# Should you breed your Dog?



## Ralph Tough (Jun 3, 2012)

Hi all, found this on Face Book! It may be of intrest to some :-k what are your thoughts?


----------



## Brian McQuain (Oct 21, 2009)

I dig it. Good post


----------



## leslie cassian (Jun 3, 2007)

Wish it was that easy.

I can't count the number of people who have said that they were sorry they spayed/neutered because they thought their dog was so nice they should have bred her/him.

I was out walking my dogs one night when I met, through the fence at the schoolyard in my neighbourhood, a guy with a pair of dogs. He told me that the black dog he had with him was in heat and the he was going to breed her to a 'king shepherd' (ding) When I asked why, he said because she was 'half shepherd.' (ding). I know I sounded like a snotty bitch for asking him 'why the **** would you want to do that?', but I couldn't help myself. To which he replied 'I used to breed German Shepherds.' (ding, ding, ding, you win the prize). Pretty sure I sealed the this guy will never talk to me again deal by adding, 'So you should KNOW BETTER'. But that is how it goes... someone will buy this guy's mongrel puppies, or take them for free and they will sooner or later end up in a shelter or a back yard, or best case, someone's beloved pet. Or they will be like the heartbreak LabX I put down a year ago just before his 9th birthday because his crappy hips betrayed him long before his time should have been up.

I have nothing against mutts. Technically, my DS is the working dog equivalent of a golden doodle, but I do wish that people who deliberately breed their dogs would put some thought and consideration into it, (and maybe some health testing or hip xrays) and breed with a goal in mind aside from $X00 per puppy.


----------



## Brian McQuain (Oct 21, 2009)

I dont have a single adult dog I would consider breeding, simply because I dont think they contribute anything to the breed. I do have an up and coming pup that looks promising, but thats still YEARS down the line. Wanna see me turn green and start smashing things? Backyard breeders will do it everytime.


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

I have had a number of rather nice dogs and not a one would I ever breed. My job, or rather what I enjoy doing, is raising them up and doing something with them that might matter to someone in some way that's meaningful. 

I'll leave the aspect of breeding to those who have a vested interest in it.


----------



## Timothy Saunders (Mar 12, 2009)

seems like a good place to start. That being said I know people who breed dogs because they like the dog. in their opinion he would contribute something to the breed.(not)


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Most of the dogs I have bred, do not make it past the first box...

as they did not have registration papers..and the ones that did were not from highly reputable registries...I did have papers for the Rotties though...

Are papers important to the quality of a dog? 
Does the paper actually improve the dogs genetics? 

Some of the best dogs that I know of (in my opinion only of course) are not registered with a reputable registry...


----------



## Nicole Stark (Jul 22, 2009)

Joby, I'm thinking that flow chart might go a little differently for those Dutch dogs and a few others of that ilk.


----------



## Brian McQuain (Oct 21, 2009)

Joby Becker said:


> Are papers important to the quality of a dog?
> Does the paper actually improve the dogs genetics?
> 
> QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

the breed I bred the most in, I was in it just as the push was made to gain FCI, and the decisions made in the standard by the "leading" clubs that were vying for power to control the breed, were terrible...might be better now..who knows...push was to close the books, tighten the standard to omit dogs from breeders they did not like, and change that standard every year or so to make it tighter and tighter on fancy show point issues that had zero to do with functionality.

That breed is still not akc registered...

I coulda got UKC on my current dog, but the window has passed, I didnt think it was all that important..and still dont...same dog..with or without papers..


----------



## Damon Moody (Dec 1, 2010)

Joby Becker said:


> Most of the dogs I have bred, do not make it past the first box...
> 
> as they did not have registration papers..and the ones that did were not from highly reputable registries...I did have papers for the Rotties though...
> 
> ...


 Yeah have to agree with you here. i also dont get why people say the dog has to be titled to breed. If your dog has the qualities that it needs to be a real dog and people know the dog and what its capable of then it shouldnt matter but just my opinion.


----------



## Sara Waters (Oct 23, 2010)

With working sheepdogs you certainly dont need performance titles. If the dog is a good worker in the farm business who cares about performance titles. Most farmers dont have time for that sort of thing. They want a good dog from proven on farm working lines. If they have a dog like this they will usually breed it with another proven worker. The dog may or may not be registered with a working dog register. Oft times not and sometimes they can be a blend of perhaps kelpie with a splash of Huntaway or collie or cattle dog or whatever suits the local terrain etc. My neighbour has a very good kelpie huntaway cross. Tireless worker in the yards, they will no doubt breed him to one of their proven kelpie bitches and the pups will get homes on local farms looking for dogs from known good workers. 

I have more of a problem when people breed because they love their dog or believe every dog needs a chance to have puppies or for the kids, or some other reason I find hard to fathom.


----------



## rick smith (Dec 31, 2010)

pretty informative inputs but this subject is ironic in that the good breeders already know how to select a dog from their lines for their breeding purpose, and the bad breeders will always breed for the wrong reasons
.... since there are WAY more bad breeders than good breeders ... well, just do the math ... pretty hopeless and i doubt we will improve the situation

i would like to hear from long established reputable breeders about their SPECIFIC breeding criteria ... but they rarely post specifics ... wish they would post more

i am more interested in how to match up sire and dams to improve the line than "what makes a dog exceptional enuff to be breeding stock" ... from the little i see it seems like too much emphasis is placed on the sire 

maybe i'm over generalizing, but imo titles are "value added" bennies that will get higher prices and longer waiting lines for people who buy pups before they are born.....but i'm not degrading breeders who also love to title their dogs and are willing to put in the time and effort to do it


----------



## Ralph Tough (Jun 3, 2012)

rick smith said:


> pretty informative inputs but this subject is ironic in that the good breeders already know how to select a dog from their lines for their breeding purpose, and the bad breeders will always breed for the wrong reasons
> .... since there are WAY more bad breeders than good breeders ... well, just do the math ... pretty hopeless and i doubt we will improve the situation
> 
> i would like to hear from long established reputable breeders about their SPECIFIC breeding criteria ... but they rarely post specifics ... wish they would post more
> ...


Rick,Well said.


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

rick smith said:


> i would like to hear from long established reputable breeders about their SPECIFIC breeding criteria ... but they rarely post specifics ... wish they would post more


I would too, it would be interesting to hear. BUT, I get the feeling that it's not as scientific as we think. I'm sure they look at a ton of information, but in the end, there is a certain amount of SWAG method happening. I'm sure every breeder has had litters that were duds when they thought they were going to be rockstars. Sure they can help minimize that chance by linebreeding, but it's still a guess how the genes are going to work out.


----------



## Angie Stark (Jul 10, 2009)

To me, the op is not really geared toward the real working dogs, its more of a general post and has more validity on facebook than here...altho I know several 'working' dog owners who are kennel blind as all get-out and just HAVE to get a litter from their beloved dog despite it not having a thing to offer the breed.

Back Yard/money breeders are a pet peeve. Im so sick of their a$$es. The Chicago area shelters put down something like a million dogs a year!!!!  These greedy people have discovered the corso and will almost certainly lead to BSL for them....but who am I? Ive had my application in to rule the world for a while but Ive not gotten a call back


----------



## Timothy Saunders (Mar 12, 2009)

I know one breeder who says he looks for extremes in his breeding male and stability in the brood bitch


----------



## Bob Scott (Mar 30, 2006)

One of my present GSDs is a dog I would have bred in a heartbeat were it not for moderate HD.


----------



## Brian McQuain (Oct 21, 2009)

Bob Scott said:


> One of my present GSDs is a dog I would have bred in a heartbeat were it not for moderate HD.


 
What a bummer. Friggin HD


----------



## Daryl Ehret (Apr 4, 2006)

After lots of expense and trial and error, I finally have a few good resources to make a generally better dog than I can find elsewhere, unless I were in-good with the best of breeders. I have now raised numerous dogs of my own breeding that meet my satisfaction.

Among the typical breeders, there's probably too much emphasis on breeding papers rather than breeding dogs. AKC is only a registry, that vouches for parentage, but doesn't _even prove THAT _unless later required by dna testing. Titles aren't a certain measure or guarantee of any worth. Health certifications aren't a guaranteed bill of health.

When all the focus has become about getting the greenlight for a public blessing to breed, the concern (and many cases, knowledge) for the most pivotal elements of breeding are somehow forgotten. So, while those mentioned points LOOK good, especially from a marketable aspect, what really MATTERS is getting a little easier overlooked.

I don't expect I'll much breed unless I ever want something from the match. IMO, there's a hundred reasons to not breed 95% of what's available (gsd's) on the market. And with the market WAY overflooded, I don't care to be a part of that. So, in way, it serves my interest to dissuade the prospective breeder from incorporating my lines into their own. And what could be less alluring than to purchase a pup from ugly/untitled/unregistered/half-breed/noncertified parantage? ;-) At least I'll have what I want, with less gamble.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

Daryl Ehret said:


> After lots of expense and trial and error, I finally have a few good resources to make a generally better dog than I can find elsewhere, unless I were in-good with the best of breeders. I have now raised numerous dogs of my own breeding that meet my satisfaction.
> 
> Among the typical breeders, there's probably too much emphasis on breeding papers rather than breeding dogs. AKC is only a registry, that vouches for parentage, but doesn't _even prove THAT _unless later required by dna testing. Titles aren't a certain measure or guarantee of any worth. Health certifications aren't a guaranteed bill of health.
> 
> ...


Daryl,

What do you feel really MATTERS? can you share?


----------



## Daryl Ehret (Apr 4, 2006)

Well, all manner of traits and characteristics, but for working dogs, especially the finer points of temperament and drives. And since no breeding is ever done without it's compliment partner, I'd prefer the question be rephrased, "Should you breed your male and female?" or similar. The type of preachings expressed in the flowchart thingy are more from the "moral" perspective and IMO, gaining market appeal for breeding "righteously", rather than effectively.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

gotcha......


----------



## Kara Fitzpatrick (Dec 2, 2009)

i wanted to print this out to give to pet owners at my work... but my coworkers didn't want to "offend" our clients. or tell them that goldendoodles aren't really a breed. give me a break.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

Kara, I hear you on that. Worked in several clinics and hospitals that also did not want to offend when clients brought ill bred mutts in they want to breed. But the clinic owner just went along with it because they did not want to lose them as clients. Not so with me right now. It is times like this when it is nice to run your own ship. ;-)


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Bob Scott said:


> One of my present GSDs is a dog I would have bred in a heartbeat were it not for moderate HD.


Same here with my old Tiekerhook dog I imported back in 1991. GREAT dog but with moderate hip dysplasia no way would I breed him, a number of people still wanted to breed their bitches to him even knowing about his hip.


----------



## Kara Fitzpatrick (Dec 2, 2009)

can I work for you Maren? LOL.


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

How does Colorado in a couple years strike you and your man? And no, I'm not kidding, I will need good techs used to working and performance dogs.


----------



## Louise Jollyman (Jun 2, 2009)

I breed because I can't buy what I want!

I went thru somewhere in the region of 15 females before I found one I would breed.

I still believe in AKC reg, x-rays and titling


----------



## Kara Fitzpatrick (Dec 2, 2009)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> How does Colorado in a couple years strike you and your man? And no, I'm not kidding, I will need good techs used to working and performance dogs.


who knows where we will be then! lol. I'll let you know!


----------



## Maren Bell Jones (Jun 7, 2006)

I will keep you in mind!


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

Brian McQuain said:


> What a bummer. Friggin HD


I love that dog so much that if he had one of those breeding accidents, I'd be the first in line to look at the pups. Sigh. . .

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie (Jun 8, 2008)

Louise Jollyman said:


> I breed because I can't buy what I want!
> 
> I went thru somewhere in the region of 15 females before I found one I would breed.
> 
> I still believe in AKC reg, x-rays and titling


Know the feeling. However, for the right herding dog, someone could probably talk me out of the AKC registry part.

T


----------



## Britney Pelletier (Mar 5, 2009)

Damon Moody said:


> Yeah have to agree with you here. i also dont get why people say the dog has to be titled to breed. If your dog has the qualities that it needs to be a real dog and people know the dog and what its capable of then it shouldnt matter but just my opinion.


As long as you have 5-12 homes already lined up from people who "know your dogs and what they're capable of", that's great!

Otherwise, a lot of the purpose behind titling before breeding is not necessarily to guarantee something about the dogs you're breeding and what they will produce, but that it's hard enough for people to sell litters from two titled dogs (pick your venue - not important) with great genetics and health clearances to great homes.. doing all of those things will just help stack the deck in your favor for your puppies and their future.. 

and people _*knowing*_ dogs is very subjective, IMO.. nearly everyone thinks they can know and read dogs and observe the dog's real abilities. Too many cooks in the kitchen, really.


----------



## Britney Pelletier (Mar 5, 2009)

Louise Jollyman said:


> I breed because I can't buy what I want!
> 
> I went thru somewhere in the region of 15 females before I found one I would breed.
> 
> I still believe in AKC reg, x-rays and titling


Absolutely! which is evident by the fact that you keep many of the dogs you have produced 

I just think all too often breeding is done for the wrong reasons, not enough thought gets put into the equation and a LOT of dogs should not be bred because they have done nothing to display that they are worthy of doing so.

I think the females often get left out of the equation frequently.. they should be doing everything to showcase that they are just as capable as a male at doing their "job", and if they can't even meet a minimum set of some sort of standard (but often the male is expected to be held to that standard), then why are they being bred, other than the fact that they are able to reproduce?


----------



## Thomas Barriano (Mar 27, 2006)

Maren Bell Jones said:


> How does Colorado in a couple years strike you and your man? And no, I'm not kidding, I will need good techs used to working and performance dogs.



Don't you guys make it too many years. I ain't getting any younger ;-)


----------



## susan tuck (Mar 28, 2006)

Britney Pelletier said:


> Absolutely! which is evident by the fact that you keep many of the dogs you have produced
> 
> I just think all too often breeding is done for the wrong reasons, not enough thought gets put into the equation and a LOT of dogs should not be bred because they have done nothing to display that they are worthy of doing so.
> 
> I think the females often get left out of the equation frequently.. they should be doing everything to showcase that they are just as capable as a male at doing their "job", and if they can't even meet a minimum set of some sort of standard (but often the male is expected to be held to that standard), then why are they being bred, other than the fact that they are able to reproduce?


On the other hand if someone doesn't do jack shit with their breeding stock, they can make all the claims in the world about how great their dogs are, since they never have to prove it - never put their money where their mouths are, so to speak. 
:wink:


----------



## Dick van Leeuwen (Nov 28, 2006)

Like some said;"everybody think they are a good breeder or may have a reason to breed their dog(s)".
But what about the people that think they are a good handler...:roll:


----------

