# Fostering your best friend?



## bigredpoodle (Sep 13, 2009)

This is something that high volume breeders do . They cant keep them all so they foster them out , or place them in homes that the foster folks understand the this is the situation .. One or two litters... Then the breeder will let the foster family spay or neuter their pet.. i have an issue with it as well, but can see the reasoning behind it I suppose..


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

So then ... GREED is the reason, right? doesn't this have a negitive affect on the friend.. or is this like pimping out your daughter.


----------



## Cdnjennga (Jul 30, 2009)

Fostering can definitely be a sign of a high volume breeder. I think some breeders like to hide how many litters they have per year by fostering the dogs out and saying "we only have x number of dogs in our home", yet somehow they're still having many litters per year!

However, fostering can also be a way for a responsible breeder to limit the number of dogs they have living with them but also establish a quality breeding program. Rather than focusing on whether the breeder fosters/ co owns or whatever, I would focus on the number of litters they have per year. That really tells more of a story than fostering does.


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

Ok so this is as far as "doing busness" is conserned. But, but what about the friend.
could you give up your friend for a few months?


----------



## KPoos (Aug 29, 2009)

Don't people do that when they send their dog off with a handler? I'm not saying it's easy but it's done.


----------



## Cdnjennga (Jul 30, 2009)

redvelvet said:


> Ok so this is as far as "doing busness" is conserned. But, but what about the friend.
> could you give up your friend for a few months?


Yep. And we have! Well kind of. My mom has had 2 litters of PWDs over the last 20 years. The first litter was from our girl. We kept one pup then spayed her. My mom then co-owned a girl with one of her good friends. The girl lived with them. Her friend wanted to have a litter but worked full time and didn't feel she could take proper care of the pups. So her girl came to live with us to whelp and raise the pups, while two of our three dogs went to live with our friend.

It worked out just fine, noone was the worse for wear! We got to have the fun of puppies, the momma dog was just fine (she knew us and our house very well) and our dogs had absolutely no problem staying with our friends as they knew them well. At 8 weeks, the momma dog and one of her pups went back to their owners and our two dogs came back to us. We didn't keep any of the puppies (only 4 were born) but they did go under my mom's kennel name. And one of them just won high in trial in obedience at the last PWD specialty!

Anyway, I was a teenager and not really involved in the decision making for the litter. It worked out, although my mom has said she's not sure she could do the same thing the other way (hand over our dog to someone else to whelp/ raise the pups).


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

I would have to agree that was a good situation for all conserned but I'm not so sure that most have an honerable reason. I know I would NEVER put my friends with a handler...for the same reason, no one would spoil my friends the same way.


----------



## Purple Poodle (May 5, 2008)

"Fostering" is a term that's used by high volume "breeders" to have more breeding bitches/stud dogs to choose from with out having to house/kennel them. I think its a load of ****.

Co-Ownership is a term used by responsible breeders who sell show quality pups they would like to use in their program either as a stud or have pick of the litter from a bitch. After that breeding/s (depending on individual contracts) the dog is signed over to full ownership to the buyer.

The difference? Co-Owners are required to show and health test the dog then working with the breeder they choose a mate depending on a umber of factors. "Fosters" just keep the dog until the "breeder" wants to use it, no showing and minimal health testing and then bred to the next bitch in season.

Sure there are gray areas but but over all if a breeder wants you to "foster" a puppy run away!

Handling on the other hand is fine if you want to use that avenue to show your dog. If they did not enjoy being shown/with a handler they would not perform in the ring.


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle (Sep 1, 2009)

Omg . . weird to read the opinions here on fostering. It must be completely different in Canada than the USA. I have known MANY breeders here, who are not what I would consider "high volume" who have some of their dogs in fostering situations, and it is a great way to carry on you breeding plans and lines without having a ridiculous number of dogs on your premises. They go into homes where they are loved and cherished (and most times long awaited and anticpated) family members.

I personally feel with two humans living in my home that four to five dogs is what needs to be my cap here. I never want there to be so many that some disappear into the woodwork. I need to be comfortable with the time and dedication I can still give my adult dogs when there is a litter of puppies in my home.

I would never rehome one of my females when I am done breeding her, so I will have the dogs I have, loving them and them being a part of my family until they die, hopefully of old age. So, if I am at my personal "cap" and should I discover a puppy who would bring great things to the table as far as my breeding efforts go, or I breed a litter and wish to retain one of the puppies to breed at a later date, the perfect scenario for me would be to place it in a foster home. It is what it is. Usually foster homes are chosen from a list of people who have been referred to a breeder by close friends, relatives or past puppy buyers, people who have desired a Standard Poodle for a long time and would be excellent guardians for a dog, but circimstances are such that they maybe cannot afford the purchase price of a Spoo, or hubby would not allow them to spend that kind of money of a dog. But they may be a perfect home for a dog otherwise...knowledge, past doog ownership of a breed that requires coat care, a big, fenced yard, a family of dog crazy people ready to love a puppy and give it a fantastic life.

Testing???? Any fostered dogs I know of are tested exactly the same as any other dogs in the breeders program. The breeder pays for any and all testing, the same as they would if the dog lived with them. The breeder either makes the arrangments with a vet for the testing to be done, and the foster parent takes the dog to the vet, or the owner picks the dog up, goes to their vet of choice and has the dog tested, then returns it to the foster home when completed. If a breeder is going to breed this dog, and tests their dogs, why would they not be testing this one if it is going to be in their breeding program?? Doesn't make sense to suggest the testing doesn't get done because a dog is foster.


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

ArreauStandardPoodle said:


> Omg . . weird to read the opinions here on fostering. It must be completely different in Canada than the USA. I have known MANY breeders here, who are not what I would consider "high volume" who have some of their dogs in fostering situations, and it is a great way to carry on you breeding plans and lines without having a ridiculous number of dogs on your premises. They go into homes where they are loved and cherished (and most times long awaited and anticpated) family members.
> 
> I personally feel with two humans living in my home that four to five dogs is what needs to be my cap here. I never want there to be so many that some disappear into the woodwork. I need to be comfortable with the time and dedication I can still give my adult dogs when there is a litter of puppies in my home.
> 
> ...


I was glad to see some of what you are saying because not all fosters are coming from high volume breeders. As a matter of fact we have some breeders on here that are thought of highly that do this, should they comment great but this just is not the case always 

I have seen some fosters in great situations, and many times a breeder is not even having litters when this is n place. So this would not be considered a high volume breeder...I wouldn't think. And fostering can be a great opportunity for those interested in showing, grooming, and being a part of breeding if they chose this route.


----------



## bigredpoodle (Sep 13, 2009)

Fostering is not done for non breediing dogs Olie .. The breeder can get into a situation that they do not have either the time or the desire to breed a foster. But the whole idea behind fostering is to be able to widen their breeding dog situation.. Because the breeder either cant or does not want to keep them all. It is not done just because ..
I have a breeder friend that does this and I think very highly of her. But it is not always done for the right reason ... IMHO it is a red flag... But then that is just me..


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

bigredpoodle said:


> Fostering is not done for non breediing dogs Olie .. The breeder can get into a situation that they do not have either the time or the desire to breed a foster. But the whole idea behind fostering is to be able to widen their breeding dog situation.. Because the breeder either cant or does not want to keep them all. It is not done just because ..
> I have a breeder friend that does this and I think very highly of her. But it is not always done for the right reason ... IMHO it is a red flag... But then that is just me..


Ok bigredpoodle - yes the breeder might have the hopes for this, but ask any good breeder - this does not always happen, as you know there are many factors that lead up to this. Also a breeder that is showing more than one dog is tied up training, traveling etc. Again, I see more breeders having 2 and 3 litters a year which is fine and some breeders out there that do use a trusted foster home and have not had a litter in a couple years......my point is I don't feel all foster situations are HVB's - :rolffleyes:


----------



## bigredpoodle (Sep 13, 2009)

Olie said:


> Ok bigredpoodle - yes the breeder might have the hopes for this, but ask any good breeder - this does not always happen, as you know there are many factors that lead up to this. Also a breeder that is showing more than one dog is tied up training, traveling etc. Again, I see more breeders having 2 and 3 litters a year which is fine and some breeders out there that do use a trusted foster home and have not had a litter in a couple years......my point is I don't feel all foster situations are HVB's - :rolffleyes:


Agreed:rolffleyes:


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

I must say for a male, I could see "keeping one's hands on HIM" but not a female. You would not keep the male for a few months. 
I very strongly have a need to make my friends feel important. Queen as it were. They know this, do they understand, I believe they do. I made a canopy for their custom whelping box... Yes mine do. I use a baby monitor and sleep next to them tell they can fend for themselves. The mom gets feed every 3 to 4 hours so it won't take as much of a toll on her. I don't take the trust lightly.
Here is the part I hate...*THEY ARE NOT CASH COWS*...
Breeding should be for the betterment of the line or improvement of color, not because you can.


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

redvelvet said:


> I must say for a male, I could see "keeping one's hands on HIM" but not a female. You would not keep the male for a few months.
> I very strongly have a need to make my friends feel important. Queen as it were. They know this, do they understand, I believe they do. I made a canopy for their custom whelping box... Yes mine do. I use a baby monitor and sleep next to them tell they can fend for themselves. The mom gets feed every 3 to 4 hours so it won't take as much of a toll on her. I don't take the trust lightly.
> Here is the part I hate...*THEY ARE NOT CASH COWS*...
> Breeding should be for the betterment of the line or improvement of color, not because you can.


Are you a breeder? I would think you would have heard that term before, Fostering that is. And I agree with this 100% - and any breeder that did it for the wrong reasons is clearly in it for the money only


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

I truly did not and I thought this person was kidding... I was the 4th poodle my father had...He had to try poodles before kids.I do understand the male dog may go nuts when the girls are in season- like teen age boys...but please don't pimp out your girls.


----------



## BFF (Jun 10, 2009)

I think fostering can be an excellent solution that can solve a lot of challenges that both the breeder and future owners face. I also think it can be cruel and neglectful to the dog.

As in anything else in life, we make choices. Some people will make them to benefit all parties involved. Other people will make them to benefit themselves. The real question for me, would be why they have chosen to use a foster family.

What about the bitch who lives full time at the breeder's home and is having a litter every heat cycle? How does that better the line? Not to mention the welfare of the bitch? 

How many times do we hear, "I want my dog to have just one litter then she will get spayed." Why not have a professional breeder do it rather than someone who has never breed? What about stud service? Don't these dogs get put out on loan to other breeders? What's the difference really?

Fostering also, in my opinion, is better than a breeder who sells a bitch once they are done breeding her. At least the dog has one primary home. In the best of situations, it would be nice if the foster family was close to the breeder, so the surroundings are familiar and everyone can visit.

I personally couldn't do this, but I see several reasons why this could be a good thing for everyone, including the dog.


----------



## Purple Poodle (May 5, 2008)

What I don't understand is WHY breeders who "foster" need that many dogs?

I always, _always_ thought that people who bred and shown dogs never owned both sire and dame. If you own the Bitch and want a litter you find an outside stud dog. If you own the Dog you stud him out. You don't own both and your certainly don't have 5 breeding dogs.

With a co-ownership breeders get a dog of their line in the ring with the _option_ to breed. To continue their line and to better their line.

Looking for a breeder has shown me that its not something I ever want to be apart of. I can only count a handful that I have found that seam to be in it for the right reason: to Better the breed.


----------



## bigredpoodle (Sep 13, 2009)

I am with you BFF I could not foster.. At least not in this time of my life. You are trusting that this "Foster " Has the good sense to keep the female in season away from other dogs, that they can afford to feed her well, take care of the coat teeth and so on .. IMHO it is scary to think about But perhaps I am too much of a controlling person to venture into this type of situation . I am open for co ownership at some point down the line tho.. 
I gree about selling the bitch when you are done with her , that is just sad ! I get calls and emails from folks looking for that type of dog.. WE just cant .. We love our furkids....Not to say we would never rehome . There are lots of times this could happen . A misfit (Fighting ) or ? But now because they are no longer useful !


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

thank you BFF


----------



## KPoos (Aug 29, 2009)

Purple Poodle said:


> What I don't understand is WHY breeders who "foster" need that many dogs?
> 
> I always, _always_ thought that people who bred and shown dogs never owned both sire and dame. If you own the Bitch and want a litter you find an outside stud dog. If you own the Dog you stud him out. You don't own both and your certainly don't have 5 breeding dogs.
> 
> ...


Well, I'm just gonna say it. I think that if you aren't taking something away from a planned litter for yourself (barring that the breeding doesn't turn out the way you wanted and then they are all placed as pets and you do not repeat) you are breeding to support your hobby of showing or something else. I refuse to believe that people that have 9 puppies in a litter and sell for $2,000 don't make a dime.hwell:

How many dogs can one person show at a time anyway? We are talking about poodles here so the coat care is extensive for showing and if you aren't showing what is your purpose for breeding a litter? Even the pros have to have a limit because if they are going to make money they have to take on client dogs.hwell:


----------



## KalaMama (Nov 20, 2009)

BFF said:


> Fostering also, in my opinion, is better than a breeder who sells a bitch once they are done breeding her. At least the dog has one primary home. In the best of situations, it would be nice if the foster family was close to the breeder, so the surroundings are familiar and everyone can visit.


I agree. I think it would be better to foster then to get rid of the adults that are no longer breeding. Not that one should never rehome an adult because there are many different situations. However, I think co-ownerships that require showing just seem better because it puts the interest on the line that already exists and making it better while still leaving room to preserve it with future generations, but not all to the profit of the breeder. It just depends on the situation. 

I think a breeder who has a female and she only wants to have 1 or 2 litters with her and then keep her could get very far. For instance, if she started in the year 2002 with a 3 yr old bitch and had one litter in which she kept a puppy. Then in 2005 the puppy(now 3 also) has one litter and there are 2 really great puppies. Well, now the breeder has a 6 yr old bitch, 3 yr old bitch and 2 awesome puppies. It may be better to place one of the puppies in either a co-ownership or foster situation so that the puppy can have individual attention. Perhaps by the time the pups are 2, the breeder may decide that one of them did not turn out as hoped and have them altered. 

I wouldn't agree with a breeder who simply keeps pups so that they can have more and more pups each year.


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

I guess if the money received was spent on a fur coat instead of coat care products and a bolster bed or new pair of scissors, perhaps toys etc. We do spend a lot on our fury friends


----------



## Cdnjennga (Jul 30, 2009)

It doesn't really bother me if a breeder profits from their litter. I mean, if they breed for all the right reasons and just happen to make a profit then good for them! It's never happened to us with our two tiny litters, but some friends of ours had 11 PWD pups last year. That's 22,000 (or more, I'm not sure exactly how much they sold them for). I'm sure they made a profit. Considering that was their first litter in about 14 years though, and the litter before that only had 3 pups, it all works out in the end.


----------



## KPoos (Aug 29, 2009)

But if they aren't keeping anything then they are profiting for the benefit of profiting right? If you are planning a litter isn't the point to keep something for yourself or why are you really breeding? There are plenty of pets in the world so if your goal is to just breed for more pets to profit, I don't see the difference between that and a byb. I'm not directing this towards anyone just generalizing.


----------



## Cdnjennga (Jul 30, 2009)

KPoos said:


> But if they aren't keeping anything then they are profiting for the benefit of profiting right? If you are planning a litter isn't the point to keep something for yourself or why are you really breeding? There are plenty of pets in the world so if your goal is to just breed for more pets to profit, I don't see the difference between that and a byb. I'm not directing this towards anyone just generalizing.


I guess so. I forgot to mention in the example I shared that they did actually keep one (they only breed to keep one), so I guess really they brought in 20,000 on that litter. So they bred for themselves, the profit was a side thing.

I don't really have a problem if a breeder doesn't keep a pup from every litter. However, most of the time, I find that small scale breeders who I prefer are breeding for themself first and plan to keep the pick. But sometimes breeders can also be breeding for a friend to have a dog or for a working purpose or some other purpose. I guess what I'm saying is every litter should have a goal outside of producing pets, yes, I agree.


----------



## KalaMama (Nov 20, 2009)

KPoos said:


> But if they aren't keeping anything then they are profiting for the benefit of profiting right? If you are planning a litter isn't the point to keep something for yourself or why are you really breeding? There are plenty of pets in the world so if your goal is to just breed for more pets to profit, I don't see the difference between that and a byb. I'm not directing this towards anyone just generalizing.


I agree that you should breed in order to keep something, but if it were me I would only want to keep something outstanding(or at least see some progress in what I chose to breed with my bitch). If it is a first breeding and there just wasn't a really great pup, then I think the breeder could either choose to not breed the bitch again or perhaps choose another stud the next time and not keep a pup from the litter than didn't produce a really great puppy.



Cdnjennga said:


> It doesn't really bother me if a breeder profits from their litter. I mean, if they breed for all the right reasons and just happen to make a profit then good for them! It's never happened to us with our two tiny litters, but some friends of ours had 11 PWD pups last year. That's 22,000 (or more, I'm not sure exactly how much they sold them for). I'm sure they made a profit. Considering that was their first litter in about 14 years though, and the litter before that only had 3 pups, it all works out in the end.


Could not agree more!! A breeder may profit from one litter and the next litter may catch a virus and cost the breeder a lot of money(eating up any profit from the first litter) and maybe not. I also think of it as an investment, you put into it and hopefully get what you put in plus a little more to continue. It may cost the breeder $15,000 or more to have the first litter. $2000 purchase price $2000 shots, testing, vet $2000 stud fee $10,000 or more for CH conformation title $1000 care of pups and mom Then, if she had 8 pups and sold for 2000 each that would break even, then if there was another litter it would be more profit-let's use the same scenario and the profit would be about 12,000. Then, the breeder has 12,000 to take one of the pups from the litter and get their CH. Then, the cycle starts over.


----------



## KPoos (Aug 29, 2009)

Oh yes I absolutely agree with that. There should be some goal in mind for the litter ahead of the breeding or you are just breeding to sell puppies for whatever personal reason. If you have a long waiting list because there are people begging for pets then that's also different.


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

KPoos said:


> Well, I'm just gonna say it. I think that if you aren't taking something away from a planned litter for yourself (barring that the breeding doesn't turn out the way you wanted and then they are all placed as pets and you do not repeat) you are breeding to support your hobby of showing or something else. I refuse to believe that people that have 9 puppies in a litter and sell for $2,000 don't make a dime.hwell:
> 
> How many dogs can one person show at a time anyway? We are talking about poodles here so the coat care is extensive for showing and if you aren't showing what is your purpose for breeding a litter? Even the pros have to have a limit because if they are going to make money they have to take on client dogs.hwell:


I agree with the plan to take away from the litter - I would hope this would be obvious for a good breeder. 
And as far as showing, I agree I would have a hard time with one as I work FT and like the sporting with my dogs, but some people that may not work, or work FT, or have young children make it happen.


----------



## bigredpoodle (Sep 13, 2009)

KalaMama said:


> I agree that you should breed in order to keep something, but if it were me I would only want to keep something outstanding(or at least see some progress in what I chose to breed with my bitch). If it is a first breeding and there just wasn't a really great pup, then I think the breeder could either choose to not breed the bitch again or perhaps choose another stud the next time and not keep a pup from the litter than didn't produce a really great puppy.


Right on ! Sometimes a pairing is just majic,, sometimes it is not .


----------



## Purple Poodle (May 5, 2008)

Breeders should only breed when they are in need of a new show prospect, not just to sell a litter. If I am going to invest time, money and effort into my dog I would expect to get something back for my efforts. Not just monetary but in the fact that the next generation will be better then the last.


----------



## partial2poodles (Feb 11, 2010)

Its not a big deal. I have done it twice but the dogs always ended up becoming part of the other family and stayed there permanantly. I'm glad the family loves them so much and they are only children dogs and spoiled to death.


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

partial2poodles said:


> Its not a big deal. I have done it twice but the dogs always ended up becoming part of the other family and stayed there permanantly. I'm glad the family loves them so much and they are only children dogs and spoiled to death.


Exactly! Plus the owner get's to build a relationship with the breeder and learn a lot, I am open to being mentored anytime so long as it is for the RIGHT reasons. There are downfalls obviously to fostering and I have juggled the pros and cons and at the end of the day, I 'might" be open to it someday.


----------



## Purple Poodle (May 5, 2008)

I really hate that "breeders" stole the term "Foster" it make ignorant people think they are doing something good.

I have _foster_ dogs, rescued dogs who need me to help them get to their forever homes. I _foster_.

They need to pick a different word :mffad:


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

every litter is different. Just because you had breed doesn't mean you HAVE to keep one with a high tail set


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

Purple Poodle said:


> I really hate that "breeders" stole the term "Foster" it make ignorant people think they are doing something good.
> 
> I have _foster_ dogs, rescued dogs who need me to help them get to their forever homes. I _foster_.
> 
> They need to pick a different word :mffad:


It is a difference of opinions on this one. :doh: Why does that make some of ignorant?


----------



## redvelvet (Jan 30, 2010)

Thank you purple I think it is an abuse of the word myself


----------



## Purple Poodle (May 5, 2008)

Olie said:


> It is a difference of opinions on this one. :doh: Why does that make some of ignorant?


Because its used like "registered" and "fullblood"


----------



## roxy25 (Dec 18, 2008)

Purple Poodle said:


> Because its used like "registered" and "fullblood"


LMAO I am sorry that is too funny, I understand what you mean PP.


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

Purple Poodle said:


> Because its used like "registered" and "fullblood"


OK I do get that..IF _IF_ - the situation is right and it is NOT HVB, I think it's OK.... 

eace:


----------



## Olie (Oct 10, 2009)

KPoos said:


> Please see other thread.


I shake my head!


----------



## Purple Poodle (May 5, 2008)

Olie said:


> OK I do get that..IF _IF_ - the situation is right and it is NOT HVB, I think it's OK....
> 
> eace:


_If_ the situation is right then its called Co-Ownership 

:hippie:

I'm glad someone gets it Roxy haha!


----------



## ArreauStandardPoodle (Sep 1, 2009)

redvelvet said:


> I must say for a male, I could see "keeping one's hands on HIM" but not a female. You would not keep the male for a few months.
> I very strongly have a need to make my friends feel important. Queen as it were. They know this, do they understand, I believe they do. I made a canopy for their custom whelping box... Yes mine do. I use a baby monitor and sleep next to them tell they can fend for themselves. The mom gets feed every 3 to 4 hours so it won't take as much of a toll on her. I don't take the trust lightly.
> Here is the part I hate...*THEY ARE NOT CASH COWS*...
> Breeding should be for the betterment of the line or improvement of color, not because you can.


I have come in here late after seeing it initially....but I do not see how "bettering the line" or "improving the colour" are not one and the same. My personal opinon is when you get right down to it, all breeders are pimping out their girls. We are the ones to decide when to breed them, we are the ones who decide why, we choose who they will be bred to. 

In my mind, the fostering (for lack of a better term) works beautifully if the foster parents knows all that is expected of them, and if the breeder has done their homework to ensure their dog is going into a terrific home.

I can see how high volume breeders may use this to their benefit, and it then ruins the concept of it for everyone. But I have two males in foster homes and they are happy, loved, well taken care of, and I am more than confident that both of them are being looked after almost as well as if they were living with me. With intact females in the house, and one intact male, who for medical reasons cannot have any surgery, there is no way I would risk accidental breedings or fighting amongst stud dogs, by bringing any more males into my home. If we had a kennel situation where we could keep everyone separated, then I could risk it, but we raise all of our dogs in our home and would never want a kennel situation. So the only way I can grow my breeding program, ensure there are no accidental breedings, keep the cap on the number of dogs that I am comfortable with, is by putting my boys in foster homes. I will not apolgize for this because my dogs are extremely happy, so are the people they live with, they are going to add to my program, and be in a marvelous situation.

Would I do this with a female?? Absolutely!! If I found the right home, I would absolutely and would not worry if I got the right home. Pimping out my girls?? That is a very odd way of looking at it, but I suppose every one of us is guilty of doing just that every single time we breed on of them.















b







i


----------



## BFF (Jun 10, 2009)

redvelvet said:


> thank you BFF


Maybe you should re-read my post. Don't twist my words and make it appear that I am on your side. Same goes to BigRedPoodle.

I simply stated that there are pros and cons. Dogs, especially breeding dogs, rely on their humans to make the best choices for their situation. I appreciate learning more how breeders can vary their breeding program. It sounds like Arreau takes a lot of care how her dogs are raised: whether by her or the homes the pups go to.

From what I have read on this forum, both RedVelvet and BigRedPoodle are more concerned about discrediting another's breeding program with no real point to their argument. 

Snippy and misleading comments do nothing to better the breed, inform the buyers, or present alternative points of view.


----------



## jak (Aug 15, 2009)

BFF said:


> Maybe you should re-read my post. Don't twist my words and make it appear that I am on your side. Same goes to BigRedPoodle.
> 
> I simply stated that there are pros and cons. Dogs, especially breeding dogs, rely on their humans to make the best choices for their situation. I appreciate learning more how breeders can vary their breeding program. It sounds like Arreau takes a lot of care how her dogs are raised: whether by her or the homes the pups go to.
> 
> ...



This is exactly the point I'm trying to get across to BRP via PM'ing!

Discrediting another breeder to make you look better is not a legitimate excuse.
You either do it right or you don't


----------



## Harley_chik (Nov 7, 2008)

BFF said:


> From what I have read on this forum, both RedVelvet and BigRedPoodle are more concerned about discrediting another's breeding program with no real point to their argument.
> 
> Snippy and misleading comments do nothing to better the breed, inform the buyers, or present alternative points of view.


They are almost as concerned with Arreau as they are w/ "dark red." It would be nice to see them mention health, conformation and temperment as often. I'm not saying they don't pay any attention to it but they don't bring it up as often as "dark red" or Arreau's breeding program. 

The whole foster/co-ownership issue really seems like a matter of semantics. "Fostering" doesn't give me warm fuzzy feelings, especially if it's a big part of a breeding program or pushed on a website, but it's not always a bad thing. It really seems like it's someone's effort to give "co-ownership" a softer sounding name. Kind of like how breeders are now "adopting" out puppies instead of "selling" them.


----------



## Marian (Oct 20, 2009)

I doubt the dogs themselves care. It's like they have two loving families instead of just one. A lot of dogs would love to have just one!


----------



## roxy25 (Dec 18, 2008)

Marian said:


> I doubt the dogs themselves care. It's like they have two loving families instead of just one. A lot of dogs would love to have just one!


Marian I agree , I think sometimes people forget dogs do not have a brain like a human, and certain emotions a dog will not think nor express. IMO this when people humanize a dog. As long as the dog is happy and not being abused I agree the dog will not care.


----------

