RAVE HERE thread

Veterinary School Application Advising Ad
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members do not see this ad.
ajs513 said:
It’s not easy doing research, writing it up, and presenting it virtually in these times. The fact that you took this past year and did something with it in and of itself is awesome. I’m glad you got the chance to present today.
Click to expand...
Thanks ajs! Means a lot to me!
 
My daughter and family just got a male lab puppy from a breeder. He is sooo soft and cute! The grandbabies are enjoying loving on him, and they are learning how to take care of him, and all the things that go along with puppy. he is very mellow and laid back!! I am trying to find a picture to post...
 
killerleaf said:
My daughter and family just got a male lab puppy from a breeder. He is sooo soft and cute! The grandbabies are enjoying loving on him, and they are learning how to take care of him, and all the things that go along with puppy. he is very mellow and laid back!! I am trying to find a picture to post...
Click to expand...

I love labs! I'm trying to decide if I want another one for my next dog. Please post a picture 😍
 
Dinashadow said:
I love labs! I'm trying to decide if I want another one for my next dog. Please post a picture 😍
Click to expand...
You want mine? He is cute but also a very destructive idiot (aka he is just a lab)

Snapchat-2091708350.jpg
 
He is pretty cute. And doing very well on potty training. and sleeping thru the night. I laughed at my daughter, she said it was like having a baby again....lol. We were discussing the breeder, and contract...she said that he is health/eyes/hips guaranteed, but that they can't neuter him until he is a year old? Have ya'll seen this before? Or is that the standard now?
 
killerleaf said:
He is pretty cute. And doing very well on potty training. and sleeping thru the night. I laughed at my daughter, she said it was like having a baby again....lol. We were discussing the breeder, and contract...she said that he is health/eyes/hips guaranteed, but that they can't neuter him until he is a year old? Have ya'll seen this before? Or is that the standard now?
Click to expand...
Breeder recommendations are a crapshoot. Go with what her veterinarian recommends.
 
killerleaf said:
He is pretty cute. And doing very well on potty training. and sleeping thru the night. I laughed at my daughter, she said it was like having a baby again....lol. We were discussing the breeder, and contract...she said that he is health/eyes/hips guaranteed, but that they can't neuter him until he is a year old? Have ya'll seen this before? Or is that the standard now?
Click to expand...
Definitely talk to your vet about the neutering situation. There are lots of studies out there saying that later neutering in large breed dogs especially is linked to reduced incidence of joint and bone issues, with the trade off of increased relative risk of some other things. My professors typically recommend waiting, the practices I’ve worked at recommend waiting, but it’s also patient specific and should be discussed with your vet. But that’s just to say that this isn’t a super crazy breeder thing that has no merit.
 
@ajs513 and @genny Thank you!! I was worried it was a "crazy breeder" thing. She was worried about the breeder invalidating the guarantee if they neutered early, so I have a feeling they will wait. Not a big deal, I just worry (cause that is what I do best) about him getting out and lost, because that is what unneutered teenagers do best! 🤣
 
genny said:
Breeder recommendations are a crapshoot. Go with what her veterinarian recommends.
Click to expand...

From the breeder side, I find it extremely frustrating when veterinarians encourage buyers to violate their contract. Also, I'm the one guaranteeing the dog and the one who has to replace and/or refund if something goes wrong. I'm not necessarily going to hold up that guarantee if the contract gets violated.

If the breeder is making a ridiculous recommendation that will harm the dog, that's one thing. But to not want the dog neutered until a year of age isn't that crazy.
 
finnickthedog said:
From the breeder side, I find it extremely frustrating when veterinarians encourage buyers to violate their contract. Also, I'm the one guaranteeing the dog and the one who has to replace and/or refund if something goes wrong. I'm not necessarily going to hold up that guarantee if the contract gets violated.

If the breeder is making a ridiculous recommendation that will harm the dog, that's one thing. But to not want the dog neutered until a year of age isn't that crazy.
Click to expand...
I saw a "mini" full-sized doodle, who is cryptorchid, with an umbilical hernia, whose breeder wants to retain breeding rights for 3 years. Obviously not a good breeding prospect, and I don't think they should wait 3 years. It's a case-by-case basis, which is why I said she should discuss medical recommendations with her veterinarian, rather than stick by breeder recommendations blindly.
 
genny said:
I saw a "mini" full-sized doodle, who is cryptorchid, with an umbilical hernia, whose breeder wants to retain breeding rights for 3 years. Obviously not a good breeding prospect, and I don't think they should wait 3 years. It's a case-by-case basis, which is why I said she should discuss medical recommendations with her veterinarian, rather than stick by breeder recommendations blindly.
Click to expand...
I'm just trying to give a breeder perspective here, because it is frustrating on the other side and it's not just cryptorchid dogs with umbilical hernias where this happens. It also happens with perfectly healthy puppies. Once I had one where the rationale given for why the dog had to be neutered immediately was a missing tooth.

There are veterinarians who think neutering at 6 months is best and that is going to be their recommendation for most dogs. I respect their opinion, but I don't think it's a good reason for the owner to violate the contract and potentially void their guarantee. I don't think owners should stick by breeder recommendations blindly, but I also don't think they should always throw them out either. Especially when there is a contract and/or a guarantee involved.
 
killerleaf said:
He is pretty cute. And doing very well on potty training. and sleeping thru the night. I laughed at my daughter, she said it was like having a baby again....lol. We were discussing the breeder, and contract...she said that he is health/eyes/hips guaranteed, but that they can't neuter him until he is a year old? Have ya'll seen this before? Or is that the standard now?
Click to expand...

I'm not involved with breeding/conformation, but am involved in the dog world through sports and own purebred dogs.

Definitely have seen it before, as well as other things, some of which I didn't agree with (must feed raw, must not vaccinate, etc.)

When I was looking for a breeder to get my toller I always checked the contract to make sure I was okay with following it. I always want to follow my vet's opinions first, but I do think it's dishonest to go against a breeder contract that you signed. You should never get a dog from a breeder if you don't feel comfortable with said breeder.

Also puppy is adorable. I'm very jealous 😍
 
finnickthedog said:
I don't think owners should stick by breeder recommendations blindly, but I also don't think they should always throw them out either. Especially when there is a contract and/or a guarantee involved.
Click to expand...
How often do you find yourself having to uphold the breeder side of the guarantee? Do you exchange dogs or pay for treatments? Genuinely curious.
 
finnickthedog said:
I'm just trying to give a breeder perspective here, because it is frustrating on the other side and it's not just cryptorchid dogs with umbilical hernias where this happens. It also happens with perfectly healthy puppies. Once I had one where the rationale given for why the dog had to be neutered immediately was a missing tooth.

There are veterinarians who think neutering at 6 months is best and that is going to be their recommendation for most dogs. I respect their opinion, but I don't think it's a good reason for the owner to violate the contract and potentially void their guarantee. I don't think owners should stick by breeder recommendations blindly, but I also don't think they should always throw them out either. Especially when there is a contract and/or a guarantee involved.
Click to expand...
Putting aside your own medical knowledge and expertise, what grounds are there for most breeders to be giving medical recommendations like this though? That is the sticking point for me. While this particular one doesn't bother me since it's a male and risks for other issues are not as great of a concern, unless the breeder is guaranteeing the dog won't develop reproductive-associated disease at all ever (especially in females), that should be a conversation the owner is free to have with their vet without the threat of a voided contract hanging over their head imo. And since even vets and researchers aren't in agreement on this topic, unless the breeder has the records to show evidence within their own line for increased risk of y outcome with x exposure, to me those kinds of things are inappropriate.
 
Dinashadow said:
I'm not involved with breeding/conformation, but am involved in the dog world through sports and own purebred dogs.

Definitely have seen it before, as well as other things, some of which I didn't agree with (must feed raw, must not vaccinate, etc.)

When I was looking for a breeder to get my toller I always checked the contract to make sure I was okay with following it. I always want to follow my vet's opinions first, but I do think it's dishonest to go against a breeder contract that you signed. You should never get a dog from a breeder if you don't feel comfortable with said breeder.

Also puppy is adorable. I'm very jealous 😍
Click to expand...
This is a good point. I think the problem comes in with owners who have little education on the matter and don't realize until they take the puppy to the vet for the first time that they've signed something ridiculous and based on breeder preferences rather than any kind of science. So they don't even know they might not want to follow the contract until after the fact.

Not saying all breeder contracts are ridiculous at all, just that I have seen several that are and/or cross the line into giving medical recommendations.
 
WildZoo said:
Putting aside your own medical knowledge and expertise, what grounds are there for most breeders to be giving medical recommendations like this though? That is the sticking point for me. While this particular one doesn't bother me since it's a male and risks for other issues are not as great of a concern, unless the breeder is guaranteeing the dog won't develop reproductive-associated disease at all ever (especially in females), that should be a conversation the owner is free to have with their vet without the threat of a voided contract hanging over their head imo. And since even vets and researchers aren't in agreement on this topic, unless the breeder has the records to show evidence within their own line for increased risk of y outcome with x exposure, to me those kinds of things are inappropriate.
Click to expand...

Came here to say this.
 
genny said:
How often do you find yourself having to uphold the breeder side of the guarantee? Do you exchange dogs or pay for treatments? Genuinely curious.
Click to expand...
It happens occasionally. Usually with a breeding prospect rather than a pet. So like the dog seems perfectly fine but goes in for OFA rads and turns out it has mild hip dysplasia so the dog is still a great pet but isn't suitable for breeding. Usually replace the dog but it's not an exchange, they just get a new dog when they're ready. I find exchanges to be a little bit of a cop out personally, because nobody wants to return the dog they've fallen in love with but there are some breeders who do it that way.

WildZoo said:
Putting aside your own medical knowledge and expertise, what grounds are there for most breeders to be giving medical recommendations like this though? That is the sticking point for me. While this particular one doesn't bother me since it's a male and risks for other issues are not as great of a concern, unless the breeder is guaranteeing the dog won't develop reproductive-associated disease at all ever (especially in females), that should be a conversation the owner is free to have with their vet without the threat of a voided contract hanging over their head imo. And since even vets and researchers aren't in agreement on this topic, unless the breeder has the records to show evidence within their own line for increased risk of y outcome with x exposure, to me those kinds of things are inappropriate.
Click to expand...

Owners are free to have this conversation with their veterinarians, I'm not telling them not to. A breeder isn't going to physically stop you from neutering the dog earlier. But yes, it comes with the threat of a voided guarantee and I think both owners and veterinarians should recognize that.

It's not fair to expect the breeder to uphold the guarantee when you violate the contract. Particularly when that stipulation is usually directly related. For example, there are the studies suggesting possible links to joint issues with early neutering. The breeder reads those studies. Joint issues are usually covered by the guarantee. The breeder, wants to reduce the risk of those joint issues occurring so they want the dog neutered later. Is it that unreasonable that they don't want to be responsible for joint issues anymore if the owner ends up neutering early?
 
WildZoo said:
This is a good point. I think the problem comes in with owners who have little education on the matter and don't realize until they take the puppy to the vet for the first time that they've signed something ridiculous and based on breeder preferences rather than any kind of science. So they don't even know they might not want to follow the contract until after the fact.

Not saying all breeder contracts are ridiculous at all, just that I have seen several that are and/or cross the line into giving medical recommendations.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree with you! There are some reputable breeders (I say reputable because they truly care about the dog breed, do health testing, prove their dogs as good stock in performance/confo, etc.) that have ridiculous reccomendations that they cherry pick from vets who agree with them.

For example, I struggled a lot when getting my toller because the breed gene pool is small (even for a purebred) and it gives rise to some autoimmune issues. There's a large amount of breeders who have decided to pin it on vaccines and kibble and they find articles (not peer-reviewed obviously) from one to two vets (see Dr. Dodds) that agree with them and use them as education for prospective buyers, which is very frustrating.

I personally believe that breeders should yield to vet opinions, but I understand some are forming their contracts under their personal vet's reccomendations (such as the waiting to neuter for large breeds), and it's well within their right to not uphold a health guarantee if you go against the contract.

This is definitely a topic that I struggle a lot with though. I personally would never buy from a breeder who doesn't agree with me/my vet's medical reccomendations, but I realize I'm coming from a place that not many owners are because I am in the vet field.
 
finnickthedog said:
It's not fair to expect the breeder to uphold the guarantee when you violate the contract.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't expect the breeder to uphold the guarantee with a broken contract. And I tell clients that it will void their guarantee.

I don't think I've ever seen a guarantee lasting more than a year anyway, but I don't think we have any show dog clients. Most of the issues covered by a guarantee for the pet dogs we see are not going to show up by a year old. I wouldn't even expect a breeder to guarantee something like a labrador's knees for life, regardless of when they suggest neutering because there are factors other than the timing of the neuter that influence CCL disease. Neutering at any point in life increases risk for CCL disease, and whether it's done at 8 weeks, 6 months, or 2 years doesn't matter. So I think that's why I'm a little flippant about breeder contracts - the guarantee usually doesn't guarantee against much of anything, and there are usually a lot of hoops to jump through to keep it in place that the average breeder really shouldn't be dictating (anyone else see "no rabies until 6 months old"? which is a violation of our state law so the contract is illegal to begin with).

This is all very general of course, and there are exceptions to what I'm saying. So my advice will always be to talk it over with your veterinarian, and to listen to their medical recommendations over the breeder.
 
finnickthedog said:
Usually replace the dog but it's not an exchange, they just get a new dog when they're ready. I find exchanges to be a little bit of a cop out personally, because nobody wants to return the dog they've fallen in love with but there are some breeders who do it that way.
Click to expand...
This is what’s in the contract for my dog’s breeder. Replacement without needing to return the original dog, which I appreciate. You can also get a half refund without needing to return the dog.
Her guarantee is also 3 years for puppies and says that you need to vaccinate at the appropriate schedule
 
I also think there’s a big difference between timing of spay/neuter in a contract versus other things. Like if a client asked me about neutering, I’d probably say some advocate for 6 months because it reduces the risk of certain cancers, some advocate for 1 year or greater to reduce risk of orthopedic disease. You have to decide what risk you can live with and which scares you more. If the client said nope I want to do it now I would but if they want to wait that’s cool too. it’s definitely not unreasonable to consider the breeders wishes for something like that. But the contracts that say you can’t ever give lepto ever because the lepto vaccine will kill the precious mini-teacup-yorkie-shih-cava-shon-chi-poo, it must eat raw, can only get a half dose of vaccines, etc. come with much higher risks for the patient and I think we need to advocate and educate that that goes against medical recommendations. Those are the contracts I would say that I disagree with because they aren’t medically sound recommendations and may cause harm. (Disclaimer yes some dogs do fine on raw and I’m ok with it if done properly but most don’t seem properly balanced and there’s gonna be the food borne disease risks, etc.). I personally wouldn’t ever sign one of those but many people just don’t know better or don’t care.
 
genny said:
I don't think I've ever seen a guarantee lasting more than a year anyway, but I don't think we have any show dog clients. Most of the issues covered by a guarantee for the pet dogs we see are not going to show up by a year old.
Click to expand...

That's sad. I'm not saying I'd necessarily guarantee for life but a year seems really short. It's been 5ever since I looked at our contract because vet school ate my whole life, but I just looked at one of my purchased dog's contracts out of curiosity and it a 3 year guarantee. A lot of the breeders I know will actually still back the dog beyond the contractually obligated length if something crops up that is likely inherited. So I know I come from a very different perspective here, but it's a perspective I felt like was worth sharing because honestly it does bother me when the blanket advice is essentially to ignore whatever the breeder says. Especially when we're talking about something that not all vets even agree on in the first place and is a perfectly reasonable recommendation--even if the vet in question doesn't personally agree.


JaynaAli said:
Like if a client asked me about neutering, I’d probably say some advocate for 6 months because it reduces the risk of certain cancers, some advocate for 1 year or greater to reduce risk of orthopedic disease.
Click to expand...

This is essentially the approach I ideally plan on. For my own dogs and any puppies, I prefer doing it later but that's my opinion and the set of risks that I'm more comfortable with. For clients, I just want them to have the information they need to make a decision that is best for them.
 
finnickthedog said:
That's sad. I'm not saying I'd necessarily guarantee for life but a year seems really short. It's been 5ever since I looked at our contract because vet school ate my whole life, but I just looked at one of my purchased dog's contracts out of curiosity and it a 3 year guarantee. A lot of the breeders I know will actually still back the dog beyond the contractually obligated length if something crops up that is likely inherited. So I know I come from a very different perspective here, but it's a perspective I felt like was worth sharing because honestly it does bother me when the blanket advice is essentially to ignore whatever the breeder says. Especially when we're talking about something that not all vets even agree on in the first place and is a perfectly reasonable recommendation--even if the vet in question doesn't personally agree.




This is essentially the approach I ideally plan on. For my own dogs and any puppies, I prefer doing it later but that's my opinion and the set of risks that I'm more comfortable with. For clients, I just want them to have the information they need to make a decision that is best for them.
Click to expand...
The problem is that good breeders are SO, SO far and few apart. Seriously. The amount of trash breeder recommendations I see vs. good breeders who health check and do all the right things is legit probably 10:1 in my practice. I'm looking at allll those adorable bernadoodles and maltipoos and bulldogs from bitches with severe allergies and the amount of frankly wrong advice in breeder paperwork is ridiculous.

What the vast majority of breeders (or at least their paperwork) lack is absolutely any finesse. They had a dog die who was on Trifexis once, so all dogs shouldn't take it. There's a study in x breed showing increased cancer with neutering young, so y breed also shouldn't be neutered young. They had a puppy have a vxn reaction three years ago, so no lepto vxn ever (despite risk factors).

No! If they care about these things, they should tell their clients to discuss them with their doctor. Have a risk:benefit conversation, provide the client with resources (like UC Davis' decision making study for determining age of castration) and then allow them to establish trust with the person who has a degree in this and who is going to be responsible for this pet for their lifetime.

It's extremely frustrating to be told that because these people can let two dogs **** and keep the puppies alive long enough to sell, they deserve my medical respect. When I stop seeing mostly worm-and-flea-ridden, non-health tested puppies, then sure!
 
PippyPony said:
I just correctly guessed a 5 digit pin code that I didn't create -- on the second try.

I'm basically a secret agent!
Click to expand...
PippyPony said:
And now I can watch season 5 of outlander :heckyeah:
Click to expand...
...I should probably clarify that I didn't hack some random person's password. It was a family member who is now receiving a free trial of Starz
 
Disclaimer to add that I *like* therio, one of my grandmothers is a breeder whom I consider "good," and I absolutely respect that good breeders often have an expansive knowledge of the niches of their breeds and expertise in particular realms. But they're not trained doctors.

Meet us with concerns, don't dictate therapy. Educate and let owners and vets come to decisions based on the limited science that exists in most of these fields, and accept that sometimes that decision is different than yours.
 
On the spay/neuter thing, I'm so glad there is a conversation now. One of our faculty has done a lot of research into this and... let's just say I wish I knew some of the risks when we spayed our golden young. We never planned to breed her, so I wish we had spoken with the vet about the increased risk of hemangiosarcoma, obesity, and joint disease, because she had all 3.

I feel very lucky because the surgeon who advocates for late S/N in some dog breeds/in some situations here also runs feral cat clinics, so I think it's a very balanced perspective. And all the kits get the snips.
 
I should probably add in a disclaimer that I overall don't like how analysis was done in that Davis paper (the 35 breed recommendation one, the weight-based one was a little better, as are the larger studies focused on specific breeds) or the weight they gave to their interpretations in making clinical recommendations, so the fact that it's now being cited everywhere as gospel bugs me but that's a whole other soapbox...
 
WildZoo said:
I should probably add in a disclaimer that I overall don't like how analysis was done in that Davis paper (the 35 breed recommendation one, the weight-based one was a little better, as are the larger studies focused on specific breeds) or the weight they gave to their interpretations in making clinical recommendations, so the fact that it's now being cited everywhere as gospel bugs me but that's a whole other soapbox...
Click to expand...
It's just something. Where prior there was... not much at best, or very individual studies that weren't easy to apply across breeds.

If clients seem very interested (and like they've got reasonable critical thinking skills), I actually recommend skeptvet's website and like, 30 page document on pros and cons and the studies. But for some reason most people never come back saying they've read it... :laugh:
 
Trilt said:
It's just something. Where prior there was... not much at best, or very individual studies that weren't easy to apply across breeds.

If clients seem very interested (and like they've got reasonable critical thinking skills), I actually recommend skeptvet's website and like, 30 page document on pros and cons and the studies. But for some reason most people never come back saying they've read it... :laugh:
Click to expand...
I know, and I appreciate it for what it is, I just...well like I said, different soapbox :laugh: hopefully more being done to refine and clarify some of the recommendations, especially ones that were made on very small sample sizes and based on relatively rare outcomes.
 
Trilt said:
The problem is that good breeders are SO, SO far and few apart. Seriously. The amount of trash breeder recommendations I see vs. good breeders who health check and do all the right things is legit probably 10:1 in my practice. I'm looking at allll those adorable bernadoodles and maltipoos and bulldogs from bitches with severe allergies and the amount of frankly wrong advice in breeder paperwork is ridiculous.

What the vast majority of breeders (or at least their paperwork) lack is absolutely any finesse. They had a dog die who was on Trifexis once, so all dogs shouldn't take it. There's a study in x breed showing increased cancer with neutering young, so y breed also shouldn't be neutered young. They had a puppy have a vxn reaction three years ago, so no lepto vxn ever (despite risk factors).

No! If they care about these things, they should tell their clients to discuss them with their doctor. Have a risk:benefit conversation, provide the client with resources (like UC Davis' decision making study for determining age of castration) and then allow them to establish trust with the person who has a degree in this and who is going to be responsible for this pet for their lifetime.

It's extremely frustrating to be told that because these people can let two dogs **** and keep the puppies alive long enough to sell, they deserve my medical respect. When I stop seeing mostly worm-and-flea-ridden, non-health tested puppies, then sure!
Click to expand...

At the end of the day I don't think that's a good justification for a blanket recommendation of ignoring your breeder and always doing whatever the vet says. Why should this not be case by case? Why are we treating "please wait until a year to neuter" the same as "never vaccinate your dog"?

Why are we treating every breeder (because mind you we know nothing about the lab breeder in this case) as though they're automatically one of the bad ones?

I understand there are a lot of crap breeders. But there are so many good ones that are getting lumped in with the bad ones and treated poorly as a result. I think we do damage to the next generation of dogs, by creating a lack of trust between breeders and veterinarians.

I also don't see how giving some credence to the breeder's opinion (provided it's reasonable) prevents you from establish trusting with your client. If the owner was the one who didn't want to neuter until later and there was no contract, would you be unable to establish trust with them at a result?

And as for being responsible for the pet for it's lifetime... the breeder (assuming they're a good one) is too. The breeder is the one guaranteeing the dog. The breeder is the one replacing or refunding the dog if there's a problem. The breeder is the one taking the dog back if the owner ever can't care for it. And ideally the breeder needs to have established trust with the owner so that the owner will inform them if anything goes wrong so that the breeder can make informed breeding decisions in the future.

No one is asking you to have respect for the crap breeders of the world. Just asking you to stop treating all breeders as though they're crap. Its' extremely frustrating to dedicate your life to producing the healthiest dogs possible and then be told to sit down, shut up, and don't have an opinion unless you went to vet school. Oh, but also make sure you still guarantee/stand behind your dogs because otherwise you're a bad breeder.
 
I think @finnickthedog makes an excellent point! We're a small community and to be frank, breeders are actually a small community too (as difficult as it is to believe). The reality is, anyone can call themselves a breeder if they let their dogs breed but those aren't actually breeders. Breeders are a legitimate business with many long-term investments that rely on them maintaining the integrity of their line and their reputation in the community. It's difficult to be a legitimate breeder in a small area because it's fairly easy to saturate the market with your breed. Overall, does it jab me a bit when I give medical advice and the owner says "but the breeder said to do this", yes. But I think that's a learning point. Maybe in the future, I'll ask, was this something in your breeding contract? For things like raw or grain-free diets which we have medical evidence aren't healthy for pets, I'll definitely put my foot down a bit but I think legitimate breeders do better research than your average "breeder". It's like when people have "service dogs" but it's obvious they bought a vest online, that's not a trained service animal. Just like because someone has 2 pitties that they love that aren't spayed/neutered and they have a litter doesn't make them a breeder (even with a contract). So I think Finnick makes an excellent point that we can all learn from. Try not to be jaded. It's hard (especially in a field like ours where our breakfast is sarcasm with a side of cynicism) but it's possible to build up our communities and be an ally to the great breeders to ensure they're the ones with the business and not the backyard people who only follow Dr. Google.
 
finnickthedog said:
At the end of the day I don't think that's a good justification for a blanket recommendation of ignoring your breeder and always doing whatever the vet says. Why should this not be case by case? Why are we treating "please wait until a year to neuter" the same as "never vaccinate your dog"?

Why are we treating every breeder (because mind you we know nothing about the lab breeder in this case) as though they're automatically one of the bad ones?

I understand there are a lot of crap breeders. But there are so many good ones that are getting lumped in with the bad ones and treated poorly as a result. I think we do damage to the next generation of dogs, by creating a lack of trust between breeders and veterinarians.

I also don't see how giving some credence to the breeder's opinion (provided it's reasonable) prevents you from establish trusting with your client. If the owner was the one who didn't want to neuter until later and there was no contract, would you be unable to establish trust with them at a result?

And as for being responsible for the pet for it's lifetime... the breeder (assuming they're a good one) is too. The breeder is the one guaranteeing the dog. The breeder is the one replacing or refunding the dog if there's a problem. The breeder is the one taking the dog back if the owner ever can't care for it. And ideally the breeder needs to have established trust with the owner so that the owner will inform them if anything goes wrong so that the breeder can make informed breeding decisions in the future.

No one is asking you to have respect for the crap breeders of the world. Just asking you to stop treating all breeders as though they're crap. Its' extremely frustrating to dedicate your life to producing the healthiest dogs possible and then be told to sit down, shut up, and don't have an opinion unless you went to vet school. Oh, but also make sure you still guarantee/stand behind your dogs because otherwise you're a bad breeder.
Click to expand...
I think if you go into GP you'll really understand where the frustration comes from.

I really respect good breeders. I had a shar pei patient maybe two months ago where the owner's mother was the breeder and very obviously dedicated to the breed, knew information about the line, we had a really great conversation about shar pei fever (she had a FUO and it was on the differentials, but we both agreed things weren't really lining up for it to be the right answer) and those are conversations and breeders that I enjoy. Because they love their breed, know their ****, and yeah maybe they're a bit kooky but kooky people can be great.

The problem is that since then, I've probably seen 5+ new puppy visits with obvious breeding and husbandry deficits, crap for recommendations in their "contracts," and the breeder trying to dictate diet, vaccines, etc. And I only work 1 day/week in GP right now!

So what's an acceptable ratio of crappy:good breeders before I can just start telling people, at baseline, to take everything their breeder says about medicine with a huge grain of salt? Because there's a whole lot of chaff with the wheat in real world GP...
 
MOOSEygoosey said:
I think @finnickthedog makes an excellent point! We're a small community and to be frank, breeders are actually a small community too (as difficult as it is to believe). The reality is, anyone can call themselves a breeder if they let their dogs breed but those aren't actually breeders. Breeders are a legitimate business with many long-term investments that rely on them maintaining the integrity of their line and their reputation in the community. It's difficult to be a legitimate breeder in a small area because it's fairly easy to saturate the market with your breed. Overall, does it jab me a bit when I give medical advice and the owner says "but the breeder said to do this", yes. But I think that's a learning point. Maybe in the future, I'll ask, was this something in your breeding contract? For things like raw or grain-free diets which we have medical evidence aren't healthy for pets, I'll definitely put my foot down a bit but I think legitimate breeders do better research than your average "breeder". It's like when people have "service dogs" but it's obvious they bought a vest online, that's not a trained service animal. Just like because someone has 2 pitties that they love that aren't spayed/neutered and they have a litter doesn't make them a breeder (even with a contract). So I think Finnick makes an excellent point that we can all learn from. Try not to be jaded. It's hard (especially in a field like ours where our breakfast is sarcasm with a side of cynicism) but it's possible to build up our communities and be an ally to the great breeders to ensure they're the ones with the business and not the backyard people who only follow Dr. Google.
Click to expand...
It is easy to ID the breeders that work hard to have a good line of dogs. But they are the ones who talk with us as well about current best care. It is a two way street. At the end of the day, however, they don't have a medical degree (except those obviously in vet school right now haha). You guys are also still in school. You haven't been hit by the idiocracy yet. It is easy to scream that you are doing what is best for the dogs, but in the end, the doctor is the one who has the most knowledge about the current situation with an animal's health.
 
Lupin21 said:
It is easy to ID the breeders that work hard to have a good line of dogs. But they are the ones who talk with us as well about current best care. It is a two way street. At the end of the day, however, they don't have a medical degree (except those obviously in vet school right now haha). You guys are also still in school. You haven't been hit by the idiocracy yet. It is easy to scream that you are doing what is best for the dogs, but in the end, the doctor is the one who has the most knowledge about the current situation with an animal's health.
Click to expand...
And to rule out jaded veterinarians, there is a second opinion if things seem wrong. I always advocate if someone is not satisfied with my assessment, they can see another vet for another set of eyes/opinions. I see a lot of animals for a second opinion myself, and sometimes I agree with what they found and other times I see something else. I dunno. I get the aggravation. There needs to be things outlined to ensure the care of the animal, but there is taking it too far.
 
I think it's possible to be skeptical without being jaded. Like @Trilt said -- it sometimes comes down to a question of odds. And those odds are very location-specific, and also honestly breed-specific in many cases.

Basically, know your audience.
 
Trilt said:
I think if you go into GP you'll really understand where the frustration comes from.

I really respect good breeders. I had a shar pei patient maybe two months ago where the owner's mother was the breeder and very obviously dedicated to the breed, knew information about the line, we had a really great conversation about shar pei fever (she had a FUO and it was on the differentials, but we both agreed things weren't really lining up for it to be the right answer) and those are conversations and breeders that I enjoy. Because they love their breed, know their ****, and yeah maybe they're a bit kooky but kooky people can be great.

The problem is that since then, I've probably seen 5+ new puppy visits with obvious breeding and husbandry deficits, crap for recommendations in their "contracts," and the breeder trying to dictate diet, vaccines, etc. And I only work 1 day/week in GP right now!

So what's an acceptable ratio of crappy:good breeders before I can just start telling people, at baseline, to take everything their breeder says about medicine with a huge grain of salt? Because there's a whole lot of chaff with the wheat in real world GP...
Click to expand...

It's not that I don't understand where the frustration comes from. I have worked in GP clinics before (albeit not as the veterinarian). It's that I also understand very well what it's like to be on the other side and I don't forget that when I'm seeing the crap breeders and crap owners.

I don't think there's ever a ratio at which it is perfectly fine to make blanket statements that we know perfectly well don't apply to all situations.

Especially since, like I mentioned, I think it erodes trusts between the breeding community and veterinarians. Which I think is not in the best interest of dogs.
 
To add my experience...

My current dog was my first time getting a pet from a breeder.

I wasn't asked to agree to anything specific, just that I wouldn't breed her and would spay her at some point. My vet suggested 12 months or after her first heat, which happened at about the same time, so that's what I did.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This conversation is making me think of some of the absolutely insane adoption contracts I've seen rescues put together. Vetting rescues can also be pretty difficult and I can't tell you how many are essentially thinly veiled hoarding situations or basically a money laundering scheme lol
 
We’re currently looking to get a puppy from a wonderful breeder later this year. All the correct health/genetic testing, puppies are raised with so much attention to detail and love. It’s been a lot of fun to watch her raise her current litter because she’s really active on Facebook. Most of her contract is pretty reasonable and doesn’t make me roll my eyes too much...but there’s also one line about recommending against the lepto vaccine and it frightens me to think about all the dogs not getting lepto vaccines because breeders said it was bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

supershorty
GGoats ThWWee: Here It GGoats Again - GAME THREAD
93 94 95 96 97
Replies
5K
Views
84K
vampyrica
vampyrica
supershorty
Here It GGOATS Again (GGOATS ThWWee) - Sign Up Thread - Sign Ups CLOSED
2
Replies
68
Views
4K
SARdoghandler
SARdoghandler
supershorty
The Good PWWace - GAME THREAD
79 80 81 82 83
Replies
4K
Views
56K
samac
samac
Clem J
CWWem's HoWWiday ExtWWavangza (mafia game thread)
36 37 38 39 40
Replies
2K
Views
21K
GoSpursGo
GoSpursGo
Animal Midwife
CHOOSE YOUR OWWN IV - Game Thread
112 113 114 115 116
Replies
6K
Views
68K
screamqueenbee
screamqueenbee
Top Bottom