Are Titles Necessary Before Breeding? - Page 2

The key to breeding in my opinion is Knowledge, knowledge, knowledge!!! And I'm not talking about the knowledge that comes from titles and certifications as they don't pass through the sperm!! The knowledge I'm talking about is of at least 4 generations of both parents. During these generations which dogs are intensely linebred to skew the equation. Remember it Takes Two to produce and their are recessives in the lines you want to submerge and recessives that you want to improve. How can you be an intelligent breeder if you don't find this info out or else if you have bred for 4 generations you know from your results. To me their is nothing more irritating than some self-righteous breeder that is going to that dog because they are OFA excellent or both parents of the stud is Sch 3 so the temperament will improve. Then when you ask them questions about the dogs in the pedigree they don't know! And these are the first people to tell somebody else what they should do. It has been said that "We die because of a lack of knowledge " and that applies to breeding also...IMO

So I guess all you need to do is send the AKC their money and then you can call yourself a breeder. (What a formula for success.) How many of you breeders participate in the "little league"? How many of you are willing to buy from the "little league"?

Titles are not necessary and even if you have one on a dog it does not necessarily mean the dog is the best choice for breeding. One thing that titles bring to the table is that many people who breed don't even know what they are doing and are not qualified to reconize the quality of the dog. Having a title does provide some protection and assurance that the dog is of higher quality. Of course we have all seen titled dogs that we would not breed,

In principal, I would like to adhere to some standard. But the truth of the matter is that all the standards set by the organizations are, in fact, empty shells. Yes, I have learned that titles are not always what they seem. I have titled dogs, worked long and hard to do so, and my dogs titles are real. But I see many who are not real. I have also shown and gotten conformation ratings on my dogs. Secondly, yes, I know many police dogs who do not have any "title" per se and are excellent examples of the breed and whose conformation is a bit lacking. I know many who are not excellent examples either in working ability, or conformation. I think it does have a lot to do with ones' goals. While I would like to title my dogs, time is an issue, especially when owning ones own business. Most people could care less if a dog has a title or not. They want a pet. My bottom line at this point, after years of being involved in the breed is this: I make damn sure I have done appropriate health checks should I decide to breed a rare litter and that includes hips and elbows long before any of the organizations suggested it. I also consider temperament and what a given dog really has to contribute for the breed. Not every dog, whether a good pet, titled, or whatever, should be bred. Not every dog with excellent hips should be bred. There are a myriad of considerations that SHOULD be going into the breeding of a litter, but most of the time, people just breed because of the money. Yes, Do Right is correct about the vast majority of dogs of whatever breed ending up as pets. For me this is the limiting factor. I do not adopt dogs out to people who do not meet very high standards and would not sell to them either unless they meet those standards. Frankly, very few people I meet are prepared for a GSD with a working temperament and want, instead, a rug that licks as a pet. I therefore cannot breed often because I cannot find appropriate homes. I am also one of the rare people who would absolutely feel forever responsible for any animal I bred. So realistically, especially since I am always having to clean up the messes other breeders and irresponsible owners they sell to make, I cannot breed as often as I might otherwise, even though I have some outstanding dogs in temperament, bloodlines, working ability and conformation. Most breedings are done in ignorance. Gustav makes excellent points about how people do not even know shit about the immediate ancestors of the breeding pair. It is about knowledge but based on what I see on this board, knowledge is most often lacking. People as simply damned lazy and too often are not interested in looking past their nose. There are lots of reasons people use to breed animals, most reasons related to money. I hope I never, ever use that as a reason to breed even a single dog. But yes, if I decide to breed a dog whom I think is an excellent example of the breed, and that dog does not yet have a Schutzhund title (which frankly is meaningless), I will do so.

Hodie, very insightful. You see it would be simple if the pups are going to take all of the traits of the parents. Then certifications and titles? become more meaningful. But...you have two dogs, is one more line/in bred than the other? How about grandparents was one of them very intensely linebred? How about hips? Was this OFA excellent out of a litter with more than half dyplastic? Was one of the parents, out of a litter that was a disaster in hips, but your bitch or sire was the exception? Is one of the traits you are trying(hopefully) to improve happenstance, or ingrained from the past grands and greats.Does the dog you're using to improve something in your dog, have this traits strongly bred in?What about secondary characteristics? There's more to it than titles and certs though these items can be helpful but people make them the criterion . The narrowing of the genepool through selections based on color, type, hips, eyecolor,etc, in the long run will hamper the breed. These elements are man created and would not affect the proliferation of the breed in the wild. And I don't think many(smile) of us are smarter than mother nature when it comes to breeding. I have talked to many people that when you ask these questions about the parents,grands, greats, they don't have a clue, but the dog is titled and hips good so i'm a responsible breeder!!How can you use this reasoning and see the continued degeneration of the W showline dogs in temp, health, longevity, when they are the most titled/certifyed dogs as a whole, of the shepherd subsets. I feel that titling a dog is a good thing especially for the dog,but when I see people challenged and labeled because they have bred an untitled dog and you DON'T know their knowledge base, I see the blind critcizing the blind so to speak.JMO

Excellent points Gustav and I agree 100%.

Hodie and Gustov, Some very good insights, and now I think I can breath again, Hodie makes some excellent points about temperament, and titles "earned" We are getting there, slower than I would like, but we are getting there, and in the meantime providing some really super dogs into great homes, for sport, k-9, Sar, and Therapy, So for that I can feel good about what we are doing so far. We plan to continue with Sch training and sar training and therapy work, I'm not an officer so can't do K-9 but would if I could, (giggle)

EchoMeadows You apparently missed a lot of my point. The exact point is also not to be breeding litter after litter, regardless of how great you think your dogs are. If you think you have great homes for all your dogs, look again. I clean up the messes in my state and believe me, there are many, many breeders breeding litter after litter, not for providing dogs for "great homes" but for making a buck. Look yourself in the mirror.

I said we plan to continue training, said nothing about continueing on breeding. That was a bit rude hodie.

and a bit presumptuous. Just my opinion though.