Breeding healthy dogs that are good examples of their breed requires a plan, a vision, and the breeder's definition of his goal. A good breeder is characterized by progress in achieving goals. Selection for quality and maintenance of different bloodlines is crucial to maintaining breed health and genetic diversity. Balancing positive traits and harmful mutated genes is essential for breeding. A responsible breeder who knows/believes that his female will contribute to the excellence of the breed in terms of conformation, health, and temperament will always carefully study pedigrees, possible health problems, or deviations in temperament and invest a lot of time and effort in finding the best breeding partner for his female. A breeder is extremely lucky to find more than one or two such potential dogs within reach at any time, as there are not many suitable studs.
By definition, a breeder is the person who owns the bitch at the time the puppies are born. Accordingly, the breeder bears all responsibility for the quality of the offspring. I agree with the first sentence, but not that the responsibility for the quality of the progeny lies entirely with the breeder. Both breeding partners, female and male, contribute genes that will have a decisive influence on the quality of the offspring. Therefore, I would say this: a responsible breeder will check the quality of a potential breeding partner for his bitch before deciding, while an accountable owner of the stud will act morally and ethically and give the breeder all the information about his dog, will not hide anything, and maybe even do some additional DNA or clinical tests so that the breeder will ultimately make the best rational decision at the time.
I own a few males registered in the breeding book of the national cynological organization and have certificates of their suitability for breeding. But, at least for me, the certificate of suitability for breeding is the least important document because, in all honesty, almost all dogs get it, as long as they are not seriously inconsistent with the standard. Before registering them with the breeding commission, I must evaluate my dogs as critically as possible regarding health, phenotype, character, courage, intelligence, self-control, etc. Only when these indicators show that the particular dog is probably suitable for breeding, a breeding test follow and allow him to bear the title of "stud,"
But honestly, at this point, I still have no idea what this dog will produce. The fact that a dog can impregnate the bitch that will give birth to puppies proves only one thing—that he is fertile. If I was lucky enough to have a dog that showed "A" quality through development and is also blessed with an ability to breed, it does not mean that he will give equally excellent offspring with every female he will mate.
What is a stud dog? There seems to be nothing complicated about the question, and the answer is quite evident and elementary. It's not that simple. A stud dog has not only proven his ability to produce quality but has a good track record of producing quality where the bitch needs help.
So, a stud is not just a fertile male with a pedigree. Also, show titles or championships have no direct relationship with a dog's ability to breed. These victories prove that the dog has the qualities necessary to win but not the ability to produce outstanding offspring.
A dog can be a great show dog and a bad stud. A dog may hate the show ring and never win, but he is an outstanding stud. That's how it is.
Too often, novice or veteran breeders equate good show dogs with good studs. They can be, we hope so, but often they are not. Show wins are, to some extent, merely an indication of a dog's value to the breed because it is the current ideal in its breed, and many share the belief that it should, therefore, be used for breeding. Yes - but only to an extent. Because it is necessary to look at the production abilities of the dog and not at the records in the ring!
Even an outstanding stud and a fantastic show dog that everyone wants at the moment can be abused in the light of saying that if a dog is good enough to win "every prize in sight, he must be good enough to mate every bitch in sight."
The excessive "use" of a famous stud, which otherwise produces good results, can be very destructive to the breed. The breed can take a big step back with this. Therefore, from the point of view of ethics and morality, the owner of such a stud would be expected to reduce the number of matings or even stop them (perhaps he would save the frozen sperm for another time).
Regarding everything written above, as the stud owner, I have been asking the owners of females looking for a suitable stud what they expect from this mating and what they want to improve in his line using my dog's genes. It happens that this question is met with astonishment, but I firmly believe that we, as owners of studs, are co-responsible for the expected offspring. On the other hand, I value the effort I put into my dog too much to "cover" any bitch and want to play open cards.
Excellent breeders never make compromises and want to know everything well. Healthy bloodlines and healthy breeds start with their vision and their work to achieve those goals.

Litter Abba and Bruce 2015
コメント