Page 9 of 12 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 112

Thread: mutts and bitzas vs pedigree dogs, responsible breeding

  1. #81

    Default

    Kalacreek,

    I still think you are misinterpreting what I say.

    I stand by my comment you don't NEED a pedigree. I didn't say you JUST need to judge the dog in front of you. I said the more, the better meaning any surviving relatives etc that can add to the picture. A pedigree is huge bonus, If its available.

    You can have a good dog with out a pedigree. I guess you can have a pedigree with out a dog, but its kind of superfluous then. I believe the dog always comes 1st.

    A pedigree is needed if you have a breed .But all breeds started with a dog, not with a recorded pedigree. If a pedigree is needed 1st, then you rule out any further breed development unless its going to start with already closed and restricted lines and possibilities. Research and development using only whats already there and results pre-determined? Thats not reseach and development by my reckoning. Its a dead end, and creating your own science as you go with a very limmited and pre-detrmined focus.

    That says, " This is our direction and we will disregard what doesn't fit, or eliminate it." A science of making it fit. Chisel off the edges and you can make a square peg fit a round hole. But it won't fill the gaps.

    Yes, I am "hung up" on the ANKC style pedigree. They adversely affect the breeding of all dogs, because they are antagonistic to any breeding that does not take place within their own system.

    I thought I made it clear I have no problem with open, working registries. They are not part of the problem. I am not attacking pedigrees.
    I am only critical of an organisation that promotes the idea what people do and how they do it is automaticaly wrong and unethical .
    Unless its done within their ranks and has their own documentation to prove it.
    The K.C pedigree comes before the dog, or any practices or knowledge will be discussed. Practices are secondary to the pedigree and I can't agree with that when its practices, to me, that define a good breeder and the chance they will be successful, or not.
    Not the pedigree.

    The pedigree, without good practices, can possibly be just a record of how we went wrong. And if we are not permitted anything to compare it to, who is to say theres anything wrong with it at all?

    Kala, the registry you support recognises this, or they would also be closed registry, maybe even forbidding members to breed out side of their own protocols

    Edited because I keep timing out.
    Last edited by Strange fruit; 05-06-2015 at 10:18 AM.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Southern NSW
    Posts
    3,784

    Default

    One of the reasons I love a pedigree dog is becuase i can look at the relaitives and see where they exelled or failed.... am looking at newfoundland dogs for water rescue, with an innate water rescue ablilty...I cannot tell you from a puppy, I can do the Volhard System and see some retrieve and other stuff. But with A Pedigree breed like the newfoundland I can do research and check out all the living/dead relaitives for helath problems as sthey are possibly on the health Data base and also look at titles or history in water rescue work. being a smallish Community we can even search for working realitves overseas. It is how I picked Yussie's parents they had great mediacl (hips/elbows etc) on the world wide Data base and also had brothers, grandparents halpf siblings doing water work and excelling at that....I think good breeders maintain thses records and do not breed for numbers, they breed for improvements. The longivity of the newf has extended in the last few decades. You can now avoid buying from lines with certain genetic problems.not completely negate them, but at least give you better odds. I think all breeds should start keeping good Databases and maintain them. We the buyer should look at thses before we buy. And be very wary of those who do not put their dogs on the Database. That does not mean you buy a dog without history, but at least you are aware. I think a few breeds have started keeping Databases
    I just wished that we would also do DNA testing like we have to in the Quarter-horse world. All our stallions and mares have to be DNA profiled so no shady things can happen. I do sometimes wonder in the dog world.......
    Pets are forever

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    I just think in the world of working dogs that a pedigree or documentation of a dogs lines gives a lot of valuable information. You can certainly start a breeding program with a good dog with no history. I have a good working dog that I know is from eastern states working lines but because I rescued him form a bad situation I was not able to get detailed information from his aggressive former owner. The breed register recognised him as a Koolie after testing him and gave me registration on the working koolie register. If I bred dogs which I dont, he possibly would have made a good sire, great conformation, good working ability and he is likely from good working lines, but really I like to buy my working dogs from breeders with good track records and have proven traits I need, which are good mustering dogs with awesome casts which my koolie doesnt have although he works sheep very well after my BC (from good casting lines) has mustered them. I have never been dissapointed.

    Really I dont worry too much about the kennel club stuff. I think in some cases it works like what Newfsie was saying, but for some breeds it is not so good, GSD springs to mind. I tend to steer clear of all that and stick to the working registers. Yeah I can understand breeding a very good working dog if its parentage was unknown but I would do all the gentic testing and scans first. I have just seen it go arse up on occassion.
    Last edited by Kalacreek; 05-06-2015 at 09:32 PM.

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    12,581

    Default

    The kennel clubs are relatively new compared to some dog breeds.

    Originally dogs were chosen for pairing based on what they could do - a proven ability and/or appearance that the humans wanted to encourage.

    But now we can do DNA tests and other health tests - and select pairings not just on performance and appearance but also on blood test and xray results. How often do humans make assumptions about performance and ability - based on appearance alone? You can't do that reliably. It's like picking a wine by its colour.

    Only by keeping and reviewing records about pairings and their health and their puppies health and performance - can you keep track of whether you are improving a breed or making it worse.

    It's not enough to just record the parents for each puppy - the data has to go back up and around the chain about the puppy's health and performance.

    Kennel clubs are perfectly placed to do this. Quite a lot of what we know about genetic mistakes are from clubs like these - even tho some of what they're doing will be outlawed for ethical reasons soon or into the future... Eg breeding dogs that can't regulate their own temperature or have puppies without a C-section.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    The kennel clubs are relatively new compared to some dog breeds.

    Kennel clubs are perfectly placed to do this. Quite a lot of what we know about genetic mistakes are from clubs like these - even tho some of what they're doing will be outlawed for ethical reasons soon or into the future... Eg breeding dogs that can't regulate their own temperature or have puppies without a C-section.
    I can never understand why with all the knowledge that we now have that can be used for improvement and good healthy dogs, we inflict problems on our dogs just because we want then to look a certain way and then take it to extremes. It really is abuse to breed an animal that cannot give birth naturally or that struggles to breath or has structural abnormalities that cause problems.

  6. #86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by newfsie View Post
    One of the reasons I love a pedigree dog is becuase i can look at the relaitives and see where they exelled or failed.... am looking at newfoundland dogs for water rescue, with an innate water rescue ablilty...I cannot tell you from a puppy, I can do the Volhard System and see some retrieve and other stuff. But with A Pedigree breed like the newfoundland I can do research and check out all the living/dead relaitives for helath problems as sthey are possibly on the health Data base and also look at titles or history in water rescue work. being a smallish Community we can even search for working realitves overseas. It is how I picked Yussie's parents they had great mediacl (hips/elbows etc) on the world wide Data base and also had brothers, grandparents halpf siblings doing water work and excelling at that....I think good breeders maintain thses records and do not breed for numbers, they breed for improvements. The longivity of the newf has extended in the last few decades. You can now avoid buying from lines with certain genetic problems.not completely negate them, but at least give you better odds. I think all breeds should start keeping good Databases and maintain them. We the buyer should look at thses before we buy. And be very wary of those who do not put their dogs on the Database. That does not mean you buy a dog without history, but at least you are aware. I think a few breeds have started keeping Databases
    I just wished that we would also do DNA testing like we have to in the Quarter-horse world. All our stallions and mares have to be DNA profiled so no shady things can happen. I do sometimes wonder in the dog world.......
    You are lucky there is still community involvement in water rescue, that helps a lot that there are even pockets of people who still appreciate the dogs original purpose, and utilise that.

    The purpose for my breed is still there, but these days catered to by specialist breeders and trainers only. Trials are used to judge suitability ( with a huge failure rate by both I might add) and the end result is that most are entirely unsuited to my own situation, which must include utility since I won't have dogs that are raised with a "kenneling unless in use" mentality. My dogs are very much a part of the family. My breed in particular, trainers will generaly not touch any more for the role they were bred for.

    True of several of the breeds traditionaly used for the role.
    Last edited by Strange fruit; 05-11-2015 at 06:59 PM.

  7. #87

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hyacinth View Post
    The kennel clubs are relatively new compared to some dog breeds.

    Originally dogs were chosen for pairing based on what they could do - a proven ability and/or appearance that the humans wanted to encourage.

    But now we can do DNA tests and other health tests - and select pairings not just on performance and appearance but also on blood test and xray results. How often do humans make assumptions about performance and ability - based on appearance alone? You can't do that reliably. It's like picking a wine by its colour.

    Only by keeping and reviewing records about pairings and their health and their puppies health and performance - can you keep track of whether you are improving a breed or making it worse.

    It's not enough to just record the parents for each puppy - the data has to go back up and around the chain about the puppy's health and performance.

    Kennel clubs are perfectly placed to do this. Quite a lot of what we know about genetic mistakes are from clubs like these - even tho some of what they're doing will be outlawed for ethical reasons soon or into the future... Eg breeding dogs that can't regulate their own temperature or have puppies without a C-section.
    I think competions and trials etc should not be permitted to be breed specific either. There are no comparisons, alternative methods, or extended abilitys permitted.

    You can't tell if you are ruining or improving either, if the only comparisons allowed is to to the current generation of the same breed. If pedigree breeding were a science experiment, it would be considered invalid with out a controll population being bred with out closed lines, but for the same purpose.

  8. #88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalacreek View Post
    I just think in the world of working dogs that a pedigree or documentation of a dogs lines gives a lot of valuable information. You can certainly start a breeding program with a good dog with no history. I have a good working dog that I know is from eastern states working lines but because I rescued him form a bad situation I was not able to get detailed information from his aggressive former owner. The breed register recognised him as a Koolie after testing him and gave me registration on the working koolie register. If I bred dogs which I dont, he possibly would have made a good sire, great conformation, good working ability and he is likely from good working lines, but really I like to buy my working dogs from breeders with good track records and have proven traits I need, which are good mustering dogs with awesome casts which my koolie doesnt have although he works sheep very well after my BC (from good casting lines) has mustered them. I have never been dissapointed.

    Really I dont worry too much about the kennel club stuff. I think in some cases it works like what Newfsie was saying, but for some breeds it is not so good, GSD springs to mind. I tend to steer clear of all that and stick to the working registers. Yeah I can understand breeding a very good working dog if its parentage was unknown but I would do all the gentic testing and scans first. I have just seen it go arse up on occassion.
    Yes, a pedigree does give a lot of information. The dog you mention with no hisory.... You might feel differently about using him if there were NO dogs of proven ability to chose from when you next want a dog. Thats where I was at when I took the risk I did. I had done the 'right thing" in sticking to pedigrees for 20 years. have no regrets at all. I had misgivings. I did NOT want to breed! I would have far prefered to "leave breeding to the experts". Much simpler if I could just buy what I needed. Life isn't always like that though. The results are what finaly changed that for me.


    There IS NO open working registry for my breed I've found, and the working breeders were just not to be found at that time. Even now with a resurgence of interest, I've not seen results that indicate success.

    If I had more in mind than keeping a very successful line going for myself and family, I would keep records. I would utilise what records come with any pure breed I were to use if I bred again.. I do think its a huge loss to the K.Cs that nothing will be learned from my experience in out crossing and the benefits it can bring, even if the dogs never are never a part of the pedigree system. The bennefits would flow both ways if breeders could SEE the value purpose brings when it comes 1st. Function doesn't follow form, its the other way around. And function will vary even in pure breeds, according to environment.
    Last edited by Strange fruit; 05-11-2015 at 08:21 PM.

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Rural Western Australia
    Posts
    2,634

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange fruit View Post
    Yes, a pedigree does give a lot of information. The dog you mention with no hisory.... You might feel differently about using him if there were NO dogs of proven ability to chose from when you next want a dog. Thats where I was at when I took the risk I did. I had done the 'right thing" in sticking to pedigrees for 20 years. have no regrets at all. I had misgivings. I did NOT want to breed! I would have far prefered to "leave breeding to the experts". Much simpler if I could just buy what I needed. Life isn't always like that though. The results are what finaly changed that for me.


    There IS NO open working registry for my breed I've found, and the working breeders were just not to be found at that time. Even now with a resurgence of interest, I've not seen results that indicate success.

    If I had more in mind than keeping a very successful line going for myself and family, I would keep records. I would utilise what records come with any pure breed I were to use if I bred again.. I do think its a huge loss to the K.Cs that nothing will be learned from my experience in out crossing and the benefits it can bring, even if the dogs never are never a part of the pedigree system. The bennefits would flow both ways if breeders could SEE the value purpose brings when it comes 1st. Function doesn't follow form, its the other way around. And function will vary even in pure breeds, according to environment.
    Yeah sure, I have 2 working bred dogs from unwanted situations with no pedigrees, both awesome structures. My working bred cattle dog has a much better structure than my ANKC registered ACD. I was delighted when the sheep and cattle farmer who bred her (she was an oops litter) didnt want her and dumped her and her litter off in rescue, as I had looked for a cattle dog with the type of build and structure that she has, which is hard to find in many of the showbreds these days.

    However there are breeders of excellent sheepdogs so I really dont need to breed. I do keep my working dogs entire untill I have had the chance to assess them and so far nothing that I couldnt get from a breeder of quality dogs. I had to sterilise my little cattle dog (conditions of adoption) and in order to compete in ANKC agility with her because she is considered a mutt by them although I suspect she could blow a few of the showbreds out of the water. A few show type people have commented on what a lovely structure she has when she stands stacked, not realising that she is a "mutt" lol.

    However when I buy a working dog I do take note of the lines, the traits the breeders are selecting for and the health and reputation of the line. Sure you can get dudds but if the breeder is any good they will be testing and selecting the best dogs for the situation that they are breeding and it usually pays off.

    Some local farmers I know breed their own dogs with varying degrees of success. One line is well known for its dodgy temperament so when he asked if I would like a kelpie pup in payment for a paddock I let him use, I declined.

  10. #90

    Default

    Just a foot note.

    I have recieved pics and emails this week from 2 of my puppy buyers. Both describe their dogs as 'Perfect' and expressed interest, again, in getting another pup.

    Dogs are a male and female, both 4 yo and over 65 kilos each. NO joint problems have ever been reported to me, from any buyer. Both owners are thrilled with the speed and athleticism of their dogs, the male running rings around a much smaller sheperd/malinois mix. Both are known as highly social and stable dogs who are very much part of their families. It rare for either to be alone in the backyard. Usualy going every where with their owners and to dog parks,hikes, beach etc.

    Have I been lucky? Yes, to some extent I have.
    Lucky to have found what I was after for a start.
    Lucky to have ever had it to know the possibilities in the 1st place.
    Lucky I searched so long to find it that my appreciation over ruled my reluctance.
    And very lucky to have found such wonderful homes for large, powerful athletic and highly intelligent dogs with a very high pack value .

    But I think I am luckier still that I have these dogs in my life. They are constantly putting "the science" of pedigree only people on the defensive. They display traits we are told don't exsist and are truely utilitarian purpose, for those willing to accept their mutual obligations as companions 1st.
    We can have better than we are taught to accept.

    I don't promote backyard breeding, or breeding at all. I agree totaly the majority of BYBers need to lift their game enormously. Every one does.

    but I can argue that much of the reason for this is the dogma that only pedigree breeders should be touching the process. The closed system makes that statement truer every year.

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
  •