Breeders? In it for the Money or Not?

[northernmastiff]

I have been researching a lot of breeders over the last two years and I have really begun to sit on the fence about whether a large breeder is really the best way to go for puppy people. I keep coming across all these threads that keep saying small breeders (2 to 3 dogs) are backyard breeders and I really think this needs to change. If the breeder is doing health tests and doing something with their dogs, number of dogs shouldn't matter. Actually, I would feel more comfortable with a breeder who doesn't show but the dogs are living in the house, the puppies are raised in the house and get 100% of the breeders attention than one that does all the showing and has 10 to 20 dogs. (Health tests would be the same, both doing health tests just one not showing).

I have been feeling really disillusioned by the breeder game lately and the way that they are. One thing that I keep going back to is that big breeders aren't always best whether they do showing and testing or not. I keep going back to some of the breeders that I have known who are big and the ones who remain small. It starts to become a cash grab for the larger kennels. I was talking to a friend about a large scale Neo breeder who studs out her champion male for 5k per stud fee. She has counted his use over 20 times in one year alone yet this same breeder looks down their nose at smaller breeders and says they are only in it for the money. Over a 100k in stud fees in a year...ummm...who's in it for the money. Add to that the 10 litters she produces in a year and that is big bucks, regardless of the amount of money you put out. This particular breeder has quit her full time job, as has her husband, and they bought a large farm to only breed dogs. If there was no money in the large kennels, then why is this possible.

Another large breeder of Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retrievers has a huge set up and he is actually breeding his dogs 6 or 7 times. Yes, they live longer but when you are using a 10 or 11 year old dam for a litter, something is wrong with the picture. I don't care how many awards the dog has or how many clearances, 11 is too old for a dog to breed.

I have also been watching the litters of another big breeder and found that she has produced over 97 puppies (that she has advertised on her website, I know that she has had more because I have talked to her and she only puts pups up that haven't been sold). That was in a 9 month period so we are looking at 242k in puppies alone. Again, that doesn't include the stud fees she gets (she has 3 males) or the puppies she doesn't list. I know her vet bills are high but I think she said it was somewhere around 35k for a year.

And then you come across all these posts about how small breeders are really no good. My friend has had a few rumors started about how she is just in it for the money. All small breeders are in it for the money and not for the betterment of the breed. I find this disgusting. With her last litter, she was actually in the hole. She takes the first three weeks of the puppies lives off work, she feeds them the best, feeds the dam the best. The puppies are actually whelped and raised in her bedroom so she can keep a 24/7 eye on them. She is already looking at lines that she wants to use for her females (the one is less than 6 months old) and she puts her heart and soul into every puppy she produces. But she knows her limitations and she doesn't want to have more than a few dogs in her kennel. She wants to enjoy them as a companion before she gets any profit from them.

Sorry if I am ranting. I was just reading the Merckle thread and was going to post in it but when my post got a bit too long, I stopped reading. I really think we need to change a few views on breeders. I am not bashing all large scale breeders as I knew a few when I was involved with labs and they were amazing but big is not always best. I was wondering if anyone else was beginning to feel like I do about this topic and what your view was.

Would you prefer to go with a reputable small scale breeder or a reputable large scale breeder?

 

[Iymala]

Reputable is the key word. Not all large or small breeders are reputable. If they health test, show, breed for betterment of the breed, research pedigrees, take in and rehome any puppy or dog from their breeding that the owners give up and properly screen potential buyers then I don't believe size of the operation is a turn off for me. The issue I have with breeders like the one in the other thread is that they do NONE of the above and are not reputable.

 

[northernmastiff]

Yes, but do they. The ones that I mentioned do research pedigrees, show, do health testing and they say that they are breeding for betterment and they will rehome. However, I have yet to see them rehome a pup and they generally use the same two or three studs with 20 females. How is that betterment? They can look wonderful on paper and on that all important checklist that has been going around, but how can they give optimal care when they have 40 puppies on the ground at once. I actually saw an interview with a breeder who was showing off her litters that she had. These three litters (big litters between 8 and 14 pups) were born today, that litter was born yesterday, the litter there was born the day before. She had six litters on the ground and 3 females were due any day. How is that quality when you are breeding for quantity? She does all the health testing, etc. There are many breeders who are reputable because they do all the right things in theory but once they get back to their kennel, the dogs live in dirt kennels and filth. Only the dogs that they show are given any real comfort. I understand kenneling breeds. Working labs are outside and kenneled to avoid making them soft but how can you truly offer the best care when you have 30 dogs.

Guess I am just over analyzing it. I just think about that St. Bernard breeder up here that has something like 27 adults and 10 young St. Bernards in her kennel.

 

[raechiemay]

I think it all depends on what is important to the puppy buyer. IMO, I would prefer a small scale reputable breeder because I want to see that one-on-one interaction with the puppies before they go to their new homes & to me, it just seems a bigger breeder probably doesn't have time to do that. I'm not saying anything bad about a larger scale breeder who does kind of jump through hoops to better their breed, it's just my personal preference, I would prefer more of that personal feel when it came to a breeder. If that makes sense.

 

[ruthcatrin]

bleh, I hate trying to create catagories cause there's always someone who doesn't fit.

Apollo's breeder had 15( ! ) adults on site when we picked up Apollo, they live in a kennel. But every single adult bitch (including Apollo's mother) had been spayed. And she rotates the dogs through spending time in the house with her. Several of them were rescues, with a couple returned pups, that she's working on finding new homes for. She takes a hugely personal approach with her dogs and her puppy buyers, and after the one year she had 3 litters on the ground at once she swore never again, two was plenty (that was the year before Apollo's litter).

I prefer non-large breeders, a few dogs, who live in the house, is certinally ideal. But I won't totally rule out larger breeders either, it depends on to many factors.

Having said that, six litters, in one season, is just way to many for the breeder, or a breeder and spouse, to manage with the personal approach, I'm sorry.

 

[northernmastiff]

See Ruth, that is the one that doesn't seem large. She is producing 2 litters a year, not all the dogs are in the kennel for breeding. She is definitely a breeder I would feel comfortable with because she is giving back more than she gets from breeding. I think my biggest problem isn't large vs small, it is the fact that more and more posts/articles are telling people to avoid buying from a small breeder because only the large are reputable. I think you can find both reputable and BYB's at any size of a kennel. There have also been a few breeders that I would say are nothing more than a glorified puppy mill.

 

[ruthcatrin]

yah, I hate trying to catagorize by "size", there's just to many other factors (which was what I was trying to say lol)

 

[SavingGrace]

My best 'tell' of a good breeder is how they react when there are problems. These are the questions I personally would ask - if our puppy is born with a life threatening disease how would they handle this situation.

Seeing how a breeder stands behind their line - shows the truth in good breeding. If they care about their puppies health and well being, they truly care about the breed. If they're not willing to stand behind what they produce, or want to hide behind technicalities or put their head in the sand, they're in it for the money. Big or small, doesn't matter.

That's just my two cents.

 

[cookiedough39]

Most kennels start out small for the most part. How can a small kennel be in it for the money more than a large scale kennel? Kennels get large after the small scale breeders see how much money there potentially can be. I prefer small kennel to a large one really just based off time. If a breeder has 3 littler on the ground at the same time, is there really enough time in the day to devote to all 3? Let's say there is. Well then how about time for all the background checks, and questions and things that come with potential buyers. Not saying anything bad about huge kennels, I would just prefer a small kennel.

 

[cayeesmom]

Most kennels start out small for the most part. How can a small kennel be in it for the money more than a large scale kennel? Kennels get large after the small scale breeders see how much money there potentially can be.

Agree 100%, example, locally here a few years back in a very upscale neighbor hood, 40 maltees were found living in cages in a garage. The woman use to show her dogs and did well, started small scale breeding for all the right reasons until greed took over and she turned in to a small puppymill selling her dogs online. Think she was caught because neighbors complained about the smell!
Not saying all large breeders are bad but when common sens says there is no way they have time for all these dogs then.....

 

[Cody]

for myself personally I will not go to a large scale breeder, yes they may be reputable but once your income and or mortgage depends on selling dogs I do not think that the best choices are always made. My breeder breeds once every 2 years, most of the pups are not sold but maintained in the program and live with friends. He does not sell breeding rights and will allow very few select people to use his studs, again there is a contract that they cannot sell breeding rights on those pups. He is small, his dogs live in the house when they are not out showing. That again is just my personal preference. I know I have life time support and a great friend, who shares my love and passion for the breed.

 

[alwcm4]

A BYB has nothing to do with size, HOWEVER I would NEVER buy a dog from someone who's dogs had to live in a kennel. dogs are social beings, and Mastiffs are couch potatoes. if they live in a kennel I don't think that breeder cares enough about the individual dogs to provide them a cushy life.

A BYB is someone who doesn't health test, who doesn't take puppies back, who knows less about the breed than the puppy buyers, who doesn't know what the words conformationally correct mean. They don't understand pedigrees, don't keep track of their progeny, etc.

 

[alwcm4]

Northern Mastiff - if you are talking American breeders PM me and I can find out whatever you want if I don't already know it . I have Canadian contacts as well, LOL I'm a Mastiff research ninja While no line of dogs is 100% fault free, I do know two of the larger 'kennels' in American who appear to be reputable I would never own a dog from knowing what I know now about thier dogs, stuff they won't tell you and deny repeatedly.

 

[DennasMom]

I'm with you Northern.
I'd prefer a smaller operation - and I'd be willing to pay more for it, too.

I like the idea of my potential puppy getting personalized care and being part of the family from day 1. Not just one of 60+ out in the barn... no matter how much "top notch" care they get, it's not going to be as personalized as if there were just a single litter at a time.

Plus, really great breeders socialize with extra people, extra dogs and start crate training, too (or so I've read)...
And if they're out working their dogs and showing them... I have no idea how they can fit that all in.

This is one of those professions you think needs to be a "calling". Like a ministry or first responders, or teachers - you do it because you love it, not because you can make a living at it.
It's not right... if you do something right and with a passion... and it's something other people think is valuable - you should be able to make a living doing it.
At least in a perfect world you could.

 

[SavingGrace]

Here's a question that I believe belongs on this thread. I hear a lot of mention around the forum about good breeders should be ready to take the puppy back (which I agree with), or that a prospective buyer should check that the breeder would take the dog back. Is it unheard of for breeders to give people their money back for sick dogs? If so - why?

Wouldn't that show as a red flag that the breeder is in it for the money?

 

[mx5055]

Depends why it's sick...when it gets sick, etc. I think most cases are on an individual basis. Most don't give money back...maybe a replacement pup. That's why it's so important for puppy buyers to really read the contract. Not all breeders are in it for the money; and sometimes things just are what they are, and it's no one's fault.

 

[SavingGrace]

I still don't understand why it's always a replacement pup. In instances where it's a birth defect or genetic disorder that can be corrected with surgery - it's always a replacement pup.

I know there are exceptions to every rule, but if I purchased a pup from a breeder who developed early/or was born with a life threatening defect - the chances of me wanting another dog from that breeder would be slim to none. I've seen a couple of CC breeders in AZ that offer a CHOICE of your money back or a replacement pup - but these are the only I've found.

I agree, it's critical to read the contract before buying BUT if breeders aren't in it for the money - why can't they return it when the pup needs it? Who wants a replacement pup after going through something like that?

I understand from a breeders standpoint it's easier (and cheaper) to simply offer a replacement - but for the owner of the sick pup? That's a raw deal if you ask me.

My Eurasier's contract is written where we would get a choice of our money or a replacement if he developed a life threatening illness or was born with a life threatening condition requiring corrective surgery (up to one year). That's the kind of health guarantee that makes me think this breeder is truly in it for the breed.

 

[mx5055]

What if the breeder had done all the genetic testing, and it was negative. That's why you do your research...you are the buyer...if you don't like the terms you can choose to go elsewhere. I'm not saying there aren't some in it for the money...some are. But there are times when shit just happens.

 

[SavingGrace]

What if the breeder had done all the genetic testing, and it was negative. That's why you do your research...you are the buyer...if you don't like the terms you can choose to go elsewhere. I'm not saying there aren't some in it for the money...some are. But there are times when shit just happens.

Yes, what if the genetic testing had been done, shown negative, and 'shit happened'. You're telling me it's ok to simply offer a replacement? I'm not trying to say you're wrong, tons of breeders do this.... my question is why is this ok?

Let's say...Yes, the parents were tested, everything was fine - but one pup (that sells for 2k+ mind you) is born with something serious that comes up later (let's say a few months later) and this is a life threatening disorder. Let's say it is genetic. The answer is replacement pup? After selling, let's say 5 pups at 2k, it's really that difficult to a breeder to say - wow, sorry puppy buyer #2, unexpected shit happened - you can have a choice of your money or a replacement. Why is it about if it's the breeders fault? No one is blaming the breeder (if the health testing was done), but a puppy owner is supposed to go through the trauma of learning of this disorder and then deciding to give up the pup or spend the money to fix? When breeders say "lifetime support" what does this really mean? If there aren't any serious issues?

This just seems to be the thought process of breeders I've realized. NOT ALL breeders, I get it, and yes it is the buyers job to do the research and read the contract - but why do breeders (who aren't in it for the money) hold so tight to replacing a pup instead of standing behind your breeding program and those you've trusted to take your money and your pup by offering a choice?

 

[SavingGrace]

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm just commenting that it seems like a tall order to ask a breeder to give you a choice, when it comes to Mastiffs. Maybe I am wrong - I hope so.