# Why do breeders sell "retired" dogs instead of keeping them for life?



## GSD_Xander

Something I've wondered with breeder's - and I'm sure someone can answer this - is on a lot of breeder's web sites that I've visited I see a page on the site that lists "retired" dogs for sale (maybe this isn't common practice). 

I guess what I don't understand is this...when I get a dog it's for life (for the whole life of the dog) and I fully consider them family. 

However, I see some breeder's listing "retired" dogs that have had a few litters and then they're selling them...

I don't get that. 

Why is it that breeder's can use a dog to make money and then sell it?

I mean - I understand that there is a limit to how many dogs one person can handle and give proper attention to at one time so if you want to be constantly breeding then you have to get new dogs but...why not just have fewer dogs, less puppies and keep the ones that you loved and that made you money until they pass on?

I'm not trying to start a war here on the forums - it is just something I don't understand and maybe I'm not looking at it right...


----------



## Emoore

If you retire a bitch at 6 or 7 years old, that's another 6 or 7 years you'll be keeping her if you don't re-home her. Pretty soon you'll have nothing but retired bitches and you'll be out of breeding all together. 

Plus, there's an old truism among dog owners: 'males fight for breeding rights, bitches fight for breathing rights.' You might get two bitches that get along ok, but several? Probably not going to happen. So you're going to have to keep these old bitches separated, both from each other and from the younger ones, which means living out their remaning 6 or 7 years in crates or kennels. A good breeder will spay them and adopt them out to loving homes, where they can be an only dog, or perhaps one of two, that gets to live in the house as a beloved family pet instead of a kennel dog, constantly having to be rotated out and spend a very limited amount of time with her owner.


----------



## selzer

I love all my dogs. 

I rehomed Rushie. I did love him. But he did not produce what I wanted to produce. I kept taking him to training classes, had an RN on him and a TDI. He was just four years old. A person contacted me wanting an adult dog who he could take to nursing homes when he inspected them, that would be good with the residents. 

I had not considered rehoming Rushie. I absolutely loved him. But I got to thinking. 

This was going to be a great home for the dog, with a family for just him. It was good for me because it would free up his kennel. It would be better for my other dogs, as the time I spent with him, the classes I took him to, was time I was not spending on them. It was good for the new owner. 

When he met the new owner a week after the first visit, he walked in and put his head in the guy's lap.

I let him go. 

Not everyone wants a puppy. Some do not want to go through the puppy stage. For some people an older dog is the right choice. 

Rushie was NOT a reject. He was a well-trained companion dog that I would have been happy to give house room to forever. I am sure he gets more attention than I gave him in his new home.


----------



## GSD_Xander

I see what you're both saying - I guess that it is better they rehome them than neglect them/leave them in kennels. 

I was just thinking that if you spaced out the period when you got your dogs you might be able to time it so - say...you'd have two bitches retired, two new female pups (that would need training/etc for a couple years) and then when they're breeding and ready to retire then they other two females will have gone to the bridge. 



Emoore said:


> Plus, there's an old truism among dog owners: 'males fight for breeding rights, bitches fight for breathing rights.' .


You're definitely right there - I've seen bitches go at it for...seemingly no reason at all - maybe one just looked at each other the wrong way. That's why I keep one male dog and one female dog rather than two females...it's been easier that way so far. 




selzer said:


> I love all my dogs.
> 
> I rehomed Rushie. I did love him. But he did not produce what I wanted to produce. I kept taking him to training classes, had an RN on him and a TDI. He was just four years old. A person contacted me wanting an adult dog who he could take to nursing homes when he inspected them, that would be good with the residents.
> 
> I had not considered rehoming Rushie. I absolutely loved him. But I got to thinking.
> 
> This was going to be a great home for the dog, with a family for just him. It was good for me because it would free up his kennel. It would be better for my other dogs, as the time I spent with him, the classes I took him to, was time I was not spending on them. It was good for the new owner.
> 
> When he met the new owner a week after the first visit, he walked in and put his head in the guy's lap.
> 
> I let him go.
> 
> Not everyone wants a puppy. Some do not want to go through the puppy stage. For some people an older dog is the right choice.
> 
> Rushie was NOT a reject. He was a well-trained companion dog that I would have been happy to give house room to forever. I am sure he gets more attention than I gave him in his new home.


That is true Selzer - not everyone wants a puppy...there were moments I had when I thought I must've been crazy for getting a landshark but it was still so much fun even though it was (and is) a lot of work. 

I can't see myself ever not having a GSD now - and when I get to be my grandmother's age an older, already trained GSD would be the perfect dog. 

That was a very sweet story about Rushie 

===

I'm sure breeder's love all their dogs and all their puppies - I can imagine it must be incredibly heart breaking and sad at times having to say good bye to a favorite dog or any dog or even puppies  

LOL - I've always thought I would LOVE to foster but I'm sure that's equally sad - you're happy and thrilled that the dog has found a great home but you're sad to see your friend go...it would be hard. 

I guess I just felt like "how could anyone give up their dog?" but I didn't look at it from the perspective that it is better for the dog, the owner and a new family will get a great friend.


----------



## BlackthornGSD

I try to think of what is best for the dog. I do not think that I am always the best home for every dog. Sometimes, I am. Sometimes, I am not. 

Especially for a dog who I bought as a titled, trained adult, would she rather split time here with me, sharing house time and play time, rotating between kennel and crate and house and yard, or would she rather live with an active family on 14 acres and a boy to follow around with and guy who loves to play ball and two grandmothers who like to hand out biscuits and a mom who works from home and wanted a companion and guardian?

There are some dogs who I could never part with--it wouldn't make the dog happier and it wouldn't make me happier. But often for a dog who joined me later in her life, I consider it the kinder, better choice to find her a loving, attentive family/person of her own. It would *selfish* for me to keep her--it would be to the detriment of her life, my other dogs' lives, and my own life. 

And I tell the new home that this dog can *ALWAYS* come back to me--she has a home here for life if needed--but if there's a better situation elsewhere, that's what I want for her.


----------



## lhczth

GSD Xander, that is something I have always wondered myself. Maybe if I bought an older female for breeding I could understand, but even then, I feel sorry for those girls that have gone form one home to another and then to another. I don't breed often. I got Nike at 9.5 weeks. She had two litters, was spayed and she still sleeps on my bed at night at almost 11 years. Vala was born here. She is carrying her 3rd and last litter. She too will stay her life with me as will her daughter and son (who I will probably never breed). I also have a dysplastic daughter or Nike's (Alexis) and she too will live out her life here. I will breed less often or stop producing puppies all together before I will ever get rid of my older females. This is just me. Others must do what they feel is best.


----------



## KLCecil

Well they normally go to great pet homes where they get to be couch potatoes and get a lot of one on one time instead of living in a kennel or with a bunch of dogs fighting for individual attention.
Also is you look at it this way, if a breeder breeds once a year and keeps one pup from each litter (many do) you’re going to wind up with 6-7 other dogs in the house. Eventually it gets a bit crowded.


----------



## Emoore

KLCecil said:


> Also is you look at it this way, if a breeder breeds once a year and keeps one pup from each litter (many do) you’re going to wind up with 6-7 other dogs in the house. Eventually it gets a bit crowded.


Exactly. If you keep back one pup from each litter, plus your breeding females, plus your retired females, and of course responsible breeders are expected to take back any pups that their owners can't keep for some reason. . . you could end up with a BUNCH of dogs rather quickly. I think it's nice to put the old girls in a "retirement home" where they can be beloved family dogs.


----------



## selzer

Also, if you wait for your last litter to keep a pup from a bitch to go forward with. There is no guaranty that the pup will be breedworthy. So you keep a promising pup from each litter, or from most litters. So you cannot really just keep one or two puppies when your bitches are becoming geriatric.


----------



## CaliBoy

I am not a breeder, but as I read the answers of breeders here, it makes perfect sense to let a retired bitch go to a new home where she will be the Queen and will not have to compete with a lot of other dogs for the attention and love she craves. And for a breeder who has become very attached to the retired bitches, I think it is very kind and heroic of them to put the dog's needs first. Thanks to the breeders here for the answers to a question I had also wondered about.


----------



## trudy

Also often breeders have older dogs who were returned for some reason and the kennel isn't the life these dogs want or deserve. My first German Shepherd I got was one of these, her owner was dying and in end stages, so she returned her to where she knew she would live out her days, and they wisely kept their eyes open for a home situation for her. So I got a well trained, socialized girl who loved with all her heart for that second chance, and i loved her and miss her still. But I am happy the breeders take back dogs and are looking for great homes, this is a resource all people should think of.


----------



## vat

I have adopted a retired bitch from my breeder and am so happy for it. My breeder was able to select 2 retired bitches that she knew would love my Max who was 10 months at the time. That is how Callan came to live with us. Yes she has retired in style and I send my breeder pictures. She is so happy to see her baby adjusting well to her new home.

I think for most breeders they do it for the breed not the money. If you want to keep your bloodline diverse and going strong you would eventually have so many dogs you would have to stop breeding. For me it was also 1/2 the price to adopt the retired bitch than to buy a puppy. Also my husband had a real fear of adopting from a rescue so again adopting from my breeder I knew exactly what I was getting.


----------



## JeanKBBMMMAAN

trudy said:


> ... So I got a well trained, socialized girl...


Keep in mind that not all are like that, so you have to ask about socialization and training, just like you would with any dog you get. 

I have a problem with senior females sold in heat, or sold around and around to be bred more. Which is not the case when they are being sold for a retirement home, but does happen.


----------



## vat

That is sad that some people would sell their female in heat. I had to sign an adoption contract and she was spayed before I got her. I did have to pay for the spay but my breeders vet considers it a rescue and charges the same fee he does for a rescue. I guess he does this because there are several breeders in his area that PTS their retired bitches. I do not understand that, why not sell or give away the dog.


----------



## BlackthornGSD

vat said:


> I guess he does this because there are several breeders in his area that PTS their retired bitches. I do not understand that, why not sell or give away the dog.


Gah. Shame on them. I've only place one retired girl so far--and I placed her for the cost of her spay--either with my vet or their vet. It was the condition of the placement. In my opinion, these girls have earned the best life I can give them, even if that means it's with someone other than me.


----------



## Vinnie

GSD_Xander said:


> I guess what I don't understand is this...when I get a dog it's for life (for the whole life of the dog) and I fully consider them family.
> 
> However, I see some breeder's listing "retired" dogs that have had a few litters and then they're selling them...
> 
> I don't get that.


I'm right there with you on this. 

I guess people can make all the excuses they want to justify what they are doing but to me - this is just not right. And some breeders agree with me, they are just few and far between but they are the breeders that will earn MY respect.

I guess it boils down to if the breeder looks at their dogs as "breeding stock" or an asset like livestock people or business people do - in which case it's more of a "money" motivator IMO than a caring for the breed kind of thing. 

I still believe that a retired brood bitch deserves the utmost respect. After all a breeder wouldn't get where they're at without her. It's the same as my DH's 14 year old spayed female. She has dedicated her life to him and she will live out her days in his house. Just because we may bring in another dog to our house does not mean we can just ship her off and treat her like she is no longer of value to us.

True there a people who would rather adopt an older dog but there are already plenty of them in rescues and humane societies around the states today (some that are actually very well trained). There is no need for a breeder to add to this overpopulation crisis in this way and take away from a dog so badly in need of a home. It's just sad to me when they do this. 

With all the breeding going on now-a-days there no need to have a huge kennel. Keep a smaller kennel and breed only what you can handle. Don't dump your unwanted dogs off on someone else just so you can make more money for yourself!


----------



## Chris Wild

BlackthornGSD said:


> In my opinion, these girls have earned the best life I can give them, even if that means it's with someone other than me.


^^^This.

At home we have 2 seniors. One retired SchH dog, Kaiser. Nara, who was purchased as a pup with hopes of SchH and breeding who proved completely unsuitable for either, so was spayed and stayed here as a pet. Up until a couple years ago that included a 3rd senior, Kali, imported from Germany as a proven broodbitch, but who was never able to produce a litter for us so was spayed and lived out her days on the couch.

As far as retiring actual broodbitches, so far we've only had one. Our foundation bitch, Ira. And she does not live with us. She was rehomed shortly after retiring. Not something we set out to do, it just happened. Close friends who had lost a daughter of her's in an accident, missed having a GSD and knew it would be a couple years before we'd have another puppy for them, out of the blue one day asked if they could have her. We thought about it, realized it was 100% the best situation for her, and we did it. She is the total queen of the house, rather than having to split time with other dogs, and be rotated because she and the aforementioned Nara were mortal enemies. Now she's spoiled rotten, in excellent hands, and we still get to see her frequently.

It has nothing to do with who gave us more, but what was best for each individual dog. With Nara's nerve and health issues she never could have been safely placed anywhere. We could manage her and give her a good life, so she stayed. Kali had already played musical homes for the first few years of her life before coming here and had a lot of baggage from that to be worked through. Even if someone had been willing to take on an older dog who had started having some health problems, rehoming her again after she'd settled in here would have been the most cruel thing possible. The only right choice was for her to stay here and never change homes again. Whereas with Ira, changing homes was no big deal. She's healthy, has a go with the flow personality, already knew these people, and the things that their home offers her are the things most important to her and she gets them 24/7, not just part time. 

Yes, as our foundation bitch Ira gave us more than the others, and as such earned the right to the most happiness she could have. Just turned out that wasn't with us. Whereas with Nara and Kali, their best chance at happiness was with us. Nothing to do with who gave us more. Nothing to do with us being more loyal to one over the other. We love them all and are loyal to them all and try to make the best decisions for them all, even when sometimes that means letting them go. When the next broodbitch comes time to retire, we'll approach it from the same standpoint of where is the best place for that dog, here or elsewhere, and move forward accordingly. 

Certainly there are some who threat their breeding dogs as commodities to be thrown out like trash once they've outlived their usefulness. But to lump everyone who rehomes their breeding dogs into that category is completely wrong, IMO. To automatically assume everyone who keeps all of their breeding dogs is exceedingly noble can be very wrong as well. Many times such is done for any number of very selfish reasons, with little thought to what is actually best for the dog. When looking at both ends of the spectrum the only fair judgment to make is to look at it from that standpoint of what is best for the dogs, and the motivation behind the rehoming in the first place. That is the most important aspect. Sometimes the best home is with someone else.


----------



## Chris Wild

Reading further, a couple interesting points I've seen hinted at through the thread that got me thinking...

For those who are against a retired breeding dog being rehomed for any reason... what about dogs who wash out?

If a breeder raises a young dog with the hopes that it will become a breeding dog, but that dog proves unsuitable, is the breeder supposed to keep all of those too? Or is this ok because since the breeder hasn't gotten any sort of monetary compensation from the wash out and the idea that a breeder must keep all dogs forever only applies to those the breeder "owes"? After all, if one subscribes to the theory of rehoming a breeding dog stealing a home from a rescue, why wouldn't that apply to a younger wash out as well? 

If yes, than one of 2 things are going to happen. The breeder, being stuck with the dog, is going to breed that non-breed worthy dog anyway. More potentially bad dogs being bred. Or the breeder who really cares about what they produce is going to end up not breeding altogether because all their time and space and energy is take up caring for dogs that aren't breed worthy and there is none left for breeding dogs. No room left for taking back dogs either, but then that would be a moot point since the breeder wouldn't have any dogs to breed in the first place.

The reality is that unfortunately a breeder can't always be the "home for life" for a dog. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. It all comes down to what is best for that individual dog.


----------



## selzer

Great posts Chirs. 

It isn't about how much the dog has done for us. That WOULD mean we look at them as their monetary value. It is about what is best for the individual dog or bitch. 

All my animals get the same care, whether they have produced puppies for me or if they will never be used for breeding. It does not matter. For certain individuals, once again though, they have to make the whole breeding thing completely impossible:

One cannot breed for the proper and correct reasons, and send all of the puppies they produce to new homes. Sorry, but you need to be breeding with a purpose and that means holding back some pups to be bred. Wash outs and returns must be kept by the breeder or euthanized because otherwise they are adding to the overpopulation/dogs in shelters problem whether they find good homes for them or not. Retired breeders must be kept for the same reason. Up and coming puppies must be kept to be bred. 

The fellow that got Rush got a four year old dog, examined by a vet at my cost and heartworm tested, hips ofa good, elbows normal, vWd in the normal spectrum, TDI certified, RN, a bag of food and six months supply of heartworm prevention. He was also shown in conformation, and had taken a first placement at a match. Normally you do not get all that from a shelter or pound or even a rescue. 

Hanging on to every dog regardless does not make you reputable, sorry. It might make you a hoarder. You are only reputable if every dog's needs are met, if every dog is specially loved, trained, cared for. If dogs are rehomed, they are rehomed properly. And if dogs are euthanized, it is because they no longer have a reasonable prognosis of having a decent quality of life if provided with procedures to treat issues and prolong life.

I do not understand what difference it is to sell a pup or to sell a dog that is an adult with respect to taking away homes from dogs in shelters. If a breeder is dumping their older dogs in shelters -- that is disgusting. If breeders sells a young adult/ green dog started with some training, or a mature adult that was good for breeding, I cannot see anything wrong with that. 

It leaves only one question really and that is how breeders can love an animal, put time into that animal, raise it from a young puppy or even from birth, and then let that dog go to someone else? I guess if the right home for the dog comes along, and they can see that the dog will have an even better life with this person, that the dog will fill a void and get even more attention and love. It does not mean it is easy to do.


----------



## CassandGunnar

All of our previous dogs have been rescues. (I'm up to 12 total in my lifetime, not counting my K9 partners). After reading the posts from Chris and Selzer, I'd take a "retired" breeding dog in a heartbeat. (I'd never considered it before and I've never had the opportunity) In taking one of these dogs, you couldn't possibly get a better deal. If the dog has been used in breeding, from a reputable breeder, how can you go wrong? You're getting a breedworthy dog, cream of the crop, probably titled in at least one area, excellent temperment and everything a GSD should be.
Sign me up. I've seen "Breed Stock" dogs advertised on CL, but I'm guessing that those may not be from the best breeders.
As I said earlier, I've never had the opportunity to adopt or purchase a retired breeding dog and I don't image that they become available too often, but I can't say for sure.
Having said that, if either of you ever have one to sell, PM me, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Just sayin' .


----------



## vat

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I for one am glad my breeder lets her retired dogs go. I have a wonderful girl with a beautiful temper and SHE is the reason my hubby has changed his mind about females. Used to never want another one. Callan is the queen here and is treated as such. Now mind you if no one wantes a retired bitch or stud from my breeder they spend their live with her until they pass. But at least she knows that some of her babies are living the high life!


----------



## Vinnie

I'm sorry if my post sounded like I was painting all breeders with one brush or that this is what I base my whole opinion of a breeder on - trust me there is a lot more that goes into that decision than one thing. I certainly understand that special situations can apply and do happen on a *rare* occasion. 



Chris Wild said:


> The reality is that unfortunately a breeder can't always be the "home for life" for a dog. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. It all comes down to what is best for that individual dog.


The reality is that unfortunately anyone (breeder or pet owner) can't always be the "home for life" for a dog. And the other reality is that it's sad when they can't fulfill that commitment they made and take away a home that could of gone to a dog who doesn't have a home to begin with due to someone saying they couldn't be that "home for life". It happens far to often. More often than it should all because a breeder is doing it so it's acceptable.

Sorry if I'm stepping on anyone's toes. Just the way I see it I guess.


----------



## Vinnie

I should also add that I'm not really talking about a female who has been purchased solely for the purpose of breeding and never used because for some reason she turned out to be not be what that breeder was looking for and they couldn't use her in their program. However, *to me* that still comes off as treating the dog as somewhat of a commodity. 

I'm talking about the brood bitch who has been used to help form the kennel and then rehomed once she is no longer useful to a breeding program.


----------



## selzer

Vinnie, I have a question. 

How about a breeder who is really doing their best to improve a certain aspect that they see as being a problem in lines today. Let's for the sake of argument say the slope in an American showline. She has found an American showline bitch that is very moderate, and in her opinion very correct in angulation. 

She breeds her to a dog that is also correct in angulation. 

She has a nice litter of pups with two flyers. She keeps them to see how they turn out and if she wants to go forward with them. 

The next year she breeds to a dog of different ancestry, but compatible pedigrees and also very correct in angulation. She has another nice litter with two flyers in it. And keeps them. 

But because she does not want to be adding to the population of unwanted dogs in shelters, she spays her four year old champion bitch with good hips and elbows, and other screening, and titled etc. And will focus her energies on the up and coming pups, so she _knows_ that this bitch will be left behind too often. 

So she has a friend who wants a dog to compete in obedience with who loves the dog. 

Should she let her go? 

Or should she tell the woman to go to a shelter or rescue and get a PAL on a dog?


----------



## Chris Wild

I get so frustrated with this because it is a lot of painting with a broad brush and passing judgment based on assumption, as well as placing often mutually exclusive and just plain insane requirements on what is considered acceptable. Another example of the fact that no matter what a breeder does, they can't win.

On the one hand breeders are supposed to only breed good dogs that are proven breed worthy. And they're also supposed to accomplish that starting mainly with puppies, keeping back pups from their own breeding to carry out their breeding plan and prove to others that their dogs are worth carrying on, and raise and train their own rather than buy breeding stock from elsewhere. Nevermind that pups are far from a sure thing when it comes to turning out to be breed worthy, much less fitting the breeder's goals and if a breeder really evaluates them honestly more will wash out than not. 

But now on the other hand if they rehome a retiree or a wash out in order to make room they are backing out on a commitment to the dog, betraying the dog, and showing that they don't care about or respect the dog. And on top of that, theoretically some rescue or shelter dog might lose a home because of it too.

And of course always be able to take a dog back. Do they have to keep those forever too, or can those be rehomed again?

And all dogs should live indoors as companions getting lots of time and attention. And since crates and kennels are usually frowned upon too the breeder also needs to do magic to make sure all those dogs get along. And they don't find themselves on some animal hoarders program due to all those dogs that they must keep forever because it can't possibly other than in very rare and unusual circumstances be right to rehome a dog. And the breeder must be independently wealthy, because they aren't allowed to make money breeding dogs, and clearly they shouldn't have any sort of job either because then their dogs aren't getting enough attention.

Absolutely there are breeders who dump their dogs like trash. But to imply that any breeder who rehomes is dooming a shelter dog (gee, we hear that same argument about breeding pups in the first place), doesn't love or care for or cherish that dog, is just plain wrong. 

If the K9 handler, or SAR handler, or serious sport competitor rehomes a wash out or a retiree in order to place that dog in a home that is more suited to it's personality and needs, and make room for them to get a dog that is suited to theirs, are they horribly uncaring about the dog and dooming shelter dogs too? Or is it only breeders, who supposedly make money off the dogs, who aren't allowed to do that?


----------



## Chris Wild

I do wonder how many people who are so against this have ever actually had to face the situation of asking themselves "am *I* the best home for this dog?" And then if they are truthful with themselves and the answer is no, have experienced the total crushing heartbreak that realization can bring. Or have had 2 dogs that absolutely will not get along and must be kept separated, usually requiring that one be securely crated or kenneled at any given time for the safety of both. A situation that causes a tremendous amount of stress at times, making sure the doors are closed and asking "did I really latch that crate when I left for work?" not to mention cuts down on the time and attention that both get.

In some ways it can be harder to rehome a dog, knowing it has a life now with someone other than you, and is happier for it, than it is to PTS. Don't believe me? Try it sometime. Having faced that situation before, and finding myself possibly facing it again with a dog that is more special to me than almost all others I've had (and all have been special) there is no way I can express what I think of people who have never been in that situation finding it ok to pass judgment on someone who has. At least not without violating a whole bunch of board rules. 

So I'll just say there are times to remember the old saying about walking a few miles in another's shoes.... And also that I hope anyone who does find themselves in that situation, be it breeder or pet owner, will look beyond their own feelings, and certainly beyond whatever anyone on an internet board thinks of them, and do what is best for the dog.


----------



## Vandal

I hate to say it but much of those beliefs have been propogated by breeders themselves. I have observed the change in attitude the longer people are breeders. Once you do it for a while, you realize all the ridiculous rules about what makes a breeder "reputable" are just that. Most of these ideas started as marketing, then were picked up by the ARs and are now used as clubs to beat breeders over the head with.

Having said that, there are dogs I will never place. The ones I will place, are the ones who were raised in a home that I maybe got back from a co-own or from a client. I just recently placed a female with a client that already has two of my dogs. She fits into that situation much better than here and is VERY happy in her new place. I could not be more pleased and happy for that dog. 

With only a few exceptions, my trusted clients are the only ones who will get a retired dog from me. You have to impress the heck out of me if I don't know you and I can only think of one person who did that and has one of my females. She is on this board. I just can't seem to do it otherwise without the trust in the people already established.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

BlackthornGSD said:


> In my opinion, these girls have earned the best life I can give them, even if that means it's with someone other than me.


Simply on the face of it I'd have to say I don't like the general idea of a breeder rehoming rehired dogs. BUT, I love this quote by Christine, and Chris also has some excellent points. Often, no matter how much they want to, it's simply not possible for a breeder to give a retired dog the kind of life they should have. How many people, breeders or not, have multiple dogs (especially females) who don't all get along and must be separated at all times? Is musical crates really better than a home where they can be pampered and spoiled?

Halo's mom had two more litters and then was retired. A great home came along, and the breeder decided to let her go. Recently she posted a wonderful picture of Hanuta sleeping with a cat curled up next to her on the dog bed, and toys around her on the floor, that the new owner sent. The man she lives with now has a handy-man business and she goes everywhere with him. She hasn't seen a leash or a crate since she got there, and she has an old jute bite arm that she loves to carry around with her. It's obvious from seeing the picture and hearing about her new life that Hanuta is now the loved and cherished pet of a devoted owner. How can that be wrong? :shrug:


----------



## RubyTuesday

I've known good breeders that keep their dogs for life. I've also known good breeders that keep some & place others. They place them carefully, responsibly & will take 'em back if it doesn't work.

Experienced breeders have numerous contacts among those looking for a dog & can more easily make a sound placement than the average pet owner, IMO. A retired bitch from a good breeder is golden. Genetically sound, well mannered, trained & healthy. I suspect the occasional re-homed young adults are also excellent b/c good breeders fully evaluate 'em & provide necessary remedial training & health care before placing them.

When I'm seeking a breeder I'm overwhelmingly concerned with whether or not s/he consistently produces sound, healthy, long lived dogs with exemplary temperaments that will fit my home. Sadly, too often the criteria used to evaluate breeders focuses very little on the actual dogs produced.


----------



## Emoore

Chris Wild said:


> Having faced that situation before, and finding myself possibly facing it again with a dog that is more special to me than almost all others I've had (and all have been special) .


Oh Chris, not Kaiser? :hugs: I remember you saying that he and Wulf weren't getting along so well?


----------



## Chris Wild

Oh goodness no. Never Kaiser. Nor Wulf. My Heidi Bear.


----------



## selzer

Great posts Chris. 

I have some of my girls that I think I could take to the vet to be PTS, before being able to give them up to someone else. How can I be 100% certain that they will get what they need there. How can I be sure they will not be dropped off somewhere, given to someone evil, etc. I could put it in the contract, but what if they just tell me she died. 

Rehoming a dog is NEVER easy and I agree with Vandal, you would have to really, really impress me to pry one of my girls away from me. 

I think that people who rehome their retired bitches with care are actually showing selflessness, not selfishness. They are truly doing something that many people cannot do, and for their dogs' benefit are denying themselves. 

It truly does not take much to maintain a six year old bitch. They know the ropes. What do they need, fresh water, a few cups of food, a scratch on the forehead, and their poop cleaned up. They might be seeing the vet more from here on out, but they are not hard to care for. If it was taking care of the bitch that was the question, no one would ever rehome a retiree. Being willing to accept that she will have a better life being the center of someone's universe, that is not selfish, or letting the dog down, or going back on your commitment.


----------



## Emoore

Chris Wild said:


> Oh goodness no. Never Kaiser. Nor Wulf. My Heidi Bear.


I'm so sorry to hear that.  But I was literally tearing up thinking it was Kaiser. You'd have a line of people wanting to take him though.


----------



## Chris Wild

LOL.... ah, who want's a 12.5yo tripod who still thinks he can rule he world?


----------



## selzer

Chris, I hope you come to some peace on your decision for Heidi-Bear. I am sure you will make that decision with what is right for the dog. If you have eight children, you do not love them less than someone with only one or two -- people do not understand that when it comes to dogs though.


----------



## Chris Wild

Thanks. But really it's up to her. She is everything I could want and I dearly love this dog. But at 18mo she hasn't had a heat cycle yet. NOT normal for her lines. And she's recently been showing signs of possible allergies. So need to do allergy testing, and see if she ever comes into heat. If she has allergies or reproductive problems she's not a breeding candidate no matter how wonderful she is in every other way. And the harsh reality is you just can't keep them all, not and have room and time for something to carry on the line. So there may be a very tough decision coming.


----------



## Vinnie

I honestly feel like some of my words are being twisted somewhat and that makes it hard for me to try and have a reasonable conversation when I have to go back and repeat what I say. But once more, I did say that I do believe there are occasions where it is necessary (and maybe even ok or better) to rehome but I honestly don't think it occurs as often as some would like us to think. I don't think it should be done every time a female is retired and as soon as someone is done using her.

It's not acceptable from a pet owner and I personally don't think it acceptable from a breeder either. 

I'm not sure why after all the years that I have worked together with someone that she wouldn't know me just a little better than to think I'm going to start now placing unreasonably high requirements on breeders (geez many times I recall that I didn't even judge them as stringently as she had) and all of the sudden now I start painting them all with one brush. Ok.

Sorry that my opinion is different than yours.


----------



## Emoore

Chris Wild said:


> Really it's up to her. She is everything I could want and I dearly love this dog. But at 18mo she hasn't had a heat cycle yet. NOT normal for her lines. And she's recently been showing signs of possible allergies. So need to do allergy testing, and see if she ever comes into heat. If she has allergies or reproductive problems she's not a breeding candidate no matter how wonderful she is in every other way. And the harsh reality is you just can't keep them all, not and have room and time for something to carry on the line. So there may be a very tough decision coming.


Sorry to hear you're going through this right now, but it's awesome to know you have her best interests at heart.


----------



## Catu

First... I'm sorry Chris this is happening to you, it must be a lot of stress being constantly crossing fingers and waiting for the best.

I don't know why it is not right for pet owners either. We humans like to think that our dogs can't be better than with us, but the truth is they are resilient criatures and most (not all) are adaptable enough to be as just happy with one owner as with the other... as much as it hurts our feelings. Pet dogs have the same rights to be happy as breeding dogs and deserve the better homes for them if the conditions change. A friend of mine had two large dogs and two boys of six and eight years old, she got divorced and decided that financially and time wise she could not take proper care of two kids and two big male dogs at the same time and gave the older dog to another mutual friend. Oh no! She should have given up on the younger, last to come is first to go, says the golden rule... but the older one was a better fit for this friend, because he was more stressed by the changes, used to be the husband dog and seems to bon better to men. Or maybe she should have rehomed a kid...

And many people, me included, are not looking for pup in the shelters but would love to have a given retired bitch from a breeder. I'm no looking for stray dogs to adopt, but if one of the dogs we recently retired from my SAR team had needed a home here would have surely had a warm place next to the woodburning stove. Receiving a certain dog has nothing to do with taking the place of a shelter dog.


----------



## holland

I guess I really lack empathy here. I have 2 females who don't get along and I never thought I would consider re-homing -but I did consider it this summer-and I didn't do it. I have heard of people who had to re-home because of serious financial/medical issues or death and I think those are heart breaking situations. But because the dog was a wash out well not so much. What defines a wash out-you wanted a top schutzhund prospect and it missed that by a few points or it has HD. I really don't feel badly for those people whether they are breeders or sport people. So if you are a breeder and you decide to re-home a dog because it has health issues-you expect to be somehow compensated for it. To me that is just part of being a breeder and if you decide that the dog is special you keep it and if not you made a choice


----------



## carmspack

... everything Chris said .. 
so where exactly is this line drawn on rehoming , and how many people have bought an adult dog from some place like ....eurosport.... or an adult , trained, title, proven adult FOR their breeding programme , or what about the dog that you have hand picked , nutured , prepared for and sold for work/service ?
Carmen
Carmspack Working German Shepherd Dogs


----------



## Whiteshepherds

I know it's painting with that broad brush, but I think breeders should be held to the same standards as pet owners. When you get a dog you make a commitment to that dog for it's entire life except in extenuating circumstances. I know those circumstances do happen but for some breeders it seems like they do it on a regular basis. 

Don't some breeders co-own females to avoid having to eventually rehome them?


----------



## Iletthedogout

It may be that we over-humanizing this issue. Let's assume that a reputable breeder does so to improve the breed. It is very unlikely that one breeding is going to achieve the desired outcome or that all the puppies in that litter match the desired outcome. Therefore achieving your goal of constantly improving the breed is a never ending avocation. And even if you achieved this goal with the perfect breeding, wouldn't you want to repeat it to continue to add to the availability of quality dogs to good homes, SAR, show ring, etc. 
The very notion of breeding suggests that you will never keep every puppy or adult GSD for yourself if you are motivated by constant improvement of the breed. The evolutionary process doesn't work that way. Breeders breed to perpetuate what they view as the best qualities of a GSD (in most cases.) If that is the pursuit, then a breeder may keep the best, sell, place or rehome puppies as part of the overall effort to create a breeding program that increases their chances of achieving their goals. This means that a male or female that doesn't pass on the particular qualities the breeders is seeking, will likely not be continued to be bred and at some point may have to be "rehomed" to make room for another dog that provides another chance at meeting the sought after goal. 
And many of us who are not breeders, but want a quality dog, will pay top dollar for a dog that is part of a longstanding breeding program. The reality is that creating such programs requires many breedings, making tough choices between keeping a dog as part of the program or placing it with someone else in order to make room for a new male or female candidate. 
But it is important that we are able to call it what it is without being judgmental or preachy. Breeders rotate, swap out, rehome, sell dogs because it is a necessary part of a successful breeding program. Yes many breeders will find great homes for the dogs, but its not out of love for the dog that breeders do this. 
There is only enough time, love, attention, money to go around to keep every male who doesn't pass on desired traits or every female who is past the breeding age. But if you want to continue to provide quality dogs to families, SAR, Law enforcement, guide dogs, etc. you have to make choices. THERE IS NOTHING INHERENTLY WRONG WITH THAT. It is a necessary part of maintaining a reputable breeding program, which means that many breeders will go the extra mile to find the best possible home for their dogs. 
And faced with the prospect of being the dog at the end of the kennel that gets a limited amount of work, attention, love etc, then rehoming it is better for the dog. 
But doing so is in the best interest of the breeding program and breeder first, love for the dog, second. And that is OK. No breeder who demonstrates a commitment and consistent track record for producing quality GSD in a humane manner should feel defensive. I admire you for your commitment and time and dedication.


----------



## Vinnie

Vandal said:


> *I hate to say it but much of those beliefs have been propogated by breeders themselves.* I have observed the change in attitude the longer people are breeders. Once you do it for a while, you realize all the ridiculous rules about what makes a breeder "reputable" are just that. Most of these ideas started as marketing, then were picked up by the ARs and are now used as clubs to beat breeders over the head with.


Yes, and this is where some of my belief comes from, straight from a breeder who is posting in this thread and getting praises for what she's saying now. But not even a year ago this very breeder was very much against another breeder and one of the biggest complaints against that breeder was that she rehomed a few of her dogs she was not going to use in a breeding program because the dogs did not get along.

It's funny to see that belief change and become ok once it's something you are going to do.


----------



## onyx'girl

Whiteshepherds said:


> I know it's painting with that broad brush, but I think breeders should be held to the same standards as pet owners. When you get a dog you make a commitment to that dog for it's entire life except in extenuating circumstances. I know those circumstances do happen but for some breeders it seems like they do it on a regular basis.
> 
> Don't some breeders co-own females to avoid having to eventually rehome them?


I don't think breeders should be held to the pet owner standard.
Because of the amount of dogs they have compared to the average pet owner, re-homing a dog that isn't a fit for their program should be acceptable. 

I'd much rather see the dog placed where it can get some one on one individual attention, continue with training, and just live the life of a pet vs placed in a kennel or rotated for the rest of its days,without getting out to train, which most dogs even in their senior years enjoy.

I would be honored to have someones foundation bitch live her days out with me! But that "someone" would know me well enough, trust me to even consider placing her with me.

We were talking about re-homing dogs at training this weekend. 
One person job is a dog trainer so placing dogs is his business, he rescues or will take a GSD that the owner can't handle and work with said dog for placement(he keeps his emotions at bay when doing so). People are constantly contacting him for placing their dogs they can't deal with.

Then we have an owner who's emotions are so in tune with the dog, that the dog doesn't work well with s/he and this dog needs to work! 
So s/he is possibly going to place the dog as a LEO K9. 
There is always an individual story to every placement and I would _never say never_ on re-homing.
What brought up the conversation was one of the club members purchased a titled female from a well known breeder who bought the dog from Europe for breeding. Dog had heat cycles every 3 months so the breeder couldn't use her in her program. Spayed her and sold her....for 5 grand!!!! Should she have kept the dog? Now the dog is still training and much happier, I'm sure.


----------



## Chris Wild

Vinnie said:


> Yes, and this is where some of my belief comes from, straight from a breeder who is posting in this thread and getting praises for what she's saying now. But not even a year ago this very breeder was very much against another breeder and one of the biggest complaints against that breeder was that she rehomed a few of her dogs she was not going to use in a breeding program because the dogs did not get along.
> 
> It's funny to see that belief change and become ok once it's something you are going to do.


Wow.
Well, for the record I see that as a bit different situation entirely. That wasn't a case of rehoming retired or wash outs that weren't going to use for breeding. It was a case of a pet owner and rescue volunteer who suddenly got rid of the pets to make room for buying a bunch of imports in order to become a breeder. That those pets suddenly stopped getting along, thus justifying rehoming, when said person decided to buy a bunch of new ones to become a big time breeder was beyond suspcious to me, yet multiple members were blatantly attacked for questioning the situation. To me that is a very different situation. 

And for the record we made that horrible, unfeeling, no respect for the dog decision to place Ira our foundation bitch in a better home before that happened. So not a case at all of it becoming ok once I decided to do it.

I absolutely do agree that more often than not a breeder getting rid of retired dogs is a trash dumping situation, and those where it is done for the best interest of the dog are the minority. But regardless of motivation behind it, far more often than not I do think it is the best thing for that individual dog. There are very few, very rare exceptions where it wouldn't be the best thing for the dog, regardless of why the person did it.

As far as breeders being held to the same standard as pet owners with regard to being a home for life, I look at it this way. A pet owner never *needs* to get another dog. Particularly setting up a situation of multiple intact dogs of the same sex. They always have the luxury of waiting to get another dog until their current one is gone, or selecting another dog by placing a priority on making sure it gets along with any current dogs.

A breeder does not have that ability. If a breeder waits until the existing dogs are gone before getting another, that means they never kept anything from those dogs. They can't develop a program and work toward a goal, using breedings to accomplish that. All they can do is produce puppies for sale, never for furthering their goals. And would have to stop their breeding once one dog reaces retirement age, and then restart it with brand new stock many years later when that dog is gone. What kind of breeding program or focus is that? A breeder has to bring in new stock every few years, either from outside or preferably by keeping pups to grow out and hopefully become the next generation. That necessitates multiple dogs and multiple dogs of the same sex. Something a breeder faces by very nature of being a breeder, that a pet owner never faces unless they make the choice to do so.


----------



## holland

Vinnie said:


> Yes, and this is where some of my belief comes from, straight from a breeder who is posting in this thread and getting praises for what she's saying now. But not even a year ago this very breeder was very much against another breeder and one of the biggest complaints against that breeder was that she rehomed a few of her dogs she was not going to use in a breeding program because the dogs did not get along.
> 
> It's funny to see that belief change and become ok once it's something you are going to do.


 
LOL-what you are really just expected to say on this board is great post Chris. But your post is funny.


----------



## robinhuerta

Very true Chris.
*I haven't read through the numerous pages.....but it seems that the idea of re-homing or selling a retired breeding dog is what's at question?!...
WHY NOT place or sell a retired dog to a forever, loving, responsible home?
If a great, retirement home becomes available for one of my "senior, retired" dogs....I would have no problem in placing them. (we don't usually sell our senior/retired dogs). If they could live out their final, senior years as a *couch snuggling, treat eating, TV watching,..with long relaxing walks, prospect.??.....ABSOLUTELY...I would place them! 
JMO

p.s....I have no idea about the "past controversy" that was prev mentioned.....I only comment on what I DO know.


----------



## holland

Of course-


----------



## robinhuerta

Holland...of course..what? I'm not understanding?


----------



## LaRen616

robinhuerta said:


> WHY NOT place or sell a retired dog to a forever, loving, responsible home?
> If a great, retirement home becomes available for one of my "senior, retired" dogs....I would have no problem in placing them. (we don't usually sell our senior/retired dogs). If they could live out their final, senior years as a *couch snuggling, treat eating, TV watching,..with long relaxing walks, prospect.??.....ABSOLUTELY...I would place them!
> JMO


I am not a breeder, but I completely agree with this. 

I also think that some dogs do great with a kennel life and they dont mind not being in the house with their owner, but I also think that some dont do well with a kennel life and would be better off in a loving home. Some dogs need more attention and love than others. Besides, retired dogs deserve to live out the rest of their life being spoiled. 

I think breeders that find their retired dogs good homes are amazing. 

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## GSDElsa

Holland-how much does that chip on your shoulder weigh? Maybe you need a chiropractor...i think its weighing you down.


----------



## LaRen616

GSDElsa said:


> Holland-how much does that chip on your shoulder weigh? Maybe you need a chiropractor...i think its weighing you down.


:rofl:


----------



## Vinnie

Chris Wild said:


> Wow.
> Well, for the record I see that as a bit different situation entirely. That wasn't a case of rehoming retired or wash outs that weren't going to use for breeding. It was a case of a pet owner and rescue volunteer who suddenly got rid of the pets to make room for buying a bunch of imports in order to become a breeder. That those pets suddenly stopped getting along, thus justifying rehoming, when said person decided to buy a bunch of new ones to become a big time breeder was beyond suspcious to me, yet multiple members were blatantly attacked for questioning the situation. To me that is a very different situation.
> 
> 
> 
> Couple things.
> 
> Your take on that breeder’s decision maybe and I’m sure is very different then her take. She had a dog she intended to breed and another dog she did not intend to breed (who was a rescue). They did not get along. She rehomed the dog that she was not going to breed (wasn’t even a GSD as I recall). She later imported 2 dogs (2 dogs does not make a bunch in my book) jointly with someone else for her kennel and still owns the other dog. I don’t believe she imported the 2 dogs to start her kennel. I believe she already owned her foundation bitch and imported the dogs to add to her kennel. Yes, she was very new to breeding at that time but why does that make her decision any worse than yours? Because you seen her as a pet owner? She wanted to be a breeder and was just starting out. Because she was new and didn’t have a known reputation as a breeder yet she’s still considered a “pet owner”? I really wouldn’t call her a “big time breeder” even now either. She produces 2-3 litters per year . But I guess if I get into too many details about her I might be unfairly naming her name.
> 
> I’m just wondering where the line is drawn? And who gets to draw this line?
> 
> 
> 
> Chris Wild said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as breeders being held to the same standard as pet owners with regard to being a home for life, I look at it this way. A pet owner never *needs* to get another dog. Particularly setting up a situation of multiple intact dogs of the same sex. They always have the luxury of waiting to get another dog until their current one is gone, or selecting another dog by placing a priority on making sure it gets along with any current dogs.
> 
> A breeder does not have that ability. If a breeder waits until the existing dogs are gone before getting another, that means they never kept anything from those dogs. They can't develop a program and work toward a goal, using breedings to accomplish that. All they can do is produce puppies for sale, never for furthering their goals. And would have to stop their breeding once one dog reaces retirement age, and then restart it with brand new stock many years later when that dog is gone. What kind of breeding program or focus is that? A breeder has to bring in new stock every few years, either from outside or preferably by keeping pups to grow out and hopefully become the next generation. That necessitates multiple dogs and multiple dogs of the same sex. Something a breeder faces by very nature of being a breeder, that a pet owner never faces unless they make the choice to do so.
> 
> 
> 
> A breeder does have the same luxury as a pet owner. No breeder *needs* to get another dog just as no pet owner *needs* to get another dog. They can both decide if they are going to breed a dog or not.
> 
> As I said earlier, I'm just a little surprised by this response and who it's coming from.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Emoore

Chris Wild said:


> That wasn't a case of rehoming retired or wash outs that weren't going to use for breeding. It was a case of a pet owner and rescue volunteer who suddenly got rid of the pets to make room for buying a bunch of imports in order to become a breeder.


I remember that.


----------



## Vinnie

GSDElsa said:


> Holland-how much does that chip on your shoulder weigh? Maybe you need a chiropractor...i think its weighing you down.


What?

Can't Holland have an opinion that's different than the majority here? Why does that mean he has a "chip on his shoulder"? I must be missing something.


----------



## Chris Wild

Vinnie said:


> A breeder does have the same luxury as a pet owner. No breeder *needs* to get another dog just as no pet owner *needs* to get another dog.


If the breeder is going to stay being a breeder, yes they do.





Vinnie said:


> As I said earlier, I'm just a little surprised by this response and who it's coming from.


You're not the only one. 
But whatever, I'm done with this thread. I've made my points more than once and from here it's just getting nasty for some reason. Certainly not everyone is going to agree, but at least hopefully some are more aware of where the other side is coming from.


----------



## Emoore

Did she also have a foster that she dumped back on the rescue? Or am I thinking of someone else?


----------



## Chris Wild

No reason to be talking about specific people or situations in here, unless someone wants to share their OWN story. So let's let that line of discussion drop please.


----------



## Vinnie

Chris Wild said:


> But whatever, I'm done with this thread. I've made my points more than once and from here it's just getting nasty for some reason. Certainly not everyone is going to agree, but at least hopefully some are more aware of where the other side is coming from.


Not even really sure how a person is to take a comment like that because I sure don't know what side you're coming from anymore but maybe you know what side I'm coming from I guess.


----------



## GSDElsa

Vinnie said:


> What?
> 
> Can't Holland have an opinion that's different than the majority here? Why does that mean he has a "chip on his shoulder"? I must be missing something.


Yes, you are missing something. 90% of her posts are going into threads and making the same snotty comments to the same group of posters she has decided she doesn't like. It's obvious she has a cyber grudge. Nothing to do with an opinion different than others, but rather the bizarre, vehement dislike she has for certain people.


----------



## holland

I will refrain from posting in the future


----------



## LaRen616

holland said:


> I will refrain from posting in the future


See now, I feel bad. 

I laughed because of the way GSDElsa worded it, it was funny.

I wasn't laughing at you. 

Your comments are needed and appreciated, so dont stop posting.


----------



## Vinnie

GSDElsa said:


> Yes, you are missing something. 90% of her posts are going into threads and making the same snotty comments to the same group of posters she has decided she doesn't like. It's obvious she has a cyber grudge. Nothing to do with an opinion different than others, but rather the bizarre, vehement dislike she has for certain people.


 Gotcha - thanks. :thumbup:

Sorry Holland for referring to you as a "he" when it appears you are a "she".


----------



## GSDElsa

holland said:


> LOL-what you are really just expected to say on this board is great post Chris. But your post is funny.


Holland, you can't take it...then don't dish it.

I don't feel bad. When 90% of your posts are nothing but snide comments like the one above geared towards a group of people on the forum, rather than anything useful at all...expect to get called out.

Admittedly, there is the occasional useful post in there. But I find it rather shocking when I see them.


----------



## Mac's Mom

holland said:


> I will refrain from posting in the future


Holland, Please don't stop posting. Your opinion is as valid as anyone elses. I don't think you come across negatively. You just happen to go against the majority sometimes.


----------



## Vandal

I think the lesson here is never say never. Everyone has a different opinion of what is in the best interest of the dog that they know better than you. I don't know the situation being discussed between Vinnie and Chris. I avoid those threads, and most all of the threads regarding breeding and opinions of breeders.. I am speaking up in this one because I think breeders need to be aware of what they are saying and how it can be used against all of us. Things are constantly being twisted. I have noticed Chris, ( more than others lately), commenting on how breeders are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Hence my earlier remark. She is absolutely correct. However, how people are selling pups and advising others to find dogs, is a big part of the problem . I know a very good breeder who would be labeled as a dreaded BYB because of all the "breeder rules" constantly brought up on this forum.

The Animal Rights crowd has grabbed onto some of these things and are trying to make them into laws. Why? Because they know it is REALLY expensive and if it is expensive, less people will be able to afford breeding. Now, some might make the argument that this is a good thing but if you think about it, if all these "rules" were made into laws, the only ones able to afford breeding are the ones least likely to do a good job of it. I am constantly amazed at breeders using the term "puppy mill" to trash other breeders. There is no legal definition of the word puppy mill and most use it just like the ARs use it, as a slur on breeders. Let me remind you, all breeders are puppy mills according to the ARs, so, the sooner you all stop using that term, the better. 

I have seen first hand how words can be twisted around breeder's throats by the ARs. People believe what they hear and all these rules about what makes a good breeder become more of a distraction than a help It becomes less about whether that person is breeding good dogs and more about how they fit the rule book that, like I said, has been written by other breeders trying to compete. The emphasis, should be on whether the breeder is first, breeding good dogs. Of course, the care of the dog is important but where they choose to advertise and so on, is not the business of other breeders.


----------



## Samba

So, they should breed good dogs and they should not abuse them. I am beginning to think it really is about this easy folks. (The breeding good dogs is the hard part). 

We have a lot of issues when people post a website and ask if this is a good breeder. Well, from a website it is really impossible to tell. Something more must be done than look at a website in the decision making. 

I have seen so many retired or washed out dogs placed in wonderful living situations where they enjoyed a grand life that I cheer when one gets such a chance! 

The AR people like nothing more than when dog people turn on breeders. It has worked to their advantage very well in my state!


----------



## selzer

Something in Vinnie's earlier post, hit a nerve, and that was (paraphrasing) that breeders not living up to their commitments to one of their dogs by rehoming it is actually taking homes away from shelters or rescues. 

This is a huge AR position. They have gone so far as to use children in a commercial with a supposedly dead dog in a body bag, saying that their buying a dog from a breeder was the same as killing a dog in a shelter. 

If every conscientious breeder took this stand, we would have to give up having the GSD breed altogether, and the AR people would be ecstatic. 

But rehoming a bitch when you have gotten 1 or 2 or 3 litters out of her will actually save homes, instead of making litter 4 and 5 and 6. When the breeder has bred the bitch to the dogs they have chosen for her, and then decide that they have accomplished what they can out of her part, spay and rehome, then you will not be pumping out the same combination over and over and over again. 

So even if you adopt the AR attitude that buying from a breeder kills a shelter dog, buying females from a breeder, whether they are returns, or washouts, or have already had a couple of litters, probably saves homes for shelter dogs. Ultimately, if breeders must keep every dog womb to tomb, that they did not sell as a puppy to their first time owner, then by necessity dogs that should not be bred, or maybe should not be bred further, will be bred again, and again. And litters from the best breeders who will hold true to breeding decisions will be fewer and higher priced and harder to come by.


----------



## Vinnie

selzer said:


> Something in Vinnie's earlier post, hit a nerve, and that was (paraphrasing) that breeders not living up to their commitments to one of their dogs by rehoming it is actually taking homes away from shelters or rescues.
> 
> This is a huge AR position. They have gone so far as to use children in a commercial with a supposedly dead dog in a body bag, saying that their buying a dog from a breeder was the same as killing a dog in a shelter.
> 
> If every conscientious breeder took this stand, we would have to give up having the GSD breed altogether, and the AR people would be ecstatic.


Ok, so again I will clarify what I said.

I did not say that there is absolutely -no exception-. 
I also believe there are plenty of people who want a puppy to keep many breeders in business for a very long time. 

I'm not a super AR person so I guess I'm not really appreciating being painted as one but if makes you feel better - go for it.  I think you might be surprised later on down the road though.


----------



## carmspack

Here is a totally new issue to think about.

Do you want your breeder to include health and longevity into the equation , then you have to understand that at 6 and 8 years that dog may just be at mid life and has another 6 to 8 years to enjoy as the centre of attention in a new home.
I hope we are not talking about run down , worn out dogs that are disposed of without thought to the quality of life.
A good breeder has a special relationship to their females, the picks, the hopes of the future , having kept back a progeny from a well thought out breeding to provide the direction for the next generation. You would hope that they had been kept in prime condition. 
It is not easy to let them go.
I still have the image seared on to my memory of letting a very special female go to a new home. I see her sitting in the back of the car with the kids holding her and the dog looking out at me.
Every year I got a Christmas card thanking me for having allowed her to enter their home.

Last year to my great surprise I go an email from one of the children of that family.
She is now grown up, educated, credentialled. She sent me a letter to say that this German Shepherd so deeply influenced her that it was life changing . It was that dog, and those memories , that ispired her to take up schooling at the University of Guelph, to become a Veterinarian.

(I have shared the letter with others - true)

xxxx
Carmen
Carmspack Working German Shepherd Dogs


----------



## Betty

Vinnie said:


> Ok, so again I will clarify what I said.
> 
> I did not say that there is absolutely -no exception-.
> I also believe there are plenty of people who want a puppy to keep many breeders in business for a very long time.
> 
> I'm not a super AR person so I guess I'm not really appreciating being painted as one but if makes you feel better - go for it.  I think you might be surprised later on down the road though.



Just because something is an AR position and someone holds the same opinion (not saying Vinnie does) does not make them an AR activist.


----------



## Mac's Mom

Vinnie said:


> Ok, so again I will clarify what I said.
> 
> I did not say that there is absolutely -no exception-.
> I also believe there are plenty of people who want a puppy to keep many breeders in business for a very long time.
> 
> I'm not a super AR person so I guess I'm not really appreciating being painted as one but if makes you feel better - go for it.  I think you might be surprised later on down the road though.


 
For what is worth...I agree with everything you've said so far.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang

Vinnie said:


> I don't think it should be done every time a female is retired and as soon as someone is done using her.
> 
> It's not acceptable from a pet owner and I personally don't think it acceptable from a breeder either.


I respectfully disagree with you statement there.

My first GSD was Neke. With her I started competetive obedience. Then I bought Gus. He was going to be my show dog but he did not turn out (structurally) so I had him neutered and he became a "pet". Then I bought Tessa and she entered the breed ring.

My free time was divided up roughly as: 45% for Neke (training and showing), 45% for Tessa (conditioning and showing) and 10% for Gus (playing, taking classes for fun, etc.).

While Gus was happy with the time I gave him one-on-one I gfelt bad that I couldn't spend MORE time with him. I wasn't _looking_ for a home for him but the right one just happened. A family with a young daughter that wanted a dog to play Fetch with. Gus LOVED kids only slightly less than he LOVED playing fetch. It was a perfect match.

He was loved and cherished and he got 100% of their attention and LOVED it!

Sometimes what is best for the dog (whether it is a pet or breeding stock) is NOT staying with their current owner 'for life'.


----------



## selzer

Vinnie said:


> I'm right there with you on this.
> 
> *I guess people can make all the excuses they want to justify what they are doing but to me - this is just not right.* And some breeders agree with me, they are just few and far between but th*ey are the breeders that will earn MY respect.*
> *
> I guess it boils down to if the breeder looks at their dogs as "breeding stock" or an asset like livestock people or business people* do - *in which case it's more of a "money" motivator IMO than a caring for the breed kind of thing*.
> 
> I still believe that a retired brood bitch deserves the utmost respect. After all a breeder wouldn't get where they're at without her. It's the same as my DH's 14 year old spayed female. She has dedicated her life to him and she will live out her days in his house. Just because we may bring in another dog to our house does not mean we can* just ship her off and treat her like she is no longer of value to us.*
> 
> *True there a people who would rather adopt an older dog but there are already plenty of them in rescues and humane societies around the states today (some that are actually very well trained). There is no need for a breeder to add to this overpopulation crisis in this way and take away from a dog so badly in need of a home.* It's just sad to me when they do this.
> 
> With all the breeding going on now-a-days there no need to have a huge kennel. Keep a smaller kennel and breed only what you can handle. *Don't dump your unwanted dogs off on someone else just so you can make more money for yourself*!


This is not about what you meant, but what you said. Of course it hit a nerve. And I certainly wasn't unfair in how I paraphrased it.


----------



## Vinnie

Lauri & The Gang said:


> I respectfully disagree with you statement there.


Again, we're assuming I said there was no exception but as you quoted me, I said;



> I don't think it should be done every time....


----------



## Vinnie

selzer said:


> This is not about what you meant, but what you said. Of course it hit a nerve. And I certainly wasn't unfair in how I paraphrased it.


And I think you are taking that post out of context. 

When I made that post I believe we were talking about breeders who do this with all their retired females but maybe I read that wrong - sorry if I did.

It's fine with me if you don't like my opinion but there's really no need to try and make them something they're not, is there?


----------



## selzer

Vinnie, in your original post on this thread, you said nothing about some of the time, or not in every situation or anything like that. You have exclamation points in there. Until someone came on that you sort or respected and countered it, you were not saying any of that. 

So now its ok, if it is someone that you personally think would be doing it for the dog and not as "more of a money motivator."

You complain that we have painted you with an AR brush, but you have painted us as some pretty cold and greedy characters -- exactly what the AR people want everyone to think. 

There are some pretty nasty people out there who have thousands of dogs who will take them out and shoot them, or dump them when they get too old to keep breeding. These people are NOT trying to rehome their nine - twelve year old bitches -- that is WORK. They do not have the time for that. A bullet is a whole lot easier. 

People who do rehome a retired bitch are not doing it for what they cost them, nor how much work they are. They are doing it because there is just so much of them to go around, and the bitch will get more attention with a family of her own.


----------



## Lilie

What is an "AR" person?


----------



## LaRen616

Lilie said:


> What is an "AR" person?


Animal Rights?


----------



## selzer

Out of context?!?

I am sorry, Vinnie, but it was not out of context at all.


----------



## Lilie

LaRen616 said:


> Animal Rights?


Thanks. My brain was stuck with "Accounts Receivable" person. I was pretty sure tht wasn't right.....


----------



## Vinnie

selzer said:


> Vinnie, in your original post on this thread, you said nothing about some of the time, or not in every situation or anything like that. You have exclamation points in there. Until someone came on that you sort or respected and countered it, you were not saying any of that.
> 
> So now its ok, if it is someone that you personally think would be doing it for the dog and not as "more of a money motivator."
> 
> You complain that we have painted you with an AR brush, but you have painted us as some pretty cold and greedy characters -- exactly what the AR people want everyone to think.


I didn't say it in my original post because I didn't think it was necessary given the context of the conversation. Like I said above - SORRY IF I READ THAT WRONG!

No Selzer - I think you are the only one labeling me as an AR person.  No - I don't think all breeders are greedy characters and never said that. These are words you are putting in my mouth and I really don't appreciate it at all but is very common of you when someone disagrees with you. No need to beat a dead horse honey. Of course, maybe you have more time than I do. 

In fact, there are a few members (more than one) who have posted in this thread that I respect but that doesn't mean I agree 100% with them or even that I think I have to agree with them 100% to respect them. 



> But whatever, I'm done with this thread. I've made my points more than once and from here it's just getting nasty for some reason. Certainly not everyone is going to agree, but at least hopefully some are more aware of where the other side is coming from.


I get it now and I agree! It's kind of useless if I have to continue to repeat and defend MY OPINION.


----------



## Vandal

If Selzer and Vinnie were retired females, i would place one of them.


----------



## Vinnie

selzer said:


> Out of context?!?
> 
> I am sorry, Vinnie, but it was not out of context at all.


I think it was.  

Bye - this is another waste of time. You win - your right.


----------



## Vinnie

Vandal said:


> If Selzer and Vinnie were retired females, i would place one of them.


Probably me. :rofl:


----------



## selzer

Vinnie, if you go back and look, I said that what you said, about the dogs breeders are placing taking away a home from a dog in a shelter -- that is an AR argument. That was my entire AR comparison. Go back and look. You jumped on it, but it is correct that they do portray that -- the old body bag commercial, and sending out body bags as a gift to new puppy buyers in Dog Fancy. 

So that was me painting you with an AR brush. Whatever. Have a nice day. Not going to put in a silly smiley to make it look like I might be joking, sorry.


----------



## selzer

selzer said:


> Something in Vinnie's earlier post, hit a nerve, and that was (paraphrasing) that breeders not living up to their commitments to one of their dogs by rehoming it is actually taking homes away from shelters or rescues.
> 
> This is a huge AR position. They have gone so far as to use children in a commercial with a supposedly dead dog in a body bag, saying that their buying a dog from a breeder was the same as killing a dog in a shelter.
> 
> If every conscientious breeder took this stand, we would have to give up having the GSD breed altogether, and the AR people would be ecstatic.
> 
> But rehoming a bitch when you have gotten 1 or 2 or 3 litters out of her will actually save homes, instead of making litter 4 and 5 and 6. When the breeder has bred the bitch to the dogs they have chosen for her, and then decide that they have accomplished what they can out of her part, spay and rehome, then you will not be pumping out the same combination over and over and over again.
> 
> So even if you adopt the AR attitude that buying from a breeder kills a shelter dog, buying females from a breeder, whether they are returns, or washouts, or have already had a couple of litters, probably saves homes for shelter dogs. Ultimately, if breeders must keep every dog womb to tomb, that they did not sell as a puppy to their first time owner, then by necessity dogs that should not be bred, or maybe should not be bred further, will be bred again, and again. And litters from the best breeders who will hold true to breeding decisions will be fewer and higher priced and harder to come by.



This does not PAINT you as an AR person. It simply says that your statement is one of their huge arguments, one that they have made commercials about. I think you were a bit defensive to state that the very next post that this was painting you as an AR person.


----------



## Betty

I recently retired, spayed and rehomed one of my girls. 

There is absolutely no doubt that the home she is in now she is happier. She is the only dog, she gets 100 percent of her owners attention. She is with her new owner 24/7 and for this girl that's better then raw steak.

I was unable to provide that for her. 

But you know, she wasn't rehomed until it was more convenient for me and my breeding program. There is an element of out with the old and in with the new which gnaws at my conscience.

I think the point Vinnie may be trying to make is that we need to be honest with ourself about our motivation. If it would of been just about the dog's happiness they would be rehomed long before we decide to retire them.

So when we decide to retire a dog and find her a better home then we are able to provide, great for the dogs involved! But lets not break our arm patting ourself on the back about our unselfish motives where we have a real gain.


----------



## selzer

If you do nothing with your dogs but breed them, then I guess I might agree with that. 

If you spend their early years training them, socializing, taking them to classes, and shows, breeding them when they are old enough, but continuing to work and show them in some venue when they are not breeding, then you are making a dog that is not only a beautiful pet, but also a well-trained pet. 

I think after they reach a certain level, you move on to working the younger dogs, and the older ones are not getting as much work and attention, that is when considering their future might make sense. Some of them will not need as much work, and be perfectly happy hanging out on the bed. Others might do a lot better in a different situation.


----------



## Lilie

Betty said:


> I recently retired, spayed and rehomed one of my girls.
> 
> There is absolutely no doubt that the home she is in now she is happier. She is the only dog, she gets 100 percent of her owners attention. She is with her new owner 24/7 and for this girl that's better then raw steak.
> 
> I was unable to provide that for her.
> 
> But you know, she wasn't rehomed until it was more convenient for me and my breeding program. There is an element of out with the old and in with the new which gnaws at my conscience.
> 
> I think the point Vinnie may be trying to make is that we need to be honest with ourself about our motivation. If it would of been just about the dog's happiness they would be rehomed long before we decide to retire them.
> 
> So when we decide to retire a dog and find her a better home then we are able to provide, great for the dogs involved! But lets not break our arm patting ourself on the back about our unselfish motives where we have a real gain.


 
Great post!


----------



## BlackthornGSD

Whiteshepherds said:


> I know it's painting with that broad brush, but I think breeders should be held to the same standards as pet owners. When you get a dog you make a commitment to that dog for it's entire life except in extenuating circumstances. I know those circumstances do happen but for some breeders it seems like they do it on a regular basis.
> 
> Don't some breeders co-own females to avoid having to eventually rehome them?


I don't think that buying a pet is a commitment for life. I think it's a commitment to be responsible. 

That is, if a pet buyer cannot keep a dog, it's their responsibility to make sure that dog ends up somewhere safe and well-cared for. Not a commitment to personally never part with the dog. So you can't keep your dog anymore--or you don't want to--you don't push it out the car door into some field; you don't drop it off in the "unwanted dogs" chute at the county dog pound. You do your best to put the pet in a situation as good or better without being "bailed out" by others' resources--as long as you have any resources at all to put toward the cause. (Sadly, all too often, recently, people have not had the resources--job layoffs, home foreclosures, etc.)

And I think breeders should do the same--with their puppies, reclaimed dogs, or even a retired dog. And both pet owners and breeders need to go into acquiring that dog (or cat or bird) with an awareness of their resources and likely future expenses--responsibly making that choice.


----------



## selzer

About co-ownership, well, I know it works for some, but I would be very afraid of it. 

For one thing, lets say you provide the puppy and a contract. The Co-Owner cares for the puppy, trains the puppy, shows the puppy. The breeder determines when and to whom the puppy is bred, and so forth. 

Now, if the co-owner fails in their responsibility, fails to socialize and train the puppy, and it takes a chunk out of the mailman's leg, who gets sued? 

If the co-owner fails to train the puppy for show or for performance events, when does the co-owner come down and whisk the dog away?

If the co-owner fails to provide adequate food and grooming and takes the puppy to a show looking in poor condition -- that would not go good. 

I don't know, but I think you would have to have an awful lot of faith in your fellow man to be willing to co-own a puppy with someone, especially nowadays when everything is a matter for the courts.


----------



## Catu

Vandal said:


> If Selzer and Vinnie were retired females, i would place one of them.


:spittingcoffee:


----------



## selzer

BlackthornGSD said:


> I don't think that buying a pet is a commitment for life. I think it's a commitment to be responsible.
> 
> That is, if a pet buyer cannot keep a dog, it's their responsibility to make sure that dog ends up somewhere safe and well-cared for. Not a commitment to personally never part with the dog. So you can't keep your dog anymore--or you don't want to--you don't push it out the car door into some field; you don't drop it off in the "unwanted dogs" chute at the county dog pound. You do your best to put the pet in a situation as good or better without being "bailed out" by others' resources--as long as you have any resources at all to put toward the cause. (Sadly, all too often, recently, people have not had the resources--job layoffs, home foreclosures, etc.)
> 
> And I think breeders should do the same--with their puppies, reclaimed dogs, or even a retired dog. And both pet owners and breeders need to go into acquiring that dog (or cat or bird) with an awareness of their resources and likely future expenses--responsibly making that choice.


I am not sure I agree with this. I think that when we set out to get a dog as a pet, we should have it in mind that the dog lives for 10-14 years, and dogs are not inanimate items without feelings. They are creatures of habit and they get used to people, and the way things are, and changes, especially for older dogs are not so easy for them.

Also, people are in the market for small, cute, furry puppies. They also may be in the market for young partly trained adults, or for trained dogs. But most people setting out to get a dog are not going to be looking for one that is a middle-aged or senior dog with little or no training. 

I think that a breeder might be in a better position to find a good home for a well trained, mature adult. 

I do not think that when one buys a puppy from a breeder, they should keep it for three or four years and then turn it back in, and go on to Newfoundlands, or go travel about for six months. Sorry. 

I think when we get a pet we are committed to provide for that pet a home, training, veterinary care, good food and water, and love and attention. And if we find that we cannot provide any one of these, we need to adjust something in our lives so our priorities are back in place. If that is not possible, then we need to do everything possible to find the best possible home for the dog. 

If we buy a dog for a specific purpose, schutzhund, SAR, K9, etc, and insist upon a puppy, if it washes, we should probably, keep it and train/work with it with the idea that we will be finding it a suitable pet home. The alternatives are to buy a green or started dog, or to work the puppy in whatever venue its strengths lie, rather than trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. 

I think on the whole people should consider when they obtain a dog that they will be keeping the dog until its death, unless they are getting it for the purpose of training it to be sold as a working dog. They should have a plan if what they want to do with a pup does not work out for whatever reason, a plan for a dog that is riddled with health or behavior/temperament issues. 

I think breeders likewise have to have a plan for dogs that do not work out, for dogs with health or temperament issues. I mean, rehoming a female that was breeding quality and has had three litters and that was enough is one thing. I think you would have to really work to find a home for a pup with a health problem like hip or elbow dysplasia, or with temperament issues. Many breeders would just take these dogs to a one way trip to the vet. Others might just plan on keeping them and not placing them in a home. If you can provide a pup with corrective surgery, and find a home with full disclosure, that would be ok, but I think that so many of these kind of pups will just end up having a permanent home with the breeder.


----------



## selzer

Vandal said:


> If Selzer and Vinnie were retired females, i would place one of them.



LOL, one would think we were having a cat fight on a dog forum.


----------



## BlackthornGSD

selzer said:


> I do not think that when one buys a puppy from a breeder, they should keep it for three or four years and then turn it back in, and go on to Newfoundlands, or go travel about for six months. Sorry.
> 
> I think when we get a pet we are committed to provide for that pet a home, training, veterinary care, good food and water, and love and attention. And if we find that we cannot provide any one of these, we need to adjust something in our lives so our priorities are back in place. If that is not possible, then we need to do everything possible to find the best possible home for the dog.


I think people should certainly acquire with the intent to keep--but I think a dog is better off rehomed than kept in a home where he/she's just an afterthought or an impediment. I want my puppies to go to homes where they are considered an integral member of the family--and I'd like that for every dog out there, but it's just not the case for any number of dogs and people.

And it's not always possible to "adjust something" -- and that's a rather glib way of looking at what can be dire circumstances. There are hundreds "real life" situations I could come up with that would make it incredibly hard to keep a dog. Some people can and will re-order their lives to keep that dog. Some people cannot and do not want to. Rather than keep the dog, I think people should looking to responsibly re-home their dogs.

I'm obviously not advocating treating dogs like cardboard boxes, but I do think that creating impossible standards ends up being the same as no standards--as if someone can't live up to the impossible standard, what course is the right one to follow.

But, I've wandered far from the original topic.


----------



## GSD07

I don't think you did, Christine. I happen to agree with you, and I think that breeders and pet owners have to be held to the same standards re rehoming dogs.


----------



## Liesje

I'm not a breeder but I agree that it's not fair to hold breeders to such impossible standards and I feel like so many good breeders are constantly "damned if they do, damned if they don't." Many of these things are not really "issues" at all and things that I personally feel aren't really my business.

I have re-homed pets in the same and I have owned and current own pets re-homed to me. Two of my best and favorite dogs were dogs that were re-homed to me. Where would I be without them? I think a lot of our opinions on re-homing are more based on our own feelings of guilt as if we have "failed" the animal. However I feel that most pets are far more resilient than we often give them credit for. My current heart dog (not a GSD) is a dog that is very social, loves and trusts everyone, even to a fault. I'd be kidding myself to think the *only* place he could ever be truly happy, safe, and loved is my household. I'd like to think that but that would be a lie. He is a great dog, my heart dog and I love him to pieces but part of the reason I love him so much is how resilient he is and how much love he gives unconditionally regardless of circumstance (we are his fourth home, and as long as I am sound in mind and body he's not going anywhere).

As far as breeders go, I'm not going to sit here at my computer and cross off breeders or bump them up some list because they do this or that or don't do this or that without first actually GETTING TO KNOW them, their dogs, their motivations and goals.


----------



## selzer

BlackthornGSD said:


> I think people should certainly acquire with the intent to keep--but I think a dog is better off rehomed than kept in a home where he/she's just an afterthought or an impediment. I want my puppies to go to homes where they are considered an integral member of the family--and I'd like that for every dog out there, but it's just not the case for any number of dogs and people.
> 
> And it's not always possible to "adjust something" -- and that's a rather glib way of looking at what can be dire circumstances. There are hundreds "real life" situations I could come up with that would make it incredibly hard to keep a dog. Some people can and will re-order their lives to keep that dog. Some people cannot and do not want to. Rather than keep the dog, I think people should looking to responsibly re-home their dogs.
> 
> I'm obviously not advocating treating dogs like cardboard boxes, but I do think that creating impossible standards ends up being the same as no standards--as if someone can't live up to the impossible standard, what course is the right one to follow.
> 
> But, I've wandered far from the original topic.


I think I actually did say that they should re-home if they cannot adjust something. I think that if it is better for you, and better for the dog and better for the new owner, than it makes sense. I just do not think people should go into pet ownership thinking that if it does not work out they will re-home. And people who buy a dog for purpose, should countinue to work with the dog to ensure that it get the best possible situation.


----------



## Cassidy's Mom

Vandal said:


> If Selzer and Vinnie were retired females, i would place one of them.


Not both? :wild:


----------



## selzer

Ya know, there wasn't any blood, just a bit of fence fighting! Ya'll are just too quick to re-home the bitches.


----------



## Catu

selzer said:


> Ya know, there wasn't any blood, just a bit of fence fighting! Ya'll are just too quick to re-home the bitches.


At least be happy we are not doing the Millan Shhhh thing


----------



## GSDElsa

Vinnie said:


> Probably me. :rofl:


I'd give ya a real nice home, Vinnie!


----------

