Comparison of Breeders |
Thanks for sharing. It is an interesting analysis of one persons interpretation of what a 'reputable' breeder is. Following the guidelines on that chart, I think very few people would be qualified as 'reputable' breeders and most of the breeders I consider reputable would be just be considered 'hobby' breeders. The comparison chart does offer a lot of things for one to consider when searching for a reputable breeder. People have to keep in mind that there is no perfect breeder just as there is no perfect yorkie but we all need to strive for perfection in both ourselves and the dogs we breed. |
People get very upset by the term backyard breeder and act like it's the highest insult, they call themselves "hobby breeders" and even say that they are great breeders. This chart goes along with my way of thinking, and I wish people would read the traits of a backyard breeder, and understand this isn't meant to be insulting, if the shoe fits . . . |
So Glad to see Basil coming from the far right column. |
I liked that matrix, it is logically laid out. But I also liked the article Mardelin posted, more narrative style, and also showed that for many reasons the majority of breeders come from the middle range of things. It takes a long time to become expert in anything. Much studying, litters, passion and time commitment. |
There is a really great post about this chart on Myra Harris's yahoo group that I belong to. I am waiting on permission to cross-post. Not really sure how the permission thing works. I will post it here if permission is granted.:) |
As far as the title terminology goes I think "Hobby" breeder sounds worse than a "Backyard" breeder. Seriously, breeding as a "hobby"?? Raising pups isn't like building birdhouses. I think a different name should be there...what I don't exactly know, but having the title of "Hobby" just isn't very complimentary IMO and I think to call oneself a "hobby breeder" conjures up negative associations and visions of breeding a few litters with some interest and little effort until a better "hobby" comes up. So what other name could one use instead of "hobby"?? "Better Breeder"?? just "Breeder"?? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote: , I'm sure whoever created the chart did it with good intentions, but it just serves to draw the lines again, and they are lines we don't need to draw. I was at a committee hearing yesterday and someone from the "other side" said this to me: "We don't want to have to define a puppy mill, but we need you breeders to define what is a good breeder." I just shook my head. The point is that breeders come in all shapes and sizes and you just can't say there is One Right Way to raise dogs. Mine live in my house and sleep on my sofa and wear pajamas all winter. I have a good friend whose whippets live in runs and paddocks. Frankly, they seem just as happy as mine do. And when you start making rules about how people "should" keep their animals, you run into all kinds of trouble. Temperature control? A chihuahua and a Siberian Husky would require pretty different climates. Exercise? How do you make rules for Border collies and Pomeranians? I used to like the idea of dogs having to be turned out in a run for an hour a day minimum....seemed like a good thing for dogs kept in crates or cages. Then I realized there are days MY dogs would call animal control if I made them stay out for an hour. Socialization? How do you force people to socialize their dogs? And how much is enough and how much stresses the puppy? There comes a point we just need to butt out and allow other breeders to make their own decisions and mistakes, regardless of their "motives" for breeding. And for heaven's sake we have to stop labeling each other. My husband defines a puppy mill as "anyone who breeds one litter a year more than we do." And I swear I think there are people who seriously believe that. Another thing I think about is this idea that the only reason to breed is for the next show dog. Dogs are PETS. When did it become so horrible to breed dogs to provide wonderful pets to loving homes? Who decided that the only "legitimate" reason to breed was for show? Shows are, after all, designed to evaluate breeding stock. But breeding stock for what? Just to produce more show dogs? That could become a circle with no end. Oh well, I know I am very late replying to this -- I have been in Richmond all week trying to stop bad legislation, and we had a good year, I'm happy to say. Now I think I'll go play with some puppies! Sharyn End |
Quote:
|
Some things that make a breeder "bad" I really don't understand. I've read that breeders who sell small puppies for more are "bad" breeders. But since the demand for smaller puppies is higher, how can they not price them higher, or price the large yorkies lower? I've searched every website I can find, and not found a single breeder within my state that fits the guidelines of a "good" yorkie breeder, and that's including the show breeders. It's frustrating when I just want to be the responsible owner of a pet yorkie! |
Quote:
Edited to add... If breeders are doing what you say (that I bolded) they are following economics 101. Supply and demand. They are treating living breathing creatures that feel emotions, feel hunger, happiness, illness, and everything you and I feel, and they are treating their dogs no better than a toaster. That to me is sick sick sick, and shows that human behind the breeding program doesn't have ethics and morals. |
Quote:
It's not the fact that breeders are arguing with each other that is causing problems with the breed! Greeders are causing the problems! This isn't just about opinions; we do have an area of knowledge in the field of breeding that is considered factual. You would never find a good mentor if you think your "opinion" is just as valid as his or hers. Have you ever studied with a coach of anything, they are considered the authority and expert, and a student won't last long if they argue with everything and want to give their opinions. Experienced breeders here do try to share information with others, but it's usually met with rationalization and excuses to justify their breeding program. Non-breeders here at Yorkietalk try and help educate others on choosing a good breeder this link that Ladymom provided offers information on what to look for when choosing a breeders. Which part of this list do you see an unimportant? In my opinion, if you see characteristics as being unnecessary, you need to reevaluate you reasons for breeding. Has a specific breeding goal Belongs to and works with breed club Has at least one mentor Understands and breeds to the standard Active in dog related activities (shows, trials, rescues) Knows the true history of the breed Sells pets with spay/neuter contract and tries to stay in touch with new owners Keeps up with health and temperament issues affecting the breeding and provides in depth guarantees All breeding stock is tested for genetic diseases affecting the particular breed. Maintains carrier records on all dogs in gene pool including effected progeny. Clean, sterile environment always maintained Expected longevity with any particular breed Sugarmom quoted someone as as asking "When did it become so horrible to breed dogs to provide wonderful pets to loving homes?" Do you really not understand this? Shelters are killing millions of wonderful pets yearly, we have an ample supply of pets, and rescues are filled up as well, we don't need more pets. The only reason to be breeding now is to protect what past breeders have accomplished to ensure healthy examples of the breed are here in the future, this is about preserving the breed. As long as people are breeding to produce money, we will have problems with this breed. |
There is an interesting comment in the cross post: "And for heaven's sake we have to stop labeling each other. My husband defines a puppy mill as "anyone who breeds one litter a year more than we do." And I swear I think there are people who seriously believe that." Unfortunately, I think there is more truth to that than anyone would like to admit. I do believe there are a lot of breeders who over-estimate their skills and contributions to the breed, while explaining away their short comings by saying "at least I don't (fill in the blank)". I'm not sure why anyone's goal would be producing pet-quality dogs. Why shoot for mediocre? |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright ©2003 - 2018 YorkieTalk.com
Privacy Policy - Terms of Use