"can We Have Her On The Main Register?"

[asal]

While everyone is putting their sixpence worth in and pontificating, Limited Register has only been around 6or so year max maybe 10 so all pups where on main before that regardless of the quality.

One wonders what brought in LR. :rolleyes: :D :D

your kidding arnt u?

LR came in because the register was out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees after fighting Mrs Furber when she as an elected director asked to see the files. the excuse i was given was she was wasting staff time.

dont know about you but I would have thought give her 3 staff full time and meals supplied while she read the files would have amounted to a fraction of the 800,000 n up they had to find money to cover. they offered life memberships for 500 and all sorts of things i forget now and of course the mandatory registration of every puppy born and as a sweetener to those like me who were horrified we had to paper pups we considered not of sufficent standard to have papers the ho so wonderfull LIMIT REGISTER.

then they proceeded to do all in their power to limit how many pups a breeder can produce in the name of eliminating puppy farmers and again bemoning the ensueing drop in income.. so to compensate fees keep climbing and climbing

geeu cant have it both ways.

Edited November 9, 2010 by asal

[LizT]

While everyone is putting their sixpence worth in and pontificating, Limited Register has only been around 6or so year max maybe 10 so all pups where on main before that regardless of the quality.

One wonders what brought in LR. :rolleyes: :D :D

your kidding arnt u?

LR came in because the register was out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees after fighting Mrs Furber when she as an elected director asked to see the files. the excuse i was given was she was wasting staff time.

dont know about you but I would have thought give her 3 staff full time and meals supplied while she read the files would have amounted to a fraction of the 800,000 n up they had to find money to cover. they offered life memberships for 500 and all sorts of things i forget now and of course the mandatory registration of every puppy born and as a sweetener to those like me who were horrified we had to paper pups we considered not of sufficent standard to have papers the ho so wonderfull LIMIT REGISTER.

then they proceeded to do all in their power to limit how many pups a breeder can produce in the name of eliminating puppy farmers and again bemoning the ensueing drop in income.. so to compensate fees keep climbing and climbing

geeu cant have it both ways.

Thanks for that asal, that explains why the Miniature Poodle I bought as "Pet Only' in the late 1970's from a Registered Breeder who was also a sucessful Exhibitor came with a lovely parchment type "Pedigree" but nothing Official looking and the Schipperke I bought as a pet in the 1980's came on MR, which was nice for me as I went on to show (andtitle) her but decided against breeding as I had been lead to believe by the literature I had read that they were a "tailess breed" and couldn't see myself sending pups off to get tails docked at their base.

PS. I think by the number of 'winks' BB is kidding.

[TrinaJ]

I just got of the phone to Dogs Vic and actually spoke to a friendly person :rolleyes: She said they would need it in writing from the breeder to alter any endorsement on the back of the pedigree, ie, if you tick the NOT TO BE BRED FROM box and 2 years down the line you change your mind, you will need to write a letter to the CEO of Dogs Vic stating that you want the endorsement lifted and they will lift the endorsement and issue a new Certificate of Registration and Pedigree.

[*Lolapalooza*]

I just got of the phone to Dogs Vic and actually spoke to a friendly person She said they would need it in writing from the breeder to alter any endorsement on the back of the pedigree, ie, if you tick the NOT TO BE BRED FROM box and 2 years down the line you change your mind, you will need to write a letter to the CEO of Dogs Vic stating that you want the endorsement lifted and they will lift the endorsement and issue a new Certificate of Registration and Pedigree.

If you tick the box and send to SA is it held up? We dont have that option on our paperwork.... :rolleyes:

[asal]

While everyone is putting their sixpence worth in and pontificating, Limited Register has only been around 6or so year max maybe 10 so all pups where on main before that regardless of the quality.

One wonders what brought in LR. :D ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

your kidding arnt u?

LR came in because the register was out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees after fighting Mrs Furber when she as an elected director asked to see the files. the excuse i was given was she was wasting staff time.

dont know about you but I would have thought give her 3 staff full time and meals supplied while she read the files would have amounted to a fraction of the 800,000 n up they had to find money to cover. they offered life memberships for 500 and all sorts of things i forget now and of course the mandatory registration of every puppy born and as a sweetener to those like me who were horrified we had to paper pups we considered not of sufficent standard to have papers the ho so wonderfull LIMIT REGISTER.

then they proceeded to do all in their power to limit how many pups a breeder can produce in the name of eliminating puppy farmers and again bemoning the ensueing drop in income.. so to compensate fees keep climbing and climbing

geeu cant have it both ways.

Thanks for that asal, that explains why the Miniature Poodle I bought as "Pet Only' in the late 1970's from a Registered Breeder who was also a sucessful Exhibitor came with a lovely parchment type "Pedigree" but nothing Official looking and the Schipperke I bought as a pet in the 1980's came on MR, which was nice for me as I went on to show (andtitle) her but decided against breeding as I had been lead to believe by the literature I had read that they were a "tailess breed" and couldn't see myself sending pups off to get tails docked at their base.

PS. I think by the number of 'winks' BB is kidding.

umm think your right, but hey maybe we all need reminding the other board directors sure can be bloody minded and not thinking of the best interests of members at times that case literally takes the cake doesnt it?

i sure know i wasnt asked my opinon about wasting all that money in legal fees for what????????????

my belief was give her the key.

what on earth made it worth wasting all that to prevent a fellow board member looking up whatever she might have wanted too. maybe im super dumb but i thought thats what they were elected to the board for. to oversee what went on and into the files?

Edited November 9, 2010 by asal

[LizT]

I just got of the phone to Dogs Vic and actually spoke to a friendly person :D She said they would need it in writing from the breeder to alter any endorsement on the back of the pedigree, ie, if you tick the NOT TO BE BRED FROM box and 2 years down the line you change your mind, you will need to write a letter to the CEO of Dogs Vic stating that you want the endorsement lifted and they will lift the endorsement and issue a new Certificate of Registration and Pedigree.

I also got a reply from them. ;)

Yes, at a later date if the breeder approves the changing of the endorsements they can be lifted. We would require a letter from the breeder for this to be done.

So now we know.

[LizT]

While everyone is putting their sixpence worth in and pontificating, Limited Register has only been around 6or so year max maybe 10 so all pups where on main before that regardless of the quality.

One wonders what brought in LR. ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

your kidding arnt u?

LR came in because the register was out of pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees after fighting Mrs Furber when she as an elected director asked to see the files. the excuse i was given was she was wasting staff time.

dont know about you but I would have thought give her 3 staff full time and meals supplied while she read the files would have amounted to a fraction of the 800,000 n up they had to find money to cover. they offered life memberships for 500 and all sorts of things i forget now and of course the mandatory registration of every puppy born and as a sweetener to those like me who were horrified we had to paper pups we considered not of sufficent standard to have papers the ho so wonderfull LIMIT REGISTER.

then they proceeded to do all in their power to limit how many pups a breeder can produce in the name of eliminating puppy farmers and again bemoning the ensueing drop in income.. so to compensate fees keep climbing and climbing

geeu cant have it both ways.

Thanks for that asal, that explains why the Miniature Poodle I bought as "Pet Only' in the late 1970's from a Registered Breeder who was also a sucessful Exhibitor came with a lovely parchment type "Pedigree" but nothing Official looking and the Schipperke I bought as a pet in the 1980's came on MR, which was nice for me as I went on to show (andtitle) her but decided against breeding as I had been lead to believe by the literature I had read that they were a "tailess breed" and couldn't see myself sending pups off to get tails docked at their base.

PS. I think by the number of 'winks' BB is kidding.

umm think your right, but hey maybe we all need reminding the other board directors sure can be bloody minded and not thinking of the best interests of members at times that case literally takes the cake doesnt it?

i sure know i wasnt asked my opinon about wasting all that money in legal fees for what????????????

my belief was give her the key.

what on earth made it worth wasting all that to prevent a fellow board member looking up whatever she might have wanted too. maybe im super dumb but i thought thats what they were elected to the board for. to oversee what went on and into the files?

Hmmm...sound like it was quite the fiasco. :D

[Bilbo Baggins]

:D ;) ;) ;)

asal what state was Mrs Furber in???

The winking was the thought that Breeders got on the band wagon to prevent other people being able to Show and breed a dog.

I had always put all my litter on the register except dead of course. I had never withheld a pup.

[ellz]

I just got of the phone to Dogs Vic and actually spoke to a friendly person ;) She said they would need it in writing from the breeder to alter any endorsement on the back of the pedigree, ie, if you tick the NOT TO BE BRED FROM box and 2 years down the line you change your mind, you will need to write a letter to the CEO of Dogs Vic stating that you want the endorsement lifted and they will lift the endorsement and issue a new Certificate of Registration and Pedigree.

I also got a reply from them. ;)

Yes, at a later date if the breeder approves the changing of the endorsements they can be lifted. We would require a letter from the breeder for this to be done.

So now we know.

Told you so! ;) :D

[asal]

:D ;) ;) ;)

asal what state was Mrs Furber in???

The winking was the thought that Breeders got on the band wagon to prevent other people being able to Show and breed a dog.

I had always put all my litter on the register except dead of course. I had never withheld a pup.

NSW Canine Council. forget the year now. there was a drawing of a thermometer at the door with a red line going up to indicate how much money had been raised for the court costs.

LOL depends on the pup n of course now the mindset if it cant win challeges enough to make champion, the breeder is unethical if they dont take the dog back and give a refund, on the advice of the rinside crowd thats why i have one back. soo how many can guarantee a 8 week pup wil still have scissor bite at 8 months? let alone not go out in size, type, whatever? i know from friends over the decades 1 in 4 is lucky to go on and grow into its puppy promise, n many's the ugly duckling that out swanned the baby swan.

had one born just afte the new law, she looked a great kelpie, pity her ancestry wasnt kelpie. she was not going to be registered but when i went to cross her off gets told. no all pups must be registered now. but u can lr her.

why on earth would i want the whole world to know this soo off type pup was bred by moi? i could hear the tongues wagging already. but was so annoyed by not being allowed to hide who bred her i main registered her and kept her as a pet. years later a judge spotted her and was in raptures??? like what the?

the comment to me was you are looking at her one fault and ignoring all her virtues. so i bred a litter from her.. her son is STUNNING.

soo although she would never have run a place at a show. she produced above and beyond my greatest expectations. breeding is weird n always will be.

Edited November 9, 2010 by asal

[ellz]

burning all bridges can have its rammifications

Been there done that too.

In fact, going through it at the moment. My pick bitch was stolen. I'm increasingly reluctant to breed from her mother again. But it doesn't for one minute mean that I should breed from one of her siblings (all of whom are on LR with spey/neuter) because they are still only second best and I don't believe in settling for second best.

I agree with that Ellz but my thoughts were more along the line of "What if the puppy that has been 'restricted' to 'Show Only and Not for Breeding' turns out as good or even better AND the line is under threat for whatever reasons. Under that situation it would be a pity not to be able to use him or for the Original Breeder to make that decision to change the amendment.

I still don't agree. If I lose my line, then it's my doing.

Given that I keep my picks for myself, even if another puppy is potentially super, if it is sold to a companion home, then it stays a companion UNLESS it has already been prearranged that after a certain period of time, if certain conditions are met, the registration will be upgraded. I've done this too.

I really don't like the idea of giving a purchaser mixed messages by telling them that "yeah, the puppy is on LR or with a Show Only or Not For Breeding notation but if I feel like it, because I just happen to have lost my line, then I'll remove the notation and I'll breed from it.....but you can't".

That would really leave a good taste in a purchasers mouth now wouldn't it?

No, I'm sorry but after many disappointments and the unreal expectations of show people, I rarely, if ever, place puppies in show homes OTHER than my own! If a dog is SOOOOOO good that I can't bear to part with it, then it stays with me. I've sold quite a few amazing puppies (definite show prospects or even show winners) to companion homes because that is what I choose to do with them. I breed to keep and not to sell.

[asal]

burning all bridges can have its rammifications

Been there done that too.

In fact, going through it at the moment. My pick bitch was stolen. I'm increasingly reluctant to breed from her mother again. But it doesn't for one minute mean that I should breed from one of her siblings (all of whom are on LR with spey/neuter) because they are still only second best and I don't believe in settling for second best.

I agree with that Ellz but my thoughts were more along the line of "What if the puppy that has been 'restricted' to 'Show Only and Not for Breeding' turns out as good or even better AND the line is under threat for whatever reasons. Under that situation it would be a pity not to be able to use him or for the Original Breeder to make that decision to change the amendment.

I still don't agree. If I lose my line, then it's my doing.

Given that I keep my picks for myself, even if another puppy is potentially super, if it is sold to a companion home, then it stays a companion UNLESS it has already been prearranged that after a certain period of time, if certain conditions are met, the registration will be upgraded. I've done this too.

I really don't like the idea of giving a purchaser mixed messages by telling them that "yeah, the puppy is on LR or with a Show Only or Not For Breeding notation but if I feel like it, because I just happen to have lost my line, then I'll remove the notation and I'll breed from it.....but you can't".

That would really leave a good taste in a purchasers mouth now wouldn't it?

No, I'm sorry but after many disappointments and the unreal expectations of show people, I rarely, if ever, place puppies in show homes OTHER than my own! If a dog is SOOOOOO good that I can't bear to part with it, then it stays with me. I've sold quite a few amazing puppies (definite show prospects or even show winners) to companion homes because that is what I choose to do with them. I breed to keep and not to sell.

agree with you there, i was once happy to let all go on mr and those lucky to find theirs was show quality could have a go and maybe become a breeder. once upon a time thats how it workd.

now its unethical to sell on MR, unethical if its MR and automatically now suppose to be a guarantee mr means its good enough to make champ.

I think that was the last one leaving here with MR now. ive joined the mob on that one now.

like so many of you now the line stops here. and who can blame anyone for doing so now. the mindset makes it your only option,

[BJean]

The buyer and I sat down and had a chat about breeding, health checks etc.

Basically I told her that the puppy I'm keeping is one I have hopes for and that I will have full control over who she is bred with and whether she is bred again etc.

The puppy I have sold her is one I have decided not to keep and therefore is offered on Limited Register to a Pet home for that very reason..that I'm not choosing to bred her on and therefore don't want anyone else to do so.

Is that because the puppy you have kept has better potential or is a better conformed pupped than the puppy you are selling the purchaser?

If not, then what is wrong with her breeding from the puppy later, if all goes well and the puppy develops nicely?

I think it's a good thing you are still selling a puppy to the lady, I just dont understand this part.

[Bilbo Baggins]

The buyer and I sat down and had a chat about breeding, health checks etc.

Basically I told her that the puppy I'm keeping is one I have hopes for and that I will have full control over who she is bred with and whether she is bred again etc.

The puppy I have sold her is one I have decided not to keep and therefore is offered on Limited Register to a Pet home for that very reason..that I'm not choosing to bred her on and therefore don't want anyone else to do so.

Is that because the puppy you have kept has better potential or is a better conformed pupped than the puppy you are selling the purchaser?

If not, then what is wrong with her breeding from the puppy later, if all goes well and the puppy develops nicely?

I think it's a good thing you are still selling a puppy to the lady, I just dont understand this part.

At the end of the day all these pups are okay. If you are outback Queensland where there might be 4 dogs entered per show, each pup would title. But here in Vic where the entry is around 50 per show you only keep the pick of the pick so means a lot of discards.

And theses discards have only minor cosmetic faults. That is markings break up of colour etc.

[LizT]

The buyer and I sat down and had a chat about breeding, health checks etc.

Basically I told her that the puppy I'm keeping is one I have hopes for and that I will have full control over who she is bred with and whether she is bred again etc.

The puppy I have sold her is one I have decided not to keep and therefore is offered on Limited Register to a Pet home for that very reason..that I'm not choosing to bred her on and therefore don't want anyone else to do so.

Is that because the puppy you have kept has better potential or is a better conformed pupped than the puppy you are selling the purchaser?

If not, then what is wrong with her breeding from the puppy later, if all goes well and the puppy develops nicely?

I think it's a good thing you are still selling a puppy to the lady, I just dont understand this part.

Yes, the Puppy I have kept is the 'pick' of the litter and with the consensus of my mentors is the better puppy to 'run on' as the term goes. The puppy that I sold the lady is not one I would choose to breed myself for various small but applicable (to me) reasons. Really there is nothing 'wrong' with her (the new owner)breeding with a puppy that shows promise but I think she needs to do a lot more 'homework' before she considers this as an option. Everyone starts somewhere but I think her request was an emotionally, "this puppy is sooo adorable" driven request.

But there was no way I was going to withhold the puppy sale from her, she would have been heartbroken. Why do that to a perfectly lovely lady when all she did was ask a legitimate question.

[ellz]

And again, it comes back to the "pick of litter" question.

EVERY litter has a pick puppy, but whether that pick puppy is a good enough specimen of the breed to grace the show ring or be selected to pass down genes to offspring is an entirely different thing.

Sadly, selling puppies to homes where you either know, or have a good gut feeling that they are going to be bred from no matter what, is tantamount to setting up the next generation of puppy mill farms and "oodlers". You may decide to upgrade the registration of a puppy to later allow the owners to breed from it, but can you be sure that they will maintain good ethics and standards and not allow your puppy to become the start of yet another "food chain"?

I am disgusted that a pair of puppies that I bred and sold to somebody who I trusted has possibly done just that....I sold the people a Stafford puppy on Limited Registration for obedience with the condition (in writing) that if after a period of time, they wished to try to show the dog I would consider upgrading him to Main Registration. Because they lived in a different state, I made it a condition of the upgrade that a trusted friend of mine who is a judge and has many years of experience in the breed would have to evaluate him first. And if he agreed, then I would write the necessary letters to apply for the upgrade.

This was done.

The dog was shown a few times with moderate success, but the owners felt that they wished they had started sooner because it would have been fun to show a youngster. So I agreed to sell them another puppy around 4 years later. A bitch from the same breeding. A really, really lovely puppy and one I would have been happy to keep myself. They said at the time they were not interested in breeding but that if I ever wanted a litter from her, I was more than welcome to lease her back to have one. At the time, it was not possible to put notations on pedigrees from dogs here in Tasmania to say "not for breeding", it was LR, MR or nothing. So I decided to trust them.

Over the years they moved and we lost contact although they could have easily found me but they didn't bother. They stopped going to obedience and dog shows. Recently, I was looking in an online International pedigree database and I was absolutely amazed, shocked and if I'm truthful, DISGUSTED to see that these people had had a litter of puppies. With the full brother and sister as parents. I'm still trying to find the people, I believe at least one of them has moved to the USA and from what I can ascertain they are no longer involved with dogs. I keep trying to tell myself it may have been accidental. But the litter were all registered on Main. And although there are no puppies listed with any of them on the database, all it means is that they have never been entered which is more than possible.

OK, so what you say? Well, those dogs have now probably well and truly hit the murky breeding gene pool, if not as legitimately Mains Registered individuals, then almost certainly as BYB tadpoles. And the BIGGEST issue that I now have is that whilst the dam line is clean, the sire is a carrier of L2-Hga. So the reality is that a couple of those puppies could be L2-Hga affected and most will almost certainly be carriers.

I am not proud of this, I worry about it constantly. And now, I have done everything I can for now, without resorting to juvenile desexing to prevent it. And this is one of the reasons I rarely sell puppies for show or breeding purposes to people I do not know very well. You may be able to rely upon the honesty of people for a little while, but even those you trust the most can have brain farts that can bring it all crashing down.

[LizT]

And again, it comes back to the "pick of litter" question.

EVERY litter has a pick puppy, but whether that pick puppy is a good enough specimen of the breed to grace the show ring or be selected to pass down genes to offspring is an entirely different thing.

Sadly, selling puppies to homes where you either know, or have a good gut feeling that they are going to be bred from no matter what, is tantamount to setting up the next generation of puppy mill farms and "oodlers". You may decide to upgrade the registration of a puppy to later allow the owners to breed from it, but can you be sure that they will maintain good ethics and standards and not allow your puppy to become the start of yet another "food chain"?

I am disgusted that a pair of puppies that I bred and sold to somebody who I trusted has possibly done just that....I sold the people a Stafford puppy on Limited Registration for obedience with the condition (in writing) that if after a period of time, they wished to try to show the dog I would consider upgrading him to Main Registration. Because they lived in a different state, I made it a condition of the upgrade that a trusted friend of mine who is a judge and has many years of experience in the breed would have to evaluate him first. And if he agreed, then I would write the necessary letters to apply for the upgrade.

This was done.

The dog was shown a few times with moderate success, but the owners felt that they wished they had started sooner because it would have been fun to show a youngster. So I agreed to sell them another puppy around 4 years later. A bitch from the same breeding. A really, really lovely puppy and one I would have been happy to keep myself. They said at the time they were not interested in breeding but that if I ever wanted a litter from her, I was more than welcome to lease her back to have one. At the time, it was not possible to put notations on pedigrees from dogs here in Tasmania to say "not for breeding", it was LR, MR or nothing. So I decided to trust them.

Over the years they moved and we lost contact although they could have easily found me but they didn't bother. They stopped going to obedience and dog shows. Recently, I was looking in an online International pedigree database and I was absolutely amazed, shocked and if I'm truthful, DISGUSTED to see that these people had had a litter of puppies. With the full brother and sister as parents. I'm still trying to find the people, I believe at least one of them has moved to the USA and from what I can ascertain they are no longer involved with dogs. I keep trying to tell myself it may have been accidental. But the litter were all registered on Main. And although there are no puppies listed with any of them on the database, all it means is that they have never been entered which is more than possible.

OK, so what you say? Well, those dogs have now probably well and truly hit the murky breeding gene pool, if not as legitimately Mains Registered individuals, then almost certainly as BYB tadpoles. And the BIGGEST issue that I now have is that whilst the dam line is clean, the sire is a carrier of L2-Hga. So the reality is that a couple of those puppies could be L2-Hga affected and most will almost certainly be carriers.

I am not proud of this, I worry about it constantly. And now, I have done everything I can for now, without resorting to juvenile desexing to prevent it. And this is one of the reasons I rarely sell puppies for show or breeding purposes to people I do not know very well. You may be able to rely upon the honesty of people for a little while, but even those you trust the most can have brain farts that can bring it all crashing down.

Ellz that is a really unfortunate set of circumstances, but I have to ask why did you sell them a full sister when they already had an entire full brother? Even as a novice I doubt I would do this JIC there was an accident? Not even sure I'd be good enough to keep a full entire brother and sister as I don't have 'yards' or runs but have my dogs 'living' with us, hence the desexing GSD and all girl Cavaliers.

Unfortunately with litters there will always be those that are not up to scratch, so the question is what becomes of them really?

Keeping all....an unlikely option, for anyone.

Culling the rejects....I guess some might do this and possibly have but I think offering them as pets that have had thought put into them is the option I'd prefer to take.

Infant desexing....not something I'm able to bring myself to do, bearing in mind I've just started out...the time may yet come for me to go down that path.

So at this point for those that I cannot keep, which as I get more discerning (I hope I learn as I go along) could mean an entire litter, I will offer on LR to (hopefully) good, honest people. I'm just glad I have a breed that has small litters.

Who knows the day may come when I feel the circumstances are correct for me to offer a puppy on MR to someone I don't know, it may even be a preferable choice than supplying a puppy to a potential BYB?

Meanwhile someone who originally wanted a pet now wants a "perfect specimen" on MR to breed with so it looks like some more buyer screening for me.

And if (or when) I get let down by those I trust there will be another jaded and cynical breeder to add to the ranks.

[ellz]

Why not sell them a full sister?

They weren't "pet people" wanting a companion for their dog, they never would have gotten a bitch from me if that was case, let alone a full sister....there was 4 years in age between the dogs, so it isn't as though I was selling them littermates.

They wanted something that was as good as, or better than their first dog, which this bitch was. They had proven themselves to be incredibly trustworthy up until that point, had followed every instruction that they had been given, had participated actively in obedience and conformation shows and at that stage, had good facilities for their dogs, including a "safe place" (ie mother-in-law's house) for a bitch in season.

As is recommended many times here, they had started with a male, got the taste of showing and wanted a good quality bitch to perhaps start out with. The pedigree was a "known entity" to them....even if it was prior to the days of DNA testing so at that stage, the L2-Hga status was unknown.

I had absolutely NO reason not to trust them.....then.

[LizT]

Why not sell them a full sister?

They weren't "pet people" wanting a companion for their dog, they never would have gotten a bitch from me if that was case, let alone a full sister....there was 4 years in age between the dogs, so it isn't as though I was selling them littermates.

They wanted something that was as good as, or better than their first dog, which this bitch was. They had proven themselves to be incredibly trustworthy up until that point, had followed every instruction that they had been given, had participated actively in obedience and conformation shows and at that stage, had good facilities for their dogs, including a "safe place" (ie mother-in-law's house) for a bitch in season.

As is recommended many times here, they had started with a male, got the taste of showing and wanted a good quality bitch to perhaps start out with. The pedigree was a "known entity" to them....even if it was prior to the days of DNA testing so at that stage, the L2-Hga status was unknown.

I had absolutely NO reason not to trust them.....then.

Fair enough. It sure sounded like they were doing everything right, for a while anyway. But if they were I guess they would not have bred the two or if it was accidently then they should have aborted.

I think it was you Ellz who said that this phase (homing) was the hardest part of breeding, I am really seeing this now.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't go in blindly and have put much effort and thought into it, but the realities have alot of variables don't they?

Edited November 10, 2010 by LizT

[ellz]

I think it was you Ellz who said that this phase (homing) was the hardest part of breeding, I am really seeing this now.

Don't get me wrong, I didn't go in blindly and have put much effort and thought into it, but the realities have alot of variables don't they?

The problem is that you cannot control what people do once they own the dog/cat/horse or whatever. Written agreements can help, but only really work in favour of the people who you would probably have trusted enough to work with, without one.

And of course, nobody has a fully functioning crystal ball. Things change, people change, circumstances change. In my case, I had worked with the couple for some time prior to them even getting their first dog. And he had flown over from Melbourne for just a few hours, hired a car and collected him in person. And I received lengthy, almost weekly phone calls with updates, questions and anecdotes for the four years between the time they got their dog and the bitch puppy was born. They were showing actively, doing obedience competitively and STILL keeping in touch until the bitch was about 2 years old and then they dropped off the radar.

I have a feeling from reading between the lines of the information that I have discovered about them, that they split up and he went overseas.

How could anybody foresee that? And why refuse to sell people who had done EVERYTHING right a quality puppy just in case they did the wrong thing?

Apart from the fact that they had a litter (and aborting isn't always a reasonable solution in a bitch which you may want to have a "planned" litter from at a later date...many litters that are aborted are done at the time of a spey and that wouldn't have been an option in this case), if another person whom I had been working with under similar circumstances contacted me and said they'd like another puppy....I'd probably do the same again.

And actually, I'm currently considering it. A young couple have a puppy from my November 09 litter. They are located in Townsville. When the puppy was due to leave home, they were overseas on a pre-wedding honeymoon in Japan so I was happy to keep Chilli here for a while longer. His parents were travelling around Tasmania on their motorbike early this year and dropped in to see the puppies and meet me. His father is a cynic by nature and I was very pleased to have received a report to tell me that he was perfectly satisfied with me and the puppies and when Chilli arrived in Townsville, he was so proud of her, you'd swear she was his puppy. He said then that if he weren't travelling on the bike so much, he'd have taken a puppy home with him! A couple of months ago, at the age of 53, he had a stroke and for a while, the prognosis wasn't good. But when he started to improve, they would take Chilli into hospital to visit and the sight of her really cheered him up AND has helped him to get mobile again. He's walking now and on the verge of going home and the family have contacted me to ask about the possibility of a puppy. The only litter I'm considering at the moment is a repeat of the November 09 litter, mostly in an effort to get a bitch with those bloodlines to go on with because the bitch I kept from the litter was stolen. I would be MORE than happy to send the family a puppy from the litter if it happens. Although as with Chilli, it would be on LR and if they want a male, it won't matter because Chilli is going to be desexed shortly anyway.