I think it is extremely lucky that all the 'instant experts' as you call them, HAVEN'T actually done it themselves. The 'experts' who have done it seem to have made enough of a mess of it.

I can't see a problem with losing some breeds---but then I like all dogs not just one breed so I am coming at it from a different angle. I have had loads of different dogs but lots of wsd's and they have all been totally different in every way.

rune

Can I ask another question, please?

If we were to merge breeds and come up with types (or perhaps even new breeds) of dogs, would that necessarily mean a healthier population? In other words, how would it be ensured that the problems we see now in various breeds aren't actually doubled-up??

Its a good point. I hope things are not so bad that this needs to be the case - but I get the feeling in some breeds this kind of may be the case

Yes exactly if it was for the long term health of the species then I think it would be better to loose some breeds
and I agree too, I have known lots of GSD's labs and BC's and every one has their own caracter - I admit more so in the collies


I would imagine by firstly carefully picking the breeds to merge - and being careful which dogs were bred from
and then more importantly totaly changing our ideas on how we breed after that
No inbreeding, no overusing one popular stud

I have read plenty of things saying that dogs have far far more genetic illnesses than for example the human population
so actually random breeding to unrelated individuals is more healthy than picking the best of the best (especially when the critieria is more often than not the ability to win)
rare conditions remain rare amoungst humans simply because we are not doubling up, fixing genes or any of the things we do with dogs

I hope its not too late but the more I am looking into it it really sounds like the way we are breeding pedigree dogs is not sustainable in the long run and I believe something needs to be done else pretty soon puppy farmers will have the healthiest dogs

as i said vested interests

think thats taking it a bit far really.... there are plenty of people out there who do things right... how many puppy farmers do you know that care about health testing, temperament, inbreeding and overbreeding?

"Quote BenMcfuzzyugs"I have read plenty of things saying that dogs have far far more genetic illnesses than for example the human population
so actually random breeding to unrelated individuals is more healthy than picking the best of the best (especially when the critieria is more often than not the ability to win)
rare conditions remain rare amoungst humans simply because we are not doubling up, fixing genes or any of the things we do with dogs"

Actually I believe there are about 350 different genetic illnesses and Humans have thousands.

I also know more humans with genetically inherited illnesses that I know dogs with genetically inherited illnesses.

.......and here's where I bow out

bit like the Kennel Club have done on the debate.

Based on what evidence?

http://retrieverman.wordpress.com/20...e-fancys-sins/
an interesting article that covers what Im saying quicker than I can as im busy tonight