Breeding without titles... open discussion, not an argument - Page 1

Ok, so rather than continuing to clutter other threads I decided to start a thread as a general discussion NOT AN ARGUMENT about the ADVANTAGES and DISADVANTAGES of breeding dogs wihtout titles.  Sport titles, working titles, hell lets even consider AKC titles.  I believe everyone is on the same page as far as hip/elbow certs so, no point in discussing that unless you feel they are unnessary for some reason. 

My view point:

I feel titles should be a necessity when considering a dog for breeding.  Whether it be Sch, Dual Purpose Certified, Narc Certified, Herding title, ie.  They PROVE the working ability of the particular dog used.  Just because the lines are great, doesnt necessarily mean your particular dog is or that he/she will pass that along.  Now, I understand that within a couple hours of working a dog you can get a general idea of what it is capable of genetically but me personally I would rather have it in writing.  Bloodlines alone arent a justification for using particular dogs as breeding dogs.  As an example.... Frank's dad was a lawyer, Franks grandpa was a lawyer. Frank has sat on the couch playing XBox his whole life.  Frank then has a son, Fred.  You get falsely arrested for a crime.  You hire Fred because his grandfather and great-grandfather were good lawyers.  But to your surprise Fred knows nothing of the law and is actually much better suited to being employee of the month at McDonalds.  Perhaps you should have hired a real lawyer, instead of the guy with the grandparents that are lawyers...

I am a pro titles person.  I want to see SCH titles as far as the eye can see.  That said I would purchase from a breeder that was known to me that had a dog that through injury was not able to title. I have seen some AMAZING dogs who rip a cruciate lig and are unable to title. I am working a bitch right now who has everything I love in a dog, BUT it will be no small miracle to get her to survive to be titled.  She over does everything. Every day I am on pins and needles waiting for that career ending injury.  But she just seems to bounce....

On the flip side I have seen Sch 3 to Sch 3 and not one of the pups had the temperment to title.   Titles are a great starting place but not the end of the search.   I personally do not even look at untitled dogs even for purchase for a client.  I don't have time to guess so why would i even shop in the "untitled" section of the market.

Titles are extremely important.  I think that you need to have a clear understanding though when purchasing a pup from a breeder if whether or not they put titles on there dogs for "sport" purposes or did they do it so that they could "test" the level of workability.  The dog that I purchased mother did not have a working title but did have its hips/elbows done and the reason why I was comfortable with it is because after meeting the breeder and seeing her dogs I could clearly see that there would be no way that she would have a dog in her kennel that was not a strong worker.  I do not think that this type of breeding practices should be common but I think that it is ok sometimes depending on who and why it is being done.  I say who because not everyone knows as much as they think they do and they may think that there dog is the sh*t but it really isn't.  they come up with reasons on why the dog isn't titled. 
 
Titles are also a good way of keeping people honest.  I know that there are people out there that will pretty much "PAY" for a title and the dog cant work worth sh*t.  That ruins the credibility of dogs with legitimate titles. 

There are titled dogs out there that should have been culled from birth and never allowed to see the light of day.

I think about 85% of the people out there would not recognize a breed quality dog unless it had a title, and they were TOLD that it was a breeding quality dog.

30 years ago, the title Sch 3 meant something. Pronounced meant something. Now it is all just a scam. If you train hard enough most shitters can get a Sch3.

Start running the shitters off the field, and then some of us might take the title seriously.

I have had dogs with outstanding pedigrees that had such high thresholds that only table training would have gotten that dog to go. Pedigrees just point you in a general direction.

What Jeff said.

Until they mean something, they shouldn't be a requirement for breeding. 

As long as people see titles in a pedigree and think that it means they were all good dogs, titles won't mean anything. 

I would buy from a like-minded person who had untitled dogs before I would buy from someone who titles just to make their dogs more marketable commercially or someone that feels that SchH titles are the be all, end all, and that as long as the dog has those, it's a good dog.  There are people who title their dog and do nothing else to test them, not even in day to day life. Stress is everywhere, and I think how a dog performs under stress is key to breeding decisions, and imo, the "title" team is often too easy on those dogs, whereas there are individuals and small groups who really work the dogs in a way that will bring those weaknesses (or strengths) to the surface and paint a much clearer picture of the true DOG, not it's resume. 

We've all seen people b.s. a resume; why do you think a pedigree is any different? I want to conduct the actual interview. ;-)

"Start running the shitters off the field..."

Are we talking about the dogs or the owners?

I think both, starting w/the owners. 

The people are really the problem. Dogs are still dogs, as they always were. 

I think kennel blindness continues to be a huge huge part of the problem in breeding, not so much titles or lack of titles, but just lack of honesty and being too complacent about what is acceptable and not, and making excuses. 

I've heard all kinds of b.s. lately about 'why' certain dogs suck...excuses go on and on. As long as breeders believe their own crappy excuses for temperament problems, we'll continue to have them, titled or untitled. 

 Titles are a good starting point but not the be all end all of the equasion. I like to read about titles I want to see the dog work not just on the trial field but in training during off field. It all depends on the honesty of the breeder or owner of the titled dog.


To quote a very high level trainer" If your dog will take a hot dog from my hand I can put Schutzhund titles on it". Thats why the work is the most important factor. But titles are a good starting point.

 The Schutzhund title used to be a temperment test of the dogs trainability,work ethic and character. Since the wattering down of the test has left it what it is so dogs of weaker character could continue to pass you must look past the paper to the dog it,s self.     
    
 I will continue to title my dogs.  

BMartin said: " They PROVE the working ability of the particular dog used ."

and I think it should read :  They SHOULD prove the working ability of the particular dog used.
Because titles do not prove a dog can work. I have personally seen dogs get 80+ in protection that were awful. Much loved maybe, but should not get a passing score. I have seen herding dogs "working" sheep without ever being challenged. The sheep are well trained to follow the shepherd and the dog happily trots alongside. Not much work to that title.

I do think titles are important. I think the training is more important.
As for AKC titles, IMO it is just like anything else. You learn a lot about the dog by doing it, but the title itself means less. When you take a dog into the Atlanta Expo Center with 2000 other dogs competing, you most definitely learn something about that dog.
. .
----Mary

Mary,

Thank you for the correction because I absolutely agree.