Professional Breeders

Chuffy

If you have the space, time, money knowledge and compassion to be a breeder, would you not WANT to fulfill your own wish and spare just a few of those resources to help the breed you love?  Is it not a natural reaction?  

Would you not be quite conscious that you may well be contributing to over population by producing more puppies, would you not feel that you were offsetting that a little by being involved in rescue, in addition to asking the buyers to sign a contract?

I would be willing to bet that most of the people here involved in rescue would want all breeders to be involved in what they do.  If they can do it, if they can pick up those pieces time after time and still feel confident that the world really needs their next litter, then yeah, maybe that next litter really is worth producing.  No?

 Sorry I just don't agree. You make it sound as if all breeders are the problem and should help rescue because they created the need for rescue. That just isn't true. Most breeders I know will and do take their dogs back if the home doesn't work out. Most I know will or do take their dogs back from shelters/rescues if by chance one ends up there. In fact, I have known in many cases where one breeder will take another breeder's dog if they end up with out a home and the breeder for some reason can't or is a great distance away. Or sire's owner may take the dog. Or the breeder of the sire or dam may.

The breed I breed does not often end up in shelters or rescues. In AKC's stats they have ranged between 100-122, out of 157 breeds in popularity in the past ten years. In 2006 there were only 266 registered - hardly enough to cause an "overpopulation". At a point, there "needs" to be "your next litter" of low number breeds or those breeds will disappear. Besides think the world will always need litters of well bred, sound purebred puppies :)

Chuffy

 I don't see it as a rule as such.  More plain common sense.  Why produce puppies if you don't have people asking for them?  Admitted, the litter may be large.  Some may not be what the buyer wanted (wrong sex for example, or pet instead of show quality), but WHY breed at all if you have no homes lined up?  Seems downright daft to me.  For one thing, you only have a relatively small window in which to find perfect forever homes for your pups, and even if you don't care to much about that you may just want a quick sale to keep your costs down. 

 

 You make a lot of assumptions. Just because you don't have puppies sold or spoken for prior to birth doesn't mean anything. When a breeder can sell or does sell their puppies really isn't anyone else's business. Why breed if you don't have people punding your door down? Because you want to further your line maybe? Because you can only wait so long on breeding a bitch? Because everyone has to start somewhere? Funny how this is a double standard - breeders shouldn't breed to fill demand but should only breed if they have a great demand.

 What is the "small window" to find homes for puppies anyway?

Chuffy

  I'm not suggesting that you are "responsible" for someone else's mess, but I do think you should keep your eyes open to the fact that "that mess" might well be how one of your pups ends up one day. 

I'll say it again - if I had the resources to breed, you bet I'd be using some of those resources to make "someone else's mess" my problem.  A dog breeder should be a dog lover, END OF.  And in this instance, just for once, when you CAN, yes it does mean you SHOULD.  That's the ethics I expect from a breeder I purchased from.

 And if someone isn't involved in dog rescue they must not be dog lovers? Does this apply to pet owners too? Dog groomers? Trainers? Pet supply sales people? Vets? Vet techs? Are they too, unethical if they are not involved or unworthy of considering themselves a dog lover?

AgileGSD

 Sorry I just don't agree. You make it sound as if all breeders are the problem and should help rescue because they created the need for rescue. That just isn't true.

 

My apologies then, because that is not what I am trying to say.

It's not that "all breeders are the problem".  "Good" breeders certainly don't create the need for rescue!  Good grief, a "good breeder" has a strict take back policy in every pup they sell, if they were the only pups being born and sold then logically, happily, shelters everywhere would go out of business!

But yeah, I still think that breeders should put their money where their mouth is, so to speak.  Now, rare breeds, breeds that rarely end up in rescue, breeds that NEED to be bred, just to keep the breed going - that's a slightly different kettle of fish and one I hadn't thought of before this point in the discussion.  That's assuming that the breed deserves to continue, which, depending on the breed itself might be another point up for discussion (on another thread).

I also agree that the world will always needs puppies that are physically and temperamentally sound.  I COMPLETELY agree that the caring and compassionate folks SHOULDN'T hold back from breeding, JUST to avoid (or help combat, depending on your POV) overpopulation, because that gives the shoddy breeders a free rein! 

If you're a good breeder, then BREED.  Provide the world with excellent pups.  Better your breed.  *raspberry* to "overpopulation", real or imagined.  Your "not breeding" won't help solve (or prevent) the problem. 

What will?  Can you think of a better solution than to have knowledgeable, compassionate people who have the resources mucking in and taking some of the load?  I suppose you could say I think that breeders have a moral obligation.

In addition to which, I don't comprehend how anyone can claim to really love a breed and be passionate about it and not be involved in the breed rescue.  (I hope we can all agree that breeders darn well SHOULD love and be passionate about their breed.)  I don't know how anyone can have the resources to breed and not WANT to use some of those resources to help a needy dog.  I suppose I am trying to measure another man's wheat with my own bushel.

AgileGSD

The breed I breed does not often end up in shelters or rescues. In AKC's stats they have ranged between 100-122, out of 157 breeds in popularity in the past ten years. In 2006 there were only 266 registered - hardly enough to cause an "overpopulation". At a point, there "needs" to be "your next litter" of low number breeds or those breeds will disappear. Besides think the world will always need litters of well bred, sound purebred puppies :)

 

I was going to raise this point too.  While I agree that many breeds are overbred, there are ALSO breeds that need to be bred purely to keep them around.  I don't think fans of those rarer breeds (I am one) would ever want their chosen breed to go the same way as so many of the popular breeds have, but there is absolutely an awareness that breedings *need* to happen.

As an example, my "heart breed" had 13 puppies born to it last year in all of the UK.  THIRTEEN.  *Maybe* half of those are going to be worthy of one day being bred.  This isn't a breed that winds up in shelters or rescues, or a breed that the puppy farmers here have cottoned on to because everyone wants breeds they have heard of.  With numbers like that, it wouldn't take very long for the bloodlines here to die out totally if no one was breeding.

AgileGSD

Chuffy

 I don't see it as a rule as such.  More plain common sense.  Why produce puppies if you don't have people asking for them?  Admitted, the litter may be large.  Some may not be what the buyer wanted (wrong sex for example, or pet instead of show quality), but WHY breed at all if you have no homes lined up?  Seems downright daft to me.  For one thing, you only have a relatively small window in which to find perfect forever homes for your pups, and even if you don't care to much about that you may just want a quick sale to keep your costs down. 

 

 You make a lot of assumptions. Just because you don't have puppies sold or spoken for prior to birth doesn't mean anything. When a breeder can sell or does sell their puppies really isn't anyone else's business. Why breed if you don't have people punding your door down? Because you want to further your line maybe? Because you can only wait so long on breeding a bitch? Because everyone has to start somewhere? Funny how this is a double standard - breeders shouldn't breed to fill demand but should only breed if they have a great demand.

 What is the "small window" to find homes for puppies anyway?

 

Yes, I am making assumptions.  As I said before, I'm measuring another mans wheat with my own bushel.  *I* wouldn't want to breed homeless puppies. Now, for an example, if I bred a litter of Rottweiler puppies, that could be TEN puppies.  That's a lot of puppies to either keep and care for (and they're gonna get big quickly) or to find quality homes for.  I want to build up a friendship with prospective buyers.  Perhaps I could encouarge them to wait until their circumstances are better for a dog?  Perhaps I could suggest a breed better suited to their lifestyle, or encourage them to take on an older dog rather than a pup?  Perhaps I want to interview them at length to make sure I am comfortable selling them a puppy, maybe I want to meet them - and have them meet my puppies once or twice as well? 

Now when *I* buy a puppy, I want a puppy for a reason.  I want to raise him myself.  I want to have as much influence over his early experiences as possible.  Perhaps I want him socialised to children/cats/horses/whatever at a young age.  Maybe I want the excitement and satisfaction that rearing a young pup can bring.  Heck, maybe I just get a kick out of standing outside in the rain at 2am with a poo bag. 

So, If I'm looking for a puppy, I want one at about 8 or 10 weeks old.  Plus, I want to know his breeder beforehand.  I want to build up a relationship with them.  I want to know I can feel comfortable buying from them, that they will continue with after-sale advice and take the pup back if needed, etc etc.  Then I'd like to visit the pups before "mine" comes home with me.  That's seems like A LOT to achieve in 8-10 weeks.

Sure there are a number of reasons for breeding, other than filling a need in the market.  I can totally appreciate that.  Whatever your reasons, the fact remains the pups born still need a home.  If you can keep them, fine.  If you can sell or give them away when they are older, that's fine too.  Am I wrong in thinking that both of those options are a heckuvalot harder?  I'm thinking of the quality one on one training and attention that each pup could get in his new home, and I'm thinking "could I stretch myself out that thin with ten puppies?"

I fail to see the double standard.  Partly because I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "breeders shouldn't breed to fill a demand".  I think there is a difference between: "Woo hoo! LOADS of people want dal puppies, we could make a fortune! Yay!"  and "I really want Spot to have a litter, so I'm pleased to have some people who are interested that could provide really good homes for them".  No, I don't think breeders should breed willy nilly just because lots of people want puppies. 

I don't think that every Tom *** and Harry who wants a dog should have one, TBH.  I suppose if they are GOING to get one, better they go to a decent breeder than a pet shop, so I suppose you could say that's a demand.  But I don't think filling demand should become a priority over maintaining excellent standards and good relationships with the homes sold to, definately not.  Is that a double standard?

Chuffy

That's seems like A LOT to achieve in 8-10 weeks.

A lot of the relationship between breeder an puppy buyer can be done over the course of more than 8-10 weeks. In fact, I usually begin puppy shopping a year before I actually plan on buying a puppy, so I have a year to build a relationship with the breeder. Many breeders advertise year round, whether they currently have a litter or not.

Chuffy

In addition to which, I don't comprehend how anyone can claim to really love a breed and be passionate about it and not be involved in the breed rescue.  (I hope we can all agree that breeders darn well SHOULD love and be passionate about their breed.)  I don't know how anyone can have the resources to breed and not WANT to use some of those resources to help a needy dog.  I suppose I am trying to measure another man's wheat with my own bushel.

 

 I'd say you are. You seem to think if one breeds they must have tons of money to spend on dog stuff and are just being greedy by not "sharing the wealth". Or that they must have space for lots of extra dogs, some of which should be used for rescues. Everyone's situation is different - who are you to judge what is wrong/right for another person? There are also many ways to "give back" to the dog world through funding or volunteer work that doesn't involve rescue such as teaching classes or an officer for the local all breed club, 4H advisor/instructor for a youth dog club, officer, contact person or newsletter editor for local or national breed club, supporting health research, mentoring a newbie or junior or putting on an AKC RDO day - just to name a few! 

 People can love their breed and not be involved with rescue. I again have to question if that statement applies to pet owners who love a certain breed or other animal professionals who love a certain breed. If someone is a long time owner of breed X because they love the breed so much, they should be involved in rescue too or they must not really love that breed? Or does that rule apply only to breeders?

Chuffy

Now when *I* buy a puppy, I want a puppy for a reason.  I want to raise him myself.  I want to have as much influence over his early experiences as possible.  Perhaps I want him socialised to children/cats/horses/whatever at a young age.  Maybe I want the excitement and satisfaction that rearing a young pup can bring.  Heck, maybe I just get a kick out of standing outside in the rain at 2am with a poo bag. 

So, If I'm looking for a puppy, I want one at about 8 or 10 weeks old.  Plus, I want to know his breeder beforehand.  I want to build up a relationship with them.  I want to know I can feel comfortable buying from them, that they will continue with after-sale advice and take the pup back if needed, etc etc.  Then I'd like to visit the pups before "mine" comes home with me.  That's seems like A LOT to achieve in 8-10 weeks.

Sure there are a number of reasons for breeding, other than filling a need in the market.  I can totally appreciate that.  Whatever your reasons, the fact remains the pups born still need a home.  If you can keep them, fine.  If you can sell or give them away when they are older, that's fine too.  Am I wrong in thinking that both of those options are a heckuvalot harder?  I'm thinking of the quality one on one training and attention that each pup could get in his new home, and I'm thinking "could I stretch myself out that thin with ten puppies?"

 

 Just because you wouldn't want to buy a puppy over ten weeks old (honestly that is my preference as well) doesn't mean that it is hard to sell puppies beyond that. With my first litter I kept a puppy, two people I know got puppies and I had one person interested before they were old enough to leave. The remaing two puppies stayed here until one was 4 months and the other was almost 6 months. It really wasn't a problem and they were worked with, housetrained and socialized as though I were going to keep them. The people who bought them were both great homes and didn't at all mind they were older puppies. Some people find that bringing in an older puppy that already has training, has been socialized and housetrained is perfect! Not everyone has the same criteria :) Some breeders even purposely hang on to several puppies until they are older to better know which one will be best for them to keep.

 Even the best plans can be changed due to circumstance. My last litter was all pretty much spoken for before they were old enough to be sold. At 6 weeks old they caught parvo and the plans for them changed. One puppy, the pick female died and her intended home decided to not take another from that litter as she was their clear favorite. Several others backed out, fearing the puppies would be unhealthy or "weird" even after recovering (which I have seen happen). The rest of them lived but had to be kept until they were 12 weeks old to ensure they were healthy enough to be placed. I split them up with their co-breeder and sire's owner to better get them socialized. On top of that the sire's owner was supposed to take the pick male, the litter had just one male and he had a retained testicle. I pretty much had to start over finding homes for them once I knew they were going to be ok. I did manage to get them into good homes by 4 months old though - not too bad!

corgipower

Chuffy

That's seems like A LOT to achieve in 8-10 weeks.

A lot of the relationship between breeder an puppy buyer can be done over the course of more than 8-10 weeks. In fact, I usually begin puppy shopping a year before I actually plan on buying a puppy, so I have a year to build a relationship with the breeder. Many breeders advertise year round, whether they currently have a litter or not.

 

Exactly!  That's my exact point! 

AgileGSD

I'd say you are. You seem to think if one breeds they must have tons of money to spend on dog stuff and are just being greedy by not "sharing the wealth".

 

Not quite.  Look at it this way.  I can't have another dog right now.  I couldn't take in another shelter dog, I don't have the space or the money or the time.  If I don't have space for just one more shelter dog, then how in heck can I have space for a litter of puppies? 

That said, this is a good point:

AgileGSD

There are also many ways to "give back" to the dog world through funding or volunteer work that doesn't involve rescue such as teaching classes or an officer for the local all breed club, 4H advisor/instructor for a youth dog club, officer, contact person or newsletter editor for local or national breed club, supporting health research, mentoring a newbie or junior or putting on an AKC RDO day - just to name a few! 

 

 

 

AgileGSD

People can love their breed and not be involved with rescue. I again have to question if that statement applies to pet owners who love a certain breed or other animal professionals who love a certain breed. If someone is a long time owner of breed X because they love the breed so much, they should be involved in rescue too or they must not really love that breed?

That depends.  Are they planning on bringing more of that breed into the world?

You seem rather fixated on my comment which was basically, don't we ALL love dogs, don't we all want to help every one of them?  It seems unnatural to me that anyone could NOT want to, but then it seems alien to me that some people don't even like dogs.  Weird.

AgileGSD

 Just because you wouldn't want to buy a puppy over ten weeks old (honestly that is my preference as well) doesn't mean that it is hard to sell puppies beyond that. With my first litter I kept a puppy, two people I know got puppies and I had one person interested before they were old enough to leave. The remaing two puppies stayed here until one was 4 months and the other was almost 6 months. It really wasn't a problem and they were worked with, housetrained and socialized as though I were going to keep them. The people who bought them were both great homes and didn't at all mind they were older puppies. Some people find that bringing in an older puppy that already has training, has been socialized and housetrained is perfect! Not everyone has the same criteria :) Some breeders even purposely hang on to several puppies until they are older to better know which one will be best for them to keep.

 

I can see what you are saying and I'm not criticising you for it at all.  If you had bred the litter with no homes lined up at all, particularly if "your" breed was one that typically had large litters, THEN I might want to criticise.  I'm sure I said before that if you are able to care for them and sell them when they are older then that's fine.  But my question was, is that not more difficult? 

Mind you, this is me talking.  I haven't even space for one more dog, even one desperately in need, so no way could I breed a litter and do it "properly", being prepared to keep the pups as long as needed, and take them back and again keep them for as long as needed if the new home didn't work out.... sounds like, if you are a "good breeder" you HAVE to be prepared to be involved in "rescue", because if one of those homes doesn't work out, that is exactly what you could be doing, no?  You could even go so far as to say that helping in rescue would give you some valuable experience which you may well be called to draw on at some point in the future.

Which takes me back to my earlier points -

1 - there IS an upper limit to how many puppies you can produce and still "do the thing properly" (unless you are actually Wonder Woman)

2 - it is surely better to have some homes lined up before you go ahead with the litter??

 

Chuffy

So, If I'm looking for a puppy, I want one at about 8 or 10 weeks old.  Plus, I want to know his breeder beforehand.  I want to build up a relationship with them.  I want to know I can feel comfortable buying from them, that they will continue with after-sale advice and take the pup back if needed, etc etc.  Then I'd like to visit the pups before "mine" comes home with me.  That's seems like A LOT to achieve in 8-10 weeks.

     From your posts it seems to me that you understand very little about what it takes to actually be a breeder. Rule number one is you need to have a strong stomach/thick skin, and rule #2 is leave the control issues at the door. I notice much of the AR mindset is weaved around control issues - everyone has live up to a certain (near impossible) standard or they are not an ethical breeder, worthy pet owner, etc. You don't take the human element under much consideration, but I digress.

     I completely agree with the point AgileGSD brought up - there seems to be some double standard here, and in general when one gets an "internet education" as to what a reputable breeder is. Much of this advice is dispensed by those who do not breed & know very little about animal husbandry issues. I've heard the rhetoric about a good breeder needing a waiting list before all the pups are born ... and let me tell you, unless you are quite the prestegiouis breeder, you do not have buyers banging your door down! I know breeders who've been breeding show champion dogs for 15+ years or much longer in some cases, and oft times, they do not have a waiting list, just interest. Interest does not sell pups.

     Now, while I have refused many sales and screen my buyers thoroughly, I do NOT wait until I have a waiting list to breed and never intend to operate in such a manner. Honestly, I don't know any successful breeder who does. The successful ones I do know breed because THEY want a pup and the buyers come later. Anyway, getting a feel for a buyer is not a lengthy process that takes several weeks. One advertises their litter, screens the buyers. In my case, I have an application. If I get a bad feeling or an answer I don't like, it's rejected. If approved, we speak further. I give them more information, we usually interview each other on the phone, but many times business is conducted entirely via e-mail. I do not set up a series of visits (come on, I have a part time day job, the other dogs to take care of, the litter to tend to ...) and nothing is set up before the pups have their first vaccination. We meet, I help them pick a pup, and usually 2 weeks after the initial visit, they pick up their new pup. Oh, and NOTHING gets set up w/o a deposit. I will not have strange people in my home whose real name and address I may not have. Not in this day & age ... I have a litter of 4 two week old pups ... none were spoken for before birth but all are sold now. To GOOD homes. To people who I've spoken to or otherwise had lengthy correspondence with and we both have to just, at one point, TRUST each other. So, no finding responsible homes should not be some lengthy process which entails befrending every buyer. Yes, there are those that I do become friends with, that I will be speaking with for years to come. But this IS a business, even if you breed one litter every 10 years, and finding homes is a business transaction, not a quest to make a forever buddy for myself.

 

Chuffy

But I don't think filling demand should become a priority over maintaining excellent standards and good relationships with the homes sold to, definately not.  Is that a double standard

 


     My hounds are used primarily for hunting - it's what got me into Beagles in the first place and hunt will always be a deciding factor in my breeding program. The best of the absolute best are retained by me for my own hunting pack and breeding program. I also have some show lines, and may do some show x show breedings in the future, in which case, I expect to have at least some of the pups go to show homes. However, I rarely sell pups to a hunting home. I market them towards pet homes, but make no mistake about it, they ARE well bred. Yet they are being sold to average families as pets. Essentially, I am a pet breeder and the working/showing my dogs is a hobby. In other breeds, I've seen titled "working" dogs that were a joke. Same goes for some show lines. So don't assume that titles determine breeding suitability. You can put my pups in front of a gun and they'll make you VERY happy. On that note, I've seen titled dogs in my breed that I would never breed to because despite all their fancy titles, they wouldn't know a hare or a rabbit if one came up and bit them on the @$$, and I think that's a shame. It's also VERY difficult to get a field championship on a Beagle, because you need much more than 16 points. Itcan take years and thousands of dollars. Some of the best bunny shaggers/pet Beagles are untitled hounds bred by hunters or hobby breeders ...

     So the short answer to your question is no. Breeding to supply pet pups does not mean one needs to lower their standards.

HoundMusic

I've heard the rhetoric about a good breeder needing a waiting list before all the pups are born ... and let me tell you, unless you are quite the prestegiouis breeder, you do not have buyers banging your door down! I know breeders who've been breeding show champion dogs for 15+ years or much longer in some cases, and oft times, they do not have a waiting list, just interest. Interest does not sell pups.

  Same with the breeders I know. Really big name breeders tend to have much more interest in puppies, as do litters where one parent is a big name dog. Otherwise having long lists of homes prior to puppies being born is just not the norm. I think you are right on about such ideas being pushed by people who aren't breeders and aren't familiar with the breeding world. I remember a WDJ article by Pat Miller (who I think is pretty AR minded FWIW) called "When Only A Purebred Will Do". The article first suggested that mixed breeds are wonderful and should be considered. It heavily promoted adoption, even if you are looking for a purebred. The article went on in a tone of if you feel you absolutely have to go to a breeder, you should only buy from ethical breeders. I can tell you that none of the breeders I know, even ones which IMO are ethical without question would not meet Pat Miller's standard for a good breeder. Neither would I. Of course, Pat Miller is not involved with breeding, showing or owning well bred purebred dogs - so why would she be a good source of info on finding one? And furthermore, since well bred purebred dogs clearly don't interest her - why would she bother writing an article for people looking for one?

First, I have to say I don't care if a breeder has a list of people wanting puppies before he or she breeds.

But with my list of what makes an ethical breeder, which is pretty strict, I had no problems finding ridgeback breeders I'd be happy to buy a dog from. Ethical is a specific term for me. In the way I use it, one can be a good breeder but not an ethical one. A run of the mill good breeder is not unethical in my books. They are neutral.

I am not an animal rights fanatic, but I have strong personal beliefs about the value of life, and the decision to bring more life into the world. It is a big deal to me. I don't try and force my beliefs on other people - taking place in this conversation is the most I've ever said about the topic!

I have high ideals. I don't apologize for them. I don't look down on people who see things differently ( as long as we're not talking abuse, which we're not in this thread).