As I can't find the original thread (?) - I googled, and found this article... fwiw

http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2014/06/puppy-farm-or-commercial-breeder/

The original thread was deleted.

I noticed this sentence in the article "This difference in terminology, it seems, largely comes down to the fact that puppy farms sell to an intermediate (which subsequently sells the pup to a buyer), while a commercial breeder sells directly to the buyer. ". Since the advent of Lucy's Law, the sale of puppies through an intermediate is illegal, and so that perceived difference has vanished. Both types of puppy producers are acting from a primarily commercial basis, and the only difference is the standard of care they give to their livestock.

> the only difference is the standard of care they give to their livestock.

Bang on Jeangenie. Someone who breeds numerous litters every year but keeps their dogs clean, tidy and well fed is still a puppy farmer, they are just at the better end of the spectrum.

>they are just at the better end of the spectrum.

There are good and bad in every sort of farming; some dairy farmers' livestock are kept immaculately, on organic spacious grazing with shade and shelter, have all mod cons and facilities for automatic milking whenever they choose. Some pig farmers have free range animals that are able to express their natural behaviour with plenty of space. Some chicken farmers give their birds excellent care and facilities. But of course at the other end of the scale there are those who have no respect for their animals and are only interested in squeezing every possible penny of profit from them before getting rid. Most are somewhere between the two. All are farmers though - using animals as a primary source of income. Commercial puppy producers are no different.

Absolutely

I agree too - as I said in the original thread I consider a puppy farmer to be someone who breeds primarily for money.

They might have the most amazing premises and give their dogs nothing but the best, or they might be one of those nightmare places full of tiny disgusting cages and dead pups in plastic bags and terrified animals that are bred from season after season and then discarded when they can’t produce any more pups.

Obviously there’s a spectrum here and I don’t think anyone would argue that the nicer end is better than the filthy end, but personally I wouldn’t buy a pup from anyone on that scale, whether they call themselves a commercial breeder or not.

I don’t see any problem with making money from a litter as long as the prices are reasonable, there are always going to be costs involved so it makes sense to try to recoup some of that if you can. But again it comes down to what the aim was behind each litter - new pup for the show ring, carrying on a certain line, trying to improve on an existing dog, lowering COI or hip scores in a line of otherwise excellent dogs, creating a better sport dog, etc all require careful planning and finding the best pairing you can, researching pedigrees and doing all the appropriate health tests. Breeding just for money requires a bitch and a dog and punters willing to buy.

As I said before too a commercial breeder is a puppy farmer.

Should we all agree to block a certain puppy farmer on here? Or at the very least no longer reply to any of their comments (no matter how inflammatory) so they go away?

One of the good ways of determining the quality of the pups produced by any breeder, commercial or hobby, is to google their affix and the names of their dogs; if there's working or showring success there are reports, and some affix searches bring up pages of articles and photos. Others are more of a telling tumbleweed moment; their stock vanishes into the world, never to be heard of again. this is what happens to the majority of pups bred by anyone, but the ones bred for a purpose usually stay visible.

My opinon is i tend to just prefer to use commercial breeder. Then it's down to a sliding scale based on how they breed and operate from a better commercial breeder to a terrible one. Their all the same type of breeder just different standards. Like how you can have a great hobby breeder and a crappy one their both still hobby breeders but one is a better version than the other (same goes for working breeders, pet breeders ect).

While I don't agree with commercially breeding dogs I think there will always be commercial breeders, so the sorts of things you would expect from a good hobby breeder should be encouraged or required of them to lower the amount of or get rid of the commercial breeders on the worse side of the scale.

I'm pretty disgusted to be honest, that the original thread got deleted.  This website is supposed to be promoting good breeding practices and yet I got a 7 day ban for pointing out the truth.  I'll be refraining from posting in the future as I can't stand promoting duplicitious posts.  Good luck with CD, not for me now since they allow people to promote puppy farming on their site.

You got banned?! Good lord that’s really poor showing I’m so sorry that happened. I’d love to keep in touch if you aren’t going to be on here. I’m sure I can learn plenty from you even if certain people don’t feel the same x

I am so angry that I got banned for speaking up for the truth, just looking now at a 'fully health tested' litter from an elbow grade stud dog of 1 on Champdogs, either step up or lose your credibility!

Oh good lord surely they can check these things!

Well an elbow scored dog IS health tested....... even though the result wasn't good it's there for people to see. Personally I'd be ashamed to advertise pups from a parent like that (well I wouldn't do the mating) but I seem to remember it being stated at some point a few years ago that scores of 1 would be accepted and hips was something like a certain percentage above the breed average.

I too am sorry to hear this. I’ve learned a great deal from your detailed, knowledgeable and thoughtful posts. I’ve a feeling you’re not the only one.

Wait, you got banned and yet the person who’s deliberately dredging up old threads to challenge people didn’t? That doesn’t make any sense at all :(

I know who’s made the more valuable contribution to the site, and I’m sad that the powers that be have responded this way.

> Wait, you got banned and yet the person who’s deliberately dredging up old threads to challenge people didn’t? That doesn’t make any sense at all :(

Sadly it makes financial sense, most f the posters on this forum aren't actually paying members, they're not contributing financially to CD, a certain "commercial breeder" is

> Sadly it makes financial sense, most f the posters on this forum aren't actually paying members, they're not contributing financially to CD, a certain "commercial breeder" is <img class="fsm fsm_roll" src="/images/epx.png" title="roll" alt="" />

Now that would be ironic, if the motivation is primarily financial. :(

The person in question hasn't posted at all for a day or two now so either they got a temporary ban as well or just decided to stop?

I too am very sorry to see yet another valuable member and responsible breeder leave.  not the first time I've seen it unfortunately

I got banned for abusive language, so there you have it, speaking the truth is abusive.  I have absolutely no words, I thought this was a good website for promoting ethical breeding, yet I get banned for speaking out against breeding from a stud dog with 36/36 hips.  If I get a permanent ban so be it, Iv'e had my say.

"I got banned for abusive language"

For 7 days yes you did. As a result an entire thread was removed from the forum because it was too much hassle to edit it and remove your obscenities. You are free to express your opinion but please keep your language decent.

My language was decent, throughout the entire thread, but you obviously felt for some reason that it was better to remove me from the forum than allow a puppy farmer to continue to contribute.  No doubt I will get banned again, fair enough, shows the intent of the website.

The thread in question was started by me and I read every single post on there - some many times over. Never, from anyone, did I see abusive language of any sort. Unless the term ‘puppy farmer’ is now classed as abusive. There is only one person who should be banned from this forum (permanently ideally) and we all know who that is. I stand by sleeping_lion completely.

I make a point of keepingu my replies polite, I never use obscenities to those I don't know personally

"My language was decent, throughout the entire thread"

Are you sure ?

Sleeping_Lion - "You really are talking bollocks though aren't you"

That is just one example so please don't play the victim. The only thing that will get you banned is your own behaviour.

Really, I got banned for saying someone was talking bollocks when they were?  Oh crikey, that's hilarious

So someone can claim to fully health test their dogs on the forum, and it turns out they haven't, and they've allowed a stud dog with a 1 elbow grade to produce numerous litters, and they've allowed a stud dog with 36/36 hips of siring litters, even though they claim no knowledge, but you accuse them of talking bollocks and get banned?  Get real

And the worst part of this Mark, is that these dogs are showing up as 'health tested' this needs changing, it needs some sort of parameter set or Champdogs is going to loose any credibility it had, I certainly won't recommend it from now onwards, how can I?

What is the point of me doing health tests on my dogs, doing the research on pedigrees and EBVs, etc, and being lump in with someone who has done a hip score that is 36/36, and they show up as health tested?

I’ll jump in here in agreement. She claims on her page that all her dogs are elbow/hip scored and dna tested. The results are not shown and so don’t exist?! Claims the parents are healthy but have poor (or horrendous in the case of 36/36) results. How can you let someone like this advertise on your website which supposedly promotes responsible breeding? It’s just unacceptable.

I’m not sure I understand why a bit of very mild bad language is considered worse than lies and deliberately raking up past threads just to bait people into “proving” an opinion someone’s already formed before anyone else even posted anything.

I certainly don’t understand why calling out someone’s lies and dubious breeding practices is worse than breeding a dog with terrible hips and imperfect elbows and claiming to be some kind of ideal we’re all supposed to venerate lest we be accused to being “mean”.

Exactly

What is 'annoying' (using nice language) is that the person who has obviously complained, who has bred on from a dog with 36/36 hips, and another with an elbow grade of 1, and bitches with no where near 9 genetic health tests, has been dredging up old threads and trying to make out that I don't care about my pups, so where is the admin in all of this.  I think you need a serious review of what goes on on this forum, as the person who seems to have gained your attention is someone who isn't entirely honest, and yet you're punishing fully paid up members who go above and beyond the KC ABS and breed club requirements, so good luck with that!

Hi chaumsong
I joined champdogs to get away from such breeders...I would gladly vote for making champdogs exclusive to those breeders who are genuinely breeding to improve lines,encouraging shows and genuinely careing  for their dogs. I have been victim to such  byb and it was very stressful, traumatic and costly. Animals are very special and are entitled to love and care,it makes me very sad to see how these bulk dog breeders behave. Dogs are one of mans best companions,they deserve love and respect...farming them is not love and respect. Thumbs down down to bulk dog breeding. Thumbs up for selective,FUNCTIONAL dog breeding. I myself and my husband are hoping to add a new puppy companion to our family when we retire in three years..by then things should be better as NO WAY would I look for one at the moment. Their are lots of people being scammed.

According to that fount of all wisdom Wikipedia, following a survey "25% of the people regarded "bollocks" as "very severe", 32% "quite severe", 34% "mild" and 8% considered it "not swearing"" Perhaps the best-known use of the term is in the title of the 1977 punk rock album Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols. Testimony in a resulting prosecution over the term demonstrated that in Old English, the word referred to a priest, and could also be used to mean "nonsense". Defence barrister John Mortimer QC and Virgin Records won the case: the court ruled that the word was not obscene.[51] It just means "put aside all of that other rubbish and pay attention to this"
The word may be coarse, but it has been legally determined in court to not be obscene. It certainly isn't abusive.

Hi sleeping_lion
I’m a fully paid member of champdogs..I joined because I was hoping I would find FUNCTIONAL Genuine dog breeders and I believe the majority are but it looks like admin are neglecting to police dog breeders. How disappointing for those people that have purchased a puppy with such poor Health Checks...results etc. In the long term it could do Champdogs more harm than good because good dog breeders don’t want to be tarred with the same brush as the saying goes and leave.

For years I’ve recommended Champdogs as the go to place to find litters from health tested parents. However recently I’ve noticed a change appearing and health tests are minimal, eyes not hips and elbows in golden retrievers, dna tests but nothing else. In other words the cheaper end of the health tests in order to say that the dog is health tested. A breed Facebook page I use is now beginning to warn newbies to be very careful when using Champdogs for a puppy due to it having become less assiduous over health tests on breeding dogs. I was greatly saddened to see this happening

Much as I believe we all come to a point when maybe a 'time out' is needed, it's sad that just one individual can adversely affect a forum like this.  I don't think I will be contributing (fwiw !) on here much for the time being, even if I may lurk.

I also have said that not every breeder who advertises a litter on here fully health tests and some don't bother at all as there is no requirement to, which is sad. I do say to people do your homework on here. So someone in my breed can advertise a litter with no health tests but if they do bother to hip and elbow score then they have to be within certain parameters, so for some this will push people to not bothering to health test. I understand a 2 elbow can only be allowed if the ebv's are in the green and the other dog is a 0.

I really think its time to make sure anyone who advertises is health testing.
I know its hard to Police with so many breeds but many breeders don't advertise litters on here but have their names down as breeders and don't health test or fully health test.
We have a website in my breed which some are on and to be on there you have to health test, only requiring 3 tests to be on there but its something and its where I'm now directing people.

Jodi - I agree with you, sadly.

As an occasional conscientious puppy buyer I try to do my homework to ensure any new addition is, above all, healthy and from FULLY health tested parents with GOOD results.  I often get asked for recommendations for finding breeders who meet these criteria.  I always happily suggested Champdogs in the past.  I am much more cautious about doing so now.  I'm shocked by the lack of, or minimal, health testing frequently appearing in adverts for puppies my breed.

Of course, there are no guarantees about health (just as the KC ABS scheme does not guarantee excellence)  but a site which promotes "responsible breeding" should do just that.  I think there really should be higher standards for advertising puppies and stricter guidance for what constitutes "Health Tested" parents before that term can be used.

Inexperienced buyers are too inclined to see the phrase "Health Tested" on a well established site and are reassured everything is fine when quite often it is not.

(There are also currently some shocking prices being asked by "reputable breeders" but I guess that is a different, Covid related, subject!)

Poor moderating in my opinion, there was no need to delete the entire thread, just lock it if it went to far. As for bad language, well, why didn't you just edit the post ?

The term 'Puppy Farmer'  comes with a majority view of the horrendous & cruel treatment of animals whether it be terrible conditions/welfare issues etc and/or high nos of bitch & puppy deaths through neglect. In my view., a good 'Commercial Breeder' who may have learned by previous mistakes - granted (everyone needs to start somewhere) but who then takes advice from and uses the UK Kennel Club Guidelines moving forward is following both legal & moral judgement. There are BYB out there also (every likelyhood who have no interest but to make their dirty money) and I hope they are all shut down, prosecuted & jailed.  So this is really comparing a kiddie who steals a sweet from a shop with a murdering robber and applying the same label/sentencel.  That is a spectrum that is just not measurable nor viable. The Dog continually highlighted on the previously pulled threads relating to hip scores has never appeared on the CD site, you are aware that an elbow score of 1 was given as appropriate on the spectrum by KC UK -  but this historical scenario brought to the table turned the whole thread into a train crash which was originally entitled 'Puppy Farming'.  I was advised that going off thread or using historical posts as reference was not allowed.  This thread relates to Puppy Farming but again has turned into 4 or 5 different topics from abuse to what constitues swearing the final outcome making the CD site itself a target.

That’s nothing compared to the language thrown at me by someone else a few months ago. THAT thread hung around for ages before anything was done about it. Needless to say I blocked the person concerned. I think you’ve been unduly harsh on Sleeping Lion.

I love that Hoggie will happily go off on a huge, off topic, aggressive rant about people, but when people find evidence against them, they say stop going off topic.

> I love that Hoggie will happily go off on a huge, off topic, aggressive rant about people, but when people find evidence against them, they say stop going off topic.

That's because they haven't got a leg to stand on.  My first bitch I health tested was 13 years ago, and decided not to breed on because of her health test results; the dog she's used at stud repeatedly, Dashing Donald Bach, had his hips and elbows done in August 2017, so three years ago, and yet they've claimed to follow best advice.  But what do I know!

I think if you’ve bred 6 litters in the last 16 months, many of those months being during a pandemic, and you describe your dog’s health tests as exemplary when they aren’t, and you lie about your breeding, then you’re definitely leaning more towards puppy farmer.

Ranting is historic on my part.  A bit of self control and reflection on everyone's part is required. Just sad there is still a core holding court.

I disagree,