[nq:1]Gotcha. Let me restate that:, [nq:2]You have no idea whether, "Sandy in

Rocky:

"Sandy in OK" (Email Removed) said in
[nq:2]Our experiences differ.[/nq]
[nq:1]How far back does your experience in the breed go?[/nq]
My personal experience is nine years. Yes, I know yours is longer, but that doesn't invalidate mine.

Matt. Rocky's a Dog.

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:2]How far back does your experience in the breed go?[/nq]
[nq:1]My personal experience is nine years. Yes, I know yours is longer, but that doesn't invalidate mine.[/nq]
No; it doesn't. Has your personal experience been as a pet owner? Nothing wrong with that. But when you've been sitting around picking the brains of the "old-timers" for close to 30 years, you may have heard a few things

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:2]Ah. Good to know that there isn't any variation in Miniature Schnauzers.[/nq]
[nq:1]Intuition is frequently wrong, and it would be incorrect to draw any conclusions without knowing more about the data. Stating ... reveal that you don't know squat about statistics (this stuff is covered at the beginning of an introductory statistics course).[/nq]
Gotcha. Let me restate that: Unless Miniature Schauzers are inbred lab rats instead of the 10th most popular dog breed in the US, it's statistically insigniciant. That better?

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Melinda Shore:

[nq:1]Gotcha. Let me restate that: Unless Miniature Schauzers are inbred lab rats instead of the 10th most popular dog breed in the US, it's statistically insigniciant. That better?[/nq]
No, because we still don't have enough information. I'd let this one drop if I were you, or at least qualify it with "I think" or "it seems to me" or some such.

Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - (Email Removed)

Sending more troops into a war is properly called an "escalation."

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

shelly:

[nq:2]You have no idea whether she health tests or not. THAT'S the point.[/nq]
[nq:1]That's not true - she does have some idea, based on the lack of a statement on the breeder's website, ... there's nobody who health tests without letting potential buyers know, but that precedent suggests that it's the less likely explanation.[/nq]
Exactly!
[nq:1]What is true is that she doesn't know.[/nq]
True, dat. Anymore than Sandy knows that Skansen is any kind of responsible. I can make an educated guess, though, based on the following:
1. I trust Robin's evaluation that the breeder has done gawdawfulthings to the Giant Schnauzer breed. I trust Judy's observation that proper coat is an essential part of the breed. Breeding for traits that harm the breed is pretty much the opposite of responsible.
2. I trust Beth's less-than-positive characterization of the breeder.
3. I know she breeds a large number of dogs too many for aresponsible breeder to justify. It's not like she needs that many dogs for her own use.
4. She has health tested her Giants but has either neglected totest her minis, or she has not made those tests public.
5. She does not show her minis in conformation. She does notappear to participate in any performance activities with them. She has not provided any information on temperament testing of them. In fact, there is no proof that she does anything beyond breeding them and selling them. I think it's a pretty fair assumption that the information she's provided on her website includes the things she feels are most important about her breeding program. The only actual information contained therein concerns pricing and shipping (any Wednesday!).
6. There is no indication that she screens potential buyers, beyondwhether or not they have a credit card.
7. She charges more for females than males.
8. She sells her "pick of the litter" pups. Most responsiblebreeders are working to better the breed, and breed first and foremost for themselves. The pick of the litter stays with the breeder, and is not sold to the first person to pony up the cash.
9. She sells uncropped dogs. (I don't know how acceptable this isto responsible Miniature Schnauzer breeders.)
10. She sells intact dogs to unscreened buyers for the purpose ofbreeding.
11. Will she take pups? At any age and at any time and for anyreason? A responsible breeder will not produce more pups than they can reasonably care for. The large number of pups produced by Skansen is alarming.
12. What sort of health guarantee does she have?
13. What sort of support can a potential buyer expect?
14. She's been deceptive about her white dogs, in claiming thatthey will eventually be recognized by the AKC. Forthrightness and honesty are important things to look for in a responsible breeder. You should be able to trust her.
15. She is apparently not a member of the breed's parent club, andis not included on the AMSC's Breeder List. Her breeding practices are in conflict with the AMSC's COE.
On the other hand, I'd be delighted to entertain any actual evidence from Sandy, or anyone else, that indicates Skansen is a responsible breeder. Because, at this point, there is not a single thing that would lead a reasonable person to consider the possibility that she might be a responsible breeder.

Shelly (Warning: see label for details)
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

shelly:

[nq:1]11. Will she take pups?[/nq]
That should be: Will she take pups back? One of the problems with breeding vast quantities of dogs is that it is inevitable that there will be returns, and most breeders will not be able to handle a large number of them.

Shelly (Warning: see label for details)
http://www.cat-sidh.net (the Mother Ship)
http://esther.cat-sidh.net (Letters to Esther)

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:2]What is true is that she doesn't know.[/nq]
[nq:1]True, dat. Anymore than Sandy knows that Skansen is any kind of responsible. I can make an educated guess, though, based on the following:[/nq]
Gah. I hate when I write a long response and a black hole eats it. Possibly the gods sending me a not-so-subtle message that I am wasting my time, but . . .
Sandy never said she knows Skansen is any kind of responsible. Just that nobody here can say that she is not, without a lot more information
[nq:1]1. I trust Robin's evaluation that the breeder has done gawdawful things to the Giant Schnauzer breed. I trust Judy's observation that proper coat is an essential part of the breed. Breeding for traits that harm the breed is pretty much the opposite of responsible.[/nq]
I suppose we need to call to task the top breeders of AmLine GSDs and Bulldogs (and several other breeds as well) A soft coat may not be functional but it's a heck of a lot more functional than deformed limbs and heads. The "winning" coat in Australian Shepherds isn't functional either. Just "purtier" than a moderate correct coat.
[nq:1]2. I trust Beth's less-than-positive characterization of the breeder.[/nq]
I might if I actually knew beth (not just on the internet) and knew on what she based her opinion.
[nq:1]3. I know she breeds a large number of dogs too many for a responsible breeder to justify. It's not like she needs that many dogs for her own use.[/nq]
As I've stated, you can't develop quality and a recognizable line with two or three housepets that you breed one or two times. You may be able to buy quality and preserve it that way. But your success is on the backs of old-style big kennels who did things very much as Sylvia Hammarstrom apparently does - kennels, hired help, and a profitable business that is a by product of the hardwork of producing her vision of the perfect Schnauzer.
[nq:1]4. She has health tested her Giants but has either neglected to test her minis, or she has not made those tests public.[/nq]
Which is true of 99+% of the breeders of that breed, if we are to believe the numbers given by OFA.
[nq:1]5. She does not show her minis in conformation. She does not appear to participate in any performance activities with ... feels are most important about her breeding program. The only actual information contained therein concerns pricing and shipping (any Wednesday!).[/nq]
So, anyone who is breeding for something besides showing is irresponsible.
[nq:1]6. There is no indication that she screens potential buyers, beyond whether or not they have a credit card.[/nq]
And no indication that she doesn't. But I'm betting a small earnest fee does cut down on people trolling her for information. which I bet she would get a lot of, being pretty high profile.
[nq:1]7. She charges more for females than males. 8. She sells her "pick of the litter" pups. Most responsible breeders ... of the litter stays with the breeder, and is not sold to the first person to pony up the cash.[/nq]
The pick of a litter isn't always a dog that the breeder wishes to use, for one reason or another. You don't know that until they are out of the uterus.
[nq:1]9. She sells uncropped dogs. (I don't know how acceptable this is to responsible Miniature Schnauzer breeders.)[/nq]
Tails are docked very early. My pups tend to be pretty much back to sleep by the time they are put back with their littermates. But ear crops are done on pups with a fully mature nervous system. It's painful, messy and difficult to maintain. Personally, I don't think I'd ever have a cropped breed, although I don't support the AR move to ban them. The idea of requiring a pup who doesn't need that for the showring to go through that boggles my mind.
[nq:1]10. She sells intact dogs to unscreened buyers for the purpose of breeding.[/nq]
you don't know if the buyers are unscreened. Certainly requiring every dog you send out to be speutered keeps them out of the hands of millers and bybs. It also limits the gene pool to a very few quality dogs owned by serious breeders and show people and a lot of crap dogs owned by BYBs and Puppymillers. Many breeds are already facing genetic bottlenecks caused by popular sire syndrome. When your show dogs are like inbred lab rats, where do you go for health? It's a difficult problem.
[nq:1]11. Will she take pups? At any age and at any time and for any reason? A responsible breeder will not produce more pups than they can reasonably care for. The large number of pups produced by Skansen is alarming.[/nq]
We don't know
[nq:1]12. What sort of health guarantee does she have?[/nq]
We don't know
[nq:1]13. What sort of support can a potential buyer expect?[/nq]
We don't know
[nq:1]14. She's been deceptive about her white dogs, in claiming that they will eventually be recognized by the AKC. Forthrightness and honesty are important things to look for in a responsible breeder. You should be able to trust her.[/nq]
Since they are recognized in Europe already, I bet she is right. I wouldn't be surprised if eventually it happens - sooner or later
[nq:1]15. She is apparently not a member of the breed's parent club, and is not included on the AMSC's Breeder List. Her breeding practices are in conflict with the AMSC's COE.[/nq]
The only people bound (however loosely) by a code of ethics are members of the club. I'm not a member of USASA. (the AKC parent club of the Aussie) Never have been. Never will be. I am not bound to follow their breed standard. And I don't
[nq:1]On the other hand, I'd be delighted to entertain any actual evidence from Sandy, or anyone else, that indicates Skansen ... a single thing that would lead a reasonable person to consider the possibility that she might be a responsible breeder.[/nq]Reasonable people are always WILLING to consider possibilities. I have no idea if Sylvia Hammarstrom is Lucifer's daughter or the bestest thing since cream cheese. Would I breed the way she does (big kennel, lots of dogs) no. My dogs are my pets. But then I don't kid myself that I've had a major influence on my breed, though I've been fairly successful on a very small scale. Will I assume that she is a puppy mill? No. There is simply not enough evidience one way or the other.

And I'm a believer in innocent until there is a good reason to believe guilty. Part of PeTA's big lie is that breeders are evil, that producing a lot of puppies is evil (even if none of those puppies ever end up in rescue or shelter), and that it's wrong for anyone but a handful of enthusiasts to have intact animals for any reason (of course, they really don't even think that but it sounds more palatable than "no dogs" and they can get more people to agree with it) .

Surely there is a middle ground that addresses overpopulation issues (although our shelter is now exporting dogs to areas that don't have enough dogs to fill their market) while not destroying centuries of progress in creating nice dogs. And I fully recongize that while I have strong personal opinions on what i do and don't like in a dog, it's not my right to decide for anyone else. BroomSandy

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:1]I know of TWO Skansen dogs here in my county.[/nq]
I've known 3 or 4 Skansen dogs. All were giants though. I don't know enough about Giant Schnauzers to say if they were excellent representatives of the breed, but certainly good enough to earn CHs (which they had) and one was working in Schutzhund. She didn't have as much drive as the GSDs and Malinois, but probably as much as my Aussie.

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

Sandy in OK:

[nq:1]And that is the biggest question of all. I was told by respected members of our breed club that you ... you can take back any and all pups that you have bred, should they all bounce at the same time.[/nq]And stating first, that I have no idea what Skansen's "take back" policy is, and no intention of sending her $100 to find out. . . IF you live in the country, on a large acreage, with large kennel facilities and staff, and probably have a waiting list of people who want a puppy or dog - whether or not your reputation is "earned". your ability to absorb returned puppies -should you choose the responsible course - would be much easier than for the small earnest breeder who lives in town with her three well-loved and occasionally bred dogs and a three dog limit.

I know if I needed to take back one of mine, it would be a hardship, And a real hardship if it was more than one. I would do so, but it wouldn't be easy. And the main reason I've decided not to breed again is that by the time I'm likely to need another dog for me, I'm going to be of an age where I won't be able to promise my health or longevity for the life of my puppies.

This thread originates from within 'usenet', and as such the content and users are not guaranteed to have been moderated by our community.

RE: "Don't touch my bone" page 27

Related forum topics: