# What is a Back Yard Breeder???????????



## Olie

Is there a one size fits all? Meaning is there a top 10 bad list in order to be considered a BYB? (I think not)

Does this offend any breeders or non breeders when people call other breeders BYB's? 

Why do you think some people get offended over the term when it is thrown around so often?


----------



## JE-UK

There isn't a hard-and-fast checklist, but there are definite indicators.

There are some really good resources here about evaluating a breeder and identifying BYBs Versatility In Poodles - Find A Poodle.

My personal red flags would be:

- Does not test for heritable conditions
- Does not compete in anything
- Breeds bitches too young 
- Breeds more litters than can be socialised effectively
- Breeds non-standard colours, sizes, etc. ("teacup", "royal", etc.)
- Sells pups to anyone! I want a breeder to quiz me as hard as I'm quizzing him/her.


----------



## Olie

I agree. 

The only thing, I am not sure I consider a BYB is the not showing. I am on the fence. I *PREFE*R to see this and I really do not care what they are showing in, but does this place them as a BYB if they are doing all the other things you listed? 

The other things I might add - are those seeming to have money motivation at the top of their lists.

Examples:

Producing litters knowingly and not intending on having a pick pup(s) I understand there may not be keepers in some litters .
Charging different prices for pups based on their sex, color, size etc.....


----------



## Jelena

Here many people have what we call 'house litters', it's when people have one or two females and they breed them, usually don't attend shows, bitches have or don't have pedigrees, they breed for pet quality and they sell their pups to families who want 'just a pet', and they are running good business if I may add. Those pet pups aren't cheap, but are of course cheaper than puppies from respectable kennels, and families that want just a pet are happy to save their money... If their 'pet' is a girl, they will probably breed her too,... There should be some strict control over this stuff, there are too many dogs that end up in street, and if someone wants just a pet and don't mind it's dog isn't bred by the book then ADOPT any dog from the street. Breeds that are usually breed like this are toy and companion breeds: maltese, bichon frise, chiuaua, poodles and similar. Don't know how but there should be made some ground rules for breeding in any way.


----------



## Locket

Olie said:


> I agree.
> 
> The only thing, I am not sure I consider a BYB is the not showing. I am on the fence. I *PREFE*R to see this and I really do not care what they are showing in,* but does this place them as a BYB if they are doing all the other things you listed? *


In my opinion, if they are health testing but nothing else, I would call them a hobby breeder. The thing is, they are few and far between. 

No health testing is where I draw the BYB line.


----------



## Liz

I like the distinction between _hobby breeder_ and _business breeder_. A hobbyist can do it well - health testing, carefully chosen stud, few litters that are well-raised and socialized. Hobbyists still care about the bitch and the puppies. On the other hand, business breeders make my skin crawl - even if they get the health tests, they have too many litters at any given time, the bitches are overbred, the puppies are raised outdoors with little socialization, all in the name of profit.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

liz said:


> i like the distinction between _hobby breeder_ and _business breeder_. A hobbyist can do it well - health testing, carefully chosen stud, few litters that are well-raised and socialized. Hobbyists still care about the bitch and the puppies. On the other hand, business breeders make my skin crawl - even if they get the health tests, they have too many litters at any given time, the bitches are overbred, the puppies are raised outdoors with little socialization, all in the name of profit.


amen!!!


----------



## PaddleAddict

If they are breeding puppies *primarily *to make money they are a backyard breeder (or possibly a puppy mill depending on the size of the operation).

I don't know why some people think "hobby breeder" is a lesser term... in my opinion the very best breeders are hobby breeders--the breed is their passion and their hobby, not their job.


----------



## Liz

PaddleAddict said:


> I don't know why some people think "hobby breeder" is a lesser term... in my opinion the very best breeders are hobby breeders--the breed is their passion and their hobby, not their job.


I get the feeling that we have similar categorizations, but we use different words. Of course, you're correct, technically, that anyone who purposefully breeds for a reason other than business is a hobby breeder, but I prefer to use a different term for the creme de la creme [I don't know how to insert accents, so pardon the misspellings] of breeders. That said, I don't know what that term should be - any help?


----------



## northerndancer

Lol. A few days ago I asked what BYB stood for. All I could figure out was that one of the B's stood for breeder and that it wasn't a good thing.

I still haven't figured it out. Some very good people breed in homes/backyards and some very bad people breed in kennels. So, I am very interested in hearing opinions.


----------



## wishpoo

> I still haven't figured it out. Some very good people breed in homes/backyards and some very bad people breed in kennels. So, I am very interested in hearing opinions.


It has nothing to do with a "goodness of people" but all about level of education , knowledge and willingness to improve the breed !!!!

Anybody who breeds just to breed and for having something to do in a free time is a BYB in my book. Hobby or no hobby - there are just too many puppies pumped -out and then dumped-out at the same rate : ((((.

That said, I do not consider some "show breeders" ethical either and some unfortunately are at par with BYB when they skip testing, or breed for some extra income occasionally.:decision: or breed just to brag about No. of Ch in their lines without taking into consideration well-being of the "line" in general. 

I do not see BYB term as "derogatory" - it is just the term that specifies of "how things are done" . We have high level, mid level and low level of quality for about everything in life - "low end" is not necessarily abhorring :noidea: - just means that things could be done *better* or MUCH *better * 

Breeders who breed dogs purely for money are same level as puppy-mills and I do not even want to go there :argh:


----------



## fracturedcircle

Liz said:


> I like the distinction between _hobby breeder_ and _business breeder_. A hobbyist can do it well - health testing, carefully chosen stud, few litters that are well-raised and socialized. Hobbyists still care about the bitch and the puppies. On the other hand, business breeders make my skin crawl - even if they get the health tests, they have too many litters at any given time, the bitches are overbred, the puppies are raised outdoors with little socialization, all in the name of profit.


Amen too.


----------



## neVar

The big thing is- there are shades of grey. it's not just 

Here is one of the best breeders who does it as good as it can be done 
And
PUPPY MILL

There's all these shades of grey between. and Many BYB's fall into that shade of grey. Many very good breeders who are not BYB fall into that shade of grey too. and part of what shade of grey they are is who's looking at them. Someone might list someone who breeds color (but health tests, shows etc etc) below someone who breeds the CKC/AKC approved colors/markings. Other people there's no difference if otherwise they are doing all the same things. 

Some people might go hey look at that top kennel- breeds some of the best around, does everything great. Another person might go MEH- their dogs live in kennels and rotate who is in the house!


----------



## northerndancer

wishpoo said:


> It has nothing to do with a "goodness of people" but all about level of education , knowledge and willingness to improve the breed !!!!


By good people, I meant good at what they do, i.e. good breeder.


----------



## Feathersprings

These questions are always so hard to answer. I have know all types of breeders ( i guess except for a puppy Miller) And I have known some of all of them to indulge in unethical breeding practices according to that list. The ones that breed and breed their pets for money, the Show breeders that breed so many puppies to try and get that one special dog!( and they will say they dont breed for the money.. breeding dogs , showing etc is expensive etc. Well it is paying for your hobby! That is not just an "Expense" of breeding. i had a friend that would say she never made money but she would charge the "business " for the clothing she wore to shows, staying in hotels, her motorhome payment, dog food vet bills etc, etc. ) I think that the testing is wonderful.. wish it could always be done. Good care of the dog, bitch and puppies is a must. Not overbreeding... you have to be responsible for EVERY puppy produced for your breedings and their puppies and so on..so i just have a hard time dumping on people that might breed their dog a couple times.. In the time i was doing rescue I had many many dogs coming from breeders I knew from shows that didnt take their dogs back when they came into rescue. The blame for too many poorly bred dogs come from many different places. I think Puppy Millers who "supply" pet shops and have warehouse sales are a huge problem.


----------



## Cdnjennga

northerndancer said:


> Lol. A few days ago I asked what BYB stood for. All I could figure out was that one of the B's stood for breeder and that it wasn't a good thing.
> 
> I still haven't figured it out. Some very good people breed in homes/backyards and some very bad people breed in kennels. So, I am very interested in hearing opinions.


I think BYB is used quite widely to basically describe kind of a bad breeder. But for me I would use it to describe the type of person who has an unspayed dog and decides to breed it to an unneutered male that they or a friend own. Sort of an unthinking/ unknowledgeable breeder. Those who say "oh, my dog is so nice, she really should have puppies at least once".

For me someone with 8 dogs who constantly has a litter on the ground and who does no health testing or proving of their dogs is not a BYB, they are more of a puppy factory or mill.

The fact is there's no strict definition of any of the terms we use, and what is a BYB to me may not be to others because opinions on breeding vary so much!


----------



## Olie

Cdnjennga said:


> I think BYB is used quite widely to basically describe kind of a bad breeder. But for me I would use it to describe the type of person who has an unspayed dog and decides to breed it to an unneutered male that they or a friend own. Sort of an unthinking/ unknowledgeable breeder. Those who say "oh, my dog is so nice, she really should have puppies at least once".


This had always been my distinction in the past, now so much is clustered into a few labels. And sometimes people that do this make a few dollars and end up doing this more and more........thus money motivated. These are people I will never support again.


----------



## wishpoo

> The fact is there's no strict definition of any of the terms we use, and what is a BYB to me may not be to others because opinions on breeding vary so much!


That is soooo true !!!! :beauty:

Especially when given BYB is doing many things well, it is really not fair to put him/her in the same category with one that is doing almost NOTHING well 

*mehhhh... 

BUT, there is no "subcategory" and that is why the term BYB is used so broadly, I think :noidea:

Still, in general, most BYB's are unmistakeably put in that correct category even by "mildly" informed people.


----------



## Olie

Liz said:


> I like the distinction between _hobby breeder_ and _business breeder_. A hobbyist can do it well - health testing, carefully chosen stud, few litters that are well-raised and socialized. Hobbyists still care about the bitch and the puppies. On the other hand, business breeders make my skin crawl - even if they get the health tests, they have too many litters at any given time, the bitches are overbred, the puppies are raised outdoors with little socialization, all in the name of profit.


What does a few litters mean to you or anyone else for a hobby breeder? 

I honestly think 3 is fair number to breed a bitch and 4 is pushing it for me. I guess I am expanding the original question


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

It would depend entirely on the bitch- how she bounces back, if she is a good mother, do you have your vet's blessing...again...many gray areas. There are lots of bitches who should never be bred a second time. So this cannot be wrapped up in a package. Lots of individual things to consider.


----------



## northerndancer

Cdnjennga said:


> The fact is there's no strict definition of any of the terms we use, and what is a BYB to me may not be to others because opinions on breeding vary so much!


That's exactly where I was coming from. It depends so much on what you are expecting from a breeder. I want a pure bred poodle because I love the characteristics of the breed. (Bonus points for non shedding and non allergenic.) Different people have different priorities and want different things. For example, my priorities are great temperament and great health. Great conformation would be nice but I am not going to show or breed the dog so that would be third on my list of priorities.


----------



## cbrand

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> do you have your vet's blessing...again...many gray areas.


People have to be careful here too. I've found that vets who really know much about breeding are few and far between. I recently called a BYB in our area about puppies she had (I was calling for a buyer who had questions.) This ninny-hammer said that her vet told her that health testing was not important and that it was over rated.


----------



## cbrand

northerndancer said:


> For example, my priorities are great temperament and great health.


So an interesting side question. What constitutes good temperament in a Standard Poodle?


----------



## furmom

Liz said:


> I like the distinction between _hobby breeder_ and _business breeder_. A hobbyist can do it well - health testing, carefully chosen stud, few litters that are well-raised and socialized. Hobbyists still care about the bitch and the puppies. On the other hand, business breeders make my skin crawl - even if they get the health tests, they have too many litters at any given time, the bitches are overbred, the puppies are raised outdoors with little socialization, all in the name of profit.



Well said.:cheers2:


----------



## cbrand

I think a BYB is someone who breeds without being an informed member of the fancy. People who care about the breed are knee deep involved in the breed. This may include:

1. Being a member of your local Poodle club.
2. Showing in conformation.
3. Showing in performance.
4. Working with your dog in some venue like hunt or therapy.
5. Staying informed about the breed through sites like this or PSG.
6. Staying current by reading breed specific magazines like Poodle Variety.

As far as breeding practices, a member of the fancy will be

1. Always looking to improve. A breeder should have a list of things they want to "fix" when they breed.
2. Going out of the way to breed to the best and not just the available.
3. Fully testing breeding stock
4. Having a good set up in which to raise, train and social puppies.
5. Caring enough to not sell breeding stock willy-nilly to other BYBs.


----------



## Olie

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> It would depend entirely on the bitch- how she bounces back, if she is a good mother, do you have your vet's blessing...again...many gray areas. There are lots of bitches who should never be bred a second time. So this cannot be wrapped up in a package.* Lots of individual things to consider*.


I don't see how there is that much gray in this. Once you whelp one time this determines if they bounce back and are good mothers. The overall importance is health, right? So your saying that if the dog has all these factors met, then they can breed more than 4, 5, 6 + times? 

I wonder do breeders that breed 4, 5, 6 + times think about the possibility of (God forbid) they have a health issue pop up in their bitch or offspring that is genetic and they have already bred a handful of litters.... what then? Isn't this a risk when having so many litters? 

*Disclaimer: I am just inquiring for knowledge here if I appear ignorant its because what I once thought may have changed a bit and I have been spending too much time soaking in other opinions and at the same time keep an open mind as well. *


----------



## northerndancer

cbrand said:


> So an interesting side question. What constitutes good temperament in a Standard Poodle?


IMO, a poodle with a good temperament is intelligent, responsive, receptive to training, easygoing but with assertiveness and personality. The opposite would be a bad-tempered, excessively nervous dog. 

Answered because asked, but I am not even remotely qualified so I would be interested in other opinions.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Olie said:


> I don't see how there is that much gray in this. Once you whelp one time this determines if they bounce back and are good mothers. The overall importance is health, right? So your saying that if the dog has all these factors met, then they can breed more than 4, 5, 6 + times?
> 
> I wonder do breeders that breed 4, 5, 6 + times think about the possibility of (God forbid) they have a health issue pop up in their bitch or offspring that is genetic and they have already bred a handful of litters.... what then? Isn't this a risk when having so many litters?
> 
> *Disclaimer: I am just inquiring for knowledge here if I appear ignorant its because what I once thought may have changed a bit and I have been spending too much time soaking in other opinions and at the same time keep an open mind as well. *


No. One breeding does not necessarily tell you how your bitch is going to do every time. She may whelp free and bounce back beautifully and then her next litter require a c section and recover horribly or want nothing to do with her pups. I had a German Shorthaired Pointer who refused to feed her puppies. She would lay outside their pen crying for them with rivers of milk running across the room, but would not lay with them. She was championed prior to my getting her, and had a three month old litter when she became a part of my family. She was a remarkable Mom first time around. Was she a candidate for a third litter? Not a chance. She had a wonderful pregnancy, an uneventful delivery, whelped eight gorgeous pups, but was a horrid mother. My brother fostered a white Standard, who, like her mother did not produce a speck of milk. Should she have been bred a second time? No. But she was, and I never heard of any issues the second time around.

Generally if a breeder does it right, they are not breeding until the bitch is two years old. In my humble opinion, breeding a girl at eight is too old. My absolute cut off would be six and a half to seven years of age. So six litters would put her at eight, which for me is too old, even if everything else was perfect. I know of reputable breeders who have bred their healthy bitch at nine for her second or third litter. For me, personally, if everything else is perfect, age is more a factor than the number of litters. 

There is risk with every litter. Every single litter. So, whether you have bitch who has one or four, there is a chance something could crop up. That is why health testing and researching pedigrees is vital. While doing EVERYTHING possible does not guarantee there will never be a problem, it cuts the risks.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

cbrand said:


> People have to be careful here too. I've found that vets who really know much about breeding are few and far between. I recently called a BYB in our area about puppies she had (I was calling for a buyer who had questions.) This ninny-hammer said that her vet told her that health testing was not important and that it was over rated.


Well, Vets are not perfect and have varying opinions. But if they have a working knowledge of a dog, their opinion should matter, if they are working in conjunction with a breeder who actually cares about their dogs.

The ninny hammer (I like that!) may have just stated that her vet said that about health testing because she doesn't health test, and that sounds a whole lot better than saying "Well, I am too cheap to do testing, and I really don't care about the future health of the pups I sell".


----------



## spoospirit

_I do not get offended if a breeder calls another breeder a byb if the title fits them. I would feel very bad for a breeder who was hung with that title who did not deserve it.

I would be offended if I found I was being referred to as a byb. Even if some people's interpretation of a byb is not a bad thing, the title itself carries a great deal of negativity with it. It makes me feel sheepish and dirty somehow. 

I think of byb's as people who are not dedicated to the welfare of their animals or the betterment of their breed; whether it is due to lack of income to do right by them, greed to use them as money machines or hoarders who have done some of the awful things we have seen here to their animals. I am sure there are other examples as well. 

There are a lot of gray areas and I am sure that each individual will decide how much gray area they are willing to find acceptable. 

I do most of the things mentioned that would determine me to be a good breeder. However, I have decided not to do the SA punch. I see no value in a test that is good only on the day that it is taken and only for the spot it was taken from. I will not put my dogs through that as I don't feel the results is worth the pain. Will some consider me a byb because I won't do this test? Perhaps so. Will some not find this to be a big issue in deciding whether or not I am a good breeder. Perhaps so.

There is no one black and white definition for a byb. But there are definite red flags that cannot be argued._


----------



## Keithsomething

I think its all perception, because in my opinion it comes down to health testing as the BIGGEST factor

Elphie was bought from a complete idiot who didn't health test, and clearly didn't know a thing about her dogs nor if they were compatible just that they both had intact genitalia
SHE was a BYB

other factors I feel that should go into what considers someone a BYB, would be not knowing about the breed, not knowing their pedigrees well, not contributing to their buyers with helpful information (though most are savvy business people/sales people able to sell anything), and not participating in even the lowest of dog activities


----------



## wishpoo

*No. of litters:*

If we start with the premise that every breeding should be planned to bring improvement to the next generation , than breeding of SAME pair of dogs over and over is making NO sense :noidea: All top breeders will agree on that fact - if bitch does not produce anything spectacular in 2 litters with 2 different studs - than she should be retired pronto. If she produces 2 or more outstanding puppies, than third litter might be contemplated. Top breeders get "improvement" they are looking for and than move ahead with planning next "improvement" in next generation.

There is just so much one can get from a single bitch (or Stud) and repeating breeding same dog over and over has no logical purpose whatsoever :noidea:

I definitely would stay away from a breeder who had more than 3 -4 litters with one bitch - there is just no reason to do that other than make some extra bucks out of that dog IMO.

*SA punch *: No, I would not address a breeder who is missing a single test a BYB *IF* there were no SA cases in immediate ancestors and any of the offspring and if that breeder knows her pedigrees like a back of her hand. Alll testing in this world will not make a BYB great breeder if that breeder has no understanding of how certain conditions are inherited and has at least some basic knowledge of genetics. Unfortunately I saw that trend happening :afraid:- some breeders doing tests thinking that it is all that is needed :ahhhhh: Oh my, scary things really ....


----------



## Standard

I agree with most of the opinions on here, however I don't believe a good breeder needs to show. Showing is a hobby, and a good breeder doesn't necessarily have to do so. However, this breeder should be producing show quality dogs. 

Really if it was up to me, breeding of animals would be regulated by the government, and any breeder would have to get a permit at a higher cost (1000-2000 a year) each and every year, reapplying. These breeders would need proof of genetic testing according to each breeds common medical issues to get a permit as well. You would also have to pay a fee for each breed of dog you bred, so if you bred just standard poodles you would pay just one fee. And each breeder would only be allowed five litters a year max. Also, mixed breeds would not be abolished, but those who bred them would have to pay a higher fee then someone who bred a standardized purebred breed. No-breeding contracts would be mandatory and punishable by law (eg like get a ticket from a cop) unless the new owner had already applied for a breeding permit and been approved. Prices of dogs would skyrocket, but in my opinion that's exactly what needs to happen so people stop treating them as disposable. Only people who were passionate about improving the breed would be willing to do this and soon only the best of each breed would be available. Also, prices would be regulated (keeping in mind testing and all proper medical care costs) so no one would be breeding for profit (although breeders could apply for higher prices should they choose to be even more thorough with testing and medical care). Anyways, i'm not some crazy commie, this is just what would happen in my own personal utopia haha. I just really think animal ownership needs to be regulated, too many bad things are happening.


----------



## Jelena

standard said:


> i agree with most of the opinions on here, however i don't believe a good breeder needs to show. Showing is a hobby, and a good breeder doesn't necessarily have to do so. However, this breeder should be producing show quality dogs.
> 
> Really if it was up to me, breeding of animals would be regulated by the government, and any breeder would have to get a permit at a higher cost (1000-2000 a year) each and every year, reapplying. These breeders would need proof of genetic testing according to each breeds common medical issues to get a permit as well. You would also have to pay a fee for each breed of dog you bred, so if you bred just standard poodles you would pay just one fee. And each breeder would only be allowed five litters a year max. Also, mixed breeds would not be abolished, but those who bred them would have to pay a higher fee then someone who bred a standardized purebred breed. No-breeding contracts would be mandatory and punishable by law (eg like get a ticket from a cop) unless the new owner had already applied for a breeding permit and been approved. Prices of dogs would skyrocket, but in my opinion that's exactly what needs to happen so people stop treating them as disposable. Only people who were passionate about improving the breed would be willing to do this and soon only the best of each breed would be available. Also, prices would be regulated (keeping in mind testing and all proper medical care costs) so no one would be breeding for profit (although breeders could apply for higher prices should they choose to be even more thorough with testing and medical care). Anyways, i'm not some crazy commie, this is just what would happen in my own personal utopia haha. I just really think animal ownership needs to be regulated, too many bad things are happening.


bravo!


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Standard said:


> I agree with most of the opinions on here, however I don't believe a good breeder needs to show. Showing is a hobby, and a good breeder doesn't necessarily have to do so. However, this breeder should be producing show quality dogs.
> 
> Really if it was up to me, breeding of animals would be regulated by the government, and any breeder would have to get a permit at a higher cost (1000-2000 a year) each and every year, reapplying. These breeders would need proof of genetic testing according to each breeds common medical issues to get a permit as well. You would also have to pay a fee for each breed of dog you bred, so if you bred just standard poodles you would pay just one fee. And each breeder would only be allowed five litters a year max. Also, mixed breeds would not be abolished, but those who bred them would have to pay a higher fee then someone who bred a standardized purebred breed. No-breeding contracts would be mandatory and punishable by law (eg like get a ticket from a cop) unless the new owner had already applied for a breeding permit and been approved. Prices of dogs would skyrocket, but in my opinion that's exactly what needs to happen so people stop treating them as disposable. Only people who were passionate about improving the breed would be willing to do this and soon only the best of each breed would be available. Also, prices would be regulated (keeping in mind testing and all proper medical care costs) so no one would be breeding for profit (although breeders could apply for higher prices should they choose to be even more thorough with testing and medical care). Anyways, i'm not some crazy commie, this is just what would happen in my own personal utopia haha. I just really think animal ownership needs to be regulated, too many bad things are happening.


As a breeder, breeding being regulated like this would not bother me. You have to realize though, where there are humans, there become ways to monkey with the rules. If a husband and wife were involved in breeding, would this then give them the right to have five litters each per year? If they brought a boarder into their home purely for the sake of their business, five more?

This is how the rules can be broken. UKC does not allow professional handlers, only owners or their friend/ or a relative to show dogs. So the new way around this is putting a handler on the papers as a co-owner. Apparently this is going on quite often now. I know this is unrelated to this thread, but it shows how rules seem to be made to be broken. And truthfully, the governments and other organizations that are supposed to be keeping watch over licensed puppy mills are doing a pathetic job of it and some pretty wretched crap is slipping through the cracks. Here is an example of a licensed, "regulated" mill and what they got away with. CAPS vs. Bauck on Vimeo


----------



## Olie

wishpoo said:


> *No. of litters:*
> 
> If we start with the premise that every breeding should be planned to bring improvement to the next generation , than breeding of SAME pair of dogs over and over is making NO sense :noidea: All top breeders will agree on that fact - if bitch does not produce anything spectacular in 2 litters with 2 different studs - than she should be retired pronto. If she produces 2 or more outstanding puppies, than third litter might be contemplated. Top breeders get "improvement" they are looking for and than move ahead with planning next "improvement" in next generation.
> 
> There is just so much one can get from a single bitch (or Stud) and repeating breeding same dog over and over has no logical purpose whatsoever :noidea:


This is what I see as a "best practices" for ethical breeders trying to better the breed!!

While we are talking about a mix of things LOL

I was on another forum where the debate was this:

"Breeders that claim to be bettering the breed are NOT, they are showing and breeding to breed as many Ch's as possible by using "tools" such as line breeding which is essentially eliminating the gene pool for the future of said breed"

Literally it was stated that "show breeders are the worst". 

Again its not something I feel is an absolute for me - I do not consider them BYB's, I just prefer to see some type of showing and particular performance arenas.


----------



## fjm

I agree - responsible breeders would comply with the rules, but have to charge higher prices - so there would be even more incentive for the profiteers and the black market. I can see only one solution - Education, Education, Education. 

I think a scheme that evaluated dogs for breeding would be hugely valuable - where there were robust, useful genetic or other tests these would of course form part of the evaluation, and each dog would also be judged for temperament, health, and conformation. All the usual issues of insuring a level playing field, of course, but that is already the case with conformation shows.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

fjm said:


> I agree - responsible breeders would comply with the rules, but have to charge higher prices - so there would be even more incentive for the profiteers and the black market. I can see only one solution - Education, Education, Education.
> 
> I think a scheme that evaluated dogs for breeding would be hugely valuable - where there were robust, useful genetic or other tests these would of course form part of the evaluation, and each dog would also be judged for temperament, health, and conformation. All the usual issues of insuring a level playing field, of course, but that is already the case with conformation shows.


No it isn't in the case of conformation shows. Did you ever see the BBC expose pure bred dogs? It was an eye opener! The winningest Cavalier in the United Kingdom has a genetic disorder in which his skull is too small for his brain. Even after being diagnosed, he won the largest speciality show in the UK, and continued to be bred, passing this disorder on to a a large percentage of his children and grandchildren. They seize, they scream in agony, their lives STINK! How do you monitor something like this? This would not be something that would be covered in standardized testing like hips, eyes, thyroid, S/A, heart...but it is happening, in the show world.


----------



## Olie

Ugh, I know I seen this but do you happen to have a link Arreau?


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Pedigree Dogs Exposed | Watch Free Documentary Online

Winning lots of trophies and ribbons should not be ANYONE's priority when breeding a living, feeling creature!


----------



## faerie

word.


----------



## jonny cash

Standard said:


> I agree with most of the opinions on here, however I don't believe a good breeder needs to show. Showing is a hobby, and a good breeder doesn't necessarily have to do so. However, this breeder should be producing show quality dogs.
> 
> I don't understand how a breeder can say they produce show quality pups without proving their breeding stock in the ring. Showing is more than a hobby. It is an independent evaluation by judges, reaffirming that your dogs meet the standard. That is what dog shows are for. I do not think a breeder can say they produce show quality pups without proving it. It is like a breeder saying they have healthy dogs without testing.


----------



## fjm

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> No it isn't in the case of conformation shows.


Sorry - I wasn't clear. I simply meant that we already face accusations of bias and favouritism in judging, not that the conformation ring guaranteed healthy breeding animals. In fact, as others have said, too much concentration on winning show prizes can have quite the opposite effect, with a shrinking gene pool and "virtues" exaggerated until they become glaring faults in the eyes of anyone other than the breed afficianados. 

An independent assessment of the health and suitability for breeding of each dog would also mean that dogs whose owners are simply not interested in showing or competing would not be lost to the gene pool.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

OK...I get ya'....


----------



## Olie

jonny cash said:


> Standard said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with most of the opinions on here, however I don't believe a good breeder needs to show. Showing is a hobby, and a good breeder doesn't necessarily have to do so. However, this breeder should be producing show quality dogs.
> 
> *I don't understand how a breeder can say they produce show quality pups without proving their breeding stock in the ring. Showing is more than a hobby. It is an independent evaluation by judges, reaffirming that your dogs meet the standard. That is what dog shows are for. I do not think a breeder can say they produce show quality pups without proving it. It is like a breeder saying they have healthy dogs without testing.*
> 
> 
> 
> *
> *
> Yep! And then the breeder who claims to have show quality and performance potentials charge the same prices even more than those investing in proving their dogs. :angry:
> 
> I do agree with Arreau that its not all about ribbons though, clearly their are many unethical show breeders out there BUT I suppose if the quality ones don't get out there the show world could become a very ugly place to be.
Click to expand...


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

I am sorry...I personally have not heard many breeders make claims of having 
"show quality puppies". Where do you see this? Seriously, I m not being a wise acre here, I just do not see it or hear it, unless on a site of serious show breeders. Even they will tell you, likely 95% of their puppies end up in pet homes. Pet homes who are thrilled if they get a healthy, sound dog, but being a show contender never crossed their minds.

Keithsomething and I were looking together on PHR at the pedigree of a puppy he was keen on, from a "show breeder" and omg...we nearly both fell off our chairs at the amount of sickness behind said puppy. It ticked me off so badly, I entertained the idea of clipping Quincy off and forgetting it. A gorgeous puppy to be sure, but at what cost? It is from proven show stock, and would be purchased as a breeding dog. Addisons, hip dysplasia, sebaceous adenitis...everywhere we looked for as far back as we could see. It could definately likely go on and win in the show ring and be assessed by judges as a wonderful example of the standard of the breed, but is it something you would want to use to reproduce? NOOOO! The only dogs in the pedigree that seemingly were not affected by something, were dogs that had seen no testing whatsoever. But, it would have been a great show dog! YIPEE!

I am genuinely sorry about my strong opinions on this, but I just went through a bloat episode with a dog who has sired 35 litters of puppies. Puppies who have become conformation champions, field champions, obedience champions, and I just thank God he was not mine to breed and I do not have to feel responsible for his puppies. I love him, and I love his breeder, but I now know this should not have come as a surprise to me...if I had been looking.

Keith, can you verify what I m saying?


----------



## jonny cash

Olie said:


> jonny cash said:
> 
> 
> 
> [/B]
> Yep! And then the breeder who claims to have show quality and performance potentials charge the same prices even more than those investing in proving their dogs. :angry:
> 
> I do agree with Arreau that its not all about ribbons though, clearly their are many unethical show breeders out there BUT I suppose if the quality ones don't get out there the show world could become a very ugly place to be.
> 
> 
> 
> you're right, it shouldn't be just about the ribbons, and just because a dog earns a ch doesn't always mean it is suitable to breed. it is aggravating when a breeder who doesn't test or show charges those prices. most breeders i know lose their a$$! lol. the best way to make a small fortune breeding is to start with a LARGE fortune.
> 
> arreau, i was just responding to the poster who said that even if a breeder didn't show they should be producing "show quality" pups. if abreeder get one or two show quality pups ina litter, i would think that is a successful breeding. and yes, there are a lot of dogs in the ring that carry a lot of bad stuff, that is why i love PHR. it is a very useful tool. i personally think three major area's should be addressed when considering a breeding, health, tempement, and conformation. i think every breeder should want it all. what good is gorgeous if it is a basket case, or worse sick? don't be sorry about your strong opinions, that is why i like this place! thick skin is a requirement for being a dog breeder. some of the winningest all time breeders have some serious health issues in their line for sure. that is why responsible breeders do their homework.
Click to expand...


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

jonny cash said:


> Olie said:
> 
> 
> 
> you're right, it shouldn't be just about the ribbons, and just because a dog earns a ch doesn't always mean it is suitable to breed. it is aggravating when a breeder who doesn't test or show charges those prices. most breeders i know lose their a$$! lol. the best way to make a small fortune breeding is to start with a LARGE fortune.
> 
> arreau, i was just responding to the poster who said that even if a breeder didn't show they should be producing "show quality" pups. if abreeder get one or two show quality pups ina litter, i would think that is a successful breeding. and yes, there are a lot of dogs in the ring that carry a lot of bad stuff, that is why i love PHR. it is a very useful tool. i personally think three major area's should be addressed when considering a breeding, health, tempement, and conformation. i think every breeder should want it all. what good is gorgeous if it is a basket case, or worse sick?
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with you...a pup SHOULD have it all! But a well put together dog who is sound of body and mind, whose eyes may be a bit too round, or ears may be set a tad too high, or whose tail is somewhat low, should not be discounted by folks looking for a great companion. And if that pups breeder spends small fortunes buying dogs to eventually better their puppies, offer their dogs fantastic medical care, feed good quality food, health test their breeding dogs, travel or ship semen to breed to dogs who will help their goals and aspirations become reality, and are sending out puppies who are incredibly well socialized and healthy, are responsible in who acquires their puppies...the fact that they may not be show breeders is certainly not an issue for me. There have been a whole lot of "diamonds in the rough". Dogs whose pedigrees and circumstances would surely have the show people scoffing. I have seen it here on this forum. But the dogs being discussed have ended up being glorious examples of the breed and have gone on to do some remarkable winning. Not from a show breeder, not from a show quality background, but glorious nevertheless.
Click to expand...


----------



## jonny cash

just beacause a dog doesn't have a show background doesn't mean it is any less a companion. and i have seen some very pretty dogs from may what be considered less than desirable pedigres. i just think all breeders should strive for the complete package. if a breeder doesn't set their goals high, how can they produce the best that they can. it is not a science , more of an art. sometimes a breeder has to take a chance. there was a dog a few years bak that a lot of the old guard breedrs scoffed at, and there still is a lot dissent about now. that breedr took a chance, and it worked out wonderfully. i am afraid that is the exception rather than the rule, but it proves that everything in breeding is not set in stone.


----------



## Keithsomething

I just want to add on to what Cherie said,
the breeder seemed to do EVERYTHING perfectly, they show extensively, place puppies in performance homes, health test their breeding stock...seem to be "up front" about what they're breeding
but when you look on PHR (which is just a tool I've come to realize, that it isn't always as extensive as it should be but...it still is quite useful IMO) you could see a STORIED pedigree of every known health issue popping up repeatedly and NUMEROUS times in one generation and the common thread amongst all of the dogs was the CH before their names

now please don't get me wrong, I appreciate breeders that prove their stock via showing...but I feel ALOT of breeders just look at the CH. title and the conformation of the dog and completely look past what has been produced in the dogs past

Thankfully I have breeders in my life that I speak too that have given me unflappable advice that has made me learn how to do my research (phone calls to breeders, emails, PHR etc.) and will keep me on a pretty straight path to my goals


----------



## 2719

*Breeding Purebred Dogs is Profitable? (hah)*



> most breeders i know lose their a$$! lol. the best way to make a small fortune breeding is to start with a LARGE fortune.



Or to go back to the original topic...backyard breed. Don't spend money on testing, grooming, registering or showing their dogs. You sure could make a lot more money this way.


----------



## Standard

To elaborate on what I said earlier about a breeder not having to show, I agree that showing would be ideal, but I would never discount a breeder for not showing. I would never expect a breeder who didn't show to advertise they has "show quality" dogs, nor would i think any responsible breeder would advertise for that anyways. But I would expect ideally that a breeder who was trying to better the breed would be able to sell dogs that would do relatively well in the show ring, is what i meant.

Anyways, human intervention in the reproduction of animals, aka selective breeding, has led to many weird issues. Like the previous poster said about the spaniel with the small skull, it ticked every box appearance wise, but was actually very unhealthy. As was said before, not all stock should be put in showing. Although poodles are relatively healthy, look at the plight of laboured breathing in pugs and bulldogs. Or that many bulldog births must be performed via cesarean. 

And should we look to another animal, one of the most famous Quarter Horse stallions in history, Impressive, won more titles and awards for confirmation than can nearly be counted. He was bred so much that his offspring have eroded the QH stock and a high quantity of QH now inherit or carry the horrible disease of HYPP that he carried in him Hyperkalemic periodic paralysis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Unfortunately this very disease is what made Impressive successful, it causes muscle spasms, and for some horses does not adversely affect them, just builds unnatural muscle, which in the QH breed is highly desired. Despite the knowledge on this issue, people STILL breed and show Impressive bred horses for their desirable appearance. Showing is not everything.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Okay - I am in Vegas so my I can't type out an elaborate response about BYB BUT I just want to say that I consider hobby breeders to be small scale, ethical breeders who breed few litters and are involved in the poodle fancy.

Someone mentioned something about hobby breeders being lower quality, I think..


----------



## wishpoo

*Just because some pedigrees on PHR do not have health issues listed does not mean they are not there :afraid: THERE IS NO line out there without health problems NONE, ZERO, ZILCH !!!!
*
If there was a breeder who had a line with no health problems - he/she would have lines and lines of people standing in front of his door 24/7 begging for a puppy. 

That said, I want to reiterate that not all show breeders are honest or ethical. I do not think that only show breeders produce nice looking dogs , nor do I think that every puppy a show breeder produces is automatically great - oh noooo !!!! We all saw last year what "well known" show breeder produced and sold to PF member :afraid:- I do not know what was "right" with that puppy :ahhhhh: !!!!???? 

*All in all - bottom line - not all BYBs are same , nor all show breeders are same level of quality and I honestly think that "low standing show- breeder" easily is overlapping with very good hobby -breeder .
*
Would I ever buy a dog from excellent, honest , hobby-breeder who does health testing and has dogs that I like in looks and temperament and is selling puppies reasonably priced - YES  !!!! (just ... it is darn hard to find one  with all above mentioned )


----------



## CharismaticMillie

I am a little confused because I always considered hobby breeders to be ideal. So, wishpoo, what other kind of breeder would you purchase from? Is there a type of breeder considered to be "better" than a hobby breeder?


----------



## wishpoo

*eeeemmmm Show -breeder , I suppose LOL :lollypop:


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

" That said, I want to reiterate that not all show breeders are honest or ethical. I do not think that only show breeders produce nice looking dogs , nor do I think that every puppy a show breeder produces is automatically great - oh noooo !!!! We all saw last year what "well known" show breeder produced and sold to PF member - I do not know what was "right" with that puppy !!!!???? "


I am confused too. I have been here a couple of years now and must of missed this. Can you elaborate or pm me to jog my memory please?


----------



## Olie

ChocolateMillie said:


> I am a little confused because I always considered hobby breeders to be ideal. So, wishpoo, what other kind of breeder would you purchase from? Is there a type of breeder considered to be "better" than a hobby breeder?


I don't think that one is "better" than the other anymore. I guess it boils down to the pet buyer and doing their research. Lot's of it.

I went through some past threads here yesterday from 2009 on COI, line breeding, age to breed, how many litters.....and it amazed me how "open" this forum was then. I was a member then. I suppose I just didn't pay as much attention in the beginning. Some good threads out there........


----------



## Keithsomething

Olie said:


> I don't think that one is "better" than the other anymore. I guess it boils down to the pet buyer and doing their research. Lot's of it.
> 
> I went through some past threads here yesterday from 2009 on COI, line breeding, age to breed, how many litters.....and it amazed me how "open" this forum was then. I was a member then. I suppose I just didn't pay as much attention in the beginning. Some good threads out there........


I've gone back and reread those olie, and I agree it did feel like a completely different place (not that I remember any of those threads happening in real time lmao)

If you read some of those threads from then and then speak to the people now you can see that there have been some complete turn arounds on opinions about certain things, I feel that could be another sign of a good breeder (opposite of the original question xD) someone who is willing to learn and has dedicated time to readjust their values maybe?


----------



## Olie

Keithsomething said:


> I've gone back and reread those olie, and I agree it did feel like a completely different place (not that I remember any of those threads happening in real time lmao)
> 
> If you read some of those threads from then and then speak to the people now you can see that there have been some complete turn arounds on opinions about curtain things, I feel that could be another sign of a good breeder (opposite of the original question xD) someone who is willing to learn and has dedicated time to readjust their values maybe?


Very true. Anyone making positive changes in anything they do is a great thing.


----------



## wishpoo

> I went through some past threads here yesterday from 2009 on COI, line breeding, age to breed, how many litters.....and it amazed me how "open" this forum was then. I was a member then. I suppose I just didn't pay as much attention in the beginning. Some good threads out there........


Oh yes... :becky: !!! This place used to have such educational potential for everybody - "starter" breeders, future buyers - you name it !!! Unfortunately it is becoming now mostly "frills and thrills " place with occasional litter "promotion" and "PoodleFecebook" goin' LOL 

I agree, any positive change is great . I just do not see it actually happening - mostly a lot of talk and " much ado about nothing" :bandit:  

But at least more people started testing ... we can now only hope they know what to do with it :act-up: :noidea:


----------



## Keithsomething

I disagree with 2points you made Wishpoo

1. Educational Value

Just the other day I was kindly helped by several members on which dremel to buy, how to introduce it to Elphie with me wielding it, how to do it properly, and encouraged to do so...if thats not educational I'm not sure what is.

2. Much Ado of nothing...

I think that every breeder that is actively posting is involved with the breed fancy, health tests to 10th degree, and is more than willing to teach and assist newbies via this forum...

Just because this forum has...evolved doesn't make it useless as an educational tool


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Does anyone have a link to those threads? I wasn't a member yet.

So if you aren't a hobby breeder but are a good ethical breeder what would you be called?


----------



## wishpoo

> Just because this forum has...evolved doesn't make it useless as an educational tool


I absolutely agree !!!! Many people can still learn a ton of new things here :act-up: , depending of what is somebody's "starting point" ; ).

Forum is evolving , no doubt - any set of changes can be regarded as "evolution" , no matter if a change is going in any given direction 

*Millie* - can you tell us what is your definition of a "hobby breeder" ? :act-up: I have a feeling that you maybe have different "nomenclature" than me , so I do not know what you are asking :beauty:


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

Keithsomething said:


> I disagree with 2points you made Wishpoo
> 
> 1. Educational Value
> 
> Just the other day I was kindly helped by several members on which dremel to buy, how to introduce it to Elphie with me wielding it, how to do it properly, and encouraged to do so...if thats not educational I'm not sure what is.
> 
> 2. Much Ado of nothing...
> 
> I think that every breeder that is actively posting is involved with the breed fancy, health tests to 10th degree, and is more than willing to teach and assist newbies via this forum...
> 
> Just because this forum has...evolved doesn't make it useless as an educational tool


I could not agree more Keith! There have been so many people come here lately with questions of all kinds who have been helped and "educated". I myself had a question about Quincy's coat and got some incredible advice. The difference between now and then is, the people who respond do not talk to the OP like they are an idiot or fight with others here. So, it may feel like Poodle Facebook because there is a lot of drama missing, but things are being accomplished, kindly and without all the hostility.

There are more breeders on here than I recall there ever being before. And if not for all the hostility in the past, there would be even more, but some ran for the hills because they got sick and tired of the anger that was here and the untruths being told about them. In my opinion, THIS is much nicer place to be.


----------



## spoospirit

_I agree with you 100% Cherrie. The BIG difference is that the sense of being part of a soap opera is gone. Thank goodness!! I can't stand all of the drama. 

Dianne and I just learned here that a Pantene product is good for coat growth. We have started using it and are very pleased with the results. We also learned how to do bevels on the bracelets when we accidentally came across that thread. We find all sorts of help here whether we are tho OP of just following the thread of another one. 

We are a community now who are talking to each other and not AT each other. 
_


----------



## wishpoo

Hmmmmm :confused3: I thought we were talking about *"improving the breed" in this BYB thread *... somehow Dremel and shampoo got into focus :noidea: ... oh well *sigh Misunderstanding, I guess ....


----------



## Olie

wishpoo said:


> Hmmmmm :confused3: I thought we were talking about *"improving the breed" in this BYB thread *... somehow Dremel and shampoo got into focus :noidea: ... oh well *sigh Misunderstanding, I guess ....


LOL! 

I stated earlier that the forum was very open at one time. I am glad the drama is mostly gone too but I do feel its a bit sugary sweet sometimes and some threads avoid getting to the real issues of expanding on learning. So I can see why Wishpoo made the comment. 

Example - I started this thread based off another forum I was on about ethical breeders. Some of our PF members are familiar as they are members as well. The topic was ethical breeders and it went long and hard LOADS of debate and I REALLY defended show breeders etc, was proud of myself. 2 years ago I might not have been able to do that but because of the members of this forum I did - so thanks for the knowledge and education. Either way there was no name calling, no banning, no bickering or accusations........it was heated at times but stayed "stable" I suppose.

BUT here is the down fall. I was very worried how to word this thread because there are members here that might have felt some things related towards them because of history. I hope some people can get past the past is all!


----------



## Olie

There are more breeders here which is great, but I not see as much breeder participation as once was.....maybe this has some to do with where past threads have went. I do not agree with being rude though. :act-up:


----------



## Keithsomething

it is a little sweet sometimes, but I wouldn't want to exchange that for what it once was...thats for sure

and I understand the defending show breeders Olie, I have become so enamored with the show world its a bit obsessive at this point... I think there are so many components that make a good breeder and showing is a part of that, but health or colour should never be compromised due to a title and unfortunately that happens more than I was willing to see


----------



## bigpoodleperson

> I think there are so many components that make a good breeder and showing is a part of that, but health or colour should never be compromised due to a title and unfortunately that happens more than I was willing to see


I would like to debate that a little Keith.  I personally think that color should be lowest on the importance list. I would choose a breeder that bred for health and titles over a breeder that bred for health and color. A good temperament and working ability, which is what titles "measure" and are for, are far more important then the color of the dog. When color comes first is when problems occur, IMO.


----------



## Keithsomething

I completely agree with you BPP colour should never be prioritized above health or temperament
that was a Freudian slip of sorts I'm sure (only it isn't psycho-sexual...subconscious... its all Freudian right?)

What I was trying to say, is that I see breeders that I respect doing things...I don't respect all for the glory that is a title. I believe that value should be placed on a title, performance/conformation, it takes time and effort to achieve both but to compromise health because of colour or a title seems sloppy and asking for issues
that is what I meant to write in my first post not the mess I wrote xDD


----------



## CharismaticMillie

Wishpoo, I think of a hobby breeder as someone who breeds very few litters (1 or 2 litters every 1-3 years), is involved in the poodle fancy (showing, performance events, etc.), health tests 100% and breeds for the love of the breed/desire to improve the breed rather than to make money. They do not operate as a business. I have this definition because many of the breeders that I consider to be ideal and that fit the above characteristics have identified themselves as hobby breeders...

What is your definition of a hobby breeder?


----------



## Liz

I'm a total neophyte when it comes to breeding, and I'm trying to make sense of these good breeding checklists. It seems to me like these best practices fall into two categories: (1) practices that are essential to raising healthy, well-socialized pups, and (2) practices that are a strong sign that the breeder probably (but not necessarily) is doing the things listed in category (1). In other words, Cat 2 can lead to false positives (e.g. crappy breeders who win titles but then over-breed) and false negatives (a wonderful breeder who really likes multicolors). Is this a useful way to think about breeders?


----------



## fjm

I think that is a good way of looking at it, Liz. Perhaps one of the problems is that knowledge and practice change over time - and the best is therefore a moving target. Linebreeding has been the accepted method to produce beautiful, show winning dogs for generations - only comparatively recently has the importance of genetic diversity come to be recognised. Top show breeders maintained kennels for their dogs - some still do - but we now want pups that have been raised and socialised with people in the house. New technology is enabling us to assess and track the health and longevity of dogs through generations in a way that was almost unthinkable even 20 years ago. Perhaps one measure of a good breeder - whether defined as show, back yard or hobby - is that he or she is prepared to learn new ways of doing things.


----------



## Liz

fjm said:


> Perhaps one measure of a good breeder - whether defined as show, back yard or hobby - is that he or she is prepared to learn new ways of doing things.


Thanks, FJM; that makes a lot of sense to me. One of the things that has surprised me is that cutting-edge practices and knowledge from five years ago are now out-dated and obsolete.


----------



## JE-UK

wishpoo said:


> Oh yes... :becky: !!! This place used to have such educational potential for everybody - "starter" breeders, future buyers - you name it !!!


Beg to disagree ... I have learned a TON about this breed from people on the forum. I'm very grateful. Otherwise I'd be taking breed advice from my vet ("never bathe a poodle and feed it Science Diet") :smile:.


----------



## CharismaticMillie

I'm with JE-UK on that one! I have learned an indescribable amount about poodles on this forum.


----------



## 2719

JE-UK said:


> Beg to disagree ... I have learned a TON about this breed from people on the forum. I'm very grateful. Otherwise I'd be taking breed advice from my vet ("never bathe a poodle and feed it Science Diet") :smile:.


:amen:

This is why I enjoy the forum so much. I asked a question yesterday and got some good advice. And I am very happy to help others on the forum when they have questions and I know the answer.

I think the main reason I joined this forum, though, is because I love the poodle breed. I want what is best for them...I want other poodle owners to get the best when they buy a puppy...and I love to hear about other people's poodles, see their pictures. I am a poodle fan! and want to communicate with other poodle fans!


----------



## wishpoo

*Millie* 


> Wishpoo, I think of a hobby breeder as someone who breeds very few litters (1 or 2 litters every 1-3 years), is involved in the poodle fancy (showing, performance events, etc.), health tests 100% and breeds for the love of the breed/desire to improve the breed rather than to make money. They do not operate as a business. I have this definition because many of the breeders that I consider to be ideal and that fit the above characteristics have identified themselves as hobby breeders...


Oh , I see now where the whole confusion is :act-up:. We tried to make a distinction between "good" and "bad" BYBs and somebody mentioned that a good one can be seen as a "hobby breeder" . So, I used that term in that context. 

Your description of a "hobby breeder" would equate to show/performance breeder who breeds just for the love of it and no monetary gain nor just No. of Ch's in that line and that definitely is THE PERFECT breeder by all means IMO :adore::first:


----------



## wishpoo

> This is why I enjoy the forum so much. I asked a question yesterday and got some good advice. And I am very happy to help others on the forum when they have questions and I know the answer.
> 
> I think the main reason I joined this forum, though, is because I love the poodle breed. I want what is best for them...I want other poodle owners to get the best when they buy a puppy...and I love to hear about other people's poodles, see their pictures. I am a poodle fan! and want to communicate with other poodle fans!


Same here LOL :act-up: - but I also like to discuss openly some more serious matters concerning bad breeding practices :cool2: and giving people honest opinion about a puppy they consider to buy without resorting to PMs which became the necessity lately. :angry: I do not mind doing it, it is just that that same information otherwise would be useful to ALL and not just one person :noidea:, I suppose ...

Oh well ray2:


----------



## Marian

Here's an article our trainer posted on FB. Just thought I'd share it here. It's really about all breeds, but it is somewhat relevant to this conversation.

Does It Matter Where I Get My Dog?


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

wishpoo said:


> Same here LOL :act-up: - but I also like to discuss openly some more serious matters concerning bad breeding practices :cool2: and giving people honest opinion about a puppy they consider to buy without resorting to PMs which became the necessity lately. :angry: I do not mind doing it, it is just that that same information otherwise would be useful to ALL and not just one person :noidea:, I suppose ...
> 
> Oh well ray2:


You obviously can give your opinion of a puppy in public, because someone just asked our opinion yesterday and got it from a good number of people. I think is it important that opinions be backed up with facts, and not innuendo or negativity just because we may not happen to like someone.


----------



## wishpoo

> You obviously can give your opinion of a puppy in public, because someone just asked our opinion yesterday and got it from a good number of people. I think is it important that opinions be backed up with facts, and not innuendo or negativity just because we may not happen to like someone.
> ________


Yes... and other way around LOL . We should not recommend "not so good breeder" just because it is our friend. 

If anything, since I am not a breeder, nor do I show, nor I have any interest wasted here or anywhere - I can give honest and objective opinion as I always did and always will :act-up:

*Marian*- thanks for a very good link : )))


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle

wishpoo said:


> Yes... and other way around LOL . We should not recommend "not so good breeder" just because it is our friend.
> 
> If anything, since I am not a breeder, nor do I show, nor I have any interest wasted here or anywhere - I can give honest and objective opinion as I always did and always will :act-up:
> 
> *Marian*- thanks for a very good link : )))


Yes indeed! A positive and glowing recommendation should also be backed up with factual information. How was your experience with this breeder? Did you visit? Were their dogs happy and well groomed? Were the premises clean and odour free? If you did not visit, did your puppy arrive healthy and clean? Did your puppy get registered? Were the parents health tested? Did the breeder back up everything they said? Did they make good on every promise made to you, the buyer? Did they answer all of your questions in a forthcoming manner? Have they been available to you since you've had your puppy to answer questions you might have had on house breaking, crate training etc.? Did they give you references readily and happily? I would think unless one had an opinion due to lack of health testing, the only way someone could have an OBJECTIVE opinion, would be if they bought or declined a puppy from said breeder and had a personal experience with the breeder themselves.


----------



## wishpoo

I absolutely agree !!!!!! Done most of that LMAO (except "visiting"  Now is time for me to slooowly "bekin' up" till I am still in one piece , I guess


----------

