Must be Titled

I have been thinking about this, lately. Why do people insist that a dog must have titles to be bred. Many dogs are exellent workers but do not have titles. For example, most police dogs are not titled, but are AMAZING working dogs. Hondo's father has NO titled what-so-ever, because he is too busy finding people. Why do people insist on having your dog titled? Just wondering.

For most dogs and breeds having titles is the only way to prove breed worthiness.

To me . breeding 40 years ago , it was more important to have good backgrounds and health checking. Today, I do feel that breeders really have to be checked out as to RESPONSIBLE breeding. There are so many more people owning dogs..If you want to go with these breedings.. at least get health checks for a pet quality dog. If wanting a show possibility ... you have to go all the way with AKC recognized dogs.

Reputable breeders breed untitled dogs all the time. They may very well be great producers of what they are looking for in thier line.
Only the breeders involved could speculate on that though.

Titles on individual dogs don't really mean anything to me. Visa doesn't have her championship -- however, she could easily get it. That right there tells me that just because a dog doesn't have a title, doesn't mean it couldn't get it. However, when looking for a reputable breeder, if none of the dogs are titled, that tells me something right there. Breeding an untitled dog I don't mind -- it's when none of your breeding dogs are titled. It tells me that your dogs are just poor workers, or maybe you aren't enough "into dogs." I think a good breeder is involved.

I'm browsing potential studs for Visa's third litter right now, and to be honest I am looking at titles. Less working titles usually means a lower drive dog (she can only be bred to low drive dogs). A CGN or CGC shows a potentially stable dog. An obedience title might show a handler-focused dog. Championships don't mean anything to me -- a championship is nothing for a Belgian. Almost any Belgian can be a champion. A BIS or BISS does speak to me, however. I wouldn't mind breeding to a non-champion, but I would require the stud to be atleast pointed so that I know it can atleast stand for a judge. I can see what I like in pictures, I don't need a championship to tell me if the dog looks nice, and I have several contacts who can look at the dog. But what is more important to me than titles, MUCH more importantly, is that the dog is suited to my bitch. I could breed Visa to the most titled dog out there, but I won't. I look for a dog that is low-drive, friendly, NOT SHY OR AGGRESSIVE, happy, calm, with health clearances, and a refined head.

What people really need to do is talk to people that have met the breeder and/or the dogs. I personally know many breeders who have dogs with several titles that I wouldn't touch with a 10-foot pole. I know breeders who are abusive to their dogs (and client dogs), who have puppies born with cleft palates and let them starve to death, breeders who have the most ugly dogs win championships because they pin their dogs against one another, who encourage irresponsible ownership, breeders producing shy dogs, breeders whose pups end up in shelters, breeders who have 8 litters a year without enough homes, etc. All of these breeders have dogs with several titles. Titles don't say much. You need to talk to people who know the breeder and know the dogs.

I totally agree with Jordan on this. Titles ARE a great thing, but they aren't everything. As far as herding dogs go, I'd much prefer a dog that works everyday & works well than a dog who is trialed occasionally, BUT I would still love to get a puppy from Herding Champion parents. Titles basically prove that the dog can perform, and is given recognition as performing at a high level. There is so much that breeders can say to exaggerate their breeding dogs abilities (such as "you should've seen my Border Collie bitch work those sheep in that field that one time, she ran around them with no training." and "you should see my Lab dog fetch a ball.")... their boasting does not necessarily mean that their dog is worth breeding and is an exceptional working dog. Titles should definitely be weighed with one-on-one observations of the parents working, which I think EVERYONE should do if it all possible. In general, though, I feel that anyone who really has an excellent working/show dog will at least prove their dog as competent in competition.

LOL @ my lab can fetch a ball! Someone I know of thinks thats quite an accomplishment! Let me see a duck or bird in its mouth then were talking!
(and not one all chewed up either)

For real though, Momof7!!! I have heard that a lot, and I'm not even involved in Labs like you are. My favorite, which I hear way too much, is people bragging about their Border Collies nipping at kids and people. That neurotic behavior is such an accomplishment for the breed totally breeding-worthy.

titles prove this, and i would only ever buy my future show prospect from a litter thats parents have titles, because just because the breeder says she could get it isnt good enough, its the proof that matters to an expecting buyer and to be honest i wouldnt buy from anyone who says their dog can get there championship, because i no that they arent as dedicated to their dogs as someone who has taken the time to title their dogs.

I personally don't care much if my dogs have a nose too long or their back isn't just bent the right way... but I think health testing is important. At this time though, I don't see the point of breeding just to breed... which is the case of people who don't show... IMO. You can't better the breed if you can't even prove your dogs are a good specimen on the breed. But I don't think it's required for all dogs to be champions, just one of the parents is fine to me - if you find the perfect dog to breed with your champion and he/she wasn't showed, I don't see it as such a big deal... providing you know enough about the breed yourself.

The average perosn does not ahvve a true"working " dog to prove their abilities so showing or competing in some sprort is the best way to show they are worthy to breed.

If a dog is a great herder and works out on the farm I don't care what it is I think that farmer has every right to breed it. But I also think to many people say their dog is a working dog when it really jsut site around(which happens a lot out here).

Titles to me don't mean that much either, but I know the breeders I'm working with. They have a rep of producing the dogs with drives and intensity and health that I want. Just because they don't have titles doesn't mean that they aren't proven though. They prove their worthiness everyday working and I've seen that.

Another not so well known kennel (by me) that didn't have titles and I wasn't familiar with their dogs or what they produced, I would have to see that their dogs were proven somehow and for most people, titles that are easily recognizable are the best way to do that.

Just because a dog hasn't been titled in the traditional way doesn't mean they haven't been proven. But I wouldn't just take someone's word for it that their dogs could work or have stable temperments or are healthy, they have to prove it to me somehow.

I absolutely agree regarding herding dogs. Most dogs that work ranches on a daily basis can out-herd trial dogs, but rarely do they get trialed because they are so busy working. They're almost always untitled, but they are some of the best workers and shouldn't be passed up just because they haven't won any trials. I notice a lot of pedigrees linebreeding on herding champions, and that's great, to win ISDS trials the dog has to be awesome. However, with everybody scrambling to breed to the champion, I think I would breed to an untitled ranch dog if only for diversity in the gene pool. Untitled dogs have a lot to offer and a lack of abbreviations before/after the dog's name doren't concern me if I can get my hands on the dog and see it work.

Every purebred dog breed has four dimensions to it that make it the breed it is; look, health, temperament, and ability. A responsible breeder will take into account all four of these dimensions before they breed. They will have a clear understanding of what these qualities are and why they are so important.

When I say *look* I’m referring to the physical appearance of the dog. Every breed of dog has a certain way it is suppose to look that is unique to it’s breed. The ideal specimen should have as many of these qualities as possible. How they keep track of what qualities each breed is suppose to have is through the dog’s breed standard. The breed standard outlines the qualities of the physical appearance of the breed. It also outlines the ideal temperament.

In regards to health, every breed has certain health problems that are common to it. Some have more than others because of multiple factors. The idea of breeding purebreds is to have the least amount of health problem possible, preferably none. Health testing is done on both parents, before breeding the litter, to determine if both dogs are free of genetic defects that could be passed on to the offspring. The breeder should also be familiar with at least four generations of the dog’s history; both parents. This is important when determining if there are any carriers of a disease in either parent’s history. Some defects skip over a generation. Health defect testing will only tell you if the dog has a defect, it doesn’t tell you if the dog is a carrier for a defect. By knowing the dog’s history, you can see if any of it’s relatives had any defects. If they did, it can tell you that the defect has skipped over one or more generations.

Temperament is another thing is impacts the breed and makes it unique. Every breed of dog has a slightly different temperament. Again, the idea is to breed dogs that come as close as possible to the breeds standard. This way, the dog will act the way it is said it’s suppose to act.

Ability means the dog can perform the function(s) that the breed was originally bred to do. Like a beagle being a good hunting dog, a golden retriever being good at retrieving and hunting, a border collie being good at herding, the mastiff being a good guard dog. Every breed has a reason it was bred for. It has an ability it is good at that makes it unique to every other breed. Some abilities are close to other breeds but each one is slightly different.

All of these four dimensions, put together, make up the breed you know and love. The catch is, all of these qualities must be worked for, through selective breeding. The founders of the breed made these qualities into the breed they are today, but it is through selecting breeding (picking out specimens that match the look, health, temperament, and ability of the breed) that maintain the breed’s uniqueness.

There are many types of breeders out there. Some breed only for health and temperament. Some breed only for look. Some breed only for ability. Some breed for ability and health. The list of possible combinations goes on and on. But the one thing all of these breeders are missing (the ones I just listed) is that they are not breeding for every dimension that the breed should have. So they are creating dogs that are only “half-pure” or “partial purebreds”. With every generation that goes on, that the breeder(s) do not breed for all four dimensions, the resulting litters become less and less like that of a purebred. Yes it is true, they will still technically have papers and be register able by the AKC, if both parents are purebred, but in reality they will not really be what they are suppose to be.
The quality of purebreds is not determined by the paper work, it is in how closely to the four dimensions the breeders breed them.

Im not even reading all the replies, but I personally think it is because they can make more money if they can have that piece of paper that shows a title!

Other then that, I dont believe they have got to be in 100% of the cases.

I don't think my animals can read that they are titled or not. I know for a fact that there are breeders who can and do create false papers. It really isn't that hard to do. Akc does not follow up on breeding as they should unless it is brought to their attention. Also if brought up they don't always pull reg.
I'm a person who does not care about papers and I have bought pappered dog but never reg. with akc.
When it comes to herding dogs I want to see the parents and what they can do not their papers .
If any of you read "Whiskeys Story" then you know how he came to us and that he is not papered but he can and does outwork the best of the best and he has excelled at anything he has been taught to do.
His trainer has said to the entire class that she has never worked with a dog that was as intellegent as he is. The others who have their dogs there are infact in awe of how fast he gets a new task nailed down and so am I. I have never owned such an alert , smart and hard worker as him and I have had many.
As far as breed he is all acd 100% and is netured. According to AKC standards he is everything he should be with the eception of height , he is 2 inches over standard.This is because he was probably some ones bybred acd. I don't like byb"s but I don't like people who use dogs for money either.
So it's what ever you want. I know that I will never buy a registered dog again as I do not intend to show or breed them. There are too many dogs and cats needing homes now. I personally think that there should be limitations on breeders as to how many litters they can have in one year etc.
Shelters are full of purebred dogs who were papered too.

Love that!!!"My dogs cannot read"! Lol...........

this is not true. there are other registries who recognize non-akc breeds. i guarantee if i were ever to buy a pit bull, there'd be conformation titles behind it, and the pit bull is not recognized by the akc.

i think titles are extremely important. i don't understand the whole argument of "she could have a title in a heartbeat if i took the time to show her". so take the time! prove that she's as great as you say. show that you cared enough to put the time, effort, and money into it.

i think the rules bend with true working dogs (i'd still want to see health certs on them though), but the vast majority of dogs being bred have never worked a day in their lives.

I think they should be proven somehow but it doesn't necessarily have to be with titles. Working dogs should be able to work like Scarlette's dogs. All are great sledders but they never step inside a show ring.

Icant agree more with what elegy said -

there are VERY FEW true working dogs left in the US that can use the excuse that they "work" so they have proven themselves. If they do, congrats - but I will still want to see the rest of the picture (proper health testing, proper structure, and a solid temperament correct for the breed).

other than that, its excuses - Saying a dog COULD do this and COULD do that is like saying well, shes CUTE and shes a good pet, and my vet says shes healthy because they examine her every year and shes up to date on her vaccines - that isn't health testing, that isn't testing the temperament, and that isn't proof of proper structure.

Titles are important because they provide us with proof the dog is what it should be. It's not just something simple someone does - these titles require training, they require an investment from the owner, and yes, they require money.

If you think your dog is structurally correct, get out there and prove it. Get independent evaluations of the dogs conformation.

If you think your dog has a solid temperament, get out there and prove it. And no, I don't think a CGC is proof that your dog is breed worthy - many breeds have breed-specific temperament tests. There is the ATTS, there are other exams including therapy dog tests that show what your dog is made up.

If you think your dog is a working dog, then get out there and show me. I can tell everyone that my dog walks nicely on leash, sits when I tell him to, and hangs out nicely around the house. But he is a working breed and should have a working temperament. Saying my dog "COULD" do it if he tried - well, it's excuses. If they COULD - then DO it.

If you can't afford these things, then you can't afford breeding, IMNSHO.

If y ou are breeding to better a breed - how do you know you are bettering it if you don't find out?

I own a working breed. A dog with a working temperament, structure that should enable them to work, and should have enough drive and such to get him to wherever he wants to go. I can say my dog could do this, that and the other - but the fact is, until you DO it, you just don't know. There are enough wonderful pets in shelters and rescues across the nation - we don't need more pets.

If you are going to breed, do it to make your breed better. Do it to improve structure, temperament, health and working ability. I see no excuse that I would accept for why a dog doesn't have all these things in the respective breeds, except that the owner doesn't feel like it or the dog cannot cut it. And both of those, to me - mean you shouldn't be breeding.