Hi Jeff,

 Quote: jeff

I do not know why you would think I might suspect you of disrespect.

I put those disclaimers in when these types of discussions happen. Often people will take offence, or read into things in a way that is not meant. Especially when the topic is principals that not everyone shares.

 Quote: jeff

When some one makes a claim such as "Dogs should only be bred with an eye for improving and contributing to a breed" with our qualifying what is meant by improving or contributing to the breed, you can not know was meant by that statement. In other words a statement was made with out an argument to support it. With our an argument you can not understand their statement.

What I personally mean by this, is that breeding two average dogs will very rarely produce an excellent dog. You will get mostly fair to average animals out of them. Therefore, you will never "better the breed" if people breed knowing that the chances of getting an animal out of the litter that will "better the breed" is slim to none. I feel it is somewhat irresponsible to breed with that knowledge. Breeding two excellent dogs has a higher chance (but still not perfect) of get those animals that will in fact do some thing for the future of the breed as a whole. It is unfortunately the mediocre dogs that usually have the negative traits, be it the temperament, health or structure that causes the very breed to be famous for them in the first place. In other words, why breed a dog that is not excellent at all, if it will never "better the breed."

 Quote: jeff

Just the pure joy of doing it...Cost is not necessarily and issue. I would not necessarly want a clone of her. That is what labs are for. I can also guarantee with 100% certainty that you will never get the same dog twice through breeding.

If you should go about this, then by all means, continue doing research, and talk to as many as you can. And good luck in your endeavor!

sorry for the misplaced quotes for the last 11 months I have been working a on designing and testing a solar powered ethanol brew/still. Today we did some anylsis and results where awsome. Just we can start to market this to farmers and biodeisel buffs.
Anyway it was a long night of celebration.

FYI
This idea was/is a back yard chemistry idea that many people had reasons for rejecting but seems to be paying off big time.

 Quote: jessicakromer

Hi Jeff,

 Quote: jeff

I do not know why you would think I might suspect you of disrespect.

I put those disclaimers in when these types of discussions happen. Often people will take offence, or read into things in a way that is not meant. Especially when the topic is principals that not everyone shares.

 Quote: jeff

When some one makes a claim such as "Dogs should only be bred with an eye for improving and contributing to a breed" with our qualifying what is meant by improving or contributing to the breed, you can not know was meant by that statement. In other words a statement was made with out an argument to support it. With our an argument you can not understand their statement.

What I personally mean by this, is that breeding two average dogs will very rarely produce an excellent dog. You will get mostly fair to average animals out of them. Therefore, you will never "better the breed" if people breed knowing that the chances of getting an animal out of the litter that will "better the breed" is slim to none. I feel it is somewhat irresponsible to breed with that knowledge. Breeding two excellent dogs has a higher chance (but still not perfect) of get those animals that will in fact do some thing for the future of the breed as a whole. It is unfortunately the mediocre dogs that usually have the negative traits, be it the temperament, health or structure that causes the very breed to be famous for them in the first place. In other words, why breed a dog that is not excellent at all, if it will never "better the breed."

 Quote: jeff

Just the pure joy of doing it...Cost is not necessarily and issue. I would not necessarly want a clone of her. That is what labs are for. I can also guarantee with 100% certainty that you will never get the same dog twice through breeding.

If you should go about this, then by all means, continue doing research, and talk to as many as you can. And good luck in your endeavor!

I get a lots of hair brained ideas. I enjoy thinking about them, talking to others about them and receiving intellectual feedback. Very rarely do I convince myself to follow through with them.
Hurting my dog or unreasonably risking the future health and happiness of future animals because of some selfish desire is something I am deeply opposed to. I doubt that I may ever breed my dog. It is just some thoughts I am exploring.
I do deeply disagree with the some of the IMO demeaning characterization of people because they may desire to breed their dog. If they want to breed their dog because they want to have a litter before they neuter the dog, I fail to see why there is anything wrong with that. It is their property and if they do it in a healthy responsible manner their motivation is none of anyone's business.

 Quote:

I do deeply disagree with the some of the IMO demeaning characterization of people because they may desire to breed their dog. If they want to breed their dog because they want to have a litter before they neuter the dog, I fail to see why there is anything wrong with that. It is their property and if they do it in a healthy responsible manner their motivation is none of anyone's business.

Great, another one. Do you think you're the only one with that thought process? Backyard breeders all think this way, most of them care about their dogs, love their own dogs and have the exact same thought process as you. Yet somehow all the shelters seem to fill up regularly and dogs are put down every day because there are not enough homes for them.

I am not opposed to breeding, I am not a rescue person, but if you're going to breed a dog then at least breed something worth breeding. Everyone thinks their dog is the greatest dog to walk the earth. Show me ANY dog, world champion or not, and I will point out a flaw in the dog.

Breeding is (or should be) about taking a great dog with the minimal amount of flaws and pairing him/her with another dog that is strong in the flawed areas of the first dog, and can be complimented by the strengths of the first dog. It's like a puzzle, and a balancing act. You are also playing with genetics, so not only do you have to consider the dogs in front you, but you have to consider 20 other dogs in the pedigree as well as finding out what they have produced in the past, whether there are any structural problems that are prone in that bloodline, or temperament flaws, or mental health issues. Some dogs even from the best bloodlines are known to produce extra vertibrae's in the spine, or produce weak pasterns, bad hips, bad elbows, splayed toes, gun shyness, anxiety, heart conditions, or any number of other genetic defects.

If you are breeding a once off litter, and you don't even know where the pedigree for the dog is, then I am sure you don't know any of these things about any of the other dogs in the bloodline. I doubt you even know how the other littermates turned out. Generally if you breed enough dogs, one of them is bound to be good, but that would be a fluke. Maybe you ended up with the fluke!? Who knows. But breeding a fluke doesn't mean the pups won't take after the crappier dogs in the pedigrees. But these are the things you need to know before you even think of breeding ANY dog. And it is because people who don't know these things before they start breeding that breeds like the many bloodlines of German Shepherds, Dobermans, Rottie's and many other great breeds have gone down the shitter.

If you can't come up with these answers and be realistic about the problems your dog has, and believe me, every dog has problems, then those people who want a pup from you would be better served going to a breed rescue and getting a pup that was bred by some other guy that also thought his dog was great and worth breeding too.

Unfortunately some people have their ideas and can't be talked out of them. I hope you're not one of those stubborn people and will some day come around to understanding why breeding should be left to those who have spent the time to learn about it, rather than those who want to have a litter from their favorite pet. Every breeder should have a goal they are working toward. Breeding a single litter is not having a goal and not working toward something.

Maybe your dog really is worth breeding, I dont know anything about her or her pedigree, or the stud you would use, but at least take the time to learn about it for a few years. Perhaps watch a few litters of puppies have to be put down from genetic defects, like being born without joints, before you ever do breed, which I know you said you probably won't do, but still, if it ever becomes a consideration, spend alot of time researching from qualified sources and spending time around good breeders before doing anything. If reading this forum doesn't change your mind, spending time around people who actually know what they're talking about will.

I actually hate the term "backyard breeder," but its the term everyone seems to understand.

Jeff

I really have a special place in my heart for the bully breeds. I really admire their muscularity, their heart and quickness to task (if bred well). I stumbled into these breeds and the education that resulted was a life changing experience for me. You are correct in the concept of the dog being your property, but the moment you relinqush the fruits of the breeding the pups are someone elses property and your control and insight now is entrusted to someone else. I ask you to consider the "heat" the bully breeds are taking today. It is unfortunate but real. The best and most knowing breeders pair two dogs with the hope and desire of producing at least one pup that will better the parents. Now what does this mean? Different things to different people. IMO the dog should always be a representation of what it's function is. So I suppose a working dog standard for me is the model. It is this model that will excel the breed to it's best. Besides the know how it takes to make the safest breeding possible, and as Cindy has stated, even these folks deal with the unexpected. All breeders should want to only perpetuate the best functional dog they can. To do this one must know what they are dealing with and be sure the desired breeding is of two dogs that have proved themselves worthy of breeding. Talk to any class breeder and they will most likely tell you they had some exceptionally performing dogs that had a flaw that the breeder did not want to perpetuate despite the exceptional performance of the dog being considered for breeding. That must be hard, but right IMO. I have the upmost respect for such breeders as they are making the best possible future for all the dogs of their breed to come.

A good breeder thinks beyond themselves and to the community of the breed of dogs they represent. This is responsible and it is sound. Good luck with your decision, your dilligence is admirable.

"Dogs should only be bred with an eye for improving and contributing to a breed"

I'm the one who said this and I'll tell you why: As Mike said so eloquently, "..many bloodlines of German Shepherds, Dobermans, Rottie's and many other great breeds have gone down the shitter." Included in that list is the Doberman; the breed I know and love best, and the breed I've put so much care, passion, thought, energy, research, money, blood, sweat and tears into. It breaks my heart to see what's been done just to my breed, and then again to see what's been done to the others just by carelessness and a quest for cash.

I KNOW money is not the motive here and it's just an idea you're kicking around. But as someone else said, there are enough mediocre dogs. And beyond mediocrity, there are serious genetic health risks to consider.

Here's a story from last year to illustrate my point:
A woman calls me up and asks if our stud dog is available for her pet Doberman, as she'd like to have a litter of puppies before she spays her dog; for the kids to witness and all of that. Of course I said no way, but kept track of the situation, well, because. She found an intact pet to breed her intact pet, and waited. There were four puppies born, two of them dead, one decomposed. The mother died in whelp because the inexperienced pet-owner didn't recognize the signs of distress, and thought because it 'was natural' she shouldn't bother call anybody. Besides, it would cost too much. Of the two remaining puppies, one died within a couple of days and the other they kept as a pet, who is now an unstable and dangerous young adult with thyroid problems. The general consensus in town here is "oh, that poor woman to go through all of that" but I'm not on that bandwagon. It didn't have to happen. She was warned by someone who knew better (me) that she shouldn't do it, and she didn't listen. I feel awful for the poor dogs involved and for her kids, though. I'm curious about what a 'wonderful' experience this was for them. This whole situation is so sad and horrible and definitely a worst case scenario, but a common one.

Breeding should be left to the breeders, IMHO.
If it means anything, I also think dentistry should be left to the dentists even if you ARE capable of pulling out your own tooth.

 Quote: valerie tietz-kelly

Jeff

I really have a special place in my heart for the bully breeds. I really admire their muscularity, their heart and quickness to task (if bred well). I stumbled into these breeds and the education that resulted was a life changing experience for me. You are correct in the concept of the dog being your property, but the moment you relinqush the fruits of the breeding the pups are someone elses property and your control and insight now is entrusted to someone else. I ask you to consider the "heat" the bully breeds are taking today. It is unfortunate but real. The best and most knowing breeders pair two dogs with the hope and desire of producing at least one pup that will better the parents. Now what does this mean? Different things to different people. IMO the dog should always be a representation of what it's function is. So I suppose a working dog standard for me is the model. It is this model that will excel the breed to it's best. Besides the know how it takes to make the safest breeding possible, and as Cindy has stated, even these folks deal with the unexpected. All breeders should want to only perpetuate the best functional dog they can. To do this one must know what they are dealing with and be sure the desired breeding is of two dogs that have proved themselves worthy of breeding. Talk to any class breeder and they will most likely tell you they had some exceptionally performing dogs that had a flaw that the breeder did not want to perpetuate despite the exceptional performance of the dog being considered for breeding. That must be hard, but right IMO. I have the upmost respect for such breeders as they are making the best possible future for all the dogs of their breed to come.

A good breeder thinks beyond themselves and to the community of the breed of dogs they represent. This is responsible and it is sound. Good luck with your decision, your diligence is admirable.

Valarie,
Thank you very much for your exceptional post. You have given me some perspective to think about, that I have not yet considered. I assume you explained what other meant by adding to the breed. This is the kind of post I was hoping to get clear and insightful, not a lecture on genetics, or some sort of condescending opinion by someone who plagiarizes ideas from others.

Kristel,
DO you think a desiring breeder should have to go to 8 years of school and pass competency testing? What standards does one have to meet to "arrive" at your definition of breeder?