[Me]

Or... my favoured option of crossing to healthy animals from a similar breed 

[verdifish]

Seems to have gone a bit quiet in here ! Wonder why

[Me]

Its usually my fault 

[verdifish]

Those in glass houses should definitely not throw horseshoes !!! So neither of our faults this time .It must be really hard being perfect !

[SallyintNorth]

Been away with limited 'net access for a few days - glad to see that the debate is lively but still reasonably well-mannered!

It's quite interesting that breeding for excellence must also keep an eye to maintaining breadth of gene pool - again, to take examples from agriculture, it is interesting to see that crossing in and out does occur in order to prevent over-dominance of certain less desirable features.  For instance, Hexhamshire Blackface breeders will cross in a judicious dollop of Swaledale if their sheep become too short-legged and/or dippy-backed; Swaledale breeders will cross in a bit of Hexhamshire Blackface if their Swales are getting too narrow or kempy... ;p  (Not that any of them will admit that out loud, of course!)  And Blue-faced Leicesters being bred for siring North of England Mules will often have a soupcon of Teeswater or other breed to help put the facial markings on the Mule ewe lambs...

It's something which I ponder about, that this outcrossing which goes on and has helped to maintain a good gene pool and healthy stock may be adversely impacted by DNA recording and testing of breeding males... 

[Me]

It must be really hard being perfect !

I must admit it is a burden at times. 

[doganjo]

Can I just clarify a couple of things?

1. I have bred 2 litters of cockers, and 6 litters of Brittanys in 42 years.  Not exactly a big breeder.
2. All my dogs are hip scored and health checked prior to mating
3. All bar 3 of the Brittany pups I bred are or were working to the gun or birds of prey.
4. All my litters were oversubscribed, and were suggested by others due to the qualities/achievements of my dogs
5. My dogs are working dogs as well as show dogs (that just happens to be a hobby which I enjoy)
6. I have no objection to anyone breeding with the same(or better) standards as myself.
7. Taking my time, feeding, vet bills, health tests etc  into consideration as an accountant I estimate that I have made a loss rather than a  profit, but I have gained a great many friends.
8. I am obsessive about idiots breeding willy nilly to line their pockets
9. I am campaigning for a properly policed licencing and registration system for dog breeding.
10. I am a firm believer in breeding for improvements and minimising disease and health problems, so I take great care in examining pedigrees - whether that be pure or cross breeds - every living thing on this planet has a pedigree.

But then I am not on trial here, or am I? 

[devonlady]

Just out of interest I have been on preloved  and was amazed to see how many Jackshites, Cockerpoos, Shiteauhahs even Foxpoos (I think) advertised and all being sold for the best part of a month's wages. I'm sure nobody can tell me that these litters were planned with the good of the breed in mind!
I was also distressed by the amount of Staffords in rescue.
A dog is a dog and cross breeds just as loving and loved as any, I have had plenty in my time but these were usually the result of someone leaving a door open or the randy dog up the road scaling a 6ft. fence and owners glad to give a pup away to a good home.
Now they are big money. How many (though there were a few) spend money on essential health tests?  How many know- or care- if their minature poodle bitch has Progressive Retinal Atrophy or that the Shite Zu they use has a dodgy patella? And how many part with the pups at six or seven weeks instead of waiting and having vaccinations, microchipping and vet. checks done. How many check the pup's mouths for jaw deformities, deformed palates etc.
Well, truly I don't know, maybe they all do  though I have my doubts
Any, that's my twopennorth in the discussion

[Me]

Can I just clarify a couple of things?... I am not on trial here, or am I? 

Its the internet - of course you are!!!

[verdifish]

Having read your statement ,if the trial is for hypocrisy then maybe the cap still fits as your original post still stands .how can it be that your any better than any other breeder .? You choose your way of doing things and belive they are the best way,others choose a different path but the end results are healthy happy loved dogs so please get of your 20 hh horse . Sort admins but I hate hypocrisy and self gratification so couldn't bite my tounge !

[mojocafa]

 

[in the hills]

Doganjo, I for one don't doubt your passion for and love of dogs and it's something that I share.

You say you are campaigning for a properly policed registration system for dog breeding. Do you have any details about such a system?  Is it a possibility?

I think (I maybe wrong!) that because of your passion you perhaps word things a little 'strongly' shall we say.
The breeding for 'power and money' part of your post, in my opinion, came across as a bit of a sweeping statement and sounded, in my opinion, a bit judgemental on all that breed dogs. Having said that I do know quite a few people who breed solely for the money. They will tell you quite openly that is the reason and genuinely see nothing wrong with it. They would say that animals have to 'earn their keep' and also that it is 'natural'. They are not 'bad' people but bought up to believe that everything has to 'earn its keep'. As an example, one fed a barn cat that arrived at his farm. Cat was very afraid and in poor condition. He fed the cat and cat came into good health. Cat did not produce any kittens. When the vet was visiting the farmer asked him to examine the cat. Vet told him that she had probably been neutered at some point. Farmer was genuinely upset by this and asked if the vet could reverse it! Farmer thought this a really cruel act and against God's way. Some see nothing wrong with litters of dogs/cats etc.

I was asked if my Flattie could be used on a German Shepherd bitch  . Can you imagine?

Just trying to illustrate the different ways that people look at this and thinking of what kind of system is going to be able to 'police' this.  How would it work?

I did contact breeders on the KC accredited scheme but was a bit shocked. It wasn't what I thought it would be and I do believe that a couple of people from the scheme were breeding 'just for money', albeit maybe in higher welfare conditions than some.

Interested to hear you ideas.

[devonlady]

I know of someone who bought a toy breed bitch, had her mated, kept a dog and a bitch from the litter and started to breed, putting the dog to his mother and sister twice a year and selling the pups to the gullible public for £800 a go and saw nothing wrong in this. I asked did she not worry about the pups when they left, were they well treated, would she have them back if necessary. No, she said, once they were sold they were no longer her responsibility.
I can't bring myself to even be polite to this person now

[SallyintNorth]

Unless I'm missing something, there's no correlation between bad behaviours in breeders and whether they are breeding purebred registered pups, designer crossbreeds, or anything else?  There are good, careful breeders, who do the health checks, don't breed unless they have a market for the pups, check the potential owners out, take the pups back if there's a problem, etc, etc, and there are terrible breeders, and all shades in between.  And there are good breeders of crossbreeds and bad breeders of purebreds as well as the converse.

What I am interested to understand more is whether there is anything more and/or different in terms of planning and managing breeding, and being diligent in terms of finding owners, that breeders of purebreds  should do compared to breeders of crossbreeds, and vice versa.

And equally, any different advice that should be given to potential owners of crossbreeds compared to those seeking a purebred pup.

[in the hills]

And just because there is 'a market for the pups' that you plan to breed I don't think that is a guarantee that those pups are going to 'forever' homes. You can't guarantee anything  .... that's life. You can 'try' but that is all.

People who show their dogs, and take it very seriously, will often breed a litter. All health checks, pedigrees studied, list of potential buyers etc. They will keep 2 or 3 pups from the litter themselves. Run them on and rehome dogs that don't meet the standard ... the least promising pups for showing. Unless you are lucky you would never get a big winner unless you did that.

Supreme Champion at Crufts, Shargleam Blackcap, was I believe sold by his breeder as a pup and bought back when she spotted his potential as a young dog.

Not everyone does this but it is not unusual at all.


Same in world of working dogs. Young collies maybe run on by the breeder. Some sold then as 'farm' dogs and others kept for trials. Same for gundogs.

Lots of folk who work dogs would soon sell on a pup that didn't come up to standard. Might have all health checks, very often they have waited on a list for that pup but at the end of the day if it doesn't fit the bill it is gone. The breeders know that this will be the case.

Mmmmm .... so for all their health checks and waiting lists are they 'good' breeders?


Not being awkward really  just trying to illustrate that it is not a simple one.