Labrador Retriever Forum

General Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
The difference between...

a breeder and a pet person? As a breeder I can tell you from my prospective is a dream and hope. Every litter planned and expected has me on the edge of my seat with hope that the "one" may be in there. In my minds eye exisits my dream dog, a black bitch by the way, that is everything I have spent years dreaming of. My jaw has dropped and become slack on the occasions I have seen this dream bitch at Potomac. That chill or tear in your eye that a breeder who hopes and dreams knows of when you see such a dog. You know it when you see it and you suck in your breath as it takes you away when you see it. Many people would not understand, but that is why and what keeps me driven when things SUCK! It is in my soul and my heart and will forever remain.
And this my friends is what enables us to place dogs and move on, or our dream will eventually have to end. We can not possibly keep them all and go on. Many may think it's selfish and perhaps they are right, but we are keeping the breed alive and many reap the benefits as one poster gratefully replied about her "almost show dog" that she was so proud of. There are plenty of aches and tears tucked away in my heart, believe me, but the dream keeps my heart alive right along side with all the memories

Re: The difference between...

Thank you for saying this.

Re: The difference between...

It is all about a dream.

Re: The difference between...

A dream is a lovely thing to have, but if you expand that dream to include other dog sports, you will not have to place so many dogs who do not suit the conformation ring.

Re: The difference between...

And then we can ALL compete in obedience with ugly, poorly made dogs. What a great idea with wonderful long-term effects on the breed.

Re: The difference between...

As breeders with a dream and a goal to breed that 'perfect' dog we do breed, not just for the conformation ring but for the whole dog. In fact, most of the dogs I've placed have been lovely. They just, unfortunately, had issues that kept them from being used for breeding/showing and those same issues may have kept them from being top performers in other disciplines as well. The goal is to breed dogs with the form, function, type and temperament to excel in and outside the conformation ring. It's not just about being pretty. As one breeder I know (one whom I have enormous respect for) often says-pretty is just the icing on the cake.

Re: The difference between...

Northwest Breeder
And then we can ALL compete in obedience with ugly, poorly made dogs. What a great idea with wonderful long-term effects on the breed.


This is a perfect example of what really bothers me about being involved with Labradors. Far too many folks with the attitude that the way they choose to do things is the only way; anyone with differing ideas is just wrong. I see it with the conformation folks, the performance folks, and the field folks. Come on! There's room for everyone in the Lab world. How about a little respect for one another? This is a hobby. It's supposed to be fun. Try to keep some perspective. In the grand scheme of things, breeding, showing, training, and competing with your Labs is not the be-all and the end-all. It's not life or death! When we all go to meet our Creator, we're not going to be judged on how many titles we earned on our Labs.

Re: The difference between...

Northwest Breeder
And then we can ALL compete in obedience with ugly, poorly made dogs. What a great idea with wonderful long-term effects on the breed.

There have been and still are some absolutely beautiful dogs competing well in other venues. Beauty is not confined to the breed ring, in fact, there are quite a few poorly made dogs being shown in breed.
There are a number of specialty winning breed champions with advanced obedience & other performance titles. Kudos to those breeders who work so hard to keep all the wonderful qualities that make up a "good" Labrador.
You should be careful not display your ignorance through your disdain.

Re: The difference between...

Breeder's Choice, I think you are missing the point as to why so many others feel the need to place their non contenders in with pet families. It's not necessarily a matter of finding a new venue for our retired dogs or younger dogs to compete in. It's about keeping the volume of our dogs down in all fairness to both the humans in the family and to the dogs who are not able to fit into a breeding program. It's about being able to financially give the dogs in a breeder's home the proper health care and fill all their emotional and physical needs.
Most all of the families who adopts my adult dogs only have that particular dog to dote on, to give excellent vet care. For the families who have the financial means and enough time and love to adopt a 2nd Labrador, I am more than happy to let one of our adult dogs go live with them.
These familes do their own fun activities with their newly adopted dog. Believe it or not, competing in akc events doesn't float everyone's boat nor is it the only recipe to make a dog happy.

Re: The difference between...

Or we could all just compete in whatever sub-par venue we can win at, CKC, UKC, IKC so that we can make ourselves "feel" better about the ugly dogs we are breeding and keeping (so we don't have to place the washouts) that didn't cut it in the real show ring...

Northwest Breeder
And then we can ALL compete in obedience with ugly, poorly made dogs. What a great idea with wonderful long-term effects on the breed.

Re: The difference between...

I am always surprised at how the anonimity makes some of you be such BIG BITCHES. I do understand the dream, but I might not necessary want to toss out a young, not quite developed dog due to one minor issue that I have seen other dogs have and those dogs get points. And I certainly won't place my perfectly wonderful bitch who gets Blue ribbons, but no points, but is a nice producer. She is lovely in her OB and Rally rings. And I am sorry, but the AKC is not the end all/be all of the dog competition world. For any of you who have read Pat Hasting's "Tricks of the Trade", she basically says that the other venues for showing are ideal for newer folks to gain confidence and hone their handling skills. But I am sure the reason most of you meanies knock it is because once some of us get past our "newbie" stage you'll have to contend with more competition.

Re: The difference between...

Competing in the obedience ring with a poorly made dog is no different than owning a BISS CH with a poor work ethic, and there are just as many of those. Not to mention there are plenty of poorly constructed Labradors winning in the show ring-long open coats, short upper arms, short stuffy necks, short muzzles, massive bone - none of these characteristics contribute to a properly functioning working retriever. On the flip side, one will rarely if ever see a dog with a poor work ethic successful at advanced field work.

I have nothing against removing inadequate specimens from the breeding pool. I do have an issue with people who are breeding numerous litters every year for the sole purpose of winning ribbons in the show ring (which in and of itself is completely meaningless), and when the dog does not win big it is replaced with yet another hopeful. I have yet to meet a breeder like this place a dog that has no work ethic, let alone have a clue about the dog's work ethic.

Re: The difference between...

Hmmmn. So it's ever so much better to place the dog in a pet home than learn to use the unique skills of the dog. Oh the ways we justify placing dogs.

Re: The difference between...

There are plenty of other ways to keep the number of dogs in your home down. Like breed less dogs. Like be a little more patient about achieving that dream conformation dog. Like think about keeping only one dog from a litter instead of "running on" three and discarding 1-3. Oh so many ways, but first you have to look at the world of dogs differently.

Re: The difference between...

So your plan would be to keep just ONE puppy, lowering your odds of getting a "worthy specimin". And when that ONE puppy turns into a pet quality dog, you will keep it until it dies, 12-15 years in a perfect world, and not breed another litter until you have room again, the next DECADE!?????
Gee, I guess some people expect to have looooong lives if they think they are ever going to get anywhere that way!
Or are you saying that you will keep and BREED that ONE dog you kept, regardless of it's quality, or lack thereof, just because "it's what you have"?
Hmmmm? That's certainly a unique approach. One of a person who is not serious about being successful no doubt.
But then again, keep that attitude, please. There is no room for the faint of heart in this heartbreak hobby. That's for sure.

Breeders choice
There are plenty of other ways to keep the number of dogs in your home down. Like breed less dogs. Like be a little more patient about achieving that dream conformation dog. Like think about keeping only one dog from a litter instead of "running on" three and discarding 1-3. Oh so many ways, but first you have to look at the world of dogs differently.

Re: The difference between...

Or perhaps I have simply questioned the idea that I MUST be the person who both bred and owns that incredibly beautiful dog who improves the breed. Maybe I am satisfy to observe that beautiful dog someone else produced and not envy the other person's dog.

Perhaps I have questioned the idea that the dogs I keep are disposable and serve no other purpose than breeding. Maybe I have learned lots of ways to enjoy the Total Dog even when the dog might not be best suited for breeding.

Perhaps I have questioned the idea that all my dogs must be breedable or they should be placed in pet homes.

Perhaps I have looked at the reasons I might not be able to breed my dogs and found that I would be placing a dog with a problem in a home less able to care for them than I am.

Perhaps I have questioned my own motivations for breeding and found that *sometimes* my real motivations for breeding are not improving the breed but my own egotism, greed and envy.

Perhaps I have questioned my own impatience to achieve my goals quickly--and by my own breeding. Maybe I can just enjoy the good fortune of others and still be aiming to improve the breed.

But even doing all that questioning, I live with the downsides of my choices and don't expect or desire anyone else to feel sorry for me for the choices I have made.

wowzer
So your plan would be to keep just ONE puppy, lowering your odds of getting a "worthy specimin". And when that ONE puppy turns into a pet quality dog, you will keep it until it dies, 12-15 years in a perfect world, and not breed another litter until you have room again, the next DECADE!?????
Gee, I guess some people expect to have looooong lives if they think they are ever going to get anywhere that way!
Or are you saying that you will keep and BREED that ONE dog you kept, regardless of it's quality, or lack thereof, just because "it's what you have"?
Hmmmm? That's certainly a unique approach. One of a person who is not serious about being successful no doubt.
But then again, keep that attitude, please. There is no room for the faint of heart in this heartbreak hobby. That's for sure.

Breeders choice
There are plenty of other ways to keep the number of dogs in your home down. Like breed less dogs. Like be a little more patient about achieving that dream conformation dog. Like think about keeping only one dog from a litter instead of "running on" three and discarding 1-3. Oh so many ways, but first you have to look at the world of dogs differently.

Re: The difference between...

Everyone should be breeding like it will be their last litter. Do the absolute best you can. Maybe if breeders thought they only had one shot in ten years to get it right there would be more carefully planned litters. And horror of horrors to have to keep the duds you breed instead of passing them off to the public (where they are most likely better off). I think there are different definitions of "success". Breeding numbers until you get a champion is one. Breeding dogs where EACH life has special value is another.

Re: The difference between...

Oh my gosh did this ever turn ugly! Why can't we all do what is right for us as individuals and not judge and so harshly critisize when others do differently???

So what if one person wants to never place a dog? So what if I do??? I am not a big show person, but I do know what I want and breed for it. It is not about the ribbons to me. I show when I want to be proud of what one of my dogs has produced. I've actually been asked why I don't get more excited about a win than I do. I have just found for myself that that is not the end all for me. I know a beautiful dog when I see it. One of my closest friends is very competitive and loves the win and wants to win. I think that's great, but it's just not me. When I go to a show it's the social part with dogs and people that I adore and look forward to.

What is wrong with all of us? Don't we all have one very important commen denominator? We all love dogs, Labradors in particular. Can we not be so quick to judge what others find right for themselves and there dogs? Dog breeder, dog enthusiast, pet owner, rally lover, obedience trainer and competitor, does it really matter?

I have my dream, we all have one don't we? How boring if they all were the same.

Re: The difference between...

You see, that is where you went wrong in your thinking. I do not just PASS OFF a DUD when I place!!
I am giving a wonderful, sweet, well trained LOVING companion to people who will care for and appreciate him/her. I resent that you would call ANY of my dogs a DUD just because they do not fit into my ideal for showing and breeding!!!! Most pet people don't care!! They want a companion and thats what they GET!


What the &^%&
Everyone should be breeding like it will be their last litter. Do the absolute best you can. Maybe if breeders thought they only had one shot in ten years to get it right there would be more carefully planned litters. And horror of horrors to have to keep the duds you breed instead of passing them off to the public (where they are most likely better off). I think there are different definitions of "success". Breeding numbers until you get a champion is one. Breeding dogs where EACH life has special value is another.

Re: The difference between...

Sorry about using the word Dud. I think you used the word washout.

wowzer
Or we could all just compete in whatever sub-par venue we can win at, CKC, UKC, IKC so that we can make ourselves "feel" better about the ugly dogs we are breeding and keeping (so we don't have to place the washouts) that didn't cut it in the real show ring...

Northwest Breeder
And then we can ALL compete in obedience with ugly, poorly made dogs. What a great idea with wonderful long-term effects on the breed.

Re: The difference between...

Yup. Washout, as a show dog. NOT a dud.


What the &^%&
Sorry about using the word Dud. I think you used the word washout.

wowzer
Or we could all just compete in whatever sub-par venue we can win at, CKC, UKC, IKC so that we can make ourselves "feel" better about the ugly dogs we are breeding and keeping (so we don't have to place the washouts) that didn't cut it in the real show ring...

Northwest Breeder
And then we can ALL compete in obedience with ugly, poorly made dogs. What a great idea with wonderful long-term effects on the breed.

Re: The difference between...

Breeding for correct structure is not only meaningful, it produces healthier dogs who CAN work. Properly built, well balanced, dogs are better athletes and take the wear and tear without breaking down. They hold up better over the years. Breeding WITHOUT consideration for the dog's structure while breeding for high performance sets a dog up for injury.

Breeding to win and washing out prospects happens every day in field trialing. That sport has more washouts than any competition outside of Greyhound racing. Top field trainers have assistants that train with the purpose of weeding out dogs of average talent. A FC is an extraordinary dog. The breeding, testing and washing out is the way to identify the top individuals -- and when those dogs fail, they are not as easily re-homed as our meaningless show dogs.

If you wanted to make a point about dual purpose dogs or trends you don't like - you took the nasty way to go about it. Maybe producing generations of show champions looks easy to you. It's not. Look at the numbers. A champion breeder deserves respect whether they produce breed, field or obedience champions. Those breeders who do it generation after generation produce the dogs that become the foundation for the future.

As to achieving those goals while breeding on a small scale, I can think of only a couple of people who became foundation breeders while producing only two or three liters a year. It takes talent but enormous luck too. There's enough heartbreak in this hobby. Getting bashed from a fellow Labrador lover shouldn't be part of it.

Another Breeder
I have nothing against removing inadequate specimens from the breeding pool. I do have an issue with people who are breeding numerous litters every year for the sole purpose of winning ribbons in the show ring (which in and of itself is completely meaningless), and when the dog does not win big it is replaced with yet another hopeful.

Re: The difference between...

Don't know if you directed these comments to me, but
I am fully aware that breeding conformation champions is difficult. But I do not believe that individuals have to achieve the goal by themselves. The desire to be the *one* person who achieves the goal is not usually based on bettering the breed. Thinking more collectively and cooperatively allows a breeder to participate in the task of producing beautiful/functional/healthy dogs without having to make some of the "sacrifices" that you would have to make to individually breed champions.

Of course, you would also have to come to grips with some of your other and more personal motivations for breeding to win in the show ring and find other ways to satisfy them. This also requires mature cooperation and the ability to enjoy the success of others without becoming envious and greedy.

Re: The difference between...

This is where you have me wrong. I have specialty winners who have advanced titles in both obedience and the field so I'm not sure which side you think I'm on.

If you think that structure is only for the show ring, you are greatly mistaken. Every day when I train, I see how important structure is for my dogs and I have had more than one dog break down because he had tons of heart but poor structure. I think it is absolutely essential that if we are going to bring these dogs into the world, we had better do our best to make sure they are as healthy and sound as possible. In the end, it can be life or death for the dogs we produce so I enter into breeding with a great deal of levity and I save the fun for the competitions and just enjoying having the dogs in my house.

I work hard to produce a dog who can do what the breed is meant to do, BOTH physically and mentally. It does neither me nor the dog no good to forgive poor instinct or poor temperament if the dog is beautiful, and it does no good to forgive poor structure if the dog can work well. There is no reason to purposely produce poor structure in a sporting dog, especially with the excuse of 'Well, the dog isn't a show dog anyway'.



Kathy
Northwest Breeder
And then we can ALL compete in obedience with ugly, poorly made dogs. What a great idea with wonderful long-term effects on the breed.


This is a perfect example of what really bothers me about being involved with Labradors. Far too many folks with the attitude that the way they choose to do things is the only way; anyone with differing ideas is just wrong. I see it with the conformation folks, the performance folks, and the field folks. Come on! There's room for everyone in the Lab world. How about a little respect for one another? This is a hobby. It's supposed to be fun. Try to keep some perspective. In the grand scheme of things, breeding, showing, training, and competing with your Labs is not the be-all and the end-all. It's not life or death! When we all go to meet our Creator, we're not going to be judged on how many titles we earned on our Labs.

Re: The difference between...

Form follows function ....

Re: The difference between...

Another Breeder
Competing in the obedience ring with a poorly made dog is no different than owning a BISS CH with a poor work ethic, and there are just as many of those. Not to mention there are plenty of poorly constructed Labradors winning in the show ring-long open coats, short upper arms, short stuffy necks, short muzzles, massive bone - none of these characteristics contribute to a properly functioning working retriever. On the flip side, one will rarely if ever see a dog with a poor work ethic successful at advanced field work.

I have nothing against removing inadequate specimens from the breeding pool. I do have an issue with people who are breeding numerous litters every year for the sole purpose of winning ribbons in the show ring (which in and of itself is completely meaningless), and when the dog does not win big it is replaced with yet another hopeful. I have yet to meet a breeder like this place a dog that has no work ethic, let alone have a clue about the dog's work ethic.


Perfectly said. Thank you!

Re: The difference between...

I am trying to find the balance in this thread with regard to the "pet person". I know that this forum is primarily for breeders, but there are some pet people here that glean information here in relation to growth, behavior, health, and to further appreciate the sweet and loyal Labrador in their lives. I am sympathetic to the trials and tribulations of breeding, I know that it is not for me. But, please, rest assured, that the two breeder pups in my home are cherished beyond compare. I am grateful for the efforts of the breeders who allowed me to have these two pups and the legacy of their hard work will be forever remembered. ~Maria

Re: The difference between...

Clearly Canadian
Form follows function ....


Yea and I've always heard, pretty is as pretty does. Just because a dog can perform its given task, doesn't mean it has proper form. Nor even have to resemble a Labrador. Heck a few years back there was a Border Collie who achieved the Master Hunter! Not much of a Labrador! LOL

But at any rate, performance competition dogs are breed for a certain temperament, drive and trainability that is needed for the type of work they do. It's that insatiable drive that, as I call it, allows the dog to "function despite its form".

Dianne Mullikin, EMT-B
Los Angeles, CA