# Breeder's practices that are deal breakers for you



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Inspired by the "questions about breeder" thread, since it got so OT, I decided to start a topic based on what people were talking about there.

For me, its refusal to take the puppy / dog they bred back. I had one breeder say that its because of diseases like parvo, that's why they don't allow any dogs they bred back, and that is a huge red flag to me. Most of the other things are for me based on how I "feel", if the feeling isn't right, I run!

What about you guys?


----------



## Godwit (Apr 7, 2014)

Breeders who don't health test their dogs!!
Also, though most puppies go to pet homes and few go to show/sport homes, I do prefer breeders who show off their dog in some way, whether in the show ring, sports, hunting.. something! I feel that it shows the parents of the pups are in good physical condition, proven to be good examples of the breed, and that the breeder is INTO their dogs. I don't know... just personal preference.

Also the "feel" of the person. Any perceived money-grabbing tactics would cause me to take a huge step back.


----------



## gwd (Sep 6, 2014)

Honesty. For me it all comes down to honesty and integrity. A breeder that tells you they've never had any inheritable health issues is lying, or they've not bred many litters. This can make stud selection a nightmare when other breeders are not honest about what is behind their stuff. ........finding out later that top winning, multi BIS CH. Fluffy came from a litter with entropion in 5 siblings does damage to a breed. 

As to taking back puppies........... it is for that reason that I made the hard decision to stop breeding. A move to California (and a small yard) meant I wouldn't' be in a good position to do that if needed. Hell, I'm of an age now where I've made provisions in my trust for my current dogs should the need arise.


----------



## Gally (Jan 11, 2012)

Not taking dogs they've bred back if the need arises at sny point is number one deal breaker for me. Lack of health testing would be a close second.


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

not health testing- most breeds i agree with CHIC or at least close to it

not raising puppies inside- have had way too many fosters raised outside that you end up having to do major work with on normal household sounds.

more than 3 litters at once- i think even 2 is pushing it but there could be a good reason. more than 3 no way.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

No health testing is #1
No taking dogs back
Many different breeds
Outdoor kennels that the puppies are raised it
Large number of dogs
Different prices for things like color
I prefer they prove their dogs somehow but it's not necessary.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Yeah a friend who has an MAS got them from a breeder and she is a wonderful dog but they don't take dogs back :/, they will help find a home for them but they say it's because they are afraid of parvo infection, and that is the reason (out of curiosity I emailed them about it).

For me it's multiple breeds.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

Honestly a lot depends on breed for me. I have a completely different ser of criteria for Border Collies then i do for other breeds. Ie in BC a absolute no is showing in or supporting conformation showing in any way. I do not hold that as criteria for any other Breed, i prefer more preformance then showing in any breed, but showing is not a deal breaker. Same with health testing, i will not forgo health testing in any breed except BCs, i still prefer health testing but a lack of, it not an immediate "no way" if other factors match what i want.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Miss Bugs said:


> Honestly a lot depends on breed for me. I have a completely different ser of criteria for Border Collies then i do for other breeds. Ie in BC a absolute no is showing in or supporting conformation showing in any way. I do not hold that as criteria for any other Breed, i prefer more preformance then showing in any breed, but showing is not a deal breaker. Same with health testing, i will not forgo health testing in any breed except BCs, i still prefer health testing but a lack of, it not an immediate "no way" if other factors match what i want.


It's the same with me and ACDs, I much more prefer to see an ACD with a herding title than a bunch of show ring titles, sure the dog is pretty but all that is bunk if the dog cant, or won't work, it's the same for most working breeds I would be interested in.


----------



## Flaming (Feb 2, 2013)

Miss Bugs said:


> Honestly a lot depends on breed for me. I have a completely different ser of criteria for Border Collies then i do for other breeds. Ie in BC a absolute no is showing in or supporting conformation showing in any way. I do not hold that as criteria for any other Breed, i prefer more preformance then showing in any breed, but showing is not a deal breaker. Same with health testing, i will not forgo health testing in any breed except BCs, i still prefer health testing but a lack of, it not an immediate "no way" if other factors match what i want.





OwnedbyACDs said:


> It's the same with me and ACDs, I much more prefer to see an ACD with a herding title than a bunch of show ring titles, sure the dog is pretty but all that is bunk if the dog cant, or won't work, it's the same for most working breeds I would be interested in.


I don't mind conformation showing, but I HEAVILY FAVOR breeders who work their dogs. I find that dogs who come from generations of working dogs tend to be healthier because the unhealthy ones don't get bred no matter how "Pretty" they look. 

But deal breakers?
-no/minimal health testing
-breeding for looks over functionality 
-more than 2 litters on ground at a time
-fad breeders (I've met and have heard of way too many bad ones)
- special colours (sometimes it's ok but usually the odd colours are tied to a gene that causes health issues like deafness or blindness)
-badly educated about dogs in general....yeah I've met those breeders.
-elitists, Sorry but if I can't talk to you how am I ever going to be able to approach you for help or advice if needed

There are probably more I'm just getting ready for bed right now


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Deal breakers;

Co-ownership, not taking a puppy/dog back, paying extra for AKC papers, no health testing for the common diseases- hip for large dogs, having dogs just running around and thinking that this one might be the father and the pay extra for the rare color of a dog. A breeder who claims to be raising teacup toys.


----------



## Foresthund (Jul 17, 2013)

Okay more based on when I was looking at breeders for my next dog,although I probably will just rescue again.
The usual although with their dogs I like to see that they have some action and fun shots besides basic conformation. Especially suspicious are dog breeders that do not do any real showing but still put most of their focus and bragging on the dogs physical aspects. I want a more well rounded dog than just a pretty face. I want to hear even in breeds not well known for it like Rottweilers that they do a little bit for sports and activities with them. Although outside of breeds like Border Collies that seems to be hard to find.

And although I`m suspicious of excess litters if the last litter they bred was from three years ago or more,I end up leaving doubting I could get a pup from them. Same goes if their far away yet won't ship. I've also seen some breeders with odd rules like mostly wanting to sell their dogs to family,and being single that kind of turns me away as well.
There is also some that sell dogs with very minimal health testing and barely any titles for a ton on money.

Also any sign that they lack dogs and breed the same two males to all their females over and over again,and other signs of heavy inbreeding. Also I don't want to hear that your dog was lame for unknown reasons but your breeding him anyways. Admittingly this is more what I saw on some low end APBT breeders.
One famous APBT breeder won't even show his stud dogs unless you pay $20 for a dvd. I want to see peoples breeding dogs right away!
There was a big one but my brain suddenly turned off and now I can't remember,I`ll write it when I do.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

I forgot one:

Breeders who automatically euthanize puppies who are deaf/blind/etc and breeders who knowingly breed double merles for any reason. Also breeders who breed merle Chihuahuas... it's a nice color but not natural in the breed.


----------



## Foresthund (Jul 17, 2013)

This breeder around here is sort of an example. http://www.windyriverranchrottweilers.com/ Their dogs are from Sieger conformation lines,but they don't even seem very into shows themselves. They say their dogs can be working dogs but theirs no sign that their dogs or bloodlines are used in any sort of work or sport. While they brag more about big chests and heads and how they make great watch dogs and mothers,pretty useless stuff. More than half their dogs seem to have no titles or any known health testing. While you get like 1-2 pics of each dog,some not even showing the dogs full body. With breeders like this even if they have nice dogs I`m just not getting enough information off of them and end up passing them by for it.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

Breeders who photoshop their dogs and sell them to celebrities for $13,000


----------



## Gumiho (Mar 16, 2013)

My list. Some of these I may be willing to bend on depending on breed, breeder & circumstances (like country breeder is from):

* Requiring non-refundable deposits before litter is on the ground and puppies have been evaluated and expecting that *any* dog from *any* litter will suffice. 

* Refusing to return deposits when they're not able to provide a suitable puppy as agreed upon.

* Not health testing. 

* Breeding strictly for "pets".

* Believing Function follows form, and that working traits and drives will just magically remain. Who insist that their dog can do X work without ever actually working, testing or breeding for it.

* Breeding for extremes. Actively breeding for incorrect traits, traits detrimental to function, deformities or colors within the breeds. Breeding absolute structural disasters and being proud of it. (Not going to specifically say out of standard, as not all registries hold the same standards and not all registries have standards are actually correct for their breeds. ) (Ex: White/Albino Dobermans, Badukgi (pinto) Jindo, Party colored yorkies, "low riders", "hippos", belly dragging / ear tripping / melting basset hound ect)

* Making impossible claims. Ex: Any Doberman breeder that claims their lines are 100% DCM free.

* Refusal to stand behind their dogs. Including refusal to admit producing a dog with health issues and not taking back dogs they produced.

* Trend chasers. If they're more concerned with the fame of the dog, then the reality of the dog... Such as willing to breed a high profile dog despite it not actually being a good choice for a particular breeding, or willing to disregard health issues in that dogs pedigree or offspring for the sake of its fame... Or willing to breed *anything* that might win, despite the risks to the litter (and puppy buyers) and long term effects on the line and breed.

* Breeding despite obvious risk of health issues. Not culling obvious health issues. If the dog is deaf or blind, it needs to be spayed / neutered. Intentionally doing a breeding with a high risk of defects. (Ex: white/albino Dobermans.)

* Shady Business dealings. Openly admitting to being willing to hang papers or falsify documents. Being shady about pedigrees. Deceitful sales tactics, outright lying to make a sale. Padding litters or transferring papers. Poor sportsmanship. 

* Over breeding - I'm not inclined to believe that a breeder is really concerned with what they're producing when they're churning out litters faster than they can really take stock of what they're producing. 

* Repeated in-house breedings. Understandable if you happen to have a good pairing in house and do one breeding and perhaps a repeat later if it goes exceptionally well. But if you've repeated the same breeding, especially in house, multiple times with nothing really to show for it... No.

* Insane and over-bearing co-ownerships. If I buy a dog, I am BUYING a dog, not renting a dog in a time share that requires I do everything at my expense for your gain. Reasonable co-ownerships are fine.

* Charging extra for registration. I may be ok with that while buying a goat, but not a dog.

* Anyone that seems unhinged. Some breeders are over-bearing, unreasonable or outright abusive toward would be puppy owners and/or others involved with dogs. 

Honestly, its not a one-size-fits-all.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

Some things I am flexible on, for the right dog and right breeder. The stars gotta align.

In general, I do not budge on:

-Health testing as recommended by the OFA
-Breeding merleXmerle or similar
-Dam and sire not disclosed or puppies aren't papered or pedigreed, I will take a "home pedigree" for purposeful crosses, obviously I wouldn't be getting one from the AKC
-Priced out of proportion. Yes, I am willing to pay (a handsome sum!) but I have to get results. So, no. I will not pay $13,000 for an itty bitty Morkieschnoodledoo
-Can't meet dam. I understand not meeting the sire as he could be worlds away with AI, but I would like to see photos of him too or be able to visit a website with his info
-Overbred bitches
-Bitches being bred way too early

I also have to get a "feel" on a breeder. I want to like them and send them photos and talk about cute puppy stuff without it being either too much or overly awkward. My most important thing is: dogs must be returned to breeder or rehomed with breeder's consent.


----------



## PatriciafromCO (Oct 7, 2012)

main thing for me that the rest does't matter to go any further, is not having any other interest or first hand experience in the breed/working the breed except breeding them.


----------



## gwd (Sep 6, 2014)

A website can create a favorable impression or............

This was found on one website:

_CHECK OUT WERE IT ALL BEAGAN" 

"TREATING AND PREVENTING DOG CARRING DECEASES" 

"BE SURE TO GET YOUR DEPOIST IN THERE GOING QUICK" 
_
he also mentions one of his stud dogs has "ONE" some shows

This same website used some strange terms in referring to puppies as 'off' of a stud. ........usually you talked about a puppy being 'by' a stud and 'out' of a b*tch. If you want to be more precise you say 'get' and 'produce' or, you could go with the non-gender specific term of progeny.


----------



## Equinox (Nov 11, 2008)

If the dogs are good, the litter is what I'm looking for, and the breeder is honest and knowledgeable, there isn't much that I'm picky about. Some deal breakers that I can think of are 

- poor living conditions and/or dogs in poor condition
- puppies are not given the best socialization and start to life in their first 7 to 8+ weeks with the breeder
- dogs being bred too young (too young is subjective here and for me it would depend on the dog/breed/circumstances)
- a contract that wants to dictate what I feed, how I train, etc.
- a contract that requires me to neuter my dog or spay before a certain age
- anything else that gives the breeder rights to the dog I bought, outside of a co-ownership agreement (which I would be highly unlikely to enter anyway, with very few exceptions)

Honestly that might be about it. When I'm looking at breeders I usually just look at specific litters with parents and a lineage that I'm interested in, and see if I feel the breeder knows their dogs, the breed, and is able to evaluate the individual puppies to match one up to me.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Breeders who don't live with their dogs in the house, and raise puppies in the house, are a deal breaker. I don't have anything against kennels in theory, and I know a lot of hunting people kennel dogs and provide them good lives, but I want a house pet and it's important to me that the parents are able to live and settle in a house. 

Breeders who don't do health testing and won't take the dog back are huge deal breakers.

Breeders who don't do anything with their dogs are a deal breaker. I don't care if it's performance, work, conformation, therapy work, etc, but I want to see that they are taking their dogs out in public and doing things with them and proving that their drives and/or temperament are sound.

I am not interested in breeders who claim there are no health issues in their line, and whoa aren't honest about potential health issues in the parents. This is not always easy to tell up front, and I think comes with time being involved in a breed and getting to know people.


----------



## Effisia (Jun 20, 2013)

My deal breakers:

-No health testing: ESPECIALLY important to me with Newfs. If a breeder doesn't take the pups to a canine cardiologist (not just a vet) at 10 weeks for a heart check, there's no way I would deal with them. 

-No taking dogs back

-Not raising the dogs in the house

-No titles (working and/or conformation) 

-Overbreeding bitches

-Ridiculous claims (For example "we breed for dry-mouthed Newfs". If you're breeding to standard, you simply can't promise this because of a Newf's proper muzzle structure. Which is the way it is for a REASON.)

-Breeding for exaggerated features/extreme traits


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Gumiho, Equinox, and Elrohwen listed most of my deal breakers. I very much agree with this point from Elrohwen (and I think Gumiho implied something similar)


> Breeders who don't do anything with their dogs are a deal breaker. I don't care if it's performance, work, conformation, therapy work, etc, but I want to see that they are taking their dogs out in public and doing things with them and proving that their drives and/or temperament are sound.


I can't put my finger on why, but breeders who don't do anything with their dogs (e.g., performance sports, work, conformation, therapy) skeeve me out. Those are often (at least in poodles) the same breeders who have one male and three females and repeatedly breed them to each other for "gr8 petz!!!" I'm fine with breeding for companionship / pets, but do something with your dogs that tells me they truly are great pets. Put a low level rally or obedience title on them, do therapy work, do something other than breed, breed, breed.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

cookieface said:


> I can't put my finger on why, but breeders who don't do anything with their dogs (e.g., performance sports, work, conformation, therapy) skeeve me out. Those are often (at least in poodles) the same breeders who have one male and three females and repeatedly breed them to each other for "gr8 petz!!!" I'm fine with breeding for companionship / pets, but do something with your dogs that tells me they truly are great pets. Put a low level rally or obedience title on them, do therapy work, do something other than breed, breed, breed.


Yes, I agree. I think it bothers me because I know so many people with pet dogs of less than stellar temperament who say things like "I would love to breed so-and-so if she wasn't fixed! She would have such pretty puppies!" Luckily the people I know are smart enough not to do it (or the dogs were fixed by rescue), but they seem to have no idea that their skittish dog who tucks her tail and won't approach strangers is really not a great candidate for breeding. We all love our pets, but if your dog just stays at home in her comfort zone and you don't try to do anything with her, it's so easy to overlook temperament issues that should not be passed on. Anyone can say "Oh, my dog is great with people, kids, and other dogs. We just don't go to crowded areas or see kids ever"

Heck, I have met show people who are just as clueless, but at least their dog is out in public and other people can see what the dog's temperament is really like, and they end up taking years to get a Ch (in a breed where that is not difficult) because the dog is terrified of everything. So not all show breeders or performance breeders are breeding the best dogs ever, but at least I have some way of checking up on what they have produced and what dogs they are breeding.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

elrohwen said:


> Yes, I agree. I think it bothers me because I know so many people with pet dogs of less than stellar temperament who say things like "I would love to breed so-and-so if she wasn't fixed! She would have such pretty puppies!" Luckily the people I know are smart enough not to do it (or the dogs were fixed by rescue), but they seem to have no idea that their skittish dog who tucks her tail and won't approach strangers is really not a great candidate for breeding. We all love our pets, but if your dog just stays at home in her comfort zone and you don't try to do anything with her, it's so easy to overlook temperament issues that should not be passed on. Anyone can say "Oh, my dog is great with people, kids, and other dogs. We just don't go to crowded areas or see kids ever"
> 
> Heck, I have met show people who are just as clueless, but at least their dog is out in public and other people can see what the dog's temperament is really like, and they end up taking years to get a Ch (in a breed where that is not difficult) because the dog is terrified of everything. So not all show breeders or performance breeders are breeding the best dogs ever, but at least I have some way of checking up on what they have produced and what dogs they are breeding.


Yeah I got a lot of that with Izze, but she was too tall ... way too tall and I didn't have the space to take care of puppies.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Yeah I got a lot of that with Izze, but she was too tall ... way too tall and I didn't have the space to take care of puppies.


Wait, I'm confused. So you didn't think she had the temperament for breeding? 

The point of my post was that doing some sort of *something* with the dog can help prove that the dog's temperament is sound. I really don't care if the dog is taller or shorter than the breed standard if it has a good temperament and is doing well in some sort of event, and the breeder thinks those genes are worth passing on. The point wasn't that all dogs should be shown so that only those that exactly fit the physical breed standard are being bred.


----------



## Eeyore (Jul 16, 2014)

In the breeds I'm interested in right now, I want a result from mental testing with good enough results, and of course the health information available. My impression from dalmatians is that a lot of breeders rationalize breeding fearful dogs, even though they do physical health testing - they care more about good papers than the dogs, or are ignorant and don't care enough to learn. I also want to speak to people who have bought their dogs from the breeder, to get information on any inheritable condition that the breeder might be trying to cover up.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

elrohwen said:


> Heck, I have met show people who are just as clueless, but at least their dog is out in public and other people can see what the dog's temperament is really like, and they end up taking years to get a Ch (in a breed where that is not difficult) because the dog is terrified of everything. So not all show breeders or performance breeders are breeding the best dogs ever, but at least I have some way of checking up on what they have produced and what dogs they are breeding.


I met a lady with four Chinese cresteds at the last show i went to and they were all absolutely TERRIFIED. it's such an incorrect temperament for the breed. i mean these dogs were visibly shaking. The other crestie owner there was not impressed and needless to say the terrified dogs did not place.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Kayota said:


> I met a lady with four Chinese cresteds at the last show i went to and they were all absolutely TERRIFIED. it's such an incorrect temperament for the breed. i mean these dogs were visibly shaking. The other crestie owner there was not impressed and needless to say the terrified dogs did not place.


Shyness is reasonably common in Welshies, and I have seen a number of timid dogs at shows. Usually people just want to show for fun, and don't plan to breed these dogs, and most are a bit shy but not terrible (they would make fine family pets, they just don't like to show). One was terrified though, and it took her hours just to take a treat from one of us, and the owner kept saying "If I can finish her championship I'd love to breed her". Seriously? Why on earth would you ever breed her? It's one thing to be reserved, it's another thing for an adolescent Welsh to hide under your chair while people are offering her delicious food. I remember the b*tch's relative and he was so shy that the judge gave him 2nd place when he was the only dog in his class. Just .... stop breeding these dogs.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

For me, it depends on what I'm getting.

What I must see in all dogs:
-Need to be knowledgeable on how to properly raise puppies.
-Breeds from older parents.
-Puppies are sold at 10 weeks or later.
-Can meet mom at least, and see she is of sound mind and physically robust.
-Allows me to see where puppies are raised, and that it is reasonably safe and enriching there.
-Honesty is a huge thing.
-Over commercializing the dogs as if they're kitchen appliances or toys and not living things is a no-go.
-Bred the dogs with a reasonable purpose. Not "they would make cute puppies." Even "both parents are so sweet and make really good pets" is enough.
-The breeder makes efforts to place dogs with responsible owners.

For a mixed breed or non-purebred type (ex. Deer chihuahua, "pit bull", etc.):
-Parents must be at least 3-5 years old and are clearly unrelated.

For a purebred dog:
-Parents should have at least minimal health testing for the most common ailments.
-Parents are from lines that tend to live 12 years or longer.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

Raising puppies outside the house. If you're selling dogs that will be living in homes, they need to be inside the home from the very start.

Not socializing puppies. An enormous amount of socialization happens before 8 weeks. I don't mind starting below zero with a rescue, but if I'm paying you for a puppy, you better be doing right by that puppy.

Not health testing.

Not taking dogs back.

Not guaranteeing health.

Talking about looks- size, coat, color, etc.- but no mention of temperament, the single most important aspect of a dog.

Promising things no one can- yes, you can influence temperament and behavior through breeding and socializing, but I get very suspicious of people who promise that not one dog of theirs will ever be yappy, that they'll all housetrain easily, etc. It's one thing to say mama is a quiet, quick learner and the father is even-tempered and friendly, it's quite another to promise that every single puppy will be all things to all people.

Not having some kind of plan. You should be breeding to a purpose, the show ring, hunting, herding, service dogs, agility, obedience, etc. Not every dog you produce needs to do something, but your dogs should be, and you should have a goal of producing even better dogs for that purpose. I would even accept breeding for companionship, if your breeding dogs are registered therapy dogs and you regularly do therapy visits. (A companion dog should be able to pass the TD test and should enjoy doing therapy visits. If the dogs can't or don't, they shouldn't be bred to create companions.)

More than 1 litter on the ground at a time, 2 in a great while. There are legitimate reasons to end up with 2 litters (did one planned breeding, got the once in a lifetime opportunity to use a stud dog you drool over), but if you consistently have 2 or more litters on the ground, there's no way you're providing proper socialization, etc. to all those puppies.

Red Flags:

This isn't a deal breaker, but I give major side eye to breeding mixed breeds and/or not participating in some sort of sport or conformation. If you're breeding mixed hounds and hunt your breeding dogs every season, okay, that's fine. If you're breeding herding dogs and work them on your farm, also cool. If you're breeding doodles, nope.


----------



## gwd (Sep 6, 2014)

I'm not quoting anyone in particular here........... but I did want to comment on those that expressed a issue with co-ownerships. 

That was a topic of discussion this weekend amongst dog show folk at a the show grounds. I heard more than one person say they were seriously considering only selling on co-ownerships in the future. The reason being, the piper situation has everyone spooked. 

Most of us have COC rules as part of our national breed clubs. this requires us to be responsible for our puppies from cradle to grave should the need arise. We might well write this in our contracts (dog must be returned to breeder if you are no longer able [or wish] to keep the animal). However, without a co-ownership, this can prove problematic should a shelter, rescue, or AC group become involve. 

Lets for example take a non-neglect situation.......... breeder sells puppy. Puppy lives a happy life with owner. owner and puppy are now getting on in years...... owner dies. Uncaring executor of estate takes a now senior citizen dog to the shelter. Without a co-ownership and dual registered micro-chip, the breeder, who WANTS to be responsible has no legal standing to collect the dog from a rescue or shelter situation.

Co-ownerships can be a good protection for the dog and don't have to be a 'strings attached' arrangement. 

That said, co-ownerships create another problem for the breeder. Under APHIS, ownership of more than four intact females puts you into the 'commercial' category. You'd now have to adhere to the same guidelines for care as a commercial facility. ..........this does NOT work in a home environment! Many bof us have carpet in our homes. ..........you can't have dogs on anything other than a solid surface that can be disinfected and be in compliance. ..........there is a host of other weird things such as you need separate facilities for housing whelps and in-season b*tches. By the rules, you couldn't have a whelping box in a family room if you had any other adult dogs in the house. ................I realize all b*tches are different but my breed wasn't at all puppy guardy. ............my last litter was whelped in the family room........ I had the dam, her sister, her mother and her grandmother......... at times grandma or great-grandma would slide into the box and lay with the puppies. Especially when momma needed a break from them. All three bitches would snuggle and clean puppies..............

Personally I think my puppies benefited from having gentle, loving attention from other adult b*tches............i'd have been in violation of the rules......


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

I think the issue with co-ownership is more for those of us who want pets, not breeding prospects. I don't want another person to have rights to my pet. If I were intending to show/breed my dog, I'd be fine with having a knowledgeable breeder to work with. So for me, personally, any breeder who will only sell me a dog under a co-ownership contract is a not the breeder for me. I don't want to deal with it. That doesn't make them a bad breeder, however, just not a breeder I will buy from.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Amaryllis said:


> I think the issue with co-ownership is more for those of us who want pets, not breeding prospects. I don't want another person to have rights to my pet. If I were intending to show/breed my dog, I'd be fine with having a knowledgeable breeder to work with. So for me, personally, any breeder who will only sell me a dog under a co-ownership contract is a not the breeder for me. I don't want to deal with it. That doesn't make them a bad breeder, however, just not a breeder I will buy from.


Yeah, this. I co-owned a dog and actually just handed him back to the breeder after a year, in large part because I couldn't hack co-ownership. It was a situation that was supposed to be short term before being given to me completely, but it didn't work out that way and I just... hated it. I'm not interested in showing/breeding, and it was getting in the way of me building a relationship with my pet. 

It's not a bad thing, but it's not something I wanted to be doing. 

As an aside, my deal breakers are pretty minimal and basically amount to 'charging for things I'm not getting'. Ie: If I'm paying thousands of dollars I want a dog who comes from health tested parents, who are proven in SOME venue or another, and comes with a health guarantee. If I'm spending 30.00, I want the dog to have been vaccinated and wormed. My only absolute deal breaker is people making money on breeding practices I don't approve of or want to support. It won't stop me taking a puppy from them, though, just me from giving them enough money to have made the venture profitable.

Wait, no. Actually the co-ownership or any requirement to breed or show or meet and greet other people interested in the breed are out for me. Ergo, no rare breeds for me.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

CptJack said:


> Wait, no. Actually the co-ownership or any requirement to breed or show or m*eet and greet other people interested in the breed* are out for me. Ergo, no rare breeds for me.


That's a thing? I would feel so awkward going to some stranger's house to ogle their dog, lol.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Amaryllis said:


> That's a thing? I would feel so awkward going to some stranger's house to ogle their dog, lol.


Yeah, it's a thing. It seems like most of the meetings happen in public places, but. Meh.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Amaryllis said:


> That's a thing? I would feel so awkward going to some stranger's house to ogle their dog, lol.


Yea, this was the case for Stabyhouns. Since the breed is so rare it's almost impossible that you would just run into some in day-to-day life, so they arrange for you to meet someone's dog to make sure you actually jive with the breed.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

ireth0 said:


> Yea, this was the case for Stabyhouns. Since the breed is so rare it's almost impossible that you would just run into some in day-to-day life, so they arrange for you to meet someone's dog to make sure you actually jive with the breed.


Yep, and that was the breed I was thinking of. 

It ABSOLUTELY makes sense to me, but it's not something I want to do. I'm not that social.


----------



## gwd (Sep 6, 2014)

Amaryllis said:


> I think the issue with co-ownership is more for those of us who want pets, not breeding prospects. I don't want another person to have rights to my pet. If I were intending to show/breed my dog, I'd be fine with having a knowledgeable breeder to work with. So for me, personally, any breeder who will only sell me a dog under a co-ownership contract is a not the breeder for me. I don't want to deal with it. That doesn't make them a bad breeder, however, just not a breeder I will buy from.


Perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly............. it's not necessarily about showing or breeding prospects. It's a tool for the breeder to have legal standing should the need arise to be responsible and take back a dog (pet) should it land in a shelter. 

You've all said that you expect a breeder to take back a dog and be responsible.......... we can't do that if we don't know a dogs owner has fallen on hard times or has perhaps died. Dual ownership and dual chip registration can exist for the protection of the pet. You can always have a written contract that stipulates very strict parameters under which the breeder can require the dog be returned........... such as only upon your death...... but should you die, at least the co-ownership allows for the dog to be returned and not have to be 'held' while an estate is being settled. 

Co-ownerships can easily exist without any strings or requirements to show, breed, be a goodwill ambassador........... that is something you can not agree to in a supplemental contract. And yeah, I wouldn't want that either. 

There was a situation in my state recently where a man with multiple dogs died unexpectedly. His daughter (and sole heir) wanted nothing to do with the dogs and dumped the lot of them at the shelter. ..........only those with co-ownerships were able to be removed from the shelter. (I think, iirc, it was 3 of the 10 dogs). The rest were all older dogs and the national rescue club had to try and pull them.......


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

I'm not a fan of co-ownerships. I can absolutely see the point when you want to keep dogs in your breeding program but can't keep them in your house. It's very common in my breed for a b*tch to be co-owned by 2-3 people and have a litter for each (where that owner can choose the sire, and take on the work of the puppies). So they are useful things. 

Still, I've seen co-ownerships destroy relationships and cause a lot of drama. I wouldn't enter into one unless I knew the person well and was comfortable with the terms of the contract. I would be ok with owning a b*tch and making an agreement for her breeder to get one litter out of her, but I would not be ok with them telling me how to care for the dog or how to train it.

I have a stud dog (or future stud dog, once his health checks are done) but he is completely mine to do what I want with. My breeder did give me an incentive to finish his championship, and there are restrictions to breed him (basically having his Ch and doing health tests), but nobody can tell me what to do with him and I like it that way.

I don't think I would go to a breeder who required co-ownership agreements on every dog.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

I think the real issue is this:

From a breeders point of view, I absolutely understand wanting to maintain control of the dog - ditto that for rescues. Things like coownerships and microchip registrations help with that.

From a pet owners point of view? I'm going to be frank: I want control of my own dog. Period, the end. I want a support network with my breeder if I need it and choose to use it, but I don't want an obligation. I don't mind requirements and restrictions in general (this dog needs to be shown, go to puppy classes, we get first right of refusal if you can't keep the dog), but there's a limit to how much I am personally willing to put up with in regards to intrusion into what I do with my dog and the legal standing of the breeder: co-ownership is over that line for me. So are some other contracted terms.

Now, I don't object a bit to breeders who use co-ownership or staying on the microchip registration or even really tight contracts about things like diet, exercise, mandatory training levels and methods or whatever. I think it shows a lot of care about their puppies and breed.

But I'm not going to them for a dog.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

ireth0 said:


> Yea, this was the case for Stabyhouns. Since the breed is so rare it's almost impossible that you would just run into some in day-to-day life, so they arrange for you to meet someone's dog to make sure you actually jive with the breed.


Agreed, it is a thing. I'm actually totally ok with it. I've met with people when breeders referred them to me, and I groomed a puppy because I lived the closest to the owners. I love my breed and I'm happy to show people what it's like to own one. It's in no way a requirement though. There are plenty of Welshie owners who don't breed or show their dogs, and who are not breed ambassadors.


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

elrohwen said:


> Shyness is reasonably common in Welshies, and I have seen a number of timid dogs at shows. Usually people just want to show for fun, and don't plan to breed these dogs, and most are a bit shy but not terrible (they would make fine family pets, they just don't like to show). One was terrified though, and it took her hours just to take a treat from one of us, and the owner kept saying "If I can finish her championship I'd love to breed her". Seriously? Why on earth would you ever breed her? It's one thing to be reserved, it's another thing for an adolescent Welsh to hide under your chair while people are offering her delicious food. I remember the b*tch's relative and he was so shy that the judge gave him 2nd place when he was the only dog in his class. Just .... stop breeding these dogs.


Yeah, shyness is one thing but i sat on the floor with two of her dogs for ages and they were straining backwards on the leashes trying to get away. That's unacceptable for any breed imo. I mean i was literally just sitting there not moving, not making eye contact and they wouldnt even sniff the air let alone investigate me.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Kayota said:


> Yeah, shyness is one thing but i sat on the floor with two of her dogs for ages and they were straining backwards on the leashes trying to get away. That's unacceptable for any breed imo. I mean i was literally just sitting there not moving, not making eye contact and they wouldnt even sniff the air let alone investigate me.


That's what happened with the b*tch the guy was so excited about breeding. When he said that my husband and I just looked at each other and rolled our eyes.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

gwd said:


> Perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly............. it's not necessarily about showing or breeding prospects. It's a tool for the breeder to have legal standing should the need arise to be responsible and take back a dog (pet) should it land in a shelter.
> 
> You've all said that you expect a breeder to take back a dog and be responsible.......... we can't do that if we don't know a dogs owner has fallen on hard times or has perhaps died. Dual ownership and dual chip registration can exist for the protection of the pet. You can always have a written contract that stipulates very strict parameters under which the breeder can require the dog be returned........... such as only upon your death...... but should you die, at least the co-ownership allows for the dog to be returned and not have to be 'held' while an estate is being settled.
> 
> ...


why not do what the rescue I got Kabota from did and microchip him with both names on the chip? If Kabota were to end up in a shelter, they would get the rescue's info and my info, so if I failed to respond for whatever reason, the rescue would be contacted.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

Amaryllis said:


> why not do what the rescue I got Kabota from did and microchip him with both names on the chip? If Kabota were to end up in a shelter, they would get the rescue's info and my info, so if I failed to respond for whatever reason, the rescue would be contacted.


Eren's breeder is the secondary contact on his microchip. I'm
Fine with that. 

Co-ownership does not appeal me, personally, but it's not a deal breaker. Depending on the terms, it may not restrict me much. Not ideal, but not horrible.


----------



## Equinox (Nov 11, 2008)

Regarding co-ownerships, I did say that I was highly unlikely to ever enter one, but that does leave room for exceptions. There are only certain people I would enter a co-ownership agreement but even then it'd take a great deal of convincing. With where I am in life now, I cannot agree to certain terms and guarantee that I will show a specific number of times or obtain titles up to a certain level or visit the breeder every so often. Nor frankly would I want to have that obligation, no matter how much I would enjoy the showing or trialing itself. I understand that co-ownerships are often excellent opportunities to own a quality dog, learn about breeding/working/showing, and are ideal situations for both breeder and buyer... but I don't see that being me. I am okay with paying the full price for a puppy to have complete ownership over it, and even if I were looking for a breeding quality dog, my breed is popular enough that I can usually always find something that suits me elsewhere if one breeder insists on a co-ownership. 

I would really only consider co-ownerships if this is a person I already respect, admire, and feel like I know and I wanted to get a puppy from them plus potentially help them out with their breeding endeavors. For the most part, I don't think a co-ownership agreement would be much benefit to me, just based on what my goals are and what I look for when I buy a dog.



elrohwen said:


> Breeders who don't do anything with their dogs are a deal breaker. I don't care if it's performance, work, conformation, therapy work, etc, but I want to see that they are taking their dogs out in public and doing things with them and proving that their drives and/or temperament are sound.





cookieface said:


> Gumiho, Equinox, and Elrohwen listed most of my deal breakers. I very much agree with this point from Elrohwen (and I think Gumiho implied something similar)
> 
> 
> I can't put my finger on why, but breeders who don't do anything with their dogs (e.g., performance sports, work, conformation, therapy) skeeve me out. Those are often (at least in poodles) the same breeders who have one male and three females and repeatedly breed them to each other for "gr8 petz!!!" I'm fine with breeding for companionship / pets, but do something with your dogs that tells me they truly are great pets. Put a low level rally or obedience title on them, do therapy work, do something other than breed, breed, breed.


Yes! I can't believe I forgot this - a breeder who does not do anything with their breeding dogs is an absolute deal breaker. I guess I sort of lumped that in mentally with a breeder not being qualified to know their dogs and choose the right puppy for me. If you don't work your dogs, how do you know them well enough to call them breed worthy, choose a match, and evaluate the puppies that they produce? 

This applies especially to breeders of working/sport dogs. And it's not the titles I'm looking for, I just want to see that the dogs are being regularly worked and evaluated in a way that removes obvious bias. Sometimes that means I'll be adamant on titles, but other times I actually believe the breeder has enough credibility to evaluate their dog for breeding through just working them, titles or no. It's case by case. 

And when I talk about breeders who do not do anything with their dogs, I'm including those that will send off all their dogs to be titled, or purchase dogs already titled. I'm okay with some dogs in the breeding program being bought titled but if that is the case for all the dogs, I'd be highly skeptical, unless I do see that the breeder works these dogs and has shown (in some way) that he/she has the breed and working experience to properly evaluate a dog of that breed. 

As far as pet breeders go... hmm, I don't know. I guess I may make exceptions. I do absolutely want to see the breeders doing something with their dogs and will likely choose someone who does therapy work or obedience over someone who doesn't, but it's tricky. For many breeds bred to be companions, I would likely go to a show breeder. But there ARE some breeds that I would likely seek out a "pet breeder" for because sometimes my preferences do not match up exactly to what the breed standard is, for practical or health reasons. 

For example, if I were looking into Pomeranians (my family's next dog, most likely), I would seek out pet breeders first because 3-7 lbs is not a size I'd feel comfortable with in the same house as Trent. Trent's littermate actually belongs to a couple who own a pair of Poms purchased from pet breeders that are exactly the size I'd like and impeccably behaved. They were also worried about size and went to a pet breeder who, as far as I know, didn't do anything with their dogs except let them be pets. I enjoy almost all aspects of the breed, but the size is a concern. Even if I were to go to show breeders and wait for flukes, I don't know how much larger a fluke puppy would get, plus I would be severely limiting my choices.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

A breeder who charges more for say, merle puppies isn't necessarily a deal breaker for me, it depends on what else they have going for them. Like if they are an otherwise great breeder except for the fact that they charge more dog merle puppies or puppies with blue eyes, but I like everything else about them than I will choose to over look that. Also because since I do not want a merle puppy or a puppy with blue eyes, it really doesn't effect me.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

elrohwen said:


> Shyness is reasonably common in Welshies, and I have seen a number of timid dogs at shows. Usually people just want to show for fun, and don't plan to breed these dogs, and most are a bit shy but not terrible (they would make fine family pets, they just don't like to show). One was terrified though, and it took her hours just to take a treat from one of us, and the owner kept saying "If I can finish her championship I'd love to breed her". Seriously? Why on earth would you ever breed her? It's one thing to be reserved, it's another thing for an adolescent Welsh to hide under your chair while people are offering her delicious food. I remember the b*tch's relative and he was so shy that the judge gave him 2nd place when he was the only dog in his class. Just .... stop breeding these dogs.


I've been wanting to tell you.. I MET A WELSHIE! Unfortunately he was one of the shy dogs though. He did come up and sniff me and let me touch him a little, but I didn't push it. He was very cute. I guess as far as shyness goes.. if the dog is wonderful in every other way I would be maybe okay with it if it was bred to the most outgoing dog ever. Maybe then things would balance out a little, then keep the more outgoing pup next time. I wouldn't breed an extreme case like you are talking about though. 

Things that are deal breakers for me, personally:

NO health testing. While I don't necessarily believe health testing is always going to get me a healthier dog, I support health testing. I want breeders to continue to utilize this tool so that we can have more health tests available in the future. 

No return to breeder policy. Shelters are full. I can't justify getting a dog from a breeder who is adding to the shelters. 

MerlexMerle or other similar types of breeding. There's no reason for it.. we have plenty of colors available in Aussies. 

I have to feed what the breeder wants me to feed, and other personal choice restrictions. I'm not going to feed my dog raw.. ever (yes I've seen a breeder require that). I just don't have that kind of dedication, space or knowledge. I don't have a problem with spay/neuter restrictions as long as it is reasonable. 

Not socialized in the home and with some kind of plan for it. I want more than just "puppies have been handled by the kids a lot!". I want intros to weird sounds, surfaces, car rides, nail trims, baths etc. 

They don't give a flying hoot about temperament. 

For my specific breed of choice, I don't want a dog from a breeder that does conformation only. Some breeds I wouldn't be so picky about. I don't like massive amounts of coat and bone in an Aussie. I want a dog that can fly around an agility course and maybe herd sheep. I like to see dogs in the lines titled in different venues. 

And most importantly.. I have to get along with the breeder. I am looking for relationships because I'm interested in learning MORE.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Amaryllis said:


> That's a thing? I would feel so awkward going to some stranger's house to ogle their dog, lol.


Um, I've done that. :redface:



Equinox said:


> And when I talk about breeders who do not do anything with their dogs, I'm including those that will send off all their dogs to be titled, or purchase dogs already titled. I'm okay with some dogs in the breeding program being bought titled but if that is the case for all the dogs, I'd be highly skeptical, unless I do see that the breeder works these dogs and has shown (in some way) that he/she has the breed and working experience to properly evaluate a dog of that breed.


I don't really have a problem with breeders who send their dogs to handlers for showing. In poodles especially, not everyone wants or has time and skills to deal with the grooming. Katie and Tyson's breeder sends her dogs to a professional handler; however, she has shown herself in the past.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Oh yeah merle x merle is a huge taboo, I have heard of a collie breeder who was big on homozygous merles :/ the dogs she was breeding were blind and deaf and all that, it was a shame. I first took notice of the problems of merle x merle from the www.borderwars.com page and www.lethalwhites.com (I think that's the right address) but if its not all one has to do is google "double merle dogs" and those two sites with all the articles will come up.

Also some ACD breeders will try to sell "rare chocolate/white" puppies for astronomically more than their normal prices! One MAS breeder who I contacted early on (a friend's daughters agility dog is from them and I really liked her, she is a great dog) and they breed great dogs ... they temperaments are great and they are goods looking dogs. The only problem is they DONT TAKE THEIR DOGS BACK! I emailed them to ask the reasoning behind this policy and she wrote back and said its because she is afraid of parvo infection. I replied with "most dogs are returned to the breeder after they have received their last puppy shots, many times after they are grown. Even if they do not, all that would need to be done is a booster of parvo and distemper if you are that worried about it." and I have yet to get a response back LOL, and I sent that email months ago xD.

Oh well their loss not mine, I have since found a really grest breeder who has been nothing but great, transparent and answered every one of my questions honestly.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

The thing for me eith heavy handed requirements is..well often time the requirements are things i do "anyway". For example i am currently in contact with a Breeder, she has several very specific vaccination and diet requirements..but they do bot bother me at all because the requirements are all things I do "anyway" i would have been raising the dog in the breeders preferenced manner weather or not they were required so to me the extensiveness of the contract is moot point. 

One requirement that is a nogo for me is requiring I WAIT for a certain age to spay/neuter. I prefer not to do it really young, but i have seen a lot of breeders now that say you are not ALLOWED to do it before the age of 2. Not happening lol. I am happy with a spay/neuter contract but the "when" is MY choice, period. I am not neutering at 6 months but i am not under any circumstances waiting till over a year.


----------



## gwd (Sep 6, 2014)

Amaryllis said:


> why not do what the rescue I got Kabota from did and microchip him with both names on the chip? If Kabota were to end up in a shelter, they would get the rescue's info and my info, so if I failed to respond for whatever reason, the rescue would be contacted.


Absolutely...........i mentioned the dual registered microchip in addition to the co-ownership.

There was a horrible situation here in so cal in July. A house fire sussed out a pretty bad situation for 61 shelties. I don't know the individual involved so I'm not making any excuses for the conditions she was keeping her dogs in, but the owner (a long time Sheltie person) ended up relinquishing her dogs to animal control. I suspect that animal cruelty charges will be filed. 

The owner was 91 years old and had some full time help on the property. As I said, I don't know if the neglect was part of the diminished capacity of the owner, or specific details........... nevertheless the dogs were in need of intervention. Some of these dogs were co-owned with other people that lived across the country. They had no idea that the situation had spiraled. This sometimes happens with elderly people. Heck, sometimes their own kids don't know that mom and dad might sound good on the phone but are living in squalor........... it happened. 

In this case, I know so far, one breeder on the east coast was able to get her 8 year old Sheltie out of the riverside shelter because she still had co-ownership of the dog. Had she only been a micro-chip contact, she'd have had no claim on the dog as micro-chip does NOT establish ownership. It is simply a registry service for the purpose of finding lost dogs. 

In the riverside case, all of the dogs are now owned by the riverside shelter as they were 'owner relinquished' (part of the terms of animal controls rescue). Only the dogs with co-ownerships are able to be returned to the breeders.......... all of which want to do the right thing and get the dogs they'd bred out of the shelter. These breeders already feel that they'd failed their puppies by having them live in neglect..........i'm sure every single breeder wishes they'd sold under a co-ownership at this point.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

Miss Bugs said:


> The thing for me eith heavy handed requirements is..well often time the requirements are things i do "anyway". For example i am currently in contact with a Breeder, she has several very specific vaccination and diet requirements..but they do bot bother me at all because the requirements are all things I do "anyway" i would have been raising the dog in the breeders preferenced manner weather or not they were required so to me the extensiveness of the contract is moot point.
> 
> One requirement that is a nogo for me is requiring I WAIT for a certain age to spay/neuter. I prefer not to do it really young, but i have seen a lot of breeders now that say you are not ALLOWED to do it before the age of 2. Not happening lol. I am happy with a spay/neuter contract but the "when" is MY choice, period. I am not neutering at 6 months but i am not under any circumstances waiting till over a year.


Those types of contracts would be a no-go for me, too. The neutering, for example, when I was looking at getting a GSD puppy and said that I'd want to neuter before first heat, because I just cannot deal with that (Kabota goes insane when he smells a dog in heat), I was told fine, just don't compete in agility or other sport that's tough on the joints. That's totally fair. You need to take each person's circumstances into account.

Really restrictive covenants on food are rediculous. The rescue I got Kabota from specified a wide variety of foods, good kibbles, some of them quite inexpensive. They were really just saying "please don't feed Beneful or other crap like that." Again, it allows for circumstances. But I've seen breeder contracts that state "you will use this one brand, for life, always" and I think why? What if I can't get that one food? What if the dog doesn't like it or is allergic to something in it? How would you even enforce that, anyway?


----------



## Equinox (Nov 11, 2008)

cookieface said:


> I don't really have a problem with breeders who send their dogs to handlers for showing. In poodles especially, not everyone wants or has time and skills to deal with the grooming. Katie and Tyson's breeder sends her dogs to a professional handler; however, she has shown herself in the past.


No, I don't mean breeders that use handlers for shows, that's pretty much the norm. I mean breeders that will send off their dogs to Germany to get their IPO1 (working) title so that their German Shepherd can get a V show rating and get koer'd as per registry breeding requirements. Usually when this happens I will wonder if it is because the breeder or the dog itself does not have what it takes to earn that working title, and I wonder about what that means for the breeding program. Unless of course, the breeder has shown that he/she does work dogs themselves and has the capability to title them and evaluate them as working and breeding dogs. When I look at working dogs and talk to breeders about potential litters that would work for me, I want to talk to a breeder who has actually worked the dog themselves and know the strengths and weaknesses of that dog. Seeing a dog on the field at a trial is great, but I want to know what training the dog has revealed about it.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

I have known (and ran away from) breeders who were otherwise GREAT, but wanted to control what I fed my dogs and a few even required that puppies be on supplements! if you are feeding the right food you shouldn't need supplements. And raw? absolutely NOT! I don't mind doing raw bones or the occasional raw meal every once and a while, but I simply do not have the facilities to store the amount of meat needed to feed four dogs raw. They get fed high quality kibble and they do great on it. 

I thought that's why breeders screened homes, so they could weed out the bad homes and the irresponsible ones! I don't mind doing things like notifying the breeder or rescue if I move ... etc but requiring what I feed MY dog that I bought is a deal breaker.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

Equinox said:


> No, I don't mean breeders that use handlers for shows, that's pretty much the norm. I mean breeders that will send off their dogs to Germany to get their IPO1 (working) title so that their German Shepherd can get a V show rating and get koer'd as per registry breeding requirements. Usually when this happens I will wonder if it is because the breeder or the dog itself does not have what it takes to earn that working title, and I wonder about what that means for the breeding program. Unless of course, the breeder has shown that he/she does work dogs themselves and has the capability to title them and evaluate them as working and breeding dogs. When I look at working dogs and talk to breeders about potential litters that would work for me, I want to talk to a breeder who has actually worked the dog themselves and know the strengths and weaknesses of that dog. Seeing a dog on the field at a trial is great, but I want to know what training the dog has revealed about it.


Ah, I understand. I didn't realize people did that (although I've thought about sending Katie to someone who knows left from right so she can do agility ).


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

ForTheLoveOfDogs said:


> I've been wanting to tell you.. I MET A WELSHIE! Unfortunately he was one of the shy dogs though. He did come up and sniff me and let me touch him a little, but I didn't push it. He was very cute. I guess as far as shyness goes.. if the dog is wonderful in every other way I would be maybe okay with it if it was bred to the most outgoing dog ever. Maybe then things would balance out a little, then keep the more outgoing pup next time. I wouldn't breed an extreme case like you are talking about though.


Yay Welshie! That's a shame about the shyness. I got very lucky with my breeder in that she really values outgoing confident temperaments, while some are ok with the dogs being much more reserved (or where reserved is a euphemism for shy). You should meet Watson - he is not at all shy. Haha. It's made me realize that I love Welshies but I will be very picky about where I get my next one, because I don't want one who is a shy shrinking violet. I will probably just get a Watson daughter, or a puppy from his half sister when she's old enough. I'm going to nationals next year if at all possible and I'm excited to meet Welshies from all over the country and see if there are other lines I'd be excited to own.



Equinox said:


> Regarding co-ownerships, I did say that I was highly unlikely to ever enter one, but that does leave room for exceptions. There are only certain people I would enter a co-ownership agreement but even then it'd take a great deal of convincing. With where I am in life now, I cannot agree to certain terms and guarantee that I will show a specific number of times or obtain titles up to a certain level or visit the breeder every so often. Nor frankly would I want to have that obligation, no matter how much I would enjoy the showing or trialing itself.


Yeah, agree with this. I want to show and trial, but I really cannot commit to absolutely getting certain titles. I think it's Gaylen's Goldens who requires that sport puppies be shown to like UD or masters agility level or something. They breed cool dogs, and I would love to have one, but even if I knew I could train a dog to that level I just couldn't commit to it. 

I think if a breeder requires that a dog be shown to its conformation championship, they should be ready to cough up the money for a professional handler. I know some breeders who have placed male Welshies with pet people, and then paid for the handler and I think that's reasonable. After all, it's really the breeder who wants those titles in many cases.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Equinox said:


> No, I don't mean breeders that use handlers for shows, that's pretty much the norm. I mean breeders that will send off their dogs to Germany to get their IPO1 (working) title so that their German Shepherd can get a V show rating and get koer'd as per registry breeding requirements. Usually when this happens I will wonder if it is because the breeder or the dog itself does not have what it takes to earn that working title, and I wonder about what that means for the breeding program. Unless of course, the breeder has shown that he/she does work dogs themselves and has the capability to title them and evaluate them as working and breeding dogs. When I look at working dogs and talk to breeders about potential litters that would work for me, I want to talk to a breeder who has actually worked the dog themselves and know the strengths and weaknesses of that dog. Seeing a dog on the field at a trial is great, but I want to know what training the dog has revealed about it.


I hate breeders who do that, I would want to title my own dogs, or at least have someone title them here so I could watch and see how they do. I THOUGHT dog sports were supposed to be fun, engaging, and bonding btw dog and human, but I guess some people don't see it that way and its too bad


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

Oh and definitely a breeder I am comfortable with, not a breeder that assumes i am always doing something wrong.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> I thought that's why breeders screened homes, so they could weed out the bad homes and the irresponsible ones! I don't mind doing things like notifying the breeder or rescue if I move ... etc but requiring what I feed MY dog that I bought is a deal breaker.


They do (or at least the responsible ones do), but things happen. At work, we've had a number of new hires seem wonderful during the interview process, but then go batpoop crazy once hired. Or, circumstances can change. I could lose my job, burn through my savings, and be living on the street, but not want to relinquish my dog. Or, I could die and have my family completely disregard my wishes and the breeder's contract and send my dog to a shelter. 

An application process is good, but not fool proof.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

cookieface said:


> They do (or at least the responsible ones do), but things happen. At work, we've had a number of new hires seem wonderful during the interview process, but then go batpoop crazy once hired. Or, circumstances can change. I could lose my job, burn through my savings, and be living on the street, but not want to relinquish my dog. Or, I could die and have my family completely disregard my wishes and the breeder's contract and send my dog to a shelter.
> 
> An application process is good, but not fool proof.


Agreed. But I thought a will was legally binding and they HAD to do what was instructed? Its not that hard ... if no one wants the dogs they go back to their breeders, even at 15, if Bear had to go back to his breeder I am 100% confident she would drive down from Tennessee (where she is now) or at least meet half way and take him back.

I still keep her updated on his he is doing, but she didn't require that, I do that as a courtesy.


----------



## gwd (Sep 6, 2014)

Amaryllis said:


> Those types of contracts would be a no-go for me, too. The neutering, for example, when I was looking at getting a GSD puppy and said that I'd want to neuter before first heat, because I just cannot deal with that (Kabota goes insane when he smells a dog in heat), I was told fine, just don't compete in agility or other sport that's tough on the joints. That's totally fair. You need to take each person's circumstances into account.
> 
> Really restrictive covenants on food are rediculous. The rescue I got Kabota from specified a wide variety of foods, good kibbles, some of them quite inexpensive. They were really just saying "please don't feed Beneful or other crap like that." Again, it allows for circumstances. But I've seen breeder contracts that state "you will use this one brand, for life, always" and I think why? What if I can't get that one food? What if the dog doesn't like it or is allergic to something in it? How would you even enforce that, anyway?


I'm going to respond from a breeder point of view on your post. ..............puppy owners want health guarantees but sometimes make choices that are in direct conflict with proper growth. ........ it's not fair to come back to the breeder and ask for them to take a puppy back (although they likely will) and refund your money because you bought an Irish wolfhound, fed him a high protein diet, neutered him at 6 months of age, kept him 20 lbs overweight and then cry, 'baaaaad breeder sold me an unhealthy puppy' 

Likewise, if you have a crappy vet that talks you into a 7 way vaccine rabies and bordetella (heck, lets throw in lymes and rattlesnake while we're at it) for your Irish setter puppy and it ends up with HOD...........that isn't fair to put that back on the breeder. 

Good breeders want to see the puppies happy, healthy and thriving in their new homes......... they just want to try and help make sure that happens. 

I have to admit I'm also a big proponent in keeping dogs entire. The sex hormones are about more than reproduction. The endocrine system is complex and elegant and you can't disrupt it without some unintended consequences. Abnormal growth and endocrine issues are a side effect of s/n..........obviously that has to be weighed against the owners ability to avoid accidental breedings but ideally I'd like to see more people keep dogs entire.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

I don't mind keeping males intact but females of mine will always be spayed, I just don't have the facilities or the means to deal with heat cycles. plus I have two males here who were neutered when they were older and would go bat **** crazy if I had an intact female around. Also altered dogs seem to treat intact dogs different. But if I can, I would like for this new puppy to go through at least one heat before she is spayed.


----------



## TravelingKoolie (Jan 4, 2011)

I honestly have very few "deal breakers" because situations can come up where I'm willing to bend or cross my lines. I have things that might make me hesitate and things I'm not fond of but I'm really of the mindset that if they are consistently producing dogs I like I'll put up with a lot. A lot of it comes down to breed also with me but I think the two things that will make me stop dead and not go any farther are is:

I don't trust the breeder to be honest. I don't need to like the breeder or even agree with all their practices but I need to be able to trust them and what they say and trust the type of dog they are producing. 

Spay/Neuter contracts. I won't sign one. Though I am willing to discuss alternative altering options with them.


----------



## Amaryllis (Dec 28, 2011)

gwd said:


> I'm going to respond from a breeder point of view on your post. ..............puppy owners want health guarantees but sometimes make choices that are in direct conflict with proper growth. ........ it's not fair to come back to the breeder and ask for them to take a puppy back (although they likely will) and refund your money because you bought an Irish wolfhound, fed him a high protein diet, neutered him at 6 months of age, kept him 20 lbs overweight and then cry, 'baaaaad breeder sold me an unhealthy puppy'
> 
> Likewise, if you have a crappy vet that talks you into a 7 way vaccine rabies and bordetella (heck, lets throw in lymes and rattlesnake while we're at it) for your Irish setter puppy and it ends up with HOD...........that isn't fair to put that back on the breeder.
> 
> ...


It's very unlikely that only one food in all the world will keep a dog healthy. 

As for keeping dogs intact, I am confident I could keep Kabota and a female apart during a heat, however, I would have to deal with him going completely bonkers for at least a week, twice a year. I don't want to deal with that and I don't want to do that to him. Dogs do just fine with early neutering, though I agree I surely wouldn't compete a large breed dog in agility after a pediatric spay. But for life as my pet? She'd be fine.

There's also the issue that as a breeder, you're going to have let go of those pups. You're going to have to trust people to care for them the best they can, and that includes choosing food and vet care. If you can't deal with that, don't breed dogs.


----------



## gwd (Sep 6, 2014)

Amaryllis said:


> It's very unlikely that only one food in all the world will keep a dog healthy.


I certainly didn't say that only one food would work........... but, in the example I used, giant breed puppies do not do well on a high protein, fast growth formula. I could certainly see a breeder requesting those not be used.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Also foods change, companies get sold etc ... like when Bear was a young puppy, Pedigree was a decent food, that's what the breeder fed. But in the months following it got really crappy, I started learning more about canine nutrition, and I learned more about what makes a good or bad dog food. Then Bear came up with allergies to grain, so we had to switch anyway and have switched a few times since then.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

I'm nodding yes and no to various points.
One thing that I'm surprised hasn't come up: that's knowing (or not knowing) the pedigree. I would rather buy a dog from known healthy lines (longevity, freedom from any serious diseases until a ripe old age, no alergies, etc. -- preferably with records going back a few generations and including siblings and half siblings) than a dog who has had every test recommended for its breed. I cannot abide people who knowingly breed from a dog with a history of allergies and skin problems, especially if they do not disclose this to puppy buyers.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Allergies are fickle things, there is no way to know if a dog will have allergies, neither of Bear's parents had allergies, none of his sib's have allergies, but he does, to grains. and I had plans to breed him (at the time). Why? because he is a nice dog, nice temperament, conformation, hunting instinct, and a overall nice example of his breed. 

Allergies aren't a deal breaker for me, Demodex mange however would be.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

A lot of things would be deal-breakers for me. No point listing them all because some would be situational. But, basically, if I felt that the breeder, in any way, wasn't acting in the best interests of the individual dogs. 

Also if they wanted a lot of close interaction, nope. I'm OK with e-mailing pictures a few times a year but nothing beyond that.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Allergies are fickle things, there is no way to know if a dog will have allergies, neither of Bear's parents had allergies, none of his sib's have allergies, but he does, to grains. and I had plans to breed him (at the time). Why? because he is a nice dog, nice temperament, conformation, hunting instinct, and a overall nice example of his breed.
> 
> Allergies aren't a deal breaker for me, Demodex mange however would be.


I ended up with a strong opinion about allergies from running a boarding kennel. Skin and ear problems were the #1 reason we had to medicate dogs in the kennel, and a lot of owners had had on and off problems requiring a lot of vet care for years. Plus their dogs were uncomfortable a lot of the time, and some of the drugs used, like prednisone, aren't specially nice. IMO I'd rather deal with moderate HD than a serious allergy. Something easy to handle like a grain allergy isn't so bad.


----------



## Miss Bugs (Jul 4, 2011)

> Really restrictive covenants on food are rediculous. The rescue I got Kabota from specified a wide variety of foods, good kibbles, some of them quite inexpensive. They were really just saying "please don't feed Beneful or other crap like that." Again, it allows for circumstances. But I've seen breeder contracts that state "you will use this one brand, for life, always" and I think why? What if I can't get that one food? What if the dog doesn't like it or is allergic to something in it? How would you even enforce that, anyway?


the feeding and vaccine contracts.... they are not a no-go for me automatically, they are only a no-go if its something I am not OK with. ie as i said about the breeder I am talking too, she requires raw feeding and limited vaccines..I have no problem with that because that's what I do regardless. if the same contract was "must feed pro-plan" that is an automatic no-go lol


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

sandgrubber said:


> I'm nodding yes and no to various points.
> One thing that I'm surprised hasn't come up: that's knowing (or not knowing) the pedigree. I would rather buy a dog from known healthy lines (longevity, freedom from any serious diseases until a ripe old age, no alergies, etc. -- preferably with records going back a few generations and including siblings and half siblings) than a dog who has had every test recommended for its breed. I cannot abide people who knowingly breed from a dog with a history of allergies and skin problems, especially if they do not disclose this to puppy buyers.


I didn't really think about that because for me it's kind of a given. When I talk to and trust a breeder, I hope that they are honest with me about their lines. That's all I can do though.. hope they are honest.


----------



## JTurner (May 19, 2013)

When i was very young (13 years old young) I contacted a bichon frise breeder...He refused to let me go to his house to look at the puppies, and when he came to my house, he not only brought bichon puppies, but he brought shihtzu's as well - which i didnt even know that he had shihtzu pups...Talk about shady!


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

sandgrubber said:


> I ended up with a strong opinion about allergies from running a boarding kennel. Skin and ear problems were the #1 reason we had to medicate dogs in the kennel, and a lot of owners had had on and off problems requiring a lot of vet care for years. Plus their dogs were uncomfortable a lot of the time, and some of the drugs used, like prednisone, aren't specially nice. IMO I'd rather deal with moderate HD than a serious allergy. Something easy to handle like a grain allergy isn't so bad.


I am lucky, the only drug Bear ever had to take was Dex.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Yeah when you talk to someone, even before you see them, you can kind of get an idea about how they are and whatever. I always trust my intuition, if I ever start to feel like "this isn't right" than I will pull up anchor and sail away. Of course I will make a graceful exit and tell the breeder I don't think they are for me.

I was recommended to a MAS breeder by another MAS breeder FB friend, she (the friend) is a good breeder who has awesome dogs who show and have working/sport titles. A few of her dogs are from this breeder she recommended, and they are nice dogs. I went to the website and she is a nice breeder who only breeds maybe once every 2 years of that, but something about her dogs I didn't like. Her dogs were very dishy faced and fine boned where I like a trim dog, but I also like them to have some substance. I cant put my finger on it, but I just didn't click with her.

That can happen, the breeder could be PERFECT in every way, do everything right, but something about them just doesn't click.


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

The breeder who states they will meet me in a parking lot. Um no thank you! Next!

As far as co-ownership goes. Dog (Rottweiler) came in with the upper canine dangling from the mouth. Told owner the tooth needed to be extracted. Owner states no can do until the co-owner is contacted. Co-owner does not call back, owner leaves clinic with the dog and the loose tooth. Such things should be part of the contract. I can understand why breeders want to be co-owners but I prefer not to co-own a dog that I pay for. As far as vaccines and food, I want to be exempt from that. I work in the vet industry and I would want to do what I know and not what some breeder believes in. As far as the spaying /neutering same thing. I will not own an intact animal. Sorry, I will wait for maturity but that is it. I see health problems with keeping the dogs intact and nope just not going to deal with hormones.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

luv mi pets said:


> The breeder who states they will meet me in a parking lot. Um no thank you! Next!
> 
> As far as co-ownership goes. Dog (Rottweiler) came in with the upper canine dangling from the mouth. Told owner the tooth needed to be extracted. Owner states no can do until the co-owner is contacted. Co-owner does not call back, owner leaves clinic with the dog and the loose tooth. Such things should be part of the contract. I can understand why breeders want to be co-owners but I prefer not to co-own a dog that I pay for. As far as vaccines and food, I want to be exempt from that. I work in the vet industry and I would want to do what I know and not what some breeder believes in. As far as the spaying /neutering same thing. I will not own an intact animal. Sorry, I will wait for maturity but that is it. I see health problems with keeping the dogs intact and nope just not going to deal with hormones.


I saw a lot of females come in with infected uteruses, I mean a LOT. I will also wait until a year, maybe two years to spay at the most. but even that's unlikely, I will probably let the MAS go through one heat before I spay her, because we live out int he middle of nowhere, where people dump dogs, let their dogs run loose and roam, and we also have coyotes. I also have two males that would go bat **** crazy (even though they are fixed) and it would just be one huge cluster that I just don't want to deal with.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Equinox said:


> If the dogs are good, the litter is what I'm looking for, and the breeder is honest and knowledgeable, there isn't much that I'm picky about. Some deal breakers that I can think of are
> 
> - poor living conditions and/or dogs in poor condition
> - puppies are not given the best socialization and start to life in their first 7 to 8+ weeks with the breeder
> ...


I think this pretty much covers it for me. If I were interested in breeds with merle, I'd add merle x merle to that. 
Health testing... depends. I wouldn't say I don't care about it but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker, either.


----------



## Foresthund (Jul 17, 2013)

Oh yes the early neutering,that was what I forgot. Eight months is probably the earliest I would tolerate and only would if they have really good dogs.


----------



## aiw (Jun 16, 2012)

Amaryllis said:


> There's also the issue that as a breeder, you're going to have let go of those pups. You're going to have to trust people to care for them the best they can, and that includes choosing food and vet care. If you can't deal with that, don't breed dogs.


I agree completely. One thing I won't tolerate is restrictive contracts or over-the-shoulder dog parenting. I would never consider a co-ownership either. Rescues can be just as guilty of overbearance as breeders. I've seen a few contracts with training, food and medical provisions. For an animal I own and live with I want to make those choices. If a breeder can't trust my judgment in those matters then they shouldn't send me off with a dog.

some contracts are downright illegal. Clauses that the breeder/rescue can enter your home and repossess they dog... No, you can't break and enter or commit theft. Not worth the paper it's written on.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

J


gwd said:


> A website can create a favorable impression or............
> 
> This was found on one website:
> 
> ...


Lol, yeah....no thanks.


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Mar 12, 2010)

Kayota said:


> No health testing is #1
> No taking dogs back
> Many different breeds
> Outdoor kennels that the puppies are raised it
> ...


^this is me too.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Some good answers here.....

I have a couple of points.

Raising a litter in the house.... While is might be ideal... How many of you have done it? It can be HARD, you will be in a constant fight to keep your entire house from stinking. Nothing wrong with a nice clean kennel as long as good quality time is spent with the puppies...

Co ownership.... Pluses and minuses here.... I bought Merlin with the breeder as a co owner.... I completed the contracted agreements on him when Merlin was 2 years 1 month old... Once the agreed upon were completed, the breeder was to sign off on him. The breeder has offered to do this numerous times... No point. The breeder bred him and he is the result of her program. The breeder deserves to share in his accomplishments. He is now 7 years four months old and the breeder remains the co owner. By my choice...

I also co own two bitches with this breeder...

If both parties are honest and can communicate, a co ownership deal is not a big issue.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Another thing to remember...... The more you do with your dogs, the better your track record, the more reputable people that will back you, etc.... The MORE you can dictate terms with breeders and the MORE flexible they will be with you. 

When we bought Keely the Lab we were looking for a pet/performance pup. We needed a Lab, pushy and bold enough to live with ACDs. 

We ended up getting her from a breeder with a reputation for restrictive contracts, very conservative deals, and a bit anal about approving puppy buyers. 

We bought her:
On a full restristration..... She offered, I would have been fine with a limited.
NO spay/neuter requirment. I decide when and if I spay. I am no longer willing to neuter. 
No co ownership, I would have been okay with the breeder co owning. Again she offered. I am actually co owner. My wife is owner. 


And we had no less than 5 or 6 GOOD lab breeders wanting to make similar deals with us. 

One breeder I LIKED in Michigan traveled in different circles told me no... A breeder in NY brushed me off but then checked me out via contacts in Florida and came back to me. 

I had zero history in the breed and making the deal I wanted was easier than I thought.. Word gets around...


I realize this is not easy for a young person. But you gotta pay some dues...


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

JB made a legitimate point about house raising puppies. Before I bred my own litter, I always thought a lot of breeders jus did not keep their puppies clean. This was accentuated to me by the fact that we got all our dogs from BYBs an they are never bathed before take home.

Several people on this forum were in my home when the puppies were all here. They know that I am absolutely anal about the cleanliness of my puppies.

The puppies still stank, and it is NOT just because there were nine. My house stank. It smelled dirty even though it wasn't. Puppies are disgusting stinky little beasts, no matter what you do. Honestly, it smells like ferrets do.

Puppies being raised outside doesn't bother me anymore as long as they are getting the interaction they need.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

I have no problems with the puppies being moved outside most of the time when they turn into stinky poop machines. As long as they know what its like to be inside the house some of the time.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

Maybe it's just me, but I think all puppies have a nasty puppy stink to them. My boss just got a golden puppy and she STINKS. But she smells like puppy stink, not rolled-in-poop or I-found-a-dead-thing. They just naturally smell bad for a while. Eren did too!


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

RabbleFox said:


> Maybe it's just me, but I think all puppies have a nasty puppy stink to them. My boss just got a golden puppy and she STINKS. But she smells like puppy stink, not rolled-in-poop or I-found-a-dead-thing. They just naturally smell bad for a while. Eren did too!


Yeah, why is that?


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

Honestly do not know, but yeah, there is definite puppy stink (beyond that awful puppy breath).


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

Indoor/Outdoor
Puppy smell changes greatly over the weeks. I LIKE the smell while they are still nursing. But the bitches I've had have all been super anal (literally and figuratively) about keeping the pups clean. By the time the pups are five weeks or so, swimming in their food, learning the noisy lessons about biting and getting bitten, and starting to walk, they BELONG outside. Smell isn't the main issue. It's the feeling that the house is going to explode with all that manic energy. When they get active, they need more space than you can give them in the spare room or the laundry. I like having them near the house, so they get lots of contact and can hear human sounds; I bring them in sometimes. But it's so much nicer to be able to open a gate and let them go frolic on the lawn while you hose down their sleeping and eating area.
I would tend to avoid a breeder who doesn't bring a bitch in for whelping and the first few weeks. Although I might make an exception for the breeders who end out sleeping in the kennel with the new litter.

Note: I've mostly had litters of 9 to 11 pups. I might think differently if my girls had small litters.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I hate the smell through the entire process lol


----------



## Adjecyca1 (Jul 25, 2010)

Uhmm.. i love puppy smell O_O


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Adjecyca1 said:


> Uhmm.. i love puppy smell O_O


Yeah, I like puppy breath too.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

@Adjecyca1 and @OwnedByACDs, Y'all are nuts! Puppies are gross  I was so glad when Eren stopped stinking and I could properly put my nose in his fur without recoiling. Ewwww.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Boo, the breeder I am getting my pup from docks dewclaws, not a deal breaker but still ... boo!


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Boo, the breeder I am getting my pup from docks dewclaws, not a deal breaker but still ... boo!


Not a deal breaker for me either, but I think if I got another Rott I would want to prepay for a pup and not have the tail done. 

I used to not like puppy breath, and now it is not so bad. I just can not get used to puppies that have the Parvo. That is downright stench. I will take puppy breath over that smell any day.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Boo, the breeder I am getting my pup from docks dewclaws, not a deal breaker but still ... boo!


That's not a deal breaker for me either. I'd rather they keep them but if it's done, it's done. Eh. Easier on me for nail grinding day. Neither of my boys have their dews. *shrug*

Note: I've seen a lot of nasty dew claw nails. Do a lot of casual pet dog owners forget about them??? In furry dogs, the hair can sometimes conceal the dew claw and then it gets long long long and curls almost into the paw pad.


----------



## Kyndall54 (Apr 26, 2013)

I'm a co-owner with Message right now, she's having one last litter before all of her paperwork gets transferred over to me. I went to pick her up initially, and my breeder paid for her to be picked up when she was in heat. And my breeder will bring her back to me when she is through. It sucks having my dog gone, but I knew it would be a possibility when I first arranged for her. It's also really nice, my breeder is paying for her to get spayed before she comes back to me. (Mostly I think she wants to insure she's not bred again by anyone, but it also saves me like $150 so I'm not complaining.)

My cousin is looking for a lb or a golden breeder right now, and she said she found one she likes but the contract REQUIRES her to keep in contact. She's a good dog owner, and fairly wealthy, so health/maintenance would never be an issue. She just hates feeling like she's indebted to a breeder because she got a dog from them. 

Deal breakers for me- 
No health tests. 
Multiple breeds. 
Breeding to make money, breeding more than one breed. 
Having to pay more for color. 
Not liking the way a breeder treats their dogs.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

I sincerely do not see what the big deal is with breeding two breeds instead of
just one. I'd actually like to get into Cardis some day, and know several GSD breeders that breed them in addition to the GSDs.

It CAN be done and be done responsibly.


----------



## Avie (Jul 10, 2011)

By removing dew claws, do you mean front dew claws aka a dog's thumbs? 

Anyway, deal breakers for me. I had to think about this a little because I've never bought a puppy from a breeder. 

- breeders who dock or crop (ears, tail or dew claws) Not that I'm likely to come across those here in the Netherlands. And if I did, I would not only not buy a dog from them, I would report them. 

- breeders who aren't knowledgeable about their breed and their dogs. Most especially in the health department. Or who tell outright lies ("there are no health concerns in my breed, that's why I think health testing is unimportant") 

- breeders who won't let me meet their dogs, most especially the parent(s) of the litter I'm interested in. I will absolutely want to see the bitch, I get that I won't be able to meet the sire. 

- breeders who can't explain to me why they made this particular combination for a litter. I want to know this is a thoughtfully bred litter. 

- breeders who don't do everything they can to produce a healthy litter. 

- breeders with constrictive contracts (feed this, speuter then, do this, do that). Once I buy a puppy, the dog is mine to take care of how I see fit, and they better trust me to do it well. Like someone else said here in this topic; if they can't trust me with that, they shouldn't sell me the dog. 

- I do not feel obliged to spay or neuter the dog. No contract can make me; once the dog is mine, it is mine to take care of as I please. See previous paragraph. And if I decide that for whatever reason, neutering or spaying should be considered at one point during the dog's life, that is my decision to make, and mine alone. 

- breeders who don't do their best to socialize their puppies and get them accustomed to normal day to day life inside the house. 

I might have forgotten a couple things, I don't know. 

I specifically left out 'needs to show/work/prove their dogs'. I feel that's a part being able to explain WHY this litter and particular combination, and knowledge about their breed and dogs. To tick those two boxes off on my list, a breeder is probably not going to get away with not doing anything with their dogs. 

I considered putting down 'having a separate housing for the dogs' as a no-go... but that doesn't really say anything in and of itself. Unless the dogs are locked up in a separate housing all day long. 

I'd prefer if the puppies grew up inside the house, but after reading the previous comments here I won't make it a deal breaker. But I would definitely prefer it.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Yes, this breeder removes the dogs "thumbs" which I can deal with but would have preferred to have the pups thumbs intact  more and more herding breeders (the ones whose breeds standard doesn't say they must be kept). Yes sometimes the dews don't develop correctly and they are really loose and floppy, so some breeders just remove them when they dock tails.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Boo, the breeder I am getting my pup from docks dewclaws, not a deal breaker but still ... boo!


Didn't you already pick a puppy out? Are they willing to not do that puppy?


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

sassafras said:


> Didn't you already pick a puppy out? Are they willing to not do that puppy?


My guess is that it was already done around 2 days old when they did tails. That's when Welshie people have it done.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

elrohwen said:


> My guess is that it was already done around 2 days old when they did tails. That's when Welshie people have it done.


Oh yea, duh.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Yes, this breeder removes the dogs "thumbs" which I can deal with but would have preferred to have the pups thumbs intact  more and more herding breeders (the ones whose breeds standard doesn't say they must be kept). Yes sometimes the dews don't develop correctly and they are really loose and floppy, so some breeders just remove them when they dock tails.


My girl has no dews. She is fine and it doesn't seem to have effected anything. It makes nail trimming easier, for sure. I really don't like back dews, but I could care less if a dog has fronts or not.


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

Xeph said:


> I sincerely do not see what the big deal is with breeding two breeds instead of
> just one. I'd actually like to get into Cardis some day, and know several GSD breeders that breed them in addition to the GSDs.
> 
> It CAN be done and be done responsibly.


Eren's sire is owned and shown by a GSD lady. He's the low rider in the group, haha. Do Cardis and GSDs just go together?


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Puppies definitely are stinky! I was one of the ones who said raised inside and by that I mean at least partially inside- hanging out in a kennel during the day with nice weather, just like the service dog breeders do? Totally fine. I just would not want someone whose pups had never set foot in a house, never felt carpet, never heard a tv by 8 weeks old. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

There are a number of practices (e.g., using kennels, rehoming retired dogs, having multiple breeds) that I would put firmly in an "it depends" category. Whether or not they're deal breakers would depend on why the breeder opts to do X and the general sense of integrity I get from them.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

Rescued said:


> Puppies definitely are stinky! I was one of the ones who said raised inside and by that I mean at least partially inside- hanging out in a kennel during the day with nice weather, just like the service dog breeders do? Totally fine. I just would not want someone whose pups had never set foot in a house, never felt carpet, never heard a tv by 8 weeks old.


Yes, this.

And I'm still concerned by adult dogs who live in kennels. Totally fine for hunting and working dogs, but I want a pet who can live in my house. If your dogs live in kennels much of the day it's impossible to know if they settle easily in the house vs bouncing off the walls. Mostly, I want the breeders to know their dogs very well and if I get the impression that they do, despite using kennels sometimes, then that's fine, but I would probably just try to find someone who doesn't for my first round pick.


----------



## Xeph (May 7, 2007)

RabbleFox said:


> Eren's sire is owned and shown by a GSD lady. He's the low rider in the group, haha. Do Cardis and GSDs just go together?



It seems they do . I've also seen a surprising number of Rottie people that also have at least one Pemmie


----------



## Kayota (Aug 14, 2009)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Yes, this breeder removes the dogs "thumbs" which I can deal with but would have preferred to have the pups thumbs intact  more and more herding breeders (the ones whose breeds standard doesn't say they must be kept). Yes sometimes the dews don't develop correctly and they are really loose and floppy, so some breeders just remove them when they dock tails.


that's usually the rear ones, i've never seen front ones like that but i have seen many dogs who use their dew claws regularly and have read about it predisposing dogs to tendon injuries and the like if they are removed so it's a real shame that breeders take them off so commonly.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

elrohwen said:


> My guess is that it was already done around 2 days old when they did tails. That's when Welshie people have it done.


Yes, you are correct.

@kayota. I hope it's the rear ones, but I doubt it, I mean I can work with no dews, but it is still a little disappointing.


----------



## Darkmoon (Mar 12, 2007)

Breeders that multiple other breeders have issues with. So many breeders start off as a great breeder then seem to lose their minds and their breeding quickly go from bettering the breed to money making. I've watched a few breeders in the APBT world do this and I'm glad I've spoken to other breeders in the breed who warned me to not do it. Sure enough later I've watched some horrible stuff go down. 

Also breeders that have too many titles on their dogs. Yeah there are too many titles for dogs. If I see a breeder bragging about having the youngest dog to make "super dog" (A UKC unofficial title for getting the basic titles on a dog in so many different events) or to hit a high achievement, I'm running away from that breeder. Also I don't like breeders who campaign their dogs just to be the top dog so they can say that. I don't care if my dog's parents never see a huge show like Westminster, normally those dogs aren't the best dogs. Human egos ruin the dogs.


----------



## Perrin (Feb 7, 2014)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Inspired by the "questions about breeder" thread, since it got so OT, I decided to start a topic based on what people were talking about there.
> 
> For me, its refusal to take the puppy / dog they bred back. I had one breeder say that its because of diseases like parvo, that's why they don't allow any dogs they bred back, and that is a huge red flag to me. Most of the other things are for me based on how I "feel", if the feeling isn't right, I run!
> 
> What about you guys?


OMG I just found the most screwed up thing!! So now that I do the Instagram i've "gotten to know" a few other Eskies. One of them told me where they got their dog, so I checked out the website. 

The people claim they can't prevent genetic diseases!!!!! GET THEM TESTED!!! are you kidding me? my dog's parents were both tested for hip problems and PRA! The worst part is that if your dog gets these issues, they refund 10% of the purchase price of the dog!!!!!!! How sick is that? 

SO they are willing to breed PRA dogs together, and if your dog gets PRA, you get 10% of your purchase price back and a blind dog.


----------



## Perrin (Feb 7, 2014)

Perrin said:


> OMG I just found the most screwed up thing!! So now that I do the Instagram i've "gotten to know" a few other Eskies. One of them told me where they got their dog, so I checked out the website.
> 
> The people claim they can't prevent genetic diseases!!!!! GET THEM TESTED!!! are you kidding me? my dog's parents were both tested for hip problems and PRA! The worst part is that if your dog gets these issues, they refund 10% of the purchase price of the dog!!!!!!! How sick is that?
> 
> SO they are willing to breed PRA dogs together, and if your dog gets PRA, you get 10% of your purchase price back and a blind dog.


Oh, and they said that they would consider doing genetic testing on the parents if the PUPPY BUYER was willing to pay for it!!!!!!


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

Perrin said:


> OMG I just found the most screwed up thing!! So now that I do the Instagram i've "gotten to know" a few other Eskies. One of them told me where they got their dog, so I checked out the website.
> 
> The people claim they can't prevent genetic diseases!!!!! GET THEM TESTED!!! are you kidding me? my dog's parents were both tested for hip problems and PRA! The worst part is that if your dog gets these issues, they refund 10% of the purchase price of the dog!!!!!!! How sick is that?
> 
> SO they are willing to breed PRA dogs together, and if your dog gets PRA, you get 10% of your purchase price back and a blind dog.


Do you happen to know the name of the breeder? So that I can stay far, far away from any other breeders that associate with them?


----------



## Perrin (Feb 7, 2014)

gingerkid said:


> Do you happen to know the name of the breeder? So that I can stay far, far away from any other breeders that associate with them?


I am such a sap, I actually feel guilty saying the name because I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings or slander anyone. I can't believe myself. 

Here is the website with the health guarantee. Hopefully you read it and we find out that I misunderstood, but I doubt that is the case.

I just reread it and they only give the 10% discount if the dog gets these genetic diseases before its 6 months old!! Are you kidding me??? you will give me 20 dollars if my puppy is the first dog in the world to go blind with PRA before 6 months old!

I want to send this breeder a politely worded email in hopes that they will change their ways, but I suppose I am naive. I am so upset about this.

Here is the link http://www.californiatoyamericaneskimo.com/Health-Guarantee.html


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Perrin said:


> I am such a sap, I actually feel guilty saying the name because I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings or slander anyone. I can't believe myself.
> 
> Here is the website with the health guarantee. Hopefully you read it and we find out that I misunderstood, but I doubt that is the case.
> 
> ...


Yeah that does sound shady :/ no good! I feel sorry for those poor people who bought puppies from these people


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

Perrin said:


> I am such a sap, I actually feel guilty saying the name because I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings or slander anyone. I can't believe myself.
> 
> Here is the website with the health guarantee. Hopefully you read it and we find out that I misunderstood, but I doubt that is the case.
> 
> ...


Not only is their Health Guarantee a load of hooey, but they can't seem to use the proper spelling of "their/they're/there".


----------



## RabbleFox (Jan 23, 2013)

Beep boop double post because I have a question.

Would a required deposit be a turn off for you guys? 
I ask because for some breeders, a deposit is required to sit on their wait list. The deposit is meant to deter non-serious buyers from taking up space on the wait list. The way I would have my deposit set up is that it will be returned if a puppy doesn't fit the buyer. How do you y'all feel about wait lists and deposits?


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

RabbleFox said:


> Beep boop double post because I have a question.
> 
> Would a required deposit be a turn off for you guys?
> I ask because for some breeders, a deposit is required to sit on their wait list. The deposit is meant to deter non-serious buyers from taking up space on the wait list. The way I would have my deposit set up is that it will be returned if a puppy doesn't fit the buyer. How do you y'all feel about wait lists and deposits?


That wouldn't bother me, especially if it would be returned. I think offering to return it if a puppy didn't fit their needs or apply it to a future litter (if one is being bred) is fair.

I'm more iffy about non-refundable deposits.


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

What Ireth0 said.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

RabbleFox said:


> Not only is their Health Guarantee a load of hooey, but they can't seem to use the proper spelling of "their/they're/there".


Oh, yeah! call me the grammar police, but I just think that people should at least TRY to use proper language (excluding those with learning disabilities and of course, typos, esp on phone keyboards LOL) and look professional. It really irks me when they misspell the breed they are supposed to be knowledgeable about.

I sent a polite email to a breeder who a friend of mine's daughter got a dog from (who is a very nice dog ... but still) why they didn't take puppies back, they claimed it was because they didn't want their facility contaminated with diseases like parvo. I replied, saying that the age most puppies are returned is usually passed the point of their last vaccines. They could also, if they haven't had their shots, could give the shots themselves (by that I mean by their vet) and also have them vetted to make sure they are healthy before they set foot onto the facility.


----------



## Perrin (Feb 7, 2014)

RabbleFox said:


> Not only is their Health Guarantee a load of hooey, but they can't seem to use the proper spelling of "their/they're/there".


I can't believe I was so upset that I didn't even notice that. I am a professional editor, and those things usually make me cringe! 

I had a horrible thought last night. Why would a breeder who tries to sell themselves as being "champion this champion that registered this and that" not want to boast about health testing? I hope it isn't because they DID, in fact, run genetic screens on their dogs and they came up with bad results. 

I was also suspicious of this because they said that even if the puppy buyer pays for the genetic testing, they might not be willing to do it. How nuts is that?


----------



## cookieface (Jul 6, 2011)

RabbleFox said:


> Not only is their Health Guarantee a load of hooey, but they can't seem to use the proper spelling of "their/they're/there".


I tend to immediately discount breeders with blatant spelling and grammatical errors on their sites (especially if it relates to their breed and/or breed standard). One or two typos, I can understand; repeated errors, I can't. Makes me wonder how much attention to detail they have about their breeding program.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

RabbleFox said:


> Beep boop double post because I have a question.
> 
> Would a required deposit be a turn off for you guys?
> I ask because for some breeders, a deposit is required to sit on their wait list. The deposit is meant to deter non-serious buyers from taking up space on the wait list. The way I would have my deposit set up is that it will be returned if a puppy doesn't fit the buyer. How do you y'all feel about wait lists and deposits?


Nope. I did it. It could have been transferred to another litter or returned if no "right" puppy was available. Although, a deposit wasn't required to get on the wait list in my case. A deposit just assured you a puppy over those who didn't make a deposit.


----------



## elrohwen (Nov 10, 2011)

I'm totally ok with refundable deposits, but I would feel much more comfortable if I already knew the breeder, or knew people who knew her. I get a little nervous sending money off to someone and hoping they send it back.

I like wait lists with a lot of transparency. With the first breeder I contact, I never knew where I was on the waiting list so I went into it thinking I would get a puppy, just to find out there weren't enough for everyone on the list. If she had just told me upfront I was #10 or something, I wouldn't have gotten my hopes up.

I would not be ok with a non-refundable deposit. If I don't get a puppy in that litter, I want to be free to look at other breeders and not worry about losing money.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

ForTheLoveOfDogs said:


> Nope. I did it. It could have been transferred to another litter or returned if no "right" puppy was available. Although, a deposit wasn't required to get on the wait list in my case. A deposit just assured you a puppy over those who didn't make a deposit.


So, if something happens (family emergency etc ...) where you cant take the puppy you put your deposit down on, it can be transferred to another litter? Forgive me for the seemingly stupid questions, only two of my dogs have been from breeders LOL, the others were rescued or from shelters.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

I also avoid people who offer pure bread dogs.


----------



## ForTheLoveOfDogs (Jun 3, 2007)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> So, if something happens (family emergency etc ...) where you cant take the puppy you put your deposit down on, it can be transferred to another litter? Forgive me for the seemingly stupid questions, only two of my dogs have been from breeders LOL, the others were rescued or from shelters.


I believe so, since you can do that if you don't even get the color you really want. I think it's only there for the people who just kinda ditch out for no reason or randomly get a puppy from somewhere else.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

ForTheLoveOfDogs said:


> I believe so, since you can do that if you don't even get the color you really want. I think it's only there for the people who just kinda ditch out for no reason or randomly get a puppy from somewhere else.


Oh no! I wouldn't ever do that, if I had to ditch, it would be for good reason. I mean, things happen, living situations change etc ...


----------



## GrinningDog (Mar 26, 2010)

*Dealbreakers for me*:

1. Not accepting a dog back for any reason
2. No health testing 
3. Not proving the breeding stock in some way (conformation, performance, therapy, etc.)
4. Breeding dogs too young, too often, or without health/temperament/structure in mind
5. Having too many litters on the ground 
6. Unwilling to discuss their lines, the good and the mistakes, what they want to produce. I want openness and to be able to ask questions.
7. Being uninterested in my suitability as an owner to one of their dogs. I would hope a breeder would care where their puppies were going!


----------

