[stale]

hi all.

first off, i personally am not interested in breeding. i own one fixed male rottie, a rescue from the SPCA, and am not particularly looking for another dog now.

i have been looking at local breeders though, mostly for some idea of how they operate and what they produce, since i am likely to get another dog in a few years.

what i'm wondering is about a trend i've noticed in most of the breeders i've found so far. it's an over-emphasis on conformation.

of the five folks i've talked to, four let me look over the pedigrees for their current bitches/studs. of those four, only one had ANY titling for working dog activities in their last 5 generations. i guess what i'm really curious about is, is this normal for rottweiler breeders??? granted, looking like a rottweiler should be important in terms of breeding, but without the working titles i'm left in serious doubt as to the dogs ability to preform in it's given field of work.

i grant you, i come from a biased point of view - i worked with a labrador breeder for years, and very few of her puppies ever came from a line that didn't have working titles on at least one side, if not both, in addition to the standard CH. rating. (yes, i say standard, because in my experience showing labs for conformation, some serious deviation from breed standard have managed to not only get titles, but place as best in show. needless to say, pretty dog titles don't impress me nearly as much as working dog titles do. it might look like a duck, walk like a duck, but if the critter can't swim or fly, it's just NOT a duck.)

i recognise that a lot of folks on this forum are a breeder, in one form or another, and i was just hoping for some feedback from them as to the importance they place on working vs. conformation titles.

and a completely seperate question, do any of the breeders on this list use a "breeding" contract? the very concept seemed alien to the rottweiler breeders i've talked to, but it's the contract on which i'd gotten all of my previous dogs.

essentially, the contract states that, barring health issues, or conformation DQ's, the dog in my possession shall NOT be altered until they are XX age. (XX normally being 3-4, to allow time to title the dog, work the dog, and generally prove it's a worthy breeding prospect.) the upshot of this was a saving on the initial cost of the dog, and knowledge that i'd be liable for reinbursment of the full price of a puppy in the event that i had the dog in question altered without the breeder's knowledge and consent. and of course the requirement that i be willing to invest the time and money training and showing the dog, and keeping the breeder updated (photo's and documentation) on the dog's development.

was i just lucky in my dealings with this woman? or is this actually a standard?

any input would be appreciated, and i apologise for the length of my post, but these things have been bothering me for a couple days now.