everybody breeds for money....everybody

Genetics, breeding, birth defects, diseases, etc. (No litter listings)

Moderator: Moderator Pack

Postby CherrystoneWeims » Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:37 pm

hicntry wrote:Cherry, if you find Cody's assuption about breeding for money offensive, you may want to be more carefull about making assumptions about what constitutes a puppy mill. I have 10 bitches and 9 males at the moment and I don't consider it a puppy mill. Strangely, remarks like that seem to be quite the thing with "showbreeders". It might possibly be because someone is doing it differently than the SB etiquette finds acceptable. Don't hjear that kind of stuff much in working circles....a little but not the norm.


hicntry, I would assume that you aren't breeding your bitches every heat cycle and that you are not making a living off of your dogs? When someone quits their job, has that many bitches, is breeding "doodles", having multiple litters at once to pay for dog and people expenses, and making a living off of just breeding then I have to say it is a puppymill.

There are many showbreeders that I do consider to just be glorified puppymillers. I don't believe in breeding quantity in the hope of having a couple of big winners. That is what many of them do. I only breed the best of my litters and spay/neuter the rest of the pups after reevaluation. I co-own all of my pups until they are spayed/neutered so that I control the breeding of them.

BTW I have 9 bitches and 5 dogs. But I don't have lots of litters at once to pay for expenses. My dogs do quite well in both the showring AND the field with attaining multiple titles. I also am involved in SAR with one of them. I get many calls asking me when I am breeding my next litter but I work really hard when I do have a litter to prepare them for their new homes. My pups are basically crate trained, well socialized by taking them individually on car rides to my son's school, stacked on a grooming table several times a day, introduced to dremmeling nails, introduced to birds and gunfire, etc before they go home at 8 weeks. That takes a lot of time away from the other activities with the other dogs!
User avatar
CherrystoneWeims
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 652
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:27 am
Location: South Carolina

Postby KYgsp » Tue Jul 11, 2006 7:34 am

hicntry wrote:Being honest, it is nice to come out ahead. Like all business, there are good times and bad times. Most people may start out thinking they just want a pup off of Fido and the can cover their cost by selling the rest. It doesn't usually work. KY, how many years have you been breeding? It has been a long time here and it is still hit and miss. It is getting better but you don't just decide to breed and throw an ad in the paper unless you got run of the mill dogs. If you are serious you have to do it seriously. You build over the years, your dogs and your reputation. Lots of years and the whole time, all it takes is a couple of bad breedings to blow it. Or sell to a few "real dog men" that couldn't train the best of the breed on their best day and let them talk. There are a lot more pitfalls than there are rewards. Right now, this very minute, I could rake it in.....seriously. I would keep three bitches and a male, loosen them up so I would have so so dogs but bigger litters, and I could drop the price a couple hundred dollars and sell every pup. I would have about 15 dogs less inthe yard, more time, WAY less care and maintenance. Less headaches....everything would be a plus except the mediocre dogs produced. Why don't I do it? Why don't some of the others? YOU DON"T NEED GOOD DOGS TO MAKE MONEY. You just need a nice pet dog because that is where the market is. Maybe there is something besides the money. The money may be there but a smart guy would do just what I said if he was in it for the money. Like the labradoodle breeder.


I fully agree that it is not going to be easy and it will take some time before you get a return on investment but I am just saying it is not the picture of doom and gloom that many had portrayed. Also it seems that a lot of the excessive cost discribed in some of the other post were related more to breed preference than anything else.
KYgsp
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:15 pm

Postby hicntry » Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:16 am

This is an enlightning thread. Last year I must have been a good breeder but this year I think I must qualify as a puppy mill because I made a few bucks. Made enough to almost cover what I had to put out last year.

Pam, do you work ? It must be awfully time consuming and expensive, traveling, titling, showing. In all these years in the breed, this is the first time I am going to the Nationals. Just couldn't afford it before, can't really afford it now, but, neither can I afford to not go either. .....that is if I want to get the price up where I can afford to quit my day job. In answer to your questions, I do work part time, normally to make ends meet almost.
Heavens yes I breed back to back. Out of 10, bitches I have three brood bithches that throw what I want to see. They have been , are, and will be bred back to back because they throw oustanding dogs. One more bitch just made the grade. Four younger ones of various ages coming up but have never been bred. It may take a time or too to get a feel of what these younger females are capable of throwing with a specific male but, if I don't like the pups they throw they are out of here and I will chalk the two or three years down as a loss. I don't care how good any specific dog is, they are not all cabable of throwing great pups. I don't handle the pups till they are four weeks old either Pam. I want to see what is in the pup, not what the conditioning has done.
Ignorance can be fixed but stupid is forever.
Law of Logical Argument - Anything is possible IF you don't know what you are talking about.

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Jim Beam in one hand, Airedale in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
hicntry
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 3581
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 7:22 pm
Location: North Fork, CA

Postby KYgsp » Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:08 am

hicntry wrote:This is an enlightning thread. Last year I must have been a good breeder but this year I think I must qualify as a puppy mill because I made a few bucks. Made enough to almost cover what I had to put out last year.

Pam, do you work ? It must be awfully time consuming and expensive, traveling, titling, showing. In all these years in the breed, this is the first time I am going to the Nationals. Just couldn't afford it before, can't really afford it now, but, neither can I afford to not go either. .....that is if I want to get the price up where I can afford to quit my day job. In answer to your questions, I do work part time, normally to make ends meet almost.
Heavens yes I breed back to back. Out of 10, bitches I have three brood bithches that throw what I want to see. They have been , are, and will be bred back to back because they throw oustanding dogs. One more bitch just made the grade. Four younger ones of various ages coming up but have never been bred. It may take a time or too to get a feel of what these younger females are capable of throwing with a specific male but, if I don't like the pups they throw they are out of here and I will chalk the two or three years down as a loss. I don't care how good any specific dog is, they are not all cabable of throwing great pups. I don't handle the pups till they are four weeks old either Pam. I want to see what is in the pup, not what the conditioning has done.


To me the defintion of a puppy mill should focus more on the treatment of the animals than the number of brood bitches they have or whether or not they breed on back to back heat cycles. That is the very reason I am aganist any more goverment involvement beyond the enforcement of humane treatment laws.
KYgsp
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:15 pm

Postby Hunter » Tue Jul 11, 2006 11:52 am

Interesting thread, here are a couple of random thoughts.

First off, I don't think there is anything wrong with making money from breeding.

Most breeders who think they are breeding to "improve the breed" have no clue what that even means nor how to do it.

As Hicntry stated, you are never going to have an impact on a breed unless you are producing a large number of pups. That doesn't mean you just need to put out a lot of pups, but have the knowledge on how to put out a lot of quality pups.

I also agree that if a breeder is truely in it to improve the breed they have to keep a number of pups out of each litter. There is no other way to evaluate what you are producing. Test scores and owner input are not nearly good enough to evaluate a pup. I don't agree with having to keep them until they are two, if you can't eliminate the dogs that are not breed worthy before they are two, then you have no business breeding dogs. I also don't think you have to cull or nueter the dogs that don't meet your breeding standard.

I seriously question the quality of some dogs being bred. From the dogs I have owned, I would say only 10% or less of the dogs out there are of good enough quality to consider breeding. Yet I see many, many people (breeders) who get a dog, train and test it, get good scores, then breed it.

Many people are talking about all the expenses that go into your dogs that needs to be considered when talking about making money. Many of those "expenses" have nothing to do with producing quality pups. They are used to put titles and test scores on the dogs, which in turn allows you to sell the pups at a higher price. These are the dangerous breeders, selling based on titles and scores rather than quality hunting dogs. They are the ones that are in it for the money and prestiage.

When it comes to hunting dogs, there is way too much emphasis placed on test scores and titles. Rarely do you hear about what an outstanding hunter a dog is or the pups dogs are throwing. Instead you hear the average test score for a litter or out of a stud; something that has very little to do with what quality of hunting dog they are.

I wonder if Bob Whele made any money with dogs? How many dogs did he keep? How many did he breed? How many pups did he keep? Was he a puppy mill?
Hunter
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 504
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 10:50 pm

Postby hicntry » Tue Jul 11, 2006 3:04 pm

Well said Hunter
Ignorance can be fixed but stupid is forever.
Law of Logical Argument - Anything is possible IF you don't know what you are talking about.

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Jim Beam in one hand, Airedale in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
hicntry
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 3581
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 7:22 pm
Location: North Fork, CA

Postby hunter94 » Tue Jul 11, 2006 6:53 pm

Hunter wrote:Interesting thread, here are a couple of random thoughts.

First off, I don't think there is anything wrong with making money from breeding.

Most breeders who think they are breeding to "improve the breed" have no clue what that even means nor how to do it.

As Hicntry stated, you are never going to have an impact on a breed unless you are producing a large number of pups. That doesn't mean you just need to put out a lot of pups, but have the knowledge on how to put out a lot of quality pups.

I also agree that if a breeder is truely in it to improve the breed they have to keep a number of pups out of each litter. There is no other way to evaluate what you are producing. Test scores and owner input are not nearly good enough to evaluate a pup. I don't agree with having to keep them until they are two, if you can't eliminate the dogs that are not breed worthy before they are two, then you have no business breeding dogs. I also don't think you have to cull or nueter the dogs that don't meet your breeding standard.

I seriously question the quality of some dogs being bred. From the dogs I have owned, I would say only 10% or less of the dogs out there are of good enough quality to consider breeding. Yet I see many, many people (breeders) who get a dog, train and test it, get good scores, then breed it.

Many people are talking about all the expenses that go into your dogs that needs to be considered when talking about making money. Many of those "expenses" have nothing to do with producing quality pups. They are used to put titles and test scores on the dogs, which in turn allows you to sell the pups at a higher price. These are the dangerous breeders, selling based on titles and scores rather than quality hunting dogs. They are the ones that are in it for the money and prestiage.

When it comes to hunting dogs, there is way too much emphasis placed on test scores and titles. Rarely do you hear about what an outstanding hunter a dog is or the pups dogs are throwing. Instead you hear the average test score for a litter or out of a stud; something that has very little to do with what quality of hunting dog they are.

I wonder if Bob Whele made any money with dogs? How many dogs did he keep? How many did he breed? How many pups did he keep? Was he a puppy mill?



so hunter, if you don't test your dogs, whether NAVHDA, AKC, NSTRA or FT's, whatever the venue of your choice, how do i know that i am buying a quality hunting dog from you? there have been many arguments made here for the qualities passed on by FT champions and other dogs that have been "proven"....are you rebuting this argument and saying there is no value?


hunter94
read, listen, learn
hunter94
Senior Poster
Senior Poster
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 10:38 am

Postby DK1 » Tue Jul 11, 2006 7:02 pm

Hunter wrote:I also agree that if a breeder is truely in it to improve the breed they have to keep a number of pups out of each litter. There is no other way to evaluate what you are producing. Test scores and owner input are not nearly good enough to evaluate a pup.....


YES! And your thoughts are not that random!! They are sensible.

Hunter wrote: As Hicntry stated, you are never going to have an impact on a breed unless you are producing a large number of pups. That doesn't mean you just need to put out a lot of pups, but have the knowledge on how to put out a lot of quality pups.


Can I take it a step further than just having to breed a good number of quality pups for improving the breed? How about the education the breeder passes on to their buyers who might end up breeding those dogs? Or the education that is not passed along? It's not just dogs that the breeders can pass on!! Good responsibilities and education can get passed along too. To me, it makes a difference if a quality dog is passed along to an irresponsible person who breeds irresponsibly. Prepotent for good genes or not.

P.S There's like 4 forums where breeding has become the issue "all of a sudden" What the heck?
DK1
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:08 pm

Postby hicntry » Tue Jul 11, 2006 7:06 pm

First thing you should learn is that there is nothing saying a FT champion can throw a decent pup. All it says is that the parents could throw a good pup. Even the least accomplished dog out of the FT champions litter may throw a better dog. Trainers figure into this also but that is something else.
Ignorance can be fixed but stupid is forever.
Law of Logical Argument - Anything is possible IF you don't know what you are talking about.

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Jim Beam in one hand, Airedale in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
hicntry
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 3581
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 7:22 pm
Location: North Fork, CA

Postby hunter94 » Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:35 pm

DK1 wrote:
Hunter wrote:I also agree that if a breeder is truely in it to improve the breed they have to keep a number of pups out of each litter. There is no other way to evaluate what you are producing. Test scores and owner input are not nearly good enough to evaluate a pup.....


YES! And your thoughts are not that random!! They are sensible.

Hunter wrote: As Hicntry stated, you are never going to have an impact on a breed unless you are producing a large number of pups. That doesn't mean you just need to put out a lot of pups, but have the knowledge on how to put out a lot of quality pups.


Can I take it a step further than just having to breed a good number of quality pups for improving the breed? How about the education the breeder passes on to their buyers who might end up breeding those dogs? Or the education that is not passed along? It's not just dogs that the breeders can pass on!! Good responsibilities and education can get passed along too. To me, it makes a difference if a quality dog is passed along to an irresponsible person who breeds irresponsibly. Prepotent for good genes or not.

P.S There's like 4 forums where breeding has become the issue "all of a sudden" What the heck?



DK1-

right on the money with your post.......educating the puppy buyer is a big deal.......


hunter94
read, listen, learn
hunter94
Senior Poster
Senior Poster
 
Posts: 143
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 10:38 am

puppy mill

Postby cody » Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:26 am

A couple thoughts on this as far as the doodle breeder being a puppy mill I don't think so she had some really nice facilities and all the dogs were taken care of, she also said the most litters she had had on the ground was three. So that brings up another question when are you a breeder, and when are you a puppy mill? Lets say a guy has 10 bitches and 2 stud dogs cranks out 10 litters a year and sells every pup his dogs are well taken care of, up to date on all things medical and is raising healthy dogs is he a puppymill? Lets say he doesn't care about titles from any org but all his dogs hunt, no gunshyness, they are all proven to him, puppymill? How come we never here about horse mills, cow mills or chicken mills? I know horse breeders that have over 100 head of broodmares, horsemill? Maybe the people with more litters are just running a larger business, kinda of like wal-mart.
cody
Senior Poster
Senior Poster
 
Posts: 228
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 7:16 pm
Location: Idaho

Postby hicntry » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:13 am

Horses? Cows, Naw ..... they're in it for the for the horses and cows Cody. No one is trying to make money. The fact is, most small busness people are starving. Doesn't have to be dogs or anything in particular. It takes a long time to get your fet on the ground......especially when you leave the pet and show arenas. There is a lot of serious people that will pay serious money for an exceptional dog.......new comers have a long way to go to gain the trust. People are creatures of habit. If they have been happy with previous dogs, they will stick to that source....unless you can show them something that is heads above the other......consistently.
In regards to puppy mills, that term came about, if I am not mistaken because of the high demand of the chain pets stores when they came into existence. The puppy miller couldn't produce enough pups. They stacked crates on top of crates with dogs in them to keep up with the demand.....and they got bottom $ so the went to volumn to make their money. Now showbee's throw the term around pretty loosly......especially if you don't do things the way they approve of, or on a larger scale, or breed back to back, or breed out of standard, or just about anything else. Showbreeders mistakenly see themselves as the keepers of the breeds. It may be so when it comes to pet type dogs but I could easily name a dozen working breeds they have literally ruined to make them look good tripping around the show floor.
Ignorance can be fixed but stupid is forever.
Law of Logical Argument - Anything is possible IF you don't know what you are talking about.

"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Jim Beam in one hand, Airedale in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"
hicntry
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 3581
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 7:22 pm
Location: North Fork, CA

Postby Hunter » Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:47 am

so hunter, if you don't test your dogs, whether NAVHDA, AKC, NSTRA or FT's, whatever the venue of your choice, how do i know that i am buying a quality hunting dog from you?


hunter94,
I do test my dogs; that is how I know the test scores are worthless. I have seen many dogs score well that are useless and dogs that score poorly that are good hunters.

The best way to know if you are buying a quality dog from me is to go hunting with the stud and dame I am breeding. There is no substitute. The next best way would be to go hunting with some of the pups I produced.

If you can't do either, then ask as me as many detailed questions as you can. Talk with past puppy buyers.

there have been many arguments made here for the qualities passed on by FT champions and other dogs that have been "proven"....are you rebuting this argument and saying there is no value?

Not sure what you are saying here. If a dog that is a FT champ never was trialed, hence no title, the dog would produce exactly the same quality pups. The title does not affect the quality of the pups, how well trained a dog is does not affect the quality of the pups, test scores are not passed to the pups. The only thing that affects the quality of pups are the genetics that are passed from the parents. In my book a dog is not "proven" unless it successfully hunts wild birds and other game in the case of versatiles.

The only thing titles and test scores do is act as marketing tools. Something that is much more important to someone trying to make money then to somebody trying to improve a breed.
Hunter
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 504
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 10:50 pm

Postby KYgsp » Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:03 am

hicntry wrote:First thing you should learn is that there is nothing saying a FT champion can throw a decent pup. All it says is that the parents could throw a good pup. Even the least accomplished dog out of the FT champions litter may throw a better dog. Trainers figure into this also but that is something else.


There are databases out there, at least for pointers on the percentage of FT winners that they have produced. While not a sure fire method to make sure you get a good point it is a good start.
KYgsp
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:15 pm

Postby KYgsp » Wed Jul 12, 2006 10:08 am

hicntry wrote:Horses? Cows, Naw ..... they're in it for the for the horses and cows Cody. No one is trying to make money. The fact is, most small busness people are starving. Doesn't have to be dogs or anything in particular. It takes a long time to get your fet on the ground......especially when you leave the pet and show arenas. There is a lot of serious people that will pay serious money for an exceptional dog.......new comers have a long way to go to gain the trust. People are creatures of habit. If they have been happy with previous dogs, they will stick to that source....unless you can show them something that is heads above the other......consistently.
In regards to puppy mills, that term came about, if I am not mistaken because of the high demand of the chain pets stores when they came into existence. The puppy miller couldn't produce enough pups. They stacked crates on top of crates with dogs in them to keep up with the demand.....and they got bottom $ so the went to volumn to make their money. Now showbee's throw the term around pretty loosly......especially if you don't do things the way they approve of, or on a larger scale, or breed back to back, or breed out of standard, or just about anything else. Showbreeders mistakenly see themselves as the keepers of the breeds. It may be so when it comes to pet type dogs but I could easily name a dozen working breeds they have literally ruined to make them look good tripping around the show floor.


I agree 100%.
KYgsp
Champion Poster
Champion Poster
 
Posts: 724
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 3:15 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Breeding

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests