How do you feel about breeding mostly just for temperament, health, and overall conformation of the dog - kind of staying true to the breed I guess, but not necessarily working your dogs or showing them?
If someone does the right research on their dog breed, works with, and owns them long enough, and knows the way their breed should be, shouldn't they be able to judge whether their dogs are worthy to be bred w/out showing them?
And working your dogs is all fine and well, but you don't exactly have to nationally compete with your dog (in whatever it is it's good at, whether it be agility, weight pulling, protection, etc) to prove it's worth, do you? I mean what about APBTs? They were originally bred to fight. That obviously isn't something that should be promoted, so what "proves" them worthy of breeding?
I mean do you think it's WRONG to breed for just companionship? Or to breed just to breed a sound temperament or good health?
If a breeder has quality, beautiful dogs, does health testing, temperament testing, finds good homes for their dogs in advance, does their part to educate people on responsible dog ownership (spaying/neutering where applicable), is a part of preserving and improving their breed, are they a good breeder, or not?
Or is in your opinion preserving and improving the breed linked with working and/or showing?
Dogs are pets first. Companions. Right? Can't that be considered a "purpose"? Yes, shelter dogs can make GREAT companions, but there are more reasons than one why some people prefer to get a dog from a breeder.
I don't know, it's just something I've been wondering about lately. I used to want to breed dogs, I planned to get into showing, and then breeding. But I really have no desire to show dogs. Working dogs, I am interested in, however, but is unrelated to any desire to ever want to breed dogs.
I know at one point many people believed "IF YOU HAVENT PROVEN YOUR DOGS IN THE SHOW RING BEFORE BREEDING, YOU'RE A BYB!" but I think a lot more people now are more interested in proving that your dogs can do what they were bred to do, whatever that is, and breeding sound, healthy dogs with good temperaments.
I'm not really sure how I feel, so I'm interested to know other's ideas. I tend to think that a good breeder just puts the dogs best interests first. That breeds healthy dogs that have a sound temperament, and fits the breed standard.
What do you think?
(Please don't flame me, if you disagree with my opinions that's fine, and feel free to state yours, in fact I ask you to. It's not like I'm a firm believer in anything I've stated here. As I mentioned, I don't really know how I feel about it, but I still ask that you don't flame me for anything I've said. Thanks .)
If someone does the right research on their dog breed, works with, and owns them long enough, and knows the way their breed should be, shouldn't they be able to judge whether their dogs are worthy to be bred w/out showing them?
And working your dogs is all fine and well, but you don't exactly have to nationally compete with your dog (in whatever it is it's good at, whether it be agility, weight pulling, protection, etc) to prove it's worth, do you? I mean what about APBTs? They were originally bred to fight. That obviously isn't something that should be promoted, so what "proves" them worthy of breeding?
I mean do you think it's WRONG to breed for just companionship? Or to breed just to breed a sound temperament or good health?
If a breeder has quality, beautiful dogs, does health testing, temperament testing, finds good homes for their dogs in advance, does their part to educate people on responsible dog ownership (spaying/neutering where applicable), is a part of preserving and improving their breed, are they a good breeder, or not?
Or is in your opinion preserving and improving the breed linked with working and/or showing?
Dogs are pets first. Companions. Right? Can't that be considered a "purpose"? Yes, shelter dogs can make GREAT companions, but there are more reasons than one why some people prefer to get a dog from a breeder.
I don't know, it's just something I've been wondering about lately. I used to want to breed dogs, I planned to get into showing, and then breeding. But I really have no desire to show dogs. Working dogs, I am interested in, however, but is unrelated to any desire to ever want to breed dogs.
I know at one point many people believed "IF YOU HAVENT PROVEN YOUR DOGS IN THE SHOW RING BEFORE BREEDING, YOU'RE A BYB!" but I think a lot more people now are more interested in proving that your dogs can do what they were bred to do, whatever that is, and breeding sound, healthy dogs with good temperaments.
I'm not really sure how I feel, so I'm interested to know other's ideas. I tend to think that a good breeder just puts the dogs best interests first. That breeds healthy dogs that have a sound temperament, and fits the breed standard.
What do you think?
(Please don't flame me, if you disagree with my opinions that's fine, and feel free to state yours, in fact I ask you to. It's not like I'm a firm believer in anything I've stated here. As I mentioned, I don't really know how I feel about it, but I still ask that you don't flame me for anything I've said. Thanks .)