies to sell, gets offended by the 'searching for faults' procedure and as a consequence, loses them the chance of an excellent pup with great aftersales.
>

What a great shame that would be.  I would be surprised, amused even but why would I be offended to discover that people have been reading up and learning as best they can on what to look for.  Are we not all in support of that sort of education and understanding and are these not the type of person we would wish for our puppies?  Maybe I lack pride ;-) but I really don't care as the bigger picture is to ensure as many people as possible look for puppies from breeders who care about welfare.
Like JG I have it in my contract that they can have a vet check and return if necessary so really does it make any difference if they have a look themselves?

> Lily Mc

I do know what you are saying but I do feel that it would be such a shame if someone is given the opportunity to obtain one of our pups, should 'blow it' by looking for fleas or asking "is the bitch KC registered". They would have to restart their search and may stumble on a BYB who impresses them with their 'Frontlined - vet checked' routine :-(

I'm sure my attitute to all this stems from breeding so few pups and having so many enquiries for them. I wonder how I'd be if my bitches produced 12 plus pups? I really dont know.

> Yes I agree if they know nothing of the breeder, going on spec and are not sure that the breeder is of the highest caliber ....then, I would say fair enough have a full inspection. The problem would arise when the 'excellent' breeder with only one or two puppies to sell, gets offended by the 'searching for faults' procedure and as a consequence, loses them the chance of an excellent pup with great aftersales.
>
>

I understand that totaly :) I'd think that the sort of people who have done enough research to find such a great breeder would not be the ones to need this advice though or have come accross it  already.I know when I first met my dogs breeder my main concern was that they she let us have one of her pups and I wouldn't have wanted to do anything to offend her,I handled all the pups enough for any obvious health problems to be apparent without purposley checking for them.I didn't find her in the free ads though and had visited litters before.The people that need to know to check for these problems are the thousands that go through the free ads etc without ever knowing that breed clubs etc exist.

> One bit of advice I would give to any puppy owner would be suspicious if they have the entire litter to choose from (or that the whole litter is for sale) - unless the breeder had magnanimously agreed to let them have pick of litter or they have all turned out sub-standard for some reason. Surely a sign of a decent breeder is to produce one for themself.

Very good advice.Some of the puppy buyers I mentioned earlier who'd bought pups with obvious health problems had been assured they had "pick of the litter" .I am amazed at how many breeders have whole litters for sale at 8 weeks and apparently you get the "pick".I always ask  the puppy buyer why the breeder was breeding if they are selling the best one to a pet owner and don't have any other homes lined up at all,sounds like a good sales pitch to me.I have never been told I could just chose which one I wanted  from a whole litter and have always been guided by the breeder.

> Maybe I lack pride ;-) but I really don't care as the bigger picture is to ensure as many people as possible look for puppies from breeders who care about welfare

Maybe Isabel that is my sin
and my other sin is not being evangelical enough -  just putting my efforts in to my own breeding.

No offence intended to anyone, and this isn't directed at anyone in particular (so I've replied to my own post, just to make sure nobody thinks it's aimed at them!) but if, as a breeder, you'd be mortally offended if a prospective buyer checked over your pups, are you not equally mortally offended when a judge does the same thing in the ring? I genuinely can't see the difference. We don't have 'shows' where people send in a photo of their dog with its name and they get judged on their reputation - so why would a puppy buyer be expected to do what amounts to the same thing?

>I handled all the pups enough for any obvious health problems to be apparent without purposley checking for them.

Or rather, by not making it obvious that you were purposely checking for possible problems. :-)

I cant answer that one JG because I'm just repeating myself.
Suffice to say if they get into 'Fortress Tooolz' - my home to see my puppies .... then potential owners dont ask if my pups have cleft palates they would assume that I would tell them ......  OH Drattt...I'm repeating myself.


Sorry I dont want to deny any one their own opinion but I dont have a problem with this, never have.

> Many fellow breeders like to look at puppies (and I theirs) and I expect them to know what they are looking for

I agree, as you say experienced breeders and some dog people would know what they are looking for and would know full well to go to a very good breeder, and one that they trust so that this type of check is rendered unneccessary.  I would hope that they will have met, and handled, the pup more than once and will have, quite naturally, checked the pup over without causing offence.

> but if a potential puppy owner looking for a pet (and I assumed that's what this thread was about)

If this thread is for the pet owner and novice then the most important thing is to find a breeder they can trust to deliver what they are looking for.  The best advice is to meet the breeder more than once, preferably without seeing any puppies, and spend a bit of time getting to know them.  You would soon get a feeling for them and their ethos.  If the breeder isn't talking about health checks, the long term welfare of their puppy, their willingness to take it back if necessary, grooming advice, feeding regimes etc then perhaps you should walk away.  No good breeder in their right mind would sell you a puppy with known problems so I'm with Tooolz here.

As in so many cases it's not always what you do, it's the way that you do it.  As a buyer with questions about hernias, cleft p's etc wouldn't you just ask the breeder about them?  The breeder would then explain how soon these things are noticable, what they look like, what the implications are etc and you'd get your reassurance without causing offence.  If they couldn't answer these basics then again - walk away - you want to buy from someone who has knowledge and experience and who will give you back up and support if the need arises.

If you do decide to buy a dog from a friend of a friend cos they're cute and she needs to get rid of them, or from someone with the results of an accidental mating then it really is buyer beware.  In those instances make sure that you have the pup checked over by an expert before you buy or ensure you have right of return following a vet check.

As this is based, supposedly on personal experience, opinion and information, I fail to understand the need by certain folks responding to 'have a pop' at anyone who doesn't share their opinion.

Why the sarcasm barely veiled - if at all - by silly winking smilies?  Why the insinuation that those who would be displeased at the checks discussed may have something to hide or suffer from inappropriate pride or vanity?

Some of those most vehement in disregarding my views and those of a few others are many years away from having last bred a puppy and many more still since having last purchased one.  Things change and IME so too our opinions when actually being recently or imminently involved in something rather than relying on distant memories.  I could insert a silly winking smiley but feel it would be inappropriate as the tone of some posters is one of ridicule and as far as I'm concerned there is no amusement to be gained from such unacceptable behaviour among adults.

>I could insert a silly winking smiley

I take it that you don't (as I do) use the 'silly' winking smiley to show that there is no insult intended - that it's all meant good humouredly (different to ridicule or amusement)? Which smiley do you use for that then?

> Why the sarcasm barely veiled

Weesht yer self hen dont take it to heart..I'm not.
The bottom line is ...there are many more 'breeders' who's methods can be disapproved of  slightly more.

So.... I take the elitelist stance but no puppies were hurt in the making of this post :-)  ;-)

I don't use it for sarcastic digs at people - which has been done here on several posts.  Humour is something we all enjoy sharing but if used to belittle or ridicule someone else it is blatant sarcasm (and you know the difference).

Moving on, in your post

>if, as a breeder, you'd be mortally offended if a prospective buyer checked over your pups, are you not equally mortally offended when a judge does the same thing in the ring? I genuinely can't see the difference

I personally think there is a world of difference between me, or anyone, paying for the professional and expert assessment of my carefully selected, responsibly bred and healthy dog against the breed standard and someone with little or no breed specific knowledge attempting to analyse whether or not I have the ability to properly arrange the breeding, whelping, rearing and socialising of a typical and much loved litter  raised in parasite free home surroundigs.

And FTR, no 'I want one now' type of purchaser would get a puppy from me anyway so, apart from my disapproval in principle of a random stranger 'inspecting' or 'questioning' my standards, the opportunity would not arise anyway as they would be required to have many conversations, a home check, vet ref and meet my family and our adult dogs before setting their eyes on a puppy - on the proviso of course that during this 'getting to know one another' period they had fulfilled my criteria.

> no puppies were hurt in the making of this po

speak for yersel hen, just belted the baby gate aff pup's nose during latest escape attempt )

> just belted the baby gate aff pup's nose during latest escape attempt

Oh no....didn't I read somewhere that dogs need a nose?

> Why the sarcasm barely veiled - if at all - by silly winking smilies?

There is no sarcasm.  It is just as JG has said.
Yes, it is about 8 years since I bred a litter but I don't quite know what you mean there.  What changes are you thinking about?

>someone with little or no breed specific knowledge attempting to analyse whether or not I have the ability to properly arrange the breeding, whelping, rearing and socialising of a typical and much loved litter  raised in parasite free home surroundigs.

IME few pet buyers have much breed specific knowledge (it's my job to make sure they understand things of that nature), but they have a fair idea of how to recognise a healthy puppy - and I think that's important that they should be able to satisfy themselves that I'm not trying to 'sell them a pup' as it were. I'm a great believer in 'Caveat Emptor'.

Maybe it's a breed thing, but in my breed we get a lot of people who can't see beyond the pretty spots - the ones who look at the puppy itself beneath the spots are the ones who make the better owners.

Perhaps I'm too proud of my reputation.

But not everyone knows about your reputation toolz not even if they have done research, you know how good you are but the general public don't so you have to expect whoever is buying a puppy from you to interview you too :)  

I don't think a puppy is anything like buying a new car, whether it be a mercedes or a ford, brand new cars usually offer a 3 year guarantee, but with puppies you can't expect that, anything can happen. And a breeder with nothing to hide should welcome the prospective owners taking such a keen interest in what is hopefully going to be a lifetime commitment to that puppy.

Munrogirl I totally agree with you about checking the health tests of not only the parents but also back a few generations.

> the ones who look at the puppy itself beneath the spots are the ones who make the better owners.

Prior to this thread I have never given it much thought but the more I do the more I agree with that.  Regardless of what research they have done regarding me if they have given consideration to checking for themselves that all they have presumed is so, then it seems to me they are surely the sort of people to really care about the continuing welfare of my puppy.......or their puppy as it will become :-)

> I'm a great believer in 'Caveat Emptor'.
>

Before a potential puppy owner gets into 'Fortress Tooolz', apart from being cross-examined, told in no uncertain terms that I will robustly enforce my contract and had a full run down of the pros and cons of the said pup....they will be guaranteed a life time of support and assurance of my take back policy  - I will know them and they me.....so maybe a little less to 'Emptor'  than with some.
And yet...hardly a show goes by without someone asking if they could be " considered' for one of my pups ...I just dont seem able to put these people off !
I suspect I'm just finding any excuse not to let my babies go

> But not everyone knows about your reputation toolz

With respect Perry....do you think that they would get within a mile of my babies until they did. I dont want people who want a puppy I want someone who wants one of my puppies. And I will keep a pup until I find that person.

>I suspect I'm just finding any excuse not to let my babies go

That I understand completely and totally agree with! :-) We just see different ways of doing it; with me, the ones who aren't interested in checking for themselves are the ones who're more likely to be shown the door - without a pup! After all, we need to be happy in our own minds that our beloved puppies are going to the best possible people (other than ourselves, of course!).

but if, as a breeder, you'd be mortally offended if a prospective buyer checked over your pups, are you not equally mortally offended when a judge does the same thing in the ring? I genuinely can't see the difference.

The judge isn't looking for fleas and dirty ears!!! So BIG difference. I'd be just as offended IF a dog judge did exactly that. We also pay a judge to get an opinion of our dog as we respect them (or we would not enter under them), we don't pay a novice puppy buyer.

>The judge isn't looking for fleas and dirty ears!!!

But sometimes - at least according to critiques I've read - the judge finds them (along with uncut nails, dirty teeth etc), so they certainly take note accordingly!

>we don't pay a novice puppy buyer.

No - we expect the novice puppy buyer to pay us!

I'm sure I read a post about a common procedure when buying a horse (independent vet checks before any money changes hands etc) which was very relevant and interesting, but it seems to have disappeared. Most odd.

Can I jsut say, as one half of a couple who are now talking about getting another dog in the near future, I would be HONOURED to be chosen to have a puppy from several of the breeders here. 

But sometimes - at least according to critiques I've read - the judge finds them (along with uncut nails, dirty teeth etc), so they certainly take note accordingly!

Well that's a new one on me! Teeth yes -but the teeth do need to be looked at. I fail to see how you'd find anything else -nor have I ever seen it mentioned in critiques. Maybe we should ask the judges on this thread if they find fleas and dirty ears when judging?

> I'm sure I read a post about a common procedure when buying a horse (independent vet checks before any money changes hands etc) which was very relevant and interesting, but it seems to have disappeared. <IMG alt=confused src="/images/confused.gif"> Most odd.

You did! It has! and yes!