LizT

So sorry for your loss. I had a puppy born last September with a cleft palate (CKCS much smaller than a labrador). It was not picked up by the Vet on the day of his birth at his mums Post-natal check as it was a line down the back of his throat and not a hole in the roof of the mouth. There was no hairlip either. It was only when he failed to thrive that I took him back to the Vets on day 3 and he was PTS on the advice of my Vet as this type of Cleft palate was definitely inoperable.

I would wait til a couple of days after they are born. I ordered mine a day after and lost a pup at day 3. :D

23 degrees and sunny. Here's hoping BB. :D

I too owned a Lhasa Apso X who lived to 17. He saw me go from partying young adult to mum and saw my partner of 19 years off as our marriage ended. I also had a Miniature Poodle and a Schipperke both live to 17 and a I got a GSD when my son was two and he saw him grow up into a young man of 16 before he passed away. Having Cavaliers now, longevity is something I would like to put emphasis on as I know this is not a breed that is well known for it. Whenever I hear of a long birthday milestones in the breed my heart lifts and I hope that this is something that we will see more and more of as we endeavour to breed from stock with good, no healthy, hearts (they all have good hearts, they're dogs!).

I think there are probably some ethical BYBs but I doubt whether any puppyfarmer is in it for anything other than a love of money. And there have been many a conversation on DOL about unethical registered breeders, for example, those who have sold to McDougal, some of whom are show breeders. This is a fact, not a generalised label. Do people really want to stand shoulder to shoulder with these people? They are condemned in thread after thread but all of a sudden, they're supported because they're registered? Not by me and not by anyone with an ounce of ethics. I don't support people who sell to pet shops, whether they do it themselves or via a broker. Yes but there is a difference between not supporting them because we dont agree with their assumed motivation or where they sell their puppies or if their philosophies are different to ours and fighting a war about it. No one is saying if they are breeding dogs in rotten conditions that we should not say so and work against this. Stand back from this a minute and look at it objectively. On this forum there is a consensus that breeding ANKC registered purebreds dogs is the preferred method of producing a puppy and there is a bunch of assumptions which go along with that. The reality is that the only thing that a registered purebred breeder HAS to do and CAN do which is any different to any other person who allows two dogs to mate is that they can register the birth details on one particular registry unless they breed a select few breeds which have to be scored or screened for specific things before the puppies can be registered. However, even if I have to score or screen thats no guarantee I only use dogs with low scores or that I will breed unaffected puppies. Except in Victoria if I know the status of my dog's DNA I can still breed carriers or affected dogs to anything I want. Any argument we want to put forward and tell people about why buying a registered purebred puppy is better can be squashed except that they are more predictible and there is a greater chance of knowing the ancestry of the parents. None of what Im about to say relates to any breeder who doesnt treat their animals as they should be treated. Lets look at the things that most people on this forum have come to expect from purebred breeders. Where tests are available for a known recessive issue in the breed breeders can test for that - but even though its not politically correct here to say so - if I were breeding first cross dogs I could test for the same things if the issues are known in the 2 breeds Im breeding or not need to test if the issue is only known in one of the breeds. Is it more likely that a purebred breeder will test for these known recessive disorders which have tests available ? Probably but I promise you there are in my opinion, only a minority of breeders who do test even when they can. Even if they do test for the things which they are able to test for there is no guarantee that the dog wont get something which hasnt been able to be tested for or for things which show up even if the parents are tested and selected to try to avoid it such as HD. Some breeders know their parent dogs have produced puppies with problems but still continue to use them to breed with regardless of whether they are breeding purebred or cross bred dogs. Then there is much talk about how registered purebred breeders are better than any other if they test their dogs against the standard and other dogs of their breed by showing their dogs.This has become more of an issue than it was 30 years ago because registered purebred breeders who show their dogs now worry about who will take their dogs and breed them and they have become restrictive on who can take a pup with papers suitable for breeding - unless the buyer is going to be led by them, sign all manner of restrictive contracts and do what the breeders tell them to do its become almost impossible to buy a good puppy which the breeder would feel is good for breeding.So now anyone who wants to buy a papered dog which they may want tohave a litter with has to go to someone who doesnt really understand the importance of the whole selection for breeding stuff. If I wanted to buy a purebred puppy 30 years ago and I told the breeder I might want to breed a litter or two later on the breeder sold me a pup which wouldn't do the breed any harm if I used it for breeding and offered to give a hand finding a stud dog if I did decide to do that when the time came. It didnt matter that much if they didnt show the dog because it had good stuff behind it and it was one which had as much chance of winning as any the breeder kept to show. You may not get litter pick but you got a good representative of the breed which wasnt likely to have too much risk for genetic diseases. I might even buy my own male but I could tell the breeder what I had and that I might want to breed so they would sell me a male which I could put with my bitch and not do the breed any harm. Back yard breeders who started out with good dogs and a bit of advice from their breeders, helped to keep the gene pool more open and actually did less damage to the breed than those who over used popular sires. No one really cared if you were breeding the litter to buy a new lounge suit because you had good dogs to start and you werent doing any harm to the breed. Breeders who had big kennels with kennel maids were held in high regard - no one questioned whether they had more than average numbers of puppies to make money,no one assumed that because they had more than average they were kept in poor conditions or not loved or treated well. People assumed that because they had more dogs to choose from and work with that they would have more and better options and choices for which dogs to use in their breeding programs and any profit they may make from selling their puppies meant they could maintain their kennels and their animals. Now they are low life puppy farmers -after all isnt it now a medal of honour to only breed a litter every couple of years and only for yourself? 30 years ago these people were seen as those who were less serious about the hobby and not regarded as being more knowledgeable or more elevated in status than someone who really put their lives and resources into the betterment of the breed by owning and breeding more not less dogs. Yet here, as soon as the discussion started, the assumption is that anyone who agreed with the basis of the article were wanting to stand shoulder to shoulder and support people who were treating animals poorly. Thats not what I got out of it at all. I saw it saying stop bagging each other out and rather than follow on like sheep re assess what you have come to believe are characteristics of a person who breeds dogs well just because they happen to be in one group or another which has been promoted as being something it probably isnt. Like it or not there are far more people judging registered purebred breeders as being the cause of all things negative in the dog world and while here on this forum it feels like there is much support for the ANKC show breeder - in the big scheme of things they are going down and when we bag each other out, introduce a 2 tiered system of membership within a CC and agree with the things we are being told is what is good for breeding dogs , changing regs and laws to fit in with animal rights and completely disregarding the science or facts rather than what is best for the species we will find that its too far gone to save. We dont have to constantly make the other group look bad to prove we are better. :D Indeed. When I bought a pet 30 years ago who happened to be papered (rare breed), I went on to do Obedience with her, later decided to show her (Titled her) and toyed with the idea of breeding her, but didn't (for my own reasons) it was ALL within my decision making boundaries and no one elses. Today as a Breeder and Exhibitor of a far more popular dog I find myself being judged with "What, when, where and how" I do things at every turn. Some days I end up "carrying the donkey".

Same. Only mine came in plastic bags...no canvas here.

My OH showed me this news story last night as he was reading Web News. So loyal a friend.

One of my Cavs meets a litter mate at shows regulary but I don't think they know they are sisters, they just make the same fuss of each other as all Cavaliers do when they meet another!!! Or in my girls case when she meets a German Shepherd either White or Sable!

Okay so here's a little something to help restore faith in human kind if you're feeling a little jaded. Sometimes people do what it right and you feel that your faith in them has been justified. The puppy bitch that I have sold on Limited Register to a lady who made an enquiry asking if I could put the puppy on Main Register as she thought she might like to breed her has had the puppy desexed yesterday (I have a copy of the Vet desexing certificate.) I am sending her my $100 refund as per my desexing contract. The puppy has taken over their lives, is adored by the family, is doing well at puppy school and will not be used for BYBing as per the many concerns in this thread (mine included). Yeah, yeah, I know there are many, many who do not do the right thing. This time someone did.

Have you run that by your passengers???? Dad used to do that and as kids in the back seat in the 1960's we always got a faceful!

Wow that sure is some list. I health test all eye conditions annually in my bitches as diagnosable by a Veterinary Opthamologist tha are of concern to the breed. Litters are eye tested at 6 weeks. Annual Vet checks for MVD Annual Vet check for general health concerns to ensure all is in good order such as ears, skin, pattelar check etc. Without any DNA markers available I would be wasting my time and money checking for any possible diseases that might occur (in any dog) such as Cushings for example. As a hobby breeder and enthusiast I endeavour to breed from outwardly healthy stock, if my bitch is not up to scratch as a suitable specimen for breeding a healthy litter of puppies then she will not be bred from. If there are any indicators of conditions contrary to this she will not be bred from. My intention is that the puppies I breed go to homes that I have taken great care to select and have every chance of growing into strong happy healthy companion animals.

So you are saying that as long as the parents are health tested and all the boxes are ticked re conditions both physical and emotional for all concerned it doesn't matter if the dogs are unregistered or even crossbred? Or have I misunderstood?

Even if she is nesting it doesn't mean there are any pups. I had a bitch nesting on and around her due date and no puppies. Just keep a close eye on her for the next week. JIC.

Since you have first hand knowledge of this abuse you need to report it. Can you please let us know you have done this. Nice try but no prize. Deflecting your own lack of condemnation of people who keep dogs in deplorable conditions just makes me wonder. Sheridan if you know about abuse you need to report it. I can say it a few more times if you like. Perhaps Sheridan is referring to previous well domumented and already reported cases of abuse and citing these as examples of what she finds deplorable?

What crying and whinging???? Our GSD didn't cry until the third night! Yeah, he's still a bit of a dope. Takes him time to learn. Our two Cav girls came at 8 weeks respectively. Neither cried. The common denominator in all this was that they all had a warm cosy bed, a blanket to curl into and a ticking clock (make sure alarm is off) and a soft toy to cuddle up to. Also for some unplanned but interesting reason ALL current dogs were "heat wave puppies" coming to us a the height of Summer. Must have been too hot to winge and all slept like logs. Cool weather pups have the benefit of the heater in the family room. None slept in my bedroom but in a Puppy Pen in the family room where they observed us going about our business and were usually out like lights before we went off to bed. Also they were all peeing on newspaper at 8 weeks of age. So I didn't change that for the first few nights and started taking them outside to pee in the middle of the night after they had settled in.

No one is saying they want to be "stand with" or be "lumped with" bad or unethical practice.They are hoping that good practice can be universaly sought by various groups in the ways that suit them and work for them.That they can clearly see problems within their own groups and work to clean them up.Take personal responsibility for seeing their own group is beyond reproach before pointing the finger at some one else. The above example may not be a "puppy farm",but it is certainly my idea of a BYBer.Are they unethical? Should we be pushing for laws to make it impossible for them to breed dogs at all because their ideals are not ours? Should THEY be forced to stand with the puppy farmers in their corner? There are no clear definitions of Registered,Ethical breeders,BYBers or puppy farmers yet. You can criticise all you want and no doubt find justification with generalizations.Just don't be suprised that they do the same with their criticism of the pedigree show breeders. There are some pedigree show breeders that should be condemned alongside the puppyfarmers and the BYBs who keep their dogs in conditions that I have described in this thread because they're little more than puppyfarmers and BYBs themselves. I just find it astounding that some people in this thread are unwilling to condemn such people whether registered, puppyfarmer or BYB. I think condemnation of ANY ill treatment of ANY animal is a given on any animal lovers forum. Not just breeders but all who have taken any responsiblility for the care and welfare of a dependent creature. Does the obvious always need stating???

Was scrolling through but this is what I was looking for!!!! So true.

In research it includes 1 undescended I was about to ask as this is more common isn't it and I thought it was also referred to as Cryptorchid?

love the audi ad! LOL I agree Audi is great. This is my fav recent pedigree dog commercial Go pugs! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpjaOUjUPUc...feature=related That's not fair I've had three kids my bladdder can't take that!!!

Wow....Talk about throwing to type!

My girl won her class, Intermediate Bitch...then got the Bitch Challenge (25 pts) and then...Wooohooo....Best of Breed. Go Crissy! Yah. Okay...I'm done now.

I've got a girl with 11! She had a litter with 6 pups. The top two on one side didn't hold much milk but were used on occassions.

It is isn't it..... I couldn't stop looking at that photo of her at 8 weeks and when I finally moved on to her now...well....WOW! Well done both of you! CONGRATULATIONS!

With breed specific rescue organisations, I think they vet the new owners very carefully before placing the dog. I know that my name went right to the top of quite a long list of possible homes because I already owned three dogs of that breed and am involved in a breed club and have access to all the knowledge and help I could need if it comes to that. Yep that is so....And we get the troubled ones .........I full agree though with LizT, but we have been doing this for many years and i am really into dog training and behaviour. And I have the back-up of a couple of awesome Trainers. And I have never been afraid to ask for help Alas not everyone is as well equipped. I have only ever owned rescue pets, the majority have been wonderful - my current dog & cat are divine- but I have also had a bad experience with a dog that ended up DA. Sentiment, hard work & caring is sometimes not enough to save a dog. Same happened to me. I cared for and eventually brought home a beautiful GSD who in all appearances got on very well with other dogs and was quite a social gentlemen....until after about a month he decided he really didnt want to share his new person and home with any other dogs and became quite agressive towards them. It was sad but he ended up going back with a new note saying "Only dog household required".

Because their definition of a "Reputable Breeder" could be anything from a Registered "ethical" Puppy Farm (where the dogs are cared for by RSPCA standards ) to a person who breeds "quantadoodles" as a BYB hobby.