When you breed, what is your list of priorities. eg. Looks, health, good stud dog

I would say top priority is health. At the end of the day you can have a dog that would win crufts with looks but it may be in crippling pain next I would say temperament. Then I would say depending on breed that they were fit for purpose. I would say this is necessarily in most breeds but, in gundogs and working dogs a very important priority. Looks are important to a certain degree. Generally speaking this would entail that a dog is well put together and has good confirmation. Hopefully a dog with good confirmation would be a dog that is fit for purpose. Although this is not necessarily the case.

__________________

http://SovargoHungarianVizsla.yolasite.com

Having thought about this question for a few years now, I don't think there's an orderly list, but more of a juggling act. Depending on what you've got, and what your plans are, you need to match that up appropriately. Temperament is of paramount importance to me, if a dog has perfect health scores, looks fabulous, but has a dodgy temperament, then it's a none starter. But if a dog has a carrier or even affected status that can be bred clear from, has generally good looks, and good temperament, I would personally count that as a better starting point. I also like to see ability in there, but that's just me, a lot of people take it for granted a dog will do what it's bred to do, and to some extent you can train a dog to do pretty much anything. But to see a dog do it naturally well is something different, I think.

I'll be interested to see what other views are on this, it's one of those things that I don't think there's a 100% right/wrong answer to, and very much will depend to a greater or lesser extent on the breed and aims of the breeder.

__________________
The British Association for Shooting & Conservation
Countryside Alliance



Follow my art here http://tarimoorart.blogspot.com/

Temperament has to be a top priority. No good having a healthy, good looking dog if it has a poor temperament.

After temperament then for me it would be working ability, health and confirmation. I've put confirmation instead of looks, because this is what I think these points are often overlooked regarding health (as an example, lack of angulation can increase the risk of crutiate ligament injury - there is no health test for this but these things need to be taken into consideration).

I will only breed if I have an exceptional bitch. It is hard work, expensive and I could buy in a well bred pup for a lot less money and work . So it makes sense to me to only breed from the best. This also means I want the best in the stud dog too.

Something I have always wanted to know is....and I guess this is a bit off topic but are breeders open and honest with one another, and their buyers, about what their dogs have died from/suffered from?

Like if you're trying to match up a stud does the breeder tell you what ailments the dogs ancestors suffered from and what they died of? Do any breed clubs have like databases that hold the mortality and vet record info. of dogs in their breed? It seems like a good idea to me.

Would it be seen as unreasonable for a buyer to ask a breeder death and illness information on the previous dogs in their breeding stock? It's the sort of thing that I would be curious to know if I was buying a pedigree dog but you don't ever see it mentioned that much.

With doggy health I guess that there are many many inherited diseases that you can't test for but rely on the integrity of the breeder for when it comes to matching lines and that and you'd need to know that sort of ancestor mortality stuff wouldn't you?

Mmmmm like a cancer record etc, many breeds seem to be predisposed to various cancers, would be good to know the history of things like this

You are right, not all health problems can be tested for. I can't speak for all types of breeding, but generally speaking, in the working and showing world, breeders actually KNOW the dogs they intend to use and know their history - if they don't know personally, there is someone out there that does know - it's a small world really. I think the biggest problems are for pet owners, who only have health test results to go on and the integrity of the breeder.

The KC health database only records health tests, rather than any illness the dog has suffered from. I'm not sure how practical having vet records would be or even, how useful.

I think that, in spite of what people say, the vast majority of quality dogs that are used for breeding (and I do say quality dogs) enjoy good health. An ethical breeder wouldn't otherwise breed from them. The biggest problem again, is in pet breeding, byb and puppy farms. Pet breeders don't have the army of information (or contacts that have that information) and byb and puppy farms don't care. I think also, a danger for pet breeders is that they often only have one or two dogs/bitches - so they can be less selective if they want a litter from their 'girl'.

I can see how useful that would be, but again, in the working/showing world, you would tend to know these things anyway - or know someone that knew. It is one of the advantages of being immersed into the a canine activity if you want to breed.

I know it's rarely the case but some pet breeders do have quality health tested bitches

But some people can't and don't want to be immersed into the competitive world of dogs, and this seems to be the only way to make those contacts.
There is a certain amount of snobbery in all forms of dog activities which I find quite off putting.
If you aren't in "the club" you aren't worth anything