Question about Exhibitor / Show Breeder litters

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by gemy

Actually no, you are incorrect. Let's take the term "show breeder" aside for one moment, and focus on an "excellent" breeder. This breeder will health test all breeding dams/sires, research pedigrees, to facilitate the best match possible. they will breed Ch to Ch, and not to any Tom, Dick or Harry. They will have their breeding stock evaluated, and this is done at shows.

Many breeders will have potential show quality, that they "could" finish, but elect not too. Why? The reasons are many. Maybe this breeder, thinks this dog is a bit high in the leg, or the muzzle and ear set is a bit long, or too wide. Maybe this dog, doesnt' have quite the temperament for the ring, or maybe they think this dog's coat will not mature to the best perfect silk and color. And maybe, this breeder didn't get quite what they hoped for in that particular mating.

Pat Hastings the author of from Best Intentions to Best in Show, states; "bring into the ring what should be finished.....not what can be finished".

Show breeders should strive to present to the world, the best quality progeny around. NOt just "nice or very nice pet quality". Mayhap the bitch will be too small, or the male a tad large, but all pups should come from the best of informed breeder decision making, which includes pedigree analysis, stud/bitch assessment and weighing of attributes and shortcomings, as well as the vertical as well as horizontal pedigree analysis, and all this prior to breeding.

Gail, I don't understand how it isn't correct.....if a breeder produces 24 dogs and the dogs are not championed, they are normally petted out, right? Regardless of the reason a breeder chooses not to show a specific dog, if the dog isn't shown then the dog becomes a pet. IOW, you have one or the other, either a show dog or a pet dog from the show breeders perspective. And, if a breeder produces 24 puppies to get one Ch. that is still a lot of dogs and that is just one breeder......multiply that 24 number by all of the show breeders and....here ya go Mardelin - more math to do..........you get the picture....it's a bunch of dogs in an already over populated pet market.

The Pat Hastings quote should be telling to/of all show breeders.....how empty would the show ring be if the advice were followed? If the goal is to "improve" the breed....how many show people are actually doing just that?

[manolos mom]

Originally Posted by jencar98

Nancy, I understand just fine, and please know, I understand a lot more than some people think that I do

Jen, I think you do understand. You know we need Good Breeder's but you also see the Rescue side when people over breed, they end up in shelters and pounds needing homes.

[jencar98]

Originally Posted by Ladyhawk

We have several exhibitors around here that finsh 4 dogs a year. This can't be done without having quite a few litters to produce those show dogs. Breeders can't be judged by how many litters they produce each year but on how well the dogs are kept, how the puppies are placed, and if the goal of perserving and improving the breed is being sought.

I disagree,.....breeders can and should be judged by how many litters they produce each year, along with, how well the dogs are kept, puppy placement, etc.

[megansmomma]

Although I do think that this is a lot of puppies and there is no way that they could all be raised inside someone's home. What I am more concerned with is if this person is raising sick or unsocialized puppies. I'm not naive to the fact that some show breeders own kennels and have many litters a year. What makes me upset is when someone is cranking out puppies and they are poorly bred, not anywhere near the standard, sick and will sell to anyone even with breeding rights. Maybe my opinion is way off base but I would rather see healthy dogs bred taken care of properly than some of the breeders that I have seen selling dogs and in rescues. I always hate to get involved in breeder discussions because truthfully I really don't know that much and am trying to learn by reading as much as I can and asking a few questions.

I do wonder what the statement "out of standard" means but I can take that more than one way. I'd love to ask this person some questions but I doubt that will happen.

I

[Nancy1999]

Originally Posted by jencar98

Nancy, I understand just fine, and please know, I understand a lot more than some people think that I do

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you. I guess I'm the one who doesn't understand, from other posts it sounds like you are against showing, and think of them as merely beauty contests, I thought that too, and I've only been trying to share what I've learned. It almost sounds like you believe that only pet owners should breed, and not people who have really devoted their lives to this. The truth is most of the yorkies produced are through pet owners, not people who've devoted their lives to breeding, and it seems we have a problem. Good breeders dogs do not wind up in rescues.

[Ladyhawk]

Originally Posted by jencar98

I disagree,.....breeders can and should be judged by how many litters they produce each year, along with, how well the dogs are kept, puppy placement, etc.

Many exhibitor/breeders have homes for these pups before they are even born. The dogs are in good homes and return to the breeder is necessary. Are you going to hold the fact that they are responsible and are providing healthy, happy dogs to those that want them against these breeders? I don't understand where the judgement comes into play. Until you've walked a mile in their shoes you can't know the devotion, hard work, and expense that goes into producing quality pups that will be a joy to their families. Sustaining this breed and insuring that it's future is healthier is a worthy goal though not an easy one.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by Ladyhawk

Many exhibitor/breeders have homes for these pups before they are even born. The dogs are in good homes and return to the breeder is necessary. Are you going to hold the fact that they are responsible and are providing healthy, happy dogs to those that want them against these breeders? I don't understand where the judgement comes into play. Until you've walked a mile in their shoes you can't know the devotion, hard work, and expense that goes into producing quality pups that will be a joy to their families. Sustaining this breed and insuring that it's future is healthier is a worthy goal though not an easy one.

You're right Tammi, Unless one walks a mile in a reputable breeder/exhibitors shoes one doesn't have the concept of the countless hours it takes to establish a great line, to consistently produce great representations of the breed.

[Furbaby Friend]

Originally Posted by Ladyhawk

Many exhibitor/breeders have homes for these pups before they are even born. The dogs are in good homes and return to the breeder is necessary. Are you going to hold the fact that they are responsible and are providing healthy, happy dogs to those that want them against these breeders? I don't understand where the judgement comes into play. Until you've walked a mile in their shoes you can't know the devotion, hard work, and expense that goes into producing quality pups that will be a joy to their families. Sustaining this breed and insuring that it's future is healthier is a worthy goal though not an easy one.

Remember, without these great breeders the Yorkie as we know it would just die out. These breeders aren't contributing to the overpopulation problem in my opinion. Mills, BYBs, and those inexperienced pet owners who let them join all willy nilly are a huge source of the problem. Those are the dogs that end up sick, in shelters, in rescues, and mangle the breed standard!

From what I understand, any true great breeder would take the dog back in a heartbeat if the owner could no longer care for it and find it another great home to go to...or just house it themselves if they had no other option.

[tegamom1]

Originally Posted by Mardelin

You're right Tammi, Unless one walks a mile in a reputable breeder/exhibitors shoes one doesn't have the concept of the countless hours it takes to establish a great line, to consistently produce great representations of the breed.

Exactly!

[kjcmsw]

Originally Posted by jencar98

I disagree,.....breeders can and should be judged by how many litters they produce each year, along with, how well the dogs are kept, puppy placement, etc.

I found this particularly interesting:

The Backyard Breeder Fallacy by Ms. Jade, TheDogPress Reporter

The fact is "Best in Show" doesn't equate to "Best in Health"

There are some exceptional Yorkies out there that could compete with the best but their owner 'chooses' not to show. Not everyone is into showing or some simply do not have the time. I think watching shows to be interesting but knowing what happens to the dogs that end up not making the cut, imo, is where another form of animal cruelty is. Few Yorkie pet owners could fathom having their dog for a few years, knowing that dog has bonded to them and simply finding it a new home so they can move to the next (better??) dog. Even the 'winners' are generally dumped off to another person after they've outlived their usefulness (producing puppies). I think when you get so many dogs that you have to get rid of them (or call it "rehoming" if you'd like) just to make room for more it's time to get out of the business and let someone else come along.

[Mardelin]

Originally Posted by kjcmsw

I found this particularly interesting:

The Backyard Breeder Fallacy by Ms. Jade, TheDogPress Reporter

The fact is "Best in Show" doesn't equate to "Best in Health"

There are some exceptional Yorkies out there that could compete with the best but their owner 'chooses' not to show. Not everyone is into showing or some simply do not have the time. I think watching shows to be interesting but knowing what happens to the dogs that end up not making the cut, imo, is where another form of animal cruelty is. Few Yorkie pet owners could fathom having their dog for a few years, knowing that dog has bonded to them and simply finding it a new home so they can move to the next (better??) dog. Even the 'winners' are generally dumped off to another person after they've outlived their usefulness (producing puppies). I think when you get so many dogs that you have to get rid of them (or call it "rehoming" if you'd like) just to make room for more it's time to get out of the business and let someone else come along.

Not any of the breeders I know......My Champions are still here, and here they will stay.

[BFar]

Originally Posted by kjcmsw

I found this particularly interesting:

The Backyard Breeder Fallacy by Ms. Jade, TheDogPress Reporter

I couldn't agree more with this article. Too many potshots taken at breeders by other breeders. I won't do it. They divide and conquer themselves... pointing fingers, raising flags, counting each others litters and dogs, while the animal rights activists are enjoying the fallout. There are counties that are proud of their zero breeding tolerance. Everyone has the right. It is in the consumer that is the problem IMO.

[Rhetts_mama]

If good breeders don't call out bad practices by other breeders than they are just as complicit in the bad practices. Silence in the face of evil is itself evil.

[Ladyhawk]

I really enjoyed the article; it's well written and makes a lot of good points. I can't imagine a world without domestic animals, without pets; the life that peta and hsus has planned for us.
Placing the few dogs that I have retired into pet homes is far from cruel. It has been hard on me but the friends and family that I have given them to are delighted. The dogs are happy with their new families, they adjust very quickly and are very loved. Because I have given them to close friends and family I'm able to see them regularly and feel very good about it. My dogs are raised and kept as pets so I can only keep a small number of them. If I had to quit once I reached my max I wouldn't have the time and experience to achieve a thing and I would be breeding in vain.

[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by Furbaby Friend

There came a point in the thread where it stopped being about this one particular breeder and took a turn into exhibitor breeders in general.

We've all already agreed THAT "breeder" is kinda iffy to most of us.

I don't think that is agreed upon by all. I would not presume to make a pronoucement on a breeder with so little information known. I am still trying to get a hold of the 5-10 litters a year as that is such a huge range. Available help is another huge concept to add to the equation too. If there is a family or even several paid hands helping to raise the litters, then the load could well be spread out thinner than a much smaller yearly tally with one lone breeder involved. Nancy has already mentioned some situations where you do sensibly use an out-of-standard dog in your program. Bringing color back is the one I see most often alluded to. It was also stated that the member "appears to be in YTCA" but that is not for sure, evidently. Not sure why that is a question -- are they not on the list? Yorkshire Terrier Club of America About The Club I would also want to know what the "breeder listing site" is and how accurate their information might be. I just don't know enough about the situation to call this mysterious breeder "iffy."

Originally Posted by jencar98

Gail, I don't understand how it isn't correct.....if a breeder produces 24 dogs and the dogs are not championed, they are normally petted out, right? Regardless of the reason a breeder chooses not to show a specific dog, if the dog isn't shown then the dog becomes a pet. IOW, you have one or the other, either a show dog or a pet dog from the show breeders perspective. And, if a breeder produces 24 puppies to get one Ch. that is still a lot of dogs and that is just one breeder......multiply that 24 number by all of the show breeders and....here ya go Mardelin - more math to do..........you get the picture....it's a bunch of dogs in an already over populated pet market.

The Pat Hastings quote should be telling to/of all show breeders.....how empty would the show ring be if the advice were followed? If the goal is to "improve" the breed....how many show people are actually doing just that?

No -- if the breeder only champions 1 out of 24, then I would not think the other 23 would all be sold as pets. Some would be sold as show potentials/hopefuls, some would become initial breeding dams/sires for new breeders or other breeders wanting to bring something to their line that these puppies offer. Most of the exhibitor/breeders have people who want to get their lines. When they have puppies, they have waiting lists and they are not all for pets, at all. If a new person wants to get into the breeding/exhibiting circle, they have to start somewhere and it is by convincing one of the seasoned exhibitor/breeders that they are educated and dedicated enough to be trusted with one of their puppies. Those looking to improve their own lines, may reach out to an exhibitor they have seen show dogs with the traits they want to improve.

I don't know who is being referred to in this thread, but why the secrecy and inneundo? Wouldn't it be better to ask the breeder direct? I would want to give them the opportunity to explain information gleened from other sources, see if it is accurate (or the result of a typo or something) and hear their explanation. Sometimes a little information can sound misleading and sometimes its just the tip of an iceberg. But I would not make any judgement based on so little info. Just my opinion though!