"Pedigree dogs exposed"

I guess I don't understand why people don't just get the breed of dog that fits their lifestyle?  There's a lengthy list of dogs I absolutely love, but do not fit my lifestyle, and I have no expectation that truly experienced, devoted breeders would risk their reputation experimenting with breeding down to a pet variety of the breed.  There are just so many factors that play into breeding well I don't see the point in complicating it even further when so many breeds are already such a mess in all lines and types.

AgileGSD

The dog still can't keep his tongue in his mouth....

 Premature conclusion.  The dog DOESN'T  have the tongue in his mouth.

Well it wouldn't be a "ridgeback" breed if it didn't have a ridge ;)

Exactly the point. It is a useless affectation being kept there for the sake of fashion.  It negatively affects the potential health of the dog, so why have a ridge in the first place?

Are you aware that the dermoid sinus issue is not just a problem in RR with ridges?

But the ridge increases the incidence of it.

Cavaliers ALL have heart defects to some degree. That means without crossing to a different breed, all breeders can do is try to breed the less affected dogs together.

That's not all the can do.  They can open the registries for a limited period.

Kim_MacMillan

Personally I've always thought the "arguments" about show vs working are a bit ridiculous. As a dog owner, enthusiast, and lover, I think that the split is *gasp* not necessarily a bad thing. ....... We no longer "need" these dogs for the jobs they were once created to do.

Not at all. Working breeders like to focus on temperatment and health.  Pet and show breeders can also focus on these traits.

 It doesn't require affecting the drastic changes some show breeds have undergone.  You can have breed X with a working temperament and pet temperament. 

3) Modify the breeds in some way so that they adapt to modern society in which their "use" is that of a valued family member and modern uses (service dogs, new types of police dogs, therapy dogs, canine actors....etc)

Yes, modify their temperament. Not ears that can act like sails or cockroach backs that serve no purpose.  

Liesje

I guess I don't understand why people don't just get the breed of dog that fits their lifestyle?  There's a lengthy list of dogs I absolutely love, but do not fit my lifestyle, and I have no expectation that truly experienced, devoted breeders would risk their reputation experimenting with breeding down to a pet variety of the breed.  There are just so many factors that play into breeding well I don't see the point in complicating it even further when so many breeds are already such a mess in all lines and types.

 I certainly feel that way on one hand.

 On the other hand, there is a real need for good pet breeders in the popular breeds. As it is, breeders who show or work their dogs, do health screening and take their dogs back can't provide puppies to the number of pet homes which want them. Top that off with puppy prices being way more than what many pet owners can or will pay for a pet puppy. The prices reflect the work that those breeders put into their dogs and the proven lines and I am not knocking anyone for that. Howeber, titled parents and pedigree doesn't mean that much to someone just looking for a good pet and a lot of pet owners don't even bother to register their puppies once they get them. So their only other choice is to get a puppy from untested parents or settle for a shelter dog from an unknown background, that is likely not going to be a puppy. There needs to be more of another "type" of breeder in popular breeds that carefully selects the parents for "good temperament" (basic - the dogs don't have any major temperament issues), health tests, provides support for owners and sells their puppies for a pet price that is more within reach of most pet owners. There are already such breeders out there but they are few and far between. So owners who find a really well bred puppy not within reach for them are likely going to the person down the road who bred their two pet dogs together and doesn't know what health testing is.

 I honestly don't think it would complicate anything further, as there are already pet breeders of the popular breeds - some good, some not.

 Splits aren't always a bad thing for the breeds which can maintain them. Actually they could potentially help a breed if one segment develops a major problem, outcrossing to another can reintroduce normal genes. I have heard that one toy breed that some breeders are working with dogs from a USDA commercial breeder because that breeders line is free of a certain bottleneck found in almost every other line and also has some older quality dogs in the pedigrees. I believe that there is at least one dog from this breeder that has been finished even.

  Now what goes on with the lower number breeds, where every litter counts and what every breeder does affects every other breeder is a bit different. These breeds can't maintain show/working/pet splits because the population just isn't big enough and if one breeder starts making widespread poor choices, it can be bad for the entire breed.

Corinthian

Cavaliers ALL have heart defects to some degree. That means without crossing to a different breed, all breeders can do is try to breed the less affected dogs together.

That's not all the can do.  They can open the registries for a limited period.

 This can only help if there are Cavaliers out there who don't have the heart issue. My understanding is that, there isn't. Normal genes don't exist in the breed for that problem. Like Dals and stone forming, the only way to get normal genes is through introducing a new breed.

AgileGSD

Liesje

I guess I don't understand why people don't just get the breed of dog that fits their lifestyle?  There's a lengthy list of dogs I absolutely love, but do not fit my lifestyle, and I have no expectation that truly experienced, devoted breeders would risk their reputation experimenting with breeding down to a pet variety of the breed.  There are just so many factors that play into breeding well I don't see the point in complicating it even further when so many breeds are already such a mess in all lines and types.

 

 I certainly feel that way on one hand.

 On the other hand, there is a real need for good pet breeders in the popular breeds. As it is, breeders who show or work their dogs, do health screening and take their dogs back can't provide puppies to the number of pet homes which want them. Top that off with puppy prices being way more than what many pet owners can or will pay for a pet puppy. The prices reflect the work that those breeders put into their dogs and the proven lines and I am not knocking anyone for that. Howeber, titled parents and pedigree doesn't mean that much to someone just looking for a good pet and a lot of pet owners don't even bother to register their puppies once they get them. So their only other choice is to get a puppy from untested parents or settle for a shelter dog from an unknown background, that is likely not going to be a puppy. There needs to be more of another "type" of breeder in popular breeds that carefully selects the parents for "good temperament" (basic - the dogs don't have any major temperament issues), health tests, provides support for owners and sells their puppies for a pet price that is more within reach of most pet owners. There are already such breeders out there but they are few and far between. So owners who find a really well bred puppy not within reach for them are likely going to the person down the road who bred their two pet dogs together and doesn't know what health testing is.

I agree as far as supply/demand.  However I'd rather just see more good breeders do their thing and place dogs in pet home than have breeders only breeding for pets.  When you look at how many working and show breeders still place many, if not the majority of their dogs in pet homes, I don't see a need for breeders not to breed for work/show because we are already getting great pets out of top breedings, if that makes sense.  I see supply/demand as a different issue.  I'm just very skeptical of self-proclaimed pet breeders because I have yet to find ones that really know what they are doing and are respected by other well established people in the GSD community.  There are great breeders that do consistently produce good pets even though that is not their goal.

I did not see this show but have some thoughts.  I remember on Animal Planet they were talking about how pugs are being bred to hae shorter and shorter bodies and is making it difficult for them to deliver pups without a c-section.  I have read about the dogs with flat faces being bred for flatter faces and it is causing breathing problems for them.

 I know one thing that is scaring me.  I belong to several golden retriever groups and I am seeing more and more 2-5 year old goldens being lost to cancer.  Recently a 6 month old puppy had  MCT removed from her head.My vet is alarmed at the amount of cancer, AIHA, and pancreititis he is seeing.

Iam alomost 65 and have been around dogs all my life.  We always had at least 2, usually up to 4 pointers andEnglish Setters as I was growing up.  I got my first very own dog, anEnglish Setter pup, for my birthday back in '56.  Everyone we knew had dogs, mosting huting dogs or hounds.I knew one replaced city family with a Boston Terrier and another replaced city family with a collie and a Peke.  I donotremember a single one of these dogs ever having hair losing, itching, coughing allergies like you see os often today.What is causing all this cancer, allergies, digestive trouble, etc?  Is it over vaccination (I think that has a lot to do with it), is it air pollution (I think that has a lot to do with it), is it  inbreeding, over breeding, etc (that also has a lot to do with it.  Also, aas little as 50 yers ago most dogs wer treted as dogs, They lived outside and ate Purina and scraps if the family had left overs.  Today they are kept inside, fed "top opf the ine food" etc.  I think this also has soething to do with the problems.

Liesje

 I agree as far as supply/demand.  However I'd rather just see more good breeders do their thing and place dogs in pet home than have breeders only breeding for pets.  When you look at how many working and show breeders still place many, if not the majority of their dogs in pet homes, I don't see a need for breeders not to breed for work/show because we are already getting great pets out of top breedings, if that makes sense.  I see supply/demand as a different issue.  I'm just very skeptical of self-proclaimed pet breeders because I have yet to find ones that really know what they are doing and are respected by other well established people in the GSD community.  There are great breeders that do consistently produce good pets even though that is not their goal.

 Certainly there are good pets being produced by working and show breeders, the issue is that those breeders aren't producing enough in the popular breeds. IMO all pet breeders would need to do is health test and breed dog who tend to have fairly well rounded temperaments (taking good care of them, screening homes and taking puppies back goes without saying) and while we may not find it ideal,it would be an appealing alternative to buying an untested puppy for a lot of owners. I have run into more and more people looking for popular breed puppies who just can't justify paying $1000-2000 for a pet puppy, even understanding the benefits of getting a well bred puppy. These owners may look for a bit in shelters but most won't find a purebred puppy of the breed they want and if they do there are other issues too, such as getting approved. They may find a rehome on CL or in classfieds. Otherwise, they are likely to go to whoever has puppies available in their price range and take their chances.

 Suzanne Clothier is  pretty much a pet breeder, although now she is working with a service dog org and dog people seem to like her well enough. I used to be on a GSD forum with a pet breeder who many people really liked, even if they didn't find her breeding program to be their ideal. She was knowledgeable enough about the breed, did health testing, took dogs back and there were quite a few happy puppy people of her's on the forum. Her dogs were from a combination of German and American lines and were all health tested. I think sometimes people get a bit too stuck on their ideals and become overly judgemental. Besides, I have run into some people who are "in" dogs that have some extremely wacky ideas about breeding, genetics and their breed so being involved doesn't really guarantee knowledge (or ethics).

     I agree that good breeders need to reconsider their breeding programs. If there is a long list of good pet homes, perhaps a litter needs to be bred to satisfy that market. Not a lesser litter, but just another litter.

     In regards to breeds changing over the decades, I can go to historical sites and find pictures and paintings to illustrate "any" point. Just because a dog had his portrait painted doesn't mean he was an outstanding example of his breed, just that he was loved by someone.

     Show fashions come and go. Breeds begin to get extremes and then often drift back to moderate. I personally became involved with showing Dobermans in the late '60s, thru the early '80s. You would not believe how much the breed has changed (in the ring)!!  I can go to Philipp Gruenig's book(1937), and pick out examples that resemble today's show dogs, and those that look like the breed as I knew it. It would be easy to say "they ruined the breed!", but the Dobe as I knew it is still out there, just not in the show ring right now, and personally I think the breed is starting to drift back.

     Show breeders will always take the heat for breed problems because they are visible to the public!! I have been grooming American Cocker Spaniels since 1968, and you would not belive the number of people that blame the "show breeders" for their dogs health and temperament issues. I have looked up their pedigrees, if they're registered, and haven't found a show bred dog in the background clear back to the thirties. They are pet bred by breeders that don't have a clue! 

sandra_slayton

I donotremember a single one of these dogs ever having hair losing, itching, coughing allergies like you see os often today.What is causing all this cancer, allergies, digestive trouble, etc?  Is it over vaccination (I think that has a lot to do with it), is it air pollution (I think that has a lot to do with it), is it  inbreeding, over breeding, etc (that also has a lot to do with it.  Also, aas little as 50 yers ago most dogs wer treted as dogs, They lived outside and ate Purina and scraps if the family had left overs.  Today they are kept inside, fed "top opf the ine food" etc.  I think this also has soething to do with the problems.

I just wanted to comment on this^. My Dad (is in his fifties) has had dogs his entire life- 4 GSD's, 2 Springers, 1 Lab, and his Mom had a Cocker and a Scottie...that's all I can think of but I think there's a few more. All those dogs lived to a ripe old age (11+ years). None of them has allergies or any weird medical issue. All of them had relatively good temperments. They were fed basic dog food (probably whatever Purina had out at the time) and scraps. None of them were neutered (except the Lab who was spayed) and *gasp* he NEVER had a litter. I don't know exactly where he got the dogs from (except the Lab who came from a very reputable breeder in our area) but I'm positive he didn't spend thousands on them, and I know he got 1 GSD for free from a breeder because it's ears never stood up. His GSD's were thinner than what I see now and seemed smaller in hight and length. His Spingers (he used hunt pheasents) were thinner than those I see now and much smaller. Now, I'm a dog walker so I come across a ton of dogs and I feel like 1 out of 4 dogs I meet has an "issue" whether it be allergy, food, medical, of behavioral. My own dogs; 1 out of 3 has a alot of allergy and food related issues.

  Bil's mom said      I agree that good breeders need to reconsider their breeding programs. If there is a long list of good pet homes, perhaps a litter needs to be bred to satisfy that market. Not a lesser litter, but just another litter."

This is not necessarily an untrue statement. When did the mark of a good breeder become "I only breed every every few years". I'm not saying good breeders should be breeding JUST to supply pets, but it seems like in the past, it was acceptable for people to breed 'expenses' litters from the same health tested dogs they bred at a different time- it was a way for people to prove their own stud dogs and see what they rpoduced, even if they ended up NOT keeping anything, and it funded, at least a little, the expenses of showing (or trialling or whatever). 

I saw this show and it broke my heart.  I guess if there is a chance that any dogs are going to be in pain and tortured like this, then why continue breeding that particular breed?  I don't know, I feel like breeding is pretty much archaic at this point anyway.  Why are we purposefully reproducing dogs when there are millions of dogs who are euthenized daily?  Why don't we concentrate on homing all the animals that need it before any more dogs are bred?  It just doesn't make any sense to me.

jennypage

I don't know, I feel like breeding is pretty much archaic at this point anyway.  Why are we purposefully reproducing dogs when there are millions of dogs who are euthenized daily?  Why don't we concentrate on homing all the animals that need it before any more dogs are bred?  It just doesn't make any sense to me.

OK, say all the breeders stop breeding and all the dogs are spayed and neutered so there wouldn't be the slightest chance of unwanted litters anymore and all the dogs in shelters find a home....um....there wouldn't be any dogs at some point. None. Zip. Good breeding is necessary.

BlackLabbie

jennypage

I don't know, I feel like breeding is pretty much archaic at this point anyway.  Why are we purposefully reproducing dogs when there are millions of dogs who are euthenized daily?  Why don't we concentrate on homing all the animals that need it before any more dogs are bred?  It just doesn't make any sense to me.

OK, say all the breeders stop breeding and all the dogs are spayed and neutered so there wouldn't be the slightest chance of unwanted litters anymore and all the dogs in shelters find a home....um....there wouldn't be any dogs at some point. None. Zip. Good breeding is necessary.

I think it's be a VERY long time before we needed to worry about there not being ANY dogs.  And I don't believe that breeding is necessary in any capacity.  Sorry, but I just don't.

 Early GSD books described the dog as a medium sized dog of 60-70 lb.  The good captain would be appalled by today's barrel like +100lb behemoths

 This website compares field v show labs  These are two pictures showing the difference

jennypage

BlackLabbie

jennypage

I don't know, I feel like breeding is pretty much archaic at this point anyway.  Why are we purposefully reproducing dogs when there are millions of dogs who are euthenized daily?  Why don't we concentrate on homing all the animals that need it before any more dogs are bred?  It just doesn't make any sense to me.

OK, say all the breeders stop breeding and all the dogs are spayed and neutered so there wouldn't be the slightest chance of unwanted litters anymore and all the dogs in shelters find a home....um....there wouldn't be any dogs at some point. None. Zip. Good breeding is necessary.

I think it's be a VERY long time before we needed to worry about there not being ANY dogs.  And I don't believe that breeding is necessary in any capacity.  Sorry, but I just don't.

That's fine. I think it's nice to have options...not everyone has to adopt.

And FYI: I adopted Apollo from a shelter and Patty & Molson were rehomed to me. They didn't come from good breeders at all.