Breeder Beware-Red Flags - Page 4

As much as the breeders get whipped on by unhappy customers, I think it's probably more often that a breeder ends up pulling out his/her hair out over the idiot clients. My friend, a breeder, is currently fighting with such an in-DUH-vidual who bought a LC on a non-breeding contract (AKC Limited Reg.) which she agreed to at the time. Well well now time has passed and said client is convinced that the dog ought to be bred and is threatening lawsuits if *FULL* Registration is not granted. Pfui! I think I'll stick to just *training* my dogs and leave the breeding to those with the stomach to fight litigation.

"I am with you, Mary! There are breeders from whom I would not take a dog, even as a gift. I want nothing with their kennel-name on it. Supporting their practices with my money goes against the grain. The stores I don't patronize and manufacturers whose products I won't buy because of their ethics/practices/policies. Why would I deal with a breeder any differently?"

Because the Breed comes first.  The breed should always come first.  You either feel I will breed the best to the best and hope for the best, because I truly love and support this breed, or else you merely are paying lip service to always striving for the best because human personalities, not dog quality, affect your decisions.   That's fine for you, but I don't see it that way.

Not buying from a big-name breeder because you don't trust them is one thing.  I understand that.  You don't want to get ripped off.  But that wasn't my question.  My question is having a choice among dogs where the one truly with the best quality just happens to be owned by someone you don't like or have issues with.  And for the sake of the dog and for the sake of the breed, I think the dog should always come first.  Doesn't matter if the seller's an SOB; it's the DOG that should matter most.

There's someone I know who I just do not care for (to put it mildly).  I don't like the way this person trains or treats their dogs. I don't like other things about them either.  But this person has done quite well with dogs, as they started with GSD with high-quality dogs and bred very wisely.  Puppies produced so far are very high quality.  Would I buy a puppy from this person?  I think I would.  Why not?  They truly have well-bred, quality GSD.  It's not the puppy's fault it was born to a family that happens to be total jerks.

You'd say no because I'd be supporting them.  I see what you mean, but I look at it as I'm supporting the breed - buying a very sound, high-quality dog which is more quality than I can get elsewhere.  I can't control what others do with their lives.

As much as the breeders get whipped on by unhappy customers, I think it's probably more often that a breeder ends up pulling out his/her hair out over the idiot clients.

Probably very true!  How many times have buyers said they'd show or train, a breeder sells them a nice dog, and it's just to much work, too much money for the buyers to ever bother.

There are breeders from whom I would not take a dog, even as a gift
ME TOO!

Buying a puppy with the determination that it will be an asset to a breeding program is unrealistic IMO.
On the other hand, I won't have a puppy with a pedigree that I wouldn't want to breed after I go to all the trouble to train and title it.

History of rehoming/washing out dogs.
Yes, as a life-time competitor, I have washed out a lot of dogs in my time, but with all the care raising and training I put into them, its easy to find them a loving home. I realize I am not a typical puppy-buyer, (or breeder either for that matter) but most of the time, people either give me pups/dogs or I keep my own. If the pups/dogs don't look like they're going to go far in the sport, I usually give them back to the breeder, healthy, housebroken, socialized, training well-started, most or all at my expense.
Obviously there is value to a serious breeder in having a trainer who competes regularly take a dog with their kennel name firmly attached as far as it can go.

Blast away!
SS

You bet there are some out there that I would not take a dog or pup from, even if they paid me!

Tess, That's where we differ ethically. I will not support the nefarious, I don't care how "high quality" the dogs they may breed--they are not the only ones with quality, nor even the same lines/dogs. Supporting the schmucks among us is not, IMO, supporting the breed-- it is simply helping an ass who should NOT BE IN the breed to continue. We recently had a breeder whose nefarious actions with dye on puppies was the subject of litigation. That individual had quality dogs, no one disputes that. However, the breeder's CHEATING in shows with dogs wearing dye jobs, questionable behavior with judges, and questionable business practices with buyers were not things some of us would choose to support. Fortunately, tha breeder has been much reduced in activity, partly as a result. At least, the breeder has not shown, nor shown face, since. :-) Make no mistake- patronage IS supporting those practices. There is NO ONE in the breed with sole and exclusive ownership to ANY bloodlines. In short, there is NOTHING in the breed I cannot get somewhere else, without compromising any principles or swallowing hard. Period. Were this a rare breed, there might be a dilemma. The German Shepherd is NOT a rare breed, so for me there is no dilemma: I don't have to deal with garbage to get quality dogs. Someone with actual ethics has the same bloodlines, hell, often from the same dogs. Keeping schmucks in the breed does nothing for the breed-- it simply lines the pockets of the schmucks.

Theme for this entire thread:

"That's the pot calling the kettle: black."

imo

There are some good posts here with interesting comments and views.

Trafalgar, care to explain your comment?

Tess, I am surprised that you say there is someone you do not care for, to put it mildly, yet you would do business with them. To me, that flies in the face of logic. It is a practice we see here all the time and more often than not, it does not work out. Like another poster who was very clear about her preferences, if you don't like what someone does or does not do, it is my stance as well that I will not deal with that person, regardless of how I might think I will benefit. I don't think one can have it both ways.

Tralfalger, I'd be very interested in an explanation, too.

"I am surprised that you say there is someone you do not care for, to put it mildly, yet you would do business with them. To me, that flies in the face of logic."

Totally logically to me.  Because Human Personalities don't matter, the BREED matters.  So if I don't like someone personally, what does that matter when it comes to what's best for the breed?  "Doing business with them"?  It's not like I'd ever go into partnership with them, co-owning a dog, for instance.  That I agree with you and there are people I would never "do business with" in that way.  Sure, that I understand, but simply to buy a dog from them?  If they have a quality dog yes, I certainly might buy it.  Again, the DOGS come first.  The poor dog can't help it that he was bred or bought by an obnoxious jerk.

"more often than not, it does not work out."

I see a dog.  I know it's parents and grandparents because I've seen them at training and at trials.  They are quality both in performance and in pedigree.  The individual dog I've seen work.  I know it's a quality, well-bred animal.  It's for sale.  I buy it. (No co-ownerships, no "deals" - an outright purchase).   What's not to work out?

We're not talking newbies here, being ripped off.  We're talking knowing buyers buying a dog.