Your opinions: is a "show" breeder more reputable?

[momto8]

Personally I think it depends on the breeder. If they show their dogs, but do no health testing then they are breeding dogs that are breed standard but might not be healthy. For me I like to see a breeder who health tests, competes in performance areas that is suitable to the breed and that shows.

[joce]

It depends on the breed.

With our next dog which will be a guardian breed or a lab(Chaz wants a corgi though) we will go with a breeder with working dogs or gun dogs. I'm not to into show labs. My dad found a breeder that health tests, shows, and hunts with theirs. But I just am no drawn to his dog as I am most labs so doubt ill go to that breeder.

My dobe was from a show breeder. Might stick with that. I know the big names to avoid. Showing does not mean good with dobes.

[Flyinsbt]

Originally Posted by Grab

I do want a breeder to do something with their dogs besides breed them. Be it conformation, sports, hunting, etc. I also won't go to a breeder who just has a dog or two that they breed to each other repeatedly. What is the goal in that besides more puppies?

This would be the big thing for me. I like to see some goal behind the breeding. There are breeds in which I absolutely would not want a dog from show lines, and breeds in which it would depend on what I intended to do with the dog. But from my own standpoint, I don't really want to support puppy producers, so if the only purpose of the breeding is breeding, then I'd give it a miss.

I will say that I avoid the term "reputable" for breeders, because it's pretty meaningless. The main thing I like to see from a breeder is that they are responsible. Which is pretty self-explanatory. A breeder should be taking responsibility for what they produce. They should be prepared and willing to take their pups back, if needed. If a person keeps that in mind when breeding, they'll tend to avoid over-producing or producing unhealthy puppies, because they don't want to be stuck with them all.

[Toller_08]

Not to me. I know of many show breeders that I wouldn't go to for a dog. Just because one shows does not make them reputable (or rather, responsible - I know I sometimes use the words interchangeably accidentally, eventhough they don't have the same meaning).

My short version idea of a responsible breeder is someone whom: Does appropriate health testing, has goals in mind and succeeds at those goals for their dogs/breeding program (be it show, work, performance, whatever), is 100% supportive and cares about each puppy they put into this world, is breeding sound and healthy dogs that are conformationally also well put together, and knows their dogs and background inside and out.

There's more to it than that, but to me those things are more important than whether someone is successful in a show ring or not.

[Pops2]

For the breeds I am most likely to buy, breeding strictly for show (or even primarily) is disreputable.

[puppydog]

No. Not at all. There are some show breeders out there that are pretty darn crappy.

[Fran101]

Originally Posted by Shai

Your premise is a false dichotomy.

Showing a dog in the breed ring makes a breeder neither reputable nor disreputable.

Not showing a dog in the breed ring makes a breeder neither reputable nor disreputable.

Big picture. Priorities.

Basically this.

For me. They must health test, they must care about each puppy the create (and take them back if necessary) and they must prove their dogs in SOME venue.

Showing =/= responsible. It's a sport, a hobby..same as any other

[AdrianneIsabel]

Originally Posted by Flyinsbt

This would be the big thing for me. I like to see some goal behind the breeding. There are breeds in which I absolutely would not want a dog from show lines, and breeds in which it would depend on what I intended to do with the dog. But from my own standpoint, I don't really want to support puppy producers, so if the only purpose of the breeding is breeding, then I'd give it a miss.

I will say that I avoid the term "reputable" for breeders, because it's pretty meaningless. The main thing I like to see from a breeder is that they are responsible. Which is pretty self-explanatory. A breeder should be taking responsibility for what they produce. They should be prepared and willing to take their pups back, if needed. If a person keeps that in mind when breeding, they'll tend to avoid over-producing or producing unhealthy puppies, because they don't want to be stuck with them all.

Great post.

[Laurelin]

1. A 'hobby' breeder means nothing other than the fact that breeding dogs is a hobby, not a living for the person.

2. Showing is not the end all be all for me. I do want a dog that is proven though. I would not buy from someone just breeding their two dogs because they had them. I would also not buy from someone that said they had great dogs but did nothing to prove them.

[Shakou]

Everybody has their own opinion and preferences, and I think a good breeder is in the eye of the beholder. Titles and conformation means absolutely nothing to me when it comes to working dogs. Ma'ii is supposedly purebred, according to his old owner and pretty much every ACD savvy individual we've met, but I'd say there's a pretty slim chance he'd ever win in a show ring....unless, you know, the judge was blind, lol. However, as far as his drive, work ethic, and being able to get a job done? This dog spent 6 years of his life, driving stock up on a ranch in NY, and according to his previous owner, was GREAT at it. There were a few reasons as to why his previous owner was rehoming him, none that were by any means the dog's fault, but what it essentially came down to was a lifestyle change....and a new girlfriend that didn't like dogs.... But that's okay. My only regret is he never took any videos for me to watch! Yes, we've had some behavior issues from him, but I attribute that more to a life time of having very little training then to bad breeding. Because most of those issues have been trained out of him.

My only want in buying a dog from a breeder would be health and temperament tested, but that's it. I couldn't give a flying whoop about titles.