# How do you handle "show quality for a pet" requests?



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

My breed is fairly rare - about 200 pups are born every year in the USA - so we swim in a shallow gene pool. We also have a genetic eye disorder, which we do thankfully have a marker for, but we have to conduct breedings around it so we don't produce more affected pups. 

When I have a litter, the top pick pups either stay with me or go to show homes. Those of you who breed show dogs know that in a litter of 4 or 5, you might have 1 or maybe 2 pups who are truly show quality - the rest are placed into pet homes.

I've always felt that, since our breed is rare and our gene pool shallow, it is my responsibility as a breeder to keep the outstanding dogs I may produce in the gene pool. This means placing them in show homes under contracts that allow them (provided health tests are passed and the pups grow out the way I expect them to) to contribute to the gene pool.

Now that I've gotten the background out of the way, I have a question for fellow show breeders. I get a fair number of puppy applications filled out where the potential family states "We want a show-quality pup but we're going to fix it and keep it as a pet" or something along those lines. I don't want to sound snotty to these people, but I'm NOT going to take the pick of my litter and sell him to a pet home :shrug:. I breed to better the breed, and that means that the best pups I produce need to be used in a breeding program...and I'm not letting them go into a pet home.

I'm always torn on how to respond. In the past I've tried to explain all that I wrote above to them, and on the whole people get really nasty when I attempt to educate them. I explain that show pups and pet pups have the same health-tested parents and are raised in the same loving environment, etc etc. But what I get a LOT of is "If I'm going to spend that much $$$ on a dog, I want the pick of the litter." I point out that I charge $200-$700 LESS than other show breeders in this breed do, but I do realize that our dogs are expensive. But they're a RARE breed and have a lot of reproductive issues, so they're just going to cost what they cost :shrug:. Whenever anyone throws a fit over price, I direct them to our rescue coordinator (when we have rescues, we adopt them out for $350). But people don't want a rescue dog...they want a perfect show-quality puppy 

I've gotten to the point where I don't even bother to try to educate people anymore. I just delete their application. I know that's not the best way to handle it, but I got tired of arguing with people over this.

So how do the rest of you deal with requests like this?


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

bluemoonluck said:


> I've always felt that, since our breed is rare and our gene pool shallow, it is my responsibility as a breeder to keep the outstanding dogs I may produce in the gene pool. This means placing them in show homes under contracts that allow them (provided health tests are passed and the pups grow out the way I expect them to) to contribute to the gene pool.


Is this what you tell the pet people who want the "pick" pup?

I don't know why anyone would get their panties in a wad over this.


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

When I used to breed, show and sell pups, I'd talk to potential buyers and not even admit I had puppies available until I found people that I liked and thought would be reasonable to deal with. Even if I advertised a litter, I'd ask them a lot of questions before I'd answer the one, "Do you have any puppies available now?". If they seemed difficult, I didn't have a puppy available for them. I figured if they were difficult with me when buying, they'd be difficult over the years to deal with and not as likely to be a good home for the puppy. 

If your breed is rare and your buyers find money to be an issue, up your prices to what other breeders are selling theirs at so that buyers value your puppies accordingly. They will sell better and to better homes, as they are worth more in the buyer's eyes. Just how I see it. When I charged top dollar for nice puppies, I always had more (and better) buyers than when I tried to sell them cheap to save my buyers money - crazy but true. Your lower prices bring you bargain hunters.


----------



## SFM in KY (May 11, 2002)

Wolf Flower said:


> I don't know why anyone would get their panties in a wad over this.


You'd be amazed at how many people do, however. Saw the same thing when I was breeding Rottweilers.

The one or two pups that I felt were the best show quality were simply not for sale, they either stayed with me or went to people I knew that were also breeders or show people or to someone on a joint ownership.

My response to pet/ show quality pet inquiries were "enclosed are photos of the pups available from this litter".


----------



## Caitedid (Jun 2, 2004)

I think that you should just be telling them they can have pick of the pups available. The ones you choose to keep are NOT available, so maybe see if you can just skirt the whole issue. Guess that might not help with folks wanting show quality dogs.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Granny, I charge $2,800 for pups. The going price in our breed is $3,000 to $3,500. Plus the cost of shipping/getting the pup to people (I can fly a pup anywhere in the US for $350, including the cost of the crate and health certificate).

So we're talking a LOT of $$$ here. I feel bad charging as much as I do to begin with, but it costs $4,500+ to get a ***** bred, c-sectioned, stud fee paid, pups raised, etc. And the average litter size is 3-4 pups. Plus they are notorious for missing when bred, and every failed breeding runs me around $2,000. So I HAVE to charge that for pups just to break even......


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Most people will not agree but this is my opinion.

Anyone who raises dogs with some genetic problem because of their breed should not be hard on who wants to buy them.

People who think they can better their breed by winning some shows and raising dogs that might win shows is not going to make any lasting progress with their breed.

Dog judges and people decide what type will win shows with not a single thought in mind of what would be best for the breed. They pick a dog that people will pay top dollar for.
If the people want a dog with 3 legs, a body like a barrel, and cross eyes, that type dog will win shows.

If people were serious about breeding there would not be show quality and pet quality dogs.


----------



## frogmammy (Dec 8, 2004)

Laughing now, thinking that when I first wanted a Belgian, I told the breeder I wanted a PET....if it was show quality, I'd show, but I REALLY wanted a pet. And yeah, turned out he was second male pick of the litter and is finished. 

I understand about the whole breeding thing, but wonder sometimes if we aren't just shooting ourselves in the foot with it. If we only breed the "perfect" dogs, aren't we limiting the gene pool so much that ALL the dogs will have the same "defects", and then lower the gene pool even further?

That being said, I did NOT breed my boy because of something healthwise I chose to not pass on. But I sometimes wonder....

Mon


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

pancho said:


> If people were serious about breeding there would not be show quality and pet quality dogs.


You know as well as anyone that even with the best pairing of sire and dam, not every puppy will turn out to be top quality in terms of the breed standard. There will always be "pet" quality dogs even in the best-bred litter.


----------



## finnsheep (May 23, 2012)

pancho said:


> Most people will not agree but this is my opinion.
> 
> Anyone who raises dogs with some genetic problem because of their breed should not be hard on who wants to buy them.
> 
> ...


I basically agree with this.

I personally don't feel that it is beneficial to a breed to keep specimens that can't even reproduce. To me, the ability to breed naturally, conceive, bear young for the duration of gestation, give birth normally unaided, and possess great maternal ability is absolutely essential. Otherwise, we are simply artficially keeping a variety going. I breed sheep and if they can't perform like that I don't care how pretty they are, they will not contribute to the genepool. I think AI and ET are wonderful tools when used properly. I will not withhold medical care to a ewe needing assistance with delivery, and I will not allow a weak lamb to starve. But I would think twice about using either for breeding or selling them for that purpose. 

However, I do see what you are saying, bluemoonluck. I won't sell my top-quality breeding sheep for pets or slaughter.


----------



## finnsheep (May 23, 2012)

Wolf Flower said:


> You know as well as anyone that even with the best pairing of sire and dam, not every puppy will turn out to be top quality in terms of the breed standard. There will always be "pet" quality dogs even in the best-bred litter.


This is very true. Always.


----------



## Immaculate Sublimity (Apr 30, 2003)

As a person who is in the same position as you having a rare breed with only about 4000 worldwide and about 400 in the US... We too have a -very- limited genepool in respect to other breeds like say a german shepherd with bad hips. 

In this case we take the lesser of two evils, for example - I'd much rather keep a pup in the genepool that may have an undershot jaw where a scissor bite is called for since I can breed (hopefully) that out when being very careful who I select as a mate for that dog - as opposed to knowingly breed something with severe temperament issues or heart issues - etc.

As to your question about who to sell what to - regardless of cost - if you're breeding within the standard and Dont have something like a disqualifying color or some-such issue... I would simply tell your 'pet-home-but-want-a-show-pup' buyers the truth. Your pups have no issues that would prohibit them from being shown - any registered pup CAN be shown, providing its not blatantly disqualifying. Its simply not a pup that you would expect to be stunning in the ring.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Wolf Flower said:


> You know as well as anyone that even with the best pairing of sire and dam, not every puppy will turn out to be top quality in terms of the breed standard. There will always be "pet" quality dogs even in the best-bred litter.


I agree there will be pet quality puppies born.
If the breeder was serious the pet quality pups would be culled.
Selling a pet quality dog and saying you are trying to improve the breed does not go together.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

pancho said:


> I agree there will be pet quality puppies born.
> If the breeder was serious the pet quality pups would be culled.
> Selling a pet quality dog and saying you are trying to improve the breed does not go together.


Pet quality pups are removed from the gene pool by being fixed. There's no need to kill a perfectly healthy pup just because it isn't worthy of the show ring. In fact many of my pet puppies go to homes where they are shown in performance events or used as therapy dogs after they are fixed.

I wouldn't sell a PET quality pup to someone and tell them it was a SHOW quality pup. THAT would be to the detriment of the breed.

Our genetic eye disorder has a DNA test available. It's a simple recessive gene, so its easy enough to breed around. We don't need to restrict our gene pool any more than it already is; in fact I go out of my way to import semen from quality dogs overseas so as not to breed myself into a corner.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

pancho said:


> I agree there will be pet quality puppies born.
> If the breeder was serious the pet quality pups would be culled.
> Selling a pet quality dog and saying you are trying to improve the breed does not go together.


Culling in the sense you are talking about makes sense for the situation you grew up in, and the dogs you had. But this is a different breed for a different purpose, and there is nothing wrong with selling the pet quality animals that come up in a well-bred litter. They will not contribute to the gene pool, so there is no damage done to the breed, but they certainly can be part of a family. Some people just like having a dog for the sake of companionship and have no interest in breeding, showing, working, etc. They should be able to have well-bred dogs, too.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

bluemoonluck said:


> Granny, I charge $2,800 for pups. The going price in our breed is $3,000 to $3,500. Plus the cost of shipping/getting the pup to people (I can fly a pup anywhere in the US for $350, including the cost of the crate and health certificate).
> 
> So we're talking a LOT of $$$ here. I feel bad charging as much as I do to begin with, but it costs $4,500+ to get a ***** bred, c-sectioned, stud fee paid, pups raised, etc. And the average litter size is 3-4 pups. Plus they are notorious for missing when bred, and every failed breeding runs me around $2,000. So I HAVE to charge that for pups just to break even......


This is exactly why I got out of showing dogs a few years ago. My breed is similar to yours as far as heritage.

I was sick of wasting thousands on genetic testing, dog shows, 1k c sections to retrieve 1 puppy, 1 and 2 puppy litters, wasted stud fees, and breedings that would not take at all. I am done playing a martyr, sacrificing way too much time and money to get a viable litter on the ground. I got sick of having to ask pet buyers to pay thousands of dollars for a pet, simply because generations of breeders have bred serious issues into the breed that make getting a puppy on the ground cost multi-thousands of dollars.

As far as placing a show quality dog in a pet home. To me it would depend on the actual quality of the dog and how many true show homes you have lined up. If someone wanted to pay for a show dog and neuter it, fine. If it was looking like a once in a lifetime type puppy that will grow out into a Specials quality dog, I would not sell it.

But, to be honest. 99.999999% of pet buyers literally have no idea what a show quality puppy looks like. Most of them will point out the ugliest runt in the litter with the best or most unusual markings, and proclaim that it is a stunning multi-BIS winner... I would simply not offer pick puppies for sale at all, till the obvious pets are sold; show prospects need time to grow out anyways.


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

I'd tell potential buyers that because of the limited gene pool with these dogs, you simply cannot justify placing breeding quality pups into homes where they will be neutered. If people can't understand this, are they really the kind of buyers you want for your pups to begin with?


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

For what it's worth. We bought the pick of the litter, with an agreement that the Breeder would get a pup when we showed/bred her. She did not grow into her "pick" status. The Breeder was furious with me for not being able to provide her with a pup. Breeders can be just as bad as some Buyers.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

7thswan said:


> For what it's worth. We bought the pick of the litter, with an agreement that the Breeder would get a pup when we showed/bred her. She did not grow into her "pick" status. The Breeder was furious with me for not being able to provide her with a pup. Breeders can be just as bad as some Buyers.


I'm sorry you had a run-in with a bad breeder 

If the breeder sees that the pup didn't grow out to be as good as she looked as a youngster, IDK why she'd want a puppy back anyway :shrug:. But some people are weird.

I think I'm going to just keep deleting any applications that are submitted with this kind of thing in it. I've tried the "gentle education" thing and it does nothing but make people :grit: that I won't give them what they want. 

I have enough issues with people telling me that they want a pup on the submissive side because they have a more dominant dog at home, for example, and when I offer them a pup that meets their criteria I often get "Oh but I like the markings on that other pup better...can I have her instead?" And when I explain that the pup they pointed out is the alpha of the litter, they say "That's fine! We'll make it work." 

The last thing I need is someone getting all :hair with me because they want the top pick show prospect of the litter and I want to sell them a pet that will best fit into their personal situation.

Thanks, all!


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Haven said:


> But, to be honest. 99.999999% of pet buyers literally have no idea what a show quality puppy looks like. Most of them will point out the ugliest runt in the litter with the best or most unusual markings, and proclaim that it is a stunning multi-BIS winner....


This is true... in fact, you could probably get away with telling each puppy buyer "This pup IS the pick of the litter!" :heh:


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

You can continue to just delete them and ignore such requests, that may well be the easiest path. Educating buyers who have such a mentality is a uphill battle, but they are paying good money and as such feel entitled to the best you have, explaining that they aren't is a conversation I personally would avoid. Hold your picks, make private treaties with other breeders, offer only the pets to your buyers, make it clear that this is what you have for sale, they take it or leave it. When I was a child my father would send us upstairs with his pick puppies when buyers came. I never show my picks or reserved puppies to other buyers, because you can bet that those are the ones their going to want. Its all in how you manage it, your seeing it as a problem that you must deal with, when you really don't have to. You just don't have a show quality dog available for them, however you do have these lovely pet puppies. Let them decide what they want to do from there.

I do want to comment on what some others have said, it often isn't the perfect show quality girl that produces the best, often its her homely little sister that truly shines in the whelping box. So many breeders are shooting themselves in the foot and creating a smaller gene pool by using only show quality dogs in their breeding programs, and in a rare breed in my opinion its a great disservice to do so. In my fathers time there was show quality, breeding quality and then pet quality, thats turned into just show and pet for many breeders, that is a huge mistake.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Honorine said:


> I do want to comment on what some others have said, it often isn't the perfect show quality girl that produces the best, often its her homely little sister that truly shines in the whelping box. So many breeders are shooting themselves in the foot and creating a smaller gene pool by using only show quality dogs in their breeding programs, and in a rare breed in my opinion its a great disservice to do so. In my fathers time there was show quality, breeding quality and then pet quality, thats turned into just show and pet for many breeders, that is a huge mistake.


A friend of mine imported semen from out of the country...she showed me pics of the dog and I immediately thought that he was NOT something I'd want to breed a ***** of mine to. He was very sound, but not a good representation of the breed :shrug:

Then she showed me pics of the dogs he was producing, and I was astonished. This male has excellent dogs behind him and he produces better than his littermate, who looks like a much nicer dog.

Genetics is a fickle lady, for sure.

ETA: I've kept pups before that I knew would never finish, for various reasons, but that had certain qualities I needed in my breeding program. I still show them on occasion, when we need "point donors" mostly, but I don't expect them to earn points.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

It isn't easy to pick a show quality dog when they are pups.
For a dog to be pet quality only that pup has to have problems.
If you have a lot of pet quality pups in each litter you need to look at the breeders.
There is no way a person can continually pick show quality and pet quality pups unless they are producing some pretty bad pups.
Some breeds have a size, weight, heighth standard. Some have other standards that do not show up on a puppy.
About the only way you can pick a show pup from a pet pup is because of some serious fault.


----------



## Jennifer L. (May 10, 2002)

bluemoonluck, I'm only answering this from the point of someone who has bought dogs, not a breeder. I think you are simply dealing with people who are uneducated about show and pet quality animals, and when they say they will neuter them they probably think they are telling you they will be responsible owners.

If you have the pet quality pups available when you get requests, why not just explain what it is about them that makes them pet quality and let them decide if they still want one? A friend of my father bought a Komondor from a breeder and it was a pet quality animal because of (I believe, it's been 20 years) the eye colour was wrong. He was thrilled with the dog and had a good story about why he'd gotten that dog as pet quality.

And finally, if people really, really want a show quality dog, then tell them, sure, and sell the pup for another $500 (or whatever) because it's going to be gone from the gene pool.

I think most people will be perfectly happy with a pet quality dog if you explain to them what makes them that way.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

pancho said:


> It isn't easy to pick a show quality dog when they are pups.
> For a dog to be pet quality only that pup has to have problems.
> If you have a lot of pet quality pups in each litter you need to look at the breeders.
> There is no way a person can continually pick show quality and pet quality pups unless they are producing some pretty bad pups.
> ...


This. I agree with Pancho.
If every breeder got a magical ability when 2 dogs mated that let them know by 8 weeks which pups were going to rock the show ring and which weren't, we wouldn't have shows. This is just one more reason why I hate (and you should too) the limited registration BS.

If you are breeding dogs of any quality whatsoever, then far more often then not you should be able to say "yes, this puppy can be shown" and people will happy. And sometimes, you can say "This puppy's ears will probably always be floppy like this." And as Wolf Flower and Honorine said, most people will go "Awwww!" and be happy.

And while we're on the show/breeding thing - breeders, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't be all up in arms "We care about more then just looks!" when 1) you're breeding dogs with health problems (and yes, I know that this can be a problem in a small gene pool - which is why you need to be looking for reasons TO breed z, y or z pup, instead of reasons not too, to broaden that gene pool up)
and 2) you only consider as breeders, pups who you think would win a show as evaluated when they're 8 weeks old. Doing that tells the world and it's cousin that you don't care squat for health or working ability. Taking that pup and running tons of tests on it and then trying to make it work (succeed or fail) does not even begin to fill the gap.

Sorry for the mini-rant Bluemoonluck, buyers get disgusted too.
Bluemoonluck - try just changing your lingo entirely. Ask people what they mean by the "best pup". I'll bet you have a standard puppy application. Ditch it. Write up a more open one.
Instead of a fill in the blank sort of male, female, color, quality thing, ask people what they want to do with the dog. Then, instead of a me vs them kind of thing, it sets it up to better help them find their "best" pup.


----------



## akane (Jul 19, 2011)

If I get a dog of a certain breed especially a a rare one I want it show quality even if I'm going to neuter it. I don't want something with off markings or disqualifying body shape in some way. I want a perfect representation of that breed or I would go find another breed or mutt that looked close. I have 2 show quality spayed akc registered dogs.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Honorine said:


> You can continue to just delete them and ignore such requests, that may well be the easiest path. Educating buyers who have such a mentality is a uphill battle, but they are paying good money and as such feel entitled to the best you have, explaining that they aren't is a conversation I personally would avoid. Hold your picks, make private treaties with other breeders, offer only the pets to your buyers, make it clear that this is what you have for sale, they take it or leave it. When I was a child my father would send us upstairs with his pick puppies when buyers came. I never show my picks or reserved puppies to other buyers, because you can bet that those are the ones their going to want. Its all in how you manage it, your seeing it as a problem that you must deal with, when you really don't have to. You just don't have a show quality dog available for them, however you do have these lovely pet puppies. Let them decide what they want to do from there.
> 
> I do want to comment on what some others have said, it often isn't the perfect show quality girl that produces the best, often its her homely little sister that truly shines in the whelping box. So many breeders are shooting themselves in the foot and creating a smaller gene pool by using only show quality dogs in their breeding programs, and in a rare breed in my opinion its a great disservice to do so. In my fathers time there was show quality, breeding quality and then pet quality, thats turned into just show and pet for many breeders, that is a huge mistake.


true true all the way around.

to Blue just say your picks are "pending" or on "hold" but that you next in line is this nice pup here and show them the best of the pet pups.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

As a breeder I bred to improve my chosen breed/breeds in health temperament and looks (this includes soundness of movement as well as shape) to get all this in one dog is not, repeat NOT easy.
Breeders are not walmart, we can't just stamp them out perfect. nor is breeding like playing with Mr potato head. it take work study and $.

Show Q means different things to different breeders. to some is means it has no DQs to others it means that the dog will be able to win CH or GCH. to others it means top ranking.


----------



## oregon woodsmok (Dec 19, 2010)

When I raised pups, my buyers got "picks" based upon first come, first served.

If I had a pup that had to be shown, I would keep it or it went to one of the very few people I trusted to show correctly. Those "picks" were already reserved.

I did not have any problems with it. When the buyers arrived, they got an evaluation of the pups, were told the price of each pup and why the price was different, and then they chose the one they wanted.

They were never shown my keeper(s). I found that nearly 100% of the time, if I let them handle and play with the pups for long enough, they would choose for themselves the pup that I would have chosen for them, based upon personality and what they intended to do with the pup.

What I found was that the pet people couldn't tell the difference and a good litter is pretty well consistent. Just because the sister would always win doesn't mean that the other pup wasn't lovely and didn't look like the breed should look.

That's what people want when they want a pup that costs a lot of money. They want a pup that looks like a good representative of the breed and that acts like the breed. They wouldn't know a Westminster prospect if it tripped them and then bit their nose.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

One of the joys of the internet and a digital camera / video recorder is that I can send pics/vids of my puppies from day one to fellow breeders (and to a few Standard BT breeders, too) and ask them which one they would keep. If you breed enough litters, you start to develop an eye for what a pup at 6-8 weeks will look like full grown.

The vet I used when I lived in Utah is a long-time Standard BT breeder, and he can look at still-wet newborn pups and tell you which ones are going to turn out show quality. He's done it to my litters - and he was 100% right. He's done it to my friend's MBT litters - and he was 100% right there too. He's done it via pictures with litters of friends of mine - surprise, surprise, he was 100% right there too.

Heads and bites in our breed change in odd ways up until the pups are 12 months of age or older. But by 6 weeks, between me and my fellow BT/MBT breeders, we CAN tell which pups should be grown out and which ones are clearly pets.

In a well-bred litter, the difference between a pet pup and a show pup is often minimal and only visible to the trained eye. A shoulder that's a bit too straight, tailset that's slightly off, not enough rear angulation, etc. How many pet homes would be able to tell the difference? Probably none! 

I don't mess around with health issues. For example, if a dog flunks his heart screening, he gets fixed and placed (with full disclosure) in a pet home. I only breed dogs with good hearts (all echo'd by a veterinary cardiologist!) and so far I've had great hearts in my lines because of this. If I purchase a show pup from another breeder I tell them up front "If this pup's heart doesn't OFA normal, I'm not going to breed him/her". I make sure in writing that they are okay with this ahead of time. No use having pretty dogs that drop dead of aortic stenosis at 4 years of age!

To me, show potential means the pup could go in the conformation ring and I wouldn't have a paper bag over my head and be trying to white out my name as the breeder in the catalog. If its a dog I'd be comfortable being associated with my kennel as a good representation of what I think is what our breed should look/act like, then its show quality IMO.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

tailwagging said:


> As a breeder I bred to improve my chosen breed/breeds in health temperament and looks (this includes soundness of movement as well as shape) to get all this in one dog is not, repeat NOT easy.
> Breeders are not walmart, we can't just stamp them out perfect. nor is breeding like playing with Mr potato head. it take work study and $.
> 
> Show Q means different things to different breeders. to some is means it has no DQs to others it means that the dog will be able to win CH or GCH. to others it means top ranking.


In many breeds if you breed to the standard you will not be improving the health, temperament, or looks.

Show quality is just the opinion of the breeder. Nothing more.
You can show a dog if it has the right paperwork. It is show quality. Winning is different.
Saying a dog is show quality is just another way to increase the cost of a dog. You can't tell the quality of the dog at 8 weeks old.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

pancho said:


> In many breeds if you breed to the standard you will not be improving the health, temperament, or looks.
> 
> Show quality is just the opinion of the breeder. Nothing more.
> You can show a dog if it has the right paperwork. It is show quality. Winning is different.
> Saying a dog is show quality is just another way to increase the cost of a dog. You can't tell the quality of the dog at 8 weeks old.



There are DQs in most breeds that will keep a dog from competing. other then that yes most any dog with the right paperwork and not altered can show. 
I can tell who might be a good show pup at 8 weeks (right profile,ear set, top line, tail set, space between eyes, it's stop, shoulders, neckline, out goingness, self stacking.....) and some you can clearly see what I consider pet Q.
And I do agree that some breeds have gone too far with the standards.


----------



## Maura (Jun 6, 2004)

Back to your original question, can't you tell the pet buyers that the pick of the litter is already sold? Even if no money has changed hands, if you have an understanding with someone about your top picks, your show quality pups are promised and not for sale to a pet home. At that point the pet buyer can keep looking for this rare breed, or accept a beautiful nonshow puppy.


----------



## akane (Jul 19, 2011)

Most breeders I've dealt with anything without a DQ was show quality but then they were placed on a range. 1 or 2 pups out of the litter would be kept or only go to certain people. The rest of the "show quality" were up for grabs if you wanted to pay the prices on a first come first serve basis.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

bluemoonluck said:


> The vet I used when I lived in Utah is a long-time Standard BT breeder, and he can look at still-wet newborn pups and tell you which ones are going to turn out show quality. He's done it to my litters - and he was 100% right. He's done it to my friend's MBT litters - and he was 100% right there too. He's done it via pictures with litters of friends of mine - surprise, surprise, he was 100% right there too.


I know it's thread drift - but can you really not see that is a self-fulfilling prophecy?
So these pups he picked were earmarked for the show homes and then got shown - naturally, these would be the dogs you see in the show ring.

And if ANYONE at all can do that 100% of the time - why bother showing??

Let's digress. Fantastic! Mr Wizard really can do it! Can he pick the still-wet pup with the most heart? How about the one with the temperament that the breed is best known for? The one who can rock the earth-dog trials? Can he tell you which will be the one-man dogs and which will never in their lives meet a stranger? Which ones might get cancer at 5? Which not-spectacular pup will beget awesome litters, like the stud you chose?

Forget it! Who needs all that?? Certainly not a breed with a limited gene pool. They might not have absolutely perfect shoulder angles!!

Or, let's put it another way. In a breed I love, the Australian Shepherd, 9 years ago a pup was born with white markings, while nowhere near a DQ, still more then was perfect. His ears are ever-so-slightly too close together - no one but a show judge would even notice. But most would notice the 1/4 inch over the height limit.
Clearly, not a breeding quality dog!!
Except that out of that entire litter, he is the only one to get multiple obedience titles and the only one with enough working instinct to be the herding dog on a ranch of 800 head of cattle, in spite of all the pups being placed in active or farm homes. Not to mention still being hale and gritty enough to still be doing it at 9 and even after losing part of his jaw to a nasty kick.

His breeder was certainly free to chuck all that and decide there was nothing there that could benefit the breed _more_ then barely noticeable ear set, slightly over height and unfashionable white might set it back. And she was free to sell that pup on limited registration so that no matter how good his get might be, the AKC would consider them mutts.

But I take offense when such breeders then claim that they want to benefit the breed and are breeding for the total dog.

And no, he's not my dog, or a relative's dog. But he is one more example of how the sort of "I am all knowing and all seeing and can tell everything about my breed" mindset is shooting itself in the foot, and driving people away from AKC registered dogs.

Sorry for the thread drift, I'll let you be now.
BTW, this is not meant to sound snotty or to pick a fight. Just to make people think. Breeds are functionally disappearing and this sort of thing is a good part of the reason why. Ask any vet, trainer or groomer and at least 95% of the dogs they see are members of less then 30 breeds. If your breed is only in the hands of the dog fancy and the gene pool is still narrowing because everyone is culling heavily for that perfect show prospect - then your breed is functionally extinct. Let's try not to head down that road.


----------



## jen74145 (Oct 31, 2006)

I can totally see why that would frustrate a breeder to no end. 

Honestly, BML, I would just tell them to look elsewhere, as you weren't selling show pups to pet homes. 

Work with a rare breed, you're going to encounter folks with a God complex on more than your average rate.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Otter said:


> I know it's thread drift - but can you really not see that is a self-fulfilling prophecy?
> So these pups he picked were earmarked for the show homes and then got shown - naturally, these would be the dogs you see in the show ring.
> 
> And if ANYONE at all can do that 100% of the time - why bother showing??
> ...


Maybe I am misunderstanding you. I have seen good Q miss marked get their CH IF they good moving and happy and otherwise the best in the ring.

and if his faults are small and his good out weighs them then he/she should be considered breeding Q.

as far as I know AKC (over 18 years) does not consider the Q of any papered dog. they just record the show points given. 

I argued this same point on the swine forum. in a rare breed the gene must be made wide before heavily removing individuals.
with show dogs it is very hard to get competitive Q and in a rare breed they are even of more value to the breed then in a common breed with a wide gene pool. so sorry pet folks if you are wanting a pet then get one that fits that role.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

I remember a friend of mine who used to show dogs with me.
This was UKC.
To become Ch. a dog needs 100 points and one best of sex or best of show.
His dog, the last I heard, had 160 points but never made Ch.
The dog was not really a good example of the breed but still had 160 points.
The reason was he entered him in shows where he was the only one in the class.
He had to win.
Any breed which is considered rare can be show quality and win their class if they are the only dog in their class. That doesn't make them a good dog, just the only dog.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

pancho said:


> I remember a friend of mine who used to show dogs with me.
> This was UKC.
> To become Ch. a dog needs 100 points and one best of sex or best of show.
> His dog, the last I heard, had 160 points but never made Ch.
> ...


In AKC it takes 15 point for CH. you must win your class and be the best in that sex (non ch) and you must win over a number of other dogs to even get 1 point. you must also have major wins (at lest 2 are needed). again dogs must be beaten to get points, that can be as little as 4 in the sex or in some divisions in goldens it takes 26 in the bitches to get a 3 point (smallest major win). 
and even if you go best in show 5 points is the most awarded.
http://pdf.akc.org/pdfs/events/conformation/2012PointSchedule_ALL.pdf


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

tailwagging said:


> Maybe I am misunderstanding you. I have seen good Q miss marked get their CH IF they good moving and happy and otherwise the best in the ring.
> 
> and if his faults are small and his good out weighs them then he/she should be considered breeding Q.
> 
> ...


Tailwagging, this is actually what I was trying to say.
I see a lot of show and kennel blindness, and it's hurting breeds, especially rare breeds. Perhaps a pup has awesome shoulders, but not great earset or something. Well, the breeder discounts the shoulders over the ears - her kennel is full of dogs with great shoulders.
Is _the breed_ full of dogs with great shoulders, that you can just chuck that away?? Too many people don't ask themselves this, too many breeders are looking for reasons to cull the dog.

I also have a huge beef with the AKC. No, they don't consider the quality of the registered dog, they just register. BUT in doing the limited registration in the way that they do it, they let breeders entirely control the gene pool - judging puppies with or without peer review. Shooting themselves in the foot - why bother to show? Why bother with peer review?

It is stupid, has bottle necked certain breeds and made a pyramid scheme out of registration.

The dog I described, was given limited registration at 7 weeks old. We'll never know what a judge would have thought of him.
The owners WANTED to show, when they saw just how good the dog was, even in spite of his small flaws (and his ears were much better as an adult then as a pup, not the most fashionable ear set of the time, but well within the breed standards). They DID show, and win, in agility, in obedience, in herding trials - none of that mattered, as because of a decision made for a 7 week old pup. If he were bred, none of his pups could be registered, much less shown.

Tailwagging, I know that you are a good breeder. Perhaps you can pick every pup who will appeal to every judge and every pup who will not. But, can you say with 100% accuracy that x pup will go on to be a perfect companion, and that y pup - who may be the boldest in her litter - doesn't have the brittle kind of confidence that easy shatters and go on to be shy? These sort of thing are important in a companion breed like yours, and I KNOW you've seen what happens when breeders ignore these things in favor of the perfect show specimen.

As I said, it was thread drift and not really relevant to the OP, I just wanted to clarify for Tailwagging.


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

A limited registration can be changed to a full registration with the breeder's permission. So, if a dog isn't fixed and turns out great, it CAN be shown and bred. The breeds are already in the breeder's hands by definition - if you aren't breeding, you don't affect the breed. Kennel blindness is a problem, usually though the breeders excuse problems because they think their dogs are better than they are, not worse.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

When I was showing dogs I always checked to see who was going to be judging. Then I picked one of my dogs that looked as much like the judges as possible or, if the judge didn't own dogs, one that looked like their favorite type.


----------



## Immaculate Sublimity (Apr 30, 2003)

pancho said:


> I remember a friend of mine who used to show dogs with me.
> This was UKC.
> To become Ch. a dog needs 100 points and one best of sex or best of show.
> His dog, the last I heard, had 160 points but never made Ch.
> ...


Actually... in UKC you need 100 points and 3 COMPETITION wins to get a CH title. Under 3 separate judges. If you never have competition, you'll never get the title. If you cant win against competition, again no title. Which is why those of us with rare breeds strive to make it to shows with competition. Even better when you have other champions to show against so you can compete for Grand Ch.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Immaculate Sublimity said:


> Actually... in UKC you need 100 points and 3 COMPETITION wins to get a CH title. Under 3 separate judges. If you never have competition, you'll never get the title. If you cant win against competition, again no title. Which is why those of us with rare breeds strive to make it to shows with competition. Even better when you have other champions to show against so you can compete for Grand Ch.


I quit showing several years ago. They may have changed the rules since then or I may be mistaken. I always had quite a few in my classes. 
Some of the most crowded classes were the Ch. classes.

We used to have a class for 3 generations, either a stud dog and his pup and the pups pup or the same with females. It wasn't a pointed class, just for fun. It is sort of fun to see 3 completely different type dogs together and 3 carbon copies competing next to them.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Otter said:


> Tailwagging, I know that you are a good breeder. Perhaps you can pick every pup who will appeal to every judge and every pup who will not. But, can you say with 100% accuracy that x pup will go on to be a perfect companion, and that y pup - who may be the boldest in her litter - doesn't have the brittle kind of confidence that easy shatters and go on to be shy? These sort of thing are important in a companion breed like yours, and I KNOW you've seen what happens when breeders ignore these things in favor of the perfect show specimen.
> 
> As I said, it was thread drift and not really relevant to the OP, I just wanted to clarify for Tailwagging.


 Thank you
I wouldn't call it a thread drift. I think it helps posters to understand what a "true breeder" is and what it takes. most think showing as JUST a pretty dog contest.
I can tell at 8 weeks who MAY turn out, not that WILL for sure turn out. some are clearly pet or only breeder Q from the get go.
what I like isn't what all judges like, just some of them.:happy2:


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

GrannyCarol said:


> A limited registration can be changed to a full registration with the breeder's permission. So, if a dog isn't fixed and turns out great, it CAN be shown and bred. The breeds are already in the breeder's hands by definition - if you aren't breeding, you don't affect the breed. Kennel blindness is a problem, usually though the breeders excuse problems because they think their dogs are better than they are, not worse.


Well sure.
Assuming the breeder; Can be bothered, doesn't feel it's proving her wrong, is still involved with dogs, likes you, doesn't want $500 to file the paperwork, doesn't have a blanket policy of "no one breeds from my kennel", isn't paranoid about whether or not you'll really show, doesn't demand half ownership of the dog in return ... shall I go on?

Kennel blindness to faults is pretty universal in popular breeds. But as soon as you start looking at something more unusual, the extreme goes _steeply_ in the other direction. _OMG, this Border Terrier pup has a white toenail at birth!!!! Limited registration!_

Limited registration as it is done doesn't just unnecessarily cull dogs, it severely culls potential show and breeder homes, while doing NOTHING to stop puppy mills and irresponsible breeders. In fact, it gave them a second source of income. Cough up a few hundred more $$$ and hey look, that pup is fully registered!


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

If a breeder wants to protect their breeding rights, they can always elect to co-own the pup. That way it can still be shown but a litter can't be registered unless both owners sign off on it.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

co-owning is a very risky thing- unless you know the person very very well.


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

yes. that can be very true. I have heard of nightmare co-ownership arrangements. Also heard of some really good and fair ones. A dog with a limited registration cannot be shown (AKC). Co-owning allows the new owner to show, but gives the breeder some control over when and if the dog is bred. You just need a good written agreement.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Every pup that leaves here on Full AKC registration is co-owned by me. Its in my contract that I'll sign off on the co-ownership when one of two things happens:

1) The dog earns his/her AKC Championship
2) The owner chooses to spay/neuter the dog

That way if the dog doesn't grow out the way we thought it would, the owner can fix it and I'll sign off on co-ownership. 

I DO send all pets out of here on Limited Registration, because its how I back up my spay/neuter agreement. I make a big deal out of telling pet owners that these are "non-breeding" papers, and put it in my contract that they have to spay/neuter by 8 months. If they choose to be underhanded and not spay the dog, then register the dog with a BYB registry and breed them anyway, at least I feel that I've done all I can do :shrug:

Interestingly enough, I've had a number of people over the years ask for "FULL" registration, even thou they want the dog for a pet and they're willing to sign my pet contract with the spay/neuter agreement. I explain that the only things they cannot do with limited registration are show the dog in conformation events and AKC register puppies born from that dog, and they always say something like "I know, and I realize it's silly, I'd just rather have the full AKC registration....I swear I'm going to spay/neuter the dog, blahblah". Amazingly, when I tell them that if it means that much to them I'll do it, BUT I'm going to co-own the dog until they have it fixed - which means they'd need my signature to sign off on any breedings done - those people suddenly are no longer interested in a pup from me 

To people with the right references, I WILL sell a "pet" pup with full or limited registration and NO spay/neuter agreement, on co-ownership with me. I know some performance people who hate to spay/neuter, and if I can get enough references or if I know them, I'm okay with that. Then if after a while we both agreed that the pup had grown into something worthy of breeding, I'd agree to sign off on the puppy registration papers or to petition the AKC to upgrade the registration from limited to full.

Rare dogs are candy for puppy mills...they'll do ANYTHING to get their hands on an AKC registered Mini Bull, because they sell for lots of $$$$$. We have to be super careful who we sell to. And there is one breeder who imported all her stock from overseas, after nobody here would sell to her, and she advertizes all these "show wins" on her website and makes it sound like her dogs are hot stuff....but fails to mention that these "wins" were at AKC-sanctioned MATCHES and don't mean squat . And the dogs she imported all have health issues and behavioral problems, but she still finds buyers because she doesn't ask any questions.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Bluemoonluck, please don't misunderstand;

I am ALL FOR responsible breeding and firmly against puppy mills and the 'pump 'em out, I can sell 'em" mentality.

I would be HUGELY FOR Limited Registration - if it was done in such a way as it actually worked.

How simple is this - the AKC is a show dog registry. Fine. Only register puppies from dogs that SHOW. If at least one parent of the litter doesn't have letters around it's name, Ch, OTC, _something_ - then no pups from that litter can be registered. You only get the full papers once your dog is titled.

Simple, efficient. 
How many folks with rabbit cages full of Bichons (because darlin, I live in the land of the puppy mill) will even be able to keep their poor little brood b*tches bred to a qualified stud?
And if you want to put the final nail in the coffin, AND make AKC papers actually mean something, after 10 years, make it both parents, allow the b*tch to get away with a CGC.

Sadly, it will never happen because too many people are making too much money trading on papers. 

Just a personal peeve of mine. Bluemoonluck, I wanted to explain so you'd know we're on the same side here, really.  And sorry for taking your thread off on such a tangent.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

AKC would go under. they need money too to pay their workers.
AKC isn't prefect but it is the best we've got.
only reg titled parentage pups would reduce the breeding gene pool even more.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

tailwagging said:


> only reg titled parentage pups would reduce the breeding gene pool even more.


Tailwagging, I can not possibly believe that. Not when we are talking about one parent per litter. And re-read. Maybe that dog doesn't have a CH, but a performance title will work, an agility title, something.
Not when you can name the breed and in 5 minutes I can have as many websites of breeders who simply NEVER sell a pup with full registration, and in 5 more minutes, at least 3 blogs where breeders explain that they don't want to be bothered with it.
How can you think that THAT doesn't drastically cut the gene pool of AKC dogs?

Yes, the AKC would lose some revenue from "commercial" breeders. But revenue from shows would be up. Have you not noticed the shows shrinking? The increasing lack of Jr's? it's been what, about 10 years since they started the program? Find stats on # of dogs registered per breed that is not in the top 30 (it's going down for most of them), and compare registration numbers to # of CH's won per breed. 
It's going down.
And entire breeds are going down with it.

No one who has ever shown a dog can tell me that it isn't full of exclusive little groups. It can be very hard for people to get a start. As it was, tons of folks got sour on the experience. Now it is next to impossible. The ultimate Good Ol' Boy experience. 
And all in the name of "protecting" the dogs.
And it doesn't even do that! Except for in the PETA way of protecting them right out of existence. 

The AKC could balance out the loss of revenue from commercial breeders with increased numbers of members and increased show venues - even if an individual show doesn't make money, it still brings people to the sport. And I know that I would pay a nominal filing fee to have my dog's papers exchanged once it got it's title. Heck, with what it costs to show, I'd be grinning like a fool as I handed over 10 bucks to cover printing and filing that paper.

What's more, by loosing that quick buck, more and more people would be drawn to the AKC, because it WOULD begin to actually mean something. As it is, more and more people are just leaving.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I started with two untitled dogs. I bred many years with out showing. It was the show snobbyness that ----ed me off ( and one friendly show person to encourage me) and I took one of MY own bred pups and kick butt in the show ring. 3 majors in one long weekend. both of his parents were untitled.
I, even now will happily breed two untitled dogs to each other IF it is the right pairing.
I couldn't care less about how my letters the offspring will have in the background, it is about the breed, not the letters.
Am I willing to help out a new breeder? yes. even if they don't show? yes but they must have the breeds well fair at heart.

people are leaving AKC due to $$ for litter papers, individual reg fees, mandatory permanent IDs and fear of inspection


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

tailwagging said:


> AKC would go under. they need money too to pay their workers.
> *AKC isn't prefect but it is the best we've got*.
> only reg titled parentage pups would reduce the breeding gene pool even more.


bullcrap, not even close! the BEST registries we have are the breed specific registries focused on producing healthy WORKING dogs and WANT NOTHING TO DO W/THE SHOW REGISTRIES. 
for example the American Leopard Cur Breeders Association (ALCBA), to be fully registered not only does the dog have to GENERALLY meet the conformation standard, but it also has to do a solo hunt start to finish in front of 3 different judges on 3 seperate occasions. grey fox, ****, cat or bear doesn't matter, it's entirely up to the dog's owner. but the dog MUST start the track, run the track & show fur at the end of the race 3 different times in front of a different judge each time. 
if it fails to earn registration, well the owner can always take the dog over to the UKC and register it as a leopard tree hound and sell puppies based on those papers.
in spite of this the UKC is still the best allbreed or big registry for coonhounds & curs. meanwhile the standard foxhound stud book is the best registry for foxhounds. the NAVHDA & FDSB are the best registries for gundogs. their isn't a good registry for sighthounds mostly because the best all around sighthounds aren't registered at all in the USA. i could go on but i think the point is made.
IN GENERAL, the AKC, UKC & other all breed registries in the USA stink at maintaining the OVERALL dog. in part because they focus on ONE aspect only LOOKS. yes they have cool activities but those are a sideline to the beauty contests. in many fields of dog WORK the very mention of AKC registration is a reason to run, not walk, run the other way. the focus on looks AND political & faddish nature of showing allows even judges to IGNORE the standard in favor of personal preferences. for example the german sheperd standard requires a LEVEL BACK but you can't find a single CH in the last couple decades that actually has a level back. so while no registry is truly perfect, the big registries are messed up like a football bat.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Bluemoonluck
you just do what you think is best.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I don't think chihuahuas would make a good ****, wild cat, or bear dog.

most dog homes are not a good fit for a working dog. 
and shows not just a beauty contest no matter how many times someone says it, doesn't make it true


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

I would never buy a dog that I didn't get the full registration papers.
I would either sell a dog with no papers or full registration papers.
Never have dealt with people who want limited registration or co-own.

Most breeders are not really going to make that much difference in their chosen breed. Most would like to think they will make a difference but it is very unlikely.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Topline-- The *withers are higher* than and *sloping* into the level back. The back is straight, very strongly developed without sag or roach, and *relatively short*.
Loin Viewed from the top, broad and strong. *Undue length* between the last rib and the thigh, when viewed from the side, is *undesirable*. 

*Croup long* and gradually *sloping*.

So you have high withers that slop to a short back that doesn't roach or sag to a long croup that slops.

Texas Kennel Club - March 2004/7 HERDING - CH Kaleef's Genuine Risk - German Shepherd Dog

Dog Show Results

though I do agree that they have go to far and the standards needs to be revisited


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

pancho said:


> I would never buy a dog that I didn't get the full registration papers.
> I would either sell a dog with no papers or full registration papers.
> Never have dealt with people who want limited registration or co-own.
> 
> Most breeders are not really going to make that much difference in their chosen breed. Most would like to think they will make a difference but it is very unlikely.


True Pet people only want the papers for brag rights. but it does help keep AKC afloat and makes re-homing (if need be) easier.

it only takes one dog to improve a line and only one line to strengthen many lines and many strong lines to improve the breed.

and you gatta start somewhere. :happy2:


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

pancho said:


> Most breeders are not really going to make that much difference in their chosen breed. Most would like to think they will make a difference but it is very unlikely.


This is not the case in rare breeds like mine. For better or for worse, each litter bred DOES make a difference in what we have available.

When only 200 pups hit the ground each year, it is very easy for each one that is kept intact and bred to have a huge impact on the breed as a whole. 

One of my friends used one stud dog on three of their bitches, 17 pups total resulted. Only 2 of them had good bites. So 15 dogs with poor bites, which is nearly 8% of the pups born last year. 

We have to breed around PLL, which means that if a ***** is a carrier (and 60% of our population are carriers, as we haven't had the test for long) we can only breed her to a clear male. Finding a clear male who not only suits your ***** but who has passed all his health tests and who has an owner willing to let him be used at stud is HARD, and when you do find him chances are good that you're not the only breeder with a carrier ***** knocking on his door. 

So its easy for what I do to impact the breed as a whole, even if I only breed 2 or 3 litters a year. Removing a dog from the gene pool isn't something I do lightly. OTOH I don't want to hand a dog to someone who has "get rich quick" BYB designs on them, either. Because by the same token, some yahoo moron who fancies themselves a breeder who wants to buy an intact pet quality dog and breed it to the throw-away one they got from overseas or from one of the established puppy millers here in the USA can also completely fubar my breed, even if they only breed a few litters a year.

If I were breeding Labs, what I did would be a drop in the ocean. Breeding these guys is a whole nuther ball of wax, for better or for worse.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

tailwagging said:


> I started with two untitled dogs. I bred many years with out showing. It was the show snobbyness that ----ed me off ( and one friendly show person to encourage me) and I took one of MY own bred pups and kick butt in the show ring. 3 majors in one long weekend. both of his parents were untitled.


And if you were starting out today, none of that would have been an option. Your first dog would have been limited registration, no one would have let you use their stud on a LR dog, your homebred pups wouldn't have had ANY papers and you would never have entered a show ring.




tailwagging said:


> people are leaving AKC due to $$ for litter papers, individual reg fees, mandatory permanent IDs and fear of inspection


And for just the scenario above, people also aren't JOINING the AKC. Snobbery aside, it's now next to impossible to get a foot in the door. The AKC has written up it's own death. Give it another decade or so and people will be referring to it as "that puppy mill registry" just like the CKC and others of that type.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

tailwagging said:


> I don't think chihuahuas would make a good ****, wild cat, or bear dog.


 and you'd be right. but how many CH sibes have the drive & recuperability to pull 200# 10+ miles a day for a week straight? how many sammies have what it takes to move 400 reindeer 300 miles? how many otterhounds have even been off leash in the woods? why aren't the bullmastiff & the neo the most popular personal protection breeds? why aren't the boxer or the bulldog the most common catchdogs for hog hunters? why isn't the afghan the jack rabbit & coyote dog of choice in utah? how many sealys can even fit down a badger hole let alone pull it out?
i am always hearing showies talking about "preserving the breed." plain & simple, if you're not proving & preserving the ability & DESIRE to do the job, then you're NOT preserving the breed. all you're preserving is the LOOK of the breed. and as the boxer & the afghan show sometimes even the look isn't preserved but changed to fit some people's idea of what the look should be.




tailwagging said:


> most dog homes are not a good fit for a working dog.


most dog homes these days aren't fit for a goldfish let alone a dog (working or not). it might surprise you to hear this, but working dogs CAN be taught to be a fair handling pet IF the owner is willing to put in the time & effort to train.



tailwagging said:


> and shows not just a beauty contest no matter how many times someone says it, doesn't make it true


beauty is about looks. beauty is very subjective (one of my old Marine brothers absolutely adores the natural "anorexic" look, i OTH adore a lot of T & A and a thick waist holding them together in a crazy hourglass shape).
if the shows aren't about looks (beauty?) & they obviously aren't about retaining function, what ARE they about?
if the shows aren't about a limited perception of beauty, why are there no wolfgrey & solid red rotties anymore? if they aren't about looks, why aren't there black samoyeds? if they aren't about looks why do most show fanciers dispute the purity of mogollon rim redline airedales? why don't you see brindle or merle foxhounds at westminster?
shows really are just beauty contests, no matter how many times someone says they're not doesn't make it true


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Otter said:


> And if you were starting out today, none of that would have been an option. Your first dog would have been limited registration, no one would have let you use their stud on a LR dog, your homebred pups wouldn't have had ANY papers and you would never have entered a show ring.


showed another breed in 94 to 95 

but I only started in chihuahuas in late 2000 and started showing in 05.
not long ago.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Pops2 said:


> and you'd be right. but how many CH sibes have the drive & recuperability to pull 200# 10+ miles a day for a week straight? how many sammies have what it takes to move 400 reindeer 300 miles? how many otterhounds have even been off leash in the woods? why aren't the bullmastiff & the neo the most popular personal protection breeds? why aren't the boxer or the bulldog the most common catchdogs for hog hunters? why isn't the afghan the jack rabbit & coyote dog of choice in utah? how many sealys can even fit down a badger hole let alone pull it out?
> i am always hearing showies talking about "preserving the breed." plain & simple, if you're not proving & preserving the ability & DESIRE to do the job, then you're NOT preserving the breed. all you're preserving is the LOOK of the breed. and as the boxer & the afghan show sometimes even the look isn't preserved but changed to fit some people's idea of what the look should be.
> 
> 
> ...


It is also about movement and soundness as the standards asks for, for that breed.
which is written by the parent club for that breed, not AKC.

judges pick what they think looks the most like that standard, not the most beautiful or cutest. and it is up to that breed's club to write what is needed to keep that breed's ability to do what it was bred to do. but again most dog homes are not good for a real working dog.

I understand why they wouldn't want merle in a breed. but that is another thread.

back to the OP subject, hopeful this thread has showed that there is a lot a breeder must consider when placing a pup in the best home for that pup and the breed.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

tailwagging said:


> It is also about *movement and soundness* as the standards asks for, for that breed.
> which is written by the parent club for that breed, not AKC.


like the movement of waddling bulldogs & the soundness of near cripppled hyena backed german sheperds.
it's always the breed club's fault. it's never the judge picking dog outside the standard or breeders breeding outside the standard just to win a ribbon. it's easier to blame the club than to accept sharing the responsibility for continuing the environment that perpetuates the destruction of the dogs they claim to love.



tailwagging said:


> judges pick what they think looks the most like that standard, not the most beautiful or cutest. and it is up to that breed's club to write what is needed to keep that breed's ability to do what it was bred to do. but again most dog homes are not good for a real working dog.





> The withers are higher than and sloping into *the level back*
> because sloping is a synonym for level





tailwagging said:


> I understand why they wouldn't want merle in a breed. but that is another thread.


actually, single merle has NEVER been a health issue. and new studies are showing that the old time catahoula & koolie breeders were right, double merle has to combine w/ the piebald to create the problems.
another point on that is that harlequin danes ARE merle w/ the diluted color suppressed so the allowance of harl but NOT merle is PURELY about LOOKS.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

the retriever & beagle people have shown you can breed for conformation AND some descent working ability. but in general conformation breeding has done absolutely nothing for preserving the WHOLE dog and has in fact created much of the health problems in purebreds now.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Pops2 said:


> like the movement of waddling bulldogs
> 
> 
> actually, single merle has NEVER been a health issue. and new studies are showing that the old time catahoula & koolie breeders were right, double merle has to combine w/ the piebald to create the problems.
> another point on that is that harlequin danes ARE merle w/ the diluted color suppressed so the allowance of harl but NOT merle is PURELY about LOOKS.



Gait -AKC
The style and carriage are peculiar, his gait being a loose-jointed, shuffling, sidewise motion, giving the characteristic "roll." The action must, however, be unrestrained, free and vigorous.

Gait- UKC
Movement and carriage are distinctive to the breed. There is a characteristic roll to the gait,

I agree single merle is not an issue. it is that most hounds colors can produce hidden merles. thus the possibility of mistakes being made in genotype pairing.

many harlequins danes have heath issues yet to keep them was was the choice of their breed club. 

it is not for me to judge another breeder if the breed club allows what they are doing. can i say that some breeds are taken to far? yes! that is why I don't breed that breed. not all purebreds are falling apart and not all show breeders care only for the standards. there are AKC field trials as well but there again most dog homes want a pet and couldn't and wouldn't have a working dog.
http://www.akc.org/dog_shows_trials/field_events/links.cfm


----------



## mekasmom (Jan 19, 2010)

Otter said:


> No one who has ever shown a dog can tell me that it isn't full of exclusive little groups. It can be very hard for people to get a start. As it was, tons of folks got sour on the experience. Now it is next to impossible. The ultimate Good Ol' Boy experience.


I have to agree with this. It isn't the same as it was forty years ago. The whole attitude of people is just different.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Realistically we have to acknowledge that most rare breeds and many, many working breeds (etc) would be extinct if it weren't for the show ring and pet families taking on these breeds. The need for these utilitarian breeds became non existent after the industrial revolution when people no longer needed them to perform tasks that helped them survive a living self sufficiently.

The alternative in today's society is to keep the breeds around, but tone down their working ability in order to more easy assimilate them into a family home. Working breeders have a wonderful niche and should definitely maintain those lines, however, I would fear that the alternative to tossing modern pet and show lines under the buss, would be a rapid extinction of a multitude of breeds.

We have no use for tollers, spit dogs, sled dogs, drovers or the crazy sharp working dogs of the old wars. Leaving only a few of them in the hands of a few people who work them would lead to a bleak outcome.

I think there is room for both sides of the dog fancy.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Otter said:


> No one who has ever shown a dog can tell me that it isn't full of exclusive little groups. It can be very hard for people to get a start. As it was, tons of folks got sour on the experience. Now it is next to impossible. The ultimate Good Ol' Boy experience..


I suppose it's like any other venue where people get together, wether it's a dog show or not. Adults tend to forget they are no longer in high school, no matter their age. Personally I never had any issues with people being rude, or feeling exluded, but my breed and in my region, people are pretty friendly. Have witnessed some seriously nasty people in other breeds though.

When I was young, I was under the impression that I could learn so much, and go to shows to "talk dogs" with other dog people. The reality I found is that that the community consists mostly of retired or non working women who took up dogs as a social hobby. Very little actual dog talk and in depth learning goes on, because people are more interested in going to lunch and socializing after the shows. The old breeders are long gone, most of the large old kennels that actually maintained bloodlines and large numbers of dogs are gone, and most new people to the hobby last maybe 5 years.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Haven said:


> We have no use for tollers, spit dogs, sled dogs, drovers or the crazy sharp working dogs of the old wars. Leaving only a few of them in the hands of a few people who work them would lead to a bleak outcome. I think there is room for both sides of the dog fancy.


My breed was designed to be ratters on small family farms. They are terriers and not predisposed to playing nicely with other animals as they were originally intended to track down and efficiently dispatch pests independent of any commands from their owner.

Yet when I'm placing a rescue dog and I tell people that the dog needs to be placed in an only-pet home, people get MAD and go on and on about how hard it is to find a Mini Bull who will get along with their cats and their little fluffy dog . Our rescue coordinator actually told someone once "If you want a dog who's going to play nice with other animals, get a Golden Retriever. MBT's are TERRIERS and they were bred to kill." LMAO!!!!!

Most people no longer NEED a little dog to dispatch rats. They WANT a dog that they can take to dog parks and pet stores and that will get along with the other animals in their home. 

I banged my head against the wall with a woman who bred show guinea pigs and wanted one of my dogs. She had guinea pigs in cages all over her house. And she wanted a dog developed to kill small rodents :hair And she kept telling me she would "train her really well" and I kept saying "you can't train instinct out of a dog".

But I DO try to breed dogs that have more laid-back "bully" temperaments and not the rat-killer "terrier" type. They are still terriers, but they're soooo much easier to live with in today's world if they aren't try to kill everything smaller than them 24/7.

To survive, my breed needs to LOSE it's heritage as rat killers and GAIN new purpose as devoted family pets. Either we, as breeders, make that happen or we might as well let the breed go extinct :shrug:


----------



## NickyBlade (May 27, 2008)

We were very interested in getting our girls involved with the AKC junior competitions 9 or 10 years ago. We don't have any friends or family who breed or show dogs, so we called around, etc. We were told we were on waiting lists by a couple breeders for pups... but it's been a long time and I don't think they'll be calling. lol. A couple told us about co-ownership... no thanks. I won't buy a house because of a shared driveway, I'm certainly not going to share ownership of my dog.

Anyway, after two years of not getting our foot in the door, we bought our fully registered AKC pup from a puppy broker. It's neat having her papers and pedigree and seeing how it works, but I'll never bother buying a registered dog again. She's fixed (never bred) and turning 8 in a couple weeks. It worked out great for us though because she is the best dog we've ever owned.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

NickyBlade said:


> We were very interested in getting our girls involved with the AKC junior competitions 9 or 10 years ago. We don't have any friends or family who breed or show dogs, so we called around, etc. We were told we were on waiting lists by a couple breeders for pups... but it's been a long time and I don't think they'll be calling. lol. A couple told us about co-ownership... no thanks. I won't buy a house because of a shared driveway, I'm certainly not going to share ownership of my dog.


Its actually pretty common in Juniors for the dog to be co-owned with the breeder :shrug:. Especially a Junior just starting out, because kids get bored with hobbies and then the breeder is out a good dog when the kid decides he doesn't want to show after all.

If you have no show experience, it's going to be hard to find a breeder willing to give you a show puppy to begin with. That said, a few years back I sold the pick pup in my litter to a woman who was a complete newbie to the breed and to the show world. I had a male at that time who would NOT tolerate another male dog in the house, and the pick pup was also a male, so I let him go on co-ownership to this lady.

That pup now has his AKC CH, is only 3 points away from his AKC GrandCH, and he's an International CH :happy2:. The lady is a nutcase, but she loves that dog and has done well with him. I just got his semen collected and frozen for my future use and I signed off on his co-ownership, per my contract, when he finished his AKC CH.

So you CAN sometimes find a breeder willing to work with a newbie. But not without strings attached :shrug:. 

Would you go up to a car dealership and expect them to sell you a car without signing paperwork or agreeing to them holding the title until it's paid off? Well you're talking about show dogs, some of which are worth as much as a small car (I turned down a very serious $6,000 offer for my stud dog about 5 years ago, and a friend just sold his dog to a serious show person in Japan for over $10,000!!). So if you want one, you're gonna have to have some strings attached :shrug:


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

tailwagging said:


> Gait -AKC
> The style and carriage are peculiar, his gait being a loose-jointed, shuffling, sidewise motion, giving the characteristic "roll." The action must, however, be unrestrained, free and vigorous.
> 
> Gait- UKC
> Movement and carriage are distinctive to the breed. There is a characteristic roll to the gait


 which is kind of the point, waddling is NOT NATURAL or NORMAL for ANY healthy dog. it certainly is not for any working dog and yet it is written into the standard. stupidity written into the standard DOES NOT make it okay.




tailwagging said:


> I agree single merle is not an issue. it is that most hounds colors can produce hidden merles. thus the possibility of mistakes being made in genotype pairing.


 and yet in the working community high white merles (double merles w/piebald) have traditionally been culled, while in at least one breed a blind double merle has been used extensively to breed show champions.




tailwagging said:


> many harlequins danes have heath issues yet to keep them was was the choice of their breed club.


and the club depends on the breeders to exist. if the breeders WANT to change things they can. likewise in a few cases the AKC has forced breed clubs to make changes from breed names to standard changes that facilitate increased registration fees.




tailwagging said:


> it is not for me to judge another breeder if the breed club allows what they are doing. can i say that some breeds are taken to far? yes! that is why I don't breed that breed. not all purebreds are falling apart and not all show breeders care only for the standards. there are AKC field trials as well but there again* most dog homes want a pet and couldn't and wouldn't have a working dog*.
> American Kennel Club - Field Events Links


YES IT IS for you to judge and to make efforts to change club policies, it's called policing your own. hunters do it by ratting out poachers, Marines do it and have even been punished for failing to do it, internal affairs cops do it and breeders in breed specific registries like the kemmer & ALCBA registries do it. if the AKC/UKC/ADBA breeders don't start doing it then your position in the fight against AR whackos becomes much less tenable.
you're right most don't want a working dog, but many show lines are founded on working culls. because a dog that is a failure as a K9 or a duck dog or an earth dog can still be a great pet. but again IF YOU"RE NOT PRESERVING THE WORKING ABILITY & DESIRE, YOU'RE NOT PRESERVING THE WHOLE DOG JUST THE APPEARANCE OF THE DOG. and again what MOST people really want is a living version of a stuffed animal that just sits in the closet until they want to play with it.
since you're into chihuahuas, in keeping w/ the original purpose of the breed, do you consider meat to bone ratio & conversion rates in your breeding?
but wait they are just pets now, so does every CH also have a CGC? does every dog you breed from have a CGC? knowing the breed's reputation, have you contacted your breed club & threatened to quit if they don't make CGC a breed requirement? if you can't answer yes to the last two questions, can you really say you are in it for the betterment of the breed?
i'm not against dog shows or even breeding for dog shows, I am against the inherent dishonesty of saying it's not about the looks or that it's about preserving the whole dog.


----------



## NickyBlade (May 27, 2008)

I do understand where you're coming from. I think it's nice that you're willing to work with people and help them get their foot in the door.

Personally, I would not feel comfortable co-owning anything with anyone. 

In NY we hold the titles to our vehicles and if their is a loan then the title shows a lien at the bottom. But, you can't really compare that with selling a puppy. I'm assuming people don't make monthly payments to you for 5 years, or do they? If I walk into a car dealership and pay $32,000 for a car with cash, then I get the title with no lien listed.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Pops2 said:


> since you're into chihuahuas, in keeping w/ the original purpose of the breed, do you consider meat to bone ratio & conversion rates in your breeding?
> but wait they are just pets now, so does every CH also have a CGC? does every dog you breed from have a CGC? knowing the breed's reputation, have you contacted your breed club & threatened to quit if they don't make CGC a breed requirement? if you can't answer yes to the last two questions, can you really say you are in it for the betterment of the breed?
> i'm not against dog shows or even breeding for dog shows, I am against the inherent dishonesty of saying it's not about the looks or that it's about preserving the whole dog.


It is not my place to force changes on breeds that are not my own.

in a way we do. chihuahua is to be a coby thick heavy for size dog.
(chihuahuas cacciatore anyone?)
I refused membership in my breed club much to the upset of my sponsors because of the merle issue. I refused to take sides, the whole club was split and fighting, i don't need drama.

most chihuahuas with the true old chihuahua temperament wouldn't pass CGC
you know the little ankle bitters that spar with other dogs.

if your dog doesn't bit the judge (stranger handling it) and doesn't eat the other dogs in the ring then the only thing a CGC is doing is seeing if it will sit and putting on letters. I am not about letters but the breed.
I would rather spent my at the show time helping with the health test clinic that my local chihuahua club puts on.

I have never heard that it is about preserving the whole dog, but the breed.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Haven said:


> Realistically we have to acknowledge that most rare breeds and many, many working breeds (etc) would be extinct if it weren't for the show ring and pet families taking on these breeds. The need for these utilitarian breeds became non existent after the industrial revolution when people no longer needed them to perform tasks that helped them survive a living self sufficiently.


 really eloquent, but it's not true. the working breeds in the show ring are NOT the working breeds they were bred from. in that sense the working breeds are extinct & what we're left with is a caricature of the the breed. industrial revolution or not there are still some jobs that animals can do better or more economically than machines.




Haven said:


> The alternative in today's society is to keep the breeds around, but tone down their working ability in order to more easy assimilate them into a family home. Working breeders have a wonderful niche and should definitely maintain those lines, however, I would fear that the alternative to tossing modern pet and show lines under the buss, would be a rapid extinction of a multitude of breeds.


 i am okay w/ this. what i'm not okay w/ is the dishonesty of most of the show community claiming to preserve the breeds while inherently changing them from what they were.




Haven said:


> We have no use for tollers, spit dogs, sled dogs, drovers or the crazy sharp working dogs of the old wars. Leaving only a few of them in the hands of a few people who work them would lead to a bleak outcome.


 again just not true. tollers are highly valued by the limited number of hunters that use them. sled dogs are VITAL survival equipment for many people in far northern AK & canada. further they are useful alternatives for people living in the rest of canada & northern states of the lower 48. cow dogs are still vital to working cattle ranches west of the mississippi. and extremely sharp guarding mastiffs are more popular in certain high risk areas because they will continue to fight intruders long after the herding breeds have quit from pain & injury.




Haven said:


> I think there is room for both sides of the dog fancy.


i absolutely agree. all i'm asking for is some honesty.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Haven said:


> I suppose it's like any other venue where people get together, wether it's a dog show or not. Adults tend to forget they are no longer in high school, no matter their age. Personally I never had any issues with people being rude, or feeling exluded, but my breed and in my region, people are pretty friendly. Have witnessed some seriously nasty people in other breeds though.
> 
> When I was young, I was under the impression that I could learn so much, and go to shows to "talk dogs" with other dog people. The reality I found is that that the community consists mostly of retired or non working women who took up dogs as a social hobby. Very little actual dog talk and in depth learning goes on, because people are more interested in going to lunch and socializing after the shows. The old breeders are long gone, most of the large old kennels that actually maintained bloodlines and large numbers of dogs are gone, and most new people to the hobby last maybe 5 years.


go to a working dog venue like plott days or autumn oaks and this is what you'll get. old timers talking pedigrees & geat dogs of the past and chomping at the bit to teach young people the best training tools.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

bluemoonluck said:


> My breed was designed to be ratters on small family farms. They are terriers and not predisposed to playing nicely with other animals as they were originally intended to track down and efficiently dispatch pests independent of any commands from their owner.
> 
> Yet when I'm placing a rescue dog and I tell people that the dog needs to be placed in an only-pet home, people get MAD and go on and on about how hard it is to find a Mini Bull who will get along with their cats and their little fluffy dog . Our rescue coordinator actually told someone once "If you want a dog who's going to play nice with other animals, get a Golden Retriever. MBT's are TERRIERS and they were bred to kill." LMAO!!!!!


which is how it should be. educating potential owners rather than changing the breed is how you keep the breed. i don't reccommend working breeds to people looking for pets. if they express a strong desire for a working breed i tell them to contact breeders and tell them EXACTLY what they are looking for and chances are the breeder will contact them w/ a working cull that will be a laid back house dog. but i also try to steer them to breeds that are better for them.



bluemoonluck said:


> Most people no longer NEED a little dog to dispatch rats. They WANT a dog that they can take to dog parks and pet stores and that will get along with the other animals in their home.


most people want a living stuffed animal that will sit quietly in the closet until they decide to take it out & play with it. 



bluemoonluck said:


> I banged my head against the wall with a woman who bred show guinea pigs and wanted one of my dogs. She had guinea pigs in cages all over her house. And she wanted a dog developed to kill small rodents :hair And she kept telling me she would "train her really well" and I kept saying "you can't train instinct out of a dog".


training isn't about taking away the instinct but controlling it. i have a friend that is a wolfer & also barn hunts ****. he has SIX terriers a fox & a foxXJRT that are retired, 3 patterdales & a patXpit. he also has free ranging chickens in his yard. because he puts the time & effort into training they leave the chickens alone (granted they do shred every ****, possum, skunk, fox, cat & even one hawk that came looking for a chicken dinner). so as long as she understands & IS WILLING to put in the work she might have actually made a descent home.




bluemoonluck said:


> But I DO try to breed dogs that have more laid-back "bully" temperaments and not the rat-killer "terrier" type. They are still terriers, but they're soooo much easier to live with in today's world if they aren't try to kill everything smaller than them 24/7.


 true, but laid back house pet & vermin destroyer are not mutually exclusive.




bluemoonluck said:


> To survive, my breed needs to LOSE it's heritage as rat killers and GAIN new purpose as devoted family pets. Either we, as breeders, make that happen or we might as well let the breed go extinct :shrug:


a breed is more than just the look (even show fanciers will say this a lot). if the otterhound & black mouth cur are any indication the real survival of a breed lies in getting it into the hands of the people that will put it to work. the otterhound is dieing and will almost certainly go extinct within a couple of decades and YET all three of the guys i know that have tried to get one to hunt have been refused by every breeder they contacted. one guy even contacted EVERY single otterhound breeder in the USA and was turned down because they refuse to place in a hunting home. OTH the bmc has survive for the last hundred years as a cow dog & hunting dog in TX, OK, AR, MO, NM, LA & MS and has stayed a healthy vigorous breed. because of changing social dynamics, the breed as a hunting dog has spread outside of it's traditional region.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

tailwagging said:


> It is not my place to force changes on breeds that are not my own.
> 
> in a way we do. chihuahua is to be a coby thick heavy for size dog.
> (chihuahuas cacciatore anyone?)
> ...


i hear it all the time as an initial defense when someone tosses out the accusation that shows are just beauty contests. again a breed is MORE than just the LOOK, it is the temperament/personality and drive ALSO. the lab & golden were developed as retreivers for sportsmen. the chessie was invented by market hunters. just because of the sheer scale of work involved the the chessie SHOULD be more intense, more driven & have greater stamina. also because the market hunters had a lot of time/money invested in their guns & boats the chessie should be fairly guardy of that property. consequently the chessie breed as a whole has far more success in personal protection sport than labs & goldens. also as a consequence the chessie is most popular w/ guides that get to do a lot of spring snow goose hunts and not so much as a house pet. so yeah if you're working to protect/better the breed then temperament & working drives ARE part of what you're supposed to be preserving.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Haven said:


> Realistically we have to acknowledge that most rare breeds and many, many working breeds (etc) would be extinct if it weren't for the show ring and pet families taking on these breeds. The need for these utilitarian breeds became non existent after the industrial revolution when people no longer needed them to perform tasks that helped them survive a living self sufficiently.


But if you go among the working dog people, you'll see that this is not true. I have a pure bred (oops bred, and gotten off Freecycle, but still purebred and pedigree known) beagle, who is 18 inches at the shoulder.
Beagles are being bred that height ON PURPOSE - *why?*
Because people who want to run fox and jack rabbits simply can not get a harrier. If they manage to wrestle one away from the show crowd, it can't hunt.
So, instead of doing what they'd _like_ to do, which is use the a breed that was developed over centuries - they have to re-invent the wheel.
Same with the sled dog folks. The Siberian used to be the racing dog of choice. Now you can't find one in a racer's kennel.

And, in the interest of total honesty, the field trial folks are just as bad. A field trial Lab looks like a black Viszla, is practically being bred for their ability to take an electric shock and keep running and can not possibly fit the historic role of a blocky dog who can hunt on weekends and hang with the family the rest of the time.
There are lines of Border Collie who will run stock flat to death.

One extreme is as bad as the other, I think. But it's the above sort of thinking that leads to all of it. people have given up on the idea that a dog can and should be good for several things and so they don't bother breeding for it.



Haven said:


> The reality I found is that that the community consists mostly of retired or non working women who took up dogs as a social hobby.


Another self-fulfilling prophecy, especially thanks to the way the limited registration is run. 
They will only sell dogs with full registration to others in their little club, You can switch breeds, but to just jump in and start, it's so hard that most folks just don't bother. They either give up on even the idea of showing or go eleswhere.




bluemoonluck said:


> My breed was designed to be ratters on small family farms.


If I had a dollar for every time I've heard this line...
Look, I HAVE a small family farm. The old-fashioned type with a bit of this and some of that. A rat dog is a phenomenally useful beastie. Your breed (and nearly every breed where I've heard that line) stopped being that useful farm tyke when you stopped letting them go to farm homes. I've worked with good rat dogs, and you know what they do? They kill rats. And once they're past their foolish puppy adolescence, that's it! They don't kill chickens, barn cats or each other. 
A dog who can't be focused that way with, what is honestly not much training is NOT a useful creature on a small family farm - it is shot. Literally.

The aforementioned beagle is currently bringing me a rabbit a day. Rabbits in cages or even running loose in the house are ignored. I've got pictures of him sleeping next to one. Cats and chickens aren't bothered either. Teaching him to not open the fridge = *hard.*
Focusing his hunting instinct to the proper venue = easy as pie.
Why?
He is from REAL working lines.

Now, I wouldn't want a terrier in a house full of guinea pigs either. They smell like rat. But I wouldn't expect one to rip up my barn cats and be after my chickens "because he has an instinct to kill" either. Hunting dogs were not bred for broad hunting instincts, but narrow ones.

Don't believe me, ask Pops how much good is a coonhound who won't leave off treeing cats and squirrels to go hunt ****.



bluemoonluck said:


> Its actually pretty common in Juniors for the dog to be co-owned with the breeder :shrug:. Especially a Junior just starting out, because kids get bored with hobbies and then the breeder is out a good dog when the kid decides he doesn't want to show after all.
> 
> If you have no show experience, it's going to be hard to find a breeder willing to give you a show puppy to begin with.


Limited registration was not about protecting breeds from puppy millers and BYB (Who, btw, make LOTS of money trading on papers now - way more then before)
It was about keeping that little club exclusive. Used to be, you could sell Jr a pup with no disqualifications so they could get their feet wet in showing and not be laughed out of the ring, and everyone was happy. Now ... when you lose kids, the sport dies with you. 




bluemoonluck said:


> Would you go up to a car dealership and expect them to sell you a car without signing paperwork or agreeing to them holding the title until it's paid off?


Why, do you take payments? I didn't think so. It's not about ownership, it's not about keeping dogs out of the hands of bad people - it's about control. It might make you feel better, but it does no good for either dogs or showing



tailwagging said:


> if your dog doesn't bit the judge (stranger handling it) and doesn't eat the other dogs in the ring then the only thing a CGC is doing is seeing if it will sit and putting on letters. I am not about letters but the breed.


Tailwagging! :nono: I am disappointed in you. You have clearly never paid attention to what a CGC is.
Ignore the cheesy music, it's not even 7 minutes. Please watch it.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIzzx5mjeUE&feature=related]CGC Demo - YouTube[/ame]

While the demo dog was clearly obedience trained (no bad thing) I hope that everyone can see that a CGC is not about putting "letters" on a dog - this is simply the most basic amount of manners a dog can have and not be a menace in public, and not hurt the vet tech/groomer.
Yes, every companion breed dog should be able to get one. This is not hard! If I want a companion, I want it to be good company - the test is that basic.

Asking for one of these on a breeding dog is not a difficult thing. If your dog can't pass that, and/or you can't be bothered to put that much time into it, the dog should not be bred.

I can see people taking issue with a lot of things, but a CGC is so very basic - it's just good manners!


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Otter - I would love to place one of my terriers in a small farm home. I don't have anyone who wants a working ratter on my list though :shrug:. People don't want to pay $3,000 for a dog to be a working ratter, and I don't blame them. 

If I could afford to breed them for less and sell them for less, I would....but I can't :shrug:

I have an adult ***** right now that I need to find a new home for. I'm only asking that the new owner spay her, she has full registration rights but has a mismark (and TBH even with that mismark I could finish her, but I don't like her head). She NEEDS to be an outside dog, as MANY attempts have been made to crate train or housebreak her and all have failed. She's sweet and smart and (besides the cost to spay her and transport her from me to her new home) she's FREE. 

I can't place her because the only two people who have been interested in her wanted to chain her up in their front yard . When I say "outside dog" that's the kind of homes I get who are interested. I cannot find a single small farm home for her among any of my inquiries, and I get two to three inquiries a DAY for these dogs. 

Which is why I say, people don't WANT a working terrier, they want a pet. I'd love to place my more terrier-type dogs into working homes, but between price and no interest I pretty much have to place them all in couch-potato positions :shrug:.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I have seen dogs not pass ONLY because they have pulled their paw back went a stranger was checking the nails.not aggressively just pulled it back.
others do to not wanting their owner to leave, so wined not barked just wined. another raised it's tail too high when meeting another dog....
normal dog stuff.

Test 1: Accepting a friendly stranger
The dog will allow a friendly stranger to approach it and speak to the
handler in a natural, everyday situation.
*(this happens in the ring)*

Test 2: Sitting politely for petting
The dog will allow a friendly stranger to pet it while it is out with its
handler. *(this happens ringside and in the ring too)
*
Test 3: Appearance and grooming
The dog will welcome being groomed and examined and will permit
someone, such as a veterinarian, groomer or friend of the owner, to do so.
*(not all dogs trust others with their paws)
*
Test 4: Out for a walk (walking on a loose lead)
The handler/dog team will take a short &#8220;walk&#8221; to show that the dog is in
control while walking on a leash.
*(this happens in the ring)
*
Test 5: Walking through a crowd
The dog and handler walk around and pass close to several people (at least
three) to demonstrate that the dog can move about politely in pedestrian
traffic and is under control in public places.
*(this happens ringside)
*
Test 6: Sit and down on command and Staying in place
The dog will respond to the handler&#8217;s commands to 1) sit, 2) down
and will 3) remain in the place commanded by the handler (sit or down
position, whichever the handler prefers).
*(something you DON'T want your dog to do in the ring!! now guess WHERE they hold the tests?)
*
Test 7: Coming when called
The dog will come when called by the handler. The handler will walk
10 feet from the dog, turn to face the dog, and call the dog.
*(ok so the dog will come to you on a leash)
*

Test 8: Reaction to another dog
To demonstrate that the dog can behave politely around other dogs,
two handlers and their dogs approach each other from a distance of about
20 feet, stop, shake hands and exchange pleasantries, and continue on for
about 10 feet.
*(chihuahuas are sometimes asked to spar in the ring, so this wouldn't work with real chihuahua temperament.)
*
Test 9: Reaction to distraction
To demonstrate the dog is confident when faced with common distracting
situations, the evaluator will select and present two distractions. Examples
of distractions include dropping a chair, rolling a crate dolly past the dog,
having a jogger run in front of the dog, or dropping a crutch or cane.
*(this happen in the ring and ringside often)
*
Test 10: Supervised separation
This test demonstrates that a dog can be left with a trusted person, if
necessary, and will maintain training and good manners. Evaluators are
encouraged to say something like, &#8220;Would you like me to watch your
dog?&#8221; and then take hold of the dog&#8217;s leash. The owner will go out of sight
*(I wouldn't want my dog to just sit there while someone he doesn't know takes him.)*

CGC is so pet owners can feel involved. it is a gate way title
many exhibitors are now using it to add an alphabet to their dogs name.

So since I don't care for an alphabet and my dog is doing what it should....

and to tell you the truth many people want their chihuahuas to be a tiny alarm dog. not one that just greets everyone with a happy dance and run off with strangers.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Bluemoonluck, you are advertising to the wrong crowd.

If I tried to sell live roosters in NYC, I probably wouldn't run into a lot of people who would give a rooster a happy home.
That doesn't mean that _no one_ wants a rooster.

Have you advertised here? Have you gone to any earthdog trials? Asked the UKC folks? If it became known to the right crowd that you would sell Mini Bulls to farm/working homes, you'd find a LOT of people who would pay $3,000 for a ratter.
But they'll want full registration. And probably prefer the UKC anyway.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

bluemoonluck said:


> Otter - I would love to place one of my terriers in a small farm home. I don't have anyone who wants a working ratter on my list though :shrug:. People don't want to pay $3,000 for a dog to be a working ratter, and I don't blame them.
> 
> If I could afford to breed them for less and sell them for less, I would....but I can't :shrug:
> 
> ...


there is a guy in my earthdog group that has a BTXJRT. she kills ***** like it's going out of style. I am pretty sure someone in that group would be interested in giving her a working home. Would you mind if i told them & gave them your website to contact you?


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Otter said:


> Bluemoonluck, you are advertising to the wrong crowd.
> 
> If I tried to sell live roosters in NYC, I probably wouldn't run into a lot of people who would give a rooster a happy home.
> That doesn't mean that _no one_ wants a rooster.
> ...


Otter
i know some ground dog guys that would pay reasonable money (varies by breed) for a BT or MBT that wants to work. and if they are hard honest workers, they would be repeat customers & bring their friends. and they wouldn't give a rat's butt about registration.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Otter said:


> Bluemoonluck, you are advertising to the wrong crowd. But they'll want full registration. And probably prefer the UKC anyway.


I advertize on Google, not just to show people. I also advertize on QualityDogs, which used to have a lot of working people (several people who bred racing whippets that I knew were on there). 

To the right person (ie NOT Joe Blow Pet Owner "I want to breed this dog so I can make some $$$$" :grit: ), I wouldn't mind giving out full registration. I'd have to get some references on them to determine that they aren't gonna turn the puppy into a puppy mill machine, but I'm certainly willing to be flexible for the RIGHT home. But I'm just NOT going to hand full registration to the average pet home :nono:.

And they can register them UKC if they want...the UKC will honor the AKC papers for dual registration. I'm not gonna stop them! In fact I'm getting ready to use a stud who is an AKC/UKC/Int'l CH.



Pops2 said:


> there is a guy in my earthdog group that has a BTXJRT. she kills ***** like it's going out of style. I am pretty sure someone in that group would be interested in giving her a working home. Would you mind if i told them & gave them your website to contact you?


Please do! I'd love to place my dogs in working homes. There are no earthdog clubs anywhere near me, otherwise I'd do earthdog with my guys. I know several MBT people who do earthdog and it sounds awesome. 

I take all my puppies (when I'm socializing them) into the pet stores and walk them right up to the rat cages...I love to watch those beady little eyes light up :happy2:. 

Make sure they specify when they contact me that they're earthdog people or whatever so I don't think they're crazy pet people looking to make a fast buck, though.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Sorry Tailwagging. I agree with you on a lot of things, but not this.
As far as the judge using their own judgement and wanting the highest interpretation - happens in every type of competition, including conformation - we don't say that all that is useless because of it.

I double checked. You can give the dog verbal praise and encouragement throughout the test.
Number 3 - nearly all dogs can learn to shake. That means that the _same number of dogs_ can learn to let a stranger hold it's paw and not freak out. 
This is really important.
My vet LOVES knowing that I can say to any of my dogs "Steady" and they'll relax and let you manipulate them in any way. Paws? No biggie! They all shake!

Number 6 - sorry, I want my dog to do those things anywhere. Obedience trials are also held in the rings. There are Ch with obedience titles. In a ring or anywhere else, I want my dog to be able to focus on me. 

Number 8 - I make a certain kissy noise. It means I want the dog to focus on me. Eventually, this little kissy noise can take the place of Leave It, No, Let's Go and a couple of others. 
The dog can do whatever it wants most of the time - spar in the ring, sniff for squirrels, what have you. But when I ask for it's attention, I want it.
I don't think this is too much to ask, especially from a breed bred to be a companion. One little kissy noise - perfectly allowed as verbal praise and encouragement - should certainly be able to get my dogs attention for the all of 12 seconds that test takes.

Number 10 - I don't want my dog to just go off with whoever takes them either. This test is not asking for that. My dogs know that if I hand a leash to someone for a second, that I will be right back, and they are safe staying where they are.
What's more, my dogs all know the command _I'll Be Right Back_ - because they don't particularly want to hang with even my husband or kids, but I don't always want them following me everywhere. So we learn I'll Be Right Back means to chill out and park it because I will.
You'd think this is especially important for show dogs to know. Do you ever have someone else handle them? Never hand someone a leash while you and another dog are needed in another ring? Or even just to dash over and get your number from the steward? This is the sort of thing that happens by the ring all the time.
And in small towns like mine - outside the grocery store, post office, feed store, etc.

A CGC is basic good manners. it can lower your insurance and get your dog into some motels and lots of rentals. It is the bare minimum of training that every dog should have.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Bluemoonluck, a lot of the time, with that crowd, it's the principle of the thing. As I said, I am against puppy mills. I can hear the barking from my house (no joke).

And actually the UKC is getting a lot of people coming to them with their AKC LR dogs so they can show. The AKC crowd gives them a lot of flack for it, because while they honor AKC papers, they don't honor limited registration, they just register the dog and let you show it.

I've actually told people about that and watched them light up. There are a bunch of folks who would like to show!

You might look into if there are UKC earthdog venues near you.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Otter said:


> Sorry Tailwagging. I agree with you on a lot of things, but not this.
> .


that is ok, still love ya :happy2:
though I think you need to see a cgc test. 
I have seen with my own eyes, dog not pass for very very silly things. I feel my time is better spent helping people and the vets with dropping in eye drops and paperwork at the heath testing clinic.



(I have yet to have any of my chihuahua adults or pups bite anyone and many repeat buyer due to their good temperament)


----------



## Ross (May 9, 2002)

An interesting thread, I did skip a few replies but never the less a great thread! I am curious if any better answer ever came up than this?


> I've always felt that, since our breed is rare and our gene pool shallow, it is my responsibility as a breeder to keep the outstanding dogs I may produce in the gene pool. This means placing them in show homes under contracts that allow them (provided health tests are passed and the pups grow out the way I expect them to) to contribute to the gene pool.


 So the OP knew the answer all along! It doesn't matter if you use a show ring to qualify the results of breeding or field work or mushing through the snow, or sniffing contraband, so long as sound animals are the goal. I am very partial to hunting dogs that hunt, sled dogs that pull and herding dogs that herd. (even LGDs that work with a shepherd!) and I've seen the show ring crowd turn a useful dog breed into "just a pet"...... but that's not such a terrible fate. Certainly not every dog will grow to meet a set standard so being sold to a home where it can be a great pet is just fine. Every breeder has to accept the responsibility to cull the suffering and place those lacking perfection in caring homes. I know its tough to break even breeding dogs correctly, (my father did sort of) and its not gotten easier these days. I chose not to breed my very (very very?) capable border collie because she had an unexplained fault in her blood sugar management..... but really I know it was as much the truth that I did not want to breed dogs as anything else. I'm a happy dog buyer! (not that I want more than one dog at a time!!)


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

tailwagging said:


> that is ok, still love ya :happy2:
> though I think you need to see a cgc test.
> I have seen with my own eyes, dog not pass for very very silly things. I feel my time is better spent helping people and the vets with dropping in eye drops and paperwork at the heath testing clinic.
> 
> ...



LOL, good!
And I have. I like dog shows (sometimes we rescue folks do  ) It's because I hang out at them whenever I get the chance that I've been really kind of disgusted at what I've seen over the past decade and I've seen them shrink and disappear.

I've seen dogs fail for silly things at all kinds of venues. The last show I was at, an absolutely brilliant GSD got flunked out of an obedience test because when the handler threw the dumbell, it slid just under the fence. The dog went to it, whined, looked back at the handler, tried to reach it, looked back and chuffed, reached under with a paw, thought about jumping the fence to retrieve it, tried to reach it with a paw again...
Clearly, the dog knew exactly what he was supposed to be doing and wanted to do it (without breaking the rule of leaving the ring) 
And certainly, the judge could have asked a ring steward to nudge the dumbell into the ring so the dog could complete the exercise. Instead, she just failed them.

Stuff like that is horribly disappointing, and perhaps was even a case of cronyism. But I'm not ready to toss obedience trials for them.

Actually, if the stars align, I'll be leading up a 4H dog club. LOL, step one will be having the kids work towards CGCs, then we'll go on to Rally-O.

Showing isn't just about breeding. Or at least it shouldn't be. I am using this to get the kids to see dogs as animals worthy of our respect, and that you get back what you put in. The attitude towards dogs is dismal around here.


----------



## Joshie (Dec 8, 2008)

Why can't pick of the litter be these are the dogs available, you pick the one you want?


----------



## SunsetSonata (Nov 23, 2006)

To the OP, I don't know if your website always said this or you added it after starting this thread, but it seems clear to me: 

"Show pups are sent only to select homes with preference given to those who have documented experience showing dogs in AKC Conformation Events. They go home with Full AKC registration but on Co-Ownership with us."

If I bothered to contact those people back at all I would probably just refer back to this statement. A lot of entitled people out there. IF you are willing to sell to those people I would say you do have a number of excellent pet quality pups to offer, but if they are not interested, good luck in their search.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Joshie said:


> Why can't pick of the litter be these are the dogs available, you pick the one you want?


Because almost 100% of my puppy buyers live a great distance from me and they can't come meet the puppies in person :shrug:. So they tell me about their family and their needs, I look at the puppies I have and determine if there's one in that litter that would be a good fit, then I send them pics and video and ask them if they want the puppy.

I live in VA. It isn't practical to ask someone who lives in Arizona to fly out to my house for the afternoon to meet 6-week old puppies, play with them and tell me which one they want, then fly home for 2 weeks and pay to have me ship the pup to them at 8 weeks. 

It is also my experience that people pick a "cute" pup who may not have the temperament they NEED. I won't sell the alpha pup in the litter to someone who has never owned a dog before :nono:. They'll get a nice middle of the road to slightly submissive puppy. But when I explain to people why the pup who has the "cuter markings" isn't a good fit for their family, they often argue with me. And I'm sorry, I'm not selling a pup to someone that I know isn't a good fit just because "well that one has a really cute white mark on his hip that I think is adorable!" .

Matching puppies with owners is temperament first, then male/female preference, then color preference. Its not like the dog isn't going to fit into their lives because he's a red with a half white collar instead of a red with a full white collar.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

I'm glad my breed of choice (catahoula) hasn't been ruined by AKC yet and the breed association is not going to let it happen. My breed also dislikes strangers and God help you if you try to take one from it's owner. The dog is most likely to bark then growl or bite. The breed is used to hunt wild cattle/hogs and be a guard dog when not on duty. My dog is laid back for his breed but he can work hogs quite good. I do plan to work him a lot more on hogs in 2013. My goal is to get another catahoula OR a pit bull for catch dog work. I've not decided yet. Originally I was going to get an american bulldog but have started to learn that not all ABs want to catch so I most likely will get either a purebred pit or a pit cross.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Ted, have you looked at Argentine Dogos? I have always been attracted to that breed although they are virtually unheard of here in the north..


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

bluemoonluck
i am actually a strong believer in letting the breeder pick the pup, especially when buying long distance & after developing a good relationship.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

TedH71 said:


> I'm glad my breed of choice (catahoula) hasn't been ruined by AKC yet and the breed association is not going to let it happen. My breed also dislikes strangers and God help you if you try to take one from it's owner. The dog is most likely to bark then growl or bite. The breed is used to hunt wild cattle/hogs and be a guard dog when not on duty. My dog is laid back for his breed but he can work hogs quite good. I do plan to work him a lot more on hogs in 2013. My goal is to get another catahoula OR a pit bull for catch dog work. I've not decided yet. Originally I was going to get an american bulldog but have started to learn that not all ABs want to catch so I most likely will get either a purebred pit or a pit cross.


how do you want the bulldog to work? there is a good chance of finding a catchdog just by checking the free to good home adds or cheap country pounds.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

Haven said:


> Ted, have you looked at Argentine Dogos? I have always been attracted to that breed although they are virtually unheard of here in the north..


there are maybe 3 or 4 people in the USA breeding dogos the way they should be bred. and most people aren't using them the way the breed founders & argentine breeders intended. not worth the price tags if you're just gonna lead them in on a leash.


----------



## Oregon Julie (Nov 9, 2006)

TedH71 said:


> I'm glad my breed of choice (catahoula) hasn't been ruined by AKC yet and the breed association is not going to let it happen. My breed also dislikes strangers and God help you if you try to take one from it's owner. The dog is most likely to bark then growl or bite. The breed is used to hunt wild cattle/hogs and be a guard dog when not on duty. My dog is laid back for his breed but he can work hogs quite good. I do plan to work him a lot more on hogs in 2013. My goal is to get another catahoula OR a pit bull for catch dog work. I've not decided yet. Originally I was going to get an american bulldog but have started to learn that not all ABs want to catch so I most likely will get either a purebred pit or a pit cross.


Catahoula Leopard Dog Page

They are an AKC breed and the breed association can/will only do so much ti impact how it changes as time passes.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

The persons who submitted their catahoulas to the AKC has been banned from the original registry (NALC National Association of Leopard Catahoulas). I know UKC now has catahoulas that are registered but they do have to come from the original registry amongst other 2 or 3 small registries. The reason for this is that NALC is very slow in issuing papers and apparently the owner does not believe in technology and possibly is the only person running the registry along with hired help. AKC is not going to allow hog dog bayings or cattle herding because catahoulas are super rough and they do not like being touched by strangers. NALC used to have numerous events showcasing the abilities of the breed along with conformation shows but lately that has slowed down..I suspect due to the age of the owner and the fact that the people running the events have to have land or access to land and animals for the events. UKC on the other hand is more up to date, etc.

As for the Argentine Dogos... I only know of maybe 3 people who breed and hunt registered dogos. Average dogo puppy price from show parents is $1k to high as $3k per pup. The people who work their dogos sell for much less. I know one guy who charges $1k per pup while the others charge much less. Lots of pups from the show bloodlines can't hunt anymore.

The reasoning for pit bulls..I am wanting one that is registered from parents so I can do conformation along with weight pulls plus catch hogs. I have found a few who I like but nothing definite yet.


----------



## anahatalotus (Oct 25, 2012)

bluemoonluck said:


> Rare dogs are candy for puppy mills...they'll do ANYTHING to get their hands on an AKC registered Mini Bull, because they sell for lots of $$$$$. We have to be super careful who we sell to. And there is one breeder who imported all her stock from overseas, after nobody here would sell to her, and she advertizes all these "show wins" on her website and makes it sound like her dogs are hot stuff....but fails to mention that these "wins" were at AKC-sanctioned MATCHES and don't mean squat . And the dogs she imported all have health issues and behavioral problems, but she still finds buyers because she doesn't ask any questions.



I'm a bit lost on this comment. If it costs thousands of $$ to breed and you don't always get pups out of a breeding so you have to sell your pups for several thousand dollars why would a puppy mill risk loosing the several grand to try to breed this breed? It's clear they are an expensive breed to buy but wouldn't they not be making any money off of the dogs since they are also expensive to breed?


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

deleted double post


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

anahatalotus said:


> I'm a bit lost on this comment. If it costs thousands of $$ to breed and you don't always get pups out of a breeding so you have to sell your pups for several thousand dollars why would a puppy mill risk loosing the several grand to try to breed this breed? It's clear they are an expensive breed to buy but wouldn't they not be making any money off of the dogs since they are also expensive to breed?


it only costs thousands if you're doing it correctly, health testing &/or proving breedworthiness. if you're just letting two dogs do it & selling the pups to anyone your overhead is A LOT less. figure feeding ol roy and keeping a half dozen bitches dropping two litters a year & one dog and selling for close to the thousands that good breeders are asking to cover their expenses. well a person w/ no morals can actually make a modest living off being a puppy mill of a rare breed.


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

Wait a minute... MBT's are c-section dogs too?? And here I thought it was only the Bulldog with this issue!


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

anahatalotus said:


> I'm a bit lost on this comment. If it costs thousands of $$ to breed and you don't always get pups out of a breeding so you have to sell your pups for several thousand dollars why would a puppy mill risk loosing the several grand to try to breed this breed? It's clear they are an expensive breed to buy but wouldn't they not be making any money off of the dogs since they are also expensive to breed?


I most breeds, they take a nice quality small male used for advertising and put it with a large number of oversized, non standard bitches that many times barely resemble the breed, that can free-whelp large litters.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

SilverFlame819 said:


> Wait a minute... MBT's are c-section dogs too?? And here I thought it was only the Bulldog with this issue!


Mini Bulls CAN whelp naturally, but it's a roll of the dice. If they're having a large litter, it's no big deal. But the average litter size is 3 puppies, and 3 puppies with blocky heads are not likely to be able to whelp naturally. 

Then you end up with emergency c-sections, which means you're risking getting an on-call vet who is an idiot and who doesn't understand the breed. Mini Bulls have smaller tracheas than other dogs of their size - you often have to use a cat-sized tube to intubate them. And most vets won't listen to breeders when we tell them this because we're not vets , just experts on the breed ya know. So you've got a vet trying to intubate your ***** with huge tubes, and while that's going on the puppies are getting lots of anesthesia and the *****'s throat is getting beaten up :grit: 

After hearing horror stories of puppies being stillborn and bitches having breathing problems due to incompetent emergency vets doing emergency c-sections, it doesn't take you too long to decide to schedule a c-section with a vet that knows your breed so you don't have to deal with the emergency after-hours clinics.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

No one breeding dogs that can't even have pups naturally care about the breed.
There is no reason to breed a dog that cannot have pups naturally.
Same with many other problems we see with dogs.
If they have something common in the breed that prevents them from being a normal dog they should not be bred. If the people actually cared about the dogs they would be culled.


----------



## simplepeace (Oct 29, 2005)

I have seen and heard of many breeders who state that show quality pups will only be placed in show homes period. I too would not acknowledge someone throwing a ----y fit over it. Or I would tell them to contact breed rescue.

My first dog (I was 13) was a co-owbership and was until he died at 18. He was 1/4 under appropriate size for his breed (Sheltie) and had an old-fashioned head, he was show quality, but was never going to set anything on fire  The breeder never planned to breed him, but he needed to saty intact until I was finished showing. The breeder mentored me, and took me to shows, introduced me to people, helped me train, groom, lent me books on genetics - hey I was into it even then  I don't know if she ever co-owned another of her pups. But she was wonderful to me.

In my 30s I agreed to a co-ownership with a finished dog (different breed), until the woman sent me a written agreement totally different than the verbal agreement. She still had the dog and wanted to have unlimited breeding rights for the life of the dog - told me I could never have him neutered. 
I did not want my name on lots and lots of litters not of my choice to begin with and... we didn't know if he would be good enough as he grew to special. So he might have gone on to just be a great pet for me.
I had agreed to allow her to breed him 3 times before he was 5, so I could *eventually * get him neutered.
I said NO. Then she tried to agrue, wheedle, threaten... she even told me that her mentor (one of the top people in the breed EVER) agreed with her. I said ok, I will talk to her. Her mentor said "She is nuts, I TOLD her not to try to hog the dog, she has too many males and can't keep him. You are correct, and I have told her she was living in fantasy land". 
I had a bad taste in my mouth by then and had decided against taking him because I never wanted to deal with her again... She had by then spoken to her mentor and offered me full ownership to me and I said no thanks. In fact she even ended up giving me back my $300 deposit! Never thought that would happen.
Found out later someone else had taken him on (an kept him intact though didn't show him) and about a year later they couldn't keep weight on him because he pined over bitches in heat.
Anyway, especially for juniors a co-ownership is a good thing (depending on who you co-own with) and you have to go with your gut sometimes, and say no. Or yes. I wpould do a co-ownership again for a dog I really wanted IF I thought the breeder would be support, not stress.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

anahatalotus said:


> I'm a bit lost on this comment. If it costs thousands of $$ to breed and you don't always get pups out of a breeding so you have to sell your pups for several thousand dollars why would a puppy mill risk loosing the several grand to try to breed this breed? It's clear they are an expensive breed to buy but wouldn't they not be making any money off of the dogs since they are also expensive to breed?


I can answer this;
First, there is no health testing, no showing or anything that costs money.
Grooming is minimal, and only done on breeds who's mats would get in the way of raising a litter.
Feeding is 50 pound bags of whatever is at the feed store. Sometimes this is surprisingly good food, sometimes not. Other care is optional. Some people treat them like good livestock, some don't.

They puppy mill English bulldogs around here. B*tches are often crossbreds, 1/2 to 3/4 Bulldog, with the rest being anything that won't lose too much of the look around the face but be bigger bodied and wider hipped. Shar-peis, boxers, what have you - you have to remember, it doesn't matter what the dog looks like when it's grown up, as long as it looks "cute" and pretty much right in the 7 to 10 week old puppy window.

My local dog vet charges about $200 for a c-section and does at least 20 to 30 a week, when I had a teeny rescue dog and asked about them. So even that is not a huge expense some places.

If they lose a b*tch, this is not the huge, heartwrenching thing it would be to you. They look in the paper or go down to the dog auction (yes, really) and get another.
They advertise pups and cute little pictures at 6 to 7 weeks old. If they can sell right to you, they get more.

If it isn't sold by 8 weeks, 9 at the most, they call up a broker or bring them to the auction where someone will buy the lot. From there they go to pet stores. Some don't bother marketing and just ship the whole litter at 7 weeks.
If, for some reason, it doesn't get sold there by 10 weeks, it will be back in the paper, for cheap to free if it is male, and being raised up to brood if it is female.

Papers are bought sold and traded regularly. The AKC limited registration program made a _huge_ profit for these folks off of paper trading.

I know all this because it's no secret. People think nothing of it, you can't go to a swap without seeing broodies for sale, you can't open the paper without seeing breeding groups for sale and "We'll buy your puppies!" ads from brokers.

That's how they do it and that's how they turn a profit. This method works ok for sheep, for a social predator with complex behavior that I want to have live in my house and play with my precious children - not so much.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Otter said:


> They puppy mill English bulldogs around here. B*tches are often crossbreds, 1/2 to 3/4 Bulldog, with the rest being anything that won't lose too much of the look around the face but be bigger bodied and wider hipped. Shar-peis, boxers, what have you


In that way the puppy mill is doing more for the breed than those that breed the females who need a c-section to have pups.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Pancho, not even a little bit.
They don't care what other health problems they breed in, and the mothers were bred that way as "designer dogs". All that matters in that instance is that the puppy has a wrinkly face. That's it. They don't care if that dog is dead at 3, so long as they get to sell a chunky, wrinkly pup. They are done with those pups in 10 weeks or less, and that's all they care about.

And a bunch of them _do_ need c-sections. That's why my vet does so many and why they're so cheap here. Friday is for emergencies, c-sections and spays and neuters - and you need to schedule a month in advance for a spay or neuter. No other appointments.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Otter said:


> Pancho, not even a little bit.
> They don't care what other health problems they breed in, and the mothers were bred that way as "designer dogs". All that matters in that instance is that the puppy has a wrinkly face. That's it. They don't care if that dog is dead at 3, so long as they get to sell a chunky, wrinkly pup. They are done with those pups in 10 weeks or less, and that's all they care about.
> 
> And a bunch of them _do_ need c-sections. That's why my vet does so many and why they're so cheap here. Friday is for emergencies, c-sections and spays and neuters - and you need to schedule a month in advance for a spay or neuter. No other appointments.


I am sure it is a money thing. But by using crossbred dogs they are lowering the number of c-sections needed. It isn't in the interest of bettering the breed but by lowering the number of c-sections needed they are doing that.

I began to notice several years ago there was a rise in the number of breeders who were distancing themselves from the puppy mills. While this sounds good many of them are breeding to a standard or a popular look that is hurting the breed. If a person is really interested in the breed why breed a dog that cannot have a live birth without c-section? Why breed a dog that has a head and shoulders so wide and large that they can not be born naturally? Why breed a dog that has a nose so mashed up that it can't breathe right?

A breeder can get all of the test done that is possible but if they continue to breed for a certain look that effects the life of the dog they are not improving the breed. If they decide to breed out those things they are going in the right direction. The problem is people will not buy these dogs. A breeder has to breed for these defects. 
No matter what a breeder may say. If they continue to breed a defect into their breed just to sell a pup they are not in it for the betterment of the breed.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I felt the same way you do. 
I guess you could say I looked down on breeders who bred these smash faced dogs that couldn't breathe and always needed Cs.
Then on a forum I meet someone who bred/showed Chins that said not all had prob breathing. I couldn't believe her, I knew better. and then she said her's free whelp!! she must be kidding right?!
So she invited me over and low and behold most of her dogs didn't have a prob breathing! and there was a ***** with pups and no C-section!
I had to stop and rethink my views.

all breeds have defects. it is the defects that make them different/a breed, otherwise they would all be Carolina dogs or wolfs. I agree some are more drastic the others.

chihuahuas are known to have probs that may need a C but with careful evaluation of the pelvic width I have had very few.
and when I do it is most often a turned pup and not something due to the pairing/breeding. so even though chihuahuas have defects (small,dome head...) most breeders want to keep them a free whelping breed.

but if BLM feels her ***** is better off with a C in the daytime that is her choice (and money) she can still have the free whelping ability of the breed by only breeding bitches that can free whelp (pelvic evaluation) yet still have a C for the *****'s safety.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

I actually liked the part where you said you wanted your best dogs to contribute to the gene pool because the breed is rare. That should be good!

Do you know what I like about breeding for show animals? The less good ones can find homes as pets. It is not a bad life for an animal, to be a pet. Mind, kids do have a deplorable habit of dressing their pets up (My daughters cat is wearing a red harness as we speak. Before that it was the blue collar with the bell), but, every living thing has to suffer a certain loss of dignity SOME of the time!!!!!!

I can relate to people wanting a pet they can be proud of. I see it in my DD when she brings home something new from the pet store for her cat to wear! But, if that is not the vision that you have for your best animals, then so be it! Like the lady says on project runway, you have to believe in your vision! That does not make your customers wrong, it means that their vision is not yours!


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

I think Bull Terriers are fun, good-looking dogs. But knowing that a C-section is necessary to get puppies makes them go on the Breeds I Will Never Own list. Putting a dog through surgery so you can get puppies is repulsive to me. I'm really disheartened to find that this is common in breeds other than Bulldogs. If a dog cannot whelp puppies naturally, then in my mind, it shouldn't be having puppies. It's cruel in my mind to put something through major surgery so you can have puppies. I'm trying to say this in the nicest way possible, because I've always enjoyed BML's posts, and don't want to offend, but I am just baffled by people who are dog lovers who are *for* breeding these dogs. If having pups will kill her, to me, that's Darwin waving the "Um, HELLO" flag.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I don't think that BLM was saying that having the pups would kill her but a vet that doesn't understand the breed COULD if a C was need due to problems.

In chihuahuas we do have some breeders who plan a C. though most of us just breed to a lager ***** with a wide pelvic opening.

I think bully breeds have a historical ( and useful) reason for having a heavy wide front and a narrower rear. make the chances of a stuck pup higher then other breeds.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

SilverFlame819 said:


> I think Bull Terriers are fun, good-looking dogs. But knowing that a C-section is necessary to get puppies makes them go on the Breeds I Will Never Own list.


I never said a C-sec was NECESSARY in my breed. I said that if a Mini Bull is going to have a small litter (which is very common), the puppies will be larger and therefore more likely to get stuck.

EVERY breed can need an emergency c-section if there is a small number of larger pups :shrug:. If you had a Doberman who was only carrying 1 big puppy, that Dobe would likely be unable to free whelp it and would need a C-sec. 

Lots of breeders of MBT's who have GOOD emergency vets nearby will free whelp their dogs. Unfortunately the vets around here are clueless about my breed in general. I had a hard enough time convincing the vet at the clinic I use for repro stuff that I knew what I was talking about. They do NO after-hours care and even if they did they're an hour away. The local emergency clinic has a horrible reputation to begin with.... if you get one of the vets he's very anti-breeder and for some reason it seems EVERY ***** he has to c-sec in the middle of the night has "complications" and she "HAS" to be spayed at the same time as the c-sec. That's total bull :flame:

So yes, I choose to schedule c-sections for my bitches. Many others in my breed who are in similar situations vet-wise also choose to c-section their bitches. My friend who is a vet tech (the ***** in my siggy below is one of hers) always free whelps her puppies, but her vet is awesome and because she's an employee her vet will get up in the middle of the night and go in if she gets a stuck puppy.

I've had 2 children myself - I birthed one of them naturally and had to have an emergency c-section with the other. I appreciate on a personal level how difficult the procedure is and how hard the recovery is, and how much easier it was on my body to have a baby naturally. 

I also care about my bitches enough to not want to make them suffer thru an incompetent vet butchering them and potentially killing both them and their puppies just because he's got a God complex and refuses to listen to what the lowly breeder is telling him about the anatomical issues of their breed.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Yep. What she SAID was that a turned pup or a very large one might require a c-section, and that holds true with most breeds. It also holds true with most mammals. And, that most vets overestimated the size of the dogs throat due to this being a rare breed, and not wanting to listen to the breeder.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

tailwagging said:


> I think bully breeds have a historical ( and useful) reason for having a heavy wide front and a narrower rear. make the chances of a stuck pup higher then other breeds.


What would you think is the reason for a heavy wide front and a narrower rear besides the looks?


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I don't know. that is why I said I THINK. I do think I read it somewhere... but bullys are not my breed/breeds so I am not sure. 
the wide fount I think was for balance. narrow rear ...??? 
when I get time I will look into it.


----------



## JasoninMN (Feb 24, 2006)

Show breeders used to think a wide chest, low slung body and a under bite helped with bull baiting. They took it to the extreme. Some even claim that the wrinkles drew the blood away from the dogs face. Its all B.S. and the best example of function not following form. A bulldog couldn't even breathe if it got a hold of a bull in its present state. Interestedly I watched a match the other day between a bulldog and a Am staff. Not sure what the lady was thinking who matched her bulldog but it was in china or japan and they don't think. They match everything. Anyways the poor dog had no chance at getting a hold of the other dog but I am sure its owner read they were good fighting dogs somewhere. The match was over quickly because she realized her dog was going to get killed.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

JasoninMN said:


> Show breeders used to think a wide chest, low slung body and a under bite helped with bull baiting. They took it to the extreme. Some even claim that the wrinkles drew the blood away from the dogs face. Its all B.S. and the best example of fucntion not following form. A bulldog couldn't even breathe if it got a hold of a bull in its present state. Interestedly I watched a match the other day between a bulldog and a Am staff. Not sure what the lady was thinking who matched her bulldog but it was in china or japan and they don't think. They match everything. Anyways the poor dog had no chance at getting a hold of the other dog but I am sure its owner read they were good fighting dogs somewhere. The match was over quickly because she realized her dog was going to get killed.


Matching an English Bulldog with anything is cruel. That's like sending a fat kid with missing limbs into a ring to fight a fit kick boxer...The bulldog would be out of breath, chocking on it's own flegm and elongated palete and rolled onto its back like a turtle on it's shell in 30 seconds...


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

tailwagging said:


> I don't know. that is why I said I THINK. I do think I read it somewhere... but bullys are not my breed/breeds so I am not sure.
> the wide fount I think was for balance. narrow rear ...???
> when I get time I will look into it.


The wide front and narrow back end isn't much use for anything except looks.

A wide chest makes for a dog with short breath, a deep chest is needed.
A wide chest makes a dog much slower.
A wide chest tends to make a dog unbalanced.

The narrow rear end is something just for looks only. A dog does most of their work on their back legs. They have to be strong. A narrow rear end would result with a dog with no drive or strength.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

this is not where I read it the first time, but an interesting read.
Bulldog History - Homestead Bullhunde - Bulldog Breeder, Ymir BC
http://www.bulldoginformation.com/bull-baiting.html
please understand I am NOT saying I think bulldogs that are in the ring are correct.


----------



## TedH71 (Jan 19, 2003)

Poms and boston terriers frequently need c-sections because their breed chapters at AKC stated that they had to be under a certain size which was not the traditional size for the breed (they used to be bigger) therefore the poor females frequently end up needing c-sections. If the breed chapters changed their requirements, we would be seeing more free whelping females and bigger dogs. I went by a boston terrier breeder in Texas and was surprised to see that all of her dogs were outside in 100 degree heat (under shade and swimming pools,etc but they were not panting at all and bigger than the breed standards because that woman has always preferred to breed the bigger sized ones. She is one of the few breeders that has stuck to her guns.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I have seen small (4 1/2 lbs) chihuahuas free whelp. I prefer larger but I have seen them do it. it is about the size of the pelvic opening and the # of pups. less pups more room for it to grow big, more pups less room to grow.
with Bostons you have a flat face so you don't have a muzzle that can be used like a wadge to open the cervix easier


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

The problem in Bostons is 3-fold.

-obstructive dystocia or flattened pelvic opening
-brachycephalic structure
-small litter size in show lines

There are 3 size classifications in the standard, however what you see as a preference in the ring is right about 15 lbs, with bitches commonly being shown down into the 10 lb range. There is no minimum. 25 lbs is the max range, and actually a decent sized dog.

I personally prefer the large ones because of substance and soundness. Mine stay outside in 100 degree heat with zero issues, despite the fact that they have a fully air conditioned kennel that they wont use. I only breed 100% clear breathers, and no extreme heads. One thing that I have found when tightly line breeding on show lines, is that litter size rapidly decreases, along with the actual size of the dogs (9 lb range).


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

can you tell a flatten pelvic by feel?


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Sorry I'm a bit late to this, regarding Limited Registration:



Otter said:


> They will only sell dogs with full registration to others in their little club, You can switch breeds, but to just jump in and start, it's so hard that most folks just don't bother. They either give up on even the idea of showing or go eleswhere.
> 
> ...It was about keeping that little club exclusive. Used to be, you could sell Jr a pup with no disqualifications so they could get their feet wet in showing and not be laughed out of the ring, and everyone was happy. Now ... when you lose kids, the sport dies with you.
> 
> ...It's not about ownership, it's not about keeping dogs out of the hands of bad people - it's about control. It might make you feel better, but it does no good for either dogs or showing


I have to disagree that Limited Reg is some sort of diabolical conspiracy. I think of it as just the opposite--it encourages "pet" folks to get out there and compete in AKC events like Obedience and Agility, while doing what it can to enforce breeding restrictions. The breeder can lift the Limited status and change to Full Registration at any time, should the owner prove the dog is breedworthy. 

If someone is interested in Conformation, then it's up to them to choose a breeder who is willing to help and mentor. Granted, not all breeders are willing to do this, preferring to keep their dogs in the hands of people they know and trust. If that is what you mean by keeping things "exclusive", then I suppose that's one way to look at it... but I really do believe that breeders want to keep their dogs out of the hands of bad people, first and foremost. 

Control? Yes, as a breeder, of course you would want to keep control of your name and reputation; if you sell a pup with Full Registration to someone who *says* they want to show, and then they turn around and use your pup as part of a puppy mill, it's going to be devastating for the breeder, the dogs, and the breed as a whole.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Wolf Flower said:


> if you sell a pup with Full Registration to someone who *says* they want to show, and then they turn around and use your pup as part of a puppy mill, it's going to be devastating for the breeder, the dogs, and the breed as a whole.


This is were people ( snobby breeders) need to understand all breeders can have this happen to them. 
it should reflect on the one who lied and bought the dog not the one who was lied to.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

tailwagging said:


> This is were people ( snobby breeders) need to understand all breeders can have this happen to them.
> it should reflect on the one who lied and bought the dog not the one who was lied to.


Yes, but what happens is, your bloodlines start looking pretty bad after a puppy miller gets hold of them... and your name gets associated with bad breeding. Certainly, people who are in the know will not blame you, but there's a vast section of the populace that isn't in the know.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Wolf Flower said:


> Yes, but what happens is, your bloodlines start looking pretty bad after a puppy miller gets hold of them... and your name gets associated with bad breeding. Certainly, people who are in the know will not blame you, but there's a vast section of the populace that isn't in the know.


It is not just ones who aren't in the know. You can hear breeder bashing from ones who should/do know better. competition can be a ugly thing:gossip:. and some just love to bash everyone for anything until it happens to them,well then is it different 
sorry for the rant


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

tailwagging said:


> It is not just ones who aren't in the know. You can hear breeder bashing from ones who should/do know better. competition can be a ugly thing:gossip:. and some just love to bash everyone for anything


True enough--yet another reason for a breeder to be VERY careful who they sell their pups to, especially if on Full Registration.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

one can only be so careful. and hope people/buys are being truthful.
otherwise we will loose any newbies like otter says.
breeders are ----ed if they do and ----ed if they don't


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Wolf Flower, if you read everything I wrote on it, you'll see why I feel the way I do. There is a simple solution that would have kept puppy mill types from mass-breeding shoddy, papered dogs, but still welcomed active newcomers to the sport.

Instead, it was done in a way that encourages making big bucks off of papers, drove many people away from showing and did _Less Then Nothing_ to stop puppy mills from pumping out AKC registered dogs 

_In fact, it makes them MORE money then it did before._

When something not only fails that drastically, but anyone looking at it logically can see that it was practically designed to fail in the way it has - how can you think there wasn't another motive (hint $$$) that was not it's intended purpose.

So you don't have to go all the way back through to see how simply this could be avoided and replaced with a system that works - find a way that this could fail more epically then the system in place.

Have _all_ pups be on Limited Registration, and dogs on LR can show in any event. Once they title in ANYTHING, obedience, conformation, you name it - the dog gets Full Registration. 
ANY title gets you full registration for your dog, and puppies can not be registered without at least ONE fully registered parent.

Now, even the puppy mill folks have to at least show their stud dog. Or find someone who does show and is willing to let them use him.

The AKC is a show dog registry - let them register dogs that show.

If you want to really sink the nail in the coffin, after 10 years, ask that the b*tch is also titled, but allow a CGC to suffice for one parent. 

It will never happen, because there's not as much fast money in it. 
There_ is_ lots of money in it, as it encourages small breeders and new competitors, and over time would have people flocking to AKC dogs as then the papers _would_ mean quality - but you lose the fast buck, and the "commercial breeders" won't go for it. Neither will the snobs or control freaks.

Could it be abused? Yes, any system at all could be abused. Could it be abused on the Huge, Massive scale that the current system encourages? I don't see how.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

that wouldn't work otter. buyes even now don't know the difference between AKC,ConKC,APR,APRI or any others, they just want papers. brag rights. to them it is "who cares if AKC is the only one that inspects kennels".
truthfully most real irresponsible breeders don't want to use AKC and be inspected.plus they cost more to get the paperwork on pups.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Tailwagging, if buyers didn't want papers, we wouldn't be having this conversation. 

And we can't talk about protecting all dogs from being farmed. They'll farm CheWeenies or some such. But if you're talking about keeping your AKC registered dogs out of puppy mills, and keeping breeding in the hands of people that care at least a little, while not driving people away - this is how I think it can be done.

Edited to add; The AKC kennel inspection is no big deal. There is one up the road from me. If you can keep clean rabbits you can pass. This might be regional, but it doesn't dissuade many, and certainly not the people selling AKC registered Poodles and Shiba-Inus in the Walmart parking lot, or the ones selling registered Pugs and Chihuahuas (and unregistered Pugwuahuas) that we pass to go to town.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

AKC wants to make money also.
They make money by selling registration papers.
If they do anything to limit the number of dogs they register they take the hit in their wallet.
Years ago there was a push by some AKC people to limit the number of pups one person could register in a year. I don't know what happened to that idea as I don't mess with AKC.


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

in 52 yrs of marriage we've quite a few dogs that were AKC registered. We never showed one. We could not deal with unspayed dogs and they were all just pets anyway. My husband always wanted a pure bred dog. Funny, now that we have Sammi and she has such a sweet personality and is so cute. It really does not matter what she is. Same thing with little Pluto. He is so sweet, cute and loves everybody. 
It took me a while to convince my husband that we(I) could not handle a big GSD again and that we should look at mixed breeds. He was completely against a mix til he saw a pic of Sammi.
He says now that Sammi at 50lbs is the size dog we need. 
bluemoonluck, do you ever keep any of your pups?


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Otter said:


> _In fact, it makes them MORE money then it did before._


AKC is a business--I don't see anything wrong with making money, in and of itself. I am not sure how you see Limited Reg as a "failure". The only thing wrong with it in my view, is the fact that puppy mills can buy a pup on Limited and still breed it, while having an AKC registration number so that the pups can be pedigreed and registered with some other fake registry.



> Have _all_ pups be on Limited Registration, and dogs on LR can show in any event. Once they title in ANYTHING, obedience, conformation, you name it - the dog gets Full Registration.
> ANY title gets you full registration for your dog, and puppies can not be registered without at least ONE fully registered parent.


That's an interesting idea. I'd counter that BOTH parents should be titled, OFA'd, and tested clear for any other breed-specific diseases. That is what they do in Germany for German Shepherd dogs--all pups are given full registration, but they cannot receive the papers needed for breeding until they pass a working trial, get a conformation rating, and pass a hip/elbow x-ray. Even in that system there is abuse--I don't think you can get around abuse in ANY system--but they are doing a great deal more over there than we do here in the US.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

When a dog has papers you kind of know what they will be when they grow up. My terrier hunts the snakes in my back yard. My Brittany tracked down stray chickens when they got out, and also kept deer and rabbits out of the vegetable garden. That is what they were bred for and that is what they did/do!

Sometimes a buyer really wants the dog to work, and sometimes they just want a pet. For those who want a working dog, a dog with papers is best! I don't think it matters what KIND of papers they are, because either system will show that the dog has been bred for the job!


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Terri said:


> When a dog has papers you kind of know what they will be when they grow up. My terrier hunts the snakes in my back yard. My Brittany tracked down stray chickens when they got out, and also kept deer and rabbits out of the vegetable garden. That is what they were bred for and that is what they did/do!
> 
> Sometimes a buyer really wants the dog to work, and sometimes they just want a pet. For those who want a working dog, a dog with papers is best! I don't think it matters what KIND of papers they are, because either system will show that the dog has been bred for the job!


I think you're confusing "papers" with good breeding.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

tailwagging said:


> can you tell a flatten pelvic by feel?


I wish I knew the answer but I don't personally know anyone trying to breed competitive show dogs that can free whelp. The dogs outside the US free whelp more often for whatever reasons. Most of the pet lines also free whelp. the x rays I have seen showed a narrowing and difference in the inner opening of the pelvis.

I thought I heard that it was possible to guess in Chihuahuas in ways other than having x rays taken? Is this true in that breed?


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Wolf Flower, I should have been more specific. 
it doesn't make the AKC more money. In fact, I think it makes them less, though I'd have to check to be sure. but I'm fairly certain that the less money after the LR program was in place for a few years is what made them start courting "commercial breeders"

It makes the puppy mills MORE money then before.

The show crowd keeps shrinking, now, more and more of the AKC's fees are from the low-end breeders. And the low-end, puppy mill type breeders are making MORE money then before. 

And I agree with you, except that I would have that as phase 2. For the reason that there are good breeders, with quality dogs, who don't finish the title on every single b*tch they have before breeding. They have good dogs, they health test, but it takes $$$ to finish a championship and sometimes they breed their girl before she's finished. Or their girl is their working dog, and they stud out. 
I know a guy with an amazing lab who is his hunting dog. She won't win a field trial, but every weekend all season long he is hunting her. Field trials for labs are hugely different then an afternoon hunting. She is from titled parents, has all her health testing done and was bred to a titled male. 
Honestly, I think he's doing really well as a breeder, even though he may only have one or 2 litters ever. They are good litters, from a working dog. I don't think we need to drum those folks out. 
I think that over 10 years, you'd see an improvement in quality of your average pet, I think you'd see more people enter showing (more revenue for the AKC) and more people seeing the value of a registered dog (more revenue again)


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

Wolf Flower said:


> I think you're confusing "papers" with good breeding.


Exactly. Papers don't prove a thing except that the owner of a litter is claiming which dogs were the parents of the litter. They do not have to prove it though. I am sure that puppy mills swap papers around all the time. If you need a dog to do a job or to show, you buy only from a good reputable breeder.

I don't mind a bit paying a lot more for a pup from a breeder who health tests their dogs. That extra amount works out to pennies a day over the life of the pup. It's foolish to get a breed that is known for genetic defects from a breeder who does not do the health testing recommended for that breed.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Do we really have to hide the word "*****" on this forum?


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Wolf Flower said:


> Do we really have to hide the word "*****" on this forum?


LOL, I just got used to it getting censored online - I never even tried to type it out :rotfl:


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Otter said:


> It makes the puppy mills MORE money then before.


I think it probably makes the puppy mill REGISTRIES more money--and in the past 5 years or so I think I've seen three new "registries" pop up just for the sake of registering dogs on AKC's Limited Reg. This is tremendously unethical, though not illegal, so there isn't much anyone can do about it except shun these organizations.

I don't see how it makes puppy mills more money, unless you suppose that they can charge more per puppy because they are "registered" with some bunk organization like the ACA, CKC (Continental Kennel Club), etc. But there are some registries that will register your dog based on a photo, so technically you don't need papers of any kind. 

Sadly, I think unethical breeders have always been around, always will be around, because no matter what we do, there will always be a segment of the population that buys from them.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Otter said:


> LOL, I just got used to it getting censored online - I never even tried to type it out :rotfl:


Yeah, this site has some really weird (and seemingly arbitrary) rules about what words we can and can't use. I think, because of the religious connotations, we can say "hell", and in the Poultry forum we can use the word "cock", but we can't use a string of characters (like in cartoons) to denote a swear word. I once got a stern warning for typing something like that.

I am on one forum where the word "dick" is automatically censored, so I guess if your name is Dick, you're outta luck. 

Sorry for the off-topic... now back to your regularly scheduled programming...


----------



## Maura (Jun 6, 2004)

Otter, I would be stricter than you are. I would register dogs who passed testing, like they do with churro sheep. Even stricter, though. I would have the dog measured and have everything compared to the dog's height. For Bostons, take the height and determine what the length should be for this breed, based on height. Measure around the chest, again determining what the chest circumference should be based on height, then head, muzzle, angles of the rear, etc. I'd give points for each stage, say 5 down to 1. So, a dog that was a little over sized would get a point taken off for height. If it was a little long, a point or two taken off. I would give only 1 point for a severely flattened face, I would take off a point for a corkscrew tail. Everything would be pointed on the health of the dog. If the dog had too few points it would not be accepted as "breedable". Then, I'd do DNA testing for things that are in the breed. I'd also do a temperament test, so the dog would have to have enough training to be able to pass a temperament test and not be dog aggressive. The dog would have to be able to run, jump well (proofing the physical structure). If the dog is accepted as breedable, its progeny would be registered. What they do in the show ring would have no bearing on "breedable". All those Bostons with normal length (elongated) palettes can win in the show ring, wouldn't mean they were breeders. I guess I am almost as bad as the Germans with their GSD's.

But, can you imagine what it would do to the puppy millers? To the back yard breeders? It would give AKC papers a good reputation because you'd know that the sire and dam of your puppies were "approved", DNA tested, etc.


----------



## Maura (Jun 6, 2004)

Otter, I would be stricter than you are. I would register dogs who passed testing, like they do with churro sheep. Even stricter, though. I would have the dog measured and have everything compared to the dog's height. For Bostons, take the height and determine what the length should be for this breed, based on height. Measure around the chest, again determining what the chest circumference should be based on height, then head, muzzle, angles of the rear, etc. I'd give points for each stage, say 5 down to 1. So, a dog that was a little over sized would get a point taken off for height. If it was a little long, a point or two taken off. I would give only 1 point for a severely flattened face, I would take off a point for a corkscrew tail. Everything would be pointed on the health of the dog. If the dog had too few points it would not be accepted as "breedable". Then, I'd do DNA testing for things that are in the breed. I'd also do a temperament test, so the dog would have to have enough training to be able to pass a temperament test and not be dog aggressive. The dog would have to be able to run, jump well (proofing the physical structure). If the dog is accepted as breedable, its progeny would be registered. What they do in the show ring would have no bearing on "breedable". All those Bostons with normal length (elongated) palettes can win in the show ring, wouldn't mean they were breeders. I guess I am almost as bad as the Germans with their GSD's.

But, can you imagine what it would do to the puppy millers? To the back yard breeders? It would give AKC papers a good reputation because you'd know that the sire and dam of your puppies were "approved", DNA tested, etc.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

Wolf Flower said:


> I think you're confusing "papers" with good breeding.


Not exactly.

Papers are the proof of which dog is out of which parents. And, sometimes strangers who want to sell you things will lie. 

A seller might lie to sell you a puppy. A seller might claim that a puppy is out of working parents or show parents once they figure out what the buyer wants, but the AKC or whoever will not. The papers are what shows that the dog has been bred to do a particular job, whether that job is to look pretty in the show ring or to hunt. Most buyers cannot look at a 6 week old puppy and TELL if it is bred to hunt or for the ring! Though you folks might!


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

AKC is not a 'Show Dog registry' their just a dog registry who has foolishly set themselves up to police those who use their services. They are floundering in the face of so many other registries and have lost huge amounts of revenue because of Limited registration, it was the stupidest thing they ever thought of. I used to sell my puppies on limited, and then started checking on how many people were registering them. As of last count 85% of my buyers did not register their puppies, so much for the so called 'coveted' AKC papers. They just wanted a lovely healthy well bred pet, and could care less about the papers. Then of course there's the fact that Limited Reg can get you full Reg with one of the faux registries- so now I'm experimenting with selling them with no reg papers at all, for a bit less. The results, they still go out the door, to lovely pet homes, last litter I didn't register at all because their were no keepers. Granted I'm down to one litter a year. But my point is that folks seem to think that the AKC should set themselves up as some sort of policing agency, and they(AKC) have bought into it, and have suffered great losses for it. Now people here are suggesting that the AKC should impose even more restrictions, only register dogs that are titled etc etc, that would sound a death knell for the AKC, and they would wither and die. Its a registry, just a registry, they shot themselves in the foot when they drove away the commercial breeders years ago, and they've been chasing after them ever since. Thats a simple but true fact they don't want the general public knowing.

TW I just helped a friend find a lovely chihuahua boy for her young daughter, and I must say I'm terribly impressed with him. He has his CGC, and the best temperament I've seen in a small dog in a very long time. He's older, about 4, bit oversized, which is a plus, is a longcoat and a merle. He's just a gem, rolls with the punches, and takes being dressed up with good humour. I know that Chi's are supposed to have a saucy, terrier like temperament but after meeting him I feel that their are Chi's who could get their CGC. Perhaps he's just exceptional, or maybe its the merle that makes him all that and an order of fries? We both know I have a merle problem. He's something esle though.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Terri said:


> Not exactly.
> 
> Papers are the proof of which dog is out of which parents. And, sometimes strangers who want to sell you things will lie.
> 
> A seller might lie to sell you a puppy. A seller might claim that a puppy is out of working parents or show parents once they figure out what the buyer wants, but the AKC or whoever will not. The papers are what shows that the dog has been bred to do a particular job, whether that job is to look pretty in the show ring or to hunt. Most buyers cannot look at a 6 week old puppy and TELL if it is bred to hunt or for the ring! Though you folks might!


You're talking about pedigrees, not registration. The registry only records the pedigrees and who was bred to whom. Who is bred to whom is decided by breeders, not registries.

And, just so you are aware, pedigrees and registration papers can easily be faked--now that there is DNA testing, everything can be verified, but most people will not bother to get their dogs DNA tested if it is just going to be a pet.

This is why you have to trust the breeder you are working with.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

gapeach said:


> bluemoonluck, do you ever keep any of your pups?


Yes! Every breeding that I do, I'm doing it because I've done my homework and I know there's a good chance that a very nice show pup (for me!) will come from that breeding. But I can't keep ALL of them myself.... my husband would kill me LOL. So I have to be selective. If I do a breeding and the genetics didn't work out the way I thought they would (and I do pedigree research, look at what both sire/dam have produced in the past, etc etc - but genetics is a roll of the dice) and there isn't a top-notch pup there, I won't keep one. 

There are exceptions, of course... I wanted to pass on a ***** I got from a breeding to a nice male in the UK (spent $$$$ importing his semen too) but my vet at the time was the Standard Breeder/internationally acclaimed Bully judge that I mentioned before and he told me "She's ugly now, but she's going to grow out nicely! KEEP HER!!!" I did, and she won Winner's ***** at Nationals last year 

I've also let some really nice pups go to show homes before that were certainly show potential and that were NICE, but since I can only have so many dogs here myself and the pup wasn't SMASHINGLY awesome, I let them go to another show home. 

I also won't keep a PLL carrier male, no matter how nice he is. I have no place in my breeding program at the moment for a carrier male :shrug: because I can't use him on any of my carrier bitches, and I know lots of very nice carrier males that I can use on my clear bitches. I'm hoping to get a good PLL clear male from the next breeding I do...the only male I have right now is 8 1/2 years old and he's a carrier, and I need a NICE clear male. But again, I'm not going to keep any ol' male I produce just because he's PLL clear. I'm waiting on the "OMG" factor clear male :grin:.


----------



## Terri (May 10, 2002)

BarbadosSheep said:


> If you need a dog to do a job or to show, you buy only from a good reputable breeder.


That is the problem. I only buy a dog every 10 years or so, and I do not know which breeders are reputable. I don't even know how to find out.

I got papers and a pedigree for Einstein, from the backyard breeder who bred his good hunting dog to a ***** who also hunted. If he had lied and claimed the dog was bred to show, it would have been very easy to find out. I am certain you folks have other avenues to find out about the background of a dog, but I do not know what they are! But, like just about everybody who buys a dog with papers, I can look at the papers and know who to contact if I think the seller has lied!

Which he hadn't. I bought a dog bred to hunt, and he happily scared the rabbits out of the garden, stared at the possums which terrified them. and found and pointed any bird that refused to get into the henhouse at night. 

Bred properly? Yes. But I only knew that because of the papers.


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

Terri said:


> Not exactly.
> 
> Papers are the proof of which dog is out of which parents. And, sometimes strangers who want to sell you things will lie.


Papers do not prove a thing. All they prove is that the breeder was in possession of a set of papers which they claim belong to the pups parents. Puppy mills will use papers from dogs who died to register litters from other dogs. It happens all of the time.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Terri said:


> That is the problem. I only buy a dog every 10 years or so, and I do not know which breeders are reputable. I don't even know how to find out.


In the Internet age, it is a lot easier than it used to be. Simply find a forum for the breed you are interested in, and hang around for a while. They can be a great resource to ask questions, find recommended breeders in your area, etc.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Haven, I used that phrase because it's off their website. I don't have time to search through their massive website right now and find exactly where, but that was part of their justification for the LR program, that they are just a show registry and that "policing" the breeds was the job of the breeders and breed clubs.

Which is why I had suggested what I did. You are a show dog registry, fine, register show dogs. 
Personally, I would be in Maura's camp and do it like the Germans - but that is not the AKC's job. Let them do what they said is what they're for, and register show dogs.

I think that in choosing to give any form of Limited Registration, they should do it right. In a way that fits with their mission statement - and this IS copy pasted right from the website - 

_The American Kennel Club is dedicated to upholding the integrity of its Registry, promoting the sport of purebred dogs and breeding for type and function_
American Kennel Club - AKC Mission Statement

Fine. Great. Do that.
Instead, what they're doing is narrowing the ranks of their show crowd ( example;in 2 *years* of looking for a pup from a certain breed, I have found exactly ONE breeder who will sell a female pup - even on a co-own, to a new show home. You basically have to be an established shower/breeder to get a girl pup to show. Why do I want a girl? Not really to breed, though I would on a co-own. I just really like girls, and never, ever end up with one.)
And the making a huge racket out of papers.

For the poster who wondered how that worked - Show breeders of X breed get an average of $1500 for a pup. You will NOT get a fully registered one. BYB will sell you a registered pup for _only_ $2000. 
They will say that their grandparents were all show winners but tehy got tired of the politics and the way the breed was going.
Used to be, you could look that up. If you didn't know how, any number of folks could teach you. Now, like Terri - who knows? How many folks - even vet techs or groomers - even run into a show dog these days? I know that when I was grooming 15 years ago, I used to. When I was grooming 5 years ago, not a one. There are less. Less folks who dabble in showing, less people who buy, less who even look.

So Average Joe sees that Breeder A will not sell registered pups because they are not breeding/ showing quality.
Breeder B, WILL, and is happy to say that they are breeding quality.
Average Joe doesn't know which of the many numbers on the AKC website to call to find this out, and probably got grilled by the breed club for even wanting a fully registered dog - so he goes with Breeder B, figures _of course_ a show breeder has lots of dogs, and didn't Uncle Bob get good Ol' Shep from a kennel, and happily pays MORE money for the papers that everyone told him meant the dog was better quality.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Haven said:


> I wish I knew the answer but I don't personally know anyone trying to breed competitive show dogs that can free whelp. The dogs outside the US free whelp more often for whatever reasons. Most of the pet lines also free whelp. the x rays I have seen showed a narrowing and difference in the inner opening of the pelvis.
> 
> I thought I heard that it was possible to guess in Chihuahuas in ways other than having x rays taken? Is this true in that breed?


most of the time you can feel the width between the ischiums (from the outside). it should be wider then your thumb hopefully two thumbs wide. I never thought of feeling for depth of the rim.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Wolf Flower, the number of new folks I've seen getting absolutely shredded on such forums completely eclipses the number of times I've seen someone nicely told what to look for and how to look up XYZ kennel's show records.

The folks who hang out there seem to feel that in the age of the internet, you should already know these things.
It is sad.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Honorine said:


> TW I just helped a friend find a lovely chihuahua boy for her young daughter, and I must say I'm terribly impressed with him. He has his CGC, and the best temperament I've seen in a small dog in a very long time. He's older, about 4, bit oversized, which is a plus, *is a longcoat *and a merle. He's just a gem, rolls with the punches, and takes being dressed up with good humour. I know that Chi's are supposed to have a saucy, terrier like temperament but after meeting him I feel that their are Chi's who could get their CGC. Perhaps he's just exceptional, or maybe its the merle that makes him all that and an order of fries? We both know I have a merle problem. He's something esle though.


longcoats as a rule are more lay back, sweet and it is a boy. I am not saying that a chi can't get a CGC BUT many good ones wouldn't stand for it and that would be a loss to the breed. mostly your bitches. bitches are called bitches for a reason
and many people want that sauciness of a small alarm dog.


----------



## Haven (Aug 16, 2010)

Otter said:


> Haven, I used that phrase because it's off their website. I don't have time to search through their massive website right now and find exactly where, but that was part of their justification for the LR program, that they are just a show registry and that "policing" the breeds was the job of the breeders and breed clubs.


Oops, I think you are talking to someone other than me??? I was talking to TW about pelvis size. Now Im confused about what you are saying to me about a phrase from a website?



> Tailwagging: most of the time you can feel the width between the ischiums (from the outside). it should be wider then your thumb hopefully two thumbs wide. I never thought of feeling for depth of the rim.


Thanks, I will Google ischium.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Otter said:


> the number of new folks I've seen getting absolutely shredded on such forums completely eclipses the number of times I've seen someone nicely told what to look for and how to look up XYZ kennel's show records.


here here! 
you otta try a non moderated breeder's forum! wooo hooo talk about a forum that just jumping with "passion"! 
( a few here know the one i speak of lol)


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Haven said:


> Thanks, I will Google ischium.


now that is for chi, not sure it would work for Bostons heads


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

I wouldn't send my worst enemy to a breed forum, dog people draw blood! I avoid them like the plague, often don't join in here because I learned my lesson a long time ago. 
Interesting about the longcoat, I had heard that they were mellower. In my breed its the girls that think they are 10 feet tall and bulletproof and are usually the outgoing ones, boys often are softer and more reserved. I could probably get CGC's on a number of girls, but not my boys. Their sissy boy momma lovers.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Whoops, sorry Haven, I meant Honorine.


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

Their fools Otter, puffing out their chests saying 'We're the Dogs Champion' while all the time their putting their hand out to Hunte Corporation hoping to get some of the commercial breeders back. They can say whatever they want in their mission statement that doesn't make it so, and actions speak louder than words. Its all about the money, and the image they want to project, its all lights and shadows, and thats not going to change because they have to follow the money to survive.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Mini Bull people are very friendly/helpful IME with newbies....until they start with the "I want to buy a puppy because I want to breed!" stuff. Then we tend to give them an education, and that can become very heated. 

We get a lot of "My wife/husband says if we're going to spend this much $ on a dog, we're going to breed it at least once so we can make our money back". And yeah, we probably come across as less than hospitable to these people.

But if someone comes into the forums we have and asks pet questions or show questions, on the whole we're helpful. There were a LOT of first-time MBT owners showing quality dogs at our Nationals a few weeks ago! If someone is genuinely interested in the breed and they don't give off the "I'm looking to get rich!" vibe, there are several of us who will help them out.

We do have the stereotypical nasty/snobby dog people in our breed of course  One of them told a newbie on a forum who was all excited because her dog had won a major that "You should handle your own dog, it's a more honest win that way than having a handler take him in the ring." I immediately jumped in and told her that I don't show my own dogs either, and neither does this person or that person, and that if she wanted to use a handler it was perfectly legal/ethical. And I wasn't the only person who said the same things I did on the forum either.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I use a handler mom daughter team now (who's sister/daughter shows MBT)
I don't like to have to worry about ring times, what to wear,is my hair done....
plus I've got to milk and gather eggs.:grin:


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

I have two long coated chihuahuas and they have amazing personalities! They are outgoing, friendly and love kids. Not snappy or nervous at all. They are both from back yard breeders.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Otter said:


> Instead, what they're doing is narrowing the ranks of their show crowd ( example;in 2 *years* of looking for a pup from a certain breed, I have found exactly ONE breeder who will sell a female pup - even on a co-own, to a new show home. You basically have to be an established shower/breeder to get a girl pup to show.


Okay, so your beef with Limited Reg is that it discourages CONFORMATION showing, which is the one AKC-sanctioned event you can't compete in without Full Registration. 

I think it is more an issue of breeders being overprotective of their breed and distrustful of newbies who want to get into showing. I think THAT has gotten worse over the years, but not because of LR. I think it's more because of liability issues, Animal Rights wackos, etc. that make everybody more paranoid in general than in years past. 



> So Average Joe sees that Breeder A will not sell registered pups because they are not breeding/ showing quality.
> Breeder B, WILL, and is happy to say that they are breeding quality.
> Average Joe doesn't know which of the many numbers on the AKC website to call to find this out, and probably got grilled by the breed club for even wanting a fully registered dog - so he goes with Breeder B, figures _of course_ a show breeder has lots of dogs, and didn't Uncle Bob get good Ol' Shep from a kennel, and happily pays MORE money for the papers that everyone told him meant the dog was better quality.


Yes, that happens, I am not sure how that is the fault of Limited Registration, though. Before LR, "pet" people simply didn't get the papers on the pup until it was spayed/neutered. Are you saying that puppy millers are more likely to breed with a an AKC Limited Reg, than they are to breed with no papers at all? I might agree with you if there weren't registries that "register" your dog as a certain breed with nothing more than a photo.

And regarding breed forums, I find that a lot depends on your approach. It is always best, if you can, to lurk for a few weeks before you post anything, just to asess the climate. I find that if you come right out and say "I'm a newbie, I'm interested in x breed, but I don't know where to start in finding a breeder", you'll get helpful replies. There may be some questioning of your intent (like I said, dog people tend toward paranoia these days), but as long as you don't say anything about wanting to BREED your dog, people are mostly nice.


----------



## Pops2 (Jan 27, 2003)

pancho said:


> The wide front and narrow back end isn't much use for anything except looks.
> 
> A wide chest makes for a dog with short breath, a deep chest is needed.
> A wide chest makes a dog much slower.
> ...


this only applies to the extremes. otherwise it is relative for example chessies have wide chests, scenthounds have deep chests & sighthounds have very deep chests. sighthounds have the best speed but poor endurance compared to scent hounds or even chessies. scenthounds will run a chessie into the ground. but put that same hound in the water and the chessie will be swimming long after the hound has drowned. likewise for holding and CONTROLLING a big hog i prefer a reasonably wide chest on a dog. IME they have better leverage to manage a hog and overpower them. i also like a short thick neck & good muscling on the shoulders as well as the back legs.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Yes, it's just one event, but it is the _main_ event. And it really does discourage a lot of people. I know, because I talk to them, work with them and try to get them to other events. Not because I think showing is so uber-awesome, but to try to get people to do things with their dogs.
People feel shut out right from the start, and then don't bother. Technically, yes, a breeder can change their mind and give full registration, and maybe will if the dog wins this, that and the other thing - but have you ever known that to happen? I haven't, but I have met people disappointing because no matter what their dog DOES win, they have a ceiling, right there from the start.
The UKC is getting a lot of folks because of it.

And yes, anyway you want to look at it, the LR program has largely become a pyramid scheme. If you had registered dogs before it came into place, from there after you could breed them and sell the papers for more money. And it got done. A lot.
Are they more likely to breed an LR dog - what I'm trying to say is _they don't have to._ They've been buying papers (with and without a dog attached) since it started. It created a huge market for full papers. And, since the only limit on them is the breeder's say so, all you had to do was have papers from before the start and you were in business.
And that business has boomed.

The new registries mostly started with the designer dog craze. But there have always been those offshoot registries. What lets them flourish now is lack of competition.

I am not against the entire concept of limited registration, and have given an example that I think would work, for the protection of breeds and the long-term health of the clubs.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I don't have time to get into it but the off shoot CKC started due to LR and DNA requirements. others came in when AKC bashed the large commercial puppy house by someone saying they had a "gut aversion " to them at a board meeting.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Otter said:


> Are they more likely to breed an LR dog - what I'm trying to say is _they don't have to._ They've been buying papers (with and without a dog attached) since it started. It created a huge market for full papers. And, since the only limit on them is the breeder's say so, all you had to do was have papers from before the start and you were in business.
> And that business has boomed.


Okay, I'm confused... WHO is selling Full Reg papers, and how do they get them? And how does LR increase this practice? People have been buying and selling papers for as long as purebred dogs have been a thing...


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

I think what she means is that since LR some disreputable people are over numbering their litter (or falsifying litters) to get papers to sell to those who have bought a LR dog and yet wants to register litters off it.

this happened even before LR, with pups with no papers.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Wolf Flower said:


> Okay, I'm confused... WHO is selling Full Reg papers, and how do they get them? And how does LR increase this practice? People have been buying and selling papers for as long as purebred dogs have been a thing...


It was a practice of some breeders to register an extra pup or two along with every litter of pups they raised. Also to buy a pup to replace one that died early.
Registration papers are very easy to get.


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

CKC was founded by Bob Yarnall Jr and others. AKC foolishly wrote some letter saying that they had a 'gut aversion' to the big commercial breeders(but were happy to take their money) and the commercial breeders voted with their feet. Bob Yarnell then had a falling out with the other board members of CKC and left and founded ACA. He's very tight with the Amish here in PA, even going to court with them when their trying to expand their breeding facilities. 

In 2008 PA passed some very prohibitive legislation aimed at the high volume breeders here. If your kennel license was for 50 dogs a year and over you had to meet some very strict guidelines and change your kennels ventilation and heating. In 2008 there were over 300 licensed high volume kennels in PA, today there is barely over a hundred. There has been a witch hunt for breeders going on for the last 4 years, even those who do not go over the limits have been turned in, often by the competition. IN PA you have to go over 26 dogs a year to be required to have a kennel license. Its been ugly, and unfair, many have been harassed by Animal Rights and Rescue groups mercilessly. In PA these days if your a breeder your a target. Sad to say its people like Bob Yarnell who are the only ones who will fight for breeders rights in PA, and to say he's shifty is an understatement.

For anyone who doesn't know who the Yarnells are Bob Sr founded Kimbertal Kennels back in the 60's. Kimbertal is credited with doing great harm to the Doberman breed, and other large protection breeds such as Rotts and Filas. Not a great legacy the Yarnells have created.

Around here most of the dogs have ACA papers, and Yarnell has been working hard to broaden his client base, edging out CKC. Its said that Bob will put papers on anything for his Amish friends, from what I've seen I believe it.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Don't know about the ACA but the CKC will register crossbred dogs. The parents can be from completely different breeds and they will register the puppies.


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

pancho said:


> Don't know about the ACA but the CKC will register crossbred dogs. The parents can be from completely different breeds and they will register the puppies.


The CKC is into this whole "hybrid vigor" thing and actually encourages breeding mutts so they can register them, for a fee of course. I have run into very misinformed folks who claim their Morkie or puggle or whatever is not a mutt because it's registered with CKC.


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

CKC will also register a dog with 3 pictures, two witnesses claiming the dog is purebred and your say so, their not so picky.


----------



## SilverFlame819 (Aug 24, 2010)

What a train wreck. I'll stick with my ABCA dogs for now. :S


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

BarbadosSheep said:


> The CKC is into this whole "hybrid vigor" thing and actually encourages breeding mutts so they can register them, for a fee of course. I have run into very misinformed folks who claim their Morkie or puggle or whatever is not a mutt because it's registered with CKC.


Same thing with me.
A while back I saw an add on one of the groups I am on that had registered snorkies for sale.
I had to ask how they were registered when the parents were different breeds.
The people selling them didn't even know there wasn't a breed called that and insisted they were pure breeds because they had CKC papers on them.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

BarbadosSheep said:


> I have run into very misinformed folks who claim their Morkie or puggle or whatever is not a mutt because it's registered with CKC.


I have a couple of clients who think a "Morkie" or a "Puggle" is an actual breed, and you can make purebred Morkies by breeding two Morkies together.

Anyone with the smallest understanding of genetics knows that it doesn't work that way, but sadly, most people don't have this understanding.


----------



## BarbadosSheep (Jun 27, 2011)

I left a local "for sale" group because some woman got raging furious at me for calling her dog a mutt. I told her "mutt" is not a derogatory term, it's just what all mixed breeds are!! She had a "purebred registered Morkie". she actually threatened to come and kick my butt for calling her dog a mutt. Jeesh...you just can't argue with Stupid!


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

BarbadosSheep said:


> Jeesh...you just can't argue with Stupid!


lol but your in SC :gaptooth: then again so am I :ashamed: lol


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

I found the gut aversion letter-starts on page 4 column three, continues on page 5 column 1. This was in June 2001, in 2000 was when AKC started their Frequently used Sires DNA program, that also drove many of the commercial breeders to other registries. Just a little history for those who may find it enlightening.

http://www.akc.org/pdfs/about/delegates_meeting/june01.pdf


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Thank you for posting that Honorine. I never got to read it, only heard about it.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Wolf Flower said:


> Okay, I'm confused... WHO is selling Full Reg papers, and how do they get them? And how does LR increase this practice? People have been buying and selling papers for as long as purebred dogs have been a thing...





tailwagging said:


> I think what she means is that since LR some disreputable people are over numbering their litter (or falsifying litters) to get papers to sell to those who have bought a LR dog and yet wants to register litters off it.
> 
> this happened even before LR, with pups with no papers.


What I mean is that people don't have to breed limited registration dogs.
When it went into effect, plenty of folks realized that their already-in-place full papers were worth more.

If you have something that isn't worth too much, and then suddenly, demand is still in place while supply crashes - what happens?
It's not dog breeding, politics or rocket science, it's basic economy.

The puppy mill folks aren't "stuck" with trying to get around limited registration. They've had full registration *the whole time*. It's not as if any controls are placed on it beside the breeder's say so.

If you or I wanted to get into breeding dogs, you (if I'm remembering right, my apologies if I've got you mixed up) couldn't decide, "Hey, my GSD is doing amazing in Schutzehund, maybe I should try for conformation, get her tested and have a litter." ~ It was folks who think *like that* that the LR program stopped dead in their tracks - not puppy mills.

The puppy mill folks had full papers before, and they have them now. I could open a newspaper and get you the numbers to call for fully registered breeding groups of 4 or 5 different breeds every week. No one who wants to market dogs for profit has any trouble whatsoever getting full AKC papers, is what I'm saying.

Getting full registration dogs is NOT a problem. Getting well bred ones is. Those are the numbers who are shrinking, because those are the dogs who are concentrated with fewer and fewer responsible breeders, and new folks who might become responsible breeders find it next to impossible to start. 

I think that you are confused because you think that folks are having to start with LR dogs and then find a way to fudge or falsify papers. Because that is what someone would have to do if they wanted to start with quality dogs and show them. 
But if all you want to do is have puppies to sell - name the breed, and you could have a fully registered dog tomorrow.

So who did this stop? Who did it slow down? 

You may also be confused as to the new face of the puppy mill. We spoke about the age of the internet. A search of ANY breed club website tells everyone the questions people are trained to ask and the answers they want to hear.

A 3 minute search pulled up 3 litters of fully registered Miniature Bull terrier pups that I could buy with paypal or credit card - they can be shipped to me for just a little more (if I wanted, and I don't - just saying). All that matters is that my check clears.
Now, the websites are pretty and they have all the right answers - but that says puppy mill to me - I ask more questions when I'm giving away free barn kitties, because I actually care what becomes of this animal.


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

It is very easy for a person with limited registration to use the dog for breeding purposes, showing purposes, and anything else just by swapping papers with another dog. It is done everyday.


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Otter said:


> If you or I wanted to get into breeding dogs, you (if I'm remembering right, my apologies if I've got you mixed up) couldn't decide, "Hey, my GSD is doing amazing in Schutzehund, maybe I should try for conformation, get her tested and have a litter." ~ It was folks who think *like that* that the LR program stopped dead in their tracks - not puppy mills.


Actually, that's not true. If my dog is doing well in SchH, and I wanted to try conformation, I could go to my breeder and ask for Full Reg to be granted. Then it's up to the breeder to decide. 



> The puppy mill folks had full papers before, and they have them now. I could open a newspaper and get you the numbers to call for fully registered breeding groups of 4 or 5 different breeds every week. No one who wants to market dogs for profit has any trouble whatsoever getting full AKC papers, is what I'm saying.


Well, if they've always had them, they don't have to buy or sell anything. Are you saying that average puppy buyers are suddenly flocking to puppy mills because Full Reg is SO important to them, more important than having a well-bred dog?


----------



## pancho (Oct 23, 2006)

Wolf Flower said:


> Actually, that's not true. If my dog is doing well in SchH, and I wanted to try conformation, I could go to my breeder and ask for Full Reg to be granted. Then it's up to the breeder to decide.
> 
> 
> 
> Well, if they've always had them, they don't have to buy or sell anything. Are you saying that average puppy buyers are suddenly flocking to puppy mills because Full Reg is SO important to them, more important than having a well-bred dog?


The majority of owners have no idea what a well bred dog looks like. For that matter quite a few people breeding the well bred dogs don't either.
If papers on a dog are important to a person they will be less interested in anything limiting that. If papers are not that important they will not be paying for a dog that has them.

Like what has been posted before. The people who want limited registration is a small select group who buy and sell to each other.

Puppy mills stay in business because they will sell a registered pup to anyone and give them the papers. Most people, except the select group, wants that.
Those who belong to the select group is doing as much damage to any breed of dogs as the puppy mills.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Wolf Flower said:


> Actually, that's not true. If my dog is doing well in SchH, and I wanted to try conformation, I could go to my breeder and ask for Full Reg to be granted. Then it's up to the breeder to decide


Why is it up the the breeder's whim? Is it so horrible a thought that it be up to a judge? Are you trying to say that being in possession of fully registered dogs and having a litter magically makes people competent, compassionate and focused on what's best for the dogs as individuals and as a breed?
Is it really so repellant a concept to let a professional judge or several over-ride the opinion of one person at 8 weeks?

And before anyone chimes in about how they always ask other opinions - you don't have to. It's not a requirement. I'm glad that you have a higher standard,and I'm proud of you - but as it's not a standard that everyone is held to it's kind of outside the argument.



Wolf Flower said:


> Well, if they've always had them, they don't have to buy or sell anything. Are you saying that average puppy buyers are suddenly flocking to puppy mills because Full Reg is SO important to them, more important than having a well-bred dog?


I'm saying that most people don't know a well-bred dog. Pretend you know nothing, go on line and try to figure out how to find out.
The puppy mill folks know all the questions someone new will ask and will give them answers that they want to hear.
The show breeders are often burned out and if you don't speak the right code (by which I mean, you and I know dogs, we talk the talk and walk the walk - that comes through) often they don't have a lot of time for you.

C'mon, are you really going to tell me you never saw a newbie reamed for asking the wrong questions? Because I'll pull up a thread right from this board.

The one thing that it is easy to find out is that purebred dogs have lots of problems that you want to watch out for, very few people will sell a full registered dog, and that full registration is reserved for the show/breeding quality dogs - which reads like, The Best Ones.

This quest for the best without the problems is what lets the designer dog craze thrive, and registries for labradoodles pop up.
It also means that if Mr. NewToDogs sees a limited registered pup for $3000, and a full registered one for $2700, and the breeder of the full registered one says all the right things about XYZ problem - he doesn't go looking up show wins, not that he knows how to anyway, he doesn't demand to see testing proof - he pats himself on the back for his buying savvy and buys what everyone has told him is the better dog.

Oh, and let's not forget the scam of, "Well, I sell _all_ my puppies as limited registration because I don't want them taken advantage of. But I can tell that you would be a really good home and you really care so for $300 I'll give you full registration on _this_ puppy."
That scam catches a lot of people too because the breeder said all the right things, from their point of view. Because _of course_ they would never stick this pup in a rabbit cage to pump out puppies (the common, if wrong, perception of the average puppy mill) and feel good that this nice person can tell. How are they to know that the breeder fed the same line to 7 other people and will say it again 7 times next month when the next litter sells.

This is why, yes, the average puppy buyer is flocking to people who don't grill them with a huge puppy application, give them the third degree, act suspicious of them when they don't ask the right questions, then tell them they won't sell them the "best" puppy even though they are asking 6 mortgage payments for it.

They go to the people who make them feel good about buying a puppy. Hence all the CKC registered schnoodles.

~
Would just changing the LR program fix all that? Of course not. 
But breeders, really, wouldn't it be helpful_ to you_ to know that no one can use your precious puppy that you've put so much time, hope, love and money into to breed registered pups (which is all the current LR program does for you anyway) unless that dog has been shown and titled?

Wouldn't you actually feel a bit safer even? Because if it was changed this way, then AKC papers _would_ actually mean something, and people would know _why_ they were better, and then look for them.


----------



## bluemoonluck (Oct 28, 2008)

Otter, I see where you're coming from. But ESPECIALLY in rare breeds, a lot of judges don't see enough dogs to know good from bad.

I know of several Mini Bulls who are CH and GCH who are HORRIBLE. I wouldn't breed to them if they were the last of our breed on planet earth! They finished either because the owner had $$ and paid for a big-name handler to show them, or because the dog was really really small and the judges thought "They're supposed to be a Miniature, so let's give the points to the smallest dog in the ring....even though he looks like a whippet instead of a bully" .

OTOH I had a lovely ***** who everyone was shocked wasn't finished. She was sound, well built, had an awesome temperament, and should have earned her CH very easily. But she HATED showing, and because she wouldn't "show" for the judges she always got overlooked. She still produced several nice litters for me :shrug:

So do I want some guy who's seen maybe 20 Mini Bulls in his entire life to tell me who should be bred (via awarding them points) or should I rely upon my own knowledge of the breed to decide who has qualities worth passing on to the next generation? Not all judges are like this, but it only takes a few UN-knowledgable judges to finish an unworthy dog if you know what you're doing!


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

bluemoonluck said:


> Otter, I see where you're coming from. But ESPECIALLY in rare breeds, a lot of judges don't see enough dogs to know good from bad.


Sorry, but unless the AKC changed something - and this says they haven't http://images.akc.org/pdf/judges/PJDG02.pdf - a judge has to have had 5 litters and bred 4 champions of the breed they want to judge. If it just takes 20 dogs to do that they must be doing alright. They can have less experience with a particular breed once they've judged for several breeds and several years, but they still need to see a lot of dogs and get a lot of breed-specific training.

What kind of tests does it take to be a breeder? That's right, none. I'm not trying to be snippy with you - just pointing this stuff out for the people reading who are not in the know.

As I said - I think it's_ great_ that you choose to go above and beyond the call. But lots of breeders don't.
You've met bad judges - are you going to say that every judge is bad and every breeder stellar? Why do you bother showing, then?
What about the not-rare breeds? What about the flashy ones? How many Boxers are lost to the gene pool because their white is not perfect, and good breeders feel that they are irresponsible if they give full papers to too many - or sometimes any - pups?

And no, not every really good dog likes the conformation ring (and, again, part of my point is that there are dogs who have something to give to the breed besides conformation wins, and LR-ing them for an off-colored toenail at 8 weeks old does not help the breed) but if you bred her to a titled dog, as I'll bet you did, you'd be square under the system I suggested. And even the stricter version - could she really not get a CGC, an earthdog trial, agility - nothing? Really? And if she was both talentless and untrainable - why breed her? I'm sure you wouldn't and didn't. I'm sure she had plenty going for her - but why is it ok for you and not for anyone else? 

What is real problem besides loss of direct breeder control?


----------



## GrannyCarol (Mar 23, 2005)

==What is the real problem, besides loss of direct breeder control?==

Well, more and more when I was a breeder, I was considered to be totally responsible for every day of the life of every puppy I sold. If I am going to be responsible, then I also want more control. Early when I started breeding, I did the best I could and I sold a puppy, it was sold. It was no longer mine and no longer my responsibility. I would replace if the pup had some genetic health problem, even though I couldn't stop said puppy from having it, no matter how carefully I bred them. I would take back one of my dogs if it needed a home, just because I cared about them. However, I wasn't considered a terrible person if someone bred one of my pups irresponsibly, it was THEIR fault. Even ten years ago when I quit breeding, if a grandchild of one of my pups showed up in a pet store, I would have been demonized, it was getting very crazy. Of course breeders find a need to keep control over their puppies, you have to CYA or lose it. :\


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Otter said:


> Sorry, but unless the AKC changed something - and this says they haven't http://images.akc.org/pdf/judges/PJDG02.pdf - a judge has to have had 5 litters and bred 4 champions of the breed they want to judge. If it just takes 20 dogs to do that they must be doing alright. They can have less experience with a particular breed once they've judged for several breeds and several years, but they still need to see a lot of dogs and get a lot of breed-specific training.
> 
> What kind of tests does it take to be a breeder? That's right, none. I'm not trying to be snippy with you - just pointing this stuff out for the people reading who are not in the know.
> 
> ...


Many judges co-owner their litter and ch # and hardly even see them.

show breeders get tested every time they go in the ring. they are showing their skill at breeding and picking the best of their's to show. dog show world is very small and talk is a fast runner.

if the boxer is good,the breeder knowledgeable and that bloodline is needed to the whole of the breed, most breeders will try and keep or find a suitable breeder home. but if the boxer is good yet the bloodline isn't really needed then the breeder most likely place it in a good pet home.

if you want to know the truth is is ARs fault and others who blames the breeder for what the buyer does. like blaming a car maker for deaths cased by a drunk or speeding driver. or gun makers when someone gets shot. 
until there is a time that we don't get blamed for the "over population" then we have to do something to show that we are trying to curb the "fast cash" set. and give a price brake to real pet buyers.

i don't think i have come across a dq for wrong color toenails in dogs. rabbits yes. which i think is silly but....

lets take it one step farther then and have all dogs at shelters and rescues must get titled before getting adopted out. all dogs must be titled before someone can own them ...or put them to sleep.

what is good for the goose.....


----------



## Wolf Flower (Dec 21, 2005)

Otter said:


> Why is it up the the breeder's whim? Is it so horrible a thought that it be up to a judge? Are you trying to say that being in possession of fully registered dogs and having a litter magically makes people competent, compassionate and focused on what's best for the dogs as individuals and as a breed?
> Is it really so repellant a concept to let a professional judge or several over-ride the opinion of one person at 8 weeks?


By "one person", you mean, the breeder? Yes, it does scare me to think a judge could overrule a breeder. Judges don't always see health problems, or hidden genes, or know the whole bloodline of the dog in question. They don't live with the dogs and know their temperament inside and out. All that matters is what they see in a few minutes, in a ring, on one day. 

Now, if it were a coalition of several different judges over time, for both conformation and performance events, yes, I could be satisfied with a system that grants FR and breeding rights for said dog.



> The one thing that it is easy to find out is that purebred dogs have lots of problems that you want to watch out for, very few people will sell a full registered dog, and that full registration is reserved for the show/breeding quality dogs - which reads like, The Best Ones.


So you're saying that the average person doesn't understand that Full Reg doesn't mean anything about the quality of the pup and the breeding. Okay, I'll grant that.



> Would just changing the LR program fix all that? Of course not.
> But breeders, really, wouldn't it be helpful_ to you_ to know that no one can use your precious puppy that you've put so much time, hope, love and money into to breed registered pups (which is all the current LR program does for you anyway) unless that dog has been shown and titled?


Yes, it would be great to have a system that doesn't award breeding rights until the dog is titled, like they do in Germany with GSDs. In that sense, ALL puppies should be sold on LR, and granted FR when the requirements are fulfilled.


----------



## Otter (Jan 15, 2008)

Wolf Flower said:


> Now, if it were a coalition of several different judges over time, for both conformation and performance events, yes, I could be satisfied with a system that grants FR and breeding rights for said dog.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wolf Flower,* yes*, that is exactly what I'm saying. 

This is what I said waaay back on post 51.
If the AKC wants to do a LR program that has a chance to actually WORK for the betterment of dogs, then all puppies are on LR until they get titled in SOMETHING. ~ The only change this form of papering would be from the current system is that LR dogs could show conformation.
And only litters with at least ONE titled (fully registered) parent are eligible for the standard LR papers - papers which allow you to show in anything you want, but not to register a litter. The main change here is that it is harder to get one, FR parent - you have to put up or shut up, at least with the stud.

I can not comprehend why show breeders (who are presumably already breeding litters with at least one, titled parent) would object to that.

So far, the closest thing to an answer I've gotten, in the posts just above, are that _breeders_ - who have no requirements for said title other then owning a ***** and having access to a stud both with full registration - ALL know far, far more about dogs then _judges_ - who are required to have years of hands on experience and breed-specific education in breeds they want to qualify to judge.
And that breeders, to prove themselves, go into the show ring and prove themselves under the judges who they just said were inept and un-educated. 
But that my system won't work because no one wants to do that, and it is too controlling to ask that show breeders - who are _already_ doing that - actually _have_ to do so to call themselves show breeders. 
...Not that any of that seems to make sense to me, but that's how it reads.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

ok in chihuahuas.
some judges like refined, others like coby. some look at only heads, others look only at sound moving body, some look at bite, some look only at size and some who is at the end of the lead. the good ones look at the whole dog
that is why it takes more then one judge to ch a dog.

sometimes the best pairing isn't from titled parents. and THAT is what breeding SHOULD be about. breeding better then the parents. titled or not.
what you are asking for is limiting the gene pool way more the LR papers are now.
if someone wants to show a pet let them show rabbits,cavys,or cats in household pet or Premiership.
or do ralley ob, agility, fly ball, earth dog, tracking, lure course or any of the field trials with a dog.there is other animal sports then conformation.

and if it sooo easy for them to get full reg pup from non-show breeder then let them get it there and show it. no one is stopping them. 

it is what I did. 
My foundation stud and ***** were not of titled parents and over sized they would have been DQed. But I know how to breed for better.
anyone who studies enough about breeding, genetics and movement can.
but it takes time money and effort and many just bleep because they don't wanna do it and feel entitled to someone best without working for it.


----------



## Honorine (Feb 27, 2006)

Your plan won't work Otter because there isn't any money in it, the Dog World just like the real world runs on money. Your plan would bankrupt AKC, narrow the gene pool even more, and drive even more people to other registries. The AKC needs revenue to survive, they need the high volume breeders, they need the commercial breeders, they need the little guys that breed a litter here and there, they need puppies sold on full reg that are then bred and that litter registered and then those puppies registered. I mentioned earlier that 85% of the puppies I sold on limited have never even been registered with the AKC, and I get e-mails and letters from the AKC asking me to give them my puppy buyers information so that they can then solicit them to register their puppies. Money- its all about the money. Show breeders alone cannot keep the AKC afloat. As for allowing a judge to decide whether a dog should be bred or not based on a few minutes in a ring, well that just doesn't make any sense. A judge can't see if a dog has the MDR-1 mutant gene, is positive for Von Willdebrands, they haven't had their hands on the three or four generations that lead up to the dog standing before them, they don't know how they lived or died, all they see is a snapshot in time, breeders see everything esle. And I'm sorry but no judge, no other person in this world has the right to tell me or any breeder what dogs should or shouldn't be bred, good or bad I make that choice and deal with the results. I may not like what other breeders do, even commercial breeders, but I will fight for their right to do it, because we still have that right and I will not easily give it up.

You know what I'd wish they would do? Get rid of Limited, let the breeders either hold papers till spay/neutor or sell without papers. Stop this ridiculous them and us carp, welcome all breeders and be honest about wanting business from all kinds of breeders. That would be the honest thing to to do, but it won't work any more than your idea, because people have to feel that their better and holier than others, most show breeders would be an unhappy lot if the the AKC didn't set them on a pedestal and tell them that they were so very very important, so much more important than all the hundreds of thousands of little nobody breeders who are the ones really supporting the AKC.


----------



## tailwagging (Jan 6, 2005)

Honorine said:


> You know what I'd wish they would do? Get rid of Limited, let the breeders either hold papers till spay/neutor or sell without papers..... little nobody breeders who are the ones really supporting the AKC.


Yes it would be nice if people would stop blaming the breeder for what a buyer chooses to do AFTER they bought and *own* the dog.

yup the little ones do help even more now that entry fee have gone so high.

I do think the mind set of "them and us" is much smaller now that more breeders are opening their eyes to the ARs agenda. and realizing the divide and conquer method.


----------

