The Ethics of Raising Purebred Dogs

[ShoresDog]

In addition to the NY Times article on AKC puppy mills ( NY Times Article on Criticism of AKC ) that was already posted, today they started an opinion forum on breeding purebred dogs, with five topic starters: Alexandra Horowitz ("Inside a Dog"), Mark Derr ("How the Dog Became the Dog"), Brent Ruppel (Guide Dogs for the Blind), James Serpell (who advocates cross-breeding), and Lillian Barber (a dog show judge).

 

The Ethics of Raising Purebred Dogs

 

It's very encouraging to see how much of the opinion expressed in the short essays as well as in the comments is against show breeding.

[Sue R]

It is interesting that the picture accompanying the article is an English Bulldog, one of the most grotesquely deformed breeds ever developed. A breed that often requires artificial insemination to conceive and then surgery to deliver the pups. A breed that often suffers from respiratory issues, over-heating, and stress from even minor exertion, and other issues due to its build. Is this what purebred breeding is all about? This dog's ancestors, not all that long ago, were strong, agile, fiercely athletic dogs. Obviously, breeding for "improvement" in some purebred breeds has taken a wrong turn somewhere...

[ShoresDog]

I'm sure it's no accident that the English Bulldog picture was chosen. The editors undoubtedly expected a lot of opinions like ours!

[ejano]

I'm sure it's no accident that the English Bulldog picture was chosen. The editors undoubtedly expected a lot of opinions like ours!

 

The sad truth is, they could have put a photograph of a dog from any of the popular breeds and there would not be a truly healthy one among them from the Saint Bernard and Newfoundlands to the poor toy breeds with their pushed in faces and unnaturally heavy coats. Winning a Westminster Best in Show is the kiss of death for the breed.

[geonni banner]

How did we get from this:

 

to this?:

 

Merle Pomeranians. Huh.

 

If the agility folks want to make Pomeranians bigger I'm all for it. But I would love to know how the merle genes got into a spitz-type breed. Shetland Sheepdog out-crossing?

[Pam Wolf]

Geonni, you mean that is not a toy Aussie

[rushdoggie]

If the agility folks want to make Pomeranians bigger I'm all for it. But I would love to know how the merle genes got into a spitz-type breed. Shetland Sheepdog out-crossing?

 

I haven't seen them getting bigger, just the opposite. They have a weird outline now:

 

[Tommy Coyote]

People breed purebred dogs for things other than the show ring. Look at all the hunting dogs, stock dogs, dogs for the handicapped, police dogs, army dogs. The difference is that the working breeds that are actually being bred to to a job have completely different criteria. Looks may come into the picture but soundness and good working ability are way more important. These are dogs that need to be able to get an important job done.

 

I used to know some people that bred show malamutes. Their ears are supposed to stand up. Now just how important would that be if they were out in minus 50 weather pulling sleds?

[diane allen]

I agree that there are SOME dogs bred for specific work. But dogs used as service dogs, many search and rescue dogs, and even some police or army dogs do NOT have to be bred, or even purebred. Some estimates are that 25% of dogs in shelters ARE purebreds. At least some of those could be turned into working dogs.

 

And in the overall scheme of things...how many dogs purposefully bred are actually working dogs? My guess is that it is a VERY small percentage. The fact that some stock dogs and hunting dogs are actually used for their original purpose is commendable; but it isn't like very many of those dog owners rely on those dogs for their livelihood (many readers of these boards being exceptions!).

 

Rant over.

diane

[waffles]

Many police dogs are taken from shelters. Our local paper just had a great story about a local officer and his dog who was plucked out of the city shelter. I would assume some military dogs are too since historically citizens gave their dogs to the military for service. (Which is a very interesting topic if you ever read up on it). Many personal people with service dogs have dogs from shelters who may or may not be purebred as well. Most "purposely" bred dogs are created to be sold as pets. People still look at me like I have 4 eyes when I tell them border collies are still used to work on real life farms ( I think they even have a hard time believing "real farms " even exist still).

[geonni banner]

I think we have to define "purpose bred" before we can agree on how many dogs are.

 

I got interested in the history of the Pomeranian from reading this thread. I looked at a great many websites, and it seems that once again the AKC has got it wrong. They say that the Pomeranian was originally a sled dog in Scandinavia/Lapland. Other sources say that they were all-purpose "working dogs" used for hunting, herding and other things. They also say that the average weight of the early Pomeranian was about 30 lbs. This is clearly not a draft-dog.

 

It has been established that they are related to the Keeshond, the Norwegian Elkhound and other spitz-type dogs. But early Pomeranians were referred to as "fox-dogs" because of their foxy-looking face. They are more distantly related to - and much less likely to have done the work of the Siberian Husky and the Malemute.

 

So maybe they were "purpose-bred" - that is, in the sense that people relied on them to do necessary work, such as getting food and helping with the livestock.

 

I can find nothing that suggests that the modern Pomeranian does any of these things. But they are used for various other things. Primarily they are pets. Some are agility dogs. Some have been trained as assistance dogs. But largely they are seen as companions and ornaments. I suppose that you could make a case that these dogs are purpose-bred as companions and ornaments. But to me that's a stretch. Though I am sure that many who own individuals of this breed feel that they couldn't imagine life without them, the breed itself would not leave a hole in the canine "work-force", the way that the Border Collie would leave in the livestock industry if they suddenly disappeared en masse. To me, this is the essence of "purpose-bred."

 

The average breeder of purebred dogs doesn't give two straws if the dogs they bring into existence can do useful or necessary work. They are created to bring in dollars to a going concern, or to inflate the ego of someone competing in breed-ring shows or a hobby sport. The latter group may have some concern for the health and soundness of the dog in general, but the inherent ability to do a job has little importance to them. In my opinion those dogs are definitely not purpose-bred.

[waffles]

Definitely agree. I was thinking of purposefully bred dogs in the sense that a human put two dogs together to create a litter of pups on purpose. Whereas a purpose-bred dog is totally different and few of those exist. Like I said , most people can't believe that border collies are still bred for their working ability and usefulness and same for other breeds such as JRT's and hunting dogs.

[Sue R]

"Purpose-bred" has always meant to me that a dog was bred *for* a purpose (or a job of some sort, working, hunting, draft, guardian, etc.) versus bred *on* purpose (which is any litter that results from anything but an "oops" since apparently, no matter what the justification, somebody made the decision to make the mating).

 

I guess I'd never given it enough thought that for someone wanting to breed a pug to a beagle to produce "puggles" for sale for pets is breeding *on* purpose, which they are. So I can see where the descriptor, "purpose-bred", could be understood to mean different things to different people with different goals.

 

Oops on me!