The joys of breeding-flame suite ready

I just wonder how many quality breeders take into cnsideration how needed it is to further their breed.  I am all for preserving the (insert yours) breed, but am I wrong to think that there are already enough good breeders of certain breeds?

That is wrong, in fact, for many breeds.  The key to health in a breed is genetic diversity - you get that with a maximum of different breeders who are committed to the same standards of health, purpose, breed type, etc.

Benedict

but the problem with discouraging people from breeding (not that you are, just the concept) is that by discouraging the people who would have bred responsibly and well, you let the people who don't breed that way dictate the future of the breed you love. 

Excellent point. 

I have many other questions that I can't get to now, time to go to work, but I appreciate all the input in helping me understand this.    Fascinating.

brookcove

The key to health in a breed is genetic diversity - you get that with a maximum of different breeders who are committed to the same standards of health, purpose, breed type, etc.

That's the key, though...I do agree that there can be too many breeders of a breed if they are NOT all committed to the same things, and if much of that gene pool is unuseable because of health issues that shouldn't be passed on.  As a whole I agree with you, but only when you do have that magic group of breeders who are all working towards the same ideals.  

twelvepaws

And I respect that.  I just wonder how many quality breeders take into cnsideration how needed it is to further their breed.  I am all for preserving the (insert yours) breed, but am I wrong to think that there are already enough good breeders of certain breeds?   I'm asking this because I want to know, not because I'm trying to be a nasty snot!

I understand exactly where you are coming from. Popularity of a breed will drive the demand for pups or interest in breeders. That popularity can come from many venues, the movies, a famous owner or plain and simple compatibility. My breed alone(Frenchies) are right there now. They are becoming popular and they sell for a high price tag so there are breeders popping out of the woodwork trying to capitalize on this. Martha has made a good impact as well. I began being owned by a frenchie 10 years ago. Back then you were lucky to see 5 at a dog show, today there generally are no less then 20! In 2002 I bred my first litter after I researched the breed and felt I knew what I was getting into as well had a demand for myself first and formost for a pup. As this was to be my foundation I did not sell a pup. In my second litter I also kept two and co-own two, my third litter I kept the one girl. I now have three girls who will be my breeding program when the timing is right. I have a litter expected now which will be her last litter and the daughters will take over and she will be spayed. What I don't keep in this litter will be co-owned by me, I have a waiting list 20 people long. Will I ever satisfy that list, probably not! I will not breed for demand, I breed for myself :)

Good breeders are few BUT there are good breeders out there in every breed. Pure bred fans will look for a dog who fits a breed type, they expect to purchase a dog that looks, acts and behaves like that breed. There is a need for pure bred dog breeders for that person. There are also the people who live to have a pet no matter where it is from or possibly what breed it is. I was that person for many, many years. Growing up I would have never imagined I would be doing what I do now. My family always had mixed breed mutts and we loved them! I've always had a higher drawing to animals and wanted to be a vet, my aunt one time explained to my mom that animals are my passion, she should have expected this...LOL!

Benedict

A lab and a shepherd are 2 different types of dog - a cross won't have the drive to herd or the temperament to hunt/retrieve.  (Or might not, exceptions happen.)

not trying to gripe, or promote hybrids but.... exceptions happen in pure breds too.. thats where we get "pet quality/non standards" or dogs that end up going bananas, or ones that have severe physical problems due to extreme inbreeding.

i think to keep them healthy and live longer we're GOING to have to outcross somewhere down the line, and work, and pick, and choose the ones that have those traits. the majority of your hard working breeds (most the UKC breeds) have recent outcrossings but many of those dogs are also field dogs. they go hand in hand in my opinion. and besides..... whats the percentage on training to breeding? And my brother's male GSD is from some fancy pants upper crust show kennel line and he's a big lazy hair ball that will drool on intruders. his female is a hyper pup from a hard working line that is already excelling at bite work and tracking. they're the same breed but they neither look alike (she's small and streamlined, he looks like a grizzly) nor act alike. And its the same song and dance with American Bulldogs. Johnson = Showdogs, Scott = Working...  I dont think there's ever going to be a happy medium with dog breeders. most of your breeders have a goal in mind (they either want pets, showers or workers) and never the twain shall meet. i want to keep an open mind about it, but if the past is any indication then we're just going to get further and further apart when it comes working breeds. and breeds within breeds? OMG the politics involved!!

i'm not a breeder but i have a love for ALL dogs -the lap warmers, ankle biters, working dogs, 100lb sofa dogs, and the pretty prancing show dogs.  they all have a place in someone's heart, right? with breeding dogs i think...... YES the breeder should plan the breeding and make damn sure those pups have homes to go to.. not just assume ...etc and so on.

the other thing... i fully and totally understand someones motives for wanting a puppy from their beloved older dog. For example: a Doberman mix i had when i was a kid. his parentage was pure DobermanXshepherd-beagle-collie(we think)! and at the time i had him-uneducated kid- i would have happily bred him to another dog, any dog! just to have part of him still!).. but what of the rest of the litter eh? i cant justify breeding a dog just to keep one puppy. every one of those puppies would have a piece of my dog right? how can i choose which one is more deserving to stay with me?  i would go crazy! (either from keeping the entire litter, extreme guilt, or disappointment because the pup didnt turn out as planned)

I'll tell you what I want..... a healthy dog. i dont care what breed it is or if i found it in a dumpster. i know for a fact that you can train most dogs to do any job you want. i've seen a ChIHUAHUA trained in Schutzehund! The guy made a little bitty sleeve he put on his thumb! he gave the same commands to the Chi and the dog did the same thing as a big dog! I'll see if i can get a video of that. but... if a Chihuahua can do Schutzehund then i dont see a limit on any other breed 

 When breeds suddenly become more popular is when it gets tricky.  For instance with Kirby's BIS at Westminster, the papillon breed has doubled in poularity.  Even since we first got Beau almost 5 years ago, as pets they have really become much more popular.  We got Beau and had only ever known one that was a pet.  Now we have a lot of friends who got paps (atmittedly that's Beau's fault though) and I meet a ton of people at school with paps. 

 I really don't think most the new breeders are breeding with anything in mind.  Quality overall is going down even though numbers go up.  I see some paps that are barely recognizable as the breed.  We're talking 20 lbs and no coat.  And what's worse to me is I hear of more and more being dog aggressive or unfriendly towards people.  Ever sense the world saw that cute little dog win (and believe me he deserved it) they fell in love with the little stylish dog.  So now these breeders are turning out paps that are just  another fashion accesory with barely a resemblance to breed.  We need the good breeders to make sure the intelligent, lively, and friendly little dogs I fell in love with stick around.

I do think that in a few cases, breeding crosses is reputable.  Lurchers, Alaskan Huskies, GSD/Mal crosses and "Dutch Malinois".....  I won't condemn all breeding of crosses or creating new breeds, but like Becca said it must be purpose-driven, and creating a breed-a-poo cross to make a buck does not count as purpose-driven.

Benedict

brookcove

The key to health in a breed is genetic diversity - you get that with a maximum of different breeders who are committed to the same standards of health, purpose, breed type, etc.

 

That's the key, though...I do agree that there can be too many breeders of a breed if they are NOT all committed to the same things, and if much of that gene pool is unuseable because of health issues that shouldn't be passed on.  As a whole I agree with you, but only when you do have that magic group of breeders who are all working towards the same ideals.  

Not just health reasons! Some breeds the gene pool is so small they have no choice but to closely line breed or even possibly inbreed. The need for more responsible breeders in some breeds are imperative. My Am Staffs right now are being tested for canine ataxia, of course health issues. We have found that there were certain dogs who were either carriers or affected dogs that were not disclosed in the earlier days and were very frequently used sires. Many dogs being tested right now are clears which is a blessing but there are a few that are coming back affected or carriers and that is scary for the future of the breed. We hope that the ethical person will spay/neuter and NEVER use the dogs who don't come back as clears. I for one will be. I've already decided that my last Am Staff litter was going to be my last but that I could possibly change my mind in a few years If Markie, Jackie, Hannibal or Liberty are carriers that will decide it for me. I'd much rather let these guys live their life out with me and enjoy them and not add to the already littered gene pool. The good news is that if they are clears the will NEVER produce a carrier or affected. Carriers bred to clears have a 50% chance of producing clears, me personally, I don't think the odds are high enough having seen a friends Am Staff affected and how horrible of a life he ended with due to the effects, it truely is a heart break.

 Yup, I know exceptions happen within breeds too, but there are never guarantees, only the opportunity to give it a best shot. 

Liesje

I do think that in a few cases, breeding crosses is reputable.  Lurchers, Alaskan Huskies, GSD/Mal crosses and "Dutch Malinois".....  I won't condemn all breeding of crosses or creating new breeds, but like Becca said it must be purpose-driven, and creating a breed-a-poo cross to make a buck does not count as purpose-driven.

Agreed 100%, but the example given (a Lab/Shepherd mix) isn't a mix I can see as being purpose-bred.  For WHAT purpose, exactly?  Even if bred for perfect health, that's not purpose-driven except for maybe a job as a pet.  There's nothing wrong with a dog having a job as a pet, at all, but I don't see the point in intentionally crossing breeds with ONLY that in mind.  Only a limited number of dogs can work, only a limited number can show, only a limited number can be guide dogs or drug dogs or sniff explosives.  An almost unlimited number of dogs are capable of being good pets provided the owners have selected the right dog, be it from a breeder or a shelter.  Given that, I just don't think that breeding for more pets is what's needed.  Breed for dogs who can work, be it pure or crossed dogs.  Breed for dogs who can show if that's your thing...amazing pets will come out of those breedings.

Benedict

Purebred humans aren't better or more effective at anything than their mixed counterparts - that's where I think that argument (which I have heard, often) falls apart.

Actually certain races do have physical attributes and many would argue a strong propensity for certain personalities traits that in effect would be more effective in certain things over their mixed counterparts. But this is way OT.    

Benedict

Breed for dogs who can show if that's your thing...amazing pets will come out of those breedings.

The part I don't understand is the insistance by people that only purebreds should be bred.  A lot of the attributes that don't' affect a dog's performance or temperment are selected for show breeding result in so many problems - flat faces, heavy wrinkling, dwarfism, long backs, giant size, cropped ears - this things can cause discomfort and health problems and do absolutely nothing good for the dog.  I hate to see dogs suffer breathing problems, shortened life spans, back problems etc., for the purpose of breeding for something that can be paraded around a show ring for ribbons.  I don't see how anyone can breed or purchase these kinds of dogs and at the same time say that puppy mills or breeding mixes are wrong because they cause suffering.  I'm sure most people won't agree with me, but that's JMHO.

pudel

Benedict

Breed for dogs who can show if that's your thing...amazing pets will come out of those breedings.

The part I don't understand is the insistance by people that only purebreds should be bred.  A lot of the attributes that don't' affect a dog's performance or temperment are selected for show breeding result in so many problems - flat faces, heavy wrinkling, dwarfism, long backs, giant size, cropped ears - this things can cause discomfort and health problems and do absolutely nothing good for the dog.  I hate to see dogs suffer breathing problems, shortened life spans, back problems etc., for the purpose of breeding for something that can be paraded around a show ring for ribbons.  I don't see how anyone can breed or purchase these kinds of dogs and at the same time say that puppy mills or breeding mixes are wrong because they cause suffering.  I'm sure most people won't agree with me, but that's JMHO.

Benedict

Did you miss the part of my post, right before the bit you quoted, where I said "breed for dogs who can work, be it pure or crossed dogs"?

ETA:  "Working"  and breeding for such means to me that every dog should be capable of doing the job for which it was intended, should it have had one.  That means that even the show dogs should, IMHO be capable of working even if they do not.  Breeding for show just means, to me, breeding with a focus on temperament that will allow for showing - not all dogs have that.

It doesn't matter why they are bred.  If a dog has to suffer a deformity so that it can "work", I have a problem with that too.

pudel

It doesn't matter why they are bred.  If a dog has to suffer a deformity so that it can "work", I have a problem with that too.

And you're entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine.  I'm not going to argue that things like dwarfism are deformities, and that some of the breeds with that do have jobs.  I will argue that to tar the whole world of purebred breeding with the "cruel" brush because a few breeds have those issues is not something I understand or find fair. 

Benedict

pudel

It doesn't matter why they are bred.  If a dog has to suffer a deformity so that it can "work", I have a problem with that too.

 

And you're entitled to your opinion, I am entitled to mine.  I'm not going to argue that things like dwarfism are deformities, and that some of the breeds with that do have jobs.  I will argue that to tar the whole world of purebred breeding with the "cruel" brush because a few breeds have those issues is not something I understand or find fair. 

 I never said all purebreds. And it's not just a few breeds that have problems.  And dwarfism is scientifically and medically considered a deformity so it's neither an opinion nor something that can be argued.