Why do people get judged when asking a breeding question????

amstaffy

..I will quote actual experiences...

..Only reason I did this breeding was for a new show male...

Actual experiences is what I count on the most from this forum.  That shared experience has the most impact on changing a course of action. 

My dog experience is rich and with each new foster dog it gets richer.  I seek help for dogs that drink excess water and has big pee, are ascared of humans, are DA dogs, has allergies, are just a hound, are emaciated, are overweight, are heartworm positive, are crippled, are of a certain breed, etc.  Imagine hearing members' judgemental opinions that all these dogs that I have helped should have been PTS in favor of saving a higher quality dog, the dogs that gets close to what others define as "show" dogs.  They don't know these dogs so it is easy to write them off.

To me, the "reputable" responsible breeder as defined here means all other kinds can be/should be sacrificed.  I believe it is sometimes ok to breed and not have the "show" or club component present.

DPU

amstaffy

..I will quote actual experiences...

..Only reason I did this breeding was for a new show male...

Actual experiences is what I count on the most from this forum.  That shared experience has the most impact on changing a course of action. 

  I believe it is sometimes ok to breed and not have the "show" or club component present.

Me too..my knowledge has come from many years of picking others brains on their experiences to keep the good and shed the bad.

I do disagree with the second part of the quote above..I have a purpose for breeding-first and foremost to provide myself with a dog to continue in the sport/hobby of dog showing. Secondly through my breeding program, to improve on the future of the two breeds I own and dedicate my life too. If I was not involved in the sport of dog showing I would NOT be breding dogs. I do not breed just because, I only breed when "I" need a new show prospect AND have a waiting list. There will never be a litter produced just because I can...matter of fact I just had two girls go in heat and back out again because I do not need another dog to add in the mix. I have this girl pup here who is showing. No, she's not exactly what I wanted but she is a fun dog and should finish easily, even if she doesn't I love her and she's my pet first

amstaffy

I do disagree with the second part of the quote above..I have a purpose for breeding-first and foremost to provide myself with a dog to continue in the sport/hobby of dog showing. Secondly through my breeding program, to improve on the future of the two breeds I own and dedicate my life too. If I was not involved in the sport of dog showing I would NOT be breding dogs. I do not breed just because, I only breed when "I" need a new show prospect AND have a waiting list. There will never be a litter produced just because I can...matter of fact I just had two girls go in heat and back out again because I do not need another dog to add in the mix. I have this girl pup here who is showing. No, she's not exactly what I wanted but she is a fun dog and should finish easily, even if she doesn't I love her and she's my pet first

And that is ok to disagree as long as "DPU should not" is left out.  You have defined a singularly self purpose to breed.  Some other purposes are also ok to me. 

From the statement above, I can see the dogs under your personal control being the ideal representations of the what the breed should be.  But the breed is much larger than just the dogs under your control.  By backing out of breeding the two girls that went into season, you missed the opportunity to better the breed (in the larger sense).  It is not a question of "I can", it should be an individual question of "should" for personal reasons or for a larger purpose.  Did you fail in bettering the breed (in a larger sense) by choosing not to breed the two girls?  I am not saying you should breed your girls with a puppy mill dog even though in some sense that would better the overall breed population. 

I seek help for dogs that drink excess water and has big pee, are ascared of humans, are DA dogs, has allergies, are just a hound, are emaciated, are overweight, are heartworm positive, are crippled, are of a certain breed, etc.  Imagine hearing members' judgemental opinions that all these dogs that I have helped should have been PTS in favor of saving a higher quality dog,

Again....I don't think anyone has implied that. 

whtsthfrequency

I seek help for dogs that drink excess water and has big pee, are ascared of humans, are DA dogs, has allergies, are just a hound, are emaciated, are overweight, are heartworm positive, are crippled, are of a certain breed, etc.  Imagine hearing members' judgemental opinions that all these dogs that I have helped should have been PTS in favor of saving a higher quality dog,

 

Again....I don't think anyone has implied that

Actually, I'm afraid that has been implied, at least in DPU's view. Some people, such as myself, have thought it wiser or more humane to PTS problem dogs in order to have more time and resources for dogs that are not problematic. Example, ten dogs in a kill shelter. One of them is a problem for anyone to handle and can't be put in with other dogs. The other 9 are sweehearts with no problems other than being homeless. Your resources and space are limited, what do you do? Do you PTS the problem dog and concentrate your energies on the dogs that just need good homes? By implication, my statements are taken to mean, for the purposes of DPU's viewpoint, that I said his dogs that he takes care of should have been PTS. That is not what I said but that is how he views it for his points to be made.

The closest shelter to me is a 7 day kill shelter. After eval and temperment test, the dog has 7 business days, not including holidays, to be adopted. If not, PTS. Problems or not. When the shelter's not full, I think they ease up a bit and exactly this kind of scenario comes into play. Plus liability. They won't adopt out a dog with problems of aggression, even if it's just a misunderstood dog. No, it's not fair. But it's the best they can do on a meager budget. Their mobile adoption trailer was not even a city purchase. It was the result of a single donation from a private citizen. He ordered and paid for the trailer to be built, including on-board a/c and gave it to them.

Some people, such as myself, have thought it wiser or more humane to PTS problem dogs in order to have more time and resources for dogs that are not problematic.

 
A priority system in order to maximize the number of adoptable dogs based on health and temperament is different than the accusation that people have advocated euthanizing less-than perfect dogs in order to only breed and keep around "perfect show dogs"

DPU

 Did you fail in bettering the breed (in a larger sense) by choosing not to breed the two girls?  I am not saying you should breed your girls with a puppy mill dog even though in some sense that would better the overall breed population. 

No, I did the breed, my girls and myself a justice by not producing more dogs at a time when the timing isn't right in my life. There is another girl who I co-own who is coming in heat right now. She'll probably go to VA to be bred by her co-owner/co-breeder, she is a Markie daughter and would be a fourth generation of that line for me here should I keep a pup out of that litter. None of the girls are old enough that I was missing anything and can still be bred should I choose too...at this time I choose not to.

 Just because a person ha a bitch who is in heat doesn't mean they should be bred, timing and the future of the pups produced should be a main concern. I didn't need another show pup, I don't have a complete waiting list therefore I did not breed...

whtsthfrequency

A priority system in order to maximize the number of adoptable dogs based on health and temperament is different than the accusation that people have advocated euthanizing less-than perfect dogs in order to only breed and keep around "perfect show dogs"

Some of us who do rescue on a higher scale can see the importance of this...many people who choose to rescue those tough cases don't understand the volume of rescue in some breeds. In my breed we are overwhelmed with Pit bulls...for those who are heavily involved, we know there are some that we must say good bye to. Of course they all must be evaluated completely because this breed of dog is not for the average owner in a normal basis, combined with issues a real time bomb!

 I posted a pictures thread tonight of our newest resident rescue..he has come a long way but still has far to go. The time we've spent with him might have not been the case with someone else but I saw he had a true Am Staff temperament and was very worth every minute we've spent on him.

Some of us who do rescue on a higher scale can see the importance of this...many people who choose to rescue those tough cases don't understand the volume of rescue in some breeds. In my breed we are overwhelmed with Pit bulls...for those who are heavily involved, we know there are some that we must say good bye to.

 
I totally agree with you...I've been lucky in that I've been able to take on one of those "hard cases" - my own dog - but I know that technically speaking, it would have made more sense for the rescue to take a better-tempered dog from the shelter. Ginny waited in rescue for almost a year before someone (me) would finally take her, and I do sometimes wonder how many other dogs could have been brought in and adopted had she not been taken instead. Now, I love my dog fiercely, and am very glad that they took her -  am I saying that my dog is "worth less" than better tempered dogs? Of course not. That by her very nature only, disregarding all situation, (i.e. simply because she was dog aggressive and had no papers, was not a show dog or even a recognized breed - MCs are not exactly AKC dogs) she should have been PTS? No, again, of course not. But like you said, in high volume instances, you almost have to take a prioritizing view and know that there are some you will need to say goodbye to. And as much as I love my dog, as good of a dog as she is in many ways, I always have that little burning question in the back of my mind.

amstaffy

Some of us who do rescue on a higher scale can see the importance of this...many people who choose to rescue those tough cases don't understand the volume of rescue in some breeds. In my breed we are overwhelmed with Pit bulls...for those who are heavily involved, we know there are some that we must say good bye to. Of course they all must be evaluated completely because this breed of dog is not for the average owner in a normal basis, combined with issues a real time bomb!

I am not offended by your statement "don't understand the volume of the rescue".  For me that is a false statement.  It may come from being in lofty position of doing rescue on a higher scale.  One just has to be part of one email rescue network or visit and take a tour of a shelter's operations.  To me, talking in terms of volume or operating on a higher scale lessens the seriousness of the situation and promotes discussion/debates but no real action.

  My rescue is small but out of about 15 dogs, there are 2 Pit Bulls.  They do take more time to place but they do get placed.  Besides their alleged reputation, one may also consider that the dog's appearance in relation to other dogs and the dog does not have a pronounced breed purpose that is compatible with being a family pet.  Two things that breeders claim they can change. 

One can not lay claim to a breed if the breeding practices are of a personal and selfish purpose.  Breeding within a vaccum does not contribute  to the betterment of the overall breed population.  If the genes of vacuum bred dogs were released to the general breed population then the breed would be bettered.  Thats why I think the "reputatble" responsible breeder defined here fails in the breed betterment department.

Why should you be offended...I was not replying to you in regards to what you wrote.

Imagine if you will this situation...a woman is breeding Am Staffs and Dobies, they live in her basement deficating in their "space" do not see the light of day until they are rescued because someone who came to purchase a pup turned her in..rescue is called because it is known as soon as hese dogs walk into a shelter they are headed straight to the back room..rescue evaluates the dogs, those who are fearful and aggressive toward people are let go, those who seem to have a stable temperament are placed in foster homes, spayed/neutered and started with OB training. It isn't any fault of the dog but it is the fault of the "breeder". Sure, she had every right to breed 4 litters of dogs because after all she is adding to the "betterment" of the breed but seriously, how much "better" did she do for the breed?? Lack of socialization, no future breeding stock for a litter sired by a very popular dog who did a lot of wining in his day who died a year later...sure it could have been a fabulous turnout for the bred itself but the timimg/situation was not good for the breed or the dogs who died..breed betterment should be left up to those who do breed responsibly for the betterment of the breed and not their selfish purpose(money)

amstaffy

..breed betterment should be left up to those who do breed responsibly for the betterment of the breed and not their selfish purpose(money)

There are more than 2 cards in the deck.  And sometimes the Ace card is defined as the high card and sometimes the low card.  Breed betterment and breed responsibility are extremely subjective, IMO.  There are bad reasons for breeding and money is one of them but there is more than one good reason to breed.  When the dog becomes secondary or is viewed as a commodity, there may not be something wrong with how responsbility is defined.  I know this.  The job of fostering is more important than the individual dog but that does not mean the foster receives less care than the residence dogs and in fact receives more care.  The same goes for the hobbyist breeder. 

I have learned a lot from these discussions on various threads.  My initial feelings have been reinforced and strengthened.  My experience is nothing like described on this forum.  I am very comfortable now in getting my next puppies from a pet quality breeder like the one I got Drizzle and Blizzard from.

I always wonder about the term "hobbyist" breeder.  Some use it as to mean like "back yard breeder" and others don't.  I've known "hobby breeders" and darn fine people they were too, producing fine puppies IMO.  

DPU, EVERYTHING discussed on these kind of threads is subjective.  Most of the time each individual has to clarify what THEY mean by terms like "ethical", "responsible" "hobby breeder" and BYB. It is the nature of this type of discussion.... 

Chuffy

 EVERYTHING discussed on these kind of threads is subjective. 

See this is where I get frusterated. Some people assume that what they are doing is to better the breed even if it goes against breed standard. The standard was set for a reason....not to be ventured off of. It takes a lot of nerve to veer off the path and should be no surprise when said breeder gets no respect for what they are doing. Just because said breeder finds enough idiots to buy their BYB dog dosnt make it ok. I had one chi breeder say "well I find people to buy my dogs so I must be doing something right"....ugh NO. Its not honorable or right, your exploiting some poor dog to accomodate your fancy or color prefference.

Hobby breeders or people who breed "pet quality" are doing no favor to themselves, the animals or they customers. If we gradualyl lower our standards over the years what are we going to have left?

We have Labs with temperment issues, cockers with rage syndrom and bull terriers with seizure issues. All because some standard was lowered somewhere and this is what we were left with. DPU I am shocked you said you'd buy from a breeder who bred "show quality pets". If you mean a regal, beautiful Great Dane I am even more shocked......they havnt sustained generations and decades to  be bred by Joe Scmo in his backyard in his spare time. How much would you pay for this "pet quality" dog? By pet quality I am assuming you mean no health, temperment tests or proven stock......thats what "pet quality" breeders do right? Cause if they did all the above mentioned they would invest in registering and showing....it wouldnt make sense to do otherwise.

Also keep in mind Amstaff's are not pit bulls. Jamie isnt contributing to the breed overpopulation of pit bulls and I can almost guarantee you when she has a litter she dosnt put them in the paper trying to sell them. The owners are already picked out....if noti lined up for months or years and a detailed breeding contract comes along with it. That is what seperates the APBT from the staffy. The staffy's breeding practices havnt been lowered or compromised so there breed hasnt deteriorated like mine.

Since the American Pit Bull Terrier and the American Staffordshire Terrier came from basically the same stock you can see how lax breeding practices heavily contributes to the deterioration of the breed! These were once the same dogs, split down the middle. The pit bull for fighting, the Staffy for show. Pit bulls are being bred irresponsibly and for money, Staffy's are being bred ONLY for breed standard. The popualtion ratio and quality of the breeds should be a major wake up call to anyone who supports "pet quality" breeders.

AuroraLove

Some people assume that what they are doing is to better the breed even if it goes against breed standard. The standard was set for a reason....not to be ventured off of. It takes a lot of nerve to veer off the path and should be no surprise when said breeder gets no respect for what they are doing. Just because said breeder finds enough idiots to buy their BYB dog dosnt make it ok. I had one chi breeder say "well I find people to buy my dogs so I must be doing something right"....ugh NO. Its not honorable or right, your exploiting some poor dog to accomodate your fancy or color prefference.

     I don't agree. Some standards have been amended to favor such extreme features that the breed becomes a monstrosity. I admire those who break away from the current written standards in favor of breeding for moderation in structure. When you have breeds that cannot even whelp naturally if they are "show quality", that's appaling. When you have certain breeds that are physically incapable of achieving the level of agility they were originally bred for, what has been improved? Some breeders speak of the Standard as if it's the Holy Bible of dog breeding & I think that's as massive a mistake as those who don't even know what a Standard of perfection is. The Standard should be a guide, something to reference when we're in doubt or to help make a better breeding decision. Yes, we don't want to stray too far from it or abandon it altogether unless the current Standard veers so far away from what the breed SHOULD be. Not all show dogs bred to the Standard are well bred, some breeds I wouldn't touch unless the breeder was deliberately breeding away from the extremes.
     Then, of course, you have both the breeder's and judge's interpretations of the Standard. Those van vary widely. The result of this is either cookie cutter dogs in the ring, or different "types" winning under different judges, with breeder's only entering under the judges they know the type they have will win under. Who is correct then, when they would all claim they are breeding/judgint to the Standard?
     Oh, now I am not talking about amateur BYBs who are churning out "gimmick" dogs because they sell. There are too many valid reasons for breeding away from the Standard to an extent, and there will always be others who do not appreciate their efforts.

AuroraLove

Hobby breeders or people who breed "pet quality" are doing no favor to themselves, the animals or they customers. If we gradualyl lower our standards over the years what are we going to have left?

We have Labs with temperment issues, cockers with rage syndrom and bull terriers with seizure issues. All because some standard was lowered somewhere and this is what we were left with. DPU I am shocked you said you'd buy from a breeder who bred "show quality pets". If you mean a regal, beautiful Great Dane I am even more shocked......they havnt sustained generations and decades to  be bred by Joe Scmo in his backyard in his spare time. How much would you pay for this "pet quality" dog? By pet quality I am assuming you mean no health, temperment tests or proven stock......thats what "pet quality" breeders do right? Cause if they did all the above mentioned they would invest in registering and showing....it wouldnt make sense to do otherwise.

     See, now this I REALLY do not agree with, at all!!! I would consider myself a hobby breeder - simply because breeding is my hobby, lol  What my breeding program entails is the gradual blending of field/show lines - I am not a show breeder, and I am not a field breeder, per se. The show dogs must show me some interest/competancy in field work before being bred, and hare hunting is the main reason I got into the breed and the main activity I do with them. I do not breed for the show ring by any stretch of the imagination. Whenever I do show, it's for fun/competition. And it's few and far between. I keep pups for other reasons before conformation, although obviously I do highly regard correct conformation. I use the Standard as my guide, say, if I have similar pups or need to determine if I have to knock out a dog from the breeding program due to too many conformation faults as well as other faults. It's there when I need it, it has an influence on what I'm producing, but if breeding to the Standard ever meant exaggeration and loosing other qualities in my breed, I'd ditch it in a heartbeat. As good as the conformation is in my breed, there are still dogs being bred "to Standard" that would systematically break down in the field. Their rears are clumsy. They are bred for trotting, not heavy running. Not enough spring of rib ... Again, what has that accomplished? Nothing.
     You are mistaking pet quality dogs with those pupmed out by amateurs, BYBs, or the Joe Schmo "one Litter" types. That's NOT what a pet quality breeder is!!! If I had to pigeonhole myself into a category of breeder, it would have to be pet quality. Why? The overwhelming majority of my pups go to pet homes. I focus on aspects of the breed that keep it the excellent companion breed that it is. I do not breed for the show ring, therefore it's not fair to say I am a show breeder. One requirement I have is that the dogs can work - the field dogs better be damn good & the show dogs, as I said, need to show me interest and capability in structure. Yet field ability is not the only reason I breed, nor will I only sell pups who are going to field homes. It's something that must be there, is incredably more important than conformation, but just another aspect. Health and temperament come first. You speak about rage syndrome (and just overall horrendous temperament) in Cockers, Labs with temperament issues ... Well it's the breeding to Standard that got the Cocker in the fine mess it's in today! The temperament issues seem to be linked to the massive amounts of coat being bred for - coat which is overabundant, gaudy, and unnecessary in a bird dog. No field bred cocker has that amount of coat! It's unnecessary, and if a breeder notes this, and breeds away from it, which is sensible, IMO, they are shunned by the "fancy". Temperament was systematically ignored by the show breeders in favor of coat & gait. Labradors - I don't like the show lines, at all. They are reminiscent of Rottweilers. Too much bone, kept too overweight. NOT HEALTHY. But breed away from that, and you're ostracized. This has nothing to do with BYBs, just good breeders who are not breeding to Standard when the Standard has gone insane.