Why are there so many wankers on this board?

[Ocre373]

They’re on every thread. I’ve never known a board like it. People come on asking for advice and you can guarantee within a couple of replies someone will jump on something in the OP, often something completely irrelevant to what is being asked. They’re judgemental, condescending, rude and often just plain nasty.

It’s happened to me time and time again and it’s stopped me asking for advice which is such a shame because there’s so many people on here with so much knowledge and experience.

It’s made this a horrible place to be.

The pups do go to carefully selected homes.
And the cost?
Covers the time and money they have spent. It’s not their “business” and the money isn’t enough for them to live on. That’s for sure. It’s not money that makes decent breeders have a litter.

Very few breeders actually use it as a source of income outside puppy farms. This is where, as others have pointed out, your opinion is a little too black and white. Doesn't mean they don't want to charge a reasonable amount for a well bred puppy and make a bit of cash at the same time.

The pups do go to carefully selected homes.
And the cost?
Covers the time and money they have spent. It’s not their “business” and the money isn’t enough for them to live on. That’s for sure. It’s not money that makes decent breeders have a litter.

I know you mean well but I find your posts on this subject so frustrating!

I don’t believe that most breeders, the good ones anyway, make enough for a sole living.
I don’t think that most of the more ignorant/poor backyard ‘hobby’ breeders make enough for a sole living either.

The only ones doing that will be the large scale operations licensed for hundreds of bitches and importing hundreds of puppies.
I think those ‘commercial’ breeders though obviously here and a big problem are not quite as common as you think.

I think, based on your previous posts on other threads, you lump an awful lot of genuine home breeders in with the commercial puppy farmers which is really unfair.

I struggle to believe there is no profit involved for the majority of litters.
I suspect that both of your breeders made profit on their pups, not enough for a sole living but a profit surely.

Pretty much all large breed pups go for £1,500 +
If we are talking breeds like Pomeranians or bulldogs it’s often closer to £4,000 +
They aren’t making any profit?
None at all?

And then this ‘they breed selectively and for a specific purpose’
Your breed is in absolute crisis!
If something isn’t done urgently to widen their gene pool they will go the same way as breeds like Dobermanns and Cavaliers.

If the breed club and kennel club really cared for the health of the breed their ‘selective breeding’ would include outcross to other breeds and/or unregistered wolfhounds.
But it doesn’t.

And what specific purpose?
A modern day wolfhound’s specific purpose can only be ‘pet’ or ‘show dog’ yet you are often so terribly negative about breeders breeding for ‘nice family pets’.
I just find it so frustrating!

I completely found this and stopped posting on here. I thought it would be a friendly board and it is horrible. I keep to Style and Beauty instead

Of course they don’t cross wolfhounds with greyhounds and call them wolfhounds.
You seem to have a kind of inverse snobbery about pedigrees. As well as a complete lack of knowledge of the genetic and testing work going on to make the animals fit for purpose. That means that a wolfhound should be capable of what it was originally intended to do. Just like a Dalmatian should be capable of running with a carriage and a gun dog should be capable of that work.
Breeding for “nice” family pets? That just means letting their pets shag. Regardless of health testing or their genetic compatibility and flogging the puppies off to their mates.

You persist in saying I’m wrong.
How is it wrong to want the very best chance of a healthy pup? How is it wrong to care about the welfare of the parent dogs after you’ve taken your puppy home?

Of course they don’t cross wolfhounds with greyhounds and call them wolfhounds
Well no, they would be greyhound x wolfhound, the idea is to introduce a different breed to try and eliminate a problem, you breed back and within 5 or so generations the puppies look indistinguishable from ‘pure’ wolfhounds and the genetic health issue is gone.

LUA Dalmations are a great example.
The originals were Dalmatian x pointer and of course they didn’t look like Dalmations abs they weren’t referred to as Dalmations.
A few generations later, the resultant dogs are indistinguishable from ‘pure’ Dalmations, you wouldn’t know they ever had any pointer blood in them whatsoever.

You seem to have a kind of inverse snobbery about pedigrees. As well as a complete lack of knowledge of the genetic and testing work going on to make the animals fit for purpose
😂
If you say so.

That means that a wolfhound should be capable of what it was originally intended to do. Just like a Dalmatian should be capable of running with a carriage and a gun dog should be capable of that work
You really think that a modern day wolfhound is capable of hunting large game?!
Honestly?
You think they are still capable of guarding?
Most pure bred dogs are no longer ‘fit for purpose’ and couldn’t actually do the job they were originally bred for unless they are from a line specifically bred for working.

Breeding for “nice” family pets? That just means letting their pets shag. Regardless of health testing or their genetic compatibility and flogging the puppies off to their mates
No it doesn’t.
There are plenty of people breeding for ‘nice family pets’ health testing/using dogs already clear by parentage and researching COI, paying attention to temperament, socialising the resultant pups, getting potential owners etc.

You persist in saying I’m wrong
But you are...

How is it wrong to want the very best chance of a healthy pup? How is it wrong to care about the welfare of the parent dogs after you’ve taken your puppy home?
Of course none of that is ‘wrong’ but to take your breed as an example, continuing to breed from an already limited gene pool and refusing to do the only obvious thing left to address the multiple serious (genetic) health issues is not wanting or aiming for ‘the best chance of a healthy pup’ nor is it ‘caring for the welfare of the parent dogs’.
Your breed isn’t the only one.
There are very many in trouble from too small a gene pool

I think we have very, very different ideas of what constitutes a ‘good’ breeder and agree with OP that your views are very black and white.

No matter how well cared for the individual dogs are or how infrequently the bitch is bred, I don’t consider the deliberate breeding of animals with ridiculously short lifespans and a long list of extremely serious health problems with no intention of actually fixing the problem/s to be the mark of a ‘good’ breeder.
I consider that cruel.

**agree with PP that should say

frostedviolets- well said! Because 99.9% of puppies that come from show stock won't make the grade. They automatically go to pet homes. The one puppy that is kept for the show ring often ends up... you guess it: as pet after they have been shown at junior level and not been placed or not been in the top 3. Depending on breeder.
I also think (but please correct me if I am wrong) that Wolfies breeder is one of those who will tell prospective puppy buyers who to buy puppies from. (I have met plenty of those over the years). The problem is, these people are the ones who keep reducing the gene pool of their breed, are are against small home / hobby breeders and they are the ones setting breed standards with the Kennel Club. And we have seen how that has put many dog breeds into health and welfare crisis. The conditions dogs are health tested for are gene mutations from a high level of inbreeding.
I fully understand that people wanting a pet dog, looking at cross breeding because it is believed that they don't suffer in the same way. Sadly, some do... as both breeds carry the same defective gene.
If anyone is seriously interested in dog/ cat breeding and DNA, Look up the Animal Health Test Trust, these people are your true friends with the welfare of all pets as first priority.

Nobody is breeding for a deliberately short lifespan.
My breeder hasn’t told me who to buy puppies from.
And wolfhounds can’t guard or deal with large prey?

Nobody is breeding for a deliberately short lifespan. confused
My breeder hasn’t told me who to buy puppies from
And wolfhounds can’t guard or deal with large prey?
I didn’t say they were deliberately breeding for a short lifespan, I said the ‘deliberate breeding of animals with ridiculously short lifespan’
As in breeding for show or pets but using dogs with abnormally short lifespan.

As I said re work, the vast majority of dogs bred now, of almost all breeds, are no longer capable of actually doing the job they were bred for unless specifically from a working line.

I could be wrong but I would be very surprised if most wolfhounds bred now retain enough prey drive and enough stamina to track, pursue and take down large prey.

I would also be surprised if they retain enough territorial instinct and defensive drive to effectively guard and actually protect you against an intruder.

You grin but what makes you think your dogs do possess the instinct still to be effective working dogs/‘fit for purpose’?

Look at GSD for an example, so many people think their GSD will protect them because it’s a GSD and because it barks at the door or lunges at unknown people, reality is most are no longer capable of work and when you examine many ‘protective’ GSD’s more closely more often than not you find an insecure, weakly nerved dog who absolutely cannot and will not protect you.
Because the necessary instinct and drive has been bred out, their new ‘specific purpose’ is to be a ‘nice pet’ or a ‘show dog’

One of the things that really frustrates me about show breeders is that far too many of them over-use winning sires and narrow the gene pool further. It's the much-maligned hobby breeders who use the 'unfashionable' lines and use a friend's dog to sire a litter who do a lot to help to maintain a wider gene pool.

Breeding for “nice” family pets? That just means letting their pets shag. Regardless of health testing or their genetic compatibility and flogging the puppies off to their mates
Well, as frosted said, there is so much more to it than sticking two random dogs together and flogging the puppies to the highest bidder. A mate of mine bred her pet: lovely-looking dog, decent temperament, excellent health . She and her DH looked around for a health-tested stud and compared the lines. By the time they got around to breeding her, they had three or four homes lined up (them, a relative, a neighbour etc). The puppies were brought up in a proper whelping box until they outgrew it, well-fed, well-socialised around people and numerous other animals, and their dam began to teach them to go outside to pee. New owners were quizzed. I don't know what contract they sold the puppies with - I never asked - but I know they still get updates because I hear about some them. Those are exactly the sort of pet owners who breed responsibly and help to maintain the gene pool. They almost certainly netted some ££ out of it, but they bloody earned it. I have zero problem with that. Nada. None.

How is it wrong to want the very best chance of a healthy pup?
It's not. But that gets harder and harder to find in a closed gene pool.

As for being fit for function, the main function of most dogs in modern Britain is to be a nice family pet: sound of temperament, happy around people and other dogs, good health, not too much drive. Dogs with drive - the sort of drive they'd need to bring down a wolf, say - are actually quite hard work to own. Yes, a dedicated pet owner can do it, but most pet owners don't necessarily want to. They want a dog that looks like a Ridgeback without the lion-hunting tendencies of an actual Ridgeback. The show breeders don't often want drivey dogs either, at least in part, I would think, because they're harder to home, and more likely to have new owners phoning up in tears because the six-month-old puppy has ripped up the kitchen lino out of sheer boredom. So I very much doubt that modern wolfhounds are fit for purpose. There's nothing wrong with that, but they shouldn't be mistaken for the kind of dogs used for fox control, or which are used to hunt feral pigs in Australia, or whatever.

And wolfhounds can’t guard or deal with large prey?
Dealing with aggressive prey isn't about size. It's about drive.

As I said re work, the vast majority of dogs bred now, of almost all breeds, are no longer capable of actually doing the job they were bred for unless specifically from a working line.
There's a very good reason why people with working Jack Russells wanted the breed kept out of the Kennel Club. There's a very good reason why a farmer I know has recently bought a non-KC puppy for the job he needs to have done. He doesn't give a shit what the puppy looks like, so long as it is soundly put together. What he cares about is whether it has the hardness of temperament to work cattle, the biddability to listen to him and the intelligence to sometimes think for itself - as well as being reliable with strangers when loose in the farmyard. And you can't know those things without actually testing them out, which is why he checked over the puppy's parents first.

Just because it looks like it, that doesn't mean it thinks like it.

And TBH, the show lines very often look nothing like the working lines anyway.

Covers the time and money they have spent. It’s not their “business” and the money isn’t enough for them to live on. That’s for sure. It’s not money that makes decent breeders have a litter.

See this makes me actually laugh. Anyone who owns a business is charging for their time and the money spent.

Thats making a profit. Charging for their time, thats profit.

Most breeders that you call crap, don't make enough money to live on all year round. Your breeder make profit. They are bo different than alot of breeders. Lots of home breeders health check their dogs and are choosey about where they go.

You have claimed your breedees aren't in it for the money, but only for the love of the breed. They aren't. Part of the reason is money.

As I said your breeder is no different to many, many others. Yet I have seen you being quite horrible to posters, using very similar breeders. Thats the point.

Your breeder may also love the breed. They may be wonderful people. But they are in it to make a profit.

Nope. Not true. Dogs shouldn’t be a business. That’s the point.

wolifie your breeders made money off breeding their dogs

What do you call that?

As I said, lots of breedees that you hate, beeeder in the exact same circumstances as your breeders.

Not enough profit to live on. But making money out of it.

If that is your feeling, you should have bought your dogs.

My breeder also spends a month sleeping in the whelping box with her puppies. And should she give them away? After the microchipping, worming, liver shunt tests etc??
She had the mother and grandfather. She’s only breeding to keep that line alive. If she breaks even that’s good. If she makes some profit then great. But it’s not the reason good breeders breed.
“You should have bought your dog” eh? I did. Do you mean I shouldn’t?? Normally I don’t. Our other pets have been rescues. But it’s not so simple with dogs.

Yes I meant shouldn't.

I dont have an issue with breeders making a profit.

You do. Your breeder is like thousands of others out there. They are also breeding pets.

Your breeder isnt any better than those you spend alot of time, saying are wrong.

Yet you used them.

Why do you always bring up that you usually rescue animals?

I have 2 dogs. One bought, one rescued. I also Foster dogs. Work with trainers and behaviourists and get them ready and asked and help find them their new home.

That doesnt make my opinion on dogs, or breeder or the ethics of it worth anymore than yours.

You bought 2 dogs, from people doing exactly the same thing that you complain about. You have a go at posters for buying from these people, when you did exactly the same thing.

Dogs shouldn't be a business
That's a moral standpoint, not a fact. But to an extent, I agree - because once the breeding of dogs becomes a sole income, problems crop up. Dogs require attention, exercise and training and if you have enough dogs to produce a reasonable income, they won't get those things. Corners get cut in a way they tend not to with livestock and horses - people buying livestock know what to look for in terms of health and husbandry, and horses are a big financial outlay so people are usually (not always) careful (plenty of dodgy people breed horses, I know that). With dogs-as-money, health tests get skipped, temperament isn't considered, biddability (trainability) isn't a factor. You have an eye on the bottom line so you 'can't afford' to pay someone to go from run to run all day socialising the puppies. You breed your bitches until they drop - as many KC registered litters as you're allowed, and crosses in between and afterwards. And so on.

But.
There are plenty of people out there who have a small and infrequent sideline in supplementing their income with a litter of puppies. They're not breeding as a business, on the whole, because they often want to keep a puppy, and they're prepared to forego their whole profit (the payment for their time and thought) if the bitch needs a section or only has a couple of puppies. For some of them, their puppy income funds their hobby: it pays for the petrol and the hotels and the entry fees for shows or trials. For others, they net a few grand for a couple of months of pretty intensive effort and much fretting over homing the puppies: just because the money you expect as your profit will be funding your summer holiday, that doesn't mean that you don't give a shit about where the puppies go. And yes, there are people who stick any two dogs together (or pay for a stud carrying 'rare' colours for the extra £££), pretty much ignore the litter until it's time to get paid for the puppies, and aim to maximise their income.

It's sifting the wheat from the chaff that is difficult. As I've said before on this board, generalisations aren't helpful.

Dogs shouldn’t be a business. That’s the point.

But the pet dog is business, they are a commodity. You don't buy them for their traits and home in on them (most notably hunting or retrieving breeds).
They are an accessory to your lifestyle, bought for looks and prestige or whatever makes you feel good about your dog.

And breeders know that and build their business around this. Otherwise they would be left with an awful lot of unwanted puppies.... Have a look at the dreaded pets4homes site, the pets with the cutest picture always sell fastest.

But shouldn’t.
Mind you that website shouldn’t exist.

Dogs shouldn’t be a business.

Why not though? Everything else is and when something is a business, you get good, ethical, sustainable business and you get bad, unethical and unsustainable businesses. Dog breeding shouldn’t the the sole income of someone but when you see it as a business, that is when you can market your time correctly. If you want your business to survive long-term, you think about your customers, who is your target audience - families or those who need working dogs.
You can then ask questions from your customers and make sure the puppies go to the right homes. You think about your product and make sure it’s fit for purpose, you get those puppies health tested, you breed from dogs with good temperaments because you want healthy puppies with good temperaments. You want your customers creating word of mouth for you. You want the hype of a new Apple release so that when you decide to release a new product, those that get the puppies are those prepared to be consistent in contacting you, in answering your questions, signing your contract (the equivalent of waiting all night in a queue for the latest Apple release).

As customers, we are starting to recognise ethical companies and non-ethical companies. If people have the money to do so, we are recognising that with our spending choices. There will all always be unethical traders in every market, including dogs. Rather than saying all breeders are bad or breeders shouldn’t make an income, you should be advising people to look for the ethical breeders. That includes making a profit because it is a business. If this was a shop and someone was asking if it was ethical, they wouldn’t get slated and told they are irresponsible and contributing to the poor welfare of loads of employees. People would explain what to look for, look at if they pay their staff living wages as opposed to minimum wage, look at if they have zero hour contracts, try to look at their supply chains and check there is no slave labour and they aren’t profiting from war. Look at their environment credentials, is it just what they put on the website or do they actually achieve these credentials. Occasionally you would get a post saying they restructured a few years ago and everyone went onto zero hour contracts, if you want an ethical company, I’d avoid. Which is exactly how it should be with dog breeders, what are the ethics we should be looking at aside from not making a profit because that isn’t feasible or sustainable.

If you don’t help people, if you just shut people down with a “breeder shouldn’t make a profit” then they will end up buying from puppy farms. They will go on pets at homes and see £1000+ for puppies and not realise that at that price they will be making a small profit - which is allowed. So they’ll either buy the pup that is cheapest - therefore has no health checks, will not be an assured breeder etc. Or they will buy the 18 month puppy that is “fully trained with sit and recall” that’s £4,500 because clearly the breeder has invested time and money in the pup. Plus if you want quality, you have to pay for it. Organic is more expensive, shops paying living wages are more expensive. Therefore, more expensive puppies are definitely from responsible breeders.

If you want to stop puppy farms, help people understand that breeders are making a small profit. Explain to them that after vet fees, stud fees, food, potential lost earnings if they have another main income whilst caring for puppies - that from a litter of 10 puppies they will get a couple of grand profit. And that’s ok - as long as they health test dogs, take care of the bitch and dog, chip the puppies, provide a contract...

Mind you that website shouldn’t exist.

But it does exist and a lot of potential puppy buyers and breeders use it. It's there to stay as a selling platform for pets. It's free to use, unlike the Kennel Club or Champdogs. And like with all the other selling platforms, you get the good , the bad and the ugly.
It doesn't always say by using this platform you are rotten to the core and don't want the best for the puppies... there are even some rescue centres advertising on there...
But you are very blinkered with your beliefs and that is sad because as someone else said on this thread, the Wolfhound is in crisis and could do with open minded, enthusiastic people to raise their popularity and showcase their potential as great family pets.

CakeAndGin, precisely.
It's also worth remembering that 'ethical' is a sliding scale from 'vaguely trying' to 'totally saintly', that everyone makes mistakes, and what is 'ethical best practice' to one person is completely irrelevant to another.

If you dig about on the despised pets4homes, you can find breeders who are, actually, pretty decent. You can also find ones who are puppy farm fronts - and people need to be helped to spot the difference (and to be educated to really, really care about the difference) rather than screeched at and told they're evil/ ignorant/ stupid for opening the site up in the first place.

I used to be on here regularly a few years ago when we first had our dog and I needed advice, not so much now.

I must admit that there were times when I winced at what seemed to be very aggressive and judgmental responses to questions and posts. It was / is a bit off-putting and I felt some posters were treated pretty badly.

My daughter has a cockerpoo and when it was a puppy I suggested she look at threads here for advice and support with training. She took one look and ran a mile. I feel sad about that.

It's not always easy to strike the right tone when posting (meaning can be misconstrued, nuance is missing) but I have sometimes thought some posters border on hostile and elitist.

Funny that you claim some people are hostile when on a thread that claims those of us who believe welfare should be paramount and dogs shouldn’t be exploited for monetary gain are “wankers”.
And no. That website is awful. People looking to stud their pet out for cash and others breeding two unhealth tested pets for cash. And then there are the multitude of puppy farmers. Those are the real wankers.