Too many breeders, or not enough? - Page 7 - Golden Retrievers : Golden Retriever Dog Forums

GoldenRetrieverForum.com is the premier Golden Retriever Dog Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 01:59 PM
SheetsSM's Avatar
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Korea
Posts: 1,872
Thanks: 1,531
Thanked 1,698 Times in 813 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenRetrieverOnline View Post

I'm told that this can be a lucrative hobby business, but if you're ending up muddling the bloodlines and causing health problems, you should get out!
Lucrative? Not so much. As you're new to the forum I encourage you to spend some time reading threads on what the reputable breeders go through to produce those fluffly balls of joy & the expenses associated with it. And if you're by chance associated with the blog/website with the same name as your username, you would be served well by the section, "Choosing a Golden Retriever and Puppy".
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
The Following User Says Thank You to SheetsSM For This Useful Post:
goldenjackpuppy (11-24-2012)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 02:03 PM
DanaRuns's Avatar
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,787
Thanks: 1,441
Thanked 2,805 Times in 1,031 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swampcollie View Post
Perhaps, but not necessarilly.





Not likely.

You're making an assumption that Conformation is THE reason sombody gets a Golden. That is not the case. The reality is that very very few golden owners participate in any type of organized activity whatsoever, let alone Conformation.
No, I'm making the assumption that good hobby breeders prove their lines by showing their dogs to at least point them if not finish them, and that twice the number of breeders means twice the number of breeders trying to prove their dogs in the ring.
__________________
I love my dogs.



Gibbs' Pedigree on K9data
Ziva's Pedigree on K9data
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 02:08 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: south dakota
Posts: 173
Thanks: 28
Thanked 133 Times in 85 Posts
From what I understand owning, showing and breeding dogs (of any breed) is not a lucrative undertaking. It appears to be demanding of time, energy and resources. Realistically there is only a certain number of people who have the time and money it takes to be a reputable hobby breeder. So although nice to think about it seems unlikely that increases in reputable breeders will occur in the near future ( especially given the current economy)

It is also my understanding that the desire of the consumer is not the motivating factor when those who love golden retrievers obtain their foundation dogs and open a kennel. Perhaps I am wrong ( experienced breeders please step in here) but these people love the breed and their goals are to ensure the longevity of the breed through producing dogs that meet the standard not as a means to provide well bred puppies to the consumer. If reputable breeders were really making such large profits from selling puppies you wouldn't see them working full time jobs in other fields to support themselves.

In business a company must post a profit to be competitive. My guess is that to really make a profit from selling dogs reputable breeders would have to increase the price of their dogs substantially. It seems pet quality dogs are provided more or less at cost so breeders can have the satisfaction of knowing their dogs go to appropriate and loving homes.

Although probably an unpopular viewpoint a well bred purebred dog is a luxury but because of supply and demand there will always be a market for lower cost knock offs ( i.e. backyard breeders)
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 03:34 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 566
Thanks: 64
Thanked 211 Times in 136 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by CAROLINA MOM View Post
I have the utmost respect for Golden Breeders, their programs, their ethics. One of the things I really like too along with the Breeding practices, is the fact that they will take their puppies/dogs back at anytime during the lifetime of that dog for any reason.

People who purchase a pup from a BYB or a puppy mill, often find themselves having a dog that is not healthy with serious medical problems such as hip displaysia, or heart problems, or with behavioral problems. The owners do not have a contract with the individual they purchased the dog from and that person will not take the dog back often times. That's where the Rescues come in, these dogs are either surrendered to the Rescue Groups or the groups pull them from shelters when the owners take them there because they are unable to pay for the required medical care. The Rescues take care of their medical needs, get them healthy, adopt them into homes, and have an Adoption Contract which states the dog is to be returned to the Rescue Group in the event the owner can no longer care for the dog and it is for the lifetime of the dog.

However, if all pups that are being bred, were being done so by Professional Breeders, the need for Rescues wouldn't exist.
Rather than fund a "rescue" for loving dog owners to give up their canine family members to almost against their will due to a large medical bill they can't pay, it would seem to me that a more humane solution for dog and owner would be a charitable fund that would be willing to assist low-income pet owners who could demonstrate a) a financial need and b) a dog certified to need expensive care. That way, the dog could stay with it's family, and the family could keep it's dog. It'd also ultimately be cheaper than a rescue paying first to fix the medical problem(s), second to feed and house the dog, and third to find a new owner.

To me, this solution seems obvious. Maybe legitimately no one has thought of it. I can't help but wonder if some classism might be in play, though- i.e. "Oh, they can't afford that expensive surgery? Take their dog and give it someone who can, even though it's actually the rescue and not the new owner who would be paying for the surgery". I just think the most compassionate thing for the owner and the dog would be to help pay for the surgery and keep the dog with his human family versus rehousing the dog- if compassion is more important and the good of the people and the animals are more important to people than moving dogs from low-income to high-income homes for prejudicial reasons (And I hope that compassion is the overriding concern rather than a narrow definition of what a dog owner should be that some have).
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 03:43 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 827
Thanks: 1,216
Thanked 1,296 Times in 494 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldensGirl View Post
While we're dreaming about perfect breeding practices, I would love to see more attention paid to breeding dogs that will be companions for us "pet people," who are actually in the majority. Too often we get the puppies that don't make the cut as show dogs and I suspect that the structure of competitions tends to move the breed towards athletic, high-energy dogs who may not be ideal for family life in an average home. That may contribute to the number of Goldens who end up in rescues or shelters.
I think that a majority of hobby breeders are very concerned with temperament. Every show dog I personally know is first and foremost a pet in the home. Yes, show dogs do have a more successful career if they have a showy personality. This however does not mean flighty, fidgety, or unsuitable to be a house dog. It means a good on/off switch.
To see this stand ring side at a large show you will see lots of dogs stand patiently for quite a long time, in close proximity. Then when they go in they flip the switch and it is show time. Athletic, high energy, or showy attitude means nothing if a dog can not gait properly, stack and stand for thorough examination or free stack. This all seems easy until you try it.

I know not every breeder crosses over to do conformation and something else like obedience but my girl is a great example. She was shown at 7.5 months old to an AKC group 1 puppy and then we literally ran over to the evaluator and passed our CGC the same day. As I type this now she is 12 months and is chilling out while laying on my feet.

There are always different activity levels in a litter and some lines do run "hotter" than others. I know of breeders who specialize in high energy working goldens in obiedience, field, or agility. These breeders are very careful of who they place their dogs with, so the energy level of the dog is appropriately matched to an owner that wants and can handle these highly driven dogs.

I really do think I boils down to telling a breeder what you are looking for in a pet and find a breeder that you trust.
__________________
Laura and the Anasazi Girls
Jinx, Tilt and Cozy
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to LJack For This Useful Post:
Ljilly28 (11-24-2012), problemcat (04-17-2013)
  #66 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 03:55 PM
Selli-Belle's Avatar
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 1,915
Images: 9
Thanks: 1,815
Thanked 1,105 Times in 593 Posts
I don't think it is that hard to find a well-bred Golden puppy. It takes an effort, yes, but that is a good thing. It makes it less of an impulse thing and more a commitment. If people are unwilling to make the effort to do some research to find a well bred puppy, having more reputable breeders is not going to make their getting a puppy easier.

Education of the public is the rule, and not simply telling them how to find a good breeder, but hammering it in their head that puppies are A LOT of work and that dogs are a commitment for 15 years if you are lucky. I think one of the reasons that there is less of an unwanted dog problem in Europe is that people in Europe do not get dogs until they have the time and means to get a dog. The see having a dog as more of a privilege than a right.

If the predominant message given to the general public about dogs makes people think and maybe not get a dog, if it helps end the culture of disposable dogs, if getting a dog seems really hard, then we are going in the right direction regardless of how many reputable breeders there are.
__________________
Carolyn (A.K.A. Aunt Care) and

Creekwood Tanglefoot Selchie CD, RN, AX, AXJ, CGC, CCA, (A.K.A. Selli-Belle) Golden

Valentine Byrd McDuff (A.K.A. Duffy) Golden/Sheltie

Tanglefoot Autumn Dexter CGC (My Heart Dog at the Bridge) Golden
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
The Following User Says Thank You to Selli-Belle For This Useful Post:
hvgoldens4 (11-24-2012)
  #67 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 04:43 PM
SheetsSM's Avatar
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Korea
Posts: 1,872
Thanks: 1,531
Thanked 1,698 Times in 813 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden999 View Post
Rather than fund a "rescue" for loving dog owners to give up their canine family members to almost against their will due to a large medical bill they can't pay, it would seem to me that a more humane solution for dog and owner would be a charitable fund that would be willing to assist low-income pet owners who could demonstrate a) a financial need and b) a dog certified to need expensive care. That way, the dog could stay with it's family, and the family could keep it's dog. It'd also ultimately be cheaper than a rescue paying first to fix the medical problem(s), second to feed and house the dog, and third to find a new owner.

To me, this solution seems obvious. Maybe legitimately no one has thought of it. I can't help but wonder if some classism might be in play, though- i.e. "Oh, they can't afford that expensive surgery? Take their dog and give it someone who can, even though it's actually the rescue and not the new owner who would be paying for the surgery". I just think the most compassionate thing for the owner and the dog would be to help pay for the surgery and keep the dog with his human family versus rehousing the dog- if compassion is more important and the good of the people and the animals are more important to people than moving dogs from low-income to high-income homes for prejudicial reasons (And I hope that compassion is the overriding concern rather than a narrow definition of what a dog owner should be that some have).
I am familiar with non-profits like the Pet Food Pantry in Oklahoma City that works with low income seniors, veterans & the homeless to help augment the care of these folks' pets & then there is Dirks Fund in MO that paid for eye surgery for a golden that was found & returned the dog to the family at no cost, even took care of the vetting for that golden for the rest of his life, so your concept isn't a new one but it is one that's dependent on generous donors.

But what about the dogs where the owners are moving and don't want to take the dog, or can't stand to see their dog growing old, or can't believe the little ball of fluff grew up into a 70lb dog that jumps on them & digs the yard up cause it was never trained, or had a litter of pups that turned out to be blind with epilepsy & they couldn't sell them...the list goes on, but the reasons people surrender are more than just for medical costs & since the breeders are nowhere to be found, rescues exist.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to SheetsSM For This Useful Post:
Bentleysmom (11-24-2012), CAROLINA MOM (11-24-2012), cubbysan (11-24-2012), DanaRuns (11-24-2012), LJack (11-24-2012), Mayve (11-24-2012), Tennyson (11-24-2012)
  #68 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 05:20 PM
GoldensGirl's Avatar
Super Moderator

 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Between D.C. and Baltimore
Posts: 6,731
Thanks: 10,106
Thanked 6,759 Times in 3,367 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden999 View Post
Rather than fund a "rescue" for loving dog owners to give up their canine family members to almost against their will due to a large medical bill they can't pay, it would seem to me that a more humane solution for dog and owner would be a charitable fund that would be willing to assist low-income pet owners who could demonstrate a) a financial need and b) a dog certified to need expensive care. That way, the dog could stay with it's family, and the family could keep it's dog...
The Forum has a sticky about just such organizations: http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/...sues-vets.html (Grants and Financial Aid... For Medical Issues & Vets). This is off topic, but important information.
__________________
Lucy, owned by Joker and Sunny, who remember Charlie with me
http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/...oker-13-a.html
http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/...years-old.html

Last edited by GoldensGirl; 11-24-2012 at 05:37 PM.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GoldensGirl For This Useful Post:
cubbysan (11-24-2012), Dallas Gold (11-24-2012), Golden999 (11-24-2012)
  #69 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 05:29 PM
Dallas Gold's Avatar
Toby & Yogi's Mom
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 20,823
Images: 13
Thanks: 15,684
Thanked 18,328 Times in 8,246 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golden999 View Post
Rather than fund a "rescue" for loving dog owners to give up their canine family members to almost against their will due to a large medical bill they can't pay, it would seem to me that a more humane solution for dog and owner would be a charitable fund that would be willing to assist low-income pet owners who could demonstrate a) a financial need and b) a dog certified to need expensive care. That way, the dog could stay with it's family, and the family could keep it's dog. It'd also ultimately be cheaper than a rescue paying first to fix the medical problem(s), second to feed and house the dog, and third to find a new owner.

To me, this solution seems obvious. Maybe legitimately no one has thought of it. I can't help but wonder if some classism might be in play, though- i.e. "Oh, they can't afford that expensive surgery? Take their dog and give it someone who can, even though it's actually the rescue and not the new owner who would be paying for the surgery". I just think the most compassionate thing for the owner and the dog would be to help pay for the surgery and keep the dog with his human family versus rehousing the dog- if compassion is more important and the good of the people and the animals are more important to people than moving dogs from low-income to high-income homes for prejudicial reasons (And I hope that compassion is the overriding concern rather than a narrow definition of what a dog owner should be that some have).

I think you need to spend some time volunteering for a rescue group in order to see just how they operate. Not everything is done with classism/elitism behind it and I can pretty well assure you that rescue volunteers are not thinking about rehoming these animals to higher income homes when they take in a dog. In fact the income of the owners releasing a dog isn't that big a factor. My Bridge Boy came from a home where the owner was a multi-millionaire physician who just didn't want to deal with his allergies and skin infections. The rescue took him and I can assure you his adoptive home (mine) is not a higher-income home.

I also believe we are off topic from the OP's questions.
__________________


Meet Yogi, CGC and CGCA, on his way to great things! http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/...tion-yogi.html
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
The Following User Says Thank You to Dallas Gold For This Useful Post:
kwhit (11-24-2012)
  #70 (permalink)  
Old 11-24-2012, 05:36 PM
GoldensGirl's Avatar
Super Moderator

 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Between D.C. and Baltimore
Posts: 6,731
Thanks: 10,106
Thanked 6,759 Times in 3,367 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dallas Gold View Post
...I also believe we are off topic from the OP's questions.
Definitely. Please keep to the topic of the thread, friends.
__________________
Lucy, owned by Joker and Sunny, who remember Charlie with me
http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/...oker-13-a.html
http://www.goldenretrieverforum.com/...years-old.html
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiTweet this Post!
The Following User Says Thank You to GoldensGirl For This Useful Post:
elly (11-24-2012)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:53 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
Golden Retriever Forum .com
PetGuide.com
Basset.net DobermanTalk.com GoldenRetrieverForum.com OurBeagleWorld.com
BoxerForums.com DogForums.com GoPitbull.com PoodleForum.com
BulldogBreeds.com FishForums.com HavaneseForum.com SpoiledMaltese.com
CatForum.com GermanShepherds.com Labradoodle-dogs.net YorkieForum.com
Chihuahua-People.com RetrieverBreeds.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65