CockersOnline Forum
Cocker Specific Discussion => Genetics & Breeding => Topic started by: *jean* on October 17, 2006, 11:17:48 AM
-
In working cockers in scotland its not common practice for pups to have endorsements on the pedigree, but with the rise in working cockers as pets, breeders up here are thinking about starting to put them on, when selling to a pet home( with potential buyers knowledge of course) to prevent indiscriminate breeding. my question is, do both dogs and bitches have endorsements or just bitches as they are the ones the puppy farmer / back yard breeders exploit?
-
both can be endorsed ;)
-
I had a litter this year and I put endorsements on all of mine.
-
hi :D
i put endorsments on all of mine too.
-
I'd assume a dog, if used regularly, can produce far more litters than a bitch, so they should both be endorsed :blink:.
-
i put endorsments on all of mine too.
And us!
-
thanks for the advice.. its for friends really they are the ones with the trial winning dogs who have regular litters. basically I dont think they are keen to put endorsements on pedigrees of working dogs as its not common practice, but surely if the dog is going to a non working home its a good thing? what do all you owners of working type spaniels think? did you have endorsements on your pups when you bought them? ( I understand its common practice in the show types)
-
what do all you owners of working type spaniels think? did you have endorsements on your pups when you bought them? ( I understand its common practice in the show types)
I didn't have endorsements on mine. But as I have absolutely no intention of breeding them, it wouldn't have bothered me at all. :D
-
I know, I think anyone with the dogs best interests at heart doesnt get a pup and mind endorsements at all. Im just trying to persuade the working spaniel community up here to start putting endorsements on their pups so they know they wont become puppy making machines or end up in rescue.
If I can do that then maybe Ill be doing some good further down the line for the breed. It getting the working fraternity to do something new...they arent very good at changes.. up here anyway.
-
I endorse my litters too and I've never had a new owner complain.
Im just trying to persuade the working spaniel community up here to start putting endorsements on their pups so they know they wont become puppy making machines or end up in rescue.
Sadly endorsing the registration can't actually stop someone from breeding a litter, it just means that they wouldn't be able to register them with the Kennel Club. :-\
-
No endorsements with Fern, but then we have known the breeder for about 40 years (local farmer)and umpteen generations of Ferns (all proper working dogs). We were intending to work her -but OH lost his eyesight and that was that. We had Fern spayed and when I told him I think he was actually a bit disappointed. He knew that we would have taken advice from him about finding a suitable stud if we had decided to breed from her. He has bred from her sister resulting in some absolute smashers :blink:.
When Fern's litter sister had her final litter this June (she had them three days before she turned 7 - talk about cutting it fine ::) ), I asked whether they were only looking for working homes for her pups and he said that he was looking for good homes for them as that was what mattered although he would obviously prefer working. He needs to know that his dogs are going to be treated with kindness above all else.
I don't know much about endorsements or how they work but I think I would only add them if I didn't know anything about the prospective owners to trust them to do right for their dogs. That would apply just as much to some working homes as to some non working homes IMO.
-
its just that the working cocker is getting very popular and if pups are only being sold to people the breeders know and respect thats fine. but if the breed becomes too popular its bound to get exploited by folk that arent so fussy about where their pups end up.
and you have a point, some working homes arent that great . thank goodness I dont breed off my girls and never want to, Id be a nervous wreck imagining all sorts of horrors happening to my pups. . :o :'(
-
I don't know much about endorsements or how they work but I think I would only add them if I didn't know anything about the prospective owners to trust them to do right for their dogs. That would apply just as much to some working homes as to some non working homes IMO.
In an ideal world, good breeders would never need to place endorsements on puppies but it's not an ideal world. No matter how lovely a prospective owner seems to be and how carefully you vet them, no breeder can ever guarantee 100% that all their new owners will turn out to be as genuine as they first thought or that the puppy will actually stay with the home he/she was first sold to. It's not about a lack of trust - it's about breeders realising there are no certainties in this world and wanting to do their best to protect their pups. We've been using endorsements for years now (we even place them on any pups we retain ourselves) and have never had one owner complain and whilst it won't guarantee that one of our pups will never be used for breeding without our permission, it does deter those who are seeking a puppy for the wrong reasons (and sadly there are a lot of those out there)
-
No endorsements with Fern, but then we have known the breeder for about 40 years (local farmer)and umpteen generations of Ferns (all proper working dogs). We were intending to work her -but OH lost his eyesight and that was that. We had Fern spayed and when I told him I think he was actually a bit disappointed. He knew that we would have taken advice from him about finding a suitable stud if we had decided to breed from her. He has bred from her sister resulting in some absolute smashers :blink:.
When Fern's litter sister had her final litter this June (she had them three days before she turned 7 - talk about cutting it fine ::) ), I asked whether they were only looking for working homes for her pups and he said that he was looking for good homes for them as that was what mattered although he would obviously prefer working. He needs to know that his dogs are going to be treated with kindness above all else.
I don't know much about endorsements or how they work but I think I would only add them if I didn't know anything about the prospective owners to trust them to do right for their dogs. That would apply just as much to some working homes as to some non working homes IMO.
Happydog you've pretty much summed up what I think and what Alfie's breeder does as well! Alfie isn't endorsed but I wouldn't care if he was as I don't intend to breed him. There is a possibility though that if his breeder had kept him as he originally intended to do then he would be a field trial dog and might have been bred from if he was an exceptionally good worker. I would love another pup from Alfie's breeder but he only breeds from exceptional dogs and as Alfie's mum is retired he won't be breeding again until he has such a dog (if he does).
Alfie's father is a superb dog, Kirsten Strachan on here (workingcockers) has some of Alfie's relatives through his father and some of his brothers from previous litters are also successful working dogs and studs so possibly if Alfie did work or trial successfully then there might be some demand for his progeny for working homes as he's a big strong boy with a fantastic temperament as well, laid back in the house but fearless when out (even if I do say so ::) ;)) but unless I really get myself into gear and learn all about trialling or let someone else compete with him then I think I'll just have to keep him as the one-off he is! :luv:
-
I don't know much about endorsements or how they work but I think I would only add them if I didn't know anything about the prospective owners to trust them to do right for their dogs. That would apply just as much to some working homes as to some non working homes IMO.
In an ideal world, good breeders would never need to place endorsements on puppies but it's not an ideal world. No matter how lovely a prospective owner seems to be and how carefully you vet them, no breeder can ever guarantee 100% that all their new owners will turn out to be as genuine as they first thought or that the puppy will actually stay with the home he/she was first sold to. It's not about a lack of trust - it's about breeders realising there are no certainties in this world and wanting to do their best to protect their pups. We've been using endorsements for years now (we even place them on any pups we retain ourselves) and have never had one owner complain and whilst it won't guarantee that one of our pups will never be used for breeding without our permission, it does deter those who are seeking a puppy for the wrong reasons (and sadly there are a lot of those out there)
Good point Jane, I am a little naive still about these things, and whilst I agree that there are far too many unwanted dogs out there and would do everything in my power to stamp out animal cruelty, whether it be via puppy farming or elswehere, I do tend to think the best of people until they prove otherwise. It's just my nature. I'm too old to change now :005: .
Jane, just wondering- can an endorsment be revoked at a later date by the original breeder if they choose to do so? :-\
-
Jane, just wondering- can an endorsment be revoked at a later date by the original breeder if they choose to do so? :-\
Yes endorsements can be lifted by the original breeder at any time just by writing a letter to the Kennel Club. Normally the breeder would state in their contract under what circumstances they might be willing to lift the endorsements so there's no confusion and the buyer knows exactly where they stand.
-
Jane, just wondering- can an endorsment be revoked at a later date by the original breeder if they choose to do so? :-\
Yes endorsements can be lifted by the original breeder at any time just by writing a letter to the Kennel Club. Normally the breeder would state in their contract under what circumstances they might be willing to lift the endorsements so there's no confusion and the buyer knows exactly where they stand.
That's good, because I was thinking , that if we had not had Fern spayed and worked/trialled her as we had originally intended, we could well have ended up with a FTCH (judging by her siblings and their offspring). If she had been endorsed as well -then that would have removed her from the gene pool resulting in a great loss to potential working cocker owners everywhere (positive thinker thats me :D ). If an endorsement can be lifted, with prior consent by the breeder, then to me endorsements do seem to make sense. A case of playing safe.. After all no responsible working cocker breeder would object to the breeding one of their dogs offspring who had qualified as a FTCH would they? Or am I still being naive? ph34r
-
When we got Fern off her breeder we didn't have any endorsements, but then we are friends too, but it was discussed before we were allowed to have her when we were going to get her spayed or did we want to let her have a litter?
These questions were asked before they said we could definately have her ;) - I want the FIRST season to be over with >:( Then I can book her in to vets ;)
-
I do worry about the emphasis on FTCH in working cocker pedigree's and the over-use of certain FTCH sires & dams in the working cocker world.
I would much rather i had a dog from good working stock who has a *few* ftch's in his pedigree rather than seeing the same ones appear in a pedigree on both dam and sire sides (sometimes over and over again!). At the moment hereditary problems aren't as big an issue with working cockers as they are with show cockers, but who knows in the future?
-
I do worry about the emphasis on FTCH in working cocker pedigree's and the over-use of certain FTCH sires & dams in the working cocker world.
I would much rather i had a dog from good working stock who has a *few* ftch's in his pedigree rather than seeing the same ones appear in a pedigree on both dam and sire sides (sometimes over and over again!). At the moment hereditary problems aren't as big an issue with working cockers as they are with show cockers, but who knows in the future?
Agree 100% Helen.
-
This may be a daft question but do breeders who breed to produce good working dogs (as opposed to dogs for the pet market) register their dogs with the KC as a rule? ph34r
I wondered whether for working dogs, it is seen as offering any benefits? I know that racing greyhounds are not always registered with the KC, even if they are registered with the NGRC; what about gundogs?
I assume of they were dogs that compete in Field Trials, then they would have to be KC Registered, but what about the true working lines; that arguably could be the "best" examples of the breed??
I do worry about the emphasis on FTCH in working cocker pedigree's and the over-use of certain FTCH sires & dams in the working cocker world.
I would much rather i had a dog from good working stock who has a *few* ftch's in his pedigree rather than seeing the same ones appear in a pedigree on both dam and sire sides (sometimes over and over again!). At the moment hereditary problems aren't as big an issue with working cockers as they are with show cockers, but who knows in the future?
Line breeding, when done properly, can successfully reduce the incidences of heritiary problems; but it needs careful management, otherwise it can have the opposite effect and produce more *hidden* problems that only become apparent after a couple of generations :-\
-
rachel the keepers etc up here who do not trial do register with the kc their dogs who are pedigreed. but as accidents happen sometimes you get a pepper.. the result of two dogs left together after a shoot one who was supposed to be out of season.!! all peppers litter worked ( one for the army and one for the police as sniffer dogs)and obviously shes not got a kc being a sprocker.
I know a pointer cross lab he worked well and a clumber cross cocker who works very well. I think if they come off kc parents then the pups are registered. one of my freinds ( a keeper ) he has a kc reg springer but he deliberately mated her with a sprocker as the sprocker is fantastic. the pups were booked before the mating took pace. these pups arent registered obviously.
-
This may be a daft question but do breeders who breed to produce good working dogs (as opposed to dogs for the pet market) register their dogs with the KC as a rule? ph34r
I wondered whether for working dogs, it is seen as offering any benefits? I know that racing greyhounds are not always registered with the KC, even if they are registered with the NGRC; what about gundogs?
I assume of they were dogs that compete in Field Trials, then they would have to be KC Registered, but what about the true working lines; that arguably could be the "best" examples of the breed??
I do worry about the emphasis on FTCH in working cocker pedigree's and the over-use of certain FTCH sires & dams in the working cocker world.
I would much rather i had a dog from good working stock who has a *few* ftch's in his pedigree rather than seeing the same ones appear in a pedigree on both dam and sire sides (sometimes over and over again!). At the moment hereditary problems aren't as big an issue with working cockers as they are with show cockers, but who knows in the future?
Line breeding, when done properly, can successfully reduce the incidences of heritiary problems; but it needs careful management, otherwise it can have the opposite effect and produce more *hidden* problems that only become apparent after a couple of generations :-\
i'm not so sure that the management is careful - a lot of the breeding at the moment is to produce 'popular' colours from 'popular' lines.
yes, working working cocker breeders are very keen to have their dogs kc registered. there is an awful lot of pride re the working dogs and along with being a strong reliable working dog, they like the lineage. They are proud creatures these gundog breeders and all of the working cocker breeders i know are very careful of the working prowess, temperament and biddability of the dogs they're breeding first, and the pedigree second.
Jarv's breeders are not bothered too much by the FTCH in the background, but proven ability and soundness of the lines is very important
-
[/yes, working working cocker breeders are very keen to have their dogs kc registered. there is an awful lot of pride re the working dogs and along with being a strong reliable working dog, they like the lineage. They are proud creatures these gundog breeders and all of the working cocker breeders i know are very careful of the working prowess, temperament and biddability of the dogs they're breeding first, and the pedigree second.
quote]
hear hear! well put helen.
-
tbh i haven't registered either paddy or ellie in my name.both are kc registered . since i have no intention of breeding i never even bothered to look at the papers to see if there are endorsements.in fact i don't even know where their papers are :o
i do like looking into the pedigrees,but have no intentions of adding to them :D
-
This may be a daft question but do breeders who breed to produce good working dogs (as opposed to dogs for the pet market) register their dogs with the KC as a rule? ph34r
I wondered whether for working dogs, it is seen as offering any benefits? I know that racing greyhounds are not always registered with the KC, even if they are registered with the NGRC; what about gundogs?
I assume of they were dogs that compete in Field Trials, then they would have to be KC Registered, but what about the true working lines; that arguably could be the "best" examples of the breed??
I do worry about the emphasis on FTCH in working cocker pedigree's and the over-use of certain FTCH sires & dams in the working cocker world.
I would much rather i had a dog from good working stock who has a *few* ftch's in his pedigree rather than seeing the same ones appear in a pedigree on both dam and sire sides (sometimes over and over again!). At the moment hereditary problems aren't as big an issue with working cockers as they are with show cockers, but who knows in the future?
Line breeding, when done properly, can successfully reduce the incidences of heritiary problems; but it needs careful management, otherwise it can have the opposite effect and produce more *hidden* problems that only become apparent after a couple of generations :-\
i'm not so sure that the management is careful - a lot of the breeding at the moment is to produce 'popular' colours from 'popular' lines.
yes, working working cocker breeders are very keen to have their dogs kc registered. there is an awful lot of pride re the working dogs and along with being a strong reliable working dog, they like the lineage. They are proud creatures these gundog breeders and all of the working cocker breeders i know are very careful of the working prowess, temperament and biddability of the dogs they're breeding first, and the pedigree second.
Jarv's breeders are not bothered too much by the FTCH in the background, but proven ability and soundness of the lines is very important
Totally agree and Alfie's breeder is the same. He's fiercely proud of his dogs' working abilities and sound temperaments rather than how many famous FTCH's there are in their lines (although there are a few).
-
I've just looked out Fern's papers and there are a few FT CH and also one FT W :huh: Sorry to be thick here but any ideas on the FT W?
-
Do they have endorsement on the export pedigree?
if so, Which part should I check out of the pedigree?
-
FTW= field trial winner.
i reckon ellie would beat all the winners hands down.i think she should have been named road runner or something like that.she is very very fast.yet so tiny.
-
FTW= field trial winner.
i reckon ellie would beat all the winners hands down.i think she should have been named road runner or something like that.she is very very fast.yet so tiny.
:huh: Thanks now I feel really silly for asking as it was so simple ::)
-
I endorse my litters