toy*dog

so oscar law people are going to dictate that you can only have a certain number and if you go over that number you are a criminal! i mean they are saying reg breeders are not in that and they are making reg breeders believe they can breathe a sigh of relief but i can quite clearly see that they are also going after reg breeders too now. so if you own over 3 say, they can quite easily come into your property under the umbrella "rescuing" then take them and make everyone else believe you are a puppy farmer. i think their actual mentality is everyone that breeds now is a "puppy farmer" its a term that is getting thrown around way too much now. i really think that they trust no one that says they are a breeder, i have personal experience with this having conversations. it scared me to crap. It is looking like they want to stop all breeding altogether! what about breeders like us who have more than 2 dogs on a permit and they are raised as our family pets in our homes? according to them a person like this does not exist we are all lying cheating and cruel to our animals. so one reg breeder dobs in another reg breeder as i witnessed not long ago to these people and then they turn on them its just a matter of time. what bothered me the most was a reg breeder of toys who had a sickly looking little dog, you could quite easily see the dog had either hydrocephalus or low sugar drop but according to the animal people this breeder was cruel and kept it away from other dogs on the premises in a pen. this is what you are supposed to do with these kinds of sick dogs. you do not make them like that they are born this way and there's nothing you can do except try to look after it as we had one like this. it looks like they are starved but in actual fact (after seeing countless vets to try to fix my little dog) they cannot keep any body weight on. so a picture is put up of this poor little dog and the reg breeder was called cruel and a puppy farmer and it was one dog. i said to other breeders this dog is suffering from this and they look like that but everyone agreed with the animal libs as many did not know what they were looking at not being in the breed all that long. even some that have been in the breed a long time have not bred many litters so also do not know what they are looking at either. But this breeder keeps their dogs in the exact conditions that the law dictates! in concrete kennels and the council knew about it and was monitoring it all. this is why we are saying in closing down "puppy Farms" we are also rallying for the reputable reg breeders to kill them off as well i feel. reputable reg breeders are being bung in on all of this goings on.

thats ridiculous they are running with the animal libs they said so on the raids that they do, they make no secret of it.

how awful the poor person but yes glad to hear they are all okay

in other words what they are essentially doing is working towards a selectively bred predictable "purebred" dog. but we know that that will never be achieved because the way genetics works it is not easy (had 26 years experience with them) and there are too many variables to work with. i just can't see that labradoodles will become a breed when some look like an unclipped poodle anyway. the point we make comparing a purebred to a DD is that a purebred is predicable in everyway and people can make informed choices according to their lifestyles to fit the dog in. a DD you cannot and it is just PURELUCK if the dogs end up friendly well socialised and no health problems. just as it is pureluck that a pedigree can have the same criteria. just because a breeder health tests and has champions in the bloodline has no bearing on whether the pups produced are going to be healthy - i mean dont' get me wrong a purebred breeder has more of a chance if they do test and research (has to go hand in hand really). I think people are putting too much faith into testing when testing is just a tool that breeders use coupled with researching the health of many generations before, and i tell you that some breeders never do this only look at the CHAMPIONS in the bloodline. sometimes, there are petrol champions i.e. a person will show their dog everywhere and pick up so many points the dog becomes a champion sometimes it does have no bearing on whether that dog is healthy or not. sometimes the judges look at the other end rather than the actual dog. because a line has champion does not indicate the health of those dogs in the bloodline im sorry to say. im not bedazzled by the word CHAMPION learnt the hard way. tests are carried out on the parents but some genetic problems are very recessive and they can be hidden in a generation long gone only to come out in one pup in a litter. we test for patella lux all our stock and bloodline, look for it in the generations before but you cannot control someone else owning a dog that may have put that dog in the bloodline unknowingly when it could be suffering from that genetic condition. so in short, testing is not a magical potion that every puppy produced will be healthy and free from whatever you are testing for. i say this when i advertise my own dogs. and what did the breeder do, that begs the question there, did they back you up? did they offer another puppy? and did they explain all that to you. i don't think its fair to say that ALL breeder just concentrate on the looks, being in this world for a long time since i was a child there are all sorts out there and we all have different goals for instance my goal is to produce a healthy happy dog that is a pleasure to own. becuase i show my dogs doesn't mean i am JUST concerned with looks. a dog that is nasty and bites is eliminated out of the ring, a dog that is lame is more times than not, ordered out of the ring, i know of alot of breeders who not only concentrate on type (looks) but also soundness too after discussing it and learning about it.

i have to be really careful how i word this but for me and probably for others, as we all know, that really animal welfare are painting a different picture and its not really washing with the govt departments is it, they claim animal rights that the govt won't listen to them. some of us here have not woken up yet!!! i mean last night on the 7pm news item about puppy farms they interviewed oscar law and they said that ALL the farms that she's been too, ALL of the farms have been quite disgusting. so they are painting it very different to what it probably is out there. Govt, councils and DPI say that they do monitor they are going to take a look and do quite regularly and they aren't finding what these animal rights people do find. a farm that keeps getting raided and is always in the news has said in the media that they are different and have had cameras in their place and it looks clean and tidy from the outside yet animal rights people are still painting a different picture entirely. so this point works on the public to gain momentum and i spose this is their angle these groups to gain people to the cause then lobby the govt with the volume of people and its getting attention but still govt are not taking any notice really are they. but in reality they want to get the people to petition the govt with that methodology the govt just don't take the concerns of the animal rights and publics seriously and now i know why. i came up against that, trying to talk to a mayor in amongst people emailing from the public and animal rights at the healm and mayor thinking i am one of the "nutters" i think he put it . i had to point out i am not in this group they kept telling me the animal rights people that they couldn't get to the mayor so i tried, i told him i am a concerned citizen wanting a talk so he did talk to me then with a sigh of relief and he did listen which was great, and i hope that he takes the info he gained from me away with him and tells his peers, i can only hope. i got to put all my points across my concerns about large volume commercial breeders. we had a nice pleasant exchange, thats all that MP's govt officials need. some of us to go to them raise our concerns and talk some sense instead of i suppose yelling and screaming and demanding that things should go this way or that way. so really no, there is, 80% of the time no problem in terms of care in these large commercial places but we all know that for our domestic pets of today its not really a good option for society to be headed to get their next pet from these sorts of places and i am meaning battery hen type places that have patoodlematoodlespoodles (my favourite word for the day).

That was exactly what I thought too....I was actually thinking to myself as he was speaking...'go on bit the bullet and say what REALLY needs to be said' ! argghh that would be 'bite' !! i read it as bite until you put that i didn't even notice you put bit

ah no, no no no.....lets confuse the crap out of the public and advise them to buy from petshops and puppy farms didn't ya know its okay now because as long as they have that mystical tick of approval then its all okay! we can still continue along the road of producing battery hen environment puppies, sort of contradicting himself there. whats that gonna stop - nothun. i think he needs to talk to a responsible ANKC reg breeder someone that can give him the ins and outs, to the dog savvy people he's just made himself look like a right ahem!!!!!!!! mmmmmmmm blah really!! the animal rights people would probably agree and nod heads because anyone that breeds dogs is guilty anyway. all this is just so frustrating to watch thats why i didn't watch the blinkin thing.

they'll just argue they are bound by a code of ethics (practice) set by the government anyway. thats not a strong point either. The animal people are saying most puppy farms aren't clean. but the industry giants would argue with that and also councils who claim that they go and inspect, but.....i said do you go and do a surprise call? yes was the answer and we found animals in good condtion meeting all requirements of the law. DPI also told me that too. so this is all the govt is interested in so from their point of view there is no need to close these places down, there is no problem at all . what a shame he couldn't plug the angle of genetic health issues with crosses becasue people dont know what they are breeding, and unknown parentage adds to health problems. and how predicable a well bred and adjusted pedigree is. but its good someone is coming out and saying something at least.

Good breeders of popular breeds don't need to advertize. I always felt lucky that I was in Labs (in WA), cause there were always waiting lists. But I notice that breeders of English pointers, flatcoats, Afghans, and rough collies, to mention a few, have a hard time finding appropriate homes for their pups. The need to advertize proves nothing about the quality of the breeder. You gotta do what ya have to do I spose if your breeding non popular breeds...just cos rescue are advertising in the Trading post doesnt mean reg breeders need to! I am for raising the bar for purebreeds not lowering them to be inline with pf's and byb's. In the good old days we used to buy the Trading Post...but now if we want to look at it we do it online. My bolded bit...not against TP advertising, just not a need. i find advertising on my website and also in DOL and the breed club is enough to find buyers. but i have known ANKC breeders to advertise in the TP, i don't see there's anything wrong with it. people just need to screen breeders thats all. i don't think where a breeder advertises has anything to do with the quality of the pups and dogs either.

i never buy cage eggs and i've watched people blindly go into the egg isle and just pick the cheapest which happens to be cage eggs. i think RSPCA only give tick of approval for barn laid, and free range not cage eggs. Coles said they were going to stop stocking cage eggs. but i haven't seen that yet! but same principle you are right there.

its just so frustrating to watch the media making a circus of all this. as i said on the other thread once again no mention of where to go to get a well adjusted well bred puppy from and yes i agree 100%, tick of approval on already ticks of approval from government sactioned commercial "large" farms as Dr chris said. the govt have already given them the tick of approval! so around and around we go on a big merry go round. commerical large farms that breed patoodlemoodlespoodles will be rubbing their hands in glee, just have to get another licence and tick of approval then its all okay. we need a more qualified knowledgable person speaking in the media about all this but unfortunately i spose they won't be as good lookin as him will they, so will probably have zero following

i just had a thought. how viable would it be steve for MDBA to get a spokes person when things like this happen then they can speak up about where to go and sort of add to what this chris brown is saying. i think oscar law group got him onboard for themselves so really we do need someone??????? just a random idea just throwing it out there.

yes agree sandgrubber, dogs are messy and mess up your house and yard pretty quick so i am constantly washing bedding and constantly cleaning, but sometimes if say, im not well and haven't done the cleaning yet in the morning, and the animal people burst into my house! claim its dirty and call me a puppy farmer. this is really scary stuff. people raiding your house because you don't fit to their standards of what has to happen! what are we coming to, people don't realise, we are drawing closer to a dictatorship country, what you can and can't do in your own home! getting back to that story, once again the mark has been missed, if i was just a pure pet owner and didn't know about dogs, i'd be asking so where do i get a well bred puppy from that hasn't been raised on a puppy farm? still not enough education and not enough direction for the public. thats why we need someone to explain to media and the public where you do go. ETA: his idea of getting a tick of approval, that doesn't stop what they're trying to stop, tick of approval from govt who already give tick of approval for the LEGAL commercial puppy farms who breed designer dogs. He has no idea does he at all. and these are the people who are advising the public! we have no one to speak up for our group. we fade into the wordwork. meanwhile everyone else speaks up what should happen and how.

and the powers that be, politicians, like the one who said about pitbulls being sharks have been invited to read this forum too. i gave him so many links through his PA's. so hopefully he did what i suggested and is reading this forum, we can only hope.

thanks, i think that has probably answered my question didnt know that that they do have a register, very interesting.

troy will probably see this and delete it. look out.

i wasn't judging anyone, i was just genuinely interested in how breeding crosses is accomplished. katrinaM could tell us that she does this or that or this is how she accomplished this. she did say that she does test so i am interested in how testing is done on crosses and how they apply that to breeding crosses how they deal with recessives. i didn't mean to say that they are breeding poor quality etc. just wanting to learn about another side because i am a sticky nose . i know you are meaning about commercial cross breed breeders and i think i made that point some time ago about them breeding blindly etc etc. when you look at it, the principles are the same breeding dogs for working as they are breeding dogs for another purpose whether that is show, obedience, tracking or guide dogs or police dogs the list goes on. health will still have to be considered. if you show a sick dog the majority of the time you get penalised for it in the showring sometimes that doesn't always happen for various reasons politically :rolleyes: (won't go into all that here), but if you breed a sick working dog it can't work, similar outcome. but you have to remember, just because a breeder does breed for show doesn't mean that they are just breeding for looks alone and bugger health. far from it. i've spent alot of time getting breeders in our group to think about the breed and to think how the health of their foundation dogs impacts future generations, i've achieved that i believe breeders are saying and doing things that was never talked about many years ago and it is helping the breed enormously. Mind you they were screaming and complaining about it for years and i bore the brunt of that, but i stuck it out talked to all of them and slowly but surely they started to accept what i was writing about, there are still some breeders dont' get me wrong who only look at the glory and forget about upholding a breed, watching over many years some exhibitors who clearly have a sick lame dog and still get the prizes because the judge is simply looking at the wrong end of the lead, this action can have a tremendous impact and do alot of damage to the breed concerned and also the dogworld and many other areas, if they do forego health. my point has always been there is less of a chance of knowing what lays beneath the surface in terms of recessive genetic health problems with DD's. i've beaten myself up for years about this , wanting to buy health dogs and not getting it over and over again until i gave up over and over again only to come back and start all over again and being told i can still breed the dog and make some money for myself some breeders are still telling some pet owners that grrrrrrrr today, breeders hiding what they actually have in the yard that should never have been bred for that dog with a genetic problem to then pass it onto the next generation and then you only finding out when you breed that line down the track. people having key dogs in a bloodline that have been desexed sold to a pet home taking that dog out of the picture forcing you to fit the remainig pieces of the puzzle and research to the best of your ability the health of each dog in the pedigree. now could you imagine a designer dog commercial breeder with over 1000 dogs doing this with each and every stud dog and bitch, it would be highly impossible given what i've been through for many years. and the average joe/pet owner would not know what we've been through as breeders they would not know how hard it is to breed a healthy litter of pups generation after generation and try not to solely concentrate on type and dogs to standard, all one way you try to encompass all those things together and it gets more difficult still. i guess my problem is that i just don't see its in the best interest of consumers, the dogs themselves to have these large commercial places churning out oodles, patoodles moodles or whatever they call them these days. its not in the best interest of the consumer because of all the issues with recessives that i know through trial and error, also congenital and polygenic comes into play as well. all lethal in the wrong hands. and i just think oodlemoodlepatoodle breeders are the wrong hands. it then impacts on the animals and people exploiting them and exploiting people at the same time and its all tied in and this is why today, i think we are all in this big bloody mess. more and more laws are being laid down simply because there are human beings that are greedy, selfish, lie and cheat and because of that we all suffer and get restiction and get dragged through the coals. it all started as far as i can see turning my mind back to late 70's (was a kid then but watched my auntie with pedigrees in the showworld) with cross breeds, heinz varities/mongrel dogs being sold for alot of money simply because of the media and marketing.

i don't mean to be rude or anything but i am genuinely interested in what you are saying here in the above statement, you breed cross breed dogs, i understand that working dogs if you have all working dogs can be crosses sometimes and good workers. my family have been farmers for years although we didn't have a working farm ourselves we just lived on a working farm in one part of the property. my aunt and uncle managed a 2000 hectare sheep farm for many generations. they've had many working dogs over the years. i am just interested in how that works out, breeding crosses to work, not being able to know the bloodlines because they are crossed and nothing recorded down so you can't cross check. its hard enough for us to breed the pedigrees and keep track of genetic problems and try to minimise them and everything is down on paper so we can cross check a name of a dog say, generations back and see where the recessives are coming back through from. so how do you test successfully crosses? sorry to everyone this is i know

Interesting document . . . much better basis for a sane discussion that what we've been working with. Too bad there's no way to make it NEWS in a new thread and start a fresh round of discussion. do you want me to see if i can cut and paste the document and put it on here? for discussion? am i allowed to do that? might be copyrighted i'll have to take a look, i'll probably have to go into source code or something though. i'll see.

Steve, do you have any links to anything I can read up on about how this process went? e.g. the date and time of the meeting, who chaired, who decided who would attend, who was due to run with the definitions and so on, and what happened next? If the RSPCA were holding the reins, did they drop them? Or was it the influence of the media yet again in policymaking, undoing the work you guys did by giving air time to the Animal Welfare Activists because of the potential pull of such an emotive story? (Government here, I have seen and heard from those within Departments, reacts strongly to the media - anything that has media coverage is on the minister's desk within minutes.) I ask because I've opened a right can of research worms myself. Prompted by how I feel about Victoria's rushed dangerous dog legislation, I spent a few pretty long nights reading and following links and trawling through archives and calling people from ages past and getting information about why the legislation as it stands on dangerous dogs won't make a difference. But of course, that sort of approach should always be balanced by what will make a difference. I'm very careful not to take the information and stances on personal web pages as God's own tears and that has involved me trudging through a lot of legislation from other jurisdictions. (The Calgary Model, for instance. I heard about it, I had views on it, I read about it from personal webpages, I had other views on it, and then I printed up the animal bylaws from Calgary and read them in tandem with Calgary's 2010 annual report, and now I have all SORTS of views on it.) What I am starting to realise is that animal welfare and control in this country cannot be tackled in bites. If we want to create a safe community for our pets and our children, if we want to prevent wilful animal cruelty and if we want to place a higher value on animals and our moral responsibility towards them as a society, we need to look at the whole pie. That pie starts with who breeds dogs and why and that ties in inextricably to how owners manage their pets and what powers our councils and rangers should have to protect our community and the place of our pets in the community. So that's where I'm coming from, and any info you have - links, PM, whatever would be most welcome. PS: Did I say I had a headache? When the discussion paper went out comments were called for and the RSPCA Australia who chaired the meeting invited those groups which had submitted comments to them to attend. It was held in Canberra and from memory. Dogs NSW,ANKC, MDBA, AAPDB, PIAA,Young lawyers,Deathrow pets, RSPCA Australia ,RSPCA ACT and RSPCA NSW , AVA and AWL. If I take a bit of time Id be able to dig out dates but for now Id be guessing. The RSPCA havent dropped the reins and they have made some good progress so far and a major part of the plan is in having breeders out in the open and not hiding away regardless of how many they own or breed to ensure the dogs in their care are being treated as they should be. We went and banged a drum and tried to get breeders to see they needed DA's and complied with codes and laws even though we dont agree with some of them but then when they do they are beaten black and blue Now anyone who dares to ask if they can breed dogs on their property know they will probably cop some crap and that lots of stress and grief is to follow. The big guys stick it out and appeal and win or go to another shire. The little guys dont dare ask. Then comes illegal raids and sensationalism and that makes everyone alienated and frightened especially when you get them "dobbing in a puppy farmer" when puppy farmer is defined by a multitude of things. There isnt any point in pushing for things to happen which are prevented from happening under federal law - It wastes time and is divisive and if cant be seen to look at it and present it objectively its not going to have the same chance of sucess I agree with you and think you are on the right track though the Clagary model is a good base line I think it needs a small change to work effectively in Australia. dont underestmate the egos and the politics. the more we get into all this the more it seems to be a big bloody mess im sure glad that we have an organisation like MDBA that obviously act professionally, diplomatically and also brings rationalism to the debate. As DV said they are working behind the scenes too so 2 organisations for pedigree dogs sticking up for us all and has our backs is all good i think to myself.

hey guys is this it? puppy farming the way forward

My dogs all come from a registered breeder who believes that as soon as her girls have done their bit in the Show-ring & got their titles.....& have had one or two litters....they deserve to be in a good pet home for the rest of their days, if possible. She doesn't have a lot of dogs, so all are known to her by name and personality.....& they have access to the house. She's part of a national & international network of breeders of her breed. Where health matters are taken seriously, with an International Working Party & tested dogs listed. She makes a conscious effort to continually socialise her dogs & puppies, with access to children and some doing pet therapy. She follows up with support, for life, any of her pups or dogs that've been placed in homes. And, because she knows their personalities so well, is able to make good matches. No wonder, the dogs that I've got from her have been brilliantly socialised to be close companion dogs. And scientific research would back the worth and necessity of what she's doing in that respect. Interestingly, the word 'socialisation' is absent from most support of commercial puppy breeding. Of course, she'd sell her puppies for money.... & they're worth it, in terms of the expert knowledge put into their breeding & raising. I doubt if she'd describe herself as a 'commercial' breeder, which implies making a living....and maybe supporting employees as well. And I doubt if commercial breeders could do what she does, given there'd have to be larger numbers of dogs & more emphasis on number of litters produced. Which is why I support her 'hobby', 'breed-centred', approach as the source for any puppy or dog I'd get. And I'd like to see registered breeders like her, get the acknowledgement and consideration they've earned. The critical issue that needs to be looked into is supply of puppies and dogs, given that such an 'expert hobby model' does not produce puppies in great numbers. Like, is there any benefits in the model frequently used in the Scandanavian country from which one of my dogs originally came. Some of a registered breeder's dogs may be placed in 'hub' homes, from which they go on with their show career, but in which they benefit from the up -close care and socialisation. Yes, the ability for a breeder to decide how many is good for them to be able to live with and cope with dependent on breed and their lifestyle. When one of your breeders's was under the gun there were all manner of crazy accusations made about her .One of which was that she kept her dogs in kennels in her back yard and never had any interaction with them As you know nothing could be further from the truth . From the other side she was beaten up because she didnt have kennels and didnt keep them according to mandatory codes. She was accused of having too many or being cruel and of not caring about them and rehoming them when she no longer needed them..of course because she had so many and had them in her home she had their voices lowered and accused of doing so in order for her to be able to hide the fact she had so many. Her home was filmed and her ordeal went on and on and it is something she will probably never get over. Imagine what that would have been like for her if rather than someone turning up with a search warrant it was someone who was skulking around and plastering accusations all over websites and national TV prior to the people who have authority to do that arrived. The numbers she owned are way over what I could cope with and do as good a job of it as she does - the size of my home, my breeds, and the numbers of humans who live here wouldnt be able to cope with having that many under foot etc either. One of her dogs was PTS with the reason being given it was under socialised and had a rotten temperament and was suffering so badly because of what she did - based on what we know of how she lives with her dogs its difficult to understand how that could ever be possible. If we are to protect her right to live her life without fear that someone will dob her in for some terrible thing which they have been doing for 30 years or so even to the point of distributing illegally gotten documents which are over 20 years old and that people will break the law to try to prove it we have to work to protect all . If we say its O.K. for one breeder to stand accused or if someone just wants to check in case so its O.K. to come in and trespass and stalk them there are few people in the dog world who wouldnt have someone prepared to take a poke. In a perfect world for me no one would breed commercially, no one would sell their puppies to pet shops, no one would see their dogs as farmers see their beef cattle and only predictible puppies would be bred from well socialised happy and healthy Mums and Dads - other's are saying in their perfect world there would be no show ring , no purebred dogs no one breeding for a breed standard, no one breeding at all, no puppies in loungerooms etc. But we cant just follow on blindly without questioning the propoganda and the un intended consequences for all dogs. We cant just decide one group has more rights or is somehow more special than another because we are in a different group. Everything that has been strategically planned by a group of people who attended the round table conferences to address the issues such as lack of socialisation etc is bought undone and it wont stop dogs suffering ,I mean really suffering. You also cant expect to educate breeders but hold back some bits which you think they may abuse or which animal rights has decided is different to what it really is. You cannot justify breaking the law treating people who breed dogs as if they are somehow exempt from having rights in case they are treating their dogs poorly and not see how that erodes the very essence of our society. We have to go in and advocate for changes in order to stop dogs suffering and if we are seen to be in bed with a bunch of redneck people who are prepared to break the law and beat up issues with sensationalism and emotionalism we are lost before we begin. We have to show we are a moderate group capable of seeing all aspects of the issue and not use illegal methods or non provable accustaions to back us up. If we dont when one thing is shown to be assumed and crap and we can be shown to be wrong or beating it up - its lost. Prime example of this was the whole pet shop thing - Where the reasons given for change were so easily proven to be in correct. RSPCA Australia tell me in writing they are not against sales of live animals in pet shops and they are not against commercial breeding and that is something that is underestimated inthe big schem of things too. yes it certainly makes you think about all this to me it is extremely extremely interesting. cant' get enough of this subject. good post. eta: you know what mita, im sure i know the breeder you speak about i've actually talked to her known her for years isnt that a funny thing. although haven't ever sat down with her and had a good talk though. too many people for that at the showring. judging on what steve has said, i think i do could be wrong though. the one im thinking off is a very nice lady indeed always say hi anyway. she'd know my face as i've been ringside for years since a kid but i don't think she'd know my name though.

I think you'd only need to look in the mirror to meet a breeder like that, toy dog. You sound like my kind of breeder! Frankly, in my limited experience, I've met far more decent registered breeders than awful ones. My wish is that responsible pet owners find their ways to breeders like that. And if calling yourself your dog's mother....birth or adoptive....is what nutters do. Then I'm a nut job, too. At least we and our dog are happy. thank you thats nice. i'd rather have dogs than kids actually. any day of the week. dogs to me are much better.

I think you'd only need to look in the mirror to meet a breeder like that, toy dog. You sound like my kind of breeder! Frankly, in my limited experience, I've met far more decent registered breeders than awful ones. My wish is that responsible pet owners find their ways to breeders like that. And if calling yourself your dog's mother....birth or adoptive....is what nutters do. Then I'm a nut job, too. At least we and our dog are happy. In my experience I too have met more great breeders than scabby ones yep me too. my mentor has been in my breed for over 45 years. she's like a walking talking book she's there to pick me up when i am down and have a million questions and i am so grateful for her. she tells me she wants to retire, and i told her she is not allowed to! these are the people who remind us of where we've been, what it was like many years ago and how its changed so much in recent years. very sad.

we keep ours, i just can't bear to part with my bitches that has given me a good bloodline to go on with. we also are a very small volume breeder only preferring to breed to replace a very small show team for ourselves not for anyone else. every breeder is different, some find nice homes for the bitches after they've been desexed. we are able to do that keep our oldies as we have the dogs on two properties. the whole family own our dogs and share them. I agree with you, toy dog. Another breeder of my breed of interest operates the same as you do, keeping her girls. She still has a couple of 'elderlies' from the breed she first started with. This lady gets top rating from me, just as the other lady does. It's how they regard their dogs, meet all their needs.....& give them a decent social life....that convinces me. Interestingly, the breeder we've got our dogs from, always refers to them as 'my girls'. And I don't mind a bit! Because of the way she raised them, I regard her as the 'birth mother'! And I'm the very grateful 'adopting mother'. In fact, another Brissie person who's also just adopted a girl from her.....with fabulous temperament & socialsation...has said that the breeder's wish is to see her girls together again one day. And we must arrange it. sounds wonderful you've even got me sold, i feel like going out and meeting your breeder too :D sounds like my kind of person. we probably sound like nutters, but my parents are grandma and grand dad and im mother, so you'll get my dad saying "go and see your mother" pointing to me and when i drop them off (like kids) its so you've come to visit your grandma and granddad. oh boy. you can see my parents are itching actually to be grandparents of human kids but have to be satisfied with dogs because it aint gona be happening anytime soon with the 2 legged variety im afraid.