The value of mentorship, the importance of science, and knowing when to reconsider what we think we know.

When I first became involved in breeding Staffordshire Bull Terriers, much of what I learned came from people who had been doing it considerably longer than I had. Experienced breeders were our teachers, and much of their knowledge had been accumulated through generations of dogs, successful litters, difficult deliveries, unexpected complications, and occasionally heartbreaking losses. There was no substitute for having someone willing to share what they had learned, particularly when we encountered something we had never experienced ourselves.

I remain enormously grateful for that mentorship. Some of the most valuable lessons I’ve learned about breeding dogs were not found in textbooks or veterinary journals. They came from watching experienced breeders work, listening to their explanations, asking questions, and eventually learning to recognize things I might otherwise have overlooked. Good mentorship offers something that cannot be easily replicated through written information alone: practical judgment developed through years of observation.

But there is something else I’ve learned along the way. Experience, no matter how extensive, does not automatically make every conclusion correct. And scientific research, no matter how impressive, does not always account for every circumstance we encounter in a real whelping room.

I believe responsible breeding requires us to appreciate both.

What Experience Teaches Us

Breeding dogs involves far more than following a set of instructions. Each bitch is an individual, every litter presents its own circumstances, and even the most carefully planned breeding can surprise us. Over time, we begin recognizing patterns in maternal behavior, nursing, puppy development, and the progression of normal delivery. We learn when a little reassurance may be helpful, when something deserves closer observation, and when a situation requires immediate veterinary attention.

There is considerable value in that kind of experience, particularly when it is shared generously with newer breeders. Unfortunately, valuable knowledge is sometimes lost because experienced people are unwilling to teach, or because those who are learning feel uncomfortable asking questions. I have never understood the belief that sharing knowledge somehow diminishes the person who possesses it. If anything, I believe the willingness to mentor others is one of the more meaningful contributions an experienced breeder can make.

However, mentorship also carries responsibility. We should be careful to distinguish between what we have observed, what we believe explains those observations, and what has actually been demonstrated. A practice may appear successful over many years without our fully understanding why it works. Sometimes the explanation we were originally given turns out to be incomplete, even when the observation itself remains valuable.

This is not a reason to dismiss experience. It is a reason to examine it more thoughtfully.

When Science Challenges Tradition

Throughout this series, we have explored several examples of how veterinary research can refine established breeding practices. Neonatal resuscitation recommendations have changed as our understanding of newborn physiology has improved. We have learned more about the limited window for colostrum absorption, the importance of early growth patterns, and the potential consequences of unnecessary medication.

We also examined something as ordinary as the temperature of a whelping room, an area where published recommendations and generations of practical breeder experience can initially appear to disagree. Yet when we look more carefully, the distinction between heating an entire room and providing appropriately warmed areas within a cooler environment becomes important. The objective is not to defend a particular temperature because we have always used it, but to understand what the puppies actually require while considering the comfort of their mother.

That example illustrates why I believe asking questions is so important. Sometimes research confirms what experienced breeders have understood intuitively for years. Sometimes it identifies risks associated with familiar practices, and occasionally it challenges recommendations we previously accepted as established fact.

But published research deserves careful examination, too. Not every study is equally well designed, not every conclusion applies to every breed, and a finding observed under controlled conditions may require thoughtful interpretation before being applied in a breeding program.

Scientific evidence is not simply whatever appears in the most recent article, just as good breeding practice is not automatically whatever a respected mentor has done for thirty years.

We need to understand the difference between reliable evidence, professional recommendations, individual experience, and personal opinion. All may contribute to a discussion, but they should not be presented as though they carry equal weight.

The Willingness to Be Wrong

Perhaps one of the greatest obstacles to learning is our natural reluctance to reconsider something we have believed for a long time. This is hardly unique to dog breeding. We see it in education, medicine, politics, and almost every aspect of human life. People become attached to familiar explanations, particularly when those explanations have served them well or have become part of their identity.

In the breeding community, this can become especially difficult because experience is often closely associated with reputation. Someone who has produced generations of successful dogs may understandably feel confident in their methods. But confidence should not prevent curiosity, and years of success do not eliminate the possibility that a particular practice could be improved.

Equally, those who are newer to breeding should be cautious about dismissing experienced mentors simply because they have encountered a different recommendation online. Access to information is not the same as understanding it, and reading a scientific paper does not automatically provide the practical judgment necessary to apply its findings appropriately.

I believe the healthiest approach is one in which we can question one another without treating disagreement as disrespect. A good mentor should be willing to explain the reasoning behind a recommendation, and a good student should be willing to listen, investigate, and occasionally discover that an initial assumption was mistaken.

There is no shame in changing our minds when better information becomes available. In fact, I would argue that the inability to do so is far more concerning.

What We Owe the Next Generation

When I think about the breeders who helped me during my earliest years, I remember not only the information they shared but their willingness to make that knowledge available. They understood that breeding responsibly involves a continuing responsibility to the animals themselves, and that helping another breeder make better decisions ultimately benefits the dogs.

That philosophy is an important part of why we have developed The Science Behind the Whelping Box. These articles were never intended to suggest that we have all the answers, nor to replace the advice of qualified veterinarians or experienced mentors. They were created to bring useful information together, encourage further reading, and help breeders understand the reasoning behind practices that can influence the health and survival of newborn puppies.

There are still questions veterinary science has not answered, and there will undoubtedly be recommendations that change as further research becomes available. That is not a failure of science. It is how knowledge develops. We should expect our understanding to improve, and we should be willing to improve along with it.

I would hope that a breeder reading this series comes away with more than a collection of recommendations about resuscitation, colostrum, neonatal care, nutrition, or maternal recovery. I hope it encourages them to ask better questions, seek reliable information, appreciate good mentorship, and recognize the difference between something they have observed and something they can reasonably conclude from that observation.

There is a philosophy I have come to believe applies not only to breeding dogs, but to education and life in general:

Our responsibility is not to produce people who agree with us. It is to encourage people who can think critically, question respectfully, evaluate evidence, and make informed decisions of their own.

I believe that is what meaningful education should accomplish. We should not be trying to create another generation of breeders who simply repeat our methods because we told them those methods were correct. We should be helping them develop the judgment, curiosity, and confidence to understand the decisions they make, and the humility to reconsider those decisions when circumstances or evidence warrant it.

Breeding dogs is a lifelong education, and I sincerely hope I never reach a point where I believe I have learned everything there is to know. The dogs have a remarkable way of reminding us otherwise, often when we least expect it.

If this series has encouraged even a few breeders to look more closely at their practices, have a thoughtful conversation with their veterinarian, or share something useful with someone just beginning their journey, then it has accomplished what we hoped it would.

Because the knowledge we gain through experience is valuable, but what we choose to do with that knowledge, and our willingness to continue questioning and improving it, may be the most important legacy we leave.

---

Further Reading

RCVS Knowledge — Evidence-Based Veterinary Medicine

An introduction to integrating clinical expertise, scientific evidence, and individual circumstances when making decisions.

https://www.rcvsknowledge.org/approach/evidence-based-veterinary-medicine

Louisiana State University School of Veterinary Medicine

Evidence-Based Veterinary Medicine: Research Guide

https://guides.lib.lsu.edu/evidencebasedvetmed

Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine (2024)

Evidence-Based Veterinary Medicine — Potential, Practice, and Pitfalls

https://doi.org/10.1111/jvim.17239

The Science Behind the Whelping Box is an educational series presented by The Stafford Knot, Inc., a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization, in collaboration with Wavemaker Staffords.