Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 112

Thread: mutts and bitzas vs pedigree dogs, responsible breeding

  1. #71

    Default

    So what makes a good breeder?

    To me, its understanding what you have in front of you and understanding it well through interaction for more than an hours training a day, through living with them.

    Understanding what you are trying to acheive.

    Not breeding dogs with known health issues, or temperament issues but only chosing the best available for your goals from the start, instead of trying to breed faults out. Start with out them if thats possible.

    Balanced nutrition and enough of of it, with control of worms , fleas etc.

    Health test or chose from clear by parentage when its known their is a good chance of problems occurring in a breed, but the ultimate goal should be thats its not nmeeded.

    LOTS of socialisation of pups and getting to know them to form opinions on their character, then chosing homes to match to the best of your ability .Making sure before the mating takes place that there IS be a demand for what you expect to offer.

    Follow up on pups to see if they have matched your and the buyers expectations. To try to determine if your breeding has has been successful or not before you repeat it, or find if changes are needed.

    Chose homes very carefully and try to match suitability.

    Understanding and adhering to legal obligations

    I prefer to buy from a breeder who keeps their dogs as family members 1st. Whos dogs are known and proven reliable in the environment they are bred to live in.

    I do NOT want to buy from a breeder who sets out conditions of sale. If you do not think I am a responsible owner, why the hell would you sell me a dog?

    If I buy a dog, I am taking full responsibility for it. As should any buyer. Unless you are shown to have been negligent in breeding dogs that should never have been bred, the risks and responsibility for dealing with problems are are mine, tho' your availability to consult with is only fair.

    I don't believe a breeder should HAVE to take back any dog...... But I do believe they should insist on involvement in re homing suitably if they can't.
    Circumstances can make taking a dog back impossible.

    Last but not least, I think a good breeder is well aware that in bringing these lives into the world, they do bear some responsibility for the lives those dogs will live and do their best to make sure sure they will be happy and fulfilling lives, to the best of their ability.

    I am not against profit. It can be the mark of a successfull breeder. I AM against commercial breeding because a commercial breeding dog is NOT living the happy and fullfilled life it was bred for and all dogs should expect. They won't all acheive it, but neither will we humans.
    Last edited by Strange fruit; 05-01-2015 at 09:42 AM.

  2. #72

    Default

    I don't agree you NEED both. But a pedigree is certainly going to increase your knowlege and make best use of it. I hope that was tyhe intention behind them.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange fruit View Post
    I don't agree you NEED both. But a pedigree is certainly going to increase your knowlege and make best use of it. I hope that was tyhe intention behind them.
    Exactly, a pedigree or documentation of a dogs lines call it what you will and it may be informal or formal increases your knowledge! I breed sheep, they are not pedigree and were a bunch of random animals to start with. It has become clear to me in my program that certain animals are what I am looking for and through numbering and documentation I am slowly developing a line that is increasing in performance fro my area. When I buy in young rams the breeders will give me measured information from the rams lines. I have noticed it is paying off big time. I am developing a history with a lot of measured information which now goes back several generations.

    Keeping good history and understading your lines in the working world to me at least is important, it narrows down my search when looking for a new puppy.

    Yeah I agree that socialisation in the home of puppies and all the other stuff is important but I also think good documentation demonstrates to me that a breeder is serious about their breeding to achieve the best results.

    So I personally will favour a breeder of working dogs who know their lines and what they are trying to achieve. I will continue improving my sheep flock with good documentation and selection practices. I have a friend doing th same thing, he is a vet and has kept good records for the last 30 years and has developed a flock that has very high performance in this difficult environment. People line up to buy his rams. It is then up to the buyers to use them wisely. A good animal use without thought is not going to miraculously make everything right.

    What I find interesting is that traits can surface a few generations down the track. With records I can see why and adjust my breeding program accordingly. So a very nice animal may have a not so nice trait lurking in their breeding that may surface at anytime or down the track. Not so important if you are not planning on breeding from that dog or sheep or whatever but critical information if you are.

    I have also kept butt ugly lambs purely on the basis of their mothers and grandmothers performance and had great sucess from them.

    I have learnt a lot from breeding and developing my own lines of sheep. I am thinking of outcrossing to a hardy South African breed next year so that might set a cat amongst my genetics, so am interested to see where it takes my program but measurement and documentation will be the key.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 05-01-2015 at 11:50 AM.

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange fruit View Post
    I do NOT want to buy from a breeder who sets out conditions of sale. If you do not think I am a responsible owner, why the hell would you sell me a dog?

    If I buy a dog, I am taking full responsibility for it. As should any buyer. Unless you are shown to have been negligent in breeding dogs that should never have been bred, the risks and responsibility for dealing with problems are are mine, tho' your availability to consult with is only fair.

    I don't believe a breeder should HAVE to take back any dog...... But I do believe they should insist on involvement in re homing suitably if they can't.
    Circumstances can make taking a dog back impossible.

    Last but not least, I think a good breeder is well aware that in bringing these lives into the world, they do bear some responsibility for the lives those dogs will live and do their best to make sure sure they will be happy and fulfilling lives, to the best of their ability.

    I am not against profit. It can be the mark of a successfull breeder. I AM against commercial breeding because a commercial breeding dog is NOT living the happy and fullfilled life it was bred for and all dogs should expect. They won't all acheive it, but neither will we humans.
    I know one breeder who has a condition of sale that you hip score the dog at the appropriate age and give the breeder that information. I dont have a problem with that.

    I know working breeders who will keep their pups till 4 months of age so they can make a better assessment of the dogs they will keep for their breeding program and the ones they will match with prospective buyers. I also know working breeders who will euthanaise any puppy that they are not happy will make a good working dog. A good breeding program obviously aims to minimise that possibility.

    I think it is you who has talked about breeding for longevity. Interesting as to how you plan to do that without any history. Certainly not based just on the dog you have in front of you, given breeding is done long before you know the longevity of that particular dog. Interesting to know also how heritable it is across environments.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 05-01-2015 at 12:37 PM.

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    There's so much you can't tell just by looking at a dog. Especially a puppy.

    Some that look wrong as puppies can grow into good looking adults and you can't tell which dogs have PRA gene (leads to blindness) just by looking at them. There's a whole lot of problems that only show up when you put two dogs together that each carry the bad gene. We might as well use the science we have, and keep records eg if you're not going to test your parent dogs - at least keep records of how the puppies turn out, and then if all good - you have a good pairing otherwise no more breeding from that line or the puppies from that pairing. That's what Pedigree - ie a record of ancestry is about. Also that kind of knowledge can help reduce inbreeding. Especially when one stud dog becomes really popular.

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    There's so much you can't tell just by looking at a dog. Especially a puppy.

    Some that look wrong as puppies can grow into good looking adults and you can't tell which dogs have PRA gene (leads to blindness) just by looking at them. There's a whole lot of problems that only show up when you put two dogs together that each carry the bad gene. We might as well use the science we have, and keep records eg if you're not going to test your parent dogs - at least keep records of how the puppies turn out, and then if all good - you have a good pairing otherwise no more breeding from that line or the puppies from that pairing. That's what Pedigree - ie a record of ancestry is about. Also that kind of knowledge can help reduce inbreeding. Especially when one stud dog becomes really popular.

    Yes it can tell you lots. There is a dog I know that is a super working sheep dog in the neighbourhood but people were not sure of his ancestory because no records kept and he came out of the north. People started using him as a stud because he was such a good dog. However quite a lot of his puppies had very poor temperaments so although recognised as a super working dog, people now avoid using him as a sire. I wonder if a documentation of his ancestory could have shed some light. His temperament is lovely.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 05-01-2015 at 04:09 PM.

  7. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalacreek View Post
    I know one breeder who has a condition of sale that you hip score the dog at the appropriate age and give the breeder that information. I dont have a problem with that.

    I know working breeders who will keep their pups till 4 months of age so they can make a better assessment of the dogs they will keep for their breeding program and the ones they will match with prospective buyers. I also know working breeders who will euthanaise any puppy that they are not happy will make a good working dog. A good breeding program obviously aims to minimise that possibility.

    I think it is you who has talked about breeding for longevity. Interesting as to how you plan to do that without any history. Certainly not based just on the dog you have in front of you, given breeding is done long before you know the longevity of that particular dog. Interesting to know also how heritable it is across environments.
    First, Who says I have no history? What ever gives you that idea?

    I have a thrird generation pup here that may be my last of my own breeding, though I have several buyers who are pressuring me to breed again as they say they don't want other dogs. Finding another pure breed to use may be impossible, since ANKC forbids members from allowing this. You could say ANKCs rules suppress my ability to breed for the environments needs by keeping dogs with available history out of the hands of non ankc members.Possibly causing a decline in the health and temperament of cross breed dogs.

    I know the history of the grandparents, barr one who is the dam of my bitch. I went ahead and got a pup from this bitch because not only had she proven to be an incredible dog herself, but her pups carried the traits I was after far more reliably than the the anti cross breeders would have you believe.She proved her qualities carried 1st, before I chose a pup. Not only that, but the breed club itself advised me these traits were not to be found.

    I own the parents.
    And I ASK that buyers keep in touch and inform me of any problems. Not all have, but a very good proportion of them have and 10 or more still ask when I might do it again.


    2nd, you seem to think I am arguing against pedigrees or keeping records. I am not. I am saying that being able to read whats in front of you doesnt mean you have a good understanding of the information or know how to get the most from it.
    I am saying the lack of a pedigree doesn't take anything away from the dog in front of you, or its potential bennefits to the gene pool.
    I am saying that disacarding dogs from the gene pool simply because they have no pedigree papers from an approved organisation is just plain wrong and ignores all rules of natural selection. Pedigrees are one option.

    They are an excellent tool for the breeding of pure breed dogs. BUT... They can't be promoted as the only ethical choice in breeding dogs because doing that locks us in to a cycle of endlessly closing lines and all the problems that brings. Health testing can not save the breeds then because disease and health problems will increase as the lines become tighter. A Pedigree only philosphy is what is stuffing up the breeds and denies an environmental influence.

    I am not trying to create a new breed. There was one perfectly capable of the job. Till it no longer was. I have no wish to create another breed to see it go the same way. I just want a dog that works and lives reliably in my own backyard, that suits MY needs, not what ANKC decrees I can have.
    I would rather correct the cause of the ruin and see ANKC an organisation I can ethicaly support. An organisation that CAN meet the needs of its environment.

    Allowing members to cross breed gives environmental demands a means to be heard and met. It makes an unviable organisation viable and could assist to provide effective out crosses where they are needed, and eventualy removing the stigma of doing out crosses.

    It also allows purpose back into the breed criteria. Resorting to ritualized trials as the only means to meet demands for purpose won't work, unless the purpose is ritualized trials.Ditto the show scene, which only selects dogs on the basis of their show ring appeal.
    Last edited by Strange fruit; 05-02-2015 at 09:17 AM.

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    The thing I find most daft about the show ring process is how judges get selected. Ie it perpetrates and enhances any errors the most popular judges may have because the only way to become a judge is to win at shows... so if the show judges are making mistakes and awarding unhealthy representatives of the breed - the next line of judges will do the same.

    So ANKC has lots of room to improve but it changes direction really slowly when the people running the breed clubs, obedience clubs and the organisation can be entrenched for entire adult life times. They don't like computers, abhor email, and certainly resist any science that might be used to improve breeding and training. The only thing that moves them any quicker is a massive public backlash after documentaries like that nasty one about pedigree dogs. When - with what I know about dog training - there should be some reward or incentive for them to move in the best interests of the dog and owner. There is - but they don't see it. Hence part of the popularity of "designer breeds" - who are not afraid of at least using the net for marketing (and scamming).

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange fruit View Post
    First, Who says I have no history? What ever gives you that idea?

    .
    I didn't say that at all. I was just commenting on your comment that you don't believe that you need a pedigree, that you just need to judge the dog in front of you.

    I simply believe that you need both. You are just hung up on the ANKC version of a pedigree. To me a pedigree contains information on the dog you have in front of you. Many working dog pedigrees show crossbreeding eg kelpie in border collie lines etc. The dog you have in front of you is important but if you want to breed it is preferable to have that history to make good decisions. When I talk about pedigree I mean documented history. I have no problem with crossbreeding in working dogs if you know what you are doing and understand working traits and heritability of working traits etc. I have absolutely no desire to own an ANKC pedigree dog, mine will always be working bred, crossbred or not.

    Sure you can breed the dog in front of you but natural selection will then heavily cull the offspring. My experiences with breeding sheep tells me the more you know the less you are likely to have to cull heavily. A good phenotype can hide genotypes that are a problem when bred to other dogs where you may also have no history. I have seen it happen in farm dogs. The culling process however is heavy.

  10. #80

    Default

    Hyacinth,

    The biological theory behind the problems of the K.Cs are realy interesting, because in the case of the K.Cs you have the both the organization itself, and then the species they are set up to breed. The same rules and constitution affect the dogs and the breeding programs, but also the members of the organization.
    What happens to gene pools of pedigree dogs under that constitution is mirrored by the members themselves. ( or realy, the species mirrors the K.C culture, so the other way around) We just see the effects faster in the dogs because they have such short life spans compared to those breeding, and the organisation at least does gain members from outside its established ranks.

    Tho' its just about impossible for new ideas to enter ranks because those promoting them will be censured and ostracized for bringing in outside influence. ie: nothing more than a puppy farmer , or a BYBer.

    The ruling against breeding a dog ineligible for registration ensures that lines will become ever tighter with no outside or environmental influence - It also ensures the culture of the K.Cs will become tighter and more set in the ideas promoted by the org, intentional or not. No out side or environmental influence on members either. The org. does not recognise its environment.
    So when people say " What you are doing is making our dogs unhealthy" that is the environment demanding healthy dogs. But the K.Cs are unable to recognise their environment, so thats seen as an attack. They respond by a return attack and tightening again their ranks to keeps the environment out, and the dogs out of the environment.
    So, we get another division in the advent of the mains register. Fewer intact dogs permitted into the environment, while member "Blame" the environment for the problems ( backyard breeders)

    We saw similar when the K.Cs were accused of fostering breeders involved only for money. They ruled that no breeders shall breed primarily for profit. Yet in a world ruled by market influence, profit is most easily made by those meeting environmental demands. So ranks closed further while demads were even less able to be met. And those within the K.Cs who do make a profit are now under scrutiny and open to criticism or censure in their their own ranks. Elimination to overcome problems instead of growth.
    And the ruling was superfluous anyway since the constitution already stated ( without a negative ruling) that the primary purpose of a breeder is improvement.

    The show ring reflects this closing of the ranks and denial of outside influences on breeding.
    Last edited by Strange fruit; 05-06-2015 at 08:42 AM.

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
  •