Article about BYB! Must read!

[cheryl19]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

I'm always preaching about breeding to standard, and I get lots of flack for it. People tell me that "Just because my dog isn't some fancy show dog doesn't mean that he shouldn't be bred". I always get the feeling people think I'm some kind of a snob because I suggest people only support the best of breeders. People constantly tell me "Who's the YTCA anyway, they are not GOD that can't dictate what should be bred and what shouldn't be bred". The article you posted gives some really good reasons why breeding to standard is so important. WE GOT A PROBLEM, millions of dogs are being killed each other, and the majority were produced by backyard breeders. If you don't breed to standard you are a BACK YARD BREEDER, no exceptions!

Please everyone stop supporting back-yard breeder's desire to make a few extra dollars, just so you can save a few extra dollars. If you don't have enough money to buy from a quality breeder, save up for it, or check out a rescue. The dogs that are easiest to place in rescues are those that meet standard, and that should be enough reason why everyone should only support those breeders who breeds to standard. However, I hope when choosing a rescue you open up your heart because in the case of rescues, it isn't important if the dog meets standard, you can set your own standards here.

I don't think you are a snob I think so many people think that their dog would have CUTE puppies. Well unless you have ALL of the breeds standards, just love your dog. To me if you love a breed you too would only want the best dogs to have puppies. And anyone that thinks that you can make money having a litter or 2 truly does not understand all that needs to be done and how much it will cost. So please Nancy keep posting if only 1 person sees that their dog is not up to standard to have puppies then it was worth it.

[4doggiemama]

Very informative thread. Thanks.

[ladyjane]

Originally Posted by cheryl19

I don't think you are a snob I think so many people think that their dog would have CUTE puppies. Well unless you have ALL of the breeds standards, just love your dog. To me if you love a breed you too would only want the best dogs to have puppies. And anyone that thinks that you can make money having a litter or 2 truly does not understand all that needs to be done and how much it will cost. So please Nancy keep posting if only 1 person sees that their dog is not up to standard to have puppies then it was worth it.

[crystalsmom]

I just might add to that, although the standard is important I feel all breeders should take 'health' under consideration first and foremost.

[WalnutHill]

Another thought..... the shows are not ends unto themselves (or, at least they aren't supposed to be). Shows were started as a way for breeders to show off their breeding stock and to show off the quality of dogs they have.

My concept of a "show breeder" is someone who shows to validate their breeding program. But, some people take it to the extreme of the sport of showing, and only breed to show, not show to prove they should be breeding.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by WalnutHill

Another thought..... the shows are not ends unto themselves (or, at least they aren't supposed to be). Shows were started as a way for breeders to show off their breeding stock and to show off the quality of dogs they have.

My concept of a "show breeder" is someone who shows to validate their breeding program. But, some people take it to the extreme of the sport of showing, and only breed to show, not show to prove they should be breeding.

That used to be my opinion too, but shows are a way for breeders to get "confirmation" that their dog does indeed meet standard. When you love a pet, it's difficult to use a critical eye to judge it's appearance, and that's where others opinions become an important part of the process. Developing an eye is an important part of being a breeder, and while not every breeder can afford the show circuit, I believe it's important to attend shows, as an aid to developing your eye. Pictures only show you so much, and seeing a great quality dog in person, allows you to better evaluate your own stock.

To crystalsmom, I agree health should always be taken into consideration first, it is my opinion that show breeders are more likely to do health screening because the are developing a "line", and not just in and out of the game. I don't think most BYB's offer health guarantees.

[WalnutHill]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

That used to be my opinion too, but shows are a way for breeders to get "confirmation" that their dog does indeed meet standard. When you love a pet, it's difficult to use a critical eye to judge it's appearance, and that's where others opinions become an important part of the process. Developing an eye is an important part of being a breeder, and while not every breeder can afford the show circuit, I believe it's important to attend shows, as an aid to developing your eye. Pictures only show you so much, and seeing a great quality dog in person, allows you to better evaluate your own stock.

To crystalsmom, I agree health should always be taken into consideration first, it is my opinion that show breeders are more likely to do health screening because the are developing a "line", and not just in and out of the game. I don't think most BYB's offer health guarantees.

That's basically what I said - what I was saying is that conformation shows are a way for breeders to show off their stock and compete against one another. But, some people only breed in order to show their dogs - and nothing else matters. They aren't breeding to do anything but win - they aren't involved in anything except showing.

I agree that if you don't show, then you should re-think why you are breeding. Not because showing is the only reason to breed, but because showing (and doing well) "confirms" that your breeding stock "conforms" to the standard.

Hoe that makes sense the 2nd time around.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by WalnutHill

That's basically what I said - what I was saying is that conformation shows are a way for breeders to show off their stock and compete against one another. But, some people only breed in order to show their dogs - and nothing else matters. They aren't breeding to do anything but win - they aren't involved in anything except showing.

I agree that if you don't show, then you should re-think why you are breeding. Not because showing is the only reason to breed, but because showing (and doing well) "confirms" that your breeding stock "conforms" to the standard.

Hoe that makes sense the 2nd time around.

When I read the words, "show off" you seem to be referring more to the breeder's self-esteem and not them really wanting to properly evaluate their dogs. I'm sure there are breeders that do it for the wrong reasons, as with anything, but I was trying to point out that this isn't really why showing started, and it's not a frivolous thing. I use to think it was, and there may be others who don't understand the true purpose of showing.

[WalnutHill]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

When I read the words, "show off" you seem to be referring more to the breeder's self-esteem and not them really wanting to properly evaluate their dogs. I'm sure there are breeders that do it for the wrong reasons, as with anything, but I was trying to point out that this isn't really why showing started, and it's not a frivolous thing. I use to think it was, and there may be others who don't understand the true purpose of showing.

Well, that's not what I meant, and I certainly wasn't alluding to any frivolity in showing. I was merely stating that showing should be used as a tool, not as the reason for breeding.

Thank you for reminding me why I spent a year on here reading without ever registering.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by WalnutHill

Well, that's not what I meant, and I certainly wasn't alluding to any frivolity in showing. I was merely stating that showing should be used as a tool, not as the reason for breeding.

Thank you for reminding me why I spent a year on here reading without ever registering.

I hope I didn't offend you, I've read that others thought showing was frivolous, and I know I use to think that too. It wasn't clear in your first comment, what you meant, but I think I understand it now. Again, my apologies, I don't want to turn you off Yorkietalk.

[SweetViolet]

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

...shows are a way for breeders to get "confirmation" that their dog does indeed meet standard.

I emphatically disagree.

Until animals that have not had their little bodies mutilated in order to conform to the standard, perfectly acceptable dogs will be overlooked by the show breeders. If you won't dock ears and/or tails, your dog can't be shown, even if it perfectly conforms to breed standard in all other ways, and if the dog can't be shown, that "confirmation" is not possible.

I readily concede that there are a lot of people who indiscriminately breed (intentionally or otherwise) dogs that pass on a poor genetic heritage but you cannot be equally indiscriminate in judging those who breed and do not show. It is tantamount to...and no more valid than...stereotyping.

I won't know for several months yet how well my girl conforms to standard. But I won't mutilate her tail...it's actually illegal here for a vet to dock tails and ears for cosmetic purposes...and the breed standard has not changed, so she can't show, no matter how perfect she may turn out to be. But if she is good enough to show and her tail is what is keeping her out of the ring, I will not allow a lack of "confirmation" from a show judge to prevent me from breeding her if that is what I want to do.

It is dangerous to put your full faith in an "authority" at the expense of your own common sense. And while some people may be blinded by their love of their dogs or are motivated by an expectation of profit, it is not true of us all, which makes this generalizing grossly unfair. And, even if an expectation of profit exists, if it is not realized at the expense of the well being of the animals involved, I fail to see what is so bad about it.

It is elitist to put forth the idea that only dogs that have received "confirmation" from show judges should be bred. It IS snobbish. What you are saying, in other words, is that dogs that are not show winners should not be allowed to breed...sorry, but dog show aspirants are the SMALLEST market for purebred dogs and there is absolutely nothing wrong with breeding otherwise healthy dogs that do not conform to championship standards. They won't get into the shows, they won't breed with the show dogs and pollute their bloodlines, and they have no less right than the show dogs to walk the earth and and bring love into the hearts of people who simply cannot pay the kind of money a show dog's offspring must fetch.

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by SweetViolet

. . .



It is elitist to put forth the idea that only dogs that have received "confirmation" from show judges should be bred. It IS snobbish. What you are saying, in other words, is that dogs that are not show winners should not be allowed to breed...sorry, but dog show aspirants are the SMALLEST market for purebred dogs and there is absolutely nothing wrong with breeding otherwise healthy dogs that do not conform to championship standards. They won't get into the shows, they won't breed with the show dogs and pollute their bloodlines, and they have no less right than the show dogs to walk the earth and and bring love into the hearts of people who simply cannot pay the kind of money a show dog's offspring must fetch.

No, I'm not saying that only "show winners should not be allowed to breed..." in post 156 I said:

Originally Posted by Nancy1999

. . shows are a way for breeders to get "confirmation" that their dog does indeed meet standard. When you love a pet, it's difficult to use a critical eye to judge it's appearance, and that's where others opinions become an important part of the process. Developing an eye is an important part of being a breeder, and while not every breeder can afford the show circuit, I believe it's important to attend shows, as an aid to developing your eye. Pictures only show you so much, and seeing a great quality dog in person, allows you to better evaluate your own stock.

There is no such thing as "championship standards", there are just "standards." If there were a shortage of pets I would agree with you. There is no shortage. There may be a shortage of Yorkies who meet standard, and this is why I think it's OK to breed for them.

Docking is a whole other matter, and it has little to do with what we are discussing, but if it illegal in your country, I would follow my counties laws. I've got to say that one of the reasons it was outlawed in England was that too many BYB's were botching it up, and your are right, it was horrible mutilation.

[yorkiepuppie]

Originally Posted by Woogie Man

I do understand the author's intent but was really thrown off by how she backed up her opening statement. Maybe I'm a stickler for details, but I feel it's important to be accurate, especially on this issue. Mis-information will never bring about effective solutions. I think it's a good thing that we all focus on different things. It can lead to a better understanding. Pet over-population is a complex issue and needs to be broken down to see different aspects clearly. No matter how each of us looks at it, in the end, it's all about the dogs and that is one thing we should all focus on. We're all they have and they deserve our best efforts.

i am a stickler for details as well, but i don't let detail sidetrack me and allow that to shift my focus away from what is truly important.

i have not done any research on all the % because i did not see that as the main point here. it's wonderful that some people are doing the research, once anyone finds good valid information that they feel like they can add to and support fellow animal lover, feel free to do that. but so far, i haven't seen that kind of attitude. it feels more like tearing apart something than trying to add to.

honestly, pet over-population is not a complex issue. it certainly can be if that's the way you choose to see it. pet over-population means that there are too many pets around. and instead of looking for breeders. most of us should look in the shelter to adopt a dog instead of buying a dog, especially instead of buying from a BYB.

did i buy milu from a breeder? Yes.

it would probably be better if i adopted an animal needing a home from the shelter instead of purchasing a dog that can too easily find a loving home. but just because i made a decision to buy a dog instead of adopting doesn't mean i am going to justify that and say that's the right thing to do.

same as BYBers or BYBer supporters.

don't try to justify what is not right. if you are doing something wrong, or have done something wrong. the least you can do is to recognize that and be honest with the reality that YOU ARE adding to the pet over-population problem.

justifying a wrong cause just make you look stupid, it doesn't make what you are doing right because you poorly 'justified' it.

(when i say 'you' i don't mean anyone specific, i just mean people in general. i am clarifying so that the post won't be read with a overall tone of hostility... thanks)

[yorkiepuppie]

also, in my previous post, i was not suggesting that woogie man is a BYBer or a BYBer supporter....

gosh, i feel like i have to be so careful about what i say now because people are getting so fired up about everything.

it's a good thing though, i like it!

i think that's how things get better, by people becoming aware and bring lots of attention to the topic and getting people to care about the topic.

[crystalsmom]

I care about the topic and I think that more than one opinion can have very valid points.