A discussion on kennel blindness - Page 6

Everyone...for the 2nd time, let's please keep this on topic.  The little personal jabs back and forth are not needed.

Thank you.

I'm looking at a bunch of puppies laid out, half are black and half are sable.  They're only 6 days old, so no eyes open.  The black ones are grouped together, and the sable ones are grouped together.  This is how they arranged themselves.  Now, they say a broken clock tells the correct time twice a day, and maybe it's true.  I don't know for sure, I've never checked.  But I know these little pups are kennel blind, right?

Given all the descriptions laid out in this thread, I'm having difficulty deciphering exactly "what breeder" isn't or hasn't been kennel blind.  And if that's me as well, I'm not ashamed to admit.  I tell you one thing though, I've never claimed to be producing anything for the "betterment of the breed".  I'm not THAT damned blind.  But I do breed to standard, and nowhere in the standard does it say parents MUST be titled, or even hip certified for that matter.  That's an SV registry requirement, and the SV is just that, a registry.

 beetree:

                The last 2 litters I breed I placed in working homes at no charge. And my next will be the same I,m not in it for the money. All are good homes and most are all working. The pursuit of money isn,t the driving factor for all. 

I will take working homes over everything else. Not sure if I am blind, I am pretty harsh on my dogs, and pups. However, I will say that nothing beats getting a dog into a good working home and it is the perfect dog for that person, both in work and in training.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFd3-bOmMyw

Here is Minty MROB with jumps, and MR1 OFA EXCELLENT doing his thing last time he was down here. Ignore the old fat kid catching the dog.

Bob, (Or Jeff, too) I wasn't talking about your breedings personally... but re the post about the Martins, relating to the subject matter by the OP.

I really don't think this thread wants to be about who gives a dog a better home, a "working home" or a "pet home", IMHO. Unless you guys are saying you will be producing puppies without all your percieved perfect buyers lined up, and that can make one blinded to their own kennel production "needs", and that has nothing to do with money.  Just a thought that all of a sudden jumped in my head.

"kennel blind" is a term I have heard almost from first becoming involved with dogs. Usually applied to a breeder who has reached such a level of success that they believe nothing out there can offer anything to their line.

I really don't think it can be applied to someone who has done a few breedings, or a generation or two and simply likes their dogs. It takes many generations to really establish a "line". I have met people who seem to be kennel "ignorant", but that might be a subject for another thread.

jmo,
Rik





  

 beetree:

                 Not arguing here, just saying without the $ factor ego can,t be a issue for most. I am well aware of my dogs short comings and when I need a dog and I breed for one I attempt to lessen the effect of that issue.

 
  

darylehret wrote:

"But I do breed to standard, and nowhere in the standard does it say parents MUST be titled, or even hip certified for that matter.  That's an SV registry requirement, and the SV is just that, a registry."

You're right, of course; the SV IS just a registry, as is the AKC, and the standard does not address the health or soundness of the animal--nor does it say anything about the dog being able to hear, or to see; it doesn't mention that the dog must be able to adequately digest it's food, either.  Do you therefore believe that it would be OK to breed dogs with those problems, as long as they 'met the standard'?

Another version of kennel blindness is the belief that because I have purchased my dogs from kennels which DO title their breeding stock and meet the health certification requirements because they have to operate under the rules set forth by their national breed registries, my dogs are automatically worthy of being bred, and would be able to meet the same strict standards their parents had to meet. 

And while the moderators have expressed concerns as to commentary directed specifically at the originator of this thread, I submit to them that by virtue of opening the topic the OP also opened the door to having his own kennel practices scrutinized, especially as he is presently running an ad on this board for his latest litter of pups which may well 'meet the standard', but fall far from the generally accepted standard for *ethical* breedings.  Daryl, it takes a pretty big set of brass ones to advertise puppies priced @ US$1500 when you can't even offer a potential buyer the minor reassurance that the parents of these pups have been *certified* as being sound of hips and elbows (in other words, not just deemed 'OK' by your local private practitioner, or worse yet based on the fact that the dogs can jump and climb and run--often dysplastic dogs can do those things, too, at least while they're young).  For US$1500, a buyer could purchase a puppy of similar lineage, but born of parents who ARE titled in some working capacity and DO have hip and elbow and degenerative myelopathy certifications.  Funny how you went to breeders who DO meet the stricter requirements of their national breed registries for their breeding stock when you purchased your dogs, instead of to breeders who have the same breeding program you're practicing.  One has to wonder what the gentleman who is Tiekerhook would think of how you're utilizing the genetics he's worked so hard to perpetuate, breeding without ensuring the dogs are sound and with no confirmation of their working ability by an officially-recognized and qualified third-party....

There's the kennel blindness of believing that I know enough, and can be impartial enough, to accurately assess not just how well my dog meets the breed standard, but also whether the dog is anatomically sound of mind and body, and if it performs the work of the breed to the appropriate level for the breed...and therefore I don't need any input from anyone save for those who feel the same way as I do. Anyone who questions or disagrees with my beliefs is, of course, immediately suspect as to their motives, is probably either another sheep, or is threatened by me and is afraid they'll lose buyers to me. 

Neither Hutch nor Nyx are AKC registered as of yesterday at 1pm. Add *that* to the list of things that make you say 'hmmmmmmm'

Lose buyers?  I don't recall ever selling any of my puppies to an internet junkie, and I'd be grateful that I never DO.  You don't threaten me, not in any way I can see.

Go ahead and breed to AKC standard, FCI standard, SV standard, Czech, Slovak, Netherlands or whatever.  Not ONE of those registries will guarantee you shit, and anyone who disagrees is kidding themselves about who's really blind here.  I know I've had my fair share of crap dogs from most of them.  Remember I can pick who I sell to just as easy as you can pick who you buy from.

This thread is completely and ridiculously derailed, with everyone so worried about what I'm doing.