Breeding Using Younger Dogs

Breeder Talk

  • I'm in the process of meeting several breeders so I can hopefully bring home a cute little female basenji this winter. So I've got lots of questions but this one stands out for me given what I've read on the forum so far.

    Two of the three breeders I've talked two are using sires (one is using a puppy from their own kennel, the other is using another breeder's male) that are few months shy of a year old. My understanding is that you can't officially do all of the health testing (e.g. hips) when they are that young. So do you look off of their pedigrees to try and make a judgement from that in this instance? Give my lack of experience in this area, is this commonplace or atypical? Why breed off of such a young dog? I'm meeting one of the breeders this Thursday so I plan to ask her some questions around this. But I'd like to get some other impressions on this so I can make the best informed decision.

    Thanks much,
    Clay


  • Well I am not a breeder of course, but IMO the only reason to use SUCH a young dog is to make puppies that you can sell. I don't see a reason at all to breed that young. Even if the sire or dam is SOOO amazing in temperament and conformation, you still have some health tests that can't quite be run yet. I would think a good responsible breeder would be more than willing to wait a few more years and really get a handle on if this dog will be what they want to breed.


  • In these cases, I would say they are definitely not BYBs.


  • They are not byb?
    Are they show folks?
    Many show dogs don't even finish until they are over a yr as the dogs body isn't fully formed.
    What is the background of these people?
    not asking names but what testing have they had done on the Adult b's they are breeding?
    Again, not being critical, but this sure doesn't sound right to me.
    A kennel name will be something YOU can check out of the sites that Pat and Lisa share for health issue.


  • @sharronhurlbut:

    They are not byb?
    Are they show folks?

    They are show folks. If I'm reading the results right, at least one of the dogs placed at Nationals.

    This is why I am asking the question primarly, because I know these breeders are very active in the basenji community and have been mentioned several times on this forum. I don't want to give the impression that I am trying to call them "irresponsible breeders", I'm just asking out curiosity so I can be informed when I talk with them and decide to make a decision about which breeder to get my dog from.


  • Are all of the 3 options in the BCOA? Because that would rule out one in WI you ought to run from….fast.


  • Being someone who shows is just a part of it..
    Sigh.
    I wish Pat would speak up.
    I do rescue but go to a lot of dog shows.
    I know folks that myself and others consider BYB who show.
    Heavens, this sounds like I am slamming show breeders and its not the case.
    Quality breeders are the ones who will get the health of our dogs to where it should be.
    Non quality breeders do it for $$$ or ego, or who knows…
    Seems now a days, you pay the same for each puppy, so its wonderful your checking to see you get the very best dog you can.
    I know BCOA breeders who I wouldn't recommend.
    But that is a place to start.
    Check out Sally Wallis site re the sire/dams health.
    That will give you a clue as to what these folks have done in the past, and will do in the future.
    More homework is better.


  • The are all listed in BCOA. Again, definitely not a puppymill or BYB.


  • I've looked through the pedigrees too and I am not concerned there either with regards to the histories of the breeders. I feel (as a novice) I've checked every resource I know of, but I'm asking here because I don't think the answer to this question is that obvious to me or necessarily straightforward. I know what the general feeling on this forum would likely be, but I don't want to make assumptions.

    I really appreciate all of the responses, it's part of my homework.

    Thanks,
    Clay


  • @Nemo:

    I'm in the process of meeting several breeders so I can hopefully bring home a cute little female basenji this winter. So I've got lots of questions but this one stands out for me given what I've read on the forum so far.

    Two of the three breeders I've talked two are using sires (one is using a puppy from their own kennel, the other is using another breeder's male) that are few months shy of a year old. My understanding is that you can't officially do all of the health testing (e.g. hips) when they are that young. So do you look off of their pedigrees to try and make a judgement from that in this instance? Give my lack of experience in this area, is this commonplace or atypical? Why breed off of such a young dog? I'm meeting one of the breeders this Thursday so I plan to ask her some questions around this. But I'd like to get some other impressions on this so I can make the best informed decision.

    Thanks much,
    Clay

    First, there are breeders out there that many of us would consider "pure of profit" breeders… they might show sometimes... but they really do not finish many dogs, nor do the really health test...

    There is really no good reason to use a dog that young. As you correctly assumed, to young for Hips to be done (you can get prelims, but they would also be on the OFA site) and it is not common place, at least not usually... a breeder "might" have a really good reason.... and "if" the hips are at least prelim'ed (and elbows too), Fanconi test done, Thyroid, current eye exam... the next thing I would look at is how old are the Sire and Dam, Grand sire/Grand dam of that dog. If they have good age on them, at least you have a starting point for health. What you find many times is that the dog being used is 1yr or younger, Sire and Dam of that dog are 2 or 3yrs old, the grand sire/dam of that dog is 4 or 5yrs old. This doesn't give you a very good idea of a long health life of that particular pedigree.... IMO.... and IMO it is not worth it to rely on their pedigree for health...

    And you can take that kennel name and search OFA site for that breeders dogs.... but remember, just because they have test a "couple" you need to know how many pups they are producing over all... and then how many are they testing.


  • And while it is great that they are a member of BCOA, this doesn't give everyone a "green" light that they are a good or responsible breeder.


  • Thanks Pat.


  • Visited the Klassics kennel page and she is using a dog well under a year this season and she certainly isn´t an unknown breeder.Not to critize but isn´t that a bit too young?


  • What health testing have they done?
    It sure does sound too young to me.
    I have to share what I heard years ago ring side. Yes at a AKC basenji show.
    Don't know who said it, but it shocked me even then.
    They said, yes, show and breed them young, before any of the "troubles" show up.
    I will leave that to you all to figure out what they meant.


  • @myran:

    Visited the Klassics kennel page and she is using a dog well under a year this season and she certainly isn´t an unknown breeder.Not to critize but isn´t that a bit too young?

    It is young, but as I said, if it were me and I was looking to use a very young male (not that I am planning on doing that) but here are the things I would consider….

    1. Prelim hips and elbows
    2. Eye Exam
    3. Fanconi - (this particular dog is from two Clear parents, so it is not quite as important, however for me, I think it should be done)
    4. Thyroid
    5. Age of the parents....
    In this case the sire of this particular dog was born in 1997 and is still living, Dam of this particular dog was born in 2000, obviously living
    Grandsire of the dog still living born in 1995, Grand dam of this dog born 1992 and died in 2006 at at 14, Grandsire on the bottom side born in 1898, died at 14, and Grand dam born 1997 and still living.
    So, that give a very good long life for this particular dog's pedigree which would for me play into using a dog of this age


  • @tanza:

    It is young, but as I said, if it were me and I was looking to use a very young male (not that I am planning on doing that) but here are the things I would consider….

    1. Prelim hips and elbows
    2. Eye Exam
    3. Fanconi - (this particular dog is from two Clear parents, so it is not quite as important, however for me, I think it should be done)
    4. Thyroid
    5. Age of the parents....
    In this case the sire of this particular dog was born in 1997 and is still living, Dam of this particular dog was born in 2000, obviously living
    Grandsire of the dog still living born in 1995, Grand dam of this dog born 1992 and died in 2006 at at 14, Grandsire on the bottom side born in 1898, died at 14, and Grand dam born 1997 and still living.
    So, that give a very good long life for this particular dog's pedigree which would for me play into using a dog of this age

    Thanks, this helps me understand more specifically what to look for in this situation. (particularly #5, I was already looking at 1-4 thanks to previous forum comments).


  • I know many breeders who are well known in the breed and who have been breeding for a long time, who will breed very young dogs. I have also seen this practice produce dogs that have health issues. The common justifications that I have heard, "This is the last litter the bitch is going to have so if I want this breeding I have to do it now" and "I know my line and xyz isn't a problem so it's okay"

    I would really look closely at the vertical pedigree data on a young dog that is being considered, use Sally's reverse pedigree function and look at what the parents have produced in any older sibs or cousins. This is a little time consuming to have to go back and forth between Sally's database and the OFA one but can really show some trends you might be surprised by.

    Also be aware that there are known breeders with show winners, who are BCOA members who have bred dogs that are known to be dysplastic, meaning you can look them up in the OFA database and see they had them x-rayed, knew the results and bred anyways. There are breeders who have bred dogs who have tested as Fanconi Carriers by marker test to untested or worse. So just because they are well known in the breed does not mean they meet the criteria for responsible.


  • Thanks again for the input.

    Is there a way to see if a dog is still alive that I am missing? The pedigree site doesn't tell you and it wasn't obvious on the AKC or OFA site either. The breeder of the younger dog doesn't have a website that I can tell.


  • To answer my own question, I guess the breeder or owner would have to go to the effort to report this. Maybe that is unlikely.


  • It is not really that easy to verify whether a dog is still living or not without talking to the owner or breeder. Many of us who do showing or performance are familiar with each other and keep track of that information for well known dogs.

Suggested Topics

  • When to consider breeding?

    Breeder Talk
    20
    0 Votes
    20 Posts
    8k Views
    DebraDownSouthD
    @bigv said in When to consider breeding?: So Taylor.rene . A little bit about my findings over the last 30 years is that every person who breeds dogs calls them self a responsible breeder? "" Yes, and fortunately for about 20 year now, anyone who really wants to verify if the breeder is actually believable can do so. Some breeders have no problem with incest for the sake of a ribbon as (dogs aren't people )..It is all about titles not the betterment of the breed. Being involved with race horses..<< Gosh, where to begin. " Incest" is a morality terminology, applied as everything from just not parent/child and aunt or uncles/nieces and nephews....all the way to 2nd or even 3rd cousins. It has little to do with genetics, hence adopted children count, and everything to do with moral views. That said, the human race is far from universally avoiding what would be called close line breeding or even incest. Isolated communities ...either physically by geographic terrain or socially by groups such Ashkenazi Jews and Romani, have limited gene pools. Ashkenazi Jews, btw, joke we are all no further than 5th cousins, but it is nearly true. Dogs and animals have no such manmade morals. A common propensity for many mammals to not to mate with closely related animals has nothing to do with incest. In limited populations they will mate, and the problems that arise if it occurs too often are due to decreased gene, increased expression of harmful genes etc. In controlled breeding, line breeding, even close, can be used to find if there are harmful recessives, or bring out desired recessives. If you think it isn't done with livestock, including horses, you're mistaken. With knowledgeable breeders who keep up on genetics, it absolutely is for the betterment of the breed, not a ribbon... Yes I am not a fan of line breeding but it seems that every zoo in the world has a similar view as they are always swapping animals to improve the genes . ...<<<<< Again, absolutely nothing to do with incest. Zoo animals, even those of nonendangered species, have a serious issue with limited gene pools. The level of that limitation cannot be compared to most pet breeds. We aren't talking many thousands of individuals, or millions, but sometimes 100 or less. Stud books are kept, for example, on all the polar bears in zoos and the effort to keep the diversification as high as possible is serious. (I'll leave out my views on them being in zoos.) So sure, if dog breeders were faced with THAT level of limited gene pool, line breeding would probably be avoided as much as possible. However, that all ignores the fact that dogs in any breed are mostly related.. If you go back 10 or more generations, you find the same dogs heavily in most lines. Sometimes 2 dogs that aren't related 3 generations back may share more actual genes than a closely related dog who has a lot of breeding out of the line on one side. That's where knowledgeable breeders come in. Having studied dingos for the past 15 years I can say without dought a bitch won't mate with relative... They are similar to basenjis in many ways. ...<< That's nice that you've studied them. But researchers are making new discoveries based on actual observations and finding a lot of what they thought isn't true. With massive interbreeding with domestic dogs, the pure dingos are disappearing. I envy those of you able to see them. However researchers suspect they have ...>>During this a hitherto unknown form of the “pure” dingo was discovered (based on DNA and skull features): a white dog with orange spots on the fur. This variant was considered as a single mutation or the result of interbreeding with an isolated dingo population.<< So they don't rule it out. (I downloaded to read, over 100 pages but you might love it. I'll save for later! https://web.archive.org/details/http://www.invasiveanimals.com/downloads/Final-proceedings-with-cover.pdf ) And my boy does have a title that no other basenji has . He is the first and only basenji to be approved by the Victorian State Goverment to be authorised to hunt deer on private and public land within its borders. But to some this would make him unsuitable to breed with you figure?<<< First, while you have done an impressive job with you dogs, I am pretty sure that is a privilege given, not a "title," and I am 100% certain his being able to would have nothing to do with whether anyone deemed him not worthy of breeding to. With the right health checks, good conformation, etc, I would think a good plus...especially if the bitch owner wanted to possibly enhance hunting ability. It simply isn't enough.
  • Same dog in pedigree

    Breeder Talk
    9
    0 Votes
    9 Posts
    3k Views
    Rita JeanR
    Going to be a very hard bug to let go.. To this day a nice truck can turn my head. Rita Jean
  • Breeding Plans

    Breeder Talk
    216
    0 Votes
    216 Posts
    97k Views
    bellabasenjiB
    I am loving McCartney's work, thank you for the link Jenn! I bookmarked it for future reference… it's great stuff!!!:cool:
  • Kinetic Breeding Plans

    Breeder Talk
    142
    0 Votes
    142 Posts
    65k Views
    YodelDogsY
    Based solely on these photos, I would rank Bella and Dean the highest but Clark and Flash are certainly not far behind. This is a fabulous litter. I love them all.
  • Oldest to breed males

    Breeder Talk
    2
    0 Votes
    2 Posts
    2k Views
    tanzaT
    @satieo: I was just curious, I saw the thread about ages of bitches but what about males is/should there be a cut off age for them? Obviously they shouldn't be younger than 2 for proper testing. No cut off age… as long as they are potent... I used a 14yr old with one of my litters and it was a natural cover.
  • Magic markering your dog

    Breeder Talk
    15
    0 Votes
    15 Posts
    7k Views
    jys1011J
    Arlene that's hysterical :D…my little brother just HATED baths...and so do C3PO & TOPAZ LOL LOL...maybe it's a family trait?? :D :D