Searching for a foundation bitch?

[olivehill]

That name rang a bell so I googled... is the "Red" she has listed as a stud on her site the same "Red" she gifted Jon Katz? He's not the stud is he? :blink:/>

 

 

If it is all the information in the world on that sire is available on Katz's blog. He writes about the dog on an almost daily basis.

[Debbie Meier]

I would bet so, this was posted on the comments of a recent You-Tube video of Cisco a 7 1/2 week old red/white pup.

 

 

"It will be a bonus, if he's anywhere near as nice as TBC Red, whose now living and working with Jon Katz on Bedlam Farm! Thank you for commenting. in faith, Karen"

 

 

But, he is not listed as the sire of any upcoming litters, there is a male named Chap owned by RC Tomlinson was my guess or Chet, looks like he is r/w

[Christina]

The sire is Chet. Red was neutered before he was given to Katz.

[olivehill]

Thanks Debbie. I didn't see the upcoming litters page.

[olivehill]

Looks like she's got a video of Chet from last year.

 

[Gloria Atwater]

And four litters a year is NOT a red flag. That is an ethical debate that I am more than willing to have as most people with an ounce of common sense should realize that the amount of puppies one produces says absolutely NOTHING about their breeding program or the dogs they choose to breed. ......

.

 

Really. You see no question of ethics in the numbers of puppies a breeder puts out into the world each year? How many would constitute a red flag, in your view?

 

Eileen is right. Time to walk away.

 

~ Gloria

[Christina]

.

 

Really. You see no question of ethics in the numbers of puppies a breeder puts out into the world each year? How many would constitute a red flag, in your view?

 

Eileen is right. Time to walk away.

 

~ Gloria

 

The most accomplished stockdog breeder in the world could produce ten litters a year and there would be nothing wrong with that. I said the number of litters says nothing about the quality of their breeding program. To judge a breeder by the number they produce walks right into the hands of the animal rights agenda. You don't have to support a breeder who breeds often but that doesn't make them a bad breeder. Quality is more important than quantity.

[DeltaBluez Tess]

Christina

 

You are going to get a pup,....that's your choice.

 

A few questions...these are questions that I ask when I look at potential pups.

Do you know the answers for your pup?

 

What is trial history of sire and dam?

Trial history of grandparents?

Ranch/farm history is just as good,providing it is not a hobby farm of few sheep.

Hips status?

DNA CEA status?

CERF status?

Any history of epilepsy?

Other health history?

Temperament?

Other folks who have gotten pups/dogs and what do they do? Trialing?

How may litters per year and for the past 3-4 years?

[Christina]

And I would ask all of those things but this is not my dog, not my choice, as I stated before.

[juliepoudrier]

Then why did you ask in the first place? Sounds to me that you're simply deflecting everything by placing it all on your SO's shoulders now that you've found that perhaps you're not making a great choice. My last question to you (which you won't answer because it's "not your choice") is this: If one is looking for an exceptional working dog on which to potentially base an entire breeding program, why wouldn't one get to know who produces the top dogs in this country (and Canada, and perhaps even the UK if one can afford to import and desires to do so--a red dog won the International Supreme a few years ago) and then look for what dogs among the best of the best produce red? For example, Alasdair MacRae, one of the top handlers/trainers (some would say the top) in this country, ran a bitch who produced a number of red puppies. He won the National Finals and other big, prestigious trials with that bitch. There's a proven bitch who produced red, the progeny from whom a person wanting a red foundation bitch might consider for a training/breeding program. This bitch is not the only top working/trialing dog out there who has produced red. So why wouldn't one look at that bitch or some of her progeny? Of course that requires actually getting out into the trialing world and learning about these handlers and their dogs; that is, learning something before jumping in and buying a pup from the most convenient likely-to-have-red litter that happens along.

 

Diane has repeated some of what I've already said. You need to look at what the breeding pair has done, what their relatives have done and I would add what their progeny have done. It's meaningless if most of the offspring have gone into sport and pet homes because there's no way a breeder can judge the value of his/her working crosses if most of the pups are never worked. And if the work is only to a novice standard or in some other venue, then once again, you are not starting with exceptional, period.

 

Someone mentioned Red Top (Patrick Shannahan, another finals winner and top handler). He is known for producing some lovely sport dogs, but he is also known for producing some exceptional working dogs. That's because he gets out there with his own dogs and people who buy from him get out there with those dogs. You can actually look at the dogs working and trialing and judge the effectiveness of his breeding program.

 

It seems to me that you and/or you SO have already placed RED above all else and aren't even bothering to look to some of the top working dogs in North America (where red certainly exists). If the dog he wants to buy would simply be the dog that he learns to work and learns about working border collies with, then that would be one thing, but if the investment in a pup is also intented to potentially start a breeding line of exceptional working dogs, then it seems to me you need to START from exceptional working dogs.

 

I don't think I can say it any more plainly than that.

 

J.

[Pam Wolf]

just my 2 cents 4 litters/year is a yellow if not red flag IMO end of story

[Christina]

Then why did you ask in the first place? Sounds to me that you're simply deflecting everything by placing it all on your SO's shoulders now that you've found that perhaps you're not making a great choice.

 

I asked in the first place because I wanted to hear points on a hypothetical breeding program. I do not intend on purchasing a foundation bitch until I am ready to do so. Right not financially ready to take on (1) another dog and (2) another hobby.

 

I am not placing ANYTHING on my SO's shoulders that isn't already there. He has decided to get a puppy now. Him, not me. I found TBC and thought they looked good. I forward them to him.

 

My last question to you (which you won't answer because it's "not your choice") is this: If one is looking for an exceptional working dog on which to potentially base an entire breeding program, why wouldn't one get to know who produces the top dogs in this country (and Canada, and perhaps even the UK if one can afford to import and desires to do so--a red dog won the International Supreme a few years ago) and then look for what dogs among the best of the best produce red?

 

I have already said I want a dog from Patrick Shannahan. Unless he is yet another "puppymill clever disgusted as a reputable working dog breeder who trials his dogs but doesn't trial them enough for the elitist members of this forum"?

 

It's meaningless if most of the offspring have gone into sport and pet homes because there's no way a breeder can judge the value of his/her working crosses if most of the pups are never worked. And if the work is only to a novice standard or in some other venue, then once again, you are not starting with exceptional, period.

 

Is anything ever good enough for you people? Elitist.

 

Someone mentioned Red Top (Patrick Shannahan]

 

Yeah. Me.

 

It seems to me that you and/or you SO have already placed RED above all else and aren't even bothering to look to some of the top working dogs in North America

 

It seems to me that you haven't read anything I've said because I have repeated over and over that working ability will always come before color for me but that I strongly prefer red dogs and if I have the choice between two equally talented dogs, one black and one red, I will most likely choose the red.

 

 

I don't think I can say it any more plainly than that.

 

Ditto.

[Gloria Atwater]

If someone is producing 10 litters of border collies a year, I have one phrase for them:

 

Puppy mill.

 

No breeder of proven working dogs would do that. And I'm on the side of the animal rights people when it comes to puppy mills. Walking, now ...

 

~ Gloria

 

 

The most accomplished stockdog breeder in the world could produce ten litters a year and there would be nothing wrong with that. I said the number of litters says nothing about the quality of their breeding program. To judge a breeder by the number they produce walks right into the hands of the animal rights agenda. You don't have to support a breeder who breeds often but that doesn't make them a bad breeder. Quality is more important than quantity.

[Christina]

If someone is producing 10 litters of border collies a year, I have one phrase for them:

 

Puppy mill.

 

No breeder of proven working dogs would do that. And I'm on the side of the animal rights people when it comes to puppy mills. Walking, now ...

 

~ Gloria

 

I'm going to quote a friend of mine because she said it oh so perfectly:

 

7 Things You Didn’t Know About Puppy Mills

 

1) There is no such thing as a "puppy mill". "Puppy mill" is not a legally defined term, it is slang used by the “animal rights” community to denigrate any and all breeders -- small or large, standard or substandard. It's the "N-word" of breeders. The phrase “puppy mill” has been promoted in the media by the animal “rights” movement, people who want to end all animal ownership. It is applied indiscriminately by these fanatics to anyone who breeds dogs.

 

2) Those horrendous photos you see in commercials for the “Humane Society” are mostly outdated or a 1 in one million exception to the care given animals by breeders everywhere. The photos are intended to shock and horrify you into giving money. Any photo can be photo shopped into looking really bad. Be skeptical. If you didn’t see it with your own eyes take it with a grain of salt.

 

3)There are three main types of breeders: Commercial, Pet and Hobby/show breeders. Every one of these can be a large-scale breeder, every one of these could be a substandard breeder. Commercial kennels are subject to state and/or federal oversight. Substandard care can be found with all types of breeders. It is about the standard of care, NOT the numbers. Most commercial breeders have state of the art kennels that meet USDA standards and the standards of their state laws. They are inspected at least yearly and must meet or exceed standards far higher than those expected of the average hobby breeder.

 

4)“Sick” puppies do not sell. It is counterproductive for any industry to produce a defective product and expect to stay in business. Any dog can have health issues. Its about Mother Nature NOT lack of care or numbers.

 

5) Passing laws intended to outlaw “puppy mills” will not solve any problem. Most substandard breeders are already in violation of existing laws. New, stricter laws will only affect those who are already working to follow the laws. The only way to have any effect is to enforce the laws that are already on the books.

 

6) All the hobby breeders in this country cannot produce enough puppies to meet the demands of the American market. A shelter dog is NOT for every family. Shelter dogs come with baggage that can require an EXPERIENCED owner.

 

--I don't necessarily agree that all shelter dogs come with baggage and require experienced owners.

 

7) BREEDERS are NOT responsible for the presence of dogs in shelters. We have a problem with a lack of responsible ownership, poor shelter management and poor pet distribution. Education is the key to improvement in this area.

 

For more information:

http://www.cfodconline.org/

http://www.petpac.net/

http://www.exposeanimalrights.com/

www.naiaonline.org

www.humanewatch.org

www.saveourdogs.net

www.nathanwinograd.com

www.saova.org

 

"Puppy mill" is not a legally defined term, it is slang used by the “animal rights” community to denigrate any and all breeders. The phrase “puppy mill” has been promoted in the media by the animal “rights” movement, people who want to end all animal ownership. It is applied indiscriminately by these fanatics to anyone who breeds dogs. Those horrendous photos you see in commercials for the “Humane Society” are mostly very outdated, photo-shopped or a 1 in one million exception to the care given animals by breeders everywhere. The photos are intended to shock and horrify you into giving money. Be skeptical. If you didn’t see it with your own eyes take it with a grain of salt. All the hobby breeders in this country cannot produce enough puppies to meet the demands of the American market. BREEDERS are NOT responsible for the presence of mixed breed dogs in shelters.

 

The rabid AR rhetoric against so-called “puppy mills” is absurd. The term itself is a pejorative intended to slur ALL dog breeding. It’s as offensive a term as any racial or ethnic slur you can come up with.

 

Either stick around and have a conversation or don't say anything at all. Stepping in to drop a line like "puppy mill" and then skipping out again is childish.

[Laurae]

Unlike, you know, revising your posts after you get criticized.

 

Good thing you're here to educate all of us.

[G. Festerling]

I am too tired but will be glad to take this on tomorrow.

All I can say is wow! Really?

[Christina]

Unlike, you know, revising your posts after you get criticized.

 

Good thing you're here to educate all of us.

 

Um. What?

 

I revised my first post because it was worded in a way that was confusing people. I even put the revision in bold letters to show what areas I had revised.

 

Beyond that, I'm not sure how I'm educating anyone when I'm the one who seems to be getting the third degree.

[geonni banner]

Over,

 

and out.

 

Happy Valentine's Day, sheepdoggers...

[Christina]

[juliepoudrier]

Christina,

Let me post a quote directly from your first post:

I would love to establish a working line of strictly red dogs while still breeding for exceptional working ability.

[emphasis added]

 

Do you want to produce dogs of exceptional working ability or not? If so, then it's not elitist to point out that exceptional means exceptional. But if you consider middling/mediocre to be exceptional, then by all means label as elitist all of us who have actually trained dogs to open, trialed at venues like the National Finals, and put the time in to learn about the dogs and the work. Such comments really reflect only on you, and not on those of us who are trying to give you useful advice. Clearly you know better than the rest of us.

 

As for puppy mills, I consider a mill any high-volume breeder, regardless of the conditions they keep the dogs in. Mills = factories, that is, places that produce a lot of product. You may have a different definition that more conveniently fits your needs and worldview, and that's your prerogative, but your belief doesn't make my belief wrong, no matter how much you wish it so.

 

So now I really am going to take my elitist self away from this conversation, since you clearly don't care to listen and have no resorted to name calling. Very mature of you.

 

J.

[Christina]

Name calling? Are you grasping at straws? How is marking anyone who doesn't do exactly what you think they should do as a "puppy mill" NOT name calling?

 

I have never claimed to know better than anyone else here. But the attitude on this forum towards other breeders is absolutely disgusting.

 

At what point is somebody producing too many dogs? Ten? Fifteen? Twenty? Let me know so I can watch out for these horrid "mills".

[Christina]

Actually, I can't figure out what you think I haven't listened to either. I've agreed that dogs should be bred for working ability first and foremost. What are you saying that I'm supposedly ignoring?

[Gloria Atwater]

I'm going to quote a friend of mine because she said it oh so perfectly:

 

...............

 

Either stick around and have a conversation or don't say anything at all. Stepping in to drop a line like "puppy mill" and then skipping out again is childish.

 

I tried having a conversation. I have no idea if you read my earlier, more in-depth attempts at it.

 

Further, throwing someone's screed about the definition of "puppy mill" at me is gratuitous. How on earth could I be anti-breeder? I have the dogs I do because of breeders who produce the quality of working dogs that I want, and I count on such people being there in the future. Furthermore, I am in total agreement that it's not breeders but irresponsible, uneducated owners who are to blame for the thousands of dogs in shelters. People can be just as ignorant or cruel with a dog they got from the pound as one they bought from breeder.

 

But you are failing to grasp the many earnest attempts, here, to explain that border collies are not just any dog. They are not "just" pets. As I said before: "Working ability is not a single trait: it's a collection of many traits, the strengths and weaknesses inherent to each individual dog." Yes, we can get pretty strident around here about breeding, but it's because we only have to glance over the AKC side of the fence to see how very quickly the qualities that make the border collie who he is can be diluted, watered down and lost.

 

So, when you brought up the hypothetical accomplished stockdog breeder who produces 10 litters a year, I reacted because that breeder does not exist. I find it remarkable that you seem to have no qualms about breeders who crank out 20 or 30 puppies a year.

 

But I see no further point in continuing this discussion. You are on the defensive, you've demonstrated misconceptions about the border collie breed (i.e. historical breeding for "crouch" or white collars and blazes) and it's clear that, however your education into the working border collie is to progress, we can be of no help to you. You already have your opinions set.

 

Okay, walking ....

 

~ GLoria

[Mark Billadeau]

It's meaningless if most of the offspring have gone into sport and pet homes because there's no way a breeder can judge the value of his/her working crosses if most of the pups are never worked. And if the work is only to a novice standard or in some other venue, then once again, you are not starting with exceptional, period.

Is anything ever good enough for you people? Elitist.

I'm curious, what part of this quote from Julie do you think is elitist?

 

1. The only way to determine if a breeding selection (ones breeding program) for working dogs was successful is to assess the working ability of the offspring.

2. Assessment of working ability should be more than just beginner level or in venues where trained sheep and very small courses are used.

 

 

[mum24dog]

Do you want to produce dogs of exceptional working ability or not? If so, then it's not elitist to point out that exceptional means exceptional.

 

This.

 

To Christina

 

I'm not elitist -

I see value in a range of working abilities dependent on the job required and don't consider Open trial winners to be the only dogs essential for the future of the working breed (and neither apparently do others who actually work their dogs from another recent thread) and

(anti unnecessary breeding though I am) in theory I don't consider the breeding of sport dogs to be the crime of the century if that's what people want to do, although I would prefer that they didn't as it isn't a good enough reason.

I do consider breeding anything for appearance is wrong.

 

However, my views are coloured by living in the UK where not many people are confused as to what constitutes a working dog or a sport dog. We are used to working and show lines of all sorts of breeds. Hobby herding isn't big here and I can't imagine anyone wanting to do it seriously to trial standard mistakenly getting a sport or conformation dog for that purpose. (Seriously meaning ISDS trials not KC herding tests.) There are plenty of working dogs to choose from for whatever purpose they are wanted and they don't seem to need the same level of protection against ignorance that people tell me is necessary where you are.

 

In this thread I am on the side of the elitists though. If you want to breed the best you have to start with the proven best and you have to know what you are aiming for. Colour should not come into it - end of. I would say the same if you were intending to breed exceptional sport dogs.