First time dog buyer help

[Stilly bay]

The 3rd route that has not been discussed is adopting a dog. I know that this isn't what the thread is all about, but with today's economy some good dogs are given up for little or nothing... I think adoption may be an easier way to asses because they are usually full grown... Neither of my hunting dogs have been adopted but i have had adopted dogs. 

 adopting a dog  could is a gamble as well. you could end up with a highly trained dog that needs a home or a nightmare full of problems that  someone is looking to get rid. at least you would have the benefit of possibly being able to "test drive" the dog before committing. knowing what you want and when to walk a way can be invaluable.

or there is getting an started dog- the sticker shock on a started dog is enough to dissuade most would be buyers, but when you factor in all money in training that has been sunk into the dog and that it should already have its first vet checks, the big price tag can be a bargain.
not to mention when you get a started dog you know exactly what you are going to end up with and you can take it for a test drive to see if this particular dog will suit you or not.
this is probably the safest bet when looking for a new dog.

like I said the price tag can be pretty daunting but if you wait a year to buy a young pup and bank the money you would have spent on the price of a puppy, vet checks, food and toys not to mention training birds and equipment and the price of the trainers expertise as he brings the pup up- you might find a started dog is too good a deal to pass up.
another benefit is not dealing with puppy trouble like house breaking, chewing, ect ect.

[JJD]

this thread CAN be very useful,  if we stick to FACTS, and suggest what people should look for in health certification, how the kennel is run,   stuff that would affect EVERY puppy purchase.
a lot of the other stuff is just opinion, like if parents are champions, or champion bread, does not necessarily give you a good pup.  and someone's experience with a certain breed can be a total different experience for me with that exact breed. 

I can see this thread turning from helping someone pick a first dog, to I like this breeder and this breeder is better because MY dog came from there..

just my       

 

I agree to a point, there should be a seperate thread for "recommened breeders".
I believe you analogy is a bit off however.  A breeder providing health clearances garrantees no more than work titles.  Both of the scew the odds in your favor.  However, pups whos sire and dam have NFC or AFC in their name may not be what the average hunter wants.  Dogs that run the upper ends of the dog games are often high power dogs who have a very high energy level and need to leave the line like they are shot out of a cannon in order to be competative.  These dogs often require more pressure and time to train than the average hunter is willing to put in.  Test titles however, indicate that the parents were trainable.  Many of these dogs may well have Field trial lines, but may have not had enough fire in themselves to compete at the upper levels.  Still excellent dogs, and maybe more suited to the dog a hunter can work with.
All based on empirical observation.  I'm not a breeder and don't intend to get into that game.  God bless those who do it right. 

So, What you are saying is that testing the dam and the sire for PRA(knowing their results) will NOT guarantee that the pups won't go blind? (I'm setting you up if you can't tell) If you are saying a PRA result is of equal importance as a agility title I'll have to politely disagree with you. Having both Sire and Dam (in breeds with histories of dysplasia such as Labs) showing good results doesn't mean anything?

PRA; yes, that is exactly what I am saying.  Due to possible genetic mutation, a test guarantees nothing.  In the case of PRA it scews the odds greatly in your favor, but still no guarantees.  Just like OFA and Penn Hip, guarantee nothing, again they certainly scew odds in your favor. I would not purchase a pup without both.  I agree if I had to choose between health and titles, I'd take the health.  No matter how great the potential, if it physically can not do the work, the dog is usless.

[Happy Gilmore]

There have been two or three cases of a mutation in labs and over how many registered per year?

I think you'd be better off buying a PRA affected dog and hoping that it didn't go blind. What you are suggesting is that OFA's have NOT reduced the amount of dysplastic dogs and breeders using knowledge of PRA genetic testing has not almost completely clipped the PRA blindness problem nearly completely out of the picture.

[JJD]

There have been two or three cases of a mutation in labs and over how many registered per year?

I think you'd be better off buying a PRA affected dog and hoping that it didn't go blind. What you are suggesting is that OFA's have NOT reduced the amount of dysplastic dogs and breeders using knowledge of PRA genetic testing has not almost completely clipped the PRA blindness problem nearly completely out of the picture.

Hap, you sure read a lot into my posts. I never suggested that tests did not reduce genetically based problems.
I am saying that a breeder can not guarantee you that your pup will never have a problem, it happens.  Why do you think breeders offer a refund, or worse, a replacement pup if something does go haywire?
If there is no mutation, did someone come along and infect these breeds with these resesive genes?
Where did displasia come from? PRA? EIC? Etc .  Heck, 20 yrs ago, no one ever heard of EIC.
I am sure not saying health clearences are not of use, I am comparing them to the genetics of a sire and dam.
Both are important
Again, No Guarantees.