|
Location: UK
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 7,723
|
|
Originally Posted by
Moobli
Could working lines of various breeds be introduced to try to combat exaggerations and produce a more "middle of the road" type? Not just thinking GSDs here, but I have seen various working types (bloodhounds, bassets, clumbers etc) in the past few days that look far less exaggerated than the show types and who look an awful lot healthier too.
If the working breeders are happy to have thier dogs used
hopefully some would be if it helps the breeds
Originally Posted by
Jackbox
What happens when we change some of theses breeds , working for less exaggeration and so on, what happens to diversity then, we will be isolated in breeding A.B. OR c, we have no influence on the rest of the world and their breeding regimes.
W e talk of introducing new genes all the time, to add diversity and new blood, but who is going to want to (after breeding for less exaggeration) go and bring in new blood from abroad when the new blood will be an example of what you are breeding away from.
Some breeds have small gene pools as it is, will we be in danger of reducing the gene pool even more,
Looking a the Neo at Crufts, I was impressed by less exaggeration than I expected, so we have to reduce it more, where do we go for "new blood" to help widen the gene pool , if you look to the country of origin, it is far more extreme than what we see here.
I wonder if by fixing some thing, we open a door for many other problems to sneak in.
While I know what you mean and I worry about what might happen to some breeds are you saying that we shouldnt change just because noone else is?? I think more to the point you could say that other countries hopefully will eventually see how unhealthy their dogs are and try and follow our example - and will then have the ability to outcrosss to our dogs to speed up the process of making their dogs less wrinkly
but I have to wonder if actually just not breeding for features like that that over time naturally the dogs would become less eggadurated
Originally Posted by
Murf
I thought Doowneerg Usi the best neo dog was OTT..
yes
I havent seen the rest of them - was the judge simply picking the best of a bad bunch or were there some a little less freaky looking (poor things)
Originally Posted by
Jackbox
Where are you going to get these healthy new genes from if not other parts of the world
If a breeder or breed club work to eradicate a trait in a bred, at some point you will have to bring in new blood from abroad , if you have just spent the last x amount of years working for less wrinkle, you are not going to go to X,Y,Z that breeds what you are trying to get way from, so what are you left with your own gene pool, that has become even more bottle necked.
actually you can work from a bottleneck and still keep a helthy amount of diversity - if everyone bred sensibly
BUT it would take a radical change in the way people think about breeding, it would involve breeding from far more dogs but taking less litters from them
doing away totaly with line breeding/in beeding
for example if a litter had 6 dogs then you breed the least wrinkly 3 of the litter instead of breeding the best 3 times
and you dont breed them back to their grandsire to fix the 'less wrinkles' you breed them to unrelated (or as much as you can get) dogs that are the least wrinkly
Its not a quick fix, yes it might be many years before some breeders are winning ribbons again, some breeds as a whole might not be in crufts again for a while
But I for one think it would be better in the long run - and then Crufts could be held up as the best dog show in the world imo
Originally Posted by
Brierley
The point I was, obviously unsuccessfully, trying to make that if there truly aren't any healthy dogs out there within a breed, then it really is time to seriously consider the welfare implications of keeping the breed going
Yes, I hope it isnt the case but I do think we may be seeing the last days of some breeds. If they are to be saved it will take some radical rethinking by the breed clubs
and while they wear their blinkers in thinking their dogs look OK then this will never happen
Originally Posted by
Sal
Confirmed by the dogs owner, that indeed it died RIP Marley x
how sad RIP Marley
Originally Posted by
Jackbox
No I understood your point clearly.
Mine is simply that, what Constitutes healthy to one country may not to another.
Country A,B,or C, may not see excessive folds or slack eyes as unhealthy.
And my point is, that we may become isolated in what we deem to be correct, and back ourselves into a corner of small gene pools, due to working to eradicate traits, which other countries prefer.
So do you think we should continue to breed animals looking like that - or should we lead by example?
Originally Posted by
Brierley
Surely, excessive folds/slack eyes etc are either healthy or unhealthy?? Would it make it right to go along with something that our vets deemed unhealthy to keep a breed going??
As previously said, I'm not a breeder or, for that matter, a particular breed enthusiast (I just love dogs
), but every time I muse on the subject, I keep coming back to health being the paramount issue and, to me, if losing a breed is a better alternative than producing dogs of that breed who are likely to suffer all their lives, then surely losing the breed is the better option. I would hope, of course, there are other and better alternatives
Sadly I agree
Originally Posted by
Jackbox
But we wont lose a breed will we, because we don`t have exclusive rights to " A" breed. I think that`s something we are all forgetting.
What we do here is not going to influence what other countries deeming what is correct for their breed standard, they will continue to breed to the standard as they see fit, and if we chance the standard to a degree that importing anything from a broad will undo what has been achieved, we wont import, and so the gene pool will get smaller and then what happens?
What do you think we should do then?? Do you agree there is a problem with things as they are right now?