The joys of breeding-flame suite ready

I haven't read this whole thread, so this may have been said, but even so I guess I'll say it again. lol One thing that REALLY bugs me is people thinking there's only one "right" way or reason to breed dogs. I used to get caught up in the whole breeding AKC champions is the only acceptable way to breed dogs. Then the more I actually thought about it, there's absolutely nothing wrong with breeding other ways. Why do some people think they're the judge and jury that decide how people should breed dogs? 

If people want to breed mixes for companions and people want them, then who are we to say that's "wrong"? Those breeders don't necessarily test for every health condition out there, but I think if the parents are reasonably healthy then I it's fine. One thing that I read on here that I agree with is how many AKC breeds are health nightmares and they're purposely bred. The examples of Dachshunds, French Bulldogs and Basset Hounds are great examples of the extreme end. And definitely English Bulldogs. Those dogs' conformation itself is the problem.

Luvntzus

If people want to breed mixes for companions and people want them, then who are we to say that's "wrong"? Those breeders don't necessarily test for every health condition out there, but I think if the parents are reasonably healthy then I it's fine.

Because, as Becca so eloquently put it, that is breeding for the lowest common denominator - it's just breeding for "reasonably healthy" dogs.

I think maybe it's hard to see right now, but if things like working ability (for whatever job, herding, hunting, guarding etc etc etc) according to what the breed should be able to do, the general look that the breed is supposed to have, the temperament the breed is supposed to possess - if all those things are not bred for, they get bred out.  We will lost not only what those breeds are supposed to be, we may one day lose the breeds altogether.  If you don't strive to breed the best of all of those things within the confines of what a particular breed should be, you'll never get them, "OK" dogs do not produce excellent examples of the breed, they produce more OK dogs.  The problem with breeding for that is that those dogs will turn up in a quality litter ANYWAY and sold as pet quality dogs - so by producing litters like you describe, what is effectively being done is the removal of the best of a breed, because those 2 or 3 amazing dogs who would likely have shown up in a quality litter will just not exist.  Do too much of that and you'll never be able to get that "best" back. 

Benedict

  The problem with breeding for that is that those dogs will turn up in a quality litter ANYWAY and sold as pet quality dogs - so by producing litters like you describe, what is effectively being done is the removal of the best of a breed, because those 2 or 3 amazing dogs who would likely have shown up in a quality litter will just not exist.  Do too much of that and you'll never be able to get that "best" back. 

The "best" in terms of what though?  Dogs do not have to be purebred to be healthy or of sound temperment.  If you are talking about working quality, that would only hold true if all dogs were bred to work, which we know isn't true and that most dogs are companions.

pudel

The "best" in terms of what though?  Dogs do not have to be purebred to be healthy or of sound temperment.  If you are talking about working quality, that would only hold true if all dogs were bred to work, which we know isn't true and that most dogs are companions.

The best in terms of health, the best in terms of temperament, the best in terms of working quality.  Yes most dogs are companions, but if you breed only for companion dogs, it will not be long before the ability to work is LOST.  Gone.  You cannot breed in drive or stock sense or memory (thanks JackieG for that) if you do not have it to begin with.  If you breed for those things, you will wind up with dogs who have those things and who ALSO make excellent pets.

Shall we lose the labradors who guide the blind, the beagles who sniff out diabetic shock before it happens, the cockers who make sure the plane to your next vacation spot doesn't blow up?  Shall we lose dogs like Becca's Tully, who follows around a ewe about to give birth to twins, so that he can lay down and keep the first lamb warm while the second is delivered?  Shall we give up on having shepherds who give their all, and in some cases their lives, to work in army units and police forces, or the Maremma in Australia who has protected a regenerating flock of endangered penguins from being ravaged by predators?  Sorry, no...not for me, not in my idealistic corner, I won't agree that we should stop breeding for the instincts and talents necessary to do all those things just because all of those breeds can be kept as pets, so we could get away with only breeding for that. 

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.

Since you list a few characteristics of my frenchies I'll jump in here-dwarfism, flat face and heavy wrinkling..Frenchies have all of those..initially they were bred as a companion dog as they are today. They were the choice of the lace makers in England and eventually wound up in France hence the name French Bulldog..the dog the ladies of the night used to keep warm. They have always had these characteristics there is no secial "breeding" for the show ring discomfort for them. If this was life threatening the breed would not have exsisted this long. They were bred to be companions then and still are today. Although are excelling in agilty believe it or not. Now in looking at my lines-American/European cross you will find that my dogs although black brindle do not suffer from heat issues, are very athletic and have great temperments. NONE of my dogs have breathing issues, in fact they all have very open nares, no pallet issues..why? Because I am dedicated to improving the breed!

 Cropped ears really aren't bred for, they are surgically made that way. The dogs discomfort is minimized by anethstesia as in any other surgical procedure like spaying/neutering

pudel

Benedict

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.

 If the idea is to show them as capable of working, then that is what they shoud be shown for.  How on earth is a dogs appearance in a conformation ring indicative of its ability to herd sheep or to hunt?  And if you want to show for the purpose of temperment, sounds like obedience or CGC would be the right venue for that.

Why don't we step away from the verbage "breeding for show"  for a moment

Every breed has a written standard approved by its parent club. It is the stamp of the breed, type and characteristic. Each dog of that breed should conform to that written standard.

Now back to the "show" aspect- When showing a dog you should be taking the dog that BEST conforms to the standard, size, weight, color, specific breed characteristics as well as the temperament so designated for the breed. The judge *should* be judging each dog against the standard, in othe owrds how close to the standard the dog is. So a breeder should be breeding the pure bred dog to look just like what the breed should look like. Showing is how breeders validate that their dogs are good examples of the breed. Of course as it was back inthe day, it still is today where people buy dogs to show as sport as well. They can show the dogs themselves or use the advantage of a professional handler. A good honest judge will evaluate each dog in his/her ring and award the dog who best exemplifies the breed standard, handler or not...that is a topic all its own!

Bottom line, there is a purpose for every breed no matter if it is a show dog or not and you can find that in every breed standard. In the case of selectively bred mixed breeds, yes there is also a purpose for some of them as well in ways that can help with work or sport.

This thread is about why someone would breed and what they expect to get out of it on both sides, pure bred "breeder" types as well as the pet owner who feels justified in breeding pure bred or mixed breed. It isn't about why no one should be breeding

 Jaime, I don't disagree at ALL...I think my post was unclear.  I don't think "breeding for show" should be in any way different in terms of looks or health or anything else than breeding for work or certain abilities or what have you.  I just think that when breeding for dogs who WILL wind up in the show ring, along with everything that should be held up to the standard there needs to be an attitude, on the dog's part, that is compatible with showing.  Not all dogs like to show and those that hate it I don't think should be forced to do it.  Those that love it - well, that love comes from taking a characteristic/attitude that was already in the dog and helping to blossom it to full potential.  It's breeding with an eye for that enigmatic potential that is what I meant by "breeding for show" - the health, looks etc are just a given (or should be).

Jaime,

I don't look at frenchies (and many of the other smaller breeds) as being products of dwarfism, but rather neotenization of puppyish traits through selective breeding.

The only dogs who "look" like they have dwarfism (to my eyes) are Basset Hounds.

Kate, first and formost the breeding planned should concentrate on type(picture of the standard) health and temperament and of course working ability for those breeds. Whe you have all of that in mind first you are breeding what your breed is. You should NEVER breed for the show ring. When breeding we hope that we will produce a dog that will be shown by us, should we be blessed enough. But our first is to conform to the above. Not every pup and in many cases no pups might truely be show quality. You take the best of what you have and that is your pick or show pup, if you're lucky enough to have more then one your truely blessed.

 Lots of things can happen from birth to six month to two years. A fine example is my last litter of Am Staffs, now a little over a year. Polly was my "pick" she looked just like Markie with her white markings on the show side. She has his sweet face and conformed to the standard in all aspects as a pup. I *placed* her in a home that I knew no matter how she turned out she would be loved and cared for unconditionally for her entire life. If she indeed did turn out to be a show dog al the better for me but my first priority was a loving home. SHe;s shown, she is pointed BUT she is the biggest bitch I have EVER seen!!! Where did the size come from??? Her fathers side I'm sure. She is balanced, beautiful and HUGE! I'm sure she will finish, her owner has no intention of breeding her and neither do I. In fact he said when I say spay her he will not give it a second thought...LOL! Jackie is with me, she was what I considered the second pick, she should finish once she grows a brain. She is closer to standard size wise but toes in a little in the front, that could change as she matures and her chest drops. I HATE her feet!! But I LOVE her. No matter what she will be my last AM Staff at this point.

 So yes, I really did do this breeding for my next show dog but in order to have my next show dog it had to conform to the above first..see where I'm going?

Well I will get a good picture of Dunkin and post it for you..he was from my first Frenchie breeding. He truely is the best example of what you can get when you breed to close in a pedigree. Have you ever heard the saying that if you inbreed you will get the best of the best and the worst of the worst..Well Dunkin is just that!

 Relying on my "mentor" for my first breeding figuring she knew her lines I wanted to linebreed to be able to outcross going forward to develop my line. Of course knowing Am Staffs I knew this would work well, or it should have if it was an actual line breeding. I found out after that litter just how close it was. Needless to say she is not a mentor nor any influence in my breeding program

Benedict

pudel

The "best" in terms of what though?  Dogs do not have to be purebred to be healthy or of sound temperment.  If you are talking about working quality, that would only hold true if all dogs were bred to work, which we know isn't true and that most dogs are companions.

 

The best in terms of health, the best in terms of temperament, the best in terms of working quality.  Yes most dogs are companions, but if you breed only for companion dogs, it will not be long before the ability to work is LOST.  Gone.  You cannot breed in drive or stock sense or memory (thanks JackieG for that) if you do not have it to begin with.  If you breed for those things, you will wind up with dogs who have those things and who ALSO make excellent pets.

I dont think we're in any danger of losing drive and ability if people start breeding for pets because more people have been breeding for pets than for workers.

so... what exactly happened to the English Bulldog and why? the working bulldog has been recreated so many times and ruined all over again because some ding dong wanted to make it into a pet(you could even go so far as to include the American Bully in this group). someone wanted to write a standard, then someone wanted to make it more friendly, then someone wanted to make it less drivey.... so.. we now have a furry frog. hm... ok! PERFECTION!! and here is the part that makes me giggle.... THEN someone felt a strong desire to justify all these changes to a once tenacious gladiator..... they said the short legs allow the dog to get low down to grab the bull... the pushed back nose allows it to breath while hanging on to the bull, the wrinkles on the face allow the blood to channel away from the dogs eyes so it can see while its hanging from the bull. And it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the fact that pug was bred into them. I dont want to sound like i'm saying all EBs are useless lumps though.... i've heard of a few purebreds and EB mixes that are great, healthy and active. the Olde English Bulldogge was supposedly created using JUST english bulldogs(debatable maybe) but that breeder had a goal to make it healthier and more active. i think he succeeded for a little while until the breed got popular. now you see OEBs for sale in every news paper and its getting harder and harder to tell them apart from EBs...

amstaffy

So ethical breeders unite, why do you do this??? What do you expect to get out of it?

Pet owners why would you do this? What do you expect to get out of it and how ready do you think you might be for it?

this seems to have turned into a debate about working vs pet vs show.. when its supposed to be about WHY a breeder feels the need to breed a dog. no one is going to agree on this. one persons crusade is going to be viewed as a suicide mission. i think breeding English bulldogs and Irish Wolfhounds are suicide missions. but after saying that i know i'm gonna get mauled for it because SOMEWHERE someone has a justifiable reason(if only in their head) as to why these breeds deserve to exist. thats fine! but at least do these breeds the courtesy of breeding them back to health no matter the cost! otherwise .... end the suffering and heart break! its inhumane to rip open a dog's gut to deliver puppies she would die having on her own! and i oughta know! i had two emergency C-sections and i never want to go through that torment ever again. i cant imagine being gutted and then having to nurse six or seven babies at once

As for the BBC you cant deny that there was some truth in that show. i didnt suddenly come up with my opinions because of that program either. its an undeniable fact that some breeders ONLY want the fame. they too have a goal and an idea on how things should be and they'll defend their opinions just like i defend mine.

anyway i've been in this forum long enough that most of you know my opinions - and i restated them for anyone who might not know them. so i'm going to happily bow out of this thread 

Interesting to look back at some pictures taken of some of these breeds from long ago. We've come a long way, and in some respects, not a good way.

Characteristics which made some breeds unique have been exaggerated over the years to the point of almost crippling deformaties.

Watching some of the AKC show ring GSDs waddle around the ring sometimes just makes me want to cry. I'd take a working german line dog over one of these hock-walkers anyday.

JackieG

LOL I gather you are some sort of forum troll or something but I'm not afraid and am groveling for favor in the hopes that you will continue to post pic's of your dogs

And I almost laughed. I'm not sure anyone else has responded to this. Amstaffy is a long, long time member and she was the Admin here for quite sometime. In fact, it wasn't until recently that I realized she wasn't adminning here, any more.

Jaime did fill me in Ron, but thanks anyway:)

To Pudel

 If you will return to my post, you will notice I mentioned working teams in which the dog provides a skill or sense the humans lack. 

Your example of a pug and to be honest with you the Peke are two of the breeds in which I believe the breeding for the show ring has actually damaged the dogs in the manner to which you object.   So do I.  It was noted that is also happened in GSDs.  The angulation of the rear that is so desired in the AKC show ring will actually prevent the dog from doing its job long term in the field.  In the less popular breeds (from registration standpoints) it is not so obvious.

That is why I do not consider an individual a responsible breeder if the dogs can't work.  If they can't run around a backyard and be a doggy goof ball.  I include the companion animals as well.  You need to be sound enough and smart enough, and stable enough to earn titles in the companion dog events.  It does not need to be done exclusively by the breeder, but it should be occurring in the direct lines through puppy buyers.

 I do believe that in most breeds there are responsible breeders who seek moderation across the board.  I currently dont care for the emphasis on heads in belgians, we are loosing our fronts.  But, we can selectively breed to improve that.  We can work to get close to a standard that allows for type, structure and temperment. 

Many of the folks in the US breed because it is their "God given" right to do what they want, when they want.  They buy a dog with the capacity of registation and they want to make their money back or experience the mircle or get a piece of Fluffy for the future.  To be a responsible breeder you must be ruthless in your evaluation of your decisions.  You need to be knowledgable personally or have mentors to fill that position. 

It is back the starfish.  Is what one person going to do effect everything? No but it will impact a small portion, and hopefully that will grow.