# Sticky  Thinking of breeding?



## Kristin (Nov 12, 2004)

Link to flowchart...

oes.org Photo Gallery: Click image to close this window


----------



## Brodysmom (Jan 8, 2009)

I have seen that flow chart before and I LOVE IT. It's really good and helps people process breeding in a logical way.... not just "oh she's so cute so I must have pups!" Thanks for posting that!!

Brodysmom


----------



## katsrevenge (Nov 24, 2008)

I love this graphic.


----------



## Triton07 (Jul 9, 2009)

Very useful chart!! I just wish more people would actually go through those steps before considering!


----------



## Kristin (Nov 12, 2004)

So do I. A girl on my mommy group (myspace) asked if she should breed her Husky and someone posted that. I really liked it. It would lovely people would consider those things because breeding their dogs.


----------



## Yoshismom (Jul 6, 2005)

Thanks for this! I am sticking this as I think it would be very useful ;-)


----------



## Ciarra (May 6, 2008)

Wow I could actually say yes to all of them, I guess I have the "A OK" to breed but I wont. No intill he gets CH added to his name, his show career will come first. and Maybe studding...maybe.


----------



## Rosiesmum (Oct 14, 2007)

Brilliant.

There are so many pet owners breeding from their sweet, but very definitely pet quality/non breed standard chihuahuas now it's unbelievable. But as long as people buy from these people it will continue I guess 

Barbara x


----------



## bindi boo (Jul 2, 2008)

oooh i see this is VERY useful and if more people followed there would be less pes in rescue BUT what about when the slightly not breed standard makes a healthier pet... my cav faith is kc reg with 5 generation pedigree but she would probs be laughed out of crufts because of her slightly longer snout.. now faiths only 11weeks old so obviously im not just saying this as if trying to jusify breeding her coz shes way way wayyy too young but ust from a personal point of view wouldnt breeding all cavs to have this ever so slightly longer nose whether they were show winners or not be better or the breed, afterall healh and wellbeing of the dog as well as the breed should come frst right? i lost my last cav BECAUSE of that smaller muzzle so for show judges to demand a muzzle tha short seems stupid to me


----------



## Triton07 (Jul 9, 2009)

bindi boo said:


> oooh i see this is VERY useful and if more people followed there would be less pes in rescue BUT what about when the slightly not breed standard makes a healthier pet... my cav faith is kc reg with 5 generation pedigree but she would probs be laughed out of crufts because of her slightly longer snout.. now faiths only 11weeks old so obviously im not just saying this as if trying to jusify breeding her coz shes way way wayyy too young but ust from a personal point of view wouldnt breeding all cavs to have this ever so slightly longer nose whether they were show winners or not be better or the breed, afterall healh and wellbeing of the dog as well as the breed should come frst right? i lost my last cav BECAUSE of that smaller muzzle so for show judges to demand a muzzle tha short seems stupid to me


How is your cav doing? I've heard a lot of them get cerebral pulsy (I really can't spell that haha), where their brain is too large for their skulls. I saw a horrible documentary on it. It was 55 minutes long and made me cry. It had to do with people breeding dogs to death (all of the in-bred dogs and making things "better"). Apparently the cavalier is the most unhealthy purebred if up to show standards. 70% have heart murmers by age 6  A lot of the cav breeders they interviewed were aware of the cerebral disease, but none will test for it because they don't see it as necessary, even if their studs or dams don't show signs of it until they are older.. it was based out of the uk too..I will try find the link to the video, only if you'd like to watch though..it is graphic and very, VERY upsetting. I cried several times.

I really hope your girl is a healthy pup! I don't mean to let you down by any means either!!!! If she has a longer snout, she is probably one of the healthy few.


----------



## bindi boo (Jul 2, 2008)

yes i saw that bbc programme. had me in tears especially at the cavs coz its so close to home. i cant remember the name of that illness now but i know its known as SM and the heard disease is MVD (maricle(sp?) valve disease), 
my girl seems very healthy atm but these diseases dont show until theyre 4-5yrs old. you can tes from 2years but im not sure how accurate it is at that age.

my last cav angel (12.1.07--11.6.09) was only 2 years old when she died and she was as healthy as can be nothing wrong with her at all, she choked to death simply because her snout was too shrt everything was packed in too tightly and her soft pallet blocked her trachea and killed her. . this isnt supposed to be a dangerous thing and is usually harmless but it dont feel very harmless after it ripped my baby girl away


----------



## Triton07 (Jul 9, 2009)

Wow I'm so sorry to hear that  It's horrible when people claim it is harmless, yet there are way too many unnecessary deaths due to a geneticly "correct" breed.. pugs are prime examples. I'm very glad to hear your cav is healthy, thank goodness she's not "perfect" breed standard. I would be so afraid if that happened to my dog.


----------



## xxxxdeedde (Jul 3, 2008)

Kristin said:


>


*LOVE IT!* Hopefully it will bring attention to BYB!


----------



## ARTEMIS (Oct 20, 2009)

produce chihuahua is complicated.. big head.. no lot of pups.. there are lot of cesarea..
you have to inform you about the line of your chihuahua before thinking about breeding..
a chihuahua to small can't have pups to.. it's very dangerous... a female to small can die..


----------



## ARTEMIS (Oct 20, 2009)

In France many people breed them chihuahua to refund the " price of parents"... 
it's very sad....


----------



## Rosiesmum (Oct 14, 2007)

ARTEMIS said:


> In France many people breed them chihuahua to refund the " price of parents"...
> it's very sad....


A lot of pet owners in the UK are doing exactly the same, very callous 

x


----------



## OurCheekyChihuahuas (Nov 18, 2009)

thats a really good chart for someone who needs to consider all the factors before just breeding their pets!


----------



## Cesar's Mommy (Aug 13, 2009)

I don't like this chart. Lets say my dog is purebreed with papers but the person I got her from didn't believe in showing or didn't like to. Does that mean I shouldn't breed my dog? It doesn't mean she is any lesser dog of her breed if her parents are not champions.


----------



## CudasMom (Dec 22, 2009)

I agree with the above, if you want to show that is fine but i don't think showing is the only thing important in breeding. You can breed show quality dogs that fit the standard and not show. Besides the system is flawed, because judges are just people too even though they have alot of experiance in the breed doesn't mean they don't use their own personal preferences in judging . Proof is that if they didn't than the same dog would win against the dogs that were previously shown with it but you can have two judges award different places out of the same group of dogs. I DO however think that you should try to stick to the standard when breeding so that Chis stay looking like Chis and not Min Pins or other breeds not to say your dog can't have any flaws but as few as possible and try not to have the same flaw in the mate. I would take health and good temperment over a physical flaw or two any day.


----------



## Rosiesmum (Oct 14, 2007)

Cesar's Mommy said:


> I don't like this chart. Lets say my dog is purebreed with papers but the person I got her from didn't believe in showing or didn't like to. Does that mean I shouldn't breed my dog? It doesn't mean she is any lesser dog of her breed if her parents are not champions.


But why would you (generalising) want to? The market in the UK and the United States is saturated with poor quality Chihuahua puppies from people who don't breed to standard and from their pet quality puppies 

There are lot's of people now breeding or planning to breed from their pet quality Chihuahuas, why?

Lot's of Chihuahuas have a plethora of Champions in their pedigree and yet the Chihuahua itself is not of breed standard. I've seen Champion sired Chihuahuas that though lovely pets are not really up to being used as stud dogs  The free ad sites are full of dogs like this...

x


----------



## Cesar's Mommy (Aug 13, 2009)

I got both my Chis fixed so I didnt want to breed them. But if I chose to breed I would make sure the pups would have good homes and being took care of which is what matters most. I love my pups and they make me happy and that is what I wanted. But just because they are not champions or their parents are not does not mean they are any less quality than a champion sired pup. My sister shows Yorkies and one of her boys had a longer nose than what he should have and people were rude to her, no matter if you follow guidelines does not mean that you are going to get the breed standard. Both of his parents came from generations of champions.


----------



## MChis (Oct 13, 2009)

I'm not posting my opinion one way or another on breeding but I just want to point out how interesting it is that the Chihuahua started out bigger & with many of the characteristics we now view as major "flaws" (floppy ears, long legs, deer head, etc). Who are the Chi expert(s) or breeder(s) who decided to change the Chi so much & make them so different from what they originally were? 

Don't get me wrong - I have nothing against breeding & showing (I'd love to do both at some point in my life) & I love the newer look of the Chi, but somebodys opinion on what the breed "should be" has changed it dramatically from what it started out to be. Now when we get a pup that would have passed for a more standard look of a Chi 100 years ago than todays "show quality" dog, it is immediately questioned whether or not it is in fact purebred Chihuahua. It is crazy IMO (for what its worth LOL)!!

I suppose the only way to totally "phase out" the old look is to stop breeding outside of TODAYS show quality. But how is breeding outside of todays show quality any different than those "professionals" who decided to change the look of the breed to begin with? 

It really can be quite a controvertial subject & I'm in no way wanting to start a debate about what the breed standard should or should not be as that is way above me.  I just find the history of the Chi interesting & it just makes it so clear as to why there are so many different looks on these beautiful dogs. It also makes the subject of breeding very tricky because you could have somebody who wants to breed for show quality or you could also have somebody who wants to breed for the way the Chi was originally was. Both are, to me, very respectful yet different reasons.

I don't know what the point of my post really was. Just some thoughts I have been pondering for some time I guess & I figured I'd finally "put them down on paper".


----------



## flippedstars (Dec 16, 2009)

MChis said:


> I'm not posting my opinion one way or another on breeding but I just want to point out how interesting it is that the Chihuahua started out bigger & with many of the characteristics we now view as major "flaws" (floppy ears, long legs, deer head, etc). Who are the Chi expert(s) or breeder(s) who decided to change the Chi so much & make them so different from what they originally were?
> 
> Don't get me wrong - I have nothing against breeding & showing (I'd love to do both at some point in my life) & I love the newer look of the Chi, but somebodys opinion on what the breed "should be" has changed it dramatically from what it started out to be. Now when we get a pup that would have passed for a more standard look of a Chi 100 years ago than todays "show quality" dog, it is immediately questioned whether or not it is in fact purebred Chihuahua. It is crazy IMO (for what its worth LOL)!!
> 
> ...


I agree that I've had some of these same thoughts myself.

Something I find interesting is that actually, the dogs I see winning in the ring, all tend to deviate in certain ways from what the standard actually looks for in the same manner.

You could have a dog that fit the standard perfectly, but it'd be beat by dogs in the ring because they are typier, but not necessarily more "standard". 

I think showing is very political and every breeder that shows who I've talked to has confirmed that. Look at the chi in the standard picture, versus what's winning. They almost look like a different breed. Just my IMO though, not trying to ruffle any feathers.


----------



## LiMarChis (Mar 29, 2010)

MChis said:


> I'm not posting my opinion one way or another on breeding but I just want to point out how interesting it is that the Chihuahua started out bigger & with many of the characteristics we now view as major "flaws" (floppy ears, long legs, deer head, etc). Who are the Chi expert(s) or breeder(s) who decided to change the Chi so much & make them so different from what they originally were?


I'm not sure where you get this information. Can you forward it to me? I'm really interested in seeing documentation that shows early Chis looked like this. Nothing I've seen in any literature to date indicates that the beginning of our breed had these characteristics. Actually, it's all contrary to these statements so if there's evidence differently, our breed historians at CCA need this information. 

I think the most illustrated research paper was done by Nancy Shobeck for CCA and published in the 1992 Handbook. "The History of the Chihuahua as Traced Through PreColumbian Artifacts" has many pictures of the early dipictions of our breed, and they all have short legs, round heads, and erect ears. The muzzles differ in length from short to longer, but the heads are round, not triangular deer heads. Some historians are pointing to the Chihuahua like dogs of Malta and suggest that they arrived via the travelling ships to influence the breed, including adding the long coat gene. Others, authorities on Latin America and the Ancient Aztecs of Mexico, contend that the original Chihuahua was a long coat. Historically, the first three AKC registered Chihuahuas were Long Coats. The Breeder who had the most Champions in the early 1920s had only Long Coats. So there is some conflict as to the origin of the Long Coat in our breed, but again, they were not long legged, long muzzled, nor did they have deer heads and down ears. In pictures of Chihuahuas in 1951, the dogs closely resemble dogs of today, with the exception of a little longer muzzle with more taper. It's long been agreed that the origins of the breed have been lost in the ages but until now, there has never been any argument over the basic look of the Chihuahua. In my 20 years with the breed, I've never heard this claim so I'm extremely anxious to see your documentation. As I've said before, one should continue to strive to learn something new everyday. If the information I have is incorrect, I'm happy to get the correct information. 

Until I see the documentation, I'll have to stand on my belief that breeders did not change the breed as a whole. It has been refined to it's current look, but they are still Chihuahuas. The should be slightly off square, with a body that's a little longer than their legs. They should have a round head with a moderate muzzle with a distinct stop. Most depictions of the earliest Chi like dogs have this marked head type. There are a few that have a more deerlike head with a triangular shape and sloping muzzle, but they are not the majority. In everything, the *ears are erect*. An open molera is documented back to our earliest breed history. This is something that very rarely happens with a "deer head" so if that was the "true" head type, the open moleras wouldn't be specifically indicated in pictures and clay representations of the breed.

I look forward to reading this new information and sharing it with the CCA and other Chi history buffs. It certainly represents a new avenue of research never done before.


----------



## foggy (Oct 12, 2009)

MChis, very interesting post! I'm so glad to see this mentioned here. It's something I have thought about too. It's funny what we see as the "standard" now is not what I have researched the breed to be from the beginning. I have looked into chi's history and seen many old pics of Chis going way back and they all have deer heads and so forth, they're larger in size (although still small) etc. I have found articles stating these changes in the breed and so forth. The breed really has changed and just because someone thought different features were more aesthetically appealing, I find it a bit funny as well. Not meaning to stir up controversy or debate either, but very interesting post, I'm glad to see this mentioned.


----------



## flippedstars (Dec 16, 2009)

Back in the 50's, here's an example of what was winning... 

http://www.hurdschihuahuas.com/Hurds_Herd/1950s.html

The toplines don't look as level, muzzles were longer, heads less apple shaped, bodies longer on the dogs, few long coats. Would these dogs still finish if they were shown today? I'd guess it would be a bit tougher for them! I also think people would frown on breeding them in that case, ranking them as "pets" rather than breed quality. 

Today, here's what's winning:

http://www.hurdschihuahuas.com/Hurds_Herd/2000s.html

Typier heads, rounded and domed more. More level top lines. Many more LC dogs. Dogs appear to be somewhat smaller than those from 50 years prior when referenced to the people at least from what I can tell =)

I realize that's just one guy's dogs/show history, but its a good example of what's changed.

This is all just my opinion, not meaning to step on any toes...its just things I've noticed.


----------



## TLI (Sep 3, 2008)

From those links it appears that the Chi was still basically the same look. Maybe just a tad longer muzzle on some, but nothing that stands out. Some not as level on the topline, but again, nothing major. The only thing I notice is that the current pics, some look bigger than 6 lbs. 

I have no clue if there is any truth to this, but from what I was told they do not weigh the dogs in show. They just go by “looks.” If one “appears” to be bigger than 6 lbs., they can weigh them at their preference.


----------



## flippedstars (Dec 16, 2009)

TLI said:


> From those links it appears that the Chi was still basically the same look. Maybe just a tad longer muzzle on some, but nothing that stands out. Some not as level on the topline, but again, nothing major. The only thing I notice is that the current pics, some look bigger than 6 lbs.
> 
> I have no clue if there is any truth to this, but from what I was told they do not weigh the dogs in show. They just go by “looks.” If one “appears” to be bigger than 6 lbs., they can weigh them at their preference.


I've heard that they don't weigh either unless they want to...the differences aren't major but IMO they are there, and in just 50 years. It's also just one guy's kennel, I haven't found any other breeders that show history like that. Would definitely be interesting to see. I think more pronounced stops are appreciated today than they were before...


----------



## foggy (Oct 12, 2009)

TLI said:


> I have no clue if there is any truth to this, but from what I was told they do not weigh the dogs in show. .


That's interesting! I would have expected they weighed them. You know, I swear some of the ones at the last show looked bigger than 6 pounds to me too. They probably weren't though, but they sure looked it.


----------



## TLI (Sep 3, 2008)

flippedstars said:


> I've heard that they don't weigh either unless they want to...the differences aren't major but IMO they are there, and in just 50 years. It's also just one guy's kennel, I haven't found any other breeders that show history like that. Would definitely be interesting to see. I think more pronounced stops are appreciated today than they were before...


We have seen some pics here on the board from years ago that showed Chi's that looked very dear headed, and quite big compared to the standard today. They weren't show Chi's, but means that look was there many many years ago. I don't know enough about breeding or showing to really comment on much other than what I see. I do have a friend that has been showing Chi's for years. And her family prior to her. I've asked her many many questions, but didn't focus much on the breeding and showing part since that isn't my interest. But it was very interesting to hear some of her stories. 



foggy said:


> That's interesting! I would have expected they weighed them. You know, I swear some of the ones at the last show looked bigger than 6 pounds to me too. They probably weren't though, but they sure looked it.


Nope, not from what I hear. The ones you saw probably were bigger. I just can't see how a Chi that is clearly larger than what we know to be 6 lbs. being 6 lbs. I have heard this and that about shape, muscle, yada, yada. I know shape has some to do with it, but I would lay money on the scale showing some of them heavier than 6 lbs. Go look at some of the Westminster pics. Geeez, some of those Chi's are bigger than standard!

I think as far as the look goes, they don't have to be "perfect" to win. I have seen some Champions that do not look any more to standard than my pets.


----------



## LiMarChis (Mar 29, 2010)

There's gonna be something off in every dog, even finished Champions. The perfect dog has yet to be bred. It should be the goal of every breeding...improvement upon what the parents are. Different breeders have different sticking points. Some will tolerate a not so great topline but not a terrier front. Some are OK with a low tail set if the rear angulation is dead on. A longer body is permissable in a bitch but not a dog but if the dog is otherwise wonderful, they may be shown anyway. Etc. Etc. That's no different now than it was in the 50's. Our bodies are more compact but still slightly off square. If you have a dog with a longer body, it's be default gonna have longer legs...but they shouldn't be leggy. The overall dog should be in proportion, with no one thing sticking out more noticably than another. I think our heads have evolved into a rounder more pleasing look. Ears have gotten smaller and I'm trying hard to get larger ears back into my breeding program. I think we went through a time that extremely short muzzles were in favor but that lead to bite issues so we've move back to a more moderate length. I would love to see the ideal muzzle length be about 1/2 the width of the head to allow for better dentition. I'm working on it, but it's slow going. I think we'll see more muzzle from now on but, pray God, it's never gonna be long and snipey. We certainly don't want a Manchester Terrier head. One definately must have a good stop and preferrably some width between the eye set.

That said, there are dogs out there that definately look like pets who have finished or are well on their way. It's the judge's interpretation of the Standard, and what's in the ring on a given day. It's sad to say that sometimes they have to pick the best of a bad group. It's few and far between that a Judge will withhold points for lack of merit. I've seen it happen, but not often. Judge's are paid by entry fees and if the entries don't come, they don't get hired. Not everyone is as joyful about maintaining the integrity of the breed as some of us are and entries would fall for judges that did this...or called for the scales. Scales are available at every show but they are only used if an exhibitor calls for them on a competitor or a judge feels that a dog may be over the limit. Again, it doesn't happen often. Honestly, the times I've seen it, the dog's weighed in, with the exception of one, and it was 6 pounds 1 ounce. Many dogs can fool you visually about weight. I don't like to push the limit for just this reason. I prefer a good 5 pounds myself. However, generally, if a judge suspects the dog is over they just don't put the dog up versus calling for the scales and putting the entire judging program behind schedule. The Superintendent's are pretty anal about how much time is allotted per dog. 

I think, over all, our breed has maintained. We've got way more long coats now than smooths, simply because long coats were better than the smooths for so long. To this day, it's hard to find a well put together smooth coat. We are working very hard to bring them back up to the same degree of structure soundness what we have in longs but it's been a hard process. That and the fact that long coats tend to take over due to the interbreeding we've done. I'm not sure that we have many pure smooth coat lines anymore so most smooths carry the long gene. I know I breed for smooths and end up with longs all the time...from two smooth parents. Frustrating. Anyway, consistency is the key and while we have refined the Chihuahua, I'd say that in general they have the same appearence as they did in the beginning. Unlike some breeds.


----------



## cathy lynn (Sep 29, 2010)

I have thought about breeding, then I got my head on striaght! lol


----------



## TheJewelKitten (Nov 20, 2010)

Haha, good one! That flow chart is epical!


----------



## TheJewelKitten (Nov 20, 2010)

I have so posted this on _my_ chihuahua forums.


----------



## ~LS~ (Oct 29, 2011)

I've never seen this chart  would be great if someone could post it once more since the original is gone.


----------



## svdreamer (Feb 20, 2010)

Not sure if it is the same chart, but here's one.


----------



## ~LS~ (Oct 29, 2011)

Thanks Pam! That's awesome!


----------



## CoverTune (Jul 1, 2011)

I love the discussion here! Is LiMarChis still an active member here? S/he seems very knowledgeable. I also don't think, judging from the pics here, that Chis have changed a lot in the past 60 or so years.. refined, yes.. but not changed.


----------



## philipabraham (Dec 15, 2011)

*Re:*

Its really a good one.Thanks a lot for sharing.


----------



## carrithedeku (Jan 15, 2012)

svdreamer said:


> Not sure if it is the same chart, but here's one.


Thank you for re-posting!


----------



## theshanman97 (Feb 19, 2012)

thank you for this! im thinking of breeding when im older (obviously i cant do it now! ) but im abit concerned , how can you find out your dogs like parents and grandparents? not for tillie but for when i do decided to breed in years with a pure breed ? cause we have pure breed collie and my mum had a papillion and we where NEVER given that info! :S x


----------



## myknitt (Jun 2, 2012)

Uhmm.. First time, I thought about breeding my chihuahua. But until they got birth, I always feel bad to sell the baby. So I keep them..
It happened every time my chi giving birth that's why now, my chi turns to be 20.. yeayyy


----------



## WinniesMum (Jan 20, 2013)

I'm intrigued! What if you want to breed to produce pets? For me personally, I have zero interest in showing my dog, I want a pet. I will look for a sensible breeder who can tell me about the past 2/3 generations of the dog, and I will chose one that looks healthy but other than that I have no interest in buying a 5th generation champion, kc registered dog, as she will only be my baby, nothing more. 
I completely understand that there are very silly people out there just trying to make money, but they are not all like that surely?


----------



## Wicked Pixie (Oct 14, 2011)

I agree up to a point, and there are some people who breed sound and healthy dogs that do not show.
The main reason that dogs with a proven show record are preferred is that a dog who is bred to standard has to be sound. A dog with a poor bite or weak knees for example, will not win in the show ring and therefore will not make it into the breeding programme. 
The breed standard isn't just about the way a dog looks, it is about the way a dog is built. A show dog will be structurally sound. 
A breeder who breeds to standard will always have some puppies who don't make the grade for showing or breeding, these are the ones that make the best pets. Lots of sound healthy dogs in their background, and bred by someone who understands the breed and has it's best interests at heart.
When you buy a puppy with an unknown history, you don't know what problems that pup may have inherited.
So by going to a good breeder who shows, you know your puppy has good genes. Doesn't guarantee a healthy pup, but it is a good start.


----------



## WinniesMum (Jan 20, 2013)

Thanks WP, I can see your point. Can I ask what you think of buying from sites like pets4homes etc? 
For example, if you saw an add like this:
One boy, black with white chest and one girl brown with white markings. both have 5 generation pedigree, both mother and father can be seen as they are both my pets. The mother is a self welping small bitch the father is normal size chihuahua.
£450 boy £500 girl not KC reg


----------



## Wicked Pixie (Oct 14, 2011)

Honestly, really good breeders do not advertise on sites like that one.
There are a lot of scams and puppies from puppy farms sold through that site.
The puppies you mention may well be a genuine litter from two family pets, or they could be from a puppy farm.
They are not registered, which may mean they are not purebred.
When buying from a pet owner who has let their pets breed, nine times out of ten no health tests have been done, so it could be a bit of a gamble. 
Ask if they have bred this pair before, see if they have photo's they can send you. Make sure you ask a lot of questions. If they don't know about luxating patellas (a common problem in the breed) I would avoid them.


----------



## maj (Apr 9, 2013)

Wicked Pixie said:


> Honestly, really good breeders do not advertise on sites like that one.
> There are a lot of scams and puppies from puppy farms sold through that site.
> .


Hi i just wanted to say that my breeder who is an assured kennel club breeder actually advertises on that site and although i found her initially through the kennel club puppy finder - i also could see photos of her pups by using that site 
I paid a high price for my lilly although she was 5 months old when i bought her as i didnt want a young pup and she had had all her vaccinations and been microchipped and vetted twice 
She came with a contract of sale where i could take her to a vet of my choice and if not totally happy get a full refund and she came with a pet carrier , a heat pad, blankets. feed and puppy training pads 
This breeder still uses this site regularly and i know i chose the right breeder so i think that was a bit of a harsh statement you made WP


----------



## Mike_S (May 10, 2013)

I'm with Cesar's Mommy on this one as I don't like either of those charts, pure snobbery. Just because the parents were not registered or they arn't related to recent show dogs does not mean they are not purebreds. I assume you pay membership to kennel club etc? I know it's for a good cause but if there were no dog shows or kennel clubs then should that mean no Chihuahuas? Surely the best advice is from vets and experienced breeders. Not necessarily these clubs and shows. The main issue is if no one wants them due to them not being registered.


----------

