To Spay or Not (shes 5 years old now)

[media310]

I have been going back and forth as to whether or not I want to put more GSP out into the world. Char is papered, great on birds, wonderful family dog and a full on athlete.. Plus she has a very classic GSP look.

So lately I have been thinking of instead of breading her, having her spayed and then adopting another dog.

However I do think her lineage would be a keeper and do well for generations to come.

Questions :

*If I DO DECIDE to spay her, when should this happen. She has been bleeding since the 26th of Feb this heat cycle. She is almost 5 1/2 years old
*Does anyone keep there dogs unspayed if they are not breeding?
*Are there enough people looking for pups that these could find good homes? My trainer in Idaho is really pushing for me to breed her as he wants a dog, and has a bunch of homes looking for such a dog.

Go easy, im new to this..

[cjhills]

I am assuming some things. First, she probably has no health tests. Second that this is her first litter. Do you have a suitable stud dog. it is to late to get hip x-rays now, for this heat. She will likely be standing in about eight to ten days. There are a lot of nice dogs out there for breeding. I would question the trainer about his thinking. What does your trainer see in her which makes him want a puppy. If it is a chance for him to make a buck that is probably not the right reason.
Older females that have not been bred sometimes have breeding, whelping and pup raising issues. You could lose your female if things go wrong. What do you do if you have two or three that do not sell. Do you have a way to deal with 3 or 4 month old puppies. Personally I would have her spayed after this heat period and forget it. The risk is not worth it. Just a few things to think about.
NO doubt if you sell the puppies cheap enough you can sell them. Just be aware that you may have to take one back if it ends up in a bad situation and some will likely end up in a rescue.
This being said it is your choice. If you think it's right go for it........................Cj

[ezzy333]

She is the right age if you want to spay her. personally I have never spayed a dog unless there was a health issue in progress. My concern is there occasionally can be minor problems from the surgery itself. I think it is whatever you want to do at this time.

Ezzy

[polmaise]

Go easy, im new to this..

What?
Breeding or deciding ?

[deseeker]

If you decide to spay her--wait until about a month AFTER her heat cycle--Don't spay during her heat cycle. JMO The vets on here should be able to give you a better idea of when to spay if you decide to. Myself--I have had 10 females, I have spayed 2 of the 10(of the 2 spayed, both were 7 years old when I had them spayed).

[cjhills]

She is the right age if you want to spay her. personally I have never spayed a dog unless there was a health issue in progress. My concern is there occasionally can be minor problems from the surgery itself. I think it is whatever you want to do at this time.

Ezzy

The problems that a older unsprayed female have far outweigh the small chance of issues with the surgery. Pyometra is fairly common in unsprayed females which are not bred and is generally fatal, if not treated. Usually part of the treatment is spaying. Unwanted and false pregnancies are major issues. Mammary cancer is very common in unsprayed older females and is usually fatal. besides the heat periods themselves are a pain in the butt especially on the road in hunting seasons.
I see no reason not to spay a female that is not used for breeding preferably before her first heat. But it is to late for that. we spay all our breeding females at 8 to nine years or earlier................CJ

[ezzy333]

She is the right age if you want to spay her. personally I have never spayed a dog unless there was a health issue in progress. My concern is there occasionally can be minor problems from the surgery itself. I think it is whatever you want to do at this time.

Ezzy

The problems that a older unsprayed female have far outweigh the small chance of issues with the surgery. Pyometra is fairly common in unsprayed females which are not bred and is generally fatal, if not treated. Usually part of the treatment is spaying. Unwanted and false pregnancies are major issues. Mammary cancer is very common in unsprayed older females and is usually fatal. besides the heat periods themselves are a pain in the butt especially on the road in hunting seasons.
I see no reason not to spay a female that is not used for breeding preferably before her first heat. But it is to late for that. we spay all our breeding females at 8 to nine years or earlier................CJ

I am not in a position to make the decision for someone else though I did try to answer their questions. They did not ask if they should but rather is now a good time if they decide to. In my mind it isn't if you or I think she should be spayed since it is their dog.

Ezzy

[RayGubernat]

Media -

If your trainer is pushing, offer them a deal. They take the dog, they breed the dog to whomever they choose, they are responsible for any stud fees they whelp the litter and all you want out of it is one pup, the first pick. Oh yeah...they are responsible for any vet bills due to the pregnancy and any services to the pups, like shots, worming and tail docking.

You will find out very quickly how serious they are.

If your dog is 5 1/2 and has never been bred, there may be a small increased risk of complications during the pregnancy.

Having a litter of pups is a gigantic PIA and your life is on hold for about one week prior to whelping and about six weeks after. And it ain't cheap, even if everything goes great.

I had two dogs spayed...one was four and the other was six. No problems whatever. I lost two females to pyometra over the years. I also had one develop mammary cancer at about 7. They cut it out and she lived until she was 11 and died of an apparent heart attack.

RayG

[cjhills]

She is the right age if you want to spay her. personally I have never spayed a dog unless there was a health issue in progress. My concern is there occasionally can be minor problems from the surgery itself. I think it is whatever you want to do at this time.

Ezzy

The problems that a older unsprayed female have far outweigh the small chance of issues with the surgery. Pyometra is fairly common in unsprayed females which are not bred and is generally fatal, if not treated. Usually part of the treatment is spaying. Unwanted and false pregnancies are major issues. Mammary cancer is very common in unsprayed older females and is usually fatal. besides the heat periods themselves are a pain in the butt especially on the road in hunting seasons.
I see no reason not to spay a female that is not used for breeding preferably before her first heat. But it is to late for that. we spay all our breeding females at 8 to nine years or earlier................CJ

I am not in a position to make the decision for someone else though I did try to answer their questions. They did not ask if they should but rather is now a good time if they decide to. In my mind it isn't if you or I think she should be spayed since it is their dog.

Ezzy

Sorry Ezzy. I Guess I misunderstood the title of the post. Thank you for pointing out my error.
I Do not believe I made a decision, just explained some problems connected with not spaying.
Thanks again Ezzy. You get my day started right. .......Cj

[Timewise65]

The good quality breeders usually have hips certified and other health certifications prior to breeding, anything less could pass on defects to future generations. The theory here is to stop as many of the avoidable problems as possible within the breed. Without these I would advise you not to breed.

Secondarily, but somewhat related you have to ask yourself if breeding this dog will enhance or improve the breed. In other words is this dog outstanding in many ways, e.g. Field Titles, or other performance titles, or Conformation titles, Health Certifications, etc. In general the good breeders will only breed dogs that are proven to be stand outs of the breed, hoping to "improve the overall nature of the breed". Wouldn't it be wonderful if all breeders carefully followed this standard....!

I personally have had to dogs that I would have liked to breed, as both were 'top dogs'! But when I researched this and read some of the literature on breeding from AKC and other sources, I soon realized that breeding is a complicated process if you want to do it ethically for the long term improvement of the breed. And that to me, is something we all should really hope for in our breeders....of course, that is just me!

[cjhills]

The good quality breeders usually have hips certified and other health certifications prior to breeding, anything less could pass on defects to future generations. The theory here is to stop as many of the avoidable problems as possible within the breed. Without these I would advise you not to breed.

Secondarily, but somewhat related you have to ask yourself if breeding this dog will enhance or improve the breed. In other words is this dog outstanding in many ways, e.g. Field Titles, or other performance titles, or Conformation titles, Health Certifications, etc. In general the good breeders will only breed dogs that are proven to be stand outs of the breed, hoping to "improve the overall nature of the breed". Wouldn't it be wonderful if all breeders carefully followed this standard....!

I personally have had to dogs that I would have liked to breed, as both were 'top dogs'! But when I researched this and read some of the literature on breeding from AKC and other sources, I soon realized that breeding is a complicated process if you want to do it ethically for the long term improvement of the breed. And that to me, is something we all should really hope for in our breeders....of course, that is just me!

This would have been my answer a few years back when I knew a every thing about breeding.
Now that I have found out how it is in the real world, I am not so sure.
Ethics are a personal thing and mine may not be yours.
You will have very little chance of " improving the overall nature of the breed"
Some times you can get the best puppy you ever bred and the worst in the same litter
The health testing is very important and I am quite sure is improving some health issues. Titles probably have very little to do with improving the breed. What one man calls improving another man calls ruining. When you breed for a certain trait chances are you lose something else. The prepotant dog is a myth and genetically impossible. Most dogs do not produce better than themselves and for sure not a whole litter.
We are very critical of our puppies. We always try to improve with each breeding. We will not have a long term affect on the breed and neither will the OP. so again it is your choice..........................Cj

[Grange]

I have not had good experiences with spaying females that have been through multiple heat cycles. Below is two quick examples of my experience. I have and know several dogs that were spayed while they were young and prior to their first heat cycle and I can't say I've seen any issues.

I had my setter spayed about a year ago when she was 6 years old when she got pyometra after I bred her. While I really didn't have a choice about the spaying as she would have died without being spayed, I am not happy with how it affected her. From her eating habits to her independence to her coat she has changed. Prior to spaying she was basically a self feeder and now I can't leave food down or she'll eat it. When running and training she still has her run and most of her range, but she is checking in more than she used to. I really don't like fat dogs and it has been difficult to keep the weight off her. She is only getting about half the amount of food that she used to get. She currently looks like a cotton ball because her hair is longer and extremely frizzy, which never happened before being spayed.

We had a Chessie growing up that was spayed at 3 years old when we found out she had hip dysplasia. This dog was a very energetic and fit dog before the spay and afterwards she got fat despite not eating much and lost most of her energy.

[ezzy333]

I have not had good experiences with spaying females that have been through multiple heat cycles. Below is two quick examples of my experience. I have and know several dogs that were spayed while they were young and prior to their first heat cycle and I can't say I've seen any issues.

I had my setter spayed about a year ago when she was 6 years old when she got pyometra after I bred her. While I really didn't have a choice about the spaying as she would have died without being spayed, I am not happy with how it affected her. From her eating habits to her independence to her coat she has changed. Prior to spaying she was basically a self feeder and now I can't leave food down or she'll eat it. When running and training she still has her run and most of her range, but she is checking in more than she used to. I really don't like fat dogs and it has been difficult to keep the weight off her. She is only getting about half the amount of food that she used to get. She currently looks like a cotton ball because her hair is longer and extremely frizzy, which never happened before being spayed.

We had a Chessie growing up that was spayed at 3 years old when we found out she had hip dysplasia. This dog was a very energetic and fit dog before the spay and afterwards she got fat despite not eating much and lost most of her energy.

You are forgetting at 3 years old she matured.

[Grange]

I have not had good experiences with spaying females that have been through multiple heat cycles. Below is two quick examples of my experience. I have and know several dogs that were spayed while they were young and prior to their first heat cycle and I can't say I've seen any issues.

I had my setter spayed about a year ago when she was 6 years old when she got pyometra after I bred her. While I really didn't have a choice about the spaying as she would have died without being spayed, I am not happy with how it affected her. From her eating habits to her independence to her coat she has changed. Prior to spaying she was basically a self feeder and now I can't leave food down or she'll eat it. When running and training she still has her run and most of her range, but she is checking in more than she used to. I really don't like fat dogs and it has been difficult to keep the weight off her. She is only getting about half the amount of food that she used to get. She currently looks like a cotton ball because her hair is longer and extremely frizzy, which never happened before being spayed.

We had a Chessie growing up that was spayed at 3 years old when we found out she had hip dysplasia. This dog was a very energetic and fit dog before the spay and afterwards she got fat despite not eating much and lost most of her energy.

You are forgetting at 3 years old she matured.

No I'm not. There is no way you can attribute the changes she went through to maturation.

[Timewise65]

The good quality breeders usually have hips certified and other health certifications prior to breeding, anything less could pass on defects to future generations. The theory here is to stop as many of the avoidable problems as possible within the breed. Without these I would advise you not to breed.

Secondarily, but somewhat related you have to ask yourself if breeding this dog will enhance or improve the breed. In other words is this dog outstanding in many ways, e.g. Field Titles, or other performance titles, or Conformation titles, Health Certifications, etc. In general the good breeders will only breed dogs that are proven to be stand outs of the breed, hoping to "improve the overall nature of the breed". Wouldn't it be wonderful if all breeders carefully followed this standard....!

I personally have had to dogs that I would have liked to breed, as both were 'top dogs'! But when I researched this and read some of the literature on breeding from AKC and other sources, I soon realized that breeding is a complicated process if you want to do it ethically for the long term improvement of the breed. And that to me, is something we all should really hope for in our breeders....of course, that is just me!

This would have been my answer a few years back when I knew a every thing about breeding.
Now that I have found out how it is in the real world, I am not so sure.
Ethics are a personal thing and mine may not be yours.
You will have very little chance of " improving the overall nature of the breed"
Some times you can get the best puppy you ever bred and the worst in the same litter
The health testing is very important and I am quite sure is improving some health issues. Titles probably have very little to do with improving the breed. What one man calls improving another man calls ruining. When you breed for a certain trait chances are you lose something else. The prepotant dog is a myth and genetically impossible. Most dogs do not produce better than themselves and for sure not a whole litter.
We are very critical of our puppies. We always try to improve with each breeding. We will not have a long term affect on the breed and neither will the OP. so again it is your choice..........................Cj

Well I think I understand what you are saying, but you have to add a lot of 'rationalizing' to make your points. e.g. "Now that I have found out how it is in the real world" As I mentioned breeder ethics are readily available from AKC and other similar organizations....so some breeders follow ethical breeding practices, some don't, but it is not a "personal thing", it is a choice they make either because they don't know better, don't care, or just choose to ignore!

Your comment about selective breeding and improving the breed...primarily I think about passing on health issues that are based in heredity. Good breed traits are, over the long-run, improved by good breeding practices and just because it does not always work or that not all the dogs in a litter will be great dogs, does not say the practice is not in the best interest of the breed and those of us that want top dogs. Again, the comments about "You will have little chance" or "Titles have very little to do..." are rationalizations to try and substantiate your comments, but are neither based in good breeding facts, the science of genetics, or pure mathematical statistics.....good breeding does in fact improve the likelihood of better dogs as far as health and breed characteristics and over the long run will improve the breed!

[cjhills]

Timewise:
Do you really believe that the OP breeding his dog or not breeding his dog will have any affect on the Gsp breed in the long term.
Generalization is exactly what is important in the dog breeding world. The real standout dogs are probably not going to reproduce themselves.
If you breed a dog based on it's title you are likely to overlook undesirable characteristics and possibly do more long term harm than good. Titled dogs specialize and that is not necessarily good for the breeds in general. Is it unethical to breed a dog who is titled if he is a couple inches taller than the breed standard or has yellow eyes(gsp) and any number of other breed standard issues. Remember breed standards are only what a few people decided were what a dog should be. Are the people who disagree unethical?
There is no way you can breed two individuals without bringing in some things you would rather not have.
Health testing likely improves the issues that the tests are for. Our OFAs have improved over several generations of testing. is it because of the testing? Who knows? Maybe we are better at selecting individuals whose are less likely to have bad hips. I know many breeders who produce very good dogs who do not believe in hip X-rays. Do you really believe hip x-rays guarantee good hips on the puppies. Dogs regress toward the mean. This is how it is and ethics are your personal beliefs.
I have done this for a long time and have seen many breedings between two super dogs that produced genetic surprises.
One thing you are right about is that the good breeders are" hoping to improve the nature of the breed". The key words there Are "hoping" and ' "Improving".................Cj
the breeder ethics for AKC and GSPCA, with which I am familiar, and other breed clubs have nothing to do with improving the breed, with the possible exception of health tests.

[Timewise65]

Timewise:
Do you really believe that the OP breeding his dog or not breeding his dog will have any affect on the Gsp breed in the long term.
Generalization is exactly what is important in the dog breeding world. The real standout dogs are probably not going to reproduce themselves.
If you breed a dog based on it's title you are likely to overlook undesirable characteristics and possibly do more long term harm than good. Titled dogs specialize and that is not necessarily good for the breeds in general. Is it unethical to breed a dog who is titled if he is a couple inches taller than the breed standard or has yellow eyes(gsp) and any number of other breed standard issues. Remember breed standards are only what a few people decided were what a dog should be. Are the people who disagree unethical?
There is no way you can breed two individuals without bringing in some things you would rather not have.
Health testing likely improves the issues that the tests are for. Our OFAs have improved over several generations of testing. is it because of the testing? Who knows? Maybe we are better at selecting individuals whose are less likely to have bad hips. I know many breeders who produce very good dogs who do not believe in hip X-rays. Do you really believe hip x-rays guarantee good hips on the puppies. Dogs regress toward the mean. This is how it is and ethics are your personal beliefs.
I have done this for a long time and have seen many breedings between two super dogs that produced genetic surprises.
One thing you are right about is that the good breeders are" hoping to improve the nature of the breed". The key words there Are "hoping" and ' "Improving".................Cj
the breeder ethics for AKC and GSPCA, with which I am familiar, and other breed clubs have nothing to do with improving the breed, with the possible exception of health tests.

I don't even know where to start here.....totally illogical comments! A very long post trying to rationalize why good breeding practices need not be followed our important to the quality of the breeds! And then after this illogical rambling....you end up with the comment "with the possible exception of health tests"....so the only traits that can be improved by selective breeding is health traits, why is it that, that is the only thing? Try and ramble about that for a bit....

[Timewise65]

I had one more after thought on breeding!

All breeds we have in existence are the result of years of selective breeding. If you have a gun dog, you know at some point in the past someone had a vision of improving an breed of dog, blending traits into a new breed that over time become recognized as a new breed. Now no doubt that some breeds may have been established more by accident than by a master plan. But most breeds can be traced back to an planned effort to create a new type of dog with certain traits....

Nuff Said about the importance of selective breeding to Improve the breed!

It is breeders who do not follow ethical breeding practices that cause many of the problems we all have to live with in our dogs, including poor health and longevity!

[ezzy333]

I had one more after thought on breeding!

All breeds we have in existence are the result of years of selective breeding. If you have a gun dog, you know at some point in the past someone had a vision of improving an breed of dog, blending traits into a new breed that over time become recognized as a new breed. Now no doubt that some breeds may have been established more by accident than by a master plan. But most breeds can be traced back to an planned effort to create a new type of dog with certain traits....

Nuff Said about the importance of selective breeding to Improve the breed!

It is breeders who do not follow ethical breeding practices that cause many of the problems we all have to live with in our dogs, including poor health and longevity!

The premise you failed to deal with is the there is a large range of values that people call improvements that others do not. that seems to be a basic point CJ was dealing with in his illogical comments. I personally think there is little thought given to improving the breed but a whole lot of thought given to what will win in a trial, conformation, agility, or sled dog competions and often not enough given to what will work best in the upland fields for the ordinary weekend hunter. And of course a lot of breeding is what will sell for folks raising pups as a source of income. Breed improvement is not only a non-item to many but is actually almost impossible to accomplish today with the animal rights people looking over your shoulder ready to pounce on any action that they want to make an issue out of so they can keep their donations flowing. Breed improvement is not accomplished readily when you raise a litter of 8 and one is better than the average but the other seven aren't but you sell them all and they all become breeders. And to go a step further, unless you keep them all and can prove which one is better, you or the world will never know, and that doesn't happen often I n the real world today.

Breed improvement is a great goal but raising the best dogs for whatever purpose they are interested in is a much more realistic happening amongst our good breeders.

[cjhills]

Timewise:
Do you really believe that the OP breeding his dog or not breeding his dog will have any affect on the Gsp breed in the long term.
Generalization is exactly what is important in the dog breeding world. The real standout dogs are probably not going to reproduce themselves.
If you breed a dog based on it's title you are likely to overlook undesirable characteristics and possibly do more long term harm than good. Titled dogs specialize and that is not necessarily good for the breeds in general. Is it unethical to breed a dog who is titled if he is a couple inches taller than the breed standard or has yellow eyes(gsp) and any number of other breed standard issues. Remember breed standards are only what a few people decided were what a dog should be. Are the people who disagree unethical?
There is no way you can breed two individuals without bringing in some things you would rather not have.
Health testing likely improves the issues that the tests are for. Our OFAs have improved over several generations of testing. is it because of the testing? Who knows? Maybe we are better at selecting individuals whose are less likely to have bad hips. I know many breeders who produce very good dogs who do not believe in hip X-rays. Do you really believe hip x-rays guarantee good hips on the puppies. Dogs regress toward the mean. This is how it is and ethics are your personal beliefs.
I have done this for a long time and have seen many breedings between two super dogs that produced genetic surprises.
One thing you are right about is that the good breeders are" hoping to improve the nature of the breed". The key words there Are "hoping" and ' "Improving".................Cj
the breeder ethics for AKC and GSPCA, with which I am familiar, and other breed clubs have nothing to do with improving the breed, with the possible exception of health tests.

I don't even know where to start here.....totally illogical comments! A very long post trying to rationalize why good breeding practices need not be followed our important to the quality of the breeds! And then after this illogical rambling....you end up with the comment "with the possible exception of health tests"....so the only traits that can be improved by selective breeding is health traits, why is it that, that is the only thing? Try and ramble about that for a bit....

Timewise 65
Nothing about my post is illogical and I am sorry you consider them rambling.
Do you even breed dogs? Do you know anything about breeding dogs. How do you define good breeders? What are good breeding practices. Start a new post and explain this to me.
I do breed dogs and I am a good breeder. I follow the Rules for ethical breeders set forth by GSPCA. Because mostly it is what I believe. We breed to improve our dogs. Rules for ethical breeders are not about improving the breed.
Have you read any of the GSPCA and AKC rules for ethical breeding. They are not about improving the breed. They are more about the welfare of the dogs and have nothing to do with selective breeding. The breed standards have a little more to do with the dogs.
Again I will say to the OP, there is no Ethical reason for not to breed your dog if that is what you want to do. IT is entirely your choice...................Cj

[Timewise65]

Based on your comments I do not believe you are a top ethical breeder....anyone who says as you just did, that someone who wants to breed their dogs can, has no clue....legally they can, ethically they should not!

I purchase dogs from only "ethical breeders" based on the definitions I believe. These dogs have been over my lifetime for my personal use for hunting, training and testing my dogs. I choose not to breed because I am not able to do it ethically do to time commitments and work schedules for myself and my family over my lifetime. But I have known and do now know many great gun dog breeders, and trainers and that all live by the standards I know to be ethical and best for the breed.

Of course I have read and studied AKC breeding standards and 100's of articles, research papers, etc. on breeding competitive gun dogs....I am also well aware that 1,000's of folks breed dogs and I understand that many of them think they know what they are doing. Unfortunately, far to many do not do their homework, or just are not welling to do the work and spend the money to breed great dogs. Now I am not saying that you may not have bred some good dogs, but doesn't sound like you optimized your effort for your pups to be the best they could be.

So we end it here.....thankfully, you would never make it through my initial screening for potential breeders, if I were looking for a new pup!

Luck to you and yours....

[Timewise65]

cjhills....

I guess I should ask if you have read any of the breeding ethics that are readily available. I have provided the links and underlined areas of particular interest, based on your assumptions. I could have found the same comments in many gun dog, breed specific breeding ethic statements...but I spent enough time stating the obvious....! Lock them up yourself, if you dare!


http://www.ukcdogs.com/Web.nsf/WebPages ... eedersCode
United Kennel Club Breeder’s Code of Ethics

The United Kennel Club expects all breeders of UKC registered dogs to adopt and adhere to the UKC Breeder’s Code of Ethics to promote and foster high standards among breeders, owners, and fanciers in their improvement and advancement of UKC dog breeds.

RECORDS
I will keep accurate records, retain those records for a minimum of the life of the dog, and make them available to UKC upon request. These records will include, but are not limited to: stud service documents, pedigrees, all litters produced, breeding and whelp dates, and all dogs/puppies sold. I may use the “Breeder’s Record” that the UKC provides to assist in maintain these records.

BREEDING
• I shall plan each breeding with the paramount intention of improving the breed.
• I will select the stud dog and brood bitch with an eye to conformation, temperament and working instinct and ability, with a careful study of the breed standard and the principles of genetics.
• I will not breed any male or female until they are both physically and mentally mature, and will breed within the bounds of the minimum and maximum ages permitted in the UKC Registration Policies.
• I will not breed dogs with serious defects or disqualifications addressed in their breed standards.
• As a responsible breeder, I will refrain from using a dog that, although free from serious or disqualifying defects, consistently produces afflicted puppies.

HEALTH
• I will maintain high standards of health and care for my dogs, and provide puppies to buyers that are free from disease and parasites.

SALES
• I will be discriminating in the sales of my puppies, and concerned with the type of homes in which they are placed. My dogs/puppies will not be sold to dog wholesalers, retailers, or pet shops.
• I will refrain from releasing any puppy until it is the minimum age as required by my state’s law.

ADVERTISING AND RELATIONS
• My advertising of dogs/puppies will be factual and honest, both in substance and implication.
• I believe breeding purebred dogs involves certain responsibilities, which I take very seriously.
• I will not advertise my dogs/puppies as UKC registered if they are not.
• As a breeder, I will encourage dog/puppy purchasers to become involved in UKC events and to embrace the Total Dog philosophy.

IMPLEMENTATION
This Code of Ethics is intended as an expression of goals for breeders, owners, and fanciers. Both the Code of Ethics and the Registration Policies may be referenced and enforced if violations are found.

ANOTHER ONE I FOUND.... NOTE THAT THE SECOND POINT WAS "BREED IMPROVEMENT" IF YOU WANT TO READ THE REST FOLLOW THE LINK PROVIDED! HOW IS THAT CROW TASTING?

http://www.akc.org/dog-breeders/responsible-breeding/
Responsible Breeding
Guide to Breeding

1 - PREPARE YOURSELF FOR BREEDING A LITTER

2 - BREED TO IMPROVE

The motto of the responsible breeder of purebred dogs is "Breed to Improve."

Every dog is the best dog in the world to its owner. Responsible breeders, however, know to avoid "kennel blindness" -- in other words, they take a step back and honestly evaluate the good and bad points of their dogs before making the decision to breed. The goal of breeding, after all, is to produce a better dog and a quality pet.
Examine your dog carefully. Recognize its flaws. If you decide to continue with the breeding process, look for a mate that will eliminate or balance those flaws. The national parent club for your breed may also provide assistance.
One of the best ways to get an objective opinion of your dog is to test it against others. Consider attending a dog show to determine how your dog measures up against the best specimens of its breed.

[cjhills]

I notice you have Goldens, breed which was nearly ruin by ethical breeders. Before a few breeders who lived in the real world saved it. Thank god for the real dog breeders.......Cj

[Timewise65]

I notice you have Goldens, breed which was nearly ruin by ethical breeders. Before a few breeders who lived in the real world saved it. Thank god for the real dog breeders.......Cj

No actually the many of the health problems in Goldens, Labs, etc. have developed because of breeders just like you!

Noticed you had no comment on the facts I presented that TOTALLY contradict what you believed to be fact! Ethical Breeder to work to IMPROVE THE BREED!

Except you repeatedly said you do not! Kind of proves my point again...!

[Elkhunter]

The funny thing throughout all of this health testing crap, is not one mention of actual REAL WORLD BIRD HUNTING EXPERIENCE. Heaven forbid you don't check the dogs hips, just breed "healthy" completely untested or challenged dogs. I have never bought a dog with health testing, have never health tested a dog. But have hunted my dogs 50+ days a year on wild birds. They seem to do just fine.

[Grange]

We did have a chesapeake that was hunted 30+ days a season and trained outside hunting season that showed no indication she had hip dysplasia. When tested we were surprised the results said she had hip dysplasia. We also had another chesapeake that had hip dysplasia diagnosed early in life, but didn't show any signs until she got old and once it started showing it got worse.

[Elkhunter]

We did have a chesapeake that was hunted 30+ days a season and trained outside hunting season that showed no indication she had hip dysplasia. When tested we were surprised the results said she had hip dysplasia. We also had another chesapeake that had hip dysplasia diagnosed early in life, but didn't show any signs until she got old and once it started showing it got worse.

So would you rather have a health tested unproven dog, or a non health tested proven wild bird dog?

I know what I would choose.

[Grange]

We did have a chesapeake that was hunted 30+ days a season and trained outside hunting season that showed no indication she had hip dysplasia. When tested we were surprised the results said she had hip dysplasia. We also had another chesapeake that had hip dysplasia diagnosed early in life, but didn't show any signs until she got old and once it started showing it got worse.

So would you rather have a health tested unproven dog, or a non health tested proven wild bird dog?

I know what I would choose.

I'd rather get a dog out of a health tested proven wild bird dog. It may take some searching, but they are out there.

[ezzy333]

They sure aren't hard to find since most responsible breeders do the health testing. They as well as the rest of us want every assurance we can get that a pup we are going to invest countless time and money on is going to be a healthy adult for many years to come. At this point in time I think it would be harder to find a well bred pup that is not out of health tested dogs than those that are.

[cjhills]

I really am not wanting to bring this up again but this "Timewise" person Who is accusing me of being against health testing is ignoring the fact that in my first post to OP that he should do hip x-rays and it was to late for that. Of course I do health tests most people do.
What I did say is if the OP does or does not breed his dog will have no impact on the breed. His litter will be sold and mostly neutered and that none of us are going to have much impact on the breed.
The Tendon and Hip issues in Labs and Goldens can be traced through genetics to a few "good" breeders who were "improving the breed" with 20 or more litters a year and had hundreds of dogs in breeding programs and thousands of puppies on the ground before they even new there was a issue. Some swept it under the Rug......Cj

[ezzy333]

I really am not wanting to bring this up again but this "Timewise" person Who is accusing me of being against health testing is ignoring the fact that in my first post to OP that he should do hip x-rays and it was to late for that. Of course I do health tests most people do.
What I did say is if the OP does or does not breed his dog will have no impact on the breed. His litter will be sold and mostly neutered and that none of us are going to have much impact on the breed.
The Tendon and Hip issues in Labs and Goldens can be traced through genetics to a few "good" breeders who were "improving the breed" with 20 or more litters a year and had hundreds of dogs in breeding programs and thousands of puppies on the ground before they even new there was a issue. Some swept it under the Rug......Cj

I see no real reason to just restate your position. we all read what you wrote before and some of agree with you and some don't and it is doubtful any of them will change their minds based on how often you post your position.

[cjhills]

I really am not wanting to bring this up again but this "Timewise" person Who is accusing me of being against health testing is ignoring the fact that in my first post to OP that he should do hip x-rays and it was to late for that. Of course I do health tests most people do.
What I did say is if the OP does or does not breed his dog will have no impact on the breed. His litter will be sold and mostly neutered and that none of us are going to have much impact on the breed.
The Tendon and Hip issues in Labs and Goldens can be traced through genetics to a few "good" breeders who were "improving the breed" with 20 or more litters a year and had hundreds of dogs in breeding programs and thousands of puppies on the ground before they even new there was a issue. Some swept it under the Rug......Cj

I see no real reason to just restate your position. we all read what you wrote before and some of agree with you and some don't and it is doubtful any of them will change their minds based on how often you post your position.

So What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Elkhunter]

They sure aren't hard to find since most responsible breeders do the health testing. They as well as the rest of us want every assurance we can get that a pup we are going to invest countless time and money on is going to be a healthy adult for many years to come. At this point in time I think it would be harder to find a well bred pup that is not out of health tested dogs than those that are.

Ezzy I feel it is very hard to find dogs that are truly tested on wild birds. When 3/4 of the country does not even have wild bird populations.

I always smile when I read an ad touting all the health clearances, and not one mention of what experience the dog actually has at being a bird dog. Which is the whole reason we are buying the dog.

And you know as well as I do, that there are huge differences in hunting ability in dogs from the same breed. So IMO knowing that the dog has been truly proven and tested doing what I plan on doing with the dog is significantly more important than an xray of his hips.

[ezzy333]

They sure aren't hard to find since most responsible breeders do the health testing. They as well as the rest of us want every assurance we can get that a pup we are going to invest countless time and money on is going to be a healthy adult for many years to come. At this point in time I think it would be harder to find a well bred pup that is not out of health tested dogs than those that are.

Ezzy I feel it is very hard to find dogs that are truly tested on wild birds. When 3/4 of the country does not even have wild bird populations.

I always smile when I read an ad touting all the health clearances, and not one mention of what experience the dog actually has at being a bird dog. Which is the whole reason we are buying the dog.

And you know as well as I do, that there are huge differences in hunting ability in dogs from the same breed. So IMO knowing that the dog has been truly proven and tested doing what I plan on doing with the dog is significantly more important than an xray of his hips.

I will have to admit I have been remiss in fully vetting any pup I have purchased as I have never asked about how wild the birds are that they have hunted as none had ever hunted as far as I know. I look at the breeding and that is about as far as I have ever checked since I find that most pups change a great deal from puppyhood to adults. Seems to me that more likely than not they make about 180 degree change.
The dogs I am familiar with just hunt and it is up to me to give them the experiences they need to develop their abilities on different birds or animals. I have never seen a dog that would only hunt certain birds and ignore any others. And I have never seen a dog that cared a hoot about how wild a bird is. The differences in native compared to pen raised is pretty much a difference in fear of you and that can but not always make them spookier to where the dog needs to point from a greater distance possibly but dogs learn from experience so I see little difference in that area. I do see differences in the dogs natural range and I have tried to judge that in puppies but there again most change as they mature.
My selection method is pick the bloodline you like, look at the parents and possibly the grand parents and then pick the one you will enjoy seeing every morning for the next ten years or so. I do like pretty pups that follow the breed standard I have to admit. Good looking dogs don't eat any more than an ugly one so I vote for pretty.

Ezzy

[birddogger]

IMO, I don't see it necessary to do either one, maybe I am missing something.

Regards,
Charlie