Why do breeders sell dogs without breeding rights - Page 3

Ditto, KCzaja,  I sold ever single pet quality dog I ever bred with a neutering contract and made it very clear up front that the dog must not be bred. This was before the AKC limited reg option or I'd have taken advantage of that as well. There are already far more GSD's sitting in rescue looking for homes and many are being PTS as I am typing this. We sure do not need more pet quality GSD's and like begets like.

I am all for limited registration.  I dont know that I would give someone a pup without papers unless I was breeding unpapered KNPV dogs - but that's moot since I am not.

I like the idea of  limited registration because for one - it's not permanent - so if a person gets a puppy who grows into a swan and wants to show/work/breed than you can take it off.  It's a pretty versatile tool.  Not only that - while it doesnt keep the bad people from breeding dogs whom perhaps should not be bred, it does keep them from papering their dogs, which also keeps the price of the puppies down which tends to make the breeding less worthwhile.

In my mind - this is an important tool.  No good breeder here wants dogs from their lines to be a detriment to the breed.  Breeders are ideally trying to improve the breed - and by giving joe schmoe a pup with full papers who is not only an ugly duckling but has mild health issues, you essentially might as well be handing them the OK to breed papered dogs.  Sure Joe may not breed - but maybe the temptation for 1500 dollar pups will be too great.

And maybe I am selfish and egotistical in a way - but breeding is a scary thing - the dogs we have today are the dogs that effect tomorrow.  The last think I want is a future with a serious health issue, or a temperment issue, or a serious structural fault being attributed to a dog out of my lines that may have been popular for one reason or another but probably shouldnt have been bred...that could have been stopped with good use of limited registration.

I dont know how familiar anyone is with Quarter Horses - but if you are - have you heard of Impressive and HYPP?  To do something like that to a breed I love would make me mad.

At the same time...breeding is a crap shoot....but at the same time...I want to do my best to minimize the crapshootines.

~Cate

Yet, the breeders are always the bad guys.  Buyers lie and say they've owned or have trained GSD's before and then when they can't handle them...we get the blame for selling them an out of control dog. Buyer isn't getting the paperwork they think they should be getting... we get blamed for it and then get our names smeared all over a forum.   I've had buyers that will go on and on about  how fabulous a dog is and how much they love that dog and then turn around and call me every name in the book....because I wouldn't give them full registration on a one year old dog.

Yeah, breeding's a blast.

I think it goes both ways.

It is good because you cut down on the amount of people that breed.

It is bad because you are doing what the person ahead of you did not.  The breeder of your dogs didn't say that you couldn't have full registration because you are a moron and I am above you.  If you think that the person ahead of you didn't do this because you are all knowing and wothy, than you should really take a second look at who you are selling to. 

Someone brought up that they would give full to a small time breeder, but limited to a puppymill.  Why would you even sell to a puppymill?  If you don't trust the person to do the right thing with breeding, why are you trusting the person with the puppy in the first place?  How do you know that a small time breeder is more or less ethical than a mill?  Because it is less?  So Scott Peterson is more ethical than Charles Manson?

Here's what I find Ironic.  You think that you are improving the breed, but your fabulous puppy may end up hindering the breed down the road.  If you are breeding such a great specimen, why wouldn't it benifit the GSD world to insert your offspring into the genepool? 

Bravo post, Cate!

Don Corleone great post.

I sell my pups all on limited registration, always have, always will.  In fact I register the pups I keep for myself on limited also, I follow my own rules.  I am happy and thrilled to change the registration over to "full" and allowing breeding, when the dog has adult passing OFA (or a-stamp) hip/elbow rating, and has a working title (Schh1, advanced obedience title, SAR or Police cert, etc).  Without these qualifications the dog is not proven to be breedworthy, I would not be breeding it myself - I either paid for the parents to have such qualifications, or spent the time and expense to put these qualifications on them myself, before breeding them.  So why would I sell a puppy from hip certified, titled parents, so someone could breed them (and my bloodlines) without the same sort of proof of breedworthiness?  I don't.  I make it very clear up front that the puppies are not sold with breeding rights - if the person has a problem with it, then it is obvious to me that they do plan on breeding the dog without title and/or hip rating, and that's not what I want for the puppies carrying my kennel name.  If they insist on full registration, then I am happy to refer them to another breeder who may not care as much as I do that their kennel name is attached to someone's BYB program.

I have never bought a puppy from another breeder, have always bred my own from imported/titled adult dogs purchased already titled, or dogs I've titled myself.  If I did buy a pup, I would expect the limited registration as I wouldn't deal with a breeder who didn't care about what happened to their pups.

molly

Eichenluft Working German Shepherds

http://workinggermanshepherd.com

Don, I think there are a very small percentage of pups in a litter that are, in the end, breedworthy. It seems to me a good idea to have no breeding clause and then possibly lift it at an age where a dog is able to be fairly assessed for breedworthiness.  

I tend to lean toward the fewer breeders the better just because the percentage of informed per uninformed is also very small. 

Senta, I don't think it's a matter of purposefully breeding without papers. I think it was a matter of circumstances that they couldn't paper the dogs. 

With AKC you can give papers with breeding rights or without breeding rights. It is up to the breeder of the litter. In this case there were complications with the paperwork on a legitimate breeding which caused there to be no papers.

There are breeders (I know a couple) who sell pups only on limited, but if you pay twice as much, they will give you full rights.