Jump to content
BC Boards

Commercial Breeders


chene
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm curious as to what peoples' opinions are on the concept alone of a "commercial" border collie breeder. Say, someone who was making money off their dogs but who you knew for a fact was doing everything else right. They bred for working ability, proved the dogs, didn't support AKC, and found good homes for all of the dogs (albeit probably not often working homes). The only difference would be that instead of only breeding when they wanted a dog from the pairing, they bred for the profit. Let's even say that they usually did keep a dog just to see what the quality of the litter was like. They never had more litters on the ground than they could handle (they had extra help for the litters, or only one at a time, or something like that).

Say all that was true. Would there be anything wrong with the breeder? If so, would it be more of a practical thing or an ethical thing? That is, would they actually be hurting the breed or the dogs, or would it just be that it felt wrong to breed just for profit?
I apologize if this has been gone over before, I just haven't seen a lot of comments about this situation in particular, although there have certainly been implications that someone breeding commercially is someone to stay away from (heck, it straight out says so in the looking-for-a-breeder info on this site). What I can't figure out is if that's generally believed because someone breeding commercially is typically doing other things wrong, or if there is an issue with the commercial breeding specifically. It's interesting because it is the kind of breeder that is seen as acceptable and of high quality with any other breed (obviously, because by now most breeds are just around to be companions, not for any practical purpose).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm curious as to what peoples' opinions are on the concept alone of a "commercial" border collie breeder. Say, someone who was making money off their dogs but who you knew for a fact was doing everything else right. They bred for working ability, proved the dogs, didn't support AKC, and found good homes for all of the dogs (albeit probably not often working homes). The only difference would be that instead of only breeding when they wanted a dog from the pairing, they bred for the profit. Let's even say that they usually did keep a dog just to see what the quality of the litter was like. They never had more litters on the ground than they could handle (they had extra help for the litters, or only one at a time, or something like that).

 

Say all that was true. Would there be anything wrong with the breeder? If so, would it be more of a practical thing or an ethical thing? That is, would they actually be hurting the breed or the dogs, or would it just be that it felt wrong to breed just for profit?.... What I can't figure out is if that's generally believed because someone breeding commercially is typically doing other things wrong, or if there is an issue with the commercial breeding specifically. It's interesting because it is the kind of breeder that is seen as acceptable and of high quality with any other breed (obviously, because by now most breeds are just around to be companions, not for any practical purpose).

 

 

Well, here's a thing I've seen. Whenever I've found a breeder's website where someone has 5 or 6 or 8 breeding bitches and they have a litter on the ground every month or two ... they are NOT "proving" their dogs. If a bitch has a litter every year, she's not spending a lot of time out working on the farm, and if they're not sending pups to working homes, well ... at some point, the quality of those litters is apt to slip. The reason being, if the pups aren't going out in the working world, how does the breeder know what they're producing? And if a bitch ain't out working, how is she proving herself and how does the breeder really know what sire would compliment her and produce the best working pups? Producing quantity is not the same as producing quality.

 

See, if someone wants to produce a good working dog, they breed dogs that work. You don't breed two random brown horses and produce a line of winning cutting horses and you don't breed two random Thoroughbreds and get a Kentucky Derby winner. At least not often. To produce and maintain good working lines requires careful thought and attention to the sire and dam, as well as the dogs in the pedigree behind both of them.

 

So, at least in anecdotal evidence as seen by me, the big, colorful websites with kennels full of bitches and multiple litters of pups a year just aren't pursuing the best in or for the Border Collie breed. It's not about properly caring for the pups or housing the bitches in clean, healthy conditions. It's about producing pups for the betterment and perpetuation of the breed. And breeding for money rarely keeps a focus on that. They just want pups on the ground and money in the bank.

 

I would not buy a dog from a "commercial" breeder for the simple fact that those people are rarely using their dogs on a trial field and odds are, they aren't running a farm where the dogs are an intrinsic part of the work force. Odds are, they're breeding names and papers, and actually "proving" the dogs comes a distant second.

 

My observation, is all. There may of course be people out there who are "commercial" breeders with 5 or 6 litters from their kennels every year, but I can't call them to mind at present.

 

My tuppence only! Everyone's mileage may vary. :)

 

~ Gloria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've seen, if a breeder is doing everything right, they have to do health stuff - testing, shots,worming, proper vet care of breeding stock - and they are socializing pups, vetting pups, screening homes carefully for pups.

 

They have to buy top quality breeding stock from time to time to avoid inbreeding, and for Border Collies, they have to grow out at least one pup from each litter to evaluate working ability.

 

Then there's mucking out, feeding, basic grooming and proper exercise for breeding stock. And probably they would need to have stock to work the dogs on, (and care for it) and be able to go places to work them on different stock. Maybe trialing, too.

 

I'm sure there's other expenses too. Kennel help, for one.

 

I don't see a lot of profit coming out of "Utopia Kennels." Unless they are selling pups at astronomical prices - which kinda narrows down potential homes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When someone is breeding with the bottom line - profit - as the single most important issue, then they are really no longer breeding with producing the best quality working dogs possible as the center of their breeding program.

 

In addition, when they are producing a lot of pups, as Gloria stated, they are not going to be putting most of them in homes where the results of their breeding choices (working ability and quality) are being proven. Most of them will likely be going to pet, performance, or other non-working homes. And that will prove absolutely nothing with regards to those breeding choices in terms of working ability and quality.

 

Plus, with greater numbers of adults and pups, can the breeder really be putting the time and attention into developing and evaluating the adults, or raising the pups, as should be done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting answers. Completely accurate, of course. Although the answer to my question seems to be more than they are very unlikely to be good breeders, rather than that they are bad breeders by definition. I am curious, though. Can a pup not be proven by keeping one and working with it? Do they have to have some go to working homes in order to feel that the litter has been properly proven?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mating two working dogs can produce a range of working characteristics in the pups.

 

The question is, how many of the pups need to be evaluated to determine if the mating was a good choice in terms of the resulting working abilities. Put another way, is one good working pup in an entire litter sufficient to consider the working bred litter (breeding choice) a success.

 

Of course the answers will affect how many working bred pups will be available for non-working homes.

 

 

 

Personally, I want our breeding choices (for our litters) to be good enough to produce more than one good working pup in the litter (preferably more than 50% of the litter). In order to evaluate this more than one pup needs to be trained.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not everything has to be done in house by the breeder.

 

A good breeder will follow the pups he produces to see how they turn out to inform his future breeding choices. He doesn't pocket the money and turn his back.

 

If you only have a small market in the working world then it makes sense to limit the number of pups you produce. If you have people all over the world wanting your dogs for work and / or trialling then you produce more if you have the set up to do so without losing quality. Reputation is everything.

 

Not all litters are an experiment; some are repeat matings that have previously produced a good proportion of good dogs.

 

And there may be a few litters in close succession at times because that's just the way it works out at the time. It might not be the norm.

 

And I'm willing to bet that the person whose livelihood depends on producing and training working dogs (and selling them on) can spot a likely good un from a very early age.

 

People have to eat, even full time farmers, and money isn't a dirty word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't find it a problem for a breeder to make a profit on their breeding program. I would be highly skeptical of a kennel that supported itself (e.g. the people made all or most of their living ) primarily on its breeding program. Most people who make a living tied to livestock herding with dogs and support their kennel via breeding in a way that's inline with the principles of maintaining the breed as a livestock herding dog necessarily have multiple revenue streams--the majority of which are also tied to maintaining the border collie as a working dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't find it a problem for a breeder to make a profit on their breeding program. I would be highly skeptical of a kennel that supported itself (e.g. the people made all or most of their living ) primarily on its breeding program. Most people who make a living tied to livestock herding with dogs and support their kennel via breeding in a way that's inline with the principles of maintaining the breed as a livestock herding dog necessarily have multiple revenue streams--the majority of which are also tied to maintaining the border collie as a working dog.

 

Well put.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breeding dogs which you intend to sell is a business. Therefore there NEEDS to be profit. So, the fact that someone does it and earns a living is not the same as the pejorative "they're doing it for the money" which implies some sort of intent which is counter-productive for the dogs.

 

I am a fifth generation child of the same family farm where dogs are not only essential, but they have been bred on-farm for as many generations. There are 26 dogs on this property presently - puppies, working and senior dogs. No dog is bred until it has worked at least two years - so all the females are at least 3.5/4 before their first litter - and they usually only have two.

 

My grandfather recently passed and the "dog-master" torch fell to my younger brother.

 

Sitting with him one night not long ago as he was poring over stock books and breeding records, over handler evaluations and vet notes, he said "every year we throw away $20,000 on puppies we don't use." Which is approximately 10-15 puppies. Puppies which are determined not to be of the right type for the work required of them are either euthanized or neutered and given to family friends or relatives. Thing is, the same amount of money is spent on a puppy that will provide ten years of work as one which will ultimately be euthanized or neutered and given away before it is 18 months old. The same medical costs, the same food costs, the same housing costs, etc. Except for rare cases of euthanization at birth (in the case of deformity or obvious disease) 10-15 puppies are taken care of each year without any benefit to the farm - either short or long term.

 

The thing was, when I checked into the possibility (which is how I ended up on this site, actually) of starting a subsidisary business of selling working dogs - I quickly realized it was probably not viable if we wanted to deal with the puppies the same way we do now. Not only do we not care about registrations and trials and what not, we don't care about color and conformation except that which might hinder performance.

 

And the puppies the "dog master" would be willing to part with would be the ones determined not to be "excellent" in terms of ability to work. Which means you would be selling to the pet market. Which is even nuttier about stuff like registration and titles and such like that.

 

I know of very few farmers with their own home-bred dogs that would part with a premium puppy to anyone BUT another farmer - which farmer could care less about trials and microchips and what not.

 

It's a proper conundrum.

 

Are there good commercial breeders of working dogs? Surely there must be - but I think people are right to be wary of such enterprises.

 

Long winded - sorry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to find another outlet for your unlucky unwanted dogs that doesn't involve killing them. Failed sheepdogs are common in rescue here and often snapped up by pet or sport people.

 

If the market doesn't exist create it. Make contacts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You shouldn't breed for profit.

 

If you're doing everything right (health tests, grooming, vet visits, etc) you shouldn't be able to make a profit. The only way I could see this working is if your dogs were wildly overpriced OR you had a very well-paying secondary job.

 

I agree with Sue. Once you stray from work, your quality lowers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You need to find another outlet for your unlucky unwanted dogs that doesn't involve killing them. Failed sheepdogs are common in rescue here and often snapped up by pet or sport people.

If the market doesn't exist create it. Make contacts.

Yes, I agree. Which is what led to the conversation.

 

But farmers - especially now - are a pragmatic lot. If it is useful, it may stay - if it is not useful, it may not stay.

 

If there were an easy anwser...

 

To be clear - VERY few are euthanized. Most are rehomed. There is no shortage of people who want a good dog as a pet/companion. The tricky part is making money at it, as was the point of the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that you will run into the same situation that we do with the dogs that don't make the cut, people don't get all excited about paying much for them simply because they know that they didn't make your cut, free, $150-$250, yeah you might be able to get that.

 

But it sure doesn't make it profitable and you still have to be wary, because of what made them undesirable for you and the work you were breeding them for may make them not such a great pet depending on who is wanting them.

 

We have held over dogs for upwards of a year that we knew were not going to be what we need or that we were not willing to represent and sell as a working dogs waiting for the right person to come along for them. 9 times out of 10, we are so relieved to find the right fit that we just give the dog away to them, dog was meant to be theirs, how do you charge for that?

 

And we don't want to burden rescue, we want to take care of what we produce, both good and bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Robin. I don't have a problem with a breeder that tries to avoid selling puppies at a loss (in other words, that "makes a profit from them") - even if they are breeding more than one or two litters per year - PROVIDED that they are seeking to better the breed (and that there is ample evidence that they are succeeding in doing so). Does this mean they have to train all their pups, or even a majority of them, personally? No - if they are skilled handlers and clinicians, and have the opportunity to see many of their pups work in clinics or trials, so that they have regular opportunities to assess the success of a breeding - I'm good with that. If they're deriving some profit from the sale of such pups, and if this represents a portion of their income (the rest coming from sale of livestock or fully trained dogs, from clinician's fees or lessons), then yes, you could call them "commercial" breeders. I'd run from "commercial" breeders who aren't bettering the breed. But you will find a handful of individuals who fall in the category I describe. I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush simply because they're all deriving some income from the sale of their pups; that's too limited a filter.

 

I don't find it a problem for a breeder to make a profit on their breeding program. I would be highly skeptical of a kennel that supported itself (e.g. the people made all or most of their living ) primarily on its breeding program. Most people who make a living tied to livestock herding with dogs and support their kennel via breeding in a way that's inline with the principles of maintaining the breed as a livestock herding dog necessarily have multiple revenue streams--the majority of which are also tied to maintaining the border collie as a working dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

] I don't have a problem with a breeder that tries to avoid selling puppies at a loss (in other words, that "makes a profit from them") - even if they are breeding more than one or two litters per year - PROVIDED that they are seeking to better the breed (and that there is ample evidence that they are succeeding in doing so). Does this mean they have to train all their pups, or even a majority of them, personally? No - if they are skilled handlers and clinicians, and have the opportunity to see many of their pups work in clinics or trials, so that they have regular opportunities to assess the success of a breeding - I'm good with that.

 

 

This. I don't expect a breeder to train all their pups or put them all on livestock, or to actively trial every dog they own. Anybody with a farm or business to run can't often make that pencil out.

 

What I squint at is a premise suggested in the original post: that pups out of these hypothetical litters were sold "not often to working homes." In my opinion, if a breeder is putting out, say, 4 or 5 litters a year and only once in a great while does a pup go to a working or trialing home, how would they know what they're turning out? I can't imagine such a breeder keeping and bringing up a pup from 4 or 5 litters a year, and if they only keep 1 pup from each sire/dam cross, but repeat that cross several times to sell puppies, that's a very narrow sampling of what their breeding program produces.

 

I know a number of people with stud dogs who've sired scads of litters, but they see those pups grow up and either show their quality on the trial field or prove their worth on the ranch or farm. As I said in my earlier post, there is no really good way to breed multiple litters a year while only sending a very few to working situations, and still have any clear idea of what that breeding program is turning out.

 

There are people out there who try. I have seen some fancy websites who happily brag about how their bloodline includes names like Dewi Tweed or Aled Owen's Roy or whatever, but that's just paper. It means nothing if the breeder's bitches are kept primarily as brood stock and most of the pups end up as pet or sport dogs.

 

So, it's not the "commercial" aspect so much that troubles me. Commercial just means someone has a business and intends to make money at it. Every farmer or rancher wants to do that! What curls my hair is when the money aspect overtakes and overlooks the importance of emphasizing the true working quality of the breed. If this hypothetical breeder is not selling to primarily working/trialing homes, if they're churning out multiple litters a year but not working or trialing their breeding dogs on a regular basis, then they might as well be breeding Basset hounds as border collies.

 

That's my tuppence, once again. :)

 

~ Gloria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also agree with Robin. A responsible breeder is not going to get rich or even make a living off of selling pups, but I don't think you can on one hand say that you want a well bred dog but on the other say that the breeder shouldn't make a profit. There is quite a bit of work, effort and education that goes into creating solid dogs and it starts years before the first litter is bred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are all largely on the same page here - that "profit" should not be more important than breeding quality working prospects; that you can't prove your matings unless sufficient offspring are raised, trained, and proven on livestock (farms, ranches, trials); and that there's nothing wrong with making reasonable money off a litter (or litters) if all goes well (and oftentimes, even the best breeders are really not making much money off the puppies they do produce, but rather that breeding is part of a total program of farming/ranching, trialing, training, clinics, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with Robin. I don't have a problem with a breeder that tries to avoid selling puppies at a loss (in other words, that "makes a profit from them") - even if they are breeding more than one or two litters per year - PROVIDED that they are seeking to better the breed (and that there is ample evidence that they are succeeding in doing so). Does this mean they have to train all their pups, or even a majority of them, personally? No - if they are skilled handlers and clinicians, and have the opportunity to see many of their pups work in clinics or trials, so that they have regular opportunities to assess the success of a breeding - I'm good with that. If they're deriving some profit from the sale of such pups, and if this represents a portion of their income (the rest coming from sale of livestock or fully trained dogs, from clinician's fees or lessons), then yes, you could call them "commercial" breeders. I'd run from "commercial" breeders who aren't bettering the breed. But you will find a handful of individuals who fall in the category I describe. I wouldn't tar them all with the same brush simply because they're all deriving some income from the sale of their pups; that's too limited a filter.

 

 

I've been following the web site of such a breeder for years now and decided that would be my first port of call if I should ever depart from my desire to rescue.

 

There have been several litters this year but most go to working homes as far as I know. I don't know whether this year is typical because litters don't often appear on the site because they are spoken for.

 

Some are sold to sport homes but not many at all. We had an entry of around 2000 dogs at our recent show and I spotted less than 10 from that kennel when processing the entries, and that in the area where they are bred. Sport people who buy them tend to be the discerning sort who are fairly knowledgeable about working dogs and know exactly what they want. I hope it stays that way.

 

Some are sold to active pet homes but only after a thorough grilling. Anyone wanting a pet who finds their way there would likely know what they were getting into. These are not buy on impulse farm gate pups.

 

I see from the web site (but you have to ferret around to find it) that one even went to a show breeder to improve their lines. That isn't such a heinous crime here and at least the show breeder should be given some credit for recognising the failings of the show BC.

 

No mention of breeding for anything but work and temperament. No mention of price.

 

I'm currently visiting and revisiting the site wondering whether to try and make a case to my non dog loving husband so I can enquire about a litter they have now. Sounds just what I want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Lynn said it much better than I did, above a few posts. Thanks, Lynn! There are exceptions to the rule.

 

I think we are all largely on the same page here - that "profit" should not be more important than breeding quality working prospects; that you can't prove your matings unless sufficient offspring are raised, trained, and proven on livestock (farms, ranches, trials); and that there's nothing wrong with making reasonable money off a litter (or litters) if all goes well (and oftentimes, even the best breeders are really not making much money off the puppies they do produce, but rather that breeding is part of a total program of farming/ranching, trialing, training, clinics, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that flusters me is the breeders I see with sometimes up to 5 litters on the ground at a time. I seriously saw one breeder recently that is well known in the sports arena here with 5 litters at once. Another I see dogs from at agility trials all the time breeds bitches back to back to back. 6 or 7 times is perfectly normal.

 

I don't get it at all. And most these breeders don't DO anything with their own dogs other than breed them (or so it seems? I can't find anything). I'd almost get it if they were out there being trialled in something. But they seem to exist just for breeding? And some reason sports people scoop them up like crazy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that flusters me is the breeders I see with sometimes up to 5 litters on the ground at a time. I seriously saw one breeder recently that is well known in the sports arena here with 5 litters at once. Another I see dogs from at agility trials all the time breeds bitches back to back to back. 6 or 7 times is perfectly normal.

 

I don't get it at all. And most these breeders don't DO anything with their own dogs other than breed them (or so it seems? I can't find anything). I'd almost get it if they were out there being trialled in something. But they seem to exist just for breeding? And some reason sports people scoop them up like crazy.

 

 

Bingo. :ph34r: That's where "commercial breeder" becomes "puppy mill." THOSE people don't give a flip about the breed or the betterment of it. In fact, the breed they choose is almost immaterial because it has nothing to do with the quality of the dogs, and everything to do with the pocketbook.

 

And yes, I say puppy mill, because not all puppy mills are monstrous places with wire floors and dog feces all over. Sometimes a "puppy mill" is just a breeder with neat, tidy kennels ... whose 6 or 7 bitches are kept perennially in pup and never, ever used for work or anything else. I think I'll stop before I stray into another rant ... :P

 

~ Gloria

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I have a formal veterinary nursing background. I would say that if they are making a profit, they are NOT "doing everything right", or breeding responsibly. Period. Because if a breeder is doing it right, the cost will be such that they cannot make much profit. They do it for love of the breed.

 

They should be health testing parents. In border collies, the minimum is testing for eyes and hips. Great breeders add ears too. This all costs money. (It is not enough to have a breeder "guarantee" health. The dogs need to be medically tested before breeding, to reduce disease that is detrimental to the puppies' working abilities, quality of life, and length of life. My 12 year old is chasing frisbees and balls like a 2 year old, and my vet doesn't believe he is 12!)

 

They should be involving a veterinary staff in the process from breeding to weaning. That costs too.

 

The should be processing as much of the paperwork for pedigree as they can prior to adopting dogs out. They should be microchipping before placing in homes. That costs.

 

The really good breeders I have met (and I have met a lot, through my own dogs and through working in the vet field) do not make a profit.

 

Also... and most importantly... it is very hard on a female dog to be bred yearly or twice yearly. It's cruel. People who aren't concerned with profit do not do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lichen, you seem very young an idealistic. In many ways, that's a good thing. I would suggest you try to remain objective and open minded. Life's not quite as black and white as your average Border Collie.

 

Vets do not need to be involved in every single step of breeding dogs. Yes, you need pre breeding health checks. IMO, that means hips (PennHIP is ideal), eyes (CEA and CERF), hearing. As we learn more, certain genetic tests will also become standard practice (TNS, IGS, etc). Yes, the sire and dam need regular checkups and general wellness care to make sure they are fit for breeding. All pups should have an exam before being sold. However, for your knowledgeable breeder, no hand holding is needed "from breeding to weaning."

 

I keep seeing you state that you have a healthy dog because the breeder did a lot of research and health tested. That is true, in part. The other part was sheer luck. No matter how much research you do or how carefully you plan, you can produce pups with a wide variety of health problems. All that health testing and research just stack the odds in your favor.

 

Please do some real research on the health effects of having pups vs not having pups every heat cycle. Once again, it's not as black and white as you make it out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that if they are making a profit, they are NOT "doing everything right", or breeding responsibly. Period.

So why can't those who breed great dogs (healthy and great working abilities) be rewarded monetarily (make a profit) for their efforts and knowledge without being labeled "bad breeders"?

 

It's not if they make a profit or not that determines good vs bad breeders; it's their breeding goals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...