The myth (and sometimes outright deception) of "Champion bloodlines."
One of the cardinal ways to recognize a breeder who is what we in the show-breeding world would call less than reputable is that they will talk about "Champion lines" or "Championship pedigree."
Here's why this is such a bad sign:
- It means absolutely nothing when it comes to the quality of the dog. Most of the offspring of a champion dog are not good enough to warrant breeding; the possibility of genuinely breeding-quality dogs becomes even more remote when the champion relative is a grandparent or great-grandparent.
- It shows that the breeder knows enough that they realize that successful show dogs make the best producers of pet dogs, but that they don't want to put in the effort, time, and money (and passion) to prove their OWN dogs in the show ring. It's very common for that type of breeder, when pushed, to say that avoiding the show ring is a virtue, that they don't want to "stress" their dogs by showing them. But then why do they brag that the owners of their dog's grandparents did so?
- Very often the price of the puppies goes up according to how many champions are in the pedigree, as though that makes the dog worth more. You should realize that buying a pet puppy from a good show breeder, and getting a pedigree that is entirely champions and not only champions but nationally ranked dogs, Westminster winners, "household names" in corgidom, is often cheaper than buying from those breeders. I don't care how much glory is attached to a breeding I do; the number-one bitch bred to the number-one dog is still going to have a bunch of pet puppies in the litter. And you can AND SHOULD be insisting on THAT level of quality in the breeder.
If you want a poorly bred Corgi, go rescue one. Please. Almost certainly that dog in a cage at the shelter has just as many champion ancestors as the average careless breeder's dogs do. And DO recognize that the words "champion lines" on a website or ad is a HUGE red flag and should encourage you to run away.
Here's why this is such a bad sign:
- It means absolutely nothing when it comes to the quality of the dog. Most of the offspring of a champion dog are not good enough to warrant breeding; the possibility of genuinely breeding-quality dogs becomes even more remote when the champion relative is a grandparent or great-grandparent.
- It shows that the breeder knows enough that they realize that successful show dogs make the best producers of pet dogs, but that they don't want to put in the effort, time, and money (and passion) to prove their OWN dogs in the show ring. It's very common for that type of breeder, when pushed, to say that avoiding the show ring is a virtue, that they don't want to "stress" their dogs by showing them. But then why do they brag that the owners of their dog's grandparents did so?
- Very often the price of the puppies goes up according to how many champions are in the pedigree, as though that makes the dog worth more. You should realize that buying a pet puppy from a good show breeder, and getting a pedigree that is entirely champions and not only champions but nationally ranked dogs, Westminster winners, "household names" in corgidom, is often cheaper than buying from those breeders. I don't care how much glory is attached to a breeding I do; the number-one bitch bred to the number-one dog is still going to have a bunch of pet puppies in the litter. And you can AND SHOULD be insisting on THAT level of quality in the breeder.
If you want a poorly bred Corgi, go rescue one. Please. Almost certainly that dog in a cage at the shelter has just as many champion ancestors as the average careless breeder's dogs do. And DO recognize that the words "champion lines" on a website or ad is a HUGE red flag and should encourage you to run away.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Joanna Kimball on
-
The standard of the ESS says that the ear leather is approximately long enough to reach the nose. Nothing about meeting in front of the nose. And I don't know how much long ear leather is a detriment in the field, if the ear furnishings are clipped short, as I've never hunted over an ESS. Have you? Similarly, I've never hunted over a show-bred Irish Water Spaniel with his coat clipped in a hunting clip.
And that's pretty much my point. You have to put your money where your mouth is; it's awfully easy to armchair quarterback about dogs and very, very difficult to live in the world of dogs. If you actually live in it, your choices affect you and you start to get serious about understanding real structure.
You also start to realize how meaningless the superficial stuff is. I wish people eager to criticize show breeding would stop talking about coat, color, ears, face. Those are ridiculously easy to change and breed in or out of a population of dogs. Talk about croup angle, about ribcage length, about loin length, about shoulder layback, about length of second thigh in proportion to the hock. That's where the nitty-gritty of breeding is and it's where the dog actually moves and lives, and those are what build a dog that can live a long time without pain. The coat is NOTHING.
-
Permalink Reply by Beth on
-
Here, this is from Wiki but I've heard a lot about it elsewhere. Bulldogs were a prime example given of a dog where they will be changing the standard, much to the chagrin of many of the bulldog people:
"In August 2008, BBC1 televised a documentary film titled Pedigree Dogs Exposed, which investigated the subject of health issues affecting pedigree dogs in the United Kingdom, with a particular emphasis on dogs bred for showing. The programme provoked an unprecedented response from both the public and the dog breeding community, with widespread critcism directed at the Kennel Club. Since the broadcast, the BBC has withdrawn it's television coverage of Crufts dog show in 2009, with other sponsors and partners also withdrawing their support, including Pedigree Petfoods, the RSPCA, PDSA and the Dog's Trust. In response to the programme, the Kennel Club in the UK announced a review of all breed standards, with the long term goal being to erradicate hereditary health concerns. Most notably, they will impose a ban on breeding between dogs that are closely related and will impose greater monitoring to prevent unhealthy dogs from being entered for and winning awards at dog shows."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conformation_show
-
-
I could go on for pages and pages and pages, but here's my response to Pedigree Dogs Exposed: http://blacksheepcardigans.com/ruff/?p=591
I wrote this a year ago; I need to go through and check all the standards again and see where things have changed for more than just the Peke. And I need to update the information on syringomyelia in CKCS (it's NOT the result of selective breeding for heads in that breed; it's actually a disorder that seems to be present in a ton of toy dogs with various head types and nobody knows why) But the short story is that PDE was HORRIBLY researched and very irresponsible, and very often factually incorrect.
-
-
As far as ESS goes, yes I grew up with a father who hunted an ESS after years of field-trialing pointers, so I do know a little bit about that and know a show bred Springer is not physically built to hunt. Not with its ear length, not with its coat. The hunting springer is not as leggy either. There are a lot of physical differences, and while I am well aware of the differences between color and conformation, coat is most certainly important in a working dog.
My parents now have a Chessie from a top breeder and most of THOSE dogs actually field-trial and/or hunt as well as bench.
I'm not just talking off the top of my head here, and you must be aware of the split and the animosity. I agree with what you say about responsible vs irresponsible breeders, but there are people who neither show nor field trial who join the clubs, stay up on the research, test their dogs, etc etc. I would not lump those people in with those who breed dogs just to make money. Not all small non-competitive breeders are bad breeders. You are entitled to your opinion, of course, but you are certainly aware of the criticism levied at show breeders and their goals over the years. There is more than one side to this issue. In fact, in some breeds there is a third split between field-trial people and people who actually hunt.
-
-
I've never, and I mean NEVER, met a breeder who follows the rules of good breeding - that you only breed sound dogs who have a reason to be born, that you go find the right stud dog and don't just use what's in your yard, that you give back to the breed through involvement in a club, that you health test, that you always take dogs back, that you provide educated support to every buyer - who does not work their dogs in some way. Never.
I can imagine such a person, but in real life I've never seen it work that way. You have to have some kind of outside evaluation of your dogs, some way of proving their worth, to be motivated to do all those other things. It doesn't have to be the breed ring, but it has to be some kind of effort where your breeding rubber hits the road.
-
Permalink Reply by Sky and Lyla on
-
I just have to get my two cents into this conversation because I find it so interesting. I am very interesting in getting into the world of Australian Shepherds. This is a breed that I love and I want to be involed in as intimately as I can. However, I am very leary of many of the conformation breeders. When I was talking to the show breeders I met at a show one weekend, I was shocked at the low quality of food they fed. I know this is relatively "minor" as I can feed the pup whatever I wanted once I got it home, but I would expect someone in the breed to know how rampant skin allergies are in Aussies and how to prevent them through good diet. Also, if the bitch is being fed bad food, how am I supposed to be confident my pup will be healthy? Just because a dog has the right proportions does not mean that it will not have skin allergies, poor immune system, etc.
The breeder I ultimately chose, I am taking a huge gamble on. I understand the risk I am taking, but have decided I am comfortable with it. The breeder I am getting my Aussie from used to be involved in the show ring, but had several bad experiences and got out, but still breeds sometimes. No, the parents of my dog will not have been in the ring. I do realize that this means my pup my very well be of a "style" that judges aren't picking anymore. But I have decided that I am more comfortable with this breeder who spent hours and hours on the phone with me (of the two show breeders who got back with me, both sent me an email telling me when the next litter was due and how much, they were just willing to hand over a puppy without talking to me other than 5 min at a show the weekend before) and who feeds a holistic diet and understands and shares with me precautions on medications and vacatinations specific to the breed. Several of her puppies have also gone on to be search and rescue dogs, flyball champs, and seeing eye dogs. She also shared with me stories of Aussie breeders she personally knew who frequently bred Merle to Merle (a HUGE no-no in Aussies as usually about 25% of the litter must be euthanized as they will be deaf/blind) just to get flashy colored dogs that would have better chances of winning in the conformation ring. I also spoke with my Agility instructor who shows Belgian Tervs and she cautioned me against any of the Aussie people in the area. She said she wouldn't trust them.
So I'm sure it has a lot to do with the breed and the area you are in, but for me, I'm much more comfortable going with the breeder who doesn't show anymore, but has a great history of healthy dogs and pups that have gone on to do good things, than a show breeder that was just willing to hand over a puppy that had been fed a grocery store food. I have already decided that if my decision means my pup is not quite "right" to win titles in conformation, I will gladly focus on performance events and have lots of fun doing Agility and Obedience to prove my dog before ever breeding.
-
-
And there's the thing: you need to find a breeder whose goals and methods and reasons for breeding suit you. There are some wonderful show breeders out there, at least in certain breeds, but there are also some truly awful ones (insert the same for field trial breeders, hunting breeders, etc).
We loved dealing with the breeder where we got Jack and Maddie. Now, you may know from other threads that I don't view the food issue in quite the same light that some others do (not to get into that debate again, just saying what is not a sticking point for me may well be for you, as our breeder feeds Eukanuba). But there were other issues important to us, and the fact that she had a lot of champions honestly didn't really come up in conversation that much as I recall it. I only found out later, after we got Jack and I started poking around on line to follow up and see how his littermates did, that she had bred a heck of a lot of show champs and had a few ROM producers too. But what I recall from the conversation is that she talked an awful lot about how she socializes her pups, and as soon as they've had their shots she has family and friends stop in and play with them. She loads them all in her car and starts taking them places. She gets them used to being poked and pulled at, the way a little kid might.
The other thing that struck me was how much she was able to tell me about the homes some of her dogs went to, and what experiences people had, and how various issues were resolved. She talked a lot about the personalities.
If I found a different breeder who was that dedicated and involved with her dogs, who did not show or compete, I would be just as impressed. It was her knowledge and commitment and obvious love for her dogs that made me so comfortable with her.
There is a breeder here in PA who breeds working German Shepherds and also breeds Corgis, and she used to show but has come to have an ethical issue with docking. None of her pups are docked. Obviously she no longer shows them. I have never talked to her, but based on what I see on her website and what I've heard from a few people here who got pups from her, she seems very committed to her dogs. Of course, having never dealt with her in person my impression could change.
-
-
Style doesn't matter. Sound bodies DO. And education and the ability to know whether a dog is structurally worth breeding does.
The statements about merles are a red flag for me, honestly. Breeding merle to merle doesn't make markings any flashier, and anyway Aussies can't have too much white. Breeders get really nervous if a puppy looks like the white is going to go below the shoulder, because the standard is very clear about the fact that the dog can't have too much white.
It's not true that 25% of the litter must be euthanized. I've seen hundreds upon hundreds of puppies born to merle-merle breedings (since I came from Danes, where merle-merle is accepted) and while the puppies are often deaf they are not usually blind. Breeders who do those breedings (and NOT for markings; there is absolutely no way you could influence markings by breeding merles together) evaluate each puppy to see if it is healthy as it grows and they will place puppies that will live a relatively normal life.
My dogs are all either the grandchildren or great-grandchildren of a double-merle (white) stud dog. As a matter of fact, most of the blue or black Cardigans on this site are probably related to him. I know Lance is. He was the top stud dog in the nation for three years in a row; produced dozens of champions. I'd have a hard time telling his breeder (who is lovely and has forgotten more about breeding than I can ever hope to learn) that she shouldn't have bred him. There's a white (double-merle) Cardi in the Pacific Northwest that has advanced obedience titles. It's not a scandal and it's not a death sentence.
I don't have any idea where you live or what Aussie breeders are around there; they certainly may be entirely crap. Showing is no guarantee of being a decent person. But buying from someone who seems to not understand color genetics, in a breed where color genetics are breeding 101, wouldn't make me feel entirely secure either. I'd still do it if the dogs were healthy, sound, and built well, but most buyers don't know how to see that yet. They are trusting their breeders to tell them if the dogs are healthy. When there's no peer evaluation, you are leaving yourself entirely in the hands of someone's assurances, which is, let's face it, risky.
-
-
"No peer evaluation."
But Sky and Lyla's owner said: "Several of her puppies have also gone on to be search and rescue dogs, flyball champs, and seeing eye dogs."
I mean, to me that would be a very positive sign. She has produced working dogs and competition dogs. I'm thinking that not just any ol' mutt gets to be a seeing eye dog, or search and rescue dog. No?
-
-
Any dog can apply to be involved in search and rescue. Any dog can go into flyball, and a FDCh can be achieved in a few weekends with a fast dog. I don't know any seeing eye organizations that currently use Aussies (virtually all of them breed their own dogs, anyway), so I am wondering if the wording was actually that the dog became "an assistance dog" or "a service dog." That, again, is something you can bring any dog into.
It's also important to know whether these were activities that breeder did or whether her puppy buyers did it. Someone actively involved in producing search and rescue dogs or flyball dogs or service dogs is very different from someone who sold a puppy to a person who decided to get involved in flyball. The first situation leads a breeder to make decisions that are really good and wise; the second allows her to breed whatever she wants and if an occasional one succeeds with an owner so much the better.
-
-
As for your Aussie pup, I wanted to add that we recently saw a deaf Aussie in PetSmart that the owner said she had just gotten from rescue. He was a red merle, and the result of a merle-merle breeding.
I agree, personally, that I would not feel comfortable with someone breeding dogs with such a high risk of deafness over something as relatively unimportant as coat color, especially in a breed like the Aussie where there are plenty of non-merle dogs to breed to. In a breed where Merles are so frequent as to make it more difficult to easily avoid, it might be a different matter.
-
-
I don't know how it works in other breeds, and I won't act like I do. But I do know just a little about the Aussie world (just the beginnings, admittedly, but a little bit) and most respectable breeders would never breed a Merle to Merle Aussie. I don't know what it's like in other breeds, but in Aussies its very looked down upon, and most reputable Aussie people would neither produce or buy from a merle-merle litter. The people who do it are the ones who want more Merle pups in a litter because they can make more money, or the show people who want a dog, but really want it to be a merle and a merle-merle breeding has a better chance of producing the conformation they want with that color, but at the risk of dogs being deaf and/or blind (although it is more commonly deaf). Of the breeders that do breed Merle-Merle, many either don't openly admit it, or count on dealing with people so uneducated that they wouldn't know the difference. This is not to say that respectable people do not ever produce double Merle litters, but it should be very rare and done for a specific purpose other than creating more Merle pups than usual. And from what I understand, many of the show breeders will euthanize the "deadly white" puppies. I'm not saying I agree with that, but it does happen, and I've even heard of breeders euthanizing pups with prick ears or other such disqualifiers. And YES, there is such a thing as TOO much white on an Aussie. The eyes and ears must be surrounded by color and no white past the shoulder. From the ASCA standard: "On all colors the areas surrounding the ears and eyes are dominated by color other than white. The hairline of a white collar does not exceed the point at the withers." So yes, "too much white" can be a disqualification. And all of this, I learned long before I talked with this breeder, so it is not that she is feeding me wrong information. When EVERY breed book I have read on Aussie clearly states the dangers and cautions against breeding Merle-Merle I take that as a pretty good sign. I may be new to the world of dog showing/breeding, and still learning about the breed, but I do know enough to do my own research and not take what a specific breeder says as gospel.
Rescue Store
Stay Connected
FDA Recall
Canadian Food Inspection Agency Recall
Groups
We support...
Badge
© 2024 Created by Sam Tsang.
Powered by
