# Your opinions: are "hobby" breeders necessarily bad breeders?



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Of course if a person is looking for a show puppy then of course you want to have the parents titled & whatnot ... This applies if a buyer is looking for just a sport/working/companion dog from a breeder:

Izze was from a hobby breeder & she was a sound well adjusted dog, as was bear. Izze's breeder only had one breeding pair, Bear's had two each only had one or two litters a year. 

My question, just because a breeder doesn't "show" &/or register their dogs (bear & his parents were registered though Izze's were not) does that make them bad breeders? Should breeders be judged on whether they campaign their dogs on the show circuit or not? Or should they be judged on how they operate? 

Personally I would buy from a breeder like Izze's again in a heartbeat. What about you guys?


----------



## Candydb (Jul 16, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> Of course if a person is looking for a show puppy then of course you want to have the parents titled & whatnot ... This applies if a buyer is looking for just a sport/working/companion dog from a breeder:
> 
> Izze was from a hobby breeder & she was a sound well adjusted dog, as was bear. Izze's breeder only had one breeding pair, Bear's had two each only had one or two litters a year.
> 
> ...


YES!!!! 
and secretly i have to say I would love to breed my Berner boy to another Berner (his father is registered, his mom is Not but both her parents were).. I think he is a beautiful boy and very representative of his breed if not better (he is so healthy and agile, I have never heard of a Berner that can jump into a car through an open window--just to see if you left any food in the car).
But I know you are supposed to breed to better the breed ( I do want to get him evaluated by a local breeder), and berners are known to be fraught with health issues-- given that there a plenty of "Breeders" dogs that have health issues as well-- and given that they have very large litters (he came from litter of 11), its not something I would actually do....
I guess the issue with Hobby breeding is that there are so many dogs already out there needing placement, and could you guaruntee all these new lives you are creating (even if its just one or two litters-- that could be 22 dogs for my breed) good owners/ a good life....


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

I think its each person preference, for me it depends on what I am looking for. if I am looking for a Border collie, I wont even consider a breeder who has ever shown a BC or owns a BC that was ever shown. and I wont consider a breeder who's dogs have never been on real stock(AKC/CKC stockdog trial or instinct test doesn't count) but I have no problem with purchasing from a random rancher who bred his working dogs without health testing. I would "prefer" Hips and Eyes having been tested, but I have no hang ups about it.

for other breeds; health, temperament and the living conditions of the breeders dogs are pretty much my only concern I do not consider showing or titles to be a requirement to be a good breeder, and TBH I consider it a bonus if a breeder focuses on health and temperament and does NOT show.


----------



## Flaming (Feb 2, 2013)

Not necessarily bad. Manna's parents, grandparents, I think 4 generations were not shown but registered. Her siblings on the other hand have a few Champ titles, mostly in obedience very few in confirmation. 
The breeder only had 1 pair and only puts out a small litter every 2-3 years. Takes back dogs when need to and all that good stuff.

Manna was a slight exception because her owners sold her without the breeders knowledge and I only met the breeder about a week ago.
Nice lady who was almost frantic with worry when she didn't know where Manna was. Offered to buy her back and everything though I think she's starting to trust that I'll keep good care of Manna for life.

Would I trust that breeder again? Yes in a heart beat, she breeds with the dogs health in mind and her dogs are very sound, she just hates to show, it's just not for her.

A good breeder in my mind takes care of their dogs and backs up their words with actions, preferably kind words.
You don't have to be a show person to be kind and responsible. 

That and about 3 years ago now a different breeder that done shows was arrested for animal cruelty in my area.

Shows =/= responsible 

Long post for a phone, please forgive my bluntness or mistakes


----------



## Nuclear_Glitter (Jun 20, 2012)

In my own personal opinion, I think that health testing and knowing your dogs is important (for temperament reasons, of course). I of course don't support people that just go about breeding their dogs randomly and tossing puppies out to anyone. 

I think that the health testing is important so they're not passing on bad genetics and health problems of course. I also think that it's important to not breed dogs that are bad behaved (not just small behavior issues that need trained, but serious bad temperaments). 

So, if the person has the money to properly care for the dogs and puppies, and has enough money for vet emergencies, and also tests them for health and they're well behaved then I don't think it's too bad. I don't support excessive breeding though, no matter what. It's also very important to find the puppies very good homes, and if the people can't care for them, then the breeder needs to accept them back. 

I don't think that people absolutely have to have show dogs to breed good puppies. That's just my opinion though. However, I'm a pretty big supporter of rescues and such first. But I don't shun anyone for getting a dog from a breeder that's good. 

My dogs didn't come from responsible breeders, or rescues. Killian came from a college student who purchased him from a car, because she knew they were too young to be sold and wanted to make sure that he'd be okay. 

And Perkins came from an oops litter. He was free though, and the people were getting their dog fixed, so I wasn't supporting a bad breeder. The male dog hopped their fence. They didn't purposefully breed. 

So, I'm in no position to judge really. 

Anyway, there's my long opinion lol.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

I just don't like where some breeds are going, like BC's & GSD's who now have "show" lines & "working" lines. Although there are four (I think ???) recognized colors in GSD's (black, black & tan, silver, sable) you only see the sable ever in the show ring. 

BC's I know can also come in liver & white I think it's called. But you ever only see black. Though I have no experience with BC's, I have been told by enthusiasts of the breed (heard this from Aussie enthusiasts too) that the "show" lines have less or no working instinct at all so if a person wants to use it to work real stock (not just trials) then they suggest a working line BC/Aussie, the "show" lines are for folks who just want a companion.

I don't know how true this is but I have seen some changes even in my breed, the ACD in regards to what some (not all but some) of the ACDs look like that have titles, some breeders don't even work their dogs. For what reason I don't know.


----------



## HollowHeaven (Feb 5, 2012)

Depends.
Do hobby breeders health and temperament test? What is their goal with breeding? Do they hold contracts like show/working/sport breeders do?
Overall, do they breed responsibly? -just minus the showing.

If so, then no I don't have a real problem with it. I'm sure there are people who just want a healthy, sound pet, who have no interest in showing or working or sports.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

> BC's I know can also come in liver & white I think it's called. But you ever only see black


actually BC's come in EVERY colour, red/chocolate, ee red, black, blue, brindle, lilac, merles, tri's, white, patterned white, freckled etc.. 

I personally LIKE the splits an I want to see them deepened , trying to avoid the splits, leads to dilution on both side and you end up with dogs that are not tops at anything but mediocre at everything.


----------



## SydTheSpaniel (Feb 12, 2011)

In my opinion, as long as the breeder is doing it in all the right ways, health and genetic testing, humane conditions, no more than 2 litters per year, etc, then I'm okay with it. My breeder doesn't personally show, she's new to the breeding world actually. Both dogs come from extensive show and working lines with many titles. But she still did everything a good breeder does - and that's all I care about. If I decide to try showing, at least my dog does have a history in its blood line, even if its not from the mother. And my dog is healthy.


----------



## Roloni (Aug 5, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> Of course if a person is looking for a show puppy then of course you want to have the parents titled & whatnot ... ?


Hobby Breeding..as Opposed to what?

I find it amazing that humans feel the need control... just about everything .
Nature was doing a pretty good job of reproducing Aminals for billions of years..

I don't see why we need to intervene in the process of reproduction of Aminals on our planet.

I sat on the beach and saw some seagulls.. I have no control of how they breed , yet somehow they survive quite well.


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

Just copying and pasting my comment from the other forum


The titles do not make the dog for me, "proving" the dog does. And when I say proving I mean in a breed specific activity, whether or not that activity gives the dog titles or not doesn't entirely matter to me. A working ranch dog on a beef farm is just as good to me if not better than a dog with a WTCH, if the dog is BOTH those things well that's fantastic!

I will only get a dog from a breeder who also health tests their dog and breeds for good conformation and temperament.


Now with that said, I show my dogs and trial my dogs and I would call myself a "Hobby breeder" I do it as a hobby I do not do it to make money.


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

Roloni said:


> Hobby Breeding..as Opposed to what?
> 
> I find it amazing that humans feel the need control... just about everything .
> Nature was doing a pretty good job of reproducing Aminals for billions of years..
> ...


Seagulls may need to be specially bred if we start using them as long range aerial surveillance


----------



## So Cavalier (Jul 23, 2010)

> I sat on the beach and saw some seagulls.. I have no control of how they breed , yet somehow they survive quite well.


Natural selection controls how seagulls breed....humans took out most everything that is natural when they started breeding dogs selectively. Personally, if and when I buy another cavalier from a breeder, it will be from a breeder who breeds for health, longevity, and temperment, not titles in the show ring. I want a breeder who follows the heart and SM/CM protocols. I expect the parents to be screened for eye and patella problems. If there are champions in the pedigree, that is an added bonus.


----------



## Roloni (Aug 5, 2011)

Keechak said:


> Seagulls may need to be specially bred if we start using them as long range aerial surveillance


Good point..!
The Stealth Seagull should have its vocal chords removed...and not poop on windshields.


----------



## Roloni (Aug 5, 2011)

So Cavalier said:


> Natural selection controls how seagulls breed....humans took out most everything that is natural when they started breeding dogs selectively. .


That may be the reason why you never see a Seagull with Hip dysplasia....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

dogdragoness said:


> Of course if a person is looking for a show puppy then of course you want to have the parents titled & whatnot ... This applies if a buyer is looking for just a sport/working/companion dog from a breeder:
> 
> ?


A lot of terms get thrown around.... Puppy mill, back yard breeder, hobby breeder, etc..


I don't use any of them...... Just two words.... Good or bad...

I do not know anyone that makes any significant money breeding.... So are they not all hobby breeders?


And I am in the hole somewhere in between 50k and 100k between Merlin and Betty when you factor in show costs, travel, health testing.....
I think I would be considered a hobby breeder....

But anyone that is considering a show, performance, or pet would or should consider a breeding involving either of those two.... The would be Nuts.... No one can argue with Merlin's show record. Factor in I was "messing around" compared to a well financed campaign, and it looks even better. 

And Betty.... OMG.... she is a HOT bitch... She is a tad small but within standard and she has a HARD CORE temperament. But conformationally and drive she is STELLER.... She is a better bitch than Merlin is a dog..... But Merlin has the it factor....He owns the ring... And Merlin has the DRIVE to do anything. He does bite work monthly, bring wild Florida Scrub cattle out of the thickets and bayheads all the time, etc.

I doubt Merlin or Betty will produce many pet puppies. The ones that are conformationally the best will be show prospects. Most of the rest will go to performance.... The list of potential Merlin puppies is long.... including at least five inquiries on this forum. Betty's is pretty long as well. 

But still you cannot call my involvement with breeding, anything but a hobby....


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Roloni said:


> Hobby Breeding..as Opposed to what?
> 
> I find it amazing that humans feel the need control... just about everything .
> Nature was doing a pretty good job of reproducing Aminals for billions of years..
> ...


Humans created dogs.... Seagulls are wild critters...

Apples and oranges..... 

Controll and manipulation is what causes dogs to be dogs...


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

Show titles and working titles matter little to me, personally. I don't ever plan to show dogs and will likely never need a _true_ working dog. I want a breeder who is heavily invested in the well-being of their dogs and pups. I want one who health and temperament tests, provides humane conditions and vet care. Beyond that it really depends on what you're looking for from a specific dog. If I wanted a conformation champ it would be a bad idea to go to a breeder who doesn't show, if I want an easy-going low drive dog I would be crazy to go to a working line breeder. Different strokes.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Show titles and working titles matter little to me, personally. I don't ever plan to show dogs and will likely never need a _true_ working dog. I want a breeder who is heavily invested in the well-being of their dogs and pups. I want one who health and temperament tests, provides humane conditions and vet care. Beyond that it really depends on what you're looking for from a specific dog. If I wanted a conformation champ it would be a bad idea to go to a breeder who doesn't show, if I want an easy-going low drive dog I would be crazy to go to a working line breeder. Different strokes.


But for a pet..... It makes a ton of sense to go to a good show breeder.....


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> Although there are four (I think ???) recognized colors in GSD's (black, black & tan, silver, sable) you only see the sable ever in the show ring.


Um, no. This is entirely incorrect.

Accepted GSD colors:
Black
Black and Tan (and variations thereof)
Sable
Bi Color

Livers and blues are DQ due to not having a nose predominately black. Whites are DQ.

And what you see most often in the ring is black and tan, not sable.

I consider myself a "hobby breeder". Most people that breed consider themselves hobby breeders, and they title their stock or work them in real life situations.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Xeph said:


> Um, no. This is entirely incorrect.
> 
> Accepted GSD colors:
> Black
> ...




I like Sables the best....


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> But for a pet..... It makes a ton of sense to go to a good show breeder.....


 Sure... If thats what you want. But there are a lot of people (like me) who don't care much about conformation or standard unless it has specific health consequences. If I were to get a pug (unlikely) I would probably end up not with a pup from a titled pug but a well-bred puggle litter - if I could find such a thing. I don't really like the ultra-smooshed face, the health problems or the grooming upkeep it requires. The heavy barrel chest, heart and joint issues don't appeal much to me. The Puggles seem to be built better. But they're not purebred or titled.... But for me, that doesn't matter.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

Everyone has a different definition of hobby breeders. For me, they are breeders who love their dogs, take great care of them, have them in the house but don't do any health testing, don't show or anything like that.
My Tucker came from such a breeder and for what I want dogs for, I might. I'm a different owner now, I know about health testing and such so maybe I would not. I chose breeders who did do testing with my last two, so...


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

aiw said:


> But there are a lot of people (like me) who don't care much about conformation or standard unless it has specific health consequences.


With most breeds, it does. A well-bred dog should be a sound dog. Some dogs will prove themselves through work, and I don't think that showing is important for them. But for breeds that are used as companions, I like to see show titles, because it proves that multiple unbiased strangers have gone over the dog and deemed it sound. Breeders who don't show or have their dogs prove themselves through work or even sports can develop kennel blindness, unintentionally breeding faults into their dogs that can weaken their lines.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> I like Sables the best....


So do I. But finding a good one in the American lines is difficult


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

It seems like that is sometimes the case, but I would argue there are many instances when type take precedence over health. Hard to make a generalization across all breeds and dogs though.


----------



## Spazmelda (Jan 27, 2013)

aiw said:


> Sure... If thats what you want. But there are a lot of people (like me) who don't care much about conformation or standard unless it has specific health consequences. If I were to get a pug (unlikely) I would probably end up not with a pup from a titled pug but a well-bred puggle litter - if I could find such a thing. I don't really like the ultra-smooshed face, the health problems or the grooming upkeep it requires. The heavy barrel chest, heart and joint issues don't appeal much to me. The Puggles seem to be built better. But they're not purebred or titled.... But for me, that doesn't matter.


This was us. My daughter desperately wanted a pug. I read up a lot on pugs and all their health problems. From what I read a lot of their problems seem to be due to the desired conformation. Their poor little squashed faces and curly tails are just adorable, but if adorable means you can't breathe, don't have room for all your teeth, have a palate that's too big for your head, and a kinked spine, it's just not fair to the animals. If I could have found someone breeding old style pugs that had longer noses and a little longer and leaner without the double curl, I might have gone that way. In some breeds, breeding to the desired conformation just seems cruel to me. And I've limited what I've said here to pugs, but its definitely not the only breed facing these issues.

I filled out an application at a local pug rescue because their website said they sometimes have 'pug bloods' (pug crosses) for adoption, but nobody ever got back to me. I ended up finding Lenny on craigslist. He is a puggle, or pug beagle cross. He was almost 6 months old and his family didn't have enough time for him. He's got a substantial nose, and he's leaner and more long legged than a pug. He's got a few very slight wrinkles, but not enough that we will have to clean in between them to avoid skin infections. He's got a curled tail, but not the double curl, so hopefully his spine will be okay. Of course there's still a chance that he inherited something from his parents, but at least some of the glaring problems that would be strictly due to conformation have a chance of being nonexistent or at least less severe. 

In my opinion, it's not responsible to breed so strictly for looks if its the look itself that causes hardship to the animal. Just because you can get the genes to express in a certain way doesn't mean you should. 

Now, I have no idea what kind of breeder produced Lenny, probably a byb. Opinion in the breeding world seems to be that anyone crossing breeds can not, by definition, be responsible. After doing a lot of reading I have a different opinion. I think that if it was done responsibly and in a well planned way, occasional breed outcrosses could alleviate a lot of problems that a few particular breeds are plagued with (with the Dalmatian as an example). I know it's considered heresy in the show world, but as someone with an advanced degree in genetics and molecular biology, keeping tightly closed blood lines seems like just about the most illogical thing that could be done in animal breeding. You can do all the health testing science can come up with, but with such small gene pools, unhealthy conformation standards, and unwillingness to sacrifice 'breed purity' there's only so much that can be done. 

I'm sure this will piss someone off, and I'm sorry. I've read a lot of rebuttals to this sort of thinking by kennel club people and none of them make sense to me. Also, keep in mind I'm not talking about all breeds, but enough that it definitely matters (in my opinion).


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

Spazmelda said:


> This was us. My daughter desperately wanted a pug. I read up a lot on pugs and all their health problems. From what I read a lot of their problems seem to be due to the desired conformation. Their poor little squashed faces and curly tails are just adorable, but if adorable means you can't breathe, don't have room for all your teeth, have a palate that's too big for your head, and a kinked spine, it's just not fair to the animals. If I could have found someone breeding old style pugs that had longer noses and a little longer and leaner without the double curl, I might have gone that way. In some breeds, breeding to the desired conformation just seems cruel to me. And I've limited what I've said here to pugs, but its definitely not the only breed facing these issues.
> 
> I filled out an application at a local pug rescue because their website said they sometimes have 'pug bloods' (pug crosses) for adoption, but nobody ever got back to me. I ended up finding Lenny on craigslist. He is a puggle, or pug beagle cross. He was almost 6 months old and his family didn't have enough time for him. He's got a substantial nose, and he's leaner and more long legged than a pug. He's got a few very slight wrinkles, but not enough that we will have to clean in between them to avoid skin infections. He's got a curled tail, but not the double curl, so hopefully his spine will be okay. Of course there's still a chance that he inherited something from his parents, but at least some of the glaring problems that would be strictly due to conformation have a chance of being nonexistent or at least less severe.
> 
> ...


Thank you for this! Very well said and put together!


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Sure... If thats what you want. But there are a lot of people (like me) who don't care much about conformation or standard unless it has specific health consequences. If I were to get a pug (unlikely) I would probably end up not with a pup from a titled pug but a well-bred puggle litter - if I could find such a thing. I don't really like the ultra-smooshed face, the health problems or the grooming upkeep it requires. The heavy barrel chest, heart and joint issues don't appeal much to me. The Puggles seem to be built better. But they're not purebred or titled.... But for me, that doesn't matter.



You are never going to find a well bred puggle breeder.... Because no breeder of well bred pugs or well bred beagles is going to let their stock go out to someone that is going to breed puggles.

And the EXACT reasons that interest you are the exact reasons to look to a successful show breeder.

Name a successful show breeder that is not going above and beyond when it comes to testing. 

Sure someone might cut corners and come up with a one hit wonder dog. But find someone that is producing top dogs year after year.... And the corner cutters are all gone...

You mentioned temperament... Well by nature.... conformation showing is a temperament test..... Crappy temperaments get excused.... Judges do not want to get nailed and have LITTLE patience for a dog with poor temperament..

It does NOT matter that you have zero interest in showing or owning a show dog...


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You are never going to find a well bred puggle breeder.... Because no breeder of well bred pugs or well bred beagles is going to let their stock go out to someone that is going to breed puggles.
> 
> And the EXACT reasons that interest you are the exact reasons to look to a successful show breeder.
> 
> ...


You're right that its usually the show breeders who are health testing, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're producing the healthiest or most sound dogs. Spazmelda wrote a good post about this above. I'm on the fence about the feasibility of keeping tightly closed gene pools at all and health issues surrounding conformation are very real. Showing seems like a good tool but is pretty far from a guarantee and occasionally actually gets in the way.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Spazmelda said:


> This was us. My daughter desperately wanted a pug. I read up a lot on pugs and all their health problems. From what I read a lot of their problems seem to be due to the desired conformation. Their poor little squashed faces and curly tails are just adorable, but if adorable means you can't breathe, don't have room for all your teeth, have a palate that's too big for your head, and a kinked spine, it's just not fair to the animals. If I could have found someone breeding old style pugs that had longer noses and a little longer and leaner without the double curl, I might have gone that way. In some breeds, breeding to the desired conformation just seems cruel to me. And I've limited what I've said here to pugs, but its definitely not the only breed facing these issues.
> 
> I filled out an application at a local pug rescue because their website said they sometimes have 'pug bloods' (pug crosses) for adoption, but nobody ever got back to me. I ended up finding Lenny on craigslist. He is a puggle, or pug beagle cross. He was almost 6 months old and his family didn't have enough time for him. He's got a substantial nose, and he's leaner and more long legged than a pug. He's got a few very slight wrinkles, but not enough that we will have to clean in between them to avoid skin infections. He's got a curled tail, but not the double curl, so hopefully his spine will be okay. Of course there's still a chance that he inherited something from his parents, but at least some of the glaring problems that would be strictly due to conformation have a chance of being nonexistent or at least less severe.
> 
> ...



Agreed. I love, love, love Bostons - and my Boston. But because of the extremity of their conformation there is no way, on earth, I could in good conscious pay someone who is breeding for that. You can do all the health testing in the world, but the bottom line is... the dogs that are winning conformation titles are the more extreme examples of the breed, and not for all the tea in china will my money go to support that. When I look for, or go to, a breeder and give them money it's a tacit way of me saying 'I approve of what you are doing'. I would go to my Rat Terrier's breeder in a heartbeat, because I want her to keep doing what she is doing.

If I ever wanted another Boston, I would find someone who was ABSOLUTELY NOT producing conformation champions. I don't support what is being done there. I don't support what is winning in show rings. I don't, and I won't. I would MUCH more readily go to a 'hobby' breeder who does some health testing for eyes/ears/hips/knees. I would even, before going to a conformation breeder, go to someone breeding their pet quality dog without any health testing at all, and feel better about the odds of getting a sound dog. Even if their pet quality Boston was bred to another breed. It wouldn't be my ideal, but I REALLY strongly feel that 'conformation = soundness" is a load of bullcrap with a whole lot of breeds. 

And if I wanted another Boston, I'd prefer one that can BREATHE, amongst a host of other issues that come from that breed standard and how 'responsible' breeders are interpreting it, today. That means a dog with a snout. Supporting someone doing something with a breed I like, that I find the very opposite of 'in the dog and breed's best interest' would just be foolishness. Since the so called responsible breeders are producing things I find NOT in the dog/breed's best interest, obviously I am not going to give them my money. That means finding an alternative. (And in truth it's all a rhetorical. Because of the nature of the breed, I won't ever own another one. Yes, Bug is poorly bred and has other health issues on top of the breathing, but the lack of a nose impacts her far more on a daily basis than the rest combined.)




JohnnyBandit said:


> It does NOT matter that you have zero interest in showing or owning a show dog...


No, it does not. But sometimes those conformation dogs are exactly what isn't wanted, because of roblems with what's winning in a conformation ring. We all financially support what we want to see more of. When I don't want to see more of what's being produced by show breeders... I'm not giving my money to one.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> I'm on the fence about the feasibility of keeping tightly closed gene pools at all and health issues surrounding conformation are very real. .


Real? what direct experience with conformation do you have? 

I could have found spaz a healthy Pug from a conformation breeder.... Easily.... There are some breeds that concern me overall. But Pugs are not even on my radar.....

And I am not a die hard lifelong conformation person..... Merlin is my first show dog. 

But I have always bought from breeders involved in conformation. Because I want the healthiest, most long lived dogs possible.. And the strength of my background is in performance. 

To me a breeder that discounts conformation throws up a HUGE red flug.... I hear the comments... See the comments on here..... But the proof is in the pudding.... I just got done a search for a Lab puppy. I would not consider any breeder that did not have titles on both ends of their dogs. Did not have to be on the same dog.... But I wanted to see both performance dogs in the line....

A breeder that breeds to produce nice pets but doesn't want to get caught up in the conformation thing is in my experience hiding something.

The breeder that only produces a sport or working line dog is heading in the wrong direction....

I am not saying that every conformation dog is stellar. I am not saying that every conformation breeder is a good breeder....

I am going to use a word here..... BALANCE.... That is what MOST people need to focus on... And that balance includes conformation....


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Real? what direct experience with conformation do you have?
> 
> I could have found spaz a healthy Pug from a conformation breeder.... Easily.... There are some breeds that concern me overall. But Pugs are not even on my radar.....


Yes. But could you have found one without the health issues associated with the *conformation of the dog*. This isn't an attack. The unpleasant truth of the matter is dogs with extremely squashed faces and the tails of both Bostons and Pugs come with problems. Those faces and tails are part of the breed standard. You might find someone who has a dog with a bit more snout or a non-standard tail, but they're still producing dogs that I, ethnically, have problems being produced. Because the confirmation itself sacrifices the health of the dog.

I'm not saying to throw conformation out the window. For most breeds, I'd go to a conformation breeder for a pet in a heartbeat, but not all of them. If I wanted a BC that would work stock, I'd go to someone breeding dogs on a ranch. If I want a really healthy, sound, Boston or Pug, I'm going to find someone who is breeding FOR that, not who is producing that as an accidental byproduct of producing something I have a moral issue with.

Theoretically. In truth, I'm not buying them at all. I do understand someone who loves the breed but takes issue with the direction the conformation ring is taking a breed they love and choosing not to support those breeders. Because of the issues associated with the conformation or because of situations like the split between conformation and working BC people.


----------



## TorachiKatashi (Sep 29, 2010)

It does make a big difference to me. I would only ever purchase a puppy (or otherwise associate with a breeder) who shows and titles all their dogs prior to breeding.

However, I wouldn't consider a "hobby breeder" to be someone who doesn't show. To me, a hobby breed is someone who doesn't profit from their breeding and has a job other than breeding (even if that job is show handling.) By that definition, I'd only ever buy from a hobby breeder.



Xeph said:


> Um, no. This is entirely incorrect.
> 
> Accepted GSD colors:
> Black
> ...


If a there is a white puppy in a GSD litter, is that puppy considered an American White Shepherd? Or is that a completely separate breed?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

CptJack said:


> Yes. But could you have found one without the health issues associated with the *conformation of the dog*. This isn't an attack. The unpleasant truth of the matter is dogs with extremely squashed faces and the tails of both Bostons and Pugs come with problems. Those faces and tails are part of the breed standard. You might find someone who has a dog with a bit more snout or a non-standard tail, but they're still producing dogs that I, ethnically, have problems being produced. Because the confirmation itself sacrifices the health of the dog.
> 
> I'm not saying to throw conformation out the window. For most breeds, I'd go to a conformation breeder for a pet in a heartbeat, but not all of them. If I wanted a BC that would work stock, I'd go to someone breeding dogs on a ranch. If I want a healthy Boston or Pug, I'm going to find someone who is breeding FOR that, not who is producing that as an accidental byproduct of producing something I have a moral issue with.


I did not take it as an attack... Nor anything on here..... Are there conformation Bostons that cannot breath..... Sure.... Conformation Pugs that cannot breath.... Sure.... 

But there is no problem finding either that can breath to the degree that any dog with a significantly shortened muzzle can breath, is no problem...

One of the people, I sometimes have gone to out of town shows with, roomed with, etc shows Bostons...

None of his had any issue breeding.... And keep in mind that I live and show in Florida.... It is HOT and HUMID most of the year... I have seen them run up two flights on stairs in June without issue...


----------



## grab (Sep 26, 2009)

aiw said:


> If I were to get a pug (unlikely) I would probably end up not with a pup from a titled pug but a well-bred puggle litter - .


Well...then you wouldn't be getting a Pug...A Pug/Beagle has a different temperament than a Pug. If you're ok with that, then you probably would not be looking to get a Pug, but rather looking to get a 'brown and black,kind of smooshy nosed dog'. This is not to say that there is anything wrong with a Pug/Beagle mix, but someone actually looking to acquire a Pug probably isn't going to end up with one.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Real? what direct experience with conformation do you have?
> 
> I am going to use a word here..... BALANCE.... That is what MOST people need to focus on... And that balance includes conformation....


None. I have absolutely no direct experience in titling or showing dogs. But frankly, you don't need it to see that a dog who wins titles but has no snout and a kinky spine is not an example of the healthiest dog possible. I also didn't need to show dogs to learn the basics of closed vs. open gene pools and the dangers of limiting diversity. I won't generalize this issue across all breeds, breeders or dogs but it exists and is a legitimate factor to consider when figuring out what you want in a dog.

EDIT: @grab: I don't really hold to the idea that genetic purity is what makes a pug a pug or that standards shouldn't be modified where desired/appropriate. You're right that temperament would need to be taken into account in choosing the right dog.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> None. I have absolutely no direct experience in titling or showing dogs. But frankly, you don't need it to see that a dog who wins titles but has no snout and a kinky spine is not an example of the healthiest dog possible. I also didn't need to show dogs to learn the basics of closed vs. open gene pools and the dangers of limiting diversity. I won't generalize this issue across all breeds, breeders or dogs but it exists and is a legitimate factor to consider when figuring out what you want in a dog.
> 
> EDIT: @grab: I don't really hold to the idea that genetic purity is what makes a pug a pug or that standards shouldn't be modified where desired/appropriate. You're right that temperament would need to be taken into account in choosing the right dog.




IF you have NO experience with conformation where are you seeing these dogs? Pictures? 


IF you are a big fan of open stud books, then you should stick with mixed breeds......


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Hobby breeder is kind of a stupid term. The opposite of hobby breeder would be someone that breeds dogs for a living. MOST breeders are breeding as a hobby. They're not making their living off of breeding their dogs.

I want a breeder that is focusing on health, proper temperament, and good structure. I am open to various breeder 'types' so long as I see proof they are doing this (and not just an 'I think my dog is great!'). I would never buy from someone that had some dogs and just bred them because they had them. I want some proof that they are thinking beyond that.


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

I very often wish the AKC had open stud books,there are some VERY nice bloodlines of Aussies that did not register with the AKC when the breed got accepted. If I got one of these dogs in the future it would be nice if I could register it with the AKC, but as of now that's not an option available to me.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Crantastic said:


> With most breeds, it does. A well-bred dog should be a sound dog. Some dogs will prove themselves through work, and I don't think that showing is important for them. But for breeds that are used as companions, I like to see show titles, because it proves that multiple unbiased strangers have gone over the dog and deemed it sound. Breeders who don't show or have their dogs prove themselves through work or even sports can develop kennel blindness, unintentionally breeding faults into their dogs that can weaken their lines.


I was going to type up something, but this basically covers it. I want to know that my dog's parents were great representatives of their breed or else why bother breeding them. Confo titles don't make a dog great, but it's a start and shows that the breeder cares the minimum about their breed and dogs. 

That is what I look for in a dog though because I think there is value in being at least mostly conformationally sound. For someone who just wants a pet I don't have a problem with a breeder who health tests and has dogs of outstanding temperament and nothing else. But then, I've also never seen a breeder who falls into that category. The only breeders I have seen who health test are also the ones who show their dog in some venue or prove them in work.

Eta: I have no issue with outcrossing if it is done for a purpose and in a responsible manner. I don't think that's really the issue at play here.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

An example.... I am not and have never been into Labs... My wife LOVES labs....

When Buc passed I did everything I could to send her in another direction....Even had a thread about here....

In the end we got a Lab... Because that is what my wife wanted.... 

We lucked into this dog.... I was referred to this breeder by a well respected handler. We ended up with her pick for a performance puppy.... 

This breeder is very successful in conformation. She is also very successful in retriever trials. Southeastern Guide Dogs uses one of her dogs as a stud dog. 

This dog has changed some long held opinions about Labs by me....


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> IF you have NO experience with conformation where are you seeing these dogs? Pictures?
> 
> 
> IF you are a big fan of open stud books, then you should stick with mixed breeds......


Sure, pictures or watching dog shows, sometimes breeder websites or the odd well-bred dog I see out and about. A smooshed snout is not a difficult thing to spot. I do like a lot of mixed breeds, although there are obviously lots of examples of perfectly healthy dogs with purebred parents... just depends. Depends what you're looking for and what the breeder is selecting for. Its not an attack, I just don't buy showing as an automatic badge of health or soundness.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Sure, pictures or watching dog shows, sometimes breeder websites or the odd well-bred dog I see out and about. A smooshed snout is not a difficult thing to spot. I do like a lot of mixed breeds, although there are obviously lots of examples of perfectly healthy dogs with purebred parents... just depends. Depends what you're looking for and what the breeder is selecting for. Its not an attack, I just don't buy showing as an automatic badge of health or soundness.


All Pugs have a "smooshed face" (your words) Looking for a longer muzzle... You need to be looking at another breed. 

So you can tell how a dog breaths by looking at pictures and watching it on tv?


Westminster? Westminster is no big deal other than it was on TV... The general public views it as a big deal.. But it is just in New York City and at the Garden. 
Pugs entered were 34 and half of those were no shows because of the weather.

And I have NEVER said conformation is a badge of automatic of health or soundness.....

You indicated if you were looking for a dog, you would stay away from conformation breeders.

And what I said was, if you were looking for a healthy puppy, you should look at conformation breeders. I never said it was automatic. But that is where you will find well bred pug.....


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Generally, I agree with what Crantastic says. I have nothing against people who health test, breed responsibly, and do SOMETHING with their breeding stock. Be it agility, conformation, flyball, whatever. One thing though--I would only consider them if they are also breeding according to the breed standard. What's the point of buying a dog that doesn't even look like its breed?

That said, I dislike breeds that have become so extreme that it impedes their ability to live comfortably. Some of these breeds can't even cool down in heat and have 90% of airlines start embargoes on them because they often die during transport. So I will neither show nor own these breeds. Just my decision. I'll stick with my average, non structurally extreme breeds. In these breeds, I think it's so important that their look and temperament be preserved. People who do not show their dogs or aren't part of the show world very VERY rarely understand what this means.

The point is that being in the show world makes people acquainted with those who have been in the breed for decades. They know all the health problems that arise in which lines, they know which lines produce what, and that's so important when breeding. People who do NOT study a breed will never know this.

You don't just put two healthy dogs together and expect a bunch of well adjusted, healthy puppies. You always have to look beyond one generation. Most experienced breeders look at 3,4,5 generations because they know the lines and sometimes the individual intimately. When they do a breeding, they mostly know what to expect and they know why they are doing the breeding and what they are trying to achieve.

Sadly I rarely see people who do not show doing this. I've seen some, for sure. Agility breeders in Europe, but they are by far the minority.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

elrohwen said:


> Eta: I have no issue with outcrossing if it is done for a purpose and in a responsible manner. I don't think that's really the issue at play here.


I want to second this. I think this is an entirely different discussion from the "is it okay to breed mixed-breed dogs" one. Outcrossing can, in some cases, really save a breed -- for example, a single pointer was crossed into the dalmatian breed and resulted in a strain of dogs without the uric acid issue. (This only works in certain situations, though.)

For the record, I am okay with people breeding mixes as long as they do the same sort of things that I would expect from a good breeder of purebreds. I just don't think that careful outcrossing with a few healthy dogs of a different breed is the same thing as breeding puggles, for example. It's two different discussions.

As for the hobby breeder thing, I've never really heard "hobby breeder" used as a negative. All of the breeders I know who health test, show their dogs, and breed a litter or two per year are hobby breeders. They are literally breeding as a hobby, because they enjoy it and because they want to better their particular breed. I actually side-eye the ones who _aren't_ hobby breeders -- the ones who are treating dog breeding as a money-making venture.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> All Pugs have a "smooshed face" (your words) Looking for a longer muzzle... You need to be looking at another breed.


Honestly I see a TON of variation in how flat pugs' faces are. For whatever reason we have a million of them up here, and the longer-muzzled ones (as long as they can get, anyway) absolutely have a better time breathing. The pictures of winning conformation pugs I've seen lately are all literally FLAT faced and that isn't typical for the pet pugs I usually see. I like to see the longer-muzzled pugs, and they most definitely are still recognizably pugs.

So I get what aiw is saying. There are a handful of breeds that I actually prefer "badly bred" (eg not to standard) dogs over dogs that meet their standard. For example, several toy breeds (poms, paps right off the top of my head) seem to be moving towards sort of a generic chihuahua-like "toy-face" that I don't care for. Give me a nice spitzy/foxy-faced pom any day.

Having said that, to me whether a breeder shows in conformation or not has nothing to do with whether they are a good or bad breeder. It wouldn't be a deal breaker either way, neither a requirement nor a mark against a breeder for me.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

I am completely FOR outcrossing when done responsibly and by an exprienced breeder who knows exactly what they're doing. Putting two purebreds together (like Beagles and a Pug) will never necessarily produce a healthy dog. On the contrary, that dog might get health problems that are rife in BOTH breeds. It's still a crapshoot.

The outcross done in Dalmatians is totally different from people breeding Puggles. It was done by an experienced, responsible breeder who consequently DNA tested all the resulting progeny to make sure they possessed the correct version of the gene to process urine correctly. That is vastly different from someone randomly mixing two breeds together.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> All Pugs have a "smooshed face" (your words) Looking for a longer muzzle... You need to be looking at another breed.
> 
> So you can tell how a dog breaths by looking at pictures and watching it on tv?
> 
> ...


There are plenty of pugs here in Toronto, there are about 3 who frequent our local dog park and its very common to see various pugs out and about. They do seem to wheeze quite a bit. There are variations within a breed. I just don't think breeding needs to be all or nothing like that, that either you get the right to standard (and currently in fashion) conformation pug or you better look at other breeds. Its exactly the exclusivity of standard that I don't like. Why couldn't you have a pug with a longer snout, a single curl tail and a bit leaner through the chest? 

I wouldn't necessarily stay away from a breeder_ because_ they show, its just not really important to me. Maybe I would feel differently if I fell in love with a breed and loved the standard, but I haven't yet and I don't think its the only way to produce well-bred dogs. In some cases I do think it can even get in the way of health.

EDIT: Thats also not to say that breeding mixes or not showing is automatically responsible breeding. Thats pretty far from the truth too. I wouldn't support putting together two random dogs from two random breeds any more than intentionally exaggerating unhealthy features for the sake of type. For example, it seems to me that carefully chosen and screened Beagle x Pug pairings can help alleviate a lot of the problems but another cross I've heard of (Bulldog x Pug) seems like the worst of both worlds.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

lucidity said:


> The outcross done in Dalmatians is totally different from people breeding Puggles. It was done by an experienced, responsible breeder who consequently DNA tested all the resulting progeny to make sure they possessed the correct version of the gene to process urine correctly. That is vastly different from someone randomly mixing two breeds together.


Yep, exactly -- that's what I was getting at. That RufflySpeaking page I posted explains why outcrossing isn't always the best solution, too. It's really great in some instances, but it's not a cure-all. I think some careful outcrossing could help cavaliers, for example, because they have a couple of specific health issues that could be alleviated, and some breeds of similar conformation that could be used without changing the overall look and temperament of the cavalier. But as the author of that article I linked posted, what about goldens? What would you cross in to "fix" their cancer issue that wouldn't change the golden's look and purpose or add more health issues?

sassafras, I agree with you about poms. That's probably the one breed where I prefer the look of the foxy, BYB version (I wouldn't buy one, but if I wanted a pom, I'd rescue). There are some other breeds I think could use some help, but the BYB versions are no better -- all of the BYB pugs I've met wheezed more than any of the show ones I've met, for example. I've also met some nice moderate show ones, so I know they're out there. 

I think it can kind of vary by area, too. I wouldn't agree that papillons in general are becoming more like chihuahuas. In some areas of the world, I'm seeing that trend, while in others, the more substantial paps are winning more. I know a lot of prominent breeders with lovely dogs. And in any case, the BYBs are no better -- in fact, they're often worse for wanting to breed tinier and tinier.


----------



## So Cavalier (Jul 23, 2010)

> The outcross done in Dalmatians is totally different from people breeding Puggles. It was done by an experienced, responsible breeder who consequently DNA tested all the resulting progeny to make sure they possessed the correct version of the gene to process urine correctly.


And yet how long has it taken for the National Breed club to recognize the LUA dal. I saw an article where a dal breeder was complaining that the LUA dal's spots "just weren't right". I am thinking that they are just being recognized as dals by AKC....It just makes me want to scream.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Its exactly the exclusivity of standard that I don't like. Why couldn't you have a pug with a longer snout, a single curl tail and a bit leaner through the chest?
> 
> .


As I said..... You are better of staying with crosses...


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> As I said..... You are better of staying with crosses...


.... Why?


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

aiw said:


> EDIT: Thats also not to say that breeding mixes or not showing is automatically responsible breeding. Thats pretty far from the truth too. I wouldn't support putting together two random dogs from two random breeds any more than intentionally exaggerating unhealthy features for the sake of type. For example, it seems to me that carefully chosen and screened Beagle x Pug pairings can help alleviate a lot of the problems but another cross I've heard of (Bulldog x Pug) seems like the worst of both worlds.


You are gonna be VERY VERY hard pressed to find someone who intimately knows all the dogs in their Beagle AND Pug pedigrees, and who do all necessary health testing on both parents to be breeding coempletely sound Puggles. Pugs have health problems that Beagles don't, and Beagles have problems that Pugs don't. Just because the puppies will have longer muzzles doesn't mean they won't have a host of other problems. That is what I am saying. Someone who breeds Pugs and Beagles together (even with health testing) isn't doing it responsibly unless they know both breeds intimately, and 3-4-5 generations of the dogs behind the ones they are breeding in depth.



So Cavalier said:


> And yet how long has it taken for the National Breed club to recognize the LUA dal. I saw an article where a dal breeder was complaining that the LUA dal's spots "just weren't right". I am thinking that they are just being recognized as dals by AKC....It just makes me want to scream.


Exactly. I think it's the problem with the "old" people in the KC who are so dead set on closed stud books even to the detriment of their breeds. Ridiculous, but I see SO many people who have that sort of mentality.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Not much to add except that I generally agree with JohnnyBandit, Crantastic, Lucidity, and Elrohwen about the reason and importance of proving dogs in some venue. For me, if someone is breeding dogs, they should have concrete goals and strategies for improving the breed as a whole and that, to me, requires an independent assessment of their dogs.



Xeph said:


> I consider myself a "hobby breeder". Most people that breed consider themselves hobby breeders, and they title their stock or work them in real life situations.


My understanding was always that "hobby breeder" was a way of indicating a reputable breeder. At the very least, hobby breeders do appropriate health testing, prove their dogs (e.g., in conformation, sports, and/or real world activities), study pedigrees, provide excellent care for their dogs and puppies, and breed with specific goals in mind. I'd consider the breeders on this forum (you, Finkie_Mom, JulieMule, etc) hobby breeders and hold you up as examples of reputable breeders.



lucidity said:


> Generally, I agree with what Crantastic says. I have nothing against people who health test, breed responsibly, and do SOMETHING with their breeding stock. Be it agility, conformation, flyball, whatever.* One thing though--I would only consider them if they are also breeding according to the breed standard. What's the point of buying a dog that doesn't even look like its breed?*


I read a breed-specific forum and there is a growing group of members who denigrate "show" breeders. Their biggest priorities when selecting a breeder is that they have low COI, breed good companions, and have dogs who live in their homes. The biggest issue I've seen is that those types of breeders often don't do appropriate health testing. Additionally, their dogs aren't bred to conformation standards and they are often breeding their own dogs to each other multiple times. It seems to me that in a few generations, they are going to produce dogs who are not recognizable as the breed they claim to be.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

cookieface said:


> I read a breed-specific forum and there is a growing group of members who denigrate "show" breeders. Their biggest priorities when selecting a breeder is that they have low COI, breed good companions, and have dogs who live in their homes. The biggest issue I've seen is that those types of breeders often don't do appropriate health testing. Additionally, their dogs aren't bred to conformation standards and they are often breeding their own dogs to each other multiple times. It seems to me that in a few generations, they are going to produce dogs who are not recognizable as the breed they claim to be.


There seems to be a growing number of "breeders" with this kind of thinking these days, and you are right. The dogs they produce have structural problems left and right, and look only vaguely like the breed they're supposed to be. Often, they are also extremely big or small. It's laughable that they think their dogs are healthier without all the health testing. That's why so many people use showing as a benchmark, because on the whole, a lot more show breeders do health testing compared to other breeders, ESPECIALLY for toy breeds who don't herd, track, or do anything pretty much other than being companion dogs.

Like I said before, the exception seems to be in Europe (I've seen them in Scandinavia), because their country requires all breeding dogs to pass health tests before being bred.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

> As I said..... You are better of staying with crosses...


I will second the "why?"

Pugs used to look like this:


















oh look, longer muzzle, single curl to the tail and narrower chest. and huh, still a pug. 

and I will add that I agree with aiw 100% and I DO have hands on experience with conformation and I own a show dog.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Crantastic said:


> I think it can kind of vary by area, too. I wouldn't agree that papillons in general are becoming more like chihuahuas. In some areas of the world, I'm seeing that trend, while in others, the more substantial paps are winning more. I know a lot of prominent breeders with lovely dogs. And in any case, the BYBs are no better -- in fact, they're often worse for wanting to breed tinier and tinier.


Yeah I was thinking that too. There are certainly some big pet bred papillons that aren't as typey looking. But I really see the chihuahua looking paps more often outside of the show ring. I know quite a few that are 3-4 lbs and look like tiny poms that are from pet stores and breeders like that. Our breed standard allows for quite a variation in head pieces, with all being correct. So you see some with shorter muzzles and a more rounded head as well as other breeders going for a blockier head, or a longer muzzle. It's all individual preference, really. But the expression and head should be very different than a chihuahua.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

cookieface said:


> Their biggest priorities when selecting a breeder is that they have low COI, breed good companions, and have dogs who live in their homes.


Actually, this is what I would consider a good breeder. But then it would also include health testing and breeding for a goal, with the breed standard always in their mind. 

Personally, I don't care for champion titles and if a breeder I had my eye on was really active in showing their dogs, that would be fine, but it's not something I would actively search for in a breeder. I want a healthy dog from a breed with a type that I like, and if I can find a breeder that breeds healthy dogs from a breed with a type that I like, I would buy there. (provided I like the breeder and the dogs are well taken care of) 

Pedigree dogs have to be shown to a judge at least two times here before they can breed, so that's the minimum in regards of conformation that I hold. If a breeder did not show their dog beyond this minimum of two times, and all other areas that I think are important were great, then I would not have a problem with it. I wouldn't consider these dogs 'proven' though, beyond adhering to the breed standard. That's good enough for me, and a breeder that health tested, bred for a goal, with low COI, the dogs in the house and well taken care of, I would consider a good hobby breeder.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Everybody has their own opinion and preferences, and I think a good breeder is in the eye of the beholder. Titles and conformation means absolutely nothing to me when it comes to working dogs. Ma'ii is supposedly purebred, but I'd say there's a pretty slim chance he'd ever win in a show ring....unless, you know, the judge was blind, lol. However, as far as his drive, work ethic, and being able to get a job done? This dog spent 6 years of his life, driving stock up on a ranch in NY, and according to his previous owner, was GREAT at it. There were a few reasons as to why his previous owner was rehoming him, none that were by any means the dog's fault, but what it essentially came down to was a lifestyle change....and a new girlfriend that didn't like dogs.... But that's okay. My only regret is he never took any videos for me to watch! Yes, we've had some behavior issues from him, but I attribute that more to a life time of having very little training then to bad breeding. Because most of those issues have been trained out of him.

My only want in buying a dog from a breeder would be health and temperament tested, but that's it. I couldn't give a flying whoop about titles.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

RCloud said:


> Everybody has their own opinion and preferences, and I think a good breeder is in the eye of the beholder.


I think this has a ring of truth to it.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

It doesn't bother me if people aren't personally interested in buying from a show breeder. That's their prerogative. But I want show breeders to stick around, because without them, a lot of breeds would change, and not for the better. I just... I think of boxers here. I'd say that a good 75% of the BYB boxers I met around my last city looked awful. Jowly, oversized, with bad conformation. I finally saw some boxers at a show -- smaller dogs, tighter lips, a good length of muzzle, a beautiful stack -- and I was amazed. I had never liked the look of a boxer before, but I thought these were gorgeous. My cocker spaniel breeder friend (from the same city) was similarly stunned. We kept commenting on it every time we ran across those boxers at the show! 

Yes, there are some breeds where I dislike the show type -- the peke, for example. One prominent show kennel changed that breed to have very bowed front legs and an extremely profuse coat; it wasn't originally that extreme. With a few breeds like that, I have a hard time defending breeding to the standard. But there are many breeds where adhering to the conformation standard helps people produce sound, lovely dogs. And showing, to me, is just about getting that outside, unbiased recognition that you're on the right track.

So I guess I can't make any generalizations across the whole dog world, because I can't even make any generalizations about me. I'll always buy papillons from show breeders. I wouldn't buy a show pom; I'd rescue a foxy-looking, out-of-standard one. I wouldn't go to a show breeder for a border collie; I'd go with working lines. I think that people have to look at the breed they're interested in and decide where to look for a dog of that breed, and what they would consider responsible breeding of that breed.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Avie said:


> Actually, this is what I would consider a good breeder. But then it would also include health testing and breeding for a goal, with the breed standard always in their mind.
> 
> Personally, I don't care for champion titles and if a breeder I had my eye on was really active in showing their dogs, that would be fine, but it's not something I would actively search for in a breeder. I want a healthy dog from a breed with a type that I like, and if I can find a breeder that breeds healthy dogs from a breed with a type that I like, I would buy there. (provided I like the breeder and the dogs are well taken care of)
> 
> Pedigree dogs have to be shown to a judge at least two times here before they can breed, so that's the minimum in regards of conformation that I hold. If a breeder did not show their dog beyond this minimum of two times, and all other areas that I think are important were great, then I would not have a problem with it. I wouldn't consider these dogs 'proven' though, beyond adhering to the breed standard. That's good enough for me, and a breeder that health tested, bred for a goal, with low COI, the dogs in the house and well taken care of, I would consider a good hobby breeder.


I agree that low COI, stable temperament, and good quality of life are important, but not to the exclusion of everything else. The general vibe on the breed-specific forum I mentioned is that "show" breeders are single handedly ruining the breed by breeding _only_ for looks and that low COI all but guarantees a dog to be free from genetic disease. Are there poor breeders who show in conformation or participate in sports? Absolutely. Are there good breeders who don't participate in any dog venues? Certainly. But, I found it difficult to locate breeders who did everything I wanted unless I looked at breeders who also titled their dogs. Also, I view proving a dog (whether in conformation, sports, and/or real-life scenarios) as showing commitment to one's dogs and the breed as a whole. My dog's breeder did everything I wanted plus is extremely active in rescue and participates in research concerning genetic diseases in the breed. I'm not sure I could ever find another breeder like her.



RCloud said:


> Everybody has their own opinion and preferences, and I think a good breeder is in the eye of the beholder.


I wholeheartedly agree


----------



## TorachiKatashi (Sep 29, 2010)

Before I got Mozart I was speaking to a few breeders, so I had a more solidified list of what I was and wasn't looking for in a breeder. A lot of it is obviously very specific to me and my opinion on certain issues rather than an overarching "no one should ever buy from a breeder who does this," but I know that I would never be able to be happy with a puppy who came from one of these breeders.

I will absolutely never buy from a breeder:

- Whose dogs don't all live in the home. Absolutely no kennel runs on the property.
- Who "rehomes" their retired dogs.
- Who has more than eight dogs living in their home.
- Who has more than two intact, breeding age females living in their home. (Breeding age really depends on the breed.)
- Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have their Conformation Championship (or Certificate of Merit for FSS breeds, or equivalent in other countries) in at least one country. (UKC Championships only count for breeds not recognized by AKC.)
- Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have at least one title in each of their breed sports. (Or at least one performance title for breeds who do not have a breed sport.)
- Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have their CGC/CGN/country equivalent.
- Who crops, docks, or removes dewclaws from their dogs.
- Who allows owners to pick their puppies based on colour and/or sex.
- Who allows any puppy to leave the litter prior to eight weeks (and preferably not prior to twelve weeks.)
- Who feeds Iams/Purina/Eukanuba/any other garbage food, and/or isn't upfront about what food they feed.
- Who utilizes and/or recommends any training that is not purely positive for any sport.
- Who has more than two litters per year. (Though all of the breeders I was looking at only bred once every three or four years.)
- Who has those two litters overlap at all. (Ideally, I'd like to see the second female not even bred until the puppy's from the first litter have gone to their homes.)
- Who breeds any one female more than once a year (or once every two years for those breeds who only go into heat once a year.)
- Who breeds any dog, male or female, too young or too old (varies by breed.)
- Who breeds to and/or from any dog who does not have a CHIC number.
- Who does not have a website with all necessary information openly displayed. (I shouldn't have to e-mail them with a huge list of questions because they didn't have the information on their website.)
- Who breeds more than two breeds.
- Who breeds any litter from which they do not intend to keep a show-quality puppy.

I _think_ that's everything. As you can tell, I'm more than a little opinionated on what I consider a "good" breeder to be.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I understand and agree with a lot of your choices, but if they breed even one or two litters a year and keep a show pup each time, don't breed dogs that are too old, yet never rehome retired breeders and can't go over eight dogs in their house, their program isn't going to last very long (unless they're one of the people who has co-owned dogs all over the place, I guess, although that comes with its own set of issues for both breeders and buyers). A few of us touched on that in another thread recently: http://www.dogforums.com/general-dog-forum/133378-mini-boxers-2.html#post1408114


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Crantastic said:


> It doesn't bother me if people aren't personally interested in buying from a show breeder. That's their prerogative. But I want show breeders to stick around, because without them, a lot of breeds would change, and not for the better. I just... I think of boxers here. I'd say that a good 75% of the BYB boxers I met around my last city looked awful. Jowly, oversized, with bad conformation. I finally saw some boxers at a show -- smaller dogs, tighter lips, a good length of muzzle, a beautiful stack -- and I was amazed. I had never liked the look of a boxer before, but I thought these were gorgeous. My cocker spaniel breeder friend (from the same city) was similarly stunned. We kept commenting on it every time we ran across those boxers at the show!
> 
> Yes, there are some breeds where I dislike the show type -- the peke, for example. One prominent show kennel changed that breed to have very bowed front legs and an extremely profuse coat; it wasn't originally that extreme. With a few breeds like that, I have a hard time defending breeding to the standard. But there are many breeds where adhering to the conformation standard helps people produce sound, lovely dogs. And showing, to me, is just about getting that outside, unbiased recognition that you're on the right track.
> 
> So I guess I can't make any generalizations across the whole dog world, because I can't even make any generalizations about me. I'll always buy papillons from show breeders. I wouldn't buy a show pom; I'd rescue a foxy-looking, out-of-standard one. I wouldn't go to a show breeder for a border collie; I'd go with working lines. I think that people have to look at the breed they're interested in and decide where to look for a dog of that breed, and what they would consider responsible breeding of that breed.


I gace actually seen more what people would consider BYB pekes who are better looking then most show bred pekes ... even the ones that appear at westminister. most BTB pekes look like the pekes of old IMHO, so maybe in that case they are healthier then show bred pekes. 

I like that "border wars" site ... its pretty blunt about the changes in breeds like the peke & the german shepherd. I was also shocked to read about merle to merle breedings in aussies & collies. I thought it was illegal?


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I think it's good to have a list but I also think there's a risk of shooting yourself in the foot with such a long list. Breeding isn't a black/white issue. Just as an example:



TorachiKatashi said:


> - Who "rehomes" their retired dogs.
> - Who has more than eight dogs living in their home.


With those two and adding on the fact they have to keep a pup each litter, they're not going to get very far at all.



> - Who has more than two intact, breeding age females living in their home. (Breeding age really depends on the breed.)


Why?



> - Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have their Conformation Championship (or Certificate of Merit for FSS breeds, or equivalent in other countries) in at least one country. (UKC Championships only count for breeds not recognized by AKC.)


What if the dog had an accident before being able to finish? Like my dog's grandsire had quite a few points before knocking his teeth out (ran into a door). Or what if you have a good quality dog that can't finish for whatever reason? Like Summer who had a cosmetic fault- lack of hair but otherwise great qualities and temperament and great health?



> - Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have at least one title in each of their breed sports. (Or at least one performance title for breeds who do not have a breed sport.)


What if the dog works instead of sports?



> - Who allows owners to pick their puppies based on colour and/or sex.


Sex of the puppy is actually INCREDIBLY important, especially in some breeds. One of the breeds I'm looking at is sometimes same sex aggressive. Therefore I NEED a male. 


> - Who does not have a website with all necessary information openly displayed. (I shouldn't have to e-mail them with a huge list of questions because they didn't have the information on their website.)


A lot of breeders, especially older breeders have no website. My dog's breeder is totally not technologically savvy. It has no bearing on the quality of their dogs.


I'm not trying to nit-pick, I just am trying to point out there's a lot of gray area. Honestly, I don't know ANY breeder that would fit all of that.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

TorachiKatashi said:


> Before I got Mozart I was speaking to a few breeders, so I had a more solidified list of what I was and wasn't looking for in a breeder. A lot of it is obviously very specific to me and my opinion on certain issues rather than an overarching "no one should ever buy from a breeder who does this," but I know that I would never be able to be happy with a puppy who came from one of these breeders.
> 
> I will absolutely never buy from a breeder:
> 
> ...


WOW seriously?????? You will be very, very hard pressed to find a puppy, then. For what it's worth, there is NOTHING wrong with rehoming retired dogs. These dogs usually go on to better homes than staying with their breeder (breeder has more dogs, less time).

And I know of some amazing breeders who breed more than 1 breed. Most of the time, 2. And their dogs in both breeds are awesome. The Affen who went BIS at Westminster the other day comes from a breeder who breeds Bostons and Affens.

Also, I would like to understand why you wouldn't support a breeder who has 2 breeding bitches?


----------



## Keechak (Aug 10, 2008)

TorachiKatashi said:


> - Who breeds to and/or from any dog who does not have a CHIC number.
> .


In addition to what others have already said about your list I would like to add that CHIC numbers are only available for a select few breeds the majority of breeds out there don't have CHIC as an option. My breed is one of the lucky few.


----------



## Roloni (Aug 5, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Humans created dogs.... Seagulls are wild critters...
> 
> Apples and oranges.....
> 
> Controll and manipulation is what causes dogs to be dogs...


Humans created Breeds of dogs.. and mutts.
They didn't create dogs.
If left alone ...the wild dog would never have evolved into what we see today.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

Laurelin said:


> What if the dog had an accident before being able to finish? Like my dog's grandsire had quite a few points before knocking his teeth out (ran into a door). Or what if you have a good quality dog that can't finish for whatever reason? Like Summer who had a cosmetic fault- lack of hair but otherwise great qualities and temperament and great health?


thats what I hate about conformation shows ... even if the breed standard says they can be "mamed" (i.e. scars, torn ears in terriers & hunting dogs, herding dogs etc ....) but you know AKC judges arent going to title a dog with a ripped ear over a "clean" dog even if the "non perfect" dog is technically more conformationally correct then the one who has no flaws & that is sad.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

dogdragoness said:


> thats what I hate about conformation shows ... even if the breed standard says they can be "mamed" (i.e. scars, torn ears in terriers & hunting dogs, herding dogs etc ....) but you know AKC judges arent going to title a dog with a ripped ear over a "clean" dog even if the "non perfect" dog is technically more conformationally correct then the one who has no flaws & that is sad.


You know that for a fact? I bet some posters here could post win photos that prove you wrong. I've seen some! They're not mine to post, though.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

Scarring depends on the breed. I know some breeds allow you to show dogs with scars and missing teeth. I am honestly not sure if they just decided to stop showing Terri once he knocked most his front teeth out or if they couldn't show him anymore.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

dogdragoness said:


> thats what I hate about conformation shows ... even if the breed standard says they can be "mamed" (i.e. scars, torn ears in terriers & hunting dogs, herding dogs etc ....) but you know AKC judges arent going to title a dog with a ripped ear over a "clean" dog even if the "non perfect" dog is technically more conformationally correct then the one who has no flaws & that is sad.


That's not really true  there was a Cavalier in New Zealand who has won BIS with one eye missing. He lost it in an accident.


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> thats what I hate about conformation shows ... even if the breed standard says they can be "mamed" (i.e. scars, torn ears in terriers & hunting dogs, herding dogs etc ....) but you know AKC judges arent going to title a dog with a ripped ear over a "clean" dog even if the "non perfect" dog is technically more conformationally correct then the one who has no flaws & that is sad.


Not true at all. BB has won with scars, she has one on her leg now, she has won breed and group placements with it. Kira finished her championship with a small piece of her ear missing (got bit by another dog). I know a dog in the UK that has won with a missing eye, a bullmastiff. My friend's cattle dog did very well at Crufts with a swollen eye. There is probably plenty more dogs with scarring and have done well.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

dogdragoness said:


> thats what I hate about conformation shows ... even if the breed standard says they can be "mamed" (i.e. scars, torn ears in terriers & hunting dogs, herding dogs etc ....) but you know AKC judges arent going to title a dog with a ripped ear over a "clean" dog even if the "non perfect" dog is technically more conformationally correct then the one who has no flaws & that is sad.


You are SORELY mistaken......

This dog went to Orlando in 2009

Merlin and this dog went head to head one time..... Merlin needed a Major to finish. This dog needed a Major to finish.... Three day show.... This dog beat Merlin head to head. 










And IMO he AIN't that nice of a dog. And I would NEVER buy a dog from the breeder that produced him. 


I know a bunch of banged up, battle scared dogs that finished AFTER they got dinged up.

I know a Border Collie and an ACD that finished despite losing a significant portion of their tail. 

I know a Rottie that took a knife in an armed break in the owners home. 8 inch scar with no hair on the show side. 

An ACD that peeled its entire shoulder off sliding into a bull panel...


And this is what bugs me about threads like this.....

Folks have a little exposure (or none at all) and make comments about what goes on in the conformation community without even knowing what goes on in the show community.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

ChaosIsAWeim said:


> Not true at all. BB has won with scars, she has one on her leg now, she has won breed and group placements with it. Kira finished her championship with a small piece of her ear missing (got bit by another dog). I know a dog in the UK that has won with a missing eye, a bullmastiff. My friend's cattle dog did very well at Crufts with a swollen eye. There is probably plenty more dogs with scarring and have done well.


Now two folks that show have made similar statements. I have seen dogs show with fresh scabs from working wounds and won....


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Actually, it's three.

It irks me that people who have never been a part of the show world, or who have never even tried to learn its ins and outs from someone who is a part of it like to make assumptions about breeders and exhibitors.

ETA: I would still like to know who these breeders are (that people are mentioning in this thread) who do not show but do all the necessary health testing and breed within the breed standards. From my experience, their numbers are far fewer than people assume.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Remember the thread where Merlin got into it with a coyote.......

He was in a show the next week and took back to back BOBs with noticable scabs on his shoulder.....

Saturday Judge asked what happened here.... I said, he went three rounds with a coyote.... He said oh.... I said, coyote LOST.... The coyote was found dead in a bayhead the next day..... He chuckled.....


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

JohnnyBandit said:


> And this is what bugs me about threads like this.....
> 
> Folks have a little exposure (or none at all) and make comments about what goes on in the conformation community without even knowing what goes on in the show community.


Completely agree. There are definitely things to criticize about conformation showing, and it's often the people who actually participate in it who will be the first to admit that. But it irritates me when people who have no idea how things work state (incorrect) opinions as if they're fact.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

lucidity said:


> Actually, it's three.
> 
> It irks me that people who have never been a part of the show world, or who have never even tried to learn its ins and outs from someone who is a part of it like to make assumptions about breeders and exhibitors.
> 
> ETA: I would still like to know who these breeders are (that people are mentioning in this thread) who do not show but do all the necessary health testing and breed within the breed standards. From my experience, their numbers are far fewer than people assume.


Sorry..... Missed your post....


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Crantastic said:


> Completely agree. There are definitely things to criticize about conformation showing, and it's often the people who actually participate in it who will be the first to admit that. But it irritates me when people who have no idea how things work state (incorrect) opinions as if they're fact.


I wonder where their sources are from?? Hearsay? 

People are always so ready to criticize than to give ideas and opinions on how to improve. The people who are actually in it, and who are honestly trying are really the ones who should be supported. Without them, there wouldn't be anyone breeding responsibly, and nobody trying to preserve breeds that have been around for hundreds of years. Breeds that YOU (everybody) get to enjoy.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

yes that is true, Baby dog was undefeated in her breed in my area, and she is missing 2 teeth and a chunk of her ear on her show side from a dog fight when she was a pup (the other dog is missing the tip of her ear) , the dog she went head to head with the most often is now one of the top Tollers in Canada, he didn't get very far till I pulled Baby from the ring damaged ear, missing teeth and all.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

lucidity said:


> ETA: I would still like to know who these breeders are (that people are mentioning in this thread) who do not show but do all the necessary health testing and breed within the breed standards. From my experience, their numbers are far fewer than people assume.


I would LOVE to know..... The only breeders I have found that have consistently tested, learned, grown, etc are conformation breeders...

And just to throw it out there..... When I was born over 45 years ago, my father bred, my grandfather bred two breeds, I had two great uncles that bred. I was born into dogs. 

I have been involved with dogs my entire life..... Been active in the dog community my entire life.... And I have *never* come across a breeder that simply breeds to produce pets that is not involved with dog sports.....


----------



## ChaosIsAWeim (Feb 12, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Now two folks that show have made similar statements. I have seen dogs show with fresh scabs from working wounds and won....


Oh yeah and plenty weims show with very evident scarring on their face, if seen welts, etc etc. And they aren't thrown out like they are pond scum, there considered and quite a few times they win. Weim standard much like most working/sporting/herding etc standards allow battle scars, and judges know that, most judges of those breeds are not going to throw out a good dog just cause it has something unattractive on it. Are there some that will? Sure.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Miss Bugs said:


> yes that is true, Baby dog was undefeated in her breed in my area, and she is missing 2 teeth and a chunk of her ear on her show side from a dog fight when she was a pup (the other dog is missing the tip of her ear) , the dog she went head to head with the most often is now one of the top Tollers in Canada, he didn't get very far till I pulled Baby from the ring damaged ear, missing teeth and all.


She sounds awesome! Have you posted any pictures here? I like tollers and I'd love to see her.

ETA: I found some, and she is pretty.  I always enjoy meeting the tollers at shows. I watched one do rally last fall, too, and she was great.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

I have seen some, but only in Europe. And that is because their kennel club has rules about which dogs can be bred. Basically, if the dogs do not pass health tests, they can't be bred. So, even the people who breed agility dogs there usually do full health testing.

I've never seen any breeders anywhere else do the same, except for some who breed tracking/herding dogs. But that again is doing SOMETHING with your dogs.. not just.. breeding a bunch of pets.

ETA: oops, my post was in response to Johnny Bandit


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

Crantastic said:


> Completely agree. There are definitely things to criticize about conformation showing, and it's often the people who actually participate in it who will be the first to admit that. *But it irritates me when people who have no idea how things work state (incorrect) opinions as if they're fact*.


Thats fair enough. If some fact or idea is wrong then it makes good sense to correct them... but its better to deal with the idea itself instead of the experience level of the person offering it. I think its a cop out to say "you can't criticize the system until you've already bought into it". Better to deal with the wrong idea itself if thats really the case.

I have no idea about dogs competing with scars... Never heard (or even thought) about if it was or wasn't allowed. But I stand by what I said about the pugs, it seems the standard itself (or the current interpretation of the standard) is causing health problems. When that is the case, I don't think showing will produce the healthiest dog possible and is therefore not something I look for in a breeder. My understanding is that flat-faced dogs often have breathing problems. That their smaller nasal cavities often cause temperature regulation issues, difficulty breathing, skin folds very prone to infection and often dental difficulties. Also that the double-curled tail is caused by an abnormality in the spine which essentially leads to 'triangular vertebrae' that can cause kinks in the middle of the spine and that the deep, barrel chest is associated with heart issues. 










This dog seems to show all of those problematic features. So, am I wrong about those features and the health issues associated?


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Are you basing all your comments off Pugs only?

ETA: Pretty sure that is NOT what Cran meant. Nobody said anything about buying into anything. But to understand things, you first need to walk in someone else's shoes and see what it is on the inside before you can make comments as nothing but an outsider.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Thats fair enough. If some fact or idea is wrong then it makes good sense to correct them... *but its better to deal with the idea itself instead of the experience level of the person offering it.* I think its a cop out to say "you can't criticize the system until you've already bought into it". Better to deal with the wrong idea itself if thats really the case.
> 
> I have no idea about dogs competing with scars... Never heard (or even thought) about if it was or wasn't allowed. But I stand by what I said about the pugs, it seems the standard itself (or the current interpretation of the standard) is causing health problems. When that is the case, I don't think showing will produce the healthiest dog possible and is therefore not something I look for in a breeder. My understanding is that flat-faced dogs often have breathing problems. That their smaller nasal cavities often cause temperature regulation issues, difficulty breathing, skin folds very prone to infection and often dental difficulties. Also that the double-curled tail is caused by an abnormality in the spine which essentially leads to 'triangular vertebrae' that can cause kinks in the middle of the spine and that the deep, barrel chest is associated with heart issues.
> 
> ...




The thing is..... IF someone is not experienced in the show community, they CANNOT speak of what goes on there intelligently....

You said last night that you had seen show pugs on tv and in photos..... The idea that you think you can tell how well a Pug breaths based on pictures or TV is ABSOLUTELY ridiculous.....

You have formed an opinion based on no real information.....


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

aiw said:


> Thats fair enough. If some fact or idea is wrong then it makes good sense to correct them... but its better to deal with the idea itself instead of the experience level of the person offering it. I think its a cop out to say "you can't criticize the system until you've already bought into it". Better to deal with the wrong idea itself if thats really the case.


That's not what I was saying at all. There's a difference between having an opinion about a particular breed (or even about conformation showing) and stating incorrect opinions about the show world in general as if they're fact. "I don't think showing will produce the healthiest [pug] possible and is therefore not something I look for in a breeder" is a very different statement from something like, "you know AKC judges arent going to title a dog with a ripped ear over a 'clean' dog even if the 'non perfect' dog is technically more conformationally correct." No, you don't "know" that, as several people have proven.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

There are plenty of pugs and bulldogs here in the city. They seem to wheeze. Which lines up well with what I've read. I think pugs are a good example of issues that can crop up when dealing with showing and standards. I couldn't possibly generalize those across all breeders/breeds/dogs though. There are almost no generalizations out there that could fit all dogs, except that they're canine. They're not the only breed with conformation-related health issues though.

Neither of you have actually answered if any of my information is wrong about those features and the associated issues.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

Crantastic said:


> That's not what I was saying at all. There's a difference between having an opinion about a particular breed (or even about conformation showing) and stating incorrect opinions about the show world in general as if they're fact. "I don't think showing will produce the healthiest [pug] possible and is therefore not something I look for in a breeder" is a very different statement from something like, "you know AKC judges arent going to title a dog with a ripped ear over a 'clean' dog even if the 'non perfect' dog is technically more conformationally correct." No, you don't "know" that, as several people have proven.


Well, I didn't say anything anywhere about scars so I'll let whoever did explain their reasons. It was more the other two posters pointing out that my lack of showing experience excluded me from criticizing the system. I don't think it does and I think its kindof a weak argument.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

LOL. OK then, looks like you are never gonna change your opinion so I'm not gonna waste anymore of my time!


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

lucidity said:


> LOL. OK then, looks like you are never gonna change your opinion so I'm not gonna waste anymore of my time!


I'd be happy to.... if someone would present me with some competing facts.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Facts on what? Please state specifically. Nobody is saying that show breeds are allllll good and all that. What we are saying is that, nobody else seems to be doing the alternative??? It's easy to criticize, but then, how do you solve the problem? Bitchin' about it with random people online isn't gonna help.

With the exception of the LUA Dalmations. That is an example of someone who saw a problem, and did SOMETHING to rectify it.

ETA: I show Cavaliers. I may breed in the future, but before I do, my bitch will be fully health tested, and she is already almost a Grand Champion. If we persevere, she might even earn her Int. Champ title. So at least, I am doing something to help my breed.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I have very little knowledge of pugs and so won't even pretend to know anything about their standard. The ones I've met at shows have breathed fine, but I haven't met many. The breeders I've spent the most time "talking dogs" with and/or helping out at the shows breed papillons, shih tzu, GSDs, bernese mountain dogs, and cocker spaniels, so those are the ones I've heard most about. 

Although I can't discuss pugs with any kind of authority, you just have to look back at my earlier posts to see that I personally don't like the way some breeds are looking in the ring.



> With a few breeds like [pekes], I have a hard time defending breeding to the standard. But there are many breeds where adhering to the conformation standard helps people produce sound, lovely dogs. And showing, to me, is just about getting that outside, unbiased recognition that you're on the right track.
> 
> So I guess I can't make any generalizations across the whole dog world, because I can't even make any generalizations about me. I'll always buy papillons from show breeders. I wouldn't buy a show pom; I'd rescue a foxy-looking, out-of-standard one. I wouldn't go to a show breeder for a border collie; I'd go with working lines. I think that people have to look at the breed they're interested in and decide where to look for a dog of that breed, and what they would consider responsible breeding of that breed.


Showing, to me, is one tool among many for judging dog quality. For the breeds I am interested in owning, I feel that breeding to standard produces a sound dog, and I will always look to show breeders first. For other breeds (like working dogs, or breeds where a more moderate, "out of style" (and therefore non-winning) look _appears_ to be healthier), I might not find it necessary. I'd do a _lot_ of research about any breed I was interested in, speak to different breeders, and make a decision.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Well, I didn't say anything anywhere about scars so I'll let whoever did explain their reasons. It was more the other two posters pointing out that my lack of showing experience excluded me from criticizing the system. I don't think it does and I think its kindof a weak argument.


I was one of those.... And your lack of in person experiience does mean you are forming an opinion without any knowledge.... There is NO WAY you can tell how well a dog breaths or does not breath from a photo or tv..... End of story as far as I am concerned.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> I'd be happy to.... if someone would present me with some competing facts.


You have no facts to back up your position in the first place....


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

lucidity said:


> *Facts on what? Please state specifically.* Nobody is saying that show breeds are allllll good and all that. What we are saying is that, nobody else seems to be doing the alternative??? It's easy to criticize, but then, how do you solve the problem? Bitchin' about it with random people online isn't gonna help.
> 
> With the exception of the LUA Dalmations. That is an example of someone who saw a problem, and did SOMETHING to rectify it.
> 
> ETA: I show Cavaliers. I may breed in the future, but before I do, my bitch will be fully health tested, and she is already almost a Grand Champion. If we persevere, she might even earn her Int. Champ title. So at least, I am doing something to help my breed.


Well, it seems pretty indisputable to me that those health issues exist - unless someone has facts or even experience to suggest otherwise - and they seem to me to be a direct result of conformation and breeding to the standard. So I think in that instance choosing a dog that has been bred to that specification is not in the health interests of the dog and not something I want to support. Which is why if I were to get a Pug I would probably not choose a pup from titled champions and instead pick one that was bred outside of standard and probably outside of the showing community. Thats what I would choose in the interests of supporting a breeder whose practices I approve of. I think thats a responsible choice and a good example of how showing a dog and breeding within standard doesn't guarantee a healthy dog and shouldn't necessarily be the automatic choice.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> Well, it seems pretty indisputable to me that those health issues exist - unless someone has facts or even experience to suggest otherwise - and they seem to me to be a direct result of conformation and breeding to the standard. .


Please list a few of these indisputable facts that health issues exist.....


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You have no facts to back up your position in the first place....


Well, I have my own (quite limited) experience and then lots of reading....



> You need to pay special attention to your Pug's ears and clean them regularly with an ear wash. It is time to see your vet if you notice any redness, heavy discharge, odor, or headshaking. You also need to clean your Pug's nose roll and wrinkles. You can use some of your ear wash if you are careful to keep it out of the eyes. Some Pugs need their faces cleaned daily, while others can go several days or longer. Sometimes the nose roll gets infected and requires veterinary care.
> 
> Pug mouths tend to have a lot of teeth in a small space and they are crowded and crooked. It is hard to visualize the teeth, let alone brush them but you should try and do your best. Your vet may have some products that are easy to use and pointers on keeping the teeth nice. Getting your Pug to chew on nylabones or other special bones can help keep the amount of tartar down and there are special foods made to help as well.
> 
> With their short, pushed in face, Pugs can have trouble breathing, especially if there is high heat and humidity. They must be kept cool and exercised with caution in the summer. Part of the short-faced or brachycephalic syndrome can involve having pinched nostrils and an elongated soft palate. Your vet will need to examine your Pug to see if the nostrils are too tight to let air flow freely. There is a surgery to correct this problem. If you notice your Pug snoring excessively or gasping to breathe, it could be that his soft palate (at the back of his mouth) is too long and is in the way. Again, there is a surgery to help correct this problem. While overheating is the biggest weather-related problem, Pugs should also not be exposed for very cold temperatures for long periods of time. They were bred to be housedogs and companions.


http://www.pugs.org/indexhealth.htm
http://www.pugvillage.com/general/dont-get-pug
http://www.pugproblems.com/pug-health-problems/
http://www.pugalug.com/what_the_books_didnt_tell_you.html

Really every website I come across about pugs list these same issues and concerns as a brachycephalic breed with heavy skin wrinkling.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

OK I read that, but the point everyone else was making is... how do you find such a breeder? People who DO NOT show usually DO NOT health test or do anything with their dogs to prove their soundness (tracking, OB, agility, Etc). Are you saying you would rather buy a Pug who is bred by someone who doesn't health test, but only breeds for something with a longer muzzle?

ETA: For what it's worth, some judges DO penalize dogs who can't seem to breathe properly. Just lately, a very good quality English Bulldog was put up in Thailand because the judge was amazed that it could go around the ring so many times without panting, and without even looking tired.

So no, it isn't ALWAYS that showing such a breed is to its detriment. There are breeders and judges who really appreciate the dogs who look like their breed, but can also live comfortably. I commend these people because they are few and far between. They are in it and are trying to improve things, instead of criticizing as an outsider.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

aiw said:


> Well, it seems pretty indisputable to me that those health issues exist - unless someone has facts or even experience to suggest otherwise - and they seem to me to be a direct result of conformation and breeding to the standard. So I think in that instance choosing a dog that has been bred to that specification is not in the health interests of the dog and not something I want to support. Which is why if I were to get a Pug I would probably not choose a pup from titled champions and instead pick one that was bred outside of standard and probably outside of the showing community. Thats what I would choose in the interests of supporting a breeder whose practices I approve of. I think thats a responsible choice and a good example of how showing a dog and breeding within standard doesn't guarantee a healthy dog and shouldn't necessarily be the automatic choice.


I think one thing you should understand, that might not have occurred to you if you haven't been to a bunch of shows and met a bunch of show dogs of a particular breed, is that standards are often easy to interpret in different ways. For example, in papillons, there can be several different "looks" that are all equally correct under the standard. Here's an example of different heads:



> Skull - The head is small. The skull is of medium width and slightly rounded between the ears. A well-defined stop is formed where the muzzle joins the skull. Muzzle - The muzzle is fine, abruptly thinner than the head, tapering to the nose. The length of the muzzle from the tip of the nose to stop is approximately one-third the length of the head from tip of nose to occiput.


All of these dogs have their championships now:














































If you hated one of those head types, or one of the body types that are also equally correct, you might decide that conformation shows are ruining papillons and you'd better find a breeder who doesn't show. But what wins in the ring, or what's in style, can vary by area or even by show. Could you find a pug breeder who is very concerned with producing healthy dogs who can breathe great and might not mind working a little harder and attending more shows to find judges who will grant them points? Maybe! I wouldn't write it off entirely. But if you can't -- if, after doing your research and checking out show and non-show pug breeders and finding that no show ones are producing what you'd like -- and you decide to go with someone who doesn't show, that's okay. It's just not fair to write something off without looking into it in person (you don't have to breed... just going to shows and meeting breeders gives you more experience).

But I don't think people here are really talking about writing off show breeders of one particular breed because you don't like how they look. We seem to mostly be objecting to people making sweeping generalizations about show breeders of all breeds.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

What Crantastic said!


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

*You need to pay special attention to your Pug's ears and clean them regularly with an ear wash. It is time to see your vet if you notice any redness, heavy discharge, odor, or headshaking. You also need to clean your Pug's nose roll and wrinkles. You can use some of your ear wash if you are careful to keep it out of the eyes. Some Pugs need their faces cleaned daily, while others can go several days or longer. Sometimes the nose roll gets infected and requires veterinary care.*

This goes for ANY flop eared breed.... IF you think you can get away with not paying attention to the ears on any flop eared dog, you are sorely mistaken. Don't want to do it? Look at prick eared dog....


*Pug mouths tend to have a lot of teeth in a small space and they are crowded and crooked. It is hard to visualize the teeth, let alone brush them but you should try and do your best. Your vet may have some products that are easy to use and pointers on keeping the teeth nice. Getting your Pug to chew on nylabones or other special bones can help keep the amount of tartar down and there are special foods made to help as well.*

This is not pug thing.... This is a SMALL dog thing......


*With their short, pushed in face, Pugs can have trouble breathing, especially if there is high heat and humidity. They must be kept cool and exercised with caution in the summer. Part of the short-faced or brachycephalic syndrome can involve having pinched nostrils and an elongated soft palate. Your vet will need to examine your Pug to see if the nostrils are too tight to let air flow freely. There is a surgery to correct this problem. If you notice your Pug snoring excessively or gasping to breathe, it could be that his soft palate (at the back of his mouth) is too long and is in the way. Again, there is a surgery to help correct this problem. While overheating is the biggest weather-related problem, Pugs should also not be exposed for very cold temperatures for long periods of time. They were bred to be housedogs *
Whether or not the nostrils are open and pass air freely is not neccessarily a direct result of a short muzzle. 

You mentioned there are a lot of pugs in your city...... and they seem to wheeze.... How many of those are conformation dogs or came from conformation breeders? IF you think conformation judges are going to put up dogs that cannot get around the show ring without wheezing.... You are mistaken. IF the dog cannot breath, it is not going to move well.... It is not going to be put up for points....


And.... If you do not want to deal with floppy ears, cleaning teeth, and some grunts and snorts.....

Do NOT get a floppy eared dog.... Do NOT get a small dog.... Do not get a dog with a shortened snout.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

lucidity said:


> OK I read that, but the point everyone else was making is... how do you find such a breeder? People who DO NOT show usually DO NOT health test or do anything with their dogs to prove their soundness (tracking, OB, agility, Etc).* Are you saying you would rather buy a Pug who is bred by someone who doesn't health test, but only breeds for something with a longer muzzle?*
> 
> ETA: For what it's worth, some judges DO penalize dogs who can't seem to breathe properly. Just lately, a very good quality English Bulldog was put up in Thailand because the judge was amazed that it could go around the ring so many times without panting, and without even looking tired.
> 
> So no, it isn't ALWAYS that showing such a breed is to its detriment. There are breeders and judges who really appreciate the dogs who look like their breed, but can also live comfortably. I commend these people because they are few and far between. They are in it and are trying to improve things, instead of criticizing as an outsider.


No probably not. I would hope to find both somewhere. Since its not a breed I'm actually likely to own I haven't done research to find a breeder whose practices and dogs I really like. I would want proper testing done. I was just making the point that even a pup whose parents have OFA and CERF and been checked for patella is still at serious risk for breathing problems if a completely flat face is considered a desirable feature. I realize its not the case across the board, just an example of why a pup from a breeder who doesn't show may actually be a responsible choice.

EDIT: 
@cran - I see what you're saying and it makes sense. Looking at pictures of breeds when they were first established does show a lot of change, and it does seem like something that changes with interpretation, popularity or individual taste. Which I think is good, breeders should be free to interpret standard as they choose (or even ignore certain sections they don't like). I guess the challenge is to find a breeder who shares your view of a great pap or pug. If a breeder does decide to ignore certain elements of standard though (like, say the double curled tail of the pug) they may choose to be out of the show world entirely. Not a choice I have much of a problem with. Like I said earlier, if dogs precisely within standard or conformation champions are what you want... then you should support a breeder who does those things. If its not... You can have other criteria.



> Do NOT get a floppy eared dog.... Do NOT get a small dog.... Do not get a dog with a shortened snout.


Exactly. I would choose a dog who still fulfilled my other criteria but didn't have those issues (or had those issues minimized). So instead of looking for a husky because I don't like the flat face of the pug I would look for a more traditional pug breeder with more moderation in their dogs or even a mix. With the criteria I listed those breeders would likely operate outside the showing system (definitely would if it were a puggle breeder). I would support the kind of breeding that I want to continue.... It just may not be the titled champion and I don't think thats necessarily a lesser choice.

To be clear, I don't really think there is a single generalization that could be made about all breeders or all dogs.... the variation is just too big.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

aiw said:


> No probably not. I would hope to find both somewhere. Since its not a breed I'm actually likely to own I haven't done research to find a breeder whose practices and dogs I really like. I would want proper testing done. I was just making the point that even a pup whose parents have OFA and CERF and been checked for patella is still at serious risk for breathing problems if a completely flat face is considered a desirable feature. I realize its not the case across the board, just an example of why a pup from a breeder who doesn't show may actually be a responsible choice.


That is why you shouldn't be making generalizations, is what we are trying to say. Not all apples are the same. Not all oranges are the same.

There are show Pugs and Chins and Bulldogs who can breathe just fine, just like how there are even long-muzzled breeds that can't breathe properly. Nothing is ever black and white or set in stone.

But there is one thing that I have rarely ever seen, is that, someone who does not show a companion breed (not bred for sledding, herding, etc.) doing all the necessary health tests and not breeding something that doesn't resemble its breed at all, or something extreme (extra small, extra big, "rare" colours). The fact is that for every show breeder you find that health tests (ALL health tests, not just one or two), you'll maybe find 1% of someone who DOESN'T show doing the same.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

I have been part of the show world, I showed jack russells for years via the JRTCA (who doesnt allow their dogss to show under double registery with AKC, i gueess they dont like their morals as a club ) 

forgive me for being ignorant but i have never seen a "Flawed" dog go BIB at nationals or westminister though you should note that I excluded herding/sporting/working dogs.

My real concern is that breeders will focus soley on showing their dogs in conformation & neglect the original form of function if their particular breed. also i have never aggred with hiring a handler, i thinkthe owner should have to show the dog, in jack russell shows that is now it is, only the other or the breeder can exhibit the dog so everyone is on more even ground (so their isnt a class where the best handler in the world if pitted against a novice I suppose) I wish the AKC was like that.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

If you are only watching a couple of dogs shows per year, you are seeing VERY few of the dogs out there. It's not a good idea to make generalizations about all AKC shows when your experience is with the JRTCA and with watching AKC shows on TV.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

dogdragoness said:


> I excluded herding/sporting/working dogs.


I know some terriers that finished with battle scars...

And hounds....

That leaves non sporting and toys..... No reason for them to have battle scars.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Well if I am going to keep my future dogs intact to prevent cancer, I might just end up being a 'hobby breeder'. 

If my females are going to be left intact and to prevent pyos, I will need to breed them
If my males are going to be left intact might as well as put them to use.

I need to find some way to make up the extra cost for licensing for having intact animals. I really don't want to show so I guess I will be labeled as a 'hobby breeder' 

I have known some really well known breeders/show people who I would not buy anything from them. A lab breeder who may pass ofa hips but her dogs have horrible allergies. Another breeder who I would profile more of a puppy mill than a person who shows. But on the other side of the coin, I know show breeders who test for everything. Breed quality dogs and if I was interested in that breed, certainly would go there first.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I know some terriers that finished with battle scars...
> 
> And hounds....
> 
> That leaves non sporting and toys..... No reason for them to have battle scars.


That was just what I was gonna say.. a Toy dog would have a much lower chance of having scars.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> - Whose dogs don't all live in the home. Absolutely no kennel runs on the property.


Still in the game for you then....for now. My dogs live in the house, but I do plan on kennel runs eventually. Not for the dogs to live in permanently, but for them to spend the day in so I can clean the dog yard and the house without concern of dog fights or accidental breedings. I prefer it to having to keep them in crates



> - Who "rehomes" their retired dogs.


Whoop! That puts me out of the game! I have to do that or else...



> - Who has more than eight dogs living in their home.


I can't meet this criteria! Eight is a random number. How'd you get to it?



> - Who has more than two intact, breeding age females living in their home. (Breeding age really depends on the breed.)


Why? This makes no sense.



> - Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have their Conformation Championship (or Certificate of Merit for FSS breeds, or equivalent in other countries) in at least one country. (UKC Championships only count for breeds not recognized by AKC.)


This puts me out, too. Wesson's first litter will be to an import. He's not finished in this country and I believe he was imported before he got his show rating in Germany.



> - Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have at least one title in each of their breed sports. (Or at least one performance title for breeds who do not have a breed sport.)


You won't find my doing schutzhund with my dogs at this point. I admire the sport, but can't deal with the people and am physically handicapped enough I can't readily do it myself. Not to mention the huge expense. We're starting herding, but that ain't cheap either at $35/lesson and a 3 hour round trip three times a month. It's exhausting both financially and physically



> - Who breeds to and/or from dogs who do not have their CGC/CGN/country equivalent.


This seems pretty arbitrary, but ok



> - Who crops, docks, or removes dewclaws from their dogs.


Well I have a completely natural breed, so this really isn't an issue...unless you count rear dewclaws, which the GSD is not supposed to have (but is sometimes born with)



> - Who allows owners to pick their puppies based on colour and/or sex.


On the fence here. I allow people to tell me what their preference for color and sex is, and in some cases, as mentioned before, sex IS important, due to same sex aggression. I won't place a puppy with the wrong personality with a family just because the family wanted sable but the puppy best suited for them is a black.



> - Who allows any puppy to leave the litter prior to eight weeks (and preferably not prior to twelve weeks.)


Darn! Just missed it! I'll be sending puppies home at 10 weeks!



> - Who feeds Iams/Purina/Eukanuba/any other garbage food, and/or isn't upfront about what food they feed.


I feed Nutrisource, but realistically, there are many kennels with top quality dogs that DO feed these foods. They've bred for many generations feeding this food and we've actually noticed that many lines of dog do not do as well off a certain brand of food. The breeding line has adapted to receiving nutrition from that particular brand and when you try to switch the dogs get sick! It's quite funky.



> - Who utilizes and/or recommends any training that is not purely positive for any sport.


I'm out! I use aversive methods beyond a "no" when the situation calls for it.



> - Who has more than two litters per year. (Though all of the breeders I was looking at only bred once every three or four years.)


Well I'm back in the game! I don't have the space or desire to breed that many litters a year!



> - Who has those two litters overlap at all. (Ideally, I'd like to see the second female not even bred until the puppy's from the first litter have gone to their homes.)


This is just silliness. Who cares if the litters overlap? I know a great breeder that had a litter of THIRTEEN and a litter of four just a couple days apart. They were raised wonderfully and are all in excellent homes. Two puppies (one from each litter) are being trained for service work.



> - Who breeds any one female more than once a year (or once every two years for those breeds who only go into heat once a year.)


Back out again. While I certainly wouldn't breed EVERY heat, a back to back litter can be beneficial to the bitch (from a reproductive perspective), and tends to be a good idea for an older bitch who is producing her last litters.



> - Who breeds any dog, male or female, too young or too old (varies by breed.)


I would like to hear what is "too old". I know GSD bitches that have whelped at 9-10 years of age. A couple had c sections done (planned, and were spayed during the c section) and a couple whelped on their own with no complications. These were bitches that were kept in peak condition, however. Not flabby geriatrics who were left to languish until bred.



> - Who breeds to and/or from any dog who does not have a CHIC number.


My breed is able to receive a CHIC. However, one of the requirements is the GSDCA TT (Temperament Test). These are SO RARELY offered it is almost impossible to get a CHIC. You know the only other thing required for a CHIC # now, too? OFA hips and elbows. We do that already....

I'm lucky, my GSD club is offering the TT this spring, and I will be testing ALL of my dogs! But this is the ONLY chance I've had to DO the GSDCA TT in a DECADE!



> - Who does not have a website with all necessary information openly displayed. (I shouldn't have to e-mail them with a huge list of questions because they didn't have the information on their website.)


Again, silly. Yeah, it's a PITA to have to ask, but if you're not prepared to ask questions, most breeders probably don't wanna deal with you anyway. That said, my website has all completed health tests openly displayed. But I also can get around HTML relatively decently. The 70 year olds that have been in the breed for 50 years? Not so much.



> - Who breeds more than two breeds.


Meh, won't really quibble about this one.



> - Who breeds any litter from which they do not intend to keep a show-quality puppy.


Won't quibble much about this either. I do believe many breeders always INTEND to keep a puppy, but sometimes it turns out that they cannot, or what they were hoping for out of the litter didn't come to fruition, so there's nothing to keep (needed a dog, got a litter of bitches, etc)


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

dogdragoness said:


> My real concern is that breeders will focus soley on showing their dogs in conformation & neglect the original form of function if their particular breed.


Breeders of what? Are you talking about specific breeds here, or all show breeders? Because first of all, in many breeds, breeding to the standard IS breeding for the form and function for which the breed was originally intended. Secondly, many show breeders also prove their dogs in other ways. Like I've said a few times, conformation showing is one tool in the toolbox.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Wish there was a LIKE feature on DF.. I wanna LIKE Xeph's post


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

lucidity said:


> OK I read that, but the point everyone else was making is... how do you find such a breeder? People who DO NOT show usually DO NOT health test or do anything with their dogs to prove their soundness (tracking, OB, agility, Etc). Are you saying you would rather buy a Pug who is bred by someone who doesn't health test, but only breeds for something with a longer muzzle?


If I were looking for a pug, I actually would put muzzle shape and less cobby body type pretty high up on my list of priorities. I can't say I would "rather" get a pug like that from someone who doesn't health test than someone who does, but it would be about equally as important to me. It is a breed where I honestly haven't been impressed by the health benefits of "well bred" over "poorly bred" dogs - and this is based on personally seeing a LOT of pugs over the years and what those flat-muzzled dogs struggle with, not only with respiratory issues (short and long-term, a lifetime of breathing through slits doesn't do many good things for your lungs) but skin fold and eye issues as well. 

For me the bottom line is that it comes down to the breed and the individual breeder. Likely my perspective is a lot different than yours because I see a lot of "poorly bred" pet dogs and honestly depending on the breed or mix most of them are not the health wrecks you seem to think they all are nor are "well bred" individuals of the same breed necessarily healthier. There ARE some breeds where I absolutely think it makes a big difference - poorly bred Bichons, for example, ARE an absolute health nightmare. But across the board? Not in my experience.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Like I said earlier, I have nothing against someone who doesn't show but does all the necessary health testing.. I don't think I could ever support a breeder who doesn't health test.. even if they are lucky and produce sound puppies from time to time.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

lucidity said:


> Like I said earlier, I have nothing against someone who doesn't show but does all the necessary health testing.. I don't think I could ever support a breeder who doesn't health test.. even if they are lucky and produce sound puppies from time to time.


LOL what if they produce sound puppies all the time? 

I'm not giving a blanket blessing to breeders who don't health test. I'm saying that sometimes, in some breeds, in my experience it's not all it's cracked up to be and doesn't seem to confer a visible benefit in the long run. 

I guess until you spend all day, every day around pet-bred dogs and experience it for yourself you can't understand, though. Or does that only apply in reverse? :/


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

The problem is that.. when someone doesn't health test but produces healthy puppies, it could just be dumb luck? If you don't know what's inside your dogs, how can you plan for the future? For dogs who have health records for generations, whenever a problem pops up, you can usually pin point or guess where they came from.. but if you don't, then, where do you go from there?

ETA: even health tested clear dogs sometimes produce something like.. bad patellas or bad hips for example, but by breeding clear to clear dogs over many generations, you minimize the risk of getting puppies with the problem. Someone who doesn't health test could be breeding a dog who has 2 affected parents, and producing puppies that are clear but their pups go on to produce all the problems again... health problems can skip generations, so the only way to keep track is to have health records.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Well I'm not going to waste any more of my time here.  I've got nothing left to say, anyway.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

I don't see what is the problem, really.. it's just genetics... there are so many studies which show that breeding clear to clear dogs greatly minimizes the risk of the health problem cropping up in the future.. the only way to know if a dog is clear.. is to health test before using it for breeding... if a dog's status is unknown, it might produce clear puppies for one generation, but then in later generations, the problem might come up.. and nobody would know where it came from.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

lucidity said:


> I don't see what is the problem, really.. it's just genetics... there are so many studies which show that breeding clear to clear dogs greatly minimizes the risk of the health problem cropping up in the future.. the only way to know if a dog is clear.. is to health test before using it for breeding... if a dog's status is unknown, it might produce clear puppies for one generation, but then in later generations, the problem might come up.. and nobody would know where it came from.


The problem you're missing isn't in lack of health testing. It's in the fact that the conformation standard in some dogs compromises the health of the animal, and someone breeding to that standard is automatically, visibly, producing a dog that is less healthy than one that would not meet the standard and therefore not be the goal of a show breeder. I like health testing. I'm a big fan. I know show breeders and for most breeds I would go to one in a heart-beat. But if I was going to get a pug, there is no way MY view of what was responsible for the breed and breeding would involve a show breeder. Because the winning dogs are bred to an extremity of conformation I find inherently irresponsible. If I was looking for a border collie, I would similarly dodge a dog who was being bred by a show breeder, because I think they are working in the opposite direction I feel the breed should be going. If I ever go for another Rat Terrier, I will go to a show breeder if I can find one who is not producing toys or giants (Ie: outside the standard) or even minis (inside it), because of what *I* feel about a breed I am passionate about. 

Health testing? Absolutely, I want it. But in some cases I'd find a lack of health testing LESS irresponsible than someone doing health testing and perpetuating a breed I love going in a direction I find utterly repugnant.

I realize it's not that simple, cut and dry. It is entirely possible to find dogs bred by show breeders who are winning and *don't* go to the same extremity that others do. I absolutely get that it isn't that black and white and with some breeds (Bostons are a good example) I would likely seek them out. I know that there are way, way more dogs in shows than show up on television, and that there's a wide variety of interpretation. That means I can find a boston breeder who has more nose and does the health testing and is winning. Pugs and Pekes though? Much harder - not only because of the faces on pugs, but their tails (that double curl IS a problem and standard), bowed legs in pekes and problems with cranial conformation in both. The work/show division in some working breeds? ALSO much, much harder if you're looking for a working dog, to find what you want in a confirmation breeder. Recognizing that it's not a universal for all breeds shouldn't be hard to do. 

And at the end of the day, there is always rescue so you're not supporting anyone breeding, which is probably the ideal. 

But again, in the magical black and white world of 'show breeder of type-y dogs or breeder who does no testing', there are a very few breeds where my default is going to be the breeder who does no testing. Because I don't approve of what 'type-y' has come to mean for those specific breeds, and I don't want to pay to support the continued breeding of that, and DO want to support the breeding of something less extreme.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

I am not missing that point.. Maybe you should read all my posts  i was simply responding to sassafras in that particular post.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

> The work/show division in some working breeds? ALSO much, much harder if you're looking for a working dog, to find what you want in a confirmation breeder. Recognizing that it's not a universal for all breeds shouldn't be hard to do.


I don't think any of us have said that you should always go to a show breeder when you want a purebred dog. I wouldn't buy a border collie from a show breeder, and lucidity mentioned mushing and working dogs in an earlier post as ones she doesn't need to see with conformation titles. I _also_ mentioned in an earlier post that if a person decides on a breed, does a ton of research, and decides that there are no show breeders around producing what they would consider to be a healthy dog (as with your pug example, if all breeders are producing that double-curled tail and that causes pugs problems), then I have absolutely no objection to them finding a responsible non-show breeder who's producing a pug they'd consider healthier. Conformation showing is one tool a breeder can use, and while I think it's an important tool in a lot of breeds, it's not an absolute must for all.

Basically, there's only one person I can remember in this thread who was making generalizations across all breeds, and she's anti-conformation showing altogether.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

What Cran said.

I mentioned in so many of my previous comments that I like people who do agility/OB/herding/tracking/whatever who health test their breeding stock. I only said they are hard to find  (for toy breeds!)

Also in my first post I said I show moderate breeds because they are not extreme. I will never own a Chin or a Pug. Just a personal choice.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

lucidity said:


> I am not missing that point.. Maybe you should read all my posts  i was simply responding to sassafras in that particular post.


Well then you were missing MY point, because CptJack summarized it pretty exactly.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

I don't think I understand what your point is.

It sounds like you don't think health testing should be a requirement because all breeding is a crapshoot anyway? That's what I got, cos what Cpt jack said is pretty much what I said... All along.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

lucidity said:


> I don't think I understand what your point is.
> 
> It sounds like you don't think health testing should be a requirement because all breeding is a crapshoot anyway? That's what I got, cos what Cpt jack said is pretty much what I said... All along.


LOL no that's not what I think at all. It's funny I don't see what you were saying in what CptJack said at all, nor do you see what I was saying there. Guess we were talking past one another. Either way, it doesn't matter.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

If I wanted a pug, and I didn't want to go with a show breeder (which again, I think is a valid choice if research shows that the conformation standard is breeding structural issues into an animal), I'd still search for someone who health tests. The recommended tests for pugs have nothing to do with the "look" -- they are:

Hip Dysplasia
Luxating Patella
CERF Eye Examination (every 3 years)
Pug Dog Encephalitis (PDE) - test for Necrotizing Meningoencephalitis

So it should be possible to find a breeder who does those tests and also breeds for a longer muzzle and a less-tightly-curled tail (and possibly a less cobby body, although that may be difficult seeing as the pug has been a cobby breed for a long time). I would definitely look for that over someone who doesn't test at all.

Basically, to try to clear up the confusion (because I do think we're all kind of arguing similar things):



> The problem you're missing isn't in lack of health testing. It's in the fact that the conformation standard in some dogs compromises the health of the animal, and someone breeding to that standard is automatically, visibly, producing a dog that is less healthy than one that would not meet the standard and therefore not be the goal of a show breeder.


Understand and agree. I just don't think that the choice is between "breeder who shows and health tests yet breeds structural issues into a dog" and "breeder who doesn't show and doesn't health test but produces dogs with fewer structural issues." I would think that in any breed like this where there's conflict over whether or not the look is harmful, you'd be able to find "breeder who doesn't show, but health tests and produces dogs with fewer structural issues."


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

sassafras said:


> LOL no that's not what I think at all. It's funny I don't see what you were saying in what CptJack said at all, nor do you see what I was saying there. Guess we were talking past one another. Either way, it doesn't matter.


Nevermind. Apples and oranges maybe. Guess it's a good thing neither of us is ever buying a Pug, then!


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

> she sounds awesome! Have you posted any pictures here? I like tollers and I'd love to see her.


little late lol, internet was not working on my reg computer for some reason lol 




























her sire is UKC/NSDTRC/AKC grand Ch Cinnstar KDs Red Tornado CD WC, and she is full(but younger) sister to UKC/NSDTRC/AKC Ch KDs Too Hot to Handle CD JH WC FDCh-G VC


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

Miss Bugs, what a gorgeous Toller!


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

She is very nice-looking, yes! Tollers are such great dogs. I know they're uncommon in some places, but there were quite a few around the Maritime provinces (which makes sense -- there are at least five good breeders in Nova Scotia alone).


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

Xeph said:


> I would like to hear what is "too old". I know GSD bitches that have whelped at 9-10 years of age. A couple had c sections done (planned, and were spayed during the c section) and a couple whelped on their own with no complications. These were bitches that were kept in peak condition, however. Not flabby geriatrics who were left to languish until bred.


Our national GSD club has written in their breeding statutes that a GSD bitch cannot be used for breeding before the day she is 18 months old or after the day she turns 8 years old. Breeders who bred 9 or 10 year old bitches would have a problem. Doesn't the American parent breed club for GSDs have breeding statutes all associated breeders have to adhere to? With age limitations? Or is this another 'don't want to impede on another's right for freedom of choice' thing? In other words, if a breeder chooses to breed a 10 year old bitch, there are no rules to say they can't?


----------



## Equinox (Nov 11, 2008)

Avie said:


> Our national GSD club has written in their breeding statutes that a GSD bitch cannot be used for breeding before the day she is 18 months old or after the day she turns 8 years old. Breeders who bred 9 or 10 year old bitches would have a problem. Doesn't the American parent breed club for GSDs have breeding statutes all associated breeders have to adhere to? With age limitations? Or is this another 'don't want to impede on another's right for freedom of choice' thing? In other words, if a breeder chooses to breed a 10 year old bitch, there are no rules to say they can't?


I know you didn't mention the SV/German registry, but I know for a fact that they don't, and that's the registry with a million and one requirements  The SV sets a minimum age requirement for breeding (24 months for males and 20 months for females), but no maximum age limit. My dog's granddam was still being bred right around age 9 and both the litter and the dog were great. A lot depends on the individual dog, I know there are 9 to 10 year old females that deliver easier and recover quicker than most 2 year olds do, and I like seeing that as a part of a breeding program.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

Equinox said:


> I know you didn't mention the SV/German registry, but I know for a fact that they don't, and that's the registry with a million and one requirements  The SV sets a minimum age requirement for breeding (24 months for males and 20 months for females), but no maximum age limit. My dog's granddam was still being bred right around age 9 and both the litter and the dog were great. A lot depends on the individual dog, I know there are 9 to 10 year old females that deliver easier and recover quicker than most 2 year olds do, and I like seeing that as a part of a breeding program.


Thanks for answering. I thought older females had more trouble with pregnancy, but I guess that's in part because of the age limits we have in place. Learned something new today.


----------



## Niraya (Jun 30, 2011)

My breeder breeds working and show dogs together. Dogs that are well within the standard, that can work in harness and also win in the ring. They are health tested (but she wouldn't at all meet the list of requirements of a breeder that someone posted earlier) and incredibly healthy and long lived dogs. The litter my pup is coming from is out of a 10 1/2 year old (and the breeder is hoping to show her next month if her coat isn't too bad). Her vet said the bitch is more fit than many of the younger dogs he's seen after a pregnancy. (At one point the SHCA had tried to implement a maximum breeding age limit of 8 or something).

As for the previous conversation about dogs having scars and marks winning in shows - the only Siberian Husky to win at Westminster had a chunk of his ear missing from the top - it was a noticeable chunk.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

TorachiKatashi said:


> Before I got Mozart I was speaking to a few breeders, so I had a more solidified list of what I was and wasn't looking for in a breeder. A lot of it is obviously very specific to me and my opinion on certain issues rather than an overarching "no one should ever buy from a breeder who does this," but I know that I would never be able to be happy with a puppy who came from one of these breeders.
> 
> I will absolutely never buy from a breeder:
> 
> ...


Honestly, honestly asking: did you ever find a breeder that fit every single one of these points? That is a (IMO) crazy list. I agree with some, but for example, the food? Breeders feed what their dogs do best on. Why in the world would you exclude a breeder for feeding Proplan or Iams? that just makes no sense.

Wait, and didnt you buy a boxer? How else would you pick your puppy at a day old, based on something other than color and sex, and then have the breeder leave your pup undocked? Am I missing something? :der:


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

CptJack said:


> The work/show division in some working breeds? ALSO much, much harder if you're looking for a working dog, to find what you want in a confirmation breeder. Recognizing that it's not a universal for all breeds shouldn't be hard to do.
> 
> 
> But again, in the magical black and white world of 'show breeder of type-y dogs or breeder who does no testing', there are a very few breeds where my default is going to be the breeder who does no testing. Because I don't approve of what 'type-y' has come to mean for those specific breeds, and I don't want to pay to support the continued breeding of that, and DO want to support the breeding of something less extreme.


The only magical black and white world I have seen and am seeing on this thread are those that are being critical of or saying they would shy away from show breeders.....

And speaking of magical lines..... That is the magical line between show and working lines in most breeds...

Some are notable and often talked about....

BCs big differences in the AKC and non AKC dogs.... But that does not mean the AKC dogs cannot or will not work.... They do.... and THEY are a HELL of a lot easier to live with...... I have a trial line BC coming here to stay with me after I get back from Palm Springs next month. 14 month old dog, already killed a sheep and hurt two more so badly that they had to be put down. And this dog came from a fairly well known trial breeder (that wants the dog put down quietly and is offering replacement) But the owner spent an big chunk of money on this dog and has a ton of time invested. I put a stop on another insane BC this owner had a few years ago. They want me to see if I can put a stop on this one. I do not know if I can or not. Dogs that maul stock can do so for various reasons. I have not worked the dog yet.... 


GSDs...... I will let Xeph comment on that. She knows more about GSDs than I do. But it depends on what you want in the way of work.... A family guardian? That is probably going to be a show line dog....

Mals..... Well yea..... Working Mals are 1 percenter dogs...... Meaning only about one percent of the dog owning public can handle one.

Then there are some breeds that are working, sporting or herding that few use any more... Goldens, Rotties, etc..... 

Labs are reputed to have a huge split..... But I found a breeder that is successful with both.... And it was not that hard to find her. 

But Most breeds, from good breeders, you can find show dogs and very good workers in the same litter. And show dogs that can work. 

This goes for most breeds.... GSP,GWP, most of the trailing hounds, most of the herding breeds, etc 

In fact most of the parent breed clubs have a register of merit system. Emphasizing the complete dog.....


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> The only magical black and white world I have seen and am seeing on this thread are those that are being critical of or saying they would shy away from show breeders.....


You could easily, easily say the same thing about people advocating for show breeders.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Rescued said:


> Honestly, honestly asking: did you ever find a breeder that fit every single one of these points? That is a (IMO) crazy list. I agree with some, but for example, the food? Breeders feed what their dogs do best on. Why in the world would you exclude a breeder for feeding Proplan or Iams? that just makes no sense.
> 
> Wait, and didnt you buy a boxer? How else would you pick your puppy at a day old, based on something other than color and sex, and then have the breeder leave your pup undocked? Am I missing something? :der:


Yes it is a crazy list...... And Chic is not all it is cracked up to be in some breeds..... I think Chic is a great thing.... But a dog can fail tests and still have a chic number.



aiw said:


> You could easily, easily say the same thing about people advocating for show breeders.


How so? 

too short


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

The magical black and white world I was talking about was the one being presented on both sides in this thread, where the options are 'show breeders who breed typey dogs, including extreme ones' and 'breeder who does no health testing at all'. 

Reality isn't either one of those.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Yes it is a crazy list...... And Chic is not all it is cracked up to be in some breeds..... I think Chic is a great thing.... But a dog can fail tests and still have a chic number.


I'm still trying to figure out the meshing of "no crop/dock" and "no picking based on color and sex" UNLESS she bought from a breeder that doesnt dock any of their pups? I dont know what the canadian boxer standard is so maybe theyve banned docking there?

so confused.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

CptJack said:


> The magical black and white world I was talking about was the one being presented on both sides in this thread, where the options are 'show breeders who breed typey dogs, including extreme ones' and 'breeder who does no health testing at all'.
> 
> Reality isn't either one of those.


Are you talking about lucidity or me here? I don't think we've said that at all. Actually, we are both okay with the third option, 'non-show breeder who breeds less extreme (i.e., out of standard) dogs but who health tests' for breeds where the conformation standard may be hurting more than helping the breed. Lucidity pointed out that this may be harder to find, however (most breeders who health test seem to also show). She (and I) like to see health testing simply because some things can't be seen, and some skip generations, so it's good for a breeder to know what could potentially pop up in their lines.

And neither of us has made any generalizations across all breeds. Both of us have stated more than once that we wouldn't even want to see conformation titles on some breeds (like BCs, which you mentioned earlier).


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Crantastic said:


> Are you talking about lucidity or me here? I don't think we've said that at all. Actually, we are both okay with the third option, 'non-show breeder who breeds less extreme (i.e., out of standard) dogs but who health tests' for breeds where the conformation standard may be hurting more than helping the breed. Lucidity pointed out that this may be harder to find, however (most breeders who health test seem to also show). She (and I) like to see health testing simply because some things can't be seen, and some skip generations, so it's good for a breeder to know what could potentially pop up in their lines.
> 
> And neither of us has made any generalizations across all breeds. Both of us have stated more than once that we wouldn't even want to see conformation titles on some breeds (like BCs, which you mentioned earlier).



No no, I was responding to Johnny's response to me, and my original mention of the 'magical black and white land where there are only two options: show breeders of dogs of a type you don't approve of, or a breeder who does no health testing'. I don't think he quite got it and was attempting to clarify. I just couldn't quote from the iPad. I'm sorry; of course you haven't implied anything of the kind and I should have been more clear.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> How so?


I don't really want to get into a he-said, she-said but when I gave my personal opinion and preference about showing and breed purity (that it doesn't matter much to me) there were many (including yourself) quick to point out how that isn't a legitimate choice. Even in the very specific - and IMO completely justified - example I gave.

Its really not worth going down the road of accusations about whose the most polarized view is though. I'm happy to leave it at different opinions for different people.

EDIT: On another forum right now I'm having a debate with people who seem to think breeding should be made illegal.... I don't think either of us can be accused of extreme opinions in the grand scheme of things I suppose.

Its so weird... what if we actually DID succeed in making breeding illegal? Where do people think dogs come from in the first place? People are crazy.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

aiw, I know you don't want to get into a "he said, she said" kind of thing, but sometimes making a statement that's basically along the lines of, "I said this and everyone jumped on me!" is worse. I think that you and I (and lucidity and possibly others) agree on more than you'd think, but you'll need to quote the exact things you're iffy on/disagree with if you want us to clarify further.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

No, I don't think its a good idea (or necessary) to start throwing accusations around on who the most polarized view is, who made a bigger generalization, who jumped on who.... Doesn't strike me as very productive (or necessary since there aren't hurt feelings on my end). We can just agree to disagree about which breeder to choose and why.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> I don't really want to get into a he-said, she-said but when I gave my personal opinion and preference about showing and breed purity (that it doesn't matter much to me) there were many (including yourself) quick to point out how that isn't a legitimate choice. Even in the very specific - and IMO completely justified - example I gave.
> 
> Its really not worth going down the road of accusations about whose the most polarized view is though. I'm happy to leave it at different opinions for different people.
> 
> ...


I know what I said.....

And I know why I said it......

Your chances of finding someone that does testing, carefully chooses breedings, produces sound, healthy puppies, etc but DOES NOT show or is somehow involved in dog sports is NOT good..... Not good at all.

And I said several pages back that I felt you were better off staying with mixes..... And I think you are....


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I don't see it as pointing out who has the most polarizing view, but asking people to clarify individual statements you might disagree with (or not understand exactly what they're trying to say). I think that's productive because it allows you to get a better idea of why the other person believes what they believe, to potentially learn from each other, and sometimes to find that you misunderstood each other and you actually agree more than you thought. But if you're content with leaving it at "agree to disagree," that's all right.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

aiw said:


> EDIT: On another forum right now I'm having a debate with people who seem to think breeding should be made illegal.... I don't think either of us can be accused of extreme opinions in the grand scheme of things I suppose.
> 
> Its so weird... what if we actually DID succeed in making breeding illegal? Where do people think dogs come from in the first place? People are crazy.


There are a bunch of people that think this way.... This IS the goal of animal rights groups when it comes to domestic dogs.....


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

aiw said:


> EDIT: On another forum right now I'm having a debate with people who seem to think breeding should be made illegal.... I don't think either of us can be accused of extreme opinions in the grand scheme of things I suppose.
> 
> Its so weird... what if we actually DID succeed in making breeding illegal? Where do people think dogs come from in the first place? People are crazy.


I've seen this. and then they say "well dogs will never die out because people will never stop breeding." which is accurate, but way to sabatoge your entire viewpoint and argument!


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

actually the chances of finding non show/sport breeders who plan and health test is getting better. its still not great of coarse and for people who dont know how to find them I still recommend show/sport breeders for that reason but it is getting easier, if you know where to look more and more pet breeders are health testing. granted looking for a specific breed that fits that bill is had but if your not too picky lol


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

I am going to say it only to bring up a point of view. 

What about the people who want a pug but can not afford the Macy department store price tag (show breeder price) and can only afford the Walmart price tag (hobby breeder price). Sometimes you can get lucky at the Walmart. Are those people who want a pug be denied because they can not afford $1200 for a dog but the $350 a hobby breeder is selling their pups for is a little bit more in their price range.

I know of several breeders whose dogs do hunt trails one weekend and show trails the next weekend. To them not only do looks matter but brains as well. They are still breeding their stock for what the dogs purpose in life was bred for.

We all have our pet peeves Mine =breeders who claim to breed teacup yorkies and chihuahuas. Show me in the standards were it mentions teacup. The thing I see these puppy buyers paying for is a runt with a possible liver shunt.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

aiw said:


> No, I don't think its a good idea (or necessary) to start throwing accusations around on who the most polarized view is, who made a bigger generalization, who jumped on who.... Doesn't strike me as very productive (or necessary since there aren't hurt feelings on my end). We can just agree to disagree about which breeder to choose and why.


Many? Really? Who?

Sorry meant to quote your previous post saying that many people here were against getting anything except from a show breeder.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

luv mi pets said:


> What about the people who want a pug but can not afford the Macy department store price tag (show breeder price) and can only afford the Walmart price tag (hobby breeder price). Sometimes you can get lucky at the Walmart. Are those people who want a pug be denied because they can not afford $1200 for a dog but the $350 a hobby breeder is selling their pups for is a little bit more in their price range.


Show breeder = hobby breeder, really. Most show breeders are breeding literally as a hobby, and because they love a breed and want to help maintain/improve it. They're not breeding for a living.

As for your hypothetical buyers, I'd say they should rescue. Rescues usually charge around that amount and then the buyers aren't directly supporting bad breeding practices. I'd be fine with adopting from an "oops" litter too, as long as it really was an oops litter and not someone just breeding their two pugs together over and over with no thought to health or conformation so that they could make a few bucks. Finally, they could most likely get an older show-bred animal (either a retired breeder or a show prospect that didn't turn out) for less than puppy price, often for the price of the spay or neuter (and "older" doesn't mean "old," either).

A lot of the time, though, bad breeders are actually charging just as much as, if not more than, show breeders. I've seen papillons in pet stores for $1600 (plus tax) when the local show breeders sell for $1500. I've seen many websites where people are selling "rare" (non-standard) colors or sizes of dogs for thousands. I've seen non-health-tested designer mixes for upwards of $1000.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Crantastic said:


> Show breeder = hobby breeder, really. Most show breeders are breeding literally as a hobby, and because they love a breed and want to help maintain/improve it. They're not breeding for a living.
> 
> As for your hypothetical buyers, I'd say they should rescue. Rescues usually charge around that amount and then the buyers aren't directly supporting bad breeding practices. I'd be fine with adopting from a "oops" litter too, as long as it really was an oops litter and not someone just breeding their two pugs together over and over with no thought to health or conformation so that they could make a few bucks. Finally, they could most likely get an older show-bred animal (either a retired breeder or a show prospect that didn't turn out) for less than puppy price, often for the price of the spay or neuter (and "older" doesn't mean "old," either).
> 
> A lot of the time, though, bad breeders are actually charging just as much as, if not more than, show breeders. I've seen papillons in pet stores for $1600 (plus tax) when the local show breeders sell for $1500. I've seen many websites where people are selling "rare" (non-standard) colors or sizes of dogs for thousands. I've seen non-health-tested designer mixes for upwards of $1000.


Not skipping the quote again, but all of this. Especially the older show prospect or retired dog. Jack was 150.00. Which is Next to nothing, especially for a trained and health tested adult.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Crystal was a show prospect that ended up too tall, so I got her for $500 less than puppy price. She was just over a year old. If she'd been a few years old, the price would have been even lower. I believe that her breeder lets retired dogs (which usually range in age from 3-8 or so; keep in mind that papillons can easily live past 14) go to good new homes for the price of the spay or neuter. This is even better to me than adopting a puppy, because these dogs were shown and are always well-mannered and well-socialized, housebroken, great on a leash, etc.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

> Doesn't the American parent breed club for GSDs have breeding statutes all associated breeders have to adhere to? With age limitations? Or is this another 'don't want to impede on another's right for freedom of choice' thing? In other words, if a breeder chooses to breed a 10 year old bitch, there are no rules to say they can't?


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.

No.

(I'm not laughing at you, I'm laughing at the parent club in this instance).


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

Imo, hobby breeders are like all others. There are good and bad. I think its important to find what you are looking for in the dogs they are producing. I have purchased dogs that were not health tested, have used studs that were not tested, and I don't register my litters, even from one bitch that was akc. I'm not a fan of AKC, for work dogs.
What I look for is drive, biddability, nerve, structure (not conformation titles, but fine if they do) ,health, and a good mind. Temperament co.es in as well, but even a dog a little hard to deal with is fine with me, if all other qualities are outstanding.
I dont even mind an occasional cross breed if its an awesome dog and breeds are similar.
Dogs don't even have to be titled in anything if they work, and there pedigree has many excellent working dogs as well. The best bitch I have is spayed, because none of her siblings work, and though her parents and grandparents were awesome, the older generations weren't. They probably could easily have been titled in a sport, and registered.

Lol, but i'm in that 1% of crazy mal owners


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

I do not put show breeders in with hobby breeders. I do know of some (like 2 breeders) who use the show circuit more for their ad campaign than a true show breeder. These breeders I would put in the classifications as puppy mills more than they would fit into a show breeder. The show breeders I know are more concerned about getting titles on their dogs than producing countless offsprings.

Also, know of several breeders who will be at a hunt trail one weekend and competing in a show trail the next. These breeders are not only trying to breed for standards but also for what the breed was designed to do.

I too think it is crazy that some will pay an exburant amount of money for a dog that is of a different color. Party yorkies and panda germans shepherds. Barnum said it best " a fool is born every second"

With all the talk about not buying a puppy from a pet store people still do. I know of someone who paid 1200 for a Bug (bostonxpug cross) When I asked the client why. Response "Because I could get the puppy financed through the store" 

A yorkie breeder I know declined a couple because they had very young toddlers. Later in the week the couple was in with yorkie they had purchased from a breeder out of the newspaper.

Hobby breeders may not be neccessary but the hobby breeders sure do get the business

As far as adults go I do not have a problem of obtaining adult dogs, but there are countless others who will settle for nothing else but a puppy. I am looking at two retired show dogs sleeping at my feet. They have come to my house to retire and I paid nothing for them. I also have a young adult chihuahua who did not pass the breeders standard. too long in body and not enough bone. Again given to me. By doing this, this allows the breeder to have space for 2 younger dogs that they feel can do good in the show world. 

I have never met a show breeder who made millions showing dogs but I have met a millionaire who showed and bred dogs.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Miss Bugs said:


> actually the chances of finding non show/sport breeders who plan and health test is getting better. its still not great of coarse and for people who dont know how to find them I still recommend show/sport breeders for that reason but it is getting easier, if you know where to look more and more pet breeders are health testing. granted looking for a specific breed that fits that bill is had but if your not too picky lol


I'm seeing working/herding dog breeders doing this, which I think is GREAT, but sadly for Toy and companion breeds, these breeders are almost no where to be found. The majority of them are breeding cute, fluffy dogs, the smaller the better! Or, the rarer the colour, the better! I've seen some agility Papillon breeders in Europe breed their agility line dogs to show line studs to try and preserve the look, but also to produce dogs that are amazing at agility. All their breeding stock has agility titles, and the dogs have all passed their health tests. If I wanted a pet or an agility dog, I would not hesitate for even a second to buy a dog from these people.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

juliemule said:


> Lol, but i'm in that 1% of crazy mal owners


Yes I am sure you are.....

I don't step up to a Mal, or More likely a Dutchie.... Because there is NO way my wife could handle one. She cannot handle the ACDs I have.....


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

luv mi pets said:


> I do not put show breeders in with hobby breeders.


But many show breeders ARE hobby breeders. If you ask a small-scale show breeder if they're a hobby breeder, many would say yes. They are literally breeding as a hobby, not a job, which is all that means. There's no positive or negative connotation attached to the term, or at least there shouldn't be.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

Crantastic said:


> But many show breeders ARE hobby breeders. If you ask a small-scale show breeder if they're a hobby breeder, many would say yes. They are literally breeding as a hobby, not a job, which is all that means. There's no positive or negative connotation attached to the term, or at least there shouldn't be.


I think this is just a debate on what the definition of "hobby breeder" is at this point. A Cavalier breeder once summed it up pretty nicely. 

Here is the description:



_WHAT IS?.......... 


a) ....A PUPPY FARMER? 

They run an establishment which concentrates on the mass breeding of all the popular breeds. They do this on a shoestring budget, spending as little as possible on food, bedding, vet bills, and nothing at all on health testing, while reaping as much profit in the bank as possible. When breeding stock are 'surplus to requirements' they are disposed of. There is no love of the breeding animal, they are purely there to put money in the puppy farmer's bank.

b) .....A BACKYARD BREEDER?

Is someone who breeds for 'pin money' from KC (un-endorsed) registered animals bought from puppy farms or pet shops. They are ignorant of health issues, have no equipment, but very often will purchase a couple of pet females and one male to 'serve' them.... which they do on a very frequent basis. They breed with no restrictions, and sell with either no KC Papers, or with no breeding restrictions on the puppy, so buyers can also breed from the pet they buy. Sometimes these people work in groups so they can use each others' 'stud dogs' cheaply, they ruin breeds and have no interest in being educated because they are quite happy to sell untypical, sickly puppies to the unsuspecting public who think they are getting a bargain.

c) .......A COMMERCIAL BREEDER? 

Can be a reputable breeder who tests for everything and cares deeply about the breed they own. The difference is they live from the profit of what they breed, and from stud fees.... Breeding and selling puppies IS their day job that pays the mortgage. They breed frequently, and have many puppies to chose from and are sometimes very successful in the show ring. Several commercial breeders are also respected judges and can belong to breed clubs. Very few commercial breeders have dogs on their sofas, and hardly ever keep their old retired dogs because old dogs cost money, and they are on a budget.... So they find a pet home for them to live out the rest of their lives in comfort.

d) ......A HOBBY BREEDER? 

These are the breeders who have their dogs around them in the home, on the sofas, armchairs, and in the bed. They are the ones who spend top dollar on the best food they can get, and buy new comfy dog bedding at every opportunity. These breeders health test, many judge and belong to Breed Clubs. They very often show, and will travel anywhere to use the best stud dog to produce their next healthy litter, while hoping for something to be good enough to show. The rest of the litter is placed in carefully vetted pet homes. They are surrounded by their beloved oldies, and are bereft when they pass.... They forever have their hand in their pocket, and don't make a buttered bean in the way of profit....



This was written by Veronica Hull (Telvara) and I thought it a really good description of the variety of different types who fall under the breeder umbrella. 

The majority of members of the UK Cavalier Clubs are caring hobby breeders. What a pity that more energy is not spent crucifying the vile puppy farmers, unscrupulous backyard breeders and immoral commercial breeders. They should be the real target and are all that will remain when all the caring breeders decide to call it a day. _

Here's the link to the original posting: http://honeybet.typepad.com/breed_notes/2011/10/27th-sept-2011.html

This is the definition that lots of breeders use, but of course everyone has their own definition.


----------



## juliemule (Dec 10, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Yes I am sure you are.....
> 
> I don't step up to a Mal, or More likely a Dutchie.... Because there is NO way my wife could handle one. She cannot handle the ACDs I have.....


As I type one of the nuts is spinning in a circle shaking a big jolly ball on a rope beating the crap out of herself, and anything nearby. Lol and that's just one of them, the others will chime in soon 


That's a wise choice, to save your marriage!

ETA: she is half dutch half mal by the way


----------



## So Cavalier (Jul 23, 2010)

> This was written by Veronica Hull (Telvara) and I thought it a really good description of the variety of different types who fall under the breeder umbrella.


I would love to have a Telvara dog or at least one with Telvara in their pedigree. She breeds cavaliers who live well into their mid and late teens. She can be quite blunt, but the proof is in the pudding. I think she hit the nail on the head.


----------



## lucidity (Nov 10, 2009)

I have seen pictures of her dogs at age 16, and they still look healthy! She's one of those who greatly endorse health testing, which I think lots of Cavalier breeders in UK and Europe are starting to do as well, which is great. There is also a low-cost MRI clinic in Australia (Sydney I think) now, which is such good news for the breed!

I know that MRIs are not the be all and end all of Cavalier testing for SM (for example... would using a dog who is clear but has lots of affected close relatives a good thing? And also, what about dogs who have no SM but are in severe pain from CM? What about dogs who only get SM at an older age, but shows no symptoms?), but I think it's such an important tool to be used in breeding. 

To me, health testing is an indispensable tool that we should use for breeding. There are so many things lurking beneath the surface that we would never see with our own eyes. Say, CC/DE and EF. BYBs and puppy millers can consistently produce puppies who don't have these diseases, but they would still be carriers of the gene and one day, the problem would arise.


----------



## xxxxdogdragoness (Jul 22, 2010)

luv mi pets said:


> I do not put show breeders in with hobby breeders. I do know of some (like 2 breeders) who use the show circuit more for their ad campaign than a true show breeder. These breeders I would put in the classifications as puppy mills more than they would fit into a show breeder. The show breeders I know are more concerned about getting titles on their dogs than producing countless offsprings.
> 
> Also, know of several breeders who will be at a hunt trail one weekend and competing in a show trail the next. These breeders are not only trying to breed for standards but also for what the breed was designed to do.
> 
> ...


First I would like to apologize if any of my pots came off as offensive & close minded, I was ignorant of show breeders & now I see that not every show breeder is like that just like not every hobby breeder is bad. I am glad for this opportunity to learn a little more about show breeders & the show scene, clearly I was misinformed & I am sorry for that but I was glad to learn that dogs with imperfections can show & win. 

I think it all comes down to buys preference, it begs the question though, why reputable breeders bother refuse someone who they feel wouldn't be a good home for their breed if they are just going to go purchase the same breed of puppy else where ... Seems like a losing battle


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

dogdragoness said:


> I think it all comes down to buys preference, it begs the question though, why reputable breeders bother refuse someone who they feel wouldn't be a good home for their breed if they are just going to go purchase the same breed of puppy else where ... Seems like a losing battle


Breeders have to think of their own puppies first. If they don't think a family would be right for that puppy, then they have every right to refuse. It's a shame that those people might run off to the pet store and get the same breed anyway, but the breeder did the right thing in protecting the puppies she brought into the world.

My breeder has turned couples away when she realized that one person was not as interested in the pup as the other (she was pleased to see that my husband was as excited about the puppy as I was). The might seem like a trivial reason, because a dog can be happy with only one responsible owner in the household, but she wants every pup she whelps to live the best life possible with a family who loves him (and to never need to be returned to her). That's her decision to make and if those people go somewhere else and get a dog, then oh well.


----------

