Is it any wonder.......

[Pjrt]

Ive just looked at the Dogzonline breed pages and counted just 125 litters listed across all breeds. Let’s overestimate 10 pups in each litter, for a total of 1250 ANKC pedigree pups. Let’s say only half the ANKC breeders are listed on Dogz, and those not listed also have 1250 pups available. I reckon that would be a gross over estimation of 2500 ANKC pups available nation wide today. 
Is it really any wonder why people buy non papered purebreed dogs and mixed breed dogs from where ever they are available? 
Quite literally, for dogs sake, ANKC breeders need to breed for the pet market. When did it become so unfashionable to breed pedigree dogs for the pet market?

Edited July 19, 2020 by Scratch

[sheena]

I agree.  I would rather see a good breeder breeding well bred pedigree dogs a bit more often than happens now to cater for those people who just want a dog on Limited Register.  ATM if they breed more often than when they are wanting to add to their own family, they get labeled as unethical.  More well bred pups available would also bring the price down slightly (perhaps) making them more affordable & more competitive with designer puppy farm dogs (does that make sense?)

[Pjrt]

I was fortunate to work for a very large but ‘top winning’ Kennel back in the 80’s. They knew the gentle art of just knowing they had sound dogs without needing to justify it with ribbons and titles. Yes, they showed and they won, a lot, but they also knew that a plain looking sound bitch with an unflappable temperament was worth her weight in gold, for example, even if she’d never go to a show. 
it seems these days many ANKC breeders use show wins & conformation titles as the sole measure of quality. And if the dogs don’t have the acceptable number of champions in their pedigree, they’re junk. 
 

[asal]

39 minutes ago, sheena said:

I agree.  I would rather see a good breeder breeding well bred pedigree dogs a bit more often than happens now to cater for those people who just want a dog on Limited Register.  ATM if they breed more often than when they are wanting to add to their own family, they get labeled as unethical.  More well bred pups available would also bring the price down slightly (perhaps) making them more affordable & more competitive with designer puppy farm dogs (does that make sense?)

from the prices i am seeing the designers are fetching twice or more

 

The rot began in the 80's when members were being encouraged to spot and deamonise any fellow member who could be accused of being a "backyard breeder" and or "puppy farmer" .when my friends Nancy Gate and Betty Step began saying it, I looked at them in surprise as they sat in their homes with their much loved dogs playing not only in the kitchen, but in what?  The backyard?  I pointed out both could be targeted as they too had a back yard, they thought I was being silly, They show, their dogs are champions, no way that could happen so it continued and they did not see the impending danger of destruction from within and has escalated unchecked sadly.

 

Today both these women would be targeted, both were pensioners who gladly bred their girls to supply pet people with puppies, keeping the pick for themselves to show and title and thus earn "pin money" to supplement their pensions.  All puppies they were proud to put their prefix on were sold on main register so could continue their lines if the puppy owner became interested in joining and registering a prefix... below standard, went as pets with a certificate of their pedigree but not for breeding.

 

The modern ankc member seems unaware there are actually three classes of a litter... show and breed, breeding quality, (as Scratch mentions) and pet. not to be bred from.

 

Now unless you 

A - show

B - dont breed except for your self

C - dont sell on main register

D - dont have more than 1 or 3 litters at most

 

you are highly at risk of being targeted for elimination and humiliation.

Edited July 20, 2020 by asal

[asal]

Come to think of it, there was one other thing that happened .

 

for some reason the garden gnome after doing so many wonderful "road tests" of many breeds, great promotion of the purebred, even had purebreds themselves.

 

Suddenly turned on the pure breed world and when some one with such a huge fan base begins promoting oodles and x breds as superior, the damage was huge and still much in evidence

 

wish I knew a quick fix solution 

 

the long term one would not win  any friends.  Start concentrating on the good in people not searching for  or assuming the bad.

 

I believe the constant exaggeration of conformation from what the breeds were to what is defined as "improved" in so many breeds that they cannot survive a hot day, self whelp etc needs to be addressed.

 

The show scene is not preserving soundness

 

its too often a follower of "fashion" regardless how detrimental to the living, "work of art" who actually has to live with the results.

 

the problem is in all species shown, google "halter QH" then a working one..  

 

It is no accident the German Coolie has never been applied for recognition , as their fan base want them to stay as they are, Ditto for the working kelpie breeders

Edited July 20, 2020 by asal

[sandgrubber]

4 hours ago, Scratch said:

Ive just looked at the Dogzonline breed pages and counted just 125 litters listed across all breeds. Let’s overestimate 10 pups in each litter, for a total of 1250 ANKC pedigree pups. Let’s say only half the ANKC breeders are listed on Dogz, and those not listed also have 1250 pups available. I reckon that would be a gross over estimation of 2500 ANKC pups available nation wide today. 
Is it really any wonder why people buy non papered purebreed dogs and mixed breed dogs from where ever they are available? 
Quite literally, for dogs sake, ANKC breeders need to breed for the pet market. When did it become so unfashionable to breed pedigree dogs for the pet market?

Back when I lived in Oz, I knew a few breeders who have several litters a year and didn't list on DOL because they always had long wait lists.  I presume this is still the case, and that there are several dozen such breeders.  That would bring the puppy count up substantially. 

I agree there is a scarcity problem (and a snobbery problem), even if there are a lot more than 2500 puppies on offer.  But it would be good to see the actual numbers.  Isn't ANCK publishing registration data any more? 

[Pjrt]

26 minutes ago, sandgrubber said:

Back when I lived in Oz, I knew a few breeders who have several litters a year and didn't list on DOL because they always had long wait lists.  I presume this is still the case, and that there are several dozen such breeders.  That would bring the puppy count up substantially. 

I agree there is a scarcity problem (and a snobbery problem), even if there are a lot more than 2500 puppies on offer.  But it would be good to see the actual numbers.  Isn't ANCK publishing registration data any more? 

Hmm you’re right. Im going to look that up later see what I can find!

[Diva]

Most breeders I know have had a heap of enquires since the pandemic started, many who usually advertise in DOL probably haven’t needed to. 

 

Still true that ANKC breeders produce only a small amount of the overall pups produced in a year. Just suggesting that current ads probably aren’t typical. 

Edited July 20, 2020 by Diva

[Rebanne]

Not all breeds are popular. No use breeding pups when there are no homes for them.

[Pjrt]

From ANKC site

 

http://ankc.org.au/media/9430/comment-on-2019-national-registrations.pdf

 

http://ankc.org.au/media/6598/a-forensic-view-of-puppy-breeding-in-australiav4.pdf

Edited July 20, 2020 by Scratch

[Pjrt]

Puppies registered 

 

2010-2019  

2000-2009

1986- 1999

[Pjrt]

59 minutes ago, Rebanne said:

Not all breeds are popular. No use breeding pups when there are no homes for them.

Absolutely. But many wildly popular breeds are massively under represented in the pedigree stats. Breeds like Poodle, Maltese. Just a few hundred annually. It does beg the question why, when every second designer dog is a mix of these popular breeds. Surely this is somewhat the result of a supply & demand issue. 

Edited July 20, 2020 by Scratch

[Rebanne]

14 hours ago, Scratch said:

Absolutely. But many wildly popular breeds are massively under represented in the pedigree stats. Breeds like Poodle, Maltese. Just a few hundred annually. It does beg the question why, when every second designer dog is a mix of these popular breeds. Surely this is somewhat the result of a supply & demand issue. 

You answered your own question. If I was a breeder of poodles etc, the breeds used to make those crossbred mutts, I'd be desexing young and breeding less. No reputable breeder wants any dog of theirs to become a puppy farm. And have you ever heard any of those mutt owners talking about their dogs? No way they want an actual poodle. Oh no they want the mutt. No pure breed for them except for the mutt they have been told is better and stupidly believe is purebred anyway. 

[Pjrt]

2 hours ago, Rebanne said:

You answered your own question. If I was a breeder of poodles etc, the breeds used to make those crossbred mutts, I'd be desexing young and breeding less. No reputable breeder wants any dog of theirs to become a puppy farm. And have you ever heard any of those mutt owners talking about their dogs? No way they want an actual poodle. Oh no they want the mutt. No pure breed for them except for the mutt they have been told is better and stupidly believe is purebred anyway. 

I get that aspect. But how is breeding less poodles, Maltese etc, and making them less available to the pet buying market, going to ever turn that situation around? It just justifies in the public’s mind that pedigree breeders are elitist and not part of the average pet puppy supply. 
I see it’s a bind. But I really feel the risks need to be weighed up against the benefits of supplying more pet owners with pedigree puppies. 
the balance has well and truly tipped over to the mixed breed market. And will continue on that trajectory while pedigree puppies remain low in numbers and less available than the mixed breeds. 
 

Eta.... as a groomer since 1986, I’m very aware of the dog owning demographics. I still can’t help but wonder if, as an example, Pedigree Maltese & poodles were available in higher numbers & readily available, they may have maintained a better standing with the pet buying public and be talked about in the same way as people do about their oodly doodlies & maltiwhatsits

Edited July 21, 2020 by Scratch

[Rebanne]

People don't want Poodles, they want oodles. They want the mutts they have been brain washed into believing are way superior than any well bred pure bred. 

 

 

[Pjrt]

35 minutes ago, Rebanne said:

People don't want Poodles, they want oodles. They want the mutts they have been brain washed into believing are way superior than any well bred pure bred. 

 

 

I really feel much of this thinking started from the lack of available purebreeds though.  
a decade or so back when pedigree breeders started slamming the door on puppy buyers, they created an ever increasing gap in the supply & demand. Where else where the puppy buying pet people going to go.  Slowly at first, but now far accelerating past the pedigree dogs, the ‘designer’ market has taken the opportunity presented by the gap in the market. 
I guess it’s all too late now but if the pedigree breeders pushed through, maintained even increased puppies available and stepped out and became better visible into the puppy market, we may just be in a very different place. People liked poodles and Maltese. But they just weren’t available in any sort of numbers. People started making their own the best they could with what was available. Now that has become entrenched. 
while pedigree breeders keep acting like it’s all too hard and alienating people for the choices they have been largely forced to make, nothing will change. Actually, no, things will keep changing in favour of the now more available oodly whatsits 

[juice]

Actually i don't think it did , it started with  the f#cking gardener.

People buy them because they think they are designer and better, elite, bullshit.

However i did get a lady in at work the other week who wanted a purebred Malt, her old one had died and she couldn't find one anywhere. i did pull out my phone to look at listings here and there were non.

[Papillon Kisses]

https://thecognitivecanine.com/blog/functional-dog-breeding-with-jessica-hekman/ 

[sandgrubber]

46 minutes ago, juice said:

Actually i don't think it did , it started with  the f#cking gardener.

People buy them because they think they are designer and better, elite, bullshit.

However i did get a lady in at work the other week who wanted a purebred Malt, her old one had died and she couldn't find one anywhere. i did pull out my phone to look at listings here and there were non.

Anti-purebred thinking goes WAAAY back. My mum was born in 1923, my dad in 1918. Mum like purebred working dog breeds, at least some breeds, but believed show breeding had ruined rough collies, cockers, Irish setters and various other breeds she had loved as a child. Dad (a doctor) was all for mutts, accepted the concept of hybrid vigor, and detested line breeding /inbreeding. Most of my friends have had it out for poodles because of the fancy cuts and elitist attitude that seemed to go with them. 

[Pjrt]

The gardener certainly had an influence no doubt. But for some reason the pedigree breeders thought barely breeding dogs was the best way to combat it?? I really understand the point about breeders not wanting to have their dogs fall into the hands of people breeding  mixed breeds. But you know, I think worse things could happen. That very big winning kennel I started at way back in the 80’s had a very wise man at the helm. They bred. A lot. They showed. They won, a lot.  And I’ll never forget him saying to me that he’d rather see people cross breeding with his pet sold pedigree pups than trying to breed non pedigree purebreds with them. Obviously he’d rather not have seen people indiscriminately breeding from any of the pups he sold, but faced with a choice, he’d choose to see the cross breeding rather than his lines popping up in non pedigree purebreds. It took me a while to find the same peace with that statement as he had, but I did. Because what harm does it actually do to the pedigree breeder. They can continue to have amazing dogs, breed amazing puppies the majority of which will go to great pet homes and not be bred from, win at shows. NOTHING about a pedigree breeders dogs change if one of their puppies happens to land in the hands of indiscriminate breeders. Yes, it may or may not be an excellent life for the puppy who ends up being indiscriminately bred. I understand how that’s hard to accept. 
If pedigree breeders bred more pups for the pet market, inevitably some would land in the hands of less than exemplary breeders, but in doing so, there would also be many more pedigree dogs out there in homes and in the community, winning hearts and perpetuating them as desirable. Breeding barely enough to meet the wants & needs within the breed fraternity is never going to help the breed flourish in the community. 
the oodly whatsits have taken the front foot and now that there are so many in the community, it’s all people see, so naturally, that’s what the majority think they want. Add that they are usually much more available too! 
maybe there is mis education and elitist thinking, but it’s not exclusive to the non pedigree market.