How to Breed a Dog

[nickagneta]

To answer your question, first, the dogs should spend a lot of time together. Bring the dogs together on a regular basis. Let them spend hours and hours together so that a pecking order can be established. If they are both peeing in the same places what you have are two dogs that consider themselves the alphas and are marking their territories. A pecking order needs to be established in their two dog pack before mating will happen.

Second, if you don't want to get physically involved, once the female goes into heat, give your dog to the owner of the female dog to care for for about the three weeks the female will be in heat. The two dogs should be penned into a spot or kept within a certain amount of rooms togther and walked together for that time. Taking turns walking the dogs together at night with the female's owner will further tie the dogs together i9nto a pack atmosphere if they see both owners often.

After the three weeks or so the trick should be done. If not try it again in 6-9 months when the female is in heat again.

The other way is to force the situation. Allow the dogs some time together and then forcibly help the two dogs. Hold the female and place the male behind the female. Sometimes actual guiding of the male into the female is necessary.

I don't recommend this but I have heard of it being done.

There's other ways too but doing it the way I suggest is a lot more natural for the dogs.

Good luck.

Thank you very much, that's the exact type of information I was looking for.  We're gonna try again tomorrow so we'll see what happens.  I brought him to the Super Bowl party yesterday and he was trying to hump everybody there (he humps people he doesn't know) so at least he's got the practice with humans, now we just need him to do this with his own kind.

Actually if your dog is humping humans he doesn't even know that means he is dominant aggressive and the humping of people is trying to illustrate that he is their superior. That he is in charge. It has absolutely nothing to do with sexuality or mating.

And it is this attitude which may be the problem with trying to mate him to this particular female. If you bring him to her house and he is going around peeing everywhere and she then follows to pee on top of where he did, you then are looking at two dominant aggressive alphas, a male and one female. Bringing them together for short periods of time and expecting mating, especially in her house, may not work unless these two dogs spend a ton of time together. They have to determine who is in charge and putting the alpha male in the alpha female's area is going to make that very very difficult.

If you are still having trouble, consult a veterinarian or call a professional breeder and ask for help. It's not impossible to breed to dogs that both consider themselves alphas, it's just not easy. And just so that you know male and female and size doesn't matter when dogs determine an alpha or leader or pecking order of their pack. My sister has four dogs. A huge black lab male, two gigantic Austrian(German) Shepherds one male and one female, and an undersized female pug. The lab and the Shepherds are all police dogs and Emily the 15 lb pug is the alpha and leader of the dogs.

[cordobes]

2) It is true that most dogs in shelters are mutts, but what is wrong with a mutt? I find them smarter and have more character than pure-bred dogs.

See, I think that's just a biased and opinion.  There may be nothing wrong with a mutt, but to say that they're inherently better than pure-bred dogs to support your agenda wreaks of intolerance for those with a dissenting point of view.

He's right on the substance though. What breeders have been doing to pedigree dogs for the last few decades has been a disgrace. Many breeds are complete horror freak shows, in terms of physical and mental health, due to the craziness of breeders who are more interested in winning contests by meeting bizarre breed standards that transform dogs in caricatures. I've seen prized dogs that are true abominations of nature. It's insane, and very worrying, the amount of breeds that have serious health problems and genetic diseases.

Amonkey, I'd follow nickagneta's advices, particularly the one about consulting the vet or a professional breeder. I'd ask some advise from the AKC and the parent club of the breed. They generally have guidelines to breeding and provide additional info if requested. My parents have been breeding Neapolitan Mastiffs for almost 20 years but they always use artificial insemination.

[Roy Hobbs]

2) It is true that most dogs in shelters are mutts, but what is wrong with a mutt? I find them smarter and have more character than pure-bred dogs.

See, I think that's just a biased and opinion.  There may be nothing wrong with a mutt, but to say that they're inherently better than pure-bred dogs to support your agenda wreaks of intolerance for those with a dissenting point of view.

He's right on the substance though. What breeders have been doing to pedigree dogs for the last few decades has been a disgrace. Many breeds are complete horror freak shows, in terms of physical and mental health, due to the craziness of breeders who are more interested in winning contests by meeting bizarre breed standards that transform dogs in caricatures. I've seen prized dogs that are true abominations of nature. It's insane, and very worrying, the amount of breeds that have serious health problems and genetic diseases.

While there are certainly problems within the breeding industry, especially in regard to puppy mills, etc., the vast majority of pure bred dogs are healthy.  To suggest that, on whole, purebreds are less intelligent than mutts is simply not true.  Many of these dogs have been bred for their intelligence or other specific skills.  I'm not going to knock mutts, but it makes no sense to paint purebreds with a broad and negative brush, either.

[cordobes]

2) It is true that most dogs in shelters are mutts, but what is wrong with a mutt? I find them smarter and have more character than pure-bred dogs.

See, I think that's just a biased and opinion.  There may be nothing wrong with a mutt, but to say that they're inherently better than pure-bred dogs to support your agenda wreaks of intolerance for those with a dissenting point of view.

He's right on the substance though. What breeders have been doing to pedigree dogs for the last few decades has been a disgrace. Many breeds are complete horror freak shows, in terms of physical and mental health, due to the craziness of breeders who are more interested in winning contests by meeting bizarre breed standards that transform dogs in caricatures. I've seen prized dogs that are true abominations of nature. It's insane, and very worrying, the amount of breeds that have serious health problems and genetic diseases.

While there are certainly problems within the breeding industry, especially in regard to puppy mills, etc., the vast majority of pure bred dogs are healthy.  To suggest that, on whole, purebreds are less intelligent than mutts is simply not true.  Many of these dogs have been bred for their intelligence or other specific skills.  I'm not going to knock mutts, but it makes no sense to paint purebreds with a broad and negative brush, either.

The "smarter" thing doesn't make a lot of sense, although I'd give the advantage to mutts over most of the breeds. Now, and most importantly, mutts are healthier than purebreds. Not on whole, but certainly on average and it's not even close. Not because mutts are especially healthy but due to the poor health of plenty of breeds.

[cordobes]

This BBC documentary kind of illustrates my point. It's over-dramatic and over-emotional (it's television, I guess...), and assumes a somewhat biased POV, but it's worth watching:

http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/pedigree%2Bdogs%2Bexposed