Culling, does it mean death for innocent pups?

Liesje

It happens all the time in the wild.

 

Yes, it does.....but, we are are educated (ahem supposed to be anyway) and thinking human beings.....when one claims to be a responsible breeder this practice simply doesn't add to what is "Responsible".....we are talking about a person who makes a decision to add to the population of animals......

I have seen enough damage done by the human race when it comes to animals......I rescue, so my view of what is responsible or not is a little more tight........soooorry.......

Nearly every working breed was created by kill-culling dogs that didn't measure up.  we're not talking about shooting a dog because it had white hair in the wrong place.  We're talking about substandard abilities that were potentially dangerous.

It would have been irresponsible to place many of those dogs as pets (for instance, fighting bulldogs that were too sharp, herding dogs that are too reactive).  You may shudder at the thought, but those were days when there were few unwanted dogs around, compared to today.  People bred pet dogs because they were nice and most people on the block wanted a puppy - and those people really did take those puppies and raise them to be nice dogs, too.

As for puppies, well, I've heard and read in books as late as the last decade, about culling (killing) puppies simply to give the mother more time with the remaining puppies.  The idea being that litter time is so important that maximizing it is a good idea.  There aren't many farmer types that do that though - to them it's best to raise as many as possible to see the depth and range of the working ability.

I do think it's icky to kill a pup for cosmetic problems, but then I think the whole show scene has some serious priority issues anyway.  I can't imagine that's a widespread practice, and with all the truly evil things that are going on in the world today, I don't frankly intend to lose much sleep over it. 

snownose

Liesje

It happens all the time in the wild.

 

Yes, it does.....but, we are are educated (ahem supposed to be anyway) and thinking human beings.....when one claims to be a responsible breeder this practice simply doesn't add to what is "Responsible".....we are talking about a person who makes a decision to add to the population of animals......

I have seen enough damage done by the human race when it comes to animals......I rescue, so my view of what is responsible or not is a little more tight........soooorry.......

 

I've yet to meet a breeder in this country that kills puppies.  I don't have a problem with spay/neuter cull. 

Liesje

I've yet to meet a breeder in this country that kills puppies.

 

Honestly, I don't think they will come straight out and tell it to your face.......that would turn many people off......

Dig a little deeper, the dog sledding situation will give you a little more insight ......but, it's done all over the place.....

 

I will readily admit that culling to ME meant killing.  And for purely cosmetic reasons?  I think that's wrong, and I personally don't know any breeders who will even consider that.  Pups that are seriously deformed, are critically ill, well, humanity demands that we help them gently to the bridge.

However, I do not know a single breeder who does NOT cull by spay/nueter.  And that is as it should be.

glenmar

I will readily admit that culling to ME meant killing.  And for purely cosmetic reasons?  I think that's wrong, and I personally don't know any breeders who will even consider that.

 

I personlly don't know any breeders who engage in that practice, or do I .......I have no clue what breeders do when I am not there....do you?

Based on the rescue cases I have seen, not a single soul should be trusted 100%.......

snownose

Liesje

I've yet to meet a breeder in this country that kills puppies.

 

Honestly, I don't think they will come straight out and tell it to your face.......that would turn many people off......

Dig a little deeper, the dog sledding situation will give you a little more insight ......but, it's done all over the place.....

 

Yeah, I have heard of dog sledders doing it.  The only breeders I know personally (more than just knowing of) are GSD breeders and I don't know any that still cull but was told that German GSD breeders may do it b/c of the registry restrictions in that country. 

Personally I don't see the point of breeding and then killing puppies... 

Of course not.  But, then again, I don't really distrust everyone either.

glenmar

But, then again, I don't really distrust everyone either.

 

Good approach in life.....but, then, I once had that, too.....until I found out even the folks who appear most trustworthy can be a let down.......remember, I bred Huskies for a couple of seasons, and once I realized I could not control the future of the pups, I ould NOT do it anymore.....but, that was only one reason for quitting......

Culling, does it mean death for innocent pups?

 I don't think there is a standard answer for this question. The act of requiring a dog to be spayed or neutered is culling so we know that this form is a widespread practice with breeders.

Some breeders will kill pups that are born deaf and others will adopt deaf pups out at a cheaper price. Some will kill a pup that does not show hunting drive and others will make sure this particular pup is fixed and goes to a pet home.

 I would like to think that the majority utilizes spay/neuter as their form of culling except for pups with serious health issues.

Culling for color and temperament does exist in my breed today, rightfully so on temperament and I personally would and have. There is no excuse for a dog who will bite a person unprovoked.

 

Culling is a touchy conversation, there are people who want to save every dog born. There are people who breed for anything, pure bred and designer breeds, growing more and more each day. It is no secret that our society does have throw away pets. Health and temperament are my only true culling reasons. I require spay/neuter for the rest of the faults.

 We can't save and home them all no matter how much we want too...it's just impossible and now our government wants to regulate spay/neuter because the practice of culling has fallen to the wayside and every dog is permitted to live no matter the breed or fault. Sure that is an ugly truth but our society is what it is. Ignorant to a fault

snownose

In another thread,"Elitist" thread the situation of culling was brought up....there is evidence that this type of cleansing of the gene pool includes killing of innocent pups that don't measure up, so to speak......it happens all over the world, even in good ole England

     One main point you need to understand is that culling is not a gene pool cleansing. It's nothing more than a way to keep non breeding quality dogs out of the gene pool. Years past, most unhealthy or otherwise poor examples of the breed were culled in the traditional sense, euthanized. Now, most dogs are culled by neutering, and a small percentage are euthanized - the ones that have *severe* health or temperament issues. I'm sure some breeders still cull in the traditional sense; it's just not something most are comfortable with doing to pups that would make good pets.
     Not every dog can be bred, not every dog is good enough to be bred, so the breeder must cull. I've had adult dogs that turned out to be either inefficent hunting dogs or had too many conformation faults & just not nearly enough to offer the breed to warrant their breeding. So, those dogs were culled - they were altered and sold to pet homes. There are times when culling in the original sense of the word is required. Cleft palate pups, or those born with other birth defects. It's done quickly and humanely, the pup lasts seconds or minutes - instead of suffering with the deformity for months or years. It's not fair to the healthy pups to keep on the seriously ill ones. I've only seen a pup culled once - the poor thing had no anal opening - and the pup was gone almost immediately when the breeder culled it. It's not the monstrous thing you're making it out to be. It's a necessary evil. No one in their right mind likes to cull a pup as in euthanizing it, but it's certainly NOT cleansing of the genepool. That's outrageous to suggest. Culling is a mercy in most instances and is almost never done (meaning euthing) becuase the pup is an undesirable color or has poor structure - those pups are culled by neutering.

HoundMusic

It's not the monstrous thing you're making it out to be. It's a necessary evil. No one in their right mind likes to cull a pup as in euthanizing it, but it's certainly NOT cleansing of the genepool. That's outrageous to suggest. Culling is a mercy in most instances and is almost never done (meaning euthing) becuase the pup is an undesirable color or has poor structure - those pups are culled by neutering.

 

I have already stated that euthanasia for a malformed pup is acceptable in my eyes......aggressivenes can't be seen in pups that are days old or just born....that comes later........culling for cosmetic reasons, like color or pattern is just wrong......

Btw, can you make a statement for all breeders in this world? What I have heard about the culling in the dog sledding world has given me enough insight to see that part of your statement is like living in a dream world......

amstaffy

 We can't save and home them all no matter how much we want too...it's just impossible

That option is not available to those of us that can save, rehab, train, and place these pups.  I most certainly understand the cull (death) as it relates to certain health and temperment issues across all breeds.  But the OP has shown us evidence that culling (dealth) is taking place for cosmetic reasons and it is condoned and encourage by a breeder club.  A heinous act to me.  Now I don't know anything about breeder clubs other than it is a distinguishing element that separates a "reputable" responsible breeder from other types of breeders. 

 

denise m

Well we can all drag out our dictionary (once again) and debate exactly what culling means but IMO the term generally refers to killing.

Yes, we could. I know it can refer to euthanizing, but I also know that where I come from, culling simply refers simply to removal of the animal from the gene pool. My girl, Shimmer, is a *culled* dog. And she's very much happy and alive. She was kept as a breeding prospect, decided she wouldn't make a good breeding bitch, and she was spayed and I took her on. That is *culling* in its purest form.

That's not to say I support all forms of culling. I don't. I have never witnessed the euthanization of a pup that was not suffering. And certainly I, nor my family, has personally euthanized any pups personally - if there were ever to be an issue, the vet would do it. When you bring an animal into the world, I too feel that you are responsible for that animal, but most of all, for its wellbeing. And if that means euthanizing a puppy with a severe cleft palate, with a hernia where the intestines are coming out, for a puppy with a shunt, by all means that is being responsible. Who would ever wish a life of suffering upon such an individual, especially when responsible breeders know what they do about most of these procedures? I don't personally support the euthanizing of newborn pups based on mismarks, or based on color, or based on, well, anything but health. And I would personally never euthanize a young puppy for any reason other than health.

But seriously. This can't just be aimed at *the responsible* breeder. This happens so much in working homes too. Sometimes the pups that don't make the grade are killed when they are older, and only the best are kept. Sometimes flock-guarding puppies are euth'd at birth simply because of color too, as they wouldn't blend in with the flock/herd/etc well, and sometimes it is for entirely cultural beliefs, such as black dogs being looked at as some sort of lesser being or evil, rather than another color. It happens worldwide, and it will forever happen worldwide, whether it is for working ability or for for show.

Talking about responsibilities. There are some breeders who don't necessarily outright euth pups, but take the attitude of *the fittest will survive, and don't interfere with a litter*. Even Suzanne Clothier has written an article on that, that things like supplimental feeding, assisting weak puppies, and helping a new mom learn to nurse her pups is not selecting for genetic fitness. I personally do not hold that view. Sure, I think it is important to take notes and really observe that dam's ability as a mother, and look at the overall fitness of the puppies. But it is my opinion that once a puppy is on the ground, it is the human's responsibility to do whatever is required to ensure that puppy is healthy. It doesn't mean you have to later use it as a breeding dog, but it means that you have brought the animal in to this world, you are responsible for it. So there are a variety of opinions when it comes to breeding animals. Is there one right answer? Not likely, although I'm sure every person feels that *their* answer is the right one. Unfortunately wishing it doesn't make it so.