# On breeding dogs



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

Thank you so much for this comment, I hope you will get constructive comments back.


----------



## schnauzerpoodle (Apr 21, 2010)

LegalEagle said:


> For example, lots of breeders of quality poodles have so many conditions on who gets their dogs that it is hard to imagine who'd be able to get one: some people don't want to sell to pet homes, they only want to sell if the dog will be shown or if the dog will compete, or the dog cannot be bred or the dog must be bred, or it must be fed raw, or not allowed to climb stairs until it's two years old or it can't go to a house without a fenced yard, or it can't be fed raw ... the list goes on and on.
> 
> Okay, so they bred the dogs and should get to choose where the pups go. I get that. But if you are just a regular person who wants a good poodle that's healthy and well-socialized, where do you go? Because if all "reputable breeders" have these kinds of restrictions, someone like me (a student who lives in a small apartment with no yard but loves her mini, walks him, trains him, plays with him, feeds him good food and grooms him religiously and has NEUTERED him) has a very limited pool of potential breeders to buy from.


I'm just a regular person who wants a well-bred, well socialized poodle that comes from health tested parents. I don't show and I don't plan to show. I don't breed and I don't plan to breed. I don't have a yard. And both my husband and I work full time. I don't find that I have limited pool of breeders to buy from. In fact, I have too many choices! I had to say no to a few breeders when they notified me that they had puppies for me because it was not the right timing (e.g. no vacation time from my work, planned vacation, singleton puppy, etc.) and none of these breeders disliked me for that. They have been willing to keep me on the list for the next/right litter. I don't have a magic touch with breeders. All I have been doing is writing them a detailed, informative email introducing myself and my living environment and what I plan to do with my puppy. I provide references from my vet, dog trainer and groomer (I didn't have any of these when I got my poodle because I didn't have a dog since my old one passed away 6 yrs ago. I explained to Nickel's breeder why I didn't have any dog-related references. I showed him pictures of my old dog. From the pictures and the exchange of emails, he trusted me and decided he wanted to place a puppy with me.) 

Now on my list I have 3 red mini poodle breeders that I will buy from - one in the midwest that there's direct flight to my home city, the other two are in the South, one ships and the other doesn't. I have 6 silver and silver-beige mini poodle breeders that I will buy from and they are everywhere from the West to the East. I can go on and on. I just wanted to say: There are plenty of good breeders that are willing to place a puppy with a regular person like me. I have talked to over 100 breeders now (poodles of 3 varieties and a few other breeds) and none of them has turned me down because (1) I don't have a yard (2) I haven't had a poodle before (3) I don't know how to groom (4) of the type of food I'm planning to feed the pup.



LegalEagle said:


> First off, nobody I know reacts this way when someone says they want to have children (and we ALL know some people who shouldn't reproduce. Just sayin'.)


I have told and yelled at a few friends that they should do testings before planning to have a human baby, knowing that some genetic diseases run in their families. I had a little brother that died from a genetic disease that runs in the family. Back in those years, my parents didn't know of the testing. I know the pain of losing a child by looking at my parents. I know the guilt of not being able to avoid passing down the disease to a child. So here I am, not planning to have a child because I'm a carrier and I told every single boyfriend about this as soon as things get serious. I think if I still plan on having a child knowing that I'm a carrier of a certain type of genetic disease, I deserve the attack of anyone who loves human babies. Same here - people who see "bringing lives to this world" as a HOBBY deserve to be warned or even yelled at. Lives is NOT a hobby. Swimming is a hobby. Reading is a hobby. Breeding is NOT a hobby. 



LegalEagle said:


> Also, as my brother pointed out, people who are on a poodle forum asking for breeding advice are probably not going to be running a puppy mill.


Really? Did you see the someone who didn't even know this color shouldn't be bred to that color here on the forum? 



LegalEagle said:


> The fact that there are so few breeders is why pure-bred poodles are so expensive ($1200-2000 in my neck of the woods).


I don't think well-bred poodles are expensive/not cheap because there are not enough breeders. A well respected breeder explained well about the cost of the puppies. I copied and pasted here but please see: Safranne Poodles, Specializing in Performance Miniature Poodles, Winona, MN

What goes into the Cost of a Puppy?


Before Birth:

1.) The cost of putting a AKC Championship and Performance titles on the parents.
2.) The cost of all health genetic testing of each parent.
These include Optigen (Screening for Genetic PRA), annual Cerf eye exams, Hip, Patellas, Leg Perthes exams/X rays and reports sent to OFA. DNA testing/report on Parents.

3.) The Stud Fee.

4.) Transportation for the Dam to get to and from the Stud.

5.) Any medical needs for the dam. Possible C section, vet assisted births etc.

After Birth:

1.) Medical needs for the puppies. Dew claws and tail docking and worming. Cerf eye exam and vaccinations. Well puppy exams at 10 weeks of age.

2.) Puppy Temperament testing.

3.) Grooming

Limited and Unlimited AKC registration.


Please see some of the videos of what good breeders do for the puppies. I think this is the reason why they can ask for more than puppy mills. These breeders provide love, care, knowledge and a service. 

desertreefpoods - YouTube
dschnulle - YouTube
TheSafranneSilvers - YouTube
ADELHEIDPOODLES - YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/feed/UC4KL1GL2bGEatGm8XrtW_ww

I don't agree that there's no "middle ground". Plenty of reputable breeders sell their older puppies, retired show dogs at a more affordable price. 

ETA: I paid $1200 for my well-bred poodle from a reputable breeder. My boy's parents are health tested. If my boy can live to 14 years old, that means this loyal, obedient, funny, smart, supportive, affectionate, loving friend of mine costs me $85.70 + food per year! I think it's the best deal in the world.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

I have the feeling that many breeders on this forum are frustrated and pass their frustration here. Maybe it`s not the right place?


----------



## ninaspoodles (Jan 28, 2013)

Well put Schnauzer poodle! And we do not want "hobby breeders" those are called Backyard Breeders. We breed to improve lines, and to improve the breed. When we are looking for a new prospect, we breed a litter as we believe it may produce what we are looking for in our next poodle. Of course we can not keep the whole litter, so we then find responsible homes and sell on non breeding contracts so as uneducated backyard breeders do not breed without permission. We want to preserve our lines and the breed!

Also, if you have gotten many negative comments about wanting to breed, perhaps it is because the breeders have not liked how you view breeding? Saying you want to breed for fun will not attract reputable breeders and you will get negative remarks. If you are truly interested in breeding, you need to do more research so as you understand why posts like these are viewed negatively. Get a good mentor (again that will be up to your research on finding a good breeder) and learn from them. Understand that you can never learn enough. Seek out different opinions etc. Then you will be welcomed into the breeding world with open arms.

We are always looking for good, knowledgable and dedicated breeders


----------



## outwest (May 1, 2011)

I think the original poster has some great points. Everybody who buys a purebred dog wants a good representation of the breed who is healthy. Still, I do think that a new breeder should be working with a respected breeder. I bought my whippet from a woman who had a couple dogs, but was working with a breeder. Breeders who are really trying to make a difference with poodles can benefit from those backyard people raising some of their puppies in a loving home. You can't normally run out and buy a show quality breeding dog. I wanted a show dog and had no relationship with any bigtime show breeders. I seriously doubted I could purchase a show dog from one of them and went with someone I had a relationship with. It's all very political. Breeders are understandably wary. It takes a long time to develop the contacts you need. ninapoodles, getting a mentor for showing dogs is easier said than done, not to mention a mentor to breed them. I've have tried...

A hobby breeder can often be a great breeder if they start with a good dog without any glaring faults and breed to only other great dogs. Nothing says those puppies won't be as nice as a show breeders puppies.


----------



## NOLA Standards (Apr 11, 2010)

"_ETA: I paid $1200 for my well-bred poodle from a reputable breeder. My boy's parents are health tested. If my boy can live to 14 years old, that means this loyal, obedient, funny, smart, supportive, affectionate, loving friend of mine costs me $85.70 + food per year! I think it's the best deal in the world. _"

Schnauzerpoodle,

Have never considered it that way. But they are, indeed, the absolute best deal in the world!!

Thanks for that!

Tabatha
NOLA Standards


----------



## Ms Stella (Aug 16, 2010)

Interesting observations..I dont see breeders as one of 2 types as the OP listed..I think many good breeders are breeding to improve the breed and to try to get the perfect poodle..they try to combine a dog they have and love with a dog from another kennel to improve upon structural faults. Everyone would love to have a litter of show pups..but Id imagine that in the real world..a litter of say...10 you are lucky to have 2 or 3 show prospects if you are lucky! But what happens with the other 8 pups? The breeders want a good home for those puppies..and if they are sold as pets..(with a spay neuter contract) they still will look like gorgeous poodles to 99% of the dog population. The things that make a poodle a winner in the show ring are not evident to the average eye..So Id imagine that you have many gorgeous poodles to choose from if you do your homework and get to know some breeders..develop some trust. Its not that all the poodle puppies are show quality..its that the best breeders really care about their puppies and dont want to sell to just anyone..unless you can prove you will be a good home. And as pointed out above it is costly to rear a litter..Im sure some make a profit..I think many do it to support their dog hobby of showing.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

Thanks for taking the time to reply, Schnauzerpoodle. I probably should have done what you did - send an email to a large number of breeders. Instead, I looked on their webpages, and I can assure you, many did list the sorts of restrictions I mentioned.

I want to quickly respond to two other points you've made. 

1) I think the point my brother was making was that, unless someone wanted to do a good job breeding, they wouldn't be asking for advice. That's why people come to a forum like this - to ask for advice to avoid making mistakes. If all they want to do is make money, they would just get a poodle with another poodle, breed them and sell the pups. I've had a half-dozen strangers stop me in my neighborhood and offer to help me find a mate for Laszlo, saying I'd be able to get $800-1000 for letting him mate. Those people are NOT going to come to this forum to ask for advice.

2) Breeding is, for most people, a hobby. Just look at what people say here. "You can't make a profit." "Don't think of it as a business." If you need a job in order to pay for your activity, it's a hobby. The only question is how deep you are into it.

3)Finally, you know as well as I do that there are a LOT of breeders who don't title their dogs, who own their own studs (no stud fee), do not do annual hip exams (no testing fee), do not temperament test, and do their own grooming. They charge the SAME PRICE as the people who do all the right things - the people I call Type A breeders. To me, that speaks to a supply and demand problem, as well as an informational deficit on the part of puppy buyers. Don't you think so?


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

ninaspoodles said:


> Well put Schnauzer poodle! And we do not want "hobby breeders" those are called Backyard Breeders. We breed to improve lines, and to improve the breed. When we are looking for a new prospect, we breed a litter as we believe it may produce what we are looking for in our next poodle. Of course we can not keep the whole litter, so we then find responsible homes and sell on non breeding contracts so as uneducated backyard breeders do not breed without permission. We want to preserve our lines and the breed!
> 
> Also, if you have gotten many negative comments about wanting to breed, perhaps it is because the breeders have not liked how you view breeding? Saying you want to breed for fun will not attract reputable breeders and you will get negative remarks. If you are truly interested in breeding, you need to do more research so as you understand why posts like these are viewed negatively. Get a good mentor (again that will be up to your research on finding a good breeder) and learn from them. Understand that you can never learn enough. Seek out different opinions etc. Then you will be welcomed into the breeding world with open arms.
> 
> We are always looking for good, knowledgable and dedicated breeders


There is a big difference between a backyard breeder (see Type 2 breeder, in my simple taxonomy) and a hobby breeder. A hobby breeder knows and loves the breed, has a great dog or two and when the opportunity arises to breed a bitch with a good temperament and good conformation to a compatible stud, does so. The hobby breeder does so for the pleasure of continuing the breed and breeding a new generation of pups, and usually keeps one or two of the pups. But it isn't done as a quick way to make money, mostly because it isn't quick and it doesn't make any money.

See this webpage for a description of the difference: http://www.woodhavenlabs.com/comparison.html


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

ninaspoodles said:


> Well put Schnauzer poodle! And we do not want "hobby breeders" those are called Backyard Breeders. We breed to improve lines, and to improve the breed. When we are looking for a new prospect, we breed a litter as we believe it may produce what we are looking for in our next poodle. Of course we can not keep the whole litter, so we then find responsible homes and sell on non breeding contracts so as uneducated backyard breeders do not breed without permission. We want to preserve our lines and the breed!
> 
> Also, if you have gotten many negative comments about wanting to breed, perhaps it is because the breeders have not liked how you view breeding? Saying you want to breed for fun will not attract reputable breeders and you will get negative remarks. If you are truly interested in breeding, you need to do more research so as you understand why posts like these are viewed negatively. Get a good mentor (again that will be up to your research on finding a good breeder) and learn from them. Understand that you can never learn enough. Seek out different opinions etc. Then you will be welcomed into the breeding world with open arms.
> 
> We are always looking for good, knowledgable and dedicated breeders


Also, I have not gotten any negative comments about wanting to breed. Even if I did have breeding as a goal, I have never been foolish enough to express a desire to do so. I've seen too frequently what happens to other people who mention such a thing in passing.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

Ms Stella said:


> Interesting observations..I dont see breeders as one of 2 types as the OP listed..I think many good breeders are breeding to improve the breed and to try to get the perfect poodle..they try to combine a dog they have and love with a dog from another kennel to improve upon structural faults. Everyone would love to have a litter of show pups..but Id imagine that in the real world..a litter of say...10 you are lucky to have 2 or 3 show prospects if you are lucky! But what happens with the other 8 pups? The breeders want a good home for those puppies..and if they are sold as pets..(with a spay neuter contract) they still will look like gorgeous poodles to 99% of the dog population. The things that make a poodle a winner in the show ring are not evident to the average eye..So Id imagine that you have many gorgeous poodles to choose from if you do your homework and get to know some breeders..develop some trust. Its not that all the poodle puppies are show quality..its that the best breeders really care about their puppies and dont want to sell to just anyone..unless you can prove you will be a good home. And as pointed out above it is costly to rear a litter..Im sure some make a profit..I think many do it to support their dog hobby of showing.


Ms. Stella, I think you are probably right. I imagine that a lot of people (myself first and foremost!) just don't know how to go about getting a good puppy. I think maybe a better way of saying it would be that the most *visible* breeders are at the extremes. But of course, you're right to say that with a bit of digging and a bit of patience, there is a middle way.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle (Sep 1, 2009)

I don't think a non breeding person has any idea what breeding and rearing puppies entails. It takes a ton of money and a lot of blood, sweat and tears to breed a quality litter and get them into good, responsible, loving homes. You begin with the expense of purchasing a female ($1,500- 3,000). You show her, or do performance work with her- ( maybe $5,000), and for two years you hope she will pass her health testing. Then you test her ($1,000). Then you choose a boy after months of research and use him to sire your litter ($1,500-3,000) Your girl might get a uterine infection, and might need vet care and antibiotics throughout her pregnancy ($1,000-2,000) You have to advertise to sell the puppies, correct? Web site and other internet advertising ($800) The puppies are arriving. Oh wait...emergency c-section!!! ($1,000) The puppies and Mom all survive, thank God!!! Tail docking and dew claw removal by a vet ($30-60 per puppy). Shots and vet physicals-($300-700) Food for the litter ($300-600) CKC or AKC registrations (litter and indivudual- $300-500) toys...bedding...ex-pens...Not to mention hardly four hours sleep a day/night for the first two weeks. At four weeks when Mom stops cleaning up after the babies who are now eating food, nonstop poop patrol inside and outside begins. You consider buying stocks in the companies that manufacture Lysol wipes and Bounty towels and Javex. Then you have many trips to the airport to ship your babies to their new homes. The big pay off? The many hours of joy these incredible little money eaters bring you and your family, and watching them go into well researched and remarkable homes. Receiving updates and knowing the happiness that what you helped create have brought to the folks they now live with. If you are lucky, some of those reports include things like "My boy became a German Youth Champion this weekend" or "Our girl got her first leg toward her Rally excellent title".

Dog breeding is not for the faint of heart. Breeders tend to be a little OCD about their kids because of the amount of time, money and effort it took to get them here and happily placed into good homes.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> I don't think a non breeding person has any idea what breeding and rearing puppies entails. It takes a ton of money and a lot of blood, sweat and tears to breed a quality litter and get them into good, responsible, loving homes. You begin with the expense of purchasing a female ($1,500- 3,000). You show her, or do performance work with her- ( maybe $5,000), and for two years you hope she will pass her health testing. Then you test her ($1,000). Then you choose a boy after months of research and use him to sire your litter ($1,500-3,000) Your girl might get a uterine infection, and might need vet care and antibiotics throughout her pregnancy ($1,000-2,000) You have to advertise to sell the puppies, correct? Web site and other internet advertising ($800) The puppies are arriving. Oh wait...emergency c-section!!! ($1,000) The puppies and Mom all survive, thank God!!! Tail docking and dew claw removal by a vet ($30-60 per puppy). Shots and vet physicals-($300-700) Food for the litter ($300-600) CKC or AKC registrations (litter and indivudual- $300-500) toys...bedding...ex-pens...Not to mention hardly four hours sleep a day/night for the first two weeks. At four weeks when Mom stops cleaning up after the babies who are now eating food, nonstop poop patrol inside and outside begins. You consider buying stocks in the companies that manufacture Lysol wipes and Bounty towels and Javex. Then you have many trips to the airport to ship your babies to their new homes. The big pay off? The many hours of joy these incredible little money eaters bring you and your family, and watching them go into well researched and remarkable homes. Receiving updates and knowing the happiness that what you helped create have brought to the folks they now live with. If you are lucky, some of those reports include things like "My boy became a German Youth Champion this weekend" or "Our girl got her first leg toward her Rally excellent title".
> 
> Dog breeding is not for the faint of heart. Breeders tend to be a little OCD about their kids because of the amount of time, money and effort it took to get them here and happily placed into good homes.


Arreau, I know that as a non-breeder, I don't really get it, but I understand what you're saying. You've put a lot of care into the litters you breed. You SHOULD be a little OCD.

But do you get what I am saying?

I don't know how much you charge for your pups, but I can almost guarantee that most people who buy poodles in my area pay a comparable amount for their pups. However, most of those pups were probably bred by people who don't do HALF of what you do. Why can these BYBs and puppy-mill breeders charge the EXACT SAME PRICE for their pups as you charge for a well-bred pup? (I paid $1200 for Laszlo, who I have come to realize came from a situation bordering on that of a puppy mill, and that was on the low end, price-wise.)

I see two factors: a restricted supply and an informational asymmetry.

Restricted supply: responsible pet poodle owners neuter their dogs. Therefore, the only people breeding (in large enough numbers to make a difference to the pet poodle market) are people like you and people just trying to make money. Moreover, some shelters are really going overboard with restrictions on adoption, which is kind of funny given the living conditions of a lot of dog shelters. It's not like the dogs are at the Ritz. I refuse to believe that a dog is better off in a shelter than in my home, because I don't have a yard. I just don't buy it.

Informational asymmetry: Here is the problem: except for the extremes, both types of breeders look the same to a novice puppy buyer. Sure, we can tell if your breeding pair has 5 titles between them or if you're selling pups off the back of a pickup truck, but in the middle, it is really hard to tell the difference. The breeders know if they are the "real thing" or not, but the buyer doesn't. What's worse, the bad breeder knows what a good breeder looks like, and counterfeits the good breeder's quality (See! I tested the hips! Of course, I did it at 11 months so there wouldn't be an ID number. Silly puppy buyer....).

I think that only education AND an increase in supply would solve the problem.


----------



## schnauzerpoodle (Apr 21, 2010)

LegalEagle said:


> Thanks for taking the time to reply, Schnauzerpoodle. I probably should have done what you did - send an email to a large number of breeders. Instead, I looked on their webpages, and I can assure you, many did list the sorts of restrictions I mentioned.


Yes, I have seen plenty of those requirements/restrictions. If one doesn't see why a breeder requires his/her puppy not to run up and down the stairs or participate in agility before turning one year old, then this person can find a breeder that doesn't have that kind of requirement. I have seen breeders that require an annual CERF result mailed to them, etc. I don't see what's wrong for setting requirements.




LegalEagle said:


> 1) I think the point my brother was making was that, unless someone wanted to do a good job breeding, they wouldn't be asking for advice. That's why people come to a forum like this - to ask for advice to avoid making mistakes. If all they want to do is make money, they would just get a poodle with another poodle, breed them and sell the pups. I've had a half-dozen strangers stop me in my neighborhood and offer to help me find a mate for Laszlo, saying I'd be able to get $800-1000 for letting him mate. Those people are NOT going to come to this forum to ask for advice.


I have seen plenty of "breeders" that ask for advice here AFTER the litters were born so the mistakes HAVE BEEN MADE already. These "breeders" have already created a few new lives and didn't know how to clean up their own mess or didn't know how to advertise their puppies (colors, size, etc.) Yes, these "breeders" are probably better than those who just breed two curly haired dogs and sell puppies. But to me, these "breeders" are still not good enough and they do not want to do a good job bad enough to ask questions BEFORE the puppies are born.



LegalEagle said:


> 2) Breeding is, for most people, a hobby. Just look at what people say here. "You can't make a profit." "Don't think of it as a business." If you need a job in order to pay for your activity, it's a hobby. The only question is how deep you are into it.


Based on what I learned from the breeders I have talked to - Breeding is NOT their hobby, showing is. Improving the breed is their dream. Breeding itself is NOT their hobby but they need to breed so that they can continue to show. Those that show their dogs so that they can breed and sell puppies at a better price (because their puppies are champion sired) are called "ribbon mill breeders."


----------



## Angl (Nov 9, 2012)

I'm just browsing the posts and something jumps out at me. Should Max not be going up and down stairs until he's one? Im sorry this is off topic. 


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## Vixen (May 31, 2011)

Angl said:


> I'm just browsing the posts and something jumps out at me. Should Max not be going up and down stairs until he's one? Im sorry this is off topic.
> 
> 
> Sent from Petguide.com Free App


I was wondering the same thing. We live in a 106yr old 2 story Victorian. Will I need to carry (insert unnamed puppy' s name here) up the stairs till age 1?


----------



## Meo'smom (Jan 3, 2013)

i just need to say that from where I come from, you will not find a breeder across the street. I had to drive 4 hours to get Meo. We all understand how you breeders feel, we ALL love our dog...why would we be on this forum if we didn't? But please be gentle with your fellow dog lovers who just want a good pet. Let's all remember that we don't come from the same place, we can't ALL afford 2000$ dogs and that maybe things are easier for one than the other...aren't we here to help one another?


----------



## Pluto (Jul 8, 2012)

schnauzerpoodle said:


> Based on what I learned from the breeders I have talked to - Breeding is NOT their hobby, showing is. Improving the breed is their dream. Breeding itself is NOT their hobby but they need to breed so that they can continue to show. Those that show their dogs so that they can breed and sell puppies at a better price (because their puppies are champion sired) are called "ribbon mill breeders."


And that is sort of the problem that LegalEagle is describing right? There are excellent breeders, they breed because they love the dogs, the breed, and showing. But they aren't breeding to produce pets. And they definitely aren't breeding to produce pets for the general public. So someone looking for "just a pet" doesn't have a ton of good breeders to go to, and doesn't always have the years to wait for the right puppy to come along. Often when a consumer looks for a new addition to their family they do it because it is a good time for them. A year or two down the line is a lot to ask of a typical pet owner that wants to add a family member now. 

So they have one sector marketing to them as a consumer - ie we have puppies now, they are cute, and we love them and we do "genetic testing" and our dogs are brilliant, and they have champions in thier line, but not for a couple of generations. They will breed how ever many puppies the consumer wants.

And you have another that doesn't breed for the consumer, they breed for the breed, and as their hobby, and because they love to show. They only have a couple of puppies available a year on average. They choose who their puppies go to, they require a deposit months in advance, they don't guarantee they will even have a puppy for you, and they often keep the very best for themselves and their friends. 

Who is the average consumer going to choose? Which breeder is going to represent the largest % of dogs out there being called poodles? Which really is impacting the breed more?


----------



## Rhett'smom (Sep 23, 2012)

Rhett is not afraid to go up the stairs but absolutely terrified to go down.. Sooo guess who gets to carry Rhett(aka Moose Man) down the stairs @ 62 pounds... Mommy .. But he loves to nuzzle me as we go down as a thank you.. He just started going up the stairs .. The vet said it is bad for his joints because of the angles.. Also since he is not known for being "graceful"


Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## schnauzerpoodle (Apr 21, 2010)

Vixen said:


> I was wondering the same thing. We live in a 106yr old 2 story Victorian. Will I need to carry (insert unnamed puppy' s name here) up the stairs till age 1?


I don't think so. Dogs should live like dogs. They can go up and down the stairs. It's about not participating in activities like agility till the growth plates close.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

No one mentioned the breeder who breeds for a "tax write-off." Also, there is no testing, puppies are kept in a backyard kennel instead of the house, there are many breeding dogs and litters a year, and buyers are never asked about the home puppies go to. Too many poodles and dogs end up in shelters and rescues because of this "over-breeding."


----------



## Cailin77 (Jul 21, 2012)

Well, personally, my response to the debate between high priced "show breeders" and mill puppies, is go get a rescue poodle!!! It can take time, and you may have to make some concessions (my ideal was a large mpoo/ small spoo female, I ended up with a 12 inch mpoo male) but it is worth it!! And yeah, there were definately rescues that I didn't even put in applications to, because I knew I wouldn't qualify (no yard, unwilling to bring my cats to a shelter to meet prospective dog), but eventually I found Brody and he is great! He was only the next state away, but for the right dog I would have been willing to fly to pick him up. 

And I REALLY don't think the issue is "supply and demand." I think those that buy from puppy mills, backyard breeders and pet stores aren't educated about health testing, genetic conditions and the conditions the parents are kept in. I think the people that are educated know that poodles are expensive and that a lot of care is required to raise healthy poodle parents and healthy puppies. And if someone can't pay the "going rate" for a well-bred puppy, should they really be committing to a dog, let alone a dog that needs constant (and potentially costly) grooming? 

Anyway, my personal stand is that health testing is a must and so are good genetics, so those "middle ground" breeders you talk about really can't exist. I have no problem with someone with a healthy, registered, tested dog working with an experienced breeder to have a litter. But chances are, those puppies are going to be just as expensive as if you got them from the experienced breeder.


----------



## Meg (Aug 1, 2010)

This is an interesting and lively debate! I'll add my two cents. 

I think that everyone is right about the compartmentalization of breeding. But I think that the real distinction should not be made between the types of breeder, be it hobby or professional, but by the type of buyer that the breeder is catering to. The professional breeder is trying to improve upon the stock available and get as close as possible to the breed standard and is obviously going to be more picky about who gets which puppy because they have earned that right through extensive time and money spent. They also have a 'brand' , so to speak, to protect. The hobby (backyard) breeder is going to be more interested in exploiting the buyers ignorance and selling a sub-par puppy as quickly as possible, before the litter next month whelps and before the faults have a chance to grow in. 

I think it would be awesome if there were a middle ground between the two but I don't think its likely to happen. I just can't find the logic in _specifically_ breeding for mediocrity. There are thousands of rescue groups and shelters with cute and curly dogs that would fit the bill quite nicely and at a steeply discounted price. Yes, those rescues may be seeking the perfect situation for thier dogs but they just don't want to place animals back into the same spot that they may have gotten them from. I don't mind paying extra for a well bred dog because I feel that the purchase price includes insurance. It gives me a little peace of mind knowing that I'm buying from people who want to minimize health defects and proof the claims of improvement by showing/performing. Clearly everything can't be accounted for in testing prior to breeding. If I can possibly reduce future pain and suffering for both my dog and I by taking precautions now, why wouldn't I? 

As far as being restricted to the point of exclusion by breeders, I think that you should run (don't walk) from those folks . You will have a relationship with the breeder for as long as your dog is living and it should at least start out on the right foot. I live alone, have an older male dog, rent my home and work full time and like other folks have said, I had to turn breeders down. I think a lot depends on how a breeder feels about you and your past experience with dogs.

As long as there are uneducated or over-educated dog buyers we will still have a wide chasm of breeders available. I don't think that will ever change. Those that have quality purebred dogs should act as ambassadors for our breed and share our knowledge with others. We will only begin seeing change once pet stores and backyard breeders start losing $$$$.It's not a perfect plan but I'm totally up to the challenge and I _reeeeeeaaaaaallllly _love talking about my poodle with people I meet!


----------



## ninaspoodles (Jan 28, 2013)

Meg said:


> This is an interesting and lively debate! I'll add my two cents.
> 
> I think that everyone is right about the compartmentalization of breeding. But I think that the real distinction should not be made between the types of breeder, be it hobby or professional, but by the type of buyer that the breeder is catering to. The professional breeder is trying to improve upon the stock available and get as close as possible to the breed standard and is obviously going to be more picky about who gets which puppy because they have earned that right through extensive time and money spent. They also have a 'brand' , so to speak, to protect. The hobby (backyard) breeder is going to be more interested in exploiting the buyers ignorance and selling a sub-par puppy as quickly as possible, before the litter next month whelps and before the faults have a chance to grow in.
> 
> ...


 I really enjoyed reading this! Thank you for that!


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

Meg said:


> This is an interesting and lively debate! I'll add my two cents.
> 
> I think that everyone is right about the compartmentalization of breeding. But I think that the real distinction should not be made between the types of breeder, be it hobby or professional, but by the type of buyer that the breeder is catering to. The professional breeder is trying to improve upon the stock available and get as close as possible to the breed standard and is obviously going to be more picky about who gets which puppy because they have earned that right through extensive time and money spent. They also have a 'brand' , so to speak, to protect. The hobby (backyard) breeder is going to be more interested in exploiting the buyers ignorance and selling a sub-par puppy as quickly as possible, before the litter next month whelps and before the faults have a chance to grow in.
> 
> ...


Thanks for this thoughtful post, Meg! I think you're very right about separating the scene based on types of buyer being catered to. 

I'd say, though, that unscrupulous breeders often target inexperienced, rather than simply ignorant, buyers. Even as a first-time puppy buyer, I knew that I should look for pups whelped and raised in the house, with tests on their eyes and hips, who had a start on socialization and whose parents I could meet. The breeder led me to believe that all of these things were true (and technically, they mostly were...it was a case of meeting the letter of my requirements while completely missing the spirit). However, when I actually got to her house to choose a puppy, and I realized I had been misled, I couldn't quite bring myself to get in the car and go home and start again from scratch. I won't be making THAT mistake again. 

On the topic of hobby breeders, I'd say that it isn't quite fair to lump them in with back yard breeders. I don't imagine that true hobby breeders, people who love the breed but don't want to start a kennel, are breeding for mediocrity. I don't think that just because a dog doesn't have a fabulous pedigree it is "mediocre." Not every great dog gets titled, and a lot of a dog's quality as a pet comes down to nurture, not nature. In my (perhaps naive) mind, a hobby breeder might be someone who has 10+ years of dog-owning experience, has owned at least two or three dogs of the same breed and does activities with them. Maybe this person loves competing with her poodles at flyball. When she meets similarly athletic, friendly, healthy, color- and variety-compatible poodles at competitions, why shouldn't she mate her dogs with them? It would help maintain genetic diversity and ensure that dogs are being bred for soundness and temperament, not just looks. However, the fact that she didn't have to pay for handlers, fancy grooming and huge stud fees or transportation costs means that she could reasonably sell the pups for a bit less than the perfect professional breeder could and still make a little money. The BYB, on the other hand, is not going to pass the savings to the customer - he's just trying to make as much money as possible.

Cost is a huge part of the issue for me. I accept that there will always be a range of breeders, and in a vibrant market there should be. But what I don't get is why, unlike for Labs, say, poodles are SO EXPENSIVE even when they are from a puppy mill or backyard breeder. Like, if the choice is between a $600 puppy from a BYB or a $1200 puppy from an ideal environment, I say make your choice and buyer beware. But here, the choice is between a $1200 puppy from a BYB (breeder makes $500+ profit) or a $1200 puppy from an ideal kennel (breeder makes maybe $100 profit). You know that saying, "You get what you pay for"? Well, with poodles, at least where I live, that isn't true, because you are going to pay out the nose for your dog, regardless of quality. And I feel like a big part of the reason that ANY breeder, no matter how inexperienced or unscrupulous or irresponsible, can command that kind of price is scarcity, i.e. an inadequate supply.


----------



## fjm (Jun 4, 2010)

Very popular breeds are churned out in large numbers by puppy mills (look at the explosion in the chihuahua population when they became the "must have" accessory). Numbers available increase until the market is saturated, the price falls, and large numbers of unwanted breeding dogs and abandoned dogs and puppies find themselves in rescue (or worse). We treat sentient fellow creatures as commodities, with a fasionable novelty value to be exploited and then discarded. No wonder most poodle lovers pray that poodles never again become the "must have" breed!

There are many good arguments in favour of increasing the number of dogs that are bred from - but I am very far from convinced that aiming to reduce the price of puppies is amongst them. Retaining maximum breadth in the gene pool and reducing the number of litters bred from individual studs to avoid yet more bottle necks, yes - breeding to produce pups to saturate the market, no!


----------



## Sookster (Apr 11, 2011)

I really think some of the posts here don't understand what a "hobby" breeder really is. Lumping them with backyard breeders IS NOT appropriate in any way. If I buy a puppy, I _want_ to buy from a hobby breeder, and here is why: 

What you are all calling "professional" breeders, I'm assuming you mean the large, big name breeders. That's all fine and everything, but I don't want or need an AKC show quality puppy and to me, most of those breeders have too many dogs and too much going on for me to feel their dogs are actually getting treated like pets. Are they shown? Absolutely, many times extensively and to great lengths. Are they well taken care of? Of course, how would you keep that coat up otherwise. But are they truly living the life that I think a poodle deserves? In most cases, I would say that is a no. I also don't like that breeding is a "business" for these breeders. While their number one priority should be and hopefully is the dogs, they do have a bottom dollar to consider. 

Now, the "hobby" breeder. I consider a hobby breeder to be someone who likely has a full or part time job, owns a business, etc. In addition to their "day job", they also love poodles and hope to contribute to the improvement of the gene pool. They have a few dogs that live as pets, they show the dogs in performance or conformation because they enjoy spending time with the dogs, and occasionally, they breed. It's _these_ breeders that are producing the "pets" you are all asking for. A hobby breeder is just as likely to have fully tested lines, and probably more likely to have and be producing even tempered, well socialized puppies because they have to live with these dogs as pets, and the "pets" part is first and foremost, ahead of the "show dog" part. These are the breeders that produce a litter and barely break even, and they are OK with that because they enjoyed the process and found good homes for the puppies. They don't have a bottom dollar to consider, that's what their day job is for. This is their "hobby", not their business. 

I won't even talk about backyard breeders other than to say they can resemble any of the other two categories, except you probably won't get health testing or showing. I think a BYB can be someone who is like the professional breeder, in that they are hoping to turn a profit, or like the hobby breeder in that they have a family pet that they let get pregnant every now and then because of irresponsible dog ownership practices. 

So watch your wording. I'd bet most of the breeders on this forum fall under the classification of "hobby breeder" and I admire them for the commitment and contribution to this breed. 

In regardes to the original argument about supply and demand, my only contribution to that discussion is that I feel the reason few poodle owners choose to pursue breeding at all is because of the expense and upkeep involved in showing. For most people, it's just not worth the effort to keep up coat, send the dog off to a handler, etc. And even if you do that, to have even a successful hobby breeding program, you have to have a few dogs. Poodles are *expensive* to own, as we all know. I don't think I could have more than two and feel that most average poodle owners are probably in the same boat. 

So yes, I think there are fewer people out there breeding poodles the right way than many other breeds. But I don't think that "most" breeders fall into the "professional" category. I think most of them fall into the hobby category, and if you look under the surface of the big name, fancy show breeders, you will find plenty of breeders that are out there producing the pet you are looking for. 

Finally, puppy mills and backyard breeders can charge the same because that's the "going rate" for a poodle puppy and many consumers don't know the difference. It's all about education.


----------



## MaryLynn (Sep 8, 2012)

I only read the OP post (I have been very busy lately, Gryphon is turning 8mo's soon and he is keeping me on my toes (and I love it!)) so forgive me if this is just a bunch of overlap. 

I really resonated with the initial part of your post, which that is some of us "feel" like we have a limited selection of breeders due to restrictions. I just wanted a healthy, well adjusted poodle, but I felt like the whole fenced yard required was a bar for me. I live in a really large apartment, that's just the way it is. I actually don't see this to be a problem. We have enough room to play fetch inside, and do training, and my little guy is amazing on a leash and good with stairs and elevators. To me a back yard (for a lot of dog owners) doesn't end up meaning more or better exercise for their dog. Most people I know with yards and dogs, just let them out there 4 times a day, and that's it. It removes the necessity for walks. I'm not saying that every person with a yard does this, but a lot of them do. 

Not having a yard doesn't give me cop out days where I just usher my dog out a patio door and call them in, even if I am feeling lazy I have to take him down 7 floors and then walk him 15 minutes away from the residence to find a clean area for him to find a "spot" to go. If we take the stairs, this is incredible exercise for both of us (since this happens 4 times a day!). Most days we go for a long walk on the bike/running trails, and take the elevator. The whole thing is an ongoing training exercise, where letting my dog into a backyard is not. It shows, too! My puppy is calmer, and more obedient, and has a bigger repertoire of experiences and skills than his 'yard' litter-mates. Not knocking the 'yardies' on these forums, obviously having a yard isn't inferior, but it can become lazy and both types of environments offer different opportunities and experiences. 

I can see why a breeder would be concerned about their dog going to an apartment home. Usually they're very small (although, I think Gryphon would happily live in a 4x4 box if I was in it too, when we're inside he mostly just likes to cuddle haha), and they could indicate low-income (which is another restriction, the assumption that someone's monetary wealth needs to be above average-even though I personally think some duel income homes are the worst places for a poodle to be (ie no one is EVER home!)).

On the topic of hobby breeding, I don't desire cheaper pets. Yes, 1000-2000$ is a big out of pocket expense (and one that some people cannot pay), but the cost of breeding programs is very high. I have however known a person that I would probably consider to be a "hobby" breeder. She bred English bulldogs (they were still expensive, but if you look into all the testing, the ultra-sounds, medical bills, studding, and delivery-you'd probably see why they're so much money!) and she only did so maybe once every two or three years. She just wanted to breed them to be healthy and to spread the joy of bulldogs. I don't believe she showed them, or wanted people to show or breed her puppies, and she was CKC reg. This is really admirable and responsible to me. 

Responsibly breeding to me would be meeting a large list of very high expectations that I have, since animal welfare is a conviction of mine. When I look at a dog, I don't see a thing, and honestly the fact that I bought mine and "own" him makes me feel a small amount of shame. They're such beautiful and wonderful souls, I feel very badly for the abuse and unfortunate circumstances that arise simply due to careless breeding in the name of profit. 

I see two sides to the costs of well bred dogs. One side that is positive is that the breeding has been done 'correctly' (which in my mind is breeding healthy, sound pets ethically, while preserving the integrity of the breed), and you have also bought the experience of a professional that you can always go to for help (invaluable). Where the two sides thing comes in for me is that I see the cost as both a positive, and a negative thing. Part of me thinks that some people who cannot afford to "pamper" their dogs shouldn't have them. I am a minimalist in life, I don't consume in excess, and I don't "spoil" my dogs-but they never run out of healthy food, they don't miss a bath or a brush, and they get groomed very well. We never run out of training treats, toys, or games. They get to go to training school, and if needed they will see a behaviorist. They both see a vet regularly, and have dental. This all costs money, and lots of it. By my rough calculation of the 'basics' I provide for my dogs they will cost over $17 000 in their life-time (over because I did not include grooming, emergency vet costs, training cost, costs of crates/accessories etc). That's a lot of money, and it's a cost that lots of people do not plan for. You think about the initial cost, the first year, but people forget your friends will live to be 12-16 years old and they require just as much care-if not more as they age. This is why I don't think there should be "cheap" dogs for people to buy. It's a lie. Dogs are not cheap. If you can't afford a dog unless it's 'free' or under 200$ (for example), then I just have to wonder are you prepared to shell out $15 000-$30 000 over the course of a dogs life? What would you skip out on? The dental, the vet? Would you dog never see a trainer or never get to do anything fun like agility, or lure? I am not accusing anyone in this tread of this, these are just my 'thoughts' on the subject. The 'other' side to this situation for me is that I feel empathy for people who love dogs, and would be great owners if the cost of owning dogs was not so inflated. But this is not the fault of the initial cost of a pet. To think that the cost of a pet is the 'issue' for people who feel economically bared from owning a dog is to ignore the entire pet industry (where you will sink most of your money!). In general there is a lot of inflation. 

My reasoning is that if you take a minimalists dog expenses and divide it by the average life expectancy (I will use the above figure) you would be looking at spending (minimally) $700+ a year just on basics. This did not include grooming, which if you DIY will cost the upkeep and initial purchase of your equipment, and for me is $55 a month (I know, I get an insanely good deal :smile: ). It didn't include training, or classes, or cool equipment/accessories to enrich your dogs life. I feel like an absolute piece of crap saying it but if you 'think' you can afford a dog if ONLY the initial cost was lower, I cringe just a little bit. 

I think if you're aware of the yearly costs of a dog, and know that you can meet them but prefer to not pay into the initial costs of owning a dog supporting a BYB would be a terrible choice, and that rescuing would be a much better option.

I do not feel that a hobbyist breeder (a person that is still reg, but not breeding for show homes/and still does all the essential testing) could produce puppies "cheaper" than a professional breeder. 

Again, I love your posts, and thoughts. It's really a lot to think about, and I believe a lot of people don't think ENOUGH about the pet industry. 

Thank you so much for spinning the wheels in my mind today.


----------



## Ruso (Nov 16, 2012)

Wow, this is so interesting... 
I understand and agree with many aspects read here. But I'm going to give you another perspective. First of all, I really envy that you live in a country who takes his pets/dogs so seriously. 
Here in Spain there's not so much to choose from. There are a few (VERY few) reputable breeders, or I must say, breeders of high quality poodles. Some are very careful people and their dogs are at the same time pets and show dogs, they live at home and so on, they socialize their pups... 
Some have great lines and good results in shows but their dogs have (in my opinion) terrible lifes: endless hours in crates, kennels, several changes in ownership... you know what I mean. Puppies form both types of breeders are very expensive (I think the same prices as you have in the States, but you have to remember that incomes in Spain are much lower than yours). I'm talking about 900/1000 euros, which are more or less 1300$, which is a HUGE amount of money in Spain for a dog.
Then there are still puppies from puppy mills. In Spain, thank god, puppy mills are disappearing, but now they import the dogs from abroad, mostly from Bulgaria or Romania. You can find poodles from half the price of a breeder in some pet shops. I have participated in several campaigns trying to ban this and to persuade people not to buy dogs from shops. But it takes a lot of time and information to change things (and minds).
And finally, there are the occasionally "backyard breeders", but as in cities in Spain most people live in flats, we should called them here "flat breeders". Obviously they don't improve the breed at all, but they are not a problem; don't breed for money and, at least, if you want a pet, is well socialized and well treated. Of course health can be a lottery, but if I want a poodle for a pet, I prefer having a puppy from a "flat breeder" than from a breeder that has the dogs in kennels like cows or sheep.
Sometimes its a sad landscape.
When I started my research for Ruso, my lovely, great, friendly, beautiful toy poodle, I missed something between the puppy mill and the super-expensive poodle with impressive pedigree. Of course I decided for the last one, and I looked for a responsible breeder (and I almost went into bankruptcy) but I'm very happy with my boy! (which, by the way, in his pedigree carries great european lines like Yamit Muskat, Von Der Salana, Solnes or Champagne D'Or (let show off bit)
And here there aren't any contracts nor limits: if you pay, the dog is yours. Just that. No problems with yards, raw food, spaying, neutering...


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

I will admit I have only just now skimmed this thread and will go back and read...

But...

what really stuck out to me is that HOBBY breeding is being equated with Backyard Breeding?! _What_?? And someone mentioned that breeding is not/should not be a hobby?! Besides being a hobby, what else _would_ you call breeding and showing? 

The difference between a Backyard Breeder and Hobby Breeder is that _one_ of them breeds to the standard and likely participates in breed events such as conformation, agility, etc. 

Breeding is and should be a _hobby_, not a profession.


----------



## kcp1227 (Jan 25, 2013)

This is an interesting thread. I will be looking for a pet standard poodle puppy in the next 2 years, but I'm already starting my breeder search. I don't want to buy a puppy from just anyone. I want the breeder to have the animals/breeds best interest at heart. I don't mind paying and I plan on spending between $1500 and $2500 on a dog whose health and temperament were priorities. Bringing any pet into your home shouldn't be done on a whim or spur of the moment decision. So how do you make sure that the general public who is looking to add a poodle (or any dog really) to their home, is educated and makes the right decision when looking for a breeder? As a groomer, I see SO many dogs from BYBs and puppymills. A lot of these dogs have many health and temperament issues. I guess people just one day decide they want a dog and look in the paper and go out and buy a 20lb yorkie for $200. They then end up rehoming their dog when it becomes more trouble than it was worth. I don't fault the breeders who want to research the homes their puppies are going to, I appreciate it. I also appreciate that if something happens and I'm unable to keep my dog, that they want the dog back. That's responsible. That's what I'm paying for.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

If the breeder doesn't ask you about yourself and your home suitability, move on. Funny thing is, one reputable breeder didn't ask either. I think a good breeder should interview the puppy buyer, too, to see if they are educated.


----------



## schnauzerpoodle (Apr 21, 2010)

CharismaticMillie said:


> I will admit I have only just now skimmed this thread and will go back and read...
> 
> But...
> 
> ...


I need to make a clarification. What I meant was, showing is the hobby and breeding is part of the program.

I think I didn't make it clear enough. A lot of BYB claim that they are breeding "just" as a hobby. They use the word "hobby" to conceal the fact that they are making a huge profit out of the activity. They explain that the joy of this "hobby" come from sending puppies to families and of course they never ask questions about these potential buyers. These are also the "breeders" that don't health test their dogs and say their dogs are all healthy and don't need any test to prove it because they "just know it." 

These "hobby breeders" are the ones that I don't approve. Everyone has their definition of "hobby." Some take their hobby seriously and those are the ones that I appreciate and would like to work with. Unfortunately many of those who introduce themselves as "hobby breeders" are in the market for profit and profit only. They don't do anything with the dogs - no conformation events, no agility trails/classes … And they advertise themselves as "not being competitive" or "just want the dogs to be a happy pet" or "just want to see the happy faces of kids who go home with one of my puppies".


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

Like this:

ht poodles.com

"sending happy poodles to happy homes"


----------



## kcp1227 (Jan 25, 2013)

petitpie said:


> Like this:
> 
> ht poodles.com
> 
> "sending happy poodles to happy homes"


Are they just breeding for color here?


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

I would say so....


----------



## MaryLynn (Sep 8, 2012)

I don't know why we're saying that breeding needs to be either a profession or a hobby. What do we call an artist that exceeds their peers? We consider them a professional. What about a musician that excels? We would consider them a professional. These things are all in their beginnings "hobbies" what makes you a professional or not would be attitude, passion, and energy put in! 

Professional does not need to mean commercialized. It doesn't need to mean "product" and rationalization of resources and time to maximize profit.


----------



## Mom-n-Reiki (Jan 6, 2013)

Wow! What an awesome debate!

I always thought I was going to get my first poodle from one of the big show breeders, and maybe show him for the experience... I always wanted to try my hand at showing since I was in preschool, and maybe that will happen one day. Instead, I live in the keys with our two other dogs and my husband who grew up in the Bahamas. He doesn't understand showing dogs, or paying (what to him is) exuberant amounts for a "floofy" dog....when he was a kid, he learned that if you wanted to keep having a dog, you bred the two you already had and kept a puppy. He constantly tells me that all this "hype" is just insane.
So when he finally realized that he needed to resign the fact to us getting a poodle, he told me I was not allowed to get one from anybody but a hobby breeder and gave me a price range. Right when I was about to give up, I saw a classified add for puppies at the lower end of the range he gave me, and only two hours away. I was VERY weary at first, and still decided to meet the woman and see the puppies.....it turns out I was grilled harder than at some rescue organizations I've worked with! 
This woman adores her dogs. The site is a former champion she bought from a show breeder, and the dam is her pet she bought from a different breeder, but was never shown. They had their testing done, but the litter is unregistered because she is so against showing dogs. Hubby and I had to interview with her, I had to give her references from my work, my apprenticeship with the groomer, training clients, my vet, my family, roommate, friends...you name it. And she followed up on them, and looked me up on Facebook. She has turned many many people away. My buying contract is strict and to the point: puppies must be neutered no later than six months old and show the breeder proof or contract is void and the dog goes back to her. As well as all the usual agreements. She simply wanted to have one litter because she believes her dogs would make excellent healthy, well tempered puppies, who have gorgeous parti markings, and so far she has been right. 
Does part of me regret not going with a show breeder? Yes, but I'm young and there will be a point where I'll be able to afford a show poodle and do so. But this time around, Reiki and I will have hours of fun together on the grooming table and competing in Rally-O! and doing whatever else we can. This hobby breeder isn't the big bad wolf; she's just another poodle fanatic that wanted to have a litter of puppies of excellent pet quality that people can afford. As a "starter family", that's something my husband and I truly appreciate. 

Especially when the poodle rescue won't adopt to you because their dog "might get eaten by alligators" (or maybe those key deer will suddenly turn carnivorous).


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

I think everyone has made some good points, and I really don't have much to add except this: I don't want an "in between" dog! (I would label that kind of breeder a BYB, btw, but that is just me) I don't mind paying a higher price for a well bred, gorgeous dog from a reputable breeder. That way, I'm not necessarily 100% assured of a healthy, temperamentally and conformationally sound dog but it sure as heck raises my chances by a lot. Anytime we lower the bar, the things we don't want start slipping in....health, mental, and physical issues due to conformational faults. If I wanted a cheaper dog, I would go down to my local kill shelter and pick one out....our first family dog was from there, she was a great dog and I miss her a lot. I think we payed $50 for her, maybe a bit more. 

I get that some people can't afford a dog from a breeder that shows, tests, etc. And I'll be honest, I don't have a solution for them. But I don't think that lowering the standards of breeding is the answer, that is for sure! That will only add to the issues we are already having within the dog world. I know most of you don't see a lot of dogs on a daily basis, but I do as a groomer. On any given day I get to see 20-40. Most are from backyard breeders, puppy mills, and rescues (filled by the former two). Almost all are not what I would call "sound", physically and/or mentally. Health issues are much too common. These things need to be fixed, and lowering our standards so that more people can afford a dog from a breeder just isn't the answer.


----------



## spotsonofbun (Jan 3, 2013)

To those who have these requirements I don't have a lot of sympathy

1. must be a puppy so we can raise it our way (a lot of people don't understand how much work there goes into a puppy to make it a 'good dog')

2. MUST be this breed I don't want a mix bred (but don't mind unpapered and badly bred from a BYB) 

3. Won't go to a rescue or shelter because they want to know the history of the dog (not bothered to spend more than few weeks on researching breeders if even that) 

If you can't afford a dog from a responsible breeder than either don't get a dog or rescue.

Puppies are so much work why go through it unless you have a higher chance of good temperament and health? Isn't better then to get an adult who is being rehomed or is in a shelter or a rescue and where you have some idea of its temperament? 

And I wouldn't call a show breeder responsible if he or she keeps her dogs in kennels and only breeds for the ring.


----------



## ninaspoodles (Jan 28, 2013)

Wow this got interesting fast! In the original post... I read as more people should breed just as a hobby and basically for mediocre dogs etc. So I refered to THIS type of breeder as a backyard breeder... Not anyone who breeds dogs as a hobby as a backyard breeder. Either way everyone has their own definitions of things and I do not feel like we should get so caught up in the "wording" of things. But I still stand my ground that if someone is not willing to breed for the right reasons and be responsible about it, they should not be breeding dogs. If someone is really dedicated, wants to learn, and their hearts are really in it for the right reasons; then they should pursue it. That was my whole point. I am obviously doing a bad job at wording things on this forum!


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

Mom-n-Reiki said:


> Wow! What an awesome debate!
> 
> I always thought I was going to get my first poodle from one of the big show breeders, and maybe show him for the experience... I always wanted to try my hand at showing since I was in preschool, and maybe that will happen one day. Instead, I live in the keys with our two other dogs and my husband who grew up in the Bahamas. He doesn't understand showing dogs, or paying (what to him is) exuberant amounts for a "floofy" dog....when he was a kid, he learned that if you wanted to keep having a dog, you bred the two you already had and kept a puppy. He constantly tells me that all this "hype" is just insane.
> So when he finally realized that he needed to resign the fact to us getting a poodle, he told me I was not allowed to get one from anybody but a hobby breeder and gave me a price range. Right when I was about to give up, I saw a classified add for puppies at the lower end of the range he gave me, and only two hours away. I was VERY weary at first, and still decided to meet the woman and see the puppies.....it turns out I was grilled harder than at some rescue organizations I've worked with!
> ...


Thank you so much for your comment, it's nice to know those type of breeders exists!


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

spotsonofbun said:


> To those who have these requirements I don't have a lot of sympathy
> 
> 1. must be a puppy so we can raise it our way (a lot of people don't understand how much work there goes into a puppy to make it a 'good dog')
> _I agree but they can learn, there is always a first time! I read many comments from people on this forum who "didn't know" but they are here and they are learning._
> ...


----------



## spotsonofbun (Jan 3, 2013)

julietcr1 said:


> spotsonofbun said:
> 
> 
> > To those who have these requirements I don't have a lot of sympathy
> ...


----------



## Cailin77 (Jul 21, 2012)

Mom-n-Reiki said:


> The site is a former champion she bought from a show breeder, and the dam is her pet she bought from a different breeder, but was never shown. They had their testing done, but the litter is unregistered because she is so against showing dogs.


My question would have been if she was sold the dogs with breeding rights. No offense (and it sounds like you got a great dog), but being "against showing" isn't a valid reason not to register the puppies. Dogs with limited AKC registration can't be shown or bred (well obviously you could breed them, but their puppies can't be registered) but can compete in AKC events (like agility trials). So, if she had two fully registered dogs, she could have sold the puppies with limited registrations and "protected them" from being show dogs, but allowed owners to participate in working events.


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

Mom-n-Reiki said:


> This woman adores her dogs. The site is a former champion she bought from a show breeder, and the dam is her pet she bought from a different breeder, but was never shown. They had their testing done, but the litter is unregistered because she is so against showing dogs.


I hate to break this to you, but the reason the puppies are not registered is more likely that she does not have the breeding rights to do so ... it is far less likely that she is just "against showing dogs"--that has nothing to do with AKC registration. 

If she bred adult dogs that were sold to her on limited registration (even just one of her dogs) she would not be permitted to register the puppies. 

She sounds dishonest. Sorry.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

I agree that some people breed dogs even if they signed a non breeding agreement but is it the ONLY reason why someone would not register a litter? Could it be the cost or some other reason? I am trying to learn here so please stay cool;o)


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

julietcr1 said:


> I agree that some people breed dogs even if they signed a non breeding agreement but is it the ONLY reason why someone would not register a litter? Could it be the cost or some other reason? I am trying to learn here so please stay cool;o)


Yes, it costs money to register the puppies with AKC, but this would not deter most BYB as AKC registration is a "selling point" (much of the general public believes AKC registration is a sign of a healthy and correct purebred dog) and they would recoup that money with the purchase price of the puppies.

There are other reasons breeders don't register with AKC: 

They have been subjected to AKC kennel inspections and either refused the inspection or not passed and then not make the necessary adjustments (essentially banned from AKC).

They have some other AKC violation (a questionable parantage issue, trying to register non-purebred, etc.) that is unresolved.

Their breeding dogs were not AKC registered or can't be indentified.

I am sure there are other reasons...


----------



## Mom-n-Reiki (Jan 6, 2013)

PaddleAddict said:


> I hate to break this to you, but the reason the puppies are not registered is more likely that she does not have the breeding rights to do so ... it is far less likely that she is just "against showing dogs"--that has nothing to do with AKC registration.
> 
> If she bred adult dogs that were sold to her on limited registration (even just one of her dogs) she would not be permitted to register the puppies.
> 
> She sounds dishonest. Sorry.


She bred adult dogs on full registration and has the paperwork to back it up; and she showed it to us before we even asked. She is fully able to register the puppies, if she had decided to do so. She explained her reasoning to me about not registering, the top reason being that she is hoping that without papers, and her strict buying contract, she has the highest chances of the dogs not being bred. She was also looking for new owners like us- where papered or unpapered dogs weren't an issue because they are looking for a pet. This breeder has been nothing but honest and forthcoming with us since the beginning, and it has been a pleasure working with her for our puppy.


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

Mom-n-Reiki said:


> She bred adult dogs on full registration and has the paperwork to back it up; and she showed it to us before we even asked. She is fully able to register the puppies, if she had decided to do so. She explained her reasoning to me about not registering, the top reason being that she is hoping that without papers, and her strict buying contract, she has the highest chances of the dogs not being bred. She was also looking for new owners like us- where papered or unpapered dogs weren't an issue because they are looking for a pet. This breeder has been nothing but honest and forthcoming with us since the beginning, and it has been a pleasure working with her for our puppy.


Honestly, that still sounds highly unusual to me. JMHO.


----------



## Indiana (Sep 11, 2011)

Mom-n-Reiki said:


> She bred adult dogs on full registration and has the paperwork to back it up; and she showed it to us before we even asked. She is fully able to register the puppies, if she had decided to do so. She explained her reasoning to me about not registering, the top reason being that she is hoping that without papers, and her strict buying contract, she has the highest chances of the dogs not being bred. She was also looking for new owners like us- where papered or unpapered dogs weren't an issue because they are looking for a pet. This breeder has been nothing but honest and forthcoming with us since the beginning, and it has been a pleasure working with her for our puppy.


I don't doubt for a second that she is trying to find the very best homes for her pups, but I just wonder why anyone would be against showing? Against anyone breeding her pups, sure, but showing? Wouldn't most people be happy that their puppies' new owners were interested in doing something fun and interactive with their dogs, and if they won wouldn't she be proud of producing pups that beat out others in competition? Anyway to me it doesn't matter if a person has a full-time job and breeds one dog, or has the money and resources to breed several litters a year from multiple dogs; labels are meaningless. What's important is how they treat their dog and what their intention is with respect to bettering the breed.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

Showing and testing provides information to the puppy buyer that the breeder is serious about healthy dogs. For instance, the breeder I mentioned was not careful about her breeding. I heard a vet say that 3 of her poodles from three different litters had the same missing teeth. She didn't test or show, so she didn't care about what she bred.


----------



## Mom-n-Reiki (Jan 6, 2013)

PaddleAddict,
Its unusual to me too, but she was able to back everything up, and has given me no reason to doubt her, so I don't.

Indiana,
I got her started talking about showing on several occasions, and asked similar questions. She feels that show dogs, esp poodles with their show cuts, aren't really allowed to be dogs, or treated as well as a dog who is "just a pet". Which, WE know isn't always the case, but she is relentless. She once rescued a former show poodle who spent her career in a crate when she was not being exercised, groomed, or shown because god forbid her fur got messed up or something happened to her so that the kennel could turn a profit on her future puppies after she titled. When she didn't get her champion title after a few years, they got rid of her. Oh my god, did she go on and on. Slowly, and with the help of showing her this forum, I think she is starting to come around.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

petitpie said:


> Showing and testing provides information to the puppy buyer that the breeder is serious about healthy dogs.


My understanding of showing is that it's about conforming "physically" to the breed so how could it provide information to the puppy buyer that the breeder is serious about healthy dogs? Do you need to provide health test results before participating in shows? If you do need to provide health tests which one do you need to provide? How to you prove your show dog is not affected with a genetic problem that will appear in 4-5 years? I am learning, please be patient;o)


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

mom24doggies said:


> I think everyone has made some good points, and I really don't have much to add except this: I don't want an "in between" dog! (I would label that kind of breeder a BYB, btw, but that is just me) I don't mind paying a higher price for a well bred, gorgeous dog from a reputable breeder. That way, I'm not necessarily 100% assured of a healthy, temperamentally and conformationally sound dog but it sure as heck raises my chances by a lot. Anytime we lower the bar, the things we don't want start slipping in....health, mental, and physical issues due to conformational faults. If I wanted a cheaper dog, I would go down to my local kill shelter and pick one out....our first family dog was from there, she was a great dog and I miss her a lot. I think we payed $50 for her, maybe a bit more.
> 
> I get that some people can't afford a dog from a breeder that shows, tests, etc. And I'll be honest, I don't have a solution for them. But I don't think that lowering the standards of breeding is the answer, that is for sure! That will only add to the issues we are already having within the dog world. I know most of you don't see a lot of dogs on a daily basis, but I do as a groomer. On any given day I get to see 20-40. Most are from backyard breeders, puppy mills, and rescues (filled by the former two). Almost all are not what I would call "sound", physically and/or mentally. Health issues are much too common. These things need to be fixed, and lowering our standards so that more people can afford a dog from a breeder just isn't the answer.


Thanks for replying, Mom24doggies! I want to respond to something that I've seen in your post and a few others before it by recapping something that Pluto said. I'm not talking about lowering the quality of breeding. The fact is that many of the dogs that come from BYBs and puppy mills are already of very low quality, masquerading as high quality dogs. What I'm talking about is honesty in advertising AND giving dog-breeding back to the people. Jeepers, I sound like some kind of breeding Che Guevara! Let me explain.

Some people want a healthy, well-socialized dog with champion parents. They should pay price X, let's say $1500.

Some people want a healthy, well-socialized dog. They should pay price Y, let's say $1200. 

Some people just want a dog NOW. They'll pay a wide range of prices.

Now part of the problem is that breeders have no way of truly signalling what kind of dog they are producing, at least in the middle.

The other part of the problem, the "Power to the People" problem, is that so few people breed. While this piece on Dog Star Daily is talking about the decline of the mongrel dog, I think the point holds for all breeds. If you tell people that ALL responsible pet owners spay and neuter, all the responsible pet owners will. So you leave breeding to the "professionals" (breeders type A and B). I think it would be better to say, all responsible pet owners who don't want the responsibility of breeding should spay and neuter, but if you are dedicated to your breed of choice, you (yes, YOU!) should consider hobby breeding - both for the good of the breed and to create a better-differentiated puppy market. And if you think you might be interested, wait to see how your pup turns out before you clip and snip.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

julietcr1 said:


> My understanding of showing is that it's about conforming "physically" to the breed so how could it provide information to the puppy buyer that the breeder is serious about healthy dogs? Do you need to provide health test results before participating in shows? If you do need to provide health tests which one do you need to provide? How to you prove your show dog is not affected with a genetic problem that will appear in 4-5 years? I am learning, please be patient;o)


 Physical conformation has a LOT to do with health. The standards are there for a reason. Many conformational flaws result in physical issues later on. 

Obviously showing can't prove that a dog is genetically free of problems, (same goes for temperament, just because a dog stands for examination and goes around a ring a few times doesn't mean he is not a biter or have other issues) but I have found that most (not all, but most) breeders who show also do health tests. As others have said, showing demonstrates a dedication to the breed, and someone who is dedicated will do everything to ensure their dogs and their offspring produce healthy pups.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

Showing and testing are very expensive. It's to a breeder's advantage in the show ring to show and breed the best dog that they can. Word also gets around (or should) about poor breeding practices. in the case of the breeder, her many litters and parents would have been laughed out of the show ring for poor structure and breeding.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

LegalEagle said:


> Thanks for replying, Mom24doggies! I want to respond to something that I've seen in your post and a few others before it by recapping something that Pluto said. I'm not talking about lowering the quality of breeding. The fact is that many of the dogs that come from BYBs and puppy mills are already of very low quality, masquerading as high quality dogs. What I'm talking about is honesty in advertising AND giving dog-breeding back to the people. Jeepers, I sound like some kind of breeding Che Guevara! Let me explain.
> 
> Some people want a healthy, well-socialized dog with champion parents. They should pay price X, let's say $1500.
> 
> ...


 I'm not entirely sure I understand what you are saying....anytime you start charging less for puppies, you have to make some cuts somewhere as most hobby breeders wouldn't be able to afford everything without getting at least a little bit of money back from their puppies. Showing, health testing, breeding, and care of puppies/adults is expensive! I don't even breed and I spend plenty on my pack of 6. I can't imagine if I started breeding! 

And yes, someday I will probably end up breeding poodles. I love them, and would love to have a hand in improving something I love so much. But because I love them, I refuse to get in a rush and embark on something I'm not ready for. Sure, I could start now. Raven is still intact and to most people's eyes he is perfect conformation wise, (he isn't, he has several issues) all I have to do is buy a cute female and set up shop. Sure, those puppies would probably be healthy, would be well socialized and would be otherwise cared for in every single way. But that's not enough. There is so much more to it! Breeding is kind of like an art, and I would hate to see it be lost. PETA and HSUS are already trying to kill it, and by being even "in between" breeders, we just give them more reasons to shut us down.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

Good dog breeding is all there should be. Even well-bred poodles can end up in shelters and rescues. Cost effective puppy breeding for a particular market is not acceptable because breeders will stop testing and showing to make more money.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

mom24doggies said:


> I'm not entirely sure I understand what you are saying....anytime you start charging less for puppies, you have to make some cuts somewhere as most hobby breeders wouldn't be able to afford everything without getting at least a little bit of money back from their puppies. Showing, health testing, breeding, and care of puppies/adults is expensive! I don't even breed and I spend plenty on my pack of 6. I can't imagine if I started breeding!
> 
> And yes, someday I will probably end up breeding poodles. I love them, and would love to have a hand in improving something I love so much. But because I love them, I refuse to get in a rush and embark on something I'm not ready for. Sure, I could start now. Raven is still intact and to most people's eyes he is perfect conformation wise, (he isn't, he has several issues) all I have to do is buy a cute female and set up shop. Sure, those puppies would probably be healthy, would be well socialized and would be otherwise cared for in every single way. But that's not enough. There is so much more to it! Breeding is kind of like an art, and I would hate to see it be lost. PETA and HSUS are already trying to kill it, and by being even "in between" breeders, we just give them more reasons to shut us down.


If you look at Arreau's post on p. 2 of the thread (wow! that grew fast!), many of the expenses that she has for her pups, a hobby breeder might not have (handlers, fancy groomers, stud fees, transportation for the stud). I'm assuming that a hobby breeder, as opposed to a BYB, might be willing to pass some of that saving along. 

If a hobby breeder only breeds when the RIGHT opportunity strikes, but neither breeds a bad pair to make money nor spends thousands of dollars looking for the perfect, titled stud, it is to be suspected that their costs would be slightly less than for the breeder that breeds for the conformation ring.

And I actually think that breeding healthy, well-socialized, cared-for dogs, who are structurally sound with good, though not necessarily award-winning, conformation IS enough for most puppy buyers. That is EXACTLY the sort of puppy I was looking for! That is IT! And I couldn't FIND that puppy! That is what MOST PEOPLE want! PLEASE BREED THOSE DOGS! If a hobby breeder's dog excels in flyball and agility, but has the wrong angulation to be competitive in conformation THAT IS OKAY! That's better than a fancy, leggy poodle who can't even comfortably sit (I saw a picture of one once on an agility site), or a wry-mouthed, roach-backed puppy-mill puppy.

PETA is full of crap, and I'll be first in line to say it to whomever will listen, but there is a REASON that people concerned with animal welfare are concerned with dog breeding, and it isn't because there are too many healthy, well-socialized, cared-for dogs running around. They are concerned because (A) the fancy has screwed up some dog breeds royally (exhibit A: GSDs; exhibit B: pugs) and (B) it's a magnet for unscrupulous, industrial breeding operations to turn out unsound, but pedigreed, dogs. 

If more breeders were turning out healthy, sound, well-socialized animals, PETA would still be yapping, but most *normal* people would be overjoyed. Myself included.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

petitpie said:


> Good dog breeding is all there should be. Even well-bred poodles can end up in shelters and rescues. Cost effective puppy breeding for a particular market is not acceptable.


Cost-effective is not the same as cost-cutting, and breeding for most competitive show poodle is not the same as breeding for the "best" poodle. Maybe you want to breed poodles who can hunt, or track, or do agility or play flyball. As long as they are sound with good, though not necessarily award-winning, conformation, why is it wrong to breed them?


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

Better to err on the side of testing and evaluation of some kind for breeding. $$$

Would those involved with testing, showing, evaluation, breeding, etc. please list and estimate the costs?


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

petitpie said:


> Better to err on the side of testing and evaluation of some kind for breeding. $$$


Sorry, I hope that wasn't ambiguous. If the dog excels in its sport and is tested, why not breed? As mentioned above, Arreau said a lot of her expenses were related to showing and stud fees rather than to breeding. Of course a breeding dog should be tested, but you'll still spend less than someone who flies a stud from half-way across the world. 

Testing costs less money than testing and paying a stud fee and stud transportation. Can we agree on that?


----------



## 3dogs (Nov 3, 2010)

This is a great discussion. I have 3 Poodles all from varying categories. Love each one & wouldn't change where I got them from. 

My Spoo Leif is my first Poodle. Yes $$ is an issue. I solely wanted a Poodle for grooming competitions, an adult & 1 that got along with other dogs & a child. I went with Poodle Rescue. I was looking for a Mini since I didn't want a Spoo since all the ones I have groomed have been over 25" & over 50lbs but at the rescue we walked away with a terrific small Spoo. For the $$ I couldn't have asked for a better dog. 2 years we have had him & so far no health issues. Not bad for an untested street dog of unknown age. 

My OT Louisa I got from my client. I groom the parents but swore I wouldn't get 1 of her pups since she does no health testing, knows nothing of poodles etc... & would be considered an OOPPPPSS! Breeder. Louisa was last of the litter, needed a haircut & @ 4 months had never been groomed only nails. Well she was so awesome for grooming @ the end of the day I had to have her. I compete with her as well.

My newest addition is from a hobby breeder that shows in AKC &UKC, as well as does grooming competitions. This is ideal for me, great tempers, good coats, heath tested parents, both parents UKC Champions & less expensive for me since we are co owners.

I have the best from all sorts of breeders. Love my poodles.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

I think that most well-tested, agility/performance dogs on the road to breeding come from such parents already. I only know of one breeding CH who came from non-tested parents and she was well-tested before breeding.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

LegalEagle said:


> If you look at Arreau's post on p. 2 of the thread (wow! that grew fast!), many of the expenses that she has for her pups, a hobby breeder might not have (handlers, fancy groomers, stud fees, transportation for the stud). I'm assuming that a hobby breeder, as opposed to a BYB, might be willing to pass some of that saving along.
> 
> 
> If a hobby breeder only breeds when the RIGHT opportunity strikes, but neither breeds a bad pair to make money nor spends thousands of dollars looking for the perfect, titled stud, it is to be suspected that their costs would be slightly less than for the breeder that breeds for the conformation ring.
> ...


 I'm sorry, I just don't think that cutting out things like showing is an option. It's essential to preserving the breed! Has the show ring messed some breeds up? Absolutely...but I can guarantee that if people quit showing and breed lower quality dogs, that will mess things up too, probably even more so! 

Here is the thing....a structurally sound dog IS an award winning dog....The standards describe structurally sound dogs that breeders should strive for. Those extremely angled poodles who can't even sit down properly are NOT correct! A poodle should be able to be competitive in the show ring AND do agility. But breeding a dog who has structural faults will eventually, down the line, result in issues. And most people don't know enough about even basic canine structure to know which dogs should be bred and which shouldn't.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

LegalEagle said:


> Cost-effective is not the same as cost-cutting, and breeding for most competitive show poodle is not the same as breeding for the "best" poodle. Maybe you want to breed poodles who can hunt, or track, or do agility or play flyball. As long as they are sound with good, though not necessarily award-winning, conformation, why is it wrong to breed them?


 Again, a dog best suited to this will have (in your words) award winning conformation. Can a dog with less than stellar conformation do it? Yep, they can! But it's harder for them, and will usually result in things like arthritis. 

Not to mention, it's pretty expensive to do performance things too! You have to take classes to train, travel, and compete, and I'm positive there is more to it than what I've listed.

Btw, I also agree that PETA is full of it. But they shouldn't be concerned with small or pro breeders, it's the mills and bybs who are really messing things up. And I'm not saying all pro breeders are good either....I know that's not true. But as with anything, there are good ones and bad ones. Having more of them doesn't mean better!


----------



## Cailin77 (Jul 21, 2012)

LegalEagle said:


> The other part of the problem, the "Power to the People" problem, is that so few people breed. While this piece on Dog Star Daily is talking about the decline of the mongrel dog, I think the point holds for all breeds. If you tell people that ALL responsible pet owners spay and neuter, all the responsible pet owners will. So you leave breeding to the "professionals" (breeders type A and B). I think it would be better to say, all responsible pet owners who don't want the responsibility of breeding should spay and neuter, but if you are dedicated to your breed of choice, you (yes, YOU!) should consider hobby breeding - both for the good of the breed and to create a better-differentiated puppy market. And if you think you might be interested, wait to see how your pup turns out before you clip and snip.


I think the "power to the people" idea really isn't going to improve any breed. It would create more dogs, sure, but I cannot see any way where it would improve any breed. 

You used Labs as an example at one point. Yes, you can buy a lab puppy for probably $250. Most likely, that cheap puppy is going to have health or behavioral problems. (Hip, elbow, eye and heart problems are common in labs). A better quality pup from a quality breeder will probably cost $700. There is a lesser chance of health and behavioral problems with this puppy, but they are still pretty common, since health issues in labs are very common! If you want the best chance of getting a lab without problems you will probably be paying $1000-$1200 for a puppy from a breeder who does extensive health testing and imports dogs from Europe to improve their breed. So, is this your ideal, a dog with a "middle of the road" pricing option? 

I'll admit I'm not a poodle expert, but also from what I understand the genetics are a bit more complicated than most breeds. There was a really popular breeder in the 1950s-1960s that virtually ever standard poodle is related to. There are higher or lower "Wycliffe percent" relation depending on the dog. But this blood line so prevelant in standard poodles that two seemingly "unrelated" dogs could have very similar genetics. IMHO, it's best to leave breeding to people who look into these relationships, rather than someone who says "I love my poodle and your poodle male is handsome- lets make puppies!"


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

All this to say, I just don't think there is a way to be "cost effective" when breeding. Well, there is, but in the end I feel that it is the dogs that will suffer. Like I said before, most people do not understand enough about dogs and structure and genetics and stuff to be breeding. And I include myself in there. Sure, I understand waaaaay more than the average person, but I'm certainly not knowledgeable enough to breed just yet! 

Btw, I don't think people fly studs to their bitches...with today's technology they usually just do AI...they take semen and ship it frozen. Nobody has to leave home that way.  My Engie's breeder has even had frozen semen shipped from Sweden! Pretty cool...now how they keep it frozen on the way I don't know.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

mom24doggies said:


> But breeding a dog who has structural faults will eventually, down the line, result in issues. And most people don't know enough about even basic canine structure to know which dogs should be bred and which shouldn't.


I agree with you 100%, which is why I think there should be more partnership between good, high quality breeders and aspiring hobby breeders. I am not at ALL against showing, but what I'm saying is that not every good poodle needs to come from Championship stock. 

If a dog can spend 10+ years of his life enjoying physically challenging doggy activities, he's already been evaluated for soundness! He doesn't need a fancy clip and a professional handler to get a judge to tell his owner he has good structure: his owner KNOWS he has good structure. That is how dogs were bred before dog shows (along the taxonomy of the races and other pernicious things) came along in the obsession with categorization in the 19th century, and it seems to have worked out pretty well. Remember, the ring was supposed to capture the ideal type of dog at the time the standard was written. Therefore, by definition, the ideal type for a given breed predates the ring. 

From what I understand, the poodle existed long before dog-showing was invented in the 19th century, and I am confident that the breed would continue to exist if people used field- and sport-tested breeding stock, as opposed to ring-tested breeding stock. I don't think it should be stigmatized, if it is done in the right context, like by a knowledgeable hobby breeder, rather than by a money-grubbing puppy-miller (the people who probably a large chunk of America's poodles).


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

mom24doggies said:


> All this to say, I just don't think there is a way to be "cost effective" when breeding. Well, there is, but in the end I feel that it is the dogs that will suffer. Like I said before, most people do not understand enough about dogs and structure and genetics and stuff to be breeding. And I include myself in there. Sure, I understand waaaaay more than the average person, but I'm certainly not knowledgeable enough to breed just yet!
> 
> Btw, I don't think people fly studs to their bitches...with today's technology they usually just do AI...they take semen and ship it frozen. Nobody has to leave home that way.  My Engie's breeder has even had frozen semen shipped from Sweden! Pretty cool...now how they keep it frozen on the way I don't know.


When I say cost-effective, I just mean the price charged for the puppy reflects the true cost of raising the dog. So, for a paragon of poodle-dom, maybe the cost-effect price is $1800. For a puppy-mill dog, maybe it's $250. For a good dog that doesn't have what it takes to be best of breed, maybe it's $1200. I'm sorry that anyone read what I've written to be advocating careless or corner-cutting practices that would harm health. I've said over and over, and will continue to say, that with today's technology health testing is a must for any responsible breeder, no matter what the scale.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

Vet care for breeding is also very expensive, including AI.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

In the case of a performance champion horse, his structure was not good and showed up early. He would have never competed in a halter class.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

Cailin77 said:


> I think the "power to the people" idea really isn't going to improve any breed. It would create more dogs, sure, but I cannot see any way where it would improve any breed.
> 
> You used Labs as an example at one point. Yes, you can buy a lab puppy for probably $250. Most likely, that cheap puppy is going to have health or behavioral problems. (Hip, elbow, eye and heart problems are common in labs). A better quality pup from a quality breeder will probably cost $700. There is a lesser chance of health and behavioral problems with this puppy, but they are still pretty common, since health issues in labs are very common! If you want the best chance of getting a lab without problems you will probably be paying $1000-$1200 for a puppy from a breeder who does extensive health testing and imports dogs from Europe to improve their breed. So, is this your ideal, a dog with a "middle of the road" pricing option?
> 
> I'll admit I'm not a poodle expert, but also from what I understand the genetics are a bit more complicated than most breeds. There was a really popular breeder in the 1950s-1960s that virtually ever standard poodle is related to. There are higher or lower "Wycliffe percent" relation depending on the dog. But this blood line so prevelant in standard poodles that two seemingly "unrelated" dogs could have very similar genetics. IMHO, it's best to leave breeding to people who look into these relationships, rather than someone who says "I love my poodle and your poodle male is handsome- lets make puppies!"


Cailin77, I am not saying that people SHOULD be breeding $250 Labs. What I am saying is that when you pay $250 for a Lab, you get what you pay for. With poodles, you could pay $1000+ and get the quality of a $250 Lab. I don't think that that is much of an improvement.

I certainly don't think that people who want to breed two dogs just because they are "cute" have any business breeding. (Remember my original post, where I said I keep getting stopped in my neighborhood by people saying exactly that? Yeah, that's who you're talking about.) But what I DO think is that people who are interested in breeding shouldn't be torn down and insulted by reflex. If they are serious, they should be mentored by experienced breeders and be encouraged to think about become hobbyists - people who do their research, love and know the breed and have goals and a breeding program. 

If you think that that is a bad idea, that is fine. But I'd love to see that happening, rather than shutting down people just for SUGGESTING that they might ONE DAY want to breed poodles.


----------



## Locket (Jun 21, 2009)

I think a huge obstacle facing your ideal breeder LegalEagle, is largely in acquiring healthy, sound dogs with breeding rights. I think the other obstacle is time. It's not just the cost of breeding, it's the time and stress and mess that comes with raising a litter.

Good breeders that produce healthy, sound but not conformationally "perfect" dogs do not breed them/sell them with breeding rights because their goal is to produce "perfect" dogs. For example, a breeder produces a lovely dog, but it has very loose eyes. It doesn't effect the dog in anyway, and the dog could produce great puppies, but that is not the correct type for a poodle. Every litter, regardless of the number of Ch. in the pedigree, will ALWAYS have "pet quality" dogs, in fact, a vast majority of puppies produced live out their lives "just" as pets. So there is no need for breeders to specialize in "pet quality" poodles because all poodle breeders produce "pet quality" dogs.


Edit to add: I fully support breeders who health test and healthy, conformationally sound performance dogs with NO Ch. titles. They put just as much, if not more, money, time and dedication into titling their dogs. So, LegalEagle, this avenue of breeding is not "cost-cutting" either.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

petitpie said:


> In the case of a performance champion horse, his structure was not good and showed up early. He would have never competed in a halter class.


I'm sorry. I honestly don't know what you're responding to here.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

There's nothing wrong aspiring to be a good poodle breeder, and I think it takes time doing the right thing to be good.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

LegalEagle said:


> I agree with you 100%, which is why I think there should be more partnership between good, high quality breeders and aspiring hobby breeders. I am not at ALL against showing, but what I'm saying is that not every good poodle needs to come from Championship stock. I see your point and agree to an extent. I do think there should be more partnerships, but honestly I've never seen a good, sound dog that didn't have some sort of champion in their background.
> 
> If a dog can spend 10+ years of his life enjoying physically challenging doggy activities, he's already been evaluated for soundness! He doesn't need a fancy clip and a professional handler to get a judge to tell his owner he has good structure: his owner KNOWS he has good structure. That is how dogs were bred before dog shows (along the taxonomy of the races and other pernicious things) came along in the obsession with categorization in the 19th century, and it seems to have worked out pretty well. Remember, the ring was supposed to capture the ideal type of dog at the time the standard was written. Therefore, by definition, the ideal type for a given breed predates the ring. Not necessarily. I have a mutt, an ACD mix. Structurally, there are many things bad about her. She is very very straight in her rear and front. Her pasterns are very straight, her chest quite narrow and a bit shallow. Amongst other things. Yet she has always been extremely active, and is now 14 almost 15. Based on what you just said, I could have bred her! She has enjoyed an active lifestyle full of running, swimming, and ball chasing and has come out without any issues other than mild arthritis.
> 
> From what I understand, the poodle existed long before dog-showing was invented in the 19th century, and I am confident that the breed would continue to exist if people used field- and sport-tested breeding stock, as opposed to ring-tested breeding stock. I don't think it should be stigmatized, if it is done in the right context, like by a knowledgeable hobby breeder, rather than by a money-grubbing puppy-miller (the people who probably a large chunk of America's poodles).


 I get what you are saying, really I do. I just don't think you can separate the ring and performance. They go hand in hand...I suppose that if you could find several (more than several) unbiased people to examine a dog and determine that it meets the breed standard (what everyone should strive for regardless of how they prove their dog) that would be acceptable. But again, anytime you do anything to prove your dog wether that be showing or performance, you are driving up the price of the puppies. And not doing anything to prove your dogs IS NOT an option. Period. They need to prove that they are going to improve the breed.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

RE: A young agility CH with poor structure from bad breeding will have problems later on and have it show up with testing.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

LegalEagle said:


> ....
> 
> I certainly don't think that people who want to breed two dogs just because they are "cute" have any business breeding. (Remember my original post, where I said I keep getting stopped in my neighborhood by people saying exactly that? Yeah, that's who you're talking about.) But what I DO think is that people who are interested in breeding shouldn't be torn down and insulted by reflex. If they are serious, they should be mentored by experienced breeders and be encouraged to think about become hobbyists - people who do their research, love and know the breed and have goals and a breeding program.
> 
> If you think that that is a bad idea, that is fine. But I'd love to see that happening, rather than shutting down people just for SUGGESTING that they might ONE DAY want to breed poodles.


 And basically you just described the breeders who frequent this forum. And I agree, no one should be torn down for admitting they are interested in breeding. I did, no one has ripped me up yet.  Anytime you see people being discouraged its usually because they are wanting to do it for the wrong reasons or are going about it wrong. 

Again, I just don't think that it's feasible for your "ideal" breeder to exist. Breeding is expensive, even if you cut out showing. That's only a fraction of the cost.


----------



## Cailin77 (Jul 21, 2012)

LegalEagle said:


> Cailin77, I am not saying that people SHOULD be breeding $250 Labs. What I am saying is that when you pay $250 for a Lab, you get what you pay for. With poodles, you could pay $1000+ and get the quality of a $250 Lab. I don't think that that is much of an improvement.
> 
> I certainly don't think that people who want to breed two dogs just because they are "cute" have any business breeding. (Remember my original post, where I said I keep getting stopped in my neighborhood by people saying exactly that? Yeah, that's who you're talking about.) But what I DO think is that people who are interested in breeding shouldn't be torn down and insulted by reflex. If they are serious, they should be mentored by experienced breeders and be encouraged to think about become hobbyists - people who do their research, love and know the breed and have goals and a breeding program.
> 
> If you think that that is a bad idea, that is fine. But I'd love to see that happening, rather than shutting down people just for SUGGESTING that they might ONE DAY want to breed poodles.


Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, and if thats the case, I appologize. I understood your mid-level breeders to be people with poodles with or without papers, who may or may not compete in working trials, but who do have health testing done. 

I think the breeders who have mentors, but aren't keeping kennels full of breeding dogs do exist! The thing is, their puppies won't be any cheaper. If they are working with an experienced breeder, often that experienced breeder maintains registration for the bitch and guides the decision on what stud to use and the puppies will be registered under the original breeders kennel. Ultimately, the same cost is the same as if the experienced breeder was the one with the litter. Maybe the dam was shown, or maybe she competed in working trials, but both cost a lot of money. Ultimately, the puppies still cost just as much as if experienced breeder bred them.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

*Clearing up a misconception*

Okay, somehow at least three people are misunderstanding what I'm saying, so let me clear it up now, if I can.

1) I am not advocating for saturating the market to create a bargain-basement poodle. I hear the breed has been there and done that, and didn't even get a T-shirt.

2) I am not suggesting that people who don't know anything about breeding should go forth willy-nilly and breed their dogs. 

3) On price: here is my theory. There are lots of people who do sports with their dogs for fun. They love it. They were going to do it anyway, regardless of whether they intended to breed dogs. In fact, many, if not most of them, neuter their dogs because "all responsible pet owners spay and neuter." Now, if some of those people became hobby breeders, they would be unlikely to factor in the cost of doing sports with their dogs into puppy prices. Why not? Because they were going to do the sports anyway. The sport is NOT a cost of breeding the dog, but a separate hobby expense. Now, they'd still have the testing and other expenses, but I suspect that they would look at pricing differently than someone who sees titled parents as part of the cost of raising puppies.

4) For those of you who say that anyone who expressed an interest in breeding and was torn down must have wanted to breed for the "wrong reasons," I advise you to read more carefully, especially in member introductions. On at least three occasions, the conversation didn't even have a chance to GET to reasons before insults were flying. Maybe the forum was in a bad patch, and that is unusual, but I tell you, it made quite an impression on a newcomer like me - and not a good one.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

The thing is that agility person with titled dogs will want to add in those costs when they suggest to puppy buyers that their puppies come from agility tested parents. An unneutered dog is a liability unless it is used for responsible breeding.


----------



## Locket (Jun 21, 2009)

LegalEagle said:


> 3) On price: here is my theory. There are lots of people who do sports with their dogs for fun. They love it. They were going to do it anyway, regardless of whether they intended to breed dogs. In fact, many, if not most of them, neuter their dogs because "all responsible pet owners spay and neuter." Now, if some of those people became hobby breeders, they would be unlikely to factor in the cost of doing sports with their dogs into puppy prices. Why not? Because they were going to do the sports anyway. The sport is NOT a cost of breeding the dog, but a separate hobby expense. Now, they'd still have the testing and other expenses, but I suspect that they would look at pricing differently than someone who sees titled parents as part of the cost of raising puppies.


They might look at pricing differently, but why should they? Personally, I would pay more for a dog with performance titles than a Ch. title. No offence meant to those who delve into the showing world, but I think a lot more time, training, and dedication go into performance titles than Ch. titles. 
I love the fact that they are working directly with their dogs, forming an incredible bond and having fun while doing it. Performance titles prove their dogs in ways a Ch. never can.


----------



## kcp1227 (Jan 25, 2013)

It's my understanding that breeding a dog, when done the right way, is not cheap. You have testing, numerous vet bills, food costs, stud fees, and I'm sure other things I'm not even considering. I really don't think breeders are making that much of a profit off of their puppies. They're probably lucky to break even.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

I don't think I am misunderstanding you, I understand what you are saying quite well. I (and probably a good many people on here from what I have seen in this thread) just happen to disagree. Each of us are entitled to an opinion. I don't think that the scenario you laid out is a good idea, I think that in the end it would do more harm than good. However, I could be wrong. I just think that breeding shouldn't be an afterthought, it should have been the goal. But again, that's my opinion.


I personally haven't seen the threads where people were attacked before they got a chance to list reasons. In fact, the threads I have seen on people wanting to breed were full of people pretty nicely stating that the op shouldn't for various and sundry reasons. Now on other forums I have seen the kind of behavior you describe, and on other topics this forum is guilty of "jumping the gun" and going for the kill without hearing everyone out. However I have not read every thread, and therefore I may have missed something.


----------



## Cailin77 (Jul 21, 2012)

LegalEagle said:


> 3) On price: here is my theory. There are lots of people who do sports with their dogs for fun. They love it. They were going to do it anyway, regardless of whether they intended to breed dogs. In fact, many, if not most of them, neuter their dogs because "all responsible pet owners spay and neuter." Now, if some of those people became hobby breeders, they would be unlikely to factor in the cost of doing sports with their dogs into puppy prices. Why not? Because they were going to do the sports anyway. The sport is NOT a cost of breeding the dog, but a separate hobby expense. Now, they'd still have the testing and other expenses, but I suspect that they would look at pricing differently than someone who sees titled parents as part of the cost of raising puppies.


I think people who show and people who do sports with their dogs really aren't as different as you think! People who show love it! They don't do it just so they can breed their dogs and make more money! 

And the dogs from working lines can, and should, factor that into their prices! If I were looking for an agility dog, I would go to a breeder who had other dogs successful in that area. 

And I think most people who just want to compete with their dogs because they love it, probably spay and neuter not because "that's what responsible pet owners do" but because it makes their dogs easier to work with. Most likely, a stud dog is going to be distracted if he's at a trial and a female is in heat. A female in heat is probably not going to preform well, because her body is telling her to go make puppies! 

Anyway, I guess it just comes down to the fact that I don't think people are going to charge mid-level prices for high quality dogs. They may compete no mater what, but that doesn't mean it should factor into the price. And show lines or working lines, both are desirable to people. Even if they only want a pet, a working line can be highly desirable if someone wants a poodle that they can take long hikes with. So, I don't think there would be a lower price.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle (Sep 1, 2009)

mom24doggies said:


> All this to say, I just don't think there is a way to be "cost effective" when breeding. Well, there is, but in the end I feel that it is the dogs that will suffer. Like I said before, most people do not understand enough about dogs and structure and genetics and stuff to be breeding. And I include myself in there. Sure, I understand waaaaay more than the average person, but I'm certainly not knowledgeable enough to breed just yet!
> 
> Btw, I don't think people fly studs to their bitches...with today's technology they usually just do AI...they take semen and ship it frozen. Nobody has to leave home that way.  My Engie's breeder has even had frozen semen shipped from Sweden! Pretty cool...now how they keep it frozen on the way I don't know.


Dry ice in tanks...lol! They use an extender, and you pay to rent the tank. It is very expensive.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> Dry ice in tanks...lol! They use an extender, and you pay to rent the tank. It is very expensive.


 I figured it had something to do with dry ice! I figured it was expensive too...


----------



## fjm (Jun 4, 2010)

I think there are a number of different issues here:

I am actually in favour of more dogs being bred. It has been estimated that to maintain a reasonable gene pool requires at least 50% of the population to reproduce; retaining (or achieving) heterozygosity may require loosening the closed registries to outcross to different sizes, or even to other closely related breeds. Insisting that only titled dogs are bred - and this usually means conformation titles - actually works against the overall long term good of the breed, especially given the continuing use of inbreeding to fix qualities in breeding lines. I would far rather see a certification process, like that used in many European countries, where dogs are evaluated for conformation, temperament and health and scored accordingly - a score which is then available to any potential buyers of their puppies.

BUT I don't think that this would necessarily mean more pups being bred - nor should it. What it would mean is that fewer pups are bred from popular sires (the shipping of semen can massively increase the number of pups produced by one sire - or it can give breeders access to unrelated lines, if only for one or two generations...), and if puppy buyers were sufficiently educated, would reduce the number of badly bred pups being churned out by puppy mills.

And even if there were hundreds, even thousands, of excellent hobby breeders producing a litter every few years, it should not affect the price charged for pups. A good pup from a good hobby breeder may cost more to rear than a good but not outstanding pup from a show breeder - the line between the two is very blurred in any case. Breeding is an expensive business - it does not combine well with full time, or even part time working, as anyone who has ever had to hand rear a litter will attest. And it is not just expensive in terms of money but emotionally too - there is a risk to both dam and pups, and a significant proportion of pups don't survive. I know of more than one breeder who has given up because of the emotional wear and tear. 

The $1500 level seems a very reasonable return to me, and also goes some way to ensuring that the new owners are serious. Pups should not be impulse buys - they should be a considered investment. I'd expect to pay a great deal more for a potential Crufts BOB, in the unlikely event a breeder would be prepared to sell her. And I would also expect a puppy mill to be trying to maximise the price of their pups, with misrepresentation, clever marketing and all the other tricks of the trade - they are in it for the money, after all!


----------



## DivinityPoodles (Jan 23, 2012)

Working lines seem to be harder to find and the scary part is that when you contact some very 'reputable' breeders of poodles with Ch titles, they have no idea what you are talking about when you are asking if their dogs are birdy! And that is a personal experience that was repeated several times. I don't understand the how and why of that other than what those dogs are being bred for is the ring and not what the standard poodle is supposed to be. They are water retrievers. It's kind of hard to breed for that when you don't even know what the dog is supposed to do. Another problem is that a LOT of the dogs in the show ring (AKC and CKC) are not structurally able to swim. Again, I don't understand how that is conforming to breed standard. 

LegalEagle... I had many conversations and email discussions with various breeders prior to choosing Tudorose. In some of them as soon as I said there was a possibility that I might want to breed, I was a goner. No questions even asked, just shut down. One of the reasons that I chose my breeder is that we got into a VERY in depth discussion on the first phone call. She was very blunt about her expectations and so was I. That works for me. Mind you, I also have past experience with GSD's and ultimately deciding not to breed due to various issues although I loved my dogs and she found this out before making a decision. 
I was and still am far more dedicated to working potential than the ability to grow hair and prance around a ring. Having said that both my current dogs are being shown and have at least 1 Ch title, but not from AKC or CKC as I could not and would not try to deal with the coat and put them in the field at the same time. If they continue to do as well as they have been, and yes they both have good qualities and things I'd like to improve on, and they health test well, we will consider breeding. It by no means is a definite. 
Both dogs are registered in 4 different registries... AKC, CKC, UKC and IABCA (which was a very cool way to show them). Just the registration costs are getting up there but I feel that I have done what I need to to assure their conformation is correct. I already know they have huge working potential and we are all in training for those types of trials.
All in all, I have to say when I factor in the cost of the dogs (both well over what you have listed), registration, competition, training for the competition and all the testing, I can't imagine selling any puppies for less than what I paid for my dogs as it would essentially be stupid for me to do that. I don't mind the costs cuz we are having a blast with the dogs, but the health testing and conformation shows probably wouldn't have been involved if there wasn't a possibility of breeding because it essentially would have been unnecessary. 
After all that, I agree with your theory but don't quite see it working in reality due to all of the above.

And yes our breeder is mentoring us. 

Thanks for reading!


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

FJM and Luvmyspoos, thank you both for your responses! They were a great start to my morning. Last night I was a bit crabby, for unrelated reasons, so I'm sorry if I was rude to anyone.

FJM: Price-wise, you could be right: maybe the price would stay the same with lots of excellent hobbyists breeding. But, in that case, one would expect the average poodle quality to go up. If the average quality of poodle stayed the same, one would expect the number of poodles to go up, and for breeders to compete on price, leading to more accurate price signaling (the extent to which price indicates quality) and a wider range of prices. I think that either would be a positive development, but I understand that some may disagree.

I also think that it's important to remember that a big part of why we have unwanted dogs is because people don't know what do with puppies once they get them. Spay and neuter campaigns have been quite successful in many areas, but we still have dogs in shelters, because lots of people will pay lots of money for a purebred dog only to surrender them when they are unruly adolescents. I don't think the biggest problem is too many puppies, but rather too-ignorant puppy buyers. Now, everyone who has a dog had to have a first dog, and lots of people, myself included, make mistakes with the first dog (crate-training Laszlo was, in retrospect, a flaming train wreck of dog mistraining). But I totally agree with you: a dog is an investment and a commitment. And to the extent that a too-low price for puppies would encourage people to forget that, it would be bad for dogs.

Thank you, by the way, for signaling explicitly that a new issue, genetic diversity and quality of breeding stock, has come to the fore. That was what the end of my post was about, and I thank you for being willing to say that the whole culture surrounding titling and breeding goes against the long-term health of the breed. I know nothing about dog breeding, but I do know enough about micro-evolution and closed populations to know that drastically limiting reproduction is bad for population health.

Luvmyspoos: Thanks for sharing your experience trying to get into breeding. Outwest shared a similar story early in the thread...it's evidently harder than it should be to get that good breeding stock to start out. In fact, Locket suggested that that (and time!) was the main obstacle to my dream becoming a reality. I don't know whether there is anything to be done with that, but I'm happy that we're at least having this conversation. It's been interesting to see the diversity (and passion) of the views among us.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

Actually, reading the above, it is clear that Ian Dunbar's indoctrination efforts at Dog Star Daily are paying off. Feel free to check out what he has to say about puppy husbandry and then challenge the premises of my above statement. Have I drunk the Kool-aid?


----------



## fjm (Jun 4, 2010)

I think possibly where we disagree is that you are considering dogs as a marketable commodity, with breeders competing on price/quality once supply meets or exceeds demand. (That then begs the question of what happens to those pups that don't fetch the price asked, of course - at present all too many of them end up in rescue.) I don't think the majority of good breeders think that way - in my experience, there is an accepted price range for a particular breed, based upon litter size, difficulty of breeding, cost etc, etc. 

Good breeders rarely charge as much as the market might stand - they are more interested in ensuring their pups go to good homes. Poppy's breeder refused at least two people before I came into the picture, because she was suspicious about their motives, or didn't think they were suitable owners for a toy poodle. They also know that the purchase price of a puppy is a tiny fraction of the lifetime costs of dog ownership, and that anyone needing to save a few hundred dollars at the start is likely to face difficulties down the line. Savvy puppy buyers know that how their pup is bred and reared has a huge impact on its health and temperament; they also know that their relationship with their puppy's breeder can be a boon in the coming months and years - help with puppy feeding and behaviour issues, help with getting into showing and/or breeding, etc, etc are all there for you if you find the right breeder in the first place. 

Puppy mills, on the other hand, look at that market range and look to see which corners they can cut to make a profit. BYB's look at it, and consider the next mortgage payments. I've seen unhealthy, mismarked Papillon pups advertised at the same price as champion progeny that would have a waiting list several years long. I've also seen panicy ads from people with pups (especially "designer" mixes) outgrowing fluffy babyhood, and wildly reduced for a quick sale. It really is a case of Caveat emptor!


----------



## DivinityPoodles (Jan 23, 2012)

LegalEagle
I don't think it should be easy to get good breeding stock. I just think that breeders (at least some of them - possibly even a majority) can be very elitist. Because of the working requirements that I have, I learned very quickly that a good deal of breeders with show dogs just did not have what I was looking for so my research was refined. That's not a bad thing, just a fact. The problem truly arises when, as you and several others have pointed out, that a person that could be a good hobby breeder is unable to find a good breeder that will even consider selling a puppy for breeding purposes under any circumstances. That's how bottlenecks occur. 
And trying to breed a perfect anything is great in theory but an actual perfect dog does not exist so there are going to be faults that any breeder is trying to improve on. And depending on the breeder, what they are trying to accomplish will determine what they consider a fault ie: lack of drive is a fault to me but to a strictly show breeder may not even be a consideration.

Thanks for this thought provoking thread!


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

mom24doggies said:


> And basically you just described the breeders who frequent this forum. And I agree, no one should be torn down for admitting they are interested in breeding. I did, no one has ripped me up yet.


Maybe you were not torn down because you agree with most of what breeders in this forum agree with? I know a breeder who was torn down and will not come to this forum anymore. She is breeding low COI spoos (under 6%) and not showing her dogs. Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that  low COI and not showing your dogs (low COI dogs are not really successful in the ring anyway) is not well considered by many if not all breeders in this forum.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

julietcr1 said:


> Maybe you were not torn down because you agree with most of what breeders in this forum agree with? I know a breeder who was torn down and will not come to this forum anymore. She is breeding low COI spoos (under 6%) and not showing her dogs. Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that low COI and not showing your dogs (low COI dogs are not really successful in the ring anyway) is not well considered by many if not all breeders in this forum.


 Perhaps...and there is absolutely nothing wrong with agreeing with the breeders on here, or at least the ones who come here often. As far as I know, they are all in poodles for good reasons and do their best to do whatever is right for their dogs and the breed in general. 

Low COI has nothing to do with wether or not the dog does well in the ring....at least not to my understanding! If a dog doesn't do well in the ring, there could be any number of reasons. Poor handling, poor structure, or even politics (I never said showing doesn't have problems!) all factor in to it. 

I personally don't have a problem with someone choosing not to do conformation showing, but they need to be doing SOMETHING to prove their dogs are good representatives of their breed. (Which brings me back to my point of how you can't have this "in between" breeder selling cheaper puppies. Anyone who is breeding for the right reasons and doing it right is going to spend a lot of money and can't afford to sell the puppies for less) Breeding a dog simply because it has low COI isn't a good reason. Now I'm not saying that is what your friend does, I don't know her. But if that IS what she was/is doing, that would be why she wasn't well received here.


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

julietcr1 said:


> Maybe you were not torn down because you agree with most of what breeders in this forum agree with? I know a breeder who was torn down and will not come to this forum anymore. She is breeding low COI spoos (under 6%) and not showing her dogs. Correct me if I am wrong but my understanding is that low COI and not showing your dogs (low COI dogs are not really successful in the ring anyway) is not well considered by many if not all breeders in this forum.


This is what Yaddaluv Poodles was doing.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

kcp1227 said:


> It's my understanding that breeding a dog, when done the right way, is not cheap. You have testing, numerous vet bills, food costs, stud fees, and I'm sure other things I'm not even considering. I really don't think breeders are making that much of a profit off of their puppies. They're probably lucky to break even.


Is this realy the only right way to breed dogs? Could we all be a bit more creative and maybe find other ways? Are all stud fees the same price? Do you really need to health test puppies that come from health tested parent before breeding them specially if they are low COI AND at lower risk than the parents? Do you think health test companies could be making money over breeders? Are health problems lower since health tested as started for spoos? If yes how come I can't find any stats on it? Are health problems lower in a spoo line from health tested parents compare to untested parents? 

We take lots of affirmations for granted but I could not find any numbers or studies to prove that health tested spoo parents produce healthier puppies.


----------



## LEUllman (Feb 1, 2010)

Luvmyspoos said:


> Working lines seem to be harder to find and the scary part is that when you contact some very 'reputable' breeders of poodles with Ch titles, they have no idea what you are talking about when you are asking if their dogs are birdy! And that is a personal experience that was repeated several times. I don't understand the how and why of that other than what those dogs are being bred for is the ring and not what the standard poodle is supposed to be. They are water retrievers. It's kind of hard to breed for that when you don't even know what the dog is supposed to do. Another problem is that a LOT of the dogs in the show ring (AKC and CKC) are not structurally able to swim. Again, I don't understand how that is conforming to breed standard.


Perhaps this should come as no surprise, given that the AKC explicitly includes the standard poodle in the "Non-Sporting Group."


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

julietcr1 said:


> We take lots of affirmations for granted but I could not find any numbers or studies to prove that health tested spoo parents produce healthier puppies.


Because other than yearly exams and vaccines (which many people skip) there's no reason a healthy standard poodle would need to be rushed to the vet. Vegas, my standard from Desert Reef Standard Poodles has never had any health issues and has only ever gone in for Heartworm test, neutered, and vaccines. Vienna, my rescue BYB has had a small seizure, one littermate bloated, another has epilepsy, and a cousin has Addisons. She also has a strange lump and licking sores.

By all means continue buying and supporting people that don't health test, I just won't be part of it or lose my dog prematurely to a preventable disease.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

mom24doggies said:


> Low COI has nothing to do with wether or not the dog does well in the ring....at least not to my understanding!
> QUOTE]
> 
> Depends on what a low COI is for you, mine is under 6.25%. A study of Standard Poodles discovered that dogs with a COI of less than 6.25% lived on average four years longer than those with COIs over 25%. Results of the Standard Poodle Longevity Study


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

julietcr1 said:


> mom24doggies said:
> 
> 
> > Low COI has nothing to do with wether or not the dog does well in the ring....at least not to my understanding!
> ...


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

julietcr1 said:


> Depends on what a low COI is for you, mine is under 6.25%. A study of Standard Poodles discovered that dogs with a COI of less than 6.25% lived on average four years longer than those with COIs over 25%. Results of the Standard Poodle Longevity Study


There's no reason a breeder can't breed their dogs to standard, have low coi, conformation titles, and complete health testing. Here are three dogs that have accomplished all of this. (All from the same breeder.)
Grace
Ava
Sassy

ETA: Again, coi has nothing to do against health issues if they are in the lines, here is Vienna's pedigree, and I've already mentioned the health issues in hers. Many breeders would be drooling over this COI.


----------



## fjm (Jun 4, 2010)

The purpose of health testing is not to guarantee healthy puppies, it is to reduce or eliminate the birth of puppies that suffer from known, identifiable, genetically transmitted conditions, like PRA. I think the point about genetic testing is that it can complement what very knowledgeable, experienced breeders have always done, by identifying dogs that carry the recessive genes before the problem occurs in their offspring. When I took Sophy to be evaluated, my mentor went through her pedigree, explaining the strengths and weaknesses of each of the lines, which had thrown up problems over the years and which were well known for the soundness of the pups they produced. I would not begin to say breeders have always got it right, but as with so many things in life, where there are few certainties one can only play the odds. Knowledge, health tests, low COI all improve the odds of getting a sound and healthy dog. 

I do not think conformation titles - or any title - is the be all and end all, nor should participation in what is essentially a minority sport be a prerequisite for dog breeding. What is essential is a deep, abiding interest and passion for dogs and the breed, and a willingness to continually research and learn and test, to rethink and change methods when science and practice tell us they are no longer valid, and generally to do whatever is necessary to produce puppies that are shining examples of happy, healthy, sound poodles. And never, ever to lose sight of welfare of the dog in front of you, no matter how magnificent your dreams may be!


----------



## N2Mischief (Dec 3, 2012)

I don't pretend to know much about breeding, nor do I want to, other than to know the parents of my poodle were genetically tested. I lived with a poodle that had PRA. She went blind at 6 years old. We bought her in 1965. I assume there was no way to test back then, and our Niki, the smartest most well behaved dog I have ever known, had to live her life in darkness. When we recently decided on another poodle, I was so happy to find out that we could find a dog that would not have this problem.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

fjm said:


> I think possibly where we disagree is that you are considering dogs as a marketable commodity, with breeders competing on price/quality once supply meets or exceeds demand. (That then begs the question of what happens to those pups that don't fetch the price asked, of course - at present all too many of them end up in rescue.) I don't think the majority of good breeders think that way - in my experience, there is an accepted price range for a particular breed, based upon litter size, difficulty of breeding, cost etc, etc.
> 
> Good breeders rarely charge as much as the market might stand - they are more interested in ensuring their pups go to good homes. Poppy's breeder refused at least two people before I came into the picture, because she was suspicious about their motives, or didn't think they were suitable owners for a toy poodle. They also know that the purchase price of a puppy is a tiny fraction of the lifetime costs of dog ownership, and that anyone needing to save a few hundred dollars at the start is likely to face difficulties down the line. Savvy puppy buyers know that how their pup is bred and reared has a huge impact on its health and temperament; they also know that their relationship with their puppy's breeder can be a boon in the coming months and years - help with puppy feeding and behaviour issues, help with getting into showing and/or breeding, etc, etc are all there for you if you find the right breeder in the first place.
> 
> Puppy mills, on the other hand, look at that market range and look to see which corners they can cut to make a profit. BYB's look at it, and consider the next mortgage payments. I've seen unhealthy, mismarked Papillon pups advertised at the same price as champion progeny that would have a waiting list several years long. I've also seen panicy ads from people with pups (especially "designer" mixes) outgrowing fluffy babyhood, and wildly reduced for a quick sale. It really is a case of Caveat emptor!


FJM, you say marketable commodity like it's a bad thing! (I kid!) 

Seriously though, I don't think of dogs like books or cars or even gerbils or fish. Clearly they are different and should be treated differently, and I believe that most breeders, even pretty crappy ones, think of them differently.

But did you notice what you said? That "there is an accepted price range for a particular breed, based upon litter size, difficulty of breeding, cost etc, etc." ?

That is a sign of a market like any other! If there is a price, or range of prices, below which sellers will not sell and above which buyers won't buy (called in economics the "market-clearing price), it is because there are many buyers and sellers engaged in a competitive market. Each individual buyer and seller has his own reasons for setting his price point where he does, but in the aggregate, it functions the same way the market for cars or books or clothing or coffee does. So individual breeders may not be setting their prices with the purpose of getting the maximum price, but if they deviate from the market clearing price substantially, relative to other breeders of similar quality dogs, they may find themselves with more difficulty finding good homes for their dogs, especially if they want to control reproduction.

Man, this conversation is great.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

Luvmyspoos said:


> LegalEagle
> I don't think it should be easy to get good breeding stock. I just think that breeders (at least some of them - possibly even a majority) can be very elitist. Because of the working requirements that I have, I learned very quickly that a good deal of breeders with show dogs just did not have what I was looking for so my research was refined. That's not a bad thing, just a fact. The problem truly arises when, as you and several others have pointed out, that a person that could be a good hobby breeder is unable to find a good breeder that will even consider selling a puppy for breeding purposes under any circumstances. That's how bottlenecks occur.
> And trying to breed a perfect anything is great in theory but an actual perfect dog does not exist so there are going to be faults that any breeder is trying to improve on. And depending on the breeder, what they are trying to accomplish will determine what they consider a fault ie: lack of drive is a fault to me but to a strictly show breeder may not even be a consideration.
> 
> Thanks for this thought provoking thread!


I agree that it shouldn't be easy to get good breeding stock, just easier...as it would be if some breeders were more open-minded. And I think your point on the "perfect dog" is well-taken: such a dog does not exist. It might behoove us to reflect on the fact that dog-showing came out of the same impulse as eugenics. In fact, the "show-title-breed" ethos yields eugenics for dogs. I think that maybe a better goal would be improving on each generation, whatever the starting point.


----------



## fairhavenmagick (Jan 19, 2011)

I am probably someone who would fall into the definition of future hobby breeder.

I'm someone who came onto the forum and was open with the fact that I wanted to breed my future bitch if she did/passed everything I wanted. I was asking for help in finding breeders that would have what I was looking for and would work with me on my goals.

I did get some pointed questions and responses, but really everyone was civil and no one tore me down. It is true that's it's hard to find breeders willing to release a pup as potential breeding stock. Between my wants and them willing to work with me I was down immediately to about 5 or 6 breeders. But I found someone and I think it's worked out fantastically thus far.

I do know that I won't be offering puppies at a lower price point than normal. 

I got my dog to be my SAR partner, and I will get my next SAR dog from her if everything works out. But I needed to prove that she as worthy outside of myself and her ability to do her job (she's a cadaver dog). She proved that part with flying colors getting her first national certification at 14 months.

So I showed her in conformation in the UKC since I couldn't maintain a show coat on a SAR dog. Even that wasn't super cheap, there was one show that was far enough away for a hotel stay- only one other breed in my group showed up and he was a REALLY nice grand champion, my girl was 9 months at the time. So all that $ was basically a wash. She got her CH at 14 months the week after her SAR certification.

My SAR costs are not insignificant by any means and I am also competing in obedience with my girl, so far we only have our CGC and a couple of Rally Novice legs. And there are plans to try other sports as well.

She will be health tested. All of these things are going to add up to a lot. But you know what? I'm doing all of it (minus some of the health testing) with my other SAR dog, a mixed breed that's been spayed since she was 9 months. It's not just about all of the costs involved. I think the average cost of a poodle is a pretty good fit. Enough that hopefully people will research what they are getting into but not so much that an average person can save and get their dream dog. After all, it is a pretty large upfront cost but it's nothing compared to what we spend during the life of the dog. 

I believe I am on a pretty good track but I guess I will find out for sure when I go looking for a stud. Hopefully by then my girl will have proved herself worthy even if she doesn't have an AKC CH.


----------



## cavon (Aug 10, 2010)

Fairhavenmagick - don't diminish your accomplishments with your girl. I think they are amazing!

In my opinion, gaining a CKC or AKC conformation title is not a certification of a dog's worth. There are a lot of dogs with a "CH" in front of their name and nothing else. They have not been proven to be capable of anything else, not even passing the CGC/CGN, which for anyone who has done it knows is not just a walk in the park, the dog must be trained and socialized in order for it to be successful.

While one could argue that this is the easiest title to earn, anyone who has trained or competed in any, or multiple performance events, knows the money, work and dedication that goes into it. Still, without the right temperament, a dog won't be successful. These titles mean far more to me than a conformation title - not that I would retun Finnegan's ALCH title or BISS, BIS or RBIS awards!! ;-)

Your pup earning her SAR certification, and doing so at such a young age, is phenominal and something to be truly proud of!

I have seen many litters from dogs with a "CH" in front of their names that have pups at 4, 5, 6 or even more months old that remain unsold for whatever reason. I suppose the same is true of many litters, but my point is that having a conformation title is not the be all and end all when it comes to the value of a dog's worth - in my opinion.


----------



## schnauzerpoodle (Apr 21, 2010)

fairhavenmagick said:


> I am probably someone who would fall into the definition of future hobby breeder.
> 
> I'm someone who came onto the forum and was o*pen with the fact that I wanted to breed my future bitch if she did/passed everything I wanted. *I was asking for help in finding breeders that would have what I was looking for and would work with me on my goals.
> 
> ...


All these have proved that you are not one of _those_ self-claimed "hobby" breeder. Thank you for proving that not everyone who shows interest in breeding is bashed.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

I want to thank LegalEgal for starting this thread and all of you for taking the time to respond. This is a great source of information for someone like me who know nothing about breeding dogs but is trying to learn as much as she can. I am retiring in 3 months and thinking about maybe breeding spoos. I always wanted to breed dogs but I chose not to do it while I was working full time outside. Now that retirement time has come (5 years earlier, Yesss!) I can't stop thinking about it, even when I read all your cons. 

So, my question to you is what should I ask myself and what should I do in the next months and even year to prepare myself and decide if this is really what I want and should do? I am not looking at making a profit but I don't want to loose money either. Breaking even would be fine, of course making money is ok to;o)

This is a fantastic thread, thanks again.


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

julietcr1 said:


> Is this realy the only right way to breed dogs? Could we all be a bit more creative and maybe find other ways? Are all stud fees the same price? Do you really need to health test puppies that come from health tested parent before breeding them specially if they are low COI AND at lower risk than the parents? Do you think health test companies could be making money over breeders? Are health problems lower since health tested as started for spoos? If yes how come I can't find any stats on it? Are health problems lower in a spoo line from health tested parents compare to untested parents?
> 
> We take lots of affirmations for granted but I could not find any numbers or studies to prove that health tested spoo parents produce healthier puppies.


Wow, what giant steps BACKWARD you are suggesting, how sad. The genetic and diagnostic tests available to breeders are valuable tools to help the future of the breed. Some things like PRA are a clear, carrier or affected, but other things are not black and white like hip screening and cardiac, etc. \

Why would any good breeder with the health and future of the dogs in mind ever suggest cutting corners to save money while breeding? It does not make sense to me. I also don't know WHY the price of puppies needs to come down. If you cannot be patient and save your money for the price of a well-bred poodle, why not just rescue?


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

Just a general comment, not directed at any one person, but I find it sad that people who have NO EXPERIENCE in the world of conformation showing can be so disparaging or dismissive of it. 

Why not start attending some dog shows? Meet some breeders and handlers, join your local breed club or all breed club. Volunteer with a handler. See what really goes on before you wax poetic about how unimportant it all is.

These people are breeding to meet the standard, having their dogs evaluated by other people (conformation dog shows) to validate that they meet that standard, health testing their breeding stock, making careful and well-researched breeding decisions, raising litters, placing puppies in show homes or pet homes, showing more dogs, and continuing the cycle of trying to better the breed. Many of these "show breeders" also participate in performance sports, therapy, etc. They educate puppy buyers, participate in meet the breed events, and love their dogs. 

In every avenue in life, there good and bad people. Every "show" breeder is not wonderful, but it's amazing how many people tear them down without having the slightest idea of what this world is all about. 

I can't imagine doing what these breeders do. It's incredible difficult. But I am grateful for these types of breeders because people like me, who just want a "pet" get to reap the rewards of all their hard work when we get one of their puppies.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

PaddleAddict said:


> Wow, what giant steps BACKWARD you are suggesting, how sad. The genetic and diagnostic tests available to breeders are valuable tools to help the future of the breed. Some things like PRA are a clear, carrier or affected, but other things are not black and white like hip screening and cardiac, etc. \
> 
> Why would any good breeder with the health and future of the dogs in mind ever suggest cutting corners to save money while breeding? It does not make sense to me. I also don't know WHY the price of puppies needs to come down. If you cannot be patient and save your money for the price of a well-bred poodle, why not just rescue?


I was not suggesting anything, I was asking questions and got answers for most of them. I have a scientific background, this is why I was looking for numbers (comparative studies) about health testing and how much it reduces health problems in a line but I could not find any. I am not saying to any breeder not to health test and if I ever breed spoos I will health test. However, I will not be able to say these tests reduces the chances of health problems in my puppies because I have no numbers (comparative studies) to prove it.


----------



## ninaspoodles (Jan 28, 2013)

It is excellent to be conscerned with the welfare of the dogs you are breeding, as well as ensure they are properly raised and heealthy; but proving your dog, through some kind of titles, whether it be obedience, rally, championship, agility, scent hurdling, dock diving, hunting, etc... Is definately an asset people should not undervalue. Yes there are politics in the show world, as there are in any sport, however it can still be fun! And very beneficial. Conformation is very useful as well... however you can by-pass that if you really do not want to show by having multiple breeders assess a litter and the bitch and the sire as well. But showing is important... Because even if the common buyer does not care about titles, it PROVES that the dog is a worthy animal to be bred. Show breeders do not always in-breed or line breed... Or keep their dogs and puppies in crates. Anyone can find two registered poodles with full breeding rights, throw them together and breed them. Even if they do health test them.... That tells you nothing about why this dog should be bred. Should we start breeding OUT of breed standard simply so people can have familily dogs? We are not only breeding for the puppy buyers. It is much bigger then that. If we stop breeding according to standard, then where does that leave the breed? If you want an intelligent, fast, athletic dog, that has medium-long straight hair, you could go for an australian shepherd or a border collie. If you want this dog to work cattle or do agility, you will probably look at working lines.... If you want this dog to be more fancy, but still athletic... you will go more for show lines. Or sometimes, the best breeders will have their dogs proven in both working and show... But if people start wanting calm border collies and breeders start breeding out of breed standard, then you lose some important pieces of the breed. When people look for certain breeds, they look for those breeds because they have an idea of what they will be getting because of their breed standard. This is why people show... To prove that their dogs are within breed standard and worthy of breeding. Forget about doodles versus poodles, if you want to preserve your breed, you have to understand these things and why they are important. Yes showing costs money, and we rarely ever actually make a profit from selling puppies... So most of us "show breeders" are doing it as a hobby, because we certainly do not do it for the money! We do not focus on mediocre dogs, we strive for the perfect poodle in all aspects... that are within breed standards. Then the rest of the puppies that we do not keep and that are non breeding quality go to pet homes. But their personalities and looks should still be well within breed standard. 

Standard poodle breed standard (short version)

The breed probably dates back to the late Roman period but certainly the variety we know as the Standard Poodle was well established across the whole of Europe by the 16th Century. The Miniature and Toy varieties developed in the next two hundred years or so. The Poodle is the world's oldest water retriever, circus performer, and truffle hunter. The ubiquitous Poodle is such a versatile dog, he can be all things to all people.

General Appearance, Carriage and Condition
That of a very active, gay, intelligent, smart and elegant-looking dog, squarely built, well proportioned carrying himself proudly. Properly clipped in the traditional fashion and carefully groomed, the Poodle has about him an air of distinction and dignity peculiar to himself.

Temperament
The Poodle is known for his intelligence, his lively, mischievous sense of humour, and his willingness to please. The Poodle is a people-oriented breed that refuses to be ignored.

Size
Within the size limitations there is no preferred size.

Standard Poodle
The Standard Poodle is over 38.1cm (15ins.) at the highest point at the shoulder. 

This is what reputable breeders will breed for. To ensure this, people show in conformation or obedience type titles. And showing helps keep us breeders objective and able to compare our dogs with other dogs and have the judges do so as well. Meeting other breeders with the same values is also an asset that comes with showing. 

It is not NECESSARY to show to be a good breeder, but if you are able, and serious about breeding, serious breeders should be proving their dogs in one aspect or another and be maintaining their breed's standard and able to prove it.


----------



## mom24doggies (Mar 28, 2011)

ninaspoodles said:


> It is excellent to be conscerned with the welfare of the dogs you are breeding, as well as ensure they are properly raised and heealthy; but proving your dog, through some kind of titles, whether it be obedience, rally, championship, agility, scent hurdling, dock diving, hunting, etc... Is definately an asset people should not undervalue. Yes there are politics in the show world, as there are in any sport, however it can still be fun! And very beneficial. Conformation is very useful as well... however you can by-pass that if you really do not want to show by having multiple breeders assess a litter and the bitch and the sire as well. But showing is important... Because even if the common buyer does not care about titles, it PROVES that the dog is a worthy animal to be bred. Show breeders do not always in-breed or line breed... Or keep their dogs and puppies in crates. Anyone can find two registered poodles with full breeding rights, throw them together and breed them. Even if they do health test them.... That tells you nothing about why this dog should be bred. Should we start breeding OUT of breed standard simply so people can have familily dogs? We are not only breeding for the puppy buyers. It is much bigger then that. If we stop breeding according to standard, then where does that leave the breed? If you want an intelligent, fast, athletic dog, that has medium-long straight hair, you could go for an australian shepherd or a border collie. If you want this dog to work cattle or do agility, you will probably look at working lines.... If you want this dog to be more fancy, but still athletic... you will go more for show lines. Or sometimes, the best breeders will have their dogs proven in both working and show... But if people start wanting calm border collies and breeders start breeding out of breed standard, then you lose some important pieces of the breed. When people look for certain breeds, they look for those breeds because they have an idea of what they will be getting because of their breed standard. This is why people show... To prove that their dogs are within breed standard and worthy of breeding. Forget about doodles versus poodles, if you want to preserve your breed, you have to understand these things and why they are important. Yes showing costs money, and we rarely ever actually make a profit from selling puppies... So most of us "show breeders" are doing it as a hobby, because we certainly do not do it for the money! We do not focus on mediocre dogs, we strive for the perfect poodle in all aspects... that are within breed standards. Then the rest of the puppies that we do not keep and that are non breeding quality go to pet homes. But their personalities and looks should still be well within breed standard.
> 
> Standard poodle breed standard (short version)
> 
> ...


 This is exactly what I think and have been trying to say, except you put it into words so much better than I ever could. Thanks for a great post!


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

Ninaspoodles, I think most posters here would agree that conformation showing is not inherently bad and that it is not necessary to show your dog in conformation, but that you should prove your dog and breed to the standard. I haven't seen anyone here who posts something who contradicts it, and I agree with mom24doggies that you've put it beautifully. But one thing I think julietcr and some others were saying earlier is that people are selective in what they breed for. People who only do conformation MAY neglect important poodly characteristics (e.g., affinity for water), while people who breed their poodles for Schutzhund (none do to my knowledge, but I'd love to see it!) may neglect others (e.g., eye shape).

Whatever type of competition you do, you can only be judged within its parameters. Just like they don't judge conformation at agility trials, they don't judge training, drive and athleticism at conformation trials. Someone who breeds to show in conformation is only getting judged on what a judge can tell in the ring: appearance and attitude. (I count structure as part of appearance, as a perfectly sound poodle with the body shape of a golden retriever would NOT be rewarded because it doesn't look poodly).

But that person is not getting judged on whether their poodle is a good water retriever, because they don't have lakes in the conformation ring. And being a good water retriever is about temperament, affinity for water, and focus, as well as proper structure. There is no way for a dog show judge to know whether a poodle is a good water retriever, although that is a part of its history and should be a part of the standard. Therefore, water retrieving is not a trait that is rewarded in the ring. Therefore, it is a trait that MAY not be bred for by people who breed only to show in conformation. So to the extent that breeders do conformation to the EXCLUSION of other types of proving, you could easily end up with a dog that LOOKS like a poodle but doesn't have some other important poodly traits. Someone was remarking earlier how hard it is to find a "birdy" poodle, which is quite sad considering that birds are what poodles were originally bred to retrieve. 

This doesn't mean conformation showing is bad, necessarily. Just that, as you say, there are other ways of being a responsible breeder, and it is probably best for a given breed if different breeders are proving their dogs in different ways. (If breeders of English Bulldogs, for example, did ANYTHING athletic with them, they would probably look like the stocky robust exemplars of the early twentieth century rather than the tottering, can't-hardly-breathe versions of today.)


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

julietcr1 said:


> I was not suggesting anything, I was asking questions and got answers for most of them. I have a scientific background, this is why I was looking for numbers (comparative studies) about health testing and how much it reduces health problems in a line but I could not find any. I am not saying to any breeder not to health test and if I ever breed spoos I will health test. However, I will not be able to say these tests reduces the chances of health problems in my puppies because I have no numbers (comparative studies) to prove it.


So what I'm getting is you want to stud your dog out, but you're justifying not health testing because it would be a money sink?


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

I see julietcr more as asking if universal testing actually leads to better health results. 

Would we recommend that every potential parent get tested for Huntington's disease before having children? Probably not, because the frequency in the general population is very low. But people with family members who have suffered from Huntington's often do get tested, because it runs in the family. Would universal testing for Huntington's decrease the rate of the disease as people decided not to have children? Perhaps, but perhaps not. At any rate, the effect would be minuscule compared to the cost of universal testing. Is that the same with true of health testing in dogs? Would it change things much to only test dogs from lines with a "family history" of certain illnesses? I think that is julietcr's question.


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

LegalEagle said:


> I see julietcr more as asking if universal testing actually leads to better health results.
> 
> Would we recommend that every potential parent get tested for Huntington's disease before having children? Probably not, because the frequency in the general population is very low. But people with family members who have suffered from Huntington's often do get tested, because it runs in the family. Would universal testing for Huntington's decrease the rate of the disease as people decided not to have children? Perhaps, but perhaps not. At any rate, the effect would be minuscule compared to the cost of universal testing. Is that the same with true of health testing in dogs? Would it change things much to only test dogs from lines with a "family history" of certain illnesses? I think that is julietcr's question.


Totally different when you are breeding with in a closed gene pool. Similar to the royals back in the day. When you are manipulating limited genes it's important to have as much information as possible.

From your posts I gather that you are not terribly familiar with purebred dog genetics. It's not a simple as knowing "family history" especially when many of the genetic diseases known in a breed are widespread and/or difficult to pinpoint or identify.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

I don't think one can compare testing breeding dogs to testing humans. Dogs are bred for humans and by humans, so humans should be morally and ethically responsible for them, and poor breeding practices are wrong. It results in, for instance, poorly bred puppies (three dogs from three litters by the same breeder, missing the same teeth). Humans with free will can choose to have children (and do), whether it is advisable or not. Humans are also testing for and choosing more desirable off-spring these days, anyway, thanks to advanced technology.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

PaddleAddict said:


> Totally different when you are breeding with in a closed gene pool. Similar to the royals back in the day. When you are manipulating limited genes it's important to have as much information as possible.
> 
> From your posts I gather that you are not terribly familiar with purebred dog genetics. It's not a simple as knowing "family history" especially when many of the genetic diseases known in a breed are widespread and/or difficult to pinpoint or identify.


Guilty as charged! Maybe julietcr is too - maybe that's why she's asking questions!

I think that is also why I find the idea of breeding a more diverse pool of poodles is so intuitively appealing. Because, even though I don't know much about purebred dog genetics, it seems like making the breed MORE inbred - the inevitable result of limiting reproduction to the "elect" - isn't a great idea. But maybe that's not right...?

I definitely think health testing is a good idea, by the way. But I can understand why someone might want to see some studies or data about its effect.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

petitpie said:


> I don't think one can compare testing breeding dogs to testing humans. Dogs are bred for humans and by humans, so humans should be morally and ethically responsible for them, and poor breeding practices are wrong. It results in, for instance, poorly bred puppies (three dogs from three litters by the same breeder, missing the same teeth). Humans with free will can choose to have children (and do), whether it is advisable or not. Humans are also testing for and choosing more desirable off-spring these days, anyway, thanks to advanced technology.


I don't know if there are statistics for that, petitpie. But I think the fact that you asked that question means that maybe it isn't crazy that julietcr did so as well. Maybe it is my liberal upbringing, but I think it is always reasonable to ask why people do things one way instead of another - blame my baby boomer parents!

As to the comparison between human and dog genetic testing, I don't think it is unfair. Testing has costs (financial) and benefits (health of the offspring) in each case. In each case, it is used to make informed decisions about reproduction. But in order to know the effect of either, it is necessary to collect and analyze the data. I imagine it would be easier with humans, since many countries have nationalized health care and keep registries. But I haven't looked. 

The question julietcr is asking isn't whether humans have responsibility for dogs' welfare because we have selectively bred them.Her question, as I see it, is whether testing actually improves welfare and, if it does, to what extent. (Please correct me if I am wrong, julietcr!)


----------



## PaddleAddict (Feb 9, 2010)

I don't think anyone would ever argue for a huge amount of inbreeding. Ideally, you want to breed as diversely as possible (for the most part, there are good arguments for careful linebreeding) within the breed. However, keep in mind that with established purebreds, the gene pool is closed. What you have is what you have, unless you want to introduce new genes from a different breed (Google LUA Dalmatians for some interesting reading on that).


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

That has also been discussed, including "the Wycliff" influence. Lines have been lost since, but all the more reason to test. I don't think any responsible breeder would be willing to not test to prove your question. Not every human has unlimited funds for extreme health care but some do and use it. Even a wealthy owner wanted to clone his pet mixed dog and funded the veterinary school for research.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

petitpie said:


> That has also been discussed, including "the Wycliff" influence. Lines have been lost since, but all the more reason to test. I don't think any responsible breeder would be willing to not test to prove your question. Not every human has unlimited funds for extreme health care but some do and use it. Even a wealthy owner wanted to clone his pet mixed dog and funded the veterinary school for research.


I think you are right, petitpie. Unfortunately, there are plenty of breeders who don't health test, if someone wanted to do a survey. Or do you think the bad ones would just lie about testing anyway?


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

That's where the puppy buyer needs to be on his/her toes to ask to see results. Good breeders with nothing to hide will be glad to show test results to buyers. Buying a well-bred puppy from a good breeder is the result of eduction and comes as a grande finale after a time for doing one's homework.


----------



## petitpie (Nov 16, 2011)

"Missyplicity"


----------



## schnauzerpoodle (Apr 21, 2010)

LegalEagle said:


> Or do you think the bad ones would just lie about testing anyway?


Yes. While these breeders are pushing to sign and mail back the deposit and contract, they will throw potential buyers excuses like:
- the test results are with the co-owners/stud owners
- not posting test results on OFA and/or CERF because they would cost extra money
- not posting test results on OFA and/or CERF because there are bad breeders out there who have stolen their results/pedigrees
- not knowing how to scan or will scan and email to potential buyer as soon as son/husband is home

And then here are breeders who photoshop PRA certificates and alike and fax to potential buyers. 

And then there are breeders who would keep telling you: I know my dogs very well. They are all healthy. I know for sure. You just have to trust me.

I'm not saying breeders must post their results on OFA. I know plenty of good breeders that don't post the results of their health tested dogs but they should be open to questions and provide copies of results BEFORE asking buyers to send deposits/signed contract. Health tested and vet checked are different.

Here are how some good breeders handle the health testing results of their breeding stocks.

Desert Reef Standard Poodles - Puppies!
Noriko Poodles - Miniatures
Safranne Poodles, Specializing in Performance Miniature Poodles, Winona, MN
My Dogs - Katcha's Miniature Schnauzers
The girls at Stillmeadow, Cristall & MyAngel


----------



## ninaspoodles (Jan 28, 2013)

So question then, I am still a co-beeder and learning some of the finer details. So when you get health testing done through your veteranarian of choice, does it not automatically get posted with OFA? How does that part work? Does anyone know? I am aware of the tests poodles should get, however as far as posting them anywhere I haven't got a clue :S
Thanks in advance!


----------



## ninaspoodles (Jan 28, 2013)

LegalEagle said:


> Ninaspoodles, I think most posters here would agree that conformation showing is not inherently bad and that it is not necessary to show your dog in conformation, but that you should prove your dog and breed to the standard. I haven't seen anyone here who posts something who contradicts it, and I agree with mom24doggies that you've put it beautifully. But one thing I think julietcr and some others were saying earlier is that people are selective in what they breed for. People who only do conformation MAY neglect important poodly characteristics (e.g., affinity for water), while people who breed their poodles for Schutzhund (none do to my knowledge, but I'd love to see it!) may neglect others (e.g., eye shape).
> 
> Whatever type of competition you do, you can only be judged within its parameters. Just like they don't judge conformation at agility trials, they don't judge training, drive and athleticism at conformation trials. Someone who breeds to show in conformation is only getting judged on what a judge can tell in the ring: appearance and attitude. (I count structure as part of appearance, as a perfectly sound poodle with the body shape of a golden retriever would NOT be rewarded because it doesn't look poodly).
> 
> ...


It is a shame that multiple titles have not been encouraged more in the pasr, however you do see it quite often in shows now. Especially with poodles. Friends of mine that also breed standard poodles have therapy dog titles, cgc's, RE's, CDX'S UT CHs... Scent hurdling, agility etc. To be honest, I do not know of one breeder who shows poodles in conformation in AB that does not have dogs with other titles. It is more popular than some would think. Also, as far as the poodle being a bird dog... There are many factors to why they are no longer really bird dogs (though there are still some out there) but that is a whole other interesting issue. Anywho, im off to bed...


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

ninaspoodles said:


> So question then, I am still a co-beeder and learning some of the finer details. So when you get health testing done through your veteranarian of choice, does it not automatically get posted with OFA? How does that part work? Does anyone know? I am aware of the tests poodles should get, however as far as posting them anywhere I haven't got a clue :S
> Thanks in advance!


You pay an additional fee to OFA and you or your vet submits the results to them.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

PaddleAddict said:


> I don't think anyone would ever argue for a huge amount of inbreeding. Ideally, you want to breed as diversely as possible (for the most part, there are good arguments for careful linebreeding) within the breed. However, keep in mind that with established purebreds, the gene pool is closed. What you have is what you have, unless you want to introduce new genes from a different breed (Google LUA Dalmatians for some interesting reading on that).


I agree that the gene pool is "closed" within a breed, and I hope all breeders know that. I don't agree that "what you have is what you have unless you introduce new genes from a different breed". Introducing new genes from a different breed is a solution but other less drastic solutions exist like outcrossing and outbreeding in the same breed. I am curious to know if breeders here outcross or outbreed and if they do it how and why.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

LegalEagle said:


> Guilty as charged! Maybe julietcr is too - maybe that's why she's asking questions!
> 
> I think that is also why I find the idea of breeding a more diverse pool of poodles is so intuitively appealing. Because, even though I don't know much about purebred dog genetics, it seems like making the breed MORE inbred - the inevitable result of limiting reproduction to the "elect" - isn't a great idea. But maybe that's not right...?
> 
> I definitely think health testing is a good idea, by the way. But I can understand why someone might want to see some studies or data about its effect.


I definitely think health testing is a good idea to but I am concern about health testing being some sort of an "ok" for breeders to continue inbreeding or linebreeding dogs with "carriers" and "clear" results since they will not transmit the specific genetic diseases. If we health test but still inbreed or linebreed it's a complete non sens for me.


----------



## liljaker (Aug 6, 2011)

Schnauzerpoodle: Thank you for the helpful info and I LOVE the Safranne site!!!! Sunny's breeder in Canada is encouraging me to do rally/agility with him and his confidence has grown tremendously so I am looking for some weekend training facilities. She is going to give Sunny his own page on her website -- already has one shot I sent her of him jumping a low fence........anyway, their poodles are beautiful so Sunny and I better get training!!!!


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

julietcr1 said:


> I definitely think health testing is a good idea to but I am concern about health testing being some sort of an "ok" for breeders to continue inbreeding or linebreeding dogs with "carriers" and "clear" results since they will not transmit the specific genetic diseases. If we health test but still inbreed or linebreed it's a complete non sens for me.


Did you miss my post where I posted my dog who's COI is under 1% 10 gen and 3% 12 gen and who's line is riddles with health issues from untested breeding stock?


----------



## Chagall's mom (Jan 9, 2010)

julietcr1 said:


> I agree that the gene pool is "closed" within a breed, and I hope all breeders know that. I don't agree that "what you have is what you have unless you introduce new genes from a different breed". Introducing new genes from a different breed is a solution but other less drastic solutions exist like outcrossing and outbreeding in the same breed. I am curious to know if breeders here outcross or outbreed and if they do it how and why.


I preface this with saying I know bupkis about the subject, but long ago (2009) bookmarked this post in an old thread. It may have some relevance here.

http://www.poodleforum.com/14-poodl...g-crossbreeding-inbreeding-ect.html#post30736

Linebreeding gives you more consistency in a litter. It allows you to double up on all the same characteristics for better or for worse. It is a way to firmly set structure, movement and temperament in a line. It was also a way, back before genetic testing, to see if your line carried a problem.

Back in the day, it was very common to closely linebreed dogs (father to daughter, mother to son, brother to sister etc). The Wycliffe kennel was renowned for this and they were extremely successful in setting a specific type. You could look at a dog and say.... that is a Wycliffe dog. Here is a fascinating article about that kennel:

http://www.dogstuff.info/wycliffe_be...armstrong.html

Here is an example of a Wycliffe dogs today and how very tightly linebred her pedigree is: Coronado Standard Poodles

The advantage of the above bitch is that you could then take her and breed her out, but her genes are most likely going to be highly prepotent and you will keep type even with out-crossing.

Today, many buyers have gotten really obsessed with Coefficient of Inbreeding (COI) numbers. In general, a larger breed pool is always better for the long term health of a species (sometimes not true when an inbred quality proves necessary to survival... but I digress...). However, out-crossing is not without its issues.

In poodles, our health issues are wide spread throughout the breeding population so you often introduce health problems that did not previously exist. Out crossing produces mixed physical and temperament results in a litter. Who was it that posted the picture of the grown littermates where one was 27" and one was 24"?

I think a wise course of action for a breeder might be to take a bitch and out-cross to a stud dog who himself is linebred. That way, you have a greater chance of having the characteristics you like come through.


----------



## Fluffyspoos (Aug 11, 2009)

Chagall's mom said:


> I preface this with saying I know bupkis about the subject, but long ago (2009) bookmarked this post in an old thread. It may have some relevance here.


Oh wow_ I_ made that thread. Look how far we've come! Thanks for posting it, that's a lot of useful information.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

julietcr1 said:


> I agree that the gene pool is "closed" within a breed, and I hope all breeders know that. I don't agree that "what you have is what you have unless you introduce new genes from a different breed". Introducing new genes from a different breed is a solution but other less drastic solutions exist like outcrossing and outbreeding in the same breed. I am curious to know if breeders here outcross or outbreed and if they do it how and why.


Julietcr, could you explain the difference between outcrossing and outbreeding?


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

LegalEagle said:


> Julietcr, could you explain the difference between outcrossing and outbreeding?


I am not shure, I would say they are the same but some breeders consider outcrossing to be mating dogs who are from separate lines (for 5 generations or more) and outbreeding to be mating dogs who are from separate lines AND not the products of line breeding.


----------



## peppersb (Jun 5, 2011)

julietcr1 said:


> I am not shure, I would say they are the same but some breeders consider outcrossing to be mating dogs who are from separate lines (for 5 generations or more) and outbreeding to be mating dogs who are from separate lines AND not the products of line breeding.


My impression is that many breeders look at COI (coefficient of inbreeding) as a general measure of how inbred a dog is.


----------



## missmygirls (Jun 5, 2012)

peppersb said:


> My impression is that many breeders look at COI (coefficient of inbreeding) as a general measure of how inbred a dog is.


I am speaking to a breeder now about a puppy. The COI for the puppy will be aprox. 19.5 % Is that to high? And should I wait for the next litter? The father has a mach title in agility and the Mother has a conformation title. I was under the impression that I should stay at or below 6%. This is a mini not a standard. Are the recommended COI %s the same for both standard and mini? I apologize if this is off topic. I will not be showing, possibly therapy training though. God Bless!:act-up:


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

missmygirls said:


> I am speaking to a breeder now about a puppy. The COI for the puppy will be aprox. 19.5 % Is that to high? And should I wait for the next litter? The father has a mach title in agility and the Mother has a conformation title. I was under the impression that I should stay at or below 6%. This is a mini not a standard. Are the recommended COI %s the same for both standard and mini? I apologize if this is off topic. I will not be showing, possibly therapy training though. God Bless!:act-up:


Personaly I wouldn't adopt a dog with a COI over 6-7% over 12 generations but this is mainly because I have a scientific background and some genetic knowledge. A low COI is the first item on my list but it's not the only one. I also ensure the parents are health tested, the puppies are socialized and many other things. Others will have a different opinion and it's ok to. You need to feel confortable with your choice.


----------



## Chagall's mom (Jan 9, 2010)

Just a small edit to post #139...
Adding a link as the one provided in the post appears not to function.

The Wycliffe Central Lines


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

COI is not everything. I'd be looking at the line and any known issues more than I'd be worrying about a pet with a COI of 19. And I don't mean to discredit COI, but there is so much more to it. A high COI dog with a low Wycliffe, for example, means a lot more than a low COI with high Wycliffe. The latter is believed by many to be still nearly a genetic twin.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

Line breeding if done correctly is not necessarily a bad thing. While true that line breeding will bring to the fore recessive genetic conditions if you continue to line breed eliminating progeny with the undesirable characteristics you may be able to eliminate them. Each cross breeding is introducing new genetic possibilities good and bad. For an example of line breeding done well look at the Holstein cow and how line breeding has affected milk production. Success in breeding is not a simple mathamatical problem of addition and multiplication. Unfortunately genetics is much too complex for a simple statistical analysis


----------



## fjm (Jun 4, 2010)

I think recent research is showing that line breeding - no matter how thoroughly tested the parents - leads to ever greater homozygosity, and homozygosity in turn has been associated with autoimmune disorders, immunity problems, and other health issues. As you say, genetics is too complicated for a simple statistical analysis, and our belief that there is always a one-to-one relationship between "bad" genes and health problems is not helpful, but I do believe assessing the COI, plus genetic testing, plus detailed knowledge of the breeding lines, is the way to maximise the probability of healthy pups.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

CT Girl said:


> Line breeding if done correctly is not necessarily a bad thing. While true that line breeding will bring to the fore recessive genetic conditions if you continue to line breed eliminating progeny with the undesirable characteristics you may be able to eliminate them. Each cross breeding is introducing new genetic possibilities good and bad. For an example of line breeding done well look at the Holstein cow and how line breeding has affected milk production. Success in breeding is not a simple mathamatical problem of addition and multiplication. Unfortunately genetics is much too complex for a simple statistical analysis


I agree that success in breeding is not a simple mathematical problem but who decides and how do you define what is a correctly done line breeding? Line breeding and inbreeding did succeed to a certain point in nature (Cheetahs are so inbred that genetically they are almost identical.) so yes it can succeed but we just don't know why and how. In my opinion, when human try to imitate nature and succeeds a big part of it is just luck and I am not buying a ticket for this type of Loto.


----------



## LegalEagle (Nov 8, 2012)

If you Google "Standard Poodle Project," there is some interesting stuff about COI and compromised immune systems. It seems to support what fjm had to say.


----------



## julietcr1 (Nov 10, 2012)

LegalEagle said:


> If you Google "Standard Poodle Project," there is some interesting stuff about COI and compromised immune systems. It seems to support what fjm had to say.


Thanks for this links, the "Notes on viability of Breeds" explain better than I could ever do it (with a card game!) how much luck plays an important role in a successful inbreed or linebreed line.


----------



## CT Girl (Nov 17, 2010)

I agree that a low COI is best. I do think this is one factor among many that I would look at when deciding upon a dog. Just by choosing to own a poodle we are limiting the potential gene pool. I don't think that there is a magic cutoff number for a COI that is acceptable vs one that has become a problem. It would be interesting for us to run an informal study on this forum and see what kind of correlations can be made with COI numbers and health issues.


----------



## DivinityPoodles (Jan 23, 2012)

LEUllman said:


> Perhaps this should come as no surprise, given that the AKC explicitly includes the standard poodle in the "Non-Sporting Group."


Kind of my point... if a 'good breeder' is supposed to know the breed and breed to the standard, having no idea what that breed is supposed to have been bred for is not a point in their favour. That is, of course, my opinion. 

And as someone said AKC and CKC CH are not the end all be all, even for conformation showing. It is sad that UKC and IABCA are looked down upon for conformation showing especially since the latter gives you a written critique of your dog against the standard. 
It was very weird to compete against a bulldog, a french bulldog and a bichon frise instead of other retrievers. And it was sad to have 3 out of 4 judges indicate that they did not believe that my dogs hunted. Lesson learned lol... I will have pictures of them in the field in the future.

I agree with whoever it was who said that multiple avenues should be used to judge a dog before breeding.... and then we are back to the cost/time factor.


----------



## airillusion (Sep 22, 2015)

I know this is an old thread but I found it fascinating, especially as the conversation focused more on genetics. As a child through to my high school years, I bred and showed rabbits through 4H and FFA, so I am vaguely aware of some of the issues of breeding in a closed gene pool to try and produce the perfect specimen of that breed (as much as possible anyways). I am trying to become more informed on this as it seems to be very important in picking the breeder of my future spoo.

I did find some comments that hinted at information I have been wondering about.



ninaspoodles said:


> ... Also, as far as the poodle being a bird dog... There are many factors to why they are no longer really bird dogs (though there are still some out there) but that is a whole other interesting issue. Anywho, im off to bed...


I would really like to know the factors behind why poodles are considered a non-sporting breed by the AKC and why they seem to be no longer bird dogs on the whole (I know there are some people out there that still hunt with their poodles, but it seems like a small minority of hunters have poodles as opposed to another retrieving breed).





cavon said:


> ...I have seen many litters from dogs with a "CH" in front of their names that have pups at 4, 5, 6 or even more months old that remain unsold for whatever reason. I suppose the same is true of many litters, but my point is that having a conformation title is not the be all and end all when it comes to the value of a dog's worth - in my opinion.


How frequently do breeders have pups that are not sold by the time they are ready to go to a new home? I was under the impression that most breeders had more buyers than pups available.


----------



## Tiny Poodles (Jun 20, 2013)

airillusion said:


> I know this is an old thread but I found it fascinating, especially as the conversation focused more on genetics. As a child through to my high school years, I bred and showed rabbits through 4H and FFA, so I am vaguely aware of some of the issues of breeding in a closed gene pool to try and produce the perfect specimen of that breed (as much as possible anyways). I am trying to become more informed on this as it seems to be very important in picking the breeder of my future spoo.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That may depend a great deal upon how dedicated a breeder is to matching clients to precisely the puppy that they are looking for, and the puppy to a home that wants precisely who they are. My breeder has no qualms about waiting until the ideal home comes along for a puppy, and I have seen her place many a puppy over six months old, and the new parents blissfully happy because the puppy was their dream dog! 
Unfortunately since she knows just what I am waiting for, when it comes along I will have to take my next one when she is 12-16 weeks old, but I would so much rather get an older puppy, they are SO much easier to raise and train when they are older. I know that some people feel that they would rather have a hand in shaping their pup's personality, but I think "what you see is what you get" is a much safer bet - I would rather have the personality fully evident and have no doubts that the puppy will fit perfectly into my lifestyle and where I live!


----------



## CharismaticMillie (Jun 16, 2010)

Oops! Old post!


----------



## ericwd9 (Jun 13, 2014)

julietcr1 said:


> I have the feeling that many breeders on this forum are frustrated and pass their frustration here. Maybe it`s not the right place?



?????? Where did you get this Idea?


----------

