With all this talk I’ve been doing of responsibility and responsible breeders; you might be curious as to what dictates this? Our ideas of responsible may vary slightly, but having surveyed a few of my acquaintances and checked several online sources, I’m sure that I’m on the right track with these points. Now this blog has already taken me a while to write, so I’m splitting it into two to avoid being overwhelming, and so it actually gets posted this week.
1. A responsible breeder is someone who takes responsibility for their dogs. Not just the ones they have at home, but for the lives they help create and send out into the world. All three of the dogs I’ve bought and owned as an adult have had clauses stating that if I could not keep them, they were to go back to the breeder rather than go to a rescue or be dumped at a pound. And this isn’t just empty words. In 2016 I unfortunately had to take my breeder up on this when I experienced same sex aggression between my two dalmatians and it couldn’t be rectified.
Even if the breeder can’t physically take a dog back (they may have council restrictions on how many dogs they’re allowed on property at one time) they will often assist and have access to a large network of people who will jump into action to help out.
Responsibility goes beyond just ensuring the dogs are looked after if they have to be rehomed though, this also encompasses general health and wellbeing as well as health screening and genetic testing where possible to ensure that defects and debilitating conditions are not passed on – keep in mind that some conditions are not purely hereditary, and some cannot be screened for. Some responsibility does fall to you the buyer here, you should know what diseases and conditions your breed is predisposed to and be prepared to ask about the status of the parent dogs if it’s not already publicly available. In this point I would also include the temperament of the dog as this is just vital as the health. Temperament is genetic to a large degree, and it is so important that only dog with correct temperaments are included in breeding programs – whether that be happy, docile, independent, aloof etc.
2. A responsible breeder will be breeding for a purpose. Good breeding is never solely about the monetary gain – some breeders may end up back in the black but the vast majority are out by thousands once they account for health testing, showing or trialling to prove their dogs worthiness, importing and generally giving their dogs the best care possible before breeding occurs. Good breeding should be about “bettering the breed” or breed preservation – not to make money, teach the kids about life, or because “they should just have one litter”. A measurement of “bettering the breed” isn’t really possible, as it’s a little open to interpretation. However I would expect a purebred dog to have competed in conformation showing (this is more than just a beauty pageant!), as well as other trials such as endurance, herding, agility, obedience, scentwork or retrieving trials. It shouldn’t matter if your dog will be nothing more than a pampered pooch living their best life on your couch, buying from a breeder who does these things means that your dog is bred from parents who are fit for purpose as they were intended.
Note: Accidental matings, oops litters DO happen and they alone are not a sign of a breeder not being responsible. Dogs can be beyond determined to get what they want and this can be devastating for a breeder who's had plans lined up, only to be dashed at the last second. A good sign in this case is honesty, and acknowledgement of the mistake.
3. Next, I would expect a responsible breeder to be registered with a governing body. For most purebred dogs in Australia, this would be Dogs Australia (formerly ANKC) but breeds such as the Koolie, have their own registry. Some breeds in development will also have their own clubs. While a registry can have its own faults, as a whole, the idea is that members are held to a standard and have to abide by a code of ethics. Therefore, ensuring that the welfare of the dogs is truly at the forefront of everything. While I would say that in some respects this certainly has not been the case, or that some organisations could do a better job, for the most part it has worked.
Now, this could be controversial, but there are several registries out there that as far as I’m concerned, are only there to give some semblance of legitimacy to designer breeds, and some backyard breeders with “pure bred” dogs. Truly developing a breed and breeding crosses is not the same thing.
This is where I’ll leave it for part one. There is a lot to this topic, and I honestly can’t go into the detail I would like, and keep this succinct. Stay tuned for part two!
Comments