Breeding an untitled GSD

[rvadog]

I have my own opinion on this but I'm curious to see what everyone else thinks.

Would it be ok to breed your dog (or bitch) to an untitled GSD or breed your untitled animal?

Say you are a Schutzhund person and have a fantastic male with all the right stuff. He's now a SchH 2 and you want to breed him to a frineds untitled female who also has phenomenal drives but the friend just doesn't train her. Ok? How about the male being untitled and the female being titled?

[robinhuerta]

I'm gonna get smashed for this.......
YES....I would.
I don't believe that a "title" makes a good dog......I believe that a good dog can make the "title"....whether they actually do or not.
...jmo...

[JKlatsky]

First I am not a breeder. I am a buyer. So here's a buyer's opinion.

It's a personal decision and one that I think that requires some reflection. What are the goals for the breeding? To make money you're going to do much better with titled parents (if you can even do it then). If you really like both dogs (objectively- not just "because you love Max who is super with people and Minnie has a uterus and loves kids...and they might produce black puppies wouldn't that be cool?") and are breeding primarily for yourself, well I know several people in sport that will get together, breed a single litter, and retain pups as possibilities for their next competition dogs. As a buyer I would want to know WHY you did it.

I am more comfortable with an untitled female than I am an untitled male. I understand that there are limited years/times for breeding a female whereas males are much more open-ended. As a buyer I would want to see the female work. If the male was untitled that would bother me more. I would expect you to take your bitch to the best male in your geographical region. It's kind of lazy to just pick the male that your friend has but hasn't bothered training. I would want the untitled parent to be Xrayed and clear of health issues.

As a buyer I would not buy your pup out of untitled parents if I couldn't see it and the parents for myself. I would most likely be willing to buy that pup if both dogs were working in my or a nearby SchH club and I liked what I saw on a regular basis. So as a breeder, I would expect your market to be considerably more local in nature for those puppies. Are there enough people locally to tap to get a puppy?? If not your drivey SchH type pups will probably go to more uninformed pet type homes that backyard breeders will typically sell to. I'm sure you can see where that might end up ore difficult for you. People who are into SchH, research kennels and breeders, are not going to buy your pup when they can go to a well regarded kennel.

Also as a buyer of SchH puppies, I would expect your puppies to cost less than what is being charged at the more major kennels. If I'm going to pay $1500 why wouldn't I go to a kennel that has proving it's puppy producing skills?

Now with that said...would I buy a puppy out of untitled parents?? Yes I would. If it was what I wanted, at the price I wanted, at the time I wanted. I have. And I was perfectly happy with the decision.

From another prospective. My dog Ike has every title. SchH3 FH OFA Good. Super temperament. Before we got him he was a stud dog (could still be a stud dog) and had a good record for his progeny. No one is beating down my door to breed. Largely because the bitches in the area either go to males that they live with, or travel to BIG name competition dogs. I imagine that is similar everywhere. I don't have a bitch in my house that I would breed him to. I like him a lot and will probably store him for later on down the road just in case I do get a bitch I like. Would I as a stud owner breed him to an untitled female? Yes. I would. A bitch with good health and sound temperament (as judged by me).

I'm pretty sure if we only bred SchH3 to SchH3 with OFA excellent we'd have a pretty small gene pool.

[robinhuerta]

Expressed very nicely!! I agree!
Robin

[Emoore]

I agree with JKLatsky. I grew up on a ranch with hard working but untitled cattle dogs. Those dogs' working ability was amazing and a lot of them weren't purebred. I would buy a dog out of untitled parent(s) but I would need some sort of proof of the dogs' temperament and nerve. I'd also expect the pups to cost less than one out of titled parents.

[GSDAlphaMom]

'I don't believe that a "title" makes a good dog......I believe that a good dog can make the "title"....whether they actually do or not.'

Also well stated. All of my dogs come from titled parents but none of mine are titled because it's not something I choose to do. Could they be titled? Absolutely. Are there bad dogs titled, you bet. There is much more to breeding then titles.

In the confirmation world dogs are 'specialed' (dogs that have their championships) in an attempt to get ranked. For instance the number 2 gsd, or the number 1 working dog, etc. These 'rankings' are only based on dogs that are actually shown and on the current circut. There could be better dogs at home with owners.

[dawnandjr]

I think it would be fine to breed one untitled dog to one that is titled. I wouldnt want to breed two untitled dogs. You just havent proven that they both have good temperaments. Both should at the minimum have OFA or PENN hip/elbows, CERF'd eyes. There is more health testing that can be done, but that would be icing on the cake. I would also have to look at bloodlines of the untitled dog and what kennel it came from. Why is the dog not titled (i.e. injury, poor training/trainer)?? If the dog has everything it takes to earn a title, and that can be demonstrated, I would breed it.

[Catu]

If I were a breeder my only concern would be about buyers. If I am going to bring pups to this world, I want the best owners for them, and the good buyers will like to see some proof of the worthiness of the parents beyond my word. There are a few really good breeders out there and in this same forum that if they say a dog is good, I would take their word as gold. But from me, as an hypotetical breeder and for the vast majority of breeders, it doesn't work that easy. So if you have a bitch of the same quality than the untitled one and a titled one, it would be safer for the possibel pups to be born from a titled parent.

Some times it is just easier. Lets say Minnie has no titles, but is the daughter of Mickey, which is a great dog and maybe known from bringing good things to the table (and don't forget the maternal sire effect) with also many other good dogs back in her pedigree. Then only one dog without titles on an outstanding pedigree won't make that much harm, specially if that pedigree is not easy to find where you are and Minnie could be your only choice to get some dogs you really like into your lines.

[selzer]

I would breed to an untitled dog if I liked the dog and trusted the dog's owner's evaluation of dogs in general. If the owner does not have the first idea what it takes to get a dog titled, how would he know whether the dog had what it takes. Another person, who has numerous titles, champions, etc, will be in a better position to say that this dog has what it takes.

[Chris Wild]

Yes, I would consider it. But only if I knew the dog, knew the trainer/handler, and was able to discern myself rather than take someone's word for it that the dog had the appropriate temperament and could title, and any lack of title was for reasons that had absolutely nothing to do with the dog.

I agree, the title doesn't make the dog, and certainly having letters before or after the registered name has no effect on genetics. But it seems more often than not when people are breeding untitled dogs, the reasons for doing so aren't valid reasons, but more excuses. Yet they assure everyone that the dog could title easily if not for this or that reason.

The even bigger problem is that very frequently the people making these claims have no basis of knowledge and experience for doing so. I see pet owners who have never put more than a CGC on a dog, if that, say "oh yeah, my dog could do that easily" but not only has the dog never been tested the owner has never done this before so has no real clue what all goes into it or what it requires in a dog. And people who may be experienced in one venue, say they've put some agility or obedience titles on a dog or a tracking title on a dog, assure everyone that of course their dog could make SchH3 or go get an HGH if they just put the time into it.

There are people out there with the depth of knowledge and experience in dogs that they could work the dog a few times, or watch someone else work it, and make that determination and I would trust their assessment of the dog. They understand dogs and know what it takes in terms of temperament to be able to accomplish certain things, because they've done it. That comes from years of working with dogs, not from sitting around and watching dogs work or reading about it or watching videos about it. Oftentimes the dogs that are untitled have still been worked quite a bit as well, so have been somewhat tested and proven by people who know what they are looking at. But such people are rare treasures within the breed.

So to me it really comes down to who is making the claim: a person who completely knows what he's talking about, who has spent time with the dog and worked the dog somewhat, or someone who has never done it making the claim with a dog who's never done it. The people out there with enough unbiased understanding of dogs for their opinion on whether a dog could title or not has merit are vastly outnumbered by the people who claim such things but can't back up those claims with sufficient experience to make them worth listening to.