German Shepherds Forum banner

test litters??

18K views 120 replies 27 participants last post by  selzer 
#1 ·
an interesting concept, i tracked a dog to a good reputable breeder imo and asked why no papers or info on the dog available. it was a "test" litter. the breeder tests a potential female on her first litter to see what/how she produces and sells them under a different name with no papers at a low price but only sells to people that he can get feedback from. not sure how this sits ethically but he actually doesn't lie about anything.

same breeder effects a father duaghter mating some rare occasions just to "test" his lines for i am guessing recessive genes?

not mentioning names but he does back all his dogs and has great success but is this ethical??
 
#3 ·
good point.

the father daughter test mating i think is valid on a clinical level yeah? ethical???



btw not ever my problem as i am not a breeder. just thought it was a brutal but possibly valid means of checking yr lines...or not.
 
#8 ·
Koerbelbach kennel has done it but most people don't even realize that there was incest and ironically it is a popular pedigree combination and you can find it in quite a few pedigrees.

However, test litters are nothing new to me. If it's happening, you won't hear about it because it'll happen behind closed doors.
 
#11 ·
Lucy i think the goal is not an experiment for specific extreme traits it is a test to test the prevalence of recessive and unwanted traits - i think.

eg if the litter did not have a high rate of HD or any other nasty things the breeder can gain some confidence in their program, again i think this only.
 
#13 ·
agreed but if the breeder does not lie to customers and authentically "sures" up his line in the most direct way but is still conscious of marketing and customer perceptions are they not being reputable still?

hopefully science will catch up or dog breeders will catch up with science and such tests will be able to be performed with a simple blood test and computer anaysis or something.
 
#14 · (Edited)
agreed but if the breeder does not lie to customers and authentically "sures" up his line in the most direct way but is still conscious of marketing and customer perceptions are they not being reputable still?
I think it depends. If the litter turns out great than everyone's happy. The grey area is if/when there's tons of health or temperament issues from the inbreeding or whatever the experiment of the litter is. How does that reflect on the breeder's program if it never existed to the public? Where do they go from there? What happens if these people no longer want their puppies after all these issues start cropping up? What if it's a larger than expected litter and there's more puppies than people in agreement with this experiment - what happens to the other puppies?

So many variables to these experiments when it comes to the ethics of it.

hopefully science will catch up or dog breeders will catch up with science and such tests will be able to be performed with a simple blood test and computer anaysis or something.
So true. Us humans would probably benefit from this too, but that's a whole nother conversation..
 
#15 ·
yeah getting into deeper waters and i dont swim real well. let us not forget tho that just about every nation has implemented (or tried) some form of eugenics program.

i think my questions here have been answered thanks for the opinions.
 
#16 ·
I suppose it would depend on the purpose of the test litter and I think it a bit ridiculous for people to exclaim that they are horrified at the idea, or to jump to the conclusion that there is incest going on, without knowing the specifics.

Test breedings are not that rare. They are often done, including by many European kennels whose "official" breedings are to strict SV regulations. It takes much time and money to get a dog qualified to breed under those regulations and many don't want to put a couple years time and thousands of dollars into a dog only to find out on it's first mating that it can't get bred, can't whelp puppies, is a horrible mother, or produces poor traits in the pups and isn't a viable breeding candidate. So they will do a test breeding and sell the pups cheap without papers so that they can make sure that the dog is a sound breeding candidate before investing a boatload of time and money into getting it's qualifications to breed according to the rules.

And yes, some test breedings are done for a different reason, using close inbreeding to reveal any nasty hidden recessives that might be present.

Neither is inherently good or bad. The biggest question is whether or not the pups are dealt with and placed responsibly. If they are, no harm is done, and both tactics can strengthen a breeding program over the long haul if done responsibly.
 
#17 ·
I'm with Chris, it is what it is. I guess I'd actually give the breeder some kudos for being honest and transparent about their purpose. I'm talking about "test" breeding, not inbreeding, FWIW. I don't really get not papering the dogs though, if they turn out nice perhaps the owners would want to show or compete with them but I guess that is between the breeder and the owners, none of my business.

I don't get why people are so horrified by this? Again I see breeders being held to double standards. They are supposed to have a magic crystal ball and know exactly what is being produced every time? How do you think we are able to make relatively accurate predictions in the first place? Because someone somewhere bred a combination and somehow the result has become common knowledge or shared among fanciers and competitors so that they can make better breeding decisions as a result. This stuff does not happen in a vacuum. There is always a risk and IMO, a good breeder is not just breeding stellar pups but putting their lines to the test and having a more complete understanding of how the genetics of their lines with interact with others.
 
#19 ·
I'm actually more interested in the "feedback" homes than anything else. What kinds of homes are these? I would have to believe that the best types of homes/owners to give feedback are the ones that are working/trialing/showing their dogs. These homes are usually deeply involved in the dog world and the biggest thing they need is papers. I'd imagine most of these homes don't have the time/money to raise another puppy that they aren't going to be moving forward with trialing.

I can't imagine that a breeder has 6-10 friends that are willing to take on a dog that doesn't have papers and do their venue of choice. I figure you'd end up selling these dogs to lower quality pet homes (possibly higher) but those homes probably don't have enought experience to give that much valuable feedback to the breeder.

BTW...people will be outraged at this. Nothing to do with inbreeding or what not, mostly to do with producing a litter of non-papered puppies sold for cheap to who knows who. What's the difference between a "reputable breeder" doing that or the guy down the street popping out puppies and selling them for $500 a piece? Adding more dogs to the population is already a hot button issue...and now you find out that even the people you think are doing it ethically might be doing something else behind closed doors.

And yes...responsibility is a huge issue when it comes to this, but its already a very blurry line of what's responsible and what isn't.
 
#21 ·
I can't imagine that a breeder has 6-10 friends that are willing to take on a dog that doesn't have papers and do their venue of choice. I figure you'd end up selling these dogs to lower quality pet homes (possibly higher) but those homes probably don't have enought experience to give that much valuable feedback to the breeder.
Actually, when you breed and trial your life evolves around the sport and you most likely have friends that are involved in the sport because not many outsiders understand the obsession you have with the dogs.

Most likely, not the entire litter will be placed for feedback. The litter is evaluated from day one and an experienced breeder can already see if it's worth it or if it isn't and most likely, depending on the number of the litter, 3-4 pups may go into feedback homes.
 
#22 ·
Actually, when you breed and trial your life evolves around the sport and you most likely have friends that are involved in the sport because not many outsiders understand the obsession you have with the dogs.

Most likely, not the entire litter will be placed for feedback. The litter is evaluated from day one and an experienced breeder can already see if it's worth it or if it isn't and most likely, depending on the number of the litter, 3-4 pups may go into feedback homes.

No, I get that, but its a lot to ask of a person to raise a puppy that they won't be able to trial or show. That's my point. I guess people might be different, but from what I've seen, rarely do you find that people that like showing/trialing want dogs that they can't do that with. So, say the person already has 2 dogs, if they're thinking about adding another one, they'll probably want one they can trial and train along with the other two rather than just train.

I'm looking at adding a puppy this year...I want one that I can train/trial along side my current one. If I get a dog that I can't do that with, I won't have another dog for a very long time as we don't have the room for more than two dogs. So even if I was really close friends with a breeder doing this, I don't know if I'd be willing to help them out. It's not just a couple month thing, its a decade in which I wouldn't be able to get another dog and pursue my passion.
 
#23 ·
As far as papers go, in Europe the pups wouldn't be able to be papered because the parents would meet the qualifications for doing so. There are also a lot of people who would be willing to take a well bred dog without papers. I do see a pup from a test breeding done by a responsible breeder where the lines are well known, the parents evaluated in some way just maybe not official titles and show ratings yet, the breeding pair is carefully selected and the litter is bred for a purpose as different than random cheap "BYB" pups without papers.

As for what these feedback homes are, I have no idea. Never done this so never had cause to look into it. But they don't have to be active sport/show people who need papered dogs in order to serve the breeder's purpose. Maybe they're experienced people who are retired from competition but still want the same quality of dog that they had in the past. Maybe they are friends and family and neighbors who are just pet owners, but are close enough to the breeder that the breeder can easily keep tabs on the pups and maybe test them himself every few months as they are maturing. The offspring from a test breeding don't need to be winning titles and competitions for the breeder to be able to get the information that they need out of the test. It's not uncommon, and clearly the breeders doing it are able to find appropriate homes for the pups where they can keep tabs on them as needed. I'd also wager that the majority of the time those pups are better bred and better placed than a random breeding so I don't agree with equating it to BYB type breeding.
 
#24 ·
How many adult dogs do you see being offered from brokers and even the occassional one on Eurosport k9 , that have no papers , but are clearly purebred . They could be from a test litter - to see the wisdom of combinations early on , to make better decisions . Those progeny may very well end up in service where papers don't mean much . The dog is evaluated . The dog either passes evaluation or fails .
 
#25 ·
If you go to the book by Winifred Strickland and Jimmy Moses, the best way to get a champion is out of a champion, and you breed a daughter back to her champion father. But they are all about culling too. They aren't talking about fixing them and selling them on a limited basis to pet homes, either. They say it is one thing to cull puppies that are off color or weak (I am paraphrasing) but when the puppies are equal in quality, and you need to cull some that is hard.

Breeding sire to daughter, mother to son, will not create temperament or issues. But because there are recessive genes present and the pups will have double, you are going to get some of whatever is back there out. So if you want to know if your dog carries the gene for long coats, or something you might do a test litter.

Know you cannot just know on some of this stuff. Some of the genetics are cut and dried, some are less so: if you breed an affected dog to an affected dog, you will get so many affected, so many carriers, if you breed an affected dog to a carrier, so many affected, so many carriers, some unaffected, if you breed an affected dog to a non affected dog, so many carriers, so many non-affected -- whatever. It is easy to see if a dog is affected, but the only way to know if a dog is a carrier is to breed it back to a known carrier or affected dog. That would be a test breeding.

It does not have to be something nasty, it could be long coats, or black color, and other stuff.

As for incest, that is applying human moral/religious/societal codes to animals. There is nothing disgusting or horrifying about it, because dogs do not have the moral codes programmed into them. For humans it makes sense, continued in breeding will reduce the gene pool and cause a degradation in health etc. And for the protection of children and families it was necessary to have a taboo on close family relations. But animals are simply not covered under this code, though in general breeders want to be conscience of pedigrees so that they do not breed generation after generation of close inbreeding.
 
#26 ·
I once heard a breeder say he imported a young untitled male (around 18 months I think) and bred him to one of his females "to see if the pipes were working". I was a bit shocked to hear that... is that a good reason to breed, just to "test the pipes"? I don't think so, but others told me that Euro breeders do "test breedings" all the time. To me it doesn't make much sense, but whatever. My biggest concern would be that the pups are dealt with responsibly.
 
#28 ·
No, I don't think that's a very good reason. We had the same concern with Nikon so all I had to do was take him to a vet, had him collected (took about 15 seconds and Nikon's 4 years old, never been bred, never lived with intact females, has never exhibited any sort of "sexual" behavior), and the sperm were checked under a microscope. His very first "shot" ever and the vet said he's prefectly healthy as far as viable sperm and how easy it was to collect them. I paid nothing for the exam since he was there for a vaccine but I believe an exam for this would have been $35, definitely under $50. Sure beats having to time a breeding and whelp an entire litter just to prove the dog has swimmers!

I think the other reasons mentioned in this thread make much more sense and are perfectly alright and quite common.
 
#27 ·
FWIW I'm keeping a dog from one of Nikon's first litters as "feedback" (I guess you can call it that). I truly want to know what he produces and I guess the best way to find out is to live with it :) Of course it's just *one* dog but IMO that's better than nothing, and I can't realistically stalk all the owners of all the other dogs for constant feedback. Plus not being the breeder myself, I'm not involved in placing the dogs so I can't say that they'll all go to sport homes or show homes or working homes and gauge their progress there. I know *I* train, show, title, work, and trial all my dogs so I'm keeping a pick back for myself.
 
#31 ·
I understand why something like this would be done, but I'm really questioning the ethics behind it. IMO you're really starting to blurr the line when it comes to ethical breeding when you're not putting your name behind your puppies "just in case."

I get why the breeders, especially the ones that understand how things work in Europe, are defending these practices. They make sense to do genetically and also for the future of lines, but something about it just seems a bit fishy to me. Not sure if I can write out the reason but it does strke some chord in my personal ethics. Europe has rules about inbreeding and titles/surveys, and this is something the US doesn't have, so to me doing a breeding "off the books" is really pushing the envelope on a system that is already pretty wide open.

I've started comparing it to the other situations that the forum or the general public finds "taboo" about breeding. (BYB, breeding an untitled dog, some of you believe a show dog shouldn't be bred because it doesn't have working titles, ect) And I don't know where I would rank this on the "bad list" but it is my personal opinion that it belongs somewhere on there. And yes, we will all have our opinions on it, as we do on a lot of breeder practices, but this is not something I would support.

If the breeder can really make sure those dogs go to homes where they won't be bred, discarded, ect., I think it's alright, but can anyone really guarantee that? If there are 10 puppies and the breeder has homes for 8, what are they going to do with the other 2? I'd really have to trust the breeder, and probably know them personally for years in order to think that what they did was alright. It would take a lot more than decades of "successful" papered dogs from a kennel to convince me that a "test breeding" is alright.
 
#33 ·
Maybe OP could elaborate, but if he is talking to someone in Germany, then its a little different due to what Mrs. K just described. It makes sense to me, its kind of like having a dog on limitted registration but still being able to breed it once its achieved certain things and those pups will be able to get their full registration.

We don't have that kind of system in the states so I read it as, the breeder is producing a litter and not registering it with the AKC. In affect these pups don't exist in the AKC database even though they were produced by a well known, reputable breeder. So if its a mistake...no one will ever know unless somehow the information gets out that they produced some subpar puppies.
 
#34 ·
I would think for a breeder in the US not registering the pups with the AKC at all would be not so much to hide anything as it would be to help ensure that the offspring of a test breeding were not bred themselves. If someone wanted to participate in performance events with one of those pups, they could do so with an ILP/PAL.

Now if the offspring did turn out very well, to the point where they were breeding quality themselves or perhaps one or more owners did want to participate in events that required actual registration, the litter can always be registered by the breeder at a later date. Not being registered when placed as puppies doesn't mean they can't ever be registered. The breeder can always go back and register them, even years later.
 
#36 ·
Yes, some females will stand the entire heat or allow breeding close to or after ovulation. Male will still breed. All you need to do is test prog levels and allow test breedings that won't lead to pregnancy.

Ever seen bully breeders use the breeding stand? Female doesn't have much say in it - doesn't mean the breeding can't happen.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top