1. BEFORE a dog (male or female) is bred, should they be titled?

2. Should both the sire and the dam be titled prior to breeding?

3. Have you ever bred an untitled female to a titled male? an untitled male to a titled female?

4. If you were looking for a responsible breeder from whom to purchase a puppy, and you discovered that they had bred dogs against the breed standard would you buy from them?

your questions 1, 2, 3, are the same question. Just because a dog has a title doesn't make it a better speciman except on paper. Title's are bought all the time with the end of a lead.

ALL JUST MY OPINION!

1. no
2. no
3. yes yes
4. no idea what you think might be "against"

"If you were looking for a responsible breeder from whom to purchase a puppy, and you discovered that they had bred dogs against the breed standard would you buy from them?"

What does this mean? Breeding bogus colors or breeding designer mixes?

Think health clearances should be the first concern before looking at titles.

1 No
2 No
3 Yes Yes

I can tell by your questions, that you have no clue what breeding Labs is about. You need to go to shows more and get an idea of what breeding dogs in about. Meet some good breeders.
If you are not happy with a breeder move on. There is plenty of good breeders around.

Health clearances and temperament, and conformation are more important than titles. I would like to see some working ability, or solid wins with good judges or breeder judges, but they are not totally neccesary. IMO

No
No
Yes
Titles can be bought. If it were like it use to be they would mean more. I like to see working titles back in a pedigree to know that the dogs are smart. But I show and do obedience and other things. I want a pedigree and dog to be able to do both. Like Labs should. Titles mean nothing to me. The dog, pedigree and health clearance. Been breeding and showing 30 years. And I agree, if you think titles are that important you do still have alot of learning to do.

So what your all saying is that it's ok for a BYB to breed a lab as long as they have minimal clearances? Is that bettering the breed?

Thanks everyone I was on another forum and a few guys were saying that a dog should never be bred until it recieves some type of title. CH or field title, he even went on saying that we are not good breeder if we do this. I think that there is not perfect lab. They all can be inproved somewhere. It is our job to find our needs of our dogs and improve where needed. Thanks for the replys

A dog should be proven in some way to show it's worthy of being bred.

The truth is there are puppy mills that get clearances and the breeder dog spends most of his or her life in a cage.

A dog should be a quality example of the breed to be considered for breeding, and must be sound, in good health, and typical for the breed (breed type). These things are proven by health and genetic tests and certifications, getting the dog out in competition in one of the various venues to see how it stacks up against others of it's breed, etc.

No one would advocate just taking a bitch of whatever breed and putting her with a male of that same breed just to get puppies; to do so is a BYB or Puppy Mill way of breeding.

Dogs don't necessarily have to be finished a title, but they should have some competitive ability, be healthy and sound, and fit their breed standard/breed type.

Unfortunately, there are many worthy dogs out there that will not get titles for various reasons. It takes more than just a good dog to earn a title. It takes, amongst other things, time, MONEY, and more money. Some have those things in excess and others simply do not. On the flip side of that, there are plenty of dogs with titles that would never had gotten them had their owners not had the resources to buy them.

Oh, and there have been plenty of non titled dogs that have produced beautifully.

Clearances are TOOLS to use and titles are nice to have if you can get them. Some clubs have Breeders Codes of Ethics where they'll say if you met Code or not if you list a litter. Probably doesn't matter either way as long as you are doing everything the best as possible and for the right reasons. I do performance, so my bitches will ALWAYS have a performance title before being bred. It's MY personal standard. I have learned it's best to never say "I'd NEVER do that" because no sooner said than you fall off your high horse.

I love the folks that preach "They never do that" and crucify other breeders for doing things like breeding on prelims, but eagerly kiss the butts of folks they think are important and turn a blind eye to the fact that these old-timers breed on prelims or no clearances at all. I think hypocrisy is worse than breeding on a prelim or not doing one of the newer clearances.

some of our foundations lines are from dogs that never received titles.
It should be about the entire package; pedigree, conformation, clearances and ability, but I don't think you have to have a title to prove ability.

Due to the money it cost now a days to show or trial, I think we will see less and less dogs getting titles.

Some of the best producing stud dogs and bitches never got a title. Look back in some nice strong pedigrees. They are there. Those we used from England a few generations back that added so much to what we have today. Bitches have less time to show, come in heat, have a litter or two. And if the pups are nice and finish who cares, she has proved herself. Some of the dogs with the brought title can not reproduce themself. You have one nice dog and that is the end of the line. Ask, bet there are tons of studs that have never had more than two or three litters. Look back again at those pedigree that have the same stud, lots of them, and bitch that never got a title. Look at the package.

It isnt just having titles, but has the breeder shown dogs or gotten field or obedience experience.

Competing isnt just about getting titles, but being out amoung good dogs to see what is out there and learning from other exhibitors and seing good dogs.

Staying at home and breeding your dog is no way to help the breed .Without the knowledge that comes with competition,it would be hard to make informaive breeding decisions.

While titles are not the be-all, end-all, they do indicate a dog has met an established standard, especially from a performance perspective. It is getting harder and harder to find dogs with any proven work ethic, let alone pedigrees reflecting consistent work ethic in a line. So few people work their dogs or have a clue what a dog should be required to do in the field that asking the stud dog owner about their dog's field ability seems to be a waste of time. At least if the dog is titled you know SOMEONE with experience has evaluated the dog.

How about someone (previous longtime BYB) who gets a nice puppy, rarely entered the puppy/dog, no placements, does nothing with the dog except breed it. Once bred another puppy is kept, rarely shown, no placements, still does nothing with the dogs. Breeds that dog several litters, still no placements, no obedience, no CGC, no rally, no JH, no agility, nada. Pedigree is starting to get sparse for titles except the studs that are used. Getting the same price for pups that show breeders get so why bother doing anything with them.

She may be learning, You seem to already know everything

Please do not say that Titles do not hold any weight in the dog world or mean anything ...COME ON! How does breeding dogs without any proven abilities from the show ring or performance events make a person any different than the neighbor down the street who is a BYB? Titles mean ALOT! Any person and dog who has spent the huge amount of time, dedication, conditioning, planning, and money to participate in events to achieve Titles knows that they are not easily earned or given away - you have to WORK hard for them and only those who have looks and brains achieve them. If it was so easy, every dog would be a Champion, every dog would have field or obedience titles - but many do not because their dog doesn't have what it takes to achieve a Title. Those who have titles definitely stand ABOVE any dog next to them that does not. Just like a college degree, someone who has a college degree has been proven.
Many breeders care about wins and Titles and "points".
If we didn't, no one would care about winning or achieving any Titles because they would have no worth.
If you want to breed to a dog who has done nothing in the show ring, nothing in any performance events, has no titles, that is your call, but do NOT try and level the playing field by saying Titles do not mean anything, nothing could be further from the truth!!

I think we were talking show champions that can be bought. Obedience and field work are different. We all like to see those back there. To me that shows the dog is smart. The only kind to have. But if the stud is what I want conformation wise, pedigree wise, clearance wise, has no title but sire does, grandsire might, something back there shows me intelligence, then I will go with the stud dog. Titles are great and take work but it does not mean the dog has everything else we want.

Saying a Champion can be bought can also be said about those breeders who win under other breeders because of politics, but no one gossips about that in the same way. You are talking about a handler vs. a breeder judge who puts up other breeders dogs because of politics. Professional handlers do NOT win every time with the Labs they are showing. Its not that easy. And if they win, it is because they have done their job as a professional and presented the dog to its best and the dog is a nice dog/bitch and deserves to win! Don't lump all pro handlers as one.