Breeders' Conditions When Selling A Puppy

[stormie]

I think some breeders get too carried away with their own perceived importance really :D When I purchase a quality bred puppy, I want it on main register with no restrictions. Unless a puppy has obvious faults, my 3 year old is on limited register due to a coat fault in the breed, fair enough, but a well bred puppy may turn out very good and very breed worthy and shouldn't be restricted with desexing clauses or limited registers as you never know until it matures. Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders.

Wow. I am of the total opposite. I'd stay clear of any breeder who puts all their puppies on main register. You only have to look at what's being bred by novice breeders in all breeds to see why it's dangerous to put everything on the main. There is variance in most litters and I think it's important to still scrutinize the litter to only pick 'the best'. I'm not sure how you can say that by putting some pups on limited, means the breeder isn't confident with their breeding. In one well planned litter, you could get a very high quality, well put together dog, but yet it's littermate may have different qualities which doesn't see it as well conformed, and thus should be placed on limited. Doesn't mean that it's not 'quality'.

The others may still be of very high quality and better than many being shown, but to put them all on main with no restrictions on breeding will only see them end up in the hands of novices who will ruin the lines.

To me, breeders who put restrictions on their dogs are being responsible for their breed.

Edited May 15, 2010 by stormie

[Gayle.]

Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders.

Not necessarily. If a breeder is using imported stock....stock that they paid a premium to import, I can definitely see why they would want pet pups to be desexed.....because they would not want their imported lines used indiscriminately.

They would want to be the ones to engineer the use of the genetic material being used as they obviously imported with a view to the future.

And I suppose the same can be said of any breeder who puts a lot of time, effort and forethought into their program and maps out the future carefully. They would not want just anyone using their lines, and who can blame them?

[Poodle Mum]

Its good you friend is made of "tuff stuff" ZZ.....she needs to tell someone to take a "flying leap"

Black Bronson....well said

I have a litter of pups nearly ready to go & yes we have questions.......but nothing like those demands ;) .....No wonder people go to pet shops!

Vaccinate....yes...obvious!

Diet....I give them a diet sheet of what the pups have been eating....then its their choice....as it becomes their pup.

Vet......again their puppy! Some of mine are going interstate!!!

Kids.....if trained are usually the best puppy trainers

Desexing.....this is the stressful one for me. As my breed is the biggest part of an "oodle".....I am most particular about getting the pup desexed, unless it has been sold for show home.

If any of my babies going that are going to pet homes, go from an "ugly duckling" into a "beautiful swan"......I will be very excited & encouraged & thinking WOW, I am achieving what I have set out to achieve........breeding a beautiful poo

Yes....I worry & stress about where my pups will go, but placing all those restrictions is not going to ensure a more loving, caring home....which is all I want.

Maybe I am a bit to simplistic....thats just me

[Red Fox]

I'm not sure that I agree 100% with the desexing debate. It depends very much on the breed size too - I would not buy a large or giant breed puppy that came desexed at 8 weeks. I think that if I wanted to go with a particular breeder and that was their policy then I would discuss this with them first.

My boy is on a desexing contract, he should have been desexed by 15 months, but he is now 18 months old and not desexed. But because I have discussed my reasons for this with his breeder and been honest it has never been a problem (and no I do not plan on breeding him, neither does his breeder and he is on limited register).

But the dogs are on that contract for a reason and I would probably question the ethics of a breeder who did not impose some restrictions.

I think that if you are able to build up a good rapoire with the breeder then the restrictions may be more open

[mr.mister]

pretty much a statement of good intentions.

Things like Ivemectin (commonly found in heart worm meds) and collies are concerning as collies are sensitive to Ivemectin and it can kill. Not too bad with BCs, but still possible.

High protein diets with Dalmatians are also known issues.

Things like this should be observed by puppy buyers and a responsibility of breeders to inform puppy buyers of known issues within the chosen breed

Our BC boy died from poisoning from the annual heartworm injection. He was a rescue, and we hadn't been told anything about risks involved with certain vaccines. We simply trusted our vet (we didn't know we had any reason not to) when they offered the injection, and after a full year of on-and-off illness, with us having no idea what was going on, he passed 6 weeks after the second injection from a massive haemorrhage (sp).

So, there is validity in vaccination conditions I think. I think going so far as to say you cannot vaccinate your dog ever is going too far, but making a point of educating new puppy buyers (and warning against) certain vaccines and medications can in the end save the dog's life. I wish we'd had the knowledge.

add: I think some of those conditions are rather ridiculous and would ward off many a pet puppy buyer.

[Rebanne]

For example, I would be very reluctant to go with a breeder who wanted to prevent me from vaccinating my dog. I had never heard of this before and I was a bit taken aback. Objected to heartworm protection too. I just think those things are important.

have to say I would be very unhappy if an owner of one of my dogs gave it the yearly heartworm injection, I think the injections are very bad, and any health guarentees I had given would be terminated.

[fifi]

I think some breeders get too carried away with their own perceived importance really When I purchase a quality bred puppy, I want it on main register with no restrictions. Unless a puppy has obvious faults, my 3 year old is on limited register due to a coat fault in the breed, fair enough, but a well bred puppy may turn out very good and very breed worthy and shouldn't be restricted with desexing clauses or limited registers as you never know until it matures. Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders. ;)

Wow. I am of the total opposite. I'd stay clear of any breeder who puts all their puppies on main register. You only have to look at what's being bred by novice breeders in all breeds to see why it's dangerous to put everything on the main. There is variance in most litters and I think it's important to still scrutinize the litter to only pick 'the best'. I'm not sure how you can say that by putting some pups on limited, means the breeder isn't confident with their breeding. In one well planned litter, you could get a very high quality, well put together dog, but yet it's littermate may have different qualities which doesn't see it as well conformed, and thus should be placed on limited. Doesn't mean that it's not 'quality'.

The others may still be of very high quality and better than many being shown, but to put them all on main with no restrictions on breeding will only see them end up in the hands of novices who will ruin the lines.

To me, breeders who put restrictions on their dogs are being responsible for their breed.

well said Stormie.

I don't think every pup in a litter is worthy of putting on the mains, and breeders who are objective and selective for their breed's future and maintaining quality in the lines, would not be so quick to send out their pups with mains reg and no restrictions at all.

fifi

[Stolzseinrotts]

^^

I agree with the above as well.

I am all for the limited register. I have some lovely show worthy pups on the limited register. They were sold as pets only and therefore pet only goes on the limited register. I am very cautious of selling any pup on the main register for many reasons including protecting the breed.

I cringe when I hear of whole litters being sold on the main.

[Stolzseinrotts]

I will agree though that some breeders really place some extreme terms on their pups.

[fifi]

I will agree though that some breeders really place some extreme terms on their pups.

Yes, the op's friend has scored a doozy there !!!

I have no problems with what I see as responsible terms,

but one of the one's mentioned - buying a puppy to have it taken off you at a later date....

fifi

edited to make sense

Edited May 16, 2010 by fifi

[Gayle.]

Both breeders I bought my dogs from mentioned Ivermectin sensitivity in the breed, to ensure I was aware of it. And each time I go to the vet, I mention it to them. And no vet has ever known about it in my breed.....in fact no vet I've ever been to has ever known what my breed is, let alone know they are a member of the collie family.

[Black Bronson]

I think some breeders get too carried away with their own perceived importance really

Not necessary :D

Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding

:D very rude

Mysticview has similar ideals to mine when it comes to the sale of a puppy

Once you have made the decision to sell to a particular person, the puppy is paid for and gone to their new home, you can only hope that as a dedicated breeder, you've done your best and provided the new owners with as much info and offers of support as you can. The rest is up to your puppy buyer and here's hoping your instincts were right and you chose a good one! :D

When I purchase a quality bred puppy, I want it on main register with no restrictions.

Why?

a well bred puppy may turn out very good and very breed worthy and shouldn't be restricted with desexing clauses or limited registers as you never know until it matures.

My Pet puppies are never sold on Main Register - always Limited with a desexing clause - and if I've made a mistake about the show potential of a particular puppy then too bad for me. ;)

T-time, I have just recently purchased a puppy, and you wouldn't believe the nonesense that some breeders carry on with to the point that only newbie dog owners would be caught by their restrictions. To make matters worse in my breed, the restrictive breeders were primarily the ones with the average bloodlines and the highest prices, nothing special in their lines at all..........so why go through with all the garbage for an average puppy :D I purchased from an extremely high level of proven bloodines, on main register, chose the pedigree name with papers ready when collecting the puppy and had pick of the litter Beautiful, that's how it should be

[percyk]

hmmm

ive never had any conditions placed

all my breeders came from the showring

thats where i met them

so theyre into their dogs

but not one has asked much of me at all

mind you i do a lot of the talking beforehand

tell em i dont want to breed

have been buying boys anyway

and that i dont want to show but that temp is important

thats about it

i tell em i train the dogs...and what i have already at home

the list you have is a strange one

dont get the bit about the groomer or the vet

[Black Bronson]

I think some breeders get too carried away with their own perceived importance really When I purchase a quality bred puppy, I want it on main register with no restrictions. Unless a puppy has obvious faults, my 3 year old is on limited register due to a coat fault in the breed, fair enough, but a well bred puppy may turn out very good and very breed worthy and shouldn't be restricted with desexing clauses or limited registers as you never know until it matures. Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders. :D

I'm with t-time on this one (for the most part)

I just purchased a puppy with restrictions. The dog is not at public stud and the breeder will most likely want him back to stud a litter. I have no problem with this as the bloodlines are sought after and the breeder is just covering her backside in case I do the wrong thing (which I wouldn't anyway but you never know with some people)

Quality bred doesn't necessarily mean breeding quality. Of coarse every breeder would like every single puppy in their litter to be show quality but the reality is that it doesn't happen... you will get a couple of pet quality dogs in the litter. Why should these dogs not be desexed and on limited register just because their breeding is 'quality'?

If you are after a pet then going with a good breeder is your best bet for health reasons, but does conformation and main register really matter when you just want a nice addition to the family?

In regards to zug zugs post I think those are some pretty hefty requirements.

I believe (and i state now, this is my opinion only)

- it needs to be desexed

Agree completely

- it cannot be desexed until it is an adult and the breeder wants the option to take it back if it is of show quality (if not, then you can desex it and keep it)

Uhhhh..... Not unless you are LEASING the dog, if you are buying it then certainly not.

- it needs to be regularly vaccinated

Of course, although I believe after 1 year of age vacc only need to be done every 3 years.

- it is not allowed to be vaccinated for anything ever

Ever? Or not after 1 year as mentioned above? If they are never vaccinated for anything EVER, then that is irresponsible.

- it needs to go to the breeder's vet, not yours

Too bad if you live interstate. Although I can understand where they are coming from.. some people prefer some vets over others... If I sold pups I would RECOMMEND a certain vet, but wouldn't force.

- it can never be taken to any vet but needs to be taken back to the breeder herself if anything is ever wrong with it

The breeder should be INFORMED of any problems, but I agree... vet first.

- it needs to be fed on a raw diet only

If the dog is yours then that's not up to them. Raw diets are good, but you should be able to make that choice yourself.

- it needs to go to a groomer of the breeder's choice

Again, same with the vets, people have preferences for certain groomers, but I would only recommend, not force.

- no kids

Under the age of 3 I tend to agree. I know that won't go down well, but in reality, all it takes is a 2 year old to pull the dogs tail and it's bye-bye child... the older the kid, the more you can teach them how to behave around dogs.

And yet another disclaimer... these are my OPINIONS only (I have already been in trouble a few times for having an opinion so please don't eat me)

So, what advantage is it for the buyer to purchase a puppy with restrictions over an unrestricted purchase..........NOTHING

[Black Bronson]

I think some breeders get too carried away with their own perceived importance really When I purchase a quality bred puppy, I want it on main register with no restrictions. Unless a puppy has obvious faults, my 3 year old is on limited register due to a coat fault in the breed, fair enough, but a well bred puppy may turn out very good and very breed worthy and shouldn't be restricted with desexing clauses or limited registers as you never know until it matures. Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders. :D

Wow. I am of the total opposite. I'd stay clear of any breeder who puts all their puppies on main register. You only have to look at what's being bred by novice breeders in all breeds to see why it's dangerous to put everything on the main. There is variance in most litters and I think it's important to still scrutinize the litter to only pick 'the best'. I'm not sure how you can say that by putting some pups on limited, means the breeder isn't confident with their breeding. In one well planned litter, you could get a very high quality, well put together dog, but yet it's littermate may have different qualities which doesn't see it as well conformed, and thus should be placed on limited. Doesn't mean that it's not 'quality'.

The others may still be of very high quality and better than many being shown, but to put them all on main with no restrictions on breeding will only see them end up in the hands of novices who will ruin the lines.

To me, breeders who put restrictions on their dogs are being responsible for their breed.

I was offered a puppy in my recent search on limited for $1250. On main, the puppy was $3500 my choice???. I can't see how that scenario was being responsible for the breed and the option was driven by money :D Pay the money and you can do with the dog as you wish, don't pay the money and it's restricted

Edited May 16, 2010 by Black Bronson

[Black Bronson]

Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders.

Not necessarily. If a breeder is using imported stock....stock that they paid a premium to import, I can definitely see why they would want pet pups to be desexed.....because they would not want their imported lines used indiscriminately.

They would want to be the ones to engineer the use of the genetic material being used as they obviously imported with a view to the future.

And I suppose the same can be said of any breeder who puts a lot of time, effort and forethought into their program and maps out the future carefully. They would not want just anyone using their lines, and who can blame them?

Of course we know why breeders place restrictions on their puppies, but if they have such a keen desire to do so, they could always keep the litter for themselves. As a purchaser for me, there is no in between.........either sell the whole puppy unrestricted or don't sell them at all. Personally, I am just not interested in restricted puppy sales and provides absolutely no benefits to the purchaser whatsoever

[mr.mister]

Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders.

Not necessarily. If a breeder is using imported stock....stock that they paid a premium to import, I can definitely see why they would want pet pups to be desexed.....because they would not want their imported lines used indiscriminately.

They would want to be the ones to engineer the use of the genetic material being used as they obviously imported with a view to the future.

And I suppose the same can be said of any breeder who puts a lot of time, effort and forethought into their program and maps out the future carefully. They would not want just anyone using their lines, and who can blame them?

Of course we know why breeders place restrictions on their puppies, but if they have such a keen desire to do so, they could always keep the litter for themselves. As a purchaser for me, there is no in between.........either sell the whole puppy unrestricted or don't sell them at all. Personally, I am just not interested in restricted puppy sales and provides absolutely no benefits to the purchaser whatsoever :D

But why? As repeated.

If the dog is not to be bred from, why?

And I'm also confused as to why a breeder should keep an entire litter regardless of individual pup quality, just because otherwise they'd go on limit?

I also might add, Limit is not designed to benefit the buyer. It is designed to keep breeder's lines safe and help ensure that any random, indiscrimiate breeding doesn't take place.

Edited May 16, 2010 by alexhegyesi

[Black Bronson]

I'm not sure that I agree 100% with the desexing debate. It depends very much on the breed size too - I would not buy a large or giant breed puppy that came desexed at 8 weeks. I think that if I wanted to go with a particular breeder and that was their policy then I would discuss this with them first.

My boy is on a desexing contract, he should have been desexed by 15 months, but he is now 18 months old and not desexed. But because I have discussed my reasons for this with his breeder and been honest it has never been a problem (and no I do not plan on breeding him, neither does his breeder and he is on limited register).

But the dogs are on that contract for a reason and I would probably question the ethics of a breeder who did not impose some restrictions.

I think that if you are able to build up a good rapoire with the breeder then the restrictions may be more open :D

I don't agree with desexing a male anyway and there is no way in the world I would remotely consider a large breed desexed at anything under 18 months. Bugger your desexing clause SecretKei if you feel it's not the best option for you and your boy

[fifi]

Most breeders hope that their most basic wishes are followed, and if you agreed to a desexing contract, then I would hope that a puppy person would adhere to it, or discuss hesitations with the breeder.

NOT listen to someone telling them to blithley disregard the agreement.

fifi

[Black Bronson]

I think some breeders get too carried away with their own perceived importance really :D When I purchase a quality bred puppy, I want it on main register with no restrictions. Unless a puppy has obvious faults, my 3 year old is on limited register due to a coat fault in the breed, fair enough, but a well bred puppy may turn out very good and very breed worthy and shouldn't be restricted with desexing clauses or limited registers as you never know until it matures. Restrictions tells me that the breeders are not confident of the quality they are breeding and personally wouldn't purchase from those breeders.

Wow. I am of the total opposite. I'd stay clear of any breeder who puts all their puppies on main register. You only have to look at what's being bred by novice breeders in all breeds to see why it's dangerous to put everything on the main. There is variance in most litters and I think it's important to still scrutinize the litter to only pick 'the best'. I'm not sure how you can say that by putting some pups on limited, means the breeder isn't confident with their breeding. In one well planned litter, you could get a very high quality, well put together dog, but yet it's littermate may have different qualities which doesn't see it as well conformed, and thus should be placed on limited. Doesn't mean that it's not 'quality'.

The others may still be of very high quality and better than many being shown, but to put them all on main with no restrictions on breeding will only see them end up in the hands of novices who will ruin the lines.

To me, breeders who put restrictions on their dogs are being responsible for their breed.

well said Stormie.

I don't think every pup in a litter is worthy of putting on the mains, and breeders who are objective and selective for their breed's future and maintaining quality in the lines, would not be so quick to send out their pups with mains reg and no restrictions at all.

fifi

I agree, not every pup in the litter are always good examples which are called "faulty" and should be on limited register. However, a "faulty" puppy is hardly of good quality is it???. If the puppy is good quality, it should be on main automatically.