Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 68

Thread: Should Crossbreeds (and breeders) be discriminated with higher registration costs?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,637

    Default

    Bernie - I get what you are saying.

    I guess one of the reasons I love the workingbred working dogs - kelpies, cattle dogs, koolies etc is that they do resemble thier Dingo origins and because they are working, their structures are pretty good for the most part and they have few health issues. The ANKC has no influence on the true workingbred dogs.

    I am no fan of dogs bred with physical proplems like breathing difficulties and birthing problems and weird hind end assemblies and would not own such breeds and personally I do not find such physical difficulties cute. I have seen some of these dogs really struggle in the heat.

    The true working breds can fetch a lot of money. It is not unusual for farmers to spend up to $12000 for a top quality dog. Reasonable when they do the work of several humans.

    I have to say though that working breeders do use line and in breeding to fix certain positive traits and done correctly with the understanding of what you are doing with regards to health it is a very valuable tool. Most working breeders I know keep an eye on their inbreeding coeffeceints. Bringing the wrong outcross into the mix can cause havoc as well. Again it gets back to be an ethical breeder who knows exactly what they are doing.

    I have no problem with a mix that is genetically and phenotypically healthy. I have no problem with a pedigree that is the same. I do have a problem with innapropriately bred mixes and pedigrees that have been deliberately or inadvertantly bred to suffer physical difficulties. I dont think that is fair on the dog no matter how cute people think it is.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,583

    Default

    Moved from the thread for people who happen to own cross breed dogs for whatever reason (rescue is my fave) - to say what a cute smart dog I have. Which they can't do over on the dark side.

    So Spiderwick and everyone

    - if you want to introduce a new and controversial (or uncontroversial) topic anytime - feel free to start a new thread - I think that makes it easier all round.
    Last edited by Hyacinth; 02-24-2014 at 10:54 AM. Reason: relevance

  3. #13

    Default

    Well I think just about everyone here knows that I think my dog is awesome and most will also know that he's a deliberately cross-bred dog. This is a subject on which I'm very passionate and I'm glad when it does get brought up because I think it's something that should be discussed.

    My question is what is a purebred dog? I know how one is identified, what I'm asking is what is it truly? They're all dogs, so whether you have a GSD or a GSD cross you still have a purebred dog. It's not like where you 'cross' a tiger with a lion and obtain a true hybrid. So essentially to me what that means is that people are using the term 'purebred' to mean more along the lines of being from the same family - ie containing as close to as possible the same genetic information as each other. They look almost identical, have predictable traits, problems and benefits. Only thing is you can't normally get that sort of uniformity even in families - for example I could 'breed' 2 famous singers and yet I'm not even necessarily likely to get offspring that are also good singers, whereas I breed 2 jack russells and my chances of getting another mouser are pretty damn good. So 'purebred' to me means a closer genetic relationship than even what you would typically see in natural families. In fact, I remember reading that all the beagles in the world had a gene pool the equivalent of about 7 individuals.

    This is all fine and dandy I suppose (if we don't apply human ethics to animals so it's not wrong to deliberately promote inbreeding etc) except that this was all started well before we had access to genetic testing. As it stands today, we still don't completely understand every gene and how they interrelate etc so I'm still not convinced you could ever say that testing produces healthy animals unless your only comparison is to other untested inbred animals. The tests that were applied have predominantly centred around aesthetics and so unfortunately, the physical ability, intelligence, longevity and overall health of the animal was largely untested in the selection of breeding animals. I think it's great that they've started testing now, but what exactly can they do when a problem is found? 7 individuals in the gene pool is not a large number to work with... When I think about how complicated and specific the markings on some breeds are, for example Bernese Mountain Dogs, well I realise just how little difference there must be between the genetic material of the 2 parents producing puppies.

    I remember reading that they were able to virtually eliminate a kidney/urinary problem in Dalmatians through the introduction of some GSP blood and yet even today despite the success, this is a point of contention. Why exactly is the 'purity' of the bloodline so important that it should trump everything else?

    It seems that the healthier breeds are those that have most recently been used for work and as such, their physical abilities were also tested in deciding which animals to use to create the next generation and in some breeds, like GSD's, you have almost 2 different breeds now with the working lines and the show lines.

    My dog was deliberately bred by a woman who has a long history in the Dobermann breed (over 30 years). Simply put, she felt that although the dogs might still look like Dobermanns, a lot of them had lost what made them Dobermanns in the first place, unfortunately they have a lot of health problems and they don't tend to be a long lived breed. Further to that, she didn't believe that all breeders should strive to produce dogs that were identical in every aspect to those before them - society has changed in many ways and what we need from our dogs in many cases has too. So she wanted a dog that was physically very able, fast, healthy, long lived, intelligent, affectionate and loyal. Then of course there's the protection element and there's a lot of debate over whether it's safe to breed dogs that have protective instincts or not. She decided that she would breed protective dogs but aim to produce dogs that were not too reactive or thin nerved (ie easily overwhelmed). So she has dogs that work in protection and in childcare centres as therapy dogs for children with particular mental disabilities. They think before they bite because they're not overly reactive, so they might have slightly slower reaction times in protection but given that a protection dog is no use if it's not with you this trait allows them to be very safe, useful dogs.

    I agreed with my breeder 100% really and I was over the moon when I found her. Sammy has grown into everything I hoped he would be and more. You can breed for 'type' rather than 'breed' as they did when we first started selectively breeding dogs, I'm not even sure why that's suddenly considered wrong, and still be an ethical breeder.

    If we're talking pure ethics though I don't think whether you're breeding cross or pure dogs even comes into it. Either you have a purpose for breeding, you've run tests to select healthy, quality parents and you are screening homes thoroughly or you don't.

    One day, when I'm rich enough, my goal is to try and start a breeding program for loyalty, health and intelligence - to better meet the needs of what people want today from their dogs. Couldn't care less what breed they are, it would just be about matching up those traits. I know there are other people out there interested in this so maybe someone will get underway before I can, but either way, I really hope to see it.
    Last edited by 99bottles; 02-24-2014 at 04:00 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,583

    Default

    If we're talking pure ethics though I don't think whether you're breeding cross or pure dogs even comes into it. Either you have a purpose for breeding, you've run tests to select healthy, quality parents and you are screening homes thoroughly or you don't.
    Yup this. Now how do we set up legislation and or council fees to encourage this? Instead of having people thinking selling puppies is a good way to make money - without any thought about the quality of the puppies or the life they might have.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,637

    Default

    I believe that a breeding should be done that gives the dog the highest chance of being structurally and temperamentally sound and a minimum risk of some of the devastating genetic diseases that either cost the owner thousands and the dog pain or results in euthanasia.

    With working dogs the traits that make them what they are as biddable, intelligent, with loads of the right instinct are paramount along with a sound structure. This can involve a mix of cross breeding and in breeding to fix the desired traits, but always keeping the health of the dog in mind. The fact with working bred dogs is that a lot of the less desirable dogs are culled like it or not, but the better the knowledge of the breeder the less likely this is to happen.

    Temperament is a really important trait and this needs to be considered in any breeding.

    Next if dogs are crossed to produce a certain type one has to remember that there will be dogs that might get the worst of the crossing. In the original crossing of dogs to produce breeds with repeatable characteristics I would bet there a good chance there was heavy culling. What happens these days to the less desirable results? I can take a guess.

    Personally I have no problem with taking a breed and I will use the Border collie as an example and adding a splash of kelpie or koolie to fix certain desirable traits but essentailly breeding a Border collie for the most part.

    The use of a splash of GSP to strenthen in a dalmation wouldnt phase me at all. I dont like the physical corruption of breeds based on looks and the ****genous characteristcs it results in. The working bred koolies, BC and kelpies are quite identifiable but they are far from ****genous in looks, they are exceptionally varied depending in the terrain, environment and stock they are bred for.

    Yeah testing does work. I have known plenty of crossbred animals suffer terrible genetic conditions. With breeding pedigreed dogs Rotties developed an ever increasing risk ED and HD. Once they started a testing program (in Sweden I think from memory) the incidence dropped significantly. In Border collies TNS or fading pupppy syndrome became a problem and now most breeders test for it and by avoiding mating 2 carriers then there is no problem, same with many of the eye conditions. Now if testing had been available from the beginning chances are many of these problems could have been avoided even in the tight breeding program by avoiding mating carriers and reducing the use of carriers in breeding programs. I guess in the much older days, heavy culling was used instead.

    A lot to be considered. My thought it is probably good to find a breed with the characteristics one is looking for and like with the working dogs maybe add a splash of another similar breed to strenghten what you want. This will likely reduce the need to cull heavily in developing a completely new breed.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 02-24-2014 at 11:04 PM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Geelong, Vic
    Posts
    871

    Default

    I think you mistake convergent evolution to actual heritage. Koolies are descended from smooth collies and other english herding dogs. There are plenty of breeds that look similar to a dingo, take the Belgian Malinois for instance, but contain no dingo at all. I constantly get are they dingo x GSDs.
    Also, a descendant doesnt have to mean it is a cross breed. Where did the original cross breeds come from them and where did the first 'non cross breed' come from is there was only the wolf? The canine as a subspecies has evolved because of environmental intervention. They just did not change enough to because separate species, they just became different 'breeds', read that as in true breeding physical characteristic groups for lack of a better description. Species can over time develop new and different characteristics as selected by the surrounding environment. In some cases human intervention chooses who breeds and who does not thus changing the animal from the original form. Evolution is more then just fish - lizard - dinosaur - ape - man.

    The point of the council rulings is that people cannot control themselves. In my own town litter after litter of puppies with NO reason or planning are produced. Two dogs are put together - for what reason. The crosses range from the ridiculous (pom x kelpie anyone?) to just profiteering (designer dog litters that get dumped off at the shelter if they dont sell quick enough) Registered breeders have dogs that are papered to be breeding animals. The ANKC and breeder can argue strongly toward loss of genetics, COE etc against having them involved which I don't see an issue with. If people are purposefully trying to create a breed for a reason, all power to you. But really, who is these days. You can probably count them on one hand. No one else really thinks past F1 generation when it comes to cross breeders or their own pocket.
    http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c11/Mali_nut/K9LOGO.jpg

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Brisbane, Qld
    Posts
    228

    Default

    To be perfectly blunt I like a smart, good looking, healthy dog with personality. Whether that's purebred or not, makes no difference to me.

    I've seen some gorgous mutts in the pound (german shepherd x huskies - personal favourite, but wouldn't buy one bred for that reason), and some hideous purebreds (I've seen some border collies that look like st bernards and are supposedly purebred - when you can clearly tell they've been inbred and inbred again to get ' perfectly turned ankles ' or whatever. Makes me sick the way breeders linebreed).

    Dogs fitting the above description are really not that hard to find.

  8. #18

    Default

    I keep timing out in my reply, but it needs to be said that pedigree dogs and cross breeds are inextricably tied. You eliminate cross breeds and you will eliminate pedigree dogs as well.

    The K.Cs ruling that no member will cross breed effectively brings in a self fulfilling prophesy to eliminate them as it passes judgement. This means that the K.Cs will never be able to have a positive influence on cross breed dogs, but WILL ALWAYS have a negative effect.

    It also ties the K.Cs into an ever decreasing environment because its a double closed system. ie no outside influence on standardized breeds, and no out side influence on those who breed them. It seeks to disregard environmental influences and attack them. Its own foundations. Pedigree dogs can not survive while this rule is in place because it denies the very base they stand on. People breeding what has value, thrives and has purpose in their own backyards. Thats what gave rise to pedigree dogs.

    If we don't allow for that, and actively support and strengthen it, dogs lose their relevence. As is happening.

    As it stands, a pedigree represents purity, predictability and records, Thats all.

    Remove that rule, and it changes the meaning of the constitution. The message members and the public alike have is no longer "a record of purity is needed for its proof of predictability and appearance"....... But IMPROVEMENT through knowledge and use of records.

    Pedigree dogs can't stand on their own, But they could and should stand as the pinacle and end result of thoughtful breeding practices.

    A much more worthy message to radiate than one that says purification leads to perfection and all else is untouchable.
    Last edited by Strange fruit; 05-28-2014 at 01:50 PM. Reason: timing out

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Western Sydney
    Posts
    809

    Default

    I think people forget that cross breeds are the result of backyard breeders and puppy mills trying to make a quick buck...with no thought to health or temperament...the most important things in any dog.

    People say cross breed dogs have a rights too...yes that's true but does that give the backyard breeders and puppy mills the right to breed thousands and thousands of unwanted dogs who end up in pounds and shelters to be put to sleep. People still buy dogs from backyard breeders, puppy mills and pet shops which is the problem and some think cross breeds are healthier than pure breeds which is wrong.

    Having said that...pure breed dogs have their health problems too and buyers are never told the puppy you buy might not live to old age as a result of this. The health guarantee we give you guarantees nothing and if there's a health problem you're told by the breeder "we've never had that...it's your fault" complain to Dogs NSW and they don't want to know as their only purpose is collecting money from people.
    Chloe & Zorro
    Rottweilers and German Shepherds are Family

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,583

    Default

    I think people forget that cross breeds are the result of backyard breeders and puppy mills trying to make a quick buck
    well that would be the designer oodle crosses you find in the pet shop.

    But plenty of others are because
    "I thought she was too young to get pregnant"
    "she pushed the gate open when I was in the shower"
    "she backed up to the fence so the male could get her"
    "she was in a yard with a 2m fence and never got out - I don't know how it happened" (some dogs can jump that quite easily in and out).
    "I thought my friend's dog was desexed"
    "I didn't think she was in season"

    etc etc.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •