Quote:
Originally Posted by kjcmsw  I kinda see where this is going. One post will say (essentially) that if a puppy doesn't come from "champion stock" it's not as good as one that doesn't (so new buyers look for that), the next will say the breeder shouldn't mention the bloodlines --- Seems like a person is damned if they do, damned if they don't. My whole point is new buyers should look at the pup they intend to buy and speak with the breeder, not concern themselves so much with all the "marketing wording" because it's really a "toe-may-toe"/ "tah-ma-toe" thing. Depending on one's locale.
Like I said, if someone asks about bloodlines, it just seems "easier" to say "champion bloodlines" and IF they want more details, then one can specify whether the pups are "champion-sired", etc The person's website that the original post discussion was basically accusing the person who stated on their website "CHAMPION BLOODLINES" was only using a "marketing ploy" - how could they - or anyone - know those weren't close relative champion lines without actually meeting the breeder, etc? AND, that it isn't right of anyone to disparage a breeder strictly on their choice of wording on their website. So you're right 'education' is important, as long as it's accurate.
Someone could say, "if champion lines are so important to the quality of a pup, then if you don't mention it, you must not breed quality dogs" --- see where I'm going?
No one can (intelligently) say that a puppy from a breeder is not quality based strictly on a website's brief introductory wording, it's wrong to do so, it is not education, it's misleading...it's just ignorant to make statements about a particular breeder without first hand knowledge.
Until my previous post I never mentioned the details of my pups' lines as I didn't think it was the priority, rather their exceptional good health, temperament, great conformation, and other details is what I also initially choose to talk about, but for those that bloodlines are important, I would initially choose to the words, "champion bloodlines" - the details of those lines?...here's their pedigrees, see for yourself.
The other person's post about the price determines the quality is also wrong. I seriously do want my pups to go to a good and loving home first. I've made the decision to sell them for less to help assure they will be sold while young and will more readily bond to their new owner. It isn't all about the money. I can't keep them all. But now I'm thinking of raising their prices so people don't "learn" from the education from these postings that somehow a pup selling for less than 1500/1000 couldn't possibly be healthy and of high quality. Why shouldn't someone be able to have one of my pups for under a $1000 and still receive a high quality puppy? I don't need to sell them for a high price "just because I could" --
I guess I just want true and accurate "education" out there, not picking other breeders apart when someone doesn't 'personally' know anything about them or their dogs. It's wrong, it's petty, it's so junior-high school. Sorry, when I hear someone say 'their choice of wording means their puppies aren't worth buying' I immediately reject their other "education" because simply put, they are wrong about that, thus possibly wrong about anything else they say. So for those who "truly" want to educate...just speak the truth...the truth they have "first hand" knowledge about. That's all I ask of those who "choose" to "educate".
Kendra |
Well if we're speaking about truths, what I bolded is one of the biggest lies I have ever heard of from unscrupulous breeder when I did my looking around. Age doesn't matter to the bonding process. (No I'm not calling anyone in this thread unscrupulous, it's just an observation I have made and am generalizing) My dog was a year old when he came home, it didn't make our bond any less. Katie, my friends foster pup, was well over 4 years old and bonded quickly to her foster family. Rex, a pup that I helped pull from a nasty shelter is estimated to be 6+ years old. He is so happy and bonded to his foster mom; he's just the happiest little thing. I've heard over and over from people posting on YT that "younger is better" and that's why they have a 6 week old-10 week old pup. "the breeder insisted" they'll say, or my favorite "I know my lines and my pups are ready to go at 6 weeks." Needless to say, I ran away from that breeder.
I hear you about damned if you do, damned if you don't. However, I as a pet owner would not initially care to hear or have the word "Champion" flashed at me on a website or initial conversation. The #1 rule that most new pet owners ignore, and really it should be the first thing on their minds, is buy your breeder first and then the puppy. It really should be a process. Get to know the breeder, learn how well they're willing to accept you into their family (really, who else would you be ok hearing from at 2 in the morning, assuming you call them when there is something wrong with the puppy), then learn about their breeding program, and finally start looking at puppies. I think this is the only way for a new puppy owner to have piece of mind that they really are getting a dog from a good place and their chances at a happy, healthy, well socialized or well balanced dog greatly increases. I understand that no breeding program is perfect or free of fault. Sometimes things happen and that openness to accept it goes both ways. A breeder shouldn't be defensive if their "perfect lines" suddenly turn up LS/LP or who knows what else; and a new pet owner shouldn't start placing blame either. They, in cases like those, should be working together to get that pup healthy again.
Maybe I'm creating an ideal situation in my head that doesn't exist, but really that's what we all should be striving for as lovers of this great breed. We should all be doing our part to continue to make the Yorkshire Terrier a great happy breed, both breeders and pet owners alike.