# We intend to breed Lucy in April



## CarolinaCasey (Jun 1, 2007)

Are you going to be starting your own kennel, or is the breeding b/c of co-ownership of Lucy? Who will be the stud? She's beautiful! Good luck!


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

Lucy is a very good looking dog. What makes you wanna breed her? Do you show or do rally/obedience/agility with her? How old is she now?

I am just curious what makes you think about breeding your girl


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

We haven't finalized the stud yet but I am leaning toward a beautiful boy named Penuche - I have his link some where-

We do not show dogs or anything like that- she will be four years old in July - 

She is almost perfect except for her elephant ears and she has an incredible disposition - unlike her cousin Jaime with the gay tail, the howling - I am convinced Jaime is an Irish Setter in a golden body

Can you see what a goof ball Jaime is ?

We lover her all the same though


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

here is our preliminary choice stud

http://www.karenhocker.com/image.php?pnum=pd-061905a-066


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

even the wild boar that roam the forests love Lucy


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

the deer love her too


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

how can you resist ?


----------



## MyMaggieGirl (Nov 12, 2008)

Ha ha ha ha love the pictures.


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

reason why I ask is because I was taught with Labradors (I own Labs, I have NO idea of Goldens) that you should only intend to breed if it makes the breed better. 

My 1.5year old Black Lab is a beautiful boy in my eyes, has a fantastic character but I would never use him for breeding. He is not worth showing but makes a fantastic Rally/Obedience dog and hopefully also agiliy. His pedigree is also a big mess (I am still amazed that the AKC let me register him with a full registration though)

My chocolate lab girl though comes from a fantastic bloodline and has hopefully a future in the show ring. She is only 12 weeks old so who knows? She is co owned with the breeder, so if she does well in the ring, gets her CH, all her clearance we might breed her in a couple of years.


----------



## Penny & Maggie's Mom (Oct 4, 2007)

Do you have her link to K9data or her pedigree to share?


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

Retrieverlover said:


> reason why I ask is because I was taught with Labradors (I own Labs, I have NO idea of Goldens) that you should only intend to breed if it makes the breed better.
> 
> My 1.5year old Black Lab is a beautiful boy in my eyes, has a fantastic character but I would never use him for breeding. He is not worth showing but makes a fantastic Rally/Obedience dog and hopefully also agiliy. His pedigree is also a big mess (I am still amazed that the AKC let me register him with a full registration though)
> 
> My chocolate lab girl though comes from a fantastic bloodline and has hopefully a future in the show ring. She is only 12 weeks old so who knows? She is co owned with the breeder, so if she does well in the ring, gets her CH, all her clearance we might breed her in a couple of years.


Lucy is the perfect dog - 

even as a puppy she was a little angel


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

Penny & Maggie's Mom said:


> Do you have her link to K9data or her pedigree to share?


 I have it somewhere let me try to find it


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> Lucy is the perfect dog -
> 
> even as a puppy she was a little angel


I don't think I'll go further with this conversation. I have only been on this board for a day so I don't wanna cause trouble yet. 

Good Luck with Lucy!


----------



## cola3812 (Nov 29, 2009)

Retrieverlover said:


> I don't think I'll go further with this conversation. I have only been on this board for a day so I don't wanna cause trouble yet.
> 
> Good Luck with Lucy!


I get what you are saying Retrieverlover. Just because a dog is a perfect puppy doesn't mean they are breed worthy.


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> I have it somewhere let me try to find it


is there an AKC page or some site where you punch in the registration number for the pedigree?

I know I had it somewhere


----------



## momtoMax (Apr 21, 2009)

She has all the clearances so why the negativity? Good luck with your puppies - Lucy is a beautiful dog!!


----------



## CarolinaCasey (Jun 1, 2007)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> is there an AKC page or some site where you punch in the registration number for the pedigree?
> 
> I know I had it somewhere



www.k9data.com 

She must have been put into k9 data for her to show up. You can always add her if you haven't yet.

Do you have full registration on Honey? Is your breeder going to be your mentor? I agree with RetrieverLover, just make sure that you are indeed bettering the breed. Have an independent person from another kennel evaluate Honey before you make any decisions, just to be sure that you are doing just that.


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

cola3812 said:


> I get what you are saying Retrieverlover. Just because a dog is a perfect puppy doesn't mean they are breed worthy.


Thank you  Go on craigslist, petfinder.com or whatever online newspaper and see how many puppies from perfect dogs are out there waiting for a home. 

My girl is only 12 weeks and the breeder and I are on the same page here: we only breed her if she has titels, can improve the breed and we have people wanting a puppy. If a puppy doesnt find a home, no matter if its the pick of the litter, the middle pup or the runt, its the breeders responsibility to keep the puppy (ies). 

I am sorry if I sound so harsh but I have heard all those stories many times and I just get frustrated. Just this morning I found 3 ads on craigslist for purebreed Labs who are *ooops* litters.


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

You can order an online pedigree from the AKC 
http://www.akc.org/reg/pedigrees.cfm

Lucy may also be on www.k9data.com - you would search on her registered name.


----------



## jwemt81 (Aug 20, 2008)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> is there an AKC page or some site where you punch in the registration number for the pedigree?
> 
> I know I had it somewhere


If we had her registered name, we could look up her clearances and get names of other dogs in her line who have had clearances done on offa.org.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

http://www.k9data.com/pedigree.asp?ID=344489


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

It seems strange to me that someone would breed a dog whose registered name they don't even know, and whose parent's names they don't know. (Most breeders can recite 5 or more generation pedigrees on all their dogs.)Add to that not having proven the dog in any venue, and some obvious faults, and it becomes a bad idea to my way of thinking. Clearances and temperament ARE very important - no question - but they are just part of the equation.


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

This is a very informative and helpful site a friend just fwded me

http://www.woodhavenlabs.com/breeding.html


----------



## mylissyk (Feb 25, 2007)

I sincerely hope that is a joke in very poor taste. Just because you think she is perfect and beautiful, that is not a good enough reason to breed her and add to the astronomical over population of pet dogs. You are not showing her or competing with her, she has no pedigree history to warrant reproducing her line. There is not a good reason to have a litter of puppies just because she is a nice dog.

She's a lovely girl with a wonderful personality. Just enjoy her.

If I was too blunt, I apologize, I just don't understand this.


----------



## jwemt81 (Aug 20, 2008)

mylissyk said:


> I sincerely hope that is a joke in very poor taste. Just because you think she is perfect and beautiful, that is not a good enough reason to breed her and add to the astronomical over population of pet dogs. You are not showing her or competing with her, she has not pedigree history to warrant reproducing her line. There is not a good reason to have a litter of puppies just because she is a nice dog.
> 
> She's a lovely girl with a wonderful personality. Just enjoy her.
> 
> If I was too blunt, I apologize, I just don't understand this.


I totally agree. Sometimes you have to be blunt.


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

I looked your pup up on offa.org 

If I look at the right pup (Dashwood Honey wolf Lucy) I would not recommend breeding. Fair hips? Imagine all the hip problems the puppies can have?


And is her original breeder okay with your plans? With Labs there are hardly any peputable breeder who will sell a bitch on full registration without co owner ship. 

I know I said earlier I won't add anymore to this thread but I feel that you need to think clearly here. 

I have heard so many horror stories about litters from the bitch dying to an entire litter born dead.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Retrieverlover said:


> I looked your pup up on offa.org
> 
> If I look at the right pup (Dashwood Honey wolf Lucy) I would not recommend breeding. Fair hips? Imagine all the hip problems the puppies can have?
> 
> ...


 
Daniela, I understand and appreciate your thoughts, however, FAIR is still a passing rating, and if bred thoughtfully and carefully, can be no more likely to produce hip problems than a dog or bitch with an Excellent rating. 

There is far, far more to breeding than just looking at an individual dog's ratings, and that dog's temperament.


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

Yes Laura, there is more to breeding than just clearance. That's why I was asking in an earlier post if the owner works with dog. 

I am new to the whole breeding/conformation and learn something new every day


----------



## Jackson'sMom (Oct 13, 2007)

mylissyk said:


> I sincerely hope that is a joke in very poor taste. Just because you think she is perfect and beautiful, that is not a good enough reason to breed her and add to the astronomical over population of pet dogs. You are not showing her or competing with her, she has no pedigree history to warrant reproducing her line. There is not a good reason to have a litter of puppies just because she is a nice dog.
> 
> She's a lovely girl with a wonderful personality. Just enjoy her.
> 
> If I was too blunt, I apologize, I just don't understand this.


My heart breaks every time I see a new post about a golden, or any dog, in need of a loving home. Breeding a dog just because she is 'nice' or 'an angel' is insufficient reason. There are millions of 'nice' dogs being put to death every year.


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

found the pedigree here it is 

http://www.k9data.com/pedigree.asp?ID=344489

here is the breeder of both Jaime and Lucy's fathers

http://tangleloft.com/index.php?pr=Tangleloft_Champions_and_Reference_Dogs

Jaime's Dad was Champ and Lucy's Dad is Willie - which technically make them first cousins once removed

thank you all for your kind words and recommendations


----------



## CarolinaCasey (Jun 1, 2007)

Have you put a test breeding into K9 data to see what the COI and other genetic information will be? I think that is a must if you still think that you should do this given the information you've received here.

Although Dashwood knows your intentions to breed, does Tangleloft?


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

momtoMax said:


> She has all the clearances so why the negativity? Good luck with your puppies - Lucy is a beautiful dog!!


Thank you very much - I intend to be as responsible as possible - she has an excellent pedigree and passed all clearances - she is as gentle and soft a disposition as any golden that I have ever seen or owned and I have seen alot- her big ears are the only thing less than perfect-I have had goldens in my family for over 45 years - I think I am as good a judge as anyone - but I am still closely coordinating with my breeder to ensure the technical aspects are correct-

I posted a few extremely rare funny pictures of her trying to look aggressive and yet some people start making negative implications ?

Please - by which standards do you determine who should be bred? I would really appreciate some constructive feedback


----------



## Mssjnnfer (Aug 9, 2009)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> Thank you very much - I intend to be as responsible as possible - she has an excellent pedigree and passed all clearances - she is as gentle and soft a disposition as any golden that I have ever seen or owned and I have seen alot- her big ears are the only thing less than perfect-I have had goldens in my family for over 45 years - I think I am as good a judge as anyone - but I am still closely coordinating with my breeder to ensure the technical aspects are correct-
> 
> I posted a few extremely rare funny pictures of her trying to look aggressive and yet some people start making negative implications ?
> 
> Please - by which standards do you determine who should be bred? I would really appreciate some constructive feedback


No one doubts that Lucy is a beautiful and well behaved golden. I think we ALL think of our goldens like that, but that doesn't mean they should make puppies. 

People are just saying that you shouldn't breed JUST BECAUSE your dog is the "perfect" golden. There are MILLIONS of dogs in shelters and on the streets that were bred (by humans or by nature) that I'm sure were perfect dogs.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

I want to respond to this comment but I want to say that my response is NOT directed at Lucy, who I know nothing about. It's a general comment about dogs and clearances.
Yes, clearances are very important, but they are NOT the be-all and end-all. Just because a dog has clearances doesn't mean they should be bred. A lot of dogs "with clearances" have horrible allergies, chronic ear problems, autoimmune diseases in their lines, or a myriad of other health issues that aren't part of "clearances". I've met a LOT of dogs "with clearances" that have temperaments that no way, no how should be passed on in the golden breed; they're either hyper, shy, fearful, aggressive, the whole gamut. Clearances don't check for that.
"Clearances" don't speak to whether or not the dog is to the breed standard, or, in the eyes of unbaised, independent people who are familiar with the golden breed, should be bred. Only competing in assorted venues, from conformation, to agility, obedience, field work, tracking, etc. will help prove whether or not the dog is in some small way worthwhile of being bred. A golden retriever who hasn't got a clue what "retriever" means should not be bred. A golden retriever who is 26 inches tall and weighs 100 pounds should not be bred, I don't care how many "clearances" he passes. 
Yes, Lucy is a very pretty dog. Again, this is NOT directed at Lucy. But one of my pet peeves is the notion that "clearances" make a dog breedable. They are only one small part of the overall picture of whether or not a dog should be bred.




momtoMax said:


> She has all the clearances so why the negativity? Good luck with your puppies - Lucy is a beautiful dog!!


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> It seems strange to me that someone would breed a dog whose registered name they don't even know, and whose parent's names they don't know. (Most breeders can recite 5 or more generation pedigrees on all their dogs.)Add to that not having proven the dog in any venue, and some obvious faults, and it becomes a bad idea to my way of thinking. Clearances and temperament ARE very important - no question - but they are just part of the equation.


Excuse me - where did you get the conclusion that I did not know my girl's registered name ?- I simply did not recall the k9 data web site - 

I am not a professional breeder - I just want to breed a litter and do so responsibly - we elected to forego breeding Jaime despite her pedigree and passed clearances -

My breeder initially gave us a restricted registration and only after all clearances passed did she allow the change-

Happy Dogs











Oh and did I mention that Lucy can fly?


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

mylissyk said:


> I sincerely hope that is a joke in very poor taste. Just because you think she is perfect and beautiful, that is not a good enough reason to breed her and add to the astronomical over population of pet dogs. You are not showing her or competing with her, she has no pedigree history to warrant reproducing her line. There is not a good reason to have a litter of puppies just because she is a nice dog.
> 
> She's a lovely girl with a wonderful personality. Just enjoy her.
> 
> If I was too blunt, I apologize, I just don't understand this.


so Goldens should only be bred for show or competition ?


----------



## cola3812 (Nov 29, 2009)

I am not a breeder nor do I know all that goes into responsible breeding. But...this whole thread screams "money" to me. It seems to me that you are in it for the money and not to better the breed. And that is what responsible breeders do. Have you considered all the money that goes into breeding? The vet appts, the possibility of a c-section in the middle of the night? You may have considered all this but your attitude is just too whimsical for me and it seems you are not taking it serious enough. I agree...it's odd that you didn't know your dogs full registered name nor did you know about K9data. I don't know...

And by the way...Lucy is beautiful. I had a beautiful BYB golden but he had a somewhat aggressive/submissive personality that I would not want to pass along to any other golden (not that I ever considered breeding). But...he was beautiful! Good luck in whatever you do. But please...seek the help of those that know about responsible breeding. I think you need to read what hotel4dogs had to say and really let that digest...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> so Goldens should only be bred for show or competition ?


 
Of course not. Honest breeders know that even when breeding the very best to the very best, only a certain percentage of the offspring will be show or competition quality, if ANY, and the rest will be sold as pets to loving homes. Having someone objective and well trained in evaluating the dogs considered for breeding is important (as in conformation judges, field judges, etc) is a very important part of determining which dogs will be bred. 
We ALL love our dogs and think that they are "perfect". But, not all of them should be bred, and producing a litter of puppies because we think they are sweet, or have good temperaments, or like their color or whatever, even if they have clearances, is not why a breeding should be made. Every breeding done by responsible, knowlegeable, experienced breeders is made with maintaing/bettering some aspect of the breed. Gigantic ears and gay tails are two faults that should not be overlooked.

Why do you want to breed Lucy?


----------



## LifeOfRiley (Nov 2, 2007)

I don't want to pile on here, and I wouldn't automatically say that you _shouldn't_ breed her. If she has her clearances and she really is a wonderful Golden, there might be absolutely nothing wrong with your breeding her.
But why rush into it? Why not take a little time and have some experienced breeders and/or judges evaluate her? If they give you the thumbs up, then go for it. But at least listen to what they have to say. Sometimes we're too close to it and love them too much to see any flaws. 
She certainly is a gorgeous girl and it sounds like she has a great temperament, but if I were you, I'd want a couple unbiased opinions before I would consider breeding.


----------



## beccacc31 (Aug 17, 2009)

Have you considered joining the Connecticut River Valley Golden Retriever Club? You may learn a lot from networking with people very active in the breed. Is your breeder a member of the Connecticut River Valley Golden Retriever Club?


----------



## THE HONEY WOLVES (Jun 9, 2007)

cola3812 said:


> I am not a breeder nor do I know all that goes into responsible breeding. But...this whole thread screams "money" to me. It seems to me that you are in it for the money and not to better the breed. And that is what responsible breeders do. Have you considered all the money that goes into breeding? The vet appts, the possibility of a c-section in the middle of the night? You may have considered all this but your attitude is just too whimsical for me and it seems you are not taking it serious enough. I agree...it's odd that you didn't know your dogs full registered name nor did you know about K9data. I don't know...
> 
> And by the way...Lucy is beautiful. I had a beautiful BYB golden but he had a somewhat aggressive/submissive personality that I would not want to pass along to any other golden (not that I ever considered breeding). But...he was beautiful! Good luck in whatever you do. But please...seek the help of those that know about responsible breeding. I think you need to read what hotel4dogs had to say and really let that digest...


Your assumption that I am motivated by money is baseless and deplorable- We do not need whatever money selling puppies would get us - I prefer ensuring that they are placed in good homes with friends and relatives 

I am working very closely with a breeder and if there is any new revelation that would warrant not breeding her we would forego doing so

I must add that the level of baseless, hostile condascending remarks are disgraceful - Simply because I did not recall the link to the K9data.com web site I am not taking this serious ? I am too whimsical? irresponsible? 

How many of you contributed to the ceasing of the calendar publication ? I am sure some of you participated - 

I must go vacuum with my Dyson now - thank you all so much for your kind words


----------



## momtoMax (Apr 21, 2009)

Is it that I do not understand the players here? Packleader bred his dogs and everyone is oh how great how cute, etc. A few others have posted about it and get the same kind of attitude. I understand why people who willy nilly decide they are going to breed their dog get the 12 gun salute but really, this is too much.

For those who do it willy nilly, you say, need clearances!! So irresponsible to do so without clearances!! Now you have someone who is working with their dogs breeder who was knowledgable and cared enough to have all the clearances done on their dog (which is not cheap) and still people with 10 posts and others stake her (who has over 400) to the ground? Hey, all breeders start somewhere and as she stated, she is working with an experienced breeder and is doing everything by the book - why do you all have to be so negative and awful to her? 

I really dislike the mob mentality that goes on here sometimes. I think it is so over the line and unwarranted in this case.  I just had to say that.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Whatever. Good luck. (I hope you don't need it.)


----------



## amy22 (May 11, 2008)

Momtomax...I agree with you. I dont know why she was jumped all over. Sounds like she is doing things right, and really researching and working with a breeder. Its sad that for some on this forum there are numerous positive posts that go on and on and on...and for others theres a few and then things die down or there is just negativity. I guess there is some inside track that some of us dont know about?? I feel bad for The Honey Wolves and others that this has happened to. I really like this forum, but its sad when this happens to a poster for no apparent reason.


----------



## LOVEisGOLDEN (Jan 4, 2008)

holy crap people! who are you to say that this person has no right to breed his dog? why do you all feel that you deserve the right to belittle him, who are you to even form an opinion about his decision? it's his dog. he has done much more than most who call themselves "breeders". he is a long standing member of GRF & simply came on here looking for help & advice. not to be chastised & told that his dog isn't good enough. if you don't agree with his decision, so be it; wish him well, and go on with your day.


----------



## mylissyk (Feb 25, 2007)

hotel4dogs said:


> I want to respond to this comment but I want to say that my response is NOT directed at Lucy, who I know nothing about. It's a general comment about dogs and clearances.
> Yes, clearances are very important, but they are NOT the be-all and end-all. Just because a dog has clearances doesn't mean they should be bred. A lot of dogs "with clearances" have horrible allergies, chronic ear problems, autoimmune diseases in their lines, or a myriad of other health issues that aren't part of "clearances". I've met a LOT of dogs "with clearances" that have temperaments that no way, no how should be passed on in the golden breed; they're either hyper, shy, fearful, aggressive, the whole gamut. Clearances don't check for that.
> "Clearances" don't speak to whether or not the dog is to the breed standard, or, in the eyes of unbaised, independent people who are familiar with the golden breed, should be bred. Only competing in assorted venues, from conformation, to agility, obedience, field work, tracking, etc. will help prove whether or not the dog is in some small way worthwhile of being bred. A golden retriever who hasn't got a clue what "retriever" means should not be bred. A golden retriever who is 26 inches tall and weighs 100 pounds should not be bred, I don't care how many "clearances" he passes.
> Yes, Lucy is a very pretty dog. Again, this is NOT directed at Lucy. But one of my pet peeves is the notion that "clearances" make a dog breedable. They are only one small part of the overall picture of whether or not a dog should be bred.


No, I don't believe Goldens should only be bred for show or competition. The above quote is exactly my point.


----------



## anniekc (Jan 29, 2010)

Interesting thread. For what it's worth, my first reaction was negative. I guess because there are so many Golden Retrievers out there, and the initial post did sound like it was being done on a lark, but subsequent posts refuted that idea, so that's that.


----------



## Claire's Friend (Feb 26, 2007)

Lucy is a beautiful dog , obviously you love and adore her. So I have one question for you. Are you willing to lose her over this, are you willing to have her die in order to have puppies? I have been blown away by the amount of fatalities we have had with our breeders on this forum. For that reason alone, I would never breed my dogs.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Go to the Golden Retriever Club in your area and find a good mentor. You've been posting on this forum for a number of years and have probably read some of the hoopla.


----------



## LifeOfRiley (Nov 2, 2007)

momtoMax said:


> Is it that I do not understand the players here? Packleader bred his dogs and everyone is oh how great how cute, etc. A few others have posted about it and get the same kind of attitude. I understand why people who willy nilly decide they are going to breed their dog get the 12 gun salute but really, this is too much.


I agree. I think some of the posts in this thread have seemed a little over the top. A little too hostile, for whatever reason.

I apologize to The Honey Wolves if my post came across that way. I certainly didn't intend for it to have that tone. I was just suggesting that they get a couple truly unbiased opinions before going ahead with it. That's all. No more, no less.


----------



## NuttinButGoldens (Jan 10, 2009)

I was going to say the same. We have someone doing it right, and they still can't catch a break.



momtoMax said:


> She has all the clearances so why the negativity? Good luck with your puppies - Lucy is a beautiful dog!!


----------



## NuttinButGoldens (Jan 10, 2009)

Agreed. Fair is a passing grade.



Pointgold said:


> Daniela, I understand and appreciate your thoughts, however, FAIR is still a passing rating, and if bred thoughtfully and carefully, can be no more likely to produce hip problems than a dog or bitch with an Excellent rating.
> 
> There is far, far more to breeding than just looking at an individual dog's ratings, and that dog's temperament.


----------



## NuttinButGoldens (Jan 10, 2009)

I'm kinda confused too.



amy22 said:


> Momtomax...I agree with you. I dont know why she was jumped all over. Sounds like she is doing things right, and really researching and working with a breeder. Its sad that for some on this forum there are numerous positive posts that go on and on and on...and for others theres a few and then things die down or there is just negativity. I guess there is some inside track that some of us dont know about?? I feel bad for The Honey Wolves and others that this has happened to. I really like this forum, but its sad when this happens to a poster for no apparent reason.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

NuttinButGoldens said:


> Agreed. Fair is a passing grade.


The key being the words "if bred thoughtfully and carefully". Which means knowing the ancestral health in the vertical pedigrees of both dogs. And a dog with a FAIR rating should have compelling and outstanding characteristics that warrant breeding only Fair hips. My preference would be to breed nothing but Good or better, but if a Fair were outstanding in every other respect (conformation, performance venues, etc) and I knew what had been produced throughout the vertical, then I would do it. 
Is the OP prepared to take puppies produced from this mating back at any time during their life? There is just _so _much more to this than the cute pictures of litters that we see here. Because no one takes photos of the les glorious side of breeding...


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

This is just my *opinion* -- and I'd like to toss it into the ring.

There are TONS of people breeding Goldens. Some good, some awful and lots in between. To me, having a nice dog who passes clearances, and choosing to breed her is making the decision to casually breed.. to casually choose to bring X number of lives into the world.

On the other hand, I totally agree that all breeders have to start somewhere. BUT, I think that if you're really interested in what I (and I think many others) consider "responsible breeding," you must first really involve yourself in the breed and all that it entails. I think with Goldens, that should include conformation and some sort of performance activity. We should all strive to maintain dogs who are structurally correct and sound and who have appropriate temperaments that enable them to successfully perform the work they were intended to do. 

I would love to see all would-be breeders spend time learning about the breed and all that it's capable of, spending time shadowing an established, quality breeder, and taking the time to pursue some sort of activity with their own dog --even if it's just achieving success in pet obedience. Short of doing those things, IN MY OPINION, the choice to breed is being taken too lightly... and isn't worth the risk of potentially losing your beloved animal. Not that anything is ever *worth* that risk, but I think if you really haven't done the research, you aren't prepared to accept the reality of the risks involved.

As for the OP, she (he?) did say s/he is working w/ the original breeder, so hopefully that's a good thing. The statement about being as good a judge as any to evaluate the dog for breeding concerns me, only b/c I think it's impossible not to have some degree of "love blindness" for your own dog. Great that s/he did clearances; that's more than some do and is a great *start*.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

The breeder/not the owner of the first choice stud is a part of one of the Golden Retriever Clubs in CT. I believe I may have communicated with her once. I would hope she placed her puppies in good hands.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

FlyingQuizini said:


> This is just my *opinion* -- and I'd like to toss it into the ring.
> 
> There are TONS of people breeding Goldens. Some good, some awful and lots in between. To me, having a nice dog who passes clearances, and choosing to breed her is making the decision to casually breed.. to casually choose to bring X number of lives into the world.
> 
> ...


I do not know the original breeder, but based on K9, I do not see that she is active in any venue currently. I may be wrong. 

If she is not, then it would be good for the OP to consider the suggestions of either joining a GR club, or, finding a mentor who is actively involved in the breed.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

I know the breeder listed on Lucy's pedigree. In fact, she led me to Tucker, who is a Broadway/Pebwin Golden.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> I know the breeder listed on Lucy's pedigree. In fact, she led me to Tucker, who is a Broadway/Pebwin Golden.


 
I'm sure you are happy with the referral, but does this speak to her own breeding, or level of participation in the breed?


----------



## CarolinaCasey (Jun 1, 2007)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> I am not a professional breeder - _I just want to breed *a* litter _and do so responsibly - we elected to forego breeding Jaime despite her pedigree and passed clearances -


This is the part that had be questioning your dedication and your decision to breed. In my first post, I acknowledged that Lucy is a beautiful girl and wanted to know if you plan to start your own kennel and breeding program. If you had intentions of using Lucy as a foundation bitch and had her evaluated by other golden judges without a biased opinion, I would wish you luck.

By your posts, it seems that you just want to produce *one* litter so that you can have another blood relative of Lucy. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have another Casey, but that will not ever happen. I'm glad that you have a good _start_ by getting clearances on Lucy, however I really have to agree wholeheartedly with FlyingQuizini. This is a decision that can't be made lightly. I don't think anyone means to attack you, but we really are looking out for the breed that we (all of us here) love.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> I'm sure you are happy with the referral, but does this speak to her own breeding, or level of participation in the breed?


Talk to Berna, she may know Marcy and Jane (Jane and Marcy may have co-owned a few GR's I'm not sure) personally or know of them. They are conformation breeders and do compete. Berna would be a good person to give you the inside scoop on them both. I think they both may be part of the Southern Berkshire GR Club? I'd have to go searching. I just can't remember.

I wish I could keep all the little tidbits organized in my brain. http://www.atlantagoldens.org/documents/GRCAPuppyReferral.htm

Marcy is or was part of the SBGRC and was a puppy referral contact. Does that make her less shabby??? She put me on the right path, that's for sure.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Sep 29, 2008)

Just to clarify, Packleader bred HER dogs, and if you watch the big show in Denver this weekend you will see her dogs in the show ring, showing in conformation. I believe her 18 month old already has his first major win.




momtoMax said:


> Is it that I do not understand the players here? Packleader bred his dogs and everyone is oh how great how cute, etc. A few others have posted about it and get the same kind of attitude. I understand why people who willy nilly decide they are going to breed their dog get the 12 gun salute but really, this is too much.
> 
> 
> QUOTE]


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> Talk to Berna, she may know Marcy and Jane (Jane and Marcy may have co-owned a few GR's I'm not sure) personally or know of them. They are conformation breeders and do compete. Berna would be a good person to give you the inside scoop on them both. I think they both may be part of the Southern Berkshire GR Club? I'd have to go searching. I just can't remember.
> 
> I wish I could keep all the little tidbits organized in my brain. http://www.atlantagoldens.org/documents/GRCAPuppyReferral.htm
> 
> Marcy is or was part of the SBGRC and was a puppy referral contact. Does that make her less shabby??? She put me on the right path, that's for sure.


 
Please. I NEVER said that she was "shabby", nor anyone else.


----------



## NuttinButGoldens (Jan 10, 2009)

Since the original breeder upgraded from limited to full registration, and the OP is working with this breeder, I highly suspect the original breeder is going to require part ownership in the bitch as well.

This is fairly typical.



FlyingQuizini said:


> This is just my *opinion* -- and I'd like to toss it into the ring.
> 
> There are TONS of people breeding Goldens. Some good, some awful and lots in between. To me, having a nice dog who passes clearances, and choosing to breed her is making the decision to casually breed.. to casually choose to bring X number of lives into the world.
> 
> ...


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> Please. I NEVER said that she was "shabby", nor anyone else.


No, you didn't, but maybe these breeders are more active than members think. Contacting the GRCA and the local clubs, may put people's minds at ease or, maybe not.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> No, you didn't, but maybe these breeders are more active than members think. Contacting the GRCA and the local clubs, may put people's minds at ease or, maybe not.


I'm don't see how my posting this:
"_I do not know the original breeder, but based on K9, I do not see that she is active in any venue currently. I may be wrong. 

If she is not, then it would be good for the OP to consider the suggestions of either joining a GR club, or, finding a mentor who is actively involved in the breed."_ suggests anything other than that. 

Your use of "shabby" suggests that I think otherwise, and I don't.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> I'm don't see how my posting this:
> "_I do not know the original breeder, but based on K9, I do not see that she is active in any venue currently. I may be wrong.
> 
> If she is not, then it would be good for the OP to consider the suggestions of either joining a GR club, or, finding a mentor who is actively involved in the breed."_ suggests anything other than that.
> ...


I think I admitted you didn't use the word, Shabby. 

I "think" the breeders _are_ part of the GR Clubs and may be actively involved. If so, maybe Honeywolves already has a good mentor (as advised). 

I made the same suggestion about joining local clubs and finding a mentor. I then recognized a few names. They know much more than I do!


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> Please - by which standards do you determine who should be bred? I would really appreciate some constructive feedback


Sorry but I do not see the posts here as being over the top or out of line. I think they are made by folks who take breeding and Goldens very seriously and have great passion about both. Sometimes passion can be mistaken for hostility. 
Now to answer your question above with my opinion. Without going into great detail here is the short answer.

http://www.grca.org/history_breed/breed_standard.html

http://www.grca.org/thegrca/code.html

These are the standards by which someone should determine if a dog should be bred in the US. And just as most experienced responsible breeders do not evaluate their own litters, neither do they evaluate their own dogs. That is why there are things such as Conformation shows and Certificate of Conformation Assessment events. 

As stated by many although clearances and temperament are two important pieces of the equation they are not the only parts to consider.


----------



## Jackson'sMom (Oct 13, 2007)

I suspect the OP's mind is firmly made up and s/he will continue with plans to breed the dog for "just one litter" because she's a "nice dog." Interesting how the story keeps changing to meet the various concerns expressed by members of this forum.


----------



## FlyingQuizini (Oct 24, 2006)

NuttinButGoldens said:


> Since the original breeder upgraded from limited to full registration, and the OP is working with this breeder, I highly suspect the original breeder is going to require part ownership in the bitch as well.
> 
> This is fairly typical.


Co-ownerships are quite common, but I'm not sure how a change of registration is related? I honestly don't know how common it is for breeders to go back and change ownership agreements if someone decides to breed. (Anyone know?)

Simply changing from limited to full reg is more likely so that the litter can be AKC registered. Otherwise, if you breed an AKC dog on a limited reg, offspring aren't eligible for registration.


----------



## kaysy (Jan 9, 2010)

I'll just put my "two cent worth" in. There are a LOT of golden breeders and a LOT of beautiful dogs/pups both mixed and purebred waiting to be adopted. Goldens are BEAUTIFUL dogs, a lot of them with wonderful temperments. But I see so many goldens in the paper looking for new homes. I look at Marty and think maybe his genes should have been passed down. But then, the breeder knows best and if he thought Marty was such a great dog, breeder would have kept him himself. "I" think he's great, but his genes won't be passed down.


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> No, you didn't, but maybe these breeders are more active than members think. Contacting the GRCA and the local clubs, may put people's minds at ease or, maybe not.


 
FWIW, Jane Zimmerman told me tonight that the original breeder "got out of dogs several years ago".


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Pointgold said:


> FWIW, Jane Zimmerman told me tonight that the original breeder "got out of dogs several years ago".


My mistake, my email is from Janet of Backgammon (?) Goldens. I do know a Cloverdale pup. My friend owns him. He's around Shadow and Tucker's age, maybe older. There has to be a reason why I know Jane's name so well...Another tidbit of information stored sloppily in my brain.

I guess this may be way the breeder hasn't been doing much with her dogs...


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Kimm said:


> I think I admitted you didn't use the word, Shabby.
> 
> I "think" the breeders _are_ part of the GR Clubs and may be actively involved. If so, maybe Honeywolves already has a good mentor (as advised).
> 
> I made the same suggestion about joining local clubs and finding a mentor. I then recognized a few names. They know much more than I do!


Being a part of a local breed club does not make those members reputable breeders. I know lots of BYBs that are "members in good standing" of various breed clubs - breed clubs are bound by the code of ethics of the parent club - which in the case of GRCA doesn't have the teeth most of us would like it to have. So the act of joining a breed club - any breed club - does not make the actions or intentions of the member reputable. **I'm not inferring this comment to the OP's mentors or Lucy's breeders - this is a general statement that membership does not mean reputability**

Erica


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

MurphyTeller said:


> Being a part of a local breed club does not make those members reputable breeders. I know lots of BYBs that are "members in good standing" of various breed clubs - breed clubs are bound by the code of ethics of the parent club - which in the case of GRCA doesn't have the teeth most of us would like it to have. So the act of joining a breed club - any breed club - does not make the actions or intentions of the member reputable.
> 
> Erica


In fact, many join simply to present an image of legitimacy/respectability. One of the late greats here in MI comes to mind...(thankfully, the GRCA said "no thanks", and of course, the AKC suspended her, as well...)
***NOTE - I am NOT in ANY way suggesting that this is the case with the op's breeder.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

So this breeder was involved somehow with Jane. Did they co-own??? I did see both there names on pedigrees in k9data. I really need to remember why I know Jane's name so well (maybe it's my Vet that knows her), but I would think Jane would associate herself with only reputable breeders? 

I'm not as stupid as you all think...


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

Kimm said:


> So this breeder was involved somehow with Jane. Did they co-own??? I did see both there names on pedigrees in k9data. I really need to remember why I know Jane's name so well (maybe it's my Vet that knows her), but I would think Jane would associate herself with only reputable breeders?
> 
> I'm not as stupid as you all think...


 
 No one has _ever_ said you are stupid, Kimm. I certainly don't think you are, and am really not sure why you are saying that...

Jane Zimmerman (Cloverdale) bred, sold to, and co-owned a dog that finished his championship with Marcy Deis.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Kimm said:


> So this breeder was involved somehow with Jane. Did they co-own??? I did see both there names on pedigrees in k9data. I really need to remember why I know Jane's name so well (maybe it's my Vet that knows her), but I would think Jane would associate herself with only reputable breeders?
> 
> I'm not as stupid as you all think...


Not stupid - in this kind of world where it seems like everyone knows everyone else it gets confusing...

Jane Zimmerman is Cloverdale. (What Laura said).
E


----------



## Pointgold (Jun 6, 2007)

MurphyTeller said:


> Not stupid - in this kind of world where it seems like everyone knows everyone else it gets confusing...
> 
> Jane Zimmerman is Cloverdale. (What Laura said).
> E


 
And heaven knows, co-owning does NOT automatically mean that one or any of the parties involved is reputable, well respected, or whatever. We could do an entire forum on "Co-Owns Gone Bad".
(Again, I'm not suggesting this is the case with the op's breeder. And Jane Zimmerman is highly respected, and deservedly so. I'd simply stated that Jane said Marcy Deis has been "out of dogs" for some time.)


----------



## Retrieverlover (Feb 8, 2010)

Pointgold said:


> The key being the words "if bred thoughtfully and carefully". Which means knowing the ancestral health in the vertical pedigrees of both dogs. And a dog with a FAIR rating should have compelling and outstanding characteristics that warrant breeding only Fair hips. My preference would be to breed nothing but Good or better, but if a Fair were outstanding in every other respect (conformation, performance venues, etc) and I knew what had been produced throughout the vertical, then I would do it. ...


Thank you so much for the explaination


----------



## LibertyME (Jan 6, 2007)

hotel4dogs said:


> I want to respond to this comment but I want to say that my response is NOT directed at Lucy, who I know nothing about. It's a general comment about dogs and clearances.
> Yes, clearances are very important, but they are NOT the be-all and end-all. Just because a dog has clearances doesn't mean they should be bred. A lot of dogs "with clearances" have horrible allergies, chronic ear problems, autoimmune diseases in their lines, or a myriad of other health issues that aren't part of "clearances". I've met a LOT of dogs "with clearances" that have temperaments that no way, no how should be passed on in the golden breed; they're either hyper, shy, fearful, aggressive, the whole gamut. Clearances don't check for that.
> "Clearances" don't speak to whether or not the dog is to the breed standard, or, in the eyes of unbaised, independent people who are familiar with the golden breed, should be bred. Only competing in assorted venues, from conformation, to agility, obedience, field work, tracking, etc. will help prove whether or not the dog is in some small way worthwhile of being bred. A golden retriever who hasn't got a clue what "retriever" means should not be bred. A golden retriever who is 26 inches tall and weighs 100 pounds should not be bred, I don't care how many "clearances" he passes.
> Yes, Lucy is a very pretty dog. Again, this is NOT directed at Lucy. But one of my pet peeves is the notion that "clearances" make a dog breedable. They are only one small part of the overall picture of whether or not a dog should be bred.


EXACTLY!!! :appl:


----------



## Jackson'sMom (Oct 13, 2007)

This is a serious, not a smart-ass, question: Why would the OP think it necessary to announce on a public forum that she plans to breed her dog in April? Seems to me that kind of blatant announcement is bound to generate the kinds of questions and comments that it did, in fact, generate.


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

I'll just speak for myself as someone who once had a romanticized notion of breeding a small, elite line of goldens- the more I learn about breeding, the more I realize how gigantic a responsibility it is to both dogs and humans, and how many things can go wrong. The idea of producing a litter of pups makes me so nervous. I agree with the poster who mentioned the risk to the mother. I wouldnt take that chance with a beloved family pet- maybe only with a sensational show or performance dog who was so excellent by objective standards that it would just be a shame if she didnt have a litter. In my mind, it's something to be thankful for if there's no pressure to breed a girl.

In the best case scenario, with a healthy mom, pregnancy and puppies, it might go fine. However, even with good clearances on both sides, statistically , things do go wrong. What if I bred my healthy golden, and then through mother nature's whim, many pups had heart murmurs or there was a swimmer pup? What if the mom had mastitis or rejected the pups? These are things , in my opinion, responsible, experienced breeders plan for and are equipped to handle, that I am not. 

I watched a litter of Joe Millionare pups be born a few weeks ago, and watched the nose to mouth efforts to save a stillborn baby. It's a pretty brutal thing, really. Of course, it is joyful to see the mom's love for the pups, and the healthy babies experience the wonders of the world as they have all their firsts. BUT, what if those 50 percent of babies have elbow dysplasia despite the fact that both parents are clear. Then, it's going to be a complete disaster. I'm not willing to take that chance. That's just me, though. . .


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Jackson'sMom said:


> This is a serious, not a smart-ass, question: Why would the OP think it necessary to announce on a public forum that she plans to breed her dog in April? Seems to me that kind of blatant announcement is bound to generate the kinds of questions and comments that it did, in fact, generate.



Didn't the original post include mention of looking for homes for potential puppies? The original has been edite - but I do remember something to the effect of a litter advertisement.

E


----------



## Charlie06 (Feb 10, 2007)

Just curious, how does one become a reputable breeder? Doesn't everyone have to start somewhere? It seems every time someone wants to learn about breeding they are shot down by others saying they are not qualified or whatever. I wonder if all the breeders had 100% of the knowledge they needed when they first started. Not trying to start anything....just curious I know they are way too many people breeding, but what about people who are serious about it and trying to do the best thing for the breed?


----------



## AmberSunrise (Apr 1, 2009)

Jackson'sMom said:


> This is a serious, not a smart-ass, question: Why would the OP think it necessary to announce on a public forum that she plans to breed her dog in April? Seems to me that kind of blatant announcement is bound to generate the kinds of questions and comments that it did, in fact, generate.


I thought the original post just smacked of someone being very excited and wanting to shout that excitement from the rooftops, so to speak.

I doubt it will happen again.


----------



## rappwizard (May 27, 2009)

Charlie06 said:


> Just curious, how does one become a reputable breeder? Doesn't everyone have to start somewhere? It seems every time someone wants to learn about breeding they are shot down by others saying they are not qualified or whatever. I wonder if all the breeders had 100% of the knowledge they needed when they first started. Not trying to start anything....just curious I know they are way too many people breeding, but what about people who are serious about it and trying to do the best thing for the breed?


I know several people in South Florida who established their kennel lines in the past 13 or so years (as long as I've been in goldens). IMHO, all of them had one characteristic in common, and that was that they were active in dog sports in some way--conformation, obedience, hunt tests--and took advantage of not only AKC but UKC events, and also International Championship events. To me, too many people seem to talk about breeding their goldens without seeing what their goldens are capable of doing--it's nice if they are the best at chasing a ball, or snuggling on the couch--that's wonderful--but can they pass on any brains or talent? But being active, to me, still isn't enough.

IMHO, the new successful breeders that I have seen, not only were active in the sport, but also hooked up with a mentor--that mentor has the knowledge on what dogs are in the background of your dog--and what golden can, perhaps, compliment your dog or bitch. It's fascinating to see a long-time breeder pour over a pedigree--I watched one breeder show another she was mentoring--the newbie was impressed by all the CH's in her bitch's pedigree--but the long-timer was pointing out the line-breedings, recognizing a grandmother-grandson pairing in the background. This type of genetic information is invaluable for someone starting out.


----------



## GoldenJoyx'stwo (Feb 25, 2007)

Did the OP ever post if he had a mentor and is or isn't involved in some sort of competion with his dogs? I just can't remember anymore.


----------



## AmbikaGR (Dec 31, 2007)

THE HONEY WOLVES said:


> Thank you very much - I intend to be as responsible as possible - she has an excellent pedigree and passed all clearances - she is as gentle and soft a disposition as any golden that I have ever seen or owned and I have seen alot- her big ears are the only thing less than perfect-I have had goldens in my family for over 45 years - I think I am as good a judge as anyone - but I am still closely coordinating with my breeder to ensure the technical aspects are correct-
> 
> I posted a few extremely rare funny pictures of her trying to look aggressive and yet some people start making negative implications ?
> 
> Please - by which standards do you determine who should be bred? I would really appreciate some constructive feedback





Charlie06 said:


> Just curious, how does one become a reputable breeder? Doesn't everyone have to start somewhere? It seems every time someone wants to learn about breeding they are shot down by others saying they are not qualified or whatever. I wonder if all the breeders had 100% of the knowledge they needed when they first started. Not trying to start anything....just curious I know they are way too many people breeding, but what about people who are serious about it and trying to do the best thing for the breed?


Again I do not think the OP was "shot down by others saying they are not qualified or whatever". They asked for "constructive feedback" and I believe that is what was given by most. May not be the feedback they were hoping for but .....
One becomes a responsible breeder by doing what is responsible. You are correct in assuming that not all breeders start out as responsible breeders. However if you know what is responsible and choose not to follow it then you there is no excuse in my opinion. (This is not a reflection on the OP but in response to your question)
In this case I believe the OP's heart is in the right place but not sure her understanding of responsible is. And just because you had Goldens for over 45 years does not mean you know are a good judge of them. There is again much more to the formula than "she has an excellent pedigree and passed all clearances - she is as gentle and soft a disposition". Yes it is a wonderful place to start but to truly be responsible you need to go further. At least in my opinion.


----------



## MurphyTeller (Sep 28, 2008)

Charlie06 said:


> Just curious, how does one become a reputable breeder? Doesn't everyone have to start somewhere? It seems every time someone wants to learn about breeding they are shot down by others saying they are not qualified or whatever. I wonder if all the breeders had 100% of the knowledge they needed when they first started. Not trying to start anything....just curious I know they are way too many people breeding, but what about people who are serious about it and trying to do the best thing for the breed?


I think a reputable breeder starts as a member of the fancy. A reputable breeder should be out there proving their dogs in some way - preferably more than just sending them out with a handler to finish a CH or taking a dog to a class but never stepping into a ring to prove that the dog is biddable and trainable. 

A reputable breeder has clearly articulated goals when producing a litter - and I'm sorry - that a dog "is perfect except for big ears" is not good enough to be classified as a reputable breeder. If the dog were trained, titled and showed aptitude in X, Y or Z, had passed the CCA, the owner/potential breeder knew what the dogs faults were and what they wanted to improve upon with the litter - then by all means have at it.

Now if the OP really wants to breed her bitch in April with just clearances and sell some pet puppies, then I wish her the best of luck - sincerely. However, wouldn't call her a reputable breeder. Is she breeding responsibly? Maybe. The same could be said for any number of BYB'ers out there who get clearances on their breeding stock in order to produce high volumes of pet puppies - the minimum criteria is being met... 

Is the OP reputably producing dogs that are likely to improve upon her (or someone else's) program? Probably not...

Erica


----------



## Loisiana (Jul 29, 2009)

Jackson'sMom said:


> This is a serious, not a smart-ass, question: Why would the OP think it necessary to announce on a public forum that she plans to breed her dog in April? Seems to me that kind of blatant announcement is bound to generate the kinds of questions and comments that it did, in fact, generate.


If I had decided after owning goldens for many years that I had one that I thought should be bred and was planning to do it soon, I would be very excited to come on where I had met friends with a similar love for goldens and share the news. I'm not saying whether or not I think this girl should be bred, just that I think the announcement was made for no other reason than sharing excitement with other.

I've been running it through my head, and if I had made the decision to breed one of my dogs, I would probably run on and post something like this:

"Well, I've finally decided to go ahead and breed ____________! I'm so excited (but really nervous too)! Unless it's a really small litter there's probably some puppies still available, so let me know if you're interested!"


----------



## cola3812 (Nov 29, 2009)

MurphyTeller said:


> Didn't the original post include mention of looking for homes for potential puppies? The original has been edite - but I do remember something to the effect of a litter advertisement.
> 
> E


Yes...I am glad I am not the only one that noticed it was edited out of the original post. Yet...several posts ago it was stated by the OP that they didn't need the money and would prefer to home them to friends and family. Hmmm...


----------



## Ljilly28 (Jan 22, 2008)

I'm sure Honeywolves is not wanting to breed a litter for the money. This is a longstanding member whom we know pretty well. The issue is more one about wonderful& beloved pet dogs, and if it is a good idea to breed them once or twice to have the experience of baby pups, and try to give other owners the same feeling of happiness one has with the awesome family pet. 

The reasons I think not are threefold: the risk to the mother, the chances of something going wrong with the pups healthwise and the capacity of the breeder to cope with all eventualities over the lifetime of the litter, and the knowledge that there are so many zillions of dogs in rescue. 

I personally believe only goldens who have demonstrated exceptional achievements in the hands of someone who both understands pedigrees in terms of health/temperament and has the set up to place/care for dogs who have something go wrong should be bred.


----------



## AquaClaraCanines (Mar 5, 2006)

Wow. The dog police strike in full force.


----------



## Old Gold Mum2001 (Feb 25, 2007)

Retrieverlover said:


> I don't think I'll go further with this conversation. I have only been on this board for a day so I don't wanna cause trouble yet.
> 
> Good Luck with Lucy!


So WHY even state that??????



if pup has been cleared as to clearences n she's stating pup has always had a great temperment, what's your problem?


----------



## Old Gold Mum2001 (Feb 25, 2007)

AquaClaraCanines said:


> Wow. The dog police strike in full force.


 
no kidding..... huh????:doh:


----------



## Old Gold Mum2001 (Feb 25, 2007)

Great post!!!



momtoMax said:


> Is it that I do not understand the players here? Packleader bred his dogs and everyone is oh how great how cute, etc. A few others have posted about it and get the same kind of attitude. I understand why people who willy nilly decide they are going to breed their dog get the 12 gun salute but really, this is too much.
> 
> For those who do it willy nilly, you say, need clearances!! So irresponsible to do so without clearances!! Now you have someone who is working with their dogs breeder who was knowledgable and cared enough to have all the clearances done on their dog (which is not cheap) and still people with 10 posts and others stake her (who has over 400) to the ground? Hey, all breeders start somewhere and as she stated, she is working with an experienced breeder and is doing everything by the book - why do you all have to be so negative and awful to her?
> 
> I really dislike the mob mentality that goes on here sometimes. I think it is so over the line and unwarranted in this case.  I just had to say that.


----------

