What Will It Take? (brookcove)

brookcove

The problem would be that the kennel clubs would have to first admit that they are wrong, that genetic purity and breeding to a physical ideal alone do not produce the best dogs in the world.  I'm afraid that will never happen. 

I agree with you (Becca) there.  I have a Lab because I wanted a dog and DH wanted a Lab if we were going to get a dog.  He wants another one, now, and even if the next dog wasn't absolutely 100% going to be a Maremma, I'd still say no.  I love Ben, desperately, but I do not love the work/show division in Labs and the more I learn, the less I want to be a part of that.  I'm glad that, of the two, I knew enough in the beginning to get a field Lab, but that's just instinct because my heart lies with working dogs, not just within a "group" definition but dogs that can actually work.  To me, if a dog physically (I'm not referring to drive, but to physical structure) can't do the work that the breed is intended for, it's not that breed.  A BC who can't herd, a Lab who can't retrieve for hours in the field, a Maremma who can't guard....these are all dogs who have been stripped of the very essence of their breed.  It's like a virgin mojito - tastes nice, but it's not the real thing and seems sort of empty and pointless. 

What follows will be Maremma-specific ramblings likely only of interest to you, that would bore the pants off everyone else.  So I'll email those. ;)

I have no idea what it will take to convince kennel clubs - I have a feeling they aren't open. I thin the only feasible thing is for dedicated breeders to work together, outside of the official kennel club domain. Where there are enough people to do so, perhaps there could be alternate registries/clubs?

I dislike division, but if kennel clubs want to treat every breed the way they've treated the border collie, then division is needed. GSDs are another example where division has helped concerned breeders and fanciers step away from the obsession with cookie cutter dogs.

I favor importing stock, and opening up the option of crossbreeding for breeds that are otherwise doomed.

 Dog_ma - would you be in favor of importing ridgeless RR stock from Africa and allowing the non-ridged dogs to be shown, as Puffs are shown equally with Hairless in the Chinese crested, and tailed Aussies are overseas?

Here's some food for thought.  Here's an example of the soundness of the Border Collie that is bred for function alone.  This competition (running this weekend in Utah) is an invitational, so performance here is an honor - kind of like Westminster.  Most of these dogs are 7 to 9 years old.  Many are ten to twelve years old!  One of the country's top dogs is twelve and still going strong - he finished third in this round of competition.  This is in Utah - you can look up the temps online for yesterday.  When the video starts, the dog has already been running for about six minutes to pick up the sheep at the top of that hill there (you can see the little structure where the sheep are being kept before running), and then bring them straight down to the point where you'll see this start.

This dog is ten years old.  The part of the course you will watch is about 400 yards long, and you can see the dog is not running that straight - he's doing little arcs back and forth the whole time.  The dog is easily running three to four times the 400 yards of the lower course, and the video is 5 minutes long.  Again, this dog is ten years old.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=_kMkLek-dlM 

Oddly, even though BCs have a lot of variation, and though they are never bred for looks, they end up looking a lot like each other.  There's no need to breed for "type" if you have very high standards for "function." 

Border Collie trials used to be followed by a little show to encourage the shepherds and farmers to pretty up their dogs for the public.  Basically it was a "best groomed" contest.  They'd check teeth and handle the dogs and reward handlers who had taken some care with their dogs to present them nicely.  I don't see a thing wrong with that - especially for the decorative breeds.  Where such things go wrong is when the clubs try to represent the winners of such shows as the best breeding stock, the most healthy representatives of the breed, when it's just not true that you can see the things that really matter in long term or genetic health, by pacing a dog or running hands over it or measuring angulation. 

brookcove

 Dog_ma - would you be in favor of importing ridgeless RR stock from Africa and allowing the non-ridged dogs to be shown, as Puffs are shown equally with Hairless in the Chinese crested, and tailed Aussies are overseas?

I would. No one's asking me, though.  

I will admit that with collies, I would actually like to see this come to fruition. I *love* the farmcollies (BC or ES or once in a while Aussie crossed with collie) - but they're not doing enough health testing for my taste And it's not JUST CEA that you worry about. To be frank, CEA comes right in the middle of the things I worry about- bloat, overall longevity/soundness, epilepsy, and cancer- plus the non-health concerns (temperament and drive- I've got all the biddability I want in my guys, but I'd like to see more drive to WORK instead of drive to be cuddly furry slugs. This means you, Mal.)

Cait 

I'm pretty new to purebred dogs as far as actually being in clubs and having registered dogs, but honestly I think consumers/pet owners need to have higher standards.  I don't think it matters what registries, parent clubs, and breeders do if uninformed or apathetic people keep purchasing dogs that are severely inbred and/or are not health screened.  If everyone refused to purchase such a dog, the clubs and breeders would have no choice but to change.  I don't know if this task is possible, generally speaking, but I try to do as much as I can, at the place where I am at.  For example if someone comes to our club and asks where to get a GSD puppy, I will offer as much advice as I can about who to trust, who to avoid, why health screening is important, what to look for, what are red flags, etc. and that person can take the information or leave it, but I find that most people who genuinely do love dogs and love the breed enough to be looking for a purebred are appreciative and open to being helped along.  Just today I met someone in the pet store who approached me about GSDs and told me her dog came from the local GSD puppy mill and had to be put down because it had problems.  The dog cost her over $3500 and is from a very popular (almost in a fad way) German line right now.  We talked for a very long time and I think now she knows more what she is looking for, whereas with the first dog she just saw flashy GSDs and figured if they cost $3500, they had to be the "perfect" dog.

Ideally, the clubs and registries should take more responsibility over the matter, but can you really blame them for not stepping in when there's no shortage of people buying and showing purebred dogs?  I'm too pessimistic about them ever stepping up to the plate and the problem is so big I just feel that if everyone did the best they could to make a difference in their own little niche, maybe we'd get somewhere...

 Liesje I agree with you completely.  I've always said this... what it's going to take.... is education.  People who just want a "pet" should be looking for a pup from a GOOD BREEDER who has done ALL the screening, INSISTS on spay/neuter, INSISTS on breeder-take-back for the life of the dog, is HONEST about the faults and virtues in their dogs and can darn well PROVE, one way or another, that the dog and bitch SHOULD have been mated.

Where the breed is seriously endangered.... outcrossing done by experienced and dedicated breeders would be a danged good idea IMO.  It will be hard, because with "good breeders" breeding so few litters, each one can only make a tiny change and if they are all pulling in different directions, the change will be negligible.... or the overall result will just be a lot of random cross breeding, especially when irresponsible idiots jump on the "outcrossing bandwagon".  I do think kennel clubs need to step in, for that reason... but that will only happen when there is pressure from the educted, puppy buying public.. some "stuff" has to happen before other "stuff".

There is some crossing done between GSDs and Malinois.  This is for police dogs or other similar work.  I don't know the exact reasoning, but my guess would be the Mal is often more suited for the work, however the GSD is more menacing and is interpreted with more fear by the general public so the Mal alone is often not as much a visual deterent as a darker, heavier boned GSD.  Or maybe they just don't care about "breeds" at all and if they want the top drives, one happens to be a Mal and one is a GSD, so be it.  It has been done by some "good" kennels as far as training and results are concerned.  Their goal is producing the best police dog, not a cookie-cutter German shepherd that matches some arbitrary standard.  I've never seen the dogs listed as anything other than "GSD/Mal mix", their goal is not creating a new designer breed.  As it stands, I have no problem with this, but yeah if the puppy buying, designer breed obsessed public caught on and these breeders actually catered to them, I'd have a REAL problem with it then. 

 I don't have a problem with out-crossing, done with significant knowledge of genetics and history, to preserve a breed.  That, however, is most assuredly *not* the definition of desiger breeding, which is done with nothing more than a profit motive, and using mostly inferior breeding stock (CAV-achons come to mind - so now, such unscrupulous people have produced a dog with mitral valve disease that you can't house train).  That is not ok.  So, the conditions under which breeders would be permitted to outcross should be carefully examined, but not prohibited.