Registered Breeders..

[OSoSwift]

The ANKC is essentially a registering body.

They do have a code of ethics, but it is just that a code.

There are some people that are registered BYB's and some that work hard at what they do and do the very best they can because they are ethical.

Unfortunately some people get a bad idea of registered breeders because they have unfortunate enough to buy a puppy from an unethical registered breeder.

I hope these Staffords have had all their health testing - for starters at least.

why on earth do u assume only faulty pups are born of parents belonging to unethical breeders?

ethical breeders do not have a magic radar that zero's in and prevents them purchasing any but the perfect genetic makup?

it aint possible.

there are thousands of deletrious genes yet to be dna markered.

bad luck can happen to EVERYONE. n anyone

YEP GIVE UP.

YES. have it your way IF A FAULTY PUP IS BORN IT can only mean the breeder be struck from the responsible ethical ranks...

would fix the problem faster. simply stike off every breeder who a defective pup came from.

that would even eliminate the puppy farmers. remember the shitzu x maltese with luxating patella, heart murmer and think it was 3 hernia's, robert zammit showed on tv once.

the world is not black and white

bad things do happen to good people. bad things happening to them does not prove they are bad people, sometimes i find myself wondering if the mentality of the dark ages and burning, drowning and elimination of witches is just the same just new names

believe it or not bad people ARE in the minority although to read this forum most could be excused for not realising that

Wow. I think you need to calm down a bit. No one said that having one 'faulty' pup makes someone a bad person or a byb. I'm pretty sure the OP was just trying to make the point that not everyone with a prefix is a good breeder, which is a perfectly valid point.

Sure, a good breeder can occasionally produce a 'bad' puppy. But a good breeder would do something about it, like refund a pup that has a health problem. There are plenty of breeders who consistently produce bad quality pups and don't care as long as they have the money in their pocket. That is what this thread is about.

Thank you, I did not say that having a faulty pup makes you unethical. Many things go inot making you ethical or unethical.

The main thing is how you react you having a puppy that you produced being diagnosed with a problem.

It is hard for the average Jo Public to know quite often how to work if someone is ethical or not and sometimes they don't until there is a problem.

And yes people can have consequences to breaching the ANKC's code of ethics.

My understanding is at this point WA breeders can still sell puppies without papers.

[geo]

My whole point of the thread was that all we ever here about is BYB, and reg'd breeders are only too quick to call them out, however we now know that having papers can mean nothing, and having AKNC registration bares no resemblance on the quality of a dog. Though it should be a decent indicator but it relies heavily upon it's members being honest.

Yet the new QLD BSL laws differing amstaffs and pitbulls heavily relied upon the AKNC registration of amstaffs, which i think is flawed as there are bad breeders out there selling papered amstaffs but without absolute proof, Unless every single dog is DNA tested.

This gets harder especially when we see 1 bloke breeding hundreds of dogs from maybe 30 bitches, where a well intentioned BYBer may have the quality but without the papers and all of a sudden that makes the dog a pitbull...?

[WreckitWhippet]

I don't care much for BYBer's, regardless of what they are producing. If someone wants to BYB Amstaffs or any Bull Breed or cross that may be mistaken for a restricted breed, then more fool them.

They have a choice, they could own ANKC recognised breeds, become a CC member and protect both the puppies they produce and the buyers.

It's a selfish act to knowingly bring puppies into this world, that could be seized and destroyed. The breeders of such dogs get no sympathy from me, when it comes to their breeding choices.

[poodlemum]

I noticed a "registered breeder" selling puppies on adelaide gumtree. I figured she must be "registered" with the local council ie permission from them to breed dogs on her place or similar. I phoned up SACA who said that "registered breeders" with them - would have waiting lists and would not need to advertise in internet classifieds. The SACA lady said that all puppies in a litter had to be registered too even if it was "limited register". The gumtree ad had no breeder prefix and was fuzzy about what breed the dogs were (arguably cross breeds).

A lot of people think they're getting a dog with "papers" or the parent dogs have "papers" and the "papers" turn out to be vet vaccination certificates, council rego, or something the breeder mocked up on their own computer.

Forgive me saying so, but that's the biggest load of codswallop I've ever seen!!! I've been a registered breeder for over 17 years and have ALWAYS had to do some advertising to sell my puppies (possibly because I don't show). I think that SACA saying that borders on defamatory - implying that anyone who has to advertise must be a BYB.

[Baileys mum]

I noticed a "registered breeder" selling puppies on adelaide gumtree. I figured she must be "registered" with the local council ie permission from them to breed dogs on her place or similar. I phoned up SACA who said that "registered breeders" with them - would have waiting lists and would not need to advertise in internet classifieds. The SACA lady said that all puppies in a litter had to be registered too even if it was "limited register". The gumtree ad had no breeder prefix and was fuzzy about what breed the dogs were (arguably cross breeds).

A lot of people think they're getting a dog with "papers" or the parent dogs have "papers" and the "papers" turn out to be vet vaccination certificates, council rego, or something the breeder mocked up on their own computer.

Forgive me saying so, but that's the biggest load of codswallop I've ever seen!!! I've been a registered breeder for over 17 years and have ALWAYS had to do some advertising to sell my puppies (possibly because I don't show). I think that SACA saying that borders on defamatory - implying that anyone who has to advertise must be a BYB.

I agree poodlemum, so what every breeder that has a puppy listing on Dol is a BYB? :D

[geo]

I don't care much for BYBer's, regardless of what they are producing. If someone wants to BYB Amstaffs or any Bull Breed or cross that may be mistaken for a restricted breed, then more fool them.

They have a choice, they could own ANKC recognised breeds, become a CC member and protect both the puppies they produce and the buyers.

It's a selfish act to knowingly bring puppies into this world, that could be seized and destroyed. The breeders of such dogs get no sympathy from me, when it comes to their breeding choices.

I agree, but ultimately it's the dogs that really suffer. In my earlier posts (i think) I had inferred that there are breeders that are memebers of all the required clubs, that a re no better than BYBers. re: dogs being advertised as extreme muscle mass, massive heads et al.

[Red Fox]

My whole point of the thread was that all we ever here about is BYB, and reg'd breeders are only too quick to call them out, however we now know that having papers can mean nothing, and having AKNC registration bares no resemblance on the quality of a dog. Though it should be a decent indicator but it relies heavily upon it's members being honest.

Yet the new QLD BSL laws differing amstaffs and pitbulls heavily relied upon the AKNC registration of amstaffs, which i think is flawed as there are bad breeders out there selling papered amstaffs but without absolute proof, Unless every single dog is DNA tested.

This gets harder especially when we see 1 bloke breeding hundreds of dogs from maybe 30 bitches, where a well intentioned BYBer may have the quality but without the papers and all of a sudden that makes the dog a pitbull...?

Huh?

Of course papers mean something.

Puppy buyers need to do their research..

Edited October 21, 2010 by SecretKei

[Steve]

Its time we all stopped this crap and started thinking it through rather than running on with what animal rights have been pushing.

Every where you turn someone is giving advice on how to choose a good breeder and cutting the odds of getting an unhealthy puppy and giving as part of the answer that the puppies are registered with their state's canine councils.

The open book exams are nothing but a PR exercise and tell you nothing more than anyone could get out of reading a book or surfing the net.

The codes of ethics are less stringent than any of the states codes of practice for breeding dogs an no state Canine association can prevent their members from selling puppies to pet shops.

This rubbish about how reputable breeders will have waiting lists and dont need to advertise is also perpetuated by idiots who dont have a clue.

The ONLY thing a regsitered breeder can give you that any other breeder cannot and the ONLY thing you or anyone can be sure of is that they can give you an ANKC REGISTERED PEDIGREE with your puppy.

Why would someone want to do all of the vet checks and then not register their puppies? Because they want to breed healthy puppies.Do you seriously think that only registered breeders are interested in that?

Up until around 15 years ago in most states you could go to a registered breeder and buy a purebred pup intended as a pet and not get papers with them.You didnt get papers unless you intended to breed purebred registered pups or show your dog. Then someone decided it would make the CCs more money if breeders had to register all of their puppies and provide rego papers with all pups they sold so they introduced pet and main papers - for no other reason but to get the registration money from the pet puppies which until then just went home with maybe a hand drawn copy of the pedigree.

Other states were slower and its relatively recent that breeders in WA have to give out rego papers with every pup.

In NSW you have to pay the money to register all puppies in a litter and give the new owner the pedigree in the hope they will change over the registered pedigree from the breeder's name to the new owners name and therefore get double the rego money.The pet buyers never do but its worth a try.

Under the old system if they bought a pet pup they didnt have the papers so if they wanted to breed it there was no point because puppies without papers were worth nothing.If you had purebred pups without papers you were lucky to get a dollar for them. They were the same dogs, the buyer didnt want papers and the breeders didnt want to give them papers but the CCs saw money so everyone gets papers and thats held up as some evidence that the breeder is doing a whole bunch of things that anyone else breeding pupppies cant or doesnt do. Back then if you wanted a purebred pup without papers you went to a purebred breeder - now you can go to a purebred breeder who doesnt register their pups which is what we used to be. What a load of rubbish.

Go and take a look at the NSW accredited breeder program that is about to come in and that simply has breeders agreeing to basic stuff like following the law and things that everyone has been telling us registered breeders have been doing all along and it still doesnt guarantee that anyone who is accredited is a good breeder and it implies anyone not accredited is not even covering these basics!

THE REASON people should be breeding registered dogs is because it enables them to research the pedigree for genetic issues which they can then eliminate and breed away from. Every breeder should be making it their business to know not just what is in their back yard but what is in the ancestry of whats in their back yard to know where the carriers and affecteds are in a pedigree. Some of these things now have DNA tests available but there's a hell of a lot of them - thousands as a matter of fact which are 20 or so years away from finding an answer if we ever do and the ONLY way to be sure you are working towards this is if you know what came before them.

Any one can breed a dog, anyone can breed a champion, anyone can breed a working dog but it takes a hell of a lot more to consistently breed healthy dogs with a lessened chance of it being affected by problems.

It makes no difference if you breed lots or hardly any though the more you breed the more chance you have of spotting a problem and being able to take adequate steps to eliminate it . Much harder if you only have a couple of dogs and only breed a litter a year. It makes no difference if you advertise them in newspapers or websites.

it makes no difference if you show them, or work them or do agility with them. In fact it makes no difference if you are registered with a CC as a breeder or whether you put your puppies out with rego papers.

I use registered papers to breed my pups because its a better way of being able to attempt to track whether or not someone's nana had alllergies, or vaccination reactions, or crook hips etc and its a thousands times better at eliminating polygenic issues than any amount of screeening or testing will ever be on its own. I register my puppies because it enables me and any one else who wants to breed a puppy from what I have had a role in breeding the opportunity of keeping a record of where the problems may show up and which dogs may need to be taken out of the gene pool. I could do exactly the same if I only used registered dogs or pedigrees which were not registered that I trusted or if I wasnt registered and the puppy's pedigrees were not registered as far as healthy puppies for my future generations were concerned. However, that wouldn't be doing the breed as a whole any good nor any breeders who want to be able to use any of the dogs I bred to better their breeding programs too. Then of course there are the other two issues and if I don't somewhere or somehow factor in how the dog looks and how it acts over a couple of generations Ill get dogs which may be healthier and less likely to go home to my pet buyers needing vet treatment but they wont look or act like they should look and act to enable my puppy buyers to be able to predict their management issues ,have them well suited to their lifestyles and live happily ever after with them.They dont all have to look like champions as a first priority but how they look has to be a PART of how I select too.

Now anyone especially any breeder who says that because a dog is registered with a CC so therefore its the same breed and thats all they need to consider as in the OP has a real lot to learn.

Any one who says there is a long line of champs in the pedigree and they are breeding dogs which win in the ring and thats all they need to consider has a lot to learn.

Anyone who says a breeder tests for certain known heritable genetic issues and so therefore there is a lessened chance of the dog being affected by health issues without considering all of the others and not just one or two which may show up has a lot to learn.

Its time people considered just what breeding for the betterment of the breed really meant and worked out it has only a little to do with show dogs.

None of this has even touched on nutrition and other husbandry issues or a bunch of other political things - but assuming someone has the knowledge and what it takes to breed great dogs based on whether or not they are registered with a state canine association is the biggest obstacle to educating those who are breeding and those who are looking at buying a pet purebred pup.

When we screen people who join the MDBA as breeder members this is what we are looking for - either the understanding of what it will truly take to breed a great pup and the desire to learn or those who have already worked it out. Whether or not they show their dogs or register their dogs on an ANKC registry is only a part of what we consider when we do this. The reality is every day I think over whether being an ANKC registered breeder is truly the answer to ensuring less dogs suffer into the future.

Everyone is a new kid once and there are none among us who havent made mistakes but if we are serious about getting it right and ensuring less dogs suffer its time we started looking at it from a reality base rather than starting at the crap.

When you find a great breeder you know the difference but to assume that anyone is that just because they breed registered dogs is crazy. Anyone who is a registered breeder with the ANKC and assumes thats all it takes to be counted as good let alone great are missing a very large piece of the puzzle.

[AmandaJ]

Its time we all stopped this crap and started thinking it through rather than running on with what animal rights have been pushing.

Every where you turn someone is giving advice on how to choose a good breeder and cutting the odds of getting an unhealthy puppy and giving as part of the answer that the puppies are registered with their state's canine councils.

The open book exams are nothing but a PR exercise and tell you nothing more than anyone could get out of reading a book or surfing the net.

The codes of ethics are less stringent than any of the states codes of practice for breeding dogs an no state Canine association can prevent their members from selling puppies to pet shops.

...etc...

Here here...........SA still does not do an exam - we have only just started having breeding seminars run by one of our vet breeders (vary basic stuff) - and anyone can apply for and get a kennel prefix without any form of vetting. I joined the MDBA to learn - that's what I'm doing. 6 years of SACA has only taught me how nasty some people can be and how stupid others are.

Edited to say - not everyone is, most are really nice people. Membership alone however is no guarantee that you are doing the right thing.

Edited October 20, 2010 by AmandaJ

[Steve]

I don't care much for BYBer's, regardless of what they are producing. If someone wants to BYB Amstaffs or any Bull Breed or cross that may be mistaken for a restricted breed, then more fool them.

They have a choice, they could own ANKC recognised breeds, become a CC member and protect both the puppies they produce and the buyers.

It's a selfish act to knowingly bring puppies into this world, that could be seized and destroyed. The breeders of such dogs get no sympathy from me, when it comes to their breeding choices.

I agree with this - I think.

The ANKC see this as a win and it is for their breeds and their members but everything has unintended consequences.

Im not sure when this is tested its going to be enough. I am also less confident that someone who has a pedigree to produce or DNA to prove parentage of two dogs with ANKC registered pedigrees which is not registered with the ANKC - because they choose not to be a member - can be discrimminated against at law.

Can the law force you to be a member of and pay money to register your pedigrees in order to have the same rights as someone else? I dont think so.

Will people who shouldnt be breeding these breeds become registered breeders and ring in dogs and breed away from the breed standard? Definitely.

Edited October 20, 2010 by Steve

[geo]

Good post Steve.

[Steve]

I noticed a "registered breeder" selling puppies on adelaide gumtree. I figured she must be "registered" with the local council ie permission from them to breed dogs on her place or similar. I phoned up SACA who said that "registered breeders" with them - would have waiting lists and would not need to advertise in internet classifieds. The SACA lady said that all puppies in a litter had to be registered too even if it was "limited register". The gumtree ad had no breeder prefix and was fuzzy about what breed the dogs were (arguably cross breeds).

A lot of people think they're getting a dog with "papers" or the parent dogs have "papers" and the "papers" turn out to be vet vaccination certificates, council rego, or something the breeder mocked up on their own computer.

Well I know that this may make me a bad breeder but I have a litter of Maremma pups here. Bloody hell they are beautiful and Id really like to keep em all.

Each and every one does me proud. There were a dozen in the litter and I dont take a waiting list because when I did I had up to 100 on it and that seemed pretty stupid to me. Im so old and been breeding dogs for so long that these days at least some - usually most - of each litter go to homes where they already have a dog I bred.

Anyway all of this litter was sold before it was 4 weeks old with the exception of the one I was keeping . They are just 8 weeks old and one of the people who were buying one has had a major personal unexpected drama and they are no longer able to take one of the puppies so here I am - bad breeder that I am - with one baby girl left and no home to send her to.

These babies grow like weeds, they soon become less cute, eat you out of house and home and if they are going to working homes there is only a short window of about 4 weeks for the optimum time for them to begin their working lives. You can get the job done after that but its a much easier process if they are young. With this breed if I keep them here and put them to work around next March I can sell them for several thousands of dollars to farmers who are desperate to take an adult dog already working and thats what I will do if she isnt sold in the next week or so but that doesnt suit me much this time and Id rather she went off to a new home sooner rather than later.

So if anyone sees my ad for a Maremma baby girl even though I know that will make me look like Im a bad breeder and I should have had homes for them before they were born the ad is going in. Im good with that ,who ever takes her into their homes will be good with that and if anyone else has a problem with it - please- keep it as your problem and dont show how ignorant you are out loud.

[Lhok]

I'm not a breeder and it is something I might consider later down the track. I was wondering though how hard would it be to set up an apprentice scheme like the Falconry clubs do?

How some Falconry clubs do their apprenticeships are that they become a member of the club and go to events and what not then if they choose to go further with it they are allocated a sponsor. The sponsor helps get them started and teaches the basics and then they get a new sponsor each year for their apprenticeship to broaden knowledge and help establish networks.

I know it is often stated that you should do your own research and find a breeder that you work well with but I think a system like that would work well to, or at least be something to think about?

Sorry if this is off topic too btw but I really wanted to ask.

--Lhok

Edited October 21, 2010 by Lhok

[poodlefan]

Steve:

When you find a great breeder you know the difference but to assume that anyone is that just because they breed registered dogs is crazy. Anyone who is a registered breeder with the ANKC and assumes thats all it takes to be counted as good let alone great are missing a very large piece of the puzzle.

Yep. Two ANKC main register dogs of opposite sexes and a registered prefix do NOT a good breeder make. It takes a whole lot more than that. There are ANKC registered breeders who really need to lift their game because its by the worst the of registered breeders that the rest are judged. Sadly, the CCs seem indifferent to that fact.

Edited October 21, 2010 by poodlefan

[AmandaJ]

I'm not a breeder and it is something I might consider later down the track. I was wondering though how hard would it be to set up an apprentice scheme like the Falconry clubs do?

How some Falconry clubs do their apprenticeships are that they become a member of the club and go to events and what not then if they choose to go further with it they are allocated a sponsor. The sponsor helps get them started and teaches the basics and then they get a new sponsor each year for their apprenticeship to broaden knowledge and help establish networks.

I know it is often stated that you should do your own research and find a breeder that you work well with but I think a system like that would work well to, or at least be something to think about?

Sorry if this is off topic too btw but I really wanted to ask.

--Lhok

Go to the Mater Dog Breeders site - their Certificate courses are fantastic. I've learned far more from them than I have from any breeder. My mother used to breed and she's astounded at the stuff I'm learning.

[Lhok]

I'm not a breeder and it is something I might consider later down the track. I was wondering though how hard would it be to set up an apprentice scheme like the Falconry clubs do?

How some Falconry clubs do their apprenticeships are that they become a member of the club and go to events and what not then if they choose to go further with it they are allocated a sponsor. The sponsor helps get them started and teaches the basics and then they get a new sponsor each year for their apprenticeship to broaden knowledge and help establish networks.

I know it is often stated that you should do your own research and find a breeder that you work well with but I think a system like that would work well to, or at least be something to think about?

Sorry if this is off topic too btw but I really wanted to ask.

--Lhok

Go to the Mater Dog Breeders site - their Certificate courses are fantastic. I've learned far more from them than I have from any breeder. My mother used to breed and she's astounded at the stuff I'm learning.

Thanks for that will check it out

--Lhok

[geo]

Steve:

When you find a great breeder you know the difference but to assume that anyone is that just because they breed registered dogs is crazy. Anyone who is a registered breeder with the ANKC and assumes thats all it takes to be counted as good let alone great are missing a very large piece of the puzzle.

Yep. Two ANKC main register dogs of opposite sexes and a registered prefix do NOT a good breeder make. It takes a whole lot more than that. There are ANKC registered breeders who really need to lift their game because its by the worst the of registered breeders that the rest are judged. Sadly, the CCs seem indifferent to that fact.

That's exactly right, and you can see what happens when these sort of breeders get involved with dogs that could look like a restricted breed, ie amstaffs.

[Jed]

geo

I agree, but ultimately it's the dogs that really suffer. In my earlier posts (i think) I had inferred that there are breeders that are memebers of all the required clubs, that a re no better than BYBers. re: dogs being advertised as extreme muscle mass, massive heads et al.

geo, I know what you mean. I am not in favour of breed bans. However, the government was encouraged to ban breeds by various bodies (not the ANKC by the way). The rationale was that generations of fighting lines did produce dogs which were savage, and which should not be in public.

I don't have a problem with that rationale - it's true.

However, banning a whole breed and condemning thousands of harmless pets to death was over the top. And the real fighting dogs were carefully hidden away. A few were nabbed, but not many.

There is some disagreement about the divergence or not of pitbulls, staffordshire bull terriers, and amstaffs. I don't own or breed any of these, but recorded history seems to state that the 3 breeds were separated. The UKC was formed in 189?? to register pit bulls. They attempted to remove "pit" from the breed name, but owners objected. To be accepted for registration into the UKC, the dog had to have won 3 fights. This requirement was dropped later.

In 1930 something, the AKC decided to register pitbulls too. The original name was staffordshire bull terrier (I think, I know "pit" was removed from the name) and the dog was later renamed American Staffordshire Bull Terrier.

The CCCQ stepped away from the pitbull bans, saying "not our breed", which is true. When a court case ended with a judge stating that pitbulls and Amstaffs were the same breed, the CCCQ went to bat for the dogs which were registered with them - Amstaffs - as they should have.

The succeeded in having the 2 breeds declared separate again by the government, so Amstaffs were safe. Registered Amstaffs particularly.

Now, that may seem unfair, but if my breed was Amstaff, I would have wanted the CCCQ to do something NOW. And they did.

The argument used was probably that the Amstaff was about 70 years away from "game bred" or fighting lines, so was safe to be in public.

If people are breeding Amstaffs to look big and muscular - that's up to them. If they are breeding with dogs who are not actually Amstaffs, they are probably not going to be doing it for long. Only until the registering body discovers it, and does something about it. People tend to think they are a bit of a toothless tiger - in some ways they are, in some not. If your dog menaces a judge in the ring (first time) he gets a holiday - every single time. If you are fudging your registrations, they will find out, and they will remove your membership.

A lot of the volume breeders are ex ANKC breeders who got the heave ho. And it had nothing to do with volume, but with their ethics or lack of them. Lots of small breeeders have had the heave go too. And it will continue to happen.

The ethics of dog breeders are within the breeders themselves. You cannot give anyone ethics, you cannot force them to behave well or decently. You can ask them to sign any amount of codes of ethics or whatever, and if they are dodgy, they will continue to be dodgy. If they are decent, and ethical, breeding dogs will not change them. And ethical breeders are in the majority. It's just that the dodgy ones get more press

People get into breeding, make a hash of it, or should not be doing it - and they soon leave. I've seen dozens come and go over the years. You are gritting your teeth while they are getting it all wrong, and swearing and carrying on, but suddenly, they don't breed any more.

It really ticks you off, but fact is, you can't do anything about it. If the people doing it are lying to the registering body, you can report them. Otherwise, just watch and wait for the "breeding enterprise" to implode. It will!

I don't believe anyone should be breeding or selling APBT. No one should produce a pup which has a good chance of falling foul of the council, and being impounded and pts.

However, people who like pitbulls can have a perfectly legal dog - and if they are muscular, as long as they are within the standard - it's all good. And if some of the people breeding them want "game bred" and produce dogs which are seriously a problem, they will no doubt be banned, so it's everyone's responsibility to report transgressions.

That's how I see it anyhow, hope it makes sense to you

Edited October 21, 2010 by Jed

[geo]

Jed,

It does make sense and it's good to know that some breed clubs will give bad breeders the arse.

You only have to look at how popular the amstaff is coming, and definately becoming popular among the undesirables who wish to pretend they're tough.

I met a beautiful male amstaff on the Goldy a while ago who's owner took it away from some idiots who were trying to fight him, hitting him etc.. to make him aggressive.

These people are seeing them as legal pitbulls (i know many will say they are) i've heard a guy on the beach with a blue amstaff telling people it's a pitbull.

The bad breeders are trying to transpose the pitbulls image onto amstaffs, exactly what the decent people are trying to get away from. The worse thing is, is that image was created by the media, not genuine pitbull breeders. So in reality they're aiming to breed a dog that fits restriction requirements, now i know a couple of pitbull breeders and they're trying to do the complete opposite.

It would be ashame for the amstaffs to suffer the same way as the pitbull.

[Christina]

Very good post Steve. As usual

One simple, (but not foolproof, what is ?) way of checking for problems is to phone someone who has a pup from every litter you have bred a year or so later & ask. Some you hear from forever but not always.

I have done this for years. They can be quite suprised but I just explain that I always check on my breeding to see if any health issues have cropped up that are not able to be tested for as it helps me to know.

They are always quite chatty & friendly & honest.

So far good reports for the last 7 years I have been doing this.

Winning the shows is a delightful bonus but health & welfare has to come first.