Should this female have been mated - Page 6

Let's be kind and say that from all litters there have been 60 puppies and then multiply this by say 700€.   This would produce a gross income of € 40,000 from this female alone.   The exact figures will only be known to the owners but in reality I would think that the income will be much higher.

I will leave the readers to ponder on this.

Mackenzie

Good point Carole - the KC here can ONLY recommend, or refuse to Register;
it cannot actually STOP something happening.  This case is happening in the
breed's birthplace, Germany, the most regulated country for GSDs.  If the OP
is correct in all said about the way she is kept, then Abby's comments are
certainly valid.  With all the best will in the world about doing things that are 
"OK" as long as the health & welfare of the bitch and her puppies are paramount,
what actually ends up happening falls far short of that.   Christine even ended
her earlier post with the sentence about making sure that was the case before
arranging such a mating.  The AKC seems not to be interested in making even
that much recommendation;  too concerned breeders 'rights' shouldn't be limited ?.
But how many breeders would be bothered about whether such matings really
were in anyone's interests except that of their own pocket,  when so many already
(as has been discussed on here many, many times) go right ahead with breeding 
dogs that are too young; untitled; un health tested  ?  So much for a   laise faire
policy of self regulation.

Is any breeding *ever* in the best interests of the dog? The safest thing is to keep the dog at home, snuggled up on the couch next to the Chihuahuas. Instead, we send them out to do bomb detection and SAR and fight bad guys and find criminals and play frisbee in the park--all of these things can be dangerous. Heck, have to watch out, those chubby couch dogs might get bored and start eating your socks and then die of an obstruction.

No dog is bred for the betterment of the individual dog--so it makes no sense to apply that as a criteria in this case.

Is the harm or chance of harm to the female greater for an older female? Somewhat--that will depend on her condition and history and genetics.

Will breeding and whelping itself decrease or improve the female's quality of life over the short or long term?  Perhaps, perhaps not--that is going to depend on each dog and her circumstances and owners.

I think we're better off encouraging responsible and caring behavior and formulating--and publicizing--informed and educated guidelines instead of trying to regulate and mandate minimum acceptable standards.


Christine

If no dog is bred for the benefit of the breed we would not be looking at the progression of the GSD to what we see today.  

The breed has had informed and regulations from its very beginnings as set out by von Staphanitz hence the formation of the SV.  Even the problems that we face today had warnings from the founder of the breed over one hundred years ago. 

Mackenzie

You mean like warnings against breeding for show and sport????.....I think I remember that.....should we listen to him sometimes when it is convienent and discard his advice when it goes against our personal likes? Just curious?

In response to Gustav I would say that Max v Stephanitz said “we must remember that we have a working dog that can be shown” and, therein lies the first direction for serious breeders.  When the SV was formed the basis of what is required was set down and these principles, rules and regulations are still good today.   Regardless of the faults in the system it is the best system in the world and is better than no system at all as is the case in many countries including the USA.  The SV system produced the best utility working dog in the world.  Our breed were willing workers that could multitask and reliably think for themselves in their work.  It is for everyone in the breed to work towards this end.

In today’s world we are seeing more self gratification, greed and destruction of the breed by breeders who just do not know what they are doing and those who, worse still, just do not care what they are doing.  As is usual when breeders cannot breed successfully to the breed standard within the current rules the cry goes out for change to accommodate what they are producing and in this time too many are the wrong type.

The only analogy that I can think of to return to this thread is would we say to our grannies who are in the seventies and have had ten children already “come on nana let us see you knock out another one”.

Mackenzie

Mackenzie.       


Christine I agree that education is a preferable route to regulation,
anytime.  But the reality is that it is 'easier' to put  $£$£$ into the
creation of regulations, than to promote EFFECTIVE education,
particularly on a wide-ranging 'hobby' subject.  And regulation -
or at least recommendation - does give a minimal 'guideline',  to
those who wish to hear it. 

@Mackensie.....save the history, I've had his book since 1971 and probably read it 40 times. My point is people are breeding FOR show and SPORT and he cautioned against this. And SV is the biggest enabler of this in the world. When SV was about the concepts you quoted they enacted, the breed had show dogs that worked, because they were bred to work and were shown incidentally ....that time is long gone in dogs and the organization. The sad part is supposedly knowledgable people about the Cap'n admonitions are buying these bred for show only or sport only dogs thus strengthening this pathway. Hypocrisy is rife in the breed because people place peer acceptance over the Cap'n concepts! If you are reading this....where do you stand?  

Gustavo , I am with the Captain and I bought the book when I came into the breed in 1970.

Where do you stand?

Mackenzie

Too right, Gustav.