I got my last pup from our local “Craigslist” equivalent. She was an “oops” puppy, daddy is an unknown. The local shelter didn’t have any pups when we were shopping, so I was glad to have an alternative information source to find puppies in the area that needed homes. Additional bonus that we picked her out, paid for her, and took her home, with no strings attached, no hoops to jump through, etc.
So no, I don’t think selling animals online should be illegal.
Totally not a backyard breeder in my book.
Health testing and proving the dogs in some way = responsible breeder.
^^ Agreed. I would not call a reputable breeder a “backyard breeder”. It’s a derogatory expression.
Your dog is from a small, responsible breeder. That’s 100% different than the term “BYB”. Even if they actually live/breed dogs in their backyard. Most of the breeders I know are small breeders. I know a few that breed more than 1-2 litters a year, but less than 3-4. The majority probably breed about 1x a year. It’s really hard to title your dogs and whelp litters at the same time if you do more than that.
I think there is a big difference between FOxtrots thoughtful planning and consideration producing a small number of pups vs someone who cranks out dogs or cats who are the flavor of the day with no consideration to quality. One is a small breeder ( foxtrot) one is a backyard breeder.
Thank you, Hoopoe - you get my point!
I agree they are different.
One would be a puppy mill and the other would be a backyard breeder.
I will also say that the age of responsible breeding with health testing is relatively new, so I don’t know how long ago Foxtrot bred dogs and/or how thoughtful the planning was.
20-25 years ago I think it would be fair to say a good number of respectable breeders did not routinely conduct health testing even though some options did exist (e.g. OFA hip testing has been around for a very long time but other tests are newer). In 2019, there is really no way to argue that someone is a reputable breeder if they do not conduct any health tests before breeding dogs, particularly those most prevalent in your breed.
Many of them are very inexpensive and readily available.
I’m kind of curious why anyone who is “thoughtfully breeding” dogs WOULDN’T do the available health testing. Cost? Hassle? Apathy? What?
It’s pretty simple to do the health testing. Hell, 25 years ago I worked for a vet who did OFA rads with no anesthesia and was GREAT at it. I get that some people may not feel proving your breeding dogs is important, or that they could think that just being good family and farm dogs is enough “proof.” But health testing??? Why on earth would anyone who sees themselves as responsible skip that?
For me, proving your dogs in competition somehow + testing = responsible breeder. Not proving your dogs + no testing = backyard breeder. Not proving + not testing + cranking out puppies = puppy mill. I’m not sure how I’d categorize someone who tested but didn’t compete their dogs somehow… @S1969 we seem to align pretty well, what do you think? Although I dunno if I’ve ever run into a breeder who skips competing but does do the available health testing, so maybe it’s moot?
I’d agree with S1969. When I got my first purebred dogs, really the only testing that I recall was OFA.
Now there is so much more and some of the tests, breed specific. But, before I got into Border Terriers, I did research their national club web page for known health related issues.
I agree that a responsible breeder should be doing health testing of their breeding stock and, if possible, all the members of a litter, not just ones that might go to a “show” home. Some health problems might show up in some pups but not all.
Competition… depends on what type of competition… or any competition would be acceptable? I played the conformation game for a while and now have an extreme distaste for it. The BTs I have now, we do nose work and yes, my younger BT’s breeder sees when I post on FB of his trial accomplishments 
I know some show people think the conformation ring is the only acceptable venue to prove breeding dogs. I think that’s silly–ANY ring is cool. Just show the dogs can do SOMETHING beyond being a good pet. Because being a good pet really should be table stakes…
You don’t often see people health test without competing but i think i would consider them “reputable pet breeders.” E.g. why not health test labs and maybe also out a CGC or Novice obedience title on before breeding? Have an understanding of the breed standard and try to stay close to it, but not go for a conformation title.
Conformation titles on popular breed like Labs or Goldens can cost $20k. Definitely not necessary for a pet.
Yeah, I agree. Conformation titles aren’t necessary unless you want to show in that ring. For some breeds, I think it’s a better idea to avoid the conformation ring breed dogs entirely and go for the sport bred ones instead if you’re looking for a pet.
Don’t really consider a CGC “proving” for a breeding animal, but a novice title would be…
Me personally, I like the working titles over conformation (too much politics in the conformation ring for meh personal taste).
Was just curious when someone (the generic someone) says competition what it means to them as it is such a broad umbrella. For some breeds, I’d almost consider a conformation title a ding ‘against’ as the conformation dog and the working dog often are pretty, IMO, different 
Well sure. The type of title depends on the purpose of the breeding. I know quite a few hunting breeders of various breeds. They might put a FC or MH or UT on a dog but no conformation title. And they health test. And they know the breed standards. By and large their dogs have good conformation because they need it to perform in the field but they definitely don’t need a Ch in front of their name.
Some breeders want both…of course. But lots do not.
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. You may also receive promotional emails from The Chronicle of the Horse. You can opt out at any time.
For Customers
Company
Terms of Use
