Acceptable Breeding Practice

Alot of these questions, in my opinion, aren't just about the dogs themselves, but for the breed as a whole. When we're breeding, we have to accept the fact that we are ALWAYS putting our dogs at considerable risk no matter what we do. You have to ask these questions: Is breeding a nearly perfect bitch so many times going to help the breed? Or is it just a mediocre bitch who really won't contribute anything better in the next litter than the last? Is this a rare breed trying to gain recognition and needing a wider gene pool, perhaps warranting that many litters per year? Does your breed suffer from any health problems that tend to pop up in the earlier years, making it a wise choice to breed older females/males?

1. Breed a bitch up to 5 times
I see this happen fairly often. I think it really depends on the bitch involved, and if she's really doing the breed a favour by having so many litters. I'll be breeding Visa for her 5th (and last) time this year. Her breeder had a singleton litter from her, then I had a litter of two pups, another litter of two, and a litter of four. So in breeding her four times, I have as many pups as I could get from a one big litter (it ain't much!) She has so much to contribute to the breed, that yes I'll breed her once more. She has many features that are incredibly difficult to find in a Belgian these days, and her lines are very old and considerably rare; With the small gene pool we have, I feel it's for the best of the breed to keep these lines going, and therefore breed her once more.

2. Breed 5-6 litters in some years
The main word here being *some.* I can see in the odd 10 or 15 years, having that many litters for some important reason (a line ending, some amazing stud dog getting neutered, or maybe you're moving or taking some big job and so breeding won't be possible for several years). In most cases that I see this (reputable ones) some of the dogs live with co-owners, so it isn't really the breeder that is having several litters at a time. The breeders who I know that *regularily* have this many litters per year are no good, and the dogs they produce are no good.

3. Breed back to back heats (not all time time, usually just 2 litters on back to back heats, I've never seen 3)
This will be my 3rd back to back breeding with Visa. She has some fertility issues, likely caused by a severe fever as a pup. The repro vet recommended back to back heats only for her, after I had issues with my first breeding with her (her second one). Do I enjoy it? Hell no. I HATE having puppies 8 months apart. Visa has never had issues recooperating, bounces back right away, and the day after having them you'd never even know she had them by looking at her.
Studies now show that it's actually better for the bitch to be bred on back to back heats. doesn't mean I plan on doing it in the future. I hope Visa is the only "special" one that requires it. If I could have one litter every two or three years I'd be happier.

4. Breed 7-8 yr old bitches
Depends on the dog, and the breed. Visa will be 8.5 for her next litter. She's in prime condition, acts like a two year old, moves like a two year old. Other than parvo as a pup she hasn't had a sick day in her life. I've never had such an athletic dog. People that meet her expect her to look old, and always remark at how young she seems. I think she's going to be one of those ugly emaciated 17 year old dogs before she dies.
In my opinion, while this isn't ideal for most (and I am not always going to take my own advice), I think the most beneficial thing for every breed would be to wait until females are older, and males are old or dead (use frozen semen) before breeding. In a perfect world. How many dogs are getting epilepsy at age 4, and dying of cancer at age 6, etc? Don't their breeders sit back and think "wow I wish I would have know that before breeding her twice. Now I have some epileptic pups, epi carriers, and some will probably die of cancer eventually." Visa was 6.5 when she had my first litter from her. I bred her to the frozen semen of a male who died at 14. I knew that Visa didn't have epilepsy, was still healthy at 6. I knew how long the male lived, what he died of, what he'd produced. My last litter, and my upcoming litter, are out of a male that is over ten years old. Again, I know his health status, and I know what he's produced. Visa will be 8.5, I'll know her even better than before, and I'll have an even better idea of what SHE has produced. It's purely ingenious to know your dogs as much as possible before breeding them. Therefore, breed them older! It's not as easy on the bitch, but it sure ain't easy on the breed when you're accidentally breeding dogs who'll get epilepsy two years from now (especially since their siblings in breeding homes, still get bred). And when you'e breeding, with the risks you already take, it isn't just about your bitch. Your bitch can get a c-section and be a-ok. It's about the breed. Selfish as that sounds, every breeder takes phenominal risks when they breed, and so they have to accept the fact that bettering the breed is just as important (if not more important) than their own dogs. Otherwise they wouldnt take that risk. It's the bigger picture.

Groenendaels.

Copying and pasting

Trent's breeder has done all of that with the exception of #4, but the breeder of his dam in Germany is still breeding her bitch at 8 years old, I believe (Trent's granddam). Beautiful bitch, produces great dogs, very athletic and both physically and mentally fit. Better looking than 3 year old dogs I know. They aren't in it for the profit or out of laziness because they breed very occasionally, and then it is only to top stud dogs. Additionally, on the breed specific board I am a part of, a highly regarded breeder has bred a bitch 4 to 5 times (in a span of 4 to 5 years) and has argued for back to back breedings as being a healthier option for the bitch in many cases. And this is a breeder whose dogs, as the board jokes, seem to be owned by almost every long time member and moderator.

I would have no problem with a breeder who did this, and would not discount all breeders for any of the practices listed. Obviously I don't think the average 8 year old bitch should still be bred, but I know an 8 year old dog can still be in excellent condition and fit for breeding. It is always a case by case scenario for me.

5-6 litters again, I am okay with. I am more concerned with the quality of the dogs being bred/produced, and, as someone who cannot look at a pedigree and tell you what you'll get, the breeder's intentions behind each breeding. 5 litters a year from Trent's breeder wouldn't surprise me - I keep regular tabs on his website. However, in the 2-3 years I have watched the website, not once have I noticed a litter where the puppies had not all been sold before 2 months of age (where litters of 6 are the norm, and litters of 11 aren't unheard of). These dogs go to working, sport, breeding, and pet homes and there is, evidently, a high demand for them. Family members (all involved with working, breeding, and training dogs) and hired employees help raise the puppies in the breeder's home, and I was completely comfortable getting a puppy from them knowing that.

I don't have a specified list of what is and isn't acceptable. What makes a good breeder for me is not going to be what makes a good breeder for someone else, so I try to keep things in perspective. I want certain things in a dog, and others will have different criterion, and maybe I'll end up seeing things their way. Right now, I know what I want and that is what I will base my search off of. But a lot of it ends up being about how I feel about a very specific breeding program, rather than one aspect of all programs (number of litters, number of back to back breedings, etc.). Situations vary so greatly it's always near impossible for me to assign strict, hard rules, a mental checklist to go over every time I speak to a breeder.

I look at everything in context. I may find one breeder okay, and then turn and walk away if I find out they are breeding their 7 year old bitch. I then may talk to another breeder, find that they just bred an 8 year old bitch and that she has been bred every year for the last 4 years and be completely okay with it and put down a deposit for a pup. For some breeders I would not be able to fathom why they breed 3 litters a year and have no wish to get a puppy from them. With others, I know they breed 5-8 litters a year and would feel privileged to meet their approval and get a pup from the kennel. For me, it becomes about perspective and context, looking at the big picture. No specific list on my part.

Just wanted to say that this is something I can 100% agree with

What is "over bred" in your terms, may I ask? How do you define that for a breed? I know it can be very obvious with puppy mill situations, but I've always wondered about the term outside of that context.

Here, are you talking about numbers of litters a breeder has/number of puppies produced, or a single bitch being over bred? One of the breeders I talked about earlier bred 4-5 litters from their bitch, but over a course of 5 years or so, and she was their only breeding bitch during those years.

My dog's breeder has 5 or more litters a year. His wife and two children work with him raising and socializing these puppies, as does the employees of the boarding kennel/supply store/training facility they run. He and his daughter are both certified DVG judges and train, work, and title many dogs of their own stock, and these are dogs that live with them in their homes.

Some of their breeding bitches also live with members of their Schutzhund Club as an "only dog" or with one or two other dogs, and these dogs are not in kennels and are instead family companion and Schutzhund dogs that go back to the breeder to be bred once they are titled, health tested, and determined "worthy" of being bred by the breeder.

Of course, the situation you talked about is all too common and I absolutely agree with you on that aspect. Just wanted to give an example of a breeder whose program I am quite happy with, regardless of the number of litters he breeds.

I guess I could ask why breed that many times a year?

There will always be examples made as exceptions to opinions, which I totally respect and believe valid, but the vast majority of over breeding is monetarily based and makes me uneasy.

Reason I feel against "over breeding" any dogs (no, I have no mathematical ideal unfortunately) is not honestly the humanity pressed upon the dog itself but rather the lack of available suitable homes for this over breeding.

Should my dogs pass their breeding exams and health tests we may consider breeding but I'm already sweating bullets at that idea and the concern of finding appropriate homes for all the little land sharks.

Pet breeding must be much easier but then again the world is filled with wonderful pets dying daily for lack of a home.

I think a lot of my concern with breeding with such frequency, titled or not, is there is such a small market for truly appropriate working dog homes and the vast market for pet homes could just as easily be shared with the rescue dogs of the world.

There has to be a happy median and breeding is not an evil doing (when responsible) but I do believe that many breeders (even those with excellent dogs) breed more puppies than needed in society today.

I must add though it is always a relief when a breeder demands of his bitch the same he does of a dog as far as titles are concerned. Far to many settle for a broad bitch as females are harder to title in sport (and some breeds in show).

Thanks, AdrianneIsabel. Wasn't trying to tell you that you were wrong or right just wanted to hear your thoughts

The breeder I am talking about does require all dogs be titled and health tested before being bred, not just the males. Taking a look at the older dogs on his website (as opposed to the 2-3 year olds) there is a very nice distribution of SchH/IPO/VPG 3's, 2's, and 1's among his females. Most of his breeding bitches retire with a 3 or 2, and a couple of his current ones live with another family and only go back to him to be bred. I do like to see that, because while these females do not live with him, they live as family dogs, proving to be good companions, and still train in Schutzhund with him, his daughter, and their club so the breeder can evaluate their ability as working/sport dogs.

As far as demand goes, even I find it uncommon, but this particular breeder, in the last 2-3 years I have been watching his website, has always sold all puppies in a litter before they hit 8 weeks old. No online or newspaper advertising needed, he has been breeding for almost 40 years, he and his daughter are DVG Judges, his son a certified level 3 helper, and they run a boarding kennel, supply store, and training facility. Perhaps that is how word gets out? Either way, I have seen them have litters of up to 11 puppies and all puppies were sold before they were 8 weeks old. In a single litter, there are often puppies that go to working homes, protection sport homes, performance homes, and pet homes.

I think for a breeder who is heavily involved in the working and sport world, with family also equally involved, (and for almost 40 years!) the demand becomes higher. It also makes it easier when the same dog that would do okay as a police dog could also be a beginner's Schutzhund sport dog, or just a good, active family pet.

Of course, I do agree that there are more dogs being bred than needed in society today, but at this point I think that if we ONLY bred the amount needed in society today, 90% of the population would no longer have pets, and the number of sport and performance dogs would decrease drastically.

1. No, I don't think any bitch is *that* special. If she's having smaller litters than the breed's average, perhaps you should consider that's a problem you're passing on by continuing to breed her. I just feel if you can't get what you want out of one or two litters from the same bitch, move on. I've personally never bred a bitch more than twice.

2. Again, no. Some years, any years - to me, it's too many puppies to do right by when raising them, too many puppy owners to reasonably support well and it's breeders like this whose dogs we always see in rescue. They breed too much to be able to take the ones back that can't be kept for whatever reason.

3. I've seen some information saying it is good for the bitch's uterus to breed back to back. Ok, well, what about the bitch herself??? I care a little more about my bitches than I do their uteruses. In my breed, my dogs come in season like clockwork every 6 months. For me to breed back to back, a bitch's first litter would just be 4 months old and frankly, at 4 months old I have no idea what they are going to be and what I've even done yet so imo, breeding back to back would be an irresponsible and stupid thing to do.

4. In my breed, they are considered seniors at 7, so it's too old for my breed. In other breeds, I would find this practice acceptable.

^Good post.

E, sounds like this breeder has his game together, I hope all those homes are lasting homes but it also sounds like he'd be the guy who'd take back puppies that didn't suit their new home should the need arise.

If Riley and Travis produce a crappy litter by some chance I will not use them together again. I will use Riley with the stud I have chosen. If by some one in a million chance that litter is cr@ppy, Riley will be spayed.

If she has a tough delivery and has trouble raising the pups, I would spay.

If the puppies are phenomenal I will breed her a maximum of three times. She is my pet and her quality of life if far more important to me then pumping out puppies.

I will not breed her older then 5 because I want her to have fun in life, I want her to enjoy herself and not be bound to having puppies as an older dog. That is MY choice and I will stick to it. If others want to breed older dogs I have no issue with it. Riley's sire is 16 this year. Riley's mother is 6.

Oh, just FYI. The stud I have chosen for Riley's second litter.

Supa 7

Now you know you shouldn't have shown me that. Why oh why would you do that to me :nono: BAD!

He is lovely isn't he? He is a nice tall dog, I like them tall!

Yes quite lov...CLASSIC TRI!!!!...ely yes yes very lovely indeed :rofl1: Honestly though I love how he carries himself. Travis is more beautiful in my opinion though. The other one just has a colour advantage that I am inclined :lol-sign:

You may have an emotional opposition to over X number of litters but healthy female animals are meant to reproduce. There are generally no lack of homes for well bred puppies, especially of the more popular breeds.

Actually in many breeds, they aren't breeding enough puppies. Pet owners shouldn't have to take on an adult rescue or mixed breed puppy because they don't "need" a well bred dog. It is sad to me that we now live in a time when even people who breed dogs or are considering breeding dogs seem to feel that it is unethical. For purebred dogs to continue, we need breeders breeding quality dogs.

I would strongly suggest reading this article, it fits in very well with this discussion and shows the effect that breeders breeding less is having on purebred dogs: Breeding Better Dogs

Also part 2:Breeding Better Dogs


"Who would have suspected that in just nine years, the blind acceptance of undefined labels would have significantly reduced the size of the AKC stud book and the gene pools of 35 breeds (Table 1). There are no accurate figures on the number of pups sold on limited registrations that were not registered but some estimates suggest the number may be at least another 100,000 per year. When the effects of both are taken as a whole, no one can question their impact on declining registrations, gene pool size and genetic diversity. It has been astonishing. The unintended consequences of these efforts have no equal."

If you're talking about my female, ther fertility issues are not genetic. The repro vet opened her up and looked at her uterus. It's very healthy. She had an extreme illness as a puppy that caused a high fever for several weeks. Two of her littermates died. She was left with fertility issues.
I think it really depends on the breed, what you're describing above. For a breed like mine with a dwindling gene pool, rare lines should be utilized as much as possible. Epilepsy already affects 10-30% of our breed, and the majority of people use similar lines and linebreed on similar epi carriers. Breeding a bitch with uncommon lines more than twice shouldn't be a crime when there is the purpose of widening the gene pool. Especially when this is also a breed that is losing bone, substance, angulation, and hardness in temperament, and the bitch has all of these qualities. After all, improving the breed is the goal.
Now saying that if you're not happy with what the bitch has already produced and that validates her elimination from the gene pool is just counterproductive. If it is a REALLY nice bitch, there is NO reason she can't produce well if she is bred to the right male. This is where pedigree research comes in to play, and looking at what the stud dog has produced in the past with similar females etc, and just choosing a dog who compliments your bitch. If you aren't happy with what she produced in two litters, it's not the bitch's fault, that is YOUR fault as a breeder. Now if it's a mediocre or poor bitch, she shouldn't be bred in the first place, unless there is something that really warrants it.

I have worked in rescue far to long to believe that the average breed is failing wildly. Dandie Dinmonts, sure, breed away but be damed sure you have suitable homes for all those puppies. Truth is most breeds that are lacking in numbers have a evolutionary or sociological reasoning for such decline. There just aren't enough people interested/suitable for many of our less common pure bred dogs. The average person has no business owning a spanish mastiff or a thai ridgeback or a xolo, the average person also rarely has interest in a spanish galgo or a lundehund (but give akc time and this too may change) or a mudi. Yes, these breeds have a smaller gene pool but really, why should it expand as long as it is healthfully maintained? To force expansion without a demand of suitable homes only runs the risk of said breed to falter in standard join the hundreds of others found regularly in ill health and shelters.

To add to which I sure hope in the "we need to breed more" mantra there is a (insert better dogs here) astrid.

The world is filled with purebred dogs, breeding better dogs is about quality not quantity.

You'll never achieve the goal of preservation of the proper dog if you're breeding for numbers alone. Look at the most popular breeds today, sure they have numbers but unfortunately the large majority of them are complete wrecks. Unfortunately my heart breed, the apbt, is a wreck and we can thank the breeding for this. Staffordshire Bull terriers seem in far better shape as far as health and temperament and they as a general rule have been far more selective in their breedings and placements of puppies, I can't imagine this is a sheer coincidence.

I am hoping I am misunderstanding your point here but are you truly debating that breeding dogs never mind them owning their provocation of betterment of their breed nor the outstanding number of suitable life long homes is a wise choice?

Should I in theory breed my malinois now, prior to their OFA scores, prior to their breed exam in their sch1, prior to their provocation of lack of unstable behaviors and without examination of compatibility to one anothers pedigree and pros and cons?

If that is true, unfortunately, we'll have to agree to disagree because I would rather see my breeds of choice fade into the gray than go down in flames... oh wait, I'm watching that already. Grand.

It's unusual in my breed for dogs to come in 4 months after having a litter. When I do a back to back, my pups are ten months old before the next litter is born.

I was checking your website (this is OT slightly) and you have very nice dogs! You also seem to have very small litters as well? From your stats page? Is that common in your line or just your female?

I assume these small litters would sway the reasoning for some answers as well, a vast difference from the 9-12 puppy litters common in many medium size dogs.

Depends

opcorn:

APBT went downhill when they were no longer bred for performance only and were bred for "the look and the prestige". I can't even have an APBT due to the lovely breed restrictions in my province. All I can do is look at nice kennels and dream. Blech. Stupid gov't.

As for Malis; there are quite a few working dog people that figure breeding for sport is what is causing the demise of Mals. They should have remained in the provenance of working dogmen - police/detection.

Similar probably to what working Terrier, sight hound and collie and yes mastiff people have experienced, once pet homes get hooked, then it becomes a shitshow as to where/what is being bred/selected for. As for pet/"lap" breeds I think it became a shitshow when large purses became fashionable; and for some ungodly reason pet dogs didn't need to be healthy.

1 - Key word here is likely the "up to" -- sure, if you have a need for your bloodlines to be crossed/developed with different sires; then you would need to breed her a few times to different sires. Possibly also if you have small litters -- which can happen with frozen semen; not just a fertility problem with the female -- so depends on WHAT you are breeding FOR/and the RESULTS you end up WITH.
2. This one is tricky -- however depends again on what bitches bloodlines to what stud bloodlines -- 3 unrelated bitches bred to Stud X whelp 5 puppies each in February, come back in heat in June, 2 are bred to Stud Y whelp 4 puppies each in August -- that's 5 litters 23 puppies -- some breeds that produce big litters could have that with 2 litters. Same deal as any responsible breeder -- have a need to improve your own kennel and want to keep back/tabs on pups from each litter -- or have someone else that wants to have something from your female -- + good homes for each pup.
3. I do believe the back to back health benefits; but I also think that the bitch has to come back healthy inbetween; not fair to her to run her down physically; even if her uterus is healthier -- the whole dog counts; not just the repro organs!
4. Sure -- depends on dog's health -- wouldn't think I'd want to see it in a first time uterus -- but that too may depend, I'm not up on my aged uterus health issues.