While prices will vary, a quick google shows asking prices are around £1000. . we payed £1400 for ours last year after our Vet made a recomendation to the breader. normally (in the current climate) £2-2.5k for a gsd puppy.
i dont know if the Mrs would share that info. we picked him (Indi) up from Campbeltown. apparently we have signed a contract that forbids us from breading with him. but tbh, i've never been that desparate. a recent pic. 9mts old.
I think we did the same. Doubt it's worth the paper it's written on. No intention of breeding anyway.... Looks proper hard work. And I only like jobs that pay loads for doing fuck all....
Putting a breeding and export restriction on the pedigree isn't unusual. Most breeders will lift the breeding restriction if the dogs health tests come back clear at a year plus. They may want a fee to do it though.
...And another Endorsement (X) prevents the puppy/dog being registered with a foreign kennel club, so progeny can't be registered anywhere else either.
It's over 15 years since I last bred a litter, and I didn't remember that restriction. A breeder friend of mine bought a Border Terrier male pup to show. It did really well, and it's breeder got the hump and refused to lift the restriction. My friend sent it abroad to a friend of hers, where I think it made it's title and sired some nice pups. It's back here, and just a pet now.
Old school establishment tricks. You can buy the dog/ puppy for a small fortune based on its lineage but we retain the rights to what you've paid for, and prevent you using it... GTF.
You buy a puppy, not the right to cash in on the Breeder's decades of time and devotion to the breed and establishing fine healthy blood lines. It's a bit like buying a Ducati. You buy the bike, but you can't benefit from onward use of the name or their developed/unique technology.
which was pretty much my first reaction when she told me. but i get the arguments/reasons stated here.
So you say, and you currently have the law on your side. Personally I doubt you will for much longer. If you sell me a less expensive neutered puppy, its one thing. If you sell me a complete dog for a much higher price I should get all the rights to it. The breeders are having their cake and eating it too. Where does a new entrant into dog breeding get all this "devotion to the breed" & how did she/he help establish the *healthy bloodlines? Or do both these admirable qualities come automatically because a buyer pays even more cash for unrestricted use of their dog? In reference to the purchased Ducati, I own the bike 100% and can do with it whatever I like. *Healthy bloodlines. Think hip dysplasia, and breathing problems for several breeds. Healthy indeed...
I lost my last 2 oldies around 5 years ago, and 4 years ago I looked at rescue dogs. I'm all for having a rescue if that works for someone. But when I looked into Dogs Trust, I was amazed to discover they pulled in donations of £80-90 million a year.
No dog in this fight , but I don't think many neutered puppies are sold. And even with the best sire and dam, there's no guarantee that all the offspring will be free of issues. That's the primary purpose of a breeding restriction. Health faults can take decades to largely breed out, and even then they still appear occasionally. Some problems can't be tested for until the dog is 12 months old, and if the dog does have issues it shouldn't be bred from. The responsible breeders have to put their breed and their reputations first.
I agree few if any neutered pedigrees are sold -which imo proves my point. I'm entirely in agreement with the breeding out of issues, and a 100% lack of certification until 12 months (or whatever is appropriate) is likely to be a benefit to all especially the animals. But these are side issues. If all pedigree dogs were required to be checked for illness & issues in order to gain certification on what grounds would/ should the paperwork refusal be justified to an owner of a healthy dog/bitch? People more sceptical than me might mutter breeding cartel & price fixing even -say its not so- gouging? I am not against anyone making money. I am for even handed rules, open to all, who meet the standards required.
I don't think this type of discussion is what the thread is about. But since you took (what I took as) a personal poke at me, here goes.... The 'Law' has nothing to do with it. If you buy a puppy with endorsements (restrictions) then that's what you bought. If you don't like the endorsements, go and buy your puppy from someone else... someone that doesn't apply them to their puppies. 'Entrant' ? I've owned, known and loved Border Collies for 50 years. OK Breeding is a more recent thing, since I retired and have the time. But I suspect you know that from our FB group ? . I don't see how you connect that with any lack of "devotion to the Breed". We were in fact invited to share the breeding experience by 2 good friends (top names in BC circles internationally). We didn't 'buy' any preferential use for breeding. We have a shared passion. So it's their blood lines and decades of devotion I have an obligation to protect. All our puppies are the same price. All our puppies come with the same endorsements. Paying extra for a puppy without those 'restrictions' isn't an option. We would NEVER neuter a puppy. Min 1yo for a dog and only after second full season for a bitch. I know many Vets would say they can be 'done' younger, but I don't agree (except if it was for a specific health reason). You can do 'whatever you like' with the Ducati you bought. You can't do 'whatever you like' with the name 'Ducati' or their technology. Oh... is that 'the law' you think will soon be defunct? Don't hold your breath. You'll find no argument from me (or any other responsible BC Breeder) about health. I agree, the KC is not fit for purpose and doesn't use its weight to eliminate bad breeding practices/encourages proliferation of 'defective' breeding. I am revolted by what's happening to some breeds. But, regarding Border Collies ..... before we (that's all reputable breeders of them) would consider 'breeding-on', we 'Hip score' all our bitches and dogs (current breed average is 5/6 and our puppies are being scored 4/4). We also DNA test them all for 8 known (to BCs) genetic disorders (CEA, DH, Glau, IGS, MDR1, NCL5, SN & TNS) and don't breed from an 'affected', and only to a 'clear' if the test shows 'carrier' for a particular disorder. We also BAER (hearing) test all our puppies. We would not breed from a dog that doesn't satisfy the tests. Yes..indeed healthy.
love him db. the spitting image of our previous dug jake. aye, Indi is gonna be huge, he already is. and as dumb as he is large. unlike the jake, who was as smart as was large.
Johnny, The problem with your reply is neatly contained in the first line of your post. My post is not about you; moreover I think its slightly odd that you thought it was. The dog breeding world -of which you are a member- is a massive industry. In the wider and intended context of the breeding supply and sale of dogs (and some other animals), all my points are valid. Re my point regarding the law. Placing restrictions -endorsements- on the sale of a dog or bitch is currently supported in law. However it is my opinion that this is very likely to be legally challenged and deemed an unfair practise in court. I wish you a good weekend.
