Jump to content
BC Boards

The danger of breeding to form


Pippin's person

Recommended Posts

Dear Doggers,

 

Ms. Rushdoggie writes,

 

 

 

"I could be wrong, but I don't think its the AKC who trains or sets breed standards. I think its the breed clubs and each breed club could set standards for health clearances if they really wanted to."

 

That's what the AKC would like you to believe. In fact their Board approves/ or disapproves/ or edits all standards (they disapproved the AKC parent club's Border Collie standard and adopted the Australian KC's standard instead.

 

Donald McCaig

 

 

Well, there you go.

 

I made my assumption based on the Dalmatian Club of America's refusal to recognize the LUA Dals a few years ago despite pressure from the AKC to do so. The club voted and said no, and the AKC couldn't make them. I have also heard of a similar issue related to a breed club making rules reated to the CKCS and the brain disorder.

 

BTW: The DCA has since voted again and they now will allow the LUA dogs to be registered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

And then there's this (please don't click if you don't want a .pdf file) letter from an AKC director to the Chihuahua Club of America: Steven Gladstone Letter regarding the merle issue.

 

 

The thing that bothers me about the "complete education on merle" link to his website,** is that his facts are wrong. According to the latest research I've read, Mm merle Dachshunds showed a significant increase in auditory dysfunction (54.6% for MM, 36.8% for Mm, with all mm (control group dogs) normal.

 

 

ETA: Sorry that link didn't work. Here is an article on it with a link to the letter: http://www.thedogpre...adstone0801.asp

 

 

**Unkind ridicule edited out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, if one is unsuccessful in "breeding to form", there is always the surgical option (said with tongue in cheek :rolleyes: ). As an example, my friend who owns whippets told me of a whippet that was excused from the show ring because it had fake testicles. Kudos to the judge for detecting the fakes, but I just don't get why anyone would bother (except to get a ribbon) to get fake testicles for a show dog. If the show ring is supposed to be where the best breeding dogs are chosen (I know, I know - conformation only, Blech!), why take the trouble to show a dog that would be sterile? (My understanding is that a cryptorchid is essentially sterile?)

 

Jovi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which came first - the chicken or the egg? Which came first - the AKC or unethical breeders? I'm not defending the AKC, however, if it didn't exist, you would still have unethical breeders. Saying that the AKC ruins dogs is not quite accurate. People ruin dogs...and the main reasons are 1. greed and 2. ego. Look at the "designer dogs" (ugh, I despise that name). No AKC registration, no fancy show titles, and people are flocking to them and paying huge amounts of money. Why are they bred? Greed, pure and simple.

 

I actively participated in the whole show ring experience. I can tell you that people that show can be unethical in both showing and breeding. There are fixed shows and people do alter their dogs. Dog shows are basically comparable to human beauty pageants, where contestants are judged on appearance (no matter what the pageant says.)

 

The problem is that there is no black and white to dog breeding. One person who believes they are ethical can be found unethical in the eyes of others. A BYB who does not show and strives to produce a good, healthy, even tempered dog will be found unethical by others. That's why dog breeding is such a gray area. I'm sure there are breeders of stock dogs who are not AKC affiliated and yet are also thought to be unethical. It happens in all aspects of dog breeding.

 

I have always believed that when a person's livelihood depends on animals, many times decisions that are made can be detrimental to the animal in deference to the bottom line. For instance, boarding kennels that contract disease should close to stop the disease. But closing would mean a loss of income, so they remain open and infect other dogs and spread the disease. When people rely on breeding dogs for income (or when people pour an enormous amount of money into dogs and dog shows), many times it is the animal that will suffer the consequences, whether it is through health issues or poor judgment placements of puppies.

 

I can tell you this: back in my AKC days, I watched the Border Collie people with great interest. I was aware that there was a huge fight going on to keep the BC from becoming AKC recognized because people feared losing the working ability, and I was your biggest cheerleader. There is nothing more beautiful than watching a dog do the work it was bred to do, whether it is a sporting breed, a working breed, or a herding breed. And I can remember when I found out that BCs had lost that battle - it really saddened me. I do not have to mention the sporting breeds that have lost their hunting instinct and could never hunt in brush with the massive feathering they are shown with. Anyone who believes that AKC recognition and working ability can co-exist in the same dog is kidding himself. History has proven that.

 

I do not live on a farm nor do I raise sheep. Years after my GSD time, I thought I'd like to own a BC. I came upon these boards and garnished some information. My first two GSDs were bought through the newspaper from two BYBs. Then I purchased from a breeder I believed to be ethical and I still believe that. My dogs had wonderful temperaments, no major health issues, and lived to 12-14 years. So I, of course, started looking at Border Collie breeders. I never would have even thought to look to rescues, simply because I had never done so before. But the more I read on these boards about rescues, the more intrigued I became. I now own two rescue BCs because of the information I found on this site. These boards have been immensely helpful to me in understanding my dogs and the breed in general. I could have looked for a discussion board that was geared more to pet homes or sport homes. But the knowledge gained from people who believe in the true existence of this breed is really invaluable.

 

So from a person who started out with AKC roots, no, breeding to form is not in the best interest of any breed...especially since people tend to make their own interpretations of what that form should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a question to call on everyone's creativity. If conformation breeding was no longer done, how should dogs be bred? Not all breeds have a necessary function that they could be tested for.

 

I always thought pet buyers were particularly poorly served

by conformation breeding, and I've wondered what type of system would better meet their needs.

 

Any ideas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a question to call on everyone's creativity. If conformation breeding was no longer done, how should dogs be bred? Not all breeds have a necessary function that they could be tested for.

 

I always thought pet buyers were particularly poorly served

by conformation breeding, and I've wondered what type of system would better meet their needs.

 

Any ideas?

 

I've thought about that, too. Because some breeds were bred to be companion dogs or lap dogs. And I don't know the answer to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a question to call on everyone's creativity. If conformation breeding was no longer done, how should dogs be bred? Not all breeds have a necessary function that they could be tested for.

 

I always thought pet buyers were particularly poorly served

by conformation breeding, and I've wondered what type of system would better meet their needs.

 

Any ideas?

 

I don't think dogs should be bred for companions at all, as radical as that might be...Not while shelters are euthanizing healthy, adoptable pets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that there is no black and white to dog breeding. One person who believes they are ethical can be found unethical in the eyes of others. A BYB who does not show and strives to produce a good, healthy, even tempered dog will be found unethical by others. That's why dog breeding is such a gray area. I'm sure there are breeders of stock dogs who are not AKC affiliated and yet are also thought to be unethical. It happens in all aspects of dog breeding.

 

Very well said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've thought about that, too. Because some breeds were bred to be companion dogs or lap dogs. And I don't know the answer to that.

 

I think that is where a lot of the sport breeders could be of use for the other breeds. For example there are a few breeders who breed lines of obedience/agility papillons. I'm sure there are similar lines in many breeds. Those breeders I think could produce good pet dogs because (1) there is no driving force for a particular look so less temptation to preserve harmful physical attributes, (2) the demands of the sport activity would limit most of the detrimental extremes, (3) dog sports do at least require some degree of decent temperament, as opposed to conformation dogs, and (4) most sport dogs are pets so the breeder is going to hear about it if he/she is producings dogs that make lousy pets. So no, dog sports are not really true 'work' in the sense of existing for gain beyond the mere enjoyment of the activity, but they are a much better breeding criteria in my opinion than the conformation ring.

 

An interesting side note - I was looking at a picture of Old Hemp a week or so ago, and thinking how he was almost the spitting image of a dog I used to own until I lost her last year. Old Hemp was born in the late 1800s. He would not look out of place at a stockdog trial today. So I find it interesting that while no attempt has been made to breed the ISDS/ABCA dogs to an appearance standard, they have remained pretty much the same as they were over 100 years ago. Now go back and look at bull dogs and other breeds from the late 1800s. Many of them are very different and their 'old' versions would really stand out today as being different. So while I know the appearance doesn't matter, I do find it interesting that the ONE thing the conformation ring says they do (preserve the appearance) they actually do a pretty crappy job at. Whereas breeding for function in the border collie has preserved appearance without even using that as a breeding criterion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An interesting side note - I was looking at a picture of Old Hemp a week or so ago, and thinking how he was almost the spitting image of a dog I used to own until I lost her last year. Old Hemp was born in the late 1800s. He would not look out of place at a stockdog trial today. So I find it interesting that while no attempt has been made to breed the ISDS/ABCA dogs to an appearance standard, they have remained pretty much the same as they were over 100 years ago.

I'm not sure I'd agree with this - when I think of the great variability in appearance that I have seen in dogs. But, then again, the majority of historical dogs would fit pretty tidily within the majority of current-day working-bred dogs, so perhaps you are right. JMO, and certainly not from any expert point of view.

 

Now go back and look at bull dogs and other breeds from the late 1800s. Many of them are very different and their 'old' versions would really stand out today as being different. So while I know the appearance doesn't matter, I do find it interesting that the ONE thing the conformation ring says they do (preserve the appearance) they actually do a pretty crappy job at.

I agree totally with this - you can see it obviously in comparing photos of show-ring winners from just a rather few decades ago to today's winners. You can see it in other species that are shown - anyone remember the short-legged, blocky cattle of the fifties or sixties (more or less), then the long-long-long-upsloping cattle of the seventies or eighties (again, more or less), and now a more moderate build.

 

I think that, in general, whenever you judge by subjective means, there will be a tendency towards extremes - particularly in something like dog shows where certain traits may have great appeal to the general public, whether they are beneficial or not to the dog itself. I don't think anyone has to look far at all to find numerous examples of this.

 

Whenever you get into judging by conformation, the "standard" will always be influenced by whatever the trend of the moment is because it is all subjective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were many pet dogs - some of them pint-sized long before there were conformation shows. There are abundant pet dogs in places where there are no dog shows. Pet dogs were acquired from owners of other pet dogs that were deemed sufficiently appealing to breed. And of course there were unsupervised, "accidental" matings. Now we have the means to prevent the latter - spay/neuter clinics - and since there will always be those who fail to, or do not wish to avail themselves of them, there will always be pet dogs having pups. For centuries there have been people who acquired their pets this way, and there are abundant, effusive and and heartfelt testimonials that attest to the admirable qualities of such dogs.

 

If every conformation dog on the planet suddenly vaporized, there would still be a huge reservoir of intact, loving, healthy and charming dogs who could make excellent pets and could give birth to more.

 

They might not closely resemble Bulldogs, German Shepherd Dogs, Cavalier King Charles Spaniels or Pugs. But I think that could be a good thing, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think dogs should be bred for companions at all, as radical as that might be...Not while shelters are euthanizing healthy, adoptable pets.

 

Just to clarify… my question was purely theoretical, since I don’t think that conformation breeding is going anywhere. That last thing I would want to do is encourage more breeding.

 

I think that is where a lot of the sport breeders could be of use for the other breeds. For example there are a few breeders who breed lines of obedience/agility papillons. I'm sure there are similar lines in many breeds.

 

Years ago, I encountered a line of shelties that were bred for obedience. They didn’t look much like the other shelties – they were a little larger, didn’t have the big coats and didn’t come in a lot of colors. But they were cute, sharp little dogs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If every conformation dog on the planet suddenly vaporized, there would still be a huge reservoir of intact, loving, healthy and charming dogs who could make excellent pets and could give birth to more.

 

They might not closely resemble Bulldogs, German Shepherd Dogs, Cavalier King Charles Spaniels or Pugs. But I think that could be a good thing, eh?

 

At last we agree...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saying that the AKC ruins dogs is not quite accurate.

Yes it is.

 

In-breeding increases and concentrates genetic mutations in gene pools.

Out crossing offsets these effects.

The AKC promotes and requires in-breeding and abhors out-crossing.

The AKC requires genetic purity even in the face of unhealthy gene pools.

Breed formation and trait fixing (required to enter the AKC) lead to genetic bottlenecks and very small gene pools.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breed formation and trait fixing (required to enter the AKC) lead to genetic bottlenecks and very small gene pools.

 

'zactly...there's something to be said for hybrid vigor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hybrid vigor is only valid when the two gene pools being crossed do not carry the same genetic mutations

 

i.e. Crossing two muts that are carriers for ______ (fill in the blank) is no better than breeding two pure-breds that are carriers of _______ (fill in the blank)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hybrid vigor is only valid when the two gene pools being crossed do not carry the same genetic mutations

 

i.e. Crossing two muts that are carriers for ______ (fill in the blank) is no better than breeding two pure-breds that are carriers of _______ (fill in the blank)

 

Actually, you're right about this. Thank you :)

 

 

 

ETA: Leash pop!!:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...