I think all reputable breeders will insist on meeting all the family
It depends on who is licensing and what terms apply. As it stands it is generally the breeder with several breeding bitches who holds a licence with their local council under which welfare issues are addressed but not the good breeding practices that you are talking about. Good breeding practices are better covered, in my opinion, by governance by the breed club so, generally speeking, if you wish to find a responsible breeder you would look for them through the Breed Club rather than the council licensing system.

what i meant was that anyone - intending to breed from a bitch - say like me - if idecided to breed from millie (i cant cos shes spayed ) but if i did - i should have a license - so then anytime the council or someone would want to chekc up on me they could - as someone said - all pups/dogs should be chipped so you can trace them - this would also prevent the problem of "your rescue centre has remhomed my dog without my knowlegde situations" - imo thats the way forward

they should say - as of jan 2008 every dog in the uk should be microchipped, if not and the dog strays, the owners will have to pay a 5000 fine or summet - this would encourage (well youd like to think) to be more responsible - if the dog strays - then the owners should be fined more to get them back as well -

The council will only check that your dogs are being kept in conditions of good welfare they do not have any interest in how you sell them or to who but I agree proper identification is good course of action. It is a requirement of the Accredited Breeder scheme, so responsible breeders are already addressing this. To make it universal you would need a dog licencing system which was not a success in the past being generally flouted by the irresponsible and so to run it the expence would be passed to the responsible and would be rather hefty I fear.
Edited to add. A big fine for the irresponsible that do not identify their dogs is an incentive to abandon them.

Good post....licensing for breeders (and rescues) is a great idea.
Maybe DEFRA could do it....definitely *not* the RSPCA.

Spot on with the reasons dogs often end in rescues, which in turn comes down to impulse/'image' buying,
instead of sensible research.
That is something breeders can assist with, and this cannot be done without meeting all the household residents, including other dogs.
A good rescue will do this..but like the case of a Lab given to the arthritic lady, some can be lacking.


Such examples of rescue mismatching would deserve a refund.
However, most dogs are returned for behaviours the adopters was pre-warned and educated about...after trainng and assessment, they stated they could cope.
So that wouldnt warrant a refund.
Other returns are because the forewarned problem happened because the adopter ignored advice and did the things the rescue told them would create the problem.
That doesnt' warrant a refund either.

Like modern day divorce I think looking for blame is pointless after all, you can say they stated they could cope, but they would wouldn't they :smt001 Some of the responsibility must lie with whoever assessed that they could cope.
But blame aside I'm looking at it more from the point of incentive. I contract to reimburse because I believe it provides an incentive for the buyer to keep to their promise to return to me if things go wrong rather than look to reimburse themselves by selling elsewhere.
From the rescue side I think a policy such as this would remove any incentive for poorly run rescues to operate in a boomerang way as someone described it.

Rescues try very hard not to get it wrong and certainly do not want dogs to bounce constantly or rehome to the wrong home on purpose! A rescue will already have incurred expenses on the dogs as Ive already stated. How much would you give back of the £100 after speying, vaccs, worming etc.

What would you charge if a dog had come in requiring vet treatment that could run into thousands? Would you then pass that on to the adoptee? Do you really think rescues make a profit out of rehoming? Most I know are always desperate for money so they can keep helping more dogs especially the old and the ill.

As a breeder you choose to incurr those expenses. Should rescues then choose which dogs they take in - the old or ill being too costly to their profit margins? Many of the dogs are in rescue for months how much feeding costs would that incurr?

Do you really believe that whatever the donation is goes anywhere near covering the costs of rehoming a dog?

Your contract states that money will be given back if and when the dog is resold, but with out of pocket expenses taken out, is that not more of an incentive for people to try and sell your pups on to get all the money back or even more?

Giving nothing back would be a bigger incentive.

Speaking as one who has done many homechecks over the years, there is a lot which can picked up on in the home setting.
If there are kids, how do they behave in their `home turf` ? Are they likely to be too much for a particular dog to cope with ?
Might a different dog to the one they are interested in be more suited to a `bubbly` family of youngsters ?
Perhaps the children in the home are so good [ and not just because they`ve been put in best behaviour mode ], that its clear a particular dog would be in a very nice environment indeed.
I personally also dont want to see a place look like a show home, I want to see that the family wont be up in arms if a muddy set of paws flew in and messed up the carpet or sofa.
Its important to see that fencing / boundary is secure and high enough.
Its a valuable thing to be able to help potential first time owners as well - a rescue which assesses dogs and has them in foster will know any tweaks a new home may need to do for the dogs safety, be it moving ornaments higher or putting a transfer on French windows so a dog can see there is something they should`nt run through.
Its not about being nosey, its about making sure the environment is safe and secure but also relaxed and offering guidence on this or that, [ first time owners especially ], if it will be useful in terms of the dog they would like to adopt:smt001


I had a two hour grilling for my Defa and that was with the rescue approaching me to see if I would consider adopting him as they knew I had deaf dog experience and had seen me often with my deaf lass
In his case, many tried to adopt him but because they loved how he looks and didn`t take the deafness into account. As a result he became very unwell through stress [ shed his stomach line basically ], so they were determined to find someone who wanted *him* not just a pretty accessory to parade around.
In the placements until then, because people wanting him were so determined to have such a `prettyboy` they would say they could do what he needed without thinking it through. The longest he lasted before being handed back was 2 weeks, the shortest was 2 hours...**

When I was approached by them, they were obviously on caution overdrive but it was absolutely necessary, and it was`nt even definate that he would make it as his health was in such a bad way, it was a case of last chance for him for his sanity, literally. So I was interviewed at great length so they could find out as much as possible about my experience, commitment, attitude etc. It was right and proper that they know my experience with my deaf girl was`nt a fluke, and as she was`nt a collie they needed to know my experience and abilities in that regard - Defa is a highly worky lad who wants to herd herd herd....
It was a bit like taking an exam but it was absolutely vital for them to do it :smt001


My Defa and Willow were handed in with papers.
Papers however do not guarantee reputation of breeder.
No reputable BC breeder produces litters from merle to merle mating just because they could charge more for merle pups [ which is far from a certainty to be what comes out anyway ! ], but thats what happened in my boys` cases...
There can be many reasons for papers not being handed in, including embarrassment in case a breeder finds out an owner could`nt cope,
or because there was a contract but they wanted to ignore it rather than contact the breeder,
or even because no matter what the class of the Pedigree on paper an owner may beem the breeder as someone they would never send a dog back to...

Many are also too upset when handing a dog over to give a thought to taking a piece of paper with them ie if through divorce or bereavement, a Pedigree paper is not usually a high priority to remember to take.

I do know of one case last year of a dog handed in at age 7 years, no papers and no breeder details given. Luckily the breeder had chipped her pups so when scanned she was contacted. She was mortified and went and picked up the dog there and then. Apparently the people who bought the dog [ a Pedigree Alsatian ] had sold the dog on - despite a contract - but pretended they still had the dog, then when they moved all contact was lost then the people who got the dog from them `got rid`...

Sometimes no matter how reputable a breeder, the people they sell to may not be what they made themselves out to be, or may have changes of circumstance which left the breeder out of the loop for no deliberate reason - it does happen all too often

I dont know any official stats on Pedigree to purebred, they would be impossible to collate for the reasons given and more, [ its far from an exhaustive list ], but I suspect they are much higher proportion than people would realise



Here here, could`nt agree more :smt038
There were moves some time ago [ when Dogs Trust was still called NCDL ], to try to make microchipping at breeder source compulsory for all dogs but it seems to be on hold at the present time unfortunately - probably too many people arguing against it, whining about it infringing `their` rights
Your paragraph is absolutely on-topic, its that sort of thing which should come under breeder responsibility, and would bring all into line with those rescues which do microchip :smt001

**For Hewey, the rescue I`m talking about regarding my lad don`t take adoption donations until the time of adoption, they prefer potential adopters to have a two week `foster` with their dog first to make sure everything is going ok and to give a `cooling off` period before a commitment on paper from both sides

Personally I would like to see tighter restrictions on advertising,breeding and selling of all dogs.I would like no more ads in free papers,local evening papers and these freeas on the net.If these were in place I believe we might see a reduction in byb breeders purely for money,because they have no place for advertising.

I would like to see all pups chipped(compulsary) before they leave there Breeder,I would like to see heavy fines,for those breeders that don't comply.

With dogs going through rescue,Has already posted it is down to education,but sometimes things do go wrong,which is totally beyond our control,for example a breeder dying suddenly,so they are unable to take a pup/dog back,
Marriage break up's,unemployment,going bankrupt and losing your property,all of these things contribute to dogs going through rescue,not just the unwanted dog.

As a breeder myself,who i might add hasn't bred for 12 years,we have very strict critera for placing our pups.
We do insist on meeting the family chilren included,we make them aware of the bad points of owing our breed as well as the good points,we then tell them to go away and think long and hard,if it is infact the right breed for them.

If my pups go locally I do unannounced spot checks,which has worked very well,we also state whatever the time night or day,if you have any worries or concerns ring us.I don't care if it's 3 in the morning.

Rescues regularly pay out vet bills and other expenses for horrific cases. If they charged adopters what a dog has cost the rescue, no one except the people on the Rich List could afford them...

Such cases are shown here at the rescue which originally saved two of my girls
Warning - some images are graphic
Rehomed cases :

http://www.limerickanimalwelfare.com...ifestories.htm

Cases requiring extensive treatment, some for whom it was too late
Warning, Very strong stomach needed for some of these cases :

http://www.limerickanimalwelfare.com...ueltycases.htm

Do breeders pay out for that sort of thing every day of the year, year after year ?
Hardly...
I hope that puts a perspective on that paltry little £100 donation.
Still think rescues should hand it back especially if an adopter does`nt exactly make the most sensible choice in the first place of the sort of dog suited to their circumstance and may easily have glossed over something in their determination to get what they want...?