Can Anyone Tell Me Why?

[*Lesley*]

Join our free community today.

Connect with other like-minded dog lovers!

Login or Register

I personally wouldn't buy a puppy with restrictions imposed on it,as I feel once a puppy belongs to me it is my right to determine what decisions I make for it in the future, whether that be showing, racing, breeding ect ect,this is my own oppinion of course

One question I do have for breeders who do this is why breed a litter then not allow the line to carry on (genuine question) Of course I understand that it stops people breeding for the hell of it ,but why not allow one litter, I also wonder if this restriction encourages people to breed litters of unregistered pups if they really want a puppy from the bitch they have bought, and if they said well thats fine I'll get her speyed if she's not allowed to have pups that wouldn't suit either :unsure:

 

[BeeJay]

The breeder should have informed you, and if they haven't then they've pretty much shot themselves in the foot.  It's my understanding that the KC has withdrawn these endorsements in cases where the breeder couldn't prove that they had informed the buyer of them.  So unless you signed a contract with the breeder that states the endorsement exists, you would have a pretty good case.
Wendy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

That's my understanding as well Wendy. If there hasn't been a written agreement signed by both parties then the KC will under pressure remove the endorsement.

 

[Seraphina]

I personally wouldn't buy a puppy with restrictions imposed on it,as I feel once a puppy belongs to me it is my right to determine what decisions I make for it in the future, whether that be showing, racing, breeding ect ect,this is my own oppinion of course

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I do absolutely agree. I have always given everybody the full papers and I have never had any problems. Few years ago our KC introduced "Limited Register". Dogs on limited register cannot be shown or bred from, but can participate in obedience and agility. So nowaday I sell most of my pups with the Limited papers, but I make sure buyers understand the situation even before they come to look at the pups. That sorts out anybody who would want to breed just for the sake of breeding. I also always tell people that if they change their minds about showing or having a litter I will be open to a discussion about it.

One question I do have for breeders who do this is why breed a litter then not allow the line to carry on (genuine question) :

The breeder may not endorse all the pups. It is quite possible that this pup has a serious fault and therefore it is not suitable for breeding BUT that should have been told to the buyer.

Of course I understand that it stops people breeding for the hell of it ,but why not allow one litter,

Some breeders do not wish certain people to get hands on their lines. If they allow every person who buys a bitch from them to have a litter they have no control where their lines will end up. It is a big dilemma.

But it still does not excuse the breeder not telling the buyer :rant:

 

[BeeJay]

I personally wouldn't buy a puppy with restrictions imposed on it,as I feel once a puppy belongs to me it is my right to determine what decisions I make for it in the future, whether that be showing, racing, breeding ect ect,this is my own oppinion of course
One question I do have for breeders who do this is why breed a litter then not allow the line to carry on (genuine question) Of course I understand that it stops people breeding for the hell of it ,but why not allow one litter, I also wonder if this restriction encourages people to breed litters of unregistered pups if they really want a puppy from the bitch they have bought, and if they said well thats fine I'll get her speyed if she's not allowed to have pups that wouldn't suit either :unsure:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I'm not a breeder but............. Out of every litter of pups some will be good examples and some less good, that can be seen before they leave the breeders. But if the breeder has made a mistake (which happens) in their judgement of the pups then once they've seen them as an adult they can change their minds and lift the endorsement.

A good breeder spends a lot of time trying to breed dogs fit for purpose. Their pups are out there with their affix on and are advertisements for that breeders line. If they sell a pup which isn't up to the breeders standard then the last thing that the breeder wants is for pups to be being bred that are poor quality and with their affix connected with them. It will reflect badly back on them AND isn't in the breeds best interest.

A good breeder would of course allow a bitch or stud dog to be bred from if it was a good example of the breed.

Note. Good example is of course a subjective decision that the breeder makes based on their experience.

What would be the point of breeding one litter of not very good whippets. That is not what breeding should be about IMO.

 

[*Lesley*]

Ok I hear what you're saying BUT how can a breeder tell what is a good example of the breed at 8 weeks :unsure:

I have two show bred dogs as you know ,bred from very good lines both pets only,but even if I had champions and I bred a litter I would want them to go to pet homes anyway, the same would apply if I had racing dogs because if the new owners then decide to on to show or race ect then any acheivement will be a bonus and never a dissapointment, therefore less chance of the new owner wanting to rehome a less than perfect dog :wacko:

I don't think there is any such thing as 'not very good whippets' personally and I may never breed a litter but I have the choice that is the main thing.

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it :thumbsup:

As always just my humble oppinion

 

[masta]

Ok I hear what you're saying BUT how can a breeder tell what is a good example of the breed at 8 weeks :unsure:  
I have two show bred dogs as you know ,bred from very good lines both pets only,but even if I had champions and I bred a litter I would want them to go to pet homes anyway, the same would apply if I had racing dogs because if the new owners then decide to on to show or race ect then any acheivement will be a bonus and never a dissapointment, therefore less chance of the new owner wanting to rehome a less than perfect dog :wacko:

I don't think there is any such thing as 'not very good whippets' personally and I may never breed a litter but I have the choice that is the main thing.

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it  :thumbsup:

As always just my humble oppinion

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

its about control a breeder has spent many years maybe and many litters perfecting their line or believing that they are perfecting the standard because as we all know 1 persons idea of correct is not always another and of course they dont want to allow just anyone to use their line and breed without their control, right or wrong? i will be interesting to see this debated looking back on the posts not many from the showy's

 

[*Lesley*]

Ok I hear what you're saying BUT how can a breeder tell what is a good example of the breed at 8 weeks :unsure:  
I have two show bred dogs as you know ,bred from very good lines both pets only,but even if I had champions and I bred a litter I would want them to go to pet homes anyway, the same would apply if I had racing dogs because if the new owners then decide to on to show or race ect then any acheivement will be a bonus and never a dissapointment, therefore less chance of the new owner wanting to rehome a less than perfect dog :wacko:

I don't think there is any such thing as 'not very good whippets' personally and I may never breed a litter but I have the choice that is the main thing.

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it  :thumbsup:

As always just my humble oppinion

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

its about control a breeder has spent many years maybe and many litters perfecting their line or believing that they are perfecting the standard because as we all know 1 persons idea of correct is not always another and of course they dont want to allow just anyone to use their line and breed without their control, right or wrong? i will be interesting to see this debated looking back on the posts not many from the showy's

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I bet there's many a champion been produced form that 'non perfect' one of the litter :thumbsup:

Mine as I say are pets only and were sold to me as that not expected to be show quality and as such no contact since, but I bet if one of them produced a champion I wouldn't be the one getting credit for it :- "

 

[Seraphina]

Ok I hear what you're saying BUT how can a breeder tell what is a good example of the breed at 8 weeks :unsure:  

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

No you cannot be hundred persent sure, but an experienced breeder has an "eye" and knows what to look for. Also some "problem" which is not apparent in the parents or other pups in the same litter may crop up. For instance one pup toes out, or in, or has undershot jaw. If you get one pup like that it is not a good idea to allow to breed from it. So, hypothetically speaking, if I had a puppy like that i would tell the buyer that I will under no circumstances allow a litter in the future and explain exactly why.

I bet there's many a champion been produced form that 'non perfect' one of the litter thumbsup.gif

Hmmmmm...not really. Not that there is such thing as a perfect dog. But it is lot easier to get a good specimen by using good breeding stock

 

[ecknnelly]

I am new to the wonderful world of whippets, as an owner, although have known many through friends and waited until the time was right for us to dedicate our time to them. And i certainily wouldn't be able to look and see any obvious defects as described above.

But the scary thing is that, if the breeder did see or know of some problem, physically or medically, as a buyer this should have been pointed out, especially as the breeder knew of the chance of a litter coming from the pups, also I don't see why the buyer should pay the same price as is being asked for the 'good' pups of the litter if the restriction has been applied for this reason. I would not have bought Nell if I had known , as i too want to make decisions regarding 'my dogs'.

Although I feel both our pets have the best personalities and are the best dogs around (biasly speaking of course) and in some way would love for them to have a litter of happy pups eventually, I don't want to have unregistered pups on the market as I agree with an earlier reply, it could encourage breeding of the pups in an uncontrolled manner, possibly just for cash. but I guess this could happen with KC pups too, with the wrong breeder :- "

We may never have a litter from eck and nell for all the reasons that have been highlighted, but as a responsible lover of whippets, I would have liked the choice to be mine :wacko:

 

[Karen]

I dont think any amount of speculation on why the breeder endorsed this puppy excuses the breeder from his/her responsibility to inform the new owner of the endorsment.

If for example the breeder had a litter where all the males had one or no testicals they may endorse any females also in that litter.

and so if any litter mates had, Cleft palettes, crests, kinked tails, bad mouths, heart problems, the list is much longer probably. So your puppy may be perfect in every way, there are many reasons for endorsement.

IMO there is far too much indisriminate puppy producing going on (not just by pet people I hasten to add, it makes my blood boil when so called breeders have litters when they have no intention of keeping one as a potential show/racing dog) and I will probably endorse most of my next litter, the endorsement can be always be lifted at a later date when the quality of the dog can be more easily assessed and a suitable mate found.

 

[ecknnelly]

The breeder in question has contacted me, she apologised for not informing me of the restriction, but didn't think i'd be breeding the pup! she explained that it is purely to control the line. she assures me that there is in her opinion nothing wrong with Nell and will be happy to lift the restristion at a later date however only if i mate Nell with a dog that she deems as suitable, from the line that Nell is from.... :- "

This breeder knew that our dog is from the laguna line and that her pup from the barnsmore line would be co habiting, from the chat, it sounds like she is not of the opinion that these two lines should be crossed as it could result in 'out breed'?

My problem now is, on top of ensuring no accidents, that this should never happen thorugh the life time of our pets. is the only option neutering?

I have every respect for breeders taking the time and care to ensure their line is kept pure but this breeder should never have sold me a pitch pup knowing i had a completely different line that she does not deem suitable for mating. she talked through the laguna line with me, so she knew exaclty where eck came from and what the lines traits are, prior to the sale.

I feel totally scunnered, as we have now been put in a position out with our control and which could arise in a litter that cannot be registered. :x

If the restriction had been known prior to the sale I would NOT have bought Nell, had the reason why been explained I would have had to travel back down to wales and search for a laguna line pup to ensure any accidents would be happy ones.

 

[BeeJay]

Ok I hear what you're saying BUT how can a breeder tell what is a good example of the breed at 8 weeks :unsure:  
If they have been breeding that line for many years then they are pretty damn good at knowing what the pups will turn out like Lesley.  That's why breeders  line breed it helps to cut out the guesswork.  Because no breeder wants to end up with the best pups in pet homes not being shown or bred from.  They want to keep them themselves.  Some breeders know which is the best pup as they are born, whilst they are still wet.

 

However it can happen and that is why endorsement's can be lifted.

I have two show bred dogs as you know ,bred from very good lines both pets only,but even if I had champions and I bred a litter I would want them to go to pet homes anyway, the same would apply if I had racing dogs because if the new owners then decide to on to show or race ect then any acheivement will be a bonus and never a dissapointment, therefore less chance of the new owner wanting to rehome a less than perfect dog :wacko:

I don't think there is any such thing as 'not very good whippets' personally and I may never breed a litter but I have the choice that is the main thing.

I do.  I can think of whippets that have dreadful temperaments for example being bred from.  Hardly great pups to put into pet homes.  Also show breeders are trying to breed to fit the breed standard so any whippet falling a long way short is not very good.

 

But I'm not into indiscriminate breeding either.  I think that any dogs that are bred from should have proven themselves fit for purpose.  Anything else weakens the breed IMO.

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it  :thumbsup:

As always just my humble oppinion

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

 

[BeeJay]

Ecknelly I just wanted to say (thought about saying it last night) that I'm not implying in anyway that there is anything wrong with your pup or in fact anyones endorsed pups.

Mouse's breeder puts endorsements on her litters. She does it as a matter of course now because one of her previous pups was used as a stud dog at a very young age to a bitch that she didn't think was suitable. It is purely about controlling the breeders line.

 

[dessie]

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it  :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Unfortunately Lesley, sometimes genetic medical conditions occur in litters when you least expect them to, despite putting a lot of thought and effort into producing what you hoped would be a wonderful litter from sound, healthy parents from what you believed was sound, healthy lines. As a responsible breeder that can be soul destroying and trying to find where the problem came from a nightmare and wondering what to do for the best in the future an absolute migraine.

 

[kris]

as a breeder who has xrayed and scored and tested her dogs i think i have the right to endorse a pups papers not to be bred from and not suitable for showing.i think as a responsible breeder who has spent many years researching and chatting to others about certain lines and faults etc i think ive earned the right to have some control over whether pups ive bred should in turn be bred from.i once sold a show quality bitch to a couple who befriended me and my family over a period of time.they did a lot of winning with this bitch and cos i trusted them that theyd ask me who to breed her to when the time came i didnt endorse.they subsequently bred her to a persons stud dog that i considerd totally unsuitable and only told me after theyd mated her.to say i was furious would be an understatement. :angry: but the deed having been done there was nothing i could do about it.after that i endorsed everything.and only lifted them when i could have a say in who a bitch was mated to or when a stud dog was used.it IS about control.but after all the years of blood sweat and tears i put into my breed i dont see why i should just hand that on a plate for someone else to ruin. :thumbsup:

 

[BeeJay]

Question.

If a breeding endorsement is lifted on a pup so that a breeder approved mating can happen can it be put on again? As by then the breeder isn't the registered dogs owner.

 

[*Lesley*]

Ok I hear what you're saying BUT how can a breeder tell what is a good example of the breed at 8 weeks :unsure:  
If they have been breeding that line for many years then they are pretty damn good at knowing what the pups will turn out like Lesley.  That's why breeders  line breed it helps to cut out the guesswork.  Because no breeder wants to end up with the best pups in pet homes not being shown or bred from.  They want to keep them themselves.  Some breeders know which is the best pup as they are born, whilst they are still wet.

 

However it can happen and that is why endorsement's can be lifted.

I have two show bred dogs as you know ,bred from very good lines both pets only,but even if I had champions and I bred a litter I would want them to go to pet homes anyway, the same would apply if I had racing dogs because if the new owners then decide to on to show or race ect then any acheivement will be a bonus and never a dissapointment, therefore less chance of the new owner wanting to rehome a less than perfect dog :wacko:

I don't think there is any such thing as 'not very good whippets' personally and I may never breed a litter but I have the choice that is the main thing.

I do.  I can think of whippets that have dreadful temperaments for example being bred from.  Hardly great pups to put into pet homes.  Also show breeders are trying to breed to fit the breed standard so any whippet falling a long way short is not very good.

 

But I'm not into indiscriminate breeding either.  I think that any dogs that are bred from should have proven themselves fit for purpose.  Anything else weakens the breed IMO.

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it  :thumbsup:

As always just my humble oppinion

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

But temperament is a different thing though Barb, I meant appearance :thumbsup: if I had a dog with a bad temperament I personally wouldn't want to pass that on or to buy a pup with parents that have anything other than a good temperament.

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it  :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Unfortunately Lesley, sometimes genetic medical conditions occur in litters when you least expect them to, despite putting a lot of thought and effort into producing what you hoped would be a wonderful litter from sound, healthy parents from what you believed was sound, healthy lines. As a responsible breeder that can be soul destroying and trying to find where the problem came from a nightmare and wondering what to do for the best in the future an absolute migraine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I was meaning with the breeders knowledge that there was a genetic fault in the parents Dessie and then still breeding, It cannot be helped if they breed a litter not knowing,thats just unfortunate and as you say must be soul destroying but then you wouldn't then breed from that pup with the condition once it's older though would you because then it is being passed on with prior knowledge.

I should add that I am no way having a go at breeders or undermining your expertise,I think you're all great :huggles: it 's just that sometimes pet homes can be quite good you know and lets face it where would all the rest of the litter that weren't of show standard go without them, for everyone show or race dog there might be another 6 + that go to show homes, but I still want the right to make the decisions in my dogs lives because they are mine

 

[dessie]

I should add that there is one circumstance where I would understand an endorsement being placed and that would be if there was a genetic medical condition, however that puppy should not have been bred in the first place should it  :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

Unfortunately Lesley, sometimes genetic medical conditions occur in litters when you least expect them to, despite putting a lot of thought and effort into producing what you hoped would be a wonderful litter from sound, healthy parents from what you believed was sound, healthy lines. As a responsible breeder that can be soul destroying and trying to find where the problem came from a nightmare and wondering what to do for the best in the future an absolute migraine.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I was meaning with the breeders knowledge that there was a genetic fault in the parents Dessie and then still breeding, It cannot be helped if they breed a litter not knowing,thats just unfortunate and as you say must be soul destroying but then you wouldn't then breed from that pup with the condition once it's older though would you because then it is being passed on with prior knowledge.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

No, I understand what you are saying, BUT with a condition e.g. cleft palate, the affected puppy is over and done with because it is pts at birth but what about its siblings??? When there are no DNA tests because it is a medical condition deemed to be polygenic and could also be caused by external factors so therefore carriers/clears cannot be identified, you either have to give up breeding or do more research and keep your fingers crossed when you mate the bitch you have kept or buy in a completely different line when you have spent years building your own up only to find you bring in another problem.

It is all about integrity really and being open and honest with each other because surely we are all in a breed for the love of it. I don't want to breed or keep unhealthy, unsound dogs but sometimes it feels like you are bashing your head against a brick wall and, if you care about your dogs as I do, heart breaking.

 

[~elizabeth~]

No, I understand what you are saying, BUT with a condition e.g. cleft palate, the affected puppy is over and done with because it is pts at birth but what about its siblings???  When there are no DNA tests because it is a medical condition deemed to be polygenic...I don't want to breed or keep unhealthy, unsound dogs but sometimes it feels like you are bashing your head against a brick wall and, if you care about your dogs as I do, heart breaking.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

I used to breed exhibition standard ducks, I gave up on doing it seriously it for similar reasons.

If you inbreed (or line-breed as it is usually termed) from good stock, you get exhibition quality birds quite quickly, but start to get increasingly severe genetic problems: low fertility, low hatchability (as baby birds have to be strong enough to peck their way out), weak legs and ultimately deformed spines and a form of cerebral palsy. Having to cull an entire hatch of 4 week old ducklings is heartbreaking too. Some people don't mind this, they are prepared to put up with a high cull rate for the glory of the rosettes. I just found it heartbreaking. I can't begin to imagine how much worse this would feel if it had been puppies.

If you outcross you do not get exhibition standard birds in the F1 or even F2 generation, (usually something odd and atavistic creeps in :wacko: ) but you certainly get health, high fertility & hatchability, and physical vigour, even in a cross between 2 inbred exhibition lines; you have to look at the overall picture and not value a single quality (e.g. colour or shape) to the exclusion of all others. The thing with polygenetic conditions is that you do need quite a number genes all to be 'turned on' at possibly a large no. of different loci on both sides, so gradual outcrossing will lessen the number of homozygous versions of these genes over time. :unsure:

Things are changing in poultry, some friends of mine, who are currently the top exhibition breeders, have done much in their many books to explain how genetics work, the need to be strict about not inbreeding for more than a couple of generations, and the proof is evident in their stock which are disease-free and top winners, although they'd be the first to agree it has taken them longer to get there. I haven't had the cerebral palsy problem since I've followed this approach, even though I'm still using the original line that it appeared in.

I know it's not exactly the same in dogs, the genetic health conditions are more complex and pernicious in dogs as there are fare more, and they appear over a much longer lifespan, and there are behavioural factors to take account of too, but the underlying genetic practice still holds good I think.

 

[ecknnelly]

as a breeder who has xrayed and scored and tested her dogs i think i have the right to endorse a pups papers not to be bred from and not suitable for showing.i think as a responsible breeder who has spent many years researching and chatting to others about certain lines and faults etc i think ive earned the right to have some control over whether pups ive bred should in turn be bred from.i once sold a show quality bitch to a couple who befriended me and my family over a period of time.they did a lot of winning with this bitch and cos i trusted them that theyd ask me who to breed her to when the time came i didnt endorse.they subsequently bred her to a persons stud dog that i considerd totally unsuitable and only told me after theyd mated her.to say i was furious would be an understatement. :angry: but the deed having been done there was nothing i could do about it.after that i endorsed everything.and only lifted them when i could have a say in who a bitch was mated to or when a stud dog was used.it IS  about control.but after all the years of blood sweat and tears i put into my breed i dont see why i should just hand that on a plate for someone else to ruin. :thumbsup:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

​

if a potential buyer has a dog from another line and you are well aware of that prior to the sale, is it not also a responsibility to tell the buyer of the endsorsement, or refuse to sell them the pup as you want to keep control.

or would you sell the pups that are not 'keepers' without saying anything and hope it will be alright in the end?